DISCLOSURE / FILE
RAAF Headquarters Support Command UFO file B5758 56/AIR Part 1, containing a translated 1953 Indonesian Air Force Angkasa article surveying global flying-saucer sightings and a press clipping in which Australian External Affairs Minister R. G. Casey proposes meteor streams as a partial explanation.
RAAF Headquarters Support Command UFO file B5758 56/AIR Part 1, containing a translated 1953 Indonesian Air Force Angkasa article surveying global flying-saucer sightings and a press clipping in which Australian External Affairs Minister R. G. Casey proposes meteor streams as a partial explanation.
This RAAF file opens with U.S. Air Attache Djakarta report TR-106-53 (AF603198), dated 13 November 1953, transmitting issue 8 of the official Indonesian Air Force magazine Angkasa with a translated feature on flying saucers adapted from Forces Aeriennes Francaises (February 1953) by Captain R. Clerouin. The translation catalogs the Gorman 'dogfight' of 1 October 1948, the Mantell crash of 7 January 1948, the Chiles and Whitted DC-3 encounter of 2 July 1948, the Kenneth Arnold sighting of 25 June 1947, and a 1949 White Sands tracking by Commander H. B. de Laughlin of saucers estimated at 28,000 kilometers per hour at 100 kilometers altitude. A separate press clipping records Australian Minister for External Affairs R. G. Casey proposing that meteor streams account for a proportion of Australian saucer reports. The file is marked UNCLASSIFIED on its lead AF Form 112 and carries the standard Espionage Act caveat.
Inclosed is issue number 8 of the official Indonesian Air Force magazine "ANGKASA" for the month of August 1953. Translations of articles of possible intelligence interest are inclosed.p.1
On known dates in each year, the earth passes through meteor streams.p.3
I do not suggest that this evidence is by any means complete, or that it is, at most more than a partial explanation of "flying saucer" phenomena.p.3
The United States of America set up a "Saucer Commission", while General Vandenberg expressed his view formally. Recently a large-scale investigation was made by England. In France only reporters and singers are watching this miracle from nearby.p.4
1 October 1948, a pilot of the National Guard named George F. Gorman made a "dogflight" with a ball of 0.40 meters for 20 minutes.p.8
He climbed up to 7000 meters, but did not have success. Eventually after one hour race, the radio communication cut off. His aircraft crashed near the airfield and Captain Thomas F. Mantell was killed.p.9
The rate of those saucers was estimated at 28,000 kilometers per hour and the altitude at 100 kilometers.p.9
Extracted text · Page 1
Page 1 · vision OCR
THIS FILE CONTAINS PAGES REPRODUCED FROM A BADLY FADED OR ILLEGIBLE SOURCE. SCANNING THE PAGES AT A HIGHER RESOLUTION WILL NOT IMPROVE THEIR LEGIBILITY. AF FORM 112--PART I UNCLASSIFIED APPROVED 1 JUNE 1948 CLASSIFICATION COUNTRY REPORT NO. [LEAVE BLANK] Republic of Indonesia TR-106-53 AF603198 AIR INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION REPORT SUBJECT Official Indonesian Air Force Magazine "ANGKASA" AREA REPORTED ON FROM (Agency) Indonesia - U. S. Air Attache, Djakarta, Indonesia DATE OF REPORT DATE OF INFORMATION EVALUATION 13 November 1953 16 October 1953 A-1 Major Walter H. Arnstein, Air Attache SOURCE Ministry of Defense REFERENCES (Control number, directive, previous report, etc., as applicable) SUMMARY: (Enter concise summary of report. Give significance in final one-sentence paragraph. List enclosures at lower left. Begin text of report on AF Form 112--Part II.) Inclosed is issue number 8 of the official Indonesian Air Force magazine "ANGKASA" for the month of August 1953. Translations of articles of possible intelligence interest are inclosed. [Stamp text - partially legible]: [ILLEGIBLE] is furnished upon the condition [ILLEGIBLE] not be released to another [ILLEGIBLE] [ILLEGIBLE] authority of the Department of [ILLEGIBLE] the United States. [ILLEGIBLE] that the [ILLEGIBLE] for military purposes only, and that the [ILLEGIBLE] be provided substantially the same [ILLEGIBLE] or security afforded it by the Department of Defense of the United States. 1R [Handwritten signature - ILLEGIBLE] - LIBRARY SUBJECT & AREA CODES Nodex [Signature] Walter H. Arnstein WALTER H. ARNSTEIN Major, USAF Air Attache 1 INCLS "ANGKASA", Aug 53 A B DISTRIBUTION BY ORIGINATOR AFOIN [ILLEGIBLE] NOTE: THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION AFFECTING THE NATIONAL DEFENSE OF THE UNITED STATES WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE ESPIONAGE ACT, 50 U.S.C.—31 AND 32, AS AMENDED. ITS TRANSMISSION OR THE REVELATION OF ITS CONTENTS IN ANY MANNER TO AN UNAUTHORIZED PERSON IS PROHIBITED BY LAW. IT MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED IN WHOLE OR IN PART, BY OTHER THAN UNITED STATES AIR FORCE AGENCIES, EXCEPT BY PERMISSION OF THE DIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE, USAF. UNCLASSIFIED [U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1950—O-818531]
Page 2 · vision OCR
Do not remove from protective enclosure. Please contact conservation if assistance is required.
Page 211 · vision OCR
DIGITS[ILLEGIBLE]
CONFIDENTIAL [ILLEGIBLE]ISTER
INSTRUCTIONS OPEN
08-01-0[ILLEGIBLE]
1. Opening of Files.—Requests for new files are to be made to the Central Registry or to the unit
correspondence clerk, as applicable, who will be responsible for—
(a) advising if a file is in existence dealing with the subject aspect.
(b) advising if the proposed file title conflicts with that of an existing file.
(c) inserting on the new file cover all cross-references to related files, and
(d) completing all details on the front cover, including the initial charging to the appoint-
ment making the request.
2. Size of Files.—Care must be taken to see that files do not become too bulky; however, the
guiding principle to be observed for opening a new part to a file is the necessity for preserving
the original enclosures.
3. New Covers.—When a new cover is placed on a file the front of the old cover is to be placed in
the file as Enclosure 1A (1).
4. Attachment of Papers.—Papers are to be attached to the file cover by means of appropriately
sized paper fasteners. Washers must be used. Minute sheets are to be attached to the [ILLEGIBLE]
side, enclosures to the right. The file number will be placed on both.
5. Enclosures.—Correspondence to or from an outside body, loose minutes or any written matter
too lengthy to be written on the minute sheet, will appear as an enclosure. Enclosures are to be
numbered consecutively and, if consisting of only one document, the minute will be followed by
the letter "A". Where two or more letters form one enclosure, they shall all bear the same number
followed consecutively by the letter "A", "B", "C", etc.
6. Minutes.—Minutes, other than [ILLEGIBLE] minutes, will be typed or written on the minute [ILLEGIBLE]
numbered consecutively. A minute should be brief and concise and is normally used to [ILLEGIBLE]
enclosure for information or decision. Both sides of the minute sheet are to be used.
7. Addressing of Minutes.—Authorised short titles are used to indicate the addressee, who is
invariably to initial the address. These initials only signify that the person concerned has seen
the minute. If it is desired to express concurrence, the words "agree" or "concur" must be added
to the initials.
8. Addressing of Files.—A file is charged to an addressee by:—
(a) Placing the authorised short title of the addressee in column 1, front cover.
(b) Placing the number of the referred minute or enclosure in column 2.
(If a minute, the number only—if an enclosure, the number and letter.)
(c) Placing the date the file is passed out in column 3.
9. Movement of Files.—Files normally are passed through Registry where the movement is re-
corded. When files are passed by hand, a direct transit slip (Form A.58) is to be used.
10. B.F. (Bring Forward) and P.A. (Put Away).—Files must not be retained when current work
has been completed. The file should be returned to the originator (as indicated on the cover) who
will P.A. the file if it is not currently required. This action is taken by inserting in column 1 the
letters "P.A." and completing columns 3 and 4. THE LETTERS "P.A." DO NOT IMPLY ANY
FINALITY. They are an instruction to Registry to retain the file until further required. If it is
known that the file will be required on a certain date, the letters "B.F." will be inserted instead of
"P.A." If a file has been "P.A." for a long period, it is preferable to open a new part if the new
action bears no relation to the old action beyond the similarity of the subject.
11. Care of Files.—File covers or their contents, when damaged or torn, must be repaired by the
Registry before passing the file out. The front cover of the old file cover must not be destroyed.
(See paragraph 3.)
12. Classified Files.—The provisions of A.A.P. 103 are to be observed when handling classified files.
13. For complete instructions, see A.A.P. 103 (R.A.A.F. Manual of Administration), Chapter
VIII.
CONFIDENTIALConcatenated page-by-page transcript. Born-digital pages came through pdf.js; scanned pages were transcribed by Claude vision OCR. Pages marked unreadable failed multiple OCR retries (heavy redaction, microfilm artifacts, or blank separators) and are kept in place for audit.
THIS FILE CONTAINS PAGES REPRODUCED FROM A BADLY FADED OR ILLEGIBLE SOURCE. SCANNING THE PAGES AT A HIGHER RESOLUTION WILL NOT IMPROVE THEIR LEGIBILITY. AF FORM 112--PART I UNCLASSIFIED APPROVED 1 JUNE 1948 CLASSIFICATION COUNTRY REPORT NO. [LEAVE BLANK] Republic of Indonesia TR-106-53 AF603198 AIR INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION REPORT SUBJECT Official Indonesian Air Force Magazine "ANGKASA" AREA REPORTED ON FROM (Agency) Indonesia - U. S. Air Attache, Djakarta, Indonesia DATE OF REPORT DATE OF INFORMATION EVALUATION 13 November 1953 16 October 1953 A-1 Major Walter H. Arnstein, Air Attache SOURCE Ministry of Defense REFERENCES (Control number, directive, previous report, etc., as applicable) SUMMARY: (Enter concise summary of report. Give significance in final one-sentence paragraph. List enclosures at lower left. Begin text of report on AF Form 112--Part II.) Inclosed is issue number 8 of the official Indonesian Air Force magazine "ANGKASA" for the month of August 1953. Translations of articles of possible intelligence interest are inclosed. [Stamp text - partially legible]: [ILLEGIBLE] is furnished upon the condition [ILLEGIBLE] not be released to another [ILLEGIBLE] [ILLEGIBLE] authority of the Department of [ILLEGIBLE] the United States. [ILLEGIBLE] that the [ILLEGIBLE] for military purposes only, and that the [ILLEGIBLE] be provided substantially the same [ILLEGIBLE] or security afforded it by the Department of Defense of the United States. 1R [Handwritten signature - ILLEGIBLE] - LIBRARY SUBJECT & AREA CODES Nodex [Signature] Walter H. Arnstein WALTER H. ARNSTEIN Major, USAF Air Attache 1 INCLS "ANGKASA", Aug 53 A B DISTRIBUTION BY ORIGINATOR AFOIN [ILLEGIBLE] NOTE: THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION AFFECTING THE NATIONAL DEFENSE OF THE UNITED STATES WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE ESPIONAGE ACT, 50 U.S.C.—31 AND 32, AS AMENDED. ITS TRANSMISSION OR THE REVELATION OF ITS CONTENTS IN ANY MANNER TO AN UNAUTHORIZED PERSON IS PROHIBITED BY LAW. IT MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED IN WHOLE OR IN PART, BY OTHER THAN UNITED STATES AIR FORCE AGENCIES, EXCEPT BY PERMISSION OF THE DIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE, USAF. UNCLASSIFIED [U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1950—O-818531]
Do not remove from protective enclosure. Please contact conservation if assistance is required.
• The Minister for External Affairs, MR. CASEY, has put forward a new theory on "flying saucer" sightings. . . He writes to the Editor: Our 'saucers' could be real meteors FROM time to time people report having seen unexplained objects in the sky which have come to be called "flying saucers." There have been many explanations — the sun shining on high-flying craft — meteorologically balloons — imagination etc. There is another possibility that may account for some of them, which has not been suggested, so far as I know. On known dates in each year, the earth passes through meteor streams. These are the remains of meteors that have disintegrated in outer space, but which continue their elongated paths round the sun in the form of streams of solid particles and meteoric dust. The fact that the earth moves round the sun in a fixed path and that these clouds of meteors also move round the sun in fixed paths, means that the paths of the earth and some of these meteoric streams intersect each other on a series of dates which are the same each year. Some days The earth sometimes takes a number of days to pass through the more important of these meteoric streams. The dates of maximum meteoric activity are: January 3, April 21, May 1, June 8, June 30, July 28, August 16-13, October 10, October 20-23, November 14-16, November 14, November 16, December 11-13. I have listed for the dates over the several years on which people have reported having seen "flying saucers" in Australia, and have compared them with the dates on which the earth passes through the principal meteoric streams. There appears to be a noticeable relationship between these two sets of dates. By the I mean that there tends to be a grouping of "flying saucer" sightings round about the meteor-stream dates; that it is hard to believe it is by chance. And again, there is a relative absence of "flying saucer" reports during the principal gaps between meteor-stream dates. For instance, the minimum meteoric activity of the year is between January and April. These are also the months in which fewest "flying saucers" have been reported in Australia. Not complete I do not suggest that this evidence is by any means complete, or that it is, at most more than a partial explanation of "flying saucer" phenomena. All that I suggest is that there is some evidence that people seem to report otherwise unexplained objects in the sky round about the dates on which the earth passes through the principal meteor streams, and there seems to be a lull in the reporting of "flying saucers" in between these dates. I do not suggest any more than that what I have said may be an explanation of at least a proportion of the "flying saucer" reports. Yours etc. R. G. CASEY Minister for External Affairs, Treasury Gardens, Melbourne. Underground rail inquiry THE City Development Association will give evidence at the Parliamentary Public Works Committee inquiry into the underground railway proposal. Announcing this yesterday, the secretary, Mr. R. A. Gardner, said there was a modern world trend for underground rail transport to go underground.
"ANGKASA" AF603198 -1 AUGUST 1953 FLYING SAUCERS A miracle, eclipse or just an [ILLEGIBLE] optical illusion? This article is adapted from "Forces Arienne Française" of February 1953. Captain R. Clercuin, the author, gave an earnest and careful description on the flying saucer, trying to withdraw us from sensation or obstinate disbelief. He warns us against deceitful reports, but on the other hand he admits the evidences, further reproaching those who consider the flying saucer something facetious and absurd. Evidently in France, said he mockingly, as he was afraid to be laughed at, people are discouraged to pay attention to this matter. The United States of America set up a "Saucer Commission", while General Vandenberg expressed his view formally. Recently a large-scale investigation was made by England. In France only reporters and singers are watching this miracle from nearby. - Believe it or not, but this is at variance with science. - An investigation alone on the spur of the phenomenon will bring it to light. - Maybe nobody being interested in science will neglect this problem. For, is science not the result of thinking about miracles? It is for this reason that "Angkasa" is publishing the following article. The Editor. To write a subject on flying saucers for such a serious organ like this, is a hard job indeed and needs energy and not little optimism. The major problem is to seek out evidences. There are thousands of these, but a great deal appears to be false upon investigation and other events do not square with each other. Anatole France used to say that one evidence alone of several happenings is no conclusive proof. He added: "Of course causes on scientific base are often very strong, while checking an evidence. But not so strong to vanquish the desire, reluctance or self-interest of those who like to be serious. Finally, it entails frivolous questions". And actually, when a start is made to check all available data, difficulties show up. At this moment the intellect comes to conflict with phantasy. Phantasy invites the intellect to extraordinary theories, phantasy arises doubt and opposes everything.
Carefully submitted suppositions are merely considered a silencer. It is hard to make comparisons between one thing and another. Such is the case with evidences which more or less are without foundation. Eventually the author produces one definite thing and that is dissatisfaction of his readers and for the rest he might be marked as a clown, someone with a nervous breakdown. Notwithstanding, the flying saucer cannot be overlooked, there are too many people who know about this. To say the least of the less growing groups which have never heard about this matter, especially "official circles", since it is they who cautiously keep silence on this subject. The flying saucer has created two groups, being diametrically opposed to each other. The miracles as accepted by the majority with doubt or hope, occur in an element, i.e. the aviation world: the atmosphere, the earth. It is impossible that they should be flying engines. On the basis of such contemplations the French Air Force cannot neglect this question. An explanation is intended to give a general information, not to outline a theory. The scheme of our description is therefore on the subject "Saucer" and further particulars around those miraculous happenings and incidentally the public opinion. Aside from all theories on scientific base, following is a description of the motions of saucers in the past five years. Evidences. It is understandable that happenings around the flying saucer have been leading to a nightmare. The flying saucer looms up suddenly, stays for awhile motionless, it does not leave concrete traces with a little exception according to some witnesses. Evidences are growing bigger and bigger. All phenomena in the atmosphere which have given rise to the assumption that there are flying engines operating in secrecy, are linked up with the Saucer. These views come from free countries, according to the Soviet Russian bloc and followers, it is not revealed whether Russia considers this matter important or not, her formal attitude is "anti-Saucer". The number of published evidences covers the thousands, either the proof or the significance of these is quite different. Our following information has been obtained as much as possible from official sources like press, reportages, individual investigations should be checked carefully, since all too often it turns out that many newspapers receive, publish and discuss evidences, reports or talks on this subject insufficiently, that is not in compliance with journalistic rights. The first evidences which can be connected with the flying saucer do not date from yesterday alone. More than 100 years ago "flying fishes", "flying triangles" and "flying boats" already flew above Nice, San Francisco, London or New Zealand, which by that time did not arise special excitement. Those events did not attract the attention. - 2 -
We will just be talking about more recent happenings. Remarkable is that previous miracles were reported at the same time as the publication of famous books on the future, such as Wells, Jules Verne, Driant etc, handling subjects on flying boats hailing from the stars to conquer the earth, thus contrary to normal situations. The latest happenings are not of much significance. Usually it is a fantastic light, moving rapidly in the air, but characteristics, shape, altitude and naturally the speed cannot be determined. The belief of those who have raised their theory on this matter - and many are the investigations settled immediately - cannot be repudiated. But mostly this concerns meteors, fireballs, silhouettes or other miracles. The psycho of the saucer cannot be opposed. Hence worthless evidences will simply be put aside. Many of the information must be considered needless, although with much regret (since they are really complete). As a matter of fact, deception is out of question, since nobody has self-interest in revealing secrets, neither the deceiver nor the examiner, the more so as newspapers must pay very much for copy-rights. The first events took place across the Pacific. We recall the case of George Koehler. This citizen of Denver (Colorado) said, three years ago he found remains of two saucers. The engines made from an unknown sort of metal were piloted by dwarves of almost the same figure as men. Of course this allegation was rejected some days later. In 1947 on Maury Island a sailor told that he had seen a big number of saucers and he had kept a piece of those miraculous things. After investigation it appeared it was a deception. More recently, on 29 August of this year, United Press reported that a saucer of 90 meter and flown by 8 men suddenly attacked a scout-master by means of rays. The attack did not harm, but the scout-master thought he was very lucky that he did not meet with a giant of 3 meters which some days later dropped from the air and which odour - according to the report - filled an armed group and also a member of the Security Guard of Sutton (Virginia) with disgust. From the Latin countries more and more reports alike come in; in Brasil the "O'Cruzeiro" daily announced that several months ago a reportage complete with pictures of a less known saucer was made by means of a Rolleiflex by reporters Jose Martins and Ed Keffel, before the miracle flew above the sea as quickly as it had appeared. Pierre Clostermann who saw the negatives of those pictures at Polytechnical School in Brasil did not realize that the pictures were false. However, more information came in from Rio which made the report really doubtful. - 3 -
In France, some time ago, an Italian wrote to a big weekly magazine that he wanted to sell at an extravagant price a series of negatives of an uncommon view in the moonlight: in the middle of it a big flying saucer equipped with a radio antenna and in front of the saucer two "classical" radio-helmeted astronauts in diving-dress. The whole was something extraordinary and it seemed not as if it was false. Nevertheless the Italian, a real artist, finally acknowledged that the saucer and the crew had been made from carton and the mountain shown on the picture was actually one near Rome. Another report from Italy dated 23 November was more interesting. A farmer from Castel Franco was addressed in an unknown language by three men in rubber dress, their faces were covered with a transparent material. The men were members of the crew of a flying saucer with a diameter of 20 meters and flying at an altitude of 10 meters. Said this witness, the engine consists of saucers piled up on each other. We therefore rather say: not a saucer but a heap of saucers, and so the problem is getting more and more difficult. Further, there are three other kinds of data which we like to add to the "list of honor", namely incontestable data even published in international magazines of worldwide reputation. But those data are a real example of German humor, maybe rather "heavy" but well composed and founded. In August of this year the "Flieger" magazine published an article on a flying saucer of 48 meters made from an unknown metal and driven by 46 exhaust gas pipes of a "Trochtoutor" and using "pentonium" element. It was seen by a Leutnant marked Fighter in Norway near Spitsberg. Some time later Oscar Linke, Mayor of a Russian district, said he had seen in the forest a round object with a radius of 15 meters and near of it were two men talking in glittering dress like steel. At the latest air congress Dr. Oberth made mention of an invention by the end of the war, that is an object with a power of resistance to such a high extent that it might be able to fly without engines. There are more and more of such doubtful evidences. It is a pity that readers are not so dainty. Indeed it is very hard to find out whether something is false or not. Apart from this, we are anxious to know the truth, since then the limits can be traced. Besides time has come to discuss evidences, not resulting from phantasy alone. Hundreds of evidences have been checked, so these have sufficient foundation and are reliable, so they can be used for study purposes. We will not describe these events one by one, but a general view will suffice and from this we will draw a parallel. An analysis of 25 of the most considerable cases you will find on the following pages. The first conclusion from investigations is the nonavailability of uniformity in the evidences. Figures, dimensions, tactics etc. are applied to the flying saucer. Universally, however, there are 3 big categories: fire balls, flying cigars and flying saucers. Fire balls are real light balls with a very small diameter, being evidently immaterial and having white or red-yellow rays. - 4 -
Sometimes the ball appears with a white ring about. Many are the evidences gathered in the United States of America. The most interesting was noticed four years ago. 1 October 1948, a pilot of the National Guard named George F. Gorman made a "dogflight" with a ball of 0.40 meters for 20 minutes. During this time the ball which he tried to run after challenged him incessantly. According to Gorman the object seemed to be very handy. It had an extraordinary speed and understood every manoeuvre to be made by the pursuer. Finally, the ball seemed to get bored of the race, it suddenly disappeared perpendicularly at a surprising speed. From an Air traffic tower 2 officials were watching this strange event. Many are the reports on such happenings. 12 June 1952 the crew of "Air France" and an observer of the Tour du Bourget witnessed at the foot of the sky a red ball which first stood still, then moved after an hour and slowly left the spot. 19 July 1952, pilot Piernan of the "Capital Airlines" saw near Washington a phosphorescent object, like a tailless comet, after a few minutes it rose perpendicularly at a surprising speed. Also reports were made by Gaillac (17 October 1952) and Cleron (17 October 1952) on red balls with a white ring in flame, moving in the air while dropping lumps which afterwards melted on reaching the ground. Also reports from Mont-de-Marsan (26 November 1952) and Cleron (5 December 1952) on fire-balls were put forward, according to attached list. Flying cigars are more obvious. What is understood from this is something like a wingless aircraft or something like a submarine, beaming and moving at a speed of 0,7 - 2 - 3 Mach. The rays are wonderful, blue, green or red-yellow (orange); the object shows windows and moves swiftly. Many reports on these flying cigars have been made since 2 July 1948. On that day Clarence Chiles and John B. Whitted, pilots of a DC 3 of the Eastern Airlines were near Montgomery, Alabama, when they saw one of these engines in the shape of a B-29, but 4 times bigger and moving into their direction. Probably it was startled too, because suddenly it turned aside, showed for a moment its profile and a row of windows, then suddenly increased its speed, disappeared while exhausting a blue gas, the current of which thrilled the Dakota. This evidence was also confirmed by a passenger and witnesses on the ground. Such meetings were many. In May 1948 a pilot, William Sperry, saw a "cigar" at an amazing speed. Further reports were received from Adams and Anderson on 31 September 1950; the crew of Mid Continent Airlines on 20 January 1951; two pilots of the Aeroclub at Casablanca on 24 September and 6 October 1952; 2 pilots of the Air France on their routine flight between London-Paris-Nice saw for 30 seconds near Draguignan a big cigar at a speed of approximately 3000 kilometers per hour. Both important facts were watched from the ground. One night in August 1948 Clyde Tombaugh, a famous astronomer (it was he who discovered Pluto) followed for some seconds by his eyes a radiant cigar moving in the air at full speed. - 5 -
Two other men also saw this. Four years later on 29 October 1952 something happened in Marignac. A customhouse officer was shocked while he saw an object moving on the runway of an airport at a speed of 200 kilometers per hour and suddenly stopped about 100 meters from him between the hangar and the air traffic tower. The shape was like a pointed cigar, about 5 meters long and with a diameter of 1 meter, there were also 4 windows showing inside flames of a blue color. The said customs house officer approached the object, but at a distance of 50 meters from it a very white flame came out of the tail, then the miracle sprang straight up and disappeared in a few seconds above the lake of Berre. Then the customhouse officer heard two full sounds: a vague sound of landing and a clearer one like a light explosion. This evidence was thoroughly investigated in view of the important details and the honesty of the witness. This event could be accepted as to be truthful or otherwise the customhouse officer might have been the victim of an optical illusion. More interesting than fire balls and cigars, flying saucers have much engrossed the attention: those round, biconvex objects, sometimes radiating brilliantly, or surrounded by a less bright light which arises the idea of a rotary speed. Pictures also show a rather mysterious appearance, sometimes a clear ring is visible and sometimes not. 25 June 1947 a manufacturer from Idaho, Kenneth Arnold, saw something that made his name famous. He was flying North of Rockhouses in Washington and saw very clearly, although the distance between him and those objects was approximately 5 kilometers, 9 saucers passing Mount Rainier in formation; he guessed the speed of those saucers was about 2000 kilometers per hour. Some days later, on 13 August 1947, in Salmon Dam and Twin Falls (Idaho) two groups of witnesses saw low flying saucers at big speed; trees bent their tops down while those soundless miracles flew past. 7 January 1948: the Mantell case. Inasmuch as the State Police had reported an exceedingly big object of unknown descent flying into the direction of Fort Knox (Kentucky), the airbase commander ordered a F-51 flight to check this matter. At 15.00 hours Captain Mantell, the flight commander, reported to the air traffic officer that he saw a flying saucer of an extremely big size and that he was trying to catch it. He climbed up to 7000 meters, but did not have success. Eventually after one hour race, the radio communication cut off. His aircraft crashed near the airfield and Captain Thomas F. Mantell was killed. After this dramatic race more evidences showed up. In 1949 in White Sands technicians of the Navy, among others Commander H.B. de Laughlin, followed by means of theodolites a couple of flying saucers with a diameter of approximately 30 meters which accompanied and now and then encircled a V-2 swiftly. The rate of those saucers was estimated at 28,000 kilometers per hour and the altitude at 100 kilometers. - 6 -
20 May 1950 Professor Hall of the Observatory at Lowell followed by his telescope in bright weather a flying saucer at a speed of 300 kilometers per hour. 14 July 1952 three red and radiant saucers with a diameter of 30 meters at a speed of 1500 kilometers per hour were reported by the crew of an aircompany in the United States. 19 July H. Fregnale, a French geologic engineer, said that he had made a picture of a flying saucer which puffed up in the middle and glittered around. It moved above Chauvet lake. 20 September a silvery flying saucer acted as a spectator of the military "Grande Large" manoeuvre, then followed a Gloster Meteor fighter to its base in Topcliff, Yorkshire. The list of extraordinary evidences of flying saucers is far from complete. Actually, several pictures must be examined. We mention some examples: the flying saucer of the Canaries (March 1950), the flying saucers of Salem Massachusetts (16 July 1952), pictures of the Chauvet lake and also negatives which pitiful enough show the saucers as formless stains. As a matter of fact as also evidences recently made by pilots and sailors are worth while to be discussed, as well as a big number of pictures on radar screen of unclassified objects, flying at various speed and altitude from Germany onto Korea, also saucers which teased radars at Andrews Field (Washington DC) on 7 August 1952. Typical characteristics of the flying saucer. An analysis of the most attractive evidences reveals the number of the types and the unclearness of the miracles. Therefore a synthesis of the elements, being necessary to find out a hypothesis, is very difficult. This pertains in particular to the fact that special characteristics cannot be controled which arise from evidences made at a considerable distance as to the type, motion and speed of the flying saucers. The speed is various. There are saucers standing motionless for a few minutes, there are saucers quick as lightning, running at thousands of kilometers per hour in the atmosphere. The sudden change of the speed in just a few seconds causes an extraordinarily big motion, maybe ten times the gravity. The data are also uncommon. Evidently these objects do not have a certain course, neither have inertia at all and they easily challenge an extraordinary tangent. In many cases, particularly when they meet planes, their sudden motions are probably handled in a clever way. All miracles which have been observed are beaming, as firstly they reflect rays of other objects and secondly because they radiate their own white, green, blue or orange rays. The beam seems much like a flame at very high temperature, the flame of wrought iron, magnesium light etc. Sometimes this radiance encircles balls and saucers and as far as the flying cigars are concerned it appears as a tail light. - 7 -
However, the most extraordinary characteristic of these miracles is undoubtedly that immaterial one. The balls form a heap of lights, cigars and saucers are much brighter and it seems as if they have no weight, no troubles with air pressure, they split the atmosphere without whistle, the motion is quite soundless. Broadly, because of the various speed, the speed of their immateriality, the flying saucers challenge all existing natural laws, economic gravity and when those flying saucers are piloted by human beings, this is quite contrary to the law of gravity of human beings. This is beyond any comprehension. Hypothesis. The inexactitude, the vagueness of the evidences, the necessary limitations with regard to the truth of several evidences, the absurdity concerning the reported miracles, all this makes an objective hypothesis on the flying saucer very difficult. Pending official evidences we can only make mention of the many hypotheses already known. These hypotheses form a very complete series and out of this one hypothesis can be sifted - from the very simplest up to the most extraordinary. Skeptical people who have always been opposing the possibility of flying saucers in the sense of miracles, are inclined to say that saucers are merely a product of the human thought. Some of them accuse reporters of having started nonsensical news in such a modern time like this. Their intention is merely to seek for a replacement of the ghost of Loch Ness who - after his excellent achievements - is considered to have withdrawn in a holy manner. This intention appears once only, further it will be like a snowball which from day to day will be growing bigger and bigger, since the evidences can be trusted and at last the authors themselves are fascinated by their own deception. This attracts the attention indeed and we recall how many dailies were hurrying to publish dubious news. However, we must admit that the press in this way - without causing too many troubles - just touches upon a subject that attracts the public more than murder news or a big lawsuit. There are people who believe that it was the United States of America which started this subject with a psychological aim; the intention was to convince American citizens of the danger of the air way, to explain the idea that Russians might possess new secret engines, in short to make all American citizens supporters of the air defense. Also here the results met the expectations highly; this explains the strange attitude of the United States Air Force which now and then made publications contradictory to each other. This information given by the communistic press is hard to accept, also in view of the fact that the formatour of the "Saucer Commission" was John Forrestal who on the same day (29 December 1948) submitted his famous "Earth Satellite Vehicle Program", an expression of at least high ideology. The more it is hard to understand that men of his influence such as General Vandenberg, Professor Tombaugh and other experts or representatives of the Air Materiel Command have shown their preparedness to study this matter, the importance of which is still an open question. - 8 -
At last it was opined that flying saucers should be merely an illusion or a hallucination of the public. Sir Harold Spencer Johns, Director of Greenwich Observatory stated to a Paris daily: "Saucers are products of the stupidity of the ears". Notwithstanding it is also clear that this expression can no longer be maintained, because of the many kinds of evidences which underline the evidences of scientists who do not know each other. For the majority the existence of flying saucers cannot be doubted. Again and again these objects are appearing, according to several experts who consider these as ordinary miracles of the atmosphere. The serious ideas are often attractive and in many cases certainly true. "An immaterial miracle that moves soundless and turns at sudden speed and disappears in just a second? But that denotes the miracle of rays", said Professor Menzel of Harvard University. Lights of an autocar, rays of the sun, the glittering of an aeroplane in the sky, this breaks the rays of the clouds or of water, in which he notes various figures of breaking rays. This hypothesis is naturally for the greatest part obvious from evidences (see Nos. 24 and 25 of the list published in this magazine). In the first case the witness might have seen the shade of three jets flying at the same time at a very high altitude and in the second case it might be a matter of projection of the clouds. In this connection it is clear that most of the evidences happened in less bright weather. Mention may also be made of loose balloons used for meteorologic purposes or to examine cosmic rays. Floating at various altitudes, these balloons can create changeable shades as a result of the various layers of the air, looking much like white saucers which sometimes can reach an extraordinary size. Now there is certainty in this matter. Aviation Week of 19 February 1951 gained from Dr. Urner Liddel, Head of the Sea Research Service, some information about the Skyhook operation. Said Dr. Liddel, evidences concerning all flying saucers can be connected with this operation and therefore it is needless to mention Russia or citizens of Mars. As a matter of fact this fits only some cases: up to now we have never seen balloons moving at a speed of 6000 kilometers per hour, moreover not in the stratosphere, and certainly not against the wind and climbing as fast as a V-2 up to an altitude of 100 kilometers. A more satisfactory opinion is expressed by Noel W. Scott. This physicist of Fort Belvoir (Virginia) believes that in the rarest air at an extremely high altitude, very strong electro-static phenomena sometimes shine brilliantly and cause echo on radar screens. He is reported to have imitated these phenomena by means of a glass mask, the air in which has first been rarefied and ionized. This is a valuable information indeed for several matters regarding the reported saucers at a very high altitude and observed through radar. According to T. Gassit, Director of the Observatory at Monte Mario (Rome) and T. Armellini, Director of the Observatory of Lyon, saucers are often meteors and extraordinary lightnings in the form of balls of a typical characteristic (see event No. 14 Le Bourget 10 Casablanca). - 9 -
Such hypotheses are often heard. The following is a list, maybe incomplete: - The change is caused by the pressure on waves made by aircraft, guided missiles moving at the speed of sound (event no. 8 White Sands?) - Wreath of smoke exhausted by a jet (event no. 18 Grande Vergue?) - Stars or planets visible at daylight, particularly Venus (event no. 2 Mantell?) - Meteors or ball (event no. 16 Piernan). - Training plane with round wings as Chance-Vought - Colored flashing circles as a result of the circulation of light in the clouds like thin stones (event no. 24 Cleron II) - Huge movement of bees (no. 21 and no. 22 Cleron and Gaillac?) - Extraordinary phenomena caused by ionisation of high atmosphere after the test of A atoms. There is no lack of data and there are many experts indeed who have studied this matter, regardless of their contradicting the reports. However, the acceptable evidences cannot always be explained on the basis of those hypotheses. 19 July 1952 the press published a report from Captain Rappelt, an Air Force Officer of the United States, especially in charge of studying flying saucers (operation bluebook). According to this officer, 30% of the observed miracles is caused by others or celestial bodies, 1½% by balloons, 22% by birds and airplanes and just 2% by deception, 10% too little information for further examination and 15% inexplicable data. Is the flying saucer supposed to be recognized as a flying engine? This part of the investigation draws special consideration. First it can be presumed whether in the present state of technical science engines are being constructed with characteristics of flying saucers and if not, what are the obstacles? As to the fire balls, this question can be put aside; we cannot imagine that a fire ball can have a diameter of 0,40 meter, piloted or operated at such an accurate speed and able to race with a F-51 for 25 minutes. Mostly those miraculous events can be explained from common hypotheses and the rest - for lack of other data - from the possibility, that this is simply a glow of some material engines or projection of the clouds, although this explanation will not suffice like that on the movement of bees. Flying cigars are not so big a problem, because of their likeness with classic airplanes. In accordance with their calculation, indeed they can remain in the air and move at supersonic speed, there is no reason why they should fight the existence of telescopic wings (several times they are reported to have short wings). Probably the cigars are operated from a big distance, only the method, like in the case of the flying saucers, is hard to fit the already known systems. Flying saucers can be listed in a more revolutionary group. The construction of the cell will not entail invincible difficulties. The formula has been studied for several years all over the world and especially in Germany during the war. A biconvex cell must have certain aerodynamic characteristics at supersonic speed; it gives a very big volume for its equipment, for fuel and for bombs. Its stability is various, dependent upon the drive system as used by aircraft of the Chance-Vought type, that is an outward-drive plane, maybe hard to operate. - 10 -
Another case is a saucer with a certain axle and a stability like a gyroscope which can move at supersonic speed without vibrations. The climbing capacity must be very big, the sudden turns in any direction easily handled must be caused by a changeable axial instrument. Sideward manipulations of a jet can only be fixed by surmounting air resistance. Since flying saucers have formed the topic, many thrilling investigations were made. The number of evidences is growing bigger and bigger, dating back to 1914. And up to now General Popoff has not joined the competition yet. Practically, small models have flown; the most popular is the flying saucer of E.W. Kay which trespasses the speed of 1000 kilometers per hour. So we can say that the creation of a cell of that flying saucer is no impossibility, the trouble is just to find out the metals which can resist extraordinary powers. A state-reactor put in line with the drive system is harder to understand. A state-reactor put in line with a tangent seems to be best complying with the formula of circles. However, this theory has not produced many results, also aerodynamic characteristics which suit big speed at low flying. It also understands which fuel fits the glow that accompanies these engines and how to explain the reaction of the exhaust gas which is soundless and forms the most typical characteristic of the flying saucers. A sound like a rocket on 14 July ... which drive system has such a characteristic? Naturally this reminds us of an atomic engine, but it seems as if this is also inexplicable. Actually an atomic engine is just a source of heat usable to drive a steam engine, to increase the air in a jet or a gas used for rockets. Such engine can explain the range of the movement, the capacity and the possibility to fly at an altitude of 100 kilometers of the flying saucers, most probably also "white balls" like mixed flour, a product of combustion of drive elements, but the sound which arises should be thundering. Consequently there is another solution to explain this by means of a source of energy which is radical and mysterious based on reaction, either the use of atomic energy/cosmic rays or the resistance of gravitation in an electro-magnetic way (atomic engines can produce electricity and also heat). This endless principle we leave entirely to our readers. Like the drive, the operation is also mysterious. Inasmuch as there is no human organism which can stand big speed as made by the flying saucers, we can take it that operation must be done from a big distance. This is not quite impossible with regard to the plane flight at an allowable altitude. But we wonder how the television-telecommand can work in such a way that from a big distance sudden movements can be adjusted to the circumstances. Many reports on flying saucers have so far been received from observations near the coast and it is not known whether these engines were released by submarines. Finally, the manufacture of those cigars and saucers is not impossible, but this means an extraordinary advance, especially in the operation by means of radio. And technic, contrary to nature, will not cut capers. It is hard to admit that such big advances can be made at an equal time. However, while contemplating this highly amazing possibility, we wonder which country might be very blessed. - 11 -
Of course we think of the United States of America and the power of their enormous industry. From wellknown circles the information has been gained that the United States Air Force is interested in flying saucers, but sofor investigations have not yet led to successful results. But, when flying saucers indeed come from the United States, why is it then that a Commission has been set up for this study? Machiavelism like this should be slavish. And besides why is it that those engines can pass areas flown by civil aircraft, and on the other hand, when in Soviet Russia an atomic explosion is inevitable, we cannot imagine that such a revolutionary engine like the flying saucer can be hidden in the United States for so long a time. According to Look (June 1952), General Hoyt Vandenberg, Chief of Staff of the United States Air Force, has announced that groups of technicians have studied all evidences and they are working on a special spectrograph used to analyse saucers of light. Director of the Technical Service of the United States Air Force is said to have submitted extraordinary evidences on miraculous happenings and an authority of American Aviation also declared that the results of the investigations were fantastic but quite true. In July 1952 Aviation published a thorough and unequalled examination by means of radar. All this does not suit the hypothesis of the "American Saucer". In another terrain in the world, that is Soviet Russia, successful results were achieved thanks to the investigations of Germany in particular with regard to missiles. Guided missiles from a big distance, the descent of which was already known, were flying to and fro in the air near Russia, Palestine and Norway until 1947, while they disappeared suddenly. Were they neglected, so that is it all the more hard to find out more particulars? Recently a doctor named Richard Miethe, said that he formerly worked together with 6 other engineers - three of them are now in Russia - on the investigation of a supersonic Helicopter V-7 provided with turbine gas engines and operated by radar and radio, being able to fly round the world without refuelling and making use of a substance something like helium. This information cannot be searched. Dr. Miethe is not known to German scientists. But a comparison can be made with the article of Dr. Beck in "Der Flieger" and the information that at the coast of the Baltic were found secret slepes. Fortunately these evidences were examined accurately and the hypothesis on the "Russian Saucer" was not really founded. Like in America, Russia is continuing to make bombers which grow heavier and heavier, probably this will say that the classic standard of flying engines has not been exceeded. But the Russian press, also the world communist press timely fight the existence of flying saucers, indicating: "a hysteric phenomenon from the United States of America and signs of a crack-brained campaign to benefit the war propaganda and to prepare tiredness in the war against Russia". Except those two countries, it is hard to find other countries which might be able to produce such engines. - 12 -
Inasmuch as it is hard to admit that countries in the world can make flying saucers, why don't we seek the solution outside the world? From this derives the theory of the outerworld. This theory is supported by wellknown experts (among others by Dr. Riedel, administrator of the Search Service at Peenemunde). Only the outerworld can satisfy unbelieving people, since their explanations can easily avoid the arguments. The cell of those engines is certainly made from a metal unknown to the world. When the shape is like a saucer, a compromise between an aeroplane and a ball, so that shape is especially made to be able to move in the atmosphere and outside. Needless to say that the drive is enabled by an atomic engine which contains plutonium. There are those who venture to bypass the stage and the atomic engine and revert to the opinion of Wells concerning the substance of "favorite" or a metal not affected by gravity. Or a revolutionary magnetic engine may be used in the magnetic field between the planets. The question of operation cannot contest this brave theory. One is inclined to allege that the engines are operated from far, a central saucer, the giant saucer of Mantell encircles the earth like a satellite (Pyridon), it sends the crew down to the earth in the shape of a saucer, a cigar or fire ball and watches it over carefully. Another says that the engines are handled by strange creatures from Mars, Venus and other celestial bodies, even other beings as created by authors - in the form of a caterpillar, lizard, other creatures composed of cells like plants or molecular beings different from us (for instance our carbon replaced by silicon). Where are those celestial guests coming from? From Mars with its rare atmosphere? From Venus with its dusty and God full atmosphere? Why so nearby? At a distance of less than 5 lightyears is the planet Centaurus, the nearest planet to us, and further at a distance of eight lightyears the planet Wolf 359. And who knows whether those planets are sources of light like our sun and surrounded by their own planets? Those are the stars included in our constellation and appearing like Milky Way. And another nearest motion of the stars is to be found in the constellation of Andromeda at a distance of 500,000 lightyears. As to the intention, the characteristics are different from each other. According to pessimists - among them are wellknown people - flying saucers are the forerunners of invading troops from another planet. Optimistic people say that our guests are small men, kind and shy, clever and modest who desire our welfare, but when we have been troubling for so many years with our atomic tests. They probably know the real reason why it is that the source of light coming from 8 planets out of the ten (the planet under Mars has disappeared in a state unknown to us, but apparently wellknown to them) does not turn any longer in the oval shape. This theory may explain that since many years the evidences on flying saucers have been repeating and that the United States wellnformed about this, are prepared to accept the reports so that a panic can be avoided, hence the incessant publications, contrary to each other, hence the success of movies about the future, books on fictitious sciences, stories about engines in the atmosphere. - 13 -
When this hypothesis clears up all problems, we must take it that this is only to satisfy the illusion. This hypothesis has no strong foundation and many are the gaps itself. So we must be careful when we read reports. On the other hand we must also oppose the easy-going statement that the hypothesis on outside-planets is funny and absurd. The opinion as if on other planets maybe creatures are living with a good constitution and having made more progress than we do, whose civilization is much higher than ours, is not some more abominable than the strong theory of Lord Kelvin and Arrhenius which is beyond expectation. But are the difficulties of this material, the possibilities of the mind not extraordinary? Many people laugh at flying saucers, since they believe in the possibilities, the use of atoms and other scientific miracles. Indeed it is the spirit of the age to oppose new inventions, because they break sciences already attained. Maybe the law of inertia does not apply to objects but also to orthodox ideas being eager to maintain normal events. So often progress has been made as a product of phantasies versus those who use their brains. Science admits that at the limits of human knowledge a new wondrous world starts which may be never investigated by mankind although by all means to enter that world within our sense-organs, and the basis of that knowledge too, a hypothesis cannot be rejected the only lack of which consists of shocking normal views and as we must recognize, startling the human haughty. Of course it does not mean that the hypothesis on outerplanets is more acceptable than other things. This is thus an incidental view on flying saucers, ectoplasm of the atomic age. What is the result of this vague study? Aside from above hallucinations and deceptions, there are many other reliable evidences. A major part of those evidences can be explained simply, but there are also other evidences made up from hypotheses like these. The number is insignificant, although for instance one only might be of the same importance. The giant saucer of Mantell, the cigar of Chiles and Whitted, the saucer of Tessalit, the cigar of Marignac may have given rise to the idea that the saucer is a material engine operated by creatures or from a distance. There are also Frenchmen who have made up their mind in this concern. Denien and Conders of the Paris Observatory contradict the reports, also Andre Laberthe. Gabriel Voisin and Pierre Clostermann, however, support the hypothesis of the outerworld. Amanoff says: "Believe it or not, but it is contrary to science". Needless to laugh at this problem. Discussions in this line will also have no result. Only investigations on the spur of the moment may reveal the necessary elements. But in Paris, probably for fear to be laughed at, nobody ventures to pay attention to this matter. It is very easy enough to have a sceptic smile. The United States of America have set up a Commission, General Vandenberg has officially expressed his view. Recently an investigation all over the world was made by England. In France, only reporters and singers have been watching this question from nearby. A good start to open the "Department de Boucoues Volantes" of the French Ministry of Information on 12 July 1952. - 14 -
At any rate, when our sky is being passed by unknown objects from what course it may be, is this not enough to attract the attention? Sufficient is the number of experts supported by military and police security services during several months to obtain results. When the information is false, a systematic control quickly shows the error and settles investigations of any nature rather than having no certainty. Awful to think that this problem might force reporters to look out for a new sea serpent of Loch Ness. Adapted from an article of Captain R. Clercuin in "Forces Aerienne Française" February 1953. - 15 -
PICTURES Page 253. A picture of flying saucers made by coast guards on 16 July 1952. 254. A design of a flying saucer made by Captain Rudolf Schriever published in 1950. Note: the middle part of this saucer has the smallest effect. This is not used as lifting power. Jet engines inside avoid the circulation of the body, enable the drive and produce a capacity (speed) up to 4200 kmh. This German design uses 21 rotors (like a helicopter). While starting the rotor can reach a rotary of 1650-1800 revolutions per minute and for plane flying 500 rpm. According to the calculation at a total weight of 3000 kg, it can have an interesting speed of 100 meters per second while the maximum speed is estimated at 4200 kmh. How big the range is without refuelling, is not stated, but considering the excessive fuel of the jet engines, we can guess that the range is short. Data: 1. Supporter. 2. Jet propulsion. 3. Cabin. 4. Rotorblade. 5. Central ring. 6. Engines to enable climbing straight up. 7. Fuel tank. 8. Drive current. 9. Diameter of the fore-ball. 10. Fuel tank. 11. Landing apparatus. 12. Propulsion engine for horizontal flight. 255. Prof. Dr. Einstein. His theory on the relativity has some connection with flying in the atmosphere. 256. Just a minute the flying saucer encircles Ilha dos Azores Island, after that it turns sharply and disappears to the Atlantic. 257. A close view on a flying saucer - Brasil. 258. A picture of a flying saucer in May 1952 made by Jose Martins and Ed Keffel, 2 reporters of Brasil. 260. General Samford, Chief of G2 (Intelligence Service) of the United States Air Force. 263. Miraculous white-colored objects in V-formation pictured by Carl Hart Jr, Lubbock, Texas. - 16 -
FLYING SAUCERS THROUGH CENTURIES 1. Miraculous, radiant objects were first noticed on 9 August 1762. Also Indonesia was visited by those things in the shape of triangles. Same in Scotland and New Zealand. 2. In 1919 at 23.00 hours a "cigar" loomed up above Huntington, West Virginia, USA, while no aircraft of the Air Force or Navy were flying. 3. In 1934 Nicolas Roehrich, leader of the Tibet expedition, saw a round thing like an egg glittering like steel, flying Southward at full speed. 4. During World War II in Sweden and Peenemunde (V-2 factories) colored rays were visible, called by people: Ghost Rockets. 5. In 1944 - 1945 the allied fighters and bombers attacking Germany and Japan were often run after by fireballs, the so-called Foo fighters or Kraut fireballs supposed to be a secret German weapon. 6. The flow of reports on flying saucers started with the evidence of Kenneth Arnold, a businessman from Idaho, USA who saw from a plane 9 saucers above Mount Rainier on 24 June 1947. 7. 7 January 1948 Captain F. Mantell, pilot of a F-51 was killed after a "dogflight" with a flying saucer in Godman Field Fort Knox - Kentucky. 8. 23 July 1948 Chiles and Whitted, pilots of a DC-3 witnessed a flying cigar without wings in Montgomery, Alabama, showing windows like a double decker. 9. 16 October 1948 at 21.00 hours Lt. Gorman piloting a F-51 ran after a fireball for 20 minutes at Fargo airfield. 10. 18 November 1948 at 22.45 hours Lt. H. C. Combs, a Harvard pilot pursued a fireball above Andrews Field, Washington DC. 11. 20 January 1951 L.W. Vinther and J.F. Backmaler, flying a DC3 of Mid Cont. Airlines were accompanied by a miraculous thing for 4, 5 seconds in Sioux City at 20.30. 12. Also the Korean War called the attention of the flying saucer. In July 1952 the crew of a B-26 saw a flying saucer above the Korean front. 13. 1 July 1952 Mr. Linke, ex-Mayor of Gleimerhausen, East Germany, swore having seen a flying saucer with its crew landing. 14. 19 July 1952 W. B. Nash and W.H. Fortenberry and 10 passengers of a DC-4 met 6 flying saucers above Chesapeake Bay Washington DC, flying in echelon 6000 ft under that DC-4. - 17 -
15. 19 July 1952 those miraculous things encircled above Washington DC from midnight till morning time, appearing through radar. They could not be caught by a F-54 Starfire at a speed of 1000 kmh. Flying saucers seem to enjoy showing up above atomic factories in the United States. 27 July 1952 jet fighters watching over Los Alamos run after those miraculous guests without any success. 16. Early in 1953 fireballs loomed above Acheen, Palembang, Magelang, Jogja, Makassar, Asahan, Bandung... 17. What are these things? Where are they coming from and how do they work? What is the purpose of their visit? All questions keeping not only readers busy, but scientists all over the world. Only time and human brains will probably once lift the screen of their secrets. - 18 -
LIST OF SEVERAL EVIDENCES OF MIRACLES IN THE AIR WITNESS | EVIDENCE | REMARKS No. Date | Name | Position | Place Time Duration Distance Altitude| Data | Official Comments 1 6-24-1947 Kenneth Arnold Private Pilot Mt Rainier Morning 3 min.+ 35 km abt.4000m 9 Saucers Washington as big as a DC4. Speed abt 2000 km 2 1-7-1948 Thomas F.Mantell Captain of a Godman AFB Ft.15,15 short 4-7000m Round object, Meteo- Hardly F-51. Other Knox Kentucky 25 min. normal size, balloon, accept- witnesses on like metal to study able the ground cosmic rays, or Venus 3 2-20-1948 Dr. Hall Through theo- 13.00 2 min 2-4 km 1500m White saucer dolite diam. 10-15m surrounded by - - white flakes 4 4-8-1948 Lt.Robert W. Flight Lt. of a Philippines - 5 km - Silvery object, Meyers F-47, 67 years. by day while approached Fighter Wing 18. turning 90° and Fighter Group disappearing in - leading four 5 seconds, no F-47's. trace of exhaust gas 5 May 1948 W. Sperry - - Night - short 2500m Lightning flying Operated submarine at from far - fantastic speed 6 7-23-1948 Clarence S. Pilots of a DC-3 Montgomery Flying cigar like Chiles & John Eastern Airlines. Alabama a B-29, 2 rows of Whitted, and Chiles is ex-lt Col 00.45 some 210 m - windows, the nose - a passenger, USAF with 8500 seconds provided with antenna, Clarence Mc Flying hours, Whitted dark blue body, red Kelfie ex pilot of a B-29 taillites (12m), in World War II speed 800-1000 kmh. - 19 -
7. 10-1-1948 Lt.George Gorman Pilot F-51, Air Fargo Airport 21.00 20 min. 150 m 300- Fireball, diam. Meteo Prob- L.D. Jensen National Guard, 4800m 0.4 m. Dogflight, Balloon ably Samuel E.Johnson Airport Traffic Winking before operat- Controller, the race. During ed from CAA employee duel radiating, far. faster than a F-51 8. August Dr. Clyde Tom- Astronomer, Las Cruces, New 23.00 20 sec. - - Round object like Meteor Un- 1948 baugh and other discovered Pluto Mexico an egg with win- believ- witnesses dows. Taillight. able Too fast for an aircraft, but too slow for a meteor 9. 8-29-1949 Commander Robert Personnel of White Morning - - 90km Like an egg of fan- Waves at B.McLaughlin & a rocket Sands. tastic size, speed of a air other officers base. Using 4-6 km per sec. V-2 density photo-theo- Diam: 40 m. Stop- or and at dolite ped. Sudden speed shades an alt. of 90 km?? 10. 2-8-1950 Lt.Commander J. Major US Navy Alameda By day - - 1500m Like ice-cream, - - L.Fraker & 5 Naval exhausting, speed citizens of San Station 150 kmh. Leandro, Cal. 11. 9-31-1950 M. Adams - - 21.30 30 sec. 600m Cigar, 2 rows of - - windows, clear blue, supersonic 12. 20-1-1951 Lawrence W.Vinther Crew of DC-3 Sioux 20.30 - 60m 2400m Cigar, long wings, - Some- & J. Bachmeier, 1 MidCont Airlines. City, red light, tailless, thing passenger and 2 Vinther ex-instruct- Iowa as big as B-29, con- ATC officers or of USAF with 5000 white front light, trary Fl. hours, Bachmeier turning at 360° in to ex-Major USN with a second, flying aero- 6000 fl. hrs. beside a DC-3 for dyna- 4-5 seconds. mics. - 20 -
13. March 1951 3 Military Experienced Bangui 04.00 5 min. - - Fireball, diam. 2 x Operated pilots Venus, big speed from a during horizontal big flight, turning 90° distance 14. 10-4-1951 2 Military Experienced Tensalit 2.00 1 min.6km - Fireball, diam. 10 - pilots cm, orange rays, first slow, turning 90°, and increasing speed exceedingly 15. 6-12-1952 Airport Reliable Le Bour- 1.00 1 hr. - 1000m. Dark-red fireball, Meteor - officials get, Paris bigger than a star, stopped for a long time, moved slow- ly 16. 7-9-1952 John Baldwin & Crew of a Renford Day - - - Round discus, white, - - George Robert- C-46 of Atomic clear. First stopped, son & 50 Korean Connor Air- plant moved farther, grew fighters lines Richland ing vague, increas- Washington ed speed and dis- appeared quickly 17. 7-18-1952 - 1 Witness and 1 Lee Chauvet photo 18.00 1 min.3-8 - Saucer with bulging Meteo center, glittering Balloon - 18. 7-19-1952 S.C.Pierman & Capt. of a DC-3 Washing- Night Some Tailless comet, Meteor Jadious many passengers Capital Airlines ton seconds - climbing straight Dubious up at amazing speed 19. 8-1-1952 Major James B. Crew of fighter Wright Day 10 sec. - 5700m Saucer. Red-white Smith & Lt Donald Patterson rays. Floating, J. Hauer AFB then flying rapid- ly - 21 -
20. 7-6-1952 Richard Thomas Radar Officer & Air Washington 24.10 5 hrs 20 km - Dots on radar Electro- & Harry Barnes port traffic control- Nation Air- screen moving magnetic ler port at 100 kmh, phenomena - Washington pursued by a jet without success due to bad weather 21. 9-20-1952 - Witnesses in the air Grande 10.30 - 5km 1500m Silvery saucer and on the ground Vogue glittering like a falling leaf, extraordinary speed, then slow- - ly and again flying at 1000 kmh 22. 9-24-1952 - 2 Witnesses Casablanca 18.30 10sec 3km 500m Cigar, blue and - Meteor - green rays. 23. 10-6-1952 - Experienced wit- Draguignan 1.30 30sec 3km - Big cigar, ex- nesses hausting white blue smoke. Meteor - Speed: 3000 kmh 24. 10-17-1952 - Through a Cleron 13.00 Some - - Dark red ball Moving tele scope min. with Saturn ring, bees Dubious elements like falling air- threads 25. 10-27-1952 - Many witnesses Gaillac 16.00 - 1000m 1000m Saucers as big as peanuts, climbing Moving straight up, to- bees Dubious gether with some- thing like glass wool 26. 10-27-1952 - Reliable custom- Marignane 2.30 1 min 50m On the A 5m cigar, diam.: Guided - house officer ground 1m, slowly coming from a then at full speed, distance sounds like a rocket.
ON HIS MAJESTY'S SERVICE [Buy WAR SAVINGS Certificates NOW!] COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA. DEPARTMENT OF AIR. If not delivered within 7 days, return to ...................................... ......................................
"ANGKASA" AEF603198 - 1 AUGUST 1953 FLYING SAUCERS A miracle, eclipse or just an AEF603198 optical illusion? This article is adapted from "Forces Ariennes Francaise" of February 1953. Captain R. Claret, the author, gave an earnest and careful description on the flying saucer, trying to withdraw us from sensation or obstinate disbelief. He warns us against deceitful reports, but on the other hand he admits the evidences, further reproaching those who consider the flying saucer something facetious and absurd. Evidently in France, said he mockingly, as he was afraid to be laughed at, people are discouraged to pay attention to this matter. The United States of America set up a "phenomenons" commission. The General Vandenberg expressed his view formally. Recently a large-scale investiga- tion was made by England. In France only reporters and singers are watching this miracle from nearby. - Believe it or not, but this is at variance with science. - An investigation alone on the spur of the phenomenon will bring it to light. - Maybe nobody being interested in science will neglect this problem. For, is science not the result of thinking about miracles? It is for this reason that "Angkasa" is publishing the following article. The Editor. To write a subject on flying saucers for such a serious organ like this, is a hard job indeed and needs energy and not little optimism. The major problem is to seek out evidences. There are thousands of these, but a great deal appears to be false upon investigation and other events do not square with each other. Anatole France used to say that one evidence alone of several happenings is no conclusive proof. He added: "Of course causes on scientif- ic base are often very strong, while checking an evidence. But not so strong to vanquish the desire, reluctance or self-interest of those who like to be serious. Finally, it entails frivolous questions". And actually, when a start is made to check all available data, difficulties show up. At this moment the intellect comes to conflict with phantasy. Phantasy invites the intellect to extraordinary theories, phantasy arises doubt and opposes everything.
Carefully submitted suppositions are merely considered a silencer. It is hard to make comparisons between one thing and another. Such is the case with evidences which more or less are without foundation. Eventually the author produces one definite thing and that is dissatisfaction of his readers and for the rest he might be marked as a clown, someone with a nervous breakdown. Notwithstanding, the flying saucer cannot be overlooked, there are too many people who know about this. To say the least of the less growing groups which have never heard about this matter, specially "official circles", it is they who cautiously keep silence on this subject. The flying saucer has created two groups, being diametrically opposed to each other. The miracles as accepted by the majority with doubt or hope, occur in an element, the aviation world: the atmosphere, the earth. It is impossible that they should be flying engines. On the basis of such compila- tions the French Air Force cannot neglect this question. An explanation is intended to give a general information, not to outline a theory. The emphasis of our description is therefore on the subject in order to get more particulars around those miraculous happenings and incidentally the public opinion. Aside from all theories on scientific base, following is a description of the motions of saucers in the past five years. Evidences. It is understandable that happenings around the flying saucer have been leading to a nightmare. The flying saucer looms up suddenly, stays for awhile motionless, it does not leave concrete traces with a little exception according to some witnesses. Evidences are growing bigger and bigger. All phenomena in the atmosphere which have given rise to the assumption that there are flying engines operating in secrecy, are linked up with the Saucer. These views come from free countries, according to the Soviet Russian bias and followers, it is not revealed whether Russia considers this matter important or not, her formal attitude is "anti-Saucer". The number of published evidences covers the thousands, either the proof or the significance of these is quite different. Our following information has been gained as much as possible from our sources. Original sources like press, reports, individual investigations should be checked carefully, since all too often it turns out that some newspapers publish and discuss evidences, reports or talks on this subject insufficiently, that is not in compliance with journalistic rights. The first evidences which can be connected with the flying saucer do not date from yesterday alone. More than 100 years ago "flying fishes", "flying triangles" and "flying boats" already flew above Nice, San Francisco, London or New Zealand, which by that time did not arise special excitement. These events did not attract the attention. - 2 -
We will just be talking about more recent happenings. Remarkable is that previous miracles were reported at the same time as the publication of famous books on the future, such as Wells, Jules Verne, Briant etc. handling subjects on flying boats hailing from the stars to conquer the earth, thus contrary to normal situations. The latest happenings are not of much significance. Usually it is a fantastic light moving rapidly in about characteristic shape, altitude and naturally speed cannot be determined. The belief of those who have raised their theory on this matter - and many are the investigations settled immediately - cannot be repudiated. But mostly this concerns meteors, fireballs, silhouettes on other miracles. The position of the saucer cannot be opposed. Hence worthless evidences will simply be put aside. Many of the information must be considered needless, although with much regret since they are not completely. As a matter of fact, deception is out of question, as nobody has self-interest in revealing secrets, neither the deceiver nor the examiner, the more so as newspapers must pay very much for copy-rights. The first events took place across the Pacific. We recall the case of George Koehler. This citizen of Denver (Colorado) said, three years ago he found remains of two saucers. The engines made from an unknown sort of metal were piloted by dwarves of almost the same figure as men. Of course this allegation was rejected some days later. In 1947 on Maury Island a sailor told that he had seen a big number of saucers and he had kept a piece of those miraculous things. After in- vestigation it appeared it was a deception. More recently, on 29 August of this year, United Press reported that a saucer of 60 meters in diam by 6 men suddenly attacked a scout-master by means of rays. The attack itself did not harm, but the scout-master thought he was very lucky that he did not meet with a giant of 3 meters which some days later dropped from the air and which odour - according to the report - filled an armed group and also a member of the Security Guard of Sutton (Virginia) with disgust. From the Latin countries more and more reports alike came in; in Brazil the "O'Cruzeiro" daily announced that several months ago a reportage complete with pictures of a less known saucer was made by means of a Rollei- flex by reporters Jose Martin and Ed Keffel, before the miracle flew above the sea as quickly as it had appeared. Pierre Clostermann who saw the negatives of those pictures at Poly- technical School in Brazil did not realize that the pictures were false. However, more information came in from Rio which made the report really doubtful. - 3 -
In France, some time ago, an Italian wrote to a big weekly magazine that he wanted to sell at an extravagant price a series of negatives of an uncommon view in the moonlight: in the middle of it a big flying saucer equipped with a radio antenna and in front of the saucer two "classical" radio-helmeted astronomers in diving-dress. The whole was something extra- ordinary and it seemed not as if it was false. Nevertheless the Italian, a real artist, finally acknowledged that the saucer and the crew had been made from carton and the mountain shown on the picture was actually one near Rome. Another report from Italy dated 23 November was more interesting. A farmer from Castel Franco was addressed in an unknown language by three men in rubber dress, their faces covered with a transparent material. The men were members of the crew of a flying saucer with a diameter of 20 meters and flying at an altitude of 10 meters. Said this witness, the engine consist- ed of saucers piled up on each other. We therefore rather say: not a saucer, but a heap of saucers, and so the problem is getting more and more difficult. Further, there are three other kinds of data which we like to add to the "list of honor", namely incontestable data even published in international magazines of worldwide reputation. But those data are a real example of German humor, maybe rather "heavy" but well composed and founded. In August of this year the "Flieger" magazine published an article on a flying saucer of 45 meters made from an unknown metal and driven by 46 exhaust gaspipes of a "rectimeter" and using "pentonium" element. It was seen by a Russian-marked jet fighter in Norway near Spitzberg. Some time later Oscar Links, Mayor of a Russian district, said he had seen in the forest a round object with a radius of 15 meters and near of it were two men talking in glittering dress like steel. At the latest air congress Dr. Oberth made mention of an invention by the end of the war, that is an object with a power of resistance to such a high extent that it might be able to fly without engines. There are more examples of such doubtful evidences. It is a pity that readers are not so dainty. Indeed it is very hard to find out whether something is false or not. Apart from this, we are anxious to know the truth, since then the limits can be traced. Besides time has come to discuss evidences, not result- ing from phantasy alone. Hundreds of evidences have been checked, 50 of these have sufficient foundation and are reliable, so they can be used for study purposes. We will not describe these events one by one, but a general view will suffice and from this we will draw a parallel. An analysis of 25 of the most considerable cases you will find on the following pages. - 4 -
Sometimes the ball appears with a white ring about. Many are the evidences gathered in the United States of America. The most interesting was noticed four years ago. 1 October 1948, a pilot of the National Guard named George F. Gormann made a "dogflight" with a ball of 0.40 meters for 20 minutes. During this time the ball which he tried to run after challenged him incessantly. According to the witness it appeared to be very handy. It had an extraordinary speed and understood every manoeuvre to be made by the pursuer. Finally, the ball seemed to get bored of the race, it suddenly disappeared perpendicularly at a surprising speed. From an air traffic tower 2 officials were watching this strange event. Many are the reports on such happenings. 12 June 1952 the crew of "Air France" and an observer of the Tour du Bourget noticed at the foot of the sky a red ball which first moved slowly, then moved often in loops and slowly left the spot. 19 July 1952, pilot Pierman of the "Capital Airlines" saw near Washington a phosphorescent object, like a tailless comet, after a few minutes it rose perpendicularly at an astonishing speed. Also reports were made by Gaillac (17 October 1952) and Cleron (17 October 1952) on red balls with a white ring like Saturn, moving in the air while dropping lamps which afterwards melted on reaching the ground. Also reports from Mont-de-Marsan (26 November 1952) and Cleron (21 December 1952) on fire-balls were put forward, according to attached list. Flying cigars are more obvious. What is understood from this is something like a wingless aircraft or something like a submarine, beaming and moving at a speed of 0.7 - 2 - 3 Mach. The rays are wonderful, blue, green or red-yellow (orange); the object shows windows and moves swiftly. Many reports on these flying cigars have been made since 2 July 1948. On that day Clarence Chiles and John B. Whitted, pilots of a DC 3 of the Eastern Airlines were near Montgomery, Alabama, when they saw one of those engines in the shape of a B-29, but 4 times bigger and sounding into their direction. Probably it was startled too, because suddenly it turned aside, showed for a moment its profile and a row of windows, then suddenly increased its speed, disappeared while exhausting a blue gas, the current of which threw into the Balance. This evidence was also confirmed by a passenger and witnesses on the ground. Such meetings were many. In May 1948 a pilot, William Sperry, saw a "cigar" at an amazing speed. Further reports were received from Adams and Andersen on 31 September 1950; the crew of Mid Continent Airlines on 20 January 1951; two pilots of the Aeroclub at Casablanca on 24 September and 6 October 1952; 2 pilots of the Air France on their routine flight between London-Nairobi saw for 30 seconds near Draguignan a big cigar at a speed of approximately 3000 kilometres per hour. Both important facts were watched from the ground. One night in August 1948 Clyde Tombaugh, a famous astronomer (it was he who discovered Pluto) follow- ed for some seconds by his eyes a radiant cigar moving in the air at full speed. - 5 -
Two other men also saw this. Four years later on 29 October 1952 something happened in Marignane. A customhouse officer was shocked while he saw an object moving on the runway of an airport at a speed of 300 kilometres per hour and suddenly stopped about 100 meters from him between the hangar and the air traffic tower. The shape was like a pointed cigar, about 5 meters long and with a diameter of 1 meter, there were also 4 windows showing in- side flames of a blue color. The said custom house officer approached the object, but at a distance of 50 meters from it, a very long flame came out of the tail, then the miracle sprang straight up and disappeared in a few seconds above the lake of Berre. Then the customhouse officer heard two dull sounds: a very low sound of landing and a clear one like a light explosion. This evidence was thoroughly investigated in view of the important details and the honesty of the witness. This event could be accepted as to be truthful or otherwise the customhouse officer might have been the victim of an optical illusion. More interesting than fire balls and cigars, flying saucers have much engrossed the attention: those round, biconvex objects, sometimes radiat- ing brilliantly, or surrounded by a clear light which arises the idea of a rotary speed. Pictures also show a rather mysterious appearance, sometimes a clear ring is visible and sometimes not. 25 June 1947 a manufacturer from Idaho, Kenneth Arnold, saw something that made his name famous. He was flying North of Rocheuses in Washington and saw very clearly, although the distance between him and those objects was approximately 5 kilometres, 9 saucers passing Mount Rainier in formation; he guessed the speed of those saucers was about 2700 kilometres per hour. Some days later, on 13 August 1947, in Wallace Ida and Twin Falls (Idaho) two groups of witnesses saw low flying saucers at big speed; trees bent their tops down while these soundless miracles flew past. 7 January 1948: the Mantell case. Inasmuch as the State Police had reported an exceedingly big object of unknown descent flying into the direction of Fort Knox (Kentucky), the airbase commander ordered a F-51 flight to check this matter. At 15.00 hours Captain Mantell, the flight commander, reported to the air traffic officer that he saw a very extremely ly big size and that he was trying to catch it. He climbed up to 7000 meters, but did not have success. Eventually after one hour race, the radio communic- ation cut off. The aircraft crashed near the airfield and Captain Thomas F. Mantell was killed. After this dramatic race more evidences showed up. In 1949 in White Sands technicians of the Navy, among others Commander B.S. McLaughlin, follow- ed by means of theodolites a couple of flying saucers with a diameter of approximately 30 meters which accompanied and now and then encircled a V-2 swiftly. The rate of those saucers was estimated at 28,000 kilometres per hour and the altitude at 100 kilometres. - 6 -
20 May 1950 Professor Hall of the Observatory at Lovel followed by his telescope in bright weather a flying saucer at a speed of 300 kilometres per hour. In July 1952 two radiant saucers with a diameter of 30 meters at a speed of 1500 kilometres per hour were reported by the crew of an aircompany in the United States. 19 July M. Fregmale, a French geologic engineer, said that he had made 4 pictures of a flying saucer which puffed up in the middle and glittered around. It moved above Chauvet Lake. 20 September a silvery flying saucer acted in a spectacular manner: the "Grande Veyrac" manouvre, then followed a Glocter Meteor fighter to its base in Topcliff, Yorkshire. The list of extraordinary evidences of flying saucers is far from complete. Actually, several pictures must be examined. We mention some examples: the flying saucer of the Canaries (29 March 1950), the flying saucers of Salem (Massachusetts) (16 July 1952), pictures of the Chauvet Lake and also negatives which pitiful enough show an army of endless chains. As a matter of fact, also evidences recently made by pilots and sailors are worth while to be discussed, as well as a big number of pictures on radar screen of unclassified objects flying at a various speed and altitude from Germany onto Korea, also saucers which teased radars at Andrews Field (Washington DC) on 7 August 1952. Typical characteristics of the flying saucer. An analysis of the most attractive evidences reveals the number of the types and the unclearness of the miracles. Therefore a synthesis of the elements, being necessary to find out a hypothesis, is very difficult. This pertains in particular to the fact that special characteristics cannot be contradicted which arise from evidences made at a considerable distance as to the type, motion and speed of the flying saucers. The speed is various. There are saucers standing motionless for a few minutes, there are saucers quick as lightning, running at thousands of kilometres per hour in the atmosphere. The sudden change of the speed in just a few seconds causes an extraordinarily big motion, maybe ten times the gravity. The data are also uncommon. Evidently these objects do not have a certain course, neither have inertia at all and they easily challenge an extraordinary tangent. In many cases, particularly when they meet planes, their sudden motions are probably handled in a clever way. All miracles which have been observed are beaming, as firstly they reflect rays of other objects and secondly because they radiate their own white, green, blue or orange rays. The beam seems much like a flame at very high temperature, the flame of wrought iron, magnesium light etc. Some- times this radiance encircles balls and saucers and as far as the flying cigars are concerned it appears as a tail light. - 7 -
However, the most extraordinary characteristic of these miracles is undoubtedly that immaterial one. the balls form a heap of lights, cigars and saucers are much brighter and it seems as if they have no weight, no troubles with air pressure, they split the atmosphere without whistle, the motion is quite soundless. Broadly, because of the various speed, the speed of their immateriality, the flying saucers challenge all existing natural laws, aerodynamic gravity and when these flying saucers are piloted by human beings, this is quite contrary to the law of gravity of human beings. This is beyond any comprehen- sion. Hypothesis. The inexactitude, the vagueness of the evidences, the necessary limitations with regard to the truth of several evidences, the absurdity concerning the reported miracles, all this makes an objective hypothesis on the flying saucer very difficult. Pending official evidences we can only make mention of the many hypotheses already known. These hypotheses form a very complete series and out of this one hypothesis can be sifted - from the very simplest up to the most extra- ordinary. Sceptical people who have always been opposing the possibility of flying saucers in the sense of miracles, are inclined to say that saucers are merely a product of the human thought. Some of them accuse reporters of having started nonsensical news in such a modern time like this. Their inten- tion is merely to seek for a replacement of the ghost of Loch Bees who - after his excellent achievements - is considered to have withdrawn in a holy manner. The intention appears once only, further it will be like a snowball which from day to day will be growing bigger and bigger, since the evidences can be trusted and at last the authors themselves are fascinated by their own decep- tion. This attracts the attention indeed and we recall how many dailies were hurrying to publish curious news. However, we must admit that the press in this way - without causing too many troubles - just touches upon a subject that attracts the public more than murder news or a big lawsuit. There are people who believe that it was the United States of America which started this subject with a psychological aim; the intention was to convince American citizens of the danger of air war, to excite the idea that Russians might possess new secret engines, in short to make all American citizens supporters of the Air Defense. All here the results met their expectations highly; this explains the strange attitude of the United States Air Force which now and then made publications contradictory to each other. This information given by the communistic press is hard to accept. Also in view of the fact that the formateur of the "Saucer Commission" was John Forestal who on the same day (25 December 1948) submitted his famous "Earth Satellite Vehicle Program", an expression of at least high ideology. The more it is hard to understand that men of big influence such as General Vandenberg, Professor Tombaugh, and other experts and representatives of the Air Material Command have shown their preparedness to study this matter, the importance of which is still an open question. - 8 -
At last it was opined that flying saucers should be merely an illusion or a hallucination of the public. Sir Harold Spencer Johns, Director of Greenwich Observatory stated to a Paris daily: "Saucers are products of the stupidity of the mass". Notwithstanding it is also clear that this expression can no longer be maintained, because of the many kinds of evidences which underline the evidences of scientists who do not know each other. For the majority the existence of flying saucers cannot be doubted. Again and again these objects are appearing, according to several experts who consider these as ordinary miracles of the atmosphere. The serious data are often attractive and in many cases certainly true. "An immaterial miracle that moves soundless and turns at sudden speed and disappears in just a second? But that denotes the miracle of rays" said Professor Mensal of Harvard University. Lights of an autocar, rays of the sun, the glittering of an aeroplane in the sky, this breaks the rays of the clouds or layers of the air which have various figures of breaking rays. This hypothesis is naturally for the greatest part obvious from evidences (see Nos. 24 and 25 of the list published in this magazine). In the first case the witness might have seen the shade of three jets flying at the same time at a very high altitude and in the second case it might be a matter of projection of the clouds. In this connection it is clear that most of the saucers happened in less bright weather. Mention may also be made of loose balloons used for meteorologic purposes or to examine cosmic rays. Floating at various altitudes, these balloons can create changeable shades as a result of the various layers of the air, looking much like white saucers which sometimes can reach an extraordinary size. Now there is certainty in this matter. Aviation Week of 19 February 1953 gained from Dr. Urner Liddel, Head of the Sea Research Service, some information about the Skyhook operation. Said Dr. Liddel, evidences concern- ing all flying saucers can be connected with this operation and therefore it is needless to mention Russia or citizens of Mars. As a matter of fact this is if only some cases up to now we have never seen balloons moving at a speed of 6000 kilometres per hour, moreover not in the stratosphere, and certainly not against the wind and climbing as fast as a V-2 up to an altitude of 100 kilometres. A more satisfactory opinion is expressed by Noel W. Scott. This physicist of Fort Belvoir (Virginia) believes that in the rarest air at an extremely high altitude, very strong electro-static phenomena sometimes shine brilliantly and cause rays. These rays can be explained to have imitated these phenomena by means of a glass cask, the air in which has first been rarefied and ionized. This is a valuable information indeed for several matters regarding the reporting of saucers at a very high altitude and observed through radar. According to T. Gault, a Director of the Observatory at Monte Mario (Rome) and T. Arzellini, Director of the Observatory of Lyon, saucers are often meteors and extraordinary lightnings in the form of balls of a typical characteristic (see event No. 14 Le Bourget 19 Casablanca). - 9 -
Such hypotheses are often heard. The following is a list, maybe incomplete: - The change is caused by the pressure on waves made by aircraft, guided missiles moving at the speed of sound (event no. 8 White Sands?) - Wreath of smoke exhausted by a jet (event no. 18 Grande Veyrac?) - Stars or planets visible at daylight, particularly Venus (event no. 2 Mantell?) - Meteors or hail (event no. 16 Pierman). - Training plane with round wings as Chance-Vought - Colored flaming circles as a result of the circulation of light in the clouds like thin stones (event no. 24 Cleron 1?) - Huge movement of bees (no. 21 and no. 22 Cleron and Gaillac?) - Extraordinary phenomena caused by ionization of high atmosphere after the test of 2 atoms. There is no lack of data and there are many experts indeed who have studied this matter, regardless of their contradicting the reports. However, the acceptable evidences cannot always be explained on the basis of those hypo- theses. 19 July 1952 the press published a report from Captain Ruppelt, an Air Force Officer of the United States, especially in charge of studying flying saucers (operation blueBook). According to this officer, 30% of the observed miracles can be explained by meteorological phenomena; 13% by balloons, 12% by birds and airplanes and just 2% by deception, 10% too little information for further examination and 15% inexplicable data. Is the flying saucer supposed to be recognised as a flying engine? This part of the investigation draws special consideration. First it can be presumed whether in the present state of technical science engines are being constructed with characteristics of flying saucers and if not, what are the obstacles? As to the fire ball, this question can be put aside; we cannot imagine that a fire ball can have a diameter of 0.40 meter, piloted or operated at such an accurate speed and able to race with a F-51 for 25 minutes. Mostly these miraculous events can be explained from common hypotheses and the rest - for lack of other data - from the possibility that this is simply a flow of some material engines or projection of the clouds, although this explanation will not suffice like that on the movement of bees. Flying cigars are not so big a problem, because of their likeness with classic airplanes. In accordance with their calculation, indeed they can remain in the air and move at supersonic speed, there is no reason why they should fight the existence of telescopic wings. Several times there are reports they have short wings. Probably the cigars are operated from a big distance. Only known systems like in the case of the flying saucers, is hard to fit the already known systems. Flying saucers can be listed in a more revolutionary group. The construct- ion of the cell will not entail invincible difficulties. The formula has been studied for several years all over the world and especially in Germany during the war. A biconvex cell must have certain aerodynamic characteristics at supersonic speed: it gives a very big volume for its equipment, for fuel and for books. Its stability is various, dependent upon the drive system as used by aircraft of the Chance-Vought type, that is an outward drive plane, maybe hard to operate. - 10 -
Another case is a saucer with a certain axle and a stability like a gyroscope which can move at supersonic speed without vibrations. The climbing capacity must be very big, the sudden turns in any direction easily handled must be caused by a changeable axial instrument. Sideward manipulations of a jet can only be fixed by surrounding air resistance. Since flying saucers have formed the topic, many thrilling investiga- tions were made. The number of evidences is growing bigger and bigger, dating back to 1934. And up to now General Popoff has not joined the competition yet. Practically, these models have shown the next popular is the flying saucer of B.V. Ray which trespasses the speed of 1000 kilometres per hour. So we can say that the creation of a cell of that flying saucer is no impossibility, the trouble is just to find out the metals which can resist our conditions. The drive system is harder to understand, it is a gyroscope counter put in line with a tangent, to be best complying with the formula of circles. However, this theory has not produced many results, also aerodynamic characteristics cannot admit big speed at low flying. It is also not understandable which fuel fits the flying saucers, none of these engines can be put aside; we cannot imagine the reaction of the exhaust gas which is soundless and forms the most typical characteristic of the flying saucers. A sound like a rocket on 14 July ... which drive system has such a characteristic! Naturally this reminds us of an atomic engine, but it seems as if this is also inexplicable. Actually an atomic engine is just a source of heat; unable to drive a steam engine, to increase the air in a jet or a gas used for rockets. Such engine can explain the range of the movement, the capacity and the possibility to fly at an altitude of 100 kilometres in the flying saucers, most probably also "White tale" is the mixed flour, a product of combustion of drive elements, but the sound which arises should be thundering. Consequently there is another solution: to explain this by means of a source of energy which is radical and mysterious based on reaction, either the use of atomic energy/cosmic rays or the resistance of gravitation in an electro-magnetic way (atomic engines can produce electricity and also heat). This endless principle we leave entirely to our readers. Like the drive, the operation is also mysterious. Inasmuch as there is no human organism which can stand big speed as made by the flying saucer, we do not take that operations can be done at such big distance. This is not quite impossible with regard to the plane flight at an allowable altitude. But we wonder how the television-telecommund can work in such a way that from a big distance sudden movements can be adjusted to any distance. Many reports on flying saucers have so far been received from observations near the coast and it is not known whether these engines were released by submarines. Finally, the manufacture of those cigars and saucers is not impossible, but this means an extraordinary advance, especially in the operation by means of radio. And technics, contrary to nature, will not eat capers. It is hard to admit that such big advances can be made at an equal time. However, while contemplating this highly amazing possibility, we wonder which country might be very blessed. - 11 -
Of course we think of the United States of America and the power of their enormous industry. From wellknown circles the information has been gained that the United States Air Force is interested in flying saucers, but sofar investigations have not yet led to successful results. But, when flying saucers indeed come from the United States, why is it then that a Commission has been set up for this study? Machiavellism like this should be slavish. And besides why is it that those engines can pass areas flown by civil aircraft, and on the other hand, when in Soviet Russia an atomic explosion is inevitable, we cannot imagine that such a revolutionary engine like the flying saucer can be hidden in the United States for so long a time. According to Look (June 1952), General Hoyt Vandenberg, Chief of Staff of the United States Air Force, has announced that groups of technicians have studied all evidences and they are working on a special spectrograph used to analyse sources of light. The Director of the Technical Service of the United States Air Force is said to have admitted trustworthy evidences on miraculous happenings, and an authority of American Aviation also declared that the results of the investigations were fantastic but quite true. In July 1952 aviation published a thorough and unequalled examination by means of radar. All this does not suit the hypothesis of the "American Saucer". In another terrain in the world, that is Soviet Russia, successful results were achieved thanks to the investigations of Germany in particular with regard to missiles. Guided missiles from a big distance, the descent of which are already known, were flying to and fro in the air near Russia, Palestine and Norway until 1947, while they disappeared suddenly. Were they neglected, so that it is all the more hard to find out more particulars? Recently a doctor named Riethe said that the Germans worked together with 6 other engineers - three of them are now in Russia - on the investiga- tion of a supersonic Helicopter V-7 provided with turbine gas engines and operated by radar and radio, being able to fly round the world without re- fuelling and making use of a substance something like helium. This informa- tion cannot be searched. Dr. Riethe is not known to German scientists. But a comparison can be made with the article of Dr. Beck in "Der Flieger" and the information that on the coast of the Baltic were secret bases. Previously these evidences were examined accurately and the hypothesis on the "Russian Saucer" was not really founded. Like in America, Russia is continuing to make bombers which grow heavier and heavier, probably this will say that the classic army also progresses. It has been even succeeded that the Russian press, also the world communist press timely fight the existence of flying saucers, indicating: "a hysteric phenomenon from the United States of America and signs of a crack-brained campaign to benefit the war propaganda and to prepare tiredness in the war against Russia". Except those two countries, it is hard to find other countries which might be able to produce such engines. - 12 -
Inasmuch as it is hard to admit that countries in the world can make flying saucers, why don't we seek the solution outside the world? From this derives the theory of the outerworld. This theory is supported by wellknown experts (among others by Dr. Riedel, ex-Director of the Search Service at Peenemuende), since they believe it can satisfy unbelieving people, since their explanations can easily avoid the arguments. The cell of those engines is certainly made from a metal unknown to the world. Then the shape is like a saucer, a compromise between an aeroplane and a ball, so that shape is especially made to be able to move in the atmosphere and outside. Needless to say that the drive is enabled by an atomic engine which contains plutonium. There are also people who venture to prepare the functions of the same atomic engine and revert to the opinion of Wells concerning the substance of "cavorite" or a metal not affected by gravity. Or a revolutionary magnetic engine may be used in the magnetic field between the planets. The question of operation cannot contest this brave theory. One is inclined to allege that the engines are operated from far, a central saucer, the giant saucer of Mantell encircles the earth like a satellite (symbidon), it sends the crew down to the earth in the shape of a saucer, a cigar or a fire ball and watches it over carefully. Another says that the engines are handled by strange creatures from Mars, Venus and other celestial bodies, even other beings as created by authors - in the form of a caterpillar, lizard, other creatures composed of cells like plants or molecular beings different from us (for instance our carbon replaced by silicon). Where are these celestial guests coming from? From Mars with its rare atmosphere? From Venus with its dusty and CO2 full atmosphere? Why so nearby? At a distance of less than 5 lightyears is the planet Centaurus, the nearest planet to us, and farther at a distance of eight lightyears the planet Wolf 359. And who knows whether those planets are sources of light like our sun and surrounded by own planets? Those are the stars included in our constellation and appearing like Milky Way. And another nearest notion of the stars is to be found in the constellation of Andromeda at a distance of 680,000 lightyears. As to the intention, the characteristics are different from each other. According to pessimists - among them are wellknown people - flying saucers are the forerunners of invading troops from another planet. Optimistic people say that our guests are small men, kind and shy, clever and modest who desire our welfare, but when we have been troubling for so many years with our atomic tests. They probably know the real reason why it is that the source of light coming from the direction of the ten (the planet unknown to us, but it has disappeared in a state unknown to us, but apparently wellknown to them) does not turn anymore in the oval shape. This theory may explain that since many years the evidences on flying saucers have been repeating and that the United States wellinformed about this, are prepared to accept the reports so that a panic can be avoided, hence the incessant publications, contrary to each other, hence the success of movies about the future, books on fictitious sciences, stories about engines in the atmosphere. - 13 -
When this hypothesis clears up all problems, we must take it that this is only to satisfy the illusion. This hypothesis has no strong foundation and many are the gaps in it. So we must be careful when we read reports. On the other hand it is also an absolutely shocking statement that the hypothesis on outside-planets is funny and absurd. The opinion as if on other planets maybe creatures are living with a good constitution and having made more progress than we do, whose civilization is much higher than ours, is of course more abominable from the strong theory of Lord Kelvin and Arrhenius which is beyond expectation. But are the difficulties of this material, the possibilities of the mind not extraordinary? Many people laugh at flying saucers, since they believe in the possibilities of the use of atoms and other scientific miracles. Indeed, it is the spirit of the atomic age to oppose new inventions, because they break sciences already attained. Maybe the law of inertia does not apply to objects but also to orthodox ideas being eager to maintain normal events. So often progress has been made as a product of phantasts versus those who use their brains. Science admits that at the limits of human knowledge a stupendous world starts which may be never investigated by mankind although by all means to enter that world with- in our sense-organs, and on the basis of that knowledge too, a hypothesis cannot be rejected the only lack of which consists of shocking normal views and of not recognizing startling the human humility. Of course it does not mean that the hypothesis on outerplanets is more acceptable than other things. This is thus an incidental view on flying saucers, ectoplasm of the atomic age. What is the result of this vague study? Aside from above hallucinations and deceptions, there are many other reliable evidences. A major part of those evidences can be explained simply, but there are also other evidences made up from hypotheses like these. The number is insignificant, although for instance one only might be of the same importance. The giant saucer of Mantell, the cigar of Chiles and Whitted, the saucer of Tensalit, the cigar of Draguignan may have given rise to the idea that the saucer is a material engine operated by creatures or from a distance. There are also Frenchmen who have made up their mind in this concern. Samson and Costenne on the basis of their observations contradict the reports, Gabriel Voisin and Pierre Clostermann, however, support the hypothesis of the outerworld. Amassif says: "Believe it or not, but it is contrary to science". Needless to laugh at this problem. Discussions in this line will also have no result. Only investigations on the spur of the moment may reveal the necessary elements. But in Paris, probably for fear to be laughed at, nobody ventures to ask this question from nearby. It were easy enough to have a sceptic smile. The United States of America have set up a Comission, General Vandenberg has officially expressed his view. Recent- ly an investigation all over the world was made by England. In France, only reporters and singers have been watching this question from nearby. A good start to open the "Department de Soucoupes Volantes" of the French Ministry of Information on 12 July 1952. - 14 -
FLYING SAUCERS THROUGH CENTURIES 1. Miraculous, radiant objects were first noticed on 9 August 1762. Also Indonesia was visited by those things in the shape of triangles. Same in Scotland and New Zealand. 2. In 1919 at 23.00 hours a "cigar" loomed up above Huntington, West Virginia, USA, while no aircraft of the Air Force or Navy were flying. 3. In 1934 Nicolas Roehrich, leader of the Tibet expedition, saw a round thing like an egg glittering like steel, flying Southward at full speed. 4. During World War II in Sweden and Peenomunde (V-2 factories) colored rays were visible, called by people: Ghost Rockets. 5. In 1944 - 1945 the allied fighters and bombers attacking Germany and Japan were often run after by fireballs, the so-called "foo fighters or Kraut fireballs" supposed to be a secret German weapon. 6. The flow of reports on flying saucers started with the evidence of Kenneth Arnold, a businessman from Idaho, USA who saw from a plane 9 saucers above Mount Rainier on 24 June 1947. 7. 7 January 1948 Captain F. Mantell, pilot of a F-51 was killed after a "dogflight" with a flying saucer at Godman Field Fort Knox - Kentucky. 8. 23 July 1948 Chiles and Whitted, pilots of a DC-3 witnessed a flying cigar without wings in Montgomery, Alabama, showing windows like a double decker. 9. 16 October 1943 at 21.00 hours lt. German piloting a F-51 ran after a fireball for 20 minutes at Fargo airfield. 10. 18 November 1948 at 21.45 hours lt. H. G. Combs, a Harvard pilot pursued a fireball above Andrews Field, Washington DC. 11. 20 January 1951 L.W. Vinther and J.F. Bachmeier, flying a DC3 of Mid Cont. Airlines were accompanied by a miraculous thing for 4, 5 seconds in Sioux City at 20.30. 12. Also the Korean War called the attention of the flying saucer. In July 1952 the crew of a B-26 saw a flying saucer above the Korean front. 13. 3 July 1952 Mr. Linke, ex-Mayor of Gleimershausen, East Germany, swore having seen a flying saucer with its crew landing. 14. 15 July 1952 H. B. Nash and W.H. Fortenberry and 10 passengers of a DC-4 met 6 flying saucers above Chesapeake Bay Washington DC, flying in echelon 2000 ft under that DC-4. - 17 -
LIST OF SEVERAL EVIDENCES ON MIRACLES IN THE AIR
W I T N E S S E V I D E N C E R E M A R K S
No. Date N a m e Position' Place Time Duration Distance Altitude' Date Official Comments
1 6-24-1947 Kenneth Arnold Private Pilot Mt Rainier Morning 3 min.+ 35 km abt.4000m 9 Saucers
Washington as big as a
DC4. Speed
abt 2000 km
2 1-7-1948 Thomas F.Mantell Captain of a Godman AFB Ft.15.15 short 4-7000m Round object, Meteo- Hardly
F-51. Other Knox Kentucky 25 min. normal size, balloon, accept-
witnesses on like metal able
the ground cosmic
rays, or
Venus
3 2-20-1948 Dr. Hall Through theo- 13.00 2 min 2-4 km 1500m White saucer
dolite diam. 10-15m
surrounded by
white flakes
4 4-8-1948 Lt.Robert W. Flight Lt. of a Philippines - 5 km - Silvery object,
Meyers F-47, 67 years. By day while approached
Fighter Wing 18. turning 90° and
Fighter Group disappearing in
leading four 5 seconds, no
F-47's. trace of exhaust
gas
5 May 1948 W. Sperry - - Night - short 2500m Lightning Flying Operated
submarine at from far
fantastic speed
6 7-23-1948 Clarence S. Pilots of a DC-3 Montgomery 02.45 some 210 m Flying cigar like
Chiles & John Eastern Airlines. Alabama seconds a B-29, 2 rows of
Whitted, and windows (12m)
a passenger, Chiles is ex-lt Col provided with antenna,
Clarence Mc USAF with 8500 dark blue body, red
Kelfie Flying hours, Whitted tailfins (12m)
ex pilot of a B-29 speed 800-1000 km/h.
in World War II
- 19 -7. 10-1-1948 lt.George Gorman Pilot F-51, Air Fargo Airport 21.00 20 min. 150 m 300- Fireball, diam. Meteo Prob-
I.J. Jensen National Guard, 4800m 0,4 m. Dogflight. Balloon ably
Samuel E.Johnson Airport Traffic Blinking before operat-
Controller, the race. During ed from
CAA employee fuel radiating, far.
faster than a
F-51
8. August Dr. Clyde Tom- Astronomer, Las Cruces, New 23.00 20 sec. - - Round object like Meteor Un-
1948 baugh and other Discovered Mexico an egg with win- believ-
witnesses Pluto dows. Taillights. able
Too fast for an
aircraft, but too
slow for a meteor
9. 8-29-1949 Commander Robert Personnel of White Morning - - 90km Like an egg of fan- Waves At
B.McLaughlin & a rocket Sands. tastic size, speed of a air
other officers base. Using 4-8 km per sec. V-2 density
photo-theo- Diam. 40 m. Stop- at or at
dolite ped. Sudden speed shades an
90 km?? alt. of
90 km??
10. 9-9-1950 lt.Commander J. Major US Navy Alameda By day - - 1500m Like ice-cream, - -
L.Kraker & 5 Naval Naval exhausting, speed
citizens of San Station Station 150 kmh.
Leandro, Cal.
11. 9-31-1950 N. Adams - - 21.30 30 sec. 600m - Cigar, 2 rows of - -
windows, clear
blue, supersonic
12. 20-1-1951 Laurence W.Vinther Crew of DC-3 Sioux 20.30 - 60m 2400m Cigar, long wings, - Some-
& J. Bachmeier, 1 MidCont Airlines, City, as big as B-25, thing
passenger and 2 Vinther ex-instruct- Iowa white front light, con-
ATC officers or of USAF with 8000 turning at 360° in trary
fl. hours. Bachmeier a second, flying to
ex-Maj USN with alongside DC-3 for aero-
6000 fl. hrs. 4-5 seconds. dyna-
mics.
- 20 -13. March 1951 3 Military Experienced Bangui 04.00 5 min. - - Fireball, diam. 2 x Operated
pilots Venus. Big speed from a
during horizontal big
flight, turning 90° distance
14. 10-4-1951 2 Military Experienced Tessalit 2.00 1 min.6km - Fireball, diam. 10
pilots cm, orange rays,
first slow, turning
90°, and increasing
speed exceedingly
15. 6-12-1952 Airport Reliable Le Buer- 3.00 1 hr. - 1000m. Dark-red fireball, Meteor -
officials get, Paris bigger than a star,
stopped for a long
time, moved slow-
ly
16. 7-5-1952 John Baldwin & Crew of a Hanford Day - - - Round discus, white, - -
George Robert- C-46 of Atomic clearly stopped,
son & 50 Korean Domestic Air- Richland moved farther, mov-
Air fighters lines Washington ing vague, increas-
ed speed and dis-
appeared quickly
17. 7-18-1952 - 1 Witness and 1 Lac Chauvet 18.00 1 min.3-8 - Saucer with bulging Meteo -
photo center, glittering Balloon
18. 7-19-1952 S.G.Pierman & Capt. of a DO-3 Washing- Night Some - Tailless comet, Meteor Dubious
many passengers Capital Airlines ton seconds climbing straight
up at amazing
speed
19. 8-1-1952 Major James H. Crew of Fighter Wright Day 10 sec. 5700m Saucer. Red-white - -
Smith & lt Donald Patterson rays. Floating,
J. Hamer AFB then flying rapid-
ly
- 21 -20. 8-6-1952 Richard Thomas Radar Officer & Air Washington 24.10 5 hrs 20 km - Dots on radar Electro-
& Harry Barnes port traffic control- Nation Air- screen moving magnetic
ler port at 100 kmh phenomena
Washington pursued by a
jet without
success due
to bad weather
21. 9-20-1952 - Witnesses in the air Grande 10.30 - 50cm 1500m Silvery saucer - -
and on the ground Vergue glittering like
a falling leaf,
extraordinary
speed, then slow-
ly again, flying
at 1000
kmh
22. 9-24-1952 - 2 Witnesses Casablanca 18.30 10sec 3km 500m Cigar, blue and Meteor -
green rays
23. 10-6-1952 - Experienced wit- Draguignan 1.30 30sec 3km - Big cigar, ex- Meteor -
nesses hausting white
blue smoke.
Speed: 3000 kmh
24. 10-17-1952 - Through a Cleron 13.00 Some - - Dark red ball Moving
telescope min. with Saturn ring, bees Dubious
elements like
falling air-
threads
25. 10-27-1952 - Many witnesses Gaillac 16.00 - 1000m 1000m Saucers as big as Moving
parachute, climbing bees Dubious
straight up, to-
gether with some-
thing like
glass wool
26. 10-27-1952 - Reliable custom- Marignane 2.30 1 min 50m On the A 5m cigar, diam.: Guided
house officer ground 1m, slowly coming from a
then at full speed, distance
sound: like a rocket.ON HIS MAJESTY'S SERVICE [seal: Buy WAR SAVINGS Certificates NOW!] COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA. DEPARTMENT OF AIR. If not delivered within 7 days, return to ................................................................................................ ................................................................................................
CONFIDENTIAL MINUTE SHEET Reference 5/6/AIR.
S.O.INTELL.
Re enclosure 56A.
2. Contacted DCA and HQTC Ops.Room, but no
record exists of any report having been received on
behalf of Capt.Morris, on or since 16 NOV.'54.
A.R.Carroll
F.Sgt.
24 Nov.'54. Intell.Section.
N.p.M. -2-
1. Rang D.C.A. (Mr. Doutteridge Evans)
and discussed Encl. 72A.
2. He advises that his office
will prepare proformae required
and distribute same to all their
control centres, for future
submissions of this nature.
John H. Prout
16th October, 1955. Fly Off
S.O. Intell
-3-
CONFIDENTIAL
R.A.A.F. Form A 60
(Mar., 45) [OVER]MXY 130 CONFIDENTIAL 67A
5/6/Air.(67A)
Headquarters, Training Command,
"G" Block,
Albert Park Barracks,
Melbourne, SC3.
Secretary,
Department of Air,
Victoria Barracks, 18 OCT 1955
Melbourne, SC1. (Copy Department of Civil Aviation)
SIGHTING OF UNUSUAL AERIAL OBJECT
1. Attached herewith is a sighting report of an unusual
aerial object submitted by Mr. Andrew McLean Murfett, Weather
Officer, Essendon Airport, Victoria.
2. Investigation revealed that a civil aircraft, in-bound
from King Island, was descending over the area at 0733Z,
approximately the time of sighting.
3. Further investigation was prohibited due to the following:
(a) no structural sighting was reported;
(b) no sound was heard from the object;
(c) there were no other reports of an
unusual object made in the same area.
4. The angle of elevation was very slight (12° to 15°) and
as it was sighted in a built-up area, it indicates that if such
an object did exist, the altitude would be extremely low, the
range would be short and therefore, the rate of speed would
appear to be excessive.
5. Due to the height of the sun above the horizon, approx.
13° at 0733Z on 3 Oct.55, and the low altitude of the civil
aircraft descending on finals at 0733Z, approx. 12° elevation,
it is considered probable that the aircraft manoeuvred itself
into a position where the reflection of the sun on the aircraft
was visible for a brief period.
6. It is considered that the above factors give all the
evidence of a reflection and therefore, recommend that no
further action be taken.
DESPATCHED
18 OCT 1955
FROM H.Q.T.C.
[signature]
(G.W. PEARCE)
Group Captain
for Air-Officer-Commanding.
CONFIDENTIALCONFIDENTIAL 67B
REPORT ON AERIAL OBJECT OBSERVED
1. Name of observer Andrew McLean Murfett
2. Address of Observer Meteorological Office Essendon Airport
3. Occupation of Observer Weather Officer
4. Date and Time of Observation (Time given in 24 hour clock zonal
time)
3/10/55 ...1737 E.S.T.
5. Period of Observation(s) 30 seconds estimated
6. Manner of Observation: (Give details of own position by map
reference if possible, or by known landmarks, and describe any
equipment used in the observation).
observer's location Green St Union St Windsor Vic (adjacent Windsor
Rail Station). A deliberate attempt at accurate
observation was made.
7. Where was object first observed, e.g. overhead, coming from
behind a hill, over the horizon, etc.
about 12° - 15° above eastern horizon
8. What first attracted observer's attention, e.g. light or noise.
Light
9. Did object appear as a light or as a definite object.
Light
10. If there was more than one object, how many were there, and what
was their formation.
Object had appearance of a cluster of brilliant globes.
11. What was the colour of the light or object Brilliant yellow
12. What was its apparent shape Elliptical. Consider that if
viewed from vertically beneath, it would be circular.
13. Was any detail of structure observable No
14. Was any method of propulsion obvious No
15. Was there any sound No
16.** Height, or angle of elevation Estimated 12° - 15° elev.
17.** Speed, or angular velocity Estimated 10°-15° of azimuth in 30 secs.
18. State any experience which enables observer to be reasonably
certain about the answers given to 16 and 17.
15 years in RAAF and civil aircraft & meteorological operation
** Since it is normally impossible to estimate the height and speed
of a strange object, it will usually be better to endeavour to
determine the angle of elevation of the object, the angle
through which it moved, and the time taken to do this.
CONFIDENTIAL
...../ 2- 2 - CONFIDENTIAL
Report on Aerial Object Observed (Contd.)
19. Direction of flight with reference to landmarks or points of
the compass.
Descending trajectory into the north. Object moved from E to ENE.
20. Did the object remain on a straight path, deviate or manoeuvre
at all.
Straight Path.
21. Was any trail of exhaust, vapour or light seen No.
22. Where did object disappear, e.g. in mid-air, behind a hill,
over the horizon.
Behind roof tops to E.N.E.
23. Existence of any physical evidence such as fragments, photo-
graphs, or other supporting evidence.
None
24. Weather conditions experienced at time(s) of observation(s)
Cloud almost overcast. 3/4000'. Small breaks to blue sky to south only.
Wind S.W. 2-6 knots. Visibility excellent.
25. Location of any air traffic in the vicinity at the time of
sighting.
................................................................................................
................................................................................................
26. Location of any meteorological stations in the general area.
................................................................................................
27. Any additional information ...................................
................................................................................................
................................................................................................
................................................................................................
Questions 25, 26 and 27 to be answered by interrogator.
CONFIDENTIALMXY 130 CONFIDENTIAL 66A
5/6/Air.(66A)
Headquarters, Training Command,
"G" Block,
Albert Park Barracks,
Melbourne, SC3.
11535
Dear Sir,
12 OCT 1955
SIGHTING OF UNUSUAL AERIAL OBJECT
65B.
1. Reference your reported sighting of an aerial
object on 1st October, 1955.
2. Attached herewith in duplicate, is form which
deals with the sighting of unusual aerial object.
3. It will be appreciated if you would complete the
forms and return same to this Headquarters as early as
possible.
[signature]
(John H. Prout)
Pilot Officer
for Staff Officer Intelligence.
Encl.
pro-formas
stamped-addressed envelope.
Mr. Edwards,
20, Edward Street,
KEW, E4.
CONFIDENTIAL
DESPATCHED
12 OCT 1955
FROM H.Q.T.C.5/6/AIR
JOINTELL 65A
COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AVIATION
Telephone: MB 033 VICTORIA-TASMANIA REGION,
Telegraphic Address: "ALMORA HOUSE,"
"VICAVIAT, MELBOURNE" 522 LITTLE COLLINS STREET
Postal Address: MELBOURNE, C.1
BOX 4579, G.P.O.,
MELBOURNE, C.1
IN REPLY QUOTE 136/2/11 10.OCT.1955
Air Officer Commanding,
Royal Australian Air Force,
Headquarters Training Command,
Albert Parks Barracks,
Melbourne, S.C.3.
Unusual Aerial Phenomenon.
Attached for your information is a copy of a report forwarded to
this office from Melbourne Airport.
See 66A [signature]
(R.D. HEAZLEWOOD.)
for Regional Director.
(Enc.)
[RECEIVED stamp: T.C.H.Q. 11 OCT 1955 C.M.P.]Regional Office No. C.A. Form 225
(Revised July, '53)
Station: Melbourne Airport No. ML 449 Head Office No.
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AVIATION
AIR SAFETY INCIDENT REPORT
(To be submitted through the Regional Director of the State of occurrence of the incident)
Place of Occurrence: Melbourne Date: 1/10/55 Time: 01/1345
Aircraft -- Type: Marking: Pilot:
Type of Operation: From: To:
Details of Incident: SIGHTING OF UNKNOWN OBJECT
1315/z. Mr. Edwards, 20 Edward Street, Kew, phoned to report a sighting of
a "Flying Saucer" at approx. 1245/z.
Description of object:- Conical object showing greenish/white lights with
cabin on top and 4 lobes underneath. Object was flying beneath cloud
(approx. 8000 ft.) from East to West parallel with Cotham Road and appeared
to dip slightly on approach.
There were no Known R.A.A.F. or Civil movements in the area at this time -
Tower informed of sighting, however Radar not alerted due to delay in
reporting sighting.
Signed: (F. R. SODEN) Designation: A/S.O.O. Date: 1/10/55
(See over page)Comments or Suggestions -- Outstation or Pilot:
................................................................................................
................................................................................................
................................................................................................
................................................................................................
................................................................................................
................................................................................................
................................................................................................
................................................................................................
Signed: ................................ Designation: ................................ Date: ................................
Regional Office Action
(To be completed in accordance with Air Navigation Instructions 2/9 and 3/9).
................................................................................................
................................................................................................
................................................................................................
................................................................................................
................................................................................................
................................................................................................
................................................................................................
................................................................................................
Signed: ................................ Designation: ................................ Date: ................................
For Head Office Use
................................................................................................
................................................................................................
................................................................................................
................................................................................................
Action Completed. Signed: ................................ Date: ................................MXY 130 CONFIDENTIAL 64A
5/6/Air.(64A)
Headquarters, Training Command,
"G" Block,
Albert Park Barracks,
Melbourne, SC3.
11415
11 OCT 1955
Dear Sir,
SIGHTING OF UNUSUAL AERIAL OBJECT
1. Reference your reported sighting of an aerial
object on 3rd October, 1955. - 63A
2. Attached herewith in duplicate, is form which
deals with the sighting of unusual aerial object.
3. It will be appreciated if you would complete the
forms and return same to this Headquarters as early as
possible.
[signature]
(J.H. Prout)
Pilot Officer
for Staff Officer Intelligence.
Encl.
Mr. A.M.L. Murfett,
Weather Office,
Essendon Airport,
Victoria.
CONFIDENTIAL
DESPATCHED
11 OCT 1955
FROM H.Q.T.C.5/6/AIR
JOINTELL 63A
COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AVIATION
Telephone: MB 033 VICTORIA-TASMANIA REGION,
Telegraphic Address: "ALMORA HOUSE,"
"VICAVIAT, MELBOURNE" 522 LITTLE COLLINS STREET
Postal Address: MELBOURNE, C.1
BOX 4578, G.P.O.,
MELBOURNE, C.1
IN REPLY QUOTE 136/2/11 -7.OCT.1955
Air Officer Commanding,
Royal Australian Air Force,
Headquarters Training Command,
Albert Parks Barracks,
Melbourne. S.C.3.
Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon.
Attached for your information is a report concerning
the above forwarded to this office from Melbourne Airport.
See 64A [signature]
(R.D. HEAZLEWOOD.)
for Regional Director.
[RECEIVED stamp: T.C.H.Q. 10 OCT 1955 C.M.P.]63B.
3/10/55
Weather Office
Essendon Airport.
Report to O.I.C:
On the above date, following observation was
made by undersigned:-
At locality 200 yards North of Windsor Rail
Station, at 0737z, an object which resembled a cluster of
brilliant electric light globes was observed above the Eastern
horizon, travelling in an apparent Northerly direction. The
object was first seen at an approximate bearing 080°T (the
Eastern bearing of the Street). Observation of the (apparently)
swiftly moving object was necessarily limited to a period of
(estimated) 20-30 secs. The brilliant object appeared to
describe a descending path from 080°T until it was lost behind
a roof top horizon at estimated 040°T. Estimated angle of
elevation start of observation about 15/20° - End of obs. 10/15°.
Weather observation taken at time:-
Overcast cloud 3/4000'. Very small cloud breaks
to blue sky to S. & E. Wind very light SW. Vis. excellent to
50 miles +. No observed virga or evidence of showers or electro
meteoric activity. Hydrometeoric occurrence only stratiform.
Remarks:-
The observation was first made whilst driving a
motor vehicle in an easterly direction. It was continued (at
some personal risk) for period 20-30 secs. The vehicle was
rather abruptly brought to halt in an endeavour to continue obs.
The object had then disappeared below the surrounding rooftop
horizon. During the observation, the observer thrust head
through side window of vehicle. The object was still observed
similarly as it first appeared.
Form of Object:- An elliptical cluster (brilliant) with major
axis N-S (estimated N-S axis about 3 times that of minor).
Distance of Object from Observer:- Estimated 15-20 miles (based
on angle of elev.) Possibly to 30 miles on personal estimation.
Speed of Object:- Estimated very high (hovered 10° of azimuth
in 30-30 secs.) Very personal estimate based on aircraft
movement at that distance and elev. - 800/1500 mph or greater
(may be computed).
Personal Thought:- The undersigned has an open mind on so-
called "Flying Saucers" and such alleged phenomena. He is
reporting the optical facts of his observation. He was
particularly careful that any reflectional or refractional
effects due to his vehicle windscreen should not mar the obs.
He also made an "on the spot" obs. of weather elements, and the
possible effects of reflection and refraction of solar radiation
(direct) is considered negligible.2.
Conclusion: - Nil, scientifically.
A reputable and reliable acquaintance of
undersigned, who is an Aircraft Pilot of very long experience,
once reported a similar occurrence in approximately the same
area. His observation was from ground, (after sunset).
I consider that normal aircraft movements in
the area could not explain the above observation.
(A.M. L. MURFETT)
Weather Officer.MXY 130 CONFIDENTIAL 62A
5/6/AIR.(62A)
Headquarters Training Command,
Albert Park Barracks,
MELBOURNE, SC3.
8395
Secretary,
Department of Air (D.A.F.I.) 2 MAR 1955
Victoria Barracks,
MELBOURNE, SC1.
(Copy Department of Civil Aviation)
SIGHTING OF UNUSUAL AERIAL OBJECT:
1. On 25 FEB.1955, the Department of Civil Aviation
reported that a sighting of an unusual aerial object had
been made by a Mr. Newton, employee of the Burwood Boys'
Home, Burwood.
2. It was also advised that Civil Aviation radar facilit-
ies failed to depict any object in the reported area, and
that there were no aircraft or meteorological balloons in
the vicinity at the time of sighting.
3. Mr. Newton was immediately contacted by the Staff
Officer Intelligence at this Head-Quarters. Details given
were:-
(a) the object sighted appeared as a star in
close proximity to the sun;
(b) the object sighted had been observed for
some three or four days - from 0600 hours
until approximately 1500 hours;
(c) the object appeared to move from East to
West;
(d) on one occasion the object appeared to
move from West to East;
(e) the object was also sighted at approx-
imately 1730 hours on the 25 FEB.1955;
(f) Civil Aviation Meteorological Bureau was
informed. This Department advised that
the object was probably a star;
(g) the "Argus" Newspaper was informed - they
advised that the object was probably a
result of cloud reflection.
4. The S.O.Intell. further contacted Mr. Newton on the
28 FEB.1955 and from the description and positions given, it
was thought that the object sighted was probably Venus and
that the apparent movement was based on the positions of the
object at various intervals relative to the sun and the horizon.
5. A study of the Air Almanac of 1955 showed that the pos-
itions given by Mr. Newton resembled closely the positions of
Venus at the particular times in question.
6. The S.O.Intell. visually checked the object and he
considers that there is reasonable conclusive proof that the
object sighted was the Planet Venus.
.../2.
CONFIDENTIAL
DESPATCHED
2 MAR 1955
FROM H.Q.T.C.CONFIDENTIAL
-2-
7. It can be concluded, therefore, that:-
(a) the apparent movement of the object
was characteristic of a star relative
to the earth and observed relative
to the sun and the horizon;
(b) the position and times of the object
agreed with those of "Venus" as
calculated from the Air Almanac 1955;
(c) the apparent reversed direction of
movement could have been due to a
movement of the observer's head or
datum point on the ground;
(d) although Venus set at approximately
1700 hours on the 25 FEB.1955, the
object sighted at 1730 hours could
possibly have been Venus and an error
made in the estimation of the time,
or alternatively another planet,
e.g. Sirius, which would have been
bright enough to be observed at that
time of day.
(e) the object sighted was Venus and no
further action is considered necessary.
[signature]
(C.W. PEARCE)
Group Captain
SENIOR AIR STAFF OFFICER.
CONFIDENTIAL61A
REPORT ON A RIAL OBJECT OBSERVED
1. Name of observer .. W.W. OSBORNE
2. Address of Observer ... 44 Aberdeen St, Essendon ...
3. Occupation of Observer . Librarian ...
4. Date and Time of Observation (Time given in 24 hour clock zonal
time)
... 6.58 pm ... 18.11.54 ...
5. Period of Observation(s) .. 3 minutes ....,
6. Manner of Observation: (Give details of own position by map
reference if possible, or by known landmarks, and describe any
equipment used in the observation).
Observed from Essendon. It seemed to be between
Northcote & Dandenong Ranges.
7. Where was object first observed, e.g. overhead, coming from
behind a hill, over the horizon, etc.
Stationary all the time at middle of distance to horizon
8. What first attracted observer's attention, e.g. light or noise.
Light
9. Did object appear as a light or as a definite object.
Light
10. If there was more than one object, how many were there, and what
was their formation.
One light
11. What was the colour of the light or object White
12. What was its apparent shape . As large as a plane...
13. Was any detail of structure observable . No.
14. Was any method of propulsion obvious .. No.
15. Was there any sound .... too far for sound....
16.**Height, or angle of elevation . 30°... Height not Known.
17.**Speed, or angular velocity ... And shown on map...
18. State any experience which enables observer to be reasonably
certain about the answers given to 16 and 17.
None
** Since it is normally impossible to estimate the height and speed
of a strange object, it will usually be better to endeavour to
determine the angle of elevation of the object, the angle
through which it moved, and the time taken to do this.
...../2- 2 -
R[e]port on Aerial Object Observed (Contd.)
19. Direction of flight with reference to landmarks or points of
the compass.
The light faded gradually or flew directly away,
not gaining any altitude or moving from side to side.
20. Did the object remain on a straight path, deviate or manoeuvre
at all.
21. Was any trail of exhaust, vapour or light seen . Light only.
22. Where did object disappear, e.g. in mid-air, behind a hill,
over the horizon.
..... In mid-air
23. Existence of any physical evidence such as fragments, photo-
graphs, or other supporting evidence.
24. Weather conditions experienced at time(s) or observation(s)
......... Fine & Lead Sky
25. Location of any air traffic in the vicinity at the time of
sighting.
Planes were not about at moment, and later when
they were, they had no landing lights on.
26. Location of any meteorological stations in the general area.
27. Any additional information adult...
There were two other witnesses all the time....
Questions 25, 26 and 27 to be answered by interrogator.REPORT ON A RIAL OBJECT OBSERVED
1. Name of observer .. W.W. OSBORNE ...
2. Address of Observer ... 44 Aberdeen St, Essendon ..
3. Occupation of Observer . Librarian ...
4. Date and Time of Observation (Time given in 24 hour clock zonal
time)
6.58 pm ... 18.11.54 ...
5. Period of Observation(s) ... 3 minutes
6. Manner of Observation: (Give details of own position by map
reference if possible, or by known landmarks, and describe any
equipment used in the observation).
Essendon ... Northcore ... [///] Dandenong Ranges ...
7. Where was object first observed, e.g. overhead, coming from
behind a hill, over the horizon, etc.
Stationary all the time at middle distance to horizon
8. What first attracted observer's attention, e.g. light or noise.
a light
9. Did object appear as a light or as a definite object.
a light.
10. If there was more than one object, how many were there, and what
was their formation.
One
11. What was the colour of the light or object White
12. What was its apparent shape ... As large as a planet ...
13. Was any detail of structure observable ... No
14. Was any method of propulsion obvious . No.
15. Was there any sound ...
16.**Height, or angle of elevation . 30°
17.**Speed, or angular velocity .. Not known
18. State any experience which enables observer to be reasonably
certain about the answers given to 16 and 17.
None
** Since it is normally impossible to estimate the height and speed
of a strange object, it will usually be better to endeavour to
determine the angle of elevation of the object, the angle
through which it moved, and the time taken to do this.
...../2- 2 -
Report on Aerial Object Observed (Contd.)
19. Direction of flight with reference to landmarks or points of
the compass.
Its light faded gradually or it flew directly away, not
gaining altitude or moving from side to side.
20. Did the object remain on a straight path, deviate or manoeuvre
at all.
21. Was any trail of exhaust, vapour or light seen Light only...
22. Where did object disappear, e.g. in mid-air, behind a hill,
over the horizon.
In mid-air
23. Existence of any physical evidence such as fragments, photo-
graphs, or other supporting evidence.
24. Weather conditions experienced at time(s) or observation(s)
......... Fine Clear sky
25. Location of any air traffic in the vicinity at the time of
sighting.
Planes were not about at moment and later when they were
they had no landing lights on.
26. Location of any meteorological stations in the general area.
27. Any additional information ...
There were two other adult witnesses all the time....
Questions 25, 26 and 27 to be answered by interrogator.60A
MXY 130
5/6/AIR
Headquarters Training Command
R.A.A.F.
Albert Park Barracks
Melbourne
3917
-6 DEC 1954
Dear Sir,
SIGHTING OF UNUSUAL AERIAL OBJECT
1. Reference your reported sighting of an aerial
object on the 16th November, 1954.
2. Attached herewith in duplicate, is form which
deals with the sighting of unusual aerial objects.
3. It will be appreciated if you would complete
the forms and return same to this Headquarters as early as
possible.
(W.R. DAVIS)
Flight Lieutenant
for Staff Officer Intelligence
Mr. K. NICHOLSON
41 Nicholson Street
Bentleigh
[Stamp: DESPATCHED
-7 DEC 1954
FROM H.Q.T.C.]59A
MXY 130
5/6/AIR
Headquarters Training Command
R.A.A.F.
Albert Park Barracks
Melbourne
3916
-6 DEC 1954
Dear Sir,
SIGHTING OF UNUSUAL AERIAL OBJECT
1. Reference your reported sighting of an aerial
object on the 16th November, 1954.
2. Attached herewith in duplicate, is form which
deals with the sighting of unusual aerial objects.
3. It will be appreciated if you would complete
the forms and return same to this Headquarters as early as
possible.
(W.R. DAVIS)
Flight Lieutenant
for Staff Officer Intelligence
Mr. W. WILLIAMS
31 Bundeera Road
Caulfield
Letter returned
unclaimed
- Dec 54
[Stamp: DESPATCHED
-7 DEC 1954
FROM H Q.T.C.]58A
MXY 130
5/6/AIR
Headquarters Training Command
R.A.A.F.
Albert Park Barracks
Melbourne
3915 -6 DEC 1954
Dear Sir,
SIGHTING OF UNUSUAL AERIAL OBJECT
1. Reference your reported sighting of an aerial
object on the 16th November, 1954.
2. Attached herewith in duplicate, is form which
deals with the sighting of unusual aerial objects.
3. It will be appreciated if you would complete
the forms and return same to this Headquarters as early as
possible.
(W.R. DAVIS)
Flight Lieutenant
for Staff Officer Intelligence
Mr. G. CLARKE
41 Bay Street,
Brighton
Letter
returned
unclaimed
[Stamp: DESPATCHED
-7 DEC 1954
FROM H.Q.T.C.]57A
5/6/AIR
SO1
COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AVIATION
Telephone MB 033
Telegraphic Address:
"VICAVIAT, MELBOURNE."
Postal Address:
Box 4579, G.P.O.,
MELBOURNE, C.1
IN REPLY QUOTE 136-2-11
14120
VICTORIA-TASMANIA REGION
"ALMORA HOUSE,"
522-536 LITTLE COLLINS STREET,
MELBOURNE, C.1
29.NOV.1954
Air Officer Commanding,
R.A.A.F. Head-Quarters,
Southern Command,
Albert Park Barracks.
UNUSUAL AERIAL PHENOMENA
A copy of a report received in this office is
attached for your information.
See 58A-60A
[Signature]
(L.P.Bond)
for Regional Director
Enc.57B
Regional Office No. C.A. Form 225
(Revised July, '53)
Station Melbourne Airport No. ML 579 Head Office No.
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AVIATION
AIR SAFETY INCIDENT REPORT
(To be submitted through the Regional Director of the State of occurrence of the incident)
Place of Occurrence: Melbourne Date: 16/11/54 Time:
Aircraft — Type: Marking: Pilot:
Type of Operation: From: To:
Details of Incident: UNIDENTIFIED OBJECT
At 2245E the "SUN" office advised that reports of an
unidentified object had been received, details being as follow:-
Reported by: 1. W. WILLIAMS, 31 Bundeera Rd., Caulfield.
2. K. NICHOLSON, 41 Nicholson Street, Bentleigh.
3. G. CLARKE, 41 Bay St., Brighton.
Description: Oval object emitting blue yellow light sighted
firstly by Mr. Williams hovering directly overhead at 2140E, then
by Mr. Nicholson at 2142E also directly overhead but moving and
lastly by Mr. Clarke at 2147E moving rapidly from overhead toward
Williamstown. Object reported as very high. All times
approximate only.
Met. advise no cloud in the area during this period.
Signed: (S.H.B. COOPER) Designation: S.O.O. Date: 16/11/54.
(See over page)Comments or Suggestions — Outstation or Pilot:
Signed: Designation: Date:
Regional Office Action
(To be completed in accordance with Air Navigation Instructions 2/9 and 3/9).
Signed: Designation: Date:
For Head Office Use
Action Completed. Signed: Date:56A
302 Riversdale Rd.,
Camberwell.E6.
19 Nov '54.
Staff Officer Intelligence,
Albert Park Barracks,
MELBOURNE.
SIGHTING OF UNUSUAL AERIAL OBJECTS. 53A
(Ref. your letter 2564 of 17 Nov '54.)
Your letter has taken me somewhat by surprise. I cannot
recollect reporting an unusual aerial object on the date
mentioned in your letter, viz., 16 Nov '54.
Some years ago, I think 1950, a Warrant Officer and myself
sighted an unusual object at Bandianna NSW; However the
Warrant Officer concerned made a report of the incident and
sent it to a friend in Sydney to the best of my knowledge.
No report of the incident was made by myself although I may
have added my signature to his report.
Whilst I would like to co-operate by filling in the form
attached to your letter the whole incident is so long
gone that my facts would be at best most inaccurate.
I am sorry if I have put you to any inconvenience but
it is hoped that you will understand the situation from the
foregoing. Should I be of any further assistance to you I
will be only too pleased to oblige.
Mins. 1 refers.
Yours faithfully
J L Morris
(J.L.MORRIS.)55A
MXY 130 CONFIDENTIAL
5/6/AIR.(55A)
2765 Headquarters,
Training Command,
Albert Park Barracks,
MELBOURNE. SC3.
19 NOV 1954
Dear Sir,
SIGHTING OF UNUSUAL AERIAL OBJECT
1. Reference your reported sighting of an aerial
object on the 18th November, 1954.
2. Attached herewith in duplicate, is form which
deals with the sighting of unusual aerial objects.
3. It will be appreciated if you would complete
the forms and return same to this Headquarters as
early as possible.
[Signature]
(K.I. FOSTER)
Squadron Leader
STAFF OFFICER INTELLIGENCE
Encl.
[Stamp: DESPATCHED
19 NOV 1954
FROM H Q.T.C.]
Mr. W.W. Osborne,
44, Aberdeen St.,
ESSENDON. V.
CONFIDENTIAL54A
COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AVIATION
Telephone MB 033
Telegraphic Address:
"VICAVIAT, MELBOURNE."
Postal Address:
Box 4578, G.P.O.,
MELBOURNE, C.1
IN REPLY QUOTE 136/2/11.
13638 17.NOV.1954
Intelligence Section,
Headquarters Training Command,
R.A.A.F.,
Albert Park Barracks,
MELBOURNE.
UNUSUAL AERIAL OBJECT:
A copy of a report received from Mr. L. B. Walker is
attached for your information.
5>A refers.
[Signature]
(L. P. Bond.)
for Regional Director.54B
Regional Office No. C.A. Form 225
(Revised July, '53)
Station: Melbourne Airport No. ML 533 Head Office No.
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AVIATION
AIR SAFETY INCIDENT REPORT
(To be submitted through the Regional Director of the State of occurrence of the incident)
Place of Occurrence: Melbourne Date: 23/10/54 Time: 0600/z.
Aircraft — Type: Marking: Pilot:
Type of Operation: From: To:
Details of Incident: REPORT OF UNIDENTIFIED OBJECT
Mr. L.B. Walker of Burwood telephone WMB457 telephoned to report
a disc like object sighted over Burwood. This report was made at
0600/z. and the object had been in view for some 30 minutes.
Mr. Walker reported that he was certain the object was not an
aircraft, and very little change of position had taken place.
On request, the A.W.C. and Tower Radar were asked to search the
area, but no unidentified echo was reported.
Mr. Walker was positive the object was present, as it was clearly
visible seen through field glasses, and could be depicted by the
unaided eye.
Signed: (R. ALEXANDER) Designation: S.O.O. Date: 23/10/54.
(See over page)Comments or Suggestions — Outstation or Pilot:
Signed: Designation: Date:
Regional Office Action
(To be completed in accordance with Air Navigation Instructions 2/9 and 3/9).
Signed: Designation: Date:
For Head Office Use
Action Completed. Signed: Date:53A
MXY 130 CONFIDENTIAL
5/6/AIR.(53A)
2564 Headquarters,
Training Command,
Albert Park Barracks,
MELBOURNE. SC3.
17 NOV 1954
Dear Sir,
SIGHTING OF UNUSUAL AERIAL OBJECTS
1. Reference your reported sighting of an
aerial object on the 16th November, 1954.
2. Attached herewith in duplicate, is a
form which deals with the sighting of unusual
aerial objects.
3. It will be appreciated if you would
complete the form and return to this Headquarters
as early as possible.
[Signature]
(K.I. FOSTER)
Squadron Leader
STAFF OFFICER INTELLIGENCE
Encl. Req. lost. TC 30E
SEE 56A
[Stamp: DESPATCHED
18 NOV 1954
FROM H Q.T.C.]
Captain Morris,
302, Riversdale Road,
CAMBERWELL. V.
CONFIDENTIAL52A
MXY 130 CONFIDENTIAL
5/6/AIR.(52A)
2563 Headquarters,
Training Command,
Albert Park Barracks,
MELBOURNE. SC3.
17 NOV 1954
Dear Sir,
SIGHTING OF UNUSUAL AERIAL OBJECTS
1. Reference your reported sighting of an
aerial object on the 16th November, 1954.
2. Attached herewith in duplicate, is a
form which deals with the sighting of unusual
aerial objects.
3. It will be appreciated if you would
complete the form and return to this Headquarters
as early as possible.
[Signature]
(K.I.FOSTER)
Squadron Leader,
STAFF OFFICER INTELLIGENCE:
Encl. Req. lost TC316
Major B.G. Walker,
5, Portham Avenue,
CAMBERWELL. V.
See 54A
[Stamp: DESPATCHED
18 NOV 1954
FROM H Q.T.C.]
CONFIDENTIAL51A
MXY130. CONFIDENTIAL
5/6/AIR.(51A)
1196 Headquarters,
Training Command,
ALBERT PARK BARRACKS, SC3.
Secretary,
Air Board, (D.A.F.1.)
Victoria Barracks,
MELBOURNE. SC1. (Copy Department Civil Aviation)
26 October, 1954
SIGHTING OF UNUSUAL AERIAL OBJECT
L.A.C. CALVERT, E.T.
47A
1. Further to this Headquarters letter 5/6/Air (0582),
dated 18 October 1954, attached herewith is a report sub-
mitted by L.A.C. Calvert, E.T. of School of Radio, Ballarat.
2. This sighting was made at 0130 hours on the 4th
October, 1954 and may be related to the sighting made by
Apprentice Khan on that date.
3. Although sighted on the 4th October, the report was
made verbally by Sqn.Ldr. Bain I.(S)O. by telephone convers-
ation on 13th October, and the attached report did not
reach this Headquarters until 20th October, 1954.
4. It is therefore considered that no further action
can be taken at this juncture, but all details have been
filed for future reference.
[Signature]
(C.W. PEARCE),
Group Captain,
For Air Officer Commanding.
ENCL.
[Stamp: DESPATCHED
27 OCT 1954
FROM H Q.T.C.]
CONFIDENTIAL51B
COPY ONLY REPORT ON AERIAL OBJECT OBSERVED
1. Name of observer...A6341 LAC. CALVERT, E.T.
2. Address of observer... C.o. RAAF School of Radio, BALLARAT.
3. Occupation of observer... RAAF Radio Serviceman
4. Date & Time of Observation
(Time given in 24 hour clock
zonal time)... 0130K, 4th Oct.1954.
5. Period of observation... 10 to 15 seconds
6. Manner of Observation: (Give details
of own position by map reference if
possible, or by known landmarks, and Visual. Near H.Q.Building
describe any equipment used in observation) School Radio. Sighted north
over hangers & travelled in a
North East direction.
7. Where was object first observed, e.g.overhead,
coming from behind hill, over horizon etc. Coming from a Westerly
direction towards N.E.
8. What first attracted observer's attention,
e.g. Light or noise... Light.
9. Did object appear as a light or as definite object... As a glowing light
like a halo.
10. If there was more than one object, how many
were there, and what was their formation... One only.
11. What was the colour of the light or object... white with pinkish edges.
12. What was its apparent shape... Elliptical.
13. Was any detail of structure observable... No.
14. Was any method of propulsion obvious... No.
15. Was there any sound... No.
16. Height, or angle of elevation... 1200 elevation from observer.
17. Speed, or angular velocity.... 1500 m.p.h. or faster.
18. State any experience which enables observer to be reasonably certain
about the answers to 16 & 17... A/C.apprentice at Short
Bros. A/C.Co.Belfast
Has seen Sabre jet A/C. break sound barrier.
Since it is normally impossible to estimate the height and speed
of a strange object, it will usually be better to endeavour to
determine the angle of elevation of the object, the angle through
which it moves, and the time taken to do this...
19. Direction of flight with reference to landmarks or points
of the compass. From West to North East above hangers Ballarat
20. Did the object remain on a straight path,
deviate or manoeuvre at all... No, continued in straight path.
21. Was any trail of exhaust, vapour or light seen. Only pinkish halo.
22. Where did object disappear, e.g. in mid-air,
behind a hill, over the horizon. Object disappeared behind "Bald Hills"
23. Existence of any physical evidence such as
fragments, photographs or other supporting
evidence... Nil
24. Weather conditions experienced at time(s)
or observations... Cold, clear, cloudless, starry night. Only sickle
moon.
25. Location of any air traffic in vicinity
at the time of sighting...
26. Location of any meteorological stations in
the general area...
27. Any additional information... Object appeared about size of little
finger nail. Bigger than [observer has previously sighted]
shooting stars and a fireball.
Questions 25, 26 and 27 to be answered by interrogator.
(signed) Edmund Thomas Calvert.
Ballarat.
15/10/5450A
MXY130 CONFIDENTIAL [printed upside down at top]
5/6/AIR.(50A)
1195 Headquarters,
Training Command,
ALBERT PARK BARRACKS. SC3.
Secretary,
Air Board, (D.A.F.1.)
Victoria Barracks,
MELBOURNE. SC1. (Copy Department Civil Aviation)
26 October, 1954
SIGHTING OF UNUSUAL AERIAL OBJECT
Sec.Off. V.W. Levy,
Flt.Lt. E.V.T. Shields.
1. Attached herewith are Reports of the sighting of an
unusual aerial object submitted by Section Officer V.W. Levy
and Flight Lieutenant E.V.T. Shields, both of School of Radio,
Ballarat.
2. This report was first made verbally by telephone con-
versation with Sqn.Ldr. Bain I(S)O. of School of Radio, Ball-
arat on the 13th October, 1954.
3. Meteorological Sections at Essendon and Laverton were
contacted immediately by the Staff Officer (Intell.) at this
Headquarters. It was advised that the time of sighting
(1707 hours) did not co-incide with the times of release of
meteorological balloons on the date of sighting, and because
the existing winds were South-West, it is improbable that the
object sighted was a met. balloon.
4. It was further advised, however, that although improbable,
it is remotely possible that the object was a met. balloon.
5. It is considered that all possible action has been
taken regarding this sighting and the relevant information
has been filed for future reference.
[Signature]
(C.W. PEARCE)
Group Captain,
For Air Officer Commanding.
ENCL.
CONFIDENTIAL
[Stamp: DESPATCHED
27 OCT 1954
FROM H Q.T.C.]COPY ONLY REPORT ON AERIAL OBJECT OBSERVED 50B
1. Name of observer... Flt.Lt. E.V.T. Shields O[??]i
2. Address of observer... RAAF BALLARAT VICTORIA
3. Occupation of observer... Radio Officer
4. Date & Time of Observation
(Time given in 24 hour clock 12 October 54 1710
zonal time)....
5. Period of observation... approximately 3 minutes
6. Manner of Observation: (Give details
of own position by map reference if
possible, or by known landmarks, and Own position - RAAF
describe any equipment used in observation... Ballarat no equipment
used in observation
7. Where was object first observed, eg overhead,
coming from behind hill, over horizon etc... W.S.W. Vertical angle about
8. What first attracted observer's attention, 50°
eg. light or noise... Jet aircraft noise going from W to E
9. Did object appear as a light or as a definite object... Definite object.
10. If there was more than one object, how many
were there, and what was their formation... -
11. What was the colour of the light or object... White
12. What was its apparent shape... Spherical
13. Was any detail of structure observable... No
14. Was any method of propulsion obvious... No
15. Was there any sound... No.
16. Height or angle of elevation... Approximately 50°
17. Speed, or angular velocity... Speed doubtful probably optical illus-
ion of movement to the SSW - relative motion 180° to
18. State any experience which enables observer to cloud movement.
be reasonably certain about the answers to 16 & 17... 17 years RAAF
service.
Since it is normally impossible to estimate the height and speed
of a strange object, it will usually be better to endeavour to
determine the angle of elevation of the object, the angle through
which it moved, and the time taken to do this...
19. Direction of flight with reference to landmarks or points
of the compass... ? to the SSW
20. Did the object remain on a straight path, Straight path if it was
deviate or manoeuvre at all... moving
21. Was any trail of exhaust, vapour or light seen... No
22. Where did object disappear, eg. in mid-air,
behind a hill, over the horizon... About cloud
23. Existence of any physical evidence such as
fragments, photographs or other supporting
evidence...
24. Weather conditions experienced at time(s) Low bank (Total cover)
or observation(s)... Approaching from southern horizon -
25. Location of any air traffic in vicinity Remainder scattered broken cum
at the time of sighting... J t aircraft had just passed overhead, -ulous.
but was not sighted
26. Location of any meteorological stations in
the general area... Laverton, Essendon, Mt.Gambier(?) Parafield.
27. Any additional information... Observer feels reasonably confident
it was a white met. balloon
Questions 25, 26 and 27 to be answered by interrogator.
(signed) E V T. Shields,
Ballarat 15 Oct 54REPORT ON AERIAL OBJECT OBSERVED COPY 50C
1. Name of observer... S/O. V.W. LEVY, W51526
2. Address of Observer... C/O. RAAF School of Radio BALLARAT.
3. Occupation of Observer... WRAAF Officer.
4. Date and Time of Observation ... 1707 K. 12th Oct.1954.
(Time given in 24 hour clock zonal time)
5. Period of Observation(s) ... 2 to 3 mins.
6. Manner of Observation:
(Give details of own position by may reference
if possible, or by known landmarks, and describe
any equipment used in the observation)...
Visual Corner of entire Road and Drome
Rd. facing West. (RAAF School Radio)
7. Where was the object first observed,
eg. overhead, coming from behind a
hill, over the horizon, etc. ... Overhead, towards West.
8. What first attracted observer's attention,
eg. light or noise... Attention drawn to it by another person.
9. Did object appear as a light or
as a definite object. Definite Object.
10. If there was more than one object, how
many were there, and what was their formation. One only
11. What was the colour of the light or object. Siver to white.
12. What was its apparent shape. / Sphere.
13. Was any detail of structure observable. No.
14. Was any method of propulsion obvious. No.
15. Was there any sound. No.
16. Height, or angle of elevation. 60° to W.N.W.
17. Speed, or angular velocity. Above Second Cloud Bank.
18. State any experience which enables observer to
be reasonably certain about the answers given to 16 & 17
3½ years WRAAF Service. Has seen
jets flying.
Since it is normally impossible to estimate the height and speed
of a strange object, it will usually be better to endeavour to
determine the angle of elevation of the object, the angle through
which it moved, and the time taken to do this
19. Direction of flight with reference to landmarks
or points of the compass. Appeared to travel in Southerly
direction.
20. Did the object remain on a straight path, deviate
or manoeuvre at all. No.
21. Was any trail of exhaust, vapour or light seen. No.
22. Where did object disappear, eg. in mid-air, behind
a hill, over the horizon. Behind a cloud bank.
23. Existence of any physical evidence such as
fragments, photographs or other supporting evidence. Nil.
24. Weather conditions experienced at time(s) or
observation(s) Low bank. Nim. cloud coming from S.W. Broken
clouds at higher level.
25. Location or any air traffic in vicinity
at time of sighting. Heard jet A/C. pass overhead, but did not
sight A/C. on account of cloud.
26. Location of any meteorological stations
in the general area. Laverton, Essendon, Mt.Gambier ?, Parafield.
27. Any additional information. Observer considers it a large MET.
balloon at high altitude travelling
in a Southerly direction.
Questions 25,26 and 27 to be ansered by interrogator.
(signed) V. Levy, Sec.Off.COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA. 49A
TELEPHONE: 2240 ROYAL AUSTRALIAN AIR FORCE.
IN R[EPLY] PLEASE QUOTE
No.... 5/2/AIR(5A)
CONFIDENTIAL R.A.A.F. School of Radio
Ballarat
Victoria
Attention:- 18th October, 1954.
Command Intelligence Officer
Headquarters Training Command
Albert Park Barracks
Melbourne, S.C.3
Victoria
REPORTS ON AERIAL OBJECTS OBSERVED
Further to discussions between Command Intelligence
Officer (Sqn.Ldr. K. FOSTER) and Unit Security Officer (Sqn.
Ldr. H. BAIN), forwarded herewith are "pro formas" in respect
of aerial object sightings by:-
No. A6341 LAC. CALVERT, E.T.
No. W51526 SECT.OFF. V.W. LEVY.
No. 03291 FLT.LT. E.V. SHIELDS.
for further investigation please.
[signature] H.M.Bain Sqn.Ldr.
for (G.E. PROSSER)
Wing Commander
Commanding Officer
CONFIDENTIALREPORT ON AERIAL OBJECT OBSERVED 49B
1. Name of observer N°A6341 LAC.CALVERT, E.T.
2. Address of Observer c/o RAAF School of Radio. BALLARAT.
3. Occupation of Observer. RAAF Radio Serviceman.
4. Date and Time of Observation (Time given in 24 hour clock
...0130 K. 4th Oct. 1954... zonal time).
5. Period of Observation(s)......10 to 15 Seconds........
6. Manner of Observation: (Give details of own position by
map reference if possible, or by known landmarks, and des-
cribe any equipment used in the observation)
....Visual...Near H.Q. Building School of Radio.
..sighted to north over hangars and....
travelled in a North East direction..........
7. Where was object first observed, e.g. overhead, coming
from behind a hill, over the horizon, etc.
.Coming from a Westerly direction towards N.E.
8. What first attracted observer's attention, e.g. light or
noise.
....light..............................................
9. Did object appear as a light or as a definite object.
...As a glowing light like a halo...
10. If there was more than one object, how many were there,
and what was their formation.
....One only..............................................
11. What was the colour of the light or object White with pinkish
12. What was its apparent shape.... Elliptical........... edges.
13. Was any detail of structure observable.... No..........
14. Was any method of propulsion obvious... No.............
15. Was there any sound... No...................................
16. Height, or angle of elevation...120° elevation from observer.
17. Speed, or angular velocity....1500 m.p.h. or faster.
18. State any experience which enables observer to be reason-
ably certain about the answers given to 16 and 17.
Aircraft Apprentice at Short Bro's Aircraft Co. Belfast
Has seen Sabre jet a/c break Sound Barrier.
Since it is nor...ally impossible to estimate the height and
speed of a strange object, it will usually be better to en-
deavour to determine the angle of elevation of the object,
the angle through which it moved, and the time taken to do
this.
........../2.- 2 -
Report on Aerial Object Observed (Contd.)
19. Direction of flight with reference to landmarks or points
of the compass.
...From West to North East above hangars BALLARAT
20. Did the object remain on a straight path, deviate or man-
oeuvre at all.
....No continued in straight path.......
21. Was any trail of exhaust, vapour or light seen. Only pinkish halo.
22. Where did object disappear, e.g. in mid-air, behind a hill,
over the horizon.
Object disappeared behind "BALD HILLS"...
23. Existence of any physical evidence such as fragments,
photographs, or other supporting evidence.
..Nil................................................
24. Weather conditions experienced at time(s) or observation(s)
...Cold. Clear. Cloudless. Starry night...
Only Sickle moon.
25. Location of any air traffic in the vicinity at the time of
sighting.
.....................................................
.....................................................
26. Location of any meteorological stations in the general
area.
.....................................................
27. Any additional information...Object appeared.....
about size of little finger nail...Bigger..
..than star...Observer has previously......
.sighted shooting stars and a fireball......
Questions 25, 26 and 27 to be answered by interrogator.
Edmund. Thomas. Calvert.
Ballarat
15/10/54[Sketch drawing] Intense white centre with pink tinge around edges. [Arrow pointing to oval/elliptical object drawn with pink/red outline and white centre at upper left of page] [Ground level drawing showing from left to right:] C.T. HANGAR HILLS HUTS
REPORT ON AERIAL OBJECT OBSERVED 49C
1. Name of observer....S/o V.W.LEVY W51526.
2. Address of Observer....c/o RAAF School of Radio BALLARAT.
3. Occupation of Observer...WRAAF Officer.............
4. Date and Time of Observation (Time given in 24 hour clock
.....1707 K. 12th Oct. 1954... zonal time).
5. Period of Observation(s)...2 to 3 mins.............
6. Manner of Observation: (Give details of own position by
map reference if possible, or by known landmarks, and des-
cribe any equipment used in the observation)
...Visual...Corner of Centre Road +.
Drome Rd. facing West.............................
...(RAAF School of Radio).....................
7. Where was object first observed, e.g. overhead, coming
from behind a hill, over the horizon, etc.
.....Overhead towards West.........................
8. What first attracted observer's attention, e.g. light or
noise.
.Attention drawn to it by another person
9. Did object appear as a light or as a definite object.
....Definite Object...................................
10. If there was more than one object, how many were there,
and what was their formation.
....One only...........................................
11. What was the colour of the light or object Silver to White.
12. What was its apparent shape........ Sphere..............
13. Was any detail of structure observable...No...........
14. Was any method of propulsion obvious...No..............
15. Was there any sound....No
16. Height, or angle of elevation...60° to W.N.W...
17. Speed, or angular velocity. Above second cloud bank
18. Appeared to move fairly fastly towards SOUTH
State any experience which enables observer to be reason-
ably certain about the answers given to 16 and 17.
.......3½ yrs. WRAAF Service. Has seen jets flying
Since it is normally impossible to estimate the height and
speed of a strange object, it will usually be better to en-
deavour to determine the angle of elevation of the object,
the angle through which it moved, and the time taken to do
this.
......../2.- 2 -
Report on Aerial Object Observed (Contd.)
19. Direction of flight with reference to landmarks or points
of the compass.
.Appeared to travel in a Southerly direction
20. Did the object remain on a straight path, deviate or man-
oeuvre at all.
No
.......................................................
21. Was any trail of exhaust, vapour or light seen... No....
22. Where did object disappear, e.g. in mid-air, behind a hill,
over the horizon.
......Behind a Cloud bank........................
23. Existence of any physical evidence such as fragments,
photographs, or other supporting evidence.
Nil
.......................................................
24. Weather conditions experienced at time(s) or observation(s)
Low bank Nim. Cloud coming from S.W. Broken
clouds at higher level.
25. Location of any air traffic in the vicinity at the time of
sighting.
.Heard Jet A/c pass overhead, but did
.not sight A/c on account of cloud.
26. Location of any meteorological stations in the general
area.
.LAVERTON- ESSENDON- MT.GAMBIER?- PARAFIELD
27. Any additional information....................................
.Observer considers it a large MET.
Balloon at High altitude travelling
in a SOUTHERLY DIRECTION..........
Questions 25, 26 and 27 to be answered by interrogator.
[signature] V.Levy Sec.Off.REPORT ON AERIAL OBJECT OBSERVED 49d
1. Name of observer...FLT.LT. E.V.T. SHIELDS...03291
2. Address of Observer...RAAF...BALLARAT...VIC...
3. Occupation of Observer...RADIO OFFICER.............
4. Date and Time of Observation (Time given in 24 hour clock
..12 OCTOBER 54......1710. zonal time).
5. Period of Observation(s)....APPROX...3 MINUTES
6. Manner of Observation: (Give details of own position by
map reference if possible, or by known landmarks, and des-
cribe any equipment used in the observation)
OWN POSITION - RAAF BALLARAT - NO...
EQUIPMENT...USED IN OBSERVATION.......
7. Where was object first observed, e.g. overhead, coming
from behind a hill, over the horizon, etc.
...W.S.W..........VERTICAL ANGLE ABOUT 50°
8. What first attracted observer's attention, e.g. light or
noise.
JET AIRCRAFT NOISE GOING FROM W TO E.
9. Did object appear as a light or as a definite object.
..........DEFINITE OBJECT....................................
10. If there was more than one object, how many were there,
and what was their formation.
11. What was the colour of the light or object ....WHITE......
12. What was its apparent shape.... SPHERICAL..........
13. Was any detail of structure observable......NO...........
14. Was any method of propulsion obvious...... NO..........
15. Was there any sound............... NO.
16. Height, or angle of elevation...APPROX...50°...........
17. Speed, or angular velocity. SPEED DOUBTFUL - PROBABLY OPTICAL
ILLUSION OF MOVEMENT TO THE SSW - RELATIVE MOTION 180°
18. State any experience which enables observer to be reason- TO CLOUD
ably certain about the answers given to 16 and 17. MOVEMENT
.......17 YEARS RAAF SERVICE..................................
Since it is normally impossible to estimate the height and
speed of a strange object, it will usually be better to en-
deavour to determine the angle of elevation of the object,
the angle through which it moved, and the time taken to do
this.
......../2.- 2 -
Report on Aerial Object Observed (Contd.)
19. Direction of flight with reference to landmarks or points
of the compass.
.........? TO THE SSW..................................
20. Did the object remain on a straight path, deviate or man-
oeuvre at all.
...STRAIGHT PATH IF IT WAS MOVING..
21. Was any trail of exhaust, vapour or light seen...NO.....
22. Where did object disappear, e.g. in mid-air, behind a hill,
over the horizon.
..........ABOVE CLOUD.....................................
23. Existence of any physical evidence such as fragments,
photographs, or other supporting evidence.
..........NIL...........................................
24. Weather conditions experienced at time(s) or observation(s)
LOW BANK (TOTAL COVER) APPROACHING FROM SOUTHERN
HORIZON - REMAINDER SCATTERED BROKEN CUMULOUS
25. Location of any air traffic in the vicinity at the time of
sighting.
...Jet A/c had just passed overhead..........
..but was not sighted...........................
26. Location of any meteorological stations in the general
area.
.LAVERTON- ESSENDON- MT.GAMBIER?- PARAFIELD
27. Any additional information....................................
.Observer feels reasonably confident
.it was a White MET. BALLOON..........
Questions 25, 26 and 27 to be answered by interrogator.
[signature] Shields
Ballarat 15 Oct 54.MXYL30
5/6/AIR Headquarters Training Command
R.A.A.F.
0533 Albert Park Barracks
Melbourne S.C.3.
Department of Civil Aviation
522-536 Little Collins Street
Melbourne C.1. 18 OCT 1954
SIGHTING OF AERIAL PHENOMENA
See 47B-d.
Attached herewith is a report on the
sighting of an aerial object forwarded for your
information.
[signature]
(C.W. PEARCE)
Group Captain
For Air Officer Commanding
Att.
DESPATCHED
18 OCT 1954
FROM H.Q.T.C.CONFIDENTIAL 47A
MXY130
5/6/AIR Headquarters Training Command
R.A.A.F.
0532 Albert Park Barracks
Secretary Melbourne S.C.3.
Air Board
Victoria Barracks 18 OCT 1954
Melbourne (D.A.F.I.)
SIGHTING OF AERIAL PHENOMENA
1. Attached herewith is a report of an aerial object
sighted at the School of Radio, R.A.A.F. Ballarat at 0300 hours
on the 4th October, 1954.
2. Apprentice RAHMAT ULLAH KHAN (PAKISTAN 85178) who
sighted the object whilst on guard duty was interrogated by
the Staff Officer Intelligence.
3. Apprentice KHAN submitted a written report (attached
herewith) some five days prior to being interrogated. During
the interrogation efforts were made to force him to deviate
from some of his earlier statements, but throughout he was
consistent in every detail. His report is therefore considered
as being sincere.
4. However, when questioned on the delay from when he
first sighted the object (0300 hours) until he reported the
sighting (0600 hours) Apprentice Khan gave the following
explanations:-
(a) Being sensitive to ridicule he originally did not intend
to report the sighting.
(b) When he sighted the object he was so frightened he
retreated to the sentry box and remained sitting on the
floor until dawn.
(c) He did not consider the sighting of aerial phenomena
came within the normal course of his duty.
(d) It is against his religious beliefs to recognise any
such phenomena.
After careful consideration he disregarded the foregoing and
decided to report the sighting to his Commanding Officer.
5. The Officer in Charge of Apprentices, F/O. HILL, was
interviewed, and his assessment of KHAN was "sincere and
consientious in his work, but has emotional tendencies".
6. It is interesting to note Apprentice KHAN, not having
been issued with ammunition, fired his rifle at what he saw.
This may tend to indicate some form of panic, and if so may
render his statement not wholly reliable and therefore some
tolerance of error may be expected. He stated that the
duration of sighting was approximately eight to ten seconds only.
7. Some six miles to the North West (the direction where
the object was first sighted) of the School of Radio are hills
over which pass roads. The cloud base was eight-eights at
1000-1500 feet. The possibility of a car with bright head lamps
passing over undulating country, the lights being reflected in
the clouds, cannot be discounted.
CONFIDENTIALCONFIDENTIAL
-2-
8. Apprentice KHAN has assessed the speed of the object
as approximately 1000 miles per hour (comparing its speed with
that of attacker aircraft which he has seen in flight at
Karachi). Although travelling at this speed, no sound was
audible.
9. The probability of an existing 'Fire Ball' cannot be
discounted. Dr. Loewe of the School of Meteorology, Melbourne
University has been approached on the subject of Fire Balls
and he has given the following information :-
"Fire Balls pertain to a rare electrical phenomenon
associated with electrical storms or dust in the atmos-
phere. They normally occur in showery weather, usually
at height or near the ground. They are usually
observed as a bright red glow and may travel at terrific
speeds, hover, change direction rapidly and may disappear
through cloud. Although this phenomenon is rare and
little is known of them they have been sighted and do
exist".
10. Mr. Loewe considers that from the description and
circumstances concerning the time, location and climatic
conditions the object sighted could have been a Fire Ball.
11. It is suggested that the object sighted at School
of Radio, Ballarat, at 0300 hours on the 4th August, 1954
was a Fire Ball.
[signature]
(C.W. PEARCE)
Group Captain
For Air Officer CommandingREPORT BY PAK/8517 A/APP. RAHMAT U. 1 Copy Please 47B
On the morning of Monday October 4th, at approximately
0300 hours, while on Tarmac area guard duty I saw a brightly red
and yellow lit object approaching at a very high speed just below
cloud level, from a northerly direction. The object approached
horizontally until it was almost directly above my head. It
then descended to a height of approximately 200 feet. I got
frightened and my eyes went blurred.
It travelled back across the hangars and descended
back somewhere near the runway and almost immediately began
travelling on its original course ascending very rapidly as
it proceeded, quickly vanishing through the clouds.
I would describe the object as being round with a
flat bottom and a curved top, brightly lit by red and yellow
lights, which when the object came close prevented me from
viewing it very clearly./
When I got scared I pulled my trigger but having no
ammunition, nothing happened.
BALLARAT [signature]
4th October, 1954.REPORT ON AERIAL OBJECT OBSERVED
1. Name of Observer: RAHMAT ULLAH KHAN
2. Address of Observer. School of Radio, Ballarat.
3. Occupation of Observer. Pakistan Air Apprentice.
4. Date and Time of Observation (Time given in 24 hours clock
zonal time.
4-10-54 0300 hours.
5. Period of Observation: 8-10 seconds.
6. Manner of Observation: (Give details of own position by map
reference if possible, or by known landmarks, and describe any
equipment used in the observation)
Visual
7. Where was object first observed, e.g. overhead, coming from
behind a hill, over the horizon, etc.
Approx. 5° elevation towards Observer from Cloud Base
1000-1500 ft.
8. What first attracted observer's attention, e.g. light or noise.
Light in Cloud Base.
9. Did object appear as a light or as a definite object.
Bright Red Light.
10. If there was more than one object, how many were there, and what
was their formation.
One
11. What was the colour of the light or object: Red when first
sighted then red with orange centre.
12. What was its apparent shape. Round at first sighting then
humped oval at lowest height angle 80 degrees.
13. Was any detail of structure observable: No.
14. Was any method of propulsion obvious: No
15. Was there any sound: No
16 * Height, or angle of elevation : See sketch attached.
17 * Speed, or angular velocity: Extremely rapid - 1000 mph approx.
18. State any experience which enable observer to be reasonably
certain about the answers given to 16 and 17.
(16) Cloud Base (17) Para. 8 H.Q.T.C. Repor .
* Since it is normally impossible to estimate the height and
speed of a strange object, it will usually be better to
endeavour to determine the angle of elevation of the object,
the angle through which it moved, and the time taken to do this
////219. Direction of flight with reference to landmarks or points
of the compass.
See attached map.
20. Did the object remain on a straight path, deviate or
manoeuvre at all.
Descended, hovered, deviated, climbed.
21. Was any trail of exhaust, vapour or light seen: No.
22. Where did object disappear, e.g. in mid-air, behind a hill,
over the horizon.
Through cloud - climbing.
23. Existence of any physical evidence such as fragments, photo-
graphs, or other supporting evidence. NIL.
24. Weather conditions experienced at time(s) or observation.
Eight- Eights cloud - Slight Precipitation at times.
25. Location of any airtraffic in the vicinity at the time of
sighting. NIL
26. Location of any meteorological stations in the general area.
NIL.
27. Any additional information: See Reports attached.DETAILED SKETCH OF AERIAL OBJECT SIGHTED AT SCHOOL OF RADIO, RAAF BALLARAT 040654 4/10/54 [Sketch showing flight path over hangar with handwritten annotations:] 8/8 cloud - Slight Precipitation INITIAL SIGHTING [Arrow] FROM NORTH WEST AND ANGLE APPROX. 10°? DEVIATION PATH HANGAR [Right side:] RED BRIGHT NUCLEUS HOOD ILLUMINATION AREA CLOSE APPROX. STONES HEIGHT TO HANGAR C.T. ANGLE OF DEVIATION APPROX 80°
COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA 46A
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AVIATION
Telephone: MB 033
Telegraphic Address: VICTORIA-TASMANIA REGION
"VICAVIAT, MELBOURNE." "ALMORA HOUSE,"
Postal Address: 522-536 LITTLE COLLINS STREET,
Box 4578, G.P.O., MELBOURNE, C.1.
MELBOURNE C.1
IN REPLY QUOTE 136/2/11. 10440
31 AUG 1954
Intelligence Section,
Headquarters Training Command,
R.A.A.F.
Albert Park Barracks,
MELBOURNE.
UNUSUAL AERIAL OBJECT
A copy of a report received in this Office
is attached for your information.
[signature] W.E.Boud
(W.E. Boud)
for Regional DirectorRegional Office No. 225/626/358. C.A. Form 225
(Revised July, '53)
Station: No. Head Office No.
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AVIATION
AIR SAFETY INCIDENT REPORT
(To be submitted through the Regional Director of the State of occurrence of the incident)
Place of Occurrence: Date: 8/8/54 Time: 0715/z.
Aircraft — Type: Marking: Pilot:
Type of Operation: From: To:
Details of Incident: UNIDENTIFIED OBJECT
An Argus Reporter advised that at 0715 a Bryan
Jones age 19, of 65 Glyndon Rd. Camberwell and Michael Rowland,
age 9, also of Glyndon Rd. had been watching the moon, and had
sighted a round silver object which glinted in the sun, in that
direction. Subsequently 6 other persons confirmed the sighting
on being informed by Jones and Rowland.
The object was stationery with reference to the
moon and the height could not be gauged. It was stated that it
definitely was not an aircraft and was definitely round in shape.
The moon was almost directly overhead at that
time and the sky was half covered with cloud (base approx. 4000
feet).
Signed: S.H.B. Cooper Designation: S.O.O. Date: 8/8/54.
(See over page.)Comments or Suggestions — Outstation or Pilot:
.......................................................................
.......................................................................
.......................................................................
.......................................................................
.......................................................................
.......................................................................
.......................................................................
.......................................................................
Signed: Designation: Date:
Regional Office Action
(To be completed in accordance with Air Navigation Instructions 2/9 and 3/9).
.......................................................................
.......................................................................
.......................................................................
.......................................................................
.......................................................................
.......................................................................
.......................................................................
Signed: Designation: Date:
For Head Office Use
.......................................................................
.......................................................................
.......................................................................
.......................................................................
.......................................................................
.......................................................................
Action Completed. Signed: Date:5/6/AIR
SOINTEL
L65A
Toronte 77 ROYAL AUSTRALIAN AIR FORCE
Ref. -- Officers Training School
R.A.A.F.
Rathmines 2N
New South Wales
16th August 1954
Headquarters Home Command
R.A.A.F.
Penrith (Copy to Headquarters Training Command)
New South Wales
ASTRAL SIGHTING
1. Attached please find a report of a light seen in the sky from
New Lambton (Newcastle) on the evening of Monday 9th August 1954.
2. The request per the radio was not heard by members of this unit
and Mr. Braidwood also cannot verify which station broadcast for reports.
3. However, the report is forwarded to Home Command as the matter is a
regional one, also for any further action considered necessary.
[signature]
(M.A. TRUMAN)
Squadron Leader
Encl. For Commandant
[circular stamp: RECEIVED 19 AUG 1954 T.C.H.Q.]COPY ONLY
74 Birdwood St.,
New Lambton
11.8.54
Squadron Leader Hill
R.A.A.F. Station
Rathmines
Dear Sir,
Further to our phone conversation this morning regarding
strange light seen by my son on Monday evening, I herewith give details:-
Time. Monday evening 9th inst. about dusk exact time not noted but
approx. 5.20pm/
Appearance. Bright green object with short tail.
Position. Bearing 190 altitude 15 when sighted and disappeared bearing
180 altitude 5
He told me that it looked like a very bright meteor and presumed
it contained copper as it was burning with a green light.
Sounds a bit fantastic but as the radio requested information
I thought it might be of some use.
Yours faithfully
(Sgd) T. BRAIDWOOD
Master Mariner40A
225/551/317
In reply Quote 136/ 2/ 11
COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA
Telephone .... MB 033
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AVIATION
Telegraphic Address:
"Vicaviat, Melbourne" Victoria-Tasmania Region
Postal Address: "Almora House,"
Box 4578, G.P.O., 08514 522-536 Little Collins Street,
Melbourne, C.I. Melbourne, C.I
Headquarters,
Training Command,
Intelligence Section, 22 JUL 1954
Albert Park Barracks,
Melbourne.
UNIDENTIFIED AERIAL OBJECT
The attached copy of a report of an
unidentified aerial object, received in this
Office, is forwarded for your information.
[signature]
(W.E. Boud)
for Regional DirectorTMA FX 375 1- E91
Regional Office No. 225/551/317 C.A. Form 225
(Revised July, '53)
Station: Melbourne Airport No. EA 317 Head Office No.
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AVIATION
AIR SAFETY INCIDENT REPORT
(To be submitted through the Regional Director of the State of occurrence of the incident)
Place of Occurrence: Vicinity Lubeck Date: 11/7/54 Time: Approx. 1135/z.
Aircraft — Type: C47 Marking: TAN Pilot: Roberts
Type of Operation: Flt. 509 From: AD To: ML
Details of Incident: UNIDENTIFIED OBJECT
Shortly after passing Lubeck at 1135 enroute to ML, Capt. Roberts
flying TAN advised that a bright red light had been sighted ahead
slightly to port, height 10,000 feet or above, and after he and his
First Officer had it in sight for approx. one minute, it
disappeared to North of track. On checking with Area Control,
no other aircraft could have been in this vicinity at the time.
Flight conditions were reported as visual - visibility good.
Acton :
Rang TMA and left message to ring —
1000hrs. 26-7-54.
B.F. 30-7-54.
Signed: (S.H.B. COOPER) Designation: S.O.O. Date: 11/7/54.
(See over page.)Comments or Suggestions — Outstation or Pilot:
Signed: Designation: Date:
Regional Office Action
(To be completed in accordance with Air Navigation Instructions 2/9 and 3/9).
Signed: Designation: Date:
For Head Office Use
Action Completed. Signed: Date:COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA
L13A
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AVIATION
Telephone: MB 033
VICTORIA-TASMANIA REGION
Telegraphic Address: "ALMORA HOUSE,"
"VICAVIAT. MELBOURNE." 522-536 LITTLE COLLINS STREET,
MELBOURNE, C.1
Postal Address:
Box 4578, G.P.O.,
MELBOURNE, C.1
IN REPLY QUOTE 136/2/11 07235
25 JUN. 1954
S/L. Johnson,
Home Training Command,
Intelligence Section,
ALBERT PARK BARRACKS.
UNUSUAL AERIAL OBJECT:
A copy of a report received in this Office is attached
for your information.
[signature]
(W. E. Boud.)
for Regional Director.C
O
P
Y
12 Gladstone Street,
EAST COBURG.
15 June 1954.
The Regional Director,
CIVIL AVIATION DEPARTMENT,
522 Little Collins Street,
MELBOURNE.
Dear Sir,
In the interests of science I feel that I should
make the following report. I neither seek publicity or suffer
from imagination.
On Monday evening June 14th 1954 I and nine other
people watched an object in the sky for approximately ten minutes
until it finally appeared to glide upwards and disappear. I will
give you the names and addresses of the people who saw this object
should you wish to contact them and verify the following descrip-
tion of what we saw:-
Drawing a line due west from 12 Gladstone Street,
East Coburg, for approximately ten miles; then, North of that
Spot 5 degrees would fix the approximate position of the object.
At first sight the object could be mistaken for a large brilliant
star. It moved about the sky at sometimes a very fast speed : at
others it hovered motionless. It appeared to dim and leave a thin
complete circle of light, the centre being dark with a slight
duskiness. After rising and falling, hovering at different times,
it finally formed this thin circle of light and rose upwards and
disappeared.
We people who observed this object are well used to
aeroplanes coming and going from Essendon : sometimes we see them
use their headlights. I myself spent almost 2½ years in the
Middle East and have seen planes caught in searchlights. I also
occasionally have seen car headlights reflected on low cloud in
the hilly country around Ararat where I lived for nine years, but
I say here and now that this object we people saw had no relation
to any of those things.
The following are the names and addresses of the
people who saw this object:-
Self - Harold Lucas. Alma Lucas. George Lucas. Olive Lucas
and Evelyn Lucas - all of 12 Gladstone St., East Coburg.
Miss Patricia Paxman, 17 Malcolm St., East Coburg.
Mr. and Mrs. H. Riley, 10 Gladstone St., East Coburg.
Mr. and Mrs. P. Foo, 10 Gladstone St., East Coburg.
Please treat this report as being solely in the interests of
Science.
I remain,
Yours respectfully
(Sgd.) Harold Lucas)
P.S. - I myself saw this same object three weeks previously.COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA
42A
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AVIATION
Telephone MB 033
VICTORIA-TASMANIA REGION
Telegraphic Address: "ALMORA HOUSE,"
"VICAVIAT. MELBOURNE." 522-536 LITTLE COLLINS STREET,
MELBOURNE, C.1
Postal Address:
Box 4579, G.P.O.,
MELBOURNE, C.1
IN REPLY QUOTE 136/2/11 06922
17 JUN. 1954
S/L. Johnson,
Home Training Command,
Intelligence Section,
ALBERT PARK BARRACKS.
UNUSUAL AERIAL OBJECT:
Mr. John Wilson of 384 Wattletree Road, East Malvern, has
advised this Office that he sighted an unusual aerial object at 1.15 a.m.
on 10/6/54, and the following details are forwarded for your information:-
He stated that he was driving from Sale to Melbourne and was
about ten (10) miles from Sale when he was attracted by an orange glow in
the sky directly ahead which lit up the clouds. While he was watching an
orange semi-circular shape (like a quarter moon) appeared, then seemed to
turn completely over and finally ended up in tear-drop shape.
The object appeared directly ahead through the windscreen
of his car at an estimated distance of 20 miles and at a height of 300' -
400' above his immediate horizon. The object was visible for two or three
minutes then disappeared in cloud.
[signature]
(W. E. Boud.)
for Regional Director.40A
REPORT ON AERIAL OBJECT OBSERVED
1. Name of observer .. David Reese Christopher Muir
2. Address of Observer .. Ck. ABc.
3. Occupation of Observer .. Com. Public Servant
4. Date and Time of Observation (Time given in 24 hour clock zonal
time)
About 0025 30 May 5 4
5. Period of Observation(s) .. 5 10 Sec.
6. Manner of Observation: (Give details of own position by map
reference if possible, or by known landmarks, and describe any
equipment used in the observation).
21 Wilmot St E. Malvern
Naked eye
7. Where was object first observed, e.g. overhead, coming from
behind a hill, over the horizon, etc.
In east elevation 10° above horizon
8. What first attracted observer's attention, e.g. light or noise.
Orange glow
9. Did object appear as a light or as a definite object.
Halo effect round oval object
10. If there was more than one object, how many were there, and what
was their formation.
one
11. What was the colour of the light or object dark
12. What was its apparent shape oval
13. Was any detail of structure observable nil
14. Was any method of propulsion obvious .. none
15. Was there any sound Yes like motor cycle but not
certain if noise belonged to object
16.** Height, or angle of elevation 10° above horizon
17.** Speed, or angular velocity impression of speed
18. State any experience which enables observer to be reasonably
certain about the answers given to 16 and 17.
nil
** Since it is normally impossible to estimate the height and speed
of a strange object, it will usually be better to endeavour to
determine the angle of elevation of the object, the angle
through which it moved, and the time taken to do this.
....../2- 2 - 41A
Report on Aerial Object Observed (Contd.)
19. Direction of flight with reference to landmarks or points of
the compass.
No apparent change of bearing or elevation
20. Did the object remain on a straight path, deviate or manoeuvre
at all.
Stationary
21. Was any trail of exhaust, vapour or light seen Yellowish luminous
gas
22. Where did object disappear, e.g. in mid-air, behind a hill,
over the horizon.
In mid air
23. Existence of any physical evidence such as fragments, photo-
graphs, or other supporting evidence.
24. Weather conditions experienced at time(s) or observation(s)
Clear
25. Location of any air traffic in the vicinity at the time of
slghting.
0016K. ONE C47 LANDED. ESSENDON. FROM. SYDNEY. No OTHER
MOVEMENTS. WITHIN THE HOUR
26. Location of any meteorological stations in the general area.
C.W.B. MELB.....WEATHER FINE. 360/14MPH
27. Any additional information
Six answers in all
Questions 25, 26 and 27 to be answered by interrogator.40A
REPORT ON AERIAL OBJECT OBSERVED
1. Name of observer .. David Reese
2. Address of Observer .. Ck. A.B.C.
3. Occupation of Observer .. Com. Public Servant
4. Date and Time of Observation (Time given in 24 hour clock zonal
time)
0025 30 May 5 4
5. Period of Observation(s) .. 5 10 Sec.
6. Manner of Observation: (Give details of own position by map
reference if possible, or by known landmarks, and describe any
equipment used in the observation).
21 Wilmot St E Malvern
Naked eye
7. Where was object first observed, e.g. overhead, coming from
behind a hill, over the horizon, etc.
In East elevation 10° above horizon
8. What first attracted observer's attention, e.g. light or noise.
Whirring noise
9. Did object appear as a light or as a definite object.
Dark object against sky
10. If there was more than one object, how many were there, and what
was their formation.
one
11. What was the colour of the light or object Nil later transparent
12. What was its apparent shape Oval
13. Was any detail of structure observable After discharge of
yellowish gas appeared transparent with satellite shot
14. Was any method of propulsion obvious .. None
15. Was there any sound Whirring noise (possibly motor cycle)
16.** Height, or angle of elevation 10° above horizon
17.** Speed, or angular velocity impression of speed
18. State any experience which enables observer to be reasonably
certain about the answers given to 16 and 17.
None
** Since it is normally impossible to estimate the height and speed
of a strange object, it will usually be better to endeavour to
determine the angle of elevation of the object, the angle
through which it moved, and the time taken to do this.
....../2- 2 - 39A
Report on Aerial Object Observed (Contd.)
19. Direction of flight with reference to landmarks or points of
the compass.
No change of bearing
20. Did the object remain on a straight path, deviate or manoeuvre
at all.
described shgbr arc
21. Was any trail of exhaust, vapour or light seen Yellowish gas.
appeared to light up companions
22. Where did object disappear, e.g. in mid-air, behind a hill,
over the horizon.
in mid air
23. Existence of any physical evidence such as fragments, photo-
graphs, or other supporting evidence.
Nil
24. Weather conditions experienced at time(s) or observation(s)
Clear
25. Location of any air traffic in the vicinity at the time of
slghting.
0016K. ONE C47. LANDED. ESSENDON. FROM. SYDNEY.... No.
OTHER. MOVEMENTS WITHIN THE HOUR
26. Location of any meteorological stations in the general area.
C.W.B. MELB.... WEATHER... FINE... W/S 360/14 MPH
27. Any additional information
Questions 25, 26 and 27 to be answered by interrogator.Confidential
REPORT ON AERIAL OBJECT OBSERVED 38A
1. Name of observer .. Brian McInerney
2. Address of Observer .. 21 Wilmot St E. Malvern
3. Occupation of Observer .. Radio Announcer
4. Date and Time of Observation (Time given in 24 hour clock zonal
time)
About 0025 30.V.54.
5. Period of Observation(s) Very Short Possibly 5 Secs. Not longer
6. Manner of Observation: (Give details of own position by map
reference if possible, or by known landmarks, and describe any
equipment used in the observation).
Object sighted in East from Wilmot St. I was standing
facing approx. S. East. No equipment used.
7. Where was object first observed, e.g. overhead, coming from
behind a hill, over the horizon, etc.
Glow in sky over left shoulder attracted me.
8. What first attracted observer's attention, e.g. light or noise.
Sudden apparition of sensation — or glow.
9. Did object appear as a light or as a definite object.
Definite object behind orange glow.
10. If there was more than one object, how many were there, and what
was their formation.
Just one object.
11. What was the colour of the light or object Blackish O; light Orang
12. What was its apparent shape
13. Was any detail of structure observable Possible transparency
of "fuselage"
14. Was any method of propulsion obvious .. Uncertain.
15. Was there any sound Yes. Like outboard motor
object
16.** Height, or angle of elevation 1°.
17.** Speed, or angular velocity Stationary with sensation of speed.
18. State any experience which enables observer to be reasonably
certain about the answers given to 16 and 17.
No experience
** Since it is normally impossible to estimate the height and speed
of a strange object, it will usually be better to endeavour to
determine the angle of elevation of the object, the angle
through which it moved, and the time taken to do this.
....../2- 2 - 37A
Report on Aerial Object Observed (Contd.)
19. Direction of flight with reference to landmarks or points of
the compass.
Seen in the East.
20. Did the object remain on a straight path, deviate or manoeuvre
at all.
It was I think in same position from start to finish of Observation.
21. Was any trail of exhaust, vapour or light seen Yes.
22. Where did object disappear, e.g. in mid-air, behind a hill,
over the horizon.
Mid air.
23. Existence of any physical evidence such as fragments, photo-
graphs, or other supporting evidence.
No.
24. Weather conditions experienced at time(s) or observation(s)
Fine, Clean
25. Location of any air traffic in the vicinity at the time of
slghting.
0016K. ONE C47. LANDED. ESSENDON. FROM. SYDNEY. No OTHER.
MOVEMENTS. WITHIN THE HOUR
26. Location of any meteorological stations in the general area.
C.N.B. MELB..... WEATHER. FINE. W/S 360/14 MPH.
27. Any additional information
Questions 25, 26 and 27 to be answered by interrogator.HQ Training Com (attention Com. Intell Gp)
Albert Pk Barracks
Melbourne
it was I think in same position from start to finish of
observation
Mid air.
No
Fine, CleanMXY 130
36A
5/6/AIR(36A) Headquarters Training Command
R.A.A.F.
3222 Albert Park Barracks
Melbourne S.C.3.
The Secretary,
Air Board.
Victoria Barracks,
Melbourne S.C.1., 11 JUN 1954
Victoria. (Attention D.A.F.I.)
SIGHTING OF UNUSUAL AERIAL OBJECT
1. Herewith reports of sightings of an unusual aerial
object at East Malvern, 31st May 1954 by the undermentioned
persons.
Christopher MUIR
David REESE
Brian McINERNEY
2. Muir and Reese have been personally interviewed by
the Command Intelligence Officer and the Intelligence(Security)
Officer, and appeared to have above average education and
intelligence.
[signature]
(L.L. JOHNSTON)
Squadron Leader
Encls. For Air Officer Commanding
[stamp: DESPATCHED 11 JUN 1954 FROM H.Q.T.C.]35A
FROM: Squadron Leader L.L. JOHNSTON,
D.S.O., R.A.F.
5/6/AIR(35A)
Headquarters Training Command
R.A.A.F.
Albert Park Barracks
Melbourne S.C.3.
11 JUN 1954
Dear
Herewith reports of sighting of unusual aerial object
by Messrs. Christopher MUIR, David REESE, and Brian McINERNEY
at East Malvern, 31st May 1954.
Yours
[signature]
Mr. W. Boud,
Victorian Tasmanian Region,
Dept. of Civil Aviation,
391 Little Collins Street,
Melbourne C.1.
[stamp: DESPATCHED 11 JUN 1954 FROM H.Q.T.C.]ARGUS, Wednesday, June 9, 1954 Page 3
Please mummy, let us shift: it may bomb us!
'Saucer' terrifies two schoolgirls
A TREMBLING, still-scared 16-year-old girl said yester-
day she stood "frozen with fear" while a "flying saucer"
hovered 20 yards away from her on Princes Highway, Dan-
denong.
Sixteen-year-old Janette
Brown, of East Dandenong,
sketches the "flying
saucer" which she claims
hovered only 20 yards
from her on Saturday
night.
And a 13-year-old schoolgirl friend said
she saw the "saucer" hovering in the air
100 yards away for about three minutes.
The girls, Janette
Brown, 16, of McLennan
st., Range View Park Es-
tate, East Dandenong,
and Jeanette Johnston,
13, of Berwick rd., Dan-
denong, saw the saucer
on Saturday night, but
were too scared to tell
anyone except their par-
ents about their experi-
ence until yesterday.
Their parents said both
girls had had little sleep
since Saturday night,
were frightened and ner-
vous.
One had asked her mother
if they could move to an-
other suburb in case the
"saucer" tried to destroy her
home and family.
Here is Janette's story:
"I was standing on Princes
Highway, opposite the 21-
mile post, waiting for Jean-
ette, about 8.30 p.m.
"I heard a loud drum-
ming noise, something like
a motor-car — but there
were no cars or cycles
around at the time.
"Then a large, dark shape
34A
appeared over the partly
built H. H. Heinz factory,
and whirled towards me
when I shone my torch.
"Just above the house
where the caretaker lives it
burst into light — a gleam-
ing, bluish, silvery-grey
night.
"It hovered about 20 yards
away on the top of the fac-
tory gate, as if it deliber-
ately wanted me to look at
it — or it wanted to look at
me.
"It was a cylindrical shape,
about 20ft. long and 15ft.
high, with a (canopy)
window on top and a win-
dow on each end."
Car came
"Then Jeanette arrived. I
told her to watch the house."
Jeanette watched the
house. Here's what she saw:
"A silvery colored cylinder
rose above the house then
swept away in a wide circle
to the International Harves-
ter factory a few hundred
yards away.
"It stayed on top of the
factory for about one min-
ute then disappeared behind
the trees," she said.Do not remove from protective enclosure. The following pages [ILLEGIBLE] of this item. Please contact conservation if assistance is required.
COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA
33A
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AVIATION
Telephone MB 033
VICTORIA-TASMANIA REGION
Telegraphic Address: "ALMORA HOUSE,"
"VICAVIAT. MELBOURNE." 522-536 LITTLE COLLINS STREET,
MELBOURNE, C.1
Postal Address:
Box 4578, G.P.O.,
MELBOURNE, C.1
IN REPLY QUOTE 136/2/11
06389
- 4 JUN. 1954
S/L. Johnson,
Home Training Command,
Intelligence Section,
Albert Park Barracks,
MELBOURNE.
Dear Sir,
Attached please find a report received in this Office
concerning an unidentified object observed from Cambridge Airport on
31/5/54.
Yours faithfully,
[signature]
(W. E. Boud.)
for Regional Director.33B
STATEMENT BY M.E. WEBB ATC GR1 - CAMBRIDGE AIRPORT.
[symbol]
Mr. B. Hart, A.N.A. Engineer reported that he, in company with
Messrs. M. Blackwell and T. Allen of Vacuum Oil Co., sighted and followed
the flight of an unidentified aircraft flying at high speed several miles
to the North of Cambridge.
It was assumed to be conventional design and possibly smaller
than a DC3.
The aircraft appeared from behind Mt. Lord travelling at high
speed from West to East low on the horizon in straight and level flight
slightly above the range of hills to the North East of the field. The
aircraft was in full view for approximately 1½ minutes and disappeared from
view flying in a North Easterly direction.
Subsequent enquiries with Launceston Operations revealed that the
only off-schedule movement was that of a R.A.A.F. Canberra (MOD) in transit
LAV/MCO/KELSO/BLA. QTH Kelso 0238 25000 ft. ETA BLA 0320.
Launceston Operations advised that no stage was this aircraft
South of Kelso or below 25000 ft.
(Sgd.) M. E. Webb
31st May, 1954.33C
STATEMENT BY WILLIAM CLAUDE HART - ENGINEER, AUSTRALIAN
NATIONAL AIRWAYS - CAMBRIDGE AIRPORT.
At approximately 1315 hrs. whilst in company with Thomas Allen and
Maxwell Blackwall (employees of Vacuum Oil Coy) I observed what appeared to
be an aircraft of an unspecified type but of apparently convensional fuselage
style flying to the N/E of Cambridge Airport.
2. The object appeared to be flying at approximately 3500 ft. and at
very high speed in a South Easterly direction. The object was in sight for
at least 90 seconds and was clearly visible but at a distance of approximately
10/15 miles which precluded a clear view of detailed structure other than
general fuselage shape.
(Sgd.) W. C. Hart.Sun 21 May 53 PEOPLE IN THIS "SAUCER", SAYS DAVID AT fantastic speed, a "flying saucer" dived over East Mal- vern early yesterday . . . and, according to 13-year-old David Reese, it seemed to have people in it. Reese and five friends saw the object — "oval- shaped and as big as a railway carriage" — as they were leaving a friend's home in Wil- mot-st., East Malvern. "I could distinctly see dark shapes in the ob- ject" he said. "If I had seen the same shapes in an aeroplane I would have said they were people." Reports agreed Reese, of St. Kilda-st., Elwood, said that de- scriptions which he and his friends later wrote about the object agreed almost exactly. "We saw the object for about five seconds," he said. "The thing I cannot explain is that, while it seemed to move at a fantastic speed, it also had a floating grace." "At the bottom of its dive, 70 feet up and 60 yards away, it belched out a yellow, gaseous matter from its stern. "It did not rush away, but disappeared quite suddenly as if someone had switched out a light," he ended. Saucer No. 2 Another "flying sau- cer" report yesterday came from Mr. C. G. Grosser, 50, of Acland- st., St. Kilda. Grosser said that he saw a dull, glowing ob- ject move across the sky over Port Phillip Bay near St. Kilda, at about 7 p.m. on Sat- urday. Last night, he said, he again saw the object from a jetty at St. Kilda. "SAUCER NO. 3" Yet another "sight- ing" is reported by Mr. Harold Lucas, of Glad- stone-st., Coburg, who said last night that he and seven others had seen a "saucer" west of Coburg. "At first we thought it was a star, but while we watched it the ob- ject steered for a while, and then dashed sideways for about two miles. We watched it for about 25 minutes," he said. [CENTRE IMAGE: Drawing of flying saucer with silhouettes of people visible inside, above a landscape] THIS IS HOW the "flying saucer" looked according to a de- scription given to Sun artist, Jack Bowie, by 18-year-old David Reese. . . . and this is DAVID REESE. 31A Six-minute "saucer": Drouin—Heidelberg [date notation: 16/5/54 8A] A GREEN ball as big as a motor car, and with a vivid yellow tail, flashed over Drouin, Frankston, St. Kilda, the city, Burwood, and Heidelberg, last night, according to Sun readers. The "saucer" was reported from Drouin, 60 miles from Melbourne) at 8.24 p.m. and from Heidelberg only six minutes later. TWO YEARS TO TELL AIR FORCE officers think it will take at least two years to build up a full and accurate file of flying saucers reports for analysis. Saucers had fre- quently been discovered to be aircraft, optical illusions, falling stars, or balloons, one said yesterday. Officials in the United States found that only 4% of reports could not be explained. Estimates of height ranged from 50 to thou- sands of feet. Here is the "plot" of its course. 8.24. Drouin. — Mr. J. Harper, of Longwarray-rd., saw the object "tearing through the sky towards Melbourne. It was a green, coppery color, shaped like a football," he said. "It descended very fast, then appeared to split into two sections before it disap- peared." 8.26. Frankston. — Mr. Ron Ould, of Campbell-st., Frankston, was driving home along Nepean High- way when he saw "a green ball with a long, tapering, yellow tail. It appeared to be flying towards the city very high and was out of sight in a few seconds." 8.29. St. Kilda Junction.— Mr. John Thompson, of Spring-st., Preston, saw the "saucer" descending from 3000ft. "A green oblong shape with a tail shaped like an airport sock, it ap- peared to descend almost to roof-top height, then blacked out." 8.29. City. — Mr. Burnie Lloyd, of Law-st., South Melbourne, was with a friend at Princes Bridge when he saw the object travelling high and fast and descending. "It belched out a long white flame and vanished in a few seconds." 8.30. Burwood. — Mr. I. Riseborough, of Gillard- was on duty as an attend- ant with a friend at the Skyline Theatre, Burwood- rd. He say "a big green ball with a long red tail pass right across the theatre ground and disap- pear." 8.29. Surrey Hills. — Miss V. Scurrah, of Surrey Hills, was with an aunt in her backyard when she saw a green blue-red object pass low over a neighbor's house. "It appeared to be like a pointed balloon with the pointed end towards the ground." A Heidelberg report at the same time from Mr. Kevin Maiden, of Red- wood-st., described the ob- ject as oval-shaped with a vivid green light, and trail- ing a shower of sparks. At Kew, Mr. R. Touzel, of Thomas-st., saw an ob- ject fly over at "tremen- dous speed," at 8.30. "It was circular in shape, and emitted showers of sparks from its exhaust," he said. —AND TONIGHT, SEE THESE! TO THE EDITOR SIR. — Tonight, the new moon, in conjunction with the planet Venus and the planets Jupiter and Mercury adjacent) should make another beau- tiful sight in the heavens. —J. Vickers-Willis (Brigh- ton).
Do not remove from protective enclosure. The foll[ILLEGIBLE] [ILLEGIBLE] of this [ILLEGIBLE]. Please contact conservation if assistance is required.
30A
COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AVIATION
VICTORIA-TASMANIA REGION
Telephone: MB 033
Telegraphic Address:
"VICAVIAT, MELBOURNE"
Postal Address:
BOX 4578, G.P.O.,
MELBOURNE, C.1
"ALMORA HOUSE"
522-536 LITTLE COLLINS STREET
MELBOURNE, C.1
IN REPLY QUOTE 136/2/11.
-6 MAY 1954
05162
S/L Johnson,
Home Training Command,
Intelligence Section,
ALBERT PARK BARRACKS.
Dear Sir,
Attached please find copies of two reports received
in this Office concerning unidentified objects at Perth, Tasmania, on 17/4/54
and Hobart, Tasmania, on 26/4/54.
Yours faithfully,
[signature]
(W. E. Boud.)
for Regional Director.COPY
30B
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AVIATION,
Government Aerodrome,
Box 416 P.O.,
606 LAUNCESTON, Tas.
125/4/1.
Regional Director,
Victoria-Tasmania Region.
REPORTS OF UNIDENTIFIED AIRCRAFT
Following the appearance of a news item in the
Launceston "Examiner" concerning the sighting of an unidentified aircraft (Object)
in the vicinity of Perth, Tasmania on the 17th April, 1954, the originator
of the report H. Bean, Carpenter, employed by Department of Civil Aviation
at Launceston Airport, was interviewed, and requested to submit a statement
and sketches for submission to Regional Office. This statement is attached
hereto.
2. Known traffic in the vicinity of Perth, at the time in
question was a R.A.A.F. "Canberra" at an altitude of 35,000 feet, and a DC.4
VH-ANG Flt. 154 proceeding Hobart to Launceston. In the case of the DC.4
this aircraft was effecting a V.F.R. descent to Launceston from an altitude
of 7,000 feet over Ross, and presumably would not be at greater altitude
than 2,000 feet when approaching abeam of Perth.
3. Since the matter was reported in the "Examiner"
telephone calls reporting the hearing of an aircraft at high altitude on
several occasions have been received. However, in each of the cases
reported it has been evident that the aircraft heard were "Canberras" on
cross country exercises from Laverton at altitudes between 15,000 feet and
42,000 feet.
4
4. Subsequent conversations with H. Bean and a telephone
discussion with a Mr. Littlejohn, also of Perth, suggested that possibly two
or three additional confirmatory statements would be made available regarding
the incident, however, as yet these statements have not been received. Should
the reports be submitted to this Office appropriate forwarding action will be
taken.
(Sgd.) (C. R. Strickland.)
A/Airport Manager.COPY
30c
Perth,
Tasmania.
23/4/1954.
Mr. C.Strickland,
Acting Airport Manager,
Department of Civil Aviation,
WESTERN JUNCTION.
Sir,
For the information of your Department, I wish to make a
report on a mysterious object which I observed at Perth, Tasmania, and which was
streaking across the sky at about 11.20 a.m. on Saturday, 17th April 1954.
I was standing in my back garden with a Mr. P. Gutteridge
an exmember of the R.A.F. and employed in the same capacity as myself, as
Department of Civil Aviation carpenter at Western Junction when our attraction
was drawn to the sky by what appeared to be the sound of a jet plane flying high
overhead, and which appeared to be heading South.
On scanning the sky for a few moments, Mr. Gutteridge, sighted
a plane, which he estimated was flying at an altitude of over 1200 feet.
As the plane appeared to look very small to him at such an
altitude he was not able to identify it; but believed it to be a military type of
plane.
Whilst endeavouring to pick out the plane myself, I observed
a mysterious object in the sky approaching from the South.
My first impression I had of it as it appeared, was in the
form of a bright long silvery object slightly oval, and appearing to have a small
dome like or raised portion on top.
As it approached closer, its course altered to a north-
westerly direction.
As it altered its course, and came closer in to view, it
appeared to me, as a solid object, large and round except for the uppermost part,
which appeared to have a raised portion extending half-way across its diameter.
It resembled a full moon as it would appear in the daytime
except for the top portion of it.
Having been employed with the R.A.A.F. for nearly four years
during the latter stages of the last war, at Western Junction Airport, and since then
by the Department of Civil Aviation, I have become familiar with various types of
planes, and to a certain degree have been able to distinguish the various types of
planes in flight and to a certain degree the altitude and speed at which they have
been travelling.
However, as the object which I observed in the sky was entirely
different to anything I had yet seen, my calculations as to its height at which it
was flying, its diameter, and the speed at which it was travelling may not be very
accurate.
From my own observations it appeared to be at least 100 feet in
diameter its speed could easily have been 2,000 miles an hour or more, and its alt-
itude may have been 15,000 feet more or less.
Although these are only rough calculations and could not be
considered in any way accurate, one thing I am certain of that no jet or other plane
which I have yet observed flying, could approach the speed, at which the mysterious
object was streaking through the sky.
In conclusion, I would like to say that I was able to observe
the object for about 25 seconds before trees hid it from my view. Since the first
report in the "Examiner" other residents at Perth have reported seeing the object,- 2 - 30c
and some description of it correspond with these I have given.
Signed. (H. O. Bean.)30C
Mysterious object which appeared to my vision over Perth, Tasmania
on Saturday, April 17th, 1954.
Signed. H. C. Bean,
Perth.
[DRAWING: elongated oval/saucer shape with a raised portion on top, viewed from the side]
First impression approaching from South to
North appeared in this shape for about
5 or 6 seconds.
[DRAWING: round/circular shape with a small raised dome on top, viewed more from the front]
As it appeared after changing its course to a
north westerly direction.
Resumed this shape for about 20 seconds until hid
from view.COPY
30D
THE AERO CLUB OF SOUTHERN TASMANIA
Subject: SIGHTING OF LIGHT IN SKY BY DARREL M. BRUMBY
Time: WEDNESDAY 26TH APRIL, 9.05 to 9.13 P.M.
Place: FROM FITZROY CRESCENT? SOUTH HOBART, IN A SOUTH
EASTERLY DIRECTION OVER RIVER DERWENT TO THE
LEFT OF MR. NELSON.
Description: AN ORANGE TO RED LIGHT VARYING IN INTENSITY,
TO ONE STAGE THERE WAS A SUGGESTION OF A GREEN
LIGHT TO THE LEFT OF THE MAIN LIGHT. THE
ONLY MOVEMENT SEEMED TO BE WHAT ONE WOULD EXPECT
FROM A CAPTIVE BALOON OR KITE. AT. 9.13 P.M.
THE LIGHT FADED OUT QUITE RAPIDLY AND DISAPPEARED.
D. M. BRUMBY.
ESTIMATED HEIGHT : 3,000 feet above sea level
EASTIMATED DISTANCE : 10 miles (Min.)FROM: Squadron Leader L.L. JOHNSTON,
D.S.O., R.A.F.
5/6/AIR(29A)
Headquarters Training Command
R.A.A.F.
Albert Park Barracks
Melbourne S.C.2.
17 MAY 1954
Dear
Thank you for your letter 136/2/11 of 30th March 1954
enclosing Mr. Beeching's thesis.
We have studied it at this Headquarters and are for-
warding it to Department of Air for their perusal. The
attached copy of the covering letter should give you some
idea of our views.
As I shall be leaving this Headquarters and the R.A.A.F.
in June, I think it advisable that you should have a record of
th e present location of the thesis in case Mr. Beeching calls
for it.
I hope to see you before I go.
Yours (Signed Sqn.Ldr. JOHNSTON)
Mr. W. Boud,
Victorian Tasmanian Region,
Dept. of Civil Aviation,
391 Lt. Collins Street,
Melbourne.
[stamp: DESPATCHED
17 MAY 1954
FROM H.Q.T.C.][symbol] MXY 130
5/6/AIR(28A) Headquarters Training Command
R.A.A.F.
Albert Park Barracks
Melbourne S.C.3.
The Secretary, 1725 17 MAY 1954
Air Board.
Victoria Barracks,
Melbourne S.C.1.,
Victoria.
(D.A.F.I. Attention Squadron Leader BIRCH)
UNUSUAL AERIAL PHENOMENA
1. Under a reciprocal agreement for the exchange of
information on the above subject, the attached paper,
purporting to explain inter alia Biblical miracles, flying
saucers and why airmen's families are mainly daughters, has
been forwarded to this office by the Regional Director,
Victorian Tasmanian Region Department of Civil Aviation.
The author of this thesis is Mr. C.W. BEECHING, 206 Alma Rd.,
St. Kilda.
2. The paper was considered by the Air Staff of this
Headquarters but it was unanimously agreed that the thesis
went beyond the comprehension of the normal G.D. officer.
3. The Command Education Officer who is well qualified
as a physicist, but whose knowledge of the latest developments
in the popular science fiction field is limited, considered
the theory novel and unsupported by any evidence of pure or
applied science known to him. He considers that the writer
has a certain amount of scientific knowledge and appears to
have read extensively of those scientific publications available
to the general public.
4. The "theo-scientific" nature of the paper has been
noted but no approach has been made to the Chaplain's Branch
of this Headquarters for their comments.
5. Unless proper consideration can be given to such
papers, the R.A.A.F. is laying itself open to charges of
cavalier treatment of persons who genuinely believe that
their contributions will materially assist in the advancement
of aviation science. The extreme view could be taken that this
Headquarters is as qualified to consider the validity of this
theory as were the 16th century monks in the case of Galileo.
6. Therefore, in view of the limited resources of this
Headquarters, the attached paper is forwarded for your
information and action. It is understood from Department of
Civil Aviation that this is the only copy in existence and
that Mr. Beeching would like it returned eventually.
[signature]
(L.L. JOHNSTON)
Squadron Leader
For Air Officer Commanding
Encl. [stamp: DESPATCHED
17 MAY 1954
FROM H.Q.T.C.]27A
COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AVIATION
VICTORIA-TASMANIA REGION
Telephone: MB 033
Telegraphic Address:
"VICAVIAT, MELBOURNE"
Postal Address:
BOX 4578, G.P.O.,
MELBOURNE, C.1
03654 "ALMORA HOUSE"
522-536 LITTLE COLLINS STREET
MELBOURNE, C.1
IN REPLY QUOTE 136/2/11.
[stamp: RECD.
31 Mar 1954
1.C.H.Q.]
30 MAR. 1954
Air Officer Commanding,
Training Command,
R.A.A.F.,
ALBERT PARK.
Attention - S/L. Johnson.
Intelligence Section.
Further to discussions concerning unusual aerial
objects, I now forward at the request of the author - Mr. C. W.
Beeching, 206 Alma Road, St. Kilda, a thesis on the theory on
flying saucers.
28 Annexes
This Office has perused this thesis but does not
intend any further action.
For your information the references to Adamski
refers to an article published in the "Australasian Post" some
months ago.
[signature]
(W. E. Boud.)
for Regional Director.[symbol] (26A1)
SIGHTINGS OF UNUSUAL AERIAL OBJECTS
Time of | Observer | Position of | Direction of | Remarks
Sighting | | Observation | Observation |
-------------|-----------------|------------------|-------------------|------------------
3-1-54 1555K | Mr.J.M. | 145°08'E 37°45'S | Elevation 42° |
| Cowden | | Bearing 272°T |
| (B'burn) | | Sun. (Sun to SE |
| | | horizon) |
-------------|-----------------|------------------|-------------------|------------------
3-1-54 1520K | Mr.John | 145°04'E 37°40'S | E to NE | Assuming these
| Dalton | | | three observers
| | | | to be at West
| Margaret | | | Heidelberg.
| Lord | | |
| | | |
| Margaret | | |
| Fury | | |
-------------|-----------------|------------------|-------------------|------------------
3-1-54 2045K | Miss Wilkins | 145°20'E 37° | W | Column 11. Ass-
| (Belgrave | 55'S | | uming observer to
| to Melb.) | | | be in vicinity of
| | | | Ferntree Gully
-------------|-----------------|------------------|-------------------|------------------
3-1-54 2045K | Mr. Pinnie | 144°56'E 37° | W | Assuming observer
| Ascot Vale | 47'S | | at home
-------------|-----------------|------------------|-------------------|------------------
3-1-54 2045K | Mrs. W. | 145°30'E 38° | W (In direction | Assuming observer
| McKay (Phi- | 15'S | of Tooradin) | in vicinity of
| lip Island | | | Nyora
| to Melb.) | | |
-------------|-----------------|------------------|-------------------|------------------
3-1-54 2045K | Mrs Homph- | | NE |
| rey (Ver- | | |
| mont) | | |
-------------|-----------------|------------------|-------------------| --
3-1-54 2050K | Miss M. | 145°02'E 37° | SW to NW | Assuming observer
| Venville | 48'S | | to be near home
| (Ivanhoe) | | |
-------------|-----------------|------------------|-------------------|------------------
3-1-54 2030K | Mr.Broadbent | 145°04'E 37° | SW to NW | Assuming observer
| (Camberwell) | 48'30"S | | to be home25A
W. Scott,
Chief Test Pilot,
G.A.F.
DATE OF SIGHTING - AUGUST 14TH, 1952.
TIME 1200 APPROX.
Flight Townsville - Amberly at height of 35000 - 36000
feet, in Vampire, near Rockhampton when looking east toward coast saw
large circular light at a lower height which could not be estimated
due to bad ground haze, colour of ordinary incandescent light globe.
After observing for approximately 1 minute a number of
small lights (6-10) appear to come from main light. The smaller lights
appear to surround big light for about 2 min. then disappeared. After
a further 2 min. the big light also disappeared.24A
REPORT OF FLYING OBJECT.
The following report was telephoned to the Regional Office at
approximately 7 p.m. on Tuesday, 5th January, 1954 by Mr. Chivell,
32 Grey Street, East Ringwood Tel. WU7074. He states -
"At approximately 8.30 to 8.45 p.m. on Sunday Evening, 3rd
January, 1954 I observed what appeared to be a spherical
object with bright tail and looked like a meteor on a
larger scale but much brighter and lower in the sky.
It appeared to be in the Warrandyte area and its height
was uncertain."
Mr. Chivell stated he did not think it was a falling star. He heard
the announcement on the wireless inviting reports and so telephoned
the Regional Office.
P.W.H.
Supt. of Personnel & Estabs.
7/1/54.23A
REPORT OF FLYING OBJECT.
The undermentioned report was telephoned to the Regional Office
at approximately 8 p.m. on Tuesday, 5th January, 1954, by Mr. J. M. Taylor,
129 Durham Road, Sunshine, Tel. MM1646. Mr. Taylor reports -
"I was travelling in my car from Tottenham to Sunshine
about 722 p.m. this evening and crossing the loopline
that runs between Brooklyn and Newport I noticed a
light like a star in a position slightly West of North
and some distance away, and in an approximate position
for aircraft on the Essendon-Adelaide run. The object
travelled a considerable distance whilst my car travelled
200 yards and it travelled too fast for an aircraft. I
observed the object for approximately 200 yards distance
in my car and after 100 yards it moved some considerable
distance across the sky and then completely disappeared.
My description of the object is a bright light with no
shape a little larger than a evening star."
P.W.H.
Supt. of Personnel & Estabs.
7/1/54.22A
REPORT OF FLYING OBJECT
The following report was telephoned to Regional Office at approx-
imately 8.30 p.m. on Tuesday, 5th January, 1954, by Mrs. Barnard, 24 Perth
Street, Murrumbeena, Tel. UM4703. Mrs. Barnard reports -
" At 8.15 p.m. I went out into the garden and observed an
oval shaped object with a luminous sheen travelling
very fast and I think faster than an aircraft in the
West. After a few seconds it vanished behind a bank
of cloud. At the time the sky was clear and as there
were no stars it was not a falling star, and there were
no aircraft in the area at the time".
P.W.H.
Supt. of Personnel & Estabs.
7/1/54.UAP 10
21A C.A. FORM 225
(Revised Aug., 1952)
Head Office No.
Regional Office No.
Out-Station No.
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AVIATION
STATION
DATE
AIR SAFETY INCIDENT REPORT
(To be submitted through the Regional Director of the state of occurrence within 48 hours of the incident)
TO DIRECTOR GENERAL OF CIVIL AVIATION,
499 LITTLE COLLINS STREET, MELBOURNE, C.1.
The following incident in relation to the safety of air navigation is reported:—
Place Date Time
Aircraft: Type Marking Pilot
Flight: From To
Details of Incident The following report was received at 1550 on 5/1/54 from Master
Keith Hill, aged 13 years, of 844 Mount Alexander Road, Moonee Ponds.
At Maryborough on 3/1/54 at 2045 hours - purple egg shaped object with a fiery tail
½ mile long appeared for approx. 10 secs. during which time it lit up the whole
area. The object travelled faster than an aircraft parallel to the ground, direction
unknown, at a height approximately that of the Manchester Unity building.
Object was also seen by uncle, Mr. Jack Chettle, High Street, Maryborough.
Attachments
SIGNED W. E. Boud.
DESIGNATION S.A.N.
REGIONAL OFFICE ACTION
NO ACTION COMMENTS
ACTION IN HAND REGION
ACTION IN HAND COMPANY
ACTION REQUIRED BY
REGION
SIGNED DESIGNATION
FOR HEAD OFFICE USE
Ensign Press.—C.1840 Action Complete SignedUAP 9.
20A C.A. FORM 225
(Revised Aug., 1952)
Head Office No.
Regional Office No.
Out-Station No.
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AVIATION
STATION
DATE
AIR SAFETY INCIDENT REPORT
(To be submitted through the Regional Director of the state of occurrence within 48 hours of the incident)
TO DIRECTOR GENERAL OF CIVIL AVIATION,
499 LITTLE COLLINS STREET, MELBOURNE, C.1.
The following incident in relation to the safety of air navigation is reported:—
Place Date Time
Aircraft: Type Marking Pilot
Flight: From To
Details of Incident
The following report was received by phone at 1620 hours on 5/1/54 from
Mr. C. Roma (age 74 years), 66 Beach Road, Hampton:
Between 2040 and 2045 hours on 3/1/54, a disc shaped object with a dome on top
appeared from direction of Mornington travelling towards city. It had the
appearance of clear glass and from a distance of 4/500 yards appeared 4/5 feet
in diameter with a tail 9/10 feet long. The object was brilliantly lit and
disappeared very fast almost appearing to go out. It was accompanied by a loud
swishing noise not unlike a jet aircraft.
Attachments
SIGNED W. E. Boud.
DESIGNATION S.A.N.
REGIONAL OFFICE ACTION
NO ACTION COMMENTS
ACTION IN HAND REGION
ACTION IN HAND COMPANY
ACTION REQUIRED BY
REGION
SIGNED DESIGNATION
FOR HEAD OFFICE USE
Ensign Press.—C.1840 Action Complete Signed9A
C.A. FORM 225
(Revised Aug., 1952)
Head Office No. ............................................
Regional Office No. .......................................
Out-Station No. .............................................
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AVIATION
STATION ........................................................
DATE ..................................................................
AIR SAFETY INCIDENT REPORT
(To be submitted through the Regional Director of the state of occurrence within 48 hours of the incident)
TO DIRECTOR GENERAL OF CIVIL AVIATION,
499 LITTLE COLLINS STREET, MELBOURNE, C.1.
The following incident in relation to the safety of air navigation is reported:—
Place ........................................................ Date .......................................... Time ..........................................
Aircraft: Type ............................................... Marking........................................ Pilot ............................................
Flight: From .............................................................................................To ...........................................................
Details of Incident ........ Report received from Mr. Gould, 12 Poplar Grove,
................Carnegie, Tel. UM4550.
................At 11.30 pm on Sunday 10th January, saw an object similar to the
................photograph of Flying Objects appearing in the Herald on Saturday 9th
................January. Object appeared in the direction of Ivanhoe, height approx.
................the same as the cloud, for 3 minutes, moving very slowly. Was seen
................by another person also.
Attachments ...............................................................................................................
SIGNED ......................................................................................
DESIGNATION ............................................................................
REGIONAL OFFICE ACTION
NO ACTION COMMENTS............................................................................
ACTION IN HAND REGION
ACTION IN HAND COMPANY
ACTION REQUIRED BY
........................................ REGION
SIGNED.......................................... DESIGNATION ...............
FOR HEAD OFFICE USE
Ensign Press.—C.1840 Action Complete Signed ............................................18A
Regional Office No. 225/5/- C.A. Form 225
(Revised July, '53)
Station: Melbourne Airport No. EA 19 Head Office No.
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AVIATION
AIR SAFETY INCIDENT REPORT
(To be submitted through the Regional Director of the State of occurrence of the incident)
Place of Occurrence: ........................................Date: ......................................Time: ....................................
Aircraft — Type:......................................Marking:..........................Pilot: .............................................
Type of Operation:..............................From: ....................................To: ................................................
Details of Incident: ........ UNUSUAL OBJECTS
1. Mrs. A.E. Jerrems, 221 Camberwell Road, CAMBERWELL,
reported sighting a round silver shiny disc whilst attending the
race meeting at Hanging Rock on January 1st, between 0430 and
0500/z. The object remained stationary for some seconds near
some trees, then turned on its side and travelled away at
terrific speed.
2. Mr. Gilbert, 1 Fallon Street, BRUNSWICK, and 5 others, sighted a
small shining object from North Melbourne Railway workshops
between 0400 and 0430/z. on January 6th.
The object was sighted for 10 minutes and travelled slowly from
low in the Eastern sky to almost directly overhead, then rapidly
went out of sight upwards vertically.
Signed: .........(J.E. SANSOM) Designation: SS/ATC Date: 6/1/54.
(See over page.Comments or Suggestions — Outstation or Pilot:
Signed: ........................................ Designation: .......................................Date: ..............................
Regional Office Action
(To be completed in accordance with Air Navigation Instructions 2/9 and 3/9).
Signed: ........................................ Designation: .......................................Date: ..............................
For Head Office Use
Action Completed. Signed: ............................................................Date: ..............................17A
Regional Office No...................................................... C.A. Form 225
(Revised July, '53)
Station: Melbourne Airport No. EA 18 Head Office No.
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AVIATION
AIR SAFETY INCIDENT REPORT
(To be submitted through the Regional Director of the State of occurrence of the incident)
Place of Occurrence: Essendon Date: 6/1/54 Time: ...................
Aircraft — Type:......................................Marking:..........................Pilot: .............................................
Type of Operation:..............................From: ....................................To: ................................................
Details of Incident: ........ REPORTS OF UNIDENTIFIED OBJECTS
1. Mr. Renkin, 268 Union Road, BALWYN.
Place of sighting - travelling West along Kenmare Street, BOX HILL.
Time 8.45 p.m. Sunday 3/1/54.
Description. Round ball of brilliant light with tail passed from
South to North - almost horizontal flight - slight downward
tendency and visual for almost 10 secs.
2. Mr. Bennett, 18 Barwin Street, BOX HILL (WX 1337)
Sighting - travelling West along Canterbury Road at corner of
Elgar Road.
Time 8.45 p.m. Sunday 3/1/54.
Very bright lighted object with tail travelling across his path
in N.W. direction. Downward angle of approx. 30° - his guess
somewhere over Footscray. In sight approx. 5 secs.
3. Mr. Richardson (FX9464)
Time 9.15 p.m. Sunday 3/1/54.
Sighting 6 miles S.E. of Echuca.
Round shaped ball of fire (very bright) with tail positioned to
SSE of Echuca - Visual for 5-10 secs.
Signed: .........(R. ALEXANDER) Designation: S.O.O. Date: 6/1/54.
(See over page.Comments or Suggestions — Outstation or Pilot:
Signed: ........................................ Designation: .......................................Date: ..............................
Regional Office Action
(To be completed in accordance with Air Navigation Instructions 2/9 and 3/9).
Signed: ........................................ Designation: .......................................Date: ..............................
For Head Office Use
Action Completed. Signed: ............................................................Date: ..............................AIR SAFETY INCIDENT REPORT 16A
Continued
- 2 -
4. Mr. Griffith, 23 Chalmers Street, McKINNON.
Place of sighting - Maroondah Highway Narbethong.
Time 8.45 p.m. Sunday, 3/1/54.
Description - Green cigar shaped object with rocket like
tail travelling fast from West to East - appeared close to
neighbouring mountains.
5. Mrs. Collins, 25 Byron Street, MOONEE PONDS.
(Name not for publication)
Sighting - Church Street, West Parkville,
Time 9.15 to 9.30 Sunday 3/1/54.
Saw to the N.W. what appeared like an exceptionally large
star-burst.
(R. ALEXANDER) S.O.O. 6/1/54.15A
C.A. FORM 225
(Revised Aug., 1952)
Head Office No. ............................................
Regional Office No. .......................................
Out-Station No. .............................................
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AVIATION
STATION ........................................................
DATE ..................................................................
AIR SAFETY INCIDENT REPORT
(To be submitted through the Regional Director of the state of occurrence within 48 hours of the incident)
TO DIRECTOR GENERAL OF CIVIL AVIATION,
499 LITTLE COLLINS STREET, MELBOURNE, C.1.
The following incident in relation to the safety of air navigation is reported:—
Place ........................................................ Date .......................................... Time ..........................................
Aircraft: Type ............................................... Marking........................................ Pilot ............................................
Flight: From .............................................................................................To ...........................................................
Details of Incident ......... Report of Flying object from Miss. M. Venville,
........................9 Menzie Grove, Ivanhoe.
........................(See attachment.)
Attachments ...............................................................................................................
SIGNED ......................................................................................
DESIGNATION ............................................................................
REGIONAL OFFICE ACTION
NO ACTION COMMENTS............................................................................
ACTION IN HAND REGION
ACTION IN HAND COMPANY
ACTION REQUIRED BY
........................................ REGION
SIGNED.......................................... DESIGNATION ...............
FOR HEAD OFFICE USE
Ensign Press.—C.1840 Action Complete Signed ............................................9 Menzie Grove,
Ivanhoe
13/1/1954.
To the Meteorological Department.
Dear Sir,
As few seems to have noticed the object in the
sky on January 3rd. I thought I had better let you know what I
observed about 8.40 p.m. of that date.
I was returning from posting a letter when
something dropped swiftly from the south-western sky. I took it to
be a meteor, it dropped very low and flattened out and travelled
N.W..
It looked to me like a yellow ball the size
of a grape-fruit with a very fiery tale when it suddenly gave off a
bright greenish light and then exploded and there appeared to be
pieces falling to earth. The greenish blaze started at the marked
spot, I never saw one so large or so low before.
Yours sincerely,
Miss M. Venville.13B
C.A. FORM 225
(Revised Aug., 1952)
Head Office No. ............................................
Regional Office No. .......................................
Out-Station No. .............................................
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AVIATION
STATION ........................................................
DATE ..................................................................
AIR SAFETY INCIDENT REPORT
(To be submitted through the Regional Director of the state of occurrence within 48 hours of the incident)
TO DIRECTOR GENERAL OF CIVIL AVIATION,
499 LITTLE COLLINS STREET, MELBOURNE, C.1.
The following incident in relation to the safety of air navigation is reported:—
Place ........................................................ Date .......................................... Time ..........................................
Aircraft: Type ............................................... Marking........................................ Pilot ............................................
Flight: From .............................................................................................To ...........................................................
Details of Incident ......... Report of Flying object from Miss I. M. Lutze,
........................6 Blencann Avenue, Caulfield.
........................Observed 28 saucers at 1515 hours on 27th October, 1950,
........................towards south-west. Coming down slowly and gliding then rising
........................rapidly; this observation took place in the Avenue of Honour
........................at Ballarat, west of the Memorial Arch.
Attachments ...............................................................................................................
SIGNED ......................................................................................
DESIGNATION ............................................................................
REGIONAL OFFICE ACTION
NO ACTION COMMENTS............................................................................
ACTION IN HAND REGION
ACTION IN HAND COMPANY
ACTION REQUIRED BY
........................................ REGION
SIGNED.......................................... DESIGNATION ...............
FOR HEAD OFFICE USE
Ensign Press.—C.1840 Action Complete Signed ............................................C.A. FORM 225
(Revised Aug., 1952)
Head Office No. ............................................
Regional Office No. .......................................
Out-Station No. .............................................
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AVIATION
STATION ........................................................
DATE ..................................................................
AIR SAFETY INCIDENT REPORT
(To be submitted through the Regional Director of the state of occurrence within 48 hours of the incident)
TO DIRECTOR GENERAL OF CIVIL AVIATION,
499 LITTLE COLLINS STREET, MELBOURNE, C.1.
The following incident in relation to the safety of air navigation is reported:—
Place ........................................................ Date .......................................... Time ..........................................
Aircraft: Type ............................................... Marking........................................ Pilot ............................................
Flight: From .............................................................................................To ...........................................................
Details of Incident ......... Report of Flying object from Mr. Hattwell,
........................Blanch Street, North Brighton.
........................Time 1405Z. 7th September, 1953.
........................Object sighted travelling north to south. 45° elevation, giving
........................a high pitched siren effect. Size approximately 4 times size of
........................DC3. Observed for 1 minute.
........................Similar object observed travelling from NE to SE for 20 seconds.
........................for description see attachment.
Attachments ...............................................................................................................
SIGNED ......................................................................................
DESIGNATION ............................................................................
REGIONAL OFFICE ACTION
NO ACTION COMMENTS............................................................................
ACTION IN HAND REGION
ACTION IN HAND COMPANY
ACTION REQUIRED BY
........................................ REGION
SIGNED.......................................... DESIGNATION ...............
FOR HEAD OFFICE USE
Ensign Press.—C.1840 Action Complete Signed ............................................[Sketch of cylindrical object with the following annotations:] PEARLY WHITE BLUE GAS EMITTED TURNING TO RED TRANSLUCENT BLUE LIGHTER BLUE BLUE LIGHTS THIS RIM SEEMED TO SHINE ABOUT 17' IN LENGTH
THIS PAGE IS THE REVERSE OF THE PREVIOUS PAGE
AND MAY NOT BE RELEVANT TO THE FILE
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AVIATION
MINUTE PAPER
SUBJECT:15C
Regional Office No...................................................... C.A. Form 225
(Revised July, '53)
Station: ........ Melbourne Airport No. EA 29 Head Office No. ................................
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AVIATION
AIR SAFETY INCIDENT REPORT
(To be submitted through the Regional Director of the State of occurrence of the incident)
Place of Occurrence: Melbourne Date: 8/1/54 Time: 0320/z.
Aircraft — Type:......................................Marking:..........................Pilot: .............................................
Type of Operation:..............................From: ....................................To: ................................................
Details of Incident: ........ FLYING SAUCER
At 0320 I received a ring from the Herald to inform me they had
received a report from Mr. Allan, C/- Ezywalkin Pty. Ltd. 143
Glenferie Rd., Malvern, that at 0300/z. he saw from his back yard
a shining circular object, very fast and trailing a red vapour
behind, heading towards the bay. He was uncertain of the height
but estimated the diameter to be 20-30 feet. I had the Radar
search but the only object they could pick up was the DC3 that
had departed and was on the Southern diversion.
Signed: .........(J.P. McCUBBIN) . Designation: S.O.O. Date: 8/1/54.
(See over page.Comments or Suggestions — Outstation or Pilot:
Signed: ........................................ Designation: .......................................Date: ..............................
Regional Office Action
(To be completed in accordance with Air Navigation Instructions 2/9 and 3/9).
Signed: ........................................ Designation: .......................................Date: ..............................
For Head Office Use
Action Completed. Signed: ............................................................Date: ..............................15D
Regional Office No...................................................... C.A. Form 225
(Revised July, '53)
Station: ........ Melbourne Airport No. EA 33 Head Office No. ................................
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AVIATION
AIR SAFETY INCIDENT REPORT
(To be submitted through the Regional Director of the State of occurrence of the incident)
Place of Occurrence: Melbourne Date: 12/1/54 Time: 1400/z.
Aircraft — Type:......................................Marking:..........................Pilot: .............................................
Type of Operation:..............................From: ....................................To: ................................................
Details of Incident: ........ UNIDENTIFIED OBJECT
At 1400/z. I received a phone call from Mr. Duband, 73 Packington St.,
ST.KILDA LU6459 to say that while driving down Peel Street, WINDSOR
towards ST. KILDA ROAD he saw at an angle of 45° a red glow in the
sky in the shape of a half moon. He proceeded on to the St Kilda
Junction but his view was obscured by trees as he proceeded towards
St Kilda Station he could see the object through the trees but
soon after it disappeared.
Signed: .........(J.P. McCUBBIN) Designation: S.O.O. Date: 12/1/54.
(See over page.Comments or Suggestions — Outstation or Pilot:
Signed: ........................................ Designation: .......................................Date: ..............................
Regional Office Action
(To be completed in accordance with Air Navigation Instructions 2/9 and 3/9).
Signed: ........................................ Designation: .......................................Date: ..............................
For Head Office Use
Action Completed. Signed: ............................................................Date: ..............................15E
Regional Office No...................................................... C.A. Form 225
(Revised July, '53)
Station: ........ Melbourne Airport No. EA 26 Head Office No. ................................
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AVIATION
AIR SAFETY INCIDENT REPORT
(To be submitted through the Regional Director of the State of occurrence of the incident)
Place of Occurrence: CAMBERWELL Date: 2/1/54 Time: 1030/z.
Aircraft — Type:......................................Marking:..........................Pilot: .............................................
Type of Operation:..............................From: ....................................To: ................................................
Details of Incident: ........ UNIDENTIFIED OBJECT
Mr. Broadbent of 179 Riversdale Road, Camberwell, Telephone No.
WF 2643 passed the following information by phone on 8/1/54.
"At dusk approx. 8.30 p.m. last Sunday my wife and I sighted
what appeared to be a meteor at close range. It appeared out of
nowhere and moved very fast from slightly South of West to the
North West in an arc. It appeared to be as large as the Sun at
midday and the light emitted equal to a flash of lightning as
observed during daylight. It appeared to have a tail although
this may have been a blurred effect caused by the speed of travel.
It disappeared in the same manner as it appeared."
Signed: .........(S.H.B. COOPER) Designation: S.O.O. Date: 8/1/54.
(See over page.Comments or Suggestions — Outstation or Pilot:
Signed: ........................................ Designation: .......................................Date: ..............................
Regional Office Action
(To be completed in accordance with Air Navigation Instructions 2/9 and 3/9).
Signed: ........................................ Designation: .......................................Date: ..............................
For Head Office Use
Action Completed. Signed: ............................................................Date: ..............................15F
Regional Office No. Vic./Tas. C.A. Form 225
(Revised July, '53)
Station: ........ Empire House No. Head Office No. ................................
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AVIATION
AIR SAFETY INCIDENT REPORT
(To be submitted through the Regional Director of the State of occurrence of the incident)
Place of Occurrence: Yan Yean Date: 30th or 31st Time: 1830 local
August, 1953.
Aircraft — Type: - Marking: - Pilot: -
Type of Operation: - From: - To: -
Details of Incident: Mr. J. A. Myers, Richards Avenue, McLeod, called at this
Office and reported observing an object like a comet, but larger, bright in
front and with an indistinct cloudy tail, climbing slowly and vertically
in the North-West, about 40° from the horizon. It was visible for 2 to 2½
minutes then moved horizontally toward the North and disappeared.
Darkness was falling and some stars had appeared. Mr. Myers
however was quite emphatic that the object was not a star.
Wrote to the "Age" newspaper at the time but received no
reply.
Signed: [signature] Designation: EAAS Date: 13-1-54
(See over page.Comments or Suggestions — Outstation or Pilot:
Signed: ........................................ Designation: .......................................Date: ..............................
Regional Office Action
(To be completed in accordance with Air Navigation Instructions 2/9 and 3/9).
Signed: ........................................ Designation: .......................................Date: ..............................
For Head Office Use
Action Completed. Signed: ............................................................Date: ..............................CONFIDENTIAL. 14A
5/3/Air(2B) Royal Australian Air Force.
Headquarters,
R.A.A.F. Mallala.
13th January, 1954.
Area Intelligence Officer,
Headquarters Home Command,
Penrith 1W
New South Wales.
UNUSUAL SIGHTINGS.
VIDE YOUR 5/3/8/Air(2A).
Attached herewith report of Unusual Sighting by Mr.
D.M.SCHEREK of 588 Seaview Road., Kirkaldy. S.Aus.
[signature]
(R.D.MILLER)
Flight Lieutenant,
for Officer Commanding.REPORT ON AERIAL OBJECT OBSERVED. 14B
[black mark] Name of Observer: David Mase SCHEREK
2. Address of Observer: 588 Seaview Road., KIRKALDY S.AUS.
3. Occupation of Observer: Businessman
4. Date and Time of Observation(Time to be given in 24 hour clock
Zonal time:
0230 to 0315 on 9th January, 1954.
5. Period of Observation: Three quarters of an hour.
6. Manner of Observation:(Give details of own position by map
reference if possible, or by known landmarks, and describe any
equipment used in the observation):
34°54'30"S 138°29'15"E
7. Where was object first observed, e.g. overhead, coming from
behind a hill, over the horizon, etc..:
Stationary over horizon.
8. What first attracted observer's attention, e.g.. light or noise:
Bright light in the sky and its movement
9. Did object appear as a light or as a definite object.
Light similar to a planet.
10. If there was more than one object, how many were there, and
what was their formation:
One only.
11. What was the colour of the light or object: White/yellow.
12. What was its apparent shape: Uncertain.
13. Was any detail of structure observable: No
14. Was any method of propulsion obvious: No.
15. Was there any sound: No.
16.x Height, or angle of elevation: 010°above horizon to [ILLEGIBLE] 007°.
17.x Speed, or angular velocity: 310°T moved to 303°T.
18. State any experience which enables observer to be reasonably
certain about the answers to 16 and 17.:
Member to R.A.A.F. 1939 to 1945 including approx. 400 hours
flying on Air Evacuation.
x Since it is normally impossible to estimate the height and
speed of a strange object it will usually he better to endeavour
to determine the angle of elevation of the object, the angle
through which it moved, and the time taken to do this.-2-
[black mark]. Direction of flight with reference to landmarks or points
of the compass:
Downward and a general movement towards South.
20 Did the object remain on a straight path, deviate or manourvre
at all:
Object moved up and down, sideways and in x slight arcs.
21. Was any trail of exhaust, vapour or light seen:
No.
22. Where did object disappear, e.g.. in mid-air, behind a hill,
over the horizon:
In mid-air approximately 007° above the horizon.
23/ Existence of any physical evidence such as fragments, photographs
or other supporting evidence:
Nil.
24. Weather conditions experienced at the time of observation:
Clear sky.
25. Location of any air traffic in the vicinity of the sighting at
the time:
Adelaide Area Control reported no aircraft activity.
26. Local of any meteorological stations in the general area:
Adelaide Metheorological Bureau, West Terrace, Adelaide. S.Aus.
27. Any additional information:
Brilliance of object varied. Observer also noticed a pin
point of light circle object three or four times.
The planet Jupiter is at present visible and would have been
approximately in the position observed.
Copies to:
✓Area Intelligence Officer, Home Command.
Director of Intelligence Branch, Air Force Headquarters.FROM: Squadron Leader L.L. JOHNSTON, D.S.O.,
R.A.F.
'6/AIR(13A) Headquarters Training Command
R.A.A.F.
Albert Park Barracks
Melbourne S.C.3.
Dear Mr Boud 19 JAN 1954
Herewith report of sighting of unusual aeri al object
by Mr. J.M. Cowden 3rd January 1954. If you can think of
anything to add I would be grateful if you would let me know.
Also enclosed for your information are reports of
sightings by Mr. R. A. Green and Mr. F.A. Arblaster at Tooma,
N.S.W. 5th January 1954.
Yours sincerely
[signature]
Mr. W. Boud,
Victoria Tasmanian Region,
Dept. of Civil Aviation,
391 Lt. Collins Street,
Melbourne C.1.
[stamp: DESPATCHED-
19 JAN 1954
FROM H.Q.T.C.]MXY 130
5/6/AIR(12A) Headquarters Training Command
R.A.A.F.
Albert Park Barracks
Melbourne S.C.3.
The Secretary, 6161
Air Board.
Victoria Barracks, 19 JAN 1954
Melbourne S.C.1.
Victoria
(Attention D.A.F.I.)
SIGHTING OF UNUSUAL AERIAL OBJECT
MR. R.A. GREEN
MR. F.A. ARBLASTER
TOOMA N.S.W. 5th January 1954
1. Herewi th report of a sighting by the two above-
mentioned persons of unusual aerial objects near Tooma, N.S.W.
1200 hours 5th January 1954.
2. These gentlemen in company with a third were on a
fishing holiday at th e time of sighting and claim to have had
no papers or radio news of previous sightings.
3. The reports were obtained by telephone in the case of
Mr. Green, and by F/O Gun of this Headquarters in an interview
in the case of Mr. Arblaster. In no case has the writer the
benefit of a personal interview with either gentleman, but Mr.
Green was quite impressive over the telephone. Mr. Green
specifically requested that his report should not be passed on
to the press.
3. The third member of the party is alleged to have seen
the objects but there has been no opportuni ty of interviewing
him as yet.
4. To the best of th e writer's knowledge no sightings
were reported in the Victorian area on this date.
[stamp: DESPATCHED
19 JAN 1954
FROM H.Q.T.C.]
(L.L.JOHNSTON)
Squadron Leader
For Air Officer Commanding
Encls.MXY 130
5/6/AIR(11A) Headquarters Training Command
R.A.A.F.
Albert Park Barracks
6160 Melbourne S.C.3.
The Secretary,
Air Board. 19 JAN 1954
Victoria Barracks,
Melbourne S.C.1.,
Victoria
(Attention D.A.F.I.)
SIGHTING OF UNUSUAL AERIAL OBJECT
Mr. J.M. COWDEN
BLACKBURN - 3rd January 1954
1. Herewith report of a sighting by Mr. Cowden of
Blackburn of an unusual aerial object 1555 hours 3rd January
1954.
2. Four other observers have reported to Department of
Civil Aviation si ghting similar objects at about the same
time on 3rd January 1954 but it has not been possible to co-
relate these sightings as yet.
3. Mr. Cowden's report was made to the Air Operations
Room AFHQ only immediately after the sighting. The writer
visited Mr. Cowden after work on 8th January 1954 and
obtained the attached report. Mrs. Cowden, who was beside
her husband at the time of sighting, saw nothing. Mr.
Cowden appeared quite genuine and had no previous interest in
"flying saucers" or other aerial phenomena. In fact he
objected to the term "flying saucer" as applied to his
sighting and regrets having mentioned his sighting because of
subsequent ridicule from his neighbours.
[stamp: DESPATCHED
19 JAN 1954
FROM H.Q.T.C.]
(L.L. JOHNSTON)
Squadron Leader
For Air Officer Commandi ng
Encl.REPORT ON AERIAL OBJECT OBSERVED 11B
[black mark]
1. Name of observer .. MR. J.M. COWDEN.. .... . ... ........
2. Address of Observer 56 Whitehorse Road, BLACKBURN.. .. .... ..
3. Occupation of Observer ..Silversmith..........................
4. Date and Time of Observation (Time given in 24 hour clock zonal
time)
..3.1.1954..1555.K.hrs,.......................................
5. Period of Observation(s) ..1.minute............................
6. Manner of Observation: (Give details of own position by map
reference if possible, or by known landmarks, and describe any
equipment used in the observation).
...Home.(27°45t S..145°09t.E)..Ground.to.Air.naked.eye...No.....
...equipment.used....................
....................................................
7. Where was object first observed, e.g. overhead, coming from
behind a hill, over the horizon, etc.
....In.the.vicinity.of.the.sun..............................
8. What first attracted observer's attention, e.g. light or noise.
....Noise.caused.observer.to.look.for.an.aircraft..............
9. Did object appear as a light or as a definite object.
....Definite.object.. ................................. .......
10. If there was more than one object, how many were there, and what
was their formation.
....One......................................................
11. What was the colour of the light or object Highly.reflective.(silver)
12. What was its apparent shape .No.tail...Possibly.oval............
....................................................
13. Was any detail of structure observable No.details.................
..... ...................................................
14. Was any method of propulsion obvious .. No................. .......
15. Was there any sound No.sound.attached.but.sound.originally. attracted
attention
16.** Height, or angle of elevation Sun.10°..An..position...Elevation.42° -
Bearing 272° T.
17.**Speed, or angular velocity .Sun.to.S.horizon...1.min...Originally.
appeared stationary.
18. State any experience which enables observer to be reasonably
certain about the answers given to 16 and 17.
....No.special.knowledge.....................................
** Since it is normally impossible to estimate the height and speed
of a strange object it will usually be better to endeavour to
determine the angle of elevation of the object, the angle
through which it moved, and the time taken to do this.
...../2- 2 -
Report on Aerial Object Observed (Contd.)
19. Direction of flight with reference to landmarks or points of
the compass.
.....From.West.to.SSE.horizon...............................
20. Did the object remain on a straight path, deviate or manoeuvre
at all.
.....Straight.path.wi..th.whia.motion........................
21. Was any trail of exhaust, vapour or light seen .No...............
22. Where did object disappear, e.g. in mid-air, behind a hill,
over the horizon.
.....Behind.trees.on.hill....................................
23. Existence of any physical evidence such as fragments, photo-
graphs, or other supporting evidence.
.....Nil......................................................
24. Weather conditions experienced at time(s) or observation(s)
.....Fine,.clear.sky,.good.visibility,.temperature.75°.........
25. Location of any air traffic in the vicinity at the time of
sighting.
.....Light.aircraft.in.vicinity.at.time.stated,.operating.from.
.....MOORABBIN.... ........ ... .............................
26. Location of any meteorological stations in the general area.
.....MELBOURNE...............................................
27. Any additional information .................................
.................................................................
.................................................................
.................................................................
Questions 25, 26 and 27 to be answered by interrogator.REPORT ON AERIAL OBJECT OBSERVED 11C
[black mark]
1. Name of observer ..Mr. R.A. GREEN.. .... . ... ........
2. Address of Observer 15.Orleys.Street,.MACLEOD,.MELBOURNE.. ....
3. Occupation of Observer ...Taxation.Dept......................
4. Date and Time of Observation (Time given in 24 hour clock zonal
time)
.5.1.1954..1200.to.1215.hrs.K...............................
5. Period of Observation(s) 15.minutes............................
6. Manner of Observation: (Give details of own position by map
reference if possible, or by known landmarks, and describe any
equipment used in the observation).
.Near.TOOMA,.N.S.W...35°58t.S.148°04t.E...Ground.to.Air.........
.Polaroid.sunglasses.only....................................
.....................................................
7. Where was object first observed, e.g. overhead, coming from
behind a hill, over the horizon, etc.
.At.angle.of.12° elevation.above.horizon.to.EAST...............
8. What first attracted observer's attention, e.g. light or noise.
.Nothing.particularly.........................................
9. Did object appear as a light or as a definite object.
.Definite.object.giving.high.intensity.steady.light............
10. If there was more than one object, how many were there, and what
was their formation.
3 objects weaving about each other travelling WEST
.................................................................
11. What was the colour of the light or object .White................
12. What was its apparent shape .Oval.or.circular.objects.very.high..
above 30,000 ft.
.................................................................
13. Was any detail of structure observable .No.details...............
..... ...................................................
14. Was any method of propulsion obvious .. No.................. .......
15. Was there any sound .No..............................................
16.**Height, or angle of elevation 12° rising to 35° and disappearing
at 10°.(all approximately)......
17.**Speed, or angular velocity .Supersonic............................
18. State any experience which enables observer to be reasonably
certain about the answers given to 16 and 17.
Considerable experience of aircraft spotting in Navy. Used
..[ILLEGIBLE] to judge angles (Navy method) for true horizon
available
** Since it is normally impossible to estimate the height and speed
of a strange object it will usually be better to endeavour to
determine the angle of elevation of the object, the angle
through which it moved, and the time taken to do this.
...../2- 2 -
Report on Aerial Object Observed (Contd.)
19. Direction of flight with reference to landmarks or points of
the compass.
.................................................................
Appeared in EAST, manoeuvred and disappeared in southerly
20. Did the object remain on a straight path, deviate or manoeuvre
at all.
.................................................................
Flight path was smooth but objects were manoeuvring continually
21. Was any trail of exhaust, vapour or light seen .................
No
22. Where did object disappear, e.g. in mid-air, behind a hill,
over the horizon.
.................................................................
In midair 10° above horizon. Light maintained high intensity with
23. Existence of any physical evidence such as fragments, photo-
graphs, or other supporting evidence.
.................................................................
No physical evidence. Two other observers.
24. Weather conditions experienced at time(s) or observation(s)
.CANBERRA.C.1..Trace.at.4,000..Visibility.unlimited..Wind.Velocity
25. Location of any air traffic in the vicinity at the time of
sighting.
..Observer's.position.was.near.Sydney-Melbourne.airway..... .......
..Nil.aircraft.en.route.at.time.stated..... ....................
26. Location of any meteorological stations in the general area.
.CANBERRA.(No.balloons.until.1400.hrs..........................
27. Any additional information ..Polaroid.glasses.were.much.more....
..effective.than.the.naked.eye..When.the.same.glasses.were.used..
..on.passing.aircraft.later.this.difference.was.not.observed...
..There.was.no.similarity.between.objects.observed.and.aircraft.
Questions 25, 26 and 27 to be answered by interrogator.REPORT ON AERIAL OBJECT OBSERVED 11a
Mr. F.A. ARBLASTER
1. Name of observer .. .......Walker Ave., MITCHAM... .......
Oil Company Representative
2. Address of Observer ........... ...............................
3. Occupation of Observer ...........................................
4. Date and Time of Observation (Time given in 24 hour clock zonal
5-1-54 1215 K time)
.................................................................
10 to 15 minutes
5. Period of Observation(s) ......................................
6. Manner of Observation: (Give details of own position by map
reference if possible, or by known landmarks, and describe any
equipment used in the observation).
Mannus Creek - 1 mile WEST of TOOMA Township. Polaroid
-glasses.only..................................................
.....................................................
7. Where was object first observed, e.g. overhead, coming from
behind a hill, over the horizon, etc.
Approximately 80° over Maragal Range
.................................................................
8. What first attracted observer's attention, e.g. light or noise.
Another observer
.................................................................
9. Did object appear as a light or as a definite object.
Definite object. Similar to star Venus.
.................................................................
10. If there was more than one object, how many were there, and what
was their formation.
6 objects varying formation, orbiting and changing positions
................................................................ Similar to a bright star
11. What was the colour of the light or object .Circular.or.oval.shape.........
12. What was its apparent shape ...................................... ....
................................................................
No
13. Was any detail of structure observable ............................
..... ......................................................No.............
14. Was any method of propulsion obvious .. No........................ .......
15. Was there any sound ..........Between.15.to.40.degrees.. .... .....
16.**Height, or angle of elevation ...No.estimate,.very.fast...... .......
17.**Speed, or angular velocity ......................................
18. State any experience which enables observer to be reasonably
certain about the answers given to 16 and 17.
Army training in aircraft recognition
.................................................................
** Since it is normally impossible to estimate the height and speed
of a strange object it will usually be better to endeavour to
determine the angle of elevation of the object, the angle
through which it moved, and the time taken to do this.
...../2- 2 -
Report on Aerial Object Observed (Contd.)
19. Direction of flight with reference to landmarks or points of
the compass.
.................................................................
Heading WEST thence in a Southerly direction
20. Did the object remain on a straight path, deviate or manoeuvre
at all.
......Moved.in.straight.path.orbiting.thence.Southerly.........
1 Headed SOUTH followed by 2 & 3 after an interval, line astern
21. Was any trail of exhaust, vapour or light seen ......formation.
No
22. Where did object disappear, e.g. in mid-air, behind a hill,
over the horizon.
.................................................................
Kept going until out of si ght in midair
23. Existence of any physical evidence such as fragments, photo-
graphs, or other supporting evidence.
.................................................................
Two other observers
24. Weather conditions experienced at time(s) or observation(s)
.CANBERRA.C.1..Trace.at.4,000..Vis..unlimited..W/V.Light.and..
25. Location of any air traffic in the vicinity at the time of
sighting.
.Nil.aircraft.en.route.at.time.stated.......................
.................................................................
26. Location of any meteorological stations in the general area.
.CANBERRA..No.balloons.released.till.1400.hrs..................
27. Any additional information .The.position.of.the.observers.was.in.the.
.Melbourne...Canberra.air.route.and.checks.were.made.by.the.three.
.observers.of.aircraft.passing.overhead.but.there.was.no.similarity.
.to.objects.originally.sighted.......................................
Questions 25, 26 and 27 to be answered by interrogator.In reply Quote..225/4/-
10A
COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA
Telephone .... MB 033 DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AVIATION
Victoria-Tasmania Region
Telegraphic Address:
"Vicaviat, Melbourne" "Almora House,"
522-536 Little Collins Street,
Postal Address: Melbourne, C.I
Box 4578, G.P.O.,
Melbourne. C.I.
00304
S/L Johnson,
Home Training Command,
Intelligence Section, 11 JAN. 1954
ALBERT PARK BARRACKS.
Dear Sir,
Attached are copies of "flying saucer" reports, forwarded as
requested.
Yours faithfully,
[signature]
(J. Lourey.)
for Regional Director.UAP 1.
10b C.A. FORM 225
(Revised Aug., 1952)
[black mark]
Head Office No. .......................................
Regional Office No. 225/4/C.
Out-Station No. ......................................
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AVIATION
STATION .................................................
DATE .....................................................
AIR SAFETY INCIDENT REPORT
(To be submitted through the Regional Director of the state of occurrence within 48 hours of the incident)
TO DIRECTOR GENERAL OF CIVIL AVIATION,
499 LITTLE COLLINS STREET, MELBOURNE, C.1.
The following incident in relation to the safety of air navigation is reported:—
Place ........................................................ Date .................................................. Time ..................................................
Aircraft: Type ...................................................... Marking....................................... Pilot ...........................................
Flight: From ............................................................. To ....................................................
Details of Incident ...... Miss Wilkins, Tel. FA8981, reported that on Sunday,
3rd January, while on the way home from Belgrave she saw a flying
object in the direction of Burwood. Only description was that it
was very large and had a long tail approx. 30 feet long, which was
illuminated. Time was approximately 8.45 pm.
Attachments .........................................................
SIGNED .................................................
DESIGNATION ............................................
REGIONAL OFFICE ACTION
NO ACTION COMMENTS...................................................
ACTION IN HAND REGION
ACTION IN HAND COMPANY
ACTION REQUIRED BY
............................... REGION
SIGNED...................................... DESIGNATION ......................
FOR HEAD OFFICE USE
...........................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................
Ensign Press.—C.1840 Action Complete Signed ....................................UAP 2.
10c C.A. FORM 225
(Revised Aug., 1952)
[black mark]
Head Office No. .......................................
Regional Office No. ....................................
Out-Station No. ......................................
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AVIATION
STATION .................................................
DATE .....................................................
AIR SAFETY INCIDENT REPORT
(To be submitted through the Regional Director of the state of occurrence within 48 hours of the incident)
TO DIRECTOR GENERAL OF CIVIL AVIATION,
499 LITTLE COLLINS STREET, MELBOURNE, C.1.
The following incident in relation to the safety of air navigation is reported:—
Place ........................................................ Date .................................................. Time ..................................................
Aircraft: Type ...................................................... Marking....................................... Pilot ...........................................
Flight: From ............................................................. To ....................................................
Details of Incident ..... Mr. Pinnie of Ascot Vale reported a flying object
over Ascot Vale at approximately 8.45 pm. on Sunday, 3rd January.
Object travelling West. No details, height, etc given.
Attachments .........................................................
SIGNED .................................................
DESIGNATION ............................................
REGIONAL OFFICE ACTION
NO ACTION COMMENTS...................................................
ACTION IN HAND REGION
ACTION IN HAND COMPANY
ACTION REQUIRED BY
............................... REGION
SIGNED...................................... DESIGNATION ......................
FOR HEAD OFFICE USE
...........................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................
Ensign Press.—C.1840 Action Complete Signed ....................................UAP. 3.
10D C.A. FORM 225
(Revised Aug., 1952)
[black mark]
Head Office No. .......................................
Regional Office No. ....................................
Out-Station No. ......................................
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AVIATION
STATION .................................................
DATE .....................................................
AIR SAFETY INCIDENT REPORT
(To be submitted through the Regional Director of the state of occurrence within 48 hours of the incident)
TO DIRECTOR GENERAL OF CIVIL AVIATION,
499 LITTLE COLLINS STREET, MELBOURNE, C.1.
The following incident in relation to the safety of air navigation is reported:—
Place ........................................................ Date .................................................. Time ..................................................
Aircraft: Type ...................................................... Marking....................................... Pilot ...........................................
Flight: From ............................................................. To ....................................................
Details of Incident ..... Mrs. W. McKay, Tel. WL3502, Reported that on Sunday, 3rd
January at approximately 8.45 pm, while on the way home from Phillip
Island, she saw an object like a Neon tube about 3 feet long in the
direction of Tooradin. Looked like fireworks, although there were
none in the vicinity.
Attachments .........................................................
SIGNED .................................................
DESIGNATION ............................................
REGIONAL OFFICE ACTION
NO ACTION COMMENTS...................................................
ACTION IN HAND REGION
ACTION IN HAND COMPANY
ACTION REQUIRED BY
............................... REGION
SIGNED...................................... DESIGNATION ......................
FOR HEAD OFFICE USE
...........................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................
Ensign Press.—C.1840 Action Complete Signed ....................................UAP. 4.
10e C.A. FORM 225
(Revised Aug., 1952)
[black mark]
Head Office No. .......................................
Regional Office No. ....................................
Out-Station No. ......................................
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AVIATION
STATION .................................................
DATE .....................................................
AIR SAFETY INCIDENT REPORT
(To be submitted through the Regional Director of the state of occurrence within 48 hours of the incident)
TO DIRECTOR GENERAL OF CIVIL AVIATION,
499 LITTLE COLLINS STREET, MELBOURNE, C.1.
The following incident in relation to the safety of air navigation is reported:—
Place ........................................................ Date .................................................. Time ..................................................
Aircraft: Type ...................................................... Marking....................................... Pilot ...........................................
Flight: From ............................................................. To ....................................................
Details of Incident ..... Mrs. Webster, 22 Atkins Street, Kew, saw a mushroom shaped
object at 1.15 pm. on Wednesday, 6th January, flying in an easterly
direction toward Melbourne. Not birds. Had field glasses. Seen over
her house.
Attachments .........................................................
SIGNED .................................................
DESIGNATION ............................................
REGIONAL OFFICE ACTION
NO ACTION COMMENTS...................................................
ACTION IN HAND REGION
ACTION IN HAND COMPANY
ACTION REQUIRED BY
............................... REGION
SIGNED...................................... DESIGNATION ......................
FOR HEAD OFFICE USE
...........................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................
Ensign Press.—C.1840 Action Complete Signed ....................................UAP. 5.
10f C.A. FORM 225
(Revised Aug., 1952)
[black mark]
Head Office No. .......................................
Regional Office No. ....................................
Out-Station No. ......................................
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AVIATION
STATION .................................................
DATE .....................................................
AIR SAFETY INCIDENT REPORT
(To be submitted through the Regional Director of the state of occurrence within 48 hours of the incident)
TO DIRECTOR GENERAL OF CIVIL AVIATION,
499 LITTLE COLLINS STREET, MELBOURNE, C.1.
The following incident in relation to the safety of air navigation is reported:—
Place ........................................................ Date .................................................. Time ..................................................
Aircraft: Type ...................................................... Marking....................................... Pilot ...........................................
Flight: From ............................................................. To ....................................................
Details of Incident ..... Mrs. Homfray of Penllyne Avenue, Vermont was near a
window at 8.45pm on Sunday 3/1/54 and saw a light flash through the
sky in a north easterly direction, gradually fading away behind trees.
Attachments .........................................................
SIGNED .................................................
DESIGNATION ............................................
REGIONAL OFFICE ACTION
NO ACTION COMMENTS...................................................
ACTION IN HAND REGION
ACTION IN HAND COMPANY
ACTION REQUIRED BY
............................... REGION
SIGNED...................................... DESIGNATION ......................
FOR HEAD OFFICE USE
...........................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................
Ensign Press.—C.1840 Action Complete Signed ....................................UAP. 6.
10g C.A. FORM 225
(Revised Aug., 1952)
[black mark]
Head Office No. .......................................
Regional Office No. ....................................
Out-Station No. ......................................
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AVIATION
STATION .................................................
DATE .....................................................
AIR SAFETY INCIDENT REPORT
(To be submitted through the Regional Director of the state of occurrence within 48 hours of the incident)
TO DIRECTOR GENERAL OF CIVIL AVIATION,
499 LITTLE COLLINS STREET, MELBOURNE, C.1.
The following incident in relation to the safety of air navigation is reported:—
Place ........................................................ Date .................................................. Time ..................................................
Aircraft: Type ...................................................... Marking....................................... Pilot ...........................................
Flight: From ............................................................. To ....................................................
Details of Incident ..... Mrs. Meade, 25 Miller Street, Glenhuntly. A month ago
on Saturday night at 7.50pm. saw an object like a falling star, blue
in colour.
Attachments .........................................................
SIGNED .................................................
DESIGNATION ............................................
REGIONAL OFFICE ACTION
NO ACTION COMMENTS...................................................
ACTION IN HAND REGION
ACTION IN HAND COMPANY
ACTION REQUIRED BY
............................... REGION
SIGNED...................................... DESIGNATION ......................
FOR HEAD OFFICE USE
...........................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................
Ensign Press.—C.1840 Action Complete Signed ....................................UAP. 7.
10h C.A. FORM 225
(Revised Aug., 1952)
[black mark]
Head Office No. .......................................
Regional Office No. ....................................
Out-Station No. ......................................
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AVIATION
STATION .................................................
DATE .....................................................
AIR SAFETY INCIDENT REPORT
(To be submitted through the Regional Director of the state of occurrence within 48 hours of the incident)
TO DIRECTOR GENERAL OF CIVIL AVIATION,
499 LITTLE COLLINS STREET, MELBOURNE, C.1.
The following incident in relation to the safety of air navigation is reported:—
Place ........................................................ Date .................................................. Time ..................................................
Aircraft: Type ...................................................... Marking....................................... Pilot ...........................................
Flight: From ............................................................. To ....................................................
Details of Incident ..... Mr. Boyla, Lands Department, on Sunday morning saw an
object like a silver butterfly at 11 am. from St. Kilda, Carlisle
Street. Direction 090°T, Altitude 60°, Height not known, Angle 7"
Speed 5° per second.
Attachments .........................................................
SIGNED .................................................
DESIGNATION ............................................
REGIONAL OFFICE ACTION
NO ACTION COMMENTS...................................................
ACTION IN HAND REGION
ACTION IN HAND COMPANY
ACTION REQUIRED BY
............................... REGION
SIGNED...................................... DESIGNATION ......................
FOR HEAD OFFICE USE
...........................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................
Ensign Press.—C.1840 Action Complete Signed ....................................UAP. 8. 105 C.A. FORM 225 (Revised Aug., 1952) Head Office No. ........................................ Regional Office No. ........................................ Out-Station No. ........................................ DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AVIATION STATION ........................................................................ DATE ........................................................................ AIR SAFETY INCIDENT REPORT (To be submitted through the Regional Director of the state of occurrence within 48 hours of the incident) TO DIRECTOR GENERAL OF CIVIL AVIATION, 499 LITTLE COLLINS STREET, MELBOURNE, C.1. The following incident in relation to the safety of air navigation is reported:— Place ................................................................ Date ........................................ Time ........................................ Aircraft: Type ........................................ Marking........................................ Pilot ........................................ Flight: From ............................................................. To ........................................................................ Details of Incident .......... Report from Mr. J. Dalton. See attachment. ........................................................................ ........................................................................ ........................................................................ ........................................................................ ........................................................................ ........................................................................ ........................................................................ ........................................................................ ........................................................................ ........................................................................ Attachments ........................................................................ SIGNED ........................................................................ DESIGNATION ........................................................................ REGIONAL OFFICE ACTION NO ACTION COMMENTS........................................................................ ACTION IN HAND REGION ........................................................................ ACTION IN HAND COMPANY ........................................................................ ACTION REQUIRED BY ........................................................................ ........................... REGION ........................................................................ SIGNED........................................ DESIGNATION ............... FOR HEAD OFFICE USE ........................................................................ ........................................................................ ........................................................................ ........................................................................ Ensign Press.—C.1840 Action Complete Signed ........................................................................
AERIAL PHENOMENA.
SUNDAY, JANUARY 3RD, 1954 : APPROX. 3.30 P.M. : OVERALL DURATION OF SIGHTING : ABOUT 2 MINS.
Characteristic John Dalton (Naked Eye) Margaret Lord (Naked Eye). Margaret Fury (Sun-Glasses)
Number Definitely 1; possibly 2. First sighting 2; second sighting Definitely 3.
1.
Shape Overall cylindrical; central region Roughly circular.
constricted, irregular not easily definable.
Length : Thickness = 3 : 1.
Colour. Overall light brown (wrapping paper); No White ; no shadows visible.
shadows visible; soft reflected sunlight Greyish-white. Instances of sunlight gave
giving an overall dull sheen. added definition to the
objects.
Flight Object oscillated slowly and over and whilst Objects moving in level flight, one Possible horizontal
travelling fairly rapidly in N-E. direction. behind the other, in N-E. oscillations. Formation arrow-
direction. head as above, presenting
[sketch of flight path] these shapes. The two rear
N.E. objects closed up on either
side of the larger leader,
appearing to attach themselves
with consequent size increase
of the leader. A very thick
cloud of grey "smoke" issued
from the rear of the leader
which then appeared to turn on
its side and drive roughly at
an angle of approx. 45°. The
object then disappeared.
Height. Initial sighting placed object at altitude Very high. The huge size and the very
of approx. 40,000 feet in vicinity of high altitude are to be
Templestowe. Object pursued level flight emphasised. The objects
to estimated locality of Eltham where it appeared to stop in flight
disappeared to be replaced by two hard white as if conducting a survey.
lights climbing at approx. angle of 45° until
lost to sight.[DIAGRAM PAGE]
Initial sighting Initial sighting
Estimated position Estimated position
of Eltham of Templestowe
E ←————————————————————————————
6.5 miles
approx.
↑ 5 miles
T → k level flight
E point of disappearance
tan x = 13/10 = 1.3
x = 52°
Estimated horizontal speed
S = 60 × 13
2
= 195 m.p.h.
say 200 m.p.h.
West Heidelberg
observation site
θ = 5 tan 35°
= 5 × 7
= 3.5 miles
= 18500 feet
allowing for wind say about 20000
West Heidelberg
observation site TemplestoweOBSERVERS:
1. John Dalton, 2. Margaret Lord, 3. Margaret Fury,
10 Toora Street, 25 Uplands Road, Cnr. Oriel Rd. & Tobruk Ave.,
IVANHOE. STRATHMORE. HEIDELBERG WEST.
JX.2191 FX.1066 JL.3121.
Employer: Employer:
Sargood Gardiner Ltd., Lords Quarries, Brooklyn.
Central 8774 MM.5239.
Extension 19.UAP.11
Regional Office No........................................ C.A. Form 225
(Revised July, '53)
Station: Melbourne Airport No. EA 7 Head Office No.
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AVIATION
AIR SAFETY INCIDENT REPORT
(To be submitted through the Regional Director of the State of occurrence of the incident)
Place of Occurrence: Essendon Date: 1/1/54 Time: 0100
Aircraft — Type:........................ Marking:........................ Pilot:........................
Type of Operation:........................ From:........................ To:........................
Details of Incident: UNUSUAL OBJECT
At approximately 0100 I received a call from Mr. E. Barker
(Phone WL2753) that he had seen a saucer shaped object flying up
the Yarra Valley from Templestowe below a cloud base of 1500-2000'.
He said that he saw it about 0015 and it was about 8 times as big
as a DC4. At the time this object was alleged to be seen a
Convair was in the vicinity.
Nothing unusual was seen on the radar screen, but this fact is
not surprising, considering the telephoned report was originated
45 minutes after the object had been sighted.
Copies of the ML 2355 and 0015 weather obs. are attached.
ML OBS. 2355 ML OBS. 0025
200/12 190/7
Vis. 25 Vis. 25
Fine Fine
6/8 2000 2/8 3000 6/8 2000 2/8 3000
1010 QNH QNH 1010
Signed: (J.P. McCUBBIN) Designation: S.O.O. Date: 1/1/54.
(See over page.[ILLEGIBLE mirror-print in background] Comments or Suggestions — Outstation or Pilot: ........................................................................ ........................................................................ ........................................................................ ........................................................................ ........................................................................ ........................................................................ Signed:........................ Designation: [ILLEGIBLE]........... Date:............... Regional Office Action (To be completed in accordance with Air Navigation Instructions 2/9 and 3/9). Report on interview with Captain Barker held on 6/1/54 follows. ........................................................................ ........................................................................ ........................................................................ ........................................................................ Signed: (W. E. Boud.) Designation: S.A.N. Date: 6/1/54. For Head Office Use ........................................................................ ........................................................................ ........................................................................ ........................................................................ ........................................................................ ........................................................................ ........................................................................ Action Completed. Signed: ...................................... Date:...............
UAP.12.
C.A. FORM 225
(Revised Aug., 1952)
Head Office No. ........................................
Regional Office No. ........................................
Out-Station No. ........................................
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AVIATION
STATION ........................................................................
DATE ........................................................................
AIR SAFETY INCIDENT REPORT
(To be submitted through the Regional Director of the state of occurrence within 48 hours of the incident)
TO DIRECTOR GENERAL OF CIVIL AVIATION,
499 LITTLE COLLINS STREET, MELBOURNE, C.1.
The following incident in relation to the safety of air navigation is reported:—
Place ................................................................ Date ........................................ Time ........................................
Aircraft: Type ........................................ Marking........................................ Pilot ........................................
Flight: From ............................................................. To ........................................................................
Details of Incident ...... Mr. Robertson, Shire Hall, Seymour. Sunday, 8.45pm.
Skyrocket type, flying horizontal, bluish tail. Travelling fast in
westerly sky, going north. Solid head, blue lighted tail.
........................................................................
........................................................................
........................................................................
........................................................................
........................................................................
........................................................................
Attachments ........................................................................
SIGNED ........................................................................
DESIGNATION ........................................................................
REGIONAL OFFICE ACTION
NO ACTION COMMENTS........................................................................
ACTION IN HAND REGION ........................................................................
ACTION IN HAND COMPANY ........................................................................
ACTION REQUIRED BY ........................................................................
........................... REGION ........................................................................
SIGNED........................................ DESIGNATION ...............
FOR HEAD OFFICE USE
........................................................................
........................................................................
........................................................................
........................................................................
Ensign Press.—C.1840 Action Complete Signed ........................................................................UAP.13
C.A. FORM 225
(Revised Aug., 1952)
Head Office No. ........................................
Regional Office No. ........................................
Out-Station No. ........................................
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AVIATION
STATION ........................................................................
DATE ........................................................................
AIR SAFETY INCIDENT REPORT
(To be submitted through the Regional Director of the state of occurrence within 48 hours of the incident)
TO DIRECTOR GENERAL OF CIVIL AVIATION,
499 LITTLE COLLINS STREET, MELBOURNE, C.1.
The following incident in relation to the safety of air navigation is reported:—
Place ................................................................ Date ........................................ Time ........................................
Aircraft: Type ........................................ Marking........................................ Pilot ........................................
Flight: From ............................................................. To ........................................................................
Details of Incident ...... Mrs. Kelleher, 34 Lockhard Street, Caulfield.
Sunday afternoon 3pm. Watching a plane from South to North saw
Round shining object much higher, like globe. Floating north over
East Malvern for 3 minutes.
........................................................................
........................................................................
........................................................................
........................................................................
........................................................................
........................................................................
Attachments ........................................................................
SIGNED ........................................................................
DESIGNATION ........................................................................
REGIONAL OFFICE ACTION
NO ACTION COMMENTS........................................................................
ACTION IN HAND REGION ........................................................................
ACTION IN HAND COMPANY ........................................................................
ACTION REQUIRED BY ........................................................................
........................... REGION ........................................................................
SIGNED........................................ DESIGNATION ...............
FOR HEAD OFFICE USE
........................................................................
........................................................................
........................................................................
........................................................................
Ensign Press.—C.1840 Action Complete Signed ........................................................................5/6/AIR (9A)
DEPARTMENT OF AIR
MINUTE PAPER
(This side only to be written on)
SUBJECT: UNUSUAL AERIAL OBJECTS
C.A.C.O.,
Training Command.
1. With the recent publicity given to sightings of
"Flying Saucers" and other unusual aerial phenomena it is likely
that the duty Operations Officer will be getting calls from
persons claiming to have sighted such objects.
2. It would be of great assistance if the maximum amount
of information regarding the sighting could be obtained on first
contact before the caller has had a chance to confuse his
impressions in discussions with neighbours, press, etc.
3. Copies of a proforma "Report on Aerial Object Observed"
has therefore been placed in the Operations Room. The proformas
should prove of assistance to the Duty Ops. Officer in questioning
the caller.
4. It has been found that observers seldom hesitate to
give an estimated height and speed of the object observed although
it is almost impossible to judge the range of an unfamiliar
object in the air. Items 16 and 17 of the proforma are
specially annotated with a view to overcoming these weaknesses.
5. In almost every case the only attributes of position
and movement that can be measured are:-
(a) Bearing
(b) Angle of elevation
(c) Angle through which object moves
(d) Angle between path of movement and horizon
(e) Time taken for movement in (c)
6. In some cases the observer may know the simple method
of measuring angles i.e., at arms length one inch subtends 2°
and it would be helpful if it could be brought out whether he was
aware of and used this method.
7. If the report is made in working hours it would be
advisable to transfer the call to the Command Intelligence
Officer. Otherwise reports should be passed to Command
Intelligence Officer as soon as possible.
[Signature]
(L.L. JOHNSTON),
Squadron Leader,
13 JAN '54 COMMAND INTELLIGENCE OFFICER.8A
FROM: Squadron Leader L.L. JOHNSTON, D.S.O.,
R.A.F.
5/6/AIR(8A)
Headquarters Training Command
R.A.A.F.
Albert Park Barracks
Melbourne S.C.3.
12 JAN 1954
Dear Boud
Herewith report of sighting of unusual aerial object
by Capt. Barker 1 January 1954. If you can think of
anything to add I would be grateful if you would let me know.
I have another report of a sighting on 3rd January
1954 which I shall let you have when it is completed.
Yours
[Signature]
Mr. W. Boud,
Victoria Tasmanian Region
Dept. of Civil Aviation,
391 Lt. Collins Street,
Melbourne.
[Stamp]
DESPATCHED
12 JAN 1954
FROM H.Q.T.C.7A
MXY 130
5/6/AIR(7A) Headquarters Training Command
R.A.A.F.
Albert Park Barracks
5842 Melbourne S.C.3.
The Secretary,
Air Board, 12 JAN 1954
Victoria Barracks,
Melbourne S.C.1.
Victoria
(Attention D.A.F.I.)
UNUSUAL SIGHTING -
CAPT. D. BARKER 1 JAN 54
1. Enclosed herewith is the report of an unusual
aerial objected sighted by Capt. D. BARKER A.N.A. on
1 JAN 54.
2. Capt. Barker was interviewed by the Assistant
Regional Director, Victorian and Tasmanian Region D.C.A.
and the Command Intelligence Officer, Training Command
6 JAN 54 at the Department of Civil Aviation.
3. Capt. Barker impressed the writer as being a
sober conscientious type of man, and although rather
apologetic for the fuss it was causing, was quite definite
that he had seen the object described in the attached report.
4. · His estimate of range and size was based on the
fact that he had an accurate idea of the cloud base.
5. Capt. Barker has no theories or explanations of
the cause of this sighting. Nothing in this vicinity was
seen on the radar scope at the time of sighting, not even
the convair known to be in the area.
[Signature]
(L.L. JOHNSTON)
Squadron Leader
For Air Officer Commanding
Encl. [Stamp]
DESPATCHED
12 JAN 1954
FROM H.Q.T.C.7b
REPORT ON AERIAL OBJECT OBSERVED
Capt. Douglas E. BARKER
1. Name of observer .............................................
472 Munro Street, EAST KEW (37°48'S 145°04'E)
2. Address of Observer .............................................
Airline Captain (A.N.A.)
3. Occupation of Observer .............................................
4. Date and Time of Observation (Time given in 24 hour clock zonal
1015 /K hours 1 Jan. '54 time)
12 secs
5. Period of Observation(s) .............................................
6. Manner of Observation: (Give details of own position by map
reference if possible, or by known landmarks, and describe any
equipment used in the observation).
At home address, ground to air, no equipment available,
i.e. binoculars etc.
.............................................
.............................................
.............................................
7. Where was object first observed, e.g. overhead, coming from
behind a hill, over the horizon, etc.
Observed at cloud base in E.N.E. direction, (range 2½ - 3 miles)
.............................................
8. What first attracted observer's attention, e.g. light or noise.
Observer watching birds in flight, when he saw object beyond
the birds. No noise - observer behind glass window.
.............................................
9. Did object appear as a light or as a definite object.
Definite object (see sketch).
.............................................
10. If there was more than one object, how many were there, and what
was their formation.
One only.
Very light amber, changing
11. What was the colour of the light or object ... to a shimmering blue.
12. What was its apparent shape ......... See sketch.
.............................................
13. Was any detail of structure observable ... See sketch.
.............................................
14. Was any method of propulsion obvious ..... No.
15. Was there any sound .................... No - observer behind window.
16.** Height, or angle of elevation ........... Height 1,800 - 2,000 (at cloud base).
17.** Speed, or angular velocity .............. At least that of jet aircraft.
18. State any experience which enables observer to be reasonably
certain about the answers given to 16 and 17.
Airline Captain - 21 years flying.
.............................................
** Since it is normally impossible to estimate the height and speed
of a strange object, it will usually be better to endeavour to
determine the angle of elevation of the object, the angle
through which it moved, and the time taken to do this.
...../2- 2 -
Report on Aerial Object Observed (Contd.)
19. Direction of flight with reference to landmarks or points of
the compass.
S.E. changing to N.E. Object appeared to be on an orbit.
.............................................
20. Did the object remain on a straight path, deviate or manoeuvre
at all.
See 19. Nipped in and out of cloud base and through lower
patches without apparent change of angle of attack.
.............................................
21. Was any trail of exhaust, vapour or light seen . See sketch....
.............................................
22. Where did object disappear, e.g. in mid-air, behind a hill,
over the horizon.
Into cloud going N.E.
.............................................
23. Existence of any physical evidence such as fragments, photo-
graphs, or other supporting evidence.
Nil.
.............................................
24. Weather conditions experienced at time(s) or observation(s)
8/8 at 1,800' - 2,000', lower patches. Haze beneath cloud base
after rain. W/V. S.E... 10 kts. vis. 7 miles QNH 1010.
.............................................
25. Location of any air traffic in the vicinity at the time of
sighting.
Convair at Templestowe about 1015 within 1 mile of observed
object...Not seen by observer.
.............................................
26. Location of any meteorological stations in the general area.
Essendon 10 miles approx.
.............................................
27. Any additional information See sketch. Approx size: If object
was actually at estimated range, the approx. size was 3-4 times
that of a DC4 fuselage. This estimate is based on the fact
that DC4 frequent this area when using localiser.
.............................................
Questions 25, 26 and 27 to be answered by interrogator.7c
Side Elevation
[SKETCH of object in side elevation]
No apparent
Rotation
Direction of flight. →
Colour : very light amber
Step effect
This tail
not so
definite
as
this portion
Colour : very light
amber
Apparently Banked (as seen at southernmost point of orbit)
[SKETCH of object apparently banked, elliptical shape]
Colour : shimmering blue
No appendage visible
possibly due to
dazzling effect or to
banking effect.
Sketch of Aerial Object Sighted by
Capt. B. Barker (ANA) 1 Jan 54CONFIDENTIAL
COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA
Tele.
M. 550
Telegraphic Address:
AIR BOARD, MELBOURNE
ADDRESS ALL COMMUNICATIONS TO
"THE SECRETARY"
IN REPLY PLEASE QUOTE
No. SEC.CD2/2 (54A)
[Stamp: RECEIVED 23 NOV 1953 T.C.H.Q.]
AIR BOARD,
AIR FORCE HEAD-QUARTERS,
VICTORIA BARRACKS,
MELBOURNE, S.C.1
16 NOV 1953
Headquarters, Home Command, R.A.A.F., PENRITH, N.S.W.
✓Headquarters, Training Command, R.A.A.F., ALBERT PARK, VICTORIA.
Headquarters, North-Eastern Area, R.A.A.F., TOWNSVILLE, Q'LAND.
Headquarters, Western Area, R.A.A.F., PEARCE, W.A.
Headquarters, North-Western Area, R.A.A.F., DARWIN, N.T.
(Attention STAFF OFFICERS INTELLIGENCE)
UNUSUAL SIGHTINGS
A pro-forma to be used for the purpose of standardising
reports of unusual sightings was forwarded under cover of my
SEC.CD2/2 (3A) of 17th January, 1951.
2. This pro-forma has now been revised with a view to
obtaining additional information. Future reporting should
be in accordance with this new pro-forma a copy of which is
attached.
3. Though it is a fact that an observer cannot judge the
distance from him of an unfamiliar object in the air, observers
in general seldom hesitate to give an estimated height and
speed when reporting unusual sightings. Items 16 and 17 on
the pro-forma have been specially annotated with a view to
overcoming these two weaknesses.
4. In almost every case the only attributes of position
and movement that can be measured are :-
(a) Bearing.
(b) Angle of elevation.
(c) Angle through which object moves.
(d) Angle between path of movement and horizon.
(e) Time taken for movement in (c).
and though observers will seldom think of actually measuring
these at the time of sighting an object, fairly accurate
estimates can often be deduced by skillful questioning and a
reconstruction of the incident.
5. The bearing of the object can be checked by reference
to a good map, to prominent local features, or to celestial
bodies.
.../2.
CONFIDENTIALCONFIDENTIAL
- 2 -
6. Angle of elevation can often be checked by asking the
observer to point out a cloud or other reference at the same
time estimating the elevation of the object under investigation.
The investigator should then measure the elevation of this. It
is unlikely that an accurate means of measuring angles will be
available but it should be remembered that if a foot rule be
held loosely at arms length and at right angles to the line of
vision each inch will subtend an angle of about two degrees at
the eye. Further simple means of measuring angles should also
be memorised.
7. Angular movement can be discussed and deduced in a
fashion similar to that used to determine elevation.
8. Direction of movement can also be translated to angles to
the horizon or some other datum.
9. Time taken for an event to happen is very hard to estimate
but it is important, and every effort should be made to estimate
lapsed time as accurately as possible. In doing this it may be
of help to time the observer while he re-enacts what he did and
said during some aspect of the incident.
10. These new instructions do not emanate from any renewed
interest in "Flying Saucers" or any new intelligence on the
subject, but are merely intended to improve the standard of
reporting.
[Signature]
R.A.G. Ells, Ug Cpr.
f* (J. ALEXANDER) Group Captain,
for CHIEF OF THE AIR STAFF.
Encl.
CONFIDENTIALREPORT ON AERIAL OBJECT OBSERVED
1. Name of Observer.......................................................................
2. Address of Observer.....................................................................
3. Occupation of Observer..................................................................
4. Date and Time of observation (Time given in 24 hour clock zonal time)
.................................................................................
5. Period of observation(s)................................................................
6. Manner of observation: (Give details of own position by map
reference if possible, or by known landmarks, and describe any
equipment used in the observation).
.................................................................................
.................................................................................
.................................................................................
7. Where was object first observed, e.g. overhead, coming from behind
a hill, over the horizon, etc.
.................................................................................
8. What first attracted observer's attention, e.g. light or noise.
.................................................................................
9. Did object appear as a light or as a definite object.
.................................................................................
10. If there was more than one object, how many were there, and what was
their formation.
.................................................................................
11. What was the colour of the light or object...............................
12. What was its apparent shape..........................................
.................................................................................
13. Was any detail of structure observable...............................
.................................................................................
14. Was any method of propulsion obvious.................................
15. Was there any sound..................................................
16. xx Height, or angle of elevation.....................................
17. xx Speed, or angular velocity.......................................
18. State any experience which enables observer to be reasonably certain
about the answers given to 16 and 17.
.................................................................................
xx Since it is normally impossible to estimate the height and speed of
a strange object it will usually be better to endeavour to determine
the angle of elevation of the object, the angle through which it
moved, and the time taken to do this.
-1--2-
Report on aerial object observed (contd.).
19. Direction of flight with reference to landmarks or points of the
compass.
.................................................................................
20. Did the object remain on a straight path, deviate or manoeuvre at
all.
.................................................................................
21. Was any trail of exhaust, vapour or light seen...............................
22. Where did object disappear, e.g. in mid-air, behind a hill, over
the horizon.
.................................................................................
23. Existence of any physical evidence such as fragments, photographs,
or other supporting evidence.
.................................................................................
24. Weather conditions experienced at time(s) or observation(s).........
.................................................................................
25. Location of any air traffic in the vicinity at the time of sighting.
.................................................................................
.................................................................................
26. Location of any meteorological stations in the general area.........
.................................................................................
27. Any additional information............................. ......................
.................................................................................
.................................................................................
.................................................................................
Questions 25, 26 and 27 to be answered by interrogator.5A
MXY 130
8/6/108 (5A) Headquarters Training Command
R.A.A.F.
Albert Park Barracks
2688 Melbourne S.C.3.
The Secretary,
Air Board. 27 OCT 1953
Victoria Barracks,
Melbourne S.C.1.,
Victoria
(Attention D.A.F.I.)
REPORT ON UNUSUAL LIGHT
1. Herewith report on the sighting of an unusual light
on 14 OCT '53.
[Signature]
(L.L. JOHNSTON)
Squadron Leader
For Air Officer Commanding
Encls.
[Stamp]
DESPATCHED
27 OCT 1953
FROM H.Q.T.C.REPORT OF AERIAL OBJECT OBSERVED
1. Name of observer . Capt. P.T.L. Taylor . . . . . . . . . .
2. Address of observer . . c/o A.N.A. Essendon . . . . . . . . . . .
3. Occupation of observer . Pilot/Executive A.N.A. . . . . . . . . .
4. Date and Time of observation . 14 OCT 1953 1910Z hrs. (150440JK Hrs)
5. Period of observation 1910Z-1912Z (2 mins. approx.)
6. Manner of Sighting . Visual Air to Air. Position 33.40S . .
135.40E. A/Speed 182 kts. True (G/S 170 kts.)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ; .
7. Where object observed . Level. 8000' . . . . . . . . . . .
8. Light or moving object Moving light
9. Colour . . . . . . . . . White . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
10. Shape and/or size . . . N/A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
11. Any details of structure . N/A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
12. Method of propulsion . Light was not jet eflux . . . . . . . .
13. Sound . . . . . . . . . N/A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
14. Height . . . . . . . . . 8000' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
15. Estimation of speed - [ILLEGIBLE]: Light moved from dead ahead to
. . . . . . . . . . . . . [ILLEGIBLE]: to port and was lost when
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . bearing approx. 90° to port
16. Experience of observer . 23 years flying experience
17. Direction of flight of object Uncertain (see 15) . . . . . . . .
18. Flight path: straight or deviating . Straight . . . . . . . . . . .
19. Exhaust, vapour or light . . . . . Not exhaust flame . . . .
20. Where did it disappear . Abaft port beam
21. Other supporting evidence . Other evidence may be obtained from
First Officer Wilson, A.N.A., Adelaide
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
22. Interception or identification action No action except to call
Aeradio and request details of other traffic in area
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
23. Weather conditions Cloud tops 7,500' Clear above. Visibility
unlimited. W/V 205/35/40 kts. (W/V doubtful T.A.S.182 G.S.170)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
24. Location of air traffic in vicinity Possibly T.A.A. aircraft in
vicinity at 8,000'.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
25. Location of Met. stations in area . N/A . . . . . . . . ...2/
26. Additional information Light was observed to pass between
observer and a cloud which was above the general tops at
7,500'.. A.N.A. practice with navigation lights is to use
them on flashing on climb and descent, and on steady on the
cruise.. .T.A.A. follow the same practice. . . . . . . .
27. . . Director of Aircraft Safety, D.C.A., held conference
of A.N.A. captain (Taylor) and T.A.A. captain and it was
established to satisfaction of all concerned that Captain
Taylor had sighted the tail light of the T.A.A. aircraft
flying at 7,500' when the tracks of the two aircraft . .
crossed in the vicinity of position 33°40'S 135°40'E . .
at approximately 1910Zhrs. 14 OCT 1953 . . . . . . . . .MXY.130.
10/1/68(1A)
Headquarters Southern Area,
R.A.A.F.,
Albert Park Barracks,
MELBOURNE.
13 MAY 1952
CONFIDENTIAL
CONFIDENTIAL:
Secretary,
AIR BOARD. (D.A.F.I. Attention Sqn.Ldr. HALE.)
ABNORMAL AERIAL PHENOMENA.
Submitted herewith are details of aerial
phenomena phoned to Headquarters Southern Area, by Southern
Command Intelligence Officer.
2. Sighted :- By Mr. H.KNOX.
" At 0545 3rd May 1952, in KEW North Balwyn
a bullet nosed object travelling at high
speed and leaving vapour trail.
- Colour :- Like a white hot metal.
Speed :- Faster than anything seen before.
Height :- Approximately 5,000 feet.
Size :- Approximately same length of
"Flying Fortress" but much wider.
Direction:- From Melbourne to Kew.
Visibility:- About half light and cloudy
with a slight break of about
five miles of clear sky.
DESPATCHED
13 MAY 1952
FROM H.S.S.A.
(H. F. MOORE),
Squadron Leader,
for, AIR OFFICER COMMANDING.CONFIDENTIAL
From:- R.A.A.F. Station East Sale
To:- Headquarters Southern Area
Date:- [ILLEGIBLE] (Attention Area Security Officer)
Ref:- 5/1/AIR (83A)
S.614.
REPORT ON UNUSUAL LIGHT
1. The Captain of Dakota aircraft A65-95 reported
that whilst returning from a night flying exercise on the
night of 7th February 1951, observed at 2330 hours an
unusually brilliant light estimated to be on a bearing of
050°(T) from East Sale airfield and on the coast line.
2. The pilot, Flight Lieutenant A.E. McKenzie, is
of the opinion that the light was a flare on the ground,
or at a very low altitude. It burned for approximately
2½ minutes and after the actual light had disappeared from
view, a strong glow persisted for some time.
3. A reliable N.C.O. on tarmac duty on the night in
question also reported an unusual glow in the same area.
4. This matter is referred to Area Security Officer
for any action he considers necessary.
[ILLEGIBLE] Wing Commander
Temp/Commanding
No further action R.A.A.F. Station East Sale
advise [ILLEGIBLE]
RECEIVED
FEB 2 2 1951
5/C 1158COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA. CONFIDENTIAL.
AIR BOARD
Air Force Head-Quarters,
In reply please quote: Victoria Barracks,
MELBOURNE S.C.1.
SEC. CD2/2 (3A) 16 January, 1951.
Headquarters, Southern Area, R.A.A.F. ALBERT PARK BARRACKS. VIC.
Headquarters, Eastern Area, R.A.A.F. PENRITH N.S.W.
Headquarters, North Eastern Area, R.A.A.F., TOWNSVILLE Q'LD.
Headquarters, North Western Area, R.A.A.F., DARWIN N.T.
Headquarters, Western Area, R.A.A.F. PEARCE W.A.
(Attention STAFF OFFICERS INTELLIGENCE.)
UNUSUAL SIGHTINGS.
A number of reports have been made by
Areas regarding unusual sightings, which have been
brought to the notice of various authorities.
2. In order to standardise the reports made
about these occurrences, the attached pro-forma has
been drafted.
3. While it is not believed that any easy
explanation can be given for these unusual sightings,
the systematic collection of standard reports may
produce a pattern of information which will lead to
fairly accurate conclusions.
4. It would be appreciated therefore, if
all reports of unusual sightings made in your Area could
be followed up, with a view to having the attached pro-
forma completed and returned to this Head-Quarters.
5. It would obviously be unwise to draw any
publicity toward Service interest in these reports, and
persons making the reports should be asked to treat
Service interest as Confidential.
[ILLEGIBLE signature]
(J. ALEXANDER) Gp.Capt., D.A.F.I.,
for Air Commodore, Ops.,
for CHIEF OF THE AIR STAFF.
8/6/18
[ILLEGIBLE signature]
[ILLEGIBLE]
[RECEIVED stamp - ILLEGIBLE]REPORT OF AERIAL OBJECT OBSERVED
1. Name of observer ............................................
2. Address of observer ............................................
3. Date and Time of observation .................................
4. Where was object first observed e.g. overhead, coming from
behind a hill, over the horizon, etc. .........................
................................................................
................................................................
5. Did the object appear as a light or as a moving object .........
................................................................
6. What was the colour of the light or object ...................
.................................................................
7. What was its apparent shape ..................................
8. Was any detail of structure observable .......................
9. Estimation of height above the ground .......................
10. Estimation of speed - Maximum: ...............................
Minimum: ...............................
11. Have you any experience which enables you to be reasonably
certain about the answers given to 9. and 10. .................
12. Direction of flight with reference to landmarks or points of the
compass........................................................
13. Did object remain on a straight path or deviate at all.........
................................................................
14. Was any trail of vapour or light seen ........................
15. Where did object disappear, e.g., in mid-air, behind a hill, over
the horizon....................................................
................................................................
16. Any other remarks:............................................
................................................................
................................................................
................................................................
................................................................
................................................................
................................................................
................................................................
................................................................R.A.A.F Form A149 (March, 1944)
ROYAL AUSTRALIAN AIR FORCE
POSTAGRAM P.G. No. 1 1065
File No. 8/6/[ILLEGIBLE]
Date: [ILLEGIBLE]
FROM: HEADQUARTERS SOUTHERN AREA.
TO: RAAF.HEAD-QUARTERS.
1. Unclassified. Reference teletalk S.A.S.O. and D.OPS. 16th
August 1950, re reported flares and lights PORT ALBERT Area.
2. Night 7th August 3 Ansons on navigation exercise EAST SALE
PORT ALBERT MIRBOO NORTH EAST SALE from 1739K to 1930K hours
searched PORT ALBERT Area. Fire sighted burning on large island
off MANN'S BEACH 5 miles East of PORT ALBERT. Fire on 100 yard
front on North shore of Island. Reddish colour. Believed to be
small scrub fire. D-24 informed at time.
3. Night 8th August Anson on navigation exercise EAST SALE
WILSONS PROMONTORY CAPE SCHANK EAST SALE from 1750K to 2008K
hours searched area. Nil sightings. Landing light turned on
vicinity PORT ALBERT but due to faulty switch could not be switched
off and remained on throughout exercise.
4. Night 9th August Anson on navigation exercise EAST SALE
PORT ALBERT MIRBOO NORTH EAST SALE from 1745K to 1915K hours.
Nil sightings. No pyrotechnics released from EAST SALE aircraft
this month.
SOF 8/6/108
(R.B. BURRAGE)W/Cdr. S.A.S.O. This message is:-
TOP SECRET
SECRET
CONFIDENTIAL
RESTRICTED
Signature of Originator, Rank and Appointment Strike out those classifications
not applicable. Date, Time, GroupMXY.130.
8/6/108.
Headquarters Southern Area,
R.A.A.F.,
Albert Park Barracks,
MELBOURNE.
24 AUG 1950
CONFIDENTIAL:
Secretary,
AIR BOARD. (D.A.F.I.)
6006
REPORT ON UNUSUAL ACTIVITY.
1. Enclosed herewith is a copy of a letter
received from R.A.A.F. Station, EAST SALE, regarding unusual
light flashes observed on LAKE WELLINGTON.
[ILLEGIBLE signature]
(R.B. BURRAGE),
Wing Commander,
for, Air Officer Commanding,
SOUTHERN AREA. R.A.A.F.
[ILLEGIBLE]
ENCL:CONFIDENTIAL
FROM : R.A.A.F. Station, EAST SALE.
TO : Headquarters, Southern Area, Albert Park Barracks.
DATE : 15th. August, 1950.
REF. : 5/1/air CONFIDENTIAL S.542
REPORT ON UNUSUAL ACTIVITY
1. During his tour of duty on 14th. August 1950 the
Orderly Officer received a telephone call from Mr. Jeffrey HAHN,
of PERRY BRIDGE, regarding some light flashes he and his son
sighted and which were allegedly flashing from PERRY BRIDGE,
which is on LAKE WELLINGTON.
2. Mr. HAHN states that he timed the flashes and is
adamant in stating that:
4 flashes were given at 18-second intervals
4 " " " " 28-second "
4 " " " " 36-second "
3. He further states that the flashes commenced at
about 1945 hours.
4. One hour later it is alleged that the flashes
were at 136-second intervals. Mr. HAHN finally states that
during the intervening hour he was inside his home and could
not say whether or not the flashes continued.
[ILLEGIBLE signature] G/Capt.
(A.D. CHARLTON) RECEIVED
Commanding, JC 17 1950
R.A.A.F. STATION, EAST SALE.
5/C 1158ROYAL
AUSTRALIAN CONFIDENTIAL
AIR FORCE
Date Created 21.6.50 HEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT
TRAINING COMMAND 6 T AIR
Originator Part Number 1
Cross References Inside
Cover
TITLE
80/3/105
REPORTS ON UNUSUAL ACTIVITY AND AERIAL PHENOMENA
Referred to for Minute or Date Initials Referred to for Minute or Date Initials Referred to for Minute or Date Initials
action/information enclosure action/information enclosure action/information enclosure
FATO 1A [ILLEGIBLE] [ILLEGIBLE]
NHVO 3A [ILLEGIBLE] [ILLEGIBLE]
[ILLEGIBLE] [ILLEGIBLE] [ILLEGIBLE]
D/A 6A 23/11
[ILLEGIBLE] V5A [ILLEGIBLE]
D.INTL D4[ILLEGIBLE]A 57/[ILLEGIBLE] [ILLEGIBLE]
D. INTELL SUA 15/4 [ILLEGIBLE]
So INTELL SUA 24/4[ILLEGIBLE] [ILLEGIBLE] WOO
ENCL 1&3 6&A 11/0 1
DEEP 6&A [ILLEGIBLE]
DESPATCH 6&A 15/14 [ILLEGIBLE]
DESSPATCH 6/A [ILLEGIBLE]/1 [ILLEGIBLE]
70[ILLEGIBLE] 6[ILLEGIBLE] [ILLEGIBLE]
INTEL D [ILLEGIBLE] [ILLEGIBLE]
DESPATCH 7/A 17[ILLEGIBLE] [ILLEGIBLE]
D. INTELL 20 1[ILLEGIBLE] [ILLEGIBLE]
INTELL 11A [ILLEGIBLE] [ILLEGIBLE]
[Large handwritten notation:] [ILLEGIBLE] 30/57
CONFIDENTIAL[File Number column] [Title column]
...../...../..... ................................................................
...../...../..... ................................................................
...../...../..... ................................................................
...../...../..... ................................................................
...../...../..... ................................................................
...../...../..... ................................................................
...../...../..... ................................................................
...../...../..... ................................................................
...../...../..... ................................................................
...../...../..... ................................................................
Cross References to be Made AboveDIGITS[ILLEGIBLE]
CONFIDENTIAL [ILLEGIBLE]ISTER
INSTRUCTIONS OPEN
08-01-0[ILLEGIBLE]
1. Opening of Files.—Requests for new files are to be made to the Central Registry or to the unit
correspondence clerk, as applicable, who will be responsible for—
(a) advising if a file is in existence dealing with the subject aspect.
(b) advising if the proposed file title conflicts with that of an existing file.
(c) inserting on the new file cover all cross-references to related files, and
(d) completing all details on the front cover, including the initial charging to the appoint-
ment making the request.
2. Size of Files.—Care must be taken to see that files do not become too bulky; however, the
guiding principle to be observed for opening a new part to a file is the necessity for preserving
the original enclosures.
3. New Covers.—When a new cover is placed on a file the front of the old cover is to be placed in
the file as Enclosure 1A (1).
4. Attachment of Papers.—Papers are to be attached to the file cover by means of appropriately
sized paper fasteners. Washers must be used. Minute sheets are to be attached to the [ILLEGIBLE]
side, enclosures to the right. The file number will be placed on both.
5. Enclosures.—Correspondence to or from an outside body, loose minutes or any written matter
too lengthy to be written on the minute sheet, will appear as an enclosure. Enclosures are to be
numbered consecutively and, if consisting of only one document, the minute will be followed by
the letter "A". Where two or more letters form one enclosure, they shall all bear the same number
followed consecutively by the letter "A", "B", "C", etc.
6. Minutes.—Minutes, other than [ILLEGIBLE] minutes, will be typed or written on the minute [ILLEGIBLE]
numbered consecutively. A minute should be brief and concise and is normally used to [ILLEGIBLE]
enclosure for information or decision. Both sides of the minute sheet are to be used.
7. Addressing of Minutes.—Authorised short titles are used to indicate the addressee, who is
invariably to initial the address. These initials only signify that the person concerned has seen
the minute. If it is desired to express concurrence, the words "agree" or "concur" must be added
to the initials.
8. Addressing of Files.—A file is charged to an addressee by:—
(a) Placing the authorised short title of the addressee in column 1, front cover.
(b) Placing the number of the referred minute or enclosure in column 2.
(If a minute, the number only—if an enclosure, the number and letter.)
(c) Placing the date the file is passed out in column 3.
9. Movement of Files.—Files normally are passed through Registry where the movement is re-
corded. When files are passed by hand, a direct transit slip (Form A.58) is to be used.
10. B.F. (Bring Forward) and P.A. (Put Away).—Files must not be retained when current work
has been completed. The file should be returned to the originator (as indicated on the cover) who
will P.A. the file if it is not currently required. This action is taken by inserting in column 1 the
letters "P.A." and completing columns 3 and 4. THE LETTERS "P.A." DO NOT IMPLY ANY
FINALITY. They are an instruction to Registry to retain the file until further required. If it is
known that the file will be required on a certain date, the letters "B.F." will be inserted instead of
"P.A." If a file has been "P.A." for a long period, it is preferable to open a new part if the new
action bears no relation to the old action beyond the similarity of the subject.
11. Care of Files.—File covers or their contents, when damaged or torn, must be repaired by the
Registry before passing the file out. The front cover of the old file cover must not be destroyed.
(See paragraph 3.)
12. Classified Files.—The provisions of A.A.P. 103 are to be observed when handling classified files.
13. For complete instructions, see A.A.P. 103 (R.A.A.F. Manual of Administration), Chapter
VIII.
CONFIDENTIAL