DISCLOSURE / FILE
Chapter 3 of Project Condign's Volume 1, presenting DI55's statistical analysis of clustered UAP sightings in the UK Air Defence Region across 1987-89 and 1996.
Chapter 3 of Project Condign's Volume 1, presenting DI55's statistical analysis of clustered UAP sightings in the UK Air Defence Region across 1987-89 and 1996.
This is the statistical-analysis chapter of the four-year DI55 study, drawing on the UAP ACCESS database to examine date-clustered events, geography, duration, and correlation with weather, solar activity, and meteor showers. The chapter inventories specific multi-witness clusters (8 events around London on 17 January 1988, 12 events on 18 June 1988, 13 events on 20 December 1988, 14 events on 18 August 1996, 12 events over Scotland on 1 May 1996), reconstructs ground tracks, and computes velocities that 'rule out any wind-borne motion.' DI55 concludes the objects are most likely propelled by 'electrical or magnetic attractive or repulsive fields' and may be 'not solid objects' with 'little or no mass,' while explicitly excluding extra-terrestrial speculation: 'All analysis is made on cold facts.' The chapter notes 1996 coincided with a year of high meteor activity and that several long-duration sightings (over an hour) 'are probably planets.'
Prejudice will take you further from the truth than ignorancep.2
Speculation as to extra-terrestrial causes is not entered into. All analysis is made on cold facts.p.4
From the written descriptive evidence there appeared to be the possibility, excluding those events that could be attributed to a known cause, that UAP, despite often appearing to be so, are not solid objects.p.4
This, together with other evidence from the reports leads to the supposition that the objects might have little or no mass.p.4
It is noted that the field forces generated on-board a vehicle would have to be significantly high (~ 10⁹ Ampere Turns), but unpredictable because of the variation of the earth's own field.p.4
From experience those events which last for more than an hour are probably planets.p.11
Extracted text · Page 1
Page 1 · vision OCR
SECRET
UK RESTRICTED
UK EYES ONLY
UNCLASSIFIED
CHAPTER 3
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF THE UAP DATABASE
Para Page
INTRODUCTION 1 2
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS - LIMITATIONS 3 3
GENERAL DEDUCTIONS FROM REPORTS 6 4
DATE-CLUSTERED EVENTS 9 5
ANALYSIS 1988/89 10 5
ANALYSIS 1996 22 9
Peak Numbers of UAP 23 9
UAP EVENTS BY MAIN UK REGIONS 28 11
GEOGRAPHICAL LOCATION ANALYSIS 29 12
Events Several Times from Same Location 34 14
NUMBERS OF OBJECTS PRESENT PER EVENT 36 15
UAP COLOUR ANALYSIS 37 15
Visual Beam Emanations from UAP 39 15
UAP SOUND & SMELL ANALYSIS 42 17
UAP SHAPE ANALYSIS 43 17
UAP MOTION ANALYSIS 44 17
CORRELATION STUDIES
With Time of Day 46 18
With Month of Year 49 20
With Weather 50 21
With Solar Activity 51 21
With Meteor Activity 53 22
RESULT OF METEOR INVESTIGATION 65 26
HUMAN FACTORS 66 26
WITNESS GENDER & AGE 67 27
WITNESS LOCATION 68 27
STATISTICAL CONCLUSIONS 69 27
1
UNCLASSIFIED
UK EYES ONLY
UK RESTRICTED
SECRETPage 2 · vision OCR
SECRET
UNCLASSIFIED
UK RESTRICTED
UK EYES ONLY
CHAPTER 3
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF THE UAP DATABASE
"Prejudice will take you further from the truth than ignorance"
Bang Weng Gwang. Chinese Journal of UFO Research
INTRODUCTION
1. The attributes described at Chapter 2 and at Volume 2 in more detail were
structured into database tables, in the UAP ACCESS format which is described at
Annex D. Some of the possibilities for statistical analysis are shown at Annex E. The
principle analysis categories, considered significant are:
(a) The overall annual monthly and daily frequency of UAP sightings.
(b) The overall frequency of UAP sightings of particular types in particular
geographical locations, and from specific platforms e.g. from the air, ground,
sea (or over the sea from land), Events with and without sound, with more than
one 'light' or 'beam' and especially those described at close range.
(c) The possible correlation of sightings with specific weather patterns,
solar/geomagnetic conditions, local geo-magnetic phenomena, earthquake or
tremor events, and weather (electrical storms).
(d) Correlation with other known positions or routes of expected aerial
platforms (e.g. proximity to low flying areas or routes, air lanes, airports,
military airfields and exercise areas, balloon-launching sites, displays etc). The
possibility of obtaining meaningful correlation is influenced by other events
which raise public awareness and can lead to gross distortions of the facts.
The most obvious candidates are:
- Media hype, which waxes and wanes and may re-occur at any
time, given an approximate 'trigger'. Examples are 'Close
Encounter' type films. 'X' Files, 'UFO' revelations on TV, and
the periodic re-awakening of the 'Roswell' or 'Bentwater'
incidents in peoples minds.
- Publication of new books on the topic- of which there were no
less than 30 in 1997/8!
- Reports of unexpected or unexplained extreme effects on humans
(eg 'abductions').
2
UNCLASSIFIED
UK EYES ONLY
UK RESTRICTED
SECRETPage 21 · vision OCR
below, were obtained. Table 3-4 shows the distribution of days per year with no reports. 50. With Weather. Weather statistics for the whole of the UK have been briefly analysed against UAP sightings, with the specific intention of searching for correlation between atmospheric conditions and days on which UAP events occurred. The information available from 23 weather stations included temperature, precipitation, sunshine, fog, snow, thunder, frost, dew point and pressure. Although the work involved to make a complete analysis (and the possibility of identifying conditions for the formation and sustaining of a UAP) is beyond the scope of this study, an initial analysis was made of the most obvious factor - that of the potential of enhanced electrical conditions in the atmosphere. A correlation was therefore sought between the incidence of thunder recorded in the weather statistics (and dependent on lightning) and UAP events. As these could not be done locally for every event, they were normalised as the numbers of days per month of thunder against UAP report frequency. Conversely, an analysis was made of days when UAP events occurred when there was no thunder. The results are plotted at Figures 3-13 and 3-14 for the years 1988 and 1996. They show that UAP can occur when there is no thunder (lightning), for example, in November 1988. December similarly shows a large number of UAP with a very low, negligible thunder rate. However, for the overall year the correlation co-efficient was -0.43 which shows that very small values of one set of data are connected with large values of the other set. When this was repeated for 1996, which was a year with more sightings and a preferable statistical situation, the correlation was positive (+0.62) showing correlation between thundery days and UAP reports. Finally, the sequence was repeated for 1988 for days of thunder against days when no UAP reports were received. This showed only a very weakly positive (0.19) correlation, meaning that the large values in one set are associated with the large values in the other set. In basic terms this shows that a large number of days can occur with no UAP even though it is thundery. The conditions for lightning occurred on those days but ball/bead lightning was not formed - or at least was not reported! In summary it seems likely therefore that while a number of UAP reports are a result of misreported ball lightning (which is a rare phenomenon for most of the population), there are many occasions when UAP reports are received when there is no recorded thunder conditions and hence no enhanced electrical activity in the form of lightning. On these occasions (other man-made objects excepted) UAP must be caused by something else. 51. With Solar Activity Because solar activity affects the earths atmosphere and electromagnetic propagation conditions it was investigated to ascertain whether the frequency of UAP reports could be correlated to solar flux, sunspot number or geomagnetic conditions. Some example plots are shown at Figures 3-15(a) and (b). It was postulated that some events, possibly many, might be plasmas' with their associated electrical fields, (and charged particles), so an examination was made of the UK daily Sun-Spot Numbers (SSN) and the geomagnetic flux (FLUX), compared with the daily number of UAP events. For convenience of the presentations of results,
Concatenated 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.
SECRET
UK RESTRICTED
UK EYES ONLY
UNCLASSIFIED
CHAPTER 3
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF THE UAP DATABASE
Para Page
INTRODUCTION 1 2
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS - LIMITATIONS 3 3
GENERAL DEDUCTIONS FROM REPORTS 6 4
DATE-CLUSTERED EVENTS 9 5
ANALYSIS 1988/89 10 5
ANALYSIS 1996 22 9
Peak Numbers of UAP 23 9
UAP EVENTS BY MAIN UK REGIONS 28 11
GEOGRAPHICAL LOCATION ANALYSIS 29 12
Events Several Times from Same Location 34 14
NUMBERS OF OBJECTS PRESENT PER EVENT 36 15
UAP COLOUR ANALYSIS 37 15
Visual Beam Emanations from UAP 39 15
UAP SOUND & SMELL ANALYSIS 42 17
UAP SHAPE ANALYSIS 43 17
UAP MOTION ANALYSIS 44 17
CORRELATION STUDIES
With Time of Day 46 18
With Month of Year 49 20
With Weather 50 21
With Solar Activity 51 21
With Meteor Activity 53 22
RESULT OF METEOR INVESTIGATION 65 26
HUMAN FACTORS 66 26
WITNESS GENDER & AGE 67 27
WITNESS LOCATION 68 27
STATISTICAL CONCLUSIONS 69 27
1
UNCLASSIFIED
UK EYES ONLY
UK RESTRICTED
SECRETSECRET
UNCLASSIFIED
UK RESTRICTED
UK EYES ONLY
CHAPTER 3
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF THE UAP DATABASE
"Prejudice will take you further from the truth than ignorance"
Bang Weng Gwang. Chinese Journal of UFO Research
INTRODUCTION
1. The attributes described at Chapter 2 and at Volume 2 in more detail were
structured into database tables, in the UAP ACCESS format which is described at
Annex D. Some of the possibilities for statistical analysis are shown at Annex E. The
principle analysis categories, considered significant are:
(a) The overall annual monthly and daily frequency of UAP sightings.
(b) The overall frequency of UAP sightings of particular types in particular
geographical locations, and from specific platforms e.g. from the air, ground,
sea (or over the sea from land), Events with and without sound, with more than
one 'light' or 'beam' and especially those described at close range.
(c) The possible correlation of sightings with specific weather patterns,
solar/geomagnetic conditions, local geo-magnetic phenomena, earthquake or
tremor events, and weather (electrical storms).
(d) Correlation with other known positions or routes of expected aerial
platforms (e.g. proximity to low flying areas or routes, air lanes, airports,
military airfields and exercise areas, balloon-launching sites, displays etc). The
possibility of obtaining meaningful correlation is influenced by other events
which raise public awareness and can lead to gross distortions of the facts.
The most obvious candidates are:
- Media hype, which waxes and wanes and may re-occur at any
time, given an approximate 'trigger'. Examples are 'Close
Encounter' type films. 'X' Files, 'UFO' revelations on TV, and
the periodic re-awakening of the 'Roswell' or 'Bentwater'
incidents in peoples minds.
- Publication of new books on the topic- of which there were no
less than 30 in 1997/8!
- Reports of unexpected or unexplained extreme effects on humans
(eg 'abductions').
2
UNCLASSIFIED
UK EYES ONLY
UK RESTRICTED
SECRETSECRET
UK RESTRICTED
UK EYES ONLY
UNCLASSIFIED
- An identification of those sighting events which have resulted
in specific human reactions, including health aspects.
2. Clearly a full statistical examination embracing all possibilities is a major task and
beyond the study TORs. However, some of the material to carry out correlations is
readily available. Hence, some researched analysis was made, taking into account the
possibility that a higher confidence of explanations of UAP events might enable the
department to dispense with the task of monitoring UAP events in the future. This
proved to be the case when all of the results were finally considered. It is emphasised
however that those conclusions drawn can only be as good as the reported data.
Further, many credible researchers have unsuccessfully attempted to find the cause of
'UFOs' in the past. If a positive UAP link and credible explanation could be found
with some natural physical conditions this could end the 'UFO' controversy.
However, any such result within the study could only come about as a by-product of
the basic investigation to determine the value, or otherwise, to Defence Intelligence.
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS -LIMITATIONS
3. Statistics deals with uncertainty. The UAP problem cannot be analysed as one
would wish because:
- Some aspects of data are missing from every event, due to the limitations of
the MOD reporting form, the elapsed time, the inevitable variability of the
quality of the witnesses (as surprised observers of an unfamiliar event) and the
incomplete nature of the reports.
- The natural (meteorological) conditions at the time are only barely known.
For example, nothing is known of the pressure, temperature or humidity all of
which significantly affect both visual and radar detection.
- It is difficult, if not impossible, to make scientific statements about
phenomena which are not fully understood. However it is possible, with
scientific knowledge and other data, to eliminate the majority of UAP sightings
by correlation with known natural phenomena or manned vehicle activity (or
satellites), or man-made artefacts.
4. It is possible, for example, to identify patterns of attributes which are repeated.
Brief cross-references with other sources have shown that the reported UK UAP
characteristics are remarkably similar to those noted from open sources world-wide.
Location and population distribution might be expected to affect the frequency of
reporting but the significance must not be distorted by the fact that more reports,
although confirmatory, are not necessarily more authoritative in nature.
3
UNCLASSIFIED
UK EYES ONLY
UK RESTRICTED
SECRETSECRET
UK RESTRICTED
UK EYES ONLY
UNCLASSIFIED
5. No attempt can be made to consider specific human mental conditions which may
have given rise to a UAP report; although attention is drawn to the psychological and
temporal lobe effects UAP sightings have on some witnesses, described at Working
Papers Nos 1, 2 and 10. Speculation as to extra-terrestrial causes is not entered into. All
analysis is made on cold facts.
GENERAL DEDUCTIONS FROM REPORTS
6. For those objects which are not recognisable and therefore unexplained, given a
shape, often without range and very rarely with imagery, the immediate deductions must
be based on:
- Shape - likelihood of accuracy of description
- Ratio of lengths/widths/heights
- Angles subtended by the object (if reported)
- Colours
7. Although some measure of size is obtainable from angle subtended, mass is
never obtainable. The method of motion of UAPs is not obvious and there is much
inconsistency in the reporting, due to a variety of mainly human factors. A brief
examination of the options, in the absence of sound (thrust), is that the UAP must move
by some sort of field-reaction. Intuitively one might propose that this might be with the
earths field or the lectrical and magnetic fields present continuously in the atmosphere.
Unless there are undiscovered force fields, magnetic/electrical propulsion seems to be
the only option. It is noted that the field forces generated on-board a vehicle would have
to be significantly high (~ 10⁹ Ampere Turns), but unpredictable because of the
variation of the earth's own field.
8. From the written descriptive evidence there appeared to be the possibility,
excluding those events that could be attributed to a known cause, that UAP, despite
often appearing to be so, are not solid objects. Also, conventional science suggests that
the energy required to support a solid object would be excessive (within our earthbound
understanding of the problem). This, together with other evidence from the reports
leads to the supposition that the objects might have little or no mass. One might further
surmise that if the object had little or neglible mass, it could be buoyant or semi-buoyant
and, importantly, that if it had electrical charge or magnetic properties it might be
propelled by interaction with other charges present on the surface or in the atmospheric.
Because of the absence of actual UAP field measurements the potential of these
possibilities have been examined using the available theory.
4
UNCLASSIFIED
UK EYES ONLY
UK RESTRICTED
SECRETSSECRET UK RESTRICTED UK EYES ONLY UNCLASSIFIED DATE-CLUSTERED EVENTS 9. Although it is recognised that a well-described single sighting can provide valuable information, an attempt was made to identify firstly months and then days where an unusual number of events were reported. This was done on the assumption that if a large number were reported on the same day there may be some correlation between them, either geographically, in physical description, in motion, or in other attributes described in the individual reports. Further, there might be conducive atmospheric conditions (e.g. weather conditions) for UAP formation which might be identifiable. There was also the possibility that such an approach may expose a means of calculating the velocity of an object (assuming the multiple reports were from the same object and had different times and geographical witness locations). However, the possibility of more than one such object seen over the same time bracket cannot be ruled out, as reports are sometimes received of objects breaking into several parts, or of several merging into one. As an initial approach, clustered events were examined for two sample one year periods, separated by a suitable period so as to make them independent (for example) of the same sunspot cycle, of potential environmental changes and of public perceptions due to immediate media effects. For the purposes of the analysis it was necessary to use the data entered to-date (1987- 1990 and 1995-1997). During the analysis durations are the period of time the observer (or more than one observer at the same spot) watched the object before it either disappeared suddenly or moved away at low or high speed. Hence, widely dispersed reports are not likely to relate to the same object, unless there is a time- difference which is longer than the expected life of the object and a velocity could be reached which would allow the transit between locations to occur. This is more likely to be possible at higher altitudes. Both event duration and apparent velocity are important parameters. A Volume 2 Working Paper has details of possible upper plasma speeds (e.g. 15km per second) and their duration. The statistical spread of UAP duration is considered below. ANALYSIS 1987/89 10. Figure 3-3 summarises the days when three or more events were reported on the same day. Of these, seven days saw three or more reports during 1987 (of 121 reports in the year). Of the 366 reported events in 1988 there were 42 days when the number of events exceeded three per day, while 1989, which recorded an overall total of 226 events, had 16 occasions with three or more reports of UAP on a single day. Plots showing typical UAP activity with the time of day, month and year are at Figures 3-10, 3-11 and 3-12. 11. Specifically, it seemed important to determine that if large numbers of events occurred on consecutive days, this may indicate, exceptionally, that, the same objects were seen in more than one geographical area as well as into the next day's reports. This is assuming that the UAP(s) reported were due to highly charged masses which 5 UNCLASSIFIED UK EYES ONLY UK RESTRICTED SECRET
SECRET
UK RESTRICTED
UK EYES ONLY
UNCLASSIFIED
had not dissipated as quickly as some others reported and may have persisted overnight.
12. In 1988, the most important daily UAP event dates were:
1988 Jan 17 8 Events
Feb 12 6 Events
Feb 17 7 Events
Jun 18 12 Events
Nov 14 7 Events
Dec 20 13 Events
1989 Nov 16 7 Events
13. Jan 17 1988. All eight events were reported over 30 minute period (1700 -
1730 hrs) starting North of London and moving into Surrey. It seems likely that these
were all from the same object.
14. Feb 12 1988. The six events on this day were spread in time from approx
1900 to 2200 hours. The earliest was in Northants, then again in Northants 90 mins
later. However, an overlap of time occurred (i.e. an object was still being watched in
Northants when a UAP was reported in Farnham, Surrey, hence these were clearly
separate objects. Another was seen at Ellesmere Port at the same time as another at
the Isle of Wight. Hence, there is nothing to be gained in analysing data from this set,
from the correlation viewpoint or from attempting to extract a velocity profile. It
clearly shows that more than one object is active at the same time at diverse locations
within the UKADR. This suggests that, if there is a strong likelihood of many UAP
sightings being due to plasmas ( such a postulation could only be made after
positively eliminating mis-reports of other causes) then it also seems likely that
conditions can be favourable to form or sustain plasmas in different locations at the
same time.
15. Feb 17 1988. The seven sightings on this date commenced at 0515hrs and
ended at 1245. The 0515 sighting in Yorkshire was followed an hour later by another
Yorkshire report, respectively Barnsley and Huddersfield. It seems likely that these
were the same object. Nothing was reported during daylight until 1600 hrs in
Northants, then later at 2030hrs in London and 2145 hrs in Oxford. But reports at
2130 from Birmingham and Barrow-in Furness were clearly unconnected with the
southerly result, as their report times overlapped. It is, of course, possible that the
early morning Barnsley and Huddersfield ones were connected and that, with the large
6
UNCLASSIFIED
UK EYES ONLY
UK RESTRICTED
SECRETSSECRET
UK RESTRICTED
UK EYES ONLY
UNCLASSIFIED
time elapsed, the latter sightings were also connected apart from those with time
coincidence in widely different parts of the country.
16. June 18 1988. No less than 12 events were reported on this day. All were in
Essex and the London suburbs, Surrey, and Herts. In general, around the periphery of
GREATER LONDON. Although one report was at 17 30 hrs, all the rest were
between 2015 and 2115. These seem to be connected/correlated both in time
sequence and location:
20.15 hrs Hayes Middlesex
20.20 hrs London(NFI)
20.25 hrs Godalming (Surrey)
21.00 hrs Rochford (Essex)
21.07 hrs Danbury (Essex)
21.10 hrs Hemel Hempstead (Herts)
21.10 hrs Norwood (Middlesex)
21.12 hrs Highgate Hill (Middlesex)
21.15 hrs Brentwood (Essex)
21.15 hrs Danbury (Essex)
21.15 hrs Brentwood (Essex)
17. A track of these events is at Figure 3-1, from which several options can be
derived. This cluster could either be connected or comprise separate events. The
earliest event, which appeared to move along a track from Hayes to Godalming
covered about 19nm in ten minutes. This represents a mean ground velocity of about
116kts (just less than 60 metres per second). This object may have slowed and even
reversed its track so as to form the series of reports either which commenced at
Rochford at 2100hrs, and travelled NW to Danbury by 2107, or that at Hemel
Hempstead, which apparently, from 2110, commenced the NSE sequence Hemel
Hempstead-Highgate-Brentwood-Danbury. If it is assumed that this was a straight leg
which was close enough to be reported by witnesses at Highgate and Brentwood, as it
progressed, the distance of 39nm(72km) was covered at a ground speed of about
465kts (240 metres per second). It is, of course, possible that the object at Godalming
at 2025hrs changed direction and moved towards Southend and formed the Rochford
sighting at 2100hrs, but was unreported for 35mins. The reader is reminded that the
7
UNCLASSIFIED
UK EYES ONLY
UK RESTRICTED
SECRETSECRET
UK RESTRICTED
UK EYES ONLY
UNCLASSIFIED
calculated velocities rule out any wind-borne motion and re-enforce the postulation
elsewhere in the report that these objects are most probably moving under the
influence of electrical or magnetic attractive or repulsive fields.
18. Nov 14 1988. Seven events occurred. Coincidental reports at 00.45 hrs were
received from the diverse locations of:
Washington, Tyne and Wear,
Leavesden, Herts
At 0050 Boroughbridge, Yorkshire, then 05.15 from Southend and two
reports at 06.15 from Sheffield.
The remaining report was not until 1700 hrs from Nantwich.
The implication is that these were probably independent UAP events.
19. Dec 20 1988. Of 13 events the longest, was viewed for ~ 15 minutes and the
shortest for ~ 15 seconds. In time sequence they commenced at 1115 hrs (two reports
in Co. Durham). The rest were all in the evening:
20.05 hrs Birdlip (Glouc)
23.30 hrs RAF Leeming (N. Yorks)
23.30 hrs Dewchurch
23.45 hrs RAF Leeming (N. Yorks)
23.50 hrs Richmond (N. Yorks)
23.50 hrs Richmond (N. Yorks)
23.50 hrs Scotch Corner
23.50 hrs Scotch Corner
23.55 hrs Cheltenham (Glouc)
23.55 hrs Richmond (N. Yorks)
23.58 hrs Harrogate (Yorks)
20. A ground track plot of the northernmost events is at Figure 3-2. The evidence
suggests that the two Gloucestershire sightings are separate events, as they occurred at
the same time and a great distance away from the northern events. Further, if it was a
single object it either persisted for almost four hours, or, more likely, represents two
8
UNCLASSIFIED
UK EYES ONLY
UK RESTRICTED
SECRETSECRET UK RESTRICTED UK EYES ONLY UNCLASSIFIED separate objects. If it is assumed that an UAP on a southerly track from Scotch Corner to Harrogate was observed as it passed Leeming and Richmond, it covered some 55km(30nm) in 8 mins, which represents a ground speed of about 223kts (~115 metres per second or ~6km per min.). The UAP may have varied in speed, which explains why it was reported twice within 15minutes at each of two locations. Allowance must also be made for time inaccuracies in public reports. 21. Nov 16 1989. All seven reports, with the exception of one from Wales were in the London/SW Essex area and involved both daylight and night events. They were typical of those reported above. ANALYSIS - 1996 22. During 1996 an unusually high number of reports were received, making this a significant year for UAP since, for example, there is no reason to suppose that mis- reported man-made objects should have been more in evidence to cause 'false alarms' in 1996, than in previous years. In fact, due to the continuing impact of the end of the Cold War, if anything, there was less military flying. Hence, there is no reason why man-made objects should cause an increase, compared with the years preceding or following. It is noted, however, that 1996 was reported as a year with a much larger incidence of meteors approaching Earth and therefore a high probability of these entering the atmosphere. [Although the potential meteor connection with UAP events and , in turn, the potential connection with plasma formation, is discussed elsewhere in the report and specifically below at para 53, where some positive statistical correlation results are reported]. 23. Peak Numbers of UAP The peak number of reported sightings was 14 on 18th August. Twelve were reported from the evening of 25 February into 26 February and 12 on 1 May 1996. Seven events were logged on each of three other days, six on each of seven other days and five on each of 13 other days. On 21 days there were four reports and on 22 other days there were three reports each day. Of the remaining days in 1996, very few passed during the year without one or two reports. The peak events are discussed below. 24. 25/26 February 1996 The eight sightings reported on 26th were preceded by four logged on the evening of 25th and are therefore treated as a continuous sighting period. A distinguishing feature was the long duration of the majority of these sightings. Long duration always adds to the credibility from the point of view of having time to watch the object for an adequate period to allow a good description. Nevertheless, the event durations exceed what would be expected to be a credible time for a degrading natural event and there is clear evidence that many of the longer events (e.g. sometimes hours in duration) are, for example, caused by visual satellite sightings reported as UAPs. The events of 25/26 February were unusual, in that several occurred in daylight: 9 UNCLASSIFIED UK EYES ONLY UK RESTRICTED SECRETS TAR 43
SECRET
UK RESTRICTED
UK EYES ONLY
UNCLASSIFIED
Date Time Location Duration
1 25 Feb.96 1740 Edinburgh 13min
2 1900 Persley 30min
3 1930 Redditch 30min
4 2030 Leith 4min
5 26 Feb.96 0001 Hereford -
6 0610 Ardmair Bay 3min
7 0732 Birmingham -
8 1530 Inverness 15sec
9 1530 Inverness 10sec
10 1845 Taunton 25min
11 1945 Inverness 75min
12 2000 Clacton 40min
25. 1 May 1996 All 12 events were over Scotland. Two very late evening events in
England on the previous day were well-separated in geographical distance (York and
Bedford). However, in view of the high speed attributed to some events, a connection
cannot be ruled out, even though the first reported event on 1 May did not occur until
midday. On the following day the only reported event was 24hrs removed from the
Scottish cluster on 1 May:
Date Time Location Duration
1 1 May 96 1220 Loch Sunart 10sec
2 2119 Edinburgh 2sec
3 2215 Alness 5sec
4 2215 Greenock -
5 2216 Lossiemouth(ATC) 2min
6 2218 Uddington 6sec
7 2220 Fort William -
8 2220 Inverness 5sec
9 2220 Lanark 3sec
10 2224 Ayr -
11 2230 Erskine Bridge 3sec
12 2300 Garve, Lochalsh 1min
26. 18 August 1996 Fourteen reports on this date were preceded by just three on
the previous day, two well-separated in time with one on the evening of 17th and one on
the following day. This analysis concentrates, therefore, on those on 18th, which
commenced at 0120hrs and spread throughout the day to 2350hrs. Three were in
daylight, seven in dusk and the rest in darkness:
10
UNCLASSIFIED
UK EYES ONLY
UK RESTRICTED
SECRETSECRET UK RESTRICTED UK EYES ONLY UNCLASSIFIED Date Time Location Duration 1 17 Aug. 96 2200 Edinburgh 15sec 2 18 Aug.96 0120 Swindon 2min 3 0130 Dagenham 8min 4 1240 Southgate, London 5min 5 1400 Newton Flotman (Norfolk) 1min 6 1800 Kidderminster 3min 7 2000 Bordon, Hants 30min 8 2000 Birmingham 2min 9 2015 Leytonstone E11 2min 10 2028 Liversedge, Yorks 5min 11 2030 Birmingham 2min 12 2035 London W12 10sec 13 2128 Bramhall, Manchester 3min 14 2200 Belfast 3min 15 2250 S.Normanton - 16 19 Aug.96 0230 Long Buckby 1hr 27. 17, & 21 July and 21 August 1996 Seven reports were received each day. On 17 July five of the seven reports were in daylight, with locations varying from, Scotland to Plymouth, N Wales and Northern England. On 21 July three of the reports were in daylight, and covered locations from Tayside to Southampton, Manchester and the London Area. On 21 August reports came in from Yorkshire, Lancashire, Wales and the London Area. From experience those events which last for more than an hour are probably planets.[See item 16 at para. 26 above, for 19 August]. UAP EVENT REPORTS BY UK MAIN REGIONS 28. Table 3-1 shows the event reports by UK main region. This is of limited interest, apart from the variations in population density, which is a key factor in witness opportunities. Further, during the Summer, Scotland has longer periods of daylight than either England or Wales and much lighter nights. If one ignores the possibility of Earthlights (which are near the surface in rocky regions) this, intuitively, suggests a lower number of sightings if dusk or darkness are a pre-requisite for higher elevation sightings. The occurrence of Earthlight activity (as both Wales and Scotland are predominantly mountainous) might have been expected to have shown some statistical evidence of reports which could be attributed to this cause but did not do so. In Scotland the bright phenomenon of the Northern Lights (Aurora Borealis), can itself not only affect visibility (reducing the probability of seeing light coloured objects in the sky) but can, conversely, also lead to spurious UAP reports. Therefore, for several justifiable reasons, any lack of numbers of sighting reports are not necessarily an indication that UAPs were not present - as most of Scotland is sparsely populated and many of the mountainous, forested and hilly areas away from the coast, and at lower altitudes, are often screened from both radar and human coverage. In 11 UNCLASSIFIED UK EYES ONLY UK RESTRICTED SECRET
SECRET
UK RESTRICTED
UK EYES ONLY
UNCLASSIFIED
summary, lower UAP event numbers reported are therefore not necessarily evidence
of UAP inactivity. Clearly, those events close to borders (eg Scotland/England and
Wales/England) can be reports of the same objects but reported separately on some
occasions from both areas.
GEOGRAPHICAL LOCATION ANALYSIS
29. Because of claims that UAPs, allegedly, have an 'interest in strategic sites' the
frequency of reports originating from important geographical locations was examined.
This could be a onerous task, since the obvious initial filter (postcodes) is missing
from most of the reports and the attachment of a code to the thousands of reports,
from an often approximate address, would be a considerable manual task. To avoid
this an automated approach was taken using repeat place names, to determine whether
they formed geographic clusters in areas of particular strategic interest. This method
is not exhaustive in its basic form, since reports could come from a main location on
one occasion (e.g the main town) and then from its suburbs (i.e with a different name)
on another occasion - thus appearing to be from the different district names and not to
be repeat visits. To obtain a good spread this investigation was over a four year
period, for ~850 events and included the latter part of the Cold War.
30. The results for specific location repeated reports are plotted at Figure 3-3, and
expressed as a percentage because of the wide variation in the number of locations.
From this it is noted that, while hundreds of locations were 'visited' only once,
between 60 and 70 locations were 'visited' twice (that is, two UAP reports were
received during the four year period with the same place name), while at the other end
of the spectrum the London area as a whole (taken as a single location), produced 43
reports in the same period. In considering any reports, clustered or not, it must be
noted that a proportion could be due to misreporting of man-made objects and thus
unless positively separated by analysis, are irrelevant as part of any investigation into
the repeat appearances of genuine unidentified phenomena.
31. Any analysis must clearly be interpreted with care if meaningful results are to be
obtained. For example, reasonable and credible account must be taken of increased
population and aircraft density (leading inevitably to false reports) in some areas and
the presence of likely places 'of interest' to (in the extreme) 'terrestrial entities', as is
claimed in some quarters. It is instructive, for example to examine the scatter plot at
Figure 3-4, where a random sample of UAP events over several months are shown as
dots. Note the significantly higher densities near to towns and in the air corridors and
ATC Control Zones. The solid lines on the map indicate the approximate centres of
the civil air traffic corridors. It should be noted that an increase in density in the areas
shown could be due to:
- Increased population density
12
UNCLASSIFIED
UK EYES ONLY
UK RESTRICTED
SECRETSECRET
UK RESTRICTED
UK EYES ONLY
UNCLASSIFIED
- The fact that UAP, (if they are charged buoyant bodies), are likely to be
attracted to airspace which contains a regular passage of aircraft. There
seems to be a possibility that either the initial formation (or the subsequent
life of a plasma UAP) may be affected by the presence of larger amounts of
charged particles in the air over large cities and the airspace where large
numbers of aircraft are flying.
- Distractors in the form of aircraft by day or night which are misreported as
UAP.
32. Locations where a presence of trained observers - for example, where trained
observers such as personnel interested in spotting aircraft might be present and distort
the number of sightings (as they might be expected to be scanning the sky more
often), should also be considered. UAP events reported from RAF Stations were
examined, for example, for a four year period for a repeated UAP presence. Only six
widely-dispersed RAF Stations reported one event each. These locations were found
to operate in a variety of roles, rather than together representing a group with specific
strategic (for example, nuclear) importance, which some have suggested attract higher
than expected UAP activity. The RAF Stations which reported were Valley(Advanced
Flying Training), Swinderby(Non-flying recruit training), Waddington (V-Bombers at
the time), Leeming(AD), Dishforth(Flying Training) and Newton(Ground Training).
It is probably the case, because of the radar and visual look out maintained, as part of
the normal role of the station, that in most cases if any UAP is present near a RAF
Station, it is quite likely to be seen and reported. From the information examined:
- Contrary to certain media suggestions that there is some sinister UAP agenda
that there are repeated UAP visits to locations of national importance, no
evidence has been found that RAF strategic sites are some sort of target at
which UAP appear more often than over certain other areas (e.g. over highly
populated areas or along air corridors)
- There is no evidence that regular or irregular repeat visits occur at any RAF
site, strategic in nature or otherwise.
33. Alternatively, each of the 66 locations found during the analysis which provided
even just two reports were examined to see whether they were (or still are) of
particular importance and might even warrant, for some special reason, more than one
occurrence by a UAP. Further, whether any of these locations could possibly have
any local characteristics which might be connected to either the initial formation or
the 'attraction' a UAP (due to some local characteristic, e.g. dust plasma, electrical
power lines, earthlights etc). [Notwithstanding the fact that the place where a UAP is
formed might not be the place where it is seen]. An examination of the 66 place-
names where UAP have appeared twice, does not appear to focus on any of special
strategic military interest. There is, therefore, no firm evidence which points to the
repeated presence of UAP at, for example, US or RAF strategic or tactical Bases
13
UNCLASSIFIED
UK EYES ONLY
UK RESTRICTED
SECRETSECRET
UK RESTRICTED
UK EYES ONLY
UNCLASSIFIED
(airfields), Army assets or RAF or Naval HQ or special assets (in particular, at
nuclear assets, such as Faslane, Aldermaston, Capenhurst, etc). A UAP at
Devonport was reported twice, but no particular significance can be attributed to this.
The fact that UAP are seen at all, at some Service locations, is undoubtedly because
they are manned 24hrs a day with staff who are likely to be observant by virtue of
their normal tasks.
34. Events Several Times at the Same Location Although three reports came from
each of 26 different locations, none appear to have any particular Defence
significance. Of those (nine) locations, which each reported four times, it is noted that
these are either actually at, or quite near to airports (Glasgow, Edinburgh, Gatwick,
Slough, Hayes, Bridgend (Cardiff)). It is suggested that this increased frequency of
reports could well be attributed to a number of causes:
- The presence of aircraft (possibly attracting plasmas)
- The increased presence of aircraft leading to the misreporting of aircraft as
UAP.
- The attraction of UAP (as plasmas) to attracting electrical items on the
surface or in the air. (These might comprise enhanced charged air-particles in
the vicinity, large metallic structures such as hangars or electrical facilities on
the ground).
- The likelihood of regular observers of aircraft to notice 'unusual aircraft', the
presence of aircrew and air trafffic control staff.
35. Higher Numbers of Reports. Similarly, those locations from where five to
eight reports were received over the four year period do not show any specific
strategic military or civil significance. The seven events from Rotherham and (as in
May 1998), as well as reports from Sheffield might indicate at least some 'earthlights'
(near Moors earth-faultlines) but neither locations have any nationally strategic sites
nearby. Only five locations reported nine or more events, respectively, Birmingham
(nine), Manchester (ten), Hull (12), Sheffield (15) and, already mentioned, the Greater
London Area, 43. It is again noted, that being high density population centres, these
will inevitably generate more sighting and reporting opportunities, airports and
overhead air corridors feature strongly in all locations. None of these locations are of
nuclear strategic significance. Although they are of major civil importance as centres
of national or regional government there is no evidence to locate the UAP reports as
being specifically close to any buildings or infrastructures of any particular
significance, rather, as can be seen at Figure 3-4 the scatter of locations seems to be
more or less random within these areas.
14
UNCLASSIFIED
UK EYES ONLY
UK RESTRICTED
SECRETSECRET UK RESTRICTED UK EYES ONLY UNCLASSIFIED NUMBERS OF OBJECTS PRESENT PER EVENT 36. Frequently, more than one object is present at the same time at one event. For example, in a 1987/91 sample of over 850 events, two objects (lights) were reported together on about 8% of occasions. The distribution is plotted at Figure 3-5. In 1996/97 the number of objects at any single sighting was smaller overall. However, two were seen on 13.5% of events and as many as eight objects in total were viewed at once on each of four occasions. Often a witness is uncertain of the number of objects, especially if they are 'manoeuvring'. UAP LIGHT & COLOUR ANALYSIS 37. It should first be noted that colour may be seen alone, with its own inherent overall shape, or as a colour which is (or appears to be on) on a larger body. Often reports state that the object is exhibiting two or more colours, or as a colour apparently being 'carried' on (the surface of) an apparently 'solid' entity. Reference is made to Figure 3-6, where a colour analysis was made of over 700 events during 1996/97. On 47 occasions (6.6%) no lights were reported - that is, the UAP were perceived and reported as solid entities in the atmosphere. Of these events, 33% were reported as 'white'. The implication is that what is seen either represents a genuine white source, (for example, a white 'lamp'), a reflected source, (for example, of white light from another source, eg. from the sun) or finally, an object with a colour temperature high enough to produce white light. Many people are colour blind to some extent, hence together blues/greens, blues/blacks, yellow/orange/amber, grey/black, and silver/white can easily be misreported. 38. Grey or black indicates opaqueness or solidity to most observers, although it is shown in Volume 2 that the prevention of the reflection or passage of light can also occur for a gaseous/plasma entity, which would then give the appearance of a solid object when there is no such solid object is present. The other colours are less consistent with the idea of reflection. What, for example, is the source of a green beam which could reflect from an airborne body and be seen omni-directionally by several witnesses? Hence, it is clear that the red, yellow, orange, blue and green sources observed, (aircraft navigation lights (lamps) excepted) cannot be simple reflections but are inherent colour temperatures or are the result of colour filtering due to the physical 'construction' of the entity - which, it should be noted are frequently reported as being in motion, such as rotation. It is noted that, in certain conditions, red, yellow, orange and even blue light, can be associated with jet aircraft exhausts. However, these are easily eliminated as UAPs by the concurrent presence of a positively recognised sound. 39. Visual Beam Emanations from UAPs. Reports are occasionally made of 'beamed lights' and sparks (of various colours). If the UAP is near to the ground these are invariably described as 'being used to inspect objects on the surface' or 'a beam was used to shoot at me' - or they 'shot at me with a beam'. An almost 15 UNCLASSIFIED UK EYES ONLY UK RESTRICTED SECRET
SECRET UK RESTRICTED UK EYES ONLY UNCLASSIFIED constant factor in these reports is that the human observer is very close to the object and almost certainly simultaneously within the influence of any other (invisible), e.g. magnetic field, which might be present. The potential field effects are explored at Volume 2 Working Papers 1 and 25, with an unexpectedly positive outcome. Characteristics of the 'lights' seen are shown at Figure 3-7. 40. This 'beam effect' is never reported when object's altitudes are higher than about 2,000 feet. When a beam is reported it is often described as a 'searchlight' (on occasions these are shown to be misreported aircraft landing lights). While there is insufficient reported data or indeed imagery for analysis, these 'beams' usually appear to be slightly divergent. It is suggested that where these objects are plasmas the beams described by witnesses could well be the discharge paths taken by charged particles which have found a way to escape from the confining forces within the plasma. Because the objects (i.e. the presumed buoyant mass) do not consistently accelerate away when this occurs, it is surmised that this emanation does not necessary represent any type of viable thrust, but is most probably what amounts to a charge leakage. On other occasions some sort of internal change seems to occur. The object apparently becomes more bouyant and as its residual charge has probably changed it moves away, sometimes at high speed and climbing. Indeed, in the interim the objects frequently 'hover' when this effect is observed, almost as though tethered while this discharge is going on. It is also likely that the discharge path contains dust particles which reflect any ambient light while this is taking place. 41. Often sooner rather than later, the object fades and disappears from view, sometimes re-appearing briefly. Although UAP motion is sometimes described as an acceleration away, it seems more than an anomaly that the object never seems to accelerate towards the observer - only away. This leads to the suggestion (and strong suspicion) that if an object rapidly diminishes in size (shrinking in diameter), giving the impression that it is fast-receding. This is re-inforced by the suggestion that the discharge has changed the balance of sustaining forces to a point which causes the shape of the object to collapse. Sometimes this is accompanied by a small explosion. This, in turn, gives rise to the supposition by the witness that he/she has heard a sonic boom, or has even been 'shot at' as the object sped away. The former is an obvious illusion - as any accompanying shock wave would be moving away, not towards the observer! It is concluded that there is no doubt that some UAP either emanate a beam of light which comes from an internal source, which, for some reason is not an omni-directional emission, or alternatively emit particles in a beam which, in turn reflect ambient light, thus appearing to form a beam of light. It is strongly suspected that a coincident electrical or magnetic field is emitted at the same time which can adversely affect some electronic and electrical equipment and the neural activity in humans. 16 UNCLASSIFIED UK EYES ONLY UK RESTRICTED SECRET
SECRET
UK RESTRICTED
UK EYES ONLY
UNCLASSIFIED
UAP SOUND & SMELL ANALYSIS
42. The incidence of sound ande smell reports is low. In one sample of events on only
29 occasions out of over 700 (2.8%) were sounds reported. For another sample of
1014 events (1996/7), 46 reported sound (4.5%), For those UAP which are not
identified later as aircraft the sound is invariably reported as 'humming', 'whining' or
'crackling', or electrical and these amount to only 1.1% overall. There are various
reasons for lack of sound when aircraft are seen. These are considered at Volume 2
Working Paper No 8. The presence of odours (usually an obnoxious sulphurous
smell) is very rare in UK reports and would only be sensed if the observer is quite
close to the explosive demise of a plasma in relatively still air.
UAP SHAPE ANALYSIS
43. Figure 3-8 shows the shape analysis for 1014 reports for the 1996/97 period.
Shapes were observed on 67% of occasions. It is noted that the shape may be that of
the coloured light itself, where a 'light' is the only item seen. Alternatively, the shape
may be on or in a body which also has lights/colours, or the shape may be a silhouette,
with or without 'lights'. In combinational reports the object shape is often described
as 'bright' (e.g. 'bright red sphere'). The shape may also be defined by an observer
from several individual objects which form a shape (formation) but are individually
generally round. Hence, three objects which become a triangle when viewed in plan
together form a 'line' or 'bar' or even a 'cigar', when viewed sideways-on.
UAP MOTION ANALYSIS
44. Whereas satellites, meteors and manned aircraft exhibit a generally linear or
curved flight profile, UAP produce a number of profiles, some of which match those
of manned aircraft. These not only include 'hovering, but other motions that no
manned vehicle could achieve. Figure 3-9 shows UAP motion analysis for a four
year (858 event) series in the period 1987-91, where other than simple linear motion
was observed. The following points are relevant:
- None of the events reported UAP diving - thus eliminating diving meteors
with visible trails. (Most of the public know the difference anyway as these
are seen nightly if the visibility allows, however see correlation with meteors
below)
- Almost 10% of the events climbed - indicating negative buoyancy or lift
from some force (e.g. due to electrical charge differentials). [Note also the
natural affinity, reported in a Russian Open Scientific Paper at Volume 3, for
(aerosols) plasmas to take up an 'aerodynamic' shape, possibly producing lift].
17
UNCLASSIFIED
UK EYES ONLY
UK RESTRICTED
SECRETSECRET
UK RESTRICTED
UK EYES ONLY
UNCLASSIFIED
- Almost 22% of the reports (when combining slow, stationary and hovering)
were expressy perceived by the witnesses NOT to be aircraft.
- About 9% were moving fast. [This eliminates satellites, which, when
observed from earth, exhibit steady, rather than 'fast' motion.]
- A small percentage (~1.6%), were described as 'bobbing' (sometimes as
'erratic'). This condition, which admittedly can be due to optical propagation
'tricks of light', such as 'twinkling', indicated instability and eliminates
aircraft. The public are well-aware of aircraft strobe lights. Further, the
'bobbing' motion is usually described as random.
- Some 14% of reports indicate 'spinning'. This can be confused by some
with 'pulsating' (1.6%), and by others who reporting a stationary light
flashing on and off regularly as 'rotation'. Taking these factors together,
this indicates some sort of turmoil/turbulence within the object which is often
consistent with the variability which might be expected in gaseous formations
in motion, due to internal changes caused by both internal and external forces.
It is also noted that the general public, in context, are more likely to expect any
object seen to be 'spinning' rather than any other motion because of the
widespread 'spinning-top', flying saucer analogy used by the media
45. In a proportion of the UAP events a combination of motion characteristics
reportedly occurs. This often depends upon how long a UAP is observed by a single
observer before it passes out of sight. For example, initial deceleration, followed by
slow movement, 'hovering' (or the appearance of doing so), followed sometimes by
either acceleration, disappearance or even explosion. During the phases of
observation colour mixtures are often seen and colour changes occur during the period
of observation. This indicates that the objects nature is in constant agitation. Indeed as
many are reported to rotate the UAP is being viewed from all aspects, repeatedly
showing all it's variations in colour.
CORRELATION STUDIES
46. With Time of Day As events are almost always first detected visually, it is no
surprise that the greater proportion are sighted after dark. For example, of the 1014
events from 1996/7, 94% of events were seen first as lights and, as can be seen from
Figure 3-10, a very high proportion are seen in the hours of dusk and darkness. One
breakdown is shown at Table 3-2, taken as a sample of some 850 reports, between
January 1987 and July 1991. Approximately 64% were reported during the hours of
darkness, 19% in daylight 10% at dusk. About 6% were seen at dawn. These figures
do not necessarily mean that UAP activity is influenced by the presence of darkness
and that they are not present through a full 24 hour period. Sightings are also heavily
dependent on viewing conditions:
18
UNCLASSIFIED
UK EYES ONLY
UK RESTRICTED
SECRETSECRET
UK RESTRICTED
UK EYES ONLY
UNCLASSIFIED
- Visibility
- Contrast in daylight
- Luminosity of the object, compared with other lighted objects in the sky.
- The presence of motion.
- Availability of witnesses - This is dependent, not only on the prevailing
weather conditions but also on population distribution.
47. The second sample was taken over ~700 event reports in 1996/7. In this example,
perhaps predictably, almost 80% occurred during the hours 1800-0600. It seems that,
for a maximum probability of being reported, either dusk and darkness is required.
While there are not necessarily large numbers of people outdoors at any given time in
the evening, (in fact there may be far less than in the daytime in most places), those
present are more likely to see UAP because the sighting conditions exist. However,
there is no evidence that UAP form at any particular time of day. Because of the wide
range of UAP durations reported, it is possible that the life-span of some extends from
daylight into dusk and darkness and vice-versa. Whatever their origins the statistics
show that the number of UAP reports increase as dusk progresses into darkness,
peaking at the time people are returning home after an evening out, walking the dog,
etc., between 2200 and 2300hrs. Thereafter, with most people in bed the levels fall.
This does not necessarily mean that there are less UAP about. Although there is no
absolute evidence that this is the case, it seems most likely that UAP distribution
occurs more or less throughout each 24 hours period, notwithstanding any peaks and
troughs if the cause of UAP is due either to meteors or electrical conditions; both of
which are variables (see Working Papers Nos. 2, 13, 17 at Volume 2). It is a fact,
taking all known characteristics into account, that:
- Most of the 33% 'white' objects reported would not be seen in bright
daylight, unless they were close to the observer.
- Only those objects attracting the eye's attention with adequate contrast with
the viewing backgound are likely to be seen. [Pink/silver (against a bright
sky), blue (against a blue sky), or yellow/orange (in a sunny sky) would be
less likely to attract the eye's peripheral vision.
- Although motion attracts the eye, unless a visible, contrasting colour, is also
present, any motion will be irrelevant.
- Aircraft lights- even if operating in daylight- will not attract attention by
themselves. Their contrast will be much less than in darkness, coupled with
the fact that an observer in the open will only be attracted if aircraft sound acts
19
UNCLASSIFIED
UK EYES ONLY
UK RESTRICTED
SECRETSECRET
UK RESTRICTED
UK EYES ONLY
UNCLASSIFIED
as the additional cue. [Hence, aircraft lights as a cause of UAP mis-reports are
eliminated in daylight].
- A large percentage of UAP reports at any time - day or night, are fleeting, often
less than 5 seconds. The certainty of a witness is higher at night, than in
daylight, because of the colour/darkness contrast. In daylight, even a second
glance may not confirm the presence of anything unfamiliar, the object may have
disappeared, dissipated or just moved quickly away.
- It is noted that the large triangular, oblong and diamond shapes reported at
dusk or in the night do not appear in daytime reports.
48. The statistical distribution values obtained do not therefore necessarily mean that
UAP presence is not evenly distributed through the full 24 hour period - or at least
more evenly distributed than the probable skew caused by the contrast in the marked
difference in visual detection conditions occurring between day and night. As a
comparison with the earlier analysis, the 1996/97 analysis breakdown is: Daylight
(0600-1700) ~17%, Midnight to 0600, also 17%, with over 56% between the hours of
1800 and midnight. Seasonal time variations have not been investigated but monthly
values are considered below. Irrespective of these factors is is clear that sightings are
a function of:
• Visibility at all times of day or night.
• Contrast in daylight.
• Luminosity of the object to attract attention.
• Presence of motion.
• Availability of witnesses - a function of population distribution
and presence in a viewing position.
49. With Month of Year Figure 3-11 and Table 3-3 show the distribution of UAP
reported sightings by month of the year, taken over a ten year period. The pattern is
consistently clear that the number of reported events peaks during February and in the
autumn and falls for about two months in April/May. Until the Meteor statistics were
developed there was no apparent or obvious reason for this, apart from the fact that,
from the visibility aspect, fewer UAP sightings would, as explained elsewhere, be
expected when the weather is very bright, or when the evenings become lighter.
However, more opportunities are available when the weather is warmer than in the
spring and more of the population is likely to be outside in the evening/dusk, for
example, in the autumn. This did not explain the peak UAP reporting, centred on
February for most of the years plotted, until the results at para. 53(Figure 3-18),
20
UNCLASSIFIED
UK EYES ONLY
UK RESTRICTED
SECRETSbelow, were obtained. Table 3-4 shows the distribution of days per year with no reports. 50. With Weather. Weather statistics for the whole of the UK have been briefly analysed against UAP sightings, with the specific intention of searching for correlation between atmospheric conditions and days on which UAP events occurred. The information available from 23 weather stations included temperature, precipitation, sunshine, fog, snow, thunder, frost, dew point and pressure. Although the work involved to make a complete analysis (and the possibility of identifying conditions for the formation and sustaining of a UAP) is beyond the scope of this study, an initial analysis was made of the most obvious factor - that of the potential of enhanced electrical conditions in the atmosphere. A correlation was therefore sought between the incidence of thunder recorded in the weather statistics (and dependent on lightning) and UAP events. As these could not be done locally for every event, they were normalised as the numbers of days per month of thunder against UAP report frequency. Conversely, an analysis was made of days when UAP events occurred when there was no thunder. The results are plotted at Figures 3-13 and 3-14 for the years 1988 and 1996. They show that UAP can occur when there is no thunder (lightning), for example, in November 1988. December similarly shows a large number of UAP with a very low, negligible thunder rate. However, for the overall year the correlation co-efficient was -0.43 which shows that very small values of one set of data are connected with large values of the other set. When this was repeated for 1996, which was a year with more sightings and a preferable statistical situation, the correlation was positive (+0.62) showing correlation between thundery days and UAP reports. Finally, the sequence was repeated for 1988 for days of thunder against days when no UAP reports were received. This showed only a very weakly positive (0.19) correlation, meaning that the large values in one set are associated with the large values in the other set. In basic terms this shows that a large number of days can occur with no UAP even though it is thundery. The conditions for lightning occurred on those days but ball/bead lightning was not formed - or at least was not reported! In summary it seems likely therefore that while a number of UAP reports are a result of misreported ball lightning (which is a rare phenomenon for most of the population), there are many occasions when UAP reports are received when there is no recorded thunder conditions and hence no enhanced electrical activity in the form of lightning. On these occasions (other man-made objects excepted) UAP must be caused by something else. 51. With Solar Activity Because solar activity affects the earths atmosphere and electromagnetic propagation conditions it was investigated to ascertain whether the frequency of UAP reports could be correlated to solar flux, sunspot number or geomagnetic conditions. Some example plots are shown at Figures 3-15(a) and (b). It was postulated that some events, possibly many, might be plasmas' with their associated electrical fields, (and charged particles), so an examination was made of the UK daily Sun-Spot Numbers (SSN) and the geomagnetic flux (FLUX), compared with the daily number of UAP events. For convenience of the presentations of results,