Friday, 7 December 2018

Google Website Searches:
Focus On UFO Incidents Involving
UFOs Ascending Straight Up


Website: J. Allen Hynek Center for UFO Studies (CUFOS.org):

(Search term: “Straight Up”)

(“Straight Upward”)

(“Straight Upwards”)

Website: National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena (NICAP.org):

(“Straight Up”)

(“Straight Upward”)

(“Straight Upwards”)

Website: National UFO Reporting Center (NUFORC.org):

(“Straight Up”)

(“Straight Upward”)

(“Straight Upwards”)

Website: UFO Casebook (ufocasebook.com):

(“Straight Up”)

(“Straight Upward”)

(“Straight Upwards”)

Website: UFOINFO.com:

(“Straight Up”)

(“Straight Upward”)

(“Straight Upwards”)

Website: UFO DNA (thecid.com/ufo):

(“Straight Up”)

(“Straight Upward”)

(“Straight Upwards”)

Website: Archives For the Unexplained (AFU.se), Norrköping, Sweden:

(“Straight Up”)

(“Straight Upward”)

(“Straight Upwards”)

UFO case directory:
“Category 1, Distant Encounters
Light Shoots Straight Up
Oct. 10, 1952
Otis AFB, Massachussetts”

(NICAP.org)

The whole UFO case report:
Brad Sparks:
Oct. 10, 1952; Otis AFB, Mass. (BBU 2155)
6:30 p.m. USAF S/Sgt and 2 other enlisted men saw a blinking white light move like a pendulum then shoot straight up. 20 mins. (Berliner)

Dan Wilson:
Oct.10, 1952; Otis AFB, Mass. (BBU 2155)
6:30 p.m. EST. USAF S/SGT Richard W. County, A/1C James M. Barren and A/2C Edward P. Robinson observed a blinking white light that flew upward and then started a pendulum like action, then shot straight up at a terrific rate of speed. The length of the observation was  approximately 15-20 minutes. Project Blue Book EVALUATION: UNIDENTIFIED.”

NICAP.org presents U.S. government (U.S. Air Force) documents that pertain to the UFO case.


Wikipedia article: “Otis Air National Guard Base”:


Quote from the article, “Otis Air National Guard Base”:
Otis Air National Guard Base (IATA: FMH, ICAO: KFMH, FAA LID: FMH) is an Air National Guard installation located within Joint Base Cape Cod, a military training facility located on the western portion of Cape Cod in Barnstable County, Massachusetts, United States. It was known as Otis Air Force Base prior to its transfer from the active duty Air Force to the Air National Guard. In the local community, it is more commonly known as Otis Air Base or simply Otis. It was named in honor of pilot and Boston surgeon Lt. Frank ‘Jesse’ Otis.

Wikipedia article: “Otis Air Force Base BOMARC site”:


The whole Wikipedia article:
“The Otis Air Force Base BOMARC site was a Cold War USAF launch complex for Boeing CIM-10 Bomarc surface-to-air missiles.[1] Equipped with IM-99Bs (56 missiles: 28 solid-state, 28 liquid-state), the site had 28 Model IV ‘coffin’ shelters, on 60 acres (24 ha).[2]

The site was run by the 26th Air Defense Missile Squadron, initially part of the Boston Air Defense Sector, 26th Air Division.”

Otis Air National Guard Base is located near Mashpee, Massachusetts.

Related posts:



realtvufos.blogspot.com/search?q=1952





















Photo of Naval Auxiliary Air Facility Otis, circa 1943
(text by Wikipedia) (wikimedia.org)
(wikimedia.org photo)























A CIM-10B Bomarc missile at the launch ready position at the Otis Air Force Base BOMARC site. (text by Wikipedia) (wikimedia.org) (wikimedia.org photo)

Thursday, 6 December 2018

U.S. Government Journal UFO Article:
“UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS (UFOs)”


The Inspector General (TIG) Brief, Number 21, Volume XVIII,
14 October 1966
(U.S. Air Force, Washington, D.C.)

Source: CUFON.org

The whole article:
      “Base commanders, and their information and operations personnel, should review AFR 80-17, 19 September 1966, to assure familiarity with their responsibilities in the event they receive an inquiry concerning UFOs, or a notice of sighting. Air Force interest in UFOs is two-fold: to determine if the UFO is a possible threat to the United States and to use the scientific or technical data gained from study of UFO reports. To attain these objectives, it is necessary to explain or identify the factor that caused the observation to be reported as an unidentified flying object – i.e., any aerial phenomenon or object which is unknown or appears out of the ordinary to the observer.

       Successful identification of UFOs requires prompt, accurate reporting and rapid evaluation of data. Any AF base which receives notice of a sighting in its vicinity must be ready to conduct an immediate investigation. Personnel who may receive the initial call, whether in operations or other base organizations, should be familiar with the local procedures established for carrying out the base’s responsibilities to screen, evaluate and report the information. Selection of the individual to serve as UFO investigating officer is a key item in implementing these responsibilities. The commander should consider carefully the scientific and technical backgrounds and previous investigating experience of all available personnel, base his choice on qualifications for gathering and evaluating the data required by AFR 80-17. Prompt on-the-spot surveys and follow-ups by the base investigator are vital for complete case information. His report must be immediate, detailed, accurate, and objective. He must make every effort to obtain pertinent data, test all leads, clues, and hypotheses, so that he will have the best possible basis for his analysis and comments in the concluding paragraph of the report.

       All personnel who may have contact with the public concerning UFO matters should be made aware of the importance of proper responses, particularly in connection with sightings which are difficult to identify. They must not only comply with the instructions in AFR 80-17 for referral of inquiries to the office which is qualified to handle them, but must refrain from any action or comment which could cause misunderstanding, either as to the UFO program or a particular case.

        The number of UFO sightings reported to the Air Force during FY 1966 was the largest of any year to date, surpassing the previous record number received in 1954. This statistic constitutes another reason why all bases should assure they have the necessary investigative capability and procedural instructions for responding to UFO notices and inquiries. (Briefing of AFR 80-17 is on page 15.)”

I also reported about this article on 27 January 2013.

http://www.cufon.org/cufon/tig_brief4.htm

Related posts:

realtvufos.blogspot.com/search?q=The+Inspector+General+(TIG)+Brief























(U.S. Air Force/CUFON.org image)

U.S. Government Journal UFO Article:
“REPORTING UNIDENTIFIED
FLYING OBJECTS”


The Inspector General (TIG) Brief, Number 11, Volume XVI,
13 April 1962
(U.S. Air Force, Washington, D.C.)

Source: CUFON.org

The whole article:
      “Unidentified flying objects (UFOs) are defined in AFR 200-2 as any aerial phenomena, airborne objects which are unknown or appear out of the ordinary to the observer because of performance, aerodynamic characteristics, or unusual features. Activities initially receiving reports of aerial objects and phenomena must screen the information to determine whether a valid UFO is involved. If determined that it is an object such as a balloon, searchlight, astronomical body, missile, satellite in orbit, or aircraft - even though the type, purpose, origin and destination is unknown - it should not be reported as a UFO.

       Flying objects reported in the past have posed no threat to the security of the U.S. However, observations aid AF readiness - and since the possibility exists that a UFO reported may be hostile, or a new foreign air vehicle of unconventional design, it is imperative to report sightings rapidly, factually, and as completely as possible.

       The AF continues to analyze all reports of UFOs until they are scientifically or technically explained - however, some remain unidentified because report of sightings was not immediate, detailed, or objective. Because of the human factors involved, such as personal impressions and interpretations, a careful study must be made of the logic, consistency, and coherence of the observer's report. Particular attention should be given to the observer’s age, occupation, education, and whether his vocation involves observation reporting or technical knowledge. Every effort should be made to resolve the sighting immediately, since the officer who receives the report initially is in a much better position to conduct an ‘on-the-spot’ survey or follow-up than subsequent investigative personnel.

        A recent change to AFR 200-2 eliminates the use of AF Form 112, ‘Intelligence Report,’ when submitting written reports of sightings over 3 days old. Such reports will now be sent by letter direct to AFSC, Foreign Technology Division (FTD), Wright-Patterson AFB, where a final report will be prepared on each sighting after collection and analysis of data. There is no change in the requirement that reports under 3 days from date of sighting be reported by electrical transmission.

       Commanders should insure that their training programs for crew members, pilots and other personnel include current information on the UFO Program in addition to the requirements of AFR 55-88 for timely and accurate CIRVIS reporting. Queries from the public or private organizations on the UFO program should be referred to the Office of Information, OSAF, Washington, D. C.”

http://www.cufon.org/cufon/tig_brief3.htm

Related posts:

realtvufos.blogspot.com/search?q=The+Inspector+General+(TIG)+Brief























(U.S. Air Force/CUFON.org image)

Wednesday, 5 December 2018

U.S. Government Journal UFO Article:
“TAKING NO CHANCES”


The Inspector General (TIG) Brief, Number 8, Volume XIV,
13 April 1962
(U.S. Air Force, WashingtonD.C.)

Source: CUFON.org

The whole article:
“For some time now the USAF has investigated all reports of unidentified flying objects (UFOs), under provisions of AFR 200-2. This has been done to leave no stones unturned in identifying objects which may pose a threat to the security of the United States and its armed forces.

Even though to date there has been no evidence that UFOs represent technological developments beyond the range of our present day scientific knowledge, we continue to be on the alert and examine reports submitted under the regulation. However, time and effort could be saved if individuals who make the sightings and submit reports understood that often reported UFOs are finally identified as jet aircraft, missiles, balloons, searchlights, birds, kites, anti-collision beacons, jet engine exhaust, condensation trails, known meteorological phenomena, etc. The fact that there are many manmade objects (satellites) now in orbit, may add to the items suspected of being extraterrestrial vehicles or foreign weapons threatening the security of this country.

A more careful scrutiny of sightings, which are potential objects of reports, is therefore obvious. Only objects which the observer is sure do not conform to known aircraft, missiles, or other above-mentioned items should therefore be reported.”

http://www.cufon.org/cufon/tig_brief2.htm

Related posts:

realtvufos.blogspot.com/search?q=The+Inspector+General+(TIG)+Brief























(U.S. Air Force/CUFON.org image)

U.S. Government Journal UFO Article:
“UFO’S SERIOUS BUSINESS”


The Inspector General (TIG) Brief, Number 26, Volume XI,
24 December 1959

(U.S. Air Force, Washington, D.C.)

Source: CUFON.org

The whole article:
     “Unidentified flying objects - sometimes treated lightly by the press and referred to as ‘flying saucers’ - must be rapidly and accurately identified as serious USAF business in the ZI As AFR 200-2 points out, the Air Force concern with these sightings is threefold: First of all, is the object a threat to the defense of the U.S.? Secondly, does it contribute to technical or scientific knowledge? And then there’s the inherent USAF responsibility to explain to the American people through public-information media what is going on in their skies.

     The phenomena or actual objects comprising UFO’s will tend to increase, with the public more aware of goings on in space but still inclined to some apprehension. Technical and defense considerations will continue to exist in this era.

     Published about three months ago, AFR 200-2 outlines necessary orderly, qualified reporting as well as public-information procedures. This is where the base should stand today, with practices judged at least satisfactory by commander and inspector:

- Responsibility for handling UFO's should rest with either 
   intelligence, operations, the Provost Marshal or the 
   Information Officer - in that order of preference, dictated 
   by limits of the base organization;

- A specific officer should be designated as responsible;

- He should have experience in investigative techniques 
   and also, if possible, scientific or technical background;

- He should have authority to obtain the assistance of 
   specialists on the base;

- He should be equipped with binoculars, camera, Geiger 
   counter, magnifying glass and have a source for 
   containers in which to store samples.
       What is required is that every UFO sighting be investigated and reported to the Air Technical Intelligence Center at Wright-Patterson AFB and that explanation to the public be realistic and knowledgeable. Normally that explanation will be made only by the OSAF Information Office. It all adds up to part of the job of being experts in our own domain.”

I also reported about this article on 27 January 2013.

http://www.cufon.org/cufon/tig_brief1.htm

Related posts:

realtvufos.blogspot.com/search?q=The+Inspector+General+(TIG)+Brief



















(U.S. Air Force/NICAP.org image)























(U.S. Air Force/CUFON.org image)

Monday, 3 December 2018

UFO TV News Report:
“UFO SECRETS:
WHY CAN’T WE KNOW MORE?”


31 October 2018
(Fox News, New York City, New York)

Source: eventimus (YouTube channel)

Host Tucker Carlson interviews Nick Pope.

One of the TV report’s subheadlines reads: “FORMER U.K. OFFICIAL NICK POPE: CONGRESS IS FINALLY SHOWING INTEREST IN UFO REPORTS.”


Related posts:





realtvufos.blogspot.com/search?q=Nick+Pope















(Fox News/eventimus/youtube.com image)

UFO Case Directory (Close Encounters):
“Rendlesham Forest Encounter / Halt Case
December 26 & 28, 1980
RAF Bentwaters AFB, Suffolk, England”


The whole UFO case report:
Brad Sparks:
December 28, 1980; RAF Bentwaters AFB, England
Rendlesham Forest case is one of the most significant military encounters with a UFO.  Rendlesham Forest is a large pine forest, east of Ipswich, in Suffolk, England.  Nearby are the twin NATO air bases, RAF Bentwaters and RAF Woodbridge, leased to the United States Air Force.  The UFO was chased through the forest by a team led by Lt. Col. Charles Halt, involving multiple-witness sightings by military personnel and slight radioactive anomalies.  At the end of his team’s 2-mile trek, Col. Halt sighted ‘pencil beams’ from the UFO hitting the nuclear weapons storage area at Bentwaters 3 miles away in the distance.  Earlier incident on Dec. 26, 1980, by USAF security patrolmen on duty, has been greatly embellished.”

NICAP.org presents U.S. government (U.S. Air Force), UK Ministry of Defence and UK House of Commons documents that pertain to the UFO case.


Related posts:




realtvufos.blogspot.com/search?q=Woodbridge











Aerial view of RAF Bentwaters, UK
(whale.to photo)


Aerial view of RAF Woodbridge, UK
(controltowers.co.uk photo)













Map of RAF Bentwaters, RAF Woodbridge, UK, and the 
December 1980 UFO landing site (2.bp.blogspot.com image)

UFO Report:
“The 1980 UFO Chronology”


Created: 15 November 2007
Updated: 6 December 2016
(NICAP.org)

Quote from the UFO report:
“Our thanks for these chronologies must go to Richard Hall (the original 1980 chronology from UFOE II), Dan Wilson (archive researcher), and Jean Waskiewicz (online NICAP DBase [NSID]). You will note the many foreign reports that we are now being able to access. Our special thanks to Dan Wilson for getting those to us. As more come in, this page will be updated. Previous chronologies (1947 to 1969) involved the expertise of two other team members: William Wise (Project Blue Book Archive) and Brad Sparks (Comprehensive Catalog of Project Blue Book Unknowns).

Francis Ridge
NICAP Site Coordinator

Aug. 3, 1980; Norton AFB, San Bernardino, CA
9:00 PM. Three airmen and five civilians at separate locations sighted an object that looked like a ‘metallic balloon’ with two flat sides, according to a base spokesman. The airmen, who observed it through binoculars, said it was a ‘highly reflective metallic color.’ It either landed or hovered just above a grassy area near a taxiway on the base. Then it took off and flew away at an estimated 30-40 m.p.h. A little later six residents of the Highland area saw an object of the same description as it flew north and eventually passed over the San Bernardino Mountains. The witnesses called the sheriff’s department, and reported that the object was flying on a straight course about 200-300 feet above the ground. About an hour later  a sheriff’s helicopter flew to the area to investigate, but saw nothing. No radar tracking were reported. (Riverside Enterprise, Aug. 6, 1980)”


Wikipedia article: “Norton Air Force Base”:


Quote from the Wikipedia article:
“Norton Air Force Base (IATA: SBD) (1942–1994) was a United States Air Force facility 2 miles (3.2 km) east of downtown San Bernardino, California, in San Bernardino County.

Overview

For the majority of its operational lifetime, Norton was a logistics depot and heavy-lift transport facility for a variety of military aircraft, equipment and supplies as part of Air Materiel/Air Force Logistics Command (1946–1966), then as part of Military Airlift/Air Mobility Command (1966–1994).

Major secondary missions of Norton Air Force Base was as Headquarters Air Defense Command for Southern California, during the 1950s and 1960s. The Air Force Audio-Visual Center produced air force films for training and public relations. The Air Force Now film, shown at monthly commander’s calls at air force bases around the world was produced at Norton. Norton hosted numerous Air Force Reserve transport units. The Office of the Inspector General was located at Norton, as was the Directorate of Aerospace Safety and the Air Force Audit Agency Headquarters.

Norton AFB was closed in 1994 as a result of Base Realignment and Closure action 1988.”

Related posts:


realtvufos.blogspot.com/search?q=1980












Norton Air Force Base (was closed in 1994), San Bernardino,
California (2006 USGS photo) (wikimedia.org)
(wikimedia.org image)

Saturday, 1 December 2018

U.S. Government UFO Document:
“SUBJECT: UFO” (Page 5)


Date: 21 December 1965
(U.S. Air Force, Washington, D.C.)

Source: NICAP.org

The document deals with the 7 October 1965 Edwards Air Force Base, California, UFO incident.

The document was sent by Headquarters Air Force Flight Test Center, Air Force Systems Command, United States Air Force, Edwards Air Force Base, California, to FTD (TDFC), Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio.

The document is written by John D. Balent, Captain, USAF, Technical Evaluation Officer, Deputy for Foreign Technology, for the Commander.

Quote from the document (not written in U.S. Department of Defense document format):
“1. The following report of UFOs is submitted per para. 14, AFR 200-2 and 200-2A:

a. DESCRIPTION OF OBJECTS:

(1) All objects had the general shape and appearance of stars.

(2) The largest appeared to be twice the size of an ordinary star. The others were the same size as stars which would make them about the size of a pinhead when held at arms length.

(3) The objects were the same color as stars.

(4) There were from 7 to 12 objects involved.

(5)  There was no discernible formation with one exception. Three of the objects appeared to be in what might roughly be described as an inverted “V”.

(6) The objects that were held visually appeared to be flashing red, green and white lights at one time or another.

(7) None

(8) None

(9) One of the objects was reported as “pushing a small cloud” in front of it. This is the one object that could be explained. It was a weather balloon.

b. DESCRIPTION OF COURSE OF OBJECTS:

(1) The Edwards tower operator first noticed flashing lights from these objects in the normal course of his duties.

(2) The first and most prominent of these objects was originally sighted at an elevation of 010° and an azimuth of 062°. The other objects appeared to have an elevation of between 020 and 045° and azimuths of 050 to 075°. It is impossible to determine just which of the radar contacts correlate with the visual sightings. There were reports of up to 12 radar contacts from relatively dispersed sites. LAADS received reports at various times from San Pedro, Laguna, March AFB, and Boron. All were able to show contacts in the area under consideration at one time or another during the 4½-hour period. The duration of most of these contacts was very short. The three contacts which eventually figured in the decision to scramble were U090, U091, and U092. LAADS did hold these contacts in a close enough proximity to those under visual observation that there is a possibility that they were the same.

(3) Of the seven objects reported visually, four persisted longer than the others. The brightest, most prominent of these was last seen flashing at an elevation of approximately 050° and an azimuth of 135°. The other three were in what might rougly be described as an inverted “V” and were last seen flashing at an elevation of 035° and azimuths of from 140 to 150°. The remaining three, which were visible for a shorter period of time, disappeared at approximately 045° elevation and in the vicinity of 060 to 090° azimuth.

(4) The objects varied in their flight paths. A general statement might be made that their main change was in altitude. There were definite changes in azimuth but these were relatively small. The four digits seen most clearly appeared to hover, then rise in a near vertical direction. Only a general statement about the radar tracks is possible. All the contacts obtained on search radar were difficult to hold because of slow speeds involved. The height finding radar similarly had little luck in giving valid changes in altitude. There was no discernible pattern to the flight paths of objects when considered as a whole.

(5) Three of the objects held visually just gradually faded from view. The four objects that were seen most clearly; i.e., the very bright object and the three in an inverted “V” seemed to take their place among the stars and persisted, looking like all the other stars, until dawn. These objects possibly faded like the others and were replaced in the eyes of the observers by the stars that happened to be in the area of last sighting.

(6) Again the objects were visible for varying lengths of time. The first observation took place at 0833Z (0133 PDT). The four most prominent objects flashed for about two hours. As mentioned above, these objects persisted until dawn although they ceased flashing after two hours. The other three objects were visible for approximately 30 minutes.

c. MANNER OF OBSERVATION:

(1) The objects were observed both visually and electronically from the ground. Search, height finding, and approach radar all held the objects.

(2) All ground observers used 7x50 binoculars.

(3) N/A

d. TIME AND DATE OF SIGHTING:

(1) 7 October 1965, 0133Z (correct time: 0133 PDT (see b. 6))

(2) Night

e. LOCATION OF OBSERVERS:

(1) The observers were located at base operations, Edwards AFB, Calif.

f. IDENTIFYING INFORMATION ON OBSERVERS:

(1) Darryl Clark, Capt, 329th FIS, George AFB, Calif., pilot. Capt. Clark is an alert pilot with Det. 1 at Edwards AFB. He happened to be on duty and was called upon to observe the activity. His observations were all made from the ground.

(2) Charles A. Sorrels, SSgt, 1925 Communications Sq, AFCS, tower operator.

(3) Forrest S. Honer, SSgt, Hq Sq Section, 6510th AB Group, Edwards AFB, dispatcher.

(4) Keith C. Peneau, A2C, Det. 21, 6th Weather Wg, weather observer.

All these observers are proficient in their particular jobs and could be classified as very reliable.

g. WEATHER AND WINDS--ALOFT CONDITIONS AT TIME AND PLACE OF SIGHTINGS:

(1) All observers agree that weather was clear and visibility good.

h. ANY OTHER UNUSUAL ACTIVITY OR CONDITION:

(1) None

i. INTERCEPTION OR IDENTIFICATION ACTION TAKEN:

An F-106 was scrambled from George AFB at 1209Z (0509 PDT). The aircraft was was controlled throughout its search on a visual basis by the Edwards tower. By the time the aircraft was scrambled the activity was just about over. The objects that were held visually had ceased flashing and had taken on the appearance of ordinary stars as mentioned earlier. Radar contact was gone or was of insufficient duration to be used in vectoring the aircraft. Passes were made through the area at 15,000, 20,000, and 40,000 ft. The only thing out of the ordinary reported by the pilot was reflection of red lights from the dry lake bed near Edwards. He felt that these were reflections from something other than the beacons in the area.

j. During the period of the sightings there was no air traffic nor were there balloon releases that might have been mistaken for the objects.

k. COMMENTS:

In summary, no one in the Air Defense Sector could provide a plausible explanation, nor did they seem overly concerned once the incident was over. Their experience and the sources of information available to them provided no help. There seems to be no question that they did have radar control at several sites. The ground observers claim definitely to have seen flashing lights for which they could offer or find no explanation. Everyone concerned at both LAADS and Edwards seems convinced that something unusual occurred.

l. EXISTENCE OF PHYSICAL EVIDENCE:

There are radar scope photos which indicated unidentified contacts were held. These scope photos are being forwarded as a part of this report.”


“EDWARDS AIR FORCE BASE” (af.mil):


Wikipedia article: “Edwards Air Force Base”:


Related posts:





realtvufos.blogspot.com/search?q=1965













(wikimedia.org image)


















Runways on and near Rogers Dry Lake, at Edwards Air Force Base. Located in the Mojave Desert, California. (text by Wikipedia) 
(wikimedia.org) (wikimedia.org photo)









Air Force Rocket Research Laboratory Edwards AFRL site
(text by Wikipedia) (wikimedia.org) (wikimedia.org photo)