by Dan Wright
August 14, 1957
At 10:55 p.m., a Varig Airlines C-47 cargo transport was passing over Brazil's state of Santa Catarina at 6,300 feet on its way to Rio de Janeiro. Suddenly it confronted a luminous object ahead that crossed its path laterally. Without warning the plane's engines began coughing and the cabin lights dimmed severely. At that point the unknown dove downward into a cloud and was gone. The C-47 immediately returned to normal operation.53
August 20, 1957
At approximately 11:30 a.m., near Enoshima Miani Beach, Japan, a gentleman's sister called his attention to an approaching airborne oddity about 3,000–4,000 feet up. He snapped one photo of the object, which they reported as silvery and glowing brilliantly. When directly overhead, the object made a 90-degree turn and sped up from an estimated 250 to 500 kph. It was quickly lost in the clouds. A few minutes later about 15 bathers at the beach spotted the same or a similar vehicle racing silently overhead.54
September 4, 1957
While flying on a path over Portalegre, Portugal, under the command of Captain José Lemos Ferreira that night, the crews of four Portugal Air Force fighter-bombers at 25,000 feet spotted a large luminescent object above the horizon. As they looked on, the anomalous light appeared to grow in size then diminish. After several minutes the pilots noticed a small yellow circle emerging from the larger unknown. Later three more circles appeared. Near the town of Coruche, the bigger object (mother ship?) rose up and away while the smaller ones left the area. The bombers landed without any problems, following which Captain Ferreira declared: “After this, do not come to us with that Venus, weather balloons, aircraft, and similar stuff which have been being used as general explanations for almost every case of UFOs.”55
November 2–3, 1957
During the night, from disparate locations surrounding the town of Levelland, Texas, frightened callers told the sheriff's office that an oval/egg-shaped object, perhaps 200 feet in length, rose from fields and charged their vehicles, passing low overhead with a thunderous sound. As it went past, each motorist claimed, the engine and headlights of the car/truck died—only to return to normal operation once the anomaly was gone.
The first call came from a pair of Latino farmhands at 10:50 p.m. After a flash in an adjacent field, a yellow-white light lifted off the ground, accelerated, and “passed directly over the truck with a great sound and rush of wind.” As it approached, the truck's headlights went dark and the engine died. When the light had passed out of sight, the engine was restarted without a problem. Another call to the sheriff at 12:05 a.m. from a college student told much the same story. He estimated the vehicle when stationary was about 125 feet across—most callers that night estimated around 200 feet—and glowing blue-green. After a few minutes it rose straight up and out of sight. The witness had no trouble restarting his car. Among the reporting witnesses across several hours were the sheriff, a deputy, and the local fire marshal.56
November 3, 1957
Just hours after the spectacular series of sightings around Levelland, Texas, at the White Sands Proving Grounds, New Mexico, a tantalizing if brief series of encounters ensued. Two military policemen were patrolling about 3:00 a.m. when they spotted a brilliant red-orange, egg-shaped object descending to about 50 yards above a bunker; it suddenly vanished before their eyes. The men estimated its expanse as 75–100 yards. A few minutes later it blinked on again and descended, this time at an angle, toward the same bunker, only to disappear once more. It did not reappear and a later search party found nothing.
Seven hours later at 10:20 a.m., two military policemen patrolling White Sands observed a brilliant red-orange, egg-shaped object descend to within 50 yards of a bunker, then vanish. Minutes later it blinked on again, descended on a slant, and disappeared in broad daylight once more. A search party found no trace of the intruder. About 8:00 p.m. that evening, a separate patrol spotted a brilliant light, 200–300 feet long, over the same bunker. The light pulsated as it ascended slowly at an angle, then imploded to a point of light and disappeared.57
November 4, 1957
At Fort Itaipu, Brazil, about 2:00 a.m., two sentries noticed what they at first thought was a star. It rapidly descended and slowed, at which point they realized it was a disc about 100 feet in diameter and surrounded by an orange glow. It stopped 150 feet above the grounds, issuing a humming sound. The sentries, standing within the light being cast, were too frightened to move. Suddenly a blast of severe heat engulfed them; one fell to the ground, the other raced away screaming in pain and terror. The sleeping men of the garrison leaped from bed only to have their interior lights go out. Then the surroundings became strangely hot. A minute later, the heat lifted and the lights came back on. Some of the soldiers running to their battle stations saw the glowing UFO as it sped away. The burned sentries were treated medically and survived. US Army and Air Force advisors were at a loss to explain the intrusion.58
Chapter 11
1958: Insurgencies Peak
Samuel Goudsmit of the Brookhaven National Laboratory, and a member of the 1953 Robertson Panel, had written to the OSI Deputy Assistant Director Philip Strong on December 26, 1957, concerning the inclusion on the retrospective panel of astronomer J. Allen Hynek and physicist Lloyd Berkner. In his reply on January 3, Strong explained that Hynek, though attending some of the panel meetings, was not a full member and did not sign the report. Berkner was a member and did sign the report.1
Leon Davidson refused to give up. On January 9, a redacted Agency person sent a memo to the chief of the support branch in the Chicago office. Davidson had been told firmly that the CIA “cannot resolve his problem concerning the space message and its transmitter because records on the matter have been destroyed by the evaluating agency.” Davidson informed the writer that he had written a second article about sightings of unknowns. (A presumably important paragraph was deleted.) The writer ended with, “We are sure more will be heard from Davidson.”2
A January 31 telegram to the Agency's support staff in Chicago from (redacted) once again addressed the CIA irritant, Leon Davidson. The writer said that Davidson was demanding an interpretation of the tape recording in question—a translation of the Morse code, as well as answers to irregularities he perceived in the CIA investigation thereof. Additionally, contrary to a statement the chemist had made, “(Redacted) did not ask Davidson to keep secret the location of the Agency's Chicago office, but advised him not to use CIA letterhead in his forthcoming article ... without first clearing with CIA authorities in Washington.”3
Air Force Regulation 200-2, titled “Unidentified Flying Objects (UFO),” was released February 5, 1958. It displaced identically numbered regulations from August 26, 1953; November 2, 1953; and August 12, 1954. This iteration reestablished emphasis on procedures for information and evidence material pertaining to UFOs. Its further purpose was to set forth “the responsibility of Air Force activities in this regard. It applies to all Air Force Activities.”4
In its introduction, the Department of the Air Force made clear that the USAF role with respect to the reported aerial anomalies was fourfold: detection, identification, interception, and, ominously, destruction. The Headquarters more broadly outlined the Air Force's responsibilities in addressing this subject:
Determine any security threat to the United States posed by unknowns.
Ascertain technical or scientific characteristics, within or beyond present-day knowledge.
Explain or identify all sightings.
These tasks would be handled by one low-ranking officer, a noncommissioned officer, a part-time secretarial assistant, and a filing cabinet: Project Blue Book.
Since UFOs could be hostile or foreign unconventional aircrafts, it was imperative to ensure rapid, factual, and complete reports of sightings by the public. The Air Force needed up-to-date information on new or unique designs, propulsion systems, and weapons. The academic fields of geophysics, atmospherics, and astronomy could benefit from the study of UFOs and other aerial phenome
na, was one current of CIA thinking.
In the quest to minimize the number of reported unknowns remaining unexplained, in all but a comparatively few sighting events, subsequent analysis had identified them as prosaic: conventional aircraft, planets and stars, atmospheric phenomena, balloons, and so forth. With better data from the reporting witnesses and others, the remainder could probably have been explained, the Agency insisted.
US Air Force interest in the UFO subject and objectives were declared to be twofold: (1) to thwart possible threats to the security of the United States and its forces, and (2) to determine the technical aspects of the so-called phenomena involved.
Until then, the flying objects reported had posed no threat to US security or that of its possessions. However, the possibility that new air vehicles, hostile aircraft, or missiles might first be regarded as unknown flying objects was real. Therefore, sightings needed to be reported as rapidly and as completely as information permitted.
These efforts had thus far failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for a number of sightings reported.
The Air Force continues to collect and analyze reports until all sightings can be satisfactorily explained, bearing in mind that:
• to measure scientific advances, the Air Force must be informed on experimentation and development of new air vehicles;
• the possibility exists that an air vehicle of revolutionary configuration may be developed; and
• the reporting of all pertinent factors will have a direct bearing on the success of the technical analysis.
UFOs were, once again, serious business to the Air Force.5
Readers might question the timing of this regulatory release. America was in the midst of a cold war with the Soviet Union, certainly, and “duck and cover” was the naïve response in public service announcements to the threat of Russian bombs or missiles. Now they had launched a pair of Sputnik satellites. In such an atmosphere of potential hysteria, using military resources to nip the buds of reported anomalous lights in the sky could certainly be justified.
Or might there possibly have been a watershed moment—per chance a change in perspective on what UFOs might mean, by the Air Force Chief of Staff, the Defense Secretary, a White House adviser—at some point over the 30 months since the Air Force's most recent regulations on the same subject?
To be clear, this directive stipulated that all base commanders were responsible to report information on UFO sightings, regardless of source. The Air Force base nearest to the sighting location was responsible for the initial investigation and efforts to resolve it. The Air Technical Intelligence Center (ATIC) at Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio, would analyze the findings and investigate further if necessary. The CIA Office of Information Services (OIS) would release sighting statistics and respond to inquiries from the public. The USAF Office of Legislative Liaison would respond to congressional inquiries and utilize ATIC as necessary. All bases and offices were to assist USAF investigators.6
Screening and evaluating sighting accounts meant assessing the logic, consistency, and coherence of the witness account. That had to be painted against the person's age, education, and occupation. A theodolite (a surveying instrument used for measuring angles) would assist in some aerial measurements. Airborne interception and ID or air search might be necessary. Contact with local air traffic controllers, ground crews, private pilots, airlines, astronomers, weather forecasters, and other sources of factual data was thereby encouraged. Photography was invaluable, and to be used whenever possible. ATIC sometimes needed additional materials (for example, maps, drawings) and was authorized to request them.7
OIS, meanwhile, was responsible for coordinating with ATIC on technical matters as well as sighting and investigative information and to process correspondence from the public.
A base commander could release information regarding sightings in the base's vicinity: “If the sighting is unexplainable or difficult to identify, ... the only statement to be released is the fact that the sighting is being investigated and information regarding it will be released at a later date.” If newsmen or individuals intended to release unofficial information, efforts would be necessary to disassociate the Air Force. OIS staff were not to contact or share information with unauthorized persons unless so directed. USAF reports transmitted within three days of the sighting were to be tabbed “Priority.” Older reports would be “Routine.”8
A detailed Air Force reporting format included the object's description, aerial course, manner of observation, sighting time and date, observer's location and identifying information, weather conditions, any unusual activity or condition, aerial interception or ID, action taken, air traffic in the area, and existence of physical evidence. Instructions were offered for handling still photos, motion pictures, negatives and supplemental prints, camera specifics, and radar tracking.9
As he had promised, Leon Davidson sent a copy of his magazine article to the Pentagon, which forwarded it to OSI without comment. OSI handed it to Colonel Stanley Grogan, Special Assistant to the CIA Director for public relations, stating nothing could be done about it; Grogan agreed. The sender declared, “We do not want any business with Davidson. If he wishes to contact the Agency he already knows enough names.... So, unless there are overriding reasons in the future we do not want (redacted) involved in this mess.”10
Herbert Scoville, OSI Assistant Director, sent a memo titled “Unidentified Flying Objects” to his counterpart in the Office of Operations on March 21. He attached two letters (not shown) recently sent to the Director of Intelligence (presumably from Donald Keyhoe and Leon Davidson, respectively) and forwarded to OSI for reply. Scoville asked for OO comment as soon as possible—especially regarding the final two paragraphs of the letter from Keyhoe, the retired Marine Corps major who headed NICAP. Scoville commented warily, “The statements and inquiries made in these letters involve a number of rather critical matters.” Three days later the AD at Operations assigned a staff person to prepare a memo for Scoville's signature. On the assignment buck slip the AD remarked, “I hope Major Keyhoe is not referring to any of our field personnel.”11
Also on March 21, retired Air Force General Charles P. Cabell, CIA Deputy Director, responded to a Donald Keyhoe letter of March 13. Having reviewed various UFO reports cited by Keyhoe, Agency staff determined that further inquiries and coordination with other organizations were needed. Cabell conditionally promised, “dependent upon the findings of my staff,” to advise Keyhoe on these incidents.12
The CIA was dealing with a salvo of criticism, courtesy of Keyhoe, NICAP's chairman, who charged that the Agency was silencing UFO eyewitnesses. (Think Men in Black.) If true and if made public, the CIA would suffer a serious embarrassment and deservedly so. It was not authorized to contact US citizens, let alone attempt to intimidate them.
An internal memo attempted to clarify the matter: Witnesses were to be told that their relationship with the Agency must remain confidential in order to minimize disclosure of CIA involvement. But there was no intent—at least not by the people in Langley, Virginia, who set policy—to impose any security restrictions on the content of their accounts. Conceivably some witnesses, or agents, were confused.
Shortly thereafter, the Operations acting AD responded to Herbert Scoville at OSI. Regarding Major Keyhoe's allegation, agents may have misinterpreted policy on communicating with UFO witnesses.
[T]he relationship between the source and the Agency is confidential in nature. This caveat is not intended to impose a security restriction on the information imparted by the source but to minimize the disclosure of the Agency's relationship with the source.13
In other words, it was all right to tell a UFO witness that “this conversation never happened,” since the agent was not permitted to contact the witness in the first place. But insisting that the person remain silent about the circumstances of an incident was over the line.
Scoville wrote to the Operations AD again on the 23rd. He attached copies of letters
to the CIA Director. To prepare replies, he requested the AD's comments on part of Donald Keyhoe's letter (not shown).14
On April 1, the Operations AD wrote to OSI's Scoville again. Major Keyhoe's question concerning CIA silencing of UFO witnesses suggested a possible misinterpretation by Contact Division staff. There was no intent to impose a security restriction on the content of eyewitness accounts. Conceivably some sources were confused. Separately, the Contact Division had accumulated a detailed history of Dr. Leon Davidson's activities in the UFO field and alleged outer space communications.15
On the 4th of April, an executive officer in the CIA Director's office, J. S. Earman, wrote to Keyhoe. Earman explained that, since the subject of Keyhoe's March 13, 1958, letter was of primary concern to the Air Force, it had been forwarded there for reply to him.16
The chief of the OSI Applied Science Division (ASD) prepared an Office Memorandum for AD/SI Herbert Scoville on April 4. Back in 1953, the Robertson Panel had assessed potential threats to national security posed by UFOs and found nothing of significance. Edward Ruppelt, an Air Force captain, had attended panel meetings because he was the first head of Project Blue Book. But his 1956 book on his investigative experience (The Report on Unidentified Flying Objects) implied that the panel's mission had been to identify UFOs. The chief asserted, “Ruppelt's statements regarding the mission of the panel are in error. He has led the reader to believe the panel's mission was to identify the flying objects and to make recommendations on methods to further identify such objects.”17
