The Air Force Investigated Sightings. One in Ten Remained Unexplained
The team compared sightings with weather data and information about stars, aircraft, and balloons.
The team compared sightings with weather data and information about stars, aircraft, and balloons.
The US Air Force investigated reports of things seen in the sky and compared them with information about the weather, stars, aircraft, and balloons. About one in ten remained unexplained.
A 17 December 1953 CIA memorandum from the Chief of the Physics and Electronics Division, SI, to the Assistant Director, Scientific Intelligence, prepared at the verbal request of Mr. Brent (Exec/SI) on 30 November. It gives a status resume of unidentified flying object (UFOB) activities, describing how the CIA's Physics & Electronics Division had confined its role to maintaining awareness of other agencies' work (notably the USAF) and keeping files. It summarizes Department of Defense activity (Air Force ATIC Project Bluebook, Navy, Army), foreign-government interest (Canada, Great Britain, Sweden), and the results of the January 1953 OSI (Robertson) panel recommendations.
"if it turns out that these things (UFOB's) are space ships or long range aircraft from another country, ADC is the (Air Force) Command that would have to take action."
Speaker: Lt. Col. Harry Johnston
Why it matters: Stated rationale for transferring Project Bluebook to Air Defense Command, framing UFOBs as a potential defense problem.
Page 2
"The consultants who considered this problem in January 1953 recommended that UFOB's be stripped of special status and aura of mystery and that policies on intelligence, training, and public education pertinent to true indications of hostile intent or action be prepared."
Why it matters: Summarizes the January 1953 OSI (Robertson) panel recommendation to debunk and downgrade UFO reporting.
Page 3
"Ninety percent of the gratings have 'gone bad'--the actual grating separating from the plastic mounting plates."
Why it matters: Documents the technical failure of the spectrographic gratings on the UFOB photography cameras.
Page 2
"For about the past year, approximately ten percent of the reported sightings have been tagged as unsolved."
Why it matters: Gives a contemporary unsolved-sighting rate for Project Bluebook.
Page 1
"Fortunately, the later book is so nonsensical and obviously fraudulent that it may actually help calm down public reaction."
Why it matters: CIA author's editorial assessment of Adamski's 'Flying Saucers Have Landed'.
Page 3
Mr. Brent
Requestor of the status resume · Exec/SI, CIA · Page 1
Capt. Charles A. Hardin
Project officer · ATIC Aerial Phenomena Section · Page 1
A/1C Max G. Futch
Airman on the project · ATIC Aerial Phenomena Section · Page 1
Lt. Col. Harry Johnston
Chief, Electronics Branch · ATIC · Page 1
D. E. Keyhoe
Author of 'Flying Saucers From Outer Space' · Page 3
Wilbur B. Smith
Conducted saucer investigations · Canadian Department of Transport · Page 3
Leslie
Co-author of 'Flying Saucers Have Landed' · Page 3
Adamski
Co-author of 'Flying Saucers Have Landed' · Page 3
Todos M. Odarenko
Chief, Physics and Electronics Division, SI (author/signer) · CIA · Page 3
Albuquerque area, USA
Page 2
A. V. Roe, Ltd., Toronto, Canada
Page 2
Canada
Page 2
Great Britain
Page 3
Sweden
Page 3
Discussion of Great Britain: 'The subject of UFOB's was discussed briefly ___ during his recent visit. He stated that since ___ investigation of UFOB's of two and one half years ago, initiated ___'
Likely reason: Name of a British official/visitor and possibly an organization or source
Section on Sweden: 'c. Sweden.) | ___ No further information is available.'
Likely reason: Source or substance of Swedish UFOB information
Manifest notes a more redacted version of this memo is on CIA's public website; this release un-redacts more text. Signer Todos M. Odarenko was the CIA P&E Division chief overseeing the agency's UFOB file-keeping role post-Robertson Panel. Document is a 3-page CIA SECRET status memo dated 17 December 1953; OCR is moderately noisy but content is legible.
No clear explanation was found for the report.
It compared the reports with information about the weather, stars, aircraft, and balloons.
Air Technical Intelligence Center (ATIC)
USAF · Page 1
Directorate of Intelligence, Hq., USAF
USAF · Page 1
Aerial Phenomena Section, Electronics Branch, Technical Analysis Division
USAF/ATIC · Page 1
Air Defense Command (ADC)
USAF · Page 1
Airways and Air Communications Service (AACS)
USAF · Page 1
Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI)
Navy · Page 2
Royal Air Force (RAF)
British military · Page 3
Physics and Electronics Division, SI
CIA · Page 1
'Videon' 35 mm cameras with 'stereon' anastigmat f3.5 lenses (stereoscopic, grating-equipped)
sensor · Page 2
ADC radar sites
radar · Page 2
Interceptor aircraft
aircraft · Page 2
An intelligence officer with the US Air Force received reports of objects in the sky. His team tried to determine what people had seen. A CIA update written in December 1953 described the team’s work.
The CIA monitored the Air Force’s activities and wrote about them. The team looked for familiar explanations and requested further checks when needed. Even so, about one in ten reports was marked unresolved. What exactly had those people seen? The document doesn’t say.
The team received reports and checked them against information about the weather, stars, aircraft, and balloons. When information was missing, intelligence officers in the area where a sighting occurred were asked to investigate.
The Air Force had stopped sending team members into the field to investigate every sighting. Instead, they received and reviewed reports, asking others to investigate when necessary. They documented their findings and conclusions. The team also passed information to the Air Force office responsible for public releases.
At the time, the Air Force was transferring the project to Air Defense Command, a military organization responsible for defending against threats from the air. According to the document, the command was already doing most of the work. In other words, those investigating the reports were already handling most of the project’s activity.
The supplied document cuts off midway through its explanation of the project’s transfer, so it doesn’t give the full reason. It also doesn’t say which reports remained unexplained or what, exactly, the witnesses saw. There is no example to compare with the explanations the team considered.
The file, then, contains reports that were investigated but never resolved. Sometimes, even after checking the weather, stars, and aircraft, something in the sky still has no clear explanation.