Australia Reviewed the US Air Force’s UFO Project
A 1971 document links an Australian review to a US project. But what did the review examine?
A 1971 document links an Australian review to a US project. But what did the review examine?
A 1971 document describes an Australian review of the US Air Force’s UFO project. The record does not specify what the review examined or found.
An Australian Department of Defence / RAAF review paper, dated to 1971 and held by the National Archives of Australia (NAA: A13693, 3092/2/000), examining the scientific and intelligence aspects of the UFO problem and the history of the USAF's Project SIGN, GRUDGE and BLUE BOOK. The author argues that the USAF's public 'debunking' of UFOs was a facade engineered by the CIA Office of Scientific Intelligence (via the 1953 Robertson Panel) to mask a covert U.S. program to study UFO propulsion and develop gravity-control / anti-gravity aircraft such as the Canadian Avro saucer. It critiques the RAAF's own disinterested, scientifically weak handling of Australian UFO reports and recommends Australia investigate the phenomenon independently and more openly. The paper includes an appendix chronology of UFO-related events from 1947 to 1969 and a statistical table from BLUE BOOK Special Report No. 14.
Kenneth Arnold's sighting of nine 'saucers' which created public interest and triggered the initial investigations by the Air Technical Intelligence Centre.
A more than twenty-fold rise in UFO reporting including two extensive July radar-visual sightings over Washington National Airport that overloaded defence communications; the CIA regarded the activity as a threat to national security.
Publication, previously cleared by the U.S. Army, describing the tracking of a UFO by an official team led by Commander McLaughlin; from the tracking data it was concluded the UFO required an extraterrestrial origin.
The well-publicised Michigan sightings, which the USAF identified as being 'swamp gas', causing a public furore.
"The early analyses of UFO reports by USAF intelligence indicated that real phenomena were being reported which had flight characteristics so far in advance of U.S. aircraft that only an extra-terrestial origin could be envisaged."
Why it matters: Opening claim that early USAF analysis pointed to extraterrestrial origin.
Page 3
"By erecting a facade of ridicule, the U.S. hoped to allay public alarm, reduce the possibility of the Soviet taking advantage of UFO mass sightings for either psychological or actual warfare purposes, and act as a cover for the real U.S. programme of developing vehicles that emulate UFO performances."
Why it matters: Core thesis of the document: public debunking as a cover for a real anti-gravity development programme.
Page 3
"Project BLUE BOOK consultants statistically tested the unknown object population to determine the likelihood that it was similar to the population of identified objects and found that the probability was less than one in 10^28."
Why it matters: Technical statistical claim from BLUE BOOK Special Report No. 14 that unknowns differed sharply from knowns.
Page 8
"Such an intensive onslaught on the gravity enigma was entirely irrational from the standpoint of conventional science, and can only be rationalized within the context of a firm belief that UFO's were real and that the intelligences behind them know how to control gravity."
Why it matters: Author's interpretation linking the U.S. anti-gravity research effort to a belief that UFOs are real.
Page 11
"my attitude right now is that there's nothing to it, but I'm not supposed to reach a conclusion for another year."
Speaker: Dr Edward U. Condon
Why it matters: Cited as evidence of Condon's biased attitude that discredited the Colorado project.
Page 12
H.P. Robertson
Chairman of the 1953 scientific panel · Page 3
Dr J. Allen Hynek
Scientific consultant to Project Blue Book 1948-69 · USAF · Page 7
Major D. Fournet
Blue Book Project Officer at the Pentagon until late 1952 · USAF · Page 7
Captain E. Ruppelt
Headed Project GRUDGE and Project BLUE BOOK until September 1953 · USAF · Page 7
Admiral Hillenkoetter
Directed CIA from its inception until October 1950; later NICAP director · CIA / NICAP · Page 7
Admiral D.S. Fahrney
First Chairman of NICAP; had directed the Navy's guided missile programme · NICAP / US Navy · Page 7
Major Keyhoe
NICAP director · NICAP · Page 7
Rear Admiral H.B. Knowles
NICAP director · NICAP · Page 7
General A. Wedemeyer
NICAP director · NICAP · Page 7
Col J.J. Bryan
NICAP director; special assistant to the Secretary of the Air Force · NICAP / USAF · Page 7
D.J. Quarles
Secretary of the Air Force; confident the Avro saucer could be developed · USAF · Page 10
Teller
Scientist involved in gravity research · University of California · Page 11
Oppenheimer
Scientist involved in gravity research · Institute of Advanced Studies · Page 11
F.J. Dyson
Scientist involved in gravity research · Institute of Advanced Studies · Page 11
Released by the National Archives of Australia (NAA: A13693, 3092/2/000), not a U.S. agency, though the manifest tags agency as CIA. Strongly argumentative/interpretive document advancing a 'cover-up of anti-gravity programme' thesis; treat its assertions as the author's claims, not established fact. OCR quality is uneven: pages 2, 3, 13 and 16-18 are heavily garbled while pages 5-12 are largely legible. Many names and dates reconstructed from degraded OCR; some spellings (e.g. Keyhoe, Deser, Wheeler) corrected for clarity. Appendix 'A' on pages 15-19 is a chronology of UFO events 1947-1969.
The summary describes it as a US Air Force project, but gives no further details about its activities.
The record does not specify any findings or cases examined.
"on retiring from the services, all publicly stated that the U.S. Government knew UFO's were extra-terrestial but was withholding this fact from the public."
Why it matters: Claim that retired senior intelligence officers publicly asserted official knowledge of extraterrestrial UFOs.
Page 7
J.A. Wheeler
Scientist involved in gravity research · Princeton · Page 11
Vaclav Hlavaty
Scientist who had worked with Einstein in Prague · University of Indiana · Page 11
Stanley Deser
Scientist involved in gravity research · Page 11
George M. Rideout
President of the Gravity Research Institute · Gravity Research Institute · Page 11
Roger Babson
Founder of the Gravity Research Institute (New Boston, N.H.) · Gravity Research Institute · Page 11
Dr B. Heim
Scientist on gravity/electromagnetic programme at Glenn L. Martin Aviation · Goettingen University · Page 11
Dr P. Jordan
Scientist on gravity/electromagnetic programme at Glenn L. Martin Aviation · Hamburg University · Page 11
J. Weber
Researcher on gravitational waves · USAF Cambridge Research Laboratory · Page 11
Maj Gen LeBailly
Director of Information; requested review of Project BLUE BOOK in 1965 · USAF · Page 12
Dr Edward U. Condon
Led the Colorado University UFO project · University of Colorado · Page 12
Dr Thornton Page
Chairman of the AAAS Special Committee; a signatory to the Robertson report · Page 12
General Vandenberg
Air Force Chief of Staff who rejected the 1948 interplanetary Estimate of the Situation · USAF · Page 15
Lt Gen Twining
Requested authority and code name for investigation of flying discs (Sept 1947) · AMC / USAF · Page 15
Dr J.E. Lipp
Replied to USAF Director of Research and Development on interplanetary origin (1948) · Rand Corporation · Page 15
Commander McLaughlin
Led an official team that tracked a UFO at White Sands missile proving ground · US Navy · Page 16
General Cabell
USAF Director of Intelligence who ordered Project Grudge revitalized · USAF · Page 16
Luis Alvarez
Member of the Robertson panel · Page 17
Lloyd Berkner
Member of the Robertson panel · Page 17
Samuel A. Goudsmit
Member of the Robertson panel · Page 17
William P. Lear
Chairman of Lear Inc.; stated serious efforts were being made to prove anti-gravitational forces · Lear Inc. · Page 18
General Nathan Twining
USAF Chief of Staff who said the best brains in the Air Force were working on UFOs (1954) · USAF · Page 18
Colonel O'Mara
Deputy Commander of Intelligence at ATIC; said more than a thousand people were working on the problem · ATIC / USAF · Page 18
Dr McDonald
Read the complete declassified Robertson report (1966) · Page 19
Australia
Page 4
Dayton, Ohio, USA
Page 5
Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, USA
Page 15
Washington D.C., USA
Page 6
White Sands missile proving ground, USA
Page 16
Princeton, N.J., USA
Page 11
New Boston, N.H., USA
Page 11
Harwell, U.K., United Kingdom
Page 11
Roosevelt Hotel, Hollywood, USA
Page 18
4602nd Air Intelligence Service Squadron
USAF (Air Defence Command) · Page 6
Air Technical Intelligence Centre (ATIC)
USAF · Page 5
USAF Cambridge Research Laboratory
USAF · Page 11
Directorate of Air Force Intelligence (DAFI)
RAAF · Page 13
Avro saucer (Canadian)
aircraft · Page 10
Diffraction-grating cameras
sensor · Page 18
IBM card-sorting machines
ground · Page 6
In 1971, Australia reviewed the US Air Force’s UFO project, which dealt with reports of UFOs. Years later, the National Archives of Australia made the document public.
It’s an intriguing connection: an Australian review of an American project that approached the subject from both scientific and intelligence-gathering perspectives. But the archive record offers only a glimpse of the document. It identifies the document’s type and date, but gives no examples of what the review examined.
The American project was called Project Blue Book. According to the document description, the Australian review covered the project. The document’s full title refers to two fields: science and intelligence gathering. It promises a look at UFOs from two angles, not just a mention of the project.
That is where the record’s account ends. It names no cases, describes no sighting, and offers no example of an explanation considered. Nor does it include excerpts from the document. The title alone can’t tell us about a specific case: the record confirms that a review took place, but doesn’t describe what it covered.
The document is dated 1971, and the record identifies Australia as the location. The National Archives of Australia made it public. The record also lists the US Central Intelligence Agency, but that detail does not clarify its role in the document.
That gap is central to the record: we have evidence of an Australian review of an American project, with a title that refers to science and intelligence gathering. But the summary doesn’t show what, exactly, was at issue. Readers hoping to learn whether the review covered a particular report, or how it assessed that report, won’t find an answer here.
The record does not say what the review found, which cases it examined, or what explanations it offered. It also does not explain the US intelligence agency’s role. Those details can be established only by consulting the document itself.
All that remains is a document title, like a closed door to the archive.