Sacred Texts  Esoteric & Occult   Mysteries
Buy CD-ROM   Buy Books about UFOs
Index  Previous  Next 

Project Moon Dust

                 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
     ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ *                                         * ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ
                 *    L I T E R A R Y   F R E E W A R E    *
                 *                                         *
                 *           F O U N D A T I O N           *
     ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ *                                         * ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ
                 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
                  -=ð P R O U D L Y  í  P R E S E N T S ð=-
                CUFON Computer UFO Network Seattle, Washington
                                  JUST CAUSE
                 ( CAUS ) Stands For Citizens Against UFO Secrecy
 Lawrence Fawcett
 Barry Greenwood
 NUMBER 8                                                     JUNE 1986
                            PROJECT MOON DUST
     (In our last issue, we alluded to one of those many project code names
      which turn up from time to time in released government documents. Few
      of these are ever identified in more than brief detail. However,
      Project Moon Dust, as named in recently-released DIA files is an ex-
      ception. We have several documents which do seem to link UFOs with
      this colorfully named project. Our thanks to Robert Todd for providing
      us with the backround information on his several-years-old research
      into Moon Dust.)
        We have heard of stories, or more accurately -- rumors, of crashed UFOs
 and alien bodies recovered. Dozens of them are presently on file. Often in
 these accounts, military personnel respond quickly to a developing situation,
 enact a carefully-planned set of procedures (like photography, mapping,
 interviews, etc.); then, usually, the evidence is carted away to an unknown
 location for further study. That's what the rumors tell us.
        You must have thought at times, while digesting these rumors, that such
 step-by-step action must have been scripted; that there muct have been guide-
 lines to follow for everything to have been done so thoroughly and properly
 that not a stick of residue was left. You know how the military does everything
 by the book, as they tell us! If all this is so, then these procedures must be
 available for consultation when needed.
        It's possible that we now have been pointed in the right direction to
 verify whether or not these procedures are on the record.
      Salted through out some recent document releases, mainly from the Defense
 Intelligence Agency (DIA) and State Department, are references to "Project Moon
 Dust." The context of this codename to the rest of the published data was
 unclear, but the fact that it repeatedly turned up in documents dealing with
 UFOs told us that is was worth checking. A feeler was put into the March 1986
 issue of Just Cause, requesting that anyone who had knowledge of Project Moon
 Dust to please contact us.
        Not long afterwards, Robert Todd, a well-known CAUS researcher, informed
 us that he had researched Moon Dust in the late l970's. What he had found was
 quite revealing.
        As a result of inquiries by Todd about Moon Dust, and other matters, the
 Air Force released a letter on August 20, 1979. It was identified as "AFCIN-1E-
 O", dated 3 November 1961. The letter was partly deleted, but enough was left
 to open the door on Moon Dust: (emphasis added where necessary--ed.)
         Extract, page 1: "c. In addition to their staff duty assignments,
 intelligence team personnel have peacetime duty functions in support of such
 Air Force projects as Moondust, Bluefly, and UFO, and other AFCIN directed
 quick reaction projects which require intelligence team operational
 capabilities (see Definitions)."
         Extract, page 2: "f. Blue Fly: Operation Blue Fly has been established
 to facilitate expeditious delivery to FTD of Moon Dust or other items of great
 technical intelligence interest. ACIN SOP for Blue Fly operations, February
 1960 provides for 1127th participation."
                          "g. Moon Dust: As a specialized aspect of it's
 over-all material exploitation program, Headquarters USAF has established
 Project Moon Dust to locate, recover and deliver descended foreign space
 vehicles. ICGL #4, 25 April, l961, delineates collection responsibilities."
         Extract, page 3: "c. Peacetime employment of AFCIN intelligence team
 capability is provided for in UFO investigation (AFR 200-2) and in support of
 Air Force Systems Command (AFCS) Foreign Technology Division (FTD) Projects
 Moon Dust and Blue Fly. These three peacetime projects all involve a poten-
 tial for employment of qualified field intelligence personnel on a quick
 reaction basis to recover or perform field exploitation of unidentified flying
 objects, or known Soviet/Bloc aerospace vehicles, weapons systems, and/or
 residual components of such equipment. The intelligence team capability to
 gain rapid access, regardless of location, to recover or perform field
 exploitation, to communicate and provide intelligence reports is the only
 such collection capability available to AFCIN, and it is vitally necessary
 in view of current intelligence gaps concerning Soviet/Bloc technological
         Let's pause a moment to absorb this.
         The letter immediately indicates that Moon Dust, "Blue Fly", and "UFO"
 are among A.F. Intelligence's quick reaction projects. It is probable here that
 "UFO" refers to Blue Book.
         We have pointed out in CLEAR INTENT (pg. 9) that often the prefix word
 "Blue" has been used in connection with high-altitude vehicles, and it appears
 in several fact, and rumor, UFO projects. Here we see it again in "Blue Fly,"
 which provided for transportation of Moon Dust material. And what did Moon
 Dust material include? Among other things, it included things acquired from
 the recovery and/or field exploitation of UFOs! Note how UFOs are set apart
 from Soviet/Bloc aerospace vehicles. Since the Soviets were the only other
 real space power in the world at the time, besides the U.S., what could have
 been meant by setting off UFOs as a separate subject of investigation? If they
 were British, or another nation's space vehicle, why not say this, as it was
 said for the Soviets?
         Note that Moon Dust and "other items of great technical intelligence
 interest" were sent to the Foreign Technology Division at Wright-Patterson
 AFB in Ohio, under Project Blue Fly. FTD was the parent group for Project
 Blue Book. Coincidence?
         Originally, Blue Book's investigative functions were partly aided by
 personnel of the 4602nd Air Intelligence Service Squadron (AISS). Part of it's
 mission during WW2, and later in peacetime, was to "exploit downed people,
 paper and hardware" for intelligence information. The 4602nd's operations were
 transferred to AFCIN in July 1957, which then assigned the 1006th AISS most
 of the 4602nd's operations. The 1006th was re-designated the 1127th Field
 Activities Group in 1960. These units all performed UFO investigations for
 Blue Book, but were trained for and capable of additional activities in the
 event that one of these UFOs had crashed somewhere.
         We discuss the operations of a possible "quick response unit" in CLEAR
 INTENT, pg 111. Our point in that discussion was that such a unit would come
 under the highest security classification. Any admission that a UFO phenomenon
 was real and unexplainable would not be in the government's best interest to
 state, considering the still-existent debunking policy. Certainly here we see
 UFO investigation linked to the highest levels of the U.S. Air Force.
         When did Moon Dust begin? We aren't sure but it likely dates from the
 beginnings of Blue Book at least, i.e. the early 1950s. It's entirely possible
 that the 1952 crashed disc incident reported in letters by Rear Admiral
 Herbert Knowles (see Just Cause, March 1986) could have been investigated
 under Moon Dust, if it were called that then. It certainly fits the criteria
 for attention, as described in the Air Force's 1961 letter.
         Compelling evidence for the Moon Dust/ crash retrieval link and its
 early origins appears in Donald Keyhoe's 1955 book, THE FLYING SAUCER CONSPIR-
 ACY. Note these extracts:
 [Pages 214-15]
           Two days after this Lou Corbin called me to report another develop-
           "Do you know anything about a `crashed-object' program?" he asked me.
           "No. Whose project is it?"
           "It's an Air Force deal, unless somebody's trying to trick me. You've
         heard of the 4602nd Air Intelligence Service Squadron, of course?"
           "Yes. It's a hush-hush unit. They have investigators in all Air
         Defense Squadrons."
           "Well, I've been contacted by one of them. First I thought it might
         be some kind of hoax. But I've double-checked, He actually is with the
           "Sounds queer, Lou. They're not supposed to talk to anyone outside of
           "I know. But he may be under special orders. Anyway, he's against the
         secrecy policy. He told me the 4602nd has a special program called the
         `investigation of unidentified crashed objects.'"
           "If it's true, that IS big." I said. "It could mean they've actually
         got their hands on some flying saucers."
           "He wouldn't admit that," said Corbin. "But I got the impression
         they'd recovered some kind of `objects'--probably something dropped from
         a saucer."
           At 2:00 P.M. on November 30 [1954?] a mysterious bright flash in the
         sky was reported simultaneously in Atlanta, Newman, and Columbus,
         Georgia; in Sylacauga and Birmingham, Alabama; and as far away as
         Greenville, Mississippi. This brilliant light was immediately followed
         by a series of strange explosions, apparently centered high in the sky
         above Sylacauga.
           Moments later a black object, six inches in diameter, crashed into
         the home of Mrs. Hewlett Hodges.
           Smashing a three-foot-wide hole in the roof, the shining black object
         tore through the living-room ceiling. Striking the radio, it bounced
         off and gashed Mrs. Hodges' arm.
           Meanwhile, the mysterious explosions had caused a hurried Air Defense
         alert. A three-state search for fallen objects was immediately begun by
         squadrons of Air Force planes.
           When word of the "Sylacauga object" reached the Air Force, Intelli-
         gence officers flew to the scene from Maxwell Air Force Base at Mont-
         gomery.  Explaining that "the Air Force is required to examine such
         strange objects," they whisked it away to Maxwell Field, from which it
         was flown immediately to ATIC.
           An hour or two later the object was labeled a meteorite.
           As soon as this appeared in the papers, I received a call from Lou
         Corbin. "It's plain that this is part of the Air Force `unidentified
         crashed-objects' investigation. They must believe the thing is linked
         with the saucers."
           "It doesn't look like a coincidence," I said, "that this object fell
         fell just after those explosions. If it had been a meteor exploding, it
         wouldn't have made such a bright flash in the daytime."
           "In the first news story," Corbin told me, "it was called an uniden-
         tified flying object. At least that's the way the Maxwell Field
 	officers explained why they had started the search."
           "This reminds me of that East New Haven signboard case," I commented.
         "On that occasion the object wasn't recovered. Judging from the size of
         the hole it made, however, it was probably about the same size."
         Later FOIA requests have indicated that the DIA is currently the res-
 ponsible agency for Moon Dust documentation. However, access is not being
 allowed because such access would reveal intelligence methods and are thus
 exempt from FOIA.
         NASA has been involved as well, as this extract from a Jan. 13, 1969,
 memo indicates:
         "The undersigned {Richard M. Schulherr} visited the Foreign Technology
         Division of the Air Force Systems Command, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio,
         9 Jan. 1969. The purpose of this trip was to identify specific items of
         space debris which had been forwarded to NASA and to re-establish per-
         sonal liason with newly-assigned FTD Moondust personnel."
         The Air Force's Moon Dust activity, as well as Blue Fly, is, in their
 words "no longer active." Perhaps the projects no longer go by these names but
 surely the procedures have not become obsolete. There is still a need to react
 to unknown vehicles landing on our soil. At the very least, national defense is
 served by such reaction.
         One last thought. Could an MJ12-type committee have begun Moon Dust as
 a reaction to early UFO events like Roswell? It would be of interest to see
 exactly when Moon Dust began its operations.
                                                    The Editor
 >>The  following  constitutes  the  entire  text  of the press release from
 CSICOP in Buffalo, concerning the recent "JALaska" UFO.
      Buffalo,   NY   -  An  investigation  of  the  incident  in  which  an
 Unidentified  Flying  Object reportedly paced a Japan Air Lines 747 enroute
 to  Anchorage, Alaska, for nearly 40 minutes on Nov. 18, 1986, reveals that
 at  least  one  extraterrestrial object was involved -- the planet Jupiter,
 and possibly another -- Mars.
      The   investigation   was   conducted   by   Philip   J.   Klass,   an
 internationally   recognized   UFOlogist   and  chairman  of  CSICOP's  UFO
 Subcommittee.  His  investigations  have  yielded  prosaic explanations for
 many famous UFO cases during the past 20 years.
      At  the  time  the UFO incident began near Ft. Yukon, the JAL airliner
 was  flying  south  in  twilight  conditions  so  that  an extremely bright
 Jupiter  (-2.6  magnitude) would have been visible on the pilot's left-hand
 side,  where  he first reported seeing the UFO, according to Klass. Jupiter
 was  only 10 degrees above the horizon, making it appear to the pilot to be
 at  roughly  his  own  35,000  ft.  altitude.  Mars,  slightly lower on the
 horizon, was about 20 degrees to the right of Jupiter but not as bright.
      Although  the  very  bright  Jupiter,  and less bright Mars, had to be
 visible  to JAL Capt. Kenjyu Terauchi, the pilot never once reported seeing
 either  -- only a UFO that he described as being a "white and yellow" light
 in  his initial radio report to Federal Aviation Administration controllers
 at Anchorage.
      Many  of  the  colorful  details  of  the incident carried by the news
 media,  largely based on the six-week-old recollections of the pilot of JAL
 Flight  1628,  are  contradicted by a transcript of radio messages from the
 pilot to FAA controllers while the incident was in progress.
      For  example, news media accounts quoting the 747 pilot said that when
 he  executed  a  360 degree turn, the UFO had followed him around the turn.
 But  this  claim  is contrary to what the pilot told FAA controllers at the
      During  the  pilot's  media  interviews, he "remembered" some colorful
 details  which did not really occur, judging from his earlier radio reports
 to  the  FAA,  and  Terauchi  "forgot"  several important events that would
 challenge his claim of being paced by an unknown craft.
      For  example,  that  another  airliner,  United  Airlines  Flight  69,
 heading  north  from Anchorage to Fairbanks, had agreed to deviate slightly
 from  its  course  to  allow  FAA  radar  controllers  to  vector it to the
 vicinity  of  the  JAL  747,  while  maintaining safe altitude and distance
 separation, to see if the United crew could spot the UFO.
      At  approximately  4:48  PM, as the United flight neared JAL, Terauchi
 reported  that  the  UFO  was to his far left and about 10 miles distant --
 which  was  in  the  direction  of Jupiter. At  roughly 4:50 PM, the United
 pilot  reported  he  now  could  see  JAL but a short time later the United
 pilot said: "I don't see anybody around him."
      Shortly  afterwards, the JAL pilot reported that the UFO now was "just
 ahead  of United" which is where Jupiter would appear to be from Terauchi's
 location.  The  United pilot would not notice Jupiter because it was to his
 right while his attention was focused on JAL which was to his far left.
      Shortly  afterward,  the  pilot  of a USAF C-130 transport in the area
 volunteered  to  be  vectored to the vicinity of the JAL airliner to see if
 he  could spot any object near the airliner. The C-130 crew readily spotted
 the JAL 747, but they too could not see any object in its vicinity.
      "This  is  not the first time that an experienced pilot has mistaken a
 bright  celestial  body for a UFO, nor will it be the last," Klass said. In
 one  case, investigated by the late Dr. J. Allen Hynek in the early 1950's,
 a  military pilot chased a "UFO" for more than 30 minutes, which turned out
 to  be  the  bright  star  Capella. In this case, as with the recent Alaska
 incident,  a  radar operator reported briefly seeing an unknown blip on his
 radar scope.
      During  World  War  II,  B-29  pilots flying at night from the Mariana
 Islands  in  the Pacific to bomb Japan reported being paced by a mysterious
 "ball-of-fire",  which  B-29  gunners tried, unsuccessfully, to shoot down.
 Some  Army Air Corps intelligence officers suspected the object was a long-
 range   Japanese   aircraft   equipped  with  a  powerful  searchlight,  to
 illuminate  the  B-29s  so  they could be attacked by fighter aircraft, but
 such  attacks  never  materialized.  Finally  the mysterious glowing object
 that  seemed  to  pace  the  B-29s  was identified. It was Venus, which was
 particularly bright at the time.
      More  than  25%  of  all UFOs reported during a 15-month period to the
 Center  for  UFO  Studies  (created  in  1973  by  Hynek)  turned  out upon
 investigation  to  be  a  bright planet or star. Some eyewitnesses reported
 that  the  celestial  UFO  "darted  up and down", or "wiggled from side-to-
 side", and a variety of shapes were described.
      In  Capt.  Terauchi's recollected account to the media six weeks after
 the  incident,  he  described  seeing two small UFOs in addition to a large
 one.  But  the  transcript  reveals  that  the  pilot only briefly reported
 seeing  TWO  lights,  NOT  THREE, and thereafter he referred only to one in
 his radio communications with FAA controllers.
      News   media   accounts   of   the  UFO  incident  stressed  that  one
 unidentified  object  had  been detected by a USAF radar in the vicinity of
 the  747's  "blip",  which  seemed  to confirm the pilot's visual sighting.
 However,  radars  operating  in  mountainous terrain such as that where the
 UFO  incident  occurred  can  receive  spurious  echoes  when  radar energy
 bouncing  off  an  aircraft  is  reflected a second time from mountains and
 snow-covered terrain.
      When  the pilot first reported seeing the UFO, FAA traffic controllers
 --  ever  concerned  over the risk of a mid-air collision -- requested that
 radar  controllers  in  an  Air  Force  Regional  Operations Command Center
 examine  their  displays  to  see if they could spot an unknown intruder. A
 radar  operator there spotted something, but was unsure whether it might be
 a  spurious  echo.  However,  the echo appeared only briefly and was BEHIND
 the  747 whereas the pilot had reported that the UFO was in front or to the
 left of his aircraft.
      Later,  as  the  JAL  747  came  within  range  of an FAA radar at the
 Fairbanks  International  Airport, a radar controller there was asked if he
 could  spot  another  object  in the vicinity of the airliner. Although the
 JAL  pilot  still  was  reporting  a UFO, the controller replied that there
 were no unknown blips in the vicinity of JAL 1628.
      On  Jan.  11,  Capt. Terauchi again reported seeing a UFO while flying
 in  approximately  the  same  part of Alaska. But after an FAA spokesman in
 Anchorage  suggested  that  this  UFO  might  only be lights from a distant
 village  bouncing  off  clouds,  the JAL pilot acknowledged that this could
 explain his second UFO sighting.
      The  transcript  of  radio  communications during the Nov. 18 incident
 indicates  that  there  were  broken  clouds  at  or  below  Flight  1628's
 altitude,  which  may help explain Capt. Terauchi's mistaking Jupiter for a
      Even  a  scientifically  trained  former Navy officer, who would later
 become  President, once mistook a bright planet for a UFO. The "victim" was
 Jimmy  Carter  and  the  incident  occurred  about 7:15 PM on Jan. 6, 1969,
 following  his  talk  to  the  Lions  Club  of  Leary,  GA. As Carter later
 recalled  the  incident,  he spotted the UFO in the west at an elevation he
 estimated  to  be  about  30  deg.  An  investigation  conducted  by Robert
 Sheaffer,  vice-chairman  of  CSICOP's UFO Subcommittee, was complicated by
 the  fact that Carter had recalled an erroneous date for the incident. Once
 Sheaffer  managed  to determine the correct date, he found that a brilliant
 planet  Venus  was  to  the west and about 35 deg. above the horizon, where
 Carter reported seeing the UFO.
      Klass  credits  astronomers  Nick  Sanduleak  and C. B. Stephenson, of
 Case   Western   Reserve  University,  in  Cleveland,  for  their  valuable
 assistance  in  computing  the  positions  and bearings of bright celestial
 bodies relative to the 747 airliner at the time of the incident.
      "My  suspicions  that  this  UFO might be a bright celestial body were
 prompted  by  the  fact  that the pilot reported seeing the object for more
 than  30  minutes,"  Klass said. "Past experience has shown that when a UFO
 remains  visible  for  many  minutes,  it  almost  always  proves  to  be a
 celestial  object."  Another  clue  was  the  fact  that  when  Flight 1628
 descended  4,000  ft.,  the  UFO  still  appeared  to  be at the airliner's
 altitude.  At  Jupiter's  great distance, a change of 4,000 ft. in aircraft
 altitude  would  produce  no  noticeable  change  in  the planet's apparent
      Klass,  who  was a senior editor with Aviation Week & Space Technology
 magazine  for  nearly 35 years until his partial retirement this past June,
 has  been  investigating  famous  UFO  cases  as a a hobby for more than 20
 years.  His most recent book on the subject is "UFOs: The Public Deceived,"
 published by Prometheus Books, Buffalo, NY
 CSICOP: Text of Klass report on JALaska
  Msg: #5479  Sec: 1 - UFOlogy
       30-APR-87  08:42 AM
 Subj: Phil Klass (F)
 From: Michael Norton
   To: Sysop (X)
 I got this number from Steve Gresser over on ZEPHYR.  He said
  that I might want to call you about Phillip Klass.
  He was talking about how Mr. Klass had changed the qualifications
  for what could be considered a "genuine" UFO sighting, but I was
  unable to get any further details out of him.  Could you
  elaborate?  How has Mr. Klass "changed the rules?"
  Msg: #5480  Sec: 1 - UFOlogy
       30-APR-87  08:43 AM
 Subj: Phil Klass (R) (F)
 From: Sysop
   To: Michael Norton (X)
     Thank you for calling, and welcome to ParaNet.
     I think perhaps Steve misconstrued some of my statements. Having met Mr.
 Klass and had several long talks with him, I've concluded that he at least
 attempts to approach the subject with a modicum of intellectual integrity. I
 disagree with his conclusions and some of his explanations, but most of his
 methodology is beyond reproach. He has said from the outset that he wants
 someone to bring him a piece of a flying saucer (to which I recently replied,
 "Sure, Phil. I'll trade you for a piece of plasma.")
     With many armchair skeptics, however, its a different story. First, they
 wanted a film. We got it -- the Mariana film. Then they said, well, how come
 astronomers don't see UFOs? Surprise, surprise. They do. Then they said, well,
 when the President of the United States sees a UFO, we'll believe it.
 Surprahz, Surprahz, along comes Jimmy Cahtuh. OK. How bout videotape? Got it
 -- Hudson Valley. Ask Al Hibbs of JPL if he thinks its a bunch of planes. Now
 the current criteria seems to be, "multiple independent photographs of the
 same anomalous object" (at least, according to Robert Scheaffer of Bay Area
 Skeptics). Well, we may have that as well -- I'm awaiting one photograph,
 gonna have it analyzed, and I'll get back to you. But how much you wanna bet,
 if it proves genuinely anomalous, that somebody somewhere will demand a live
 TV interview between Mike Wallace and an LGM?
     As far as I'm concerned, we've proved that something of an anomalous
 nature is indeed happening. I don't care if its from outer space or
 not...we've met the challenge. The ball is now squarely in the skeptic's
 PS: Do you mind if I forward our conversation into the public area? Since
 before your sun burned bright in your sky, I have awaited a decent
 conversation with a skeptic.
 SOURCE : CUFON Computer UFO Network
 SUBJECT: Unidentified Flying Objects
 1.  I can assure you the flying saucers, given that they exist, are not
     constructed by any power on earth. President Harry S. Truman - Press
     conference, Washington DC, April 4, 1950.
 2.  Based upon unreliable and unscientific surmises as data, the Air Force
     develops elaborate statistical findings which seem impressive to the
     uninitiated public unschooled in the fallacies of the statistical method.
     One must conclude that the highly publicized Air Force pronouncements
     based upon unsound statistics serve merely to misrepreent the true
     character of the UFO phenomena.  Yale Scientific Magazine (Yale University)
     Volume XXXVII, Number 7, April 1963
 3.  I feel that the Air Force has not been giving out all the available
     information on the Unidentified Flying Objects. You cannot disregard so
     many unimpeachable sources.  John W. McCormack, Speaker of the House of
     Representatives of the United States.  January 1965
 4.  I have absolutely no idea where the UFO's come from or how they are
     operated, but after ten years of research, I know they are something from
     ourside our atmosphere.  Dr. James E. McDonald, Professor of Atmospheric
     physics, University of Arizona. 1967.
 5.  I've been convinced for a long time that the flying saucers are real and
     interplanetary. In other words we are being watched by beings from outer
     space.  Albert M. Chop, deputy public relations director, National
     Aeronautics and Space Administration, and former United States Air Force
     spokesman for Project Blue Book.
 6.  The least improbable explanation is that these things UFO's are artificial
     and controlled.  My opinion for some time has been that they have an
     extraterrestrial origin.  Dr. Maurice Bilot, one of the world's leading
     aerodynamicists and mathematical physicists.  Life, April 7, 1952
 7.  Of course the flying saucers are real and they are interplanetary.
     Air Chief Marshal Lord Dowding, commanding officer of the Royal Air Force
     of Great Britain, August 1954
 Comments:  It would seem that many people thought there was something to
            all of this stuff called UFO's and if this is all true, could it
            be that all of us are being mislead. One thing is for sure the
            history of this subject matter is being forgotten and there is over
            40 years of it.  It should be very clear to many people that this
            at least is true and if so then why?  I must admit this does bother
            me to think that we think so little of ourselves not to care about
            whats real and whats not.  The old story is why should anyone care
            unless there is some money to be made or does this really concern
            a layman who does not know anything anyway are so they say.  but
            who are they?   This is what we should start finding out and then
            maybe we will be a little closer to the problem.  There has been
            to many good men who put themselves on the line for such a good
            cause, I believe we call this truth or have we forgotten this too.
            Dale D. Goudie, Director Of CUFON.
                            ->   LATE NEWS   <-
                                JUNE 1, 1986
   CUFON: Does not necessarily take or have any opinion as to the (AP) News
          Articles which are on this system.
    Note: CUFON - Leaves this up to the reader or readers.
 The Seattle Times
 BY Elizabeth Puliiam
 Times Staff Reporter
        NASA should get out of the business of launching spacecraft and let
 private industry take over before astronomical costs cancel the space program
 forever, according to one member of a presidential commission on U.S. space
 Unless we can radically lower the cost of reaching space, it's possible that
 this country may not go, said David Webb, a space development consultant and
 member of President Reagan's National Commission on Space, in an interview
 here yesterday.
 Webb will address the Space Development Conference at 3:30 p.m. today in the
 Westin Hotel.  The Commission delivered its recommendations to the president
 Friday, although parts of the controversial report had earlier been leaked to
 trade journals.  The report describes layers of space stations between the
 earth, moon and mars to be built by 2017.
 The cost of putting objects into space must be slashed to noe-tenth its
 present level, from $2,000 per pound, to $200 per pound, to make further space
 exploitation possible, Webb said.   That means that the private sector should
 be more heavily involved in designing and opwerating space craft.
                        CUFON - Computer UFO Network
                             ->  LATEST NEWS  <-
                                July 17, 1986
 The Seattle Times
 Close-Up  Mystery Air Force Crash
 Hush Fuels Reports That Doomed Plane Was "Stealth"
 Knlght-Ridder Newspapers and Reuters:
 Bakersfield, Calif. - Out on Rancheria Road stands a roadblock manned
 by two soldiers wearing "sunglasses", green-and-brown camouflage outfits
 and black M-16 rifles slung over their backs.
 Beyond that roadblock, out in the sun-bleached hills about 12 miles from
 Bakersfield, is a mystery.
 Early last Friday, something fell out of the sky and into a canyon in the
 Sequoia National Forest, crashing on Kenneth and Agnes Mebane's ranch about
 4 miles south of the roadblock. It is something the Air Force wishes no one
 else knew about. And they intend to do everything they can to keep others
 from finding out.
 I haven't asked them anything, says 63-year-old Kenneth Mebane of the soldiers
 who moved onto his property without asking permission shortly after the 2 A.M.
 Then, echoing many who live nearby, Mebane adds, I think that's their business.
 Officially, the Air Force says only that one of its planes crashed and that its
 pilot, Maj. Ross Mulhare, was killed.
 Military analysts suspect the plane was one of a number of top-secret Stealth
 fighters designed to be virtually invisible to enemy radar. The Pentagon
 refuses to acknowledge that any such planes exist, although it is known the Air
 Force currently has three Stealth programs in operation.
 The plane also is suspected to have come from nearby Edwards Air Force Base,
 although the military won't comfirm or deny that. I can't say where it was
 based at or where it was going, say Air Force Lt. Col. Jerry Guess, who is
 stationed at Edwards and who is the only authorized dpokesman at the crash
 scene. So much secrecy is ironic in light of a pending congressional
 investigation into reports that the Lockheed Corp., major contractor for the
 F-19 Stealth fighter, may have lost hundreds of documents involved with its
 Stealth research.
 The plane was first sighted by a pilot in a small commercial airplane, who
 radioed the Federal Aviation Administration in Los Angeles. The FAA notified
 the Forest Service, which called in Kern County firefighters from Bakersfield
 to put out a 120 acre fire sparked by the crash. Fire Capt. Darrell Tiede
 and his crew from the Niles station house arrived before the military and saw
 the wreckage. But Tiede refuses to talk about it. A reporter for the
 Bakersfield Californian says one firefighter described the crash site as molten
 iron. But the reporter says the man's supervisor quickly told him not to say
 Kern County Fire Capt. Bill Alexander says all the secrecy can cause problems.
 Air Force personnel shooed firefighters away from the area before they had
 completely mopped up the blaze, he says. A Kern County "coroner's investigator
 was dispatched to the ranch, but turned back to Bakersfield when military
 officials said they were taking care of the remains. The Air Force refuses to
 say where the pilot was taken."
 While the cleanup continues, the Air Force has moved into an office at
 Meadows Field, Bakersfield's public airport. And it has been flying helicopters
 and twin-engine planes in and out of the field over the past six days. If the
 plane that crashed was a Stealth model, the Air Force has to be concerned that
 no debris is left in the area. Not only is the sleek, highly aerodynamic shape
 of a Stealth fighter believed important in eluding radar, but the materials
 used to build the plane must be of a special kind to absorb, rather than
 reflect, enemy radar. Thus the military would have to make sure that every
 chunk of the plane's body was removed.
                      CUFON - Computer UFO Network
                           - >  LATE NEWS  <-
                             DECEMBER 5, 1985
                          FALLSTON, MD.  ( AP )
 President Reagan revealed wednesday that his discussions with soviet
 leader Mikhail Gorbachev, touched not only on "Star Wars," but the
 In an address to students at Fallston High School here, reahan departed
 from his prepared remarks to say that in his private discussions with
 Gorbachev at last months Geneva summit, he noted that "we're all god's
 "I couldn't help but say to him just think how easy his task and mine
 might be in these meetings that we held if suddenly if there was a threat
 to this world from some other species from another planet outside in the
 universe," Reagan said the president went on to say that such an event
 would force himself and Gorbachev to forget all the little local differences
 that we have between our countries and they would find out that we really
 are all human beings here on this earth together.
 "Well, I don't suppose we can wait for some alien race to come down and
 threaten us," Reagan added.  "But I think that between us we can bring about
 that realization."
 The President then ended his remarks, without giving his young audience a
 clue as to how Gorbachev reponded.
                  History of UFO's During World War II
  During world war II the accumulation of sightings of mysterious celestial
  objects, finally started to worry the military authorities.
  In both camps, high-ranking officials of the intelligence services started
  to study these strange objects and investigation committees composed of
  military and scientific personnel were set up in various countries. They had
  a double purpose: first of all to determine the nature of these flting objects
  and then to see if they constituted a threat to the security of the nation.
  During world war II, the Allies, just like the Germans, noticed the presence
  of these enigmatic flying objects above their secret bases. The first reaction
  of each side was obviously to suspect espionage on the part of their enemy.
  In 1943 the English were the first to set up a special group to enquire into
  the question of these objects.  The British set up a small organization to
  collect evidence. It was headed by Lieutenant General Massey and was inspired
  by reports from a spy who, in fact was a double agent operating under the
  orders of the Mayor of Cologne. He had confirmed that the "Foo-fighters" were
  not German devices, but that the Germans thought that they were Allied weapons
  which, of course, the British knew was not so.
  Later in 1966, was learned from the British Aviation Minister that project
  Massey had been officially classified in 1944. Perhaps it was pure coincidence,
  but the double agent was denounced and executed at the beginning of that year.
  For their part the Germans did not remain inactive. But in 1944, the Wehrmacht
  asked Oberkommando of the "Luftwaffe (aviation)" to set up a center to collect
  information on all the various sightings of these mysterious celestial objects.
  This was known as Sonderburo No 13 which, until the time of the German defeat
  scrupulously applied itself to its job. The short time that this commission
  was in existence prevented it from coming to any definite conclusions, but it
  collected an impressive amount of information.
           CUFON - UFO Information Service Seattle, Washington
                  History of UFO's During World War II
                                 Part II
  The first sighting, studied by the Sonderburo, went back two year and came
  from a Hauptmann Fischer, an engineer in civil life. On March 14, 1942, at
  5:35 p.m., Fischer landed at the secret air base at Banak, in Norway.
  At that instant the radar picked up a luminous object and Fischer was asked to
  go up and identify it.  At about 10,000 feet the pilot caught sight of the
  object, and gave a description by radio to the base: an enormous streamlined
  craft about 300 feet long and about 50 feet in diameter. The aerial whale
  which was Fischer's title for it stayed horizontal for a long moment before
  rising vertically and disappearing at great speed.
  It was not a machine constructed by the hand of man, Fischer stated in his
  report. On reading the report, Air Marshall Hermann Goering concluded that
  the solitude of the north does not seem to have done much for this pilot.
  The report of another interesting incident was carefully preserved in the
  archives of the German Investiganion Committee: that of the launching of an
  experimental rocket on February 12, 1944, at the Kummersdorf test center.
  On that day the Minister of Propaganda, Joseph Goebbels, S.S. Reichsfuhrer
  Himmler and S.S. Gruppenfuhrer Heinz Kammler were present at the launching
  which was being filmed. Some days later the authorities at the base organized
  a showing of the film. The astonished spectators could see very clearly a
  spherical body which followed the rocket and circled around it.
  The autorities immediately suspected Allied espionage. However, an agent
  informed Himmler that the English were themselves victims of the same sort of
  phenomenon and thought that it was a new type of German prototype craft.
  However, the most convincing evidence filed away by the Sonderburo came from
  a military flying ace.
  On September 29, 1944, at 10:45 a.m., a test pilot was trying out a new
  Messerschmitt jet, ME 262 Schwalbe, when his attention was suddenly caught
  by two luminous points situated on his right. He shot at full speed in that
  direction and found himself face to face with a cylindrical object, more than
  three hundred feet long with some openings along its side, and fitted with long
  antennae placed in front up to about halfway along its length.
  Having approached within about 1,500 feet of the craft the pilot was amazed to
  see that it was moving at a speed of more than 1,200 m.p.h.
          Information On - Close Encounters / Explanation Of Classifications
   LRS   -  Cases that are classified as LRS are usually cases in which the
            witness or witnesses have observed an object or light at a long
            distance, usually over 500 feet away, and up to several miles.
            Distance light in the night sky, such as those which maybe at
            the same altitude as satellites, are classified as a LRS case.
            There's no interaction or effect on those making the observation.
   CE I   - Cases that are classified as CE I are usually cases in which the
            witness or witnesses have observed an object or light at a short
            distance, usually within 500 feet away, from the witness or
            witnesses.  There's no interaction or effect on those making the
   CE II  - Cases classifed as CE II are quite similar to CE I cases.  The
            difference in these 2 classifications are, CE II reports usually
            involve a type of interaction, such as electromagnetic effects,
            strange effects on animals, or perhaps on the witness themselves.
            Cases that are reported to the CUFON that occurred within 500
            500 feet of the witness or witnesses are usually also classified
            as a CE II.
   CE III - In cases with this classification, occupants in, on, or about
            a unidentified flying object are reported.  It should be noted
            that this CE III classification does "Not" pertain to contact
            cases.  There are no contacts or communications carried on in
            this classification of sighting.
   CE IV  - This type of sighting or report involves some type of contact
            or exchange of said mental or verbal communications between the
            witness or witnesses and the occupants.
   CE V  - Cases classifed as CE V are known as abductions cases or
           missing time cases i.e. said people have consciously remembered
           seeing a UFO but do not remember being taken aboard and
   UAO  - Cases classifed as UAO`s are known as Unauthorized Aerial Objects.
          We only use this term after all analysis and investigation has been
          done to verify a case as an unknown which means that the object
          or objects are real but Unauthorized.   The Air Force uses the term
          Unknowns, of course this means that they are not prepared to take the
          responsibility to say that the object or objects are real after the
          analyzing has been done to verify the reality of the phenomena.
  CUFON - Please remember that CUFON is the only organization using UAO, CE IV,
          CE V also LRS codes. LRS stands for "long range sighting" anything
          over 500 feet. We use this type of coding for computer calculations
          and for high numbers of cases.
          We also use these codes for sequential sightings which are very
          important when studying UFO movement i.e. the same reported UFO or
          UFO's moving from one state to another or a number of states and etc.
 CUFON Computer UFO Network
  File #: 1
      From: UFO INFO SERVICE         
 Date Sent: 06-18-1986
  Subject: 1954 JANAP 146(C)        
   DATE:  10 MARCH 1954   
                                                          JANAP 146(C) 
                         THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF 
                            WASHINGTON, D. C. 
                                                      10 MARCH 1954    
                       LETTER OF PROMULGATION 
 unclassified publication.
 effective upon receipt and supersedes JANAP 146 (B), COMMUNICATION    
 (CIRVIS) and all other conflicting instructions.  JANAP 146(B) shall be    
 destroyed by burning.  No report of destruction is required.
                              CHAPTER II 
                            CIRVIS REPORTS    
                          SECTION I - GENERAL 
       a.  Sightings within the scope of this chapter, as outlined in  
 Article 102b(l), (2), and (3), are to be reported as follows:    
           (l)  While airborne (except over foreign territory - See    
                Article 212).  
                (a)  Single aircraft or formations of aircraft which   
                     appear to be directed against the United States,  
                     its territories or possessions.    
                (b)  Missiles. 
                (c)  Unidentified flying objects.  
                (d)  Submarines.    
                (e)  A group or groups of military surface vessels.    
           (2)  Upon Landing.  
                (a)  Individual surface vessels, submarines, or aircraft    
                     of unconventional design, or engaged in suspicious
                     activity or observed in an unusual location or    
                     following an unusual course.  
                (b)  Confirmation reports.    
       Reports are not desired concerning surface craft or aircraft in 
 normal passage, or known U.S. military or government vessels and aircraft. 
                                                            JANAP 146(C)    
                               CHAPTER III    
                              MERINT REPORTS  
                          SECTION I - GENERAL 
       a.  Sightings within the scope of this chapter (as outlined in  
 Article 102b., (4), (5), (6), (7) are to be reported as follows: 
           (l)  Immediately (except when within territorial waters of other 
                nations as prescribed by international law)  
                a)  Guided Missiles 
                b)  Unidentified flying objects    
                c)  Submarines 
                d)  Group or groups of military vessels 
                e)  Formation of aircraft (which appear to be directed 
                    against the United States, its territories or 
                f)  Individual surface vessels, submarines, or aircraft of  
                    unconventional design, or engaged in suspicious    
                    activity or observed in an unusual location or
                    following an unusual course.   
           (2)  When situation changes sufficiently to warrant an 
                amplifying report (see Art. 409).  
                        SECTION III - SECURITY
       a.  All persons aware of the contents or existence of a MERINT  
 report are governed by the Commincations Act of 1934 and amendments   
 thereto, and Espionage Laws.  MERINT reports contain information affect-   
 ing the National Defense of the United States within the meaning of the    
 Espionage Laws, 18 U.S. Code, 793 and 794.  The unauthorized transmission  
 or revelation of the contents of MERINT reports in any manner is pro- 
       b.  Military commands and activities in making local distribution    
 of MERINT reports and in subsequent communications regarding the contents  
 of any MERINT report shall handle such communications in accordance with   
 current security regulations. 
       The following are examples of the types of "MERINT" reports.    
 Specific application of Military or commercial procedure has been avoided  
 since the means of transmission would determine the procedure to be used.  
 Of primary importance is the expeditious handling and accuracy of the 
       a.  "MERINT" REPORT
           (1)  A radiotelegraph transmission:
           RAPID US GOVT  
           211513Z JONES NKLN  
 CUFON Computer UFO Network
  File #: 3
      From: UFO INFO SERVICE         
 Date Sent: 06-18-1986
  Subject: 1966 JANAP 146(E)        
   DATE:  31 MARCH 1966   
                                                       JANAP 146(E)    
                                                       31 MARCH 1966   
                        THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF  
                        Washington, D.C.  20301    
                          FOR JANAP 146(E).   
 REPORTING VITAL INTELLIGENCE SIGHTINGS, is an unclassified non-registered  
 publication prepared under the direction of the Canadian Defence Staff and 
 the United States Joint Chiefs of Staff for Canadian and United States
 Joint use.
 102.  Scope. - 
       a.  This publication is limited to the reporting of information of   
 vital importance to the security of the United States of America and  
 Canada and their forces, which in the opinion of the observer, requires    
 very urgent defensive and/or investigative action by the US and/or    
 Canadian Armed Forces.   
       b.  The procedures contained in this publication are provided for:   
           (1)  US and Canadian civil and commercial aircraft.    
           (2)  US and Canadian government and military aircraft other 
                than those operating under separate reporting directives.   
           (3)  US and Canadian merchant vessels operating under US and
                Canadian registry.  
           (4)  US and Canadian government and military vessels other than  
                those operating under separate reporting directives.   
           (5)  Certain other US and Canadian vessels including fishing
           (6)  Military installations receiving reports from civilian or   
                military land based or waterborne observers unless
                operating under separate reporting directives.    
           (7)  Government and civilian agencies which may initiate    
                reports on receipt of information from land-based,
                airborne or waterborne observers.  
                                                         JANAP 146(E)  
                                 CHAPTER II   
                               CIRVIS REPORTS 
                           SECTION I - GENERAL
 201.  Information to be Reported and When to Report.   
       a.  Sightings within the scope of this chapter, as outlined in  
 paragraphs 102b(1), (2), (6) and (7), are to be reported as follows:  
           (1)  While airborne and from land based observers.
                (a)  Hostile or unidentified single aircraft or formations  
           of aircraft which appear to be directed against the United  
           States or Canada or their forces.  
                (b)  Missiles. 
                (c)  Unidentified flying objects.  
                (d)  Hostile or unidentified submarines.
                (e)  Hostile or unidentified group or groups of military    
           surface vessels.    
                (f)  Individual surface vessels, submarines, or aircraft    
           of unconventional design, or engaged in suspicious activity or   
           observed in a location or on a course which may be interpreted   
           as constituting a threat to the United States, Canada or their   
                (g)  Any unexplained or unusual activity which may
           indicate a possible attach against or through Canada or the 
           United States, including the presence of any unidentified or
           other suspicious ground parties in the Polar Region or other
           remote or sparsely populated areas.
           (2)  Upon landing.  
                (a)  Reports which for any reason could not be transmitted  
           while airborne.
                (b)  Unlisted airfields or facilities, weather stations,    
           or air navigation aids.  
                (c)  Post landing reports (to include photographs or film   
           if pictures were taken; see paragraph 104).  
 204.  Contents of CIRVIS Reports.  
                                      2-1                      ORIGINAL
       c.  When reporting unidentifiable objects:  
           (1)  CIRVIS Report. 
           (2)  Identification of reporting aircraft or observer as    
          (3)  Object sighted.  Give brief description of the object which  
      should contain the following items:
               (a)  Shape.
               (b)  Size compared to a known object (use one of the    
        following terms:  Head of a pin, pea, dime, nickel, quarter, half   
        dollar, silver dollar, baseball, grapefruit, or basketball) held in 
        the hand at about arm's length.  
               (c)  Color.
               (d)  Number.    
               (e)  Formation, if more than one.   
               (f)  Any discernible features or details.
               (g)  Tail, trail, or exhaust, including size of same    
        compared to size of object. 
               (h)  Sound.  If heard, describe sound.   
               (i)  Other pertinent or unusual features.
        (4)  Description of Course of Object: 
             (a)  What first called the attention of observer(s) to the
             (b)  Angle or elevation and azimuth of object when first  
             (c)  Angle or elevation and azimuth of object upon   
             (d)  Description of flight path and maneuvers of object.  
             (e)  How did the object disappear?  (Instantaneously to   
        the North, etc.)  
             (f)  How long was the object visible?  (Be specific, 5    
        minutes, 1 hour, etc.) 
        (5)  Manner of Observation: 
             (a)  Use one or any combination of the following items:   
        Ground-visual, ground-electronic, air electronic.  (If    
        electronic, specify type of radar.)   
               (b)  Statement as to optical aids (telescopes, binoculars,   
           etc.)  used and description thereof.    
               (c)  If the sighting is made while airborne, give type of    
           aircraft, identifiction number, altitude, heading, speed, and    
          home station.   
          (6)  Time and Date of Sighting:
               (a)  Zulu time-date group of sighting.   
               (b)  Light condions.  (Use one of the following terms:
          Night, day, dawn, dusk.)  
          (7)  Location of Observer(s).  Exact latitude and longitude of    
       each observer, and/or geographical position.  A position with   
       reference to a known landmark also should be given in electrical
       reports, such as "2mi N of Deeville;" "3mi SW of Blue Lake."    
       Typographical errors or "garbling" often result in electrically 
       transmitted messages, making location plots difficult or impossible. 
          (8)  Weather and Winds - Aloft Conditions at Time and Place of    
               (a)  Observer(s) account of weather conditions.    
               (b)  Report from nearest AWS or U.S. Weather Bureau Office   
           of wind direction and velocity in degrees and knots at surface,  
           6,000', 10,000', 16,000', 20,000', 30,000', 50,000', and    
           80,000' if available.    
               (c)  Ceiling.   
               (d)  Visibility.
               (e)  Amount of cloud cover.    
               (f)  Thunderstorms in area and quadrant in which located.    
               (g)  Temperature gradient.
           (9) Any other unusual activity or condition, meteorological,
       astronomical, or otherwise, which might account for the sighting.    
          (10) Interception or identification action taken (such action
       may be taken whenever feasible, complying with existing air defense  
          (11) Location, approximate altitude, and general direction of
       flight of any air traffic or balloon releases in the area which 
       could possibly account for the sighting.    
                                       2-5                       ORIGINAL   
           (12)  Position title and comments of the preparing officer, 
       including his preliminary analysis of the possible cause of the 
           (13)  Existence of physical evidence, such as materials and 
                                    2-6                         ORIGINAL    
  File #: 8
      From: UFO INFO SERVICE         
 Date Sent: 06-18-1986
  Subject: 1954 AFR 200-2           
   DATE:  12 AUGUST 1954  
 NO. 200-2           )          1-5             WASHINGTON, 12 AUGUST 1954  
         Unidentified Flying Objects Reporting (Short Title:UFOB) û
     Purpose and Scope_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _1    
     Definitions_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _2    
     Objectives_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 3    
     Responsibility_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 4    
     Guidance_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 5    
     ZI Collection _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 6    
     Reporting _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 7    
     Evidence _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _8    
     Release of Facts _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _9    
   1.  Purpose and Scope.  This Regulation establishes procedures for  
 reporting information and evidence pertaining to unidentifed flying   
 objects and sets forth the responsibility of Air Force activities in this  
 regard.  It applies to all Air Force activities.  
   2.  Definitions:  
    a.  Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOB) -- Relates to any airborne  
 object which by performance, aerodynamic characteristics, or unusual  
 features does not conform to any presently known aircraft or missile type, 
 or which cannot be positively identified as a familiar object.   
    b.  Familiar Objects -- Include balloons, astronomical bodies, birds,   
 and so forth.  
   3.  Objectives.  Air Force interest in unidentified flying objects is    
 twofold:  First as a possible threat to the security of the United States  
 and its forces, and secondly, to determine technical aspectr°involved.
    a.  Air Defense.  To date, the flying objects reported have imposed no  
 threat to the security of the United States and its Possessions.  However, 
 the possibility that new air vehicles, hostile aircraft or missiles may    
 first be regarded as flying objects by the initial observer is real.  This 
 requires that sightings be reported rapidly and as completely as 
 information permits.
    b.  Technical.  Analysis thus far has failed to provide a satisfactory  
 explanation for a number of sightings reported.  The Air Force will   
 continue to collect and analyze reports until all sightings can be    
 satisfactorily explained, bearing in mind that:   
      (1)  To measure scientific advances, the Air Force must be informed   
           on experimentation and development of new air vehicles.
      (2)  The possibility exists that an air vehicle of revolutionary 
           configuration may be developed.    
      (3)  The reporting of all pertinent factors will have a direct   
           bearing on the success of the technical analysis. 
   4.  Responsibility:    
    a.  Reporting.  Commanders of Air Force activities will report all 
 information and evidence thaty may come to their attention, including that 
 received from adjacent commands of the other services and from civilians.  
    b.  Investigation.  Air Defense Command will conduct all field
 investigations within the ZI, to determine the identity of any UFOB.  
    c.  Analysis.  The Air Technical Intelligence Center (ATIC), Wright-    
 Patterson Air Corce Base,Ohio, will analyze and evaluate:  All  
 information and evidence reported within the ZI after the Air Defense 
 Command has exhausted all efforts to identify the UFOB; and all  
 information and evidence collected in oversea areas.   
    d.  Cooperation.  All activities will cooperate with Air Defense   
 Command representatives to insure the economical and prompt success of an  
 investigation, including the furnishing of air and ground transportation,  
 when feasible. 
   5.  Guidance.  The thoroughness and quality of a report or investigation 
 into incidents of unidentified flying objects are limited only by the 
 resourcefulness and imagination of the person responsible for preparing    
 the report.  Guidance set forth below is based on experience and has been  
 found helpful in evaluating incidents:  
    a.  Theodolite measurements of changes of azimuth and elevation and
 angular size.  
    b.  Interception, identification, or air search action.  These actions  
 may be taken if appropriate and within the scope of existing air defense   
    c.  Contact with local aircraft control and warning (AC&W) units, ground
 observation corps (GOC) posts and filter centers, pilots and crews of 
 aircraft aloft at the time and place of sighting whenever feasible, and any
 other persons or organizations which may have factual data bearing on the  
 UFOB or may be able to offer corroborating evidence, electronic or    
    d.  Consultaiton with military or civilian weather forecasters to
 obtain data on:  Tracks of weather balloons released in the area, since    
 these often are responsible for sightings; and any unusual meteorological  
 activity which may have a bearing on the UFOB.    
    e.  Consultation with astronomers in the area to determine whether any  
 astronomical body or phenomenon would account for or have a bearing on the 
    f.  Contact with military and civilian tower operators, air operations  
 offices, and so forth, to determine whether the sighting could be the 
 result of misidentification of known aircraft.    
    g.  Contact with persons who might have knowledge of experimental  
 aircraft of unusual configuration, rocket and guided missile firings, and  
 so forth, in the area.   
   6.  ZI Collection.  The Air Defense Command has a direct interest in the 
 facts pertaining to UFOB's reported within the ZI and has, in the 4602d    
 Air Intelligence Service Squadron (AISS), the capabil8ity to investigate   
 these reports.  The 4602d AISS is composed of specialists trained for 
 field collection and investigation of matters of air intelligence interest 
 which occur within the ZI.  This squadron is highly mobile and deployed    
 throughout the ZI as follows:  Flights are attached to air defense    
 divisions, detachments are attached to each of the defense forces, and the 
 squadron headquarters is located at Peterson Field, Colorado, adjacent to  
 Headquarters, Air Defense Command.  Air Force activities, therefore,  
 should establish and maintain liaison with the nearestelement of this 
 squadron.  This can be accomplished by contacting the appropriate echelon  
 of the Air Defense Command as outlined above.
   a. All Air Force activities are authorized to conduct such preliminary   
 investigation as may be required for reporting purposcs; however,
 investigations should not be carried beyond this point, unless such action 
 is requested by the 4602d AISS.    
   b. On occasions-after inital reports are submitted-additional data is    
 required which can be developed more economically by the nearest Air Force 
 activity, such as: narrative statements, skctches, marked maps, charts,and 
 so forth.Under such circumstances,appropriatc commanders will be contacted 
 by the 4602d AISS.  
   7.Reporting.All information reating to UFOB's will be reported promptly  
 The method (electrical or written) and priority of dispatch will be   
 selected in accordance with the apparent intelligence value of the inform- 
 ation. In most instances, reports will be made by electrical means:   
 Information over 24 hours ald will be given a "deferred" precedence.  
 Reports over 3 days old will be made by written report prepared on AF Form 
 112, Air Intelligence Information report, and AF Form 112a, Supplement to  
 AF Form 112.   
   a. Addderssess:   
      (1) Electrical Reports. All electrical reports will be multiple  
 addressed to: (a) COMMANDER, Air Defense Command, Ent Air Force Base, Col- 
                   orado Springs, Colorado.   
               (b) Nearest Air Division (Defense). (For ZI only. )
               (c) Commander, Air Technical Intelligence Center, Wright
                   Patterson Air Fofce Base, Ohio. 
               (d) Director of Intelligence, Headquarters USAF, Wasgington  
 25, D.C.  
       (2) Written Reports:    
               (a) Within the ZI, reports will be submitted direct to the   
                   Air Defensc Command. Air Defensc Command will reproduce  
                   the report and distribute it to interested ZI intellige- 
                   nce agencies. The original report together with notation 
                   of the distribution effected then will be forwarded to   
                   the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters USAF,    
                   Washington 25, D.C.   
                (b) Outside the ZI, reports will be submitted direct to
                    Director of Intelligence, Headquarters USAF,Washington  
                    25, D.C. as prescribed in (Intelligence Collection 
                    Instructions" (ICI), June 1954.
        b. Short Title. "UFOB" will appear at the beginning of the text of  
           electrical messages and in the subject of written reports.  
        c. Negative Data.  The word "negative"
                  Index for Associated Press (AP) Articles
 Art #   Date       From             Bulletin #          Subject
 -----   ----       ----             ----------          -------
   1   06-17-1986  UFO INFO SERVICE     28       1978 AP PILOT DISAPPEARS 
   2   06-17-1986  UFO INFO SERVICE     28       1985 MISSING PHANTOM JET 
   3   06-17-1986  UFO INFO SERVICE     28       1978 NEW ZEALAND ALERT   
   4   06-17-1986  UFO INFO SERVICE     29       1979 CIA UFO SURVEILLANCE
   5   06-17-1986  UFO INFO SERVICE     30       1966 DR. J.E. McDONALD   
   6   06-17-1986  UFO INFO SERVICE     30       1968 SCIENT.RECOMM.STUDY 
   7   06-17-1986  UFO INFO SERVICE     30       1966 UFOS CALLED GAS     
   8   06-17-1986  UFO INFO SERVICE     31       1966 FORD TO ASK INQUIRY 
   9   06-17-1986  UFO INFO SERVICE     31       1966 CONGRESS REASSURED  
  10   09-23-1986  UFO INFO SERVICE     31       1968 CO U ENDS STUDY     
  11   09-23-1986  UFO INFO SERVICE     31       1966 SATEL.TERMED UNKNOWN
  12   09-23-1986  UFO INFO SERVICE     32       1969 NO VISITS FROM AFAR 
  13   07-11-1986  UFO INFO SERVICE     32       1947 CRASHED DISK ROSWELL
  14   07-12-1986  UFO INFO SERVICE     32       1966 SIGHTINGS PEAK 1,060
  15   07-19-1986  UFO INFO SERVICE     33       1973 P.CARTER REPORTS UFO
  16   07-19-1986  UFO INFO SERVICE     33       1977 CARTER,ASKED NASA   
  17   07-19-1986  UFO INFO SERVICE     33       1977 NASA REFUSES CARTER 
  18   07-19-1986  UFO INFO SERVICE     33       1977 UN TO SET UP AGENCY 
  19   07-19-1986  UFO INFO SERVICE     33       1978 UN HEARS CASE - UFO 
  20   07-20-1986  UFO INFO SERVICE     34       1969 BLUE BOOK CLOSES    
  21   07-26-1986  UFO INFO SERVICE     34       1944 NEW GERMAN WEAPONS  
  22   01-11-1987  UFO INFO SERVICE     34       1986 ALASKA 747 SIGHTING 
  23   01-11-1987  UFO INFO SERVICE     35       1986 ALASKA 747 SIGHTING 
 - End of Index -

Next: Stanton Friedman Monthly Report Dec. 1996