◆ SpookStack

Approved For Release 2001/04/02 : CIA-RDP81R00560R000100010001-0 (k) December 7, 1959; Bangor, Me. Airport runway lights went out, airliner circling over field reported unexplained blinding glow around plane. During the summer of 1963 the story broke that Russian nuclear tests of 1961-1962 in the atmosphere had knocked out the electronic equipment on board a U.S, satellite in space. [3.] Pub- licity about this little-known side effect of high-yield nuclear explosions immediately led to speculation on the military appli- cations of it. A prominent magazine on space activities later that year reported that the Soviet Union might be developing an anti-ballistic missile system based on the E-M effects of nuclear blasts. [4.] The main significance of this discovery, in relation to UFOs, is that it provides a clue about how UFOs might affect the elec- trical systems of automobiles. American scientists have theorized that an ‘electromagnetic pulse’? is emitted by large nuclear explosions at high altitude. John Crittenden, General Electric consultant on radiation, has stated: ‘The detonation of (nuclear) weapons produces radiation over the entire electromagnetic spec- trum. The prompt gamma pulse will affect electronic devices sensitive to ionization, and the radio-frequency signal propagated carries enough energy to damage electronic circuits drasti- cally. . .”? Mr. Crittenden added that a one-megaton explosion in space could affect electronic systems over a radius of 110 miles or more. In testimony before the House Committee on Science & Astronautics, major aerospace firms have strongly advocated the development of an atomic engine for use in the U.S. space program. ([5.] Douglas Aircraft Corporation, for example, citing the inefficiency and great expense of normal rocket boosters, stated: ‘A gross reduction of these costs will come only with the development of a propulsion system with truly superior performance. Only then will extensive manned space travel on an interplanetary scale be practical. In our opinion, the greatest immediate hope for such an improvement may be found in nuclear propulsion systems. . .” [6. The energy locked up in matter, obviously, is universal. UFOs could plausibly have some nuclear propulsion component, perhaps controlled explosions which incidentally interfere with electrical circuits under certain conditions. (Another conceivable G = Ground Radar A = Airborne Radar V = Visual Sighting P = Photograph explanation for the E-M effects observed in the presence of UFOs is that some atomic device or weapon on board is used deliber~ ately and selectively, as a test or for other purposes. However, this is purely speculative), The fact remains that is isnot necessary to postulate a ‘‘mys- terious force’’ in some mystical sense to account for the observed effects. An atomic device capable of producing the observed effects is now technologically feasible. Even if this were not the case, it is false logic for a scientist to deny observations on the grounds that we cannot fully explain the mechanism involved in E-M effects. Taken in association with the other accumulated evidence about UFOs, the fact that we do have difficulty explaining the E-M effects could also mean that we are dealing with a superior technology about which we know very little. RADAR UFO SIGHTINGS Unidentified targets have been detected by radar on numerous occasions. Air Force radar-scope photographs of UFOs are classified (see box), but the facts of many radar observations have been published. The questionis, what causes the unexplained ‘‘blips’’ on the scope? On the whole, theorists have tended to attribute all such reports to the vagaries of radar. This view is challenged here. NICAP’s position is that the radar-UFO reports, after all, were made largely by experienced radar operators who were convinced they had tracked something solid and unexplained. The conflict amounts to data versus theory, with most theorists all too prone to assume that radar operators are incompetent. It is a well-known fact that false (or misleading) images can appear on radar scopes. However, if these could not be dis- tinguished from the blips of solid targets, radar would be a use- less instrument. Also, lights and objects have been observed visually in the positions where radar indicated the presence of unexplained objects. The theorists’ ad hoc arguments to account for this aspect of the reports leave much to be desired. What can radar detect? How do different phenomena appear on the scope? What are so-called radar ‘‘angels?’’ These questions are analyzed following the chart which includes the controversial cases under discussion. Radar Cases WO I ee Sources & Speed Altitude Code Date & Location Description References TTT GIs assasscs0_II II I_> a References G Summer 1948 Goose Bay, Labrador A,V October 15, 1948 Japan USAF and RCAF radar indepen- dently tracked unidentified target. Air Force F-61 night interceptor tracked and saw visually UFO shaped "like a rifle bullet.” On 9000 mph. 60,000 ft. [Details this Section] Abt. 200 mph. Accel. to est. 1200 mph. 5000 - [7] 6000 ft. one pass, F-61 got close enough to see silhouette 20-30 ft. long. November 1, 1948 Goose Bay, Labrador UFO tracked November 6, 1948 Japan Air Force radar tracked two maneuvering UFOs for over an 600 mph. [8] [9] hour. On scope, looked like two planes dogfighting. G,V November 23, 1948 Fursten- Feldbruck, Germany Fall 1949 Key atomic base 23,000 feet in few minutes. 4 minutes G,V February 22, 1950 UFO tracked, reddish star-like object observed visually. Climbed Five UFOs in formation clocked covering 200 miles in less than Two glowing objects sped over 900 mph. [10] 4500 mph. [11] (average) [Section Iv] Key West, Fla. Naval Air Station G, V March 8, 1950 Dayton, Ohio "blip", climbed vertically Two F-51 pilots saw "huge and metallic'' UFO which ground radar detected. Object gave solid 15,000 ft. [12] Approved For Release 2001/04/02 7*CIA-RDP81R00560R000100010001-0