PROJECT BLUE BOOK

PROJECT 10073 RECORD CARD» ‘yes

--
4.

LOCATION ¢ 12, CONCLUSIONS ~*~
| 0 Was Balloon
OF Intem 5 : Oo Probably Balloon
7 3. DATE-TIME GROUP 4. TYPE OF OBSERVATION 0 Possibly Balloon
: 3.2 {3 : ; 0 Was Aircraft
i cut_21/0800Z O Air Visual O Air-Intercept Rodor |9 Possibly Aircraft
3 5. PHOTOS _ | 8 SOURCE <5 D Was Astronomicel
O Yes O Probably Astronomicol
Ci No Civilian DO Possibly Astronomical

+= ——=:

7. LENGTH OF.OBSERVATION 8. NUMBER OF OBJECTS | 9. COURSE Othe Light reflections
0 Insufficient Dete for Evaluation
- . 0 Unknown
o mins one N to E
} a 10. BRIEF SUMMARY OF SIGHTING 11. COMMENTS
SourceS bedroom was flooded with an Investigation revealed two
intense light, she Jooked out the light sources, either or both
. window: and saw an obj flat & circular of which could cause the

Slowly moving north w/an oscillating ‘oscillation', plus ground
motion. Obj was emitting pinkish-grayish fog & presenee of smoke in th

smoke, had dull aluminum color. Obj area which cou ave reflect¢d
rose instantaneously out of sight, lights,

se"

ATIC FORM 329 (REV 26 SEP 52)

She called to her husband who also saw the object, but could

not identify it. About five minutes later she looked for the
object again, and found that it had shifted its position in

a westerly direction. She does not remenber seeing the moon
even though she did look for it. She descrihes the sky as clear.
The red object did not seem to be the source of the light

which illuminated the room, According to the witness, the
object was 2 inches wide at a distance of 14 inches,

By using similar triangles the size of the object seen ty

Mrs, SR was claculated at atout 22 feet in d ameter.
Her first estimate was 12 feet, but later sie said that it

appeared atout 1/3 the length of her front yard, which is
65 feet, from house to street. This wo.ld confirm the 22

feet figure...

On the same morning, about 2 an, a —— 0
ae . Lorain, watched a "big red ball" moving outside
her window. See fig. 6
The object made a low pulsating sound which made the witness
"sick to my stomach." She thought at first that the light
was due to a train or possibly a truck. A railroad runs one
block south of the house. The witness was lying in a bed,
with her head about 15 feet from the window, which is two
feet across, and she said that the object took up the entire
width of the window. When it approached nearest to the window |
the witness thought it was giving off heat. The sound connected
with the object increased and decreased as the the otject
advanced and receded. An examination of the trees outside the

window disclosed nothin- peculiar, even though the object must
have passed through some light branches. The witness thinks '
she heard a crashing sound when the object first appeared,

. —
¥ ’ rT a’ | ieee El Ree 0 ep eager nr + eerwe © © etre Rr ae er 8

On the morning of September 21, 1958, the moon set at ap~
proximately 1:07 a.m. This explains why Mrs. QR could
not see the moon at 2:30 ame, and makes more mysterious the
detail about bright ined lll

F\e. \

j — — oe

| wineew j |

_—

: |
z

-‘e--
ee Owe,
++

jw “7s\

- ~“. >
hn) eee u
*S- omewe.

ee ed

ea

An, § ew meron

: ce PL Ak)

sAND PLAIN DEALER, MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 22, 1958

7 a ai |

~~ © a2 ’

‘
=

oe eT) ae ee ee
‘

———— =

“——.

Mrs. Willicm EL Fitzgerald

Fitzgerald

+ ere eae ee

sw eet

*-*@

. ~ . 7
“a he
“a
be |
“J
-

-
’
x.
‘
’
J
yen Se tegen

John Fitzgerald

Sheffield Lake family examines mock-up

of “saucer.”

———_ - ———= —«

Plain Dealer Staff Photo

|

——_—-- -————_————_-

‘Saucer Terrifies Houscwite

*% From First Page

From that point on, his ac-
count of the incident agreed
with his s*epmotuer'’s.

Coth atso said that the
“saucer” made a whirring noise.
Then, as it left, the noise took
o:: a muffled, whining sourd.

John denionstrated with 2
low whistle, inereesing in
pitch together “ith a lum.

Not Secn by Others

The “saucer” wes describra
as round from a tep or bottom
view and ovai from a side view
with a rounded cep on top, It
was about eight fect in diam-
ete,, they said, and about three
fect hish.

Mrs. Fitzgerald said it had
openings on both s:dcs in which
she saw & series of smal] tubes
“like smal] exhaust pipes.”

Sheffield Lake Police Chief

Clarerce FE. Hambly said he| vicinity of the Fityveerala bor
Iwas not notified of the sight-!had secon the “saucer.”
ling and had not had any! Fitsccraid and this acpolt

3 icpost
“saucer” reports from anyone! examined the ground y
i clse. which the object reported

A check of neighbors re!traveied and could not
vealed that no one else in thel anything unusual.

—

|

satis ae re

abd yt by teh ha habe 4g all *

; | Flyi

~ SPT eh RTE Nh gE memcerer oer were

By ALLIN D. ASHBOLT
Lorain Covnty Correspondent

Terrified und shaken by their
experience, a Sheffield Lake
housewife and her 10-year-old
stepson yesterday related a
weird account of a 3 a.m. visit
by a “flying saucer.”

Mrs. William H. Fitzgerald,
93% East Drive, said she
watched the ob‘ect for more
than five minutes at close
range after a brilliant light
roused her from her bed.

Tears filled her eyes, stil!
reddened from crying until
dawn following the experience.
as she told of unsuccessfully
trying to wake her husband, an
unemployed truck driver, to
help her through the ordeal,

“I had just gone to bed after

‘| the Jast movie on TV,” she said,

when a brilliant white glere

filled her bedroom through the}

ee ee a -

RTT I rm

wea

ng Saucers on Top of D. acula,

Territies Sheffield Lake Woman

closed window drapes. The
movie was “Dracula's Daugh-
ter.”

Blinded at first, she hid her
head under the pillow until the
light subsided, Then she stood
on her bed, looked through the
window and watched the “sau-
cer’ glide over her driveway,

It hovered a foot above a
neighbor's lawn, suddenly)
slowed, and discharged a cloud
of “heavy pinkish - grayish -
purplish smoke from the sau-
cer’s back and sides,” she said.

It then swept in a curve onto
Mrs. Fitzgeralc’s front lawn,
she said, and rose to about]
seven feet above the ground.

After It completed two short
circular maneuvers, she lost,
sight of it, she said, when it
sped straight up into the sky
over the top of her home.

————__—— -—

Mrs. Fitzeerald, 28, said her
daughter, Christy Lynn, 7, and
her husband slept peacefully as!
she waiched what she cescribed
us “the most horrible looking
thing” she had ever seen. “It
was terrifying,” she said.

Mer stepson, Jolin, a fourth]

grade student at Milford Ele-
mentary School in Cleveland,
Was spending the weekend/
visiting his father, He was in
the next bedroom, also at the|
front of the house, and hap-
pened to be awake when the
“saucer” made its early-morn-
Ing appearance,

Since his small bedroom win-
dow was above his eye leves,'
he explained, he could not see
the object until he stepped on
a wall heat register. By that
time, he said, it was emitting
the cloud of smoke.

iCantinued on Page 8, Column 6)

|

ee, onic

September 29, 1958
Rep. A. D. Baumhart
House of Representatives
Washington, D.C.
Dear Mr. Baumhart:

You no doubt have read the accounts of my experience with a
"flying saucer on the morning of Sept. 21. Articles appeared in
the Lorain Journal and Plain Dealer. I have sent a summary of the
sighting to the Air Force UFO Center in Dayton, Ohio.

Will you please check with the Air Force to find out their
conclusion in this case?

If these objects are landing in populated areas, it will not
be long before disaster strikes. This is deinitely a menace to
ordinary people. So if this was a government missile, can you
stop them from being flown in populated areas? If it did not
belong to our government, this fact should be made public, and proper
steps should be taken to insure the public safety.

I have talked to people who have investigated similar sightings.
These people tell me that usually no real investigation is made by
the Air Force, and when one is made the results are ridiculous.

I would not have written this letter if I did not feel sincerely
that the matter must be studied closely by authorities. The object
which came down in my yard had no business there, under any circun-

stances.

CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES
House of Representatives
Washington, D.C.

October 2, 1958

Office of Congressional Liaison

United States Air Force
538, Old House Office Building
Washington, D.C.

Attention: Major Corbin

Dear Sir;
Please find enclosed a thermofax copy of a letter I have

received from my constituent, Mrs . qqammmaegye

of Sheffield Lake, Ohio.

I am forwarding this to you in accordance with the in-
structions you gave me and trust you will find this
enclosure self-explanatory.

I would appreciate your advice, and assurance t attention
and consideration will be given to Mrs. summary

so that I may properly advise her.
Sincerely yours,

/s/ A. D. Baumhart, Jr., M.C.

ADB: bv
Enclosure

MN lik Mil AE oe ee ta Mie eee

. 3 NEVRR USE FOR APPROVALS, DISAPPROVALS,
Mich) ROL G SLIP WURRENCES, OR SIMILAR ACTIONS ff
*1 NAME OR TITLE INITIALS CIRCULATE -
SATIS
"ORGANIZATION AND LOCATION DATE COORDINATION
2 FILE
7 INFORMATION
3 NECESSARY
ACTION
x
NOTE AND
INCLS RETURN {
A SEE ME
é SIGNATURE ||
REMARKS

SUBJECT: CONGRESSIONAL INQUIRY
(Object landed in yard of Mrs. Wives
Sheffield, Ohio)

SAFLL: 69306 (C/M A. D. Baumhart)

ee A ace ee se

SUSPENSE : ASAP = not later than 14 Oct 58

ACTION: Req memo w/proposed reply per HOI 10-20
and indicate AO name & telephone number.

INCLS: ltr fr C/M to AF L&L 2 Oct 58

cy ltr fr Mrs. QA, to C/M 29 Sept

WILLIAM C. VAN DYK ci be
\\) Major, USAF __ 6 Oct 58

.
ORGANIZATION AND LOCATIONMateriel & Operations Branch | TELEPHONE
Congressional Dp 78692

FORM Replaces DA AGO Form 895, 1 Apr 48, and AFHQ 6—48467-4 GPO TY
DD 1 FEB 50 95 Form 12, 10 Nov 47, which may be used.

—

DRAFT Si Bek. |

Deazr Mr.. Baumhart:
I refer to your inquiry concerning the interest of Mrs. Qi
of Sheffield Lake, Ohio, concerning an unidentified flying object she saw on

21 September 1958,
Air Force investigators arrived in Sheffield, Ohio, on 3 October 1958,

contacted irs . SRI ona also initiated other phases of an investigation

to possibly evaluate this sighting.

Investigation revealed that a railroad track ran near the home of Mrs.

ag. The night of Mrs am : sighting a train passed the house |

at approximately the same hour of the reported sighting. The train had a

rotating headlight which under some conditions would produce unusual effects.
Contact was also made with Chief Bosun Mate William Schott of the Lorain Coast
Guard Station. Chief Schott reported that he was using his spotlight in an attempt
to atteuct the attention of another ship, and that the light was directed toward
shore in the general direction of Mrs. QMS house. ‘The time and date of
this incident coincide with those reported by Mrs. SasRngsUmmm. —_— of
Lorain, Ohio, @ witness listed in Mrs. Qe report, couldn't recall

anything unusual on the night of the reported sighting. Mrq@jiigp another
witness of Lorain, Ohio, was not available for interview. The weather at the

time of the incident was a misty rain with haze and smoke.
Conclusion of Airy Force investigators were that the combination of moving
lights, noise of the train and prevailing weather account for the illusion

experienced by Mrs. MARMMMMMMMs The Air Technical Intelligence Center, after
evaluating the evidence in this case, concurred with the conclusion of the

For your information, I am inclosing the latest Department of Defense
fact sheet on the subject of unidentified flying objects, dated 6 October 1958,
This fact sheet clearly outlines the Air Force position with respect to
unidentified flying objects.
Sincerely,

kw
Sheffield Lake, Ohio
October 29, 1958

Public Information Officer

Wright— Patterson AFB

Dayton, Ohio

Dear Sir:

This is a request for the official conclusion on
my UFO report. |

My sighting took place on September 21, 1958, at
my home in Sheffield Lake, Ohio. It was investigeted
on October 3 and 4 by Sgt. Hof and Sgt. Haistan, both
of the Air Technical Intelligence Center.

I was assured by the sergeants that the conclusion
would be available to me within thirty days. They also
said that if the case is in the "known" category I will
be furnished with the evidence which indicated that
conclusion.

Please send the conclusion as soon as possible,

—_———— $$

Sincerel —

ee ee id tty, — So)

UFO SIGHTING
SHEFFIELD LAKE, OHIO
21 September 1958

On the morning of 21 September 1958 at approximately 0300 EDT, the
witness was awakened by a very bright light which illuminated her bed-
room. Looking out a bedroom window which faced her front yard, she
saw flat, circular object with a dome-shaped top. The object was
approximately six to eight feet from the ground, moving slowly in a
northerly direction, parallel with the length of the house, and descend-
ing with a floating oscillating motion. The object was reported to be
approximately ten feet from the window when first sighted. Mrs. X in-
sists the top of the object was clear to her in every cetail, and that
the color reminded her of dull aluminum, The dimensions of the object
were estimated to be 20 feet in diameter and approximately six feet
thick. The object was reported to have made several turms around the
yard and then rose instantly out of sight. Total elapsed time was
estimated at five minutes, Mrs X's stepson also viewed the object
from the bathroom window which is located on the same side of the house

as Mrs, X's vantage point,

In Summary, the investigation revealed that a railroad track ren

near the home of Mrs, X, Contact with Mr, Dr acsyaped station master at
Lorain, Ohio, revealed that a train passes the witness's home at approxi-
mately the hour and date of the sighting. The train had an oscillating
headlight, and this light could have been seen by Mrs. X. Contact was
also made with the Officer-In-Charge of the Lorain Coast Guard Station,
The chief reported that he was using his spotlight to attract the atten-
tion of another ship, and that his light was directed toward shore in the
general direction of Mrs. X's home, The time and date of this incident
coincide with those reported by Mrs. X. Mrs. Y of lIorain, Ohio, was con-
tacted but was unable to recall anything unusual on the night of the
reported sighting. Mrs. Z, another witness of Lorain, Ohio was not

-' available for interview.

The weather at the time of the sighting was intermittent mist and

rain with haze and smoke. Weather is always an important factor because
of its direct effects, and the fact that it often allows for indirect
conclusions (i.e., stars, planets, etc., may be immediately ruled out
when there was a thick overcast at the time of the sighting).

Investigation further disclosed that Mrs. X received letters from

other self-appointed UFO experts concerning her sighting. These letters
all inferred that Mrs, X may have been harmed in some way, and were toned
for encouragement to Mrs, X and all directed toward discrediting the

U.S. Government and particularly the Air Force,

The Air Force conclusion in this case is thet Mrs, X and her step-son

were victims of an illusion. is illusion resulted from the combination
of lights from the train and possibly the Coast Guard boat, the roar from
the train, and the prevailing weather conditions, It is not uncommon for

nerrsanae hawineg the eame or aimilar vantace nninte tn ernerience the cama

ee See)

Ol Sse

12 November 1958

Dear Mrs. 9gae

Your letter of 29 October 1958, addressed to Wright-
Patterson Air Force Pase concerning an unidentified flying object
sighting on 21 September at Sheffield Lake, Ohio, has been
referred to this office for reply.

The conclusion of Air Force investigators were that the con-
bination of moving lights, the noise of a train and the prevailing
weather at the time accounted for the sighting experienced by you
that night.

Sincerely,

%s LAWRENCE J. TACKER
Major, USAF
Executive Officer
Public Information Divicion
es Office of Information Services

—
1d Lake, QGhio

Dali nn i ee oth ceo BD ghee

Pal

Sheffield Lake, Ohio
November 27, 1958

Dear Major Tacker:

Would you kindly specify what moving lights caused
me to see an object 22 feet in diameter and 6 feet high
hovering in my front yard ?

Your reference to the prevailing weatner has also
confused me somewhat. I stated in the report form that
it nad stoppea raining some time before tne signting. I
woula appreciate it very much if you woula explain these
matters to me in a little more detail.

Sincerely

an CR SHEET See

ORIGIN OF BASIC

SUSPENSE

DATE /}
= C,

ASSIGNED BY

0.

DATE i we Lue
SUBJECT _ in j ——" i ag .

ik

(@ UFO Sighting, Mrs. A (Sheffield lake, Ohio)

ROUTING

Initial "IN" column to denote review prior to action, Initial "OUT" column to denote review of completed
action. (X for action; ,~ for coordination, )

IN | OFFICE out | IN | OFFICE our | in] OFFICE [out] IN | OFFICE [ cuz] IN | oFFice jour
Lorne qT OIN 2 | OIN: 3 i [eins IF AFOIN
DIN» 1X OINs 2x OIN- 3X OIN: 4X AFOIN-X
ia rT ‘aa | [ J aa AFOIN: X
$_____—— + —- + +— T +_— 4 +_—— + aEDiNext
| | } r y |e | SL | f AFOIN-X2 T
r T iJ T ] | T AFOIN-X3
A ] - ahi i | if | | 49 [AFoINexa
| i—4 | | | [ aE r AFOIN- XS
ea [ | [ a
| ea ae ] if | | castes sl ia
a J E i aie 4 3 eS
Fa hg FILE
a et et ar | 'F 7? ile r|__| O1SPATCH aS
TO: pe An Raa T DATE
\ . SAFIS-3, Attn: Maj. Tacker 10 Dec 1958
FROM: ” “| COMMENT NO.
AFCIN-LE | 1
, if a= ae te
COMMENTS (Lise reverse necessary) hE) /Maje R. 3. 4 1/ac/6-9216/Blag 828

1. It is evident the only explanation that will satisfy Mrs. ies or the
so-called private UFO investigators, is that she saw a space ship. To these indivi-e

duals, including Mrs. be nae she saw a "flying saucer", and nothing we can say
will change their way of thinking.

2. According to the Lorain Coast Guard Station log, the weather throughout the
early morning of 21 September 1958, was alternately misting and raining.

3. Although Mrs. ee claims @ train did not pass her house at any time
just prior to, or after, her sighting, a check with the Lorain railway station was
made. It was determined a train did pass her house, going west, at about the time
of her sighting, having a headlight that made a figure eight oscillation.

4h. ATIC retains its original stand on the conclusions in this case. Mrs.

was the victim of an illusion.
/Velt MTT RVALG)

SUE APE) AT YE. ificat!
GON, ah Siete ee . SEARS. R Classification Cancelled
Oe) Dik wty.1 a abaatat
uc | casemate AhaBealian, JPY Menken
3 Inols: H. K. GILBERT BY fectade.ne

1. Ttr Atd 27 Nov 58 Colonel. USAF

PM S|

Lor (GSE

EL,

UNCLASSIFIED

23 December 1958

Dear Mrowt I

This is to acknowledge your letter of 27 November 1958 con-
cerning your unidentified flying object sighting of 21 September

1958. .

According to the Lorain Coast Guard Station log, the weather
throughout the morning of 21 September 1958 was alternately mist-

ing and raining.

Also, a check with the Lorain railway station disclosed that
@ train passed your house, going west, at the time of your
Sighting. This train had a headlight that made figure eight
oscillations. It is the opinion of the Air Technical Intelligence
Center investigators that this was the light you observed.

Sincerely r

LAWRENCE J. TACKER

Major, USAP

Executive Officer

Public Information Division
Office of Information Services

» Ohio ie:
Classification Cancelled

PEAT a ie ws
BOWNGRADED AT 3 YAAK OYTERVALS; UNCLES 216

Cub

Sheffield Lake, Ohio
November 10, 1956
Public Inforne tion Officer
Wright-Patterson A.F. Fase
Dayton, Ohio

Dear Sir:
On October 31 you recetived a certified letter from

me requesting the official conclusion on my UFO sighting.
To date I have not heard from you. I was promised tnis
intormation, and if necessary I will contact my congressman

about the matter.
Sincerely,

Information Copy for ATIC >?

‘Sheffield lake, Ohio

14, November 1958

Mr

Dear Lire SRE.

Thank you for your letter of 10 November requesting information
about your UFO sighting and your previous letter of 31 October.

Your original letter stated that the investigation was conducted
by two members of the Air Technical Intelligence Center; therefore,
your letter was forwarded to that organization for direct reply to
youe Air Technical Intelligence Center is a tenant organization of
the base and is not under operational control of this office.

We have sent your latest query to the Center and you will be
hearing from them soon, undoubtedly.

Sincerely ®

DENNIS E. MeCLENDON
Captain, USAF
Information Services Officer

U. & AIR FORCE TECHNICAL INFORMATION SHEET

This questionnaire has been prepared so that you can give the U. S. Air Force as much
information as possible concerning the unidentified aerial phenomenon that you have observed,

Please try to answer as many questions as you possibly can. The information that you give will
be used for research purposes, and will be regarded as confidential material. Your name will not
be used in connection with any statements, conclusions, or publications without your permission,
We request this personal information so that, If it is deemed necessary, we may contact you for

further details. |
, |

1. When did you see the object? 2. Time of day: rs

Hour | Minutes

rer pee (Circle One): ¢ A.M or P.M,

3. Time zone: ;
(Circle One): (Circle One): ex Daylight Saving >

b. Contre! b. Standard
¢. Mountain
d. Pacific
@, Other
4. Where were you when am]
°
Stote or Country
Additional remarks:
5. Estimate how long you saw the object, ——___ ak 2 ee
Hours Minutes Seconds
5.1 Circle one of the following to indicate how certain you are of your answer to Question 5, |
a. Certoin c. Not very sure
Chu Foirly certain> d. Justa guess

6. What was the a of the sky?

Mrse: Gh loa. a. abd toy OL heen! Agere’ 7 A Pp ari ad sf de

re
b. Dull daylight e. No trace of daylight
¢. Bright twilight f. Don't remember

7. IF you sow the object during DAYLIGHT, TWILIGHT, or DAWN, where was the SUN located as you looked at
the object?

23 Gaya

Page 2?

8. IF you saw the object, at NIGHT, TWILIGHT, or DAWN, what did you notice concerning the STARS and MOON?
8.1 STARS (Cirele One): 8.2 MOON (Circle One):

a. None
b. A few
c. Many

0. Bright moonlight
b. Dull moonlight
c€._No moonlight — pitch dark >

<d;_Don't remomber> d. Don't remember

———_— -—-—~—

9. Was tho object brighter than the background of the sky?

ac Yes > b. No

10, IF it was BRIGHTER THAN the sky background, was the brightness like that of an automobile headlight ?:

Ve Dole nf tile (Circle One) a. A mile or more away (a distant car)?
. CG) .. SINLG Tey VAs Sp, b. Several blocks away?

haan WV thd we cere c. Ablock oway?
wt d. Several yards away?

74 : ay eo e, Other

11, Did the object:

(Circle One): c. Don’t remember

(Circle One for each question)

a. Appear to stand still at any time? Yes > No Don’t Know
b. Suddenly speed up and rush away at any time? latT? No Don’t Know
¢. Break up into parts or explode? Yes Che > Don't Know
d. Give off smoke? Ges> Ne Don't Know
e. Change brightness? Yes (No > Don’t Know
_f. Change shape? Yes (No> Don’t Know
Tf. J: Flicker, throk oF pul ate? 5 ad. ae : P No ae Don't Know

12. Did the object move behind something at Savile, particularly o clouw

(Cirele One): Yes aD Don’t Know.
Oe UO YS | ee

IF you answered YES, then tell what

13. Did the object move in front of something at anytime, particularly a cloud?
(Circle One): Yes fo) IF you answered YES, than tell what

it moved in front of:

Don't Know.

b. Transparent? c. Don’t Know.

15. Did you observe the object through any of the following?

Cle > e. Binoculars Yes fo
Alen > §. Talascone Yes Yo

14, Did the object appear: (Circle One):

a. Eyeglasses Yes

~~ VAN Hee RO PST Ty i>
. _ ww

Poge 3
16. Tell in a few words the following things about the object.
a. Sound LE (teh /2iad Wht rtp bee eter sess, A) Le: oral
b. Color Au zi lag AL A, ; 4444 /

| 17. Draw o pleture that will show the shape of the object or objects. Lobel and Include in your sketch ony details
of the object thot you saw such as wings, protrusions, ete., and especially exhaust trails or vapor trails. Place

on arrow beside the drawing to show the direction the object was moving.

18. The edges of the object were:

(Circle One): a. Fuzzy or blurred
b. Like a bright star

scSiermy evilined >

d. Don't remember

19. IF there was MORE THAN ONE object, then how mony were there?
Drow @ picture of how they were orranged, and put an errow to show the direction that they were travel ing.

Page 4

20. Draw a picture shat will show the motion that the object or objects made. Place on “A® ot the beginning
of the path, a "B" at the end of the path, and show any changes in direction during the course.

‘@

2\. IF POSSIBLE, try to guess or estimate what the real size of the object was in its longest dimension,
feet,

22, How large did the object or objects appear as compared with one of the following objects held in the hand
and ot about arm's length?

(Circle One): a. Head of a pin g- Silver dollar
b. Pea h. Baseball
c, Dime 1. Grapefruit
d. Nicket j. Basketball

Quarter k. Other 22 yY SuAWZR - 7 WY ches

eo.
f. Half dollar
22.1 (Circle One of the following to indicate how certain you are of your answer to Question 22,

©. Certain > c. Not very sure
b. Fairly certain d. Uncertain

23, How did the object or objects disap

L

peor from view?

24. In order thot you can give os clear a picture os possible of what you sow, we would like for you to Imagine that you could
construct the object that you saw. Of whot type material would you make It? How large would it be, and what shape
would It have? Describe in your own words a éommon object of objects which when placed up in the sky would give the
some oppecrance as the object which you sow.

Avil ALlvinjpwumM - <0 fT WwW a Aare Te pe - CLyRevlar

Vy ; ~ }
sine I hail - WBE Aizrer deg ether Lith J2iadl-

VE Atek rn Jap

F
f
e
:

—

oz- —_—
a
>
o
FS
=

AFCIN~4

AFCIN-4X2b

Al nen
>
oO
z
Cc
sed
A
'
=

| -4X4

—
=

lel
>
nl
O
>
h
oh

AFCIN-—4A

AFCIN-4B

~4D

Al
> > >
“Tl Ti Ti
a} | jal | fa
t iF
a &
m ‘s)

Mi

Ca
o
=
=
res
x
nm

;

4c

we
afte
ta
i
AS

B21 S<=

AFCIN-\E)|/Maj Friend/ac
69216/Bldg 828

Typed 10 Oct 58 FILE CLASS:

OFFICIAL FILE COPY

——OFFICE OF RECORD

13 OCT 1958

ffield Leke, Ohio

Mie

Inclosed cre your letters from Mr. Mrs. nd Mre.
which you loaned to the Air Force investigators of your uni-

otified flying, object aighting of 21 September 1958.

Your reporting of the incident, intcrest and the cooperation given
the Air Force investigators is greatly appreciated.

Sincerely,
Incls: H. K. oe
l. Colonel, USAF / Ys”

Deputy for Science
and Components

3. Ltr sgnd
TASS

LLG |

Cc?
on"
enw

"ad

— ee

ee

Page 5

25. Where were you lucated when you saw the object? 26. Were you (Circle One)
(Circle One):
- a. Inthe business section of a city?
a. (inside a building> b. In the residential section of a city?
b. Ina car ce. In open countryside?
c. Outdoors d. Flying near an airfield?
d. Inan airplane e. Flying over a city?
e. At sea f, Flying over open country?
ple Bl ee g- Other £27Z (bad! Fi ReA

.27. What were you doing at the time you saw the object, and how did you happen to notice it?
/ ow wz of, VEL i ‘ ‘ : 4 a3 'Y . - ae SS : ke 4

; sag ee. | |

28. IF you were MOVING IN AN AUTOMOBILE or other vehicle at the time, then complete the following questions:

28.1 What direction were you moving? (Circle One)

a. North c. Eost e. South g. West |
b. Northeast d. Southeast f. Southwest h. Northwest

28.2 How fast were you moving? _._ Ss éomilles per hour,

28.3 Did you stop at any time while you were looking at the object?
(Circle One) Yes No

29. What direction were you looking when you first saw the object? (Circle One)
oCferth > c. East e. South g- West '
b. Northeast d. Southeast f. Southwest h. Northwest

30. What direction were you looking when you last saw the object? (Circle One)

a. North c. East > e. South g- West

b. Northeast d. Southeast f. Southwest h. Northwest

31. If you are familiar with bearing terms (angular direction), try to estimate the number of degrees the object was
from true North and also the number of degrees it was upward from the horizon (elevation).

31.1 When it first appeared:

a. From true North __________ degrees.
b. From horizon _____¥___ degrees.

31.2 When it disappeared:

a. From true North ______ degrees.

Poge 6

—_—_—————S naar a6... 2.909090. —

—

32. In the following sketch, imagine that you are at the point shown. Place an “A” on the curved line to show how
high the object was above the horizon (skyline) when you first saw it. Place a “B” on the same curved line to
show how high the object was above the horizon (skyline) when you /ast saw it.

33. In the following larger sketch place an “A” at the position the object was when you first saw it, and a “B” at its
position when you last saw it. Refer to smaller sketch as an example of how to complete the larger sketch.

* oes ted e. .
~ - . *-*.,

Page 7

34, What were the weather conditions at the time you saw the object?

34,1 CLOUDS (Circle One) 34.2 WIND (Circle One)
a. Clear sky a.CNo wind )
b. Hazy b. Slight breeze
c. Scattered clouds c. Strong wind
d. Thick or heavy clouds d. Don’t remember
e£ Don't remember >)
34.3 WEATHER (Circle One) 34.4 TEMPERATURE (Circle One)
a. Dry qa. vic |
beFog, mist, or light rain>) Cb. Cool >) |
c. Moderate orheavy rain c. Warm
d. Snow d. Hot
e. Don't remember e. Don't remember

——

— — —

35. When did you report to some official that you had seen the object?

es See7, _L¢8° 8
Doy nth Year

— ———

36. Was anyone else with you at the time you saw the object?

(Circle One) Yes CNo>
36.1 IF you answered YES, did they see the object too?
(Circle One) Yes No

36.2: Please list their names and addresses:

37. Was this the first time that you had seen an object or objects like this?

(Circle One) (Yes» No

37.1 IF you answered NO, then when, where, and under what circumstances did you see other ones?

38. In your opinion what do you think the object was and what might have caused it?

bd Cela Lh. Zh dtde/ meets hig “ae
yer vart ley Ki bey “7 Olle EPS AL av

39. Do you think you can estimate the speed of the object? Aly tek wthewkée ty Lhike) Glyw

(Circle One) Yes Lhen
IF you answered YES, then what speed would you estimate? Z mph.

_

40. Do you think you can estimate how far away from you the object was?

(Circle One) Cte No

Page 8

Mote dire Wi Leghh

ANMARTA IL ca tole of

--——-

IF you answered YES, then how far away would you say it was? 2 -~ 2? feet. |

41, Please give the following information about yourself:

TELEPHONE NUMBE

What is your present job? ate

[Seer >) Sex Ferale ¢

Please indicate any special educational training that you have had.

e, Grode host Eth Siar \Caatmieal gta) cel i
_b. High school U2) aS a eee ee eee Se

c. College
d. Post graduate

42, Date you completed this questionnaire:

f. Other special training

5 January 1959

od
ge 36, Mass.

Dear Dr. Site

You and your family have my hopes for a happy and successful
New Year.

In our earlier telephone conversation I promised to send you a
weekly summary of our activities, but after further thought I feel a bie
monthly summary would be sufficient, supplemented by telephone calls,
TwX's and letters on cases requiring immediate attention. If you have
any objections or suggestions to this procedure let me know at your

earliest convenience.

It has been some tine since you have been brought up to date,
therefore, I shall attempt to summrize the outstanding cases of the last
three months of 1958 I will not go invo figures for the period as they
may be obtained from the inclosed chert covering the last six months of

1958.
08002, 21 September 1953, Sheffield Lake, Ohio

A housewife was awakened by an intense bright light in her bede-
room. She rose to a standing position on the bed and from her window
viewed an object which she described as round (saucerelike) approximately
twenty feet in diameter and six feet high. The glowing object made several
oscillations in her front yard approximately six feet from the ground, and
then disappeared straight up moving at a very high rate of speed. The
witness stated that the sound associated with the object was a muffled

humming and whirring.

The Air Force investigators on the case discovered two light sources
which were in the vicinity of the witness’ house during the time of the
reported sighting. The search light of a coast guard ship was thrown on
the coast in the vicinity of the witness’ house and a train with an os-
cillating head and tail light passed the house at the same hour. The
weather at the time of the sighting was alternately mist and rain with
smoke and haze. As a result of these and the additional fact that the
witness watched a horror show (Dracula's Daughter) before retiring. and

was probably emotionally vulnerable, led the ATIC to conclude that the
witness was a victim of an illusion.

03232, 26 September 1958, Columbus, Miss. to Atlanta, Ga.

Object described as a bright ball of fire with a tail and moving at
a very high rate of speed. Two of the eight witnesses claimed the object
was at an extremely low altitude (200-300 feet) and one witness, an off
duty CAP pilot, heard a roaring noise from the object. The weather at
the time of this sighting was clear. The ATIC concluded tnis object was
@ meteor.

Z Septembe 8, Was ton, De. C ttsburgh, Pae

Object described as round and flaming or burning very bright, with a
faint possibility of a tail and a roaring or fluttering sound. The object
was reported to be moving at a very high rate of speed. This object was
witnessed by twelve people and was reported to have struck the ground or
landed in both the Washington, D. Ce. area and the Pittsburgh area.

The ATIC concluded this object was a meteor.

03302, 26 October 1958, Lock Raven Dam (Baltimore), Mi.

Two civilians were taking a ride near the dam when, from a distance
estimated by the witnesses to be approximately 250 yards, but which ine
vestigation proved to be approximtely one mile, they saw an object
hovering approximately 125 feet over the super structure of the bridge.
The witnesses estimated the size of the object as approximately 100 feet
and a dull gray in color. The witnesses reported that as they got closer
it ssenei the clectrical system of the car was affected, the lights went
Out and the motor went dead. Both witnesses got out of the car and were
greeted by a bright flash of light accompanied by a thunder clep from the
vicinity of the object, then it began to rise vertically and in five or
ten seconds it had completely disappeared. The witnesses were then able
to get their car started, mke their way to a phone and report the aighting
to the Ground Observers Corps and the Towson Police Department. Both men
then proceeded to St. Josephs Hospital in Baltimore for a physical examina-
tion which had negative results.

The ATIC is presently chasing down the possibility of an escaped
captive balloon, however, this would leave elements of the case unsolved.
This case lacks sufficient evidence for an accurate scientific analysis.

Z, 28 obe 8, Charles S.C. to Sav °

Object described as a bright burning ball falling from the sky.
Weather clear with 15 miles visibility. The ATIC concluded this was
@ meteor.

Sincerely ,

1 Incl: Robert J. Friend
Cy of Statiatiaa a".

—— eee Cee ee

UFO Sighting, Speffield

SAFIS-3, Attn: Maje L. J. Tacker 17 December 1958

AFCIN-4E 1
AFCIN-JElg/Miaje Friend/ac/69216/Bldg 828

1. Reference the questions outlined in Mr. SMBs letter of 7 December 1958,
to M/Gen. Fisher. The ATIC will not recommend any disciplinary action be taken against
the investigators. The ATIC feels that the investigation was adequate and intends no
further investigation of this case. A staff study of the UFO Program is presently
being prepared for presentation to the Commander of ATIC, this study does propose
sokin improvement in the Air Force's UFO investigative capability, but was in no sense
prompted by this case,

2. Reference the charges of criminal mishandling in Mr s@ilie's letter and in
"The-Qee Report," dated 21 September 1958, published by the UFO Research
Committee of Akron, Ohio. T/Sgt L. A. Haisten and T/Sgt V. J. Hof are both trained
investigators, Haisten having experience since 1948 and Hof since 1951. The following
paragraph dealing with the specific charges will substantiate the competence of the
investigators.

3. Omissions, errors and/or contradictions in "Thea Report," dated
21 September 1958, and published by the UFO Research Committee of Akron, Ohio are as

follows. Referenced page numbers are from the report.

a. (Page 1) No mention of the horror movie (Dracula's Daughter) which the
witness was viewing just before the sighting. It is the opinion of the ATIC that this
was a contributing factor to the emotional vulnerability of Mrs .uAine

be (Page 1) Witness mentions for the first time that window curtains were
made of heavy cloth.

ce (Page 3) The investigators did inform Mrs. ee that approximately
thirty (30) days would be required for the Air Force to get an answer to her. However,
they made no statement concerning the extent of the material which would be made avail-

able to her.

a. (Page 3) T/Sgt Haisten questioned Mrs. Qa for approximately two
to two and one-half hours. During approximately half of that time T/Sgt Hof and Mr.
Durant, of the UFO Research Committee were not present. T isten points out that

many more questions than those listed were asked of —

e. (Page 3) The Air Force investigators did not make a house to house check
in the neighborhood. It has already been pointed out that these men have considerable
experience, and in their opinion the evidence already collected precluded the necessity
of continuing investigation at additional expense,

f. (Pages 3 & 4) It is assumed that Mro@eis the Mrs gg of Lorain

who was contacted by the Air Force investigators and indicated that nothing unusual
neared nn the nicht of Mno IMM ciohtine Mno Fs nainnena +n enn

UNCLASSIFIED

Foe PRBS aad: eae,
@e (Page 4) The investi geo atic eetied no-one was home at thé"
house. Contact would certainly have been made with Mrs. ee had this been possible.

he (Page 6) The fact that this object was seen by another person from approxi-
mately the same vantage point does not rule out the illusion. The same illusion can be
experienced by more than one individual if the conditions are right. Mirages, and the
fact that there are so many successful magicians, is proof enough of this claim.

i. (Page 6) In obtaining a descript

ion of the item Mr. @§MMadmitted to
the Air Force investigators that he showed — a drawing from Blue Book

for comparison. Small wonder that there is similarity between her description and the
item in Blue Book.

je The train time indicated here is not specified as EST or EDI. The Air
Force investigators, however, recorded a train west bound at 2:5); EDT, the approximate
time of the sighting, while the station master's log indicates that the eastbound train,
mentioned in the GER : cport, passed at 2:52 EST (3:52 EDT) or 52 minutes after

the sighting.

ke (Page 8) The investigators oint out that approximately 100 feet of track
can be seen from the window of Mrs. bedroom and that the train light would

not be blocked by houses or trees.

@. 1. (Page 8) The primary job of Haisten and Hof is investigation; they may or
may not offer a conclusion as a result of their findings. The responsibility for the
analysis of all UFO cases lies with the ATIC. In no instance should investigators
hazard a conclusion for official publication as Air Force representatives.

me (Page 8) The Air Force conclusion stated that it was a combination of the

lights which was responsible for the illusion experienced by Mrs SM... Air
Force investigators were informed that the light on Chief Schott's ship iS pencil—beamed.

he The following statements align themselves with the alleged charges of blunders
committed by T/Sgt Haisten and T/Sgt Hof. Page 9 of "TIQQMMWPR-port."

a. The investigators indicate that the light can be seen from Mrs “GREE
windowe

b. There was no claim that the light was reflected from clouds but was possibly

Shown directly on the home of Mrs. Sgt Hof sta e made no commitment
concerning the impossibility of the light shining on Mrs house.

’

c. The impression of the investigators is that the light on Chief Schott's

Ship is of the spot Jight variety. A light source would not be nearly as noticeable
in the lighted town as at the unlighted area of — ee

d. Mes - GUM 3. admit seeing a red glow on the night of the sighting;
however, she attribut this to reflections from the Ohio Edison Plant to the wNw of

her home. It is si to note that — = home is approximately 3 miles
to the west of Mr placing Mrs, etween Mrs, end the

Nhinan DAA aan Dianne

UNG] nomen)

WWE we Pe ed

f. The report plays with words here. Mist is visible water vapor or rain
of very small droplets. The weather was obtained from the log of Chief Schott. The

Ohio Edison Plant is northwest of Mrs. @@NNQMMMMbe house and also a source of smoke,
there was no specific claim that the smoke came from the U. S. Steel Company plant.

g- (1) The Air Force investigators did not feel a house to house check was
necessary in view of evidence already obtained and expense involved.

(2) Mrs. QM hed already constructed a model made of paper plates
and a bowl which was shown to the sergeants along with a verbal description,

(3) T/Sgt Haisten obtained information concerni

object from Mrs.“ This was during the period Mr
T/Sgt Hof.

the motion of the
as absent with

(4) The sergeants did take notes during the investigation and interview. |
However, it should be noted that the trained interrogator is taught not to take, or to
take & minimum of notes. Witnesses are more prone to free talk if they feel there is |
ho record requiring exact recound,on their part in the future. |

J
(5) The ATIC feels that it should once again be pointed out that the

apparent purpose of the UFO Research Committee, like most private organizations, is
to discredit the U. Se Government and particularly the United States Air Force.

(6) The UFO Research Committee is claimed to be a scientific organization.e
However, there are no indications of a high level of education within the organization.

(7) The ATIC stands firmly behind the investigators in this case. True
there were some additional phases of investigation which they could have carried out,
i1.@e, house to house check, but this would have resulted in additional expense to the
Air Force when in the judgment of these experienced men the collected evidence was

sufficient.

1 Incl: H. K. GILBERT
Ltr dtd 7 Dec 58, Colonel, USAF
w/report of AFCIN-E}
UFO sighting

Cc
0
P
Y

rNVT ey) ayS ‘..

’ r
caNED AT 2 VRAY
ROW NG Ras HIE) API “+ ’ is 1 eet bee

SUSPENSE

ORIGIN OF BASIC DATE

ASSIGNED BY

DATE NO.

SUBJECT

(U)\@ VO Sighting, ‘rei (Shertield, Onio)

ROUTING

Initial "IN" column to denote review prior to action, Initial “OUT” column to denote review of completed
action, (KX for action; .~ for coordination, )

IN OFFICE Jour | IN OFFICE jour tN | OFFICE out] IN OFFICE OUT} IN OFFICE pout
OIN-1 OIN-2 OIN-3 I OIN- 4 AFOIN
OIN+ 1X y OIN= 2x if | OIN- 3x OIN: 4X AFOIN+X |
ri] [ F- r | AFOIN: X |
Ly | ] . | Aromn-xt |
| | a AFOIN- X2 if
| cae aay _[Arornexs 3
1 | ification Po [ AFOUN-X4 r
gs gaa ‘ AFOIN: X5
F af fu} Se [ AFOIN-Z
i: ] | po of! pred CABLES |
== 2 | : \ bad =1_f iid me | | FILE
etal olan. q j rR} | DISPATCH |
TO; : DATE
SAFIs-3 Attn: Major Tacker 10 Oct 1958
FROM: COMMENT NO.
AFCIN-E) 1

COMMENTS (lee reverse, if necessary)

hE) /Ma j ivaa/ ac/69216/Bldg 828

le Onl Oct 8, the Air Technical Intelligence Center received a letter
from Mr of Sheffield, Ohio, containing a report of her UFO
sighting on 21 SeptemBer 1958, and action was initiated on this date to have the case

investigated.

26 Hes. Smee onete in her report that on the morning of 21 September
1958, she was awakened by a very bright light which illuminated her bedroom at approx-
imately 0300 EDT. looking out of a bedroom window which faced her front yard, she
saw an object which was flat and circular with a dome shaped top. Object was approx-
imately 6 - 8 feet from the ground, moving slowly in a northerly direction; parallel
with the length of the house, and descending with a floating oscillating motion.
Object was reported to be approximately 10 feet from the window when first sighted.
Witness insists the top of the object was clear to her in every detail, and that the
color reminded her of dull aluminum. The dimensions of the object were estimated to
be 20 feet in diameter and approximately 6 feet thick. Witness reports that the item
made several turns around the yard and then rose instantly out of sight. Total
elapsed time was estimated as five minutes.

3 Air Force investigators arrived in Sheffield, Ohio on 3 October 1958, con-

tacted Mrs SEAS also initiated other iin of the investigation. Mrs.

Wu at 21) interviews was advised by Mr. @ member of a

_— om wwe

———

UFO Sighting, Sheffield Lake, Ohio ()t xq ENT

aN Classification Cancelled
. At
: uth
NY SAFIS-3, ATTN: Maj. L. J. Tacker By h May 1959
Da’ Si *= i
\ ahi ZA 5 ee
“i hEe/ia§ Six" Friend/ac/69216/Blig 263
am)

1. On 1 October 1958, the Air Technical Intelligence Center received a letter
‘N fron ie ininaiaion o: Sheffield Lake, Ohio, containing a report of her
(\ sighting of an unidentified flying object on 21 September 1950. Action was initiates
N' by the ATIC on this date to have this sighting investig:.ted by the 1006th AISS.

2. The goneral content of Mrs. GRR’ s report is thot on the morning of
21 Septenber 1953, she was awakened by a very bright light which illuzinated her
bedroom at approximately 0500 LUT. Looking out of a bedroom window which faceu her
front yard, she saw an objest which was flat and circular with a dome shaped top.
The object was approximately six to eight feet from the ground, moving slowly ina
northerly direction; parallcl with the length of the house, and descending with 2
floatim: oscillatin: motion. The object was reported to be approxim:tely ten fcet
froa theo window when first sighted. iia insista tne top of the object
was clear to her in every detail, and that the color reminded her of dull aluainuce
Ww The dimensions of the ovject) were estimated to be 20 feet in dinneter and apmroxi-

mately six feet thichse!, The item was reported to have made several turns aroun

* the yard and thon rose instantly out of sight. Total elapsed time was estisated as
five minutes.

Cf iL ¢e "7

2. The Air Fores investicutors arrived in Jheffield Iakc, Ohio on 3 October

eR ee
Us ULASS 3 ie

4h. The general procedure used in the investigation of this case
was to interview ‘xs. Qmmiennd other witnesses, both for infore
mation of the sighting and for evaluating the sources; visit the scene
of the sighting, observe the physical liuyout, searoh ror possible con}

G@itions which could be responsible for the sighting, ami to scan the
general area far possible more remote causes for the sighting.

Se In summary, the investigation revealed that a railroad track

ran near the howe of irs, MER Contact with br, =.
8 on raster at Lorain, Ohio, revealed that a train passei the
eae, howe at approximately the hour and date of irs. ay
Bightinge ‘he train had an oscillating headlight and this li:ht could
have been seen by jira. QR. «Contact was also mde with Chief
Bosun Mate Williwa Jghott, OfficereIn-Charve of the Lorain Coast Guard
Station. The olic? reported that he was using his spotlight to attract
the attention of another ship and that hi was directeu toward
shore in the ¢enereal direction of tao house. The tine and
date of this incident coincide with those reported by irs. Qapmueiiigggye
Mrs QM leorsin, Ohio was contacted, but was unable to recall
anything unusual on the night of the reported sighting. irs.

another witness of Lorsin, Onio, was not available for interview.

6. The weather at the time of the sighting was intermittent mist
and rain with heze snd smoke. Weather is always an important factor
because of its direct effects and the fact that it often allows for
indirect conclusions (i.e. stars, plancts, etc. may be inoediately
ruled out when there was a thick overcast at the time of the sighting).

7+ Mrsqelgt mpressed the Air Force investigators as being
nervous, emotioual, and iupressionable. At tices during tie interview
the witness was on the brink of tesrs, and «ave other indications of a
highly emotional atute. iricy to retiring tae witness had watched a
horror movie on television (Dracula's Daughter) which probably contri-
buted to her emotional state.

3 8. Investigation further disclosed that hrs. gM received
Jetters from other self-appointed UFO experts concerning her sighting.
These letters all inferred thit iirs, QAM mey have been harmed
in sone Way, ai were toned for encoursgenent to dirs agg ond
@ll directed toward discrediting the U. S. Covernment end particularly
the Air Foroe. (incls. 3, 4 & 5)

9. Mrs IM oduiited that the letter ani report which
she sent to the Air vechnicol Jitelligence Center was prepared by vir.

Um, ke opinion of the investigators, and sharei by the
ATIC, is that this individual had considerable influence upon the report

and subsoquent cacticns of :thée! witnesse

10. The investigators, T/Set Le A. Haisten and T/ Set Ve J. ilof,
wae et otinneal .f weiouteiutterson Air Force Pase, end it was convenicnt

Us

PPR eee
case. lIffectively the sex,.ca.ts had nothing to add only to substan-e
tiate the information which is contained in thei:: report and to deny
the Gisime against them in “Tho gga Keport,* which was pub-

lished by the Ui¥ iiesearch Comaittee of Akron, Ohio.(Incl. 6)

ll. The following are omissions, errors and/or contradictions
in "Tne@Qe teport," dated 21 September 1958. lieferenced
page nunbex's ave irom the report:

ee (luge 1) No mention of the horror movic (Dracula's
Daughter) which the witness was viewing just before tho sighting. It
is the opinioa of tae ATIL that this was a contributing factor tc the

emotional vulucrevility of Mro. SN

be (inge 1) Witness mentions for the first time that winiow
curtains were iauce of heavy cloth.

co. (fuge 3) The investigators did inform Vrs. Wagga
that approximately 30 days would be required for the Air Farce to «get
an answer to her. lowever, they made no statement concerning the
extent of the suterial which would be made available to her.

de (Pave 3) T/Set Haisten questioned Mrs agggglllittef or
eprproxinately two to two ani one half hours. During approximately
half of that tise t/set riof and Mr. of the UIC Research
Comittee, were not present. T/Set sten points out thet many more
questions than tiose listed were asked of iirs 4g

e. (Page 3) The Air Force investigators did not make a
house to house check in the neighborhood. It has already been pointed
out that these men have considcrable experience, and in their opinion
the evidence alr<«ady collected precluded the necessity of continuing
investigation at aiditional expense.

f. (rages 3 & 4) It 4s assumed tuat Mrs. is the birs,.

fF ti‘isY of Lorain who was contacted by tue Air Force estigators

and indicated tuit nothing unusual occurred on the ni, ht of irs.

erent sijatings iro. SQM indicated to tae investicators
ba

t tae red ;, iow she saw wus fron the mills, an opinion shared by
the sergesnts.

5e (iage &) The investigators indicate that no one was
at the nie. Gontact would certainly have Loen mde with irs.

WP hod this been possible.

he (fnge 6) The fact that this object was scen by another
person from approxtisztely the sase vantage point does not rule out
the illusion. suc sane illusion can bo experienced by more than one
individual if the comiitions are right. Mirages, and the fact thot
thera are BO buy successful magicians, ia proof enough of this clain.

4. (rage 6) In obtaining a description of the item Mr.
admitted to the Air Force investigators that he snowed hirs.
a drawing from Blue Book for comparison. Small womer that there is
Similarity between her description ani the item in Blue Book.

j.- (Fage 8) The train time indicated here is not specified
as EST or EDT. The Air force investigators; however, recorded a train
west vound at 2:54 Evi, the approximate time of the sighting, wile the

stati ‘ * ~od in
*The | saitinays> -. > ibid ites
afte
itely

100 { 'a bede
room ea 9 TEC.

ues (ESE GAM ahh PS Teg, , rsti-
eatid pix
Lindi Lin ANC Bix | | lien
wi th : 3 , slusion
for {

’ ; 2 a
comb) FW "ie expere
densi. : ; : : i that
the |

oe ee ees +e +

12. The following statements align themselves with the alleged
charges of blunders committed by T/Sct Haisten ami T/Set Hot (Page 9

of "ThentiRERREBRe ort ):
@. The investigators indicate that the light can be seen

from Mrswp" wincow.

be. There was no Claim that the light was reflected from
Clouds, but was possibly shown directly on the home of Mrs. age.
Set Hof states he made no nt concerning the impossibility of
the light shining on irs. ie : house.

c. The impression of the investigators is that the licht on
Chief Schott's ship is of the spotlicht variety. A light source would
not be nearly oa noticeable in the lighted town as at the unifighted areca
of — home e

d. live. digg did adnit secing a red clow on the night of
the sightin:; however, she attributed tiis to roflections from the Ohio
Téigson Flant to the Wii of her home. It is significsnt to note that Mrs.
Ws nome is ayproxmately three miles to the west of Mrs.
Gees, placin, is. Qa dectwoon Mrs. Smpemiand the Ohio
Edison Plante a

i
|
i
i
|
i

4. (Page 6) In obtaining a description of the item ir.
admitted to the Air rorce investigators that he snowed ‘roemiieilie
a drawins, from Blue Book far comparison. Small wonmier that there is
Binilsrity between her description ani the item in Blue Hook.

j- (Page 8) The train time indicated here is not specified
at EST or EDT. The Air force investigators; however, recorded a train
west doumd at 2:54 Evi, the approximate time of the sighting, wile the
stati er's log indicates that the eastbound train, mentioned in
e teport", passed at 2:52 BST (3:52 EDT) or 52 minutes
after the sigiting:.

ke. (Page 9) The investigators point out that a ximately
100 feet of track can be seen from the window of lirs,. bode
room end that tae train light would not be blocked by houses or trees.

1. (Sage 8) The prinary job of Haisten and Hof is investi-
gations they my or may not offer a conclusion as a result of their
findings. The responsibllity for the anelysis of all UFO cases lies
with the ATIC. In no instance should investigators hazard a conclusion

for official publication as Air Force representatives,

me (Page 8) Tne Air Force conclusion stated that it was a
combination of the lights which was responsible for the illusion expere
iensed by Se Air Force invosticators vere informed that
the light on Chicé schott's orig is peccil bermed.

ged

‘ F se

Par. 12 w

char, tee te ge 9
of * 12. The bitow tatements disprove the “

charges in er tee that T/Spt

Haisten and T/Sgt Hof committed blunders in on
from conducting the investigation of this case. (Page 9

of "Thee Report’) “
clou This change was requested by Mr. air, and OE .
Sgt | Major Friend notified Major Tacker 8 May 1959, y of
the | by telephone. *

Mest ASSIEED. bt on

Chie; i re would

ted arca

not | ee
of M :
t. _—

G. Mroe Qgmmewaid adait seoitic a reé clow on the night of
the sighting; however s she attributed this to roflections from the Ohio
Faison Plant to tie Wii of her home. It is significent to note that Mrs.

home is anprosxdmately three miles to the west of Mrs.
e placing irs. QE ctvcon Mins ag and the Chio
Edison Plante

e. No one was home to be contacted at theg@R house.

f. The report plays with words hore. Mist is visible water

vepor or rain of very small droplets. The weather was obtained from the

log of Chief Schott. ‘The Uhio Fdison Flant is northwest of irs.
house and also a source of smoe; there was no specific
Glain that the smoke came from the U. Se 3tecl Company plent.

&~» (1) The Air Force investigators did not feel a house to
house check was necessary in view of evidence already obtained and
expense involved.

(2) lirs Qed already constructed a model made
of paper plates and a bowl which was shown to the sergeants, along with
@ Werbal description.

(3) T/Sc-t Haisten obtained information concerning the
motion of the object from Mra. QQ. «This was during the period
My, QF was abscnt with 7/Sgt Hof.

(4) ‘The sergeants did take notes during the investigae-
tion and interview. However, it should be noted that the trained
interrogatar is taucht not to take, or to take a minimun of notes.
witnesses are more prone to free talk if they feel there is no record
requiring exact recount on their part in the future.

13- The men assigned to investic¢ate this case are both well
trained and experienced investigators. T/Sct Haisten having experience
@ince 198 and T/sgt Hof since 1951.

lie This report, like all others upm reaching the ATIC, is first
given general consideration; does the description and characteristics
indicate the object is probably an aircraft, balloon, meteor, etc. If
the description and characteristics places the item in a general catee
gory, then steps ere taken to determine if such an object or sircraft
was in the area at the time of the sightin>. Next it is inspected with
@ wiew toward its special requirements; i.e., laboratory analysis, if
eny mtecrial accompanies the report, or if it requires a specialist
tO conduct the analysis; ieee astroncner, physicist, etc. The fact
that the Aerial Phemonema Croup is a part of the Air Science Division,
amd with the labcratories of the \Wright Air Developicnt Center located
on the Wri; hte,ntterson .ir Force Base, makes this type cf scientific
and technical suyppart icrimiiately available; furthcr the Air Force has
under coutract a noicd astroephysicist for consultant services to this
project. The AavIC approack to the analysis of these cases is as
acientific a3 tic evidence allows, and whenever pocesaaury the analyst
ig a specialist. In considerin; rs. Mbecasc it is the

opinion of the 4,''C that rs. pei ond hicr hheglieeecre
wictins of an illusion. This illusion resulting from the combination

of lights from the truin aml possibly the coust guard boat, the roar

SE OS er me .

nore

ye mt K

and the prevailing weather conditions. It is not

from the train
having tho same ©

uncomnon for persons

experience the suc {illusions Furthere
ATIC that there was no threat to na national security or & danger of any
kind essociated with irs “Qe 9 sighting «

ound in

15. This case was analyzed by a mon with a backer

astronoy and physics.
of investigation n andi copy of original
es available at the ATICes

letter from > is, 2 the only copi
and it is requested that they be returned at the earlicst conveniences

Wtf o-22

© GORDON C. HOPMAN

6 Inols:
1. Ltr fr bre. Colonel, USAF
AFCINeE

_ summry

: (CG) AF 112
36 Ltr fr
Ltr fr

5e Ltr fr
6

wares 8 TF ys tr *

,AND PLAIN DEALER, MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 22, 1958

—————

———_—————

‘Saucer Territfies Housewite

+ From First Page Clarence E. Hambly said he| vicinity of the Fitzgerald home
———————_aJRee | was not notified of the sight-| had seen the “saucer.”

From that point on, his ac-) ing and had not had any| Fitzgerald and this reporter
‘count of the incident agreed “saucer” reports from anyone examined the ground over
with his stepmother’s. else. which the object reportedly

Both also said that the) A check of neighbors re-| traveled and could not find
“saucer” made a whirring noise. vealed that no one else in the anything unusual.

Then, as it left, the noise took —
on a muffled, whining sound.
John demonstrated with a
low whistle, increasing in
pitch, together with a hum.

Not Seen by Others

The “saucer” was described!
as round from a top or bottom}
view and oval from a side view
with a rounded cap on top. It
was about eight feet in diam-
eter, they said, and about three
feet high.

Mrs. Fitzgerald said it had
openings on both sides in which
she saw a series of small tubes
like small exhaust pipes.” |

Sheffield Lake Police Chief

> , | ’
» , “ :
+, o>

reek : {i bees b Pe
Bygee Oe A er . oe it Mpeeisdiess sesigaee
Mrs. William H. Fitzgerald John Fitzgerald

Fitzgerald

Sheffield Lake family examines mock-up

of “saucer.”
\ Plain Dealer Staff Photo '

—_—_—_—_— —_ — _—-—— —EE

‘ao *€

an ¥ 4 we

|

|

|

| sire to see one, and has less de-

changed location for good,

.

PTTL
.

RESEARCH ON

i Soe a

nidentified FY —

By Lillian Crowner Desguin

MTTTITITITITTTT TTT Ee

Bob: Adkins of WTVN radio is;the form of this object.

responsible for bringing - this
weeks Flying Saucer ‘story to
print. In his Monday morning
news broadcast he mentioned a

‘| sighting by Mrs. William Fitz-

gerald of Sheffield Lake, Ohio.

,Feeling that this event deserv-
ed a follow-up, especially be-

fore some government official
could arrive to advise her not to
discuss the sighting, I put in a
long distance call.

Mrs. Fitzgerald lives in a hous-
ing development where there

are about 85 homes, indicating
not much territory between
houses. She had gone to bed
Sunday shortly before 3 A.M.
(September 21st). Suddenly a
brilliant light shone through her
closed draperies with such in-
tensity that she was forced to
shield her eyes and bury them
in her pillow. When the light
disappeared she ran to the win-
dow. There about seven or eight
feet above her lawn was a full-
fleged UFO. Mrs. Fitzgerald
knew nothing about such phen-
omena, I’m sure she had no de-

sire to see one again. To me she
sounded like a woman who was
scared stiff. She said she felt as
if everything inside of her

Not being much good on guess-
ing sizes she did her best to give
approximate measurements. :She
thought the object might have
been eight feet in diameter and
three feet through. She described

| it as looking like two faper

plates placed edge to edge and
topped with a soup dish, It was
a dull aluminum color, the only
illumination coming from an ex-

|haust which gave off a grayish

pink hue sufficient to show off

She watched it for several
minutes as it did various antics,
as well as hovering here and
there. This saucer-shaped ship
even went around her house and
over in her neighbors yard. Hav-

ing played long enough, the UFO!

went straight up, disappearing
into what no doubt, must be
heaven.

Apparently, Mrs. Fitzgerald's
ten year old son was awakened
by the light, as he saw the ship
from his own bedroom. He ran
to awaken his father before she
was able to navigate that far.

A mother’s main concern is the
safety of her children, and this
was certainly what bothered
Mrs. Fitzgerald. After assuring

her that I didn’t feel that this
was a Russian invention or that

it was going to harm her chil-|}

dren, I believe she felt relieved.

Any one would have to be the
world champion cynic to talk to
this woman and believe that she
had made up such a tale for
publicity’s sake!

I am sorry I haven’t an answer
to give to this sighting. The best
I could do would be to give sev-
eral possibilities, and this will
not be forthcoming in the near
future. I can say that there are
many sightings which describe
a brilliant spotlight sometimes
turned on by UFO’s. A woman
who lives on Harrisburg Pike
saw one of these ships cross a
cornfield, with a light so bril-
liant that every clod of dirt
could be seen around the new
young corn. I wouldn’t even care
to venture a guess as to whether
this ship was occupied or not, !
believe either answer is possible.

——- — —-

:

— -

——

—- ——

—

————— ——————

Wa

Flying

| By ALLEW D. ASHBOLT
Lorain Covnty Correspondent

Terrified und shaken by their
jexperience, a Sheffield Lake
housewife and her 10-year-old
stepson yesterday related a
weird account of a 3 a.m. visit
by a “flying saucer.”

Mrs. William H. Fitzgerald.
934 East Drive, said she
watched the object for more
than five minutes at close
range after a brilliant light
roused her from her bed.

Tears filled her eyes, still
reddened from crying until
dawn following the experience,
as she told of unsuccessfully
trying to wake her husband, an
unemployed truck driver, to
help her through the ordeal.

“T had just gone to bed after
the last movie on TV,” she said,
when a brilliant white glare
' filled her bedroom through the

Terrifies Sheftie

—_
-

Saucers on Top of Dracula,

ld Lake Woman

closed window drapes. The
movie was “Dracula's Daugh-
ter.” 2

Blinded at first, she hid her
head under the pillow until the
light subsided. Then she stood
on her bed, looked through the
window and watched the “sau-
cer” glide over her driveway.

It hovered a foot above a
neighbor's lawn, suddenly
glowed, and discharged a cloud
of “heavy pinkish - grayish -
purplish smoke from the sau-
cer’s back and sides,” she said.

It then swept in a curve onto
Mrs. Fitzgerald's front lawn,
she said, and rose to about
seven feet above the ground.

After it completed two short
circular maneuvers, she lost
sight of it, she said, when it
sped straight up into the sky
over the.top of her home.

———

7

She ed

0 a Or

daughter, Christy Lynn, 7, and
her husband slept peacefully as
she watched what she described
as “the most horrible looking
thing” she had ever scen. “It
was terrifying,” she said.

Mer stepson, John, a fourth}

grade student at Milford Ele-}
mentary Schoo] in Cleveland?
was spending the weekend,
visiting his father, He was inj
the next bedroom, also at sy
front of, the house, and hap-'
pened to be awake when the
“saucer” made its early-morn
ing appearance.

Since his smal! bedroom win¢
dow was above his eye level}
he explained, he could not seq
the object until he stepped on
a wall heat register. By that
time, he said, it was emitting

Mrs. Fitzgerald, 28, said :

the cloud of smoke.
(Continued on Page *%. Column 6

——

$$

’
"
|
|

Monday Eve «

Dear Mrs. SMG

I have written up your story for this weeks paper, and if I do
not find that you have sent for a subscription will send you a
Clipping. I forgot to ask you if there was any noise involved and
take for granted there wasn't, but I should have asked’ Most ships
make no noise but now and then they do, so it is quite important.
Also I'm womering whether the Air Force or anyone will get to you and
suggest you do not give out your story. This happens, and I'll surely
appreciate it if you will keep me informed. I do wish we had time for
a few hours talk. I would be glad to share the material I have found
out, but I find that generally no one believes you anyway, so it's
almost useless,

Am almost tempted to drive up to see you as yours is one of the
best sightings. Do let me hear from you on any points you have forgotten
to mention, no matter how slight. Sometimes they have more importance

than you think.
Sincerely,

poe ee eee ee) el ee | ee te ee

DOCUMENT RECEIPT [reese OR oe NUMBER mY et SB
TO: FROM: (Return signed original receipt)
AFCIN JE
ATTN: Major Friend - MCLAIS

~ .

Carter 0. Cooper, Ma jor, USAF

—

—

Each entry listed below will describe a document and its in- 2. Number of Indorsements: Number of copies and copy numbers
closures, and will be separated by a horizontal line drawn from of each and other unclassified identifying data (as applicable).
margin to margin. Each entry will include:

3. Number of Inclosures: Subject (short title, if subject is clazsi-
fied), and other unclassified identifying data. including number of

1. Description of Basic Material: File number, type (number of Copies and copy number of each (as applicable).
copies and copy numbers), source, addressee, date, subject (short title,
if subject is classified). 4. Date of latest action.

DESCRIPTION OF DOCUMENT(S) (Avoid any identification which might necessitate classification of this receipt.)

Map, Lorain County Ohio
2 Ea. Newspaper Clippings (1 article)

er f |
Letter from OES -|

Letter from
TOTAL NUMBER OF ENTRIES LISTED:

Letter f
x DATE RE ED
IPT FOR DOCUMENT(S) DESCRIBED ABOVE IS ACKNOWLEDGED ~
RECE ° (S) | 76 Se d 3

RECEIVING AGENCY TYPED NAME, GRADE, OR TITLE iGN RE "a L
NEC OW YE WEE: iltecet ~

AF FORM 310 REPLACES AF FORM 683 WHICH MAY BE USED AND WU. &. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1958.s3400085
1S JUN SS DO FORM 646 WHICH {6 OBSOLETE IN THE USAP

UFO Reports, Cleveland Area

SAFISe3 Yajor Tacker 10 Oct 58

AFCINe4 Th i
hrh/tej Friend/ac/69216/Bld,, 828

le This Center checked with Fli¢ht Test center, “ADC, conoerning test fli, hts
around Cleveland area. ihe Ail Center was duformed taat flight tests ere coniucted

fn reatricted arca elC9, cast of Layton, and none in the Cleveland area.

2. Builoons sre released irom all over tue United states, some amall, some very
larce. ‘The large balloons will travel thousands of miles from the launching site
before voming down. uns of tuese launchings are unsocucduled, and are so numcrous
as to preclude cuccking vita uli tae airports that might release balloons.

36 A thorowh cueok of tue ATIC files failed to reveal any reporte of unidentiq-
fied flying objects in be vicVelaiid area on the lbtn or lYth of August 1956

& Incla: He Ke GILBERT

le Ltr fr House of op , Colonel, UsAF
Ze Uy l

3e
be Gy At |

vy 1

ae

he Investigation revealed that a railroad track ran near the home
; of Mrs. Qe. The night of Mrs. ges sichting a train
i passed the house at approximately the same hour of the reported sighting.
The train-had a rotating headlight which under some conditions would pro-
| duce unusual effects. Contact was also made with Chief Bosun Mate william
f Schott of the Lorain Coast Guard Station. Chief Schott reported that he
weg using his spotlight in an attempt to attract the attention of another

ship, and that the light was directed toward shore in the general direc-
tion of Mrs. ousee The time and date of this incident

coincide with those reported by Mrs. Mr egies of Lorain,
Ohio, a witness listed in Mrs. 8 report, couldn't recall any-
|
\

thing unusual on the night of the reported sighting. Mr. QM another
witness of Lorain, Ohio, was not available for interview. The weather
at the time of the incident was a misty rain with haze and smoke.

5. Mr copesinnlallaiaana impressed the Air Force investigators as being
nervous, emotional and impressionable. At times during the interview

| the witness was on the brink of tears and gave other indications of a
. highly emotional state.

6. Mrsmqggpe admitted that the letter and report which she
| sent to the Air Technical Intelligence Center was prepared by li Gia.
Pl The opinion of the Air Force investigators, and shared by
| the ATIC, is that this individual had considerable influence upon both

the report and subsequent actions of the witness.

| 7- Investigation further disclosed that Mrs. gg received

letters from other self-appointed UFO experts concerning her experience.

These letters are all written in a tone of encouragement to Mrs. |

| Re and all directed toward discrediting the U. S. Government
and particularly the U. S. Air Force. Thermofax copies of these letters
are inclosures to this correspondence.

8. The conclusions of the Air Force investigators is that the
combination of moving lights, noise of the train, prevailing weather and
the emotional condi the witness accounts for the illusion ex-
perienced by Mrs. The Air Technical Intelligence Center,

after evaluation of the evidence in this case, concurs with the con-
4 Clusions of the investigators.

9. Mrs. QR original letter and report to the Air Technical |
Intelligence Center is also an inclosure to this correspondence. This
letter requires an answer directly to Mrs.

;

Wan. - “+5 Incls: Shae wabaree OP « K. GILBERT Ct. MS ALF,

l. Ltr 4 Colonel, USAF Classification Concctled
me AEUENehE Niko wha A

| 4% .

| DOWNGRADE: aT 2 ye: he merervarg, as | if :
. DiULwess ihe or os YEARS. hs he “6

4 Lids Dilys esty.ld ee re, Wg

, 7 - Se gg

SIGHTING: One of the best
sichtings to come to our ate
tention ina long time is
one from Shoffield Lake,
Ohio, that occurred on Sept.

2lst. According to the local
newspapers, Mre Qin.
ong = weiched « flying

saucer at very close range
for more than five mimites
early that morning, aftor a
brilliant light from the UFO
had roused her from her bed,
She watched the object as it
glided along slowly about a
foot above her neighbor's
driveway, It was seen to
discharge a cloud of “heavy
pinkish-gray purplish smoke!

It then swept in a curve on-
to Mrs io: front
lawn, and rose to about sev-

en feet above the ground.
Thereupon it made two cir-
cular maneouvere, and shot
straight up inte the sky,
out of sisht. Mrs.

a rt husband and daurche
» @lthough in the sane

room, did not see the object; but her Perri rait who was thought to be
Sleoping peecefully in the next room, did see the UFO ~- and the next duy his
story tallied with hers. The saucer was described as round from a top or bot-
tom view and cval from @ side view, with @ rounded cap cr top. It was about
Gight feot in diamster end three feat high, and had openings on both sides, in
which Mrs .qmiie cow @ guries of small tubes “like small exhaust pipes.*
- Fortunately for saucer fans, this sighting was given a therough first-hand
investigation by an Ohio saucer group called the UFO Research Committee of
Akron,who have prepered @ thirteen page report on all aspects of the incident.
Unfortunately, spece limitations prevent us from repreducing this repert even
in summary form, but it is an extremely well-done job, and we heartily recom
mend it to all our readers. In addition te containing many details of the
sichting that the newspapers did not carry, the report shows the sloppiness or
tho downrizht unfairness of the Air Force's investigation of tha incident. Tne
Air Fores cace up with &n “explanation® of the sighting that simply does not
conform to the fasta,und if this is typicsl of their investigation procedures,
it js etsy to see how they @re now able to solve over 98% of all sightings

FINAL VALLE rruur

Galley 103—The world of flying saucers

gated, She enclosed a three-page summary prepared by members
of the UFO Research Committee of Akron, and added, “I assure
you that I will contact my congressman about this matter if some
action is not taken soon to explain it.”

The alleged UFO had appeared at about 3 a.M. in the yard of
the one-story, two-bedroom house occupied by Mrs. Fitzgerald and
her husband. She had been sitting up alone watching television
and had gone to bed at the end of the late movie. The bedroom
window was shut and the window curtains were closed. Outside,
the night was dark; the moon had set, there were no street lights,
and none of the neighboring houses was lighted. Lying with her
arm over her eyes, trying to get to sleep, she suddenly realized that
the room was illuminated and stood up on the bed to look out of
the window.

According to her account, a disk-shaped object with a hump in
the middle, a dull aluminum in color, was moving across the yard
at a height of about five feet. The object did not glow and did not
have lights on it; she could not determine the source of the light
that made it visible to her. About twenty to twenty-two feet in
diameter and about six feet high, the UFO moved north across the
driveway into a neighbor’s yard, losing altitude on the way until

it was only one foot above the ground. At a distance of fifty feet, it

stopped and floated motionless for several seconds while pink-gray
smoke billowed out from two openings in the rim and illuminated
the UFO. Each opening contained seven pipes. The smoke did not
come from the pipes but from the openings from which the pipes
projected. The object then moved back into the witness's yard,
rising to a height of five feet. No longer emitting smoke, it made
two quick clockwise turns with a radius of about three feet, and
rose straight up. The roof of the house, jutting out over the window,
cut it from further view. During the entire time of the sighting,
about thirty-six seconds, she had heard a muffled noise like that of
a jet engine warming up. She had tried several times to waken
her husband, by kicking him, but without success. When the object
had gone, she went back to bed and slept.

When she awoke at 11:00 the next morning and mentioned her
experience to the family, she learned that ten-year-old John Fitz-
gerald, sleeping in the second bedroom, had also seen a strange

| light. He had apparently wakened during the night to go to the
bathroom and had returned to bed, when he saw a bright light
| shining into his room and heard an unusual noise. Climbing up on
| the radiator to look out of his window, he saw something the color
of a tin cup moving across the yard. After watching for a few sec-
onds until the light had gone, he went to bed and to sleep.

Puzzled by the incident, Mrs. Fitzgerald telephoned the local
newspaper, the Lorain Journal, and the story appeared in several
| Ohio newspapers. Members of the Akron Committee, one of whom
lived in the nearby town of Lorain, soon arrived to question her
and prepare the summary of her experience; other witnesses in
Lorain were reported to have seen the same UFO.

Even at first glance, the situation presented several unusual
features. The witness had delayed more than a week before notify-
ing Air Force investigators, yet she threatened to notify her con-
gressman unless some action were taken soon. She had not waited
for action, however, but by the same mail had written to her con-
gressman requesting him to obtain an explanation from the Air

2.2 e

FINAL GALLEY PROOF

Galley 103—The world of flying saucers

gated, She enclosed a three-page summary prepared by members
of the UFO Research Committee of Akron, and added, “I assure
you that I will contact my congressman about this matter if some
action is not taken soon to explain it.”

The alleged UFO had appeared at about 3 a.M. in the yard of
the one-story, two-bedroom house occupied by Mrs. Fitzgerald and |
her husband. She had been sitting up alone watching television
and had gone to bed at the end of the late movie. The bedroom |
window was shut and the window curtains were closed. Outside,
the night was dark; the moon had set, there were no street lights,
and none of the neighboring houses was lighted. Lying with her |
arm over her eyes, trying to get to sleep, she suddenly realized that
the room was illuminated and stood up on the bed to look out of
the window.

According to her account, a disk-shaped object with a hump in
the middle, a dull aluminum in color, was moving across the yard
at a height of about five feet. The object did not glow and did not |
have lights on it; she could not determine the source of the light |
that made it visible to her. About twenty to twenty-two feet in
diameter and about six feet high, the UFO moved north across the
driveway into a neighbor's yard, losing altitude on the way until |
it was only one foot above the ground. At a distance of fifty feet, it
stopped and floated motionless for several seconds while pink-gray
smoke billowed out from two openings in the rim and illuminated |
the UFO. Each opening contained seven pipes. The smoke did not |
come from the pipes but from the openings from which the pipes
projected. The object then moved back into the witness's yard,
rising to a height of five feet. No longer emitting smoke, it made
two quick clockwise turns with a radius of about three feet, and
rose straight up. The roof of the house, jutting out over the window,
cut it from further view. During the entire time of the sighting,
about thirty-six seconds, she had heard a muffled noise like that of
a jet engine warming up. She had tried several times to waken
her husband, by kicking him, but without success. When the object
had gone, she went back to bed and slept.

When she awoke at 11:00 the next morning and mentioned her
experience to the family, she learned that ten-year-old John Fitz-
gerald, sleeping in the second bedroom, had also seen a strange
light. He had apparently wakened during the night to go to the
bathroom and had returned to bed, when he saw a bright light
shining into his room and heard an unusual noise. Climbing up on
the radiator to look out of his window, he saw something the color
of a tin cup moving across the yard, After watching for a few sec-
onds until the light had gone, he went to bed and to sleep.

Puzzled by the incident, Mrs. Fitzgerald telephoned the local
newspaper, the Lorain Journal, and the story appeared in several
Ohio newspapers. Members of the Akron Committee, one of whom
lived in the nearby town of Lorain, soon arrived to question her
and prepare the summary of her experience; other witnesses in

FINAL GALLEY PROOF

Galley 104-THE WORLD OF FLYING SAUCERS

4. Other factors. (a) Between midnight at 4 A.M. a Coast Guard
cutter equipped with an eight-inch spotlight had been plying back
and forth on Lake Erie searching for an overdue cabin cruiser. At |
about 3 A.M. the cutter had been headed east toward Lorain, reach-
ing there at 3:15, had then continued east beyond Sheffield to Avon,
before turning back to the Lorain lifeboat station and berthing at
4 aM. (b) At 2:52 A.M. a train had left the Lorain railroad station,
roughly three miles from the Fitzgerald house. Eight minutes later
it would have been passing south of the house at a distance of about
100 yards. The engine was using a rotating headlight.

From these facts it was possible to reconstruct the probable
sequence of events that produced the UFO: In the hour or so before
the sighting, the witness had been sitting up alone watching the late
movie on TV. The film that night was a horror movie, Dracula's
Daughter. About 3 4.M., soon after the witness had gone to bed,
the Coast Guard cutter on Lake Erie was traveling east toward
Lorain, was very near the harbor and was flashing its spotlight
toward shore. The light had briefly illuminated the two bedrooms .
of the Fitzgerald house and had roused Mrs. Fitzgerald. At that
distance, between three and four miles, the beam would have
spread and would have been dispersed still more by the drops of
rain falling. By the time Mrs. Fitzgerald reached the window and
pulled back the curtains, the searchlight was gone. At the same
time, however, the train that left Lorain at 2:52 was passing south
| of the house, using its rotating headlight and producing a roaring
| noise made more piercing by the moist atmosphere. Looking

through the wet glass of the window, the witness saw the beam
of the train’s headlight moving through the haze in the yard. Smoke
from the nearby foundry was also being blown into the yard, II-
luminated by the circular beam of light, the smoke seemed to be a |
glowing, solid object that moved back and forth and emitted clouds
of gray-pink smoke. |
In summary, the Air Force concluded that Mrs. Fitzgerald’s UFO |
was an illusion produced by a combination of factors: an excited
frame of mind induced by Dracula’s Daughter, the spotlight on
the Coast Guard cutter, the rotating headlight of the train and. the
| noise of its engine, the smoke from the nearby steel plant, and the
! haze of the drizzly night.
This analysis provoked an explosion from the witness, who wrote
| her congressman: “I was outraged when I read the Air Force con-
clusion to my sighting. The person who made it must be insane.”

ee ee et

- Jee ee te ee

“The Fitzgerald Report”

The UFO Research Committee compiled and on December 1
published a thirteen-page pamphlet (later reissued in amplified
form and copyrighted) entitled: “The Fitzgerald Report, A Com-
plete and Detailed Account of the Sighting of an Unidentified
Flying Object, Sheffield Lake, Ohio, September 21, 1958.” This docu-
ment charged “duplicity” in the Air Force treatment of UFO re-
ports in general, and asserted that the Fitzgerald investigation in

.

WUNUCY LUG hades Weather Se eee eee
4. Other factors. (a) Between midnight at 4 a.m. a Coast Guard

cutter equipped with an cight-inch spotlight had been plying back
and forth on Lake Erie searching for an overdue cabin cruiser. At
about 3 a.m. the cutter had been headed east toward Lorain, reach-
ing there at 3:15, had then continued east beyond Sheffield to Avon,
before turning back to the Lorain lifeboat station and berthing at

4 AM, (b) At 2:52 a.M. a train had left the Lorain railroad station,

roughly three miles from the Fitzgerald house. Eight minutes later
it would have been passing south of the house at a distance of about
100 yards. The engine was using a rotating headlight.

From these facts it was possible to reconstruct the probable
sequence of events that produced the UFO: In the hour or so before
the sighting, the witness had been sitting up alone watching the late
movie on TV. The film that night was a horror movie, Dracula's
Daughter. About 3 a.M., soon after the witness had gone to bed,
the Coast Guard cutter on Lake Erie was traveling east toward
Lorain, was very near the harbor and was flashing its spotlight
toward shore. The light had briefly illuminated the two bedrooms
of the Fitzgerald house and had roused Mrs. Fitzgerald. At that
distance, between three and four miles, the beam would have
spread and would have been dispersed still more by the drops of
rain falling. By the time Mrs. Fitzgerald reached the window and
pulled back the curtains, the searchlight was gone. At the same
time, however, the train that left Lorain at 2:52 was passing south
of the house, using its rotating headlight and producing a roaring
noise made more piercing by the moist atmosphere. Looking
through the wet glass of the window, the witness saw the beam
of the train’s headlight moving through the haze in the yard. Smoke
from the nearby foundry was also being blown into the yard, I]-
luminated by the circular beam of light, the smoke seemed to be a
glowing, solid object that moved back and forth and emitted clouds
of gray-pink smoke.

In summary, the Air Force concluded that Mrs. Fitzgerald’s UFO
was an illusion produced by a combination of factors: an excited
frame of mind induced by Dracula’s Daughter, the spotlight on
the Coast Guard cutter, the rotating headlight of the train and the
noise of its engine, the smoke from the nearby steel plant, and the
haze of the drizzly night.

This analysis provoked an explosion from the witness, who wrote
her congressman: “I was outraged when I read the Air Force con-
clusion to my sighting. The person who made it must be insane.”

“The Fitzgerald Report”

The UFO Research Committee compiled and on December 1
published a thirteen-page pamphlet (later reissued in amplified
form and copyrighted) entitled: “The Fitzgerald Report, A Com-
plete and Detailed Account of the Sighting of an Unidentified
Flying Object, Sheffield Lake, Ohio, September 21, 1958.” This docu-
ment charged “duplicity” in the Air Force treatment of UFO re-
ports in general, and asserted that the Fitzgerald investigation in
particular had been “criminally mishandled” and was a “disgrace to
the U. S. Air Force and an insult to the American public.” It further
suggested that Sergeants A and B be “disciplined” because their
investigation was not adequate or thorough, and that they had had
“little or no intention of making an honest investigation.”

Copies of the pamphlet were mailed to eminent scientists through-
out the country, members of the United States House of Repre-

eo ree eee

t
4

Se

Galley 105—THE WORLD OF FLYING SAUCERS

the night, picking up objects in all directions. It is hard to estimate
how many times spotlights were snapped on and off during subject
search, but they were used quite often during short periods of
time.” ]

Charge 4. The statement that the supposed confirmatory witness,
Mrs. S, could not recall anything unusual for the night of the sight-
ing was a “lie,” as evidenced by her signed statement. [Incorrect.
When the investigators visited Mrs. S, she asserted that she had
nothing to contribute. At about 2:30 a.m. (half an hour earlier than
the Fitzgerald sighting) she had indeed noticed a bright-red glow
that had startled her at first until she realized that it probably came
from the nearby Ohio Edison plant or from the foundry. The signed
statement printed by the Akron Committee in the December 1958
edition of the document bears no date. The notarized statement
used in the 1959 edition is dated March 25, six months after the
sighting had occurred. After the Air Force interview, apparently,
Mrs. S had changed her mind for reasons unknown.

Charge 5. The statement that another confirmatory witness, Mr.
G, was not available for interview was “pathetic” because it was
Mrs, G, not Mr. G, who saw the UFO [The point of this accusation
is not clear. Because of a typographical error in a letter, “Mrs.”
was changed to “Mr.” The fact remains that the supposed witness,
Mrs. G, was not available. Also, the light she reported had appeared
about 2 a.M., an hour before the Fitzgerald sighting. ]

Charge 6a. It was not true that a misty rain with haze and mist
had occurred at the time of the sighting; the witness herself stated
that it was not raining. [Incorrect. The Cleveland Weather Bureau
recorded continual slight precipitation between midnight and 7
A.M.: .20 inches were recorded between 2 and 4 a.M. When asked
whether it was raining when she saw the UFO, the witness replied,
“It had rained a few hours before,” a vague response suggesting that
she had not noticed the weather at the time of the sighting. Other
parts of her account, however, strongly indicate rain. Although the
night was warm (about 65 degrees F. at 3 a.M.), her bedroom win-
dow was closed.]

Charge 6b. It was not true that smoke from the steel plant south-
west of the house could have been a factor in the sighting, because
the direction of the wind was wrong. [Incorrect. The Weather
Bureau recorded “WSW and SW” winds that night averaging ten
miles an hour; coming from the southwest, the winds would have
blown the smoke northeast, directly toward the house.]

Charge 7a. The sergeants did not make a house-to-house check

among the neighbors to obtain confirmatory evidence. [Correct.
Such a time-consuming procedure would not have been justified.

The neighbors had had two weeks in which to report a visiting
spaceship. No such report had been made, even by the neighbor
in whose yard the noisy object was supposed to have hovered
while emitting puffs of smoke.]

Charge 7b. They did not ask Mrs. Fitzgerald to make a drawing
of the UFO. [Correct. Before their visit she had already made such
a drawing, prepared with the help of members of the Akron Com-
mittee who had shown her a sketch of an alleged spaceship re-
produced several years earlier in an Air Force pamphlet [13]. With
this sketch before her to aid her memory, Mrs. Fitzgerald had des-
cribed her UFO to a draftsman provided by the committee. Un-
surprisingly, the resulting sketch was very similar to the picture
used as an example. A drawing obtained in this way could have no

value as evidence. ]
Charae 7c The cerdaante Failed ta ack ananah anectinne ahant

OT rn tt rere eee oe Saree

Pw ol) Me ryan ey 0) ee hk J seers

legal action.
The document made a number of specific accusations. Because

of the wide publicity given this attack, we shall discuss each point
fully, to illustrate the procedures followed by many civilian saucer
groups. Our comments, appended in brackets, are based on official
records of the Air Force, the New York Central Railway, the United
States Weather Bureau, and the United States Coast Guard. Most
of these facts were available to the Akron Committee itself.

Charge 1. Because of the position of the Fitzgerald house, the
headlight of the train could not have shone into the bedroom win-
dows. (Correct. But the point is irrelevant. The Air Force did not
suggest that the train’s light shone into the window. The light could
have shone into the yard, however, and would have been visible
to a witness looking out of the window. The brilliant light that
flashed in the window and roused the witness did not come from
the train but from the spotlight of the Coast Guard cutter. ]

Charge 2. Events taking place on the lake could not have had
any relation to the sighting because the shore was 3000 feet away
and, because of intervening houses and trees, a witness in the Fitz-
gerald house could not see the lake. [Incorrect conclusion from the
facts. The beam of a spotlight on a boat moving one or two miles
offshore (as was the Coast Guard cutter at about 3 A.M.) could
have been scen from the house. The beam of such a light can be
visible for great distances. Reflected from the clouds and spread
by the drops of moisture in the air, it could easily have flashed into
the window with great brilliance. ]

Charge 3a. The spotlight used by the Coast Guard cutter was
of a type that could not be focused like a searchlight; therefore
the beam could’ not have been reflected from the clouds to the
Fitzgerald house. [Incorrect. The spotlight used could operate as
either a diffuse or a narrow beam, could be focused like a search-
light, and could have been reflected from the clouds to the house.]

Charge 3b. The Coast Guard cutter had used its: spotlight
and turned the beam im the direction of the house only once that
night, while signaling another boat at a time two hours earlier
than the sighting and a place roughly five miles from’ the house.
[The December 1, 1958, editiom of the document gives the distance
as 442 miles; the 1959 edition gives 52 miles; Whatever the true dis-
tance, the statement is incorrect. A signaling incident did occur
at’ the time and about the place specified). but it had no relation
to the Fitzgerald sighting. The light was used frequently in the
hours between midnight and 4 a.M.,.asithe cutter carried out its
search for the missing cabin cruiser. In a statement obtained by
the Akron Committe itself, the chief boatswain’s mate affirmed that

“subject spotlight was flashed on and off a number of times during:

-_-

—_———-

'

ee wee ee

—— Ohio

September 29, 1958

Aerial Phenomena Group

Air Technical Intelligence Center
Wright-Patterson AFB

Dayton, Ohio

Dear Sirs:
This is to inform you ot a UFO sighting I had on

September 21, 1958. I would appreciate it very much if
you would send an investigator, or someone to explain
this happening to mew It was a terribly frightening

experience,
I assure you that I will contact my congressman

about this matter if some action is not taken soon to

explain it.
No private citizen should be placed in the path of
government devices, if that is what it was. If it was
a space craft, steps must be taken to warn the public.
The summary included here was prepared by a private
ufo investigator who interviewed me and the other peonle
who reported strange objects that morning.
Sincerely,

—

.
Rated nb be

. se

include questions that allowed Mrs. litzgerald to express ail ner
ideas of what she had seen. [Correct. The questions are designed to
elicit observed physical facts; it docs not ask for the witness's in-
terpretations. ]

Charge 7e. They did not take notes during the interview. [Cor-
rect. In filling out the report form they obtained all the necessary
information. They had been trained not to take additional notes
because some witnesses become nervous when they see that their
remarks are being written down.]

Basic charge 7. These “omissions” in procedure proved that the
sergeants had little intention of making an honest investigation.
[Incorrect. They omitted no query that might have yielded useful
evidence. Their duty was to report and try to account for the
phenomenon observed by Mrs. Fitzgerald, not to record her belief
in a hypothetical spaceship. The details of structure and motion
that Mr. C was eager to insert in the record were mere impressions
based on the assumption that the UFO was a solid object under
intelligent control.]

The document repeatedly charged that the investigators asked
too few questions, and implied that they asked only five of Mrs:
Fitzgerald—yet she answered all the many questions in the standard
report form. Furthermore, Mr. C had no way of knowing just how
many and what questions were asked; during all the latter part
of the interview he was outside the house, trying to interrogate Ser-
geant A.

There is little more to say of the irresponsible attack based on
the Fitzgerald case. The purpose was obvious. In a letter to one
scientist who received a copy of the Fitzgerald Report, a member
of the Akron Comittee bluntly stated that although “the sighting
was really unimportant,” the report had been prepared and dis-
tributed in order to prove that the Air Force investigation was
“not fair, honest, or scientific.”[14]

Perhaps the best comment on this notorious affair and on the
activities of civilian saucer-investigation groups in general is that
of Dr. Thornton Page, the eminent astronomer who in 1952 served

on the scientific panel to evaluate UFO reports (see Chapter vu).

After receiving a copy of the Fitzgerald Report, he wrote to a mem-
ber of the Akron Committee:

“As a scientist I am interested in unexplained phenomena,
but the one or ones responsible for Mrs. Fitzgerald’s sighting is or
are undoubtedly highly complex. It is just as false to say simply
that she saw a flying saucer 20 feet in diameter as it is to say that
she saw nothing, or that she simply saw the train headlight on a
mist. Certainly, I would not expect a pair of Air Force investigators
to be able to explain her sighting (and the others) satisfactorily
from interviews two weeks after the event. It would be ridiculous

Tera @

Oe

FINAL GALLEY PROOF

Galley 1066-THE WORLD OF FLYING SAUCERS
to propose that a team of experts in the fields of physics, psychology,
meteorology, engineering and railroading be sent to Sheffield Lake,
Ohio, to study these sighting from all possible angles.

“I have already written to you and to others that your fundamen-
tal error is in oversimplifying your explanations of complex natural
phenomena by assuming a common cause without justification. If
you say that everything you cannot understand is caused by grem-
lins, then gremlins are everywhere! And the Air Force would
need a much larger budget to investigate every sighting or hearing
or feeling of a gremlin!

“ _. The onus is not on the Air Force or me to prove that no
flying saucer was present that night; the onus is on you and your
UFO Research Committee to prove that there is no other explana-
tion of what was seen and heard.”

UFO at Sheffield Lake, Ohio
duggery:

was that
ld sighting {11},

s of Air Force skul

ucerian stud the Fitzgera
‘ttee of Akron, Ohio, which

ough the case was

|
}
shall discuss it in }

plained, we

d methods of the flying-

d was completely ©x

unimportant an
e the peculiar views an

detail to illustrat
saucer lobbyists:

In summary, 4 strange light observed on 4 dark ni

i by a drowsy housewife was converte

e incident inspired thousands

to attack the Air Force. Th
of argument, caused the publication and distribution of
tors, required an other-

| document, used the
wise unnecessary expenditur

change of letters among angry citize

| equally harassed Air Force offici

mountain has eve? been made
\ On September 3° 1958, the Air Technica
Wright-Patterson Air Force Base received a let

Fitzgerald of Sheffield Lake, Ohio, repot i
a1 she had sighted a UFO whieh sh

|
\

‘UFO Sighting
SIN TEAS OTE a,
Sheffield Lake, Ohio

Morning of September 21, 1958, app. 3 aM.

re. had gone to bed after watching the late movie

on television. This was about 3 am. She was in bed with her
eyes closed, when the room was illuminated by a very strong

light, causing her to open her eyes. The witness was as-
tonished, because the window curtains were drawn, and the
room was "brighter than in the daytime." She then rose, and
standing on the bed, pulled back the curtains and looked out

the window. (see fig. 1 )

Looking through the window, the witness saw a round object

(see fig. 2) avout 20 feet in diameter and ten fect from the
house. The object was travelling slowly in a northerly directe
fon across the front yard, and losing altitude. At the tine o
it was first sishted the object was about 6 feet off the ground,
It proceeded until reaching a point about 50 feet from the
witness, in the lot next door (see fig. 3) Here the object
stoored for several seconds, It then moved south into the
front yard to a point atout 25 feet from the witness, The
object made two tight clockwise turns, then shot strairht up
and out of sight.

Close questioning about the motion of the object brought out
the following. During its move from a position in front of
the window to the position in the lot 50 fect north of the
window, the otject was descending with a motion "like a feoe
ther droppins." The witness explained that this was a slirht
side to side oscillation. When it returned half way into the
front yard, it made two tight turns. The witness thinks that

During the turning maneuver the object did not tip at all. It
remained flat during the turns. Then the object flew out of

sight, going straight up.

The witness was so frightened by this experience that she could
not call out to her husband, who was sleeping in the bed. She
did try to rouse him by kicking with her left foot, but was
unable to do so. During this time she did not take her eyes

off the object.

At this same i ne ga, 2.2.x s old, got out of

bed to go to the bathroom, He also was attracted by the bricht
light. Stepping on a heat register to get the necessary hee
ight to see out of the window in his roon, he watched the ob=
ject perform the same motions described by his mother, However,
neither party notified the other that he had seen the object,

Both went to sleep.

The next morning QM told his father about the sighting, to
which his father replied " It was just a tad drean." Several

hours
mimates later Mrs, QQ joined her husband and son for
breakfast. It was then that she began telling her husband

about the object she saw. Hr, Wee auiioned his son
to keep quiet, and heard his wife ropeat the story alt had

told. The reports coincided in every point, even though
neither witness knew of the other when the sighting took
place. Thus the object was seen simultaneously and indepen-

dently by two persons.

Roth witnesses reported a noise like am hum and a whirr con-

bined. "Like a jet engine warming up," said rs gies,
GPP sinuleted the noise by whistling and humming.

The object seemed to be "aluminum eolor.”" There were no
lights on in nearby houses, and there are no street lights

in this neighborhood.  KANBPANMOONXVANNOOXKKKNAK the sky was
cloudy. The source of the original brirht licsht was not
definitely established, but was assumed to be &km due to

the object. During the entire perdod of observation the
object was visible tecause of the light given off by two
clouds of glowing gas which the object gave off. This gas
emanated from two sets of tubes or “machine guss " in the rin.
The gas did not seem to be propelling the cbject. The

witness says that the light was sufficient to iight up the
surrounding sround, but threw no shadows on the pbject itself,
She did not notice if other shadows ( from telephone pole, etc.)
were present. The smoke was a gray=-pink color,

The object seemed to be solid, as nothing in the background
could be seen throush it. It was seen aseinst a stationary
and familiar background. The witness wasllooking down on

it during the time it was stationary, so her estimates of
size and location must be reasonably accurate, |

The bright light which alarmed Mrs. SQM, was soon by
four other peovle in the neishborhood. One woman heard the

whirring noise. No one else saw the object. :

—— en eee

The same nicht, at 2:30 am, Mrs. =: ee
iis, Lorain, was startled by a bright light which
made the room she was sleeping in like "it was 6 am instead

of 2 am." She thourht that the sun had risen, The licht
mystified her, so she went to the window to try to discover
ttm enimne Tonkinr un in the WSW sky, she saw a red object