PROJECT BLUE BOOK

PLOJECT LUU7S REARD
KOUP 2. LCCATION
BELLFONTAINE, OHIO
10. CONCLUSION
RADAR: AIRGRAFT
VISUAL: EALLOON
4. N..ASER OF CJJECTS
-ENGTH CFOJSERVATION 11. ERIEF SUMMARY AND ANALYSIS
At 15512, 1 Aug 52 the 664 A0W Sq painted a target 20 mile W
of Wright-Patterson AFB and traveling on a course of 240 es
TYPE OF OSSERVATION at 400 knots. Two F-86's were vectored toward the target but
the radar did not,however, have a height finder. Che two
radar jets were flying at 30,000 ft and when they reached the
7. COURSE area the controller requested them to get a visual. At
approximstely this time the ground radar failed. the
two pilots sighted an object far above them and cne pilot
8. PRoTos managed to photograph the object but they ceula not reask
the altitude of the object becsuse it was too higk.
Comments: The original objeet painted by the radar ves Comments: The original object painted by the radar ves n
.P-YSICAL EV.DENCE SCALEV.DENCE airerart flying out of Cleveland. The chjeet si huei by airerart flying out of Cleveland. The chjeet si hueé by
the pilcts was later positively identiris. as an upper the pilcts was later positively identi:is. as
research balloon. researeh balloon.

ROJECT 10073 WEATHER DATA SH
1.DATE OF OBSERVATION 2. TIME OF OBSERVATION 3. STATION OBSERVING
15002 FFO
WINDS ALOFT:
ALTITUDE VELOCITY DIRECTION ALTITUDE
(foet) (knote) (feet) (knots) (degrees)
0 18 25,000 25 2.70
1,000 30,000 29
2,000 =4 270 35,000
3,000 =8 40,000 276
4,000 34 45,000 31 270
5,000 50,000 31 260
6,000 55,000
7,000 60,000
8,000 19 80 65,000
9,000 21 260 70,000
10,000 75,000
12,000 80,000 80,000
14,000 85,000
16,000 266 90,000
18,000 18.000 95,000 95.000
20,000 100,000
5. WAS AN INVERSION LAYER NOTED? Yes No
(If yes, at what altitude?
6. WERE ANY THUNDERSTORMS NOTED IN AREA? Yes No
(If yes, at what quadrant?
7. CLOUD COVER: 8. VISIBILITY WAS
tenths at feet. MILES.
tenths at feet. tenths at
9. COMMENTS:
9
ATIC Test Form 333 (13 Aug 52)

CASE9
1 August 1952 Bellefontaine, Ohio
Deceription of Incicent
At 15512 a rudur track appeared 20 miles MW of W-P AFB. Tuo cource was 240
degrees at 400 kmots. Two F-86's under CCI control woro then SW of that position.
The fighters were vectored and made visual contact et l555z, Pighters stayed with
the object witil 1613z.
Intarogation of sources, on AF major and lieutenant, roveal the following:
a. The F-86's climbed to 48,000º, fell aff, and then mado & second climb
to 48,c00'. The pilot made a camera run. The major estimated the object at 50 to
70,000'. The cbjuct's size, accepting source's ostinate of distance was 24-40' in
diameter and source said his optical sight just covered the object. The films were diametor and source said his optical sight just covered the object. The filns were
not sufficiently clear. The object appeared as a fuzzy, small image in the upper right
hand corner with discernable motion to lover left. hand ccrner with discernable motion to lover left.
b. Two irportant facts were cstablished: Re-affirmation that the UFo
moved at 400 kmots and indication that the two F-86's and UF0 appcared simultaneously moved at 400 kmots und indication that the two F-86's and UF0 appoared simultaneously
on the ground radar scope. It is obvious that all eyes and antonnas wcre fixed on the
same object.
Comonto - bust spud rulatius!
The object was not a balloon, since the speed was too fast. A rawinsonde was
released at l5o% snd moved ofr to the cast. The object moved e& against the wind.
The blip size was that of a normal a/c. The object was not a kmown a/c because the
altitude was too high. The object was not astrononical as dual radar returns eliminate
this. Elcctronic  visual mirage of meteorological phenaenon is out of the question
as the radar set vas on high beam, and both would not occur similtaneously in the same
place. The sighting oscurred "above the weather".
Conclusion
thitgrephel

SECURITY CLASSIFICATION (IenB)
DISPOSITION FORM
UNCLASSIFIED
FILE NO. SUBJECT
(Restricted) Project Blue Book, Gun Camera Film
10 Chief, Air Technical FROM Dept of the Air Force DATE COMMENT NO.1
Intelligence Center Hq USAF - AFOIN-2A Maj Fournet/ 71016 52
Wright-Patterson AFB
Ohio
1. Returned herewith is gun camera film taken of an unidentified flying
object by the 97th FI Squadron.
2. Prints were made of four frames by OSD-OPI and declassified by Security
Review, OSD. It is understood that a print of two of these frames will be fur-
nished TRUE magasine in answer te their request.
10Sule ar
1 Incl: 1 Incl: WILLIAMA. ADAMS
Roll 16mm film COLONEL, USAF
Chief, Topical Division
Deputy Director for Estimates
Directorate of Intelligence, DCS/0
When ine)(n)N
Secrel
teis cor
restricted
uceordance wit,Par 25e J5-1.
DOWNGRADED AT 3 YEAR INTERVALS
UNCLASSIFIED DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS.
DOD DIR 5200.10
TS2-16443-8

ToTus
17
2 August 1952 Bellefontaine, Chio
Description of Incident
At 1551z, a radar track appeared 20 ziles NNW of W-P AFB. The course was
240° at 400 knots. Two P-56's under GC1 contro1 were then located ten miles
SW of that position. The fighters were vectored and made visual contact at
15552. Pighters stayed with the object until 1613z.
Interrogation of sources, an AF major and lieutenant, reveal the following:
a. The F-g6's climbed to 48,000r, fell off, and then made a second
climb to 4s,ooos. The major made a canera run the second time and received a
weak return on his radar gunsight. The lieutenant's sight was "caged" so he
received no return. The major estimated the object at 12,000-20,000' above his
altitude of 4s,ooo'. This estimate was substantiated by the range capability
of the radar gunsight. The object's size, accepting source's estimste of dis-
tance, was 2l-40' in dianeter and scurce gaid his optical sight just covered
the object. The films were not sufficiently clear. The object appeared as a
fuszy, small image in the upper right hand corner with discernable motion to
lower left.
b. The A&W Squadron established two important facts: Re-affirmation
that the UFO moved at 400 knots and indication that the two F-86's and UFO ap- that the UFO moved at 400 knots and indieation that the two F-86's and UFO ap-
peared simultaneously on the GCI scope. It is obvious that all eyes and anten-
nas were fixed on the same object. nas were fixed on the same object.
Comments
The object was not a balloon, since the speed was too fast. A rawinsonde
was released at 15o0z and moved off to the east. The object moved against the
wind. The blip size was that of a normal aireraft. The object was not a known
aircraft because the altitude was too higt. The object was not astronomical as
dual radar returns eliminate this. Dectronic or visual mirage of meteorolog-
ical phenomenon is out of the question as the radar set was on high beam, and
both wouid not occur simultaneously in the same place. The sighting occurred
"above the weather".
Conclusion
Unknown
DOWNGRADED AT 3 YEAR INTERVALS:
DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS.
DOD DIR 5200.10
UNCLASSIFIED

,
AF FORM 112 UNCLASSIFIED t q
APPROVED 1 JUNE 1948
COUNTRY REPORT NO. (LEAVE BLANK)..
AIR INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION REPORT
SUBJECT
AREA REPORTED ON FRQM (Agrney)
DATE OF REPORT DATE OF INFORMATION EVALUATION
PREPARED BY (OAon) SOURCE
Raparances (Oondrol number, diroctios, provioue report, de, es applicable)
SUARY: (e  ome  rapo. Go egn in  on-oo pagrep. L nlore et loa let. Beg le of repo on AP Fer -Pa I.)
Phoee 721,5.
At 155l4 e tresk apseore1 en tho soope 20 miles north nortioest ef richt
Patterson reld. Twa Fe urder nontrol sera then lonted 10 miles conthoant
glight dealer. ho zrack wen making a grounl epted at 45) krste so a mnt aft
vastie vas givon. T flight loaer imadiately talty h' st l0st om the
trenk ent the heatiny wes obenged 30 dogrees te mut the traak ol? soro. se
clonk posttlon vas crimeot by fltghe Peedere Tronk Wee cu noope For 15 wiles
beadtog 240 degenen fron tlm or płekap. Pligé leader pepoted cbjest s
edlver in nelor peand in chp. Fisght Jender irdbed to 40o fer, wut
estinsted cbjeet. a 70,oo Poet. kght a-fa ptayed vith cojoet until
y ouniny to meé ow on fun. t the ne t wu trpe eo vn y otuniny to tesé ow on funl. At tho slne it wus trope, oo wn
alle drthest et sprisesto, Onio étete e enn sda t s allen dartient et sprásesteld, Onios éstete ie tenn sda ta sa s
suaeva flld ava fila
The wenther et Dere wn 2s,o, meretore vde srre n Peors The wentrer et Mee wan 25,on, meretere vle srre m eors
40.00 fen 40.000 len 260 deprece 33 knate
45,00 4500 260 260 35
50000 50,000 250 36 36 t6
55:0204 55.0n 320 1H 17 17
APPREVTD:
okre a. westg
Crutaing 0
Iabolligonno uTicer
Hom INCLS.
12
2 eye - GG, A:, Eright Patteraon AFB, DOWNGRADED AT 3 YEAR INTERVALS:
1 oy - , , rt AF, At: D for DECLABSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS.
1 ay DODD200.10
MOTE THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION AFFECTING THE NATIONAL DEFENSE OF THE UNITED STATES WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE ESPIONAGE ACT. 50 U. S. C.—
IT MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED IN WHOLE OR IN PART, BY OTHER THAN UNITED STATES-IR FORCE AGENCIES, EXCEPT BY PERMISSION OF THE DIRECTOR OF
INTELLIGENCE, USAF. UNCLASSIFIED
~59 10-86500-2

This se des one(1) 5"7"
photoqagh.
KORvI _
4

1) The object picked up on ground radar had actually been a
jet plane, flying out of Cleveland. It had not been identified im-
mediately because the Bellefontaine station had not received its
flight plan. At 1o:45 that morning the jet had been north of Dayton,
flying at low altitude on a southwest heading, at a speed of around
525 miles an hour-the exact time, position, and speed of the radar
unknown.
2) The pilots of the interceptors never saw this jet. What they
saw, what their gun radar detected, and what their gun camera
photographed was a twenty-foot radiosonde balloon that had been
released from Wright-Patterson Air Force Base that morning shortly
before the sighting. Ground radar, on the other hand, never picked
up the balloon.
3) The chief reason for the confusion was that ground radar
did not have a height-finding device. When the operator notified
the pilots that his scope showed a blending of the returns pro-
duced by the pursuit jets and by the unknown, neither he or the
pilots had any way to tell whether the unknown was directly above
or directly below the pursuing jets. At 3o,ooo feet the pilots were
too high to see the Cleveland jet far below them. But they did see
the balloon above them and naturally assumed that it was the
object they were supposed to be chasing.
4) Since the ground radar stopped functioning at this point, the
operator could no longer track the course of the unknown or of the
interceptors. If the radar had been working, he would have seen
that the target continued on to the southwest while the interceptors
were searching in a different area to the north.
FINAL GALLEY PROOF
Galley 63-THE WORLD OF FLYING SAUCERS
5) The photographs confirmed this reconstruction of a compli-
cated series of events. The pictures obtained by the gun camera
displayed a round, indistinct blur. Analysis showed that the size of
the object was that of a twenty-foot sphere-a balloon-photo-
graphed from a distance of 3o,ooo feet.

st 1, 1952, two days after the Michigan in'nt, such a
arose with an impressive radar-visual-photogra,nic sighting A
Bellefontaine, Ohio [2]. At 10:45 A.M. C.D.S.T., the radar
perator at the Air Defense command post picked up an uniden-
tified target north of Dayton, moving southwest at a speed of about
525 miles an hour. Two jets from Wright-Patterson Air Force Base
were scrambled for an intercept and were vectored in by ground
control. Since the ground radar was not equipped with height-
finding devices, however, the operator could not direct the pilots
to a specific altitude; he could only tell them whether they were
nearer to or farther from the target.
When the jets had reached 3o,ooo feet, ground radar informed
them that they were almost on target, which was still moving
southwest at the same speed. A few seconds later, the returns from
the jets and the UFO blended on the radarscope and the operator
advised the pilots that they would have to continue the search
visually. At this moment, unfortunately, the ground radar suddenly visually. At this moment, unfortunately, the ground radar suddenly
failed. Soon after communication between ground and air had
ended, the lead pilot observed a silver-colored sphere several thou-
sand feet above him. Both jets went after it but although they
climbed to their maximum altitude, 4o,ooo feet, neither could get
close enough to identify the object, which was still some 3o,ooo feet
above them. One pilot, however, managed to expose several feet
of film with his gun camera. At the same moment the warning light
on his gunsight radar blinked on to indicate it detected a solid
object. At this point the jets broke off the intercept and started
back to Wright-Patterson Field.
Both pilots then realized that, although they had been chasing
an unknown for some ten minutes, they were still northwest of
the base in almost the same area where they had started the inter-
cept. This surprising fact seemed to indicate that the unknown had
slowed down from its original speed of 525 miles an hour, to hover
in the sky nearly motionless.
Flying-saucer addicts regarded this series of events as an iron-
clad case. One of them commented, "For the first time a saucer
had been photographed during simultaneous radar and visual sight-
ings, with the camera 'plane [sic] also locked on by radar. It
FSFO was absolute proof that this saucer was a solid object, a controlled,
disc-shaped machine." [10, p. 109]
After sifting the evidence, ATIC investigators eventually found
the more prosaic though complicated solution to the puzzle:

2 Jet Pilots See Objed
DAYTON. Ohio. Aug. 1 (P).—Jet
interceptor pilots reported to
Wright-Patterson Air Force Base
officials today that they saw an
object in the sky which they did
not think was a light reflection.
It was the first time pilots
checking on flying saucer reports
here had made such a positive
.atement.
The two interceptors were sent
up about 1:45 a. m. after the Air
Force base had received five or six
reports of "flying saucers."
They told officers they went up
about 17,000 feet and for about ten
seconds watched a bright object
which hovered above them. It then
disappeared at "a high rate of
speed."
"We deliberately maneuvered
around to make sure it wasn't a
light refit ion. At first it appeared
red and white and then white
only." they said.
The pilots, attached to the 97th
Fighter Wing. were Maj. James
B. Smith, and 1st Lt. Donald J.
Hemer, recently transferred from
O'Hare Air Force Base, Park
Ridge, Ill.
The Air Technical Intelligence
Center. in charge of "flying-saue-
er"investigations,immediately
ordered the two pilots to stop com-
menting further on their experi-
ences and ordered a ban on pic-
tures of the two.
In the report to Capt. E. J. Rup-
pelt, in charge of "flying-saucer"
studies. the two pilots said they
were unable to estimate the ob-
ject's location because "it was
dark and there was nothing to
compare it with."
Although the official report said
the pilots observed the object for
about ten seconds. that probably
referred to the brief time they got
a good look at it.
One of the pilots reported: "I
don't think the light was a reflec-
tion. I deliberately maneuvered
arounditat several angles to
make sure it wasn't a light reflec-
tion. If ithad been. there would
have,been a change."

1
0n ...s

1 August 1952 Belfntain' Ohio
.1 An unidentified object was observed st sim on radar, and fighters were
vectored in for an attempt to identify the unidentified radar return.
Fighters were able to see the object, but were not able to get near it because
of the altitude of the object. The object im gbserved in thés sighting
has positively been identified as a type of upper air research balloon.
This'object actually consisted of four balloons attached to one "load".s
this load wieghed approximately 500 pounds, mmiox atty and consisted 0
of metal meesureing devises that would give a rader return.
11
Hasthis
4

UNCLASSIFIED
FLYOBRPT - 1 Aug 52 - Bellefontaine, Ohio
I. Interrogation of Maj Smith and Lt Hemmer by Lts Flues and Olsson revealed
following:
A. F-86's climbed to 48,000 ft., then fell off, then made a second climb
to 48,000 ft. Maj Smith made a camera run the second time and received a weak
return on his radar gunsight. Hemmer's sight was "caged*, so he received no
returns. Smith estimated object at 12-20,000 ft. above him at 48,000 ft. This
estimate is substantiated by range capability of radar gunsight.
B. Objects sise, accepting Smith's estimate of distance, is 24-40 ft. in
diameter, as computed from the fact that the gunsight is two mils in diameter and
Smith said pip just covered object.
C. The films were not sufficiently clear. Object appeared as fuzzy small
image in upper right hand corner with discernable motion to lower left.
II. The object is not:
A. Balloon speed too fast. 15o0z radiwkonde release moved off to east. A. Balloon speed too fast. I5ooz radjobonde release moved orr to east.
Object moves against the winds.Blip sise is that of normal aircraft. Object moves against the winds. Blip sise is that of normal aircraft.
b. Known aircraft. Altitude too high.
c. Astro. uual radar returns eliminate this.
d. Electronic or visual mirage or meteorological phenomena. Radar set
is on high beam. Both would not occur simultaneously in same place. Sighting
occurs "above the weather".
10
UNCLASSIFIED DOWNGRADED AT 3 YEAR INTERVALS:
DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS.
DOD DIR 5200.10

AF FORM 112—PART II (CLASSIFICATION)
APPROVED 1 JUNE 1948
AIR INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION REPORT
FROM (AgenCy) REPORT NO.
Director of Intelligence, CAirC IR.-60-52 PAGE OF 2 PAGES
While eboard the U.S. vessel Sante Luies, which was at enchor in the mouth
of the Guayas River, Capt. called my attention to three round
flat stationary objects overhead. These objects were to the northwest and
high at en engle of aoproximately 75º elevation. They were metalic in color
and reflected the sun, which at 3s00 p.m., was a little more to the west than
the objecte. After about 5 seconds one of the objects dived down to the west
and turned back to the northwest. While watching the one I lost eight of the
other two. Within another 5 seconds the one I was watching was out of sight.
The sise is unknown due to the unknown altitude. Ench would appear about the
sise of e pin heed held at erm's length. I estimete the distnce as ten miles
away on the 75º depree engle end the sise as fifty feet in diemeter. From
my angle the objecte appeared almost round in shape.
M/Sgt., M/Sgt., USAF USAF
Mission
Ecuador
TRUE COPY:
LAWRENCE P. STOVER
Major, USAF
. Director of Intelligence

Information Oul..
in I aug 52
Solution: Balloon Bellefontaine, Ohio
Source:Military
2. Bellfontaine, Ohio - 1 August 1952
At 155lZ on 1 Aug 52 ground radar from Wright-Patterson AFE sighted
an unknown object on its scope. Two F-86's from the 97th Fighter-In-
terceptor Squadron were vectored into the area and observed a silver
round object. Airborne radar contact was not made but attempts were
made to get gun camera shots. The object was above the climbing capa-
bility of the F-86's and appeared to be steadily gaining altitude when
the fighters returned to base for fuel.
The gun camera film showed a moving object which is too indistinct
for further analysis. for further analysis.
Solution: Was a balloon. There were local balloon releases prior Solution: Was a balloon. There were local balloon releases prior
to the sighting.
2

4
ASE /9
1 August 1952 Bellefontaine, Ohio
Deseription of Incident
At 1551Z a rader track appeared 20 miles mW of W-P AFB. The course was 240
degrees at 400 kmots. Two F-86's under GCI control were then SW of that position.
The figaters were vectored and made visual eontact et l555z, Pighters stayed with
the objest uatil 16132.
Interrogation of sources, an Ar major and lieutenent, reveel the following:
a. The F-86's climbed to 48,000', fell off, and then made & second elimb
so 46,000'. The pilot made a camera run. The major estimated the object at 50 to
70,000'. The object's sise, accepting source's estimate of distance was 24-40' in
diamater and souree said his optical sight just covered the object. The films were meter and soures said his opticel sight just covered the object. The films vere
not sufficiently cleur. The object appeared as a fussy, small image in the upper right not sufriciently cleur. The object appeared as & fussy, smmll image in the upper right
head corner vith discernable motion to lover left.
b. Two important facts were established: Re-affirmation that the UFo
moved at 400 kmots and indication that the two -86's and ur0 appeared simaltaneously moved at 400 kmots and indication that the two f-86's and Ur0 appeared simultaneously
a a the ground rades scope. It is obvious that all eyes and antannas vere fixed on the the ground rader scope. It is obvious that all eyes and antannas vere fixed on the
aemeobjeet.
Comments -bustpudaelatus!
x The object was not & balloon, since the speed was too fast. A ravinsonde vas
seleased at 150cz and moved of? to the east. The object moved es against the vind.
The blip sise ves that of & normal a/c. The object was not e kmowm a/e because the
altitude was too high. The object was not astromomioal as dual radar returns eliminate
this. Electronic or visual mirage of metecrological éhemomenon is out of the question
es the reder set yas on high beem, and both vould not occur simaltaneously in the same
place. The sighting oceusred "above the vesther".
Conelusion
1
thi I

1 August 1952 Bellefontaine, Chio
Description of Incident
At 1551Z, a radar track appeared 20 ziles NNW of W-P AFB. The course was
240° at 400 knots. Two P-86's under GCI control were then located ten miles
SW of that position. The fighters were vectored and made visual contact at
15552. Fighters stayed with the object until 1613z.
Interrogation of sources, an AF major and lieutenant, reveal the following:
a. The F-g6's climbed to Ls,0ott, fell off, and then made a second
climb to 4s,ooo'. The major made a camera run the second tine and received a
weak return on his radar gunsight. The lieutenant's sight was "caged" so he
received no return. The major estizated the object at 12,000-20,000' above his
altitude of 4s,ooo'. This estimate was substantiated by the range capability altitude of 4o,ooo'. This estimate was sabstantiated by the range capaolllty
of the radar gunsight. The object's size, accepting source's estimste of dis-
tance, was 2l-l0' in dianeter and scurce ssid his optical sight just covered tance, was 24-40' in dianeter and scurce said his optical sight just covered
the object. The films were not sufficiently clear. The object appeared as a
fuszy, small image in the upper right hand corner with discernable motion to
lower left.
b. The AC&W Squadron established two important facts: Re-affirmation b. The A&W Squadron established two important facts: Re-affirmation
that the UFO moved at 400 knots and indication that the two F-86's and UFO ap-
peared simultaneously on the GCI scope. It is obvious that all eyes and anten-
nas were fixed on the same object.
Comments
The object was not a balloon, since the speed was too fast. A rawinsonde
was released at 15o0z and moved off to the east. The object moved against the
wind. The blip size was that of a normal aireraft. The object was not a known
aireraft because the altitude was too higt. The object was not astronomical as
dual radar returns eliminate this. Electronic or visual mirage of meteorolog-
ical phenomenon is out of the question as the radar set was on high beam, and
both would not occur simultaneously in the same place. The sighting occurred
"above the weather".
Conclusion
Unknown
DOWNGRADED AT 3 YEAR INTERVALS:
DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS.
DOD DIR 5200.10
3
UNCLASSIFIED

Glassified
UNCL.SSIFIED Headquerters: 664th AC&W
By Authority of: CG, 30th AL
Dete 11/10/52
ATIC W-P AFB ATLAA-5 SubJ: (Unc1) FLYOBRPT Initials s/127
ATIAA-5 (2 Cct 52) lst Ind
HEADQUARTERS, 664TH AC-W SQUADRON, Bellefontaine, Ohio
Tã: Commanding General, Air Tech Intel Center, Wright-Patterson FB,
Dayton, Ohio
In compliance with paragraph l, basic letter, the Radar
Observation Data Sheet is completed and forwarded for your information.
FOR THE COMANDING OFFICER:
ChstuNerermski
1 Incl CHESTER J. DEREZENGRI
n/c lst Lt., USAF
Adjutant
UNCLASSIFIED
DOWNGRADED AT 3 YEAR INTERVAL
DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS.
#307 DOD DIR 5200.10
T12-14017.17

UNCLAIED AUTH: CG, ATIC
BY: E.J. RUPPELT.Y
Capt, USAF
AIR TECHNICAL INTELLIGENCE CENTER DATE: 29 S0D 52
WRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE
OHIO
In reply refer to OCT 2 1952
ATIAA-5
SUBJECT: (Uncl) FLYOBRPT
TO: Commanding Officer
664th AC & W Squadron
Bellefontaine, Ohio
1. With reference to your unidentified flying object report
(FLYOBRPT) of Ol1550Z August 1952, it is requested that you complete
the inclosed Radar Observation Data Sheet. You may omit questions 1,
2, 4, 5, and 6 of Part II as the Air Technical Intelligence Center is
already in possession of the complete weather data.
2. However, question 8, Part II, is extremely important. Speci-
fically, it is necessary to know if the unidentified flying object and
the two F-86's appeared simultaneously on the radar scope. the two F-86's appeared simultaneously on the radar scope.
FOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL
1 Incl Jamer Cheacha ames Cleachal
Radar Observation Radar Observation 1st Lieut, USAF JAMES C. PASCHAL
Data Sheet Asst Air Adjutant General
6
DOWNGRADED AT 3 YEAR INTERVALS;
DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS.
UNCLASSIFIED DOD DIR 5200.10
T52-14017-A
609

UNCLASSIFIED
I. QUESTIONS REGARDING DETECTING RADAR EQUIPMENT
1. What type radar equipment is involved?
AN/FPS-3 Searoh Radar
2. Has there been any recent maintenance difficulties? If so, describe.
Negative
3. What type modulator (i.e., spark gap, hard tube, etc.) is used in the radar equipment?
Hydrogen Thyratron (hard tube)
4. Was the AFC (automatic frequency control) circuit of the receiver operating properly?
Yes - in auto position
5. Has interference from another radar set been observed recently, and are personnel
familiar with the effects caused by an interfering signal?
None observed, and personnel are familiar with adjacent station interfering
6. What type indicators, "A scope", "B scope", etc., were used to follow the target? als.
PPI Scope PPI Soope
7. What was the radar scan rate? 7. What was the radar scan rate?
3.3 RPM
8. What was the approximate frequency of the transmitter?
1290 Mo
II. GENERAL QUESTIONS
1. What were the general weather conditions at the time unidentified target was observed?
X
2. What weather data from nearby U.S. weather stations is available on temperature vs
altitude, humidity vs altitude, and wind velocity vs altitude?
3. Was the target observed by any other nearby radar equipments? If so, give details.
No
4. Are the operator and the supervisor familiar with the effects of anomalous (duct-
effect) propagation as they pertain to this type radar?
X
ATIC Form 332 (18 Jun 52) Page l of 2
UNCLASSIFIED
DOWNGRADED AT 3 YEAR INTERVALS
DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS.
DOD DIR 5200.10
7 TS2-14017

UNCLASSIFIL
b., Has anomalous propagation been observed to extend the range or ground clutter by this
radar at this site, and did this condition exist during or near the time that unknown
target was observed?
X
6. What effects of rain storms and lightning have been observed on this radar?
X
7. Were any checks made to determine if unknown target could have been one of our own
aircraft? Tes. Aireraft were directed to the target by the controller. Target
was believed to be another jet aircraft until observed by the flight leader.
8. Was any interception attempted? If so, give details.
Intercept was successful, but target was too high for the aircraft to get
close for positive identification. Pictues were taken.
III. SPECIFIC TARGET QUESTIONS
1. What technical personnel observed the unknown target? Have they been questioned
thoroughly? What was their opinion? thoroughly? What was their opinion? Maj. Smith, Flight Leader and Lt. Lott,
Controller were observers. :The target intercepted was not the target on the
PpI Soope it muat have been flying the same ccurae at the same time. PpI Soope it muat have been flying the same acurae at the same time.
2. Was a permanent record "track" made of the target positions as they appeared on the
indicators? If so, attatch to this report.
None
3. At what range, azimuth, altitude, and time was the target observed?
Range 25 miles, asimuth 230°, altitude unknown. High beam was used - target
was aboge 10,000 feet. was aboze 10,000 feet.
4. How did the target appear in size and shape as compared with conventional aircraft
targets?
Normal
5. Was the target of consistent size, or did it change rapidly?
Yes, until about one mimute.after intercept.
6. Was the speed of the target constant or variable? Explain.
Speed consistant about 400 knots.
7. Did the target appear "fuzzy" or clear and sharp as compared with a known aircraft
target?
Glear until fade.
8. What other (aircraft) targets were observed in the same general area, altitude, and
time as that of the unknown target?
2 F-86's from 97th Fighter Interceptor Squadron, Wright-Patterson AFB,
Dayton, Ohia, at 30,000 feet, M.S.L. DOWNGRADED AT 3 YEAR INTERVALS
ATIC Form 332 (18 Jun 52). DECLASSIFIED AFTER P2FEARS.
DOD DIR
UNCLASSIFIED
T52-14017