DOW-UAP-D095: Joint U.S.-Canadian Aviation Projects and UFO Sighting Reports, 1954,1955

[page 1]
# BEORET

INT 2-2-7 UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS (UFO)

DECLASSIFIED
Authority:
NND 974373

Best Possible Image

NW 91198 Doclld 34745775

[page 2]
AIR TECHNICAL INTELLIGENCE CENTER
WRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE
OHIO

Major General John A. Samford
Director of Intelligence
Headquarters, USAF
Washington 25, D. C.

Dear General Samford:

I thought you might be interested in what is being done in the mat- ter of the A. V. Roe (Canada) Project Y-2 (Secret) which we dis- cussed recently and the subject of which was recently given "pop- ular" treatment in the AID.

# BEORET (cont.)

We have been thoroughly briefed by the Bombardment Aircraft Divi- sion, Director of Weapons Systems Operations, WADC, on their present knowledge. This Division of WADC has issued a one-year study contract, dated 29 December 1954, to A. V. Roe, Canada, on subject project. This study will attempt to develop sufficient ana- lytical, design and test data to determine the practicability of utiliz- ing the well known design principles which are employed, in the pro- posed vehicle.

As you know, we feel very strongly that some truly factual data must be obtained to correct (or substantiate) the picture so far pre- sented on this device by the Press and by the Air Intelligence Di- gest, a picture which doubtless provides comfort and support to popular writers on the subject.

Accordingly, we have initiated a joint WADC/ATIC project which will result in a Technical Report to be ready 15 February 1955. This report will assemble all available information on the subject and will present such conclusions as can safely be drawn, this far ahead of the A. V. Roe study. It will be forwarded to you, without delay, upon completion.

Sincerely,
<signature>
HAROLD E. WATSON
Brigadier General, USAF
Commander

[page 3]
Aut 2-2-7

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE Head.quarters United States Air Force Washington 25 1 D. C.

SCIENTIFIC ADVISORY BOARD TO THE CHIEF OF STAFF, tJSAF'

SCIENTIFIC ADVISORY BOARD REPORT ON AVRO PROJECT Y2
November 1954
Report

This document consists of 9 pages
Copy Number 2 of 33 copies.

DS 55-0323-2

NW 91198 Dodd 34745775

[page 4]
DEPARTMENT OF TBE AIR FORCE
Head.quarters United States Air Foree
Washington 25, D. C.

10 December 1954

Lieutenant General Donald I .. Pu·tt Deputy Chi et of Staff, Development Headquarters United States Air Force Washington, D. C..

# SECRET (cont.)

Dear Don:

In response to your request for SAB comments on the Avro "Saucer" project, the SAB has taken the following action:

The Aircraft and Propulsion Panels were briefed on September 28 by representatives of Hq. ARDC, at the time of the Fall meeting of the Board in Omaha. The tentative conclusions of both panels immediately after this briefing were to the effect that this pro- ject warranted no more than limited support. However, to assure thorough consideration of this project, I requested representatives of these two panels to supplement the briefings given to them at Omaha by a visit to A. V. Roe Canada Ltd., Malton, Ontario.

With the advice of Clark Millikan and Dean Soderberg, a select committee was chosen to conclude this study. It was composed of Dean Soderberg, Chairman of the Propulsion Panel and senior member of the group; Professor Markham, of the Aircraft Panel; and Mr. Donovan, who has been serving both as a member of the Aircraft Panel and as liaison member with the Propulsion Panel.

The attached report ot this ,group is ~orwarded with my «.PPt•oval, representing the results ot the SAB's ccapleted study.

Sincerely,

/s/
J. H. DOOLITTLE
Acting Chairman
Scientific Advisory Board
Office of the Chief of Staff

[page 6]
# SECRET

# SECRET (cont.)

hovering; for level flight the intake is changed to a normal frontal inlet by a set of slides and doors. In later versions the radial engine has been replaced by radially disposed axial flow turbojets of conventional type. This modification was originally considered as an intermediate version which might simplify the devel- opment procedures, but as the radial engine has been more realisti- cally appraised, it is now looked upon as an alternative form of equal promise.

# SECRET (cont.)

SECRET

such an undertaking must depend on (a) the significance of the ob- jectives which the new airplane claims to fill and (b) the sound- ness of the means proposed to attain these objectives.

# SECRET (cont.)

The key feature on which the design of the 12 is based is the utilization for hovering of the pressure built up in the center of an annular jet stream. This pressure build-up increases the lift at standstill close to the ground in such a fashion as to indicate the practicability of hovering a few feet off the ground with en- gines whose static sea level thrust, without this augmentation from ground effect, would be less than the airplane gross weight. Also, because of the nature of the ground effect, the aircraft would be stable with respect to height when hovering; that is, it would not require pilot attention to hold a height above the ground, although it would require control to maintain its attitude. The thrust aug- mentation for hovering obtained by A. V. Roe in small scale tests is of the order of 60 to 80%. Because the appropriate variables were not investigated and the pertinent measurements not made during the tests, data are not available to extrapolate this result properly to predict accurately full scale augmentation factors. There are many features which could make the full scale augmentation factors smaller but very little likelihood of their being larger than in the model. The possibility of stable hovering is, nevertheless, an engaging feature. Unfortunately, it has dominated the evolution of the con-

[page 8]
## FOR ST

figuration to such an extent that performance in level flight ap- pears to have been seriously compromised. Since forward flight is, after all, the important function of any airplane, we have attempted to examine into the inventor's claim for the flight characteristics with particular care.

# SECRET (cont.)

## FOR ST (cont.)

The inventor has advanced claims for favorable forward flight characteristics on the basis that the radial flow engine has a very favorable thrust to weight ratio (about .22), that the specific thrust on the projected area of the plane (about 600, excluding air intakes) is unusually high, and that the drag characteristics of the plane are very favorable. While not enough information is available to settle all of these points, we are compelled to take exception to all three of these claims. The specific engine weight is no longer unusual and would not in itself justify the radial engine development. Moreover, the radial engine possesses certain inherent limitations in pressure ratio and component efficiencies which are detrimental to good fuel consumption in comparison with the axial flow type. The shift to con- ventional turbojets has, of course, altered the situation, but it has not strengthened the claims based on the engine. The high thrust per frontal area is in part due to the fact that all discussions so far have been made around planes with no pay load. The situation with respect to drag appears to us the most serious, however, since we feel that the drag may have been underestimated by a factor of two. Very

4

SECRET

[page 9]
## SECRET

lengthy and expensive experiments are needed to settle these questions with finality.

The inventor has assumed that some improvement in the drag situ ation might be obtained through boundary layer suction. The alleged gain from this source is associated with the distribution of the ex- haust jet over the trailing edge of the airplane. It is not wholly impossible that such a gain might in fact be present, but no reliable test information is available at the present time a this point. In this respect this airplane differs from more conventional types only because the exhaust jet is distributed over the trailing edge of the wing. The circular plan form offers no particular advantage in this connection.

[page 10]
## SBORDI

information to indicate that this is so. No basic laws appear to have been transgressed in the design. It is merely a question of overempha- sis on the hovering characteristics without any assurance that the level flight characteristics would be tolerable.

# SECRET (cont.)

## SBORDI (cont.)

In arriving at a recommendation for action by the United States Air Force, we have attempted to bring into focus several considerations. The kind of imaginative thinking about unconventional aircraft which the inventor has displayed certainly has a place, and there is per- haps not enough of it in the planning operations of the USAF. When a scheme of this kind is ready for more serious exploitation, however, certain considerations are essential. The dreams must stand the test. of hardheaded theoretical and experimental evaluation. The argument that such a procedure, if applied to aircraft developments fifty years ago, would have prevented powered flight is a specious one. The development of an engine such as the 12, if it is to be carried to a flight article of some kind, is en undertaking of such a magni- tude that it simply cannot be undertaken on a mere hunch. We do not feel that the inventor can support the claims he has made for it, particularly with reference to level flight. Moreover, we find a sorious lack of attempt at a systematic exploration of the various key aerodynamic phenomena involved. There must also be a set of goals for the aircraft, which would place it in a class ahead of

6

SECRET

[page 11]
SECRET

other developments in performance, if the basic ideas should be capable of realization. We do not feel that the objectives of the development have been clearly formulated. In particular, we feel that there has been a preoccupation with the hovering char- acteristics to such an extent that the more direct essentials of the aircraft have been lost sight of.

2

[page 13]
AFOIN-201
Mr Bollum/erh/55867
1 October 1954

M/R

# MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD

## PROBLEM:

1. To make a final report on a special project assigned to Mr. C. W. Bollum, Sr., for the purpose of investigating possible Soviet capabilities for developing and producing a Vertical Take-Off Aircraft which might be similar in appearance to a "Flying Saucer".

# MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD (cont.)

## FACTS AND DISCUSSION:

2. In the Magazine Section of the Washington Post, dated 13 December 1953, there appeared an article which reported the development of a flying saucer by the A.V. Roe Canada, Limited of Toronto. The article stated that Lt. Gen. Donald L. Putt, Director of ARDC, had visited this company and had viewed this flying saucer. Other information given in the article impressed Mr. Bollum with the thought that here was the first factual evidence that it was possible to build a flying saucer. If it was possible for Canada to build a flying saucer, then it was also possible for the Soviets to build one. Mr. Bollum requested that he be authorized to initiate a special pro- ject for the purpose of determining Soviet capabilities in this field. Such permission was granted by Col. T. W. Wolfe, Chief of the Future Estimates Branch.

# MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD (cont.)

## FACTS AND DISCUSSION: (cont.)

3. With the aid and assistance of Squadron Leader George C. Wainwright, RAF, the project was launched by going to the U.S. Patent Office and reading a patent filed by the A.V. Roe people on a device entitled "A Gas-Turbine Engine Aircraft". The patent application for this device was first filed in the U.K. on 21 August 1952. This patent pointed out the feasibility of the project. Bollum and Wainwright then traveled to Baltimore to discuss the project with personnel of ARDC. It was on this visit that Lt. Col. V. L. Gossick first disclosed the information regarding the application of the Coanda Effect to the Project "Y" design. Several more visits were made to ARDC and after discussing the project with several engineers and officers, Mr. Bollum and Squadron Leader Wainwright decided that there was little doubt that a "state of the art" capability did, in fact, exist, and that their next step was to investigate the possibility that the Soviets already had possession of such information.

[page 14]
- a.e George Klein who, as of April 1953 resided in Hamburg, claims to have been chief engineer of all flying disc projects. How- ever, his principal importance seems to be that he knew of the exist- ence of such projects and has called attention to other Germans in this field.

b. Otto Habermohl, who has not been heard of since the end of the war, is reported to have had a project for a 16 meter diameter fly- ing saucer which was test flighted on 14 February 1945 at Holice.

# MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD (cont.)

## FACTS AND DISCUSSION: (cont.)

C. Rudolf Schriever, who died in 1945, was a designer/test pilot at BMW Works at Prague. He is reported to have constructed a flying saucer, which at a trial in April 1945 failed to leave the ground.

# MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD (cont.)

## FACTS AND DISCUSSION: (cont.)

d. Robert Miethe, who is supposed to have entered the U.S. in 1953, is reported to have constructed a 43 meter diameter flying saucer called the "V-7", which is reported to have flown with a crew of three in 1944. In August 1944 the Cesko-Moravske Works in Prague is reported to have received a production order for a short series, but none had been finished by the end of the war. Miethe remained in Breslaw, whence he escaped in an ME-163 one jump ahead of the Russians. The Russians captured three of Methe's principal assistants and his workshops. Miethe, according to the Canadians, came into this country as an emigrant. It is of interest to note that in March of 1954, a man using the name Bruno Berberich and who claims to have entered this country in 1953, forwarded to a Senator from Ohio a manuscript and drawings depicting how he would build a flying saucer. These were in turn forwarded to the Legislation and Liaison Division of Headquarters, USAF, who sent them to AFOIN. AFOIN forwarded the documents to ATIC for translation and evaluation. Mr. Bollum was assured by Mr. Arcier of ATIC that he would receive a copy of the results as soon as ATIC had completed the translation. To date no such information has been received and therefore Mr. Bollum is not able to report the results obtained. The big question would seem to be whether or not this man Berberich could be Miethe.

[page 15]
given to brief the engineering personnel of the Los Angeles Air Force Development Office.

# MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD (cont.)

## FACTS AND DISCUSSION: (cont.)

7. An "Air Force Only" restriction was dropped in June 1954 and the following have been briefed since: Chief of Naval Operations and Staff, Chief of Staff U.S. Army and Staff, Commandant of the Marine Corps and Staff, Key Personnel of CIA-OSI, Mr. Eiselstein of ATIC, Intelligence per- sonnel of SAC, TAC, ADC, ARDC, AFSS, AFSSOP, NSA, and Requirements Officer of the Air War College. A copy of the briefing is attached as TAB A.

# MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD (cont.)

## FACTS AND DISCUSSION: (cont.)

8. On 15 June 1954, Bollum and Wainwright visited the A.V. Roe Limited, Toronto, Canada. One day was spent discussing Project "Y" and information of German and/or Soviet interest in such unconventional aircraft. Mr. Frost, the Chief Engineer on the project and designer of the radial flow jet engine, demonstrated by use of laboratory models all the principles of the Coanda Effect, the air bearings, and the control system contemplated. Such demon- strations left little doubt in the minds of anyone present that the project would be a success. Mr. Frost had previously gone to Europe to interrogate George Klein and in addition had had access to many flying saucer reports from Europe. He firmly stated that there was no doubt in his mond that the Soviets are ahead of the Western Nations in the development of a true verti- cal take-off aircraft.

9. Recent news articles indicate that both the U.S. and U.K. have other projects in being which are in the field of Vertical Take-Off Aircraft (VTO).

# MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD (cont.)

## CONCLUSIONS:

10. In conclusion, it appears that the chances of success are good for Project "Y" or Project "Ladybird" as it is known in the USAF. If this is the case a breakthrough in the aeronautical "State of the Art" has occurred which will revolutionize aircraft design and air warfare. If we accept the possi- bilities of such designs then we must also conclude that the Soviets must at the least have the capability to have such aircraft almost as soon as the Western Nations. At the other end of the possibilities, we must consider the chance that the Soviets are several years ahead of the U.S. at this time. Perhaps one of the most important results of this investigation has been that such unconventional aircraft are not considered as fantastic as previous and the emphasis will shift from disproving flying saucer reports to proving such reports. The effect of a successful flight will be far reaching. A new look will have to be taken at the design of many categories of military equipment; 1.e. radars, guided missiles, armament, antiaircraft artillery, etc. It is possible that such capabilities could very radically change estimates for the period of 1960-65.

# MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD (cont.)

## RECOMMENDATIONS: (cont.)

assume any responsibility in this field. Informally, ATIC personnel have indicated to Mr. Bollum opinion that the success of Project "Y2" is very doubtful and that it is not expected that ATIC will show any great inter- est or take any action other than that normally taken by the Unidentified Flying Object (UFO) personnel. As a result of this inactivity, very little new has been accomplished in the last few months toward ascertaining Soviet capabilities. It is therefore recommended that the following actions be requested by the Director of Intelligence.

a. Inasmuch as Vertical Take-Off aircraft similar in appearance to a flying saucer will be test flown in a matter of 18 months with a possible production within three years, it is believed appropriate at this time to divorce the reports, analysis, and estimates of earth produced flying saucers from the UFO activity at ATIC. Such items of intelligence should be handled through normal material and equipment channels in the D/I.

# MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD (cont.)

## RECOMMENDATIONS: (cont.)

b. All reports of sightings of UFO's in areas immediately adjacent to the Soviet Union and Satellites should be re-examined in light of the possibility that the Soviets could be well ahead of the U.S. and Canada in the development and service testing of such an aircraft.

C. A section should be inserted in the Basic Air Intelligence Requirement Manual and an AFM should be prepared on "Intelligence Collection Guidance Manual on Vertical Take-Off Aircraft".

d. Necessary support should be requested of other government agencies in an attempt to locate Robert Miethe and Bruno Berberich. After location of the above men, steps should be taken to have them interrogated by personnel familiar with the entire background on this project.

e. A project should be established to estimate probable military applications for such an aircraft and the extent to which requirements and designs for other military equipment would be affected. As a part of this project, a short discourse on airfield requirements might be included.

f. A collection requirement should be placed on all agencies in the field including Attaches.

[page 17]
12. Subject matter will not be submitted for inclusion in the D/I Policy Book or the Daily Staff Digest.

[page 18]
## TAB "A"

# BRIEF ON AN UNCONVENTIONAL AIRCRAFT POSSIBLE
BY 1960

# BRIEF ON AN UNCONVENTIONAL AIRCRAFT POSSIBLE
BY 1960 (cont.)

## INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this briefing is two-fold. First, I will attempt to tell you of a project being financed by the U.S. Air Force and as a result thereof to dispel to the greatest extent possible any doubt in your minds that such a project is feasible and desirable. Second, I will attempt to show that there is a very good possibility that we may not be the first nation to successfully fly such an aircraft. In order not to take up your time with uninteresting technical considerations and information, I will make the first part very brief. However, if anyone desires more inform- ation on the design, performance, operation, etc., I am prepared to go into a more detailed discussion complete with slides at the end of the regular briefing.

# BRIEF ON AN UNCONVENTIONAL AIRCRAFT POSSIBLE
BY 1960 (cont.)

## INTRODUCTION (cont.)

The "State of the Art" being one of the most important considerations in a technical estimate, we have attempted to ascertain what effort is be- ing made in this field. Through various sources it was determined that the foremost authority on the theories surrounding such an aircraft was a Mr. Jack Frost, an aeronautical engineer presently employed by the A.V. Roe Limited of Canada. Some indication of Mr. Frost's capability may be derived from the fact that he was project engineer on the CF-100 in Canada. The principal sources of information covered in this brief were ARDC, Baltimore; AFDRD, Washington; DAI, Ottawa; and A. V. Roe Limited of Canada. Before going any further, I wish to emphasize that the interest of the HQ, USAF D/I in this subject is solely from the foreign aspect and particularly as it concerns the Soviet capabilities. Any emphasis that we may give to the Research and Development program in this country is a bonus and not intentional.

# BRIEF ON AN UNCONVENTIONAL AIRCRAFT POSSIBLE
BY 1960 (cont.)

## INTRODUCTION (cont.)

further possibility and danger that a foreign power not entirely friendly to the U.S. might achieve the desired results sooner, the USAF has made an agreement with the Canadian government and A.V. Roe Company to take over the complete development effort. The prime contract appears to be with the A.V. Roe Canada,Limited and upon my last visit to the factory, they were well along the way in the preparation of drawings and possibly at this time are starting fabrication of parts. As of the last report known to us, it was expected that the flight test of the first model would take place in the Spring of 1956. By this time some of you would like to see a picture of this aircraft. I have two artist conceptions (Slide 1). This slide is to depict landings and take-offs from other than established airfields. (Slide 2). This slide is for the purpose of showing a naval or marine use by launching from a submarine. An earlier model called Project "Y" or Project "OMEGA" which would have used the same engine (Slide 3) but would have been flat on the aft end similar in shape to the letter Omega. Two versions of small research type Vertical Take-Off aircraft, identified as Project "Y" and Project "12" have now been de- signed. Each project is essentially a simple proposal for the construction of a very large radial flow gas turbine engine, suitably shaped and covered to form a flying wing which is said to be the minimum aircraft that can be designed around a turbo-jet engine.

# BRIEF ON AN UNCONVENTIONAL AIRCRAFT POSSIBLE
BY 1960 (cont.)

## INTRODUCTION (cont.)

The engines are designed to fly "edge-on" to the wind instead of axially, as in the case of the more conventional types. Each engine is basically a large diameter airborne rotor disc, supported by an air bearing which employs compressor bleed air as its only form of lubrication. Stability and control, will be dominated by the gyroscopic reactions of the rotor.

Such an aircraft would have some very fundamental advantages; such as:

8. The manufacturing simplicity that results.

b. The much greater than one thrust/weight ratio.

C. The very high thrust/frontal area ratio.

d. The gyroscopic stability.

e. The ability to operate without prepared landing fields; this being the most important consequence of the thrust/weight ratio being much greater than one.

[page 20]
aircraft and the ground which eliminates the possibility of severe impact on landing. Tests have shown that the jet lift is increased several times over that of a flat disc near the ground. Advantages of such a technique are as follows:

# BRIEF ON AN UNCONVENTIONAL AIRCRAFT POSSIBLE
BY 1960 (cont.)

## INTRODUCTION (cont.)

- It is safer and more acceptable to pilots.

b. The gyroscopic plane is parallel with the ground.

C. It improves the use of the aircraft in the transport category.

(Slide 5). In general, the proposed aircraft consists of a very large radial flow gas turbine engine disposed between two concentric rings. It is estimated that the engine will produce nearly 50,000 lbs. Sea Level Static Thrust. De- pending on the final design and balance the circular plan form may need to be modified to accommodate trim flaps. The air intakes are also circular in plan, the skins extending across the central part of the plane. The pilot, fuel and disposable loads are containëd in the central compartment which is well insul- ated against aerodynamic heating by the fuel. The aircraft is shown in the take-off configuration with both air intakes closed and relieving doors on the top intake open all the way around. This arrangement permits the air to sink in and over into the intake annulus, then radially outwards to the jet exhausts which are normal to the surface around the whole periphery; about 15 inches from the edge.

# BRIEF ON AN UNCONVENTIONAL AIRCRAFT POSSIBLE
BY 1960 (cont.)

## INTRODUCTION (cont.)

(Slide 6) Typical streamlines of the airflow through the aircraft are shown in this slide which represents any section through the circular form of the aircraft. This aircraft will have neither an oil system nor a hydraulic system, inasmuch as the engine is air lubricated and there is no retractible under carriage nor hydraulic operated controls employed. The control equip- ment in the cockpit will be much simpler. Normal flight and navigational instruments and equipment will be installed in the aircraft. A simplified form of ejector seat is fitted, as high ejection velocities are not considered necessary for this tailless aircraft.

Now for a few general operational characteristics. The first model to be tested is expected to be able to have speeds up to Mach. 2.5, fly at altitudes up to 85,000 feet, and have a range of 1500 n.m. (one way). A later model with a diameter of 100 ft. and configured as a bomber, recon, or transport version is expected to have speeds up to Mach. 3.5 and ranges sufficient for intercontinental operations. Time to climb from the ground to 65,000 feet would be about 2 minutes.

# BRIEF ON AN UNCONVENTIONAL AIRCRAFT POSSIBLE
BY 1960 (cont.)

## INTRODUCTION (cont.)

is not seen to present any specific difficulty. Guns or rockets may be mounted in the nose, or to fire out of the intake. Similarly, radar may be installed in a nose pod or if scan is considered adequate, inside the intakes, where the drag penalty will be less. New types of side look antennas may work very well on this type of configuration. Guided Missiles may be carried externally. A larger bomber version of the aircraft is visualized as having more available payload space in the central well. The aircraft under study has an ample margine of thrust/weight to lift additional military load from the ground. Performance penalty will there- fore only be felt at a somewhat reduced range and ceiling. Top speed is unlikely to be affected, since the drag due to lift is extremely small for this condition. Larger aircraft may be expected to have a longer range, but no detail figures are yet available. However, intercontinental ranges do not appear to be impossible.

When such an aircraft has been proven by tests, it will no doubt have a great affect on the design and requirements for many other types of mili- tary equipment. Let us for a minute review some of the changes that might be apparent.

# BRIEF ON AN UNCONVENTIONAL AIRCRAFT POSSIBLE
BY 1960 (cont.)

## INTRODUCTION (cont.)

RADAR Due to the speeds involved, it is possible that the present type of airborne radar will be entirely inadequate. And, due to the possible speeds and altitudes, our presently designed ground radar equipment might be useless for most purposes.

ANTIAIRCRAFT ARTILLERY It is very doubtful that such weapons as now available in this field would be very useful.

SURFACE-TO-AIR GUIDED MISSILES The presently known G/M designs would hardly be adequate for use against bombers with speeds up to Mach. 3.5 flying at 80,000 ft. Especially if those bombers had a good capability for maneuvering.

# BRIEF ON AN UNCONVENTIONAL AIRCRAFT POSSIBLE
BY 1960 (cont.)

## INTRODUCTION (cont.)

While the application of the "Coanda Effect" appears to be Mr. Frost's idea, he feels that such an application could have been apparent to engineers in Germany and the Soviet Bloc nations. Two particular reports, although of low reliability, are of interest. The first deals with an individual who, while riding a bicycle down a country road in one of the Satellite countries, observed a flying saucer descending from above and hovering above the ground. He stated that suddenly the saucer accelerated rapidly and while gaining speed and altitude wobbulated with a slight counter clockwise rotation until a cer- tain speed was attained. Mr. Frost has been quoted as making the statement that his prototype would act in the same manner if full thrust was applied after hovering. The second report deals with a PW fieldhand who, with others, was at work when a saucer-shaped aircraft landed in a nearby field. He re- ported that the aircraft had Soviet markings on it and that one or more persons climbed out of the aircraft. Immediately police or some sort of authority appeared on the scene, placed a cordon around the aircraft and arrested this man's co-workers. The informant escaped and reported the incident. While it is admitted that such reports may be fabricated, the possibility cannot be overlooked that the information is essentially true. As an example, in the electronic field a review of low reliability reports has indicated that a large proportion of the sources gave an honest description of what they observed and that intelligence analysts failed to identify the equipment from such descriptions. We have reports of the French interest in flying saucer designs and of reported German activities in this field during the World War. Of the Germans supposedly in this field of activity we have four names. George Klein, who in April 1953 resided in Hamburg, claims to have been the chief engineer of all flying disc projects. However, his principal importance seems to be that he knew of the existence of such projects and has called attention to other Germans in the field. Otto Habermohl, who has not been heard of since the end of the war, is re- ported to have had a project for a 16 meter diameter flying saucer which was test flighted on 14 February 1945 at Holice. Rudolf Schriever, who died in 1945, was a designer/test pilot at BMW Works at Prague. He is reported to have constructed a flying saucer, which at a trial in April 1945 failed to leave the ground. Robert Miethe, who is supposed to have entered the U.S. in 1953, is reported to have constructed a 43 meter diameter flying saucer (V-7) which was flown with a crew of three in 1944. In August 1944, the Cesko-Moravske Works in Prague is reported to have received a production order for a short series, but none was finished by the end of the war. Miethe remained in Breslaw, whence he escaped in an ME-163 one jump ahead of the Russians. The Russians captured three of Miethe's principal assist- ants and his workshops. In March of 1954, a man by the name of Bruno Berbevich, who claims to have entered this country in October 1953, forwarded to the Senator from Ohio a manuscript and drawings of how he would build a flying saucer. These were in turn sent to the Legislation and Liaison Division of Headquarters, USAF, who sent them to AFOIN. General Samford's office had them sent to ATIC for translation from German to English. The big question is "Could this man be Robert Miethe?" Last, projects on the Coanda Effect have existed at two Satellite universities. It has been said that Mr. Frost has made the statement he personally believes that the Soviets could be as much as two years ahead of Canada at this time. If such be the case, the interceptor application would have a serious effect on the effectiveness of the Soviet Air Defense capabilities.

[page 23]
## PART IV
SUMMARY

We have presented to you some evidence that flying saucers are within the capabilities of the existing "state of the art" in this country and Canada. The "state of the art" is well known in European countries. The Coanda effect has been known to all countries and the application is not beyond the capabilities of the Soviets. It is possible that German projects for flying saucers existed at the end of the war. The man considered possible tops in this field is supposed to be in the U.S. now. We have reports on eye witnesses of flying saucers in Soviet territory.

## PART V
RECOMMENDATIONS

[page 24]
AFOIN-X/Lt Col Bloomer/tjc/54738
W rtn 13 Jan 55
<signature>
JAN 13 1955

# MEMORANDUM FOR GENERAL SAMFORD

SUBJECT: Article "The Flying Disc" in December Issue of the Air Intelligence Digest

1. During the latter part of November I was approached by Major Hosford and asked for a new summary or statement of position on UFO's, preferably classified, for use in the Air Intelligence Digest in connection with an article on a revolutionary new type of aircraft. I stated our position regarding UFO's and indicated that our best efforts in this field were constantly directed to discouraging, minimizing, and playing down any and all attempts at publicity, not excluding classified vehicles such as AID.

2. Major Hosford accepted this statement, indicating that the article on the new aircraft would be published without the companion piece on UFO's and suggested that I glance at the final draft.

[page 25]
SECRET

# MEMORANDUM FOR GENERAL SAMFORD (cont.)

(1) Despite the unfavorable tone of the Scientific Advisory Board, report responsible key technicians within DCS/D are split into two groups on the feasibility of the project.

(2) In view of this feeling within DCS/D, General Putt's letter to ARDC the last week in December was, in effect, a compromised position. The letter directed ARDC to award a contract to A. V. Roe, Ltd., for certain wind tunnel tests, and further indicated that additional U. S. development funds would be decided on the basis of the data analysis produced.

5. During General Watson's last visit here he discussed with me a letter (Tab B) which had been prepared for his signature by one of his staff but which he refused to sign to you because of its tone. He feels strongly, however, that the monitorship of this project should be the province of ATIC and differs greatly in his personal views with the article in AID.

6. The Memorandum for Record (Tab C) explains the full background of the entry of OIN-2 into this project which briefly was governed by two considerations:

- A feeling in OIN-2C that this project was "hot" and that no one else was acting for OIN.

b. Availability and "entree" afforded OIN-2 by Squadron Leader Wainwright.

[page 26]
## SECRET

d. No reply should be made to the memorandum from the Executive Secretary of the Scientific Advisory Board.

JOSEPH A. BLOOMER
Lt Colonel, USAF
Directorate of Intelligence

D/I File Cy, X2B2

[page 27]
-SECRET

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE
WASHINGTON 25, D. C.

JAN 13 1955

# MEMORANDUM FOR GENERAL SAMFORD

SUBJECT: Article "The Flying Disc" in December Issue of the Air Intelligence Digest

# MEMORANDUM FOR GENERAL SAMFORD (cont.)

1. During the latter part of November I was approached by Major Hosford and asked for a new summary or statement of position on UFO's, preferably classified, for use in the Air Intelligence Digest in connection with an article on a revolutionary new type of aircraft. I stated our position regarding UFO's and indicated that our best efforts in this field were constantly directed to discouraging, minimizing, and playing down any and all attempts at publicity, not excluding classified vehicles such as AID.

2. Major Hosford accepted this statement, indicating that the article on the new aircraft would be published without the companion piece on UFO's and suggested that I glance at the final draft.

[page 28]
-SECRET

# MEMORANDUM FOR GENERAL SAMFORD (cont.)

(1) Despite the unfavorable tone of the Scientific Advisory Board, report,responsible key technicians within DCS/D are split into two groups on the feasibility of the project.

(2) In view of this feeling within DCS/D, General Putt's letter to ARDC the last week in December was, in effect, a compromised position. The letter directed ARDC to award a contract to A. V. Roe, Ltd., for certain wind tunnel tests, and further indicated that additional U. S. development funds would be decided on the basis of the data analysis produced.

5. During General Watson's last visit here he discussed with me a letter (Tab B) which had been prepared for his signature by one of his staff but which he refused to sign to you because of its tone. He feels strongly, however, that the monitorship of this project should be the province of ATIC and differs greatly in his personal views with the article in AID.

6. The Memorandum for Record (Tab C) explains the full background of the entry of OIN-2 into this project which briefly was governed by two considerations:

# MEMORANDUM FOR GENERAL SAMFORD (cont.)

a. A feeling in OIN-2C that this project was "hot" and that no one else was acting for OIN.

b. Availability and "entree" afforded OIN-2 by Squadron Leader Wainwright.

No action has been taken on any of the recommendations made in the M/R by Colonel Morrow and he has instructed Mr. Bollum verbally to discontinue further work and briefings on the project.

7. In view of the above I offer the following recommendations:

8. Because of the divided opinions within and outside of the Air Staff on the feasibility of Project "Y", no further articles or briefings on this project should be accomplished without your personal approval. (Colonel Adams and Colonel Morrow concur.)

b. No attempt should be made in an early issue of AID to state the case for Project "Y" in more objective terms since any attempt to do so would only serve to further "muddy the waters." OIN-2 and DCS/D concur.

C. At their earliest convenience, General Watson and Morrow should have a discussion directed toward the transition responsibility for monitorship of Project "y" from OIN-2C to ATIC. Colonel Morrow and General Watson concur.

2

NW 911198 Daclldt:34745775

[page 29]
d. No reply should be made to the memorandum from the Executive Secretary of the Scientific Advisory Board.

<signature>
JOSEPH A. BLOOMER
Lt Colonel, USAF
Directorate of Intelligence

3

-SECRET

NW 911198 Doclld: 34745775

[page 30]
DEPARTMENT .OF THE AIR FORCE
HEADQUARTERS UNITE£) STATES AIR··FORCE
WASHINGTON 25. D. C.

14 December 1954

[page 31]
27 December 1954

Major General John A. Samford
Director of Intelligence
Headquarters USAF
Washington 25, D. C.

# MEMORANDUM FOR DIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE, AFOIN (cont.)

Dear General Samford:

I am quite concerned about the article, "The Flying Disc," and paragraph 1, "Editor's Notes," which appeared in the December issue of the Air Intelligence Digest. It caused quite a bit of consterna- tion in my organization.

This article was not submitted to my shop for technical coordination, probably on the basis that we were not interested.

Mr. Bollum, AFOIN-2C, in his Memorandum for Record, dated 1 October 1954, indicates that my organization had very little interest (technically) in this development. My personnel have been attempting to acquire all technical information on this subject since February 1953 and they have been told this project is very highly classified, "stay out." Even with this roadblock, the Center has enough information to know that the technical information in the article is incorrect for the "medium size" vehicle. The AID range is 1500 NM, while A. V. Roe estimates 620 miles; the AID altitude was 90,000 ft, yet A. V. Roe states 80,600 feet to date. To make matters worse, the "large size" and the "small size" vehicle perform- ance have no technical basis insofar as the WADC project engineer for SILVERBUG could determine.

[page 32]
Major General John A. Samford

27 Dec 1954

I, therefore, suggest that the monitorship of Project SILVERBUG (UNCL) be removed from AFOIN-2C, and that in the future all technical information on this project be acquired from my analysts.

Sincerely,

H. E. WATSON
Brigadier General, USAF
Commander

T54-18661

NW 911198 Doclid:34745775

[page 33]
Дано Водно здог Jeor REY

AFOIN-2A4

17 December 184

MEMORANDUM FOR: CHIEF AFOIN-2A

# MEMORANDUM FOR DIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE, AFOIN (cont.)

## SUBJECT: Flying disc article, Air Intelligence Digest

1. Reference the Scientific Advisory Board report throwing cold water on the idea of support for the Canadian project, I have contacted officers in DOS/D and the Secretariat, Air Force Council, and have talked with Mr. Bollum of AFOIN-20, who submitted the article to us.

2. Colonel R. M. Wray (x71510, 48341). chief of the Aeronautics Division, Director of Research and Development, DOS/D, says that he has prepared a letter for General Putt's signature addressed to ARDO on the subject. He does not wish to reveal the contents of the letter until he is sure that it has General Putt's approval. He suggested I contact him again next week.

3. Major Linn (x79175, 50940), Secretariat, Air Force Council, informs me that the Council held a meeting on 14 June 1954, at which representatives of A. V. Roe presented the case for Project Y. The Council took no action and has taken none since then.

# MEMORANDUM FOR DIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE, AFOIN (cont.)

## SUBJECT: Flying disc article, Air Intelligence Digest (cont.)

4. Mr. Carl W. Bollum Sr. (x55867), AFOIN-201, holds strongly to his opinion that the project has merit. He points out that some of the material in the Scientific Advisory Board report does not disprove Project Y theories, but that the report instead states that it would take a good deal of expense to prove the theories. He feels that he is restricted in further pursuing this subject, since the word has come down to him verbally to discontinue work on it. He mentioned the Scientific Advisory Board report to Colonel Morrow this morning, and handed the colonel a copy of the report with the hope that he would be instructed to look into the matter.

[page 34]
AFOIN-2A4

28 December 1954

MEMORANDUM FOR: CHIEF, AFOIN-2A
SUBJECT: Flying Disc Project

Colonel Wraye of DCS/D as yet (22 December 1954) has no final decision from General Putt on the above subject. When he receives the decision, he will notify me and has promised to get together in a discussion on it.

BOWEN I. HOSFORD
Major, USAF
Directorate of Intelligence

Bolun 201
Barenman 201
Farrion 201
Zullen 20
Gimne 2 B
Donas 2 A

NW 911198 Doclid:34745775

[page 35]
SECRET
OIN-2X/Rewrtn 25 Jul/Col Schneider/gmk/
77175
Jul 2-2-7
/X NEAC 7
AFOOP
1
Coordination
AFOIN-204
APODC
2
Signature
L/Col Whitman/bps
52466
JUL 28 1955
1700

# (secret) Request NEACfor Immediate Fighter Scramble Against Flying Objects

1. On 6 July the crew of a KC-97 tanker reported the sighting of an unidentified Corne object in the Newfoundland area (491011/5950W). At the time of the sighting a CCI radar in the same area obtained a radar return of an object which apparently was identical to the one the KC-97 crew had under visual observation. A committee, appointed by this Directorate to evaluate this sighting reviewed reports summarizing the incident by the Northeast Air Command. The committee tentatively attributed the sighting to electrical phenomenon and visual misinterpretation by aircrew members. At the same time, however, the committee discussed the possibility that the object might have been an high performance unconventional aircraft. This Directorate is of the opinion that the development of such an aircraft by an unfriendly nation would constitute a serious technological threat to the United States, and therefore every effort must be made to identify sightings in the future.

[page 36]
AFCOP
AFODC

1: Coordination
2: Signature

APO 018-204
Lt Col Whiteman/bpo 52h66

# (Secret) Request AAC and BEAC for Immediate Fighter Scramble Against Flying Objects.

# (Secret) Request AAC and BEAC for Immediate Fighter Scramble Against Flying Objects. (cont.)

- On 6 July the crew of a KC-97 tanker reported the sighting of an unidentified airborne object in the Newfoundland area (4910/5950W). At the time of the sighting a CCI radar in the same area obtained a radar return of an object which apparently was identical to the one the KC-97 crew had under visual observation. A committee, appointed by this Directorate to evaluate this sighting reviewed reports summarising the incident by the Northeast Air Command. The committee tentatively attributed the sighting to electrical phenomenon and visual misinterpretation by aircrew members. At the same time, however, the committee discussed the possibility that the object might have been an high performance unconventional aircraft. This Directorate is of the opinion that the development of such an aircraft by an unfriendly nation would constitute a serious technological threat to the United States, and therefore every effort must be made to identify sightings in the future.

[page 37]
ORIGIN OF BASIC: <empty>
DATE: <empty>
TYPE: <empty>

<b>SUSPENSE</b>: <empty>
<b>DATE</b>: <empty>
<b>ASSIGNED BY</b>: <empty>
<b>NO.</b>: <empty>

<b>SUBJECT</b>
(Uncl) Memorandum for Record

# (Secret) Request AAC and BEAC for Immediate Fighter Scramble Against Flying Objects. (cont.)

## ROUTING

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

# (Secret) Request AAC and BEAC for Immediate Fighter Scramble Against Flying Objects. (cont.)

## ROUTING (cont.)

| IN   | OFFICE   | OUT   | IN   | OFFICE   | OUT   | IN   | OFFICE   | OUT   |          | IN   |     | OFFICE        | OUT   |
|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|
|      | OIN-1    |       |      | OIN-2    |       |      | OIN-3    |       |          |      |     | AFOIN         |       |
|      | OIN-1X   |       |      | OIN-2X   |       |      | OIN-3X   |       |          |      |     | AFOIN-X       |       |
|      |          |       |      |          |       |      |          |       |          |      |     | AFOIN-X       | B     |
|      |          |       |      |          |       |      |          |       |          |      |     | OIN-XI        |       |
|      |          |       |      |          |       |      |          |       |          |      |     | OIN-X2        |       |
|      |          |       |      |          |       |      |          |       |          |      |     |               |       |
|      |          |       |      |          |       |      |          |       |          |      |     | SR ARMY OFF   |       |
|      |          |       |      |          |       |      |          |       |          |      |     | SR NAVAL OFF  |       |
|      |          |       |      |          |       |      |          |       |          |      |     | CABLES        |       |
|      |          |       |      |          |       |      |          |       | M        |      |     | FILE          |       |
|      |          |       |      |          |       |      |          |       | &<br />R |      | [x] | DISPATCH mets | 7/28  |

[page 38]
COVER SHEET
ORIGIN OF BASIC: OIN-2C4
DATE: <empty>
ASSIGNED BY: <empty>
DATE: 12 Jul 55
TYPE: c/s
NUMBER: <empty>
SUBJECT: Memorandum for Record

## ROUTING

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

# (Secret) Request AAC and BEAC for Immediate Fighter Scramble Against Flying Objects. (cont.)

## ROUTING (cont.)

| IN   | OFFICE   | OUT   | IN   | X OFFICE   | OUT   | IN   | OFFICE   | OUT   | IN       | OFFICE   | OUT   |
|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|
|      | OIN-1    |       |      | OIN 2      |       |      | COIN-3   |       |          | AFOIN    |       |
|      | OIN-IX   |       |      | OIN-2X     |       |      | COIN-3X  |       |          | AFOIN    |       |
|      |          |       |      | JOIN-20    | M     |      |          |       |          | AFOIN X  |       |
|      |          |       |      | OIN-204    | Eac   |      |          |       |          | AFOIN-X  |       |
|      |          |       |      | DIN-201    | wat   |      |          |       |          | OIN-X1   |       |
|      |          |       |      | DIN-202    | 4/4   |      |          |       |          | OIN-X2   |       |
|      |          |       |      | OIN-2C3    |       |      |          |       |          | OIN-X3   |       |
|      |          |       |      | OIN-2C5    | let   |      |          |       |          | OIN-X4   |       |
|      |          |       |      |            |       |      |          |       |          | OIN-X5   |       |
|      |          |       |      |            |       |      |          |       |          | CABLES   |       |
|      |          |       |      |            |       |      |          |       | M        | FILE     |       |
|      |          |       |      |            |       |      |          |       | &<br />R | DISPATCH |       |

[page 39]
COVER SHEET
SECRET
SUSPENSE
ORIGIN OF BASIC: OIN-2C4
DATE: <empty>
ASSIGNED BY: <empty>
DATE: <empty>
TYPE: <empty>
NUMBER: <empty>
SUBJECT: Memorandum for Record

## ROUTING

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

# (Secret) Request AAC and BEAC for Immediate Fighter Scramble Against Flying Objects. (cont.)

## ROUTING (cont.)

| IN   | OFFICE   | OUT   | IN   | OFFICE      | OUT   | IN   | OFFICE   | OUT   |          | IN   | OFFICE   | OUT   |
|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|
|      | OIN-1    |       |      | COIN-2      |       |      | OIN-3    |       |          |      | AFOIN    |       |
|      | OIN-IX   |       |      | OIN-215 JUL | 1955  |      | OIN-3X   |       |          |      | AFOIN    |       |
|      |          |       |      | OIN-2C      |       |      |          |       |          |      | AFOIN-X  |       |
|      |          |       |      | OIN-204     |       |      |          |       |          |      | AFOIN-X  |       |
|      |          |       |      | OIN-201     | was   |      |          |       |          |      | JOIN-X1  |       |
|      |          |       |      | OIN-2C2     | WHS   |      |          |       |          |      | OIN X2   |       |
|      |          |       |      | OIN-205     | WEG.  |      |          |       |          |      | OIN X3   |       |
|      |          |       |      |             |       |      |          |       |          |      | OIN-X4   |       |
|      |          |       |      |             |       |      |          |       |          |      | OIN X5   |       |
|      |          |       |      |             |       |      |          |       |          |      | CABLES   |       |
|      |          |       |      |             |       |      |          |       | M        |      | FILE     |       |
|      |          |       |      |             |       |      |          |       | &<br />R |      | DISPATCH |       |

[page 40]
AFOIN-2C4
Col. MacDuff/bps/52466
w/11 July 1955

## PROBLEM:

# MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD

1. To evaluate Kc 97 crew sightings and ground radar returns of object in the Newfoundland area (4910N/5950W).

## FACTS AND DISCUSSION:

2. OIN-2C directed the OIN-2C committee on 8 July to evaluate the 6 July Kc 97 sightings and GCI radar returns over Newfoundland as summarized and detailed inCAF IN 15592, ata 6 July 55 and CAF IN 90703 dtd 7 July 55.

3. In arriving at the following conclusions the conmittee reviewed reports summarizing the incident, the crew interrogations and the NEAD evaluation of the j_nc1.dent. In addition certain new U.S. and Canadian developments in high performance unconventional aircraft were considered.

# MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD (cont.)

## CONCLUSIONS:

4. It was concluded that no intelligence is available to support or deny the existence of unconventional Soviet aircraft comparable to those un.der consideration in the US and Canada and provid1.ng performance such as reported.

5. The committee was unable to explain the simultaneous ground radar returns and aircrew visual sightings, and tentatively accepts the NEAC evaluation attributing the :i.ncident to electrical phenomenon on the one hand and mis interpretation of -the s:i.ghtings by aircrew members on the other.

6. It was further concluded that this inc:f.dent should be classified as UFOB.

7. This item is not considered suitable for inclusion in D/I Policy Book or the Daily Staff Digest.

## RECOMMENDATIONS:

8. Due to the serious technological threat should tmfriendly nations succeed in developing high performance unconventional ai.rcraft increased effort should be made by all collec·tion agencies to penetrate the Soviet Research and Development establishments a.nd programs in order to give the U.S. adequate warning of any developments in this area.

9. It is further recommended that in the event of future incidents of this nature fighter scrambles be effected without delay.

[page 41]
AF HQ-50 (ev 21 June 48)
H01 10-5

DEPARTMENT OF THE SECRET

AIR FORCE

# AIR STAFF SUMMARY

Int-2-2-7
SHEET

| TO    | ROUTE   | DESIRED ACTION                 | INITIALS   |
|-|-|-|-|
| AFOOP |         | Coordination                   | AGEN       |
| AFODC | 2       | SignatureGNED                  | AUG        |
|       |         | 18                             |            |
|       |         |                                |            |
|       |         | E. BRIGGS                      |            |
|       | Major   | General, USAF                  |            |
|       |         | of<br />Assistant Deputy Chief | Staf       |
|       |         | Operations                     |            |
|       |         |                                |            |

OFFICE OF PREPARATION: AFOIN-2C4
GRADE - SURNAME: L/Col Whitman/bps
TEL.: 52466
DATE: JUL 28 1955

## SUBJECT

(Secret) Request EAC for Immediate Fighter Scramble Against Flying Objects\

# AIR STAFF SUMMARY (cont.)

## SUMMARY

1. On 6 July the crew of a KC-97 tanker reported the sighting of an unidentified orne object in the Newfoundland area (4910N/5950W). At the time of the sighting a GCI radar in the same area obtained a radar return of an object which apparently was identical to the one the KC-97 crew had under visual observation. A committee, appointed by this Directorate to evaluate this sighting reviewed reports summarizing the incident by the Northeast Air Command. The committee tentatively attributed the sighting to electrical phenomenon and visual misinterpretation by aircrew members. At the same time, however, the committee discussed the possibility that the object might have been an high performance unconventional aircraft. This Directorate is of the opinion that the development of such an aircraft by an unfriendly nation would constitute a serious technological threat to the United States, and therefore every effort must be made to identify sightings in the future.

# AIR STAFF SUMMARY (cont.)

## SUMMARY (cont.)

2. In its discussion of methods to be used to obtain identification of objects sighted in a similar fashion in the future, the committee concluded that the method possessing the most likelihood of success would be interception of the object by fighter aircraft and recommended that in the event of future incidents of this nature fighters 14 ithin range be scrambled without delay.

3. Attached as Tab A is a proposed message to the Commander NEACOM, directing the scramble of fighters as recommended by the committee.

## RECOMMENDATION

4. Signature of attached message.

1 Incl <signature>
Proposed Msg to need wr MTR.
Cdr NEAC H.C.

<signature>
FRANK B. CHAPPELL
Colonel USAF
Directorate of Intelligence

AFODC CONTROL NO 55 1907 SECRET

24/8/53
Kier
B2
x2

AFOOP 41703
1907

NW 91198 Dodd 34745775

50 12579

[page 42]
NWW 91198 Docd134745775

[page 43]
AFOIN-2C4/LtCol Trites/bps/52466
w/5 Aug 55
↓ INT 2-2-7
↓ x INT 2-2-2
↓ x a a Canada
9 AUG 1955

# AIR STAFF SUMMARY (cont.)

## RECOMMENDATION (cont.)

AFOIN

SUBJECT: (Uhel) Transmittal of USAIF Reports of Evaluation

TO: Chief of Staff
Royal Canadian Air Force
Ottawa, Canada
ATTN: Director of Air Intelligence

1. Inclosed are summaries (TAB A and TAB B) of the Headquarters USAF Committee that evaluated two incidents in which USAF aircraft crews reported unusual sightings. The incidents are as follows:

a. A series of sightings by B-47 aircraft crews over the Canadian Archipelago between 1 and 8 June 1955. (TAB A)

b. 6 July 1955 sightings of Unidentified Object in the Newfoundland area by Ke-97 aircraft. (TAB B)

2. If further information is desired in this matter, please address request to the attention of Director of Intelligence, Headquarters USAF.

FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF:

2 Inc1s
1. TAB A
2. TAB B

[page 44]
# SUBJECT: (Unal) Headquarters USAF Evaluation of 1-8 June 1955 Sightings by RB-47 Aircraft Crew Over Canadian Archipelago

1. The Headquarters USAF Committee on 23 June 1955 considered all available information concerning 1-8 June 1955 sightings by RB-47 aircraft crews.

TAS
A

[page 46]
AFOIN-2C4
Lt Col Trites/bps/52466
w/3 Aug 55

# MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD

## PROBLEM:

M/R.

1. To forward to RCAF the findings of the Hq USAF Committee.

[page 47]
AFOIN-LA3/Maj Bogan/31r/76095
Wrtn 9 Sep 55, rewrtn 13 Sep 55
Rewrtn Col Richman/Maj Voorhees/mvr/75818
on 23 Sep 55
INT 2-2-7
29 SEP 1955
X 9 F01 N-4

# MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD (cont.)

## COORDINATION: (cont.)

AFOIN-LA3

MEMORANDUM FOR THE DIRECTOR, APOIN-4, WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB, OHIO
x meteorite
SUBJECT: (Unclassified) Meteor Data Obtained by AN/FPS-17

1. Reference is made to the attached letter from Rome Air Development Center, dated 6 July 1955, letter your Headquarters, dated 14 July 1955 and letter from Air Research and Development Command, dated 22 July 1955, all with subject as above.

2. This Headquarters has notified Headquarters ARDC that your organization is responsible for distributing technical data from AN/FPS-17. If any unusual dissemination problems arise, which are not covered by current security policies, it is requested that they be referred to this Headquarters.

3 Incls:
1. Cy ltr fr Rome Air
Development Center,
6 July 55.
2. Cy ltr fr AFOIN-4,
14 July 55.
3. Cy ltr fr ARDC,
22 July 55.

[page 48]
SECRET

AFOIN-1A3/Maj Bogan/elr/76095 Wrtn 9 Sep 55, rewrtn 13 Sep 55

AFOIN-1A3

# MEMORANDUM FOR THE DIRECTOR, AFOIN-4, WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB, OHIO

# MEMORANDUM FOR THE DIRECTOR, AFOIN-4, WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB, OHIO (cont.)

## SUBJECT: (Unclassified) Meteor Data Obtained by AN/FPS-17

1. Reference is made to the attached letter from Rome Air Development Center, dated 6 July 1955, letter your Headquarters, dated 14 July 1955 and letter from Air Research and Development Command, dated 22 July 1955, all with subject as above.

2. This office has notified Headquarters Air Research and Development Command by separate letter that your suggested distri- bution plan for technical data on radar returns from meteors and missiles is satisfactory.

3. It is requested that your Center assume complete responsi- bility for the control of subject/data for D/I Headquarters USAF with particular emphasis on the release to commercial firms. If the release to commercial firms should generate any "need to know" or security problems, these should be referred to this Headquarters for resolution.

[page 49]
SECRET

Ribs

RCDIL

SUBJECT: (Unc1) Meteor Data Obtained by AN/FFS-17

JUL 6 1955

THRU :
Commander
Air Research and Development Command
ATTN: RDTDRB (Col. Edward Friedlander)
Post Office Box 1395
Baltimore, 3, Maryland

# MEMORANDUM FOR THE DIRECTOR, AFOIN-4, WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB, OHIO (cont.)

## 3 Incls: (cont.)

TO:
Commander
Air Technical Intelligence Center
ATTN: ATIAA (Lt. Col. James C. Manatt)
Wright-Patterson AF Base, Ohio

1. Radar Set AN/FPS-17 is obtaining a large quantity of technical data on radar returns from meteors and missiles. These data include frequency of meteor trail returns, height of meteor trails, duration and strength of meteor trail returns, echoing areas of missiles, characteris- tics of radar returns from missiles, etc. The great value of this infor- mation to groups working on improvements of Radar Set AN/FPS-17 and to those working on defense against Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles was discussed by the AN/FPS-17 Advisory Committee. This committee recommended that provisions be made to furnish the above type of technical data to those groups working on ICBM and on the AN/FPS-17. These groups include the Lincoln Laboratory, AFCRC, RADC, and several commercial companies. (SFORST)

# MEMORANDUM FOR THE DIRECTOR, AFOIN-4, WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB, OHIO (cont.)

## 3 Incls: (cont.)

2. The technical information listed above is now being obtained by the General Electric Company. t is recommended that the General Electric Company be given permission by your office to provide RADC with meteor data obtained by Radar Set AN/FPS-17. RADC will arrange for the dissemina- tion of these data to other agencies requiring the information. It is further recommended that missile data be furnished to the following Professor Radford of the Lincoln Laboratory, Dr. Hollingsworth of AFCRC, and Mr. Howard Davis of RADC. The missile data could be furnished most

SECRET

05-11 No 03658-2

NW 91198 Dodd:34745775

[page 50]
SECRET

Hq RADC RCDIL. Subject: (Unel) Meteor Data Obtained by AN/FPS-17

conveniently by providing duplicates of the magnetic type and of the portions of the film containing the data. -(SECRET)

3. It is strongly recommended that the above action be expedited. The obtaining of the meteor and missile data by personnel working on the defense against ICBM will accelerate the program and may result in a savings to the Air Force of several million dollars. (SECRET)

FOR THE COMMANDER:

JAMES W. ANDERSON, JR.
Colonel, USAF
Dir, Directorate of Intel and EW

<s>SECRET</s> C5-11307 N°0-3658-2

NW 911198 Doclld 34745775

[page 51]
SECRET

R1109

ATIA

14 JUL 1955

# SUBJECT: (Unclassified) Meteor Data Obtained by AN/FPS-17

THRU:
Commander
Air Research and Development Command
ATTN: RDTDIR (Col Edward Friedlander)
Post Office Box 1395
Baltimore 3, Maryland

TO:
Commander
Rome Air Development Center
ATTN: RCDIL (Col James W. Anderson, Jr.)
Griffiss Air Force Base
Rome, New York

1. Reference is made to your letter of 6 July 1955, subject (U) "Meteor Data Obtained by AN/FPS-17”.

[page 52]
<b>17.4.1.1</b> A vehicle that is subject to section 174.1415 of this chapter may not be operated on a highway or public property.

# SUBJECT: (Unclassified) Meteor Data Obtained by AN/FPS-17 (cont.)

Verbreitung und
Zusammensetzung der
Flora und Fauna
(inkl. Mikroorganismen)
sowie deren
ökologische
Bedeutung

# SUBJECT: (Unclassified) Meteor Data Obtained by AN/FPS-17 (cont.)

[Redacted]
1. [Redacted] 2. [Redacted] 3. [Redacted] 4. [Redacted] 5. [Redacted]
6. [Redacted] 7. [Redacted] 8. [Redacted] 9. [Redacted] 10. [Redacted]
11. [Redacted] 12. [Redacted] 13. [Redacted] 14. [Redacted] 15. [Redacted]
16. [Redacted] 17. [Redacted] 18. [Redacted] 19. [Redacted] 20. [Redacted]
21. [Redacted] 22. [Redacted] 23. [Redacted] 24. [Redacted] 25. [Redacted]
26. [Redacted] 27. [Redacted] 28. [Redacted] 29. [Redacted] 30. [Redacted]
31. [Redacted] 32. [Redacted] 33. [Redacted] 34. [Redacted] 35. [Redacted]
36. [Redacted] 37. [Redacted] 38. [Redacted] 39. [Redacted] 40. [Redacted]
41. [Redacted] 42. [Redacted] 43. [Redacted] 44. [Redacted] 45. [Redacted]
46. [Redacted] 47. [Redacted] 48. [Redacted] 49. [Redacted] 50. [Redacted]
51. [Redacted] 52. [Redacted] 53. [Redacted] 54. [Redacted] 55. [Redacted]
56. [Redacted] 57. [Redacted] 58. [Redacted] 59. [Redacted] 60. [Redacted]
61. [Redacted] 62. [Redacted] 63. [Redacted] 64. [Redacted] 65. [Redacted]
66. [Redacted] 67. [Redacted] 68. [Redacted] 69. [Redacted] 70. [Redacted]
71. [Redacted] 72. [Redacted] 73. [Redacted] 74. [Redacted] 75. [Redacted]
76. [Redacted] 77. [Redacted] 78. [Redacted] 79. [Redacted] 80. [Redacted]
81. [Redacted] 82. [Redacted] 83. [Redacted] 84. [Redacted] 85. [Redacted]
86. [Redacted] 87. [Redacted] 88. [Redacted] 89. [Redacted] 90. [Redacted]
91. [Redacted] 92. [Redacted] 93. [Redacted] 94. [Redacted] 95. [Redacted]
96. [Redacted] 97. [Redacted] 98. [Redacted] 99. [Redacted] 100. [Redacted]

# SUBJECT: (Unclassified) Meteor Data Obtained by AN/FPS-17 (cont.)

**Date:** 19 JUL 1955

**Outer Ring:** This appears to be a numerical indicator, possibly representing days or hours, with numbers visible from 1 to 31, segmented around the circle.

T-2 yd boiro (0)

- 0017 (828) 2 boxer ud old lost avt
gongondang abrog od bodas por ad tw

RECEIVED
14 JUL 1955
[ATIC]
55 4 2 6 0
Jul 15

NW 91198 Dodd:34745775

[page 53]
JUL 22 1955

RDTSI

SUBJECT: (Uncl) Meteor Data Obtained by AN/FPS-17

TO: Director of Intelligence
Headquarters USAF
ATTN: AFOIN-1A3
Washington 25, D.C.

1. Reference is made to letter from Rome Air Development Center, subject as above, dated 6 July 1955, copy attached and letter from Air Technical Intelligence Center, same subject, dated 14 July 1955 in answer to the referenced 6 July letter, copy also attached. (UNCL)

2. The procedure outlined by the Air Technical Intelligence Center on the subject matter is satisfactory to this Command. Request confirmation of this procedure and/or any additional guidance deemed necessary.

FOR THE COMMANDER:

2 IncIs
a/s
JOSEPH J. PELLEGRINI
Lt Colonel, USAF
Ch, Intel, Recon & Supporting Sys Div.

This correspondence is
classified SECRET because
of the inclosures and will
be downgraded to UNCLASSIFIED
upon their removal.

C5-46412

SCORET

NW 9111198 Doclld: 34745775

[page 54]
AFOIN-1A3/Maj Bogan/elr/76095/9 Sep 55
Rewrtn 13 Sep 55

## MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD

SUBJECT: (Unclassified) Meteor Data Obtained by All/TPS-17

# SUBJECT: (Unclassified) Meteor Data Obtained by AN/FPS-17 (cont.)

## PROBLEM:

1. To approve or disapprove the Air Technical Intelligence Center plan for distributing data obtained by AN/FPS-17 equipment.

## FACTS AND DISCUSSION:

2. On 6 July 1955, Rome Air Development Center, reported that AN/FPS-17 equipment was obtaining large quantities of technical data on radar returns from meteors and missiles. Information is being gathered by General Electric Co. and is considered to be of great value to personnel working on the technical aspects of ICBM defense.

3. ATIC, by letter dated 14 July 1955, recommended following distribution: From General Electric Co. to ATIC where further distribution will be made to RADC, AFCRC and the Lincoln Laboratory.

4. ATIC will request Site 9 to provide pulse-to-pulse photography since available equipment is in position there.

[page 55]
SECRET Wrtn OIN-1A-P/Maj Buskey/ram/54555/wrtn 3 Nov 55
Rewrtn OIN-1XLt Col Green/mvr/71592/8 Nov 55

# SUBJECT: (Unclassified) Meteor Data Obtained by AN/FPS-17 (cont.)

## RECOMMENDATION: (cont.)

SUBJECT: (Uncl) Importance of CIRVIS Program
TO: Commander
Military Air Transport Service
Andrews Air Force Base, Maryland

1. Attached copies of correspondence between this headquarters and Headquarters, Air Defense Command, are forwarded for your infor- mation and to point up the importance placed on the CIRVIS program by ADC as an aid in the early warning of a possible attack on the United States or its forces.

2. This headquarters agrees with paragraph 3 of the 1st indorse- ment and takes this opportunity to recommend continuing emphasis on impressing CIRVIS importance to the civilian agencies involved. We recognize that the MATS effort in indoctrinating the various commercial airlines, airline pilots, National Business Aircraft Association member companies and pilots, and others in similar organizations, has caused them to become active participants in the program.

3. The high value which ADC has placed on the civilian effort in CIRVIS attests to the truly excellent job that has been done by MATS in this field. It is considered that continuing work with these agen- cies is warranted and will pay off by keeping them active in the CIRVIS program.

BY ORDER OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:

[page 56]
OIN-LA-P/Maj Buskey/ram/54544
Written 3 Nov 55

<s>SECRET</s>
<signature> 8/2005

0-1955

AFOIN-1A-P

SUBJECT: (Uncltd) Importance of CIRVIS Program
TO: Commander
Military Air Transport Service
Andrews Air Force Base, Maryland

1. Attached copies of correspondence between this headquarters and Headquarters, Air Defense Command, are forwarded for your information and to point up the impor- tance placed on the CIRVIS program by ADC as an aid in the early warning of a possible attack on the United States or its forces.

# SUBJECT: (Unclassified) Meteor Data Obtained by AN/FPS-17 (cont.)

## RECOMMENDATION: (cont.)

2. This headquarters agrees with paragraph 3 of the 1st indorsement and takes this opportunity to recommend continuing emphasis on impressing CIRVIS' importance to the civilian agencies involved. We recognize that the MATS effort in indoctrinating the various commercial airlines, airline pilots, National Business Aircraft Association member companies and pilots, and others in similar organizations, has caused them to become active participants in the program. The present high value placed by ADC on the civilian effort in CIRVIS attests to the truly excellent job that has been done by MATS in this field, one of which we are well aware. It is believed that continuing work with these agencies is warranted and will pay off by keeping them active in the CIRVIS program.

<signature>
BY ORDER OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:
<signature>
i letter See
green draft above
C. C. ROGERS
Colonel, USAF
Directorate of Intelligence

1 Incl
Cy 1st Ind fr
Hq ADC dtd 27 Oct 55
w/cy B/Ltr dtd
8 Sep 55 (SECRET)

[page 57]
# MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD

NOV 3 1955

## SUBJECT: CIRVIS Program

1. In accordance with AFR 200-3, Hq MATS, is responsible for contacting commercial airlines and pilots to indoctrinate them and secure their participation in the CIRVIS program as outlined in the JANAP 146 series.

# MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD (cont.)

## SUBJECT: CIRVIS Program (cont.)

2. Intelligence Division, Hq MATS, has done an out- standing job in this indoctrination, having contacted commercial airlines, the National Business Aircraft Association, and the pilots in both. They have secured the cooperation of all companies and associations through writing a multitude of letters. They have gone into the field and personally lectured to regional pilots' meetings and have succeeded in getting a real interest in CIRVIS aroused for the first time. This has been a tremendous task and has only been accomplished by an' exceptional effort. However, the only way to keep the interest at a peak is to keep emphasizing the importance of the CIRVIS program to them. MATS efforts must continue.

# MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD (cont.)

## SUBJECT: CIRVIS Program (cont.)

3. AFOIN-1A-P, wherein lies the responsibility for moni- toring the CIRVIS program for AFOIN, and in part for Hq USAF, has long felt that MATS should be complimented in writing on their fine job, and at the same time be urged to continue their program. It is felt that any letter of recognition or commendation should come originally from CINCONAD and an in- formal suggestion has been made along these lines.

4. However, this seeas like a good opportunity for us to easily and naturally show our awareness of and satisfac tion for a job well done. Hence, the forwarding of the correspondence from ADC by the letter indicating our apprecia tion.· It is felt that we should take this chance to help the• continue the good work.

<signature>
PAUL G. BUSKEY
Major, USAF
Directorate of Intelligence

NW 911198 Dorelld: 34745775