Documents / Hearing transcript
This is the printed record of a July 29, 1968 symposium on unidentified flying objects held by the Committee on Science and Astronautics of the U.S. House of Representatives, chaired by Rep. J. Edward Roush. The committee heard statements from six scientists: J. Allen Hynek, James E. McDonald, Carl Sagan, Robert L. Hall, James A. Harder and Robert M. L. Baker. It also printed papers from Donald Menzel, Stanton Friedman, Frank Salisbury and others. Hynek argued that puzzling UFO reports from competent witnesses deserve serious scientific study.
“The Advance”52 pages
70 The airmen felt obliged to consider the possibility that their six attempted intercepts involved more than one unknown. Hemphill mentions that, in the first attempted intercept, "the target put on a tremendous burst of speed and dived so fast that we were tenable to stay with it." After this head-on intercept, Hemphill did a chandelle back to his original 6000 -ft altitude and tried a stern interception, "but the aircraft immediately outdistanced us. The third target was spotted visually by myself," Hemphill's signed statement in the case -file continues. "I had an excellent silhouette of the target thrown against a very reflective under - cast by a full moon. I realized at this time that it did not look like any type aircraft I was familiar with, so I immediately contacted my Ground Control Station . . ." which informed him there were no other known aircraft in the area. Hemphill's statement adds further that, "The fourth target passed directly over my ship from stern to bow at a speed of roughly twice that of my aircraft, 200 mph. I caught just a fleeting glance of the aircraft; just enough to know he had passed on. The fifth and sixth targets were attempted radar interceptions, but their high rate of speed put them immediatelyout of our range." (Note the non -committal terminology that treats each intercept target as if it might have been a separate object.) A sketch of what the object looked like when seen in silhouette against the moonlit cloud deck is contained in the file. It was estimated to be about the size of a fighter aircraft, but had neither discernible wings nor tail structures. It was somewhat bullet -shaped, tapered towards the rear, but with a square -cut aft end. It seemed to have "a dark or dull finish". Discussion. Ground radar stations never detected the unknown that was seen visually and contacted by airborne radar. The report indicates that this may have been due to effects of "ground clutter", though the F-61 was seen intermit-tently on the ground units. The airmen stated that no exhaust flames or trail were seen from this object with its "stubby, clean lines". The total duration of the six attempted intercepts is given as 10 minutes. We deal here with one of many cases wherein radar detection of an unconventional object was supported by visual observation. That this is carried as Unidentified cannot surprise one; what is surprising is that so many other comparable instances are on record, yet have been ignored as indicators of some scientifically intriguing problem demand- ing intensive study.2. Case 36. Nowra, Australia, September, 1954 The first UFO case to command general press attention in the Australian area seems to have been a combined radar -visual sighting wherein the pilot of a Hawker Seafury from Nowra Naval Air Station visually observed two unknown objects near him as he flew from Canberra to Nowra (Ref. 43). Press descriptions revealed only that the pilot said "the two strange aircraft resembling flying saucers" were capable of speeds much beyond his Seafury fighter. He saw them flying nearby and contacted Nowra radar to ask if they had him on their scope; they informed him that they had three separate returns, at which juncture he described the unidentified objects. Under instructions from the Nowra radar operator, he executed certain maneuvers to identify himself on the scope. This confirmed the scope -identity of his aircraft vs. the unknowns. As he executed the test maneuvers, the two unknowns moved away and disappeared. No explana- tion of this incident was offered by Naval authorities after it was widely reported in Australian and New Zealand papers about three months after it occurred. Discussion.—It is mildly amusing that the press accounts indicated that "the pilot, fearing that he might be ragged in the wardroom on his return if he abruptly reported flying saucers, called Nowra by radio and asked whether the radar screen showed his aircraft." Only after getting word of three, not one, radar blips in his locality did he radio the information on the unknowns, whose configuration was not publicly released. This is in good accord with my own direct experience in interviewing Australian UFO witnesses in 1967; they are no more willing than Americans to be ridiculed for seeing something that is not supposed to exist. 3. Case. 37. Capetown South Africa, May 23, 1953 In November 1953, the South African Air Force released a brief announcementconcerning radar-tracking of six successive passes of one or more unknown high-
Hearing transcript, from the govinfo collection. The PDF is mirrored here; the original link is above. 256 pages are in the text index: search them above, or from the library's search.