Documents / Report

The Roswell Report: Fact vs. Fiction in the New Mexico Desert

USAF / The Black Vault · 1995 · 882 pages · text by OCR

The Roswell Report: Fact versus Fiction in the New Mexico Desert was published by Headquarters United States Air Force in 1995. The Black Vault distributes this copy. It reproduces the report by Col. Richard L. Weaver and the synopsis by 1st Lt. James McAndrew, both written after a General Accounting Office inquiry requested by Representative Steven Schiff. The Air Force search found no evidence of an extraterrestrial craft or crew. It concluded that the Roswell debris most likely came from NYU Flight No. 4, a Project MOGUL balloon train.

  • p. 15 …Ramey Col William H. Blanchard Maj Gen Clements McMullen Brig Gen Donald N. Yates Albert P…
  • p. 26 …Similarly, two authors, William L. Moore and Charles Berlitz, also engaged in research which led them…
  • p. 28 …The Roswell Incident (1980) by William Moore and Charles Berlitz; "Crashed Saucers: Evidence in Search of…
  • p. 174 …incident" (it was in about 1980 that William Moore contacted me and asked questions about balloons…
  • p. 182 …the books that have been written by William Moore, and Randall Schmidt, and others, a lot…
  • p. 227 …One thing I should mention is that after I had visited from William Moore around '80…
  • p. 664 …Elec. Engineering, Brooklyn Polytechnic & NYU Charles B. Moore Jr. Research Engineer Former weather equipment officer, Army…
  • p. 749 …Charles B. Moore, Project Engineer and James R. Smith, Project Meteorologist Approved by: William D. Murray…
Flight 103 through 111: These flights were released in January and February, 1949 from Alamogordo, New Mexico to test the action of the combined ballast controls (displacement switch and rate-of-ascent switch). Receiving units were stationed at Alamogordo; at Miami, Oklahoma and at Nashville, Tennessee; aircraft were used both to receive the signal and also to track and position the balloon by the use of the radio compass.

For the first time on these flights, a program switch was used to permit a single transmitter to transmit three temperature signals as well as ballastflow data and pressure information. By interrupting the pressure and ballast data for short intervals of temperature data, all of this information was telemetered with the AM-1 (N.Y.U.) transmitter.

Aircraft reception of 500 miles was reported on these flights, but ground reception was limited to about 250 miles, perhaps due to mountains surrounding the receiving station.

No significant data was obtained on four of these flights, and on two more the principal objective of the flight was defeated by the excessive gas loss from the balloons.

From the height-time curves of Flights 103 and 107 (Figures 50 and 51) may be seen that even with constant ballast flow (at 2400 grams per hour)

Figure 50

Cited by

Cases discussed

About this file

Report, cited by the archive. The PDF is mirrored here; the original link is under it. The text was read from the page images by an OCR model; expect the odd misread word. 882 pages are in the text index: search them above, or from the library's search.