Documents / Document

The UFO files extract

The National Archives · 22 pages · text from the file's own layer

The National Archives published this edited extract from Chapter 2 of David Clarke's 2009 book The UFO Files, which draws on Ministry of Defence UFO records. It covers Stan Hubbard's 1950 Farnborough sightings, which the Flying Saucer Working Party attributed to optical illusion or normal aircraft. It also covers Churchill's 1952 memo asking about flying saucers, the Topcliffe sighting during Operation Mainbrace, a Meteor crew's sighting from Little Rissington, and RAF research concluding that most radar 'angels' were birds.

mode. This performance was repeated many times … and it appeared
that all this was taking place some eight to ten miles south of us over the
Farnham area.’
The UFO was under observation for some 10 minutes during which the lit-
tle crowd had swelled to more than a dozen RAF personnel. ‘They were
awestruck,’ Hubbard recalls, ‘but not one of them had a camera! I remem-
ber one of them saying “Sorry Stan, I didn’t believe those first stories.” It
made my day.’ Within 24 hours they were all questioned by the Flying Saucer
Working Party. ‘We were not given their names and we were strictly warned
not to ask questions of them, nor make enquiries elsewhere in the Ministry’,
Hubbard said. ‘We were also warned not to discuss the
subject later, even amongst ourselves in private.’
Despite his misgivings Hubbard believed the assur-
ance given by the Air Ministry member of the team that
he ‘had never had a more reliable and authentic sight-
ing than ours.’ He was unaware of the outcome of this
investigation until he got to see a copy of the working
party’s final report after its release in 2001. In its sum-
mary of Hubbard’s initial sighting the report said there
was no doubt the experienced test pilot had honestly
described what he had seen,
‘but we find it impossible to believe that a most
unconventional aircraft, of exceptional speed, could have travelled at no
great altitude, in the middle of a fine summer morning, over a populous
and air-minded district like Farnborough, without attracting the atten-
tion of more than one observer.’ ( DEFE 44 /119 )
Accordingly, they concluded he was ‘the victim of an optical illusion, or that
he observed some quite normal type of aircraft and deceived himself about
its shape and speed.’The report then turned its attention to the second inci-
dent, which they described as ‘an interesting example of one report influ-
encing another.’ Although Hubbard believed the objects he saw on both
occasions were identical, the authors felt this opinion was of little value.
While they had no doubt a flying object of some sort had been seen,
‘we again find it impossible to believe that an unconventional aircraft,
manoeuvring for some time over a populous area, could have failed to
attract the attention of other observers. We conclude that the officers in
fact saw some quite normal aircraft, manoeuvring at extreme visual
range, and were led by the previous report to believe it to be something
abnormal.’ ( DEFE 44 /119 )
The working party were satisfied this solution was correct because of
another example of misperception reported to them by the Air Ministry
member of their team, Wing Commander Myles Formby. Whilst on a rifle
T H E F LY I N G S A U C E R A G E 4 5
The UFO was under observation
for some 10 minutes
during which the little crowd
had swelled to more than
a dozen RAF personnel.
‘They were awestruck,’
Hubbard recalls

Cases discussed

About this file

Document, cited by the archive. The PDF is mirrored here; the original link is above. 22 pages are in the text index: search them above, or from the library's search.