◆ SpookStack

Approved For Release 2001/04/02 : COPY American Airlines, Inc. Flight 139 - February 24, 1959 Captain P, W. Killian Departing Newark 1910 arriving Detroit 2252. It was approximately 2045 I noticed these three lights off my left wing inthe vicinity of Bradford, Pennsylvania. I was flying 8,500 VFR on top of broken clouds. Visibility was unlimited with no upper clouds observed. It was extremely difficult to ascertain the distance of the lights. The color of the lights were from a yellow to a light orange. The intensity of the lights also changed from dim to a bright brilliant. Sometimes the interval of the three lights were identical to the Belt of the constellation Orion. Occasionally the rear lights lagged somewhat behind. Also changed altitudes. During the 40 minutes of observation, the three lights occasionally came forward from a 9 o’clock position to 11 o’clock position and then fell back to the original 9 o’clock position. Also occasionally the lights extinguished completely alternating from one to another, sometimes the whole three were extinguished and during this whole operation, as I mentioned before, the lights changed in intensity. This motion was not only seen by myself but four crew members and passen- gers on board and also by two other airplanes in the area. The only possible explanation other than flying saucers could be a jet tanker refueling operation. Never having witnessed re- fueling operation at night, I am not aware of the lighting of the jet tanker. My air speed during this complete flight was 250 knots indicated. I also do not know the air speed of tankers during operation if this could be so. I contacted ATC to find out if they had any airplanes on a clearance and no three airplanes were given. 4 In attempting to resolve the contradictions, NICAP once again telephoned Capt. Killian. Mrs. Killian stated to the NICAP Director that Capt. Killian had been instructed not to say any more about the sighting. She indicated he was angry about being silenced, and felt his rights were being denied. Officially, the case hasbeen ‘‘explained”’ asa refueling mission. The facts obtained before Capt. Killian was silenced (including his own public denial of that explanation), the above triangulations, and the type and timing of the Air Force statements all cast doubt on the validity of the explanation. Though it may seem far-fetched to those unfamiliar with UFO history to suppose that the Air Force would have any motive for a deliberate cover-up, the former chief of the Air Force UFO project, himself, reported many similar incidents. Agood paral- lel to the Capt. Killian sighting is described by Capt. Edward J. Ruppelt (Report on Unidentified Flying Objects, ppg. 119-120). When a report came in from airline pilots that their plane had been buzzed by a cigar-shaped object as they were taking off from Sioux City, Iowa [See Section V; 1-20-51], Capt. Ruppelt witnessed the reaction by Air Force investigators. The sighting was treated as a joke; the ‘‘investigator’’ merely located an Air Force bomber near Sioux City and blamed it for the sighting. Capt. Ruppelt acknowledged the absurdity of this answer: a bomber buzzing an airliner in an airport traffic pattern. There was no investigation; only an arbitrary and counter-to-fact ‘‘explanation.’’ The Ryan Case On April 8, 1956, an American Airlines flight, headed west across New York state, saw and followed a UFO. After notifying an Air Force Base in the vicinity, the pilot, Capt. Raymond Ryan, was requested to follow the UFO until jet interceptors could reach the scene. Ina taped interview [see transcript of sighting detail, Section V], Capt. Ryan admitted going off course and following the UFO as far as Oswego, N.Y., on the shore of Lake Ontario, before giving up the chase. Although Capt. Ryan stated the UFO zoomedthrougha 90 degree arc from off his wingtip to dead ahead, the Air Force later blamed the sighting on the planet Venus. NICAP asked the then Civil Aeronautics Administration and the Civil Aeronautics Board for an investigation. CAA, CAB and American Airlines all denied that Capt. Ryan departed from his course. The Air Force does not admit asking Capt. Ryan to follow the UFO. [Taped interview CIA-RDP81R00560R00010001000 of Capt. Ryan and al er documen nm, on 429. NICAP]}. November 1957 Press Release On November 15, 1957, after two weeks of highly publicized UFO sightings, the Air Force issued news release No. 1108-57. Out of hundreds of current sightings, five cases were listed and debunked: 1. Levelland, Tex.; 2. Alamogordo, N. Mex. (James ‘Stokes); 3. Coast Guard Cutter, Gulf of Mexico; 4, White Sands, N. Mex. (Army jeep patrols); 5. Kearney, Nebr. (Reinhold Schmidt). Two, the Kearney incident and the sighting by James Stokes at White Sands, were labelled hoaxes. The first case no doubt was a hoax, but there is not the slightest evidence of a hoax in the White Sands case. At last report, Mr. Stokes was still employed as a research engineer at White Sands in good standing. The Levelland sightings were attributed to ‘‘weather phenomena of electrical nature, generally classified as ‘Ball lightning’ or ‘St. Elmo’s fire,’ caused by stormy conditions in the area... .” The two are totally different phenomena. The Air Force stated it was able to locate only three persons who saw the ‘‘big light.”’ Actually, there were at least 10 witnesses who similarly de- scribed elliptical objects. [See Section XII, Nov., 1957 Chronol- ogy] The Coast Guard sighting was attributed to ‘‘aircraft, and pos- sible spurious radar returns.’’ (See Section XII] The Army jeep patrols sightings were evaluated as ‘‘astro- nomical.”’ The release said: ‘‘Astro plots indicate Venus is at magnitude at the time, place and direction of the first patrol’s observation, and the Moon, with scattered clouds, was in general direction of the second patrol’s observation.’’ [See Section XII] With the exception of the Levelland sightings and the one fairly obvious hoax, the remaining cases all involve personnel under military control. This selection of cases could be significant. A few days after the November sightings began, the Air Force had rushed out a general news release stating that in 10 years of UFO investigation ‘‘the number of unknowns has been reduced to less than 2%.’’ Both news releases bear all the earmarks of public relations utterances designed to reassure the public that (1) the Air Force is conducting a thorough scientific investigation, and (2) nothing truly unexplainable is being seen. Inside of two weeks, the Air Force found answers to hundreds of reports. The time factor, alone, casts doubt on the thoroughness of investigation and validity of the explanations. NOTES 1. Committee on Government Operations, U.S. House of Repre- sentatives, Availability of Information From Federal Depart- ments and Agencies. (House Report No. 1884, 1958), p. 2 2. Mollenhoff, Clark R., Washington Cover-Up. (Popular Library, 1963), p. 73 3. Burns, James MacGregor, ‘‘The Eagle’s Wings Need Re- aligning,;’’? Book Week, March 8, 1964, [Review of Power in Washington, by Douglass Cater (Random House, 1964) | 4, Mollenhoff, op. cit., p. 12 5. NASA Technical Note D-1432 Approved For Release 2001/04/02 !’CIA-RDP81R00560R000100010001-0