2. LOCATION I-!ar.1pton, Virginia 3, SOURCE 10. CONCLUSION 4. NUWBER OF OBJECTS 5. LENGTH OF OBS!RVATION 10 !-Iinut e s 6. TYPE OF OBSERVATION Ground-Visual 9. PHYSICAL EVIDENCe Probable balloon observation. ::o r cport.s f::o:n a/c in the 3.rea. :otion arrl description in as;cor d .d.th Balloon analysis. 11, BRIE, SUMMARY AND ANALYSIS Large object larger on one end than the other. Too hi!?):l to detemine other features. Aluminum bright ora.'1.ge or r e d rol or. Shaped like a/c :lithou t ~dngs: Ini"c;ia.l observation object hov eriP.g dt hi.Jl altitude sli.;htly i.f.l of ov e r hc:ad XX k'QJIXI position. Slmo~ly drifte d Hest a rrl disapJ=eared. l-ioveJ~ i..:g consumed 2- 3 minutes motion to ~iest, then obj ect returnee to origin.:ll pos ition, hovered once more for ?- 3 w.inutes and t;1 m dri f tcd ~Jesbt~rd as~in. i-;umerous jet a / c observe d :L'1 area of object dur~ si.:;hting . Object appeared to be a'oove a/c contrails. HEADQUARTERS AIR BASE WING UNITED STATES AIR FORCE LANGLEY AIR FORCE BASt;, VIRGINIA 23365 REPL.Y T O / 2 ATTN OF: IX) 711 sueJEcT, Initial Report of Investigation of UFO TOt AFSC (FTD) Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohi o 45433 1. The following infonnation is presented as directed by paragraph 4, a . Description of the object: (1) Shape: Longer on one e nd than the other ( airc raft without ( 2 ) Size: Too high to determine. (3) Color: Aluminum -bright orange or red. (4) Number: One. (5) Formation: None. (6) Discernible features: None. (7) Tail: None. ( 8 ) Sound: None. b . Description o f course of object: a low-flying jet, (person interviewed ) was h anging clothes, heard ooked up and noticed this hovering object. (2) Object was first observed hovering a t a very high altitude, slightly northwest of her overhead position. (3) Object maintained same approximate alti t ude, slowly drifted westward a nd disappeared. Flight path con s i sted of drifting to west, r e turning to origina l position for a short t ime, the n drifting t~estward again. (5) Object hovered 2 - 3 minutes , drif t e d to t he wes t a nd di s - appeared for a few moments; returne d to same approximate position for 2-3 minuta s the n drifted westward a nd d i s a poe nr ec.l . 10 minutes. stated she observed the object for approximately c . Manner of observation: (1) Ground v i sual. (3) Not applicable. : Time and date of incident: (2) Light conditions: day. e. Location of observer: , Hampton, Identifying information ob observer: civilian,housewife, mpton, Virginia. g . Weather and winds: Aloft conditions at time and place of s ightings : (1) Observer's account of weather conditions: clear-windy. Wind direction and velocity (Norfolk Weather Bureau) 1200L 50-80 M winds were too high for balloon reading. Ceiling : clear. Visibility: 10 miles. (5) ~\mount of cloud cover: None. (6) TRW: None. (7) Vertical temperature gradient: Not taken except at 0600L, figures below: Surface temperature: 4.4C 300 meters (900')-2.8C (This is a small inversion that would d isappear before 1200L) 1300 meters -5.3C (An inve r s i o n at this altitude) Then normal rate to 8360 meters (25,000' ). h. No unusual meterological activities or conditions were reported. i. There was no interception or immediate identification action taken because the object had disappeared prior to the reporting time. j. Norfolk Weather Bureau stated that a balloon had been launched from their facility a t 1215E (19 minutes prior to the s ighting). However their balloon drifted rapidly eastward and should not have reached the position of the sighting a t any time. k. This report was prepared by Captain Page G. Brake, USAF, 4500 Air Base Wing (DOO-R), Langley AFB, Virginia. The description of this UFO sighting was given by Mrs. to Captain Brake via telephone conversa- tion o n 28 January 1965. No personal intervie w was accomplished as Mrs . tated she was leaving town that evening for a few days. Several possible explanations can be offered; however, no single item can be pointed to, and a definite statement made that this was what was seen. Mrs. stated repeatedly that numerous jet aircraft were observed in the immediate vicinity of the sighting. No aircraft reported a ny unusual events or s ightings during the period. She also s tated the object seemed to be higher than the con~rails the aircraft were leaving. At certain high altitudes it i s possible for an aircraft to leave an intermittent contrail which a ground observer could possibly identify as a hovering or slow-flying craft. Due to the large amount of jet traffic at the time of this sighting and due to the fact that no airborne craft reported this phenomena I feel this to be the most probable cause of the reported incident. (1) No physical evidence was reported to exist. The observer stated she probably would not have reported thi s incident if there had not been so many UFO reports ot lut~ a nd t~at she wanted to do ~11 she could to help. 'R TH.E COMMANDER -\\ Lt Col, USAF ~Deputy Commander for Operations