1.0ATE TIME GltOU' 2. LOCATION lr:l.lita%7 MUM II R 0' OIJICTS One Each TLiB LENGTH Of OISIRYATION Not Reported 6. TYPE OF OISEAVAD.ON J Ground-& Grrxi -Radar nv Radar Overlays 10. CONCLUSION EIJmTiDNIC Insutticient Dat (Visual) 111111' SUMMARY AND ANALYIII See Case: Ei[]lt returns at abo u.t one hour in terva~s or bli oor.:ri..ng directly to1-rard the radar stati. on arrl di sappearL-,g as theo:J reached. the site. Visual observations r eported rut dcJ.t not c.laar as to the tin~ of the si[;htings. !:;ey-or may not occured in the s.;rne direction at the same tir.:e. oo:J.3.rTS: Radar analys;ists regard the radar r eturns a s nost likely bErl.rJ6 caused by trans~rl.ttjng sie;nals, !rar regarded as a oolid object. Visual portions not clear in ;:essage. Insufficient Data. o Ne !'ret 1 9. PHYSICAL EVIDINCI Jh,~ l.ESSAt ~rc:: Visoo 1 observations sirrl.la r to Satellite ECHO I r.e.ssed 1!orth of lex a tion. aot consi. sta.nt vd.th the redar tra<~kb. Classification Cancelled UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED M/R.: Maj Groening contacted Sgt Moody stating that F'TD had been directed to rep~ on this message. wanted to know if this was the proper office. Agreed that it was. Sgt Moody contacted Mr Bryant (TDEF!D) regarding the radar portion. He says it could not be a/c report indicates that returns could be caused by tile transmitting as indicated in paragraph two of the measagSe. Did not think it was a maltunction due to the fact that eight returns were received. If a device would have triggered the tntoxmation on such a device, it known 1D exist, would be obtainable -r.,.,. Mr Gould, ext 72131. Mr Bryant :reels The visual portion ot the sightinS -No conclusions can be reached as to whether the visual observations coincide with radar returns. Sattlites are ruled out it the visual objects are consistent with the radar returns, that is if the heading is towards 230 (Southwesterly) Aircraft are also ruled out if the xeported speeds are correct. In order for an evalqation ot the visual sightings additional data woo.ld be required.