J10. CONCLUSION 3. \)IIRCt INSUFl-'ICIENT DATA FOR EVALUATION .i. NUMBER OF OB.;~CTS 5. LENGTH OF OS.iERVATION 11. BRIEF SUMMARY AND ANALYSIS 6. TYPE OF OBSE~VATION Grourd-Visual (BX) 9. PHYSICAL EVI DENCE p,..vloue dSUof'le or thl lo,_ 11\aY ~ uee4, REPORT OF UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS Description of Object: vert ica 1 a.xis; According to witnesses, the shape appears to be oval on a however, some witnesses have the impression that it was spherical. 2. Size: There is general agreement that the size according to the criteria j compared to that of a pea, in some cases slightly smaller, in other cases slightly l 3. Color: No established color is known since it appears that the objects were lightad with either flashing red and green with white lights or were capable of changir.g from red through green to white. In any event, the color in most cases appeared to be a rhythreic change. 4. N1mber: The number of objects viewed is unknown since when first noticed there were only two which attracted attention. After this occurred, more attention was paid to the sky and as more people devoted attention to the area, more of the objects were discovered. It is believed that the number noted on this particular night of J~:y 27, 1966, morning of the 28th, may have amounted to as manyas 15. This numoer is estLmated on the basis of reports from numerous free lance photo- grap~e~s a~d interested witnesses who were observing the objects as a point of 5. For~ation: There was no particular formation detectable. It was noted that some of the objects would remain stationary for quite some time and then leave in s~me direction at a high rate of speed. One free lance photographer with a high powered telesco?e equipped for photographic purposes stated that on obj r in the 20~! -fgr two ho s_and then departed in a Northerly direction at an extremely high rate of speed disappearing over the horizon in a matter of seconds. 6. Fea=urc s or details: Two witnesses, both FAA employees, testified that at least one o f the objects lowered another object from itself which appeared to be cylindri~al i~ shape, although possibly it may have been flat. The object lowered ~as ~=c lighted but appeared to reflect a light from the mother object. 7. Tall , t r ail, or exhaust including size compared to object: There was no apparent t=ail or exhaust witnessed except that one witness .indicated there was a grayish area completely surrounding the object which .appeared to be about twice the width of the object. 8. Soun d: No sound was heard by any observers or witnesses. 9. Unusual features: The most unusual feature of the objects was their p_a:rant: ability to~- .in stat_!~n~IY.J-~or-what appeared to be- -stationary, and then to move off at rapid speed. The lighting features are themselves unusual in that some appeared to change in a gradual subtle manner while others had more abrupt changes. Some of these changes were very rhythn1ic while others were quite uneven and unpredictable. Another unusual feature appeared to be from witnesses the fact that in some cases the objects reversed course without any apparent turn around motion. I personally viewed one of the objects through binoculars and noting a very erratic motion from side to side, back and forth, attributec it to my inability to hold the binoculars steady. However, I noticed that two stars \ere visible simultaneously with the object and the stars lvere not moving in the erratic fashion that the object was. This fact has been supported by both FAA witnesses and conversation with free lance photographers that had n oted the same features. B. Descri?tion of Course: Due to the many objects observed and the many courses taken, it is not possible to individually describe them. Many of the courses were coursas not followed by the stars. This was particularly noted in order to attempt to establish whether or not they were stars. 1. W~at called attention of observer: On the first night, July 25, 1966, the observ2~ s attention was called by the exceptionally brilliant white lights apparent slightly to the West of Fulton County Airport. elevation and azimuth first observed: The first observer, Mr. feels that the angle above the horizon was about 30 degrees, . j while most: of the other witnesses feel it was more on the order of 70 degrees. }Jit,v' .,. All witnesses agree that the bearing was approximately 290 degrees true from )v-~. , t h:-obse:-v:..tion point on the first night. Due to the large l?: Jler _q_! oth~ ( \ 'tl"v o:;.:; -:ct s ap?~aring, it wa~ .. p,ot--?~act icab.le p obta!!_l-.:_t:.~--infor:mat-ion-.c.oncerning fhe a!:gle i:1d-azlmufn-on the=. There was one rather consistent appearance in the h~a}t at about the sa~e time every morning which progressed from the horizo~ U?w~rd as if it was a star following the same path. Further statements on this a~c contained in Mr. Bennett's report. 3. Ang!.e, elevation and azimuth as disappeared: In all but a very few cases the c~jects disappeared with the appearance of daylight. In some cases, they disappeared over the h orizon in various directions. Two of these are fairly certain to have been 5atellites that disappeared over the North horizon. These had n o colored light phenomenon. 4. Fli; path and ma~:uvers: For the most part the objects appeared to remain very ~early stationary, or at least with slow movement, unless they chose to leave t~c area, in which case they generally left rather rapidly. No particula~ =z~a~vers, as such, or established flight paths, could be determined. 5. How d object disa?pear (direction): As previously stated, most dis- appeared witn the appearance of daylight when they became no long visible. Those that disappeared prior to daylight disappeared in various directions. 6. How long visible: In general, on all three.nights the objects were visible by F. personnel for approximately one hour and twenty minutes. They may have been actually visible longer, but personnel are not available to de- vote any appreciable time to observing the phenomenon . C. Manner of Observation: 1. Observations were conducted from the ground in the immediate vicinity of the FAA Building on Fulton County Airport and, for the most part, were con- ducted by Weather Bureau ~ertificated Weather Observers, although they were assisted by Conanunications Relay Equipment Operators and FAA electronics personnel on duty. On the last two nights there were numerous T.V. and news media repo=ters, plus free lance cameramen and other interested witnesses present. Some of these made reports to the news media. 2. C?tical aids: The only optical aid used of 7X50 bi~oculars under the trademark of Swift. were with the unaided eye. D. Time and Date: by FAA personnel was a pair For the most part, observations F~-~ observations were conducted during the approximate period of 0740 GMT 2. Light conditions, night/day, dark/dusk: Night E. Location of Observers: In the immediate vicinity of latitude 33 degrees, 47 mi~utes North, longitude S~ degrees, 31 minutes West, which is more specifically described as Fulton County Airport about seven miles West of downtown Atlanta, Georgia, a~d the FAA Buildi~g located thereon. F. Identi=ying Informatio~ on Observers: Atlan~a, Georg a Mab etc~, Georgia vilian) Age: 38 Austell, Georgia Flight Service Station Reliability: Creditable witness and should be ex- perienced enough in the aviation industry to not be readily confused. Flight Service Station Reliability: Creditable witness and should be ex- perienced enough in the aviation industry not to be readily confused. Flight Service Station Reliability: Creditable witness and should be ex- perienced enough in the aviation industry not to be readily confused civilian) Age: 27 Atlanta, Georgia civilian) Age: 52 Mable~on, Georgia civilian) Age: 46 East Point, G. Weather and Winds Including Aloft Conditions: Flight Service Station Reliability: Creditable witness and should be ex- perienced enough in the aviation industry not to be readily confused. Flight Service Station Reliability: Creditable witness and should be ex- perienced enough in the aviation industry not to be readily confused. Airways Facilities Section Reliability: Creditable witness and should be ex- perienced enough in the aviation industry not to be readily confused . 1. O~servers account: Tt~ Weathe r Bureau observer at Municipal Airport was not availa~le for conent. e FAA observe r at Fulton County Airport commented that on July 25, 1966 it ap?eared to be one of the clearest nights that he had witne ssed in quite a long tL~e. July 26, 1966 was also very clear. July 27, 1966, while clear, was not q ui t e as clear as the two preceding nights. 2. Weather Bureau report of wind direction and velocity at surface: There are no weather bureau winds aloft reports made at Atlanta. The nearest observa- tions are taken at Athens, Georgia. The following reports were provided by the U. S. Weather Bureau Airport Station at Municipal Airport in an attempt to best meet the request contained in this item. 3. Ceil i ng: Ceiling on July 25, 1966, clear until approximately 0930 GMT, at which t ime a ceiling of 900 f eet moved into the area. On July 26, 1966, virtually the s ame thing occurred with it being clear until about 0930 GMT, and again a 900 ft. ceiling moving into the area. On July 27, 1966, it was clear during the entire period. 4. Visibility: July 25, 1966, visibility 15 miles or more until 0930 GMT when it became reduced to about 10 miles. July 26, 1966, visibility ranged from miles at 0600 GMT down to 10 miles at 0930 GMT. July 27, 1966, visibility ranged from 15 miles at 0600 GMr down to 12 miles at 0930 GMT. 5. Amount of cloud coverage: July 25, 1966 no cloud coverage apparent until 0930 GMT, at which time a complete overcast moved in. July 26, 1966 no cloud coverage apparent until 0930 GMT when a cloud coverage of more than five- tenths to less than nine-tenths moved in to cover the sky. July 27, 1966 no cloud coverage was apparent. 6. Thunder storms in area and quadrant: The Weather Bureau advises that there were no thunder storms in the area and no rain showers reported or visible on their radar. 7. Vertical temperature gradient: Temperature 1200 Gl'rr Surface 21 c 1200 GMT Surface 21 c H. Other Un~sual Activities and Conditions -Meteorological or Astronomical or Othe ise: There were no other unusual activities, conditions, meteorologi~al or astronomical or otherwise that were apparent either to our personnel or :o the Weather Bureau Airport Station personnel at Atlanta Airport. J. Location of object, approximate altitude and distance of flight of air traffic or balloon releases in area: Since this is a major terminal area, there are no doubt many aircraft departures and arrivals at Municipal Airport that passed in this irrnatediate vicinity, both jet and propeller driven type . There were no balloon releases of which we were cognizant. There were no military operations that we were aware of. K. My title is Chief of the Flight Service Station at Fulton County Airport, Atlanta, Georgia. I have spent the entire night in preparing this report, interviewing the witnesses and observing some of the phenomenon. I have dis- cussed previously some of the observations made by free lance photographers. I .do not feel at this point that I have enough information to offer much constructive comment. I feel that some of tqe objects could have easily bean very high lying aircraft engaged in refueling operations. It is also my feeling that some of the lighting affects may have been caused by the denser atmosphere when the o~jects were closer, say within 30 degrees of the horizon. It is felt, however, particularly after discussion with some experienced free lance observers, that some unusual activity was in progress and that the objects were capable of act ions not conm1only known to the general public or to the average FAA employee. I personally observed objects remain virtually stationary, having rested the binoculars on an automobile top, and then suddenly move off at a very rapid rate. I eel that the only way that laymen such as I would be able to come to any definit; conclusion concerning the altitude of these objects would be for all FAA facilities noting these phenomenon to take clinometer readings recording the time a~d elevation. I feel that I can do nothing other than submit the attached report with the hope that it will be of some assistance in determining exactly what the explanation may be. L. Exista~ce of physical Evidence such as Photographs, etc.: One of the free lance p!tot:~graphers, which ~as quite elaborately equipped with telephoto lens and excep~ionally high speec camera equipment, is very hopeful that he has some pictures ch he has promised to produce for my viewing if they develop. If these becoc e available to ree, I will submit them forthwith, with any other evidence we nay obta:n in the rneantL~e. Flight Service\ tation Atlanta, Georgia At 0825 GMT I noted another object high to the West and moving. It moved North- ward, and I could see through the binoculars t~e same changing colored lights that characterized the first object. As I was comparing the two, r saw a .third object near the horizon East-Northeast and slightly further North than the first. This infor~ation was reported to the Officer of the Day at Dobbins Air Force At 0905 I obtained a definite clinometer reading which was 30 degrees above the plane of the earth. This was the object located approxLmately 70 degrees true from the observation point At 0930 ~ broken clouds blocked further view of the unidentified flying Gbjects On .July 27, 1966 at 0540 GMT I observed through binoculars a semi-stationary light in a??roximately the same position as the light seen yesterday at this time. It changed colors rapidly from red to green to white and emanated a faint blue glow n~:.t noted on surrounding stars. At 0630 GMT I saw a bright light moving generally South to North. It maintained a steady course in speed and regarded as a satellite by many witnesses such as news reporters, etc., who were preser.:c. At 0855 G~C r saw a large bright light on the horizon to the East. It appeared t o be risi~g slowly. At 0950 the above bright light,regarded by some as being the Eastern Star, was ~easured as being 3 degrees above the horizon. At ~ 1003 GMT this same light, co~sidered to be the Eastern Star, was measured as \ being 15 deg~ees above the horizon. At 1026 GMT this same light measured 20 degrees above the plane of the earth. It was dimmer but clearly visible. The other light had disappeared with the first rays of sunrise. In all of the above four er-tries, in each i~stance, the colors appeared to be changing rapidly. Robert A. Bennett, Supervisory Air Traffic Control Specialist Atlanta Flight Service Station On July 25, 1966 at 0842 GMT I observed two objects close together and very bright about 70 degrees above the horizon, bearing abo~t 290 degrees from the Flight Service Station. The one on the left moved to the left and app~ared to become stationary. The one on the right moved toward a Northerly direction at extremely rapid rate of movement1 Lmpression was of yery high altitude. Shape not deterntinable at this point. The size was considered to be about the size of a dime, considering usual stars to be about the size of a head of a pin. The color appeared to be a whitish orange when together. Did not notice color changes un:il it reached a point about 20 degrees above the horizon, and at this point it ap?eared, through bi~oculars, to change color and also at this point it appeared, through binoculars, to be about the size of a lemon. There was no sound heard from the object. I:_he _obj appe.ared .t..9 ha _disapE,eared. ,.becap.se o: the oncom~!}g da_xlight. The objects were in view for approximately one hour and twenty minutes. observations were from the gound and observed with the unaided eye with use of 7X50 binoculars. occasional I am absol~tely positive it was not a conventional aircraft within my present knowledge o= aircraft operations. Color cha~ges were rhythmic and not believed caused by atmospheric conditions. On July 25, 1966 at 0738 G~rr observed UFO approximately East of Station moving to North and back to East with a shape and color same as night before, located about 20 degrees above horizon S~ AL 0825 GMT observed motion of UFO between two stars that were not moving. UFO moving Nortr.ward, did not note change of color. On July 27, 1956 at 0540 GMT I observed, through binoculars, what appeared to be the same object seen about the same position on the previous night. Object was changing co~ors which did not conform with adjacent stars. At about 0630 GMr anothe~ o~je~t was observed moving from overhead South to North maintaining same speec ~nd course. This was regarded as being a satellite by approximately 12 to 15 people present at this time. First object remained visible until sunrise. c Control Specialist Flight Service Station On July 25, 1966 at about 0845 GMT I was told of what was thought to be two satellites overhead. I went out for a moment and noticed them moving in opposite directions and returned to my position to meet a scheduled operation