DEPARTMENT OF DEFENCE ries recorded wttb Australtan Archtves This cover is to be used only for official file se Form Number AR Ill ts to be used for workm FILE NUMBER REPORTS ON FLYING SAUCERS AND OTHER AERIAL OBJECTS. Reterred 10 Referred 10 Oop.or1ment of Oolttnce (AIR FORCE OFFICE) MINUTE PAPER oJec.. RECLASSIFICATION OF FILES Reference: A. DI(AF)AAP 810 para 326. DEFAIR 580/1/1 Aelerenceti'554/1 /30 (34) In accordance tofith Ref'erence A, all folios, in all parts of Department of Air File series 580/1/1 are reclassified 'UNCLASSIFIED' with effect 7 May 82. A. PERSKE) DO .N{If' t>SHOVE 'iliJS s~ee;~ fllCM FIE COMMONWEAL IH OF AUSTRALIA , , rL Y PLEASC QUOTE ROYAL /IJSTRALIAtl AUt F01.tE Hecdqunrtc r::. \Attention AI.1) nCH!lJ.CAL Jt:ol'OHT OIT COLOuR ~.; sp,;;:;E!;C!ES Or' UJ:llJ.~'!-.'TIFl'!:lJ FLTIUG P..BF TELZCON scr LJJR \, 3Ew'R ~ LDit CC}r.Jr:LLY 4TH !:ARCH 1066 1 ~<l.H~st&d .ey -{)R Reoo-aml.-P~ \duplicate slides of a reported UniC.antified Fl~rinc; Object were inspected by Central Photol)Taphic Establishment. AlthoU,!;h CJ.!,'lfPhO ;-;,2:> 1casonably certain ot' tho causes of the"Uii'O"ima~, the elides were su'bw1 ttod to the colour technicians of' KODAK (1. 'SIA) PTY L'l'.ll to verify the probable cau:.; of the ir.ago. The finding of this investigation puts the cauoo d<n"m to a li l]'~t flare, and possible coma abberation, resulting in tho col our and shape identil'ied r.s tho Unidentified Flying Object. 2 . In n endeavour to explain tile image, the follo1.i.ng teclmical infonnetion is ofre1cd ... ConcerninG' tl:e light flare, a round or oval patch of licht m~y bo a "flare spot" esp,.ci.::".ly if tile pictu::e ,,as taken against tho light or if there was :: light, e . g . , otreet lamp, on the e:drece edge of the field of view of the lens but not necessarily !!hcmi:--.g on the film. 3 This "flara :;'!)ot" could have been combined witb. tl:e coma abbzr.'ltion :::entioned in pn:roerar>l 1. 'l'llie abberatic!l concerns oblique :!'a:'s of Echt passing -:;hrough a lens vhich .. r., brou6ht to focus in ap-:>roxim;tely the sa:ne plan-3, \)u~ f!!ll at different dist:mces '!'ro:n the x:is instez.d of bein~ superimposed. It do<:c not exist in the centra of the i~ace (the lens axis) but increases steadily for images lyine progr~seiv~ly father out in tee field. type c;r.d T'nie co:natic fo~ of star image, is COt::l!Il.only fourd in lances of the simple is ver:: dif:icult to eliu1i'lete when covering a wide angular field 'lritb wide aperture. ' It may be reduced by stoppil".g dol'llly i.e. , employing a diapb.r.::sm which rcst11cts the marginal rays o the lens system. 5 As these photoe;raphe were taken at night of 3 city scene from a ereat diste.nce, it toa_y bo r3asonably osew.1ad that the ex.posuros \'Jere mntlc on rnlXimvm aportu~-a i . e . , witlJ the diaphragn aperture v.i.d.e open. This vrould indicate that the marginal 8l'9aa of tb<' lr-.ns wa::: llffactive and the light rays would be affected aa described producing 3 comatic flar~ opot. 6 Al tl:.ou@l. it io almost in~,ossible to ei ve a c17.!1plotely c.ocura tl .report on an imaee ouch a:: tl:io 17). thcut kncwin& full details of exposure, ct'.!llera poei tion nnd tho possibility of licht oourcc::: nc:::r the camera, the Kodllk techniciano arc 'tS sura asis possible w1dcr the circumatnnce::: that the reasons b~ven in this letter aro responsible for the it'lages. Squadr on L.-~dcr .r'or Ot'i'ic or CoCT.ondir.g S A N T A/ C R 'I'C&.ItOIItA~MIC A001tCe NAYY CAN8CR,..A .. COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA -, aval Intelligence Division, OEPARTME"'T OF T .. E NAVY. CAN&ERRA, A.C,T The Director of Air Force IntelligenPe, Department of Air, CM\:i:!.ERRA. A. C . r. REPORT BY HMAS ANZAC - UNIDEr~TIFIED FLYH!G OBJECTS S M:ZAC has reported that at 1745(L) Thursday 5th Msy, 1966, when i n position 130 27' S, 1660 18' E, four unidentifi ed flying objects were sighted !it about 200 angle of elevation on bearing of 1500f"by the Navigating Of~icer and several other officers who were not on the bridge at the 2. These objects were quite distinct and appeared closely grouped with the leadir.g object glowing red end the t h ree trailing objects green in colour and forming an equilateral triangle, apex towards tne leadir.g object. They left trails of colour in their wakes but these did not last. trails were approximately 6 times the size of the objgcts i n length. 3. After the objects bad disappeared behind cloud ahead of the slip, they reappeared momentarily on an approximate beari ng of 1Q50Tbefor e once agai n disappearing behind cloud. ro smQl:e o r other evidenc e wa s visible during the passage of these objects. 4. The approximate time in sight was not more than 25 se~onds and the objects were travelling at high speed. No radar contacts were detected at the time Director of' "aval Intellig,oncta. Aost. Press Cuttings l\ge::&y "BARRIER TRUTH" Broken Hill, N.S.W. / The Victorian Flying Saucer Reseor::h Sociery doesn't miss much that is going on -eirher in the skies or in the national press. UNIDBNTIFIED FLYrnC OBJIX:TS -AU EVALUATION BASED Ol~ AUSTRALIAN, AltER I CAN AND :BRITis:l AIR FORCE REPORTS A summary of an addre,:s given by '!r B. G. Roberts of the Opem t ional Research Office, Department of Air, CANBERRA to the Ballarat Astronomical Society at BALLARAT, February, 1965 The Term UFO and Some Objections to it 1. Unfortunately th~ tern "unidentified flying object", or UFO for short, beceuse of its widespread ru1d indiscrioinate use is gener&lly regarded as just another word for "flying saucer". This is a rather ironic situation since the term waa originally introduced to conbat just such an eventuality, and so over- come the tendency automatically and haphazardly to relegate all unidentified sightings to the category of "flying saucers". the tern "unidentified flying object" is somewhat of a misnomer, this ~robably is the underlying reason for its indiscriminate use. We bolieve it to be a misnomer on a number of counts. Firstly many sightings are not of material objects but of 1vhat the observer, in all good faith, believ:ee to be material objects. Freak weather conditions, electrical storms and unusual light conditions c give rise to misleading impressions, especially when the obs~rver is unused to them and the time of viewing is short. The eye is not alone i11 this respect. For instance Radar is fer from infallible. Radar fro~ dense clouds and pockets of air ere quite common and can give the erron~cus impression that some materiel object has been detected. 3. Secondly it is our experience that, ~xcept in sightings of aircraft, the process of flying is rarely involved. Many sightings are of the planets or of meteors entering the earth' s atmosphere, and, in one case, we ~eceived an excellent report from some 17 separate observers in the Central NORTBEHrf TERRITORY of the re-entr3 of the Russian Satellite Cosmos II into the earth' s atmosphere. 4. One might even go a stage further and c.'lallenge the wor d "unidentified" on t~e grounds that the classification is a purely tentative one, since inform- ation not available to the observer generally provides an adequate identification of t~e sighting subsequently. It is our experience that more than 9o% of all 1vell reported sighti.ngs can be identified satisfactorily. 'lhe rest cannot be identified specifically, ~inly because the obserrer' s report of the sighting does not contein sufficient info~wation to urovide an identification, or in cases whera it ia considered that illther investi ,ation is un11erranted. An example of the latter is illustrated by the case of a woman who wrote in 1964, after rca 'ing a newspaper report of a UFO sighting, to tell u3 of sounds she had heard one night more than tt.relve months previously; she did not know what date it was she had heard the noises and, as s)l.e vms too frightened to get out of bed, she did not see what 17ea caking the noise. Could the "object" be identified? N~turally it could not be. 5. Although it is difficult to conjure up a name which adequately dca~ribes these sighti.n,;s I think a more appropriate terc than "unidentified fly:Lllg objects" woulJ. be "unidentified aerial sigt.tings" -the sightinga being "unidentified" only insofar as the observer is concerned. It could be defined 1\S an obaerv3tion which re:Jains unexplained to the vie.ver at least long enough for ~. to report it. Although the tero may still be inadequate in some respects I think it re!JOvcs sor.K: of the cisleading inferences which were apparent previously when using the term "unidentified flying object". Asscs~ment of derial Si~htings 6. Tha asscs nt of reports of unidentified aorial sightings in J.tJSTMLIA and the TERRITORIES i3 the responsibility of the Department of Air at C~RR:. Ther~ is no hidden implication in this allocation of responsibility. ':'he Department is si.mpl.r thG most appropriate authority for the task, which is purformed to detcrmino ~hcthcr or not a threat to the security of the nation is involved. 1 Much effort a~d ti~c is devoted each year to the asses~rnent of gerial &ishtings. Repor .... have been received fron as far south as TASMAliTA and eo .&r north as ;fF;J GUI~. Imodiately f'ollol'li:ng a report the observer is usually contacted and ruque~ted to conplete ~ detailed pro-foroa covering all aspects of the sighting. If there is no i=e iate and obvious explanation for the sight:ir~ the observer r:ay then be interviawed by a meober of the RAdF so that his c reditabilit'J ca.y be assessed and in order to obta.i.n useful additional inforc- ation. The Dcpartnent of Civil Avi~tion may then be contacted concerning civil aircrsft nove1ents in the area, while mill te.ry aircraft t oveoents and weather balloon flights rue also checked, in case they nay have been responsible for the s ighting. Satellit~s are also responsible for a nuo~r of reports, basically because of public interest in satellites and the inoraaoing number put into our skies. ~no novemcnts of satellites and satellite debris are checked through t he Departcent of Supply, which tabulates data on all satellites, regardless of o"untry of OI'igin. Because of the steadily increasing amount of traffic in our skies, and in space for that matter, (more than 500 pieces of satellite hard- ware are orbiting the earth at this minute), the task of identifYing aerial s i ghtinga is assuming substantial proportions. The Department of Air cannot be expected to issue an immediate explanation fcrsightings publicisod in the press unti l a l l t he infor~tion has been obtai ned and assessed. Consequently, soDe dnys wil l have elapsed before its publication could be expected and, then, only if i t is deemed necessary. 8 . Reporting Proc3dure. The procedure to be adopted when reporti ng an unidentified ~-rial ~ighting is to write a letter to the nearest RaAF base or , ternatively, to the nearest police station giving your nnce and address and as much of the following infornation as you may be able to recall :- Date and tice of the sighting; Le h of tioe sighting under observation; re the sighting took place; Position of the sighting When first observed (e.~. , overhead, coming froa ber~d a hill, over the horizon etc.); l'ihc.t was it that attracted your attention; (e. g . light, noise); the sighting appear to be a light or a solid object; imat was its colour; What was its apparent ohape; If l!lore than one sighting was concurrentl y observed, how many were there and what vras their formation; Was any detail of the structure of the sighting observed; ~'las any method of propulsion obvious; Was thure any sound (description, if any); and, est~te of the object' s height, speed and direction of 9 . !low this la.at iten is very ioportant and I would venture to say that unless Y?u have so experience in estL~ating height and speed your iopression of any oojcct's h~ibht, speed and direction of flight could be cocpletely er:oneous. ~11 thio is so beconcs clear when one realises that any estio- ~t1on of speed r~uires that we have so~e idea of an object's height and this, 1n turn, ~quires that we have sone ide~ of tha true size of the object. 1?. If a sighting appears as e light or is so far away that we cannot d1scern &ny detail ab~ut it other then that it appears to be an object, then we h~ve nothing against which to compare its size. Consequently our estimation of its size ~nd our i~preasion of its height and speed are likely to bo in error. For c:r.a::1ple, an aircraft flying overhand at 300 7-ph a t a hei gh;; of 5,000 ft. could_eAsily ~ve an observer tho erroneous impression that he had sighted sn obJect flY1ng at 3, 000 ~.p.h.,if he thought that the heient was about 50,000 ft. 'lbistlcdom1, less than one inch in dia;neter, which a.re blown up to 100 ft or so by the v:ind during our sur.u::~e~ 'l!onths, can appear e.s objects !lying very high at fantastic speeds and capabld of the most acazing man- oeuvres, simply because their size is a ~ttcr of conjecture at the tioe. iuilarly en aircraft flying dir~ctly away from the observer, particularly at night, could nppear c.a a slowly descending or hovering object. 11. Since the size of the sighting, the direction of its flight and ito distance froo us is nornally io;>ossible to .::stioate acct:rately, it is bettar to ~ke an est~ate of the sighting' s initial angle of elevations above the horizon, ths a~lc through which it subsequently may appear to nov" and the t~e t~en to do so. n10 Identification of Aerial Sightings 12. Ider.tified Sightings. With the info~ation available froc the aerial sightins report, an attempt is made to identify the sighting. Ic 9 out of 10 17ell reoorted cases this is usually possible. B7 far tha greatest b~r of si~htinSs have ~en attributed to astronooic~l pMenomena, such es felling m~tbors or the view of a particular planet (such as Venus, Jupitor or ?.Iars) which may have appeared unusual to the observer. Aircraft are resoonsible for th<.! 1~ert 11ighest percentag~ of sightings, while a variety of oth:r causes,su as roxets of the firecrackers variety, w~atber ball?ons, set~llite caterial and so on, coobine to forD the remainder. I t is significant to note that our rGcords show, both in 1963 and again in 1964, that the ~onths during which the great~st number of aerial sightings were reported w~re also the ~nths of greatest.oeteor activity. The months of July and August consistently bring in ClOre sightings than any other month of the year. 13. Unidentified Sin-htinss. The nunber of sightings which the Depart- m~nt is unable t o identify from the infornation available has remained fairly consistently at around about two a year. Indeed, given sufficient ti~ eni effort, the nUL1bur of unidentified sightinga probably could be reduced further. One has to assess, however, whether the required additional tine and effort is warranted. The Department of Air believes that there is, ani alwa;:rs will be, a small number of sightings (due to high altitude pheno:aena, \?hich o.re strange to the untrained eye) for which the available info tion will never be suff~cient to enable an identification to be made. In other words it is just not possible to achi e ve a 10~ record of successful identification. The ideal can be appr oached but not achi e~, si~ply because the inaccuracies inherent in this type of work milit~te against its achievement. So much for experience in AUS~'~LIA; whdt of tho experience of overseas ~ir Forces such as for instance the USAF. 14 . Experience in USA. El..-pcrience in the UNITED STA'fi:S runs p:1.re.llel to our own. ~El Americans howcv~r handle many more reported sightings than we do, averaging froo 400 to 600 eo.ch year. Th.:! analysis of all reported sightings in the US.l has been the: responsibility of the USAF Air T~chnical Intelligence Centre since investigations stnrted in 1947. Since that time th~y heve investigated sone 9, 000 reports. 15. In their effort to id~ntif,y reported aerial sightings the ~ricans use automatic sorting nnd computing techniques, because these method.a provide tl1e best 11ay to handle such great amounts of data. The >7ri ttcn r'-'porta ~::-c reduced to IB!'! punch-card abstracts by means of logic~ly developed fo~s and standardised evaluation proced~es. The ev:1.lua.tion ::>f the reports, a cruc.al step in the preparation of the d3ts. for statidtical trc~toont, consists of an appraisal of the ~ports, the subsequent classifcation of the sighting, with the emphasis on complete consisttJncy and objoctivity. This consistency and objectivity can be Ml.Dtaincd right through the :lnn.l;rsi3 since the c:>r.:puter is a t:~achine and not a man. 16. A typic3l brck~)~ -~ ~ -~, identificati)n, bcfo~ i::~proved reporting ~:;r.'i. 1 <r ... ' .,r!-r ..; vr~re int!'Odlced, woull have been as foll b Astrnor.li~a.l pi1eno!Jcna: .'drcreft: 2o% Other ccu""~s (1i~ts, ini'or::~ation: un:.C.anr,;.iir~cl 17. Reports classified under the heading of insuffiaian t infom- ation11 arc those for shich an essential piece of inforo'l.tion io Diesing. For example the omission of sighting tL~o or location. 18 . After tl'.e nc:1 procedure had been in opuration for acme 6 non:ths , th.a per o:mta6"! of aightings rei!laining unidentified was reduced to one third of the previous figures. The figures for this period then Astronomcal phenooena: tot,u oightinga Other caases: Ruports with insufficicn t inforoation Uni1cntifiod repo!.'ts: 19. The off~ct of the n~m reporting ;\nd investigating proccdu=es has continued to ba uarked, reducL~g the percentage of those unidentified to 1. 6<f, and, on one occasion, to as low as 0 . n~. The .a.r:~cricans, in fac t , believe the percentage c be reduced even ~th~r. 20. E."<P..:ri.mcc in UK. In the UNITED KI:iGDOH a sotl..JWhat sicrilar picture pres~nts itself. T'ocrc, all reports of unidentified acrie.l sightinga are proceDaed through Defence hhniatry Air Intallisence, and an average of 9 out of 10 zi~1tings hav~ been identified. Astron~mical pheno~ena and airc~aft are once ~in the main reasons for sightings. Defence Ministry is confident that with r.1orc reli:lble infornntioJl a.l'ld ir.1