Blogarchiv
UFO-Forschung - Project Blue Book - Teil-57

blue-book-titel-16

Project Blue Book case review: January-June 1959

This is the latest edition of the Project Blue Book case review covering January through June of 1959. Like the previous evaluations, I tried to examine each case to see if the conclusion had merit. I added comments to help clarify the explanation or if I felt it was not correct or adequate. 

1958-bluebook-a-1

1958-bluebook-aa-1

1958-bluebook-ab-1

1958-bluebook-ac-1

1958-bluebook-ad-1

1958-bluebook-ae-1

1958-bluebook-af-1

1958-bluebook-ag-1

1958-bluebook-ah-1

1958-bluebook-ai-1

1958-bluebook-aj-1

1958-bluebook-ak-1

1958-bluebook-al-1

1958-bluebook-am-1

Summary

The cases during this time period, while minimal in number, contained some challenging events. The Father Gill and Killian cases were the two major events and I tend to agree with Blue Book’s conclusions on both. Father Gill has been a highly disputed case but I it is hard to dismiss that Gill was looking in the direction of Venus and that the UFO was no longer visible once Venus had set. He also seems to have confused other celestial objects as UFOs, which gives credence to the theory that he mistook Venus as a UFO. As for seeing beings on the floating platform, I can only suggest that this was some form of optical illusion. Marty Kottmeyer has suggested that they might have been fishing boats and that the witnesses mistook where the horizon was located. This might explain the observation of individuals on top of the craft but this makes some assumptions with which I am not totally comfortable. 

Some of the more interesting cases involved aircraft chasing UFOs. The USAF indicated that the UFOs were probably high performance aircraft. I find that difficult to accept since the AF should know if there were their own aircraft in the vicinity. Instead, I believe that the pilots probably chased astronomical objects. Unfortunately, the cases for Cincinnati, Ohio (2/20) and Montana (3/25), there weren’t any good astronomical objects that could explain the case. The Cincinnati, Ohio case could have been Venus but Venus had set before the time given. In the case of Montana, the only possible star would be Deneb, which could have been the source but it is hard to explain what happened prior to the chase. As a result, I listed both of these cases as “UNIDENTIFIED”. 

I also considered classifying the June 9th Manassas/Roanoke, Virginia case as “UNIDENTIFIED” when I saw the speed listed as 200 knots. However, I looked at the radar data in the message traffic and I think there was an error in computing the speed of the objects. The Roanoke site tracked the targets for 102nm in 22 minutes. This computes to be 278 knots. The Manassas site tracked the targets for 100 nm in 15 minutes (it followed a curved track). This computes to about 400 knots. Both stations appeared to be tracking the same target(s) since the track went from West Virginia towards northern Pennsylvania with the object increasing altitude and speed. It seems plausible what was tracked was one, or more, high altitude reconnaissance aircraft that were gaining altitude. The RB-57D is a possibility (its cruise speed was 420 knots at 65,000 feet). It may have been the case that the various parts of the aircraft gave the impression of three separate targets flying abreast (the wingspan was over 100 feet). During this time period the RB-57D was used for fallout sample missions and testing continental air defense. It seems plausible this was one of those types of flights. As a result, I decided to agree with the Blue Book conclusion even though Blue Book should have done a more thorough follow-up to identify the aircraft. 

It is a bit disappointing to have two cases moved into the “UNIDENTIFIED” category but I have to call it as I see it. If anybody has an interest in looking at these cases for possible solutions, I would be willing to discuss it with them.

Quelle: SUNlite 2/2020 

1292 Views
Raumfahrt+Astronomie-Blog von CENAP 0