Some comments on
The Testimony of Colonel Otis “Mad Dog†Retchner, USAF (Ret.)
http://www.danielbrenton.com/2006/11/27/the-round-files/
There was a fascinating story over at Dan Brenton’s weblog the other day. http://www.danielbrenton.com/ Dan sends updates and comments to the Odd Emperor once and a while. Odd asked me to comment on this piece because, once, long ago I worked on equipment similar to that which is described in the story. I’ve actually been in similar situations as those portrayed in the story.
The years I served in the US military I worked on some of the era’s most sophisticated tracking and search radar, I’„¢m well acquainted with how this equipment operates, it’s limitations and it’s strengths. I’m also very familiar with some of the myths surrounding military operations but, more on that later. I was once trained and indoctrinated in the prosecution of uncorrelated objects, meaning I was given instructions on how to deal with UFOs, that tale can wait as well.
There were at least two USAF bases in Spain Mor Air Base, in Andalusia and Torrejon Air Force Base, in Madrid (which was turned back over to the Spanish Government in the 1990s.) There also seemed to be one in at Zaragosa Airforce Base
It seems the US Air Force and the Spanish Government did establish several Spanish USAF bases in 1953. A US tactical wing could have been in Spain a year earlier, or this gentleman was in command before the wing was assigned overseas. However, I haven’t find any USAF officer by that name. (just from checking the usual sources, I haven’t bothered to do a complete search of PD records.)
Anyway, according to the story.
‘“On August 4, 1956, I was awakened from a sound sleep when my second in charge rang me to notify me that base security had been breached by an unidentified slow-moving aircraft, which radar had tracked moving north-northwest across the base. “
I find it difficult to believe that a radar operator would have used the term “aircraft.”There are lots of things flying around that are not aircraft. The correct term is “uncorrelated target” or bogey. Most radar operators (if they are experienced) won’t jump to conclusions. Certainly not if it’¢s going to put the base on alert. It would also have been proper for the operator to relate what kind of aircraft. If they were sure it was an aircraft they probably had some idea what kind, how big etc.
Now the witness’
he was near the eastern perimeter when he said he ‘“felt like something was watching him’ and he looked up to see a pitch black section of sky suddenly filled with something that from his description sounded all the world like an oversized black Christmas tree that was trimmed with purple lights and stank of brimstone.
Strangely enough, this is not too far afield from a typical UFO sighting including the report of an odor.
However, when was the last time you smelled a helicopter, even one that was hovering close by? It’s not out of the question but very unusual to say the least as anyone who’s been around aircraft can tell you. I know the aroma of jet fuel very well and it’s very rare indeed that I detect it from a flying aircraft. My point is, the brimstone odor report and the ‘“I feel like someone is watching me’ statement are classic UFO components. Certainly no aircraft as we know it!
This thing passed overhead with its long axis parallel to the ground, maybe forty-five feet up and traveling at about fifteen knots*
(*About seventeen miles per hour, far too slow for a conventional aircraft. MPH= K *1.1508) about the speed of a balloon drifting with the wind.
Later, the wing commander sent a report of this incident to his higher-ups. That didn’t sound like a very good idea because’
When the report made it to the top of the chain of command, the response came back down in the form of an ‘“eyes only’ order to me which, reluctantly, I carried out: all personnel involved in the incident were instructed that they hadn’t seen or heard a thing about it; that it had never happened; that it would be considered a treasonous act to say that it had;
I believe this happened pretty much as related. Except for one thing,’“classified eyes only” is pretty much meaningless in this context. There is no such thing as “Classified, Eyes only.†You might have “Secret- eyes only†document but the word “classified†is a declaration of a classification, not a classification itself. The word “classified†is allways followed by the level of classification.
Many people seem to put a lot of weight on the military classification system, some seem to think that the system is a license for military people to lie. That it’s evil and should be done away with. As a matter of fact, classification systems are not licenses to lie or to deceive people. They are systems to control information in organizations where the control of information can literally mean life or death. … for billions of people… for you and I this very second.
“A government is responsible for the survival of the nation and its people. To ensure that survival, a government must sometimes stringently control certain information that (1) gives the nation a significant advantage over adversaries or (2) prevents adversaries from having an advantage that could significantly damage the nation. Governments protect that special information by classifying it; that is, by giving it a special designation, such as “Secret,†and then restricting access to it (e.g., by need-to-know requirements and physical security measures).†http://www.fas.org/sgp/library/quist/index.html
This is pretty cut and dried. It’s is to be expected that a government agency designed for conflict (like a military arm) will have and hold secrets. No military organization can survive (or really exists) without it. Today, everything is classified! Try finding out exactly how many plastic forks are used daily on a US aircraft carrier, you will discover that even this seemingly innocent information will have some kind of classification stamped on it.
Today, the lowest level is “unclassified.†“Confidential†is the next level.†followed “secret†and “top secret.†To my knowledge (and I could be wrong.) there really are no classifications above “top secret.â€Â
Your retired military person for whatever reason did not give the classification of his order (BTW, when you muster out it’s still illegal to divulge classified material as he well knows.) I suspect the order was indeed, Top Secret. If the order was for his eyes only and I suspect (unless he has a screw loose) he will not divulge to you exactly what the message said or why to this day. Any order like that is probably no more than a ‘“please don’t send any more of this stuff OK? command.
Now as to why the USAF asked him to in a sense shut the hell up about the incident? First of all, there was really nothing to go on. Radar operators routinely see stuff that they cannot immediately identify. Back in the day, an operator would be looking at raw returns in a mountain of ground and air clutter. What they saw (in all probability) was a large, sharp edged return that was moving slowly over the base with the prevailing wind.
We don’¢t know what the weather was like that night, I’d be willing to bet it was cloudy-rainy with a 10-15 knot surface wind. If so the target was almost certainly a cloud.
It is quite possible for clouds to reflect radar. If you want proof I suggest you go over to NOAA or your favorite weather page. Radar reflects off of anything, even air. We turn the receivers down to make air and clouds (even flocks of birds) transparent to the receiving equipment.
There is no fundamental difference between the radars used today and the ones they used in the 1950s (other than a lack of vacuum tubes today and MUCH better computers.) Nowadays it’s very rare for an operator to even look at raw data like they did back in the 1950s. Radar targets are automatically “recognized”depending on the type of radar set that is being used (weather radars for example reject aircraft while aircraft tracking radar rejects clouds.) There was probably no such equipment between the radar operator and the raw data that night, just an attenuation knob and a certain amount of training.
They probably were using a PPI display (that’s the round one with the radial-sweeping trace.) I doubt that they had 3D sets or Doppler tracking equipment. If they did, it’s quite possible that they not only saw the trace on the search radar but they could have actually locked onto it although this story doesn” mention it. I actually have locked on to clouds with Doppler targeting radar designed for aircraft.
Depending on the conditions, a cloud might have enough ice, water vapor or rain to stand out from the rest and look very peculiar. Radar people call these clouds stuffed with rocks. They can look quite striking, a slow moving-huge blip that looks perfectly solid. I’ve seen these fool people more than once.
Now the witness– we know almost nothing of him. He’s an Airman (about an E3) What was his capacity on the base? What was he doing on the perimeter so late at night? Was he on watch? Was he coming back from liberty? Had he been drinking?
There is no way to determine any of this. All we have is a blank statement that ““I saw an unusual object that smelled like sulfur. Coincidentally we have a radar operator saying that they have an unknown aircraft and a grumpy-sleepy wing commander.
Is that enough to have generated a bogus UFO encounter?
Absolutely! Would the airman have related the account without being asked? Perhaps he was on watch, asleep and dreaming when the phone rang. He answers the phone half awake. One of his superior demands that he to relate any unusual occurrences. The airman blurts out that he saw something just before the call, which in reality was a dream.
He’s going to stick with the story too, especially before a grumpy wing commander, or he’¢s going admit he was sleeping on watch? Probably get court-marshaled and drummed out? What would you do?
The wing commander sends in a report (probably following regs.) His superiors react by saying“shut the hell up about that!” Why? Because even investigating something like this would call a lot of people in question.
Believe it or not, the Air Force is not in the business of chasing UFOs. The Air Force is in the business of hurting the enemy, setting fire to their aircraft and their cities. Strange stories of wild looking aircraft and odd radar traces might not fall under this mission.
Your retired officer’s superiors had two choices, investigate something that on the surface sounded bogus or, just forget the whole thing.
It looks like they opted to forget it.
If they investigated? Was the airman on watch and awake? Is the radar staff well trained enough to determine a real aircraft from a meteorological? The base commander? Is he competently leading his men in this high profile location? Do we really need to be investigating this stupid shit (I’¢m sorry but that’s exactly how MY superiors would have looked at it.)
Now I’m not saying that the event was completely bogus. The Airman did sight a UFO. The radar people probably didn’t see anything significant at least, according to the way this story is related. Since radar can (and does) reflect off of things that are not aircraft all the time I strongly suspect that they were simply mistaken.
It”old-man was shaken out of a deep sleep for and you must tell the old-man something or else! The old-man shoots off a twixt of his interrupted night to HIS old-man, I can only imagine what Colonel Otis “Mad Dog higher ups might have said
The Place — (US European command HQ- Up the chain of command.)
The time, August 5th, 1956, 08:34
Honcho= Mad Dog’s CO.
Numbnuts= Honcho’s adjunct.
(Numbnuts) “Sir, did you see that report from Morn- it was on your desk this morning“
(Honcho) ” Yes I saw it–you tell what his name..Retchman TO put a lid on it.”
(Numbnuts) “Sir?”
(Honcho)“Stow it! Put it where the sun don’t shine! That’s all we f$%^ing need, flying saucers!
(Numbnuts) “Um-it was bad smelling Christmass trees sir- and they had a radar trace-“
(Honcho) “yah sure-sure! you can tell them where they can cram their radar trace! If it aint got red stars on the dorsal fins, I don’t want to hear about it ‘ if it DO have red stars, I want you to shoot it down – CLEAR?
(Numbnuts) “Perfectly clear sir!”
And the rest as we say — is history.
Guy:
You wrote:
“Believe it or not, the Air Force is not in the business of chasing UFOs. The Air Force is in the business of hurting the enemy, setting fire to their aircraft and their cities. Strange stories of wild looking aircraft and odd radar traces might not fall under this mission.”
Actually, the Air Force is in precisely this business of chasing odd radar signals, because one never knows when they might be a threat. There are planes designed specifically for the purpose of seeing what’s “up there” (although they’re not looking for aliens, of course). If you want to try your skeptical muscles out for size, I suggest the 1957 RB47H case as a good place to start – if you can explain it, you’ll be the first; and yes, the crew of the RB47 did chase the UFO that day, just as the UFO chased them – and there was a visual sighting as well as ground radar and ELINT contact on the plane.
The fact that this case (and others like it – there were, for example, more than one RB47H encounter with UFOs) is virtually unknown to the general public, and that something like Roswell (or, gag, alien abductions) has become the face of serious ufology, tells you all you need to know about the state of affairs re: serious ufology, and why the public has tuned out.
Best regards,
Paul
Hey Paul;
While it’s true the military has some interest in UFOs, they don’t as a rule follow up on them very much (certainly not when I was in.) Military radar doesn’t track UFOs, they track potential threats. Today they have stuff tacked onto radar that can passively identify the type of aircraft just on how it changes the reflected radar beam. If they ever lock-on and track one of those things they could get all kinds of stuff, size, mass, general shape, heat signature not to mention RF output.
Oh god ! You could have come up with an easier one!
There are really only two explanations- perhaps three (in reverse order of likelihood.) It was some kind of high performance aircraft of a type we (the general public) know nothing about. This is basically what the Condon committee came up with, a genuine unknown. Condon made a big deal of there not being anything on paper but the crewmen on that flight reported that they were interrogated, those records should exist somewhere.
The second one is along the same lines, it’s not a solid object, it’s a projection of some sort. However there is no way to reconcile that with existing technology let alone that which existed in the 1950s. In a way, that idea is more complex than the first one.
The third explanation is a little trickier, but the simplest. It never happened- not really! Someone talked the crewmembers into the story, something odd does happen during the flight, the pilots take the plane on a wild goose chase with some blinky-malfunctioning gear. Over time the story gets expounded on until it became what we see today, complete with “missing” reports, sinister interrogations and people who genuinely remember something happening. The details ales are filled in by one crew member telling the rest what “œactually” took place.
This sort of thing has happened before, Ron Hubbard (the Scientology guru) once convinced the crew of a Navy corvette another ship and a couple of aircraft that there were Japanese subs off the Oregon coast. They fired a bunch of weapons at what turned out to be a known magnetic deposit, clearly marked on the charts.
That’™s always been a very oddball tale and really is one of the best UFO stories around, too bad there is little more than eye witness testimony and some secondary sources.
G. Pettingil, and Mr. Kimball —
By the depth of analysis and reflection on my post, I can only conclude that both of you took this seriously. I am sorry to say this, but it’s a parody. I would have hoped all the gags in it would have given it away, let alone the introduction as a “Round File” and the image of the UFO in a trash can.
I am flattered that apparently I wrote it with enough of the right feel and at least some of the right “buzzwords” that it was taken as an actual event.
Oddly enough, I had a similar response when I sent an earlier version of this to a former MUFON assistant state director. I thought it was a fluke.
Honestly, what I was aiming for was a good laugh.
I really do appreciate the attention to the detail of this, and should I need technical background for some material in the future, you two will be the first I’ll contact.
Enough feel? Why it’s better THAN MOST UFO REPORTS!
Baa hahhhahhhahah!
Daniel:
Actually, I only gave your post a cursory read, and filed it away to look at more closely later on when I was less busy (thanks for sending it along, by the way). Here I was simply responding to G.P.’s post.
GP:
You left out a fourth possibility – that they encountered something truly anomalous.
A comment on the first possibility. I’ve interviewed a former highly decorated RB47 crew member, and done extensive research myself on the plane and the case. They were at the top of the food chain when it came to experimental or high tech, super secret aircraft. They knew, when almost no-one else did, including USAF fighter pilots, about the U-2, because they flew missions with it. There was nothing up there that we had that they would have been unfamiliar with. This explanation also doesn’t take into account the visual sighting, which certainly didn’t resemble “one of ours”.
As for the third explanation – it never really happened – that is just not possible. Records exist. The entire crew was interviewed and de-briefed, and then later interviewed by ufologists, including Dr. James McDonald. There were also other RB47 incidents, similar in nature. In other words, it happened.
Paul
Hey Daniel;
I did have some problems with that story, I’m gratified that my feelings were correct. I’ve read about odors coming from UFOs once or twice. The shape was too vague to remark on and I don’t put much stock in what a UFO looks like anyway.
Paul;
Sugestion #1 is truly anomalous. We don’t have anything like that, the Russians didn’t. Now, mind you I didn’t call it a spacecraft (it was not observed to fly outside of the atmosphere) or alien. There was no indication of the pilots (if any) or who might have manufactured it.
Ever read Orwell? Anything can be faked. History as we know it is a construct, one that hopefully reflects real events with some semblance of accuracy. Bt it never really can. Events are only reflected in historical accounts no matter how earnest and reliable a historian is. Memory is a plastic medium and even written records can drift in meaning as our languages changes over time.
Now, I suspect that “something†happened during that flight in 1957 but at this moment in time it is not possible (for me anyway) to say with any with any certainty what. There are a number of things that don’t add up, Where are those debriefings? Were they found? It is my understanding that the crew remembers being debriefed but never saw the reports.
It’s also my understanding that only the pilot and the co-pilot saw lights and the rest of the crew saw only what their remote sensing equipment reflected. The aircraft radar did not pick up a solid object while ground base radar may have. The visual sighting while spectacular, has some inconsistencies. Why was the angular motion not mentioned in the “original intelligence report:â€
http://www.ufocasebook.com/rb47.html (Billy Booth’s page)
http://www.nicap.dabsol.co.uk/en1.htm (NICAP)
I’m a little unclear as to when this testimony was taken too. It’s labeled report prepared by the Wing Intelligence Officer, COMSTRATRECONWG 55, Forbes Air Force Base but no author or date is cited.
This is pretty different from later statements suggesting that it moved unlike any aircraft. On fact the contemporary account sounds a little like someone firing tracer rounds across their path and simultaneously killing their landing lights. I’m not saying that’s what it was, if I were mandated to simulate or “stimulate†and anomalous aircraft report and had nearly unlimited resources, that’s the way I would do it.
The bottom line remains with any anomalous event is, we don’t understand exactly what happened. To me there’s a huge jump between that and assigning an agency (be it aliens, the CIA, Russians or some sinister government organization bent on hiding free energy machines.) I also think that any event which resembles what we think an extra-terrestrial agency might look like is immediately suspicious. I believe (and there is a huge body of research supporting this) that if we magically ran across representatives of our own culture merely 500 years from the past or future- (take your pick,) they would be so far outside of our experiences that only a specialist in language and sociology would be able to make any useful communications with them—outside of the basic stuff. Show a flush toilet to a random European circa 1406 and tell me I’m wrong. These people were very different than us.
Now a person from the future would be even more different, sociological changes are moving so quickly that we may as well try to communicate with a TV set. They might be able to communicate with us but we would never really comprehend what their lives would be like, no more than a man from a primitive Amazon tribe (a contemporary with our culture BTW) could comprehend an atomic power plant.
My point is, these cultures are our cultures. An alien culture will be so far removed from anything in our experiences that we might have difficulty determining if they are alive or not.
My secondary point is, if it looks like an alien spaceship it was probably meant to. That suggests layers upon layers of deception. Don’t believe the surface stuff, look elsewhere and you will most likely find your answer.
Guy:
I didn’t say it was an alien spaceship. I simply said it was anomalous, and remained unexplained.
As for the rest, I’ll tackle that when I have a bit more time!
Paul
Paul Kimball wrote:
I suggest the 1957 RB47H case as a good place to start…
Somebody’s been hanging around with Sparks…. 😉
Just taking note. No desire to enter any sort of debate. Seen the RB47 hashed and rehashed, and multi-redundantly hashed and rehashed slantwise and edgewise and up and down and all around like that damned merry go round that broke down and made the damndest sound. And I’ve seen Sparks meltdown like frickin’ white hot magnesium way too many times…;-)
Genuine unknown? Possibly. Really, though, no way to be absolutely certain about that.
So, fifty years after the report, what are we supposed to do with it? Where does it fit in the theoretical schema we have built up, based on decades of painstaking observations of UFOs and their various characteristics? The printouts from the RB47 are available aren’t they, or is the ELINT data from the mission stored on a CD somewhere? Aside from that, what has been learned from studying the emission spectrum of the anomaly taken by the RB47?
Between the U.S. and other nations, there are now a wide range of aircraft with ELINT capabilities substantially in advance of the electronics flying on that RB47 50 years ago. As ELINT capabilities increased in the years following 1957, what other instances of “phenomena” similar to that encountered by the RB47 have been encountered? Is the data recorded by their instruments available for inspection?
Why has no one at the Institute for Serious Inquiry into Peculiar and Interesting Depositions (INSIPID) addressed this matter further? Even more importantly, why doesn’t the U.S. Council on Weird Crypto-Aeronautical Phenomena (COWCRAP) look into it?
Ok – I’m being flippant. RB47 “saturation” I suppose. I submit that the RB47 case is a big ? floating out there in the haze of a “recollection” provided through the written word and passed down through several generations, and as a serious scientific problem takes a backseat to…well, just about anything. I qualify that statement with a disclaimer: “This is just crochety old RDB’s not-so-humble opinion, so nobody get their panties in wad.”
Best,
RDB