Washington State ‘UFO’ Investigation, 1952-1960

Text

A machine read this text from the scan. When the text and the image disagree, the image is right.

CONFIDENTIAL

20D OSI 24-0
Re: Unidentified Flying Objects

24 June 1954

"Information for this report was received from Senior Controller, GCI Site, TIMOTHY; Senior Controller, Direction Center, MERCURY; Senior Controller, Division Combat Center, LAST CHANCE; the two F-86D pilots; a 25th Air Division pilot who was flying locally in T-33 and who heard all ground-air transmissions between F-86D pilots and ground stations.

"RELIABILITY

A. (Pronto Blue #2) 2nd Lt Edward E. McBride, 317th Fighter Interceptor Squadron, 1124C pilot; approximately 145 hours, of which over half has been in fighter-interceptor work; approximately 270 hours in fighter aircraft; for approximate total hours of 463.

B. (Pronto Blue #1) 2nd Lt Hilson L. Sewell, 317th Fighter Interceptor Squadron; approximately 29 hours in F-86D aircraft; 80 hours (approximately) in fighter aircraft; 251 hours other type aircraft; for a total of 360 hours. The F-86D pilots were interrogated singly by Major Eugene L. Zechmeister, Director of Intelligence and CWO Odin E. Sorensen, Asst Director of Intelligence, within four (4) hours of incident.

C. At the time of first mode return picked up by TIMOTHY, question arose as to possibility of malfunction. The site Tech Representative was on hand and monitored scope. In his opinion, malfunction of radar was definitely ruled out.

D. All weather stations, as well as Seattle AMIS; Navy; Coast Guard; 5 ADDC at Vancouver, B. C. Canada, were checked with negative results, ruling out possibility of weather balloons; boats or ships; or aircraft. One Navy P2V was found to be flying at time, but over one-hundred (100) miles from location of incident. A slight 3 degree inversion at 5,000 feet was present at 1900, but would possibly affect only a limited area.

E. The F-86D pilots were queried at great length in reference to the size and general appearance of blips presented on scopes. Both pilots appeared to have a very clear and firm concept of the difference between the observed blips as opposed to seaborne blips and B-36, B-52 type blips previously encountered.

F. All statements were obtained individually either in person or by telephone, ruling out possibility of subconscious innocent collusion. Superficially, all statements appear to support one another and to coincide.

2

CONFIDENTIAL

NW 90291
DocId:34714596 Page 32