RADAR_VISUAL CASE NEARKANSASCITY
HEAVILY-WITNESSED
cAsE #3-9-163
This UFO is certainlY an unusual.
dynamicone,puttingon a show over
Belton,MO that could be seen in three
neighboringsuburbssouth of Kansas
City, with dozens of witnesses reporting
it independently to law enforcement
agencies and the localAir Force
base(whowerealsowatchingit).Thus,
it is distinguished with
as the IUR case
the greatestnumber of witnesses.lt
alsoappearsto have been seen briefly
on radar.lf thiseventwas based on a
hoax. it would be unprecedentedlY
elaborate.
ENVIFlONMENT
DATE: Tuesday,August 8,1978.
STARTINGTIME: 9:40 PM
PLACE: Belton, Missouri,east of
RichardGebaur Air Force Base.a
largely residential areain a suburban
city about 15 miles south of downtown
KansasCity.
APPEAFlANCE
Most of the witnesses indicated that
they saw a large red light dropping
"flares". One individual, Mr. Joseph
Staudinger,Jr., was fortunate enough
to have been directly underneath the
UFO and providedthe sketches seen
above.Notethat the rows of red lights
were rotating like a turntable. while
the white strobe lights beaming in
tvifnesssketch of UFO
front of and beh ind the object remained
fixed in the direction of travel. When
overhead,Staudingersawthe object as
large-lookingas a full moon (%-degree
of arc); coupled with the elevation
(estimatedfrom triangulation) of 2800
feet,this providesa roughoverallsize
of 25 feet. Binoculars at the Air Force
base revealed a faint white blinking
light unseen by the tower witnesses
with the naked eye accompanying the
red lights.
MOTION
Two particularly articulate reports
enableus at this stage to triangulate
the location and height of the object
throughout its trajectory. One viewpoint
comesfrom Sgt. GaryHavensat
the Air Forcebase air tower; the other
is providedby Mr. Joseph Staudinger,
alsoformerly in the Air Force.who
saw the UFO fly directly over his
house on Park Drive (a north-south
street) and parallelto the street.His
houseis two milesSEof the tower at
the base.Key pointsof discussion are
numbered below on the map and
discussed(all times are approximate,
based on interpolations between
known endpoints) :
119:40 PM.'Staudinger,his wife, his
14-vearold son and his neighbors
(who notified the Air Force base)
watched the object come from the
south over the tree line.
219:42 PM: UFO passedvirtually
overhead on Park Drive. This is the
point where the tower at Richard
Gebaur first took note of it, about 15
to 20' up. This triangulates to a height
of about 2800 feet. No noise was
heard.
319:47 PM: The object stoppedhere,
accordingto both witnesses.For the
Air Force base witnesses,it wasnow
due east about 15ouP. For the Park
Drive witnesses,it was due north,
about 15 degrees uP.Thisworksout
to 2000 feet, adoptingthe elevation
anglesliterally. The UFO flew at
roughlya levelaltitude,then,taking
about five minutes to travel from the
Staudingerhouse to a Position 1.4
miles north of it. This works out to a
speed of 17 m.p.h. -more like a
balloon than a plane,or possiblya
helicopter.Sgt. Havens estimated the
distancenow to be 314to 1%miles
away...anexcellentguess,sincethe
UFO works out to a distanceof 1.4
milesfrom the tower. Another indi'
:
vidual.on the base,standingabout
two blocks dueeastof the tower, also
confirmedthe "due east"positionfor
the UFO once it had stoPPed.Since
the base has no radar of its own,
HavenscalledKansasCity International
Airport, over 30 miles north of the
action,to see if they couldtrack"anything
east of the base".ControllerHal
Robertsconfirmedthat they could,
but that it was intermittent,appearing
as a non-transponding
targetonly 7 or
8 sweepsout of 30. InterestinglY,
Havensdid not clue Robertsat KCI
how far he should look; Yet when
Allan HendrycalledRobertsdirectly
andaskedhow far the targetwasfrom
the small paintedline indicatingthe
runwayat RichardGebaur,he told us
"one and one-half miles", which
correspondsperfectlY to the now-
triangulatedposition.
It washerein the ten-minute hover'
ing positionthat the UFO performed
its spookiest stunt. seenby virtually
everyonewith whom we sPoke:it
dropped a red/orangef lare down
toward the ground. Everyone agreed,
however,that the flarecould be seen
fizzling out beforeit hit the ground.
Priorto this, a whiteflash of lightwas
seenby both Havens and Staudinger.
It looked like it had occured beneath
the red lights through binoculars(as
seenfrom the tower).The Park Drive
witnessesactuallyheard a loud "pop"
or "crack" soundaccompanyingthe
flash'Thetower witnesses didn't hear
the noise, but an airmannamedLucas
near the maingateof the base did; in
fact, he reported severalsuch"explosions".
41 70:00 PM.' Now the object rose
straightup. as seen from bothvantage
points.Thiswas a slow process,taking
15 to 20 minutes.Fromthetower,the
red lights were seen to disaPPear
suddenlyat what wasguessedto be an
increasein altitude of 4000 feet'
Anothergoodguess,accordingto the
triangulations:using their elevation
angleof 45o as a moreaccurateguage
of height,the heightof theobjectwas
equalto the original distance:about
1.4 miles.Although the red lights
could no longer be seen with the
nakedeye,the useof binocularscontinuedto
revealthedimflashingwhite
light. Havenswatchedit movesouthboundnowfor
"about a quartermile".
It then turnedabruptlynorthbound
againstill at a slow sPeed.Then it
drifted ESE, climbing to a higher
altitudeat an estimated speedgreater
than 200 knots, at Position(5) at
10:23PM.
Meanwhile.backat Park Drive, the
rising,levellingoff,north-south"glitch"
and ESE departure wereall seenas a
straighttrajectorythatextendedup to
15oeast of their zenith (overhead).
Thisis much furtheralongits trajectory
for the red lightsto disappear thanwas
seenfrom the side view of the Air
Force tower, but then the Park Drive
witnesseswere underneath it (at
position(6)).
Incidentally,oncethe UFO started
risingup, HavenscalledRobertsatthe
Kansas City airport again,but that
controllersaw nothingon his radar
screen now --a disaPPointment.
All of the abovefigures are subject
to error, of course, as theYarebased
on the elevationangleestimates.That
the UFO'sflightpathwasalignedwith
the north-south Park Drive was
fortunate.Total Duration:about 45
minutes.
WEATHEFI
Thetowerwitnessesat RichardGebaur
notedthe sky to beclear,with winds
from the SSE(170') at 3 to 6 knots'
These wind conditions were not
variableduring the event' Note that
the motion of the object is, thus, fairly
consistentwith wind directionfor the
first half of the sighting,but not the
secondhalf.
WITNESS
FlEACTION
amongall
of IUR's UFO casesbY the numberof
individualwitnessesinvolved.Richard
GebaurAFB had numerouswitnesses
on their own property;they also were
"flooded" with callsfrom civilians.
Accordingto a detectiveon the Belton
policeforce,their agencyreceived20
calls. ReportedlY, neighboring
Grandviewand KansasCitY Police
departmentsalsoreceivedcalls.There's
no questionthat somethingwasin the
sky overBeltonthat night.Nor canit
be claimed that Press attention
generateda lot of falsesightings,since
the case miraculouslYescaPedthe
The sighting is distinguished
attentionof thelocalnewsmedia(who
normallywatch policeblotterslike a
hawk). In IUR's exPerience, a huge
turnout of independent witnessesfor a
sighting usually foretells a ready
(e.9"
commonplace exPlanation
meteors,ad planesandotherconspicuous
lFOs),but what couldthis one
Od?Sgt. Gary Havens,an air traffic
controllerwithnineyearsof experience
saidit was "somethinglike l've never
seenbefore."lUR is still intheprocess
of coordinatingthe manywitnessesto
the event; any new informationwill
appearin a futureissue.Obviously.in
acaselikethis, the routine"suspicions"
normallyappliedto repor{ing witnesses
canbe relaxed considerablY.
ON THE CASE
Original source: direct call from
Richard Gebaur Air Force Base
securitypoliceto the Centerfor UFO
Studies'Hotline.Comprehensive
inter
views were conducted with the
principalwitnessesdiscussedherewith
in 24 hours of the event bY Allan
Hendry.Morewitnessesarestillbeing
contacted,but so far, most of them
havenot watched the objectascom
pletely or carefullyas the witnesses
mentioned.TheYdo all note a large
red light "making exPlosions"or
dropping"red lights".
The largenumberof indePendent
witnesses precluded the need to
conduct routine searchesfor more;
thereis no questionin this particular
casethat somethingwasthere. In an
effortto probethe nature of the target
a little further; IUR obtajned the
cooperationof the FAA's Air Route
Traffic ControlCenterin Olathe, KS
in securinga computerprintoutof all
of the radartargetsin that vicinity,
both "raw" andtransponder-equipped.
for the durationof the event'Several
time frames are shownhere,restricted
in area to the vicinitY of Richard
GebaurAir Force Base. Targetsthat
have been assignedlettercodesareair
craft with transponders;a separate
chart shows their transPonder
f requencies and altitudes.The Air
Force Base is coded as "GVW".
Targetswithout transponders(includ
ing light aircraft,"false"targetsand
presumablY-UFOs) are dePictedas
periods(.)andplussigns(+)'Plus signs
are more solid targets'Now halfway
throughthe event,a C-130 madean
approachto the basefrom 10milesto
the south. Whenthe pilot approached
to within 3 miles,he was askedif he
could see the UFOvisually.Hecould,
but he wasreluctantto getanywhere
near"the explosions". Havensrecalled
that he cut due westof the baseone
mile,cut to the south for threemiles
and turnednorthboundagainto land
,i
:j
a
:
at the base. These maneuvers showuP
clearly on the printout.Anothernontranspondingtargetcan
also be seen
flying NNE through the area,but
whereis the UFO? lt should appear as
a dot or a plussignto theright of the
"GVW" where the tower is; in the
periodwhereit is hovering and rising
straightup, it should be aboutl%"
away.Oneframe with a goodfit doth
not a radar match make, esPeciallY
when ground clutter "dots" keep
poppingup sporadically. Not that it
should appear constantly, since
ARTCC controllersclaim at best a
50% successrate in receiving "raw"
radarreturns(without the aid of a
transponder).lt's possiblethat we are
being told something here about the
nature of the object's tenuousness
when the radar returns from it are so
sooradic.
A NOTE ON RADAR COMPUTER
PRINTOUTS:This marks the third
occasionthat IUR hassecuredaTrack
AnalysisProgram(TAP) on a UFO
that promisedradar returnability. The
first was for the helicopterencounter
in Charlotte,North Carolina (lUR,
Mar. 1978). Not only did the UFO fail
to show up on radar, so did the nontranspondinghelicopter!
The second
instancewas for the Ocala. Florida
radar-visualcase #3-6-40 (lUR, June
These reports are of intermediate stature.
They are UFOs in the sense that we don't
know what they are, but for a variety of
stated reasons(distance. poor details, single
1978);this one is still being examined.
While there is a possibletargetex'
ecutinga hairpinreversalof motion,
we still need better time estimates
from the witnesses to establish that it
isn'tjust a coincidental"false" target
(there are many on this Printout).
ALTEFINATIVE
EXPLANATIONS
ASTRONOMY,METEOROLOGY:No
interpretationisPossible.
AERONAUTICS:The sketch of the
rows of red lightsimmediatelybrings
to mind our oldfriend. the advertising
plane.lndeed,one was in the area two
hourspreviousto the sightings. The
kind of rotation,theflashes.pops,and
droppingflares,theflightpathandthe
failureto appear on radarwhenother
low-flyingplanes(likethe C-130 with
a computer-indicatedaltitude of
1200 feet)drrCshowup serveto rule
this out.
SOCIOLOGY:Remarkably,no Press
attentionwasgivento this case in the
local news mediaat all. There can be
no claim, then, that all of the
witnesseswere simply jumPingon a
"UFOlogicalbandwagon".The consistencyfrom
story to story is also
quiteexceptional.
witness, etc.) they are not worthy of the
closest scrutiny. Namesof witnesses in this
category are generally withheld unless the
news media have already revealled them.
CC|NCLUSIONS
That an undeniablymysterious
object was seen over the skies of
Belton, Missouriappears to be undeniable.
A truly anomalous UFO?
For once,thereseemsto be only one
other credible alternative:a truly
bizarreprankballoon,constructedin a
way that would suggest a slowly'
rotatingrectangulararray of redlights!
This would account for the slowspeed,
the initial conformance to wind
direction,the characteristic"dropping
burning material",and the tenuous
radar returns. For this to work out,
though,the windborne propulsionof
the balloon wouldhaveto stop abruptly
for an extended period and the
balloon would have to lose ballast
(thedroppingmaterial?)to rise;then
the winds aloft (1%milesup) would
have to be directly opposite those
measuredon the ground (perfectly
possible),shift suddenlyindirection
andresumesouthwardagain.Contrived
sounding?What about the blinking
white light? Unlessthe remains of
somehoax are discovered,
orpranksters
confessto someingeniouscontraption,
a conclusion of "true anomaly" will
be one of two "economical"solutions
in this case.
NOTE: UFOs and lFOs alike can fail to
appear on radar for a wide variety of
technicalreasons.
TIME DURATION WITNESSES
CASE TYPE DATE
3-9-1I NL 7-19-78 9:30-10PM 2-3 min. 4
A 3S-year old teacherwas driving
through this suburban area in the
companyof his wife, a 28-year old
nurse, when they spotted this
uniformly-illuminated a
form against
Sd
clear dark sky. The couple stopped the
)
car to confirm that it reallYwas
motionlessin the sky. lt lookedround
,i"r
ed in the front with an amber light
that looked as if it were shining
througha translucent materialand was
as wide as a full moon. The couple
7-22-78 1:15 PM 2-3 min.
3-9-28
A retired couple, he71, she 67, was
attractedoutdoorsby a noiseunlike
any they hadheard after livingnextto
LangleyAFB. VA for 30years.Flying
NE from an overheadpositionwas a
silver/greyform (asreconstructed
here)
aslargeas a full moon. lt was sharply
defined,had lines across its surface,
PLACE
Hudson,NY
RADAR_VISUAL CASE NEARKANSASCITY
HEAVILY-WITNESSED
cAsE #3-9-163
This UFO is certainlY an unusual.
dynamicone,puttingon a show over
Belton,MO that could be seen in three
neighboringsuburbssouth of Kansas
City, with dozens of witnesses reporting
it independently to law enforcement
agencies and the localAir Force
base(whowerealsowatchingit).Thus,
it is distinguished with
as the IUR case
the greatestnumber of witnesses.lt
alsoappearsto have been seen briefly
on radar.lf thiseventwas based on a
hoax. it would be unprecedentedlY
elaborate.
ENVIFlONMENT
DATE: Tuesday,August 8,1978.
STARTINGTIME: 9:40 PM
PLACE: Belton, Missouri,east of
RichardGebaur Air Force Base.a
largely residential areain a suburban
city about 15 miles south of downtown
KansasCity.
APPEAFlANCE
Most of the witnesses indicated that
they saw a large red light dropping
"flares". One individual, Mr. Joseph
Staudinger,Jr., was fortunate enough
to have been directly underneath the
UFO and providedthe sketches seen
above.Notethat the rows of red lights
were rotating like a turntable. while
the white strobe lights beaming in
tvifnesssketch of UFO
front of and beh ind the object remained
fixed in the direction of travel. When
overhead,Staudingersawthe object as
large-lookingas a full moon (%-degree
of arc); coupled with the elevation
(estimatedfrom triangulation) of 2800
feet,this providesa roughoverallsize
of 25 feet. Binoculars at the Air Force
base revealed a faint white blinking
light unseen by the tower witnesses
with the naked eye accompanying the
red lights.
MOTION
Two particularly articulate reports
enableus at this stage to triangulate
the location and height of the object
throughout its trajectory. One viewpoint
comesfrom Sgt. GaryHavensat
the Air Forcebase air tower; the other
is providedby Mr. Joseph Staudinger,
alsoformerly in the Air Force.who
saw the UFO fly directly over his
house on Park Drive (a north-south
street) and parallelto the street.His
houseis two milesSEof the tower at
the base.Key pointsof discussion are
numbered below on the map and
discussed(all times are approximate,
based on interpolations between
known endpoints) :
119:40 PM.'Staudinger,his wife, his
14-vearold son and his neighbors
(who notified the Air Force base)
watched the object come from the
south over the tree line.
219:42 PM: UFO passedvirtually
overhead on Park Drive. This is the
point where the tower at Richard
Gebaur first took note of it, about 15
to 20' up. This triangulates to a height
of about 2800 feet. No noise was
heard.
319:47 PM: The object stoppedhere,
accordingto both witnesses.For the
Air Force base witnesses,it wasnow
due east about 15ouP. For the Park
Drive witnesses,it was due north,
about 15 degrees uP.Thisworksout
to 2000 feet, adoptingthe elevation
anglesliterally. The UFO flew at
roughlya levelaltitude,then,taking
about five minutes to travel from the
Staudingerhouse to a Position 1.4
miles north of it. This works out to a
speed of 17 m.p.h. -more like a
balloon than a plane,or possiblya
helicopter.Sgt. Havens estimated the
distancenow to be 314to 1%miles
away...anexcellentguess,sincethe
UFO works out to a distanceof 1.4
milesfrom the tower. Another indi'
:
vidual.on the base,standingabout
two blocks dueeastof the tower, also
confirmedthe "due east"positionfor
the UFO once it had stoPPed.Since
the base has no radar of its own,
HavenscalledKansasCity International
Airport, over 30 miles north of the
action,to see if they couldtrack"anything
east of the base".ControllerHal
Robertsconfirmedthat they could,
but that it was intermittent,appearing
as a non-transponding
targetonly 7 or
8 sweepsout of 30. InterestinglY,
Havensdid not clue Robertsat KCI
how far he should look; Yet when
Allan HendrycalledRobertsdirectly
andaskedhow far the targetwasfrom
the small paintedline indicatingthe
runwayat RichardGebaur,he told us
"one and one-half miles", which
correspondsperfectlY to the now-
triangulatedposition.
It washerein the ten-minute hover'
ing positionthat the UFO performed
its spookiest stunt. seenby virtually
everyonewith whom we sPoke:it
dropped a red/orangef lare down
toward the ground. Everyone agreed,
however,that the flarecould be seen
fizzling out beforeit hit the ground.
Priorto this, a whiteflash of lightwas
seenby both Havens and Staudinger.
It looked like it had occured beneath
the red lights through binoculars(as
seenfrom the tower).The Park Drive
witnessesactuallyheard a loud "pop"
or "crack" soundaccompanyingthe
flash'Thetower witnesses didn't hear
the noise, but an airmannamedLucas
near the maingateof the base did; in
fact, he reported severalsuch"explosions".
41 70:00 PM.' Now the object rose
straightup. as seen from bothvantage
points.Thiswas a slow process,taking
15 to 20 minutes.Fromthetower,the
red lights were seen to disaPPear
suddenlyat what wasguessedto be an
increasein altitude of 4000 feet'
Anothergoodguess,accordingto the
triangulations:using their elevation
angleof 45o as a moreaccurateguage
of height,the heightof theobjectwas
equalto the original distance:about
1.4 miles.Although the red lights
could no longer be seen with the
nakedeye,the useof binocularscontinuedto
revealthedimflashingwhite
light. Havenswatchedit movesouthboundnowfor
"about a quartermile".
It then turnedabruptlynorthbound
againstill at a slow sPeed.Then it
drifted ESE, climbing to a higher
altitudeat an estimated speedgreater
than 200 knots, at Position(5) at
10:23PM.
Meanwhile.backat Park Drive, the
rising,levellingoff,north-south"glitch"
and ESE departure wereall seenas a
straighttrajectorythatextendedup to
15oeast of their zenith (overhead).
Thisis much furtheralongits trajectory
for the red lightsto disappear thanwas
seenfrom the side view of the Air
Force tower, but then the Park Drive
witnesseswere underneath it (at
position(6)).
Incidentally,oncethe UFO started
risingup, HavenscalledRobertsatthe
Kansas City airport again,but that
controllersaw nothingon his radar
screen now --a disaPPointment.
All of the abovefigures are subject
to error, of course, as theYarebased
on the elevationangleestimates.That
the UFO'sflightpathwasalignedwith
the north-south Park Drive was
fortunate.Total Duration:about 45
minutes.
WEATHEFI
Thetowerwitnessesat RichardGebaur
notedthe sky to beclear,with winds
from the SSE(170') at 3 to 6 knots'
These wind conditions were not
variableduring the event' Note that
the motion of the object is, thus, fairly
consistentwith wind directionfor the
first half of the sighting,but not the
secondhalf.
WITNESS
FlEACTION
amongall
of IUR's UFO casesbY the numberof
individualwitnessesinvolved.Richard
GebaurAFB had numerouswitnesses
on their own property;they also were
"flooded" with callsfrom civilians.
Accordingto a detectiveon the Belton
policeforce,their agencyreceived20
calls. ReportedlY, neighboring
Grandviewand KansasCitY Police
departmentsalsoreceivedcalls.There's
no questionthat somethingwasin the
sky overBeltonthat night.Nor canit
be claimed that Press attention
generateda lot of falsesightings,since
the case miraculouslYescaPedthe
The sighting is distinguished
attentionof thelocalnewsmedia(who
normallywatch policeblotterslike a
hawk). In IUR's exPerience, a huge
turnout of independent witnessesfor a
sighting usually foretells a ready
(e.9"
commonplace exPlanation
meteors,ad planesandotherconspicuous
lFOs),but what couldthis one
Od?Sgt. Gary Havens,an air traffic
controllerwithnineyearsof experience
saidit was "somethinglike l've never
seenbefore."lUR is still intheprocess
of coordinatingthe manywitnessesto
the event; any new informationwill
appearin a futureissue.Obviously.in
acaselikethis, the routine"suspicions"
normallyappliedto repor{ing witnesses
canbe relaxed considerablY.
ON THE CASE
Original source: direct call from
Richard Gebaur Air Force Base
securitypoliceto the Centerfor UFO
Studies'Hotline.Comprehensive
inter
views were conducted with the
principalwitnessesdiscussedherewith
in 24 hours of the event bY Allan
Hendry.Morewitnessesarestillbeing
contacted,but so far, most of them
havenot watched the objectascom
pletely or carefullyas the witnesses
mentioned.TheYdo all note a large
red light "making exPlosions"or
dropping"red lights".
The largenumberof indePendent
witnesses precluded the need to
conduct routine searchesfor more;
thereis no questionin this particular
casethat somethingwasthere. In an
effortto probethe nature of the target
a little further; IUR obtajned the
cooperationof the FAA's Air Route
Traffic ControlCenterin Olathe, KS
in securinga computerprintoutof all
of the radartargetsin that vicinity,
both "raw" andtransponder-equipped.
for the durationof the event'Several
time frames are shownhere,restricted
in area to the vicinitY of Richard
GebaurAir Force Base. Targetsthat
have been assignedlettercodesareair
craft with transponders;a separate
chart shows their transPonder
f requencies and altitudes.The Air
Force Base is coded as "GVW".
Targetswithout transponders(includ
ing light aircraft,"false"targetsand
presumablY-UFOs) are dePictedas
periods(.)andplussigns(+)'Plus signs
are more solid targets'Now halfway
throughthe event,a C-130 madean
approachto the basefrom 10milesto
the south. Whenthe pilot approached
to within 3 miles,he was askedif he
could see the UFOvisually.Hecould,
but he wasreluctantto getanywhere
near"the explosions". Havensrecalled
that he cut due westof the baseone
mile,cut to the south for threemiles
and turnednorthboundagainto land
,i
:j
a
:
at the base. These maneuvers showuP
clearly on the printout.Anothernontranspondingtargetcan
also be seen
flying NNE through the area,but
whereis the UFO? lt should appear as
a dot or a plussignto theright of the
"GVW" where the tower is; in the
periodwhereit is hovering and rising
straightup, it should be aboutl%"
away.Oneframe with a goodfit doth
not a radar match make, esPeciallY
when ground clutter "dots" keep
poppingup sporadically. Not that it
should appear constantly, since
ARTCC controllersclaim at best a
50% successrate in receiving "raw"
radarreturns(without the aid of a
transponder).lt's possiblethat we are
being told something here about the
nature of the object's tenuousness
when the radar returns from it are so
sooradic.
A NOTE ON RADAR COMPUTER
PRINTOUTS:This marks the third
occasionthat IUR hassecuredaTrack
AnalysisProgram(TAP) on a UFO
that promisedradar returnability. The
first was for the helicopterencounter
in Charlotte,North Carolina (lUR,
Mar. 1978). Not only did the UFO fail
to show up on radar, so did the nontranspondinghelicopter!
The second
instancewas for the Ocala. Florida
radar-visualcase #3-6-40 (lUR, June
These reports are of intermediate stature.
They are UFOs in the sense that we don't
know what they are, but for a variety of
stated reasons(distance. poor details, single
1978);this one is still being examined.
While there is a possibletargetex'
ecutinga hairpinreversalof motion,
we still need better time estimates
from the witnesses to establish that it
isn'tjust a coincidental"false" target
(there are many on this Printout).
ALTEFINATIVE
EXPLANATIONS
ASTRONOMY,METEOROLOGY:No
interpretationisPossible.
AERONAUTICS:The sketch of the
rows of red lightsimmediatelybrings
to mind our oldfriend. the advertising
plane.lndeed,one was in the area two
hourspreviousto the sightings. The
kind of rotation,theflashes.pops,and
droppingflares,theflightpathandthe
failureto appear on radarwhenother
low-flyingplanes(likethe C-130 with
a computer-indicatedaltitude of
1200 feet)drrCshowup serveto rule
this out.
SOCIOLOGY:Remarkably,no Press
attentionwasgivento this case in the
local news mediaat all. There can be
no claim, then, that all of the
witnesseswere simply jumPingon a
"UFOlogicalbandwagon".The consistencyfrom
story to story is also
quiteexceptional.
witness, etc.) they are not worthy of the
closest scrutiny. Namesof witnesses in this
category are generally withheld unless the
news media have already revealled them.
CC|NCLUSIONS
That an undeniablymysterious
object was seen over the skies of
Belton, Missouriappears to be undeniable.
A truly anomalous UFO?
For once,thereseemsto be only one
other credible alternative:a truly
bizarreprankballoon,constructedin a
way that would suggest a slowly'
rotatingrectangulararray of redlights!
This would account for the slowspeed,
the initial conformance to wind
direction,the characteristic"dropping
burning material",and the tenuous
radar returns. For this to work out,
though,the windborne propulsionof
the balloon wouldhaveto stop abruptly
for an extended period and the
balloon would have to lose ballast
(thedroppingmaterial?)to rise;then
the winds aloft (1%milesup) would
have to be directly opposite those
measuredon the ground (perfectly
possible),shift suddenlyindirection
andresumesouthwardagain.Contrived
sounding?What about the blinking
white light? Unlessthe remains of
somehoax are discovered,
orpranksters
confessto someingeniouscontraption,
a conclusion of "true anomaly" will
be one of two "economical"solutions
in this case.
NOTE: UFOs and lFOs alike can fail to
appear on radar for a wide variety of
technicalreasons.
TIME DURATION WITNESSES
CASE TYPE DATE
3-9-1I NL 7-19-78 9:30-10PM 2-3 min. 4
A 3S-year old teacherwas driving
through this suburban area in the
companyof his wife, a 28-year old
nurse, when they spotted this
uniformly-illuminated a
form against
Sd
clear dark sky. The couple stopped the
)
car to confirm that it reallYwas
motionlessin the sky. lt lookedround
,i"r
ed in the front with an amber light
that looked as if it were shining
througha translucent materialand was
as wide as a full moon. The couple
7-22-78 1:15 PM 2-3 min.
3-9-28
A retired couple, he71, she 67, was
attractedoutdoorsby a noiseunlike
any they hadheard after livingnextto
LangleyAFB. VA for 30years.Flying
NE from an overheadpositionwas a
silver/greyform (asreconstructed
here)
aslargeas a full moon. lt was sharply
defined,had lines across its surface,
PLACE
Hudson,NY
guessedit was really as large as a football
field. No noise was heard.They
resumeddriving, occasionally losing
sightof the broadlightsourcebehind
trees.Arriving at a friend's houseon
the sameroad, they joined another
couple to watch it but the lights
suddenlywent out. ThirtY seconds
later, a roar could beheard originating
from the samepartof the sky, moving
off to the SE.
6 Ventura,Cl
and made a noise like a card flapping
against bicycle spokes.This noise
grewfainter as it flewstraightawayto
the NEanddisappeared
in the distance.
Seenagainsta clear daylight sky in a
suburbanresidentialarea;no additional
reportswereobtained.
guessedit was really as large as a football
field. No noise was heard.They
resumeddriving, occasionally losing
sightof the broadlightsourcebehind
trees.Arriving at a friend's houseon
the sameroad, they joined another
couple to watch it but the lights
suddenlywent out. ThirtY seconds
later, a roar could beheard originating
from the samepartof the sky, moving
off to the SE.
6 Ventura,Cl
and made a noise like a card flapping
against bicycle spokes.This noise
grewfainter as it flewstraightawayto
the NEanddisappeared
in the distance.
Seenagainsta clear daylight sky in a
suburbanresidentialarea;no additional
reportswereobtained.