skyeagle409
Master Poster
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2016
- Messages
- 2,488
In fact, it does. The event occurred in the Alaskan region. There were three objects, the large object described by the aircrew as larger than an aircraft carrier, which ground-based military and civilian radars confirmed.
UFO SIGHTING CONFIRMED BY FAA, AIR FORCE RADAR
ANCHORAGE, JAN. 1 -- A veteran pilot whose UFO sighting was confirmed on radar screens Tuesday said the mysterious object was so enormous that it dwarfed his Japan Airlines cargo plane.
The FAA confirmed on Tuesday that government radar picked up the object that Terauchi said followed his Boeing 747 cargo jet.
Terauchi, a pilot for 29 years, said he briefly glimpsed the large unknown object in silhouette. "It was a very big one -- two times bigger than an aircraft carrier," he said.
JAL 1628 Communications Transcript
(JAL1628) Japan Airlines Flight 1628
(AARTCC) Anchorage Air Route Traffic Control Center
(ROCC) Elmendorf Regional Operational Control Center
5:24:50 AARTCC - JAL1628, do you still have, uh, visual contact with the, ah, traffic?
5:24:53 JAL1628 - Affirmative. Also, we [have] radar contact, ah... (unintelligible; broken transmission).
5:25:02 AARTCC - I'm picking up a hit on the radar approximately five miles in trail of your six o'clock position (i.e., behind the plane). Do you concur?
5:26:03 AARTCC - I'm picking up a primary approximately 50 miles southeast. But it's right in front of the (JAL1628)
5:26:13 ROCC - OK. I've got him about....
5:26:15 AARTCC - Eight miles in front of the (JAL1628) he's got traffic at the same altitude (35,000 ft.).
5:26:18 ROCC - OK. I've got him about his, ah, oh, it looks like about, ah, 10 o'clock at about that range, yes.
5:39:32 JAL1628 - Ah, say again?
5:39:35 AARTCC - JAL1628 heavy, roger sir. The military radar advises they do have a primary target in trail of you at this time.
5:39:35 AARTCC - JAl1628 heavy. Military radar advises they are picking up intermittent primary target behind you in trail, in trail I say again.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/arch...e-radar/c186c4b7-54ed-459e-b94d-eeeff7b3322e/
The Anchorage Incident - FAA Division Chief John Callahan Video Testimony
The Alaskan FAA Investigator's Summary
The FAA had kept a great deal of data on the incident including all the positional radar data, an actual video recording of the radar screen, and all the audio records from both calls to the military base, including the conversations with Captain Kenju Terauchi, the pilot of flight 1628 (recorded as the event transpired). The FAA investigator assigned to the case, John Callahan, investigated the incident in depth and put on a ‘dog and pony show’ for a small group representatives from several branches of the US Government, and handed over all copies of the data collect to the appropriate officials. What slipped passed those official’s knowledge, was that Mr. Callahan had all the original documents in a box under his desk, and there they sat for several years, available to anyone interested in the case. It should be understood, that John Callahan remains truthful and willing to cooperate in any way with any inquiries on the subject of JAL flight 1628.
"As the Division Manager for the FAA Washington headquarters Accidents, Evaluation and Investigations, I was responsible for the quality of air traffic service provided to the FAA users." Mr. Callahan states. "When informed of the ‘UFO incident involving a Japanese B747 in the Alaskan region’
I ordered the RADAR recorded data and voice tapes flown to the FAA Technical Center in Atlantic City, New Jersey for evaluation and analysis by both FAA Hardware and Software experts.
After reviewing the play back of the event on a controller’s scope, referred to as a ‘PVD’ and receiving a detailed analysis of the incident, I briefed the FAA Administrator and members of President Reagan’s scientific staff, CIA, etc. on the following information:
During the play back of the event I observed a primary radar target in the position reported by the Japanese pilot. The intermittent primary target stayed in close proximately to the B747 for approximately 31 minutes. Both the FAA controller and military NORAD controller reported observing the RADAR return of the ‘UFO’ target on their ‘scopes.’
There was no noticeable ‘weather’ in the area. ‘You can see into next Tuesday’ was reported by a United pilot.
The UFO was painted as an extremely large primary target. As a result of the lacking run length identification the FAA computer system treated the UFO RADAR return as ‘weather’ and transmitted it to the controller’s PVD via a non recorded line.
(All known aircraft are programed in the FAA computer systems ‘Run Length’ table.)
At the conclusion of the hand-off briefing the CIA advised they were ‘confiscating all the data, this event never happened, we were never here and you are all sworn to secrecy.’
PERSONNEL STATEMENT
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION
Anchorage Air Route' Traffic Control Center
January 7, 1987
The following Is a report concerning the Incident involving aircraft JL 1628
north of Fairbanks on November 18, 1986 at 0218 UTC.
My name is Samuel J. Rich (SR). I am employed as an Air Traffic Control
Specialist by the Federal Aviation Administration at the Anchorage Air Route
Traffic Control Center, Anchorage, Alaska.
During the period of 0035 UTC, November 18, 1986, to 0835 UTC, November 18, 1986, I vas on duty in the Anchorage ARTCC. I was working the D15 position from 0230 UTC, November 18, 1986, to 0530 UTC, November 18, 1986.
The pilot of JL 1628 reported that he had traffic at his altitude. He stated
it was a big plane with yellow and white lights. We advised him we had no
traffic in his position. We adjusted the radar PVD to approximately a 25 mile
scale and there was a radar return in the position the pilot had reported
traffic.
I called ROCC to ask if they had any military traffic operating near JL 1628.
The ROCC said they had no military traffic in the area. I then asked them if
they could see any traffic near JL 1628. ROCC advised that they had traffic
near JL 1628 In the same position we did.
I asked ROCC if they had any aircraft to scramble on JL 1628, they said they
would call back. However, there was no further communication regarding the request for a scramble.
Samuel J. Rich
Air Traffic Control Specialist
Anchorage ARTCC
UFO contacts confirmed. Weather during the incident was not a factor.
Generally, UFOs in question do not produce sonic booms, as noted in the Belgian UFO report during their 1989-90 UFO incidents, which were captured on multiple dissimilar ground-based and airborne radars and the radar contacts were confirmed visually by ground observers. Notice on the data, the UFO demonstrated advanced technology whose unmatched by any known aircraft and yet, no sonic boom as produced.
Also reported in the "Wall Street Journal."
Not in these cases since these were radar/visual cases where observers visually confirmed the radar contacts. We can also take a look at the Air Force's 1969 study. Radar controllers can differentiate between natural phenomena and solid contacts such as an airplane and in addition, radars have filters because radar controllers cannot afford to be distracted while guiding aircraft and issuing instructions to pilots in crowded controlled airspace.
This thoroughly debunked junk does not do you any good. The part alone that the aliens are humanoid gives the game away.[/QUOTE]
Last edited:
