Comments on the Zanthus case from Martin Shough

Hi

A technical glitch somewhere along the line meant that two comments by Martin Shough didn't arrive at the Blog. I therefore reproduce them below, by re-typing from emails from Martin.

"Hello Keith

Thanks for posting this interesting follow-up. It's a pity that it was left to you to do this job now when ideally it would have been done 40 years ago, as you say.

If I could just comment on the comments:

Yes it would be very interesting to see radiosonde profiles for that day. I wish you luck in getting hold of them. Hopefully your request will focus if possible on balloon localities to the NW of the sighting area, in the sighting direction, which could be more significant than conditions in the immediate vicinity of the plane because the ray paths might be passing for long distances through an hypothetical optical duct extending over a wide area far from the plane.

Connected with that, I'd point out that the (equally hypothetical) target(s) of this mirage - silhouetted peaks, or clouds etc -might conceivably lie at a distance of hundreds of miles from the plane, so the topography and weather of the immediate Zanthus area is possibly not so relevant.

Note a point made in my report on the Captain Howard case (possibly notes 83, or thereby 11RC) - that the radio signal loss during the Zanthus sighting could be consistent with a strong temperature inversion causing an optical duct. In dry air such as might be the situation at altitude in reportedly very clear blue skies over a region like this, radio and optical ducting onset would be much closer in time than would typically be the case (radio wavelengths normally being affected disproportionately by the relative humidity.) It could happen that radio waves were being refracted and prevented from entering the optical duct. When the duct broke down, or the plane emerged from it, radio and optical propagation might return almost simultaneously to normal.

Re Captain Gardin's late recollections of details which indicate vertical angular displacements that seems to possibly conflict with a mirage explanation - the 45 degree final ascent, and merging of the satellite objects from underneath - I am reluctant to place as much weight on material information recalled 43 years later that was not mentioned at the time. Capt Smith's account (I agree with you) did give the impression - not explicitly, but by (I would say) conspicuous omission - that observed motions were confined to a horizontal plane.

It may not be irrelevant that these new details tend to increase the strangeness of the event. No doubt Gardin encountered attempts by various people to explain the sighting - possibly including mirage-type theories, of which the original story was at least somewhat suggestive, it would be natural to want to defend a contrary opinion in which the witness may have invested some public and personal capital over the years (as possibly also hinted at by the 'psychic' revelations.) A similar temptation appears to have influenced Captain Howard (BOAC case 1954) in similar circumstances a decade or more after the event, as proven by detailed documentary evidence in my report on that case.

In respect of memory, I note that Captain Gardin now recalls that "the Sun was above the horizon" and sky conditions in the sighting direction was "clear blue sky." However your own findings are as follows.

'A check of the astronomical sky using a software program indicated that at 0940 GMT (1740 local) the Sun had set and was about 4 degrees below the ground horizon, some 20 degrees to the right of the aircraft's track.'

I look forward to your further work on this interesting case. Perhaps contemporary evidence will emerge that convincingly disproves the mirage theory."

Second comment on the finding of a contemporary newspaper clipping.

"Thanks for sharing this discovery. As usual with newspaper reporters we have to be cautious about the account. It quotes Smith: "He said that a big white object had flown on a collision course  with their Piper Navijo (sic) aircraft for 20 minutes" but if we are to credit Smith's own words in his own report of the RAAF file, this is utter garbage. The object(s) was/were not white, but dark grey or black. The objects were not at any time on a collision course, but on an apparent pacing course maintaining station. And the sighting lasted not 20 minutes, but 10 minutes. Not exactly ace journalism!"

Cold case - Canberra, Australia - 15 July 1965

Some internet UFO sources carry an item about a sighting on 15 July 1965, at Canberra, Australia. These accounts usually mention a UFO was sighted from Canberra airport for some time, before mysteriously vanishing.

I recently looked through my Disclosure Australia project material to see what I could find on this case.

Firstly, I located a copy of the RAAF's summaries of aerial sightings, and for 1965 found an entry:

"15 Jul 65 White spherical object, Canberra, ACT (Possible cause) astronomical."

Then, on file series A703, control symbol 580/1/1 part 4 folio 83, there was a one page telex, dated 16 July 1965. The sender was Headquarters Operations Command. The recipient was the Department of Air. It read:

"Restricted. AI32/CINTELLO for DAFI. UFO sighting Canberra airport 15 Jul. This headquarters has concluded that object was planet Venus. No further action will be taken."

So, the RAAF's conclusion was that the observation was of the planet Venus.

I tried to find a detailed investigation report from a civilian UFO group about the case, but turned up nothing. Some UFO newsletters did mention the event but referenced a newspaper article in The Australian dated 16 July 1965. On a visit to the South Australian State Library, I found the article.

(Source: The Australian newspaper number 313 Friday 16 July 1965, page 16.)

"While Earth was looking at Mars, somebody from out there could have been looking at us.

"An unidentified flying object was sighted over Canberra airport yesterday morning. And that put it in a position to eavesdrop Tidbinbilla.

"It was described as a metallic silvery object, hovering in the sky to the north-east at an elevation of between 20 and 30 degrees.

"Air traffic control staff in the main  control tower spotted the visitor about 11am.

"The officer-in-charge of Civil Aviation at the airport, Mr A B Lindeman saw it too.

"So did Flight-Lieutenant Weston, the RAAF base operations officer. But the first was an air-traffic controller Mr Tom Lindsey. He was scanning the sky to the north-east looking for a light aircraft due from Bankstown.

"Another controller, Mr A F Frodsham said it hung in the sky for about 40 minutes. He said it could have been a reflection from an aircraft. But there were no planes departing from Canberra at the time nor was there any record of other aircraft in the area.

"Mr Lindsey said there were definitely no civil aircraft in the area at the time. "I don't know what it was - your guess is as good as mine."

"Said Flight Lieutenant Weston "It's hard to say whether it was stationary. At one time it seemed to be approaching us but I'm not sure."

"He had never seriously thought about flying saucers before but he supposed they were possible. "There must be a reasonable explanation for it, but I wouldn't like to hazard a guess."

Mars paying a return visit perhaps."

The mention of Mars is in reference to Mariner 4's visit to the red planet. Tidbinbilla tracking station was the receiving point for the second picture to be beamed back from Mars.

My comments:

1. Based on the newspaper article the mystery object was located at about 20-30 degrees angular elevation in the north-eastern sky.

2. It was seen over a time span of 40 minutes.

3. It was reported as a "metallic silvery object."

4. It "hung" in the sky, and seemed to be stationary.

5. Could it have been the planet Venus?  Venus is sometimes visible in broad daylight. I have seen it around noon in clear skies myself. On these occasions it does look like a silver star in the sky. The question then is, where was Venus at 11am on 15 July 1965? Was it even above the horizon?

6. A check with an astronomical software program showed me that Venus was above the horizon. It was due north-east, at an angular elevation of 23 degrees. It was very bright, at magnitude -3.8.

7. So, Venus was in the specific location mentioned by all the observers in the newspaper article. Venus as the 'UFO' fits all the details given. Over a 40 minute period it would have moved roughly northwards, through an angle of some 10 degrees, which may not have been enough for ground observers to think, during a discontinuous observation (it would appear no one watched it continuously for the whole 40 minutes,) it was other than north-east at between 20-30 degrees elevation.

8. It is therefore reasonable, to suggest that this 'UFO' was in fact the planet Venus.

Zanthus sighting newspaper article located

During my interview with Walter Gardin, one of the pilot witnesses to the 22 August 1968, Zanthus, Western Australia, aircraft encounter, he mentioned he thought that there had been press coverage of the sighting. This morning, I visited the South Australian State Library newspaper collection to see if I could locate any press coverage. In fact, I found an article.

It appeared in The West Australian newspaper, Saturday 24 August 1968 on page 13. It was headed "Check on sighting." The text reads:

"The sighting of an unidentified flying object by two commercial pilots near Kalgoorlie on Thursday will be investigated by the R.A.A.F.

Mr Gordon Smith of Tuart Hill and Mr Walter Gardin of South Perth, made full reports of the sighting to Department of Aviation officials in Kalgoorlie.

Mr Smith said yesterday that he retained an open mind on what he had seen. He was sure it was not an aircraft or a satellite.

He said that a big white object had flown on a collision course with their Piper Navijo aircraft for 20 minutes before speeding out of sight. It appeared to emit several big-dish-like objects which kept within a few miles of the main object then merged with it again."

I have never seen this newspaper article cited in any UFO literature in connection with the Zanthus event. So, you read it here for the first time in 43 years.

Surveillance technology and mini-ufos

Dear readers

Jenny Randles from the UK has a very interesting article in Fortean Times issue 277 (August 2011 p.31.)

The article is about Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs.) "Going back to the days when these craft were first tested - one might think in a more liberal environment than today's War on Terror - we find decade's worth of UFO sightings that would make more sense if interpreted in the context of UAV technology."

Jenny reports on a sighting on 4 May 2011 by 17 year old Laurance Baker of Widnes, Cheshire. "What made this story different was that the small oval 'craft' flew very low above the art design student's head and was - he insists - a structural device that he suspected to be 'stealth aircraft technology." He based his argument on the craft's unusual design. Modest in size but covered in black cell-like structures similar to scales and with an antenna at the rear that projected over the curved surface pointing forward in the direction the object was travelling."

Jenny then takes a look at other cases which might fit the UAV scenario.

27 August 1979. Two men flying in a Cessna aircraft in Surrey, went into a steep dive to avoid "a small dough-nut shaped object as it crossed their path. This object then travelled around the Cessna as if inspecting them...the description...includes reference to a honeycomb of small cells making up the outer structure, which rotated...Another pilot...had a more distinct view of the min-ufo the next day...it was heading for nearby Farnborough, the home of experimental aircraft design..."

April 1984. A medical research scientist saw "...a hovering object made from a series of 'grid' structures...near the Lakenheath military base in East Anglia. I later discovered...that she had  probably seen a UAV that had temporarily gone out of control..."

"I have many other cases in my files and their locations cluster around military or BAE locations such as Warton in Lancashire."

Jenny notes "In 2007, a new hovering spy camera was unveiled that was even likened to a flying saucer at the launch...This device was based on a mini-helicopter with multiple rotors...including an antenna and a surface area made up of small, black, scale-like tiles."

"Moreover, some trade sources suggest that similar devices, have been sold to UK special forces recently for highly covert surveillance activities, that, needless to say, is not going to be discussed openly."

For information on BAE Australia click here. For an article on the use of UAVs by the Australian Army and RAAF click here.

Have readers come across any cases which might have been due to UAVs?

Zanthus - a paranormal connection

Dear readers

It's a warm and gusty day here in Adelaide, so I am taking a day off and visiting my local library to read science magazines. The subject of this post is the 22 August 1968, Zanthus case, which my co-blogger, Keith Basterfield has recently posted about.

I was reading Keith's posts, and although all the details were great to see, one aspect completely surprised me.

Walter Gardin revealed that during the event, and for six months afterwards, he felt that he was under the control of something/someone who was gathering information on people on Earth. This is an extremely unusual aspect to the whole event; which has never been revealed before. It took an interview 43 years after the event to uncover it.

Mentally digesting this revelation, I then recalled some information I'd read in Jacques Vallee's "Forbidden Science - Volume two." Documatica Research, LLC. San Francisco. ISBN 978-0-615-24974-2.

(1) In November 1974 (p273) Vallee reviewed the Herb Schirmer, 1967 abduction case. "There are several interesting things to note in connection with the case. First, there had been a knock on Schirmer's door at 10.45am that day. The dog rushed to the door and Schirmer opened it: there was no one there. In another curious detail, he never felt his body after the green flash." (One humanoid held a box which emitted a green flash.)

(2) In September 1977 (p397.) Vallee was talking to Father Gill (Papua, 1959 observation of occupants on a UFO) about his events. Over coffee, Vallee asked Gill "Do you ever dream about the 1959 incident?" then when Gill responded "Yes." Vallee further asked "Anything unusual about those dreams?"

"Funny you should ask that. Few people inquire about these details. I dream about something that happened an hour after the object flew away."

"He heard an explosion just outside the Mission building, in Boainai: his hair stood up. That's the moment, that always comes back in his dreams, he told me, rather than the sighting itself."

(3) In November 1978 (p447) Vallee had a discussion with Lieutenant-Colonel Larry Coyne (pilot in the Mansfield, Ohio helicopter event.) "After his sighting he remained 72 hours unable to sleep. A week later he had the experience of floating out of his body. And he began some personal psychic experiments."

The point that Vallee makes about these three cases is "So now we have a series of cases in which UFO observations have combined with paranormal effects that are never mentioned in the literature: Crutwell, Father Gill, Schirmer, and now Coyne." (p447.)

Comment:

Could this mean that had we inquired of the witnesses in the 1966 Tully "nest" affair, or the 1980 Rosedale CE2 case, or any other Australian close encounter, that paranormal associations would have emerged?

Are readers aware of any other early (say 1950's-mid 1970's) Australian cases where paranormal events are part and parcel of the published event? If so, please share.

One of the witnesses to the 22 Aug 1968 Zanthus case located and interviewed

So far, I have posted the details of the 22 Aug 1968, Zanthus, Western Australia case, as recorded in the RAAF's UFO files. However, upon reading those documents there were a few questions which arose in my mind, which I wanted to resolve. What was the size comparison of the small to large objects? How far to the left and right of the large object did the small objects travel? Were any radar observations made?

I was fortunate enough, the other day to be able to locate and interview, by phone,  one of the pilots involved in this event. Walter Gardin is now aged 77, being 34 when the event transpired. He was kind enough to answer my questions. Here then are my interview notes, which provide some interesting new details which have not seen the light of day in 43 years.

Interview notes with Walter Gardin 15 Sep 2011:

Q1 What first drew your attention to the formation?

We had heard that a balloon was to be flown from Western Australia to Sydney. I was flying the aircraft at the time, when I suddenly noticed an object out of the cockpit window. I looked again but nothing was there. I was reading a newspaper at the time. On looking up once again, the object was now present. Later I learnt that the balloon in questions had not flown on that day. So, the answer to your question is that I first thought it was a balloon I was seeing.

Q2 The statement said the formation was at the same level as the aircraft. Does this mean that you looked straight at it, as opposed to needing to look up or down from the aircraft's horizon?

Yes.

Q3 There was one larger object and several smaller ones. If the length of the larger object was one unit, what was the length of a smaller object?

1/10th to 1/5th of a unit.

Q4 For the whole ten minutes of viewing, the formation maintained the same distance. Does this mean that the angular size of both the larger and smaller objects remained constant?

Yes.

Additional information:

Walter was supposed to provide a position report to DCA Kalgoorlie, during the time they were out of radio contact with DCA Kalgoorlie. When Kalgoorlie failed to receive this report they were concerned that the aircraft may have crashed.

Q5 The statement reads "the smaller aircraft then flew out left and right." If the length of the larger object was one unit, how many units to left and right did the smaller objects travel?

About 30 degrees. Two smaller objects went to the right and four to the left.

Q6 "At 0950GMT the whole formation joined together." Does this mean that they became one, and only one object, which diminished in angular size?

Yes, they all merged. The smaller objects merged with the larger one by going in to it from underneath. The one object then departed by going upwards at a 45 degree angle from the aircraft's horizon. It diminished in size as if receding.

Q7 Was the Sun above the horizon at the time?

Yes.

Q8 Was the Moon or any other object visible in the sky?

No. It was a clear blue sky in the direction of the formation.

Q9 The statement said the weather was fine. Does this equate to clear sky in the direction of the objects?

Yes. The weather was fine in that direction. Clear blue sky.

Q10 Was there any air turbulence at the time?

No.

Further information:

When they arrived at Kalgoorlie, the police were present, as DCA thought that the aircraft may have crashed. Walter did not talk to them about his observations. He understood that Gordon may have appeared later, on TV or in the paper.

Q11 Kalgoorlie told you that there was no traffic in the area, when you asked them. Would this have been based on their radar observation?

Walter and I discussed this point and came to the conclusion that Kalgoorlie relied on aircraft identifying themselves as being in the area, rather than radar observations from Kalgoorlie.

Q12 Did your aircraft have radar onboard.

No.

Q13 To your knowledge, was Kaloorlie in receipt of any other observations of unidentified traffic?

No.

Q14 Did any RAAF personnel ever speak to you or Gordon about the observations?

RAAF did. Walter recalls someone telling them about a case involving the US Dewline and of a building in the US where they looked into UFOs.

Q15 Prior to 22 Aug 1968 what was your opinion of UFOs?

UFOs were "bull," ( that is he didn't believe in them.)


Q16 Did you change your opinion as a result of the 22 Aug 1968 observation?

Yes. After this episode I formed the opinion that there are other inhabited planets out there.

Additional information:

While looking at the formation, Walter had a strange sensation, which lasted for the next six months. He had the feeling that he was "in the control of people gathering information on people on the earth."

Q17 What radios were onboard the aircraft?

Two UHF and one VHF.

Q17 How many times did the cycle of smaller objects going outwards and inwards occur?

I saw it three times. Gordon twice.

Q18 Do you know if Gordon Smith is still alive?

I don't know. The last I heard of him he was at a flying school in Perth.

My comments:

Some very interesting information has emerged from this interview.

1. That the single, united object left at a 45 degree upwards direction. I had thought, from the statement given to the RAAF that the one final object had simply gone out of sight still on the aircraft's horizon.

2. That the smaller objects, when moving left and right of the main object had travelled through about 30 degrees away from the main object. This is a large angular distance. I double checked this fact with Walter.

3. The smaller objects were 1/10th to 1/5th the angular size of the larger object.

4. The smaller objects merged with the larger one by going into it from underneath. I had thought from the original statement that the smaller objects came in from left and right, i.e. along the same plane as the aircraft's horizon.

Given all the data, from both from the original 1968 documentation, and this interview, albeit it is 43 years later (why did no one follow this case up at the time?) I don't believe that the mirage hypothesis is valid.

In my opinion, this event represents an excellent example of the "core" UFO phenomenon, and deserved a scientific investigation at the time.

What do readers think?

Cold case - Zanthus 22 August 1968 - Part three

What the RAAF did with this case:

Captain's Smith's statement was attached to a memo from RAAF Headquarter Pearce, Western Australia to the Department of Air, Canberra, dated 12 November 1968. This memo stated that Smith's account was received by Pearce on 11 November 1968.

The Department of Air sent a "message form" to Pearce (Flt Lt Martin) and asked Pearce to contact the Department of Civil Aviation in Perth "on whether UFO report filed with any DCA agency in this event. In particular did Smith or Gardin report facts to DCA. Request check Kalgoorlie on whether pilots radio reported on UFO on 22 Aug."

A telex passed from HQ Pearce to DOA dated 25 Nov 1968 stated "Ref UFO sighting on  22 Aug 1968. Enquiries with DCA Perth do not show any reports received. Am now making enquiries with DCA Kalgoorlie on sighting."

On 9 Dec 1968 a memo went from the DAFI to Flt Lt Martin at Pearce asking for a follow up on the DCA Kalgoorlie angle.

The response from Pearce came in the form of a telex and stated that DCA Kalgoorlie confirmed "that aircraft VH-RTO on 22 Aug at approx 0940GMT enquired from APKG if there were any known traffic Zanthus area. On being informed there was none the aircraft reported sighting of a UFO in company with six small disc like objects approximately ten miles north of track FT80 KAL on the same heading and keeping pace with them. The pilots of VH-RTO confirmed this on arrival APKG at 1038GMT. Before departing for Perth at 1138 they were advised to make a full report to RAAF Pearce."

My comments/analysis:

1. A check of the RAAF's own published annual summary of UFO reports received by them, fails to locate this case.

2.  To my knowledge, no additional information has ever come forward, either in the form of official documents, or further comments by the pilots concerned in the UFO literature.

3. I cannot find any record of any UFO group conducting an investigation.

4. Smith's report states that the initial observation point was 130nm East of Kalgoorlie. This puts the plane near Zanthus, a locality on the East-West transcontinental railway line.  An atlas puts Zanthus at latitude 31 deg 02 min latitude south and 123 deg 34 min longitude east.

5. The final observation point's location is not given. However, at a speed of 195kts and a duration of 10 minutes, the final point would have been approximately 100nm east of Kalgoorlie.

6. The aircraft was tracking 270 deg(m) and the bearing to the "UFO" was approximately 320 deg (m.) Smith's observation that "the whole formation maintained the same distance and bearing from our aircraft during the whole time of the sighting " implies that the "formation" was travelling at 195kts tracking 270 deg paralleling the aircraft's track at some unknown distance away.

7. A check of the astronomical sky using a software program indicated that at 0940GMT the Sun had set and was about 4 degrees below the ground horizon, some 20 degrees to the right of the aircraft's track. The Moon had set, and was some 23 degrees below the horizon. The planet Venus was 13 degrees above the horizon at a bearing some 15 degrees to the right of the aircraft's track. There was nothing astronomical at 50 degrees to the right of the aircraft's track.

8. I located one potential explanation for the event (click here.) In an article by Martin Shough about the classic 29 June 1954 BOAC Labrador sighting of a large object and several smaller ones, a possible cause was suggested of an unusual mirage. He lists a number of other similar sightings which includes the Zanthus event and comments.

"As with the BOAC Labrador case, the lateral movements of the smaller objects occurred in a very narrow band  ("without actually turning like a normal aeroplane would have to.") Interestingly, this happened at the same time the "main ship split into two sections" which might suggest that the inversion layer became thicker at that point allowing more objects to enter the mirage duct."

9. I did locate a photograph of the actual aircraft involved. Click here.

In conclusion:

This is a particularly interesting case, whether it was an unusual mirage as posited by Shough, or a "true" UFO.

The RAAF, which was the official body charged with looking into UFO reports, did not follow it up according to the official documents, despite the excellent witnesses.

Here was an excellent example of a "UFO" which deserved, but did not receive a proper scientific examination.