Foia Release Unclassified Complete

23857122-0457-180273-0104

National Archives and Records Administration

Released
Published
Added to archive
Jun 18, 2026
Department
National Archives and Records Administration
Original size
16.8 MB
External ID
daff03ff2c8cd6d771aefd966e23843677f9b5fd110a088ab20bfe43f8f7fa81
Confidence
85%
Credibility
90%

View original document ↗ hosted at the official government source

Intelligence summary

The document discusses various sightings of unidentified flying objects (UFOs) and evaluates the possibility of them being weather balloons. Multiple observations indicate that the objects were likely not balloons due to timing, altitude, and flight patterns inconsistent with balloon behavior.

Tags & topics

AviationSightingsUAPUFOWeather Balloons AviationMilitarysightingsUFOWeather Balloon

Entities mentioned

Full document text

2,243 characters, transcribed via OCR. Errors reflect the source scan. Compare with the original ↗

Suggest a correction
Wo. 206; If description is accurate, i.e., wings on fuselace, roar of encine, circling object, possibility of weather balloon is remote. Also, latest time of release for Clark Field was four hours prior to sighting. Also, note F.B.I. note on character of observer. No. 207: Definitely not a weather balloon. i rr ‘3 No. 208; ee sighted about four hours after last scheduled release time. Upper air flow pattern gives no indication of possibility of weather Siilaan drifting in from another station. Also balloon would have to have leaked to remain at 30,000 feet. Noe 209: Determined to have been twin-enzsined bomber. No. aes Summary sheet missing; no altitude given; time incon- patible with soheduled balloon release times. If direction is correct, chasghe.) were flying into the wind. Cannot be determined conclusively. 2 Inclined to believe objects were Jet aircraft. No. 2lls: Very Pistol. No. 212: Objeot sighted three hours after release time of Indian- apolis and Ft. Wayne balloons. Defective balloon could have remained low enough to be seen and upper winds indicate that such a balloon would have been in the Dayton area at the time sighted. All other statements i of observers seem to indicate that the object was a weather balloon. No. 213: Evidently refers to the same object as in Incident No. ele, but with entirely different description which, if accurate, makes con- clusion of No. 212 obviously incorrect. If not same object, certainly not a weather balloon, as definite pattern of motion, as described, not possible under existing wind flow conditions. Mo. 21; No information whatsoever. No. 215: Very high winds 60-70 M.P.H. from SW at all levels, definitely would cee prohibited any balloon from making any southerly mothe: Also, last scheduled released time was three hours prior to sighting at 1,000 feet. No time in sight civen so cannot compute rate of elimb to 20,000 feet. Fairly conclusive, not a balloon of any kind. No. 216: Object reported moving directly into 19 M.P.H. head winds ab an estimated 350 M.P.H. Observer is a professional weather observer and should know a weather balloon. Also, reported Sighting was four hours after scheduled release time. Declassification Authority: NND 57565