It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


The Smoking (Anti-Aircraft) Guns (of Los Angeles, 1942)

page: 16
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 28 2009 @ 12:46 PM

Originally posted by Leto
I found another classified memo that is related to the 1942 Battle of LA event. In this memo dated March 5, 1942, the then Secretary of Defense wrote to the then President that they have recovered an unidentified craft from the coast of California and that they have determined that it is of interplanetary origin:

You can find this and other classified documents about ufo's here:

Leto, I just followed this old link, and it no longer works. Here is the new one:

And here is the February memo from FDR referenced in the above document:

If these documents are indeed authentic (to which I have no direct knowledge) they would be very very persuasive evidence in this case.

Specific use of the term 'Celestial Devices' (referring to possible Atomic Energy secrets that might be learned from their study) and 'no conventional explanation', and 'unidentified plane' are identified in these reports.

In the March 5th, 1942 memo, the term 'interplanetary origin' is introduced.
Further in this memo, reports of the recovery of 2 'planes of likely interplanetary origin' is documented (one plane from the San Bernardino Mountains, likely shot down and reported by the Police, Military Gunners, and recovered by the Army and possibly the LA Fire Dept.) (The other plane was reported recovered off the Coast of California).

While direct verification of this memo is not possible for me independently, the reports discussed events that are found elsewhere in the documented record of the event itself (like the downed plane, and reports of seeing it go down...). It seems strange to me as an investigator, that reports like this (with seemingly no evidence like an actual downed craft in the public record) to back up the claim, seem to be the very same events reported on in this claimed declassified memo.

It seems we may have found some of the further reporting on these events, if these memos are indeed authentic.

The March 5th report, in addition to apparently ordering the creation of the IPU (Interplanetary Phenomenon Unit), also orders a full report on intelligence regarding IP going back to 1897. This researcher finds that year noteworthy due to this case:

The case detailed the account of the crash of a spaceship, complete with an Alien that survived for a short time, before being buried in the local Cemetery in Aurora Texas. It's one of the most interesting trace evidence cases in my view, since the records from Aurora seem to indicate that this case involved factual events. The newspaper reported the event at the time, and there is a real grave-marker in the Cemetery, although the trace evidence from the crash itself been removed, and the actual point of burial remains undisclosed.

The case incidentally followed national reports of an airship from across the United States, with period newspapers tracking sightings, confirming them, and plotting the airship's course.

Interesting reading to say the least. If anyone has any evidence to either support or invalidate the above posted memos, I would very much appreciate some links in the right direction.

Thanks very much ATS crew!


Edited to add a link to the Feb 22nd, 1944 Memo, which has been transposed online, and sent to the Roosevelt Library for verification of content and authenticity...


[edit on 28-8-2009 by WitnessFromAfar]

posted on Aug, 28 2009 @ 01:04 PM
reply to post by WitnessFromAfar

In the search for this supporting document (follow link for info...)

I found

I looked at length for the document, but could not source it.

I've sent them a communique requesting the document, and will post it here if I hear back from them. The email went as follows:

"Hello, I'm looking for:
App B, Doc 28, incl #1, Page 6

A supporting document, cited in:
4th Anti-Aircraft Command history, Chapter V, “Defense
Operations on the West Coast.”

Thank you very much for your assistance."

and was submitted here:

I'll let you all know if this request returns anything...


posted on Aug, 28 2009 @ 01:10 PM
Could they have been japanese fire balloons?

I will look for a link ,unless anyone can beat me too it?

posted on Aug, 28 2009 @ 01:32 PM

Originally posted by gambon
Could they have been japanese fire balloons?

I will look for a link ,unless anyone can beat me too it?

This theory has occurred to both myself and other researchers here in the thread, however thank you for your contribution.

The possibility of the object being a balloon has failed to meet the standard (fit the with observed evidence in the case) on the following counts:

1) Speed - The object tracked on Radar was moving too quickly to have been a balloon. This is dissected here in this post:

2) Flight Characteristics - The Object not only moved quickly, but it (once making land) then slowed down, then hovered, then made a sharp turn and headed out over Long Beach. These maneuvers are not possible with a fire balloon. They are possible for a controlled dirigible, however the airspeed would still be an issue. This post outlines that line of reasoning:

3) Invulnerability - It is highly unlikely that a fire balloon would withstand a single flak burst within it's vicinity. Over 1400 shells were expended during this event, from multiple gun posts all along the California Coastline. A Balloon simply could not withstand such an assault.

4) The Timeline - Japanese Fire Balloons were not reported in active use until 1944. This event occurred in February of 1942...

I'd love to hear a theory from you that fits with this observed evidence however...

I do like to examine every terrestrial option (please read the entire thread, where individual airplanes from the era have also been tested against the observed evidence in the case), and if you have further theories that might fit with the data, I'd love to examine them!

Thanks for your input


[edit on 28-8-2009 by WitnessFromAfar]

posted on Aug, 28 2009 @ 02:00 PM
reply to post by WitnessFromAfar

Well, I got an auto-reply, telling me that my request for the document had been received... Here it is:

"Thank you for contacting the National Archives and Records Administration.

This message confirms that your inquiry (or inquiries) was
received by the National Archives on Friday, 8/28/2009 at 2:07 pm EST.
We look forward to serving your needs as soon as possible.

Please do not reply to this email message. This message
was automatically generated by the Inquire Form on
our web site ( If you wish to
contact us again, please use our Inquire Form at

Please note that under certain circumstances, we may
respond to different portions of your inquiry with
separate replies.

For more information on how we respond to customer
inquiries, please visit the National Archives web site at

Thank you for your submission."

If/When I get any further response, I'll let everyone know...


posted on Aug, 28 2009 @ 03:12 PM
Okay, bear with me here, because I think I might be on to something...

I did some thinking this morning about possible methods for independent verification of the FDR Documents posted above. There are some qualified statements in that memo, which can be subjected to research. I found one, and I'd like to illustrate where the search led...

The statement I picked came from the March 5th, 1942 memo here:

The statement was (to my reading):
"The Army Air Corps also recovered a similar (_____) in the San Bernardino Mountains East of Los Angeles, which cannot be identified as conventional aircraft. This Headquarters has come to a determination that the mystery airplanes are in fact not earthly and according to secret intelligence sources they are in all probability of interplanetary origin."

The memo then goes on to order further study of this object.

Now, if this memo is indeed authentic, what would you do, in if you were in the position of commanding the further study of such a craft?

I can't offer my conclusions as fact, however, if in that position...

I would order the immediate establishment of an Army Base, surrounding the entire crash site, and tell the public that reports of a downed plane were exaggerated.

So, in scientific terms, as to the theory that this memo may be authentic, I used the memo in order to make a prediction. That prediction can then be tested.

Thus I began my search online for confirmation of that particular statement in the public record...

Here is what I found:

George Air Force Base (Originally Victorville Army Airfield) - Located in the San Bernardino Mountains, Victorville, California, is located here on Google Maps:

Very possible for a crash site, from a plane fired upon in Santa Monica...

I did some research on the Base, and found that NO KIDDING...

"George AFB, originally called the Victorville Army Airfield, was constructed between 1941 and 1943 as a flight training school. After World War II, the base was placed on standby status and used for surplus aircraft storage. The base was reopened in 1950 under the command of the newly created U.S. Air Force and renamed George Air Force Base. Flight training remained the primary mission of this base throughout its history and a number of bomber, glider, single engine, twin engine, and jet fighter aircrafts were flown there. George AFB was a major training facility for the Air Force's F-4 Phantom and was the home of the 35th Tactical Fighter Wing (U.S. Air Force, 1997c)."

From the source:

Now here's where it gets even more interesting...

The base is now closed, and fenced off. I wondered why, and found that there were signs of health hazards there. And not just spilled Jet Fuel (something we would expect from an aircraft training facility...)

There were radiological contamination risks!

"A small amount of radioactive material was discovered and removed from a portion of the Southeast Disposal Area (SEDA). Radiation surveys and exploratory soil excavation indicate that this area and the two munitions storage areas were not used for disposal of significant quantities of radioactive waste. Although people using the SEDA for recreation in the past may have been exposed to small amounts of low-level radioactive material, such exposures would have been infrequent and of short duration and would not be expected to pose a health hazard. The SEDA has recently been fenced and its landfill cover has been rehabilitated. The George AFB property located south of Air Base Road, which includes the SEDA, has been transferred to the Federal Bureau of Prisons and will be the site of a prison that is currently under construction; the SEDA will remain fenced and will be within the fenceline of the prison."

Now quick math applies here, Radioactive levels surveyed in 1992 (When George Air Force Base was decommissioned) found the above results...

There are methods for dating objects, using Radioactive decay, that could apply here, if we knew the exact readings on radiation detected in the area. For example:

"When an organism dies the carbon-14 slowly decays, so the proportion of C-14 is reduced over time. Carbon-14 has a half life of 5730 years, making it very useful for measuring ages of objects that are a few thousand to several tens of thousands of years old. To measure the age of something, then, you measure the activity of carbon-14, and compare it to the activity you'd expect it to have if it was brand new. Plugging these numbers into the decay equation along with the half-life, you can calculate the time period over which the nuclei decayed, which is the age of the object. "

although this method really only works on the 1000's of years timelines, we could find a strange result that could influence the data set in this case.

Just a thought...

If we new the source of the gamma radiation present, that would also enable us to determine that isotope's halflife, further dating the material.

Here is a good informational page on Radioactive decay, for those interested...

At any rate, I find it very interesting that an Army Air Base WAS indeed constructed at the right time, and in the right place, to have been an ordered response to the BOLA event, cited in the FDR memo.

I find it even more interesting that there were significant amounts of radiation detected on the site, after more than five decades since the proposed impact event.

Thoughts on this new information fellow ATS researchers???

I'd love to hear them!


posted on Aug, 28 2009 @ 07:19 PM
This is an amazing thread! Fantastic effort.

posted on Aug, 29 2009 @ 03:32 AM
I've recently noticed an older thread on the BOLA case, that primarily focuses on the video from the event.

The thread (IMHO) does not heavily feature research, however some insights are given that many of you researching this case might find intriguing.

The link is here, for those who would like to give it a read:


posted on Aug, 29 2009 @ 03:35 AM
Thread hijack much?

posted on Aug, 29 2009 @ 03:43 AM
reply to post by fls13

Why thank you very much for your kind words Fls13!

I've got a feeling that this investigation is far from over...
It seems that every time a new line of investigation emerges, it brings forth new data. That's an exciting process, and is evident thus far in the thread.

Looking back on page 1 now, I never could have imagined then that we'd currently be in a position where:

1) We have verified the location of the Photographer, when taking the Original LA Times Image

2) We have eliminated all aircraft made by man in 1942 (including airplanes, balloons, and dirigibles) from being the probable solution, according to the documented evidence

3) We have offered independent analysis confirming Dr. Bruce macabee's study, suggesting a solid object at the convergence point of the searchlight beams

4) We have verified the locations of each Anti-Aircraft Artillery Battery and NIKE missile site in place along the Coastal Defense perimeter.

5) We have established a likely flight path for the main object

6) We have verified direct radar returns, and extensive radar tracking of the object, by the United States Army Air Corps.

7) We have established a searchable data set, for use in referencing and cross-referencing.

8) We have determined the necessary airspeed of the craft (extrapolated from Radar data)

I'm sure I'm missing some important points, since it's about 1 AM for me here, and this thread has been running now for over 15 pages

At any rate, I wonder what this thread will look like 15 pages from now?

I've got a feeling that the intrepid researchers here at ATS are going to keep on digging through this case, until every stone has been overturned.

Please let us know if you find any new data pertaining to this case, or if you are able to corroborate data that already exists here in the thread!

Well met Fls13!


posted on Aug, 29 2009 @ 03:46 AM

Originally posted by Zenagain
Thread hijack much?

Hi there. I'm confused as to your meaning?


posted on Aug, 29 2009 @ 06:28 PM
reply to post by WitnessFromAfar

TY for your reply

Do you have the altitude of the objects when they were travelling at this speed 300 approx? ,the one thing i cannot find in any of the observances is the altitude?
pls excuse if i have missed it , getting late here .

Also on rense it describes the movement of the object thus

"At least 6 people died as a direct result of the Army's attack on the UFO which SLOWLY AND LEISURLY made its way down to and then over Long Beach before finally moving off and disappearing".(caps for emphasis)

no mention of 300 mph also was this an estimated air speed or ground speed?

I am thinking possible jet stream and coastal wind shears ? effecting a non conventional aircraft

What was there movement bearing on the map ?

Also i am not being funny here but in 1942 usa radar was in its infancy and just not very good ,new equipment and new operators ,could a misreading be involved of speed etc...
Are any of the records of radar operators available in USA etc if not are any documentaries available on US radar in ww2 ,there are for uk radar ..might be intresting...

"Submarine I-25 shelled a coastal fort in Oregon, damaging a baseball backstop, and in September, that submarine's crew assembled and launched a small float plane that dropped incendiary bombs, starting a few small forest fires. "

[edit on 29-8-2009 by gambon]

[edit on 29-8-2009 by gambon]

[edit on 29-8-2009 by gambon]

[edit on 29-8-2009 by gambon]

posted on Aug, 29 2009 @ 08:52 PM
reply to post by WitnessFromAfar

Hi there Gambon

If you re-read my response to you (linked above), you will see several links to complete posts already existing in this thread, where you will find the answers to many of your questions.

I'll try to directly address each of the questions in your post on Tuesday, when I have more time online.

Between now and then, reading the posts linked in my above post will help to answer many of your questions.

Also, please read the CUFON document. It's sourced in the Bibliography section of this thread (I think on page 1). That report (and the citations from that report already posted in this thread) should help to answer your questions about the radar tracking.

Hope that helps, I'll address your questions directly when I have more time


posted on Aug, 30 2009 @ 05:09 PM
I have read them and knowhere does it say what altitude they where meant to be ?

I have a specific reason for asking

It is to do with the AA guns used at the time..........

I also have read eyewitness (sourced) accounts that dispute the "object" travelling at anything like 300 mph?
Couldnt find the cufon one if you could help would be greatfull

Have also accounts and a pdf of intelligence of the time stating the japanese used balloons in 1942 and a photograph in it is quite intresting

[edit on 30-8-2009 by gambon]

[edit on 30-8-2009 by gambon]

posted on Aug, 31 2009 @ 07:44 AM

Originally posted by gambon
I also have read eyewitness (sourced) accounts that dispute the "object" travelling at anything like 300 mph?
Couldnt find the cufon one if you could help would be greatfull

Witnessfromafar (I think, or maybe it was someone else) did show their calculations on speed estimates around 300mph between something like 2am to 2:25 am when the radar contact was observed.

However as I stated before, I can't figure out what happened to that object that was supposedly traveling 300mph, between 2:30 and 3am? Were there radar contacts during that time? If so I didn't find them.

They opened fire a little after 3am I think and while they were tracking an object at maybe 300mph from 2:00-2:30, I don't see the link between what they were shooting at at 3am and the object they tracked from 2:00-2:30. I didn't see record of anything moving at 300mph at 3am when the shooting started, though I may have missed it. Possibly a few stray witness accounts of planes, but no confirmed speed estimates from radar after 3am that I saw.

posted on Aug, 31 2009 @ 08:13 AM
reply to post by WitnessFromAfar

it was probably just going to release its baby spheres into the atmosphere when it was "ambushed." poor thing...

posted on Sep, 1 2009 @ 11:10 AM
reply to post by Arbitrageur

Good morning Arby
Sorry for my delay in response, I was out of town this weekend.

Please read here this post:

Wherein an excerpt from the CUFON report is posted for reference info.
It appears to me from this report (and many eyewitness accounts) that the object was tracked by 3 coastal radar units, and HQ during the time period you've described. As the object came over land, (and after the blackout was ordered) all but 1 radar unit was diverted to assist the AA Battery Searchlights.

The CUFON report read pretty clearly to me on that count, please let me know if you read it differently...

Additionally, there was direct reference to both 'Unidentified planes' (which qualifies IMHO as UFOs in context with records indicating that no human party had planes in the sky that night...) and an unidentified 'dirigible', which took direct fire, to no effect.

See this post here for a the full linking:

I'm currently searching for the supporting documents, that the CUFON report (the History of the 4th...) was drawn up from.

I've got a request in for the document at NARA, we'll see what happens there. If Arby, or anyone else interested would like to join in the hunt for these supporting reports, I'd be very appreciative of the assistance in seeking out additional data

Here is an info sheet on the SCR 268 (Radar Units) - because Arby, I know how much you like Data


Gambon - Here is the link for the speed calculations, an extrapolation from the radar return data:

Regarding your altitude question, I don't have direct quote on that, to my knowledge, however you may find this post interesting (regarding altitude, and the guns themselves...):

If you find exact altitude data Gambon, with proper sourcing, please do add that info to the thread!

I hope that helps! Thanks to you both for continuing to investigate this case


posted on Sep, 1 2009 @ 01:13 PM

Originally posted by gambon
I also have read eyewitness (sourced) accounts that dispute the "object" travelling at anything like 300 mph?
Couldnt find the cufon one if you could help would be greatfull

Sorry Gambon, upon re-reading I see that I did not address this question directly...

One of the strangest things about the object in this case, is that it is reported to move at differing speeds. The documented evidence in the case supports these reports, from my reading.

The 334 mph extrapolation was acquired using basic math, applied to the data in the CUFON report on the Radar Tracking. It wasn't mentioned in the report (the speed) directly, however enough data was there to provide for a rough estimate of how fast the object must have been moving, while being tracked on Radar from Flower St. HQ.

Originally posted by gambon
Have also accounts and a pdf of intelligence of the time stating the japanese used balloons in 1942 and a photograph in it is quite intresting

Please post these Gambon, I'd love to review that .pdf.

I still think that taking into account the AA fire and the windspeeds reported that evening, that the Balloon theory doesn't quite fit the observed evidence. However I'm perfectly willing to examine evidence to the contrary! Please post it here


posted on Sep, 1 2009 @ 04:12 PM
While doing some more digging, I found the following eyewitness reports, chronicled here:

From that source:
H.G. writes -
"It could have been two, or three, or up to six miles away, I can't recall exactly since it occurred so long ago. But I strongly remember the searchlights converging on the bottoms of the reddish objects flying in formation "

Scott Littleton writes -
"While my father went about his air-raid warden duties, my late mother and I watched the glowing object, which was caught in the glare of searchlights from both Palos Verdes and Malibu/Pacific/Palisades and surrounded by the puffs of ineffectual anti-aircraft fire, as it slowly flew across the ocean from northwest to southeast. "

Thanks to ATS Member: Dulcimer for the initial link on page 1 of this thread!

Also, from the LA Times Story (The one with the title, Army Says Alarm Real) from February 26th 1942:
[Overshadowing a nation-wide maelstrom of rumors and conflicting reports, the Army's Western Defense Command insisted that Los Angeles' early morning blackout and anti-aircraft action were the result of unidentified aircraft sighted over the beach area.
In two official statements, issued while Secretary of the Navy Knox in Washington was attributing the activity to a false alarm and "jittery nerves," the command in San Francisco confirmed and reconfirmed the presence over the Southland of unidentified planes.
Relayed by the Southern California sector office in Pasadena, the second statement read:
"The aircraft which caused the blackout in the Los Angeles area for several hours this a.m. have not been identified."]


Then there is also this:
[Wailing air raid sirens at 2:25 a.m. awakened most of the metropolitan's
three million citizens. A few minutes later they were treated to a gigantic
Fourth-of-July-like display as huge searchlights flashed along a 10-mile front
to the south, converging on a single spot high in the sky. ]

This report clearly indicates that the searchlights almost immediately converged, and tracked the object.

This report corroborates the CUFON reporting of the Radar Units switching over to support the searchlight beams.

This report further timestamps that particular order, placing it immediately following the blackout order (supporting the CUFON report).

The report goes on to mention that the guns opened up on the object after the searchlight convergence (further supporting the CUFON report data showing the Radar units supporting the searchlights, and the gunners aiming at the convergence point of the beams.)

The above quote came from the original Glendale News Press Article on February 25th, 1942, source here:

Further from that source:
"All the action, clearly spotlighted for ground observers by 20 or so
searchlights, was just a few miles west of Los Angeles proper. "

and this:
"Firing, first heard at 3 a.m., ceased suddenly at 3:30 a.m., after the object disappeared south of Signal Hill, at the east edge of Long Beach."

The above quote confirms the plotted flight-path of the object, as plotted by this author.

More to come as new information emerges!

Special thanks to for the wonderful newspaper transcripts!!!


posted on Sep, 1 2009 @ 04:21 PM
Here's one more, from the NY Times Article:
"Residents of Beverly Hills, including Tom C. Clark, enemy alien control coordinator for the Far West, saw perhaps twenty searchlights piercing the heavens, all focused on the same spot, and said that they were reminded of "a world premiere" of a movie."

Further confirmation of the convergence of the beams, from an official source...

Source here:


new topics

top topics

<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in