murnffim

Fuhlinhril [qfhu f,lilinh U,f. I]. Hnusnruft tnsuninlinrl

JNUtrlNALln this issuo

lsle of Wight low-level sightingA 'classic' from Belgium

MOD traeks UFO on radar

The British UFO Research Association

Bufora Limited (by guarantee). Founded 1964. Registered Office: Old Brook Cottage, WhiteCross, Haughton, Stafford. Registered in London: Number 1234924. Incorporating the LondonUFO Research Organisation, founded 1959, and the British UFO Association, founded 1962.

AimsTo encourage and promote unbiased scientific investigation and research into UFO phenomena.To collect and disseminate evidence and data relating to UFOs. To co-ordinate UFO researchon a nationwide scaie and to co-operate with people and organisations engaged on similar researchin all parts of the world.

MembershipThe annual subscription is d4'00, $10 in the USA and Canada. Membership is open to al1 whosupport the aims of the Association and whose application is approved by the Executive Council.Application/information forms can be obtained from anv oficer.

Council and officers lS75176

PresidentGeofrey G Doel MRCS, LRCP, DMRE

Vice-presidentsThe Rt Hon Earl of ClancartyLeonard G Cramp ARAEs, MSIAProfessor Bryan \Tinder Bsc, cENGJ FIMEcHEGraham F N Knewstub cnNc, MIEREJ FBIS

The Council

ChairmanRoger H Stanway MBA, FRAs

Vice-chairmanLionel Beer

Honorary secretary

Miss Betty Wood

Honorary treasurerStephen Smith uaCouncil members

Richard Beet MAIE, mAsMrs Anne HarcourtCharles F Lockwood BAJ DIP ED sruDC A E O'Brien cBE, BA, FRAs, FRGs

Tony Pace rnasKen Phillips AMSERT

Miss Jenny Randles

Other officers

Publicity secretaryMiss Christine Henning

Assistant editorsCarol GodsellMichael Prewett AFBIS

Administration DepartrnentGeneral conespondence: Miss Betty Wood6 Cairn Avenue, London \f5Telephone 0l-579 3796 (evenings only)

Membership secretary: Mrs Anne Harcourt170 Faversham Road, Kennington, Ashford, KentTreasurer: Stephen Smith lvra5 Arndale Road, Sherwood, Nottingham,N95 3GT. Telephone 0602 267053

Media relations; (post vacant)

Group liaison fficersSouth: (postvacant)

North: Jenny Randles, 23 Sunningdale Drive,Irlam, Greater Manchester M30 6NJTelephone 061-881 8410

Publications DepartmentJournal editor: Richard Beet

Adaertisement manager: Lionel Beer15 Freshwater Court, Crawford Street, LondonWlH 1HS. Telephone 0l-723 0305

Publications co-ordinator: Arnold West16 Southway, Burgess Hi1l, Sussex RH15 9STTelephone O44 46 6738

Research and Investigations DepartrrrentResearch director: Tony PaceNewchapel Observatory, Newchapel, Stoke onTrent, Staffs

Research projects fficer: Charles Lockwood5 The Ridgeway, Farnsfield, Newark, Notts.N ational Ino e stig ations C o-or dinator :I(en Phillips, 26 Chevening Road, Kensal Rise,London N\76 6DD. Telephone 01-969 8847

Training fficer: Trevor VhitakerI Central Park, \7e11head, Halifax HXl 2BT

Continu.ed, on insid.e baeh couer

BUFORA JOURNALVolume 4 Number 12 March/April 1976

New Editorial Address: 95 Taunton Road, London SE12 8PA

Editoria!At the time of going to press, ir appearsthat the Bufora publication survey hasmet with a good response. MichaelPrewett tells me that your comments andsuggestions have all been constructive.

The concept of a survey of this sort withinBufora is, I think, unique. I have beenthe first editor to risk the fury-and in afew cases, thanks-of the membership.But the survey should prove important.We are often seen to be preoccupied withour own problems. Many of these prob-lems have been reflected in the material Ireceive for publication-a lot of raw data,but no feedback from those who areinvestigating, and from those who areresearching. Council members know thatthey too, have an obligation to feed theJournal with correctly prepared inform-ation. After all, it is the Journal which isthe link with you, the member.

Another consideration is that in pro-fessional terms, the Journal is alreadyprinted on a miniscule budget and isproduced in limited spare time in com-petition with demanding domestic andprofessional commitments.

But our communication problems are beingfaced. Armed with your comments, andyour co-operation, I am confident that wecan all contribute to the advance of ourchallenging new science-by committingour joint efforts to print!Rlcneno Bsrr.

4

5

6

8

10

T2

15

Features

Isle of Wight sighting

Venusian Tiddlywinks

New identity for Bufora

MOD track UFO on radar

Lunar mystery deepens

A ' classic' from Belgium

Advisers required

Regular contributions

Research

Lecture summaries

Controversy

Uforum

Sighting summaries

People

Nufon News

2

2

7

11

L4

t6

t6

pufqrg 1-2g7ai is published six limes, a year and is available to members onlg or by exchange. TheBritish UFO Research Association does not hold or express corporare viewi on iJFO phEnomena.Contributions..reflect only the views of the editor or the authors.' Copy for publication in the Journalmust be sent directly_to-the editorial address shoztn abozte, Original mat6rial ii copy-right to b"oth thecontributor and to Bufora. Requests for permission to reproduce rnaterial fromtie Jiurnal should beaddressed to the editor. - ISSN OSOO-ZS8X

Research

Research evening

This weil-attended Kensington meeting (7 Feb-ruary) demonstrated the interest in, and import-ance of, our Research work. Chaired by TonyPace, who stressed the value of the amateur inufology, the meeting continued with the foliowingspeakers:

Charles Lockwood, who spoke on the progress ofthe EM detection and Vehicle Interference pro-jects. On the first project, EM detection, it rvassuggested that Bufora contact the 10 continu-ously operating geophysical recording stationssituated throughout the country. The VehicleInterference project was going weil, and, withthe help of member Geoffrey Falla in Jersey,Bufora now had 200 VI reports.

Ken Phillips, NIC, described the new sightingaccount form and reported that he and his counterpart in Contact were working closeiy logether.Training for investigators-by correspondencecourse-was expected to start after the public-ation of the investigators handbook.

Mark Rodiquee, Research Assistant for AllenHynek's Center for UFO Studies, described thework that had gone into a forthcoming catalogueof EM cases. The EM case was especially in-teresting, he said, because it cut across many other

ciassifications. There were remarkable simil-arities between the cases cataiogued by the Centerand those gathered by Bufora. The first re-corded E.lvl case was in 1893, when witnessesobserved a fish-like UFO over Oregon, and thefirst recorded vehicle interference case was aslate as 1954, in Ontario.

Finally, Daoid Viewing) Extra-terrestrial Society,presented an intriguing and thought-provokingpaper entitled ' The way ahead'. F{e citedufology as 'ascientific', and ufologists as having'little purpose and little abiiity'. Part of theremedy would be the impiementation of a re-search programme, and the publication of resultsin existing scientific journais. The research pro-gramme, he suggested, cou-ld be of three yearsduration, and should be comprised of specialistgroups, dealing in topics such as psychology,physiology, optical perception and aviation.

Another conferenee ?

The 7 February Council Meeting agreed inprinciple to explore the possibility of organisinganother Research and Investigation conference,with a suggested date of autumn 1976. Theorganisers would be asked to see whether prom-inent international ufologists would attend.Jenny Randles agreed to prepare the initialgroundwork for this exercise.

Training handbook

This has now been prepared in draft form and itis hoped that, subject to sufficient flnance beingavailable, it would be available later this year.

Lecture summariesUfology as a fringe scienceby IVOR GRATTAN-GUINNESS,4 October 1975.

The talk provided an interesting insightinto the ways science works and con-trasted this with the UFO phenomenon,showing reasons why there is still anuncertain hostility between the scien-tific community and our subiect. Itwas stressed that ufologists must striveto make scientists aware that there is areal problem, since it will ultimately bethe scientist who provides the answers.Until recently, it was attested, physics wasthe science. All other fields were brokendown and related to this (even to theintriguing point of once trying to make

2

chemistry a part of physics!).

In many v/ays the approach to the UFOphenomenon has been similar. We haveattempted to reduce it to simple machines.Nowadays there is a swing away from thistowards a realisation that other more peri-pheral factors are involved. This swingparallels one in science itself where fringesciences have become more popular andphysics has lost its pride ofplace. It doeshowever, help to explain the hostilitypreviously felt by science, since the UFOphenomenon is not reducable to 'onefield' as science once tried to be. Per-haps this new approach to a less struc-tured study will assist ufology in gainingrecognition.

A further parallel with science is in the factthat ai1 theories are based on somethingunknown. For instance, it has now beenfound there are sub-atomic particles, butwhen we o explain' these, we only findmore complex things waiting for an ex-planation. In this sense, he stated, thesame thing will happen with the UFOphenomenon. The idea that UFOs arerepresentative of beings from anotherplanet will, at the least, be a very incom-plete answer. He concluded by asking usto recognise that UFOs did belong tofringe science and that their study was butone of many such ' sciences.' There didseem to be an overall pattern, as cited ex-amples of the Stella Lansing phenomenon(featured fully in recent issues of FlyingSaucer Rez;iew) indicated, but the answerscould only lie in finding ways to appeal tothe scientist and getting him involved.

JnNuv Rasorns.

UFO scene in Belgiumand the EECby RUDY DE GROOTE,I Noz.tember, 1975

This was a most welcome current situ-ation report on the state of ufology in therest of Europe. As might be anticipated,it r.vas apparent that France had taken thelead in UFO research. This, it wasthought, was due to several factors.These include the famous public state-ment in 1974 by the Minister of Defence,who declared that the Government hadbeen officially studying the phenomenonfor 20 years and that they did believe agenuine problem existed. Coupled withthis was the emergence onto the field ofDr Ciaude Poher, his successful system ofco-operation with the Gendarmerie andthe public support of leading astronomers.

Two of the . most important Europeanpublications came from that country)namely Lumieres Dans La Nuit andPhenontenes Spatieux. The latter was partof the contemplative organisation GEPA,who only carried through a few investig-ations in depth. Apart from the existence

of a well-respected magazine and itsresearchers in Spain (Stendek) the pos-ition elsewhere was none too favourable.Germany, for example, had only onemajor organisation-and that was totallyconvinced that UFOs were extra-terres-trial.Concluding with his native Belgium, henoted that groups tended to be short-lived and would spring up after each waveof sightings-a situation also true in thiscountry. SOBEPS were the largest or-ganisation publishing Inforespace, but oneof the chief problems in European ufologywas language-which made exchange ofdata very difficult. In Belgium the StudyGroup for Progressive Sciences did pro-duce a bi-lingual publication and onlydealt with selected 'true' UFO cases.He summarised some recent examples oflanding cases, including the most recentknown at the time, where an entiry wasseen sitting on high-tension cables ! Hepointed out the urgent need for inter-national co-operation on the subject.This had to be preceded by co-operationwithin one country. It had been triedunsuccessfully before in other countries,but he refused to believe pessimists whoproclaimed that it was not possible,because people did notwant to co-operate.Time will tell who is right.

JeNNv ReNorss.

Personal columnScience Paper No I-THE USE OF ANALYT-ICAL INSTRUMENTS in the SEARCH forEXTRA-TERRESTRIAL SPACECRAFT.Price 30p (non-members 50p), post free. Cashwith order to: A West, 16 South'"vay, BurgessHil1, Sussex RH15 9ST.

Bufora Lending LibraryI have been trying to get the Lending Libraryrestarted for some time, having donated a numberof books to Bufora over the years. We have nowfound a volunteer to run it and I know severalmembers want to use it. However, most Councilmembers seem to think this valuable servicewould be little used. If you think otherwiseplease write to the Chairman and let him know.LroNnr, Bnrn.

Isle of Wight low-level sighting

Inoestigator: Rlcnanl Ness.

Date of Event: 14 January 1976.

Place: Ryde, Isle of \xi ight.

Inztestigation' February 1976.

Codes: 76-003 and 76-012.

Mr Riddell (35), a Pilots Assistant, wasin his garden at 0040 when he noticed abright light in the west, at about cloudlevel. It remained stationary for a periodof about one minute and seemed to beslightly obscured by cloud. It then grewbrighter and appeared to be definitelyglowing. It appeared to be moving to-wards the witness at an estimated speedof only 30 mph. He called to his wifewho then both watched it approachr grow-ing dimmer and at a considerably lowerheight than when first seen. It passedalmost directly over their heads and theglow from above silhouetted the under-side which appeared as dark roundedoblong shape. Estimates of size are 100feet long and 50 feet wide, and the closestthey can come to an angular size at armslength, is a packet of tea! Despite itsproximity and an estimated height of300 feet, there was at no time no soundduring the four minutes of observation.

After passing overhead, the object con-tinued eastwards. Mr Riddell followedit around the side of his house where henoticed it suddenly accelerate to a fantas-tic speed and depart at what he is certainwas an upward angle.

The witness reported their observation tothe RAF at Thorney Island. The RAFinformed the coastguard, because theythought the witnesses were " quite con-vinced ". It was the coastguards whoinfor:rned the press, much to Mr Riddell's

4

chagrin, since he was subsequently in-undated by reporters and was unhappywith the way they 'played up' the srory.A spokesman from the air base said thathe thought it might have been a helicopter,but on checking, found that it had notbeen one of theirs. He also inforrned thewitness that he would probably hearshortly from the Ministry of Defence.Within five minutes of reporting theincident to RAF Thorney Island, theMOD were on the phone to him!

Mr Riddell later received the usual stand-ard 'non-committal' letter from theMinistry, with no explanation offered forthe sighting.

It has since now been discovered that theMeteorological Officer at RAF ThorneyIsland made an independent report of asubstantially very similar object. Thisoccurred at 22.30 on the night of 13 Jan-uary, that is about two hours, ten minutesbefore the Riddell's sighting.

What may be a further connected reportcomes from a Quantity Surveyor and hiswife who were about to get into their carto drive the mile or so into Ryde at 08.15on 14 January. The sun was low downin the east and they spotted what theythought to be an aircraft fuselage stronglyreflecting its light in the western sky,below cloud level. It was glowing abrilliant orange-gold and had no visiblewings or protruberances, but a ' whirling'white light underneath. They estimatedit to be about a mile distant, at a height ofbetween 1000 and 15000 feet. It movedquite silently on a slow course to the north.They watched it only for about 30 seconds,as they had to be on time for work, but itwas still visible as they drove away.Apparantly they only considered it un-usual in retrospect, and in the light of thereport of the Riddell's observation.

Venusian Tiddlywinks

Glancing through back issues of theJournal, (yes, I actually do!), I came acrossVol 2 No l0 1969170 to which I had con-tributed an article As True As I'm TalkingTo This Venusian. Somehow though,I'd managed not to refer to Him( ?) at all,and finished with a PS which said,'Perhaps I'd better tell you about myVenusian friend some other time!'V7eli, five years is a fair length of time-to us poor Earthmen or perhaps underone of our latest legislative efforts thisshould be Earth-persons-sex equalityand all that! Mind you, my Venusiancontact can't understand this at all, since'they don't go in for that sort of thing.'It is rather, in fact, like one of Ray Brad-bury's Martian characters who, whenasked what they did about sex, gave theappalling answer, 'Oh! About sex wehave our teal' But I digress, since Ireally r,vant to tell you some of the thingsmy Venusian friend has to say about us.

WINE COOLERS' I can't understand you lot at ail,'he says,'I thought we'd proved once and for allit was zs who were coming to Earth whenwe contacted Adamski. Mind you, hedid get one or two minor details wrong-after ali, he really should have noticed wehave seven legs and three eyes, but apartfrom that he was pretty accuratel' 'But,'he went on, 'I really do get my backs upwhen you lot start saying we travelleddown to Earth in lamp shades, mooringbuoys and now-even wine-coolers! Itreally is a bit much!'

'You must .also understand that ourscientists have definitely ruled out thepossibility of any intelligent life-formsexisting elsewhere in the Galaxy. It rtrue, of course, that we haven't been any-where else in the Galaxy other than Earth

-but we know we're right. We've

by NaRMAN OLTVER

heard too, that some crackpots on Earthsay there's a 'twin' Earth, exactiy op-posite the Sun to you and in the sameorbital plane. Now, I mean, this isabsolute nonsense-we know there's nosuch planet. Mind you, though, we'veoften wondered whether there might be atwin Venus. And it's no good your say-ing that you can't see it from Earth,because it's quite obvious to any thinkingperson that such a planet would haveinteliigent life on it, capable of hiding theplanet's existence by bending light-raysand so on.

TERRAWOTSITS' What did you say ? Yes ! I knozo Isaid there \,vas no intelligent life any-where else, but it's only logical to main-tain a flexible attitude, and surely it'sobvious there's no contradiction betweenour saying there is no intelligent life else-where while at the same time admittingthe possibility that there could be. Butthen of course, you Terrawotsits neverdid understand logic!'

'Then take this stupid 'IJltra-coexistentTerrathingamejigs' notion you've comeup with-it's enough to make us Venus-ians I(eel over in disgust! Ttrey can'tsxisl-'67s'ys proved it! Though, whenI say that, it es true to say that several ofour Venusian 'sensitives' thinks they'veseen some ' co-existents' down here .

My God, there's one of them now: takeit away! Take it away ! Oh, it's gone,thank the Lord.''By the way, I hope that you didn't thinkmy references to God mean we think thatthere is one. Of course, we don't sincewe know that there isn't one and there isn'tany Afterlife. \fe're quite sure aboutthis ever since one of our intellectuals

continued ozterleaf

5

VEN USIAN TIDDLYWINKScontinued from preuious page

came back after he'd died to tell us he'dceased to exist ! No ! There can't pos-sibly be any religious significance) youknow, but we are beginning to get a bitworried about all the UFOs and contactclaims on Venus. You see, we know we'tethe only ones flitting about from planet topianet, so ail those reports must be hallu-cinations or something.'' Vhat ? You want to know why, if I'vegot seven legs and three eyes, I look al-most human to you too ? rVell, that'sobvious, isn't it ? I am almost human,but I hypnotised you into thinking I saidthat bit about seven legs and three eyes.Why ? Well, wasn't it the obvious thingto do ? \7hat ! You think it wasn't ?

\Vell, I just can't understand how youEarth-things think-it was only logic,after all !

' I{ow do you mean ? You say that if I'mgoing by logic I can't exist ? Oh, I see-it's the bit about Venus being too hot tolive on. Vell, that's quite true-it es /

One explanation giaen for the stange phenomenotin this photograph, was ' light reflection !'

6

Nonsense-it's perfectly reasonable. I'mnot existing now at alll Don't you re-member ? You stupid lot started dis-tributing blue algae into our atmospherein the 1970s-that made Venus into aplanet with an Earth-type atmosphere:then we developed and now we're time-tra.velling back to try and stop you lotfrom doing it: then we won't exist andyou lot can stop worrying about flyingsaucers !'

My Venusian friend then vanished into acassette tape which seif-destructed withinten seconds. Since his remarks have,without question, solved the UFO enigmaonce and for all, it is clear we can now allrelax and go back to playing tiddley-rn'inksl How dare you Sirl af coursethat isn't all we've been doing up till now!

With acknowledgementslYilron.

to tr4argaret

New identity for Bufora

The Council have accepted the Public-ation Sub-Committee's recommendationthat the go-ahead should be given on anew-style letterhead-the first stage in anew visual identity for Bufora Ltd.

Designed by Richard Beet, the new iden-tity is distinctive, yet at the same time,aims to project the right 'image' to ouraudience-the scientific community, pot-ential members and the press. It in-corporates a logotype which symbolisesour objectives in an abstract, but strikingway.

It is the first part of an overall schemeaimed at providing a long-term solutionto the problem of achieving instant recog-nition. It is hoped that, in the next twoyears) the identity will be carried intoforms, publications, compliment slips,lecture and membership cards, and even,perhaps, on ties and badges.

Controversy !The future of British ufology

There has been a good deal of contro-versial comment in recent months con-cerning the future of British ufology.Inevitably Bufora, as a leading represent-ative in this field, has come in for criticalreaction from many quartefs. Some ofthis reaction has been justified, some not.There can be little doubt that this countrylags behind many others. Not only doesit lack the professional support of official-dom and science existent elsewhere, butalso we fail to make the most of whatorganisation we do have. Obviously thegaining of professional support will notcome overnight. There are signs of itsdevelopment, as was well illustrated at theHanley conference, but how can we ex-pect such recognition without putting ourown house in order ?

ENTHUSIASMA vital step is being taken by Bufora in itsattempts to forge a close link with Con-tact (UK). Such an integration of themajor data gathering bodies in the countryis not simply desirable-it is essential.There is no need for fears or apprehen-sions about mergers and loss of individualidentity. Both organisations have muchto offer and can be mutually co-existent.

Of course most UFO investigation in thiscountry is carried out by individuals. Itis a very diffficult matter to ensure that thestandard of this work remains high becausethe enthusiasm and circumstances of theseindividuals differs so widely. Buforamust do all it can by providing field man-uals, instructions and field exercises ininvestigation .techniques. Of course amajor difficulty is that those who willbenefit most are the dedicated persons(who invariably need less assistance). Afar greater role has to be played by thelocal investigations co-ordinators andliaison officers. Every willing and ex-

by JENNY RlNDrEs

perienced Bufora member must be usedin some way so that the less experiencedhave someone to turn to for advice andassistance. I am convinced that part ofthe reason why so much investigationwork is of poor standard is because theordinary Bufora member is unsure whatto do, or who to turn to.

Many RICs have vast regions and it isbeyond the bounds of reason to expectthem to give assistance to every Buforamember inside their area. Thoughtshould be given towards reducing RICareas-even to the point of utilisingnon-Bufora personnel with the requiredexperience. Naturally Bufora want thesubscriptions berr surely we have enoughconfidence in ourselves to believe thatsuch a non-member, once carrying outhis function and seeing the benefits ofmembership, would join up. In anyevent, as I pointed out, if that person cando something positive to assist Buforaand ufology, does it matter ?

THREATThis whole situation affects local UFOinvestigation groups. One cannot forceBufora members to join their local group,or help to form one if such does not existalready, but more ought to be done topoint out the advantages. There is noreason on earth why Bufora should beafraid, as they seem to be, that such groupsare a threat to their own existence.Groups within Nufon have proved that avery satisfactory working relationship canexist between them and the national body,with benefits not only to both parties, butto British ufology. Groups have morepower in the local community, to gainpublicity for themselves (and Bufora) andto attain public confidence in reportingUFO observations.

cont'inued oaerleaf

7

CONTROVERSYcontinued from previous page

A tentative step in the right direction hasbeen taken with the appointment ofliaison officers. Through them it mustbe made clear that a radical change inthinking has taken place. Can there beany objection to carrying nalnes andaddresses of local groups) provided theyprove they wish to assist Bufora, on theback page of the Journal? Surely suchinformation ought to be made readilyavailable to all Bufora members. Perhapsthe odd piece of news or informationabout these groups would not go amisseither. They are a vital part of Britishufology and must be integrated withBufora in their activities.

PROBLEMSNetworks such as Nufon do have a future.Such networks, on a limited geographicalscale, ensure that experience, resourcesand information can be pooled and sharedat a local level. It is perhaps significantthat since Nufon began not one northernUFO group has been dissolved. Thismust say something positive for the ad-vantages of mutual contact. Such a net-work of networks, over the country as awhole, all working with Bufora, would goa long way towards solving our problems.

cRos.tRolDsAfter we have set our store right thereseems no reason why we ought not turnour attention to the world. By now aninternational network of UFO groups oughtto be operating. With such a vast inter-national problem, it is sheer folly, that oneis not. Here Britain could take the lead.

I have heard it said, and believe it true,that ufology in this country is at a cross-roads. The time has come when thebig push has to be made. We must setout firmly on the road, and it must be theright one. Otherwise we shall find our-selves doing nothing and going nowherevery fast!

8

MOD tracks ttFO olThis case is potentially interesting because of r

the closeness of the encounter with the obiect,

CASE DETAILSDate: 12.37, 23 June 1975.

Location: 52 degrees 30 minutes N,20 degrees W.

Witness: Well qualified and exper-ienced radar operator withelectronics engineer qual-ifications.

\Teather: Thick fog-visibility 1000yds.

Equipment: 10cm (3GHz) Radar set.Radar horizon-22 miles.

CASE SYNOP.SISThe first point that must be made con-cerning this report is that, although thewitnesses' name, address and fuil occu-pation is on file, none of these details canbe made public. This is becuase he wasat the time under the strict jurisdiction ofthe Ministry of Defence, to whom a fullreport was made. W'e are most fortunatetherefore, that he has seen fit to brave theOfficial Secrets Act by reiating the story tous. The witness was on board a ship inthe Atlantic, off the west coast of Ireland.He is well qualified and was operatingradar equipment in thick fog. He pickedup an echo which he presumed to bea ship closing in on them, and repoftedthis to the captain. On returning to thescreen, he noted the object's trace wasdisappearing at a 'totally impossible 'velocity. Being acquainted with all typesof natural phenomenon and anomolouspropagations as recorded on the screen,he was certain that this object could onlybe classed as an unidentified flying object.

He reported it as this, and the Captainsubmitted the report to the Ministry ofDefence. The sighting lasted for oneminute.

l radarseveral factors. These includeand the possibility of back-up witnesses.

OBSERVATION

Trace recorded approximately 30 seconds.Elevation was constant at 1] degrees.Initial bearing 105 degrees rrue, remainingconstant. Object was initially at rangeseven nautical miies and closing at a speedof approximately six knots. It disappearedwithin 15 seconds with a terminal velocityof at least 6000 knots. Its accelleration,z/ constant, was at least 18G.s

INVESTIGATIONThe witness was interviewed severaltimes, and on each occasion the story wasrelated without inconsistency. \7e wereimpressed by the witness, who appearedknowledgable in radar and electronics,level-headed and open-minded. He ad-mitted to a mild interest in UFOs, buthis interest has not been affected by hissighting. The possibility of misinter-pretation is considered virtually nil. Thewitness is well versed in types of 'ghostimages'1 there were no temperature inver-sions recorded and no surface turbulance.The ship in question was stationarythroughout the observation, and unfor-tunately the witness did not wind up thevertical aerial as the object disappearedfrom view, so we are unable to ascertainwhether it simply was lost over the 22mile horizon of the equipment or rvhetherit also ascended. The conclusion of theinvestigators was that the witness wassincere, he believed that he had seen aUFO, but did not know what that meanthe had seen. The possibility of a hoaxseems remote, because of the character ofthe witness and the fact that he is insistenton personal details not being revealed.

Owing to the close supervision of theships crew by the MOD, the investigatorsfeel that there is little more progress thatcan be made on this case.

Reporr by PETER BOTTOMLEY andGORDON CLEGG.

CONCLUSION.S

The above investigation was conductedbetween 26 and 30 November 1975.However, we include a second reportdated 4 December 1975. This concernsthe possrbility of a hoax-something whichhad to be considered carefully for tworeasons. Firstly, slight inconsistenciesin the quoted figure calculations, andsecondly that the witness is known to oneof the investigators through connectionsat work (where he is often good-naturedlyderided for his UFO involvements).He felt that there was a risk of a hoaxbeing perpetrated on him, despite theobvious sincerity of the witness.

The inconsistencies came from the figuresquoted by the witness. He stated thetrace described an object at seven mileselevation 1$ degrees with an estimatedaltitude of 220 feet. Taking any two ofthese as constant, and varying the otherthe results are significant:

Distance 7 miles; Elevation 1|- degrees;Height : 1115 feet.

Distance 7 miles; Altitude 220 feet;Elevation : 0 degrees 18 minutes.

Elevation 1$ degrees; Altitude 220 feet;Distance: 1'38miles.

Consultation was then entered into withJeff Porter of Mufora, himself an electron-ics engineer. He suggested that the errormay be due to the pitch of the ship, if theradar were not corrected for a shiftinghorizon. Consequently, the witness wasquestioned on rhis point, and the dis-crepancies pointed out. IIe was mostdisturbed by them, and agreed that therevised figures were correct. He statedthat the radar set z{ras gyroscopically com-pensated, but that in any case, with fog,there was no wind and therefore no

continued oaerleaf

9

RADAR UFOcontinued from preuious page

shifting horizon. His only possible ex-planation was that he had used a sliderule, which he termed a 'guessing stick,'and thought he may have dropped adecimal point. He suggested we re-check his figures for acceleration andspeed. From this it was determinedthat he had under estimated these figures.The true acceleration was 25Gs and theterminal velocity 7194 knots.

To summarise, we are now sure that thereport is genuine. Not only do we bel-ieve in the testimony of the witness, butwe feel sure that he wouid have not mademistakes in calculations or would haveerred on the high (rather than low) side.They also feel he would have seized on theshifting horizon as a convenient 'out' forthe error, or had some other explanationready. The cumulative effect, they be-lieve, indicates that the repor-t is genuineand concerns the detection of a truly un-known object performing feats of accel-eration and motion totally outside thecapabilities of current aircraft.

The second part of Lionel Beer's'trIistory of Bufora' has been heldover to the next issue.

!nvestigator trainingA training programme is being preparedto help the less experienced investigator,or members with no experience, to carryout investi€iations for the Association.Our training officer (Trevor Whitaker)will be pleased to hear views of exper-ienced investigators as to what are therequirements of such a programme.Views of members who may not now beactive investigators, but have been so inthe past, will also be most welcome.Trevor's address is on the inside frontcover ofthis Journal.

10

Lunarmystery deepensAn untimely and unexplained occurrenceon 18 January 1976, ended the perform-ance of one of five remote scientific stationstransmitting data from the moon.

Scientists and engineers were disappoin-ted and puzzled. The station was almostfive years old and had an estimated re-maining life of fi'om two to three years.Alan Shepard and Edgar Mitchell hadestablished the station during their visitto the moon on Apollo 14 in February7971. In March 1975, the 14 station lostits receiver, rendering ground controlsuseless. And when the transmitter failedin January, it left the scientists andengineers who designed the stationsperplexed.

But the mystery deepened, when, on 19February, the Apollo 14 ALSEP (ApolloLunar Scientific Experiment Package)returned to life with

-its Iransmirrer, 1e-

ceioer and experiments functioning ex*eme-ly well.

In fact, for one of the experiments, the 14station appears to be performing betterthan it ever has. The charged particlelunar environment experiment (CPLEE)had not been able to perform during lunardaylight due to temperature variations,which degraded the power supply. TheCPLEE is now performing during lunarday'ight and sending good data.

The ALSEP team at the Johnson SpaceCenter at present has no idea of why thestation came back on. However, theyare proceeding slowly in their trouble-shooting as a precaution against overload-ing the station with too many commands.Extreme temperature variations, rangingas much as 220 degrees C in two hours,were cited as a possible cause for thecessation.

RICHARD BEET

Uforum

Readers are invited to comment on any article appearing in BUFCRAJournal 9-r- on any other relevant topic. Letters sh-ould b,J kept as briefas pos_sible. The editor reserves the right to publish and to extractfrom letters where necessary. Letters of some length may be consieleredby the editor to be suitable as features.

Advice for investigatorsDear Sir

As the investigaror is the only link be-tween the Bufora organisation and thewitness of a UFO event, it is importantthat he is acquainted with the subject, andthat he must have a professional approach.Read everything available on the UFOphenomenon, but learn to disregard'pseudo-orientated ' material. Use c-om-mon sense and good judgement. Ob-tain a working knowledge of associatedsciences, most impor-tantly, photography,astronomy, biology, geology, aerody-namics, radiology, physics, psychologyand electronics, and get acquainted wiihradar techniques, satellites, aircraft andnatural phenomena.

I realise all work done on behalf ofBufora is voluntary, but to achieve worth-while aims, time and money must be used.The subject is too serious for half-heartedmeasures, and we should not rely onschoolboys or old ladies to do all our workfor us. Although we often feel the workthat we are doing, and the results we aregetting, are of no value, we must remem-ber that work done today will be of helpto future researchers.

Yours sincerdly

Benny M KrNc554 Goresbrook RoadDagenhamEssex RM9 4XD

Farnborough entityDear SirIn his report on the possible UFO enrirycase at Farnborough (Bufora Journal IailFeb i976), Mr Omat Fowler asks whetherone of the features of the entitv-nopupils in his eyes-does correlate withother cases ofthis type.

One report which comes to mind is theclaimed contam by Arthur Shuttlewoodwith ' I(arne', described in chapter 16of his book Warnings from Ftying Friends.The eyes of the ' entity ' in this particularcase were 'brilliant blue or grey-green',and appeared to lack pupils. Ferhapsthere is a further similarity in the colour-as the eyeg of the Farnborough ' entity,were described as being a' greeny coloui '.Yours sincerely

Nrcuoras MeronsrWessex Association for The Studv of Un-explained Phenomena (WATSUP)180 Locksway Road, MiltonPortsmouth, Hants PO4 8LE

A question of why ?

Dear SirI refer to J E Scarry's comments oub-lished in the column ' Controversy ' in theNovember/December issue of the Journal.In this he strongly indicated that allUFOs or at least the vast majority, very

continued ozterleaf

11

UFORUMcontinued from pre'uious page

rarely-if indeed ever-shol any inclin-ation toward hostility. This, I am afraid,is iust simply not the case.

Although I personally wouid very muchlike to believe UFOs or their occupantsto be intelligent, peacable beings, there isoverwheiming evidence that at least someUFOs pose a possible danger to us un-aware 'earthlings'.In particular, I refer to the rather fright-ening case published in the book, TheNezu UFO Breakthrougl2, which detailsthe incident of a UFO encounter by ayoung girl. in u'hich she received multipleand severe burns, administered purposelyby it's occupants.

Taking this and many other unmentionedcases into consideration, I feel that it is a

very naive concept indeed to regard allUFOs as friendly to Homo-Sapiens.I am also quite certain that the inform-ation published in the previously statedbook, is not the work of some UFO fan-atics and the information put forwardmust certainly be based on some concreteevidence. Perhaps if Mr Scarry was tostudy more carefully the many books ofcares relating to UFO hostility, he mightand that the number of hostile encountersare far in excess of the number that hewould have us believe.

Yours sincereiy

Tnouas HrcclNs65 Sarto Road, Naas,Co I{ildare, Ireland.

Horsham flapAt the time of going to press, there wasintense activity in the Horsham, Sussexarea. More details to follow . . .

l2

On 5 June 1955, around 1930 hrs, a MrMuyldermans was riding on his bicycletowards Saint-Marc, a few kilometresnorth-west of Namur, when his attentionwas drawn by a bright glow that wasmoving in the sky, at high speed andwithout any sound. The witness saw theobject slow down and, owing to its lowaltitude, thought that it was going to landin the large field that bordered the road.

Suddenly, the object-thought then bythe witness to be an aeroplane-stopped.He got off his bike to observe the strangemachine-disc-shaped and a dark bottle-green colour. A luminous brightnesscould be seen reflecting the sun on thedome and underneath could be seen whatresembled landing spheres.

WHITE TRAILMr Muyldermans, a photographer, grab-bed his camera, a Leica 1948 model equip-ped with a 1'8mm objective iens and a 17DIN film, and took a photograph whenthe object rvas stationary. After a fewseconds, the object descended, producinga rvhite trail like that of an aeroplane'scondensation. It then moved lound on ahorizontal plan, and ascended into thewhite trail. As the trail faded, theUFO suddenly accelerated, dropping tinyluminous particles. According to thewitness, the object moved off at 500km/h, and disappeared into the westernhorizon.

The totai duration of the observation wasapproximately 1] minutes. This objectwas apparently observed from Namurand, in the evening, from Brussels.

Mr Muyldermans' documents were pub-lished in several newspapers and special-ized reviews. He then decided to sendthe negatives to the French newspaperRadar, which was offering at that period;

A ' classic'from Belgium

In Challenge to Science, Jacques andJanine Vallee wrote on page 64:

The three pltotographs taken near Namur,Belgium, on 5 June 1955 are belieoed ro beauthentic, because on exposure 2 the objectis seen behind a condensation trail, whichcould not haae.formed at an altitude lowerthan 1500 mettes, according to the pro-fessiona,l meteorologists by whom the photo-graphs zaere analyzed. On that basis, theminimum diameter of the object must lxaoebeen twelve metres. Also, a professionalastronomer examined the negath)es andreached the conclusion that they had notbeen faked.

a vely iarge sum of money to someone whocould provide authentic photos of a'flying saucer'. The papei received theprecious documents but when, one rnonthlater, Mr Muyldermans vranted to re-cuperate them, the editors of Radar toldhim that the negatives had already beensent back by the maii . . . Mr Muvlder-mans took ihe matter to justice un.l uninvestigation was undertaken, but withno results, and the negatives still remainundiscovered.

ref: Inforespace 197214, pps 21 ro 22.Science et Vie,516.Le Soir lllustr|, I6 June 1955.

Translated and supplied from InJorespaceby Miss Alice Ashton-.SO.BEPS.

Alan Fossey resignsIn a letter sent to the Jounrul on 21 Feb-ruary) Alan Fossey, A,{edia r.elationsdirector and soutliern liaison olicer-,announced his resignation from the BuforaCouncil.

Increased professionai responsibilities, to-gether with the added load of an OpenUniversity degree course, are contribu-tory factol's in Alan's decision. I{e seesthe degree course as a means of openingnelv vistas, and may, he says, help him tomake a serious contibution to ufology infuture years.

Alan will continue to take an avid interestfrom the 'sidelines', and will remain amember of Bufora.

Official U FOThis excellent American newsstand mag-azine is now in its seventh issue. Full ofUS articles, eyewitness accounts andphotographs, Official UFO is available bysubscription to Countrl'wide PublicationsInc,257 Park Avenue South, New York,New York 10010. Cost for nine issues is$8'oo.

13

Sighting surnmariesA selection from the lnvestigation Department files

IN THE PINK75-0641065 23 February 1975

Orqington

There were two phases to this sighting. Theflrst occurred at 18.41 when a young man wasout driving with his fiancee, near Potts Wood.They noticed a huge, bright object in the sky.It was glowing slightly pink and circular. Ob-servations were made and it is estimated that atleast a footbali at arms length would be neededto cover it. Both witnesses got out of the car,and using a stopwatch, timed it for 30 seconds asit hovered. It then descended into, or justbeyond the woods for five seconds at a speed of30 to 35 mph. The witnesses immediately wentto report the sighting to the BUFORA LogisticsAdvisor, Lawrence Dale. rVhen the story hadbeen related, Mr Dale suggested he and the youngman return to the scene of observation. Theywaiked into the forest at 20.41, observing severalaircraft circling on approach to London Airport,with landing lights on. Suddenly one to twodegrees below the aircraft a small bright lightappeared. It seemed to move on a coursedirectly towards the witnesses for about thirtyseconds, increasing in size and luminosity. Itsfinal brightness was four times that of the bright-est aircraft headiight seen. Both witnesses thenexperienced a strong feeling of recognition andthat the object was going away. Mr Dale's col-league expressed the view that it was almost asif it knew it was being watched. Vithin twoseconds, it dimmed to a point source one to twodegrees north west of its original position anddisappeared. For the next 15 minutes, threemiiitary aircraft circled the area, in a lowerposition ro the civil aircraft.

RED AND WHITE LITS75-058 12 June 1975 23.30

Belfast

Yet another LITS report involving Belfast school-children tells of two white lights and a red one,flying swiftly across the sky in trianguiar form-ation.

SCHOOLBOYS SEE MAGNESIUM UFO

75-057 16 June 1975 23.25Belfast

Several local schoolboys were witness ro a hazyround object, like a piece of burning magnesium,as it moved northwards against the dark skybackground.

74

UFO OR NOT?75-056 24 June 1975

Belfast

A schoolboy and some friends reported they hadseen a silvery oval shape surrounded in haze.It moved west to east above a vapour trail leftby an aircraft which had just passed over anddisappeared behind houses. A father of one ofthe boys was present, viewing through binoculars,but attests that he only saw the aircraft duringthe ten minutes of the alleged sighting.

SPARKING PEAR75-067 24June 1975

Dublin

Two schoolboys were sitting on a wall near adisused factory. Suddenly a pear-shaped obiectappeared in the south east. It was silvery whitein colour and moved towards them slowly beforehovering briefly for a few seconds. It thendisappeared over houses to the north east. Itwas in view for six minutes and seemed to dis-charge sparks from its right side as it moved.

SILVER CIGAR75-055 23 July 1975 12.30

Belfast

A baker and his wife viewed a sih'ery cigar-shaped object, hovering between clouds and re-flecting sunlight. It was in sight for six minutes,but the witnesses did not see it disappear.

CLOCK FACE UFO75-068 2 August 1975 00.30

Biddenden, KentIn the wake of Stella Lansing (see recent issuesof Flying Saucer Repiew) a clock face UFO madeits appearance over the early morning village ofBiddenden. The witness is well respected andhas a good record of observational experience.The hands of the clock were at f,ve to f,ve, andremained so for two hours. During this period,it did not move at ail, but by the closing stages itresolved into a solid, bright light which wasmuch smaller in apparent size than the clock face.Several times small pin points of light were seem-ingly discharged by the object, though they didnot appear until well clear of the main body andwere only momentary in duration. Note thesighting at Dartford one hour previous (75-066).

UNDULATING TENNIS BALL75-066 2 August 1975 23.i0

Dartford, KentTwo witnesses observed an orange bali of light,the size of a sma1l tennis ball, moving northwtrd;on an up and down path. After a ferv rninutes,it veered eastwards and vanished.

SAILS ALOFT75-060 3 August 1975 21.00

Cambridge

There are several independent rvitnesses ro thisintcresring case. Their descriptions of the ob-ject do not entireiy agree, but ttiere is a consensusof opinion that it resembled two bright stars closetogether, One of the witnesses was a surveyorand he described two 'sail-like' projections on aflat base hanging motionless in the sky. It wasyellow/orange in colour and vanished after 30seconds, by just fading out. By cross referenceto the positions of all the witnesses, it would seemthat the object was 2000 feet up and 150 feet insize. No official expianation has been forth-coming, but the theory of the surveyor, is that itw_as sunlight reflecting off a mass of floating fueldischarged by an aircraft.

GOLDEN SAUCER75-062 7lB August 1975 04.30

Soundwell, BristolThig qost spectacular sighting, made by a re-tired BAC worker, occurred on two consecutivenights for over two hours duration. On bothoccasions he was awakened by his cat ' growling'and jumping onto the window. In the southeinsky,was a saucer-shaped object with a rotatinggolde! edge. It glittered and made a slighi'purring' sound like a generator. His experi-ence with aircraft enginesr has been quite eiten-sive and he is sure that this sound rvas different.The object remained stationarv and faded out asthe sky brightened. On the flrst morning a trapdoor opened in the side of the object ana tgnlseemed to radiate from the inside. A smallshap_e appeare9 to come out and move slowlysouthwards. It returned some 20 minutes laterand th€ trap door closed. This occurred only theonce, just before the object vanished.

SHIMMERING RED CRO.SS

Uncoded 1964-197A After 00.30Belfast

The witness,was, at the unremembered date, anurse. As she walked towards the geriatric unitof the City Hospital, she saw a brightly shim-mering silver cross, hovering ovlrh6ad. Itseemed like a' big star'with an apparent verticalaxis of 16 inches and a much smaller horizontalone. She went into the ward and tried to per-

suade an auxiliary ro go our ro view it, but sheinsisted rhar lhey both go. Since the nurse couldnot leave the rvard unattended. it is not knownhow the.object disappeared. The investigatorsfe^el that it is possible this was an optical ill-usionof a very bright star.

BASCOTE DISCSUncoded lYhit Monday 1959 15.30

Bascote, Warwichs

After searching the fields for cowslips, a house-wife and her ten year old daughter were lvine inthe grass gazing at rhe sky. Suddenlv a-siliervdisc shape flew overhead on a north-we;t io south:east course. It was apparently quite low, buttotaily silent. The underside seemed to be re-volving. It was in view for a minute, and whenit had gone our of sight. a second, simiJar obiecttraversed rhe same parh. In all lour identicaldiscs r.vere seen in a matter of minutes. Twoother aduits were close by, but were engrossedin conversation and despite efforts to mak-e themlook up, did not see any of the phenomena.

Advisers still requiredIn the November/December issue of theJournal, a brief mention was made bv theResearch Department that we are in needof advisers. Such advisers will be ex-pected .to lave an understanding orknowledge of certain subjects, though notnecessarily formal qualificarions. Theyare needed to assist in the many facets ofinvestigation work which crop up incertain cases. We intend to compile adetailed list of advisers and publishit, sothat the expertise within Bufora can beseen.

If you feel that you can contribute eitheryour knowledge or experience then pleasewrite to Jenny Randles, and outline in asmuch detail as possible horv, and why, voucan help. Do not think that if youdon,thave a degree in physics you will be of novalue. There are many diverse fields inwhich we vitally need assistance, for exam-ple soil analysis, photographic analysis, andpqychology. In the complex subiect ofufology, we never know exactly what kindof special help we are going to need next.You could be just the one we need, sowhatever your speciality, let us know.JrNNv RaNnrBs

15

FeopleWe extend a welcome to the following,recently admitted to Buf,ora:

6 December 1975 admissionsLondon: Miss J Cook; R GHaslam; J Kealy;L E Kendrick.

Home Counties: M Knight; Miss S Lewis;R McHardy; Miss M Navarro; J Racher; P SRoberts; Miss V A Tuckey.

National: P K Bartholomew; A Brogden; PColes; A B Collins; D Cox; A P Dewhurst; CDexter; B M Garoner; B J Gibbs; D Gideon;K Grimsey; G Hewitt; Mrs P Higley; S Higley;Miss S M Jacobs; A S James; M C Leieh; JMarians; M R Pickup; K Reardon; Miss S Row;R L Rushforth; R G Smith; P S Westrope;C B Sfilkes, T J Barrable; M Barry; C Bourne;B Bradiey; T Bryan; E C B Cauchi; A Cervi;Miss B Chivers; S Ciarke; P Cloherty; G LCollier; D Cromwell; D Dardis; LWDavies;E Downey; M J Duffy; L Fairbairn; J Fitzgerald;Miss A Griffiths; Miss S J Harper; M J Harris;B Hartley; P J Holownia; R J Howard; P RHudson; V K Jassi; P Jones; J P Kain; J J GKelly; J Lack; D R Lennard; T Lewis; P Liss;G Martin; D O Mayes; S McCarten; Miss PMcKeown; A J Mclaren; D P Meadows; JMurphy; A J O'NeiIl; R L Pearcy, C A Randall;

P J S Rogers; P Schubert; E Spindier; P Taylor;S Thrower; S J Thorpe; S D $/ales; A HlVhetstone; K .Wilkinson; R H \Tolstenhoime;J Yourell.

Overseas: L/Cpl R Barrett; G Lyg; Pte R AMcGillivray; Cpl G T Robinson; A R A Quarles.

Society: Edinburgh {Jniversity UFO ResearchSociety.

7 February 1976 admissionsLondon: R Burton; B Foley; P R Hardman;C C Palmer; Mrs E Robson; P J Villiams;D I/rightson.

Ilome Counties : Miss A D Bain; Miss J EBaker; J Connor; D Fincham; C E Glaister; S JJ Hay; R I Inns; Mrs H Miller; Miss E Murray;G Noble;.T Stabler; M Stenhoff.

National : D A Bethell; S Bradley; D Brown;G S Brownett; Miss R Carrick; T P Chivers;K P Cresswell; I S Cressweli; Miss C Daybell;G Doran; C R Fitzpatrick; Miss K Gibson; A'W Griffin; R Hal1; J Herbert; T Higgins; I Jones;G Knights; Miss J H Lay; P Lorvry; Mrs IMcCrossan; P McTeigue; J McGowan; Mrs W'Moore; W J Mushat; N Pollard; G A Pope;D J Rya11s, J W Smith; M R Smith; S Smith;Miss S Thomas; J Thomason.

Overseas: M Krmelj; Cpl M I Barnett; MissMPVaulk;RWatts.

Nufon FrlewsSighting activityAt the start of 1976, the importance ofgroup co-operation has been proved by no less than threelocal groups (Mufora, Digap and Rigap) ailworking together, through Nufon, on investig-ating a series of reports in central Lancashire.Ufosis (cio 136 Cleveland Tower, HollowayCircus, Birmingham 1) are also very active in the'W'est Midlands. They also operate an inform-ation service for newcomers to ufology, and willbe pleased to answer any queries on receipt of astamped addressed envelope. They have, in-cidentally, applied for association to Bufora.

AdministrationNufon is now organised by a Governing Com-mittee, which consists of equal representation ofall associate groups. There is also an executivewhich controis day-to-day administration' Thiscurrentlv consists of Jenny Randles of Bufora(secretaiial work), Peter rVarrington of Mufora(Finance) and Trevor Whitaker (Bufora York-

t6

shire) acting as Chairman. This committeestands down at each committee meetingJ heldevery three months. Rising like a phoenix fromthe ashes of the Bufora Staffordshire branch, anew organisation, Ufora (Staffs), is looking afterinvestigation work in this area. Nufon has alsoforged stronger links with outlying Bufora assoc-iates, the Northern Ireland branch and the Edin-burgh University UFO Society. Work on jointprojects with both Contact UK (a detailed cata-logue of UFO activity in the north of England)and Bufora (Investigator Training and Investig-ation and Research advisers) is progressing rvell.

EventsA conference is to be held on 22 May 1976 at theFiesta Club in Sheffield. Hosts to this yearsevent are the Shefield, Dinnington & RotherhamUFO Research Association. Provisional plansare to base the aflernoons programme on ufolo-gists, with research-orientated lectures and sem-inars, and to aim the evening at the general publicwith a more 'popular' presentation. Fulldetails will be available from local groups andliaison officer in due course.

JrwNv Rawor,rs.

continued from inside front cooer

AdvertisernentsPersonal column: 2p a_ word. Display,rates;_whole page d10.00; half page d6.00 quarterpage d3 ' 00. outside back cover : d.12.. 0o; half page f z . oti. rteaie send a"dvdtising iopy andrelated correspondence to the Vice-Chairman:L E Beer, l5 Freshwater court,crawford street, LondonwlH lHS. Telephone 0I-723 030s

Bufora Investigation Network

N ational Ina e s tig ations C o -ordinatorKen Phillips, AMsERr, 26 Chevening Road, Kensal Rise, London N\f6 6DDTelephone 01-969 8847

Regional Investigation Co-ordinator s

S Campbell, 4 Dovecot Loan, Edinburgh, ScotlandR Colborne,98 Envis Way, Guildford, SurreyL Dale, 11 \Wimborne Avenue, St. Pauls Cray, Orpington, Kent BR5 2NSM Dickie 4 Menai Court, Beaumaris, Anglesey, N \7a1esR Farrow, 9 Hawthorns, Cornwall PL12 4BBP Hudson, Flat 2, 15 London Road, Spalding, LincsA Jackman, 17 Loring Road, Whetstone, London N20D James, 7 Queen Street, Porthill, StaffordshireB Jeffrey, St Catherine's College, CambridgeP Johnson, 1 Demorley Garth, Sheringham, NorfolkM Johnston, The Desmesne, Lurgan, Craigavon, Co Armagh, N IrelandR Jones-Pugh, Parkland Place, Roch, Haverfordwest, Pembs, WalesB King, 554 Goresbrook Road, Dagenham, EssexD McGroary, 63 Thames Road, Redcar, ClevelandMURO, 8 Newiands Avenue, Boughton, NottsR Nash, Ker House, 12 Southwick Hill Road, Cosham, Hants PO6 3LUJ Roylance, 41 Eastfield, Blewbury, Didcot, OxonI Sanderson, Sandon, High Street, Ryton-on-Dunsmore, CoventryJ Shaw, 22Lavender Gardens, Battersea, London S!/11D Shelton, 8 Moorhouse Road, \fillerby Road, Hull, North Humberside HU5 5p\fT Thornton, 45 Ellesmere Road, Braunstone, Leicester LE3 lBGI Vinten, 51 Hutton Park, Hutton Moor Road, Weston-super-Mare, Somerset

J Webber, 4 Embankment Road, Kingsbridge, Devon TQ7 1JZT Whitaker, 8 Central Park, Wellhead, Halifax, Yorshire

Info.rmation as supplied_by _the National Inaestigations Co-ordinator. All (JFO reportsinitially be reported to the NIC.

BUFORA BRANCHYorkshireT !/hitaker, 8 Central Park, \(rellhead, Halifax, Yorkshire HX1 2BT

with Member Societies

should

"N

Bufsra PublicatimnsNOIY] AI/AILABI,h'l-hr: fir:st paper to be publisheci fionr last vear's llcsealclr ancl Inycstigrrti6u( lrrnt-ilence --The use of analytical instruments in the search for extra-terrestrial spacecraftb;DA\rID VIRWIN(iI ll Lrstr:atce1.

irricc (inch.rcling post anti pacliing) -lt)p (t'ncmber-si. (r01'r lnon-.mentbcrs).

O7'H E]< P LI B I,IC.47'1OIT5

Guide to the UFS Phenomenonils.sential backsrr)und. intbrmation lirr all ufblogisrs

I)rice (inclr-rding po51 lnd nx1'iiing) 25p (menrbcls). -i2| (n.n-r.nenrbcrs)

Bufora JournalA selection o1'back issues alc availaltlc.

l)ricc pcr copr'(inclucling post trird prtc)<ir.re) .15f imsll.lbsrs). .5{)p (r.rorr-r.nt-r1lrc1.sr.

A Challenge to Seienee

An in-depth ini,estigatioi-r ot'the e\,ents in anci ufolrlitl l-lat-ritulr' 1971. l{c.1.1r1.1inclu<les anaivsis of thc fi1m taken br, an ATY tlln-r rr-cu.

A\/AII-ARI,II ONLY IIROM I{OGEII S |AN\\'AYOlcl Bt'ook (l()ttage, \X'l.rite ( lt'oss, Haughton, Staflbldsl-rit-c.

Plice per copt'(incluciing post ancl packing) 1.2 LS (r-nen'rber-s). 1,2.fr-i I11,,n-menrbers).

Ilxcept for A CliullerLgc to Scien,e. all publications ale availr.ble 1r.or.r.i.

Arnold West, Bufora Publications, 16 Southway, Rurgess Hill, SussexRH15 9ST.

Buruttt's Pr,titrittg lli'rAr. (.lrrlrtr.t Rout!, llut'gtjr Fliil, ,5v.srrl. l'.1 }3rr'rgr.{j lliil .t l}h | .\'l l) O.i.l ,!(,