Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Minot AFB - 1968


Recommended Posts

In the early morning hours of 24 Oct. 1968, United States Air Force (USAF) maintenance and security personnel stationed within the Minuteman, Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) complex surrounding Minot AFB, North Dakota, observed one—and at times—two UFOs. The Minot Base Operations dispatcher initiated radio communications with personnel reporting in the field, Minot, Radar Approach Control (RAPCON), and the crew of a returning B-52H aircraft.
 

 

Edited by Vaz
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, Bluebook determined that all those witnesses saw stars. Didn't know stars could hover along the ground and dart around. :blink:

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That was my 8th birthday :)   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Hawken said:

So, Bluebook determined that all those witnesses saw stars. Didn't know stars could hover along the ground and dart around. :blink:

Unfortunately, that's not what Blue Book or the Strategic Air Command (SAC) investigations concluded.

Don't worry I'll help...

"TO COL PULLEN SSO SAC. FROM LT COL QUINTANILLA. REFERENCE OUR TELECON WITH REGARDS TO MINOT AFB UFO’S. IT IS MY FEELINGS, AFTER REVIEWING PRELIMINARY INFORMATION SUBMITTED BY M[I]NOT THAT UFO PAINTED BY B-52 ON RADAR AND ALSO OBSERVED VISUALLY BY IP AND PERSONNEL ON GROUND IS MOST PROBABLY A PLASMA OF THE BALL-LIGHTNING CLASS. PLASMAS OF THIS TYPE WILL PAINT ON RADAR AND ALSO AFFECT SOME ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT AT CERTAIN FREQUENCIES. PLASMAS ARE NOT UNCOMMON, HOWEVER, THEY ARE UNIQUE AND EXTREMELY DIFFICULT TO DUPLICATE IN THE LABORATORY. ALSO BECAUSE OF THE TIME DURATIONS, FEEL STRONGLY THAT SOME SECURITY GUARDS AND MAINTENANCE CREW WERE OBSERVING SOME FIRST MAGNITUDE CELESTIAL BODIES WHICH WERE GREATLY MAGNIFIED BY THE INVERSION LAYER AND HAZE WHICH WAS PRESENT AT MINOT DURING THE TIME OF THE UFO OBSERVATIONS. DO NOT CONSIDER THE PHYSICAL VIOLATION OF THE LOCK AS BEING RELATED IN ANY WAY WITH UFO’S. I CONSIDER THE UFO REPORTS AS FAIRLY ROUTINE, EXCEPT FOR THE PLASMA OBSERVATION WHICH IS INTERESTING FROM A SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW. WE WILL STUDY THIS REPORT IN MORE DETAIL WHEN WE RECEIVE THE RAW DATA FROM MINOT.[161]"

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Trelane said:

Unfortunately, that's not what Blue Book or the Strategic Air Command (SAC) investigations concluded.

Don't worry I'll help...

"TO COL PULLEN SSO SAC. FROM LT COL QUINTANILLA. REFERENCE OUR TELECON WITH REGARDS TO MINOT AFB UFO’S. IT IS MY FEELINGS, AFTER REVIEWING PRELIMINARY INFORMATION SUBMITTED BY M[I]NOT THAT UFO PAINTED BY B-52 ON RADAR AND ALSO OBSERVED VISUALLY BY IP AND PERSONNEL ON GROUND IS MOST PROBABLY A PLASMA OF THE BALL-LIGHTNING CLASS. PLASMAS OF THIS TYPE WILL PAINT ON RADAR AND ALSO AFFECT SOME ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT AT CERTAIN FREQUENCIES. PLASMAS ARE NOT UNCOMMON, HOWEVER, THEY ARE UNIQUE AND EXTREMELY DIFFICULT TO DUPLICATE IN THE LABORATORY. ALSO BECAUSE OF THE TIME DURATIONS, FEEL STRONGLY THAT SOME SECURITY GUARDS AND MAINTENANCE CREW WERE OBSERVING SOME FIRST MAGNITUDE CELESTIAL BODIES WHICH WERE GREATLY MAGNIFIED BY THE INVERSION LAYER AND HAZE WHICH WAS PRESENT AT MINOT DURING THE TIME OF THE UFO OBSERVATIONS. DO NOT CONSIDER THE PHYSICAL VIOLATION OF THE LOCK AS BEING RELATED IN ANY WAY WITH UFO’S. I CONSIDER THE UFO REPORTS AS FAIRLY ROUTINE, EXCEPT FOR THE PLASMA OBSERVATION WHICH IS INTERESTING FROM A SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW. WE WILL STUDY THIS REPORT IN MORE DETAIL WHEN WE RECEIVE THE RAW DATA FROM MINOT.[161]"

You are forgetting that the UAP was witnessed by those on the ground and in the aircraft, which simply means that you are incorrect on all counts. You will notice that Minot AFB is mentioned in the following link as well. 

A NARRATIVE OF UFO EVENTS AT MINOT AIR FORCE BASE

In the early morning hours of 24 Oct. 1968, United States Air Force (USAF) maintenance and security personnel stationed within the Minuteman, Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) complex surrounding Minot AFB, North Dakota, observed one—and at times—two UFOs. The Minot Base Operations dispatcher initiated radio communications with personnel reporting in the field, Minot, Radar Approach Control (RAPCON), and the crew of a returning B-52H

The Minot AFB UFO Case | 24 OCTOBER 1968 | Documents | Interviews | Analysis (minotb52ufo.com)

 

Edited by skyeagle409
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Hawken said:

So, Bluebook determined that all those witnesses saw stars. Didn't know stars could hover along the ground and dart around. :blink:

 Project Blue Book was on the same level as Condon committee. Check it out:  "The extraordinary story of the half-million-dollar "trick" to make Americans believe the Condon committee was conducting an objective investigation."

SHG - The Flying Saucer Fiasco "Look" Magazine - John G. Fuller (project1947.com)

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Trelane said:

Unfortunately, that's not what Blue Book or the Strategic Air Command (SAC) investigations concluded.

Don't worry I'll help...

"TO COL PULLEN SSO SAC. FROM LT COL QUINTANILLA. REFERENCE OUR TELECON WITH REGARDS TO MINOT AFB UFO’S. IT IS MY FEELINGS, AFTER REVIEWING PRELIMINARY INFORMATION SUBMITTED BY M[I]NOT THAT UFO PAINTED BY B-52 ON RADAR AND ALSO OBSERVED VISUALLY BY IP AND PERSONNEL ON GROUND IS MOST PROBABLY A PLASMA OF THE BALL-LIGHTNING CLASS. PLASMAS OF THIS TYPE WILL PAINT ON RADAR AND ALSO AFFECT SOME ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT AT CERTAIN FREQUENCIES. PLASMAS ARE NOT UNCOMMON, HOWEVER, THEY ARE UNIQUE AND EXTREMELY DIFFICULT TO DUPLICATE IN THE LABORATORY. ALSO BECAUSE OF THE TIME DURATIONS, FEEL STRONGLY THAT SOME SECURITY GUARDS AND MAINTENANCE CREW WERE OBSERVING SOME FIRST MAGNITUDE CELESTIAL BODIES WHICH WERE GREATLY MAGNIFIED BY THE INVERSION LAYER AND HAZE WHICH WAS PRESENT AT MINOT DURING THE TIME OF THE UFO OBSERVATIONS. DO NOT CONSIDER THE PHYSICAL VIOLATION OF THE LOCK AS BEING RELATED IN ANY WAY WITH UFO’S. I CONSIDER THE UFO REPORTS AS FAIRLY ROUTINE, EXCEPT FOR THE PLASMA OBSERVATION WHICH IS INTERESTING FROM A SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW. WE WILL STUDY THIS REPORT IN MORE DETAIL WHEN WE RECEIVE THE RAW DATA FROM MINOT.[161]"

Even plasma balls are not a fully understood phenomena. So, they're using an unknown phenomenon to explain another unknown phenomenon. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Hawken said:

Even plasma balls are not a fully understood phenomena. So, they're using an unknown phenomenon to explain another unknown phenomenon. 

That's the thing, plasma events aren't unknown as you say. They aren't fully understood and still to this day aren't fully understood the conditions that lead to their development, duration and intensity, as well as how they present themselves physically.

The Minot incident isn't "unknown" as well. It was an actual even that was observed and recorded in multiple aspects. The explanations that were concluded from the two different investigative bodies have not been completely accepted so the perception and notion of otherworldly propositions persist.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Trelane said:

That's the thing, plasma events aren't unknown as you say. They aren't fully understood and still to this day aren't fully understood the conditions that lead to their development, duration and intensity, as well as how they present themselves physically.

The Minot incident isn't "unknown" as well. It was an actual even that was observed and recorded in multiple aspects. The explanations that were concluded from the two different investigative bodies have not been completely accepted so the perception and notion of otherworldly propositions persist.

Just to let you know, plasma had nothing to do with the Minot AFB incident. The aircrew flew near the UAP and this is the image of the object that was provided. This is Capt. Bradford Runyon’s drawing of the UFO, which he cautiously estimated the size as 200 feet in length; 100 feet in width; and 50 feet in height. At 3200 MSL, their altitude would have been around 1500 feet above the local terrain.

Capt. Brad Runyon's Drawing

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, skyeagle409 said:

Just to let you know, plasma had nothing to do with the Minot AFB incident. The aircrew flew near the UAP and this is the image of the object that was provided. This is Capt. Bradford Runyon’s drawing of the UFO, which he cautiously estimated the size as 200 feet in length; 100 feet in width; and 50 feet in height. At 3200 MSL, their altitude would have been around 1500 feet above the local terrain.

Capt. Brad Runyon's Drawing

Nowadays almost everyone has camera 24/7, where did all those impressive "huge spaceships" wanished, huh?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, bmk1245 said:

Nowadays almost everyone has camera 24/7, where did all those impressive "huge spaceships" wanished, huh?

Overhead.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Description of a B-52 radarscope photograph

The counter identifies the frame as #772. The B-52 is the bright spot in the center of the radarscope, on a heading of 122 degrees (0 degrees is north). The UFO echo appears at 242 degrees azimuth, 1.05 nautical miles (nmi) aft of the right wing of the B-52.

 

Basic Reporting Data – Minot AFB, 24 Oct. 1968

A. DESCRIPTION OF THE OBJECTS: (1) [Shape.] SHAPE WAS DESCRIBED BY VISUAL SIGHTING AS “JUST ABOUT ROUND, A LITTLE OBLONG IF ANYTHING”. THE SHAPE ON AN AIRBORNE B-52 RADAR SCOPE WAS VERY SHARP AND IRREGULAR AND AT TIMES RECTANGULAR. (2) [Size compared to a known object.] VISUAL SIGHTING COMPARED OBJECT SIZE TO BE EQUAL TO THE SUN, VERY LARGE, TOO BIG FOR AN AIRCRAFT. RADAR SIGHTING DESCRIBES THE SIZE ON THE SCOPE TO BE LARGER THAN THAT OF A KC-135 DURING AERIAL REFUELING. (3) [Color.] COLOR WAS A VERY BRIGHT RED ORANGE MOST OF THE TIME. (4) [Number.] THE INITIAL SIGHTING WAS ONE OBJECT. THE ONE OBJECT WAS JOINED BY ONE OTHER LIKE OBJECT FOR A SHORT TIME. THE AIRBORNE RADAR

Basic_Reporting_Data.pdf (minotb52ufo.com)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

One object joined by another object. Sound familiar? How about the 1976 Iranian UFO encounter where intelligence documents reported that the larger UFO was joined by a smaller object. Notice the description comparing the size of the object to that of a KC-135 in the Minot AFB incident and size comparison of a KC-135 as mentioned in the Iranian incident report. 

Editorial from the US Air Force MIJI newsletter (page 2)

 

Edited by skyeagle409
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Trelane said:

Standing by for usual change of topic and copy paste snippet from the 1950-60's.

Actually, it doesn't make any difference. As they were back then, they remained same today.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, skyeagle409 said:

Overhead.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Description of a B-52 radarscope photograph

The counter identifies the frame as #772. The B-52 is the bright spot in the center of the radarscope, on a heading of 122 degrees (0 degrees is north). The UFO echo appears at 242 degrees azimuth, 1.05 nautical miles (nmi) aft of the right wing of the B-52.

 

Basic Reporting Data – Minot AFB, 24 Oct. 1968

A. DESCRIPTION OF THE OBJECTS: (1) [Shape.] SHAPE WAS DESCRIBED BY VISUAL SIGHTING AS “JUST ABOUT ROUND, A LITTLE OBLONG IF ANYTHING”. THE SHAPE ON AN AIRBORNE B-52 RADAR SCOPE WAS VERY SHARP AND IRREGULAR AND AT TIMES RECTANGULAR. (2) [Size compared to a known object.] VISUAL SIGHTING COMPARED OBJECT SIZE TO BE EQUAL TO THE SUN, VERY LARGE, TOO BIG FOR AN AIRCRAFT. RADAR SIGHTING DESCRIBES THE SIZE ON THE SCOPE TO BE LARGER THAN THAT OF A KC-135 DURING AERIAL REFUELING. (3) [Color.] COLOR WAS A VERY BRIGHT RED ORANGE MOST OF THE TIME. (4) [Number.] THE INITIAL SIGHTING WAS ONE OBJECT. THE ONE OBJECT WAS JOINED BY ONE OTHER LIKE OBJECT FOR A SHORT TIME. THE AIRBORNE RADAR

Basic_Reporting_Data.pdf (minotb52ufo.com)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So? Where are photos/live feeds nowadays? There are plenty of burglary vids, clear as hell, yet non of "huge spacecrafts".

Sky, you are reasonable man, show me one clear pic of huge spacecraft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, skyeagle409 said:

Actually, it doesn't make any difference. As they were back then, they remained same today.

Pilot with army experience as you are, why majority of accidents are due to human factor?

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, bmk1245 said:

So? Where are photos/live feeds nowadays? There are plenty of burglary vids, clear as hell, yet non of "huge spacecrafts".

 Data is just as good as photos. Question is, Why are you ignoring the radar photo depicting the object on the aircraft's radar screen? 

Just now, bmk1245 said:

Sky, you are reasonable man, show me one clear pic of huge spacecraft.

Certain things regarding our space surveillance assets remain classified and not releasable to the public. However, the following 1942 photo is not classified.

Army fired 1430 rounds of anti-aircraft shells at the object in the photo, which remained unaffected. It was first detected by multiple radars 120 miles west of Los Angeles where upon reaching the shoreline, the object changed its heading and flew over the Los Angeles area before reversing course and before heading back over the ocean. The Army tried but failed to shoot down the object.

A Los Angeles Times photo of searchlights in the skies during the air raid. (Credit Los Angeles Times)

 

 

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, skyeagle409 said:

 Data is just as good as photos. Question is, Why are you ignoring the radar photo depicting the object on the aircraft's radar screen? 

Certain things regarding our space surveillance assets remain classified and not releasable to the public. However, the following 1942 photo is not classified.

Army fired 1430 rounds of anti-aircraft shells at the object in the photo, which remained unaffected. It was first detected by multiple radars 120 miles west of Los Angeles where upon reaching the shoreline, the object changed its heading and flew over the Los Angeles area before reversing course and before heading back over the ocean. The Army tried but failed to shoot down the object.

A Los Angeles Times photo of searchlights in the skies during the air raid. (Credit Los Angeles Times)

 

 

 

Lights focuced on single point. Clowds have tendecies to scatter light.

Do you have other frames? Or just this one?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bmk1245 said:

Pilot with army experience as you are, why majority of accidents are due to human factor?

There are many reasons that include pilot errors such as exceeding airspeed limitations of an aircraft, running out of fuel, not taking proper actions during certain flight situations, flying in conditions for which the pilot or aircraft is not certified or trying to return to an airport shortly after taking off due to engine failure, which I have warned pilots, that is a no-no! There have been pressurization issues and a pilot's failure to recognize the early warning signs of hypoxia until it was too late. Bird strikes are another hazard along with mid-air collisions.

 

 

Edited by skyeagle409
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, bmk1245 said:

Ok..,District-9-Movie-Alien-Spaceship.jpg 

Any of it?

How many people in town saw the object you posted? If none, then there is a problem unlike the Los Angeles UFO where thousands of people witnessed the object. 

Edited by skyeagle409
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, bmk1245 said:

Lights focuced on single point. Clowds have tendecies to scatter light.

Do you have other frames? Or just this one?

Not in this case. The object was a structured craft according to witnesses, which changed its heading, airspeed and remember, it also reversed its course. 

4219c9728a06ccc1bb0d31b383882df4.jpg

 

The Minot AFB UAP was also a structured craft. 

 

Edited by skyeagle409
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Trelane said:

:lol::lol::lol:

 

Yeah, it was really funny to me when that fake image was posted knowing that no one else in town saw the object, unlike the 1942 LA UFO case where thousands upon thousands of people across the LA area watched as the Army tried and failed, to shoot down that UAP.

Just to let you know why you are unable to provide such evidence.

ANALYSIS OF RADAR AND AIR-VISUAL UFO OBSERVATIONS
ON 24 OCTOBER 1968 AT MINOT AFB,
NORTH DAKOTA, USA

Conclusion

It is certainly interesting to consider that this apparently non-aerodynamic aerial device has no comparison with all currently known technological developments. Here again, we are dealing in one or more devices in which the dynamics and energy characteristics are quite simply phenomenal and have the theoretical potential to allow for an interstellar voyage.

Poher Report: Part 5. The Ionized Cloud Surrounding the UFO | The Minot AFB UFO case | 24 OCTOBER 1968 (minotb52ufo.com)

 

Edited by skyeagle409
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.