Wednesday, April 30, 2025
Contact    |    RSS icon Twitter icon Facebook icon  
Unexplained Mysteries Support Us
You are viewing: Home > News > The UFO Phenomenon > News story
Welcome Guest ( Login or Register )  
All ▾
Search Submit

The UFO Phenomenon

CIA spy plane behind decades of UFO reports

By T.K. Randall
December 31, 2014 · Comment icon 206 comments

The Lockheed U-2S spy plane. Image Credit: US Air Force
The CIA has revealed that its secret spy plane program was responsible for countless UFO sightings.
In a somewhat jovial end of year Tweet, the Central Intelligence Agency revealed on Monday that one of its most popular online documents of 2014 was a report from 1998 detailing its involvement in the development of the U-2 spy plane.

Entitled 'The CIA and the U-2 Program, 1954-1974', the document also investigated the fact that the top secret plane was responsible for a long spate of UFO reports throughout the 50s and 60s.

"High-altitude testing of the U-2 soon led to an unexpected side effect - a tremendous increase in reports of unidentified flying objects (UFOs)," the report stated.
In particular the report detailed how sightings of fiery or shiny objects by airline pilots were the result of the spy plane being tested at 60,000ft, an altitude far higher than airlines were flying at the time.

Such sightings even lead to the establishment of Operation Blue Book by the Air Force, a project that aimed to collect and analyze sightings of Unidentified Flying Objects over the United States.

The CIA report concluded that during the 1950s and 1960s more than half of all reported UFO sightings could be attributed to flights of the U-2 and A-12 Oxcart spy planes.



Source: News.com.au | Comments (206)




Other news and articles
Our latest videos Visit us on YouTube
Recent comments on this story
Comment icon #197 Posted by lost_shaman 10 years ago
Agreed. And yeah, contrails certainly seem highly unlikely at those altitudes!
Comment icon #198 Posted by Valdemar the Great 10 years ago
Woops... But yes, it doesn't affect the point - if anything the U2 might be a harder target given it is significantly shorter.. while it has a similar wingspan to the SR-71's length, they are narrow wings and would be virtually invisible at that altitude. Just a tiny moving speck, would not be seen except under exceptional circumstances and if you knew where to look (and at that altitude and given their engine designs, they are rather unlikely to leave contrails... ) Actually regarding that point, the SR-71 might be even more likely to be taken for a UFO, since it could produce some pretty imp... [More]
Comment icon #199 Posted by skyeagle409 10 years ago
As Sky would vomit, trying to sound important, Let's Look At Some Facts: 1. That 95 feet would only come into play if the entire length was fully and brightly illuminated. Most times it will only catch a smaller amount of light, and of course the craft is designed / painted /surfaced to blend with the sky.. And if it caught an actual sun glint where the sun was brightly reflected, the spot will bloom out and be featureless as it overloaded your eye. 2. The calculation assumes the aircraft is *directly* overhead - at all other times it will of course be *further* and the angular size will be le... [More]
Comment icon #200 Posted by skyeagle409 10 years ago
No, parallax error does that, not height. And a dot often translates into a flying saucer with the more zealous claimants. How many aircraft did you notice flying overhead yesterday? How many satellites are in orbit and can be seen on certain nights?
Comment icon #201 Posted by skyeagle409 10 years ago
Just like you believing in an all trusting government about 9-11 but yet believe in an all lieing goverment about green men. Not to get off track, but I have blamed the Bush Adminstration for dropping the ball by ignoring warnings from around the world that al-Qaeda terrorist would attack the United States with aircraft. Some warnings were even received from the Philippine government in 1995 that terrorist would use aircraft to attack America, particularly CIA Headquarters. It is not a matter of trusting or not trusting the government, it is a matter of obtaining the needed knowledge to know w... [More]
Comment icon #202 Posted by skyeagle409 10 years ago
I am still looking for the numerical information of the absolute ceiling of that aircraft and how far above the absolute ceiling it could go with a zoom climb. This is necessary to determine if the report is accurate or not. Did you bother to review what I had posted by the British Lightning? That will give you a clue that aircraft are not restricted in altitude solely to their service ceiling. Now, explain to me how the Lightning, whose service ceiling is around 54,000 feet, managed to dive down on the U-2 at 70,000 feet. I told you how it was done and now, I want to see if you had been payin... [More]
Comment icon #203 Posted by psyche101 10 years ago
How many aircraft did you notice flying overhead yesterday? How many satellites are in orbit and can be seen on certain nights? 6 aircraft I saw yesterday. 4 at work, two at home. My work is not far from Coolangatta Airport, and there is a flight path that goes right above my house, I am a good 100K from the airport so reasonably high altitude still at that point, which explains the parallax error my kids encountered and the cigar UFO that had wings and then became an obvious plane, but some days I see one almost every hour. Satellites seems to pass over almost every night and the ISS comes pa... [More]
Comment icon #204 Posted by psyche101 10 years ago
I have seen the SR-71 on many occasions and they do not look like flying saucers either. BTW, the SR-71 was not the fastest nor highest flying recon aircraft that we had. Not to you, but at altitude doing Mach3, the average person would think they saw something "Not in our closet" which they then report erroneously according to their own interpretation which then gets picked up by some slack jawed UFOlogist which is then regurgitated on this forum. And that is how you turn and SR71 into an alien spaceship. And that we had higher and faster just makes for more misidentification.
Comment icon #205 Posted by psyche101 10 years ago
It is not a matter of trusting or not trusting the government, it is a matter of obtaining the needed knowledge to know when to hold 'em and when to throw 'em. The problem is you have been dealt a crap deck. What you throw down from the likes of Friedman, Regher and the like do not bolster your claims, they make you look like you are trying to dupe others because the information is undoubtably a lie and incorrect. I do believe your intentions are otherwise and I believe you are a genuine person trying to understand more, and get help from others to assist you and make you not feel crazy. But o... [More]
Comment icon #206 Posted by Sweetpumper 10 years ago
I have seen the SR-71 on many occasions and they do not look like flying saucers either. BTW, the SR-71 was not the fastest nor highest flying recon aircraft that we had. I think the whole 'saucers' deion is too general. None I've seen would be of that deion. They sure as hell didn't have wings.


Please Login or Register to post a comment.


Our new book is out now!
Book cover

The Unexplained Mysteries
Book of Weird News

 AVAILABLE NOW 

Take a walk on the weird side with this compilation of some of the weirdest stories ever to grace the pages of a newspaper.

Click here to learn more

We need your help!
Patreon logo

Support us on Patreon

 BONUS CONTENT 

For less than the cost of a cup of coffee, you can gain access to a wide range of exclusive perks including our popular 'Lost Ghost Stories' series.

Click here to learn more

Recent news and articles