Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2013 13:08:59 -0800
Subject: U=Z Thread; Late Oct. to early Nov., 1954
United Kingdom

From: "Rob Duvall" <>
To: "francis ridge" <>
Cc: "'daniel wilson'" <>
Subject: U=Z
Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2013 13:08:59 -0800


In my studies of UFO activities in countries outside the US there are many examples of very important nuclear/correlative events. One in particular is worth having in the NUCCON database. Others are important as well, but the timing of this one ­ well it doesn’t get any better and it is a radar event. In 1954 many things were happening around the world. To understand the importance of the events one must realize the recent history in the particular country of the events. The reasons for the activity will be related to the historical events occurring in those countries and the countries they are influencing one way or the other. Some will be related to conflict, some to obtaining sovereignty, and others will be related to the nuclear developments there. In November of 1954 there was an event in the UK that really needs to be presented on the NICAP website within the pretext of not just nuclear connection but nuclear historical correlation. There is a huge difference in those two categories/phrases. One implies some sort of connection ­ the other implies a direct measurable connection in terms of timing, location, activity type, and duration. Additionally ­ there is consistency of similar types of events over time. All over the world this has happened over and over, and not just within the context of nuclear related events.

The event I would like to see worked out ­ and verified as a good known event, is the U=Z radar case. In November (6th?) there were not just one but several radar stations that picked this up ­ a formation (I believe it was more than 40 objects) that changed patterns as the sweeps occurred creating in sequence “U=Z”. When one considers what the UK was doing with regard to nuclear weapons at that time it should not be too alarming to see such a message conveyed.

I followed some of the developments regarding the UK’s weapons program as it migrated, for instance, to Australia. The activity followed it. I did this same sampling with other countries and it was the consistency that at first blew me away, then became my reason to continue along those lines of research. We can focus on the US, but the truth is that this happened globally within the original 5 declared nuclear states and the sixth original undeclared state. Some of these for obvious reasons are difficult to get useful material out of.

Doing this one case with the correlative history, and perhaps reconsidering the less than descriptive “connection” category vs. “correlation”, could jump-start interest in putting the puzzle pieces together. We all sit around and read this stuff and if even just one in the group finds and interesting correlation and documents it on the website, others may follow. It is a way to get the study out into the hands of those who can contribute. While I know this is not the core thrust of NICAP, I think folks like Keyhoe and Hall would support it.

Give it some thought, please. There are so many books and articles available on the history that this is sort of a no-brainer ­ otherwise I would not be doing it. I am not smart ­ just tenacious. I think you know tenacious.

Your friend,

Robert Duvall


Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2013 11:25:52 -0600
To: A-Team
From: francis ridge <>
Subject: Radar case sought U=Z

The event I would like to see worked out ­ and verified as a good known event, is the U=Z radar case. In November (6th ?), 1954, there were not just one but several radar stations that picked this up ­ a formation (I believe it was more than 40 objects) that changed patterns as the sweeps occurred creating in sequence “U=Z”.


Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2013 09:33:59 -0700
From: Michael Tarbell <>
Subject: Re: [Current Encounters] Lt. Oct. to early Nov., 1954; United Kingdom: RADCAT

What a curious incident!

Martin's write-up doesn't indicate if anyone recorded the details of the relative orientations of the 'symbols' and how they evolved. For example, did they maintain a consistent aspect relative to the 'reader', such that if all the symbols were placed in a row simultaneously they would literally appear as "U=Z"? I ask because I can imagine starting with a "U", which then gradually loses the base of its 'trough', leaving two parallel bars, i.e., an "=" sign, but rotated 90 degrees from its proper 'reading' orientation. Should that missing segment reappear, now diagonally joining the opposite ends of the parallel bars, it would produce a "Z", but again not in the proper orientation.

The above scenario might be plausibly consistent with a flight of birds/insects, but nonetheless incredible for having occurred in the same way on six different occasions.



From: "Rob Duvall" <>
To: "'daniel wilson'" <>
Cc: "francis ridge" <>
Subject: RE: [Current Encounters] Late October to early November, 1954;United Kingdom / The Arming of Europe in 1954 and The UFOs / WP 36#
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 09:02:29 -0800

It could be that the U=Z occurrence was related to Matador and nuclear cannon deployments, also at that time the UK was moving ahead with thermo-nuclear bomb development. Both could certainly get write-ups although in the case of the Matadors I would focus on sightings specifically related to the deployment areas, storage areas, etc… Those deployments certainly stirred things up between East and West, but really this was necessary to both let the Soviet Union know where the hard borders were and to give Europe the necessary defense/deterrent mostly missing at that time.
France was involved in other matters that year, as was Italy. My take on this is a little of both - conventional and nuclear rationale for the sightings. I am learning that nuclear policy did not account for events that seemed like responses to the nuclear strategy at the time.
The example I can give you is the June 1968 activity at the DMZ in Vietnam. I was told emphatically it was likely there was a nuclear component to those series of events. For years I was pounding that square peg ­ till I got blisters and gave up. Now I know with certainty that this activity was conventional. The US did NOT want to get into a nuclear exchange over Vietnam. Of course the Joint Chiefs brought the tactical nuclear option to Westmoreland (they were giving him latitude), but he didn’t want it and foreign policymakers in D.C. didn’t want it.
In 1954 France lost out on Vietnam ­ this could easily account for some specific events that year. France had its own atomic weapons program that was moving along slowly likely accounting for other activity that year as well. It wasn’t until 1956 that France signed a secret deal with Israel on joint development. There were agreements with Germany and Italy for joint development that same year, but those were abandoned when Charles De Gaulle prioritized the program in 1958 ­ and in 1960 France had its first successful test. Italy had a nuclear power program from the early sixties but responded to catastrophes around the globe and eventually decommissioned its plants with the last one closing in 1990. Since then attempts have been made to restart nuclear power efforts ­ but once again accidents caused political resistance to those efforts.
It is likely that activity is very specific in many different areas of discipline. If we spend time and make each case have a high probability we will better serve the correlative indoctorinization and the research field will respond accordingly. My head is bloody from hitting the wall with it. I have learned the hard way that the activity is more nuanced than I used to think.


From: "Rob Duvall" <>
To: <>
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 09:06:18 -0800
Subject: Re: [Current Encounters] Lt. Oct. to early Nov., 1954; United Kingdom: RADCAT


This incident, when realized within the context of nuclear developments in
the UK at that time is succinct. Yes this case needs firming up. It is a
critical case and has over the years not received proper attention. My hopes
on this particular case are that efforts be put into firming it up rather
than decapitating it. The case is covered in Richard Haines' "Project Delta:
A Study of Multiple UFO". It has other sources going back further and was
originally brought to my attention by researchers in Japan. The Japanese are
keen to nuclear related activity and are not prone to calling out spurious
incidents. I have learned much through their observations. They have more
reasons than anyone else globally for their apparent interest.

Thanks in advance for everyone's help on this.

Rob Duvall


From: "Rob Duvall" <>
To: "francis ridge" <>
Cc: "'daniel wilson'" <>
Subject: RE: [Current Encounters] Lt. Oct. to early Nov., 1954;United Kingdom: RADCAT
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 10:36:43 -0800


Taken on its own merit - this event doesn't even qualify for categorization.
Only within the context of understanding what U=Z means can it be
categorized. Why did that particular event occur at that particular time and

I read Martin's coverage on the case and have some comments.

I think the analyses are good but the conclusions are weak. Martin says
after good analysis it can't be birds then restates it as a probable cause,
but after summarizing why it can't be, goes on to state "insufficient

If I were looking at this fresh from the outside I would wonder how it got
into the category, what it meant, and why NICAP even bothered with this
sighting after claiming "insufficient information".

Without context this case is perplexing to say the least, and leaves Martin
to conclude "insufficient information", even though it happened over a
period of days at the same time, location and altitude - and was witnessed
on multiple radar sets. Honestly - this is how progress is muted
perpetually. When you categorize something it makes it easy for someone
researching to find the data. But leaving out possible reasons for the
activity makes the event next to useless.

If additional notes are allowed from the Rome events, why not some notes on
possible reasons for the event? Without context many of these cases fall
into the "insufficient information" category and are lost to obscurity.

By the way - so many elements are covered on the Rome case that it obscures
the U=Z case. Have a simple note relating the two events - even though there
is no direct relationship other than date and formation activity. Rome and
therefore Italy are getting different treatment than the UK. Italy had no
nuclear program at that time. Give the Italy case its own spot outside of
the U=Z case. It is likely an important event that gets obscured by putting
it with U=Z.

The UK was in the middle of a whole lot of nuclear weapons related activity
at that time. It was moving forward with the H-bomb, it was hosting US
nuclear weapons, it had its own atomic weapons, and it was involved in
deployment to Eastern Europe. U=Z, uranium/atomic weapons equals "Z", as in
the end (of alphabet). This is how the event has been interpreted by others.
When I saw it without knowing anything about it - that was the first thing I
thought of.

Martin's coverage below.

This is why I am advocating Nuclear Correlation in addition to Nuclear

Rob Duvall