Carried as Radar Anomalies.
Dates was in confusion since no report of it went out right away and since it was reported as Dec 29 at first. But in file, in backpocket is Navy Speedletter showing transcript of taped conversation between PAX River and DCA ARTCC that dates it positively at 2055Z (1555EST) on Dec 19. The above times are times of the taped conversation. No name of Pax person calling, but he was clearly impressed by the strength of the returns ("I never saw one give such a big radar return. They give a radar return on this radar scope about the size of a pencil eraser.") DCA/ARTCC tells Pax that they're not getting them down here at DCA and Pax then remarks that Pax is getting it only on the short range radar, not on their long range radar.
has TWX dated 9 Jan 65 that seems to be initial
formal report. Was on CFN-18A
radar, using MTI.
excellent credibility, one observer doubtful.
Suspected electronic freak. File
to make clear that no distinct turns were
Targets carne in and faded. Thus
paths Sujka indicated to me aren't
borne out by this material. Clearly
interference, this was odd interference, and of
type that neither EDP nor JDF
the two experienced men had seen.
is given as ceiling unlimited (0.7 cirrus), and
time 1505 local, both of which
contradict Sujka's statements.
ltr of Jan 8 65 to Navy from an RW Schumann Jr.
seems to indicate that the two
senior observers tended to write it off as
electronic and hadn't reported
gathers that Maj. Marston Jacks
queried Pax on it when AP story carne out,
primarily because some DC radioman
queried USAF on it.
This seems to have
led to inquiries at Pax that led to the report. Or
so I here piece it together.
the FPS-37 radar was checked to verify the
unknowns but revealed nothing. That's
significantly negative unless there's
some odd circumstance involved. If
should have appeared on the other set. Report
specify that the CFN-18 was in good operating
condition, and had been
routinely checked one day previously.
is point that all tracks were radials --
contradicting Sujka again. Says the
observers stated they'd never seen
interference like this before nor ever seen radar
targets similar to the ones
seen here. Speeds given as 4800-6000 knots.
of this casefile seems to suggest that this one is
moot. Interference not
clearly enough ruled out. Radials
it, as does lack of corresponding return on
long-range set and absence
of similar returns on other stations.
Sujka wrong on time of day and wrong on why no visual. Nothing in report re any tower check on visual.