1971 - A Challenge to Science Banbury Film Case Roger Stanway

Magazine Overview

This document is a preliminary report titled "A CHALLENGE TO SCIENCE," detailing a UFO event recorded on 16mm cine film on October 26, 1971, near Banbury, Oxfordshire, England. The report was authored by Roger H. Stanway, M.B.A., F.R.A.S., and published on May 1, 1975, by The British UFO Research Association (BUFORA).

Introduction

The report sets out the known facts surrounding an extraordinary event captured on 16mm color film by a professional cameraman from Associated Television (ATV) in Birmingham. This cameraman was experienced in filming high-speed jet aircraft, including the "Red Arrows" aerobatic team. The film is described as being of good quality, leaving no doubt that a real "object" was photographed and that no hoax was perpetrated. The reader is encouraged to judge the facts for themselves.

The decision to publish the facts was made for three reasons:
1. BUFORA believes publication of the remarkable facts surrounding this unique case is long overdue.
2. It is hoped that publication will attract interest and assistance from readers who might otherwise not come forward.
3. Proceeds from the sale of copies are intended to contribute towards the costs of past and future research.

The report notes that the described event was one of many similar reports from Oxfordshire and neighboring counties during the autumn of 1971 and spring of 1972. It acknowledges the extensive investigation efforts by individuals like Mr. Richard Colbourne and the assistance provided by Mr. Julian Hennessey.

Case Summary and Investigation Details

The report outlines the structure of the investigation, which was conducted jointly by Roger H. Stanway, Richard Colbourne, and Michael Prewett (BUFORA), Julian J.A. Hennessey (on behalf of Dr. Allen J. Hynek), and Charles Bowen (Editor, Flying Saucer Review).

• Basic Reference Data:
• Date: Tuesday, 26th October, 1971
• Time: Between approximately 11.50 a.m. and 12.15 p.m.
• Location: Oxfordshire, Northamptonshire, and Bedfordshire.
• Witnesses: At least 7 independent groups, totaling about 25 persons.

Summary of the UFO Event:

The report details the event from multiple witness perspectives, including:

• ATV Film Unit (Position 1): Six members of the film crew witnessed the event in a field near Enstone, Oxfordshire. The object was first sighted at a bearing of 300°N, moving East. It remained stationary for a short time before moving Eastwards. Filming began at 350°N and ended at 20°N. The object emitted a "vapour trail" and was lost to sight at 30°N. It appeared to be climbing in altitude. The object was described as a small, bright orange (fluorescent) ball of light emitting a thick dense trail of vapour or smoke. Its motion involved rapid acceleration and deceleration, and it remained stationary for up to 30 seconds, appearing to spin. The vapour trail sometimes showed a spiral effect.
• David Chatt (Position 2): A 16-year-old witness in Ruscote Estate, Banbury. The object was seen traveling East, leaving a thick white vapour trail. The trail showed a double bend, suggesting a sharp turn. The sphere passed over the witness's head, and the trail ceased with a puff. The witness noted deceleration and a possible restart of the trail. He heard no sound, but other witnesses at the location reported a roaring noise. The vapour trail faded quickly.
• Mrs. Blaise Smith (Position 3): A housewife in Cherwell Hights, Banbury. She described a sharply defined orange sphere leaving a vapour trail and a roaring/crackling noise. The object stopped twice, leaving a puff of vapour. When the vapour stopped, the noise ceased; when it restarted, there was an audible explosion and a puff. No flames were seen.
• Mr. Blaise Smith and 3 others (Position 4): Witnesses at Stonehill Quarries, Croughton, Oxfordshire. They observed a whitish, sharply defined object leaving a vapour trail, traveling West to East. The trail stopped several times, and a large flame emerged from the object on these occasions.
• Mr. Trevor Twynham and 3 older men (Position 5): Witnesses in Evenley, Oxfordshire. They described a sharply defined aircraft of unconventional design leaving a white vapour trail and, on one occasion, a flame. The object traveled East at a 45° elevation. The vapour stopped, and a flame, twice the size of the object, emerged. The object then vanished abruptly.
• Five schoolboys (Position 6): Witnesses in Hayes Lane, Deanshanger, Wolverton, Buckinghamshire. They saw a glowing white, well-defined missile-shaped object emitting an orange flame and white smoke. It traveled East very fast. The vapour trail stopped three times without puffing or tapering, each time replaced by an orange/red flame. One witness could hear sound.
• Mr. and Mrs. Peachey (Position 7): Witnesses in Jenkinson Road, Towcester, Northamptonshire. They described a sharply defined white rocket-shaped object with a pointed nose cone and a blue diagonal stripe. It made a noise like distant thunder. The object stopped twice, with a burst of flame, and then moved off very fast. It was visible for about 12 minutes before disappearing upwards.

Technical Data and Analysis:

The report includes technical details such as distances of foreground features from the camera, location descriptions, and meteorological data. It notes that the tropopause was at 32,000 feet, suggesting that condensation trails at that altitude would be produced by aircraft. Trigonometrical calculations were performed to estimate the object's path and height, suggesting a height of approximately 15,000 feet.

• The investigation also involved reviewing various documents, including:
• Case summary and map.
• Tape transcripts of interviews with ATV film crew members (commentator, electrician, production assistant, director, cameraman).
• Signed statements from witnesses.
• Preliminary sighting reports.
• Eye-witness descriptions from independent witnesses.
• Notes from visits to Upper Heyford (USAF).
• Letters from the Meteorological Office, Colonel Richard M. Baughn (USAF) concerning fuel-dumping, Dr. Robert M. L. Baker Jr., Mr. A.N. Davis (Ministry of Defence), and Antony Lambton (Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence).
• A summary report from BUFORA's National Investigations Co-ordinator concerning a visit to the KODAK MUSEUM to view the film with experts.
• Enlargements of film frames showing a "vapour trail."
• Newscuttings from The Daily Telegraph.
• Photographs taken from the sighting location.
• A photograph of a camouflaged F-111 in flight.

Conclusion and Recommendations:

The report concludes with sections for Conclusion and Recommendations, though these are not detailed in the provided pages.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring theme is the presentation of evidence for an extraordinary aerial phenomenon, emphasizing the quality of the 16mm film and the corroboration from multiple independent witnesses. The editorial stance is one of scientific inquiry, encouraging readers to assess the facts presented. The report aims to be a comprehensive preliminary account, acknowledging the need for further research and potential assistance from the public. The document highlights the unusual nature of the object's appearance, motion, and the associated phenomena like vapour trails and flames, while also considering conventional explanations such as aircraft, though the observed characteristics often defy easy classification.

This document, identified as a UFO magazine issue from December 1971, Volume 2, focuses on a detailed investigation into a UFO sighting that occurred on October 26, 1971. The primary witness accounts and analysis are presented, along with technical data related to the filming of the event. The magazine is published by B.U.F.O.R.A. and is in English, originating from the United Kingdom.

Detailed Account of the Sighting

The main narrative revolves around a sighting at Jordon Farm, near Enstone, Oxfordshire, where a film unit was present. At approximately 7 minutes to 12 noon, witnesses noticed an orange, revolving object in the sky. Initially, not much attention was paid to it, but as the filming of sheep progressed, the object drew their full attention. The camera was turned to film it, and it was described as orange and appearing to revolve. However, what appeared on the film was a white object. The object was followed as it moved, and a thick vapour trail appeared. The cameraman lost sight of the object in the viewfinder, but it was still visible to the naked eye, having changed from orange to white and appearing much smaller.

Further attempts were made to film the object, with a witness screaming to film something on the ground for scale. The camera was swung to include a shepherd and Mollie Harris walking across the field. The object was then filmed again as it gave off a vapour trail and appeared to be travelling at a very high speed, moving towards the North East. The sky was described as very bright blue, with no clouds, despite a prediction of rain.

NB: It is noted that although the camera was set up for filming, it was not actually running at that moment in time. The object was initially orange, but appeared white on the film.

Witness Testimony - Charlie Lynch

Charlie Lynch, from Handsworth, provided his account, stating that the object did not look like a plane. He described it as revolving and then stopping, hanging in the air before shooting off at a terrific speed. He noted that the vapour coming out was from the back. He distinguished it from a jet, which he saw later, by its revolving nature and orange colour. He estimated the object was stationary for about 10-15 seconds and he saw it for 30-60 seconds before filming began. After the object disappeared, a greenish vapour trail was observed, which lasted for several minutes. He did not see any F 1 11 aircraft at the time, though they had been flying nearby before and after. Lynch was convinced it was not a plane, describing it as having two colours, black and orange, constantly changing as it turned.

Interview with Christine Fewlass and Sidney Kilby

An interview conducted on December 3, 1971, with Miss Christine Fewlass (Production Assistant) and Mr. Sidney Kilby (Director of the Unit) provided further details. Sid Kilby stated the object hung in the sky for about 30 seconds, allowing the cameraman to focus and zoom in. He noted the object appeared to change size (grow bigger) as it was zoomed, suggesting it was neither moving towards nor away from them, and was stationary. Chris. Fewlass highlighted the vapour trail as the first noticeable element. She described the object moving at a constant speed, initially slowly, then faster. She observed evidence of it having travelled across the sky without leaving a trail before the visible trail appeared.

Fewlass described the object as hanging in the sky and spinning, catching the sun, which caused it to flash. Kilby recalled the object stopping, slowing down, and divorcing itself from the vapour trail, which then formed into wiggly lines. He noted a gap where the object had moved away from its trail. Fewlass agreed, describing the wavy lines as horizontal, suggesting a spinning motion on a horizontal plane.

They were setting up to film when Noel spotted the object. Noel panned to it, and it stopped again. The object then moved for a second time and stopped again, at which point it was filmed. Kilby mentioned cutting the film and then restarting filming as it moved out of frame. He recalled a stopped period of about 10-15 seconds, during which he had time to look through the camera himself.

Fewlass emphasized that the vapour trail remained visible for several minutes after the object had disappeared.

NB: In a previous interview, Alan (on sound) had reported no sound interference from the object, despite complaining about interference from aeroplanes earlier. Mr. Kilby, having filmed with the RAF, considered the object to be larger than a jumbo-jet at 25,000 ft and estimated its speed to be 10-15 times faster than a commercial jet at equivalent height.

Further Witness Testimony - Noel Smart

Noel Smart provided his account, describing the object as spherical, orange, and fluorescent, hovering and spinning. After a few seconds, it flew off in a south-easterly direction at unbelievable speed, leaving a normal vapour trail. This trail suddenly expanded to ten times its original width as the object decelerated, stopped, and hovered again. This sequence repeated three times until he lost sight of it. Seconds after losing contact, he followed the dispersing vapour trail back to its source and found the object had passed directly overhead. No noise or sound was emitted during the entire event.

Technical Data: The filming was done with an Arriflex B.L. camera, Angenieux 12mm - 120mm f2.5 zoom lens, Ektachrome 7242 stock, f16 aperture, under perfect bright cloudless conditions with the sun at a 45-degree angle.

Analysis and Conclusion

The investigations are noted as incomplete, but the collected evidence suggests three possible explanations:

1. An aircraft of extremely unconventional design, performance, and maneuverability.
2. A guided or non-guided missile or rocket.
3. An unidentifiable object representing an unknown phenomenon.

The report states that if either of the first two explanations were correct, the Ministry of Defence should be able to identify the object quickly. However, the Ministry of Defence's statement that a plane dumping fuel is the most likely explanation is considered unlikely based on the evidence presented.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue are witness testimony, detailed observation of unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP), the challenges of photographic and video evidence, and the process of investigation. The editorial stance, as represented by Roger H. Stanway, Chairman of B.U.F.O.R.A., is one of thorough investigation and critical analysis of witness accounts and evidence, questioning official explanations when they appear inconsistent with the data. The magazine highlights the unusual characteristics of the observed object, emphasizing its non-conventional flight patterns, speed, and visual appearance, and suggests that it was definitely not a conventional aircraft.

This document is a collection of reports and a questionnaire form from the BRITISH UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT RESEARCH ASSOCIATION, dated primarily around October 26, 1971, with a report form submission date of January 27, 1971. The content focuses on detailed accounts of Unidentified Flying Object (UFO) sightings.

Full Account of Observation (Page 1)

One witness, on a film location with an A.T.V. unit near Enstone, Oxon, reported seeing a revolving orange object moving slowly from west to east. The cameraman filmed it, and after a few seconds, a thick vapour trail started as the object appeared to accelerate. The trail then stopped, and the object accelerated further, giving off another vapour trail before vanishing. No sound was heard. The witness stressed that the object appeared orange with black and seemed to rotate, although the film showed a white object. Camouflaged F.III aircraft were also present but paid no apparent attention to the object. The sighting occurred at farmer Jordan's field, Radford Bridge, near Enstone, Oxon, at approximately 11:55 am, with the sun behind the observer.

Questionnaire (Page 2-4)

This section contains a detailed questionnaire filled out by a witness, providing further specifics about the sighting on Tuesday, October 26, 1971, at 11:55 am. The witness was in farmer Jordan's field near Enstone, Oxon. The object was visible for approximately 10 seconds. The sky was bright daylight, and the sun was behind the observer. The object was brighter than the sky background, compared to the sun. During observation, the object hovered, rotated, emitted smoke or vapour, and changed brightness. It moved in front of and behind clouds. The object was described as solid, not cloud-like. The witness noted no sound, and the object's colour was orange with black, and its shape was a ball with a rider. The witness has no experience observing aircraft or satellites but is a commentator. They are long-sighted and provided personal details.

Preliminary Sighting Report (Page 5-10)

This section includes preliminary reports from several witnesses:

• Chris Fewlass (Miss): Saw an object on Tuesday, October 26, 1971, around 12 noon, in Oxfordshire, near Enstone. The object was a clear orange and visible for perhaps two minutes. The sky was clear and cloudless. The vapour trail was the first thing noticed, with straight horizontal edges, suggesting the object was spinning. The object appeared circular and stationary, hanging in the air for about 30 seconds before moving off. The trail was described as 'curly'.

• Mr. Kearsley: Travelling on the M45 near Dunchurch, he and a student teacher observed a silverish metallic object with an exceptionally heavy white trail. The object was at an elevation of 45 degrees and travelling parallel to the observer. The trail ceased, and the object changed direction by 90 degrees, heading north. It accelerated rapidly, and the object seemed to be an elongated shape.

• Mr. Collison: Parked his car on the south side of Bridge Street, Banbury, and saw an object engulfed in a ball of flame, with an orange/white/grey trail. The object zig-zagged before resuming its course. He is familiar with aircraft and believes this was not an aeroplane.

• Mr. Sparks: Looking out of his daughter's window in Cherwell Heights Estate, Banbury, he saw an orange spherical object spinning, emitting a vapour trail that started with a puff, continued, and stopped with another puff. This happened three times. The object was compared in size and colour to an old half-penny.

• Neal: With Dave, saw a uniform orange, spherical object leaving a vapour trail similar to an aircraft's. The trail ceased and recommenced. The object picked up speed and vanished, presumably due to acceleration. Neal said the object pulsated at approximately 2c.p.s. Dave ran to get binoculars and the object had gone when he returned.

• Mr. Heritage: Arrived with Mr. Collison and saw an object with flames issuing from it, leaving a thick white smoke trail. The object was a dark shape, and the flames came from the back. He and Mr. Collison were joined by car park attendant Frank Miles. The witness implied the object was making smoke and flames simultaneously.

• Mr. Miles: Standing in his kiosk in Banbury, he saw an object leaving a dense vapour trail, moving easterly at an elevation of 35-40 degrees. The smoke ceased, and the object burst into flames. It initially travelled at aircraft speed, slowed down considerably, then accelerated abruptly.

• Mrs. Saysell: Standing outside Friz Hill House, she saw an unusual vapour trail that was straight, with two puffs, and remained in the sky for several minutes. The exact position of the observer was SP 298535, but the angular bearing could not be determined.

• Mrs. Blaise-Smith: Heard a roaring/crackling noise and saw an orange sphere leaving a vapour trail. The sphere stopped twice with a puff of vapour. The noise and vapour stopped, then restarted with an audible explosion. She is certain the object stopped and saw no flames.

• David Chatt: Saw an orange sphere above houses in Banbury, leaving a thick white vapour trail. The trail showed a double bend, indicating turns. The sphere passed overhead, and the trail ceased. The sequence repeated, and the object accelerated away. Dave ran to get binoculars, and the object had gone, the trail tapering and fading out. He heard no sound.

• Trevor Twynham: With Mr. Ridge and others, saw an object described as an aeroplane leaving a white vapour trail, flying east at a 45° elevation. Above Evenly Hall, the vapour stopped, and the object continued before a flame came out the back. The vapour started again, then the object vanished. Mr. Ridge thought it went behind trees.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in these reports include the consistent observation of orange or metallic-coloured objects, the emission of vapour trails or smoke, and remarkable acceleration and maneuverability. Many witnesses reported no sound, contrasting with some accounts of noises. The British Unidentified Flying Object Research Association appears to maintain a neutral, investigative stance, collecting detailed testimonies and questionnaires to analyze these phenomena scientifically.

This issue of UFO Data, dated December 1971, focuses on a significant UFO sighting and the subsequent investigation, featuring witness testimonies, official statements, and film analysis. The cover story highlights a television crew's filming of a 'mystery flying object' over Oxfordshire.

Witness Accounts

The issue details accounts from several witnesses. Simon Pearce, along with school friends Steven Louis, Martin Nicols, and Philip Smith, reported seeing an object in the sky near Deanshanger. Their attention was drawn by a vapour trail that suddenly stopped. The object, visible for about five minutes, was described as rocket-shaped with a white glow. When the vapour trail stopped, an orange/red flame appeared, and the trail itself was whitish. The object seemed to stop and go multiple times, with the trail lingering before disappearing. Steven Louis reported a rumbling noise and the ground shaking slightly.

Alan Boag, also interviewed separately, corroborated the general similarity of the stories. Mrs. Peachey was called into her garden by her husband and saw an object described as white and rocket-like, with an offset nosecone and a blue diagonal stripe. She described a noise like distant thunder and stated the object stopped twice as it went overhead, leaving a trail, then a short burst of flame, before moving off suddenly and very fast. The cycle of flame and vapour recommenced, with noise levels rising when the flame superseded the vapour.

Official Investigations and Statements

Colonel "Skip" Burns, Flight Commander at the USAF Base Upper Heyford, was interviewed along with other senior officers. They viewed a 16mm film of the object multiple times. Colonel Burns considered the object to be a high-flying jet leaving an intermittent vapour trail, entering and re-entering the troposphere. He noted that the lack of a fixed reference in the film made it difficult to assess sudden stops and accelerations. The officers were impressed but maintained that the evidence pointed towards a conventional aircraft. Colonel Burns confirmed that no planes were dumping fuel on the morning in question, a statement that contradicted information provided by Antony Lambton.

The Meteorological Office provided weather data for the area on October 26, 1971, indicating fair weather with light winds and scattered clouds, with upper winds estimated at various altitudes. The tropopause was recorded at a height of 36,200 feet.

Colonel Richard M. Baughn of RAF Upper Heyford confirmed that US Air Force aircraft operate under established regulations and that a specific route near Enstone was used. He stated that fuel dumping by any aircraft is extremely infrequent and dictated by necessity, only performed over unpopulated areas or at low altitudes when required for safety.

Mr. A.N. Davis from the Ministry of Defence confirmed that their records showed a military aircraft dumping fuel over Oxfordshire around midday on October 26, 1971. He stated that the aircraft was an F-111 based at RAF Upper Heyford. However, he noted that the fact of fuel dumping did not prove it was the event recorded on film, but the observation was consistent with an aircraft emitting a condensation trail or dumping fuel.

Antony Lambton, writing to Julian Ridsdale MP, confirmed the Ministry of Defence's statement about the F-111 dumping fuel and acknowledged that the specific record of this occurrence could not be provided. He also addressed Mr. Hennessey's questions about the credibility of the US National Academy of Sciences, affirming its reputable status. The Ministry of Defence's interest in UFOs is limited to defence aspects.

Film Analysis

A summary report by Mr. C.A.E. O'Brien details the inspection of the film by a panel of experts at Kodak. They found the 'hovering' dot on the print un-definable, drifting and becoming a line. They suggested a darker print with different exposures on higher contrast material might reveal the object's shape. The second shot was considered not incompatible with a conventional aircraft moving in the opposite direction, with the camera panning incorrectly. The experts were baffled and could offer no constructive conclusions, though they expressed interest in obtaining a darker print.

The Daily Telegraph reported on the TV crew's film, describing it as a startling pictorial record. The six-man ATV crew filmed a gleaming, circular object leaving an intermittent vapour trail. The object appeared to hover, move at great speed, stop instantly, and shoot out of view. The director, Sidney Kilby, estimated the object was 8-10 miles away and stated it was not an F-111, despite US F-111s flying in the area earlier. Roger Stanway of the British UFO Research Association considered the film reliable evidence, suggesting the Ministry of Defence should investigate further. A spokesman for the US Tactical Fighter Wing at Upper Heyford stated their pilots saw nothing unusual.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The issue consistently presents witness accounts of unusual aerial phenomena, juxtaposed with official explanations and investigations. The editorial stance appears to be one of serious inquiry, presenting evidence and official responses without definitive conclusions, leaving the nature of the reported objects open to interpretation. The recurring theme is the difficulty in definitively identifying UFOs, even when filmed, and the potential discrepancy between official explanations and witness experiences. The issue highlights the challenges in analyzing visual evidence and the limitations of official investigations.

This document is an issue of the BUFORA Journal, specifically issue number 19, published in 1971. It focuses on UFO sightings and the technical analysis of related film evidence. The primary date of the reported events is Tuesday, October 26th, 1971.

Witness Testimonies and Sightings

The issue details several witness accounts from the Banbury area and surrounding regions in the UK.

On Tuesday, October 26th, 1971, at 11:55 hrs BST, Mrs. Eileen Williams of Tywford, near Adderbury, reported seeing a circular yellow object with a vapour trail moving fast from east to west. The weather was hot with a slight breeze and no clouds.

Also on Tuesday, October 26th, 1971, at 11:55 hrs BST, Police Inspector Ted Cawte of Banbury Police Station observed a high-flying glowing object that stopped and started, leaving a contrail that soon disappeared. The weather conditions were the same.

Similarly, the Editor of Banbury Guardian reported seeing a circular yellow object with a vapour trail going fast across the sky east to west on Tuesday, October 26th, 1971, at 11:55 hrs BST, under hot, clear weather conditions.

On Tuesday, 26th Oct., 1971, at 07:30 hrs, Mrs. Balbirnic of Greatworth, near Banbury, witnessed a ball of orange light stationary in the sky. It remained for four minutes before racing off to the east at high speed, leaving a contrail. She stated the object was not a plane and made no noise. The weather was bright, sunny, and day.

On Tuesday, 26th October 1971, at 19:50 BST, Mr & Mrs. A. Burton of Shutford, Banbury, reported seeing an object in a field next to five ways crossroads. They estimated it to be 500ft above the field and 50 yards in diameter, with lighted windows. The object made no noise and disappeared suddenly.

Flight Sergeant Howley, associated with the R.A.F. Greatworth, near Banbury, Oxon., reported on Tuesday, Oct., 26th, 1971, at 11:53 a.m. BST, watching an object with an unusual vapour trail moving fast from northeast to east at an estimated speed of 4,500 m.p.h. at a height of 35,000 ft. He described the object as circular, making no noise, and stopping for ten seconds as if observing the ground before shooting off at a speed that would crush a normal plane. He estimated its angle to be 85° from the horizon. The contrail glowed for 14 minutes. Flight Sgt. Howley, familiar with all types of aircraft, stated this was not an aircraft or a re-entry space craft.

On Tuesday, October 26th, Mr. Keith Duffy of 90 Well Lane, Curbridge, near Witney, also reported seeing an object. Workers at the Paper Mill at Wolvercote, north of Oxford, also witnessed it. Mr. Duffy, with 14 years in the R.A.F., described the object as "a silver pin prick at the head of an unusually thick and substantial vapour trail," moving much faster than anything known. He noted two distinct trails, the first lasting seconds, followed by a second trail. The object's speed was estimated at 5,000 m.p.h.

Film Analysis

The document includes a detailed technical analysis of a film sequence related to these events.

Technical Data: The film type was Ektachrome 7242, rated at 80 ASA, developed normally. The camera used was an Arriflex B.L. with an Angenieux 12mm-120mm zoom lens, aperture f16. The running speed was 28 frames per second, with a total duration of 54.76 seconds. Frame dimensions were 0.3" x 0.4". The film examined was a copy made by ATV, and each frame was inspected with a calibrated magnifying eye lens and projected onto a ground glass screen with 225x magnification.

Description of Film Sequences:

• First Sequence (Frames 1 to 590, 21.01 secs): A round orange image, slightly less than 0.005" in diameter, was observed near the center of the frame. The cameraman positioned the object at the intersection of the cross-hairs. The image moved slightly side to side within the frame. No vapour trail or other forms of image were present.
• Second Sequence (Frames 590 to 611, 0.75 secs): The orange image's brilliance faded and brightened. It became a faint white dot before disappearing.
• Third Sequence (Frames 611 to 1035, 15.14 secs): The faint white dot moved and elongated. The image began to look like a small bright white comet with a head and tail, approximately 0.015" long. The cameraman followed the object. The 'head' of the comet-like image became thicker and more prominent, with the leading edge angled. The image appeared to be coming slightly detached from its tail, resembling a sparkler firework. It is noted that it is unclear if the 'vapour trail' created by the object dispersed quickly.
• Fourth Sequence (Frames 1036 to 1536, 17.86 secs): This sequence was filmed after the cameraman swung his camera towards the fields, reduced magnification, and checked his film and exposure. This was done to show the object's relationship to ground features and persons, and to demonstrate it was not a trick. Shots included fields with two persons walking and a dog. The higher of the two images on the film was described as a thick white, wedge-shaped object, 0.015" long with a curved leading edge, resembling a dense 'vapour trail' rather than a solid object. A lower image was a small white patch linked by an imaginary diagonal line, with a 'vapour trail' leading into the distance. The cameraman attempted to trace and keep up with the rapidly accelerating object.

Discussion and Conclusions

The report discusses the difficulty in dismissing the UFOs as conventional jets leaving contrails, emphasizing the need for scientific method and intellectual honesty. It highlights that numerous reliable witnesses reported similar descriptions, indicating an object maneuvering with abilities unknown to man-made machines. Several witnesses categorically stated the object stopped and hovered, and accelerated at rates far exceeding conventional jets. The object's size was noticeable even without a vapour trail, and its motion and color were extraordinary.

While the object's height was estimated at 32,000 ft for vapour trail production, evidence suggested it was lower, possibly 12,000-18,000 ft. The writer concludes that neither a conventional jet nor a secret rocket could satisfactorily explain the filmed object.

A footnote mentions discussions with meteorologists, establishing that while condensation trails from jets can form at various heights, they are unlikely below 26,000 ft. The time it takes for a jet's trail to disappear is also noted as being longer than observed in some cases. The report questions whether the 'vapour trail' is the true explanation, suggesting the effect might be caused by ionization of the air, and that the object's shape could be inferred from the surrounding cloud effect.

Recommendations

Despite intensive initial investigations, progress had been slow due to the difficulty in finding experienced personnel for film analysis. Recommendations for further research included:

• Interviewing the ATV crew's sound technician and the shepherd.
• Analyzing the film further, following up with Kodak and Dr. Baker.
• Simulating the film sequence by filming a jet aircraft under similar conditions.
• Calculating the object's size, speed, height, brightness, and rates of acceleration/deceleration.
• Re-interviewing key witnesses and interviewing those not yet contacted.
• Obtaining color film of a plane dumping fuel for comparison.
• Gathering reports from consultants on atmospheric conditions, aircraft maneuvers, fuel dumping, and film analysis.

The preliminary report was concluded on May 1st, 1975, by Roger H. Stanway, Chairman, BUFORA.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes are UFO sightings, witness testimonies, and the scientific analysis of photographic and film evidence. The editorial stance, as represented by the writer and chairman of BUFORA, is one of rigorous investigation, emphasizing the need for scientific methodology and open-mindedness when evaluating unusual phenomena. The report actively challenges conventional explanations when witness accounts and film evidence suggest otherwise, advocating for further research rather than outright dismissal.