CENAP Report - No 041

Magazine Overview

Title: CENAP - REPORT
Issue: Nr. 41
Date: July 1979
Publisher: CENAP (centrales erforschungsnetz außergewöhnlicher phänomene)
Country: Germany

The Büchenau 'UFO' Incident

The lead article, "Ein brennendes „UFO" landete im Büchenauer Spargelacker" (A burning 'UFO' landed in the Büchenau asparagus field), details an investigation into a reported UFO landing near Büchenau, Germany. The incident came to CENAP's attention on June 26, 1979, when a colleague mentioned a newspaper report with a photo about a UFO landing in Büchenau. Initial research led to the "Badische Neueste Nachrichten" (BNN) newspaper. The reporter, Günter Kunz, learned that the newspaper had reported on a UFO landing, with traces left behind that were allegedly given to the University of Karlsruhe for examination. However, the author of the report was unavailable.

After a delay in receiving the newspaper article, Kunz contacted the BNN again and spoke with Günter Kunz, who was responsible for the report. Kunz stated that investigation results indicated the 'landing traces' were actually burnt garbage bags. He did not receive this information directly from the police. Kunz then obtained the police contact number and requested the BNN issue again.

The following day, the BNN issue arrived. The article, accompanied by a photo of a burnt object, describes the event: On Tuesday evening around 9:40 PM, a driver from Neudorf saw a comet-like object fall from the sky near Büchenau. His passenger later saw a fire in an asparagus field where the object landed. The object was described as a burning mass, approximately 50x50x20 centimeters. Firefighters extinguished flames that were about 20 centimeters high. The remaining material was described as charred and its origin and composition were unclear. Initial theories included 'a piece of Skylab' or a 'meteorite,' but these were dismissed due to shallow impressions (5-10 cm deep) in the soft earth, indicating it didn't fall from a great height. The material was described as elastic and plastic-like, smelling of wax or PVC when burned. A Geiger counter measurement confirmed the material was not radioactive.

The Bruchsal police handed over the object to the State Police Directorate for further examination. The article notes that there was significant air traffic, including fighter jets, over Bruchsal and Büchenau that evening, leading to speculation that the object might be a reserve fuel tank from a fighter jet. However, the article cites a Bundeswehr officer stating that flammable materials are not used in aircraft construction. The possibility of it being the remains of a homemade rocket was also considered, but this remained unconfirmed pending investigation.

Police Conclusion and CENAP's Analysis

Further investigation by CENAP staff, including a call to the Bruchsal-Ost police station, revealed the final conclusion. The object was forwarded to the State Criminal Police Office for examination, which determined it to be a burnt plastic bag found burning in a field. The police attributed the UFO connection to public speculation due to the recent heavy air traffic in the area. The police stated there was no indication of anything mysterious or UFO-related, suggesting that people had embellished the story with fantasy. CENAP's own analysis concluded that the data did not support a UFO sighting, noting that observed aircraft with landing lights and the field fire were linked, and a UFO was quickly invoked for the story. They concluded it was not a cosmic visitor and not a CE II case.

UFOs Over US Atomic Weapon Bunkers

Another significant section of the report, titled "Pentagon facht die Diskussion an: „Ufos flogen über Atom-Waffenlager“" (Pentagon fuels the discussion: 'UFOs flew over atomic weapon depots'), discusses declassified reports from the US Ministry of Defense. These reports, initially kept secret, reignited the UFO discussion. The Pentagon revealed that in 1975, UFOs were sighted over nuclear weapon storage and bomber bases in US states like Montana, Michigan, and Maine for two weeks. These luminous, unidentified flying objects were observed by watch personnel and also appeared on radar screens. They were sometimes described as resembling helicopters or aircraft. US defense aircraft attempted to intercept these objects, which reportedly exhibited evasive maneuvers. The reports also mention that electronic systems on one of the intercepting military aircraft failed when it approached the UFO.

A related incident from 1976 over Teheran, Iran, is also detailed. Two F-4 Phantom fighter jets encountered a brightly shining object that emitted colored lights and was the size of a Boeing 707. The object was also detected by ground radar and a passenger plane. The US Air Force report described the object as disk-shaped with four searchlights. The Pentagon had kept these reports classified until a Phoenix-based organization, tasked with evaluating all UFO information, requested them.

Selected UFO Cases from Belgium

The magazine also includes a section presenting "Ausgesuchte UFO-Fälle von Belgiem" (Selected UFO cases from Belgium), compiled from the GESAG archive. GESAG reportedly has 1400 cases in its archive, with most identified or explained. The report highlights 12 cases deemed relevant to the UFO phenomenon in Belgium:

• August 1947, Jalhay (Provinz Liege): A farmer witnessed an object land in his field, leaving a 15-meter diameter burnt area.
• May 16, 1953, Bouttiolx (Provinz Hainaut): A photographer captured a round light with a smoke trail, which was investigated by a military team.
• June 5, 1955, Saint-Marc (Provinz Namur): A witness reported a hemispherical object and took three photos.
• September 20, 1965, Berchem-Antwerpen (Provinz Antwerpen): A family observed a yellow-green globe that hovered and ascended, also seen by airport personnel.
• September 24, 1969, Zeliik (Provinz Brabant): Two couples saw two triangular objects that stopped and hovered.
• February 24, 1973, Handzame (Provinz West Vlaanderen): A farmer saw an oval light near the ground.
• September 14, 1973, Cuesnes (Provinz Hainaut): A witness and daughter observed an object resembling a 'flower pot' with antennas.
• January 24, 1974, Aische-en-Refail (Provinz Namur): A woman saw a disk-shaped object near the road, causing her car's engine power to decrease.
• April 21, 1974, Loverval (Provinz Hainaut): A woman reported seeing an oval object with green and red lights, hovering near trees.
• Summer 1975, Peruwelz (Provinz Hainaut): A man observed an oval object with a flat underside, described as tobacco-colored.
• Early 1973, Raversijde Airport (Provinz West Vlaanderen): An airport control tower operator saw a light flying over the airfield, which also appeared on radar.
• June 23, 1973, Evergam (östliches Vlaanderen): Two couples saw a disk-shaped object, described as greyish with four searchlights.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue of CENAP-REPORT are the critical examination of UFO reports, the importance of thorough investigation, and the debunking of sensationalized claims. The editorial stance, as demonstrated by the Büchenau case analysis, is to seek rational explanations for phenomena and to question extraordinary claims when evidence is lacking. The inclusion of declassified US government reports and a collection of Belgian UFO cases suggests an interest in both official investigations and a broader cataloging of unexplained aerial phenomena, while maintaining a skeptical approach to premature conclusions.

This issue of 'Die australische Szene in UFO MYSTERY' (The Australian Scene in UFO MYSTERY), dated October 1978, focuses heavily on the mysterious disappearance of Australian pilot Fred Valentich and numerous related UFO sightings reported in Australia and New Zealand.

The Disappearance of Fred Valentich

The central event covered is the vanishing of 20-year-old pilot Fred Valentich on the evening of Saturday, October 21, 1978, while flying his Cessna 182 over Bass Strait. Valentich, a former RAAF pilot, was on a solo flight when he reported seeing an unidentified object. The magazine details his last known communications, including his report of a UFO persistently following him, and his subsequent disappearance. The aircraft, a blue and white Cessna 182 valued at $43,000, was never recovered, and no wreckage was found.

Witness Reports and Sightings

The issue compiles several witness accounts of UFO sightings occurring around the time of Valentich's disappearance and in the preceding days. These include:

• Mr. A.A.: Reported a bright, oval object with a box-like structure and pulsating light observed from his home.
• Christopher Clark (14): Saw a yellow object moving slowly across the sky.
• James B. Mortimer: A taxi driver, reported a red object moving from the southwest.
• David and Martin: Observed a star-shaped object at low altitude while playing with walkie-talkies.
• Mrs. G. McNiece: Witnessed strange lights in the sky on the night Valentich disappeared.
• Ray Manifolf: Photographed an object near Cape Otway lighthouse, which some believe could be the UFO Valentich encountered.

Several other sightings are detailed, including two cigar-shaped objects, a 'skyrocket' object, a solid mass of light with projections, and a bright white object performing 'impossible acrobatics'. A table on page 18 lists seven specific sightings with times, locations, descriptions, number of witnesses, and duration.

Investigations and Analysis

The magazine highlights the efforts of UFO research organizations like VUFORS (Victorian UFO Research Society), which have collected numerous reports related to the Valentich incident. The article mentions that VUFORS investigators have borne the costs of these investigations themselves. Photographic evidence, such as the Cape Otway photos, is being sent to the United States for expert analysis. The article also refers to a Channel O TV film crew that captured footage of UFOs, which was being developed and analyzed. Dr. Bruce Maccabee, an optics physicist and UFO investigator, is mentioned as analyzing this footage, identifying objects as glowing triangles and oval shapes.

Historical Context and Theories

The issue places the Valentich incident within a broader context of unexplained disappearances and UFO activity in the Bass Strait region. It references historical cases, such as the disappearance of a schooner in 1920 and the loss of the aircraft 'Miss Hobart' in 1934, both in the Bass Strait, with no wreckage found. The article also touches upon theories of 'underwater UFO bases' and mentions that radar has detected 'squadrons' of unidentified objects over New Zealand.

Scientific and Official Responses

The magazine notes the skepticism from the scientific community, with some astronomers suggesting objects could be meteors or atmospheric phenomena. It also alludes to government secrecy and the difficulty in obtaining information, referencing the FBI archives and NICAP. The article criticizes official explanations and the tendency to dismiss UFO reports.

International Connections

Reports from New Zealand are also included, discussing a UFO film captured by a TV crew. The analysis of this film by Dr. Maccabee is presented, showing enlarged images of triangular and disc-shaped objects. The article suggests that governments, including New Zealand's, may be following a similar policy of downplaying UFO sightings as the US government.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes are the mystery surrounding pilot Fred Valentich's disappearance, the prevalence of UFO sightings in Australia and New Zealand, and the ongoing efforts to investigate and understand these phenomena. The magazine appears to lean towards the belief that these are genuine unexplained aerial phenomena, highlighting witness credibility and the limitations of official explanations. There is an underlying tone of advocating for transparency and further investigation into UFOs, while also acknowledging the skepticism and potential for misidentification.

Title: CENAP REPORT
Issue: 40 (with reference to Volume 41)
Date: April-June 1965 (referencing a 1965 photograph)
Publisher: CENAP
Country: Germany
Language: German

Article 1: "Keine UFOs!" (No UFOs!)

This section of the CENAP REPORT aims to refute material previously published by DUIST, specifically addressing a photograph that was claimed to be of a UFO. The article begins by referencing a report from 'The Australian' dated February 19, 1979, which discussed a press release from the Transport Department and a radar recording obtained by Dr. Maccabee concerning 25 unidentified flying objects reported by ARGOSY film crew and pilots in New Zealand. Dr. Maccabee's computer study reportedly concluded that the phenomena were not celestial bodies, nor from the ground or sea.

The main focus of this issue is the debunking of a specific case, presented as "Der Fall 'Flo-Strahlschiff' in Australien fotografiert" (The Case of the 'Flo-Strahlschiff' Photographed in Australia). The photograph in question was published in UFO-Nachrichten (Wiesbaden) and translated from DUIST's president, Kleitt. The original report stated that the picture was taken on March 17, 1965, from a ship off the Australian coast near Fort Adele by amateur photographer Walter Jacobs, a steward on the freighter 'Iram Duke'.

Jacobs described seeing an object about 15 km away, appearing as a shiny, yellow-orange glow. He initially thought it was a planet but then observed it moving. He took a photograph as it moved under the moon and then disappeared vertically at high speed. He later developed the negatives in his cabin. Crew members speculated it was a spacecraft.

Jacobs stated that the ship was near Margaret Brock Lighthouse, between Adelaide and Melbourne. He saw the light to the left of the moon shortly after 10 PM. As he began photographing, the light moved under the moon and then reappeared above it. He adjusted his camera settings and took another shot.

Subsequent analysis by scientists was reportedly unable to provide a definitive conclusion, but the object's shape was considered likely a "flying saucer." The article laments the lack of any correction published in UFO-Nachrichten, suggesting that DUIST's focus on "contactee fairy tales" leaves no room for serious reporting.

The Brock Lighthouse Pictures - A Hoax?

K. Basterfield is credited with presenting this case. He explains that while compiling a catalog of Australian UFO photographs, he encountered this case. After examining various magazines and the photos, he concluded the object had characteristics of a "lens reflection." He decided to investigate further.

One of the primary sources for this investigation was the 'NEWCASTLE MORNING HERALD AND MINER'S ADVOCATE' from March 23, 1965, which reported on the "Mysterious Moon Object Photographed."

According to the newspaper, Walter Jacobs, 38, a steward on the B.H.P. freighter 'IRON DUKE', took the photos on the sea off the Victorian coast. He saw the object by chance while photographing a moon-cloud effect. He developed the negatives and was convinced it was a light, possibly a spacecraft, based on crew speculation.

Jacobs recounted that the ship was near Margaret Brock Lighthouse. He saw a light to the left of the moon, which was low in the sky and behind clouds. He initially thought it was a planet. As he photographed, the light moved under the moon and then above it. He took a picture, and two seconds later, it shot high above the moon. He took more photos, but was more interested in getting good pictures than in the object itself. He noted that the object seemed stationary after he turned away.

Upon developing the prints, Jacobs saw a protrusion on the bottom and a depression on the top, which he described as a "mysterious description of a flying saucer."

A representative from the 'NEWCASTLE MORING HERALD' accompanied Jacobs to Newcastle University, where Professor C.D. Ellyet, head of the physics department, studied the photographs. Professor Ellyet suggested the phenomenon was likely a reflection or refraction of moonlight through ice crystals in the clouds. This could explain the object's changing shape and movement around the moon, attributed to air movement and ice crystals.

Jacobs considered his photos the clearest he had ever taken of such a phenomenon.

Footnote: Professor Ellyet emphasized that while he had developed a theory, there was never reliable evidence in such cases. He noted that no satisfactory explanations had been given for sightings that year.

Other sources cited indicate that "astronomical experts were unable to identify the object" and that a WRE spokesperson suggested it was an aircraft, but a RAAF spokesperson stated no aircraft were in the area at that time.

Further investigation revealed that the object was not seen by the ship's crew when the photos were taken; it only appeared in the developed prints. It was also claimed that the object was still visible when the steward turned away, but he did not pay further attention. These points cast doubt on the eyewitness accounts and newspaper reports. The article concludes that the phenomenon was likely a camera lens reflection, possibly enhanced by the development process, and that the steward may have exploited the situation.

Notices: The article cites several sources for the information: "Australien Flying Saucer Digest" (April-June 1965, page 4), "UFOs over the Southern Hemisphere" by M. Hervey (pages 143-144), and "Australien Flying Saucer Digest" (No. 8, June 1965, page 28 and No. 9, November 1966, inside back cover). The source for this section is A.C.O.S.-Bulletin, Number 14, June 1978, pages 4-5.

This concludes the first part of the report "Keine UFOs." More will follow in the next CENAP REPORT.

Zum CR 41: (Towards CR 41)

Werner Walter / CENAP-Staff Translation

This section addresses the readers of CENAP-REPORTS. The editor apologizes for the suboptimal quality of the previous issue (No. 40) due to technical printing reasons. He explains that the CR is produced via photocopy, usually reduced in size, folded, and stapled, to save costs instead of using a professional printing service. They hope that issue 41 will return to the usual quality.

The article also provides the current address for the National Investigation Committee on Aerial Phenomena (NICAP) in Washington, D.C., noting that NICAP has moved twice and changed its publisher and editor. The current address is NICAP, 5012 Dali Ray Avenue, Washington, DC 20014, USA.

Finally, the editor mentions that 'UFO INVESTIGATOR' has not been delivered regularly, causing some issues to be missed. He reiterates the urgent need for translators of various languages and asks for help.

Contact: CENAP Mannheim, Werner Walter, Hansjürgen Kähler.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring theme in this issue is the critical examination and debunking of UFO reports, particularly those involving photographic evidence. The editorial stance is clearly skeptical, emphasizing scientific explanations, potential hoaxes, and the importance of rigorous investigation over sensationalism. The CENAP REPORT positions itself as a source for serious, fact-based reporting, contrasting itself with organizations perceived as promoting unsubstantiated claims or "contactee" narratives. The publication also highlights its reliance on translation and its need for volunteer assistance, particularly translators, to continue its work.