CENAP Report - No 109

Magazine Overview

Title: CENAP-REPORT
Issue: Nr. 109
Date: 10./3/85 (March 10, 1985)
Publisher: CENAP (Centrales Erforschungsnetz außergewöhnlicher Phänomene)
Country: Germany
Language: German
Price: DM 35,-- (annual subscription)

This issue of the CENAP-REPORT focuses on a wave of reported UFO sightings across Germany in early February 1985, under the dramatic headline "UNTERTASSEN ÜBER DEUTSCHLAND!" (Flying Saucers Over Germany!). The report meticulously documents these events, cross-referencing them with expert opinions and media coverage, ultimately identifying most of the phenomena as natural occurrences, primarily meteor showers and fireballs.

CENAP's Mission and Definition of UFO

The magazine begins by introducing CENAP as a private, non-commercial research organization focused on the serious, factual, and critical study of the UFO phenomenon. It quotes Klaus Webner's definition of a UFO: an object that appears strange and cannot be identified by the observer during the sighting. Webner emphasizes that the term "UFO" originates from aviation terminology and does not inherently imply extraterrestrial spacecraft, cautioning against common misconceptions. CENAP's research aims to demythologize and identify the physical and socio-psychological aspects of the UFO phenomenon. The CENAP REPORT itself is described as a monthly publication documenting case studies with authentic material, analyzing the public UFO debate, and taking a clear stance on the subject.

The "UFO Flap" of February 1985

The central theme of this issue is the "UFO Flap" that occurred on the night of Sunday, February 3, 1985. The report details numerous sightings across Germany, including specific locations like Ludwigshafen, Mannheim, Heidelberg, Frankfurt, Wiesbaden, Berlin, and Köln. The cover highlights a map of Germany with these locations marked.

Mannheim Sighting

The report includes an account from Werner Walter and Hansjürgen Köhler, who were attending a CENAP meeting in Mannheim. On their way home in the early hours of February 4th, they witnessed a spectacular aerial event. Initially mistaking it for stars, they soon realized it was something unusual. The report suggests that police radio channels and US military communications were abuzz with the topic of "flying saucers" that night.

Wiesbaden Sighting

Klaus Webner, CENAP's photo consultant and film producer, provides a detailed report of his own sighting in Wiesbaden on February 3, 1985, at approximately 23:45. He observed two bright green spheres flying horizontally across the sky from right to left, appearing to move over a neighboring house. As he watched from his balcony, the spheres' intensity decreased, their color shifted to a dull red, and they then vanished. He described the movement as faster than an airplane but slower than a shooting star. His mother, Hildegard Webner, also witnessed the event. Webner notes that he had never seen such a phenomenon before and regrets not having photographic evidence.

Media Coverage and Expert Explanations

Numerous newspaper articles are included, showcasing the widespread media attention the events garnered. Headlines like "UFO-Alarm: It rained debris from space" (EXPRESS) and "We saw a UFO over Berlin" (BZ) highlight the initial confusion and excitement. However, many articles quickly moved to provide explanations. The RHEINPFALZ reported "Meteorites in the Night Sky," and the RHEIN-NECKAR-ZEITUNG noted "Nightly UFO was Meteorite." Experts from various observatories, including the Sternwarte Bochum and Landessternwarte Heidelberg, identified the phenomena as meteorites or meteor showers.

Johann-Georg Schiffer, an expert from the Heidelberg observatory, explained that a particularly bright meteorite, possibly several millimeters in size, had entered the Earth's atmosphere at high speed, causing it to glow intensely before breaking apart. He estimated its altitude to be between 50 and 100 kilometers. Professor Heinz Kaminski from Sternwarte Bochum described the event as a rare meteor shower, with some meteorites being up to twelve centimeters in size and weighing several kilograms.

Berlin Sighting

An article from B.Z. Berlin describes a blue-yellow-green fireball seen by thousands over Berlin on February 5, 1985. Carola Lemke, 27, and Hartmut Rudolph, 22, provided sketches and accounts. While some, like Rudolph, were convinced it was an extraterrestrial spacecraft, the Wilhelm-Foerster-Sternwarte suggested it was a meteorite, with Adolph Kunert, the observatory's head, stating that such events are calculable with witness help. The article also mentions that similar sightings occurred in Rheinland-Pfalz and Baden-Württemberg.

Other Sightings and Explanations

Reports from Frankfurt, Zweibrücken, and other locations confirm sightings of green glowing objects. The Bundesanstalt für Flugsicherung confirmed that one to two recognizable meteorites had flown over parts of Germany at altitudes of 100 to 400 meters and burned up in the atmosphere. Some reports mentioned entire meteor swarms. The article "Grüne Himmelskörper" from DARMSTÄDTER ECHO also discusses these green glowing objects, attributing them to meteorites burning up in the atmosphere.

The "Green Fireballs" of 1949/50

The issue draws a parallel between the recent sightings and the "Green Fireballs" observed in the New Mexico desert in 1949/50, which were investigated by the US Air Force project TWINKLE. It suggests that these green fireballs are now "back in business" and have been observed over Europe for several days.

Hansjürgen Köhler's Detailed Account

A specific account from Hansjürgen Köhler on February 4, 1985, describes observing a bright, glowing object from his window in Heidelberg. He initially thought it was a plane approaching Mannheim's small airport but realized it grew larger, about the size of the full moon, before silently exploding and breaking apart upwards. This event lasted less than five seconds.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring theme throughout this issue is the investigation and identification of anomalous aerial phenomena. While CENAP acknowledges the existence of the UFO phenomenon and the need for serious research, this particular issue strongly leans towards explaining the reported sightings as natural events, specifically meteor showers and fireballs. The editorial stance is one of critical analysis, aiming to demythologize the subject by providing scientific explanations and debunking sensationalist interpretations. The inclusion of numerous newspaper clippings and expert opinions underscores this approach, contrasting initial UFO claims with scientific findings. The magazine emphasizes the importance of accurate reporting and scientific investigation over speculation.

This issue of the Pirmasenser Zeitung, dated February 5, 1985, features a prominent cover story titled "UFO über der Stadt gesichtet" (UFO Sighted Over the City), with the sub-headline "Flugkörper am Nachthimmel entpuppte sich als Meteorit" (Flying Object in the Night Sky Turned Out to Be a Meteorite).

UFO Sighting in Neustadt and European Meteor Shower

The main article details a sighting by two police officers in Neustadt, Germany, on a Monday night. They observed a bright green flying object moving at high speed towards the northeast. This report led to numerous calls from across Rhineland-Palatinate, with 40 police stations reporting "UFO" sightings. The mystery was later resolved by air traffic control in Frankfurt, which identified the phenomenon as a meteor shower that was visible across Europe. The spokesperson for air traffic control, Hans-Ulrich Ohl, explained that the clear night allowed for the spectacle, and two large meteorites did not burn up in the atmosphere but fell into the North Sea. He assured that air traffic was not endangered.

International UFO Reports

The issue also highlights that the "UFO scare" was becoming an international phenomenon. It mentions a report from "DER TAGESSPIEGEL" about a UFO sighting in Prague and a report from the Turkish newspaper "TERCÜMAN" dated February 7, 1985, detailing a "UFO panic in Istanbul."

UFO Panic in Istanbul

The Turkish report describes UFOs flying in formation and emitting light beams in Alibeyköy, Istanbul. The objects were described as elliptical and were observed at night, causing many people to wait in the streets to catch a glimpse. One witness, Mustafa Tuzcu, described seeing a "double light" that moved horizontally, side-by-side, and had an elliptical shape. The Kandilli Weather Office in Istanbul received numerous calls but could not provide an explanation. Azis Tekedereli relayed this newspaper report and its translation.

UFO Sightings in the UK: December 31, 1978

The magazine then delves into a significant UFO wave that occurred on December 31, 1978, in the UK. It references research by BUFORA and an article by J.B. Delair in the BUFORA-JOURNAL, which discussed "remarkable observations" on the British sky during that evening. The phenomenon involved thousands of sightings across the United Kingdom, with descriptions ranging from fiery objects and luminous vapor to objects with colored beams. Some reports described the objects as spheres, others as elongated or triangular. Exotic comparisons were made, such as "wingless newts" or "flying tadpoles."

Explanations and Misidentifications

While many national and provincial newspapers published accounts and illustrations of these sightings, various explanations emerged. Initially, some suggested a meteor shower or a reentry. However, the article points out that the official explanation for the December 31, 1978, phenomenon was the reentry of the KOSMOS 1068 booster. J.B. Delair, however, concluded that the phenomenon was not related to the KOSMOS 1068 booster, citing the varied directions of movement and the relatively slow speed. The eyewitness sketches, illustrated in figures 1 and 2, are presented as evidence suggesting objects of foreign or extraterrestrial origin.

The Meteor Explanation

The article discusses the official explanation that the events of December 31, 1978, could be explained as a meteor shower or a satellite reentry. It notes that the entry speed of a satellite (27,400 km/h) is lower than that of a meteor (80,500 km/h), which could explain the observed speed. Temperature changes experienced by the descending object could also account for color variations.

The "Suffolk-Crash" Incident

A section titled "STREIT" (Dispute) addresses the "Suffolk-Crash?" incident. It refers to an article in the "Wiesbadener UFO-NACHRICHTEN" which claimed the "Ministry of Defence confirms: UFO landed in England." The article criticizes this ufologically tendentious reporting, suggesting that Hellmuth Hoffmann's research was based on sensationalist newspaper accounts. It mentions the "News of the World" and a supposed original document from the US Air Force Ministry. The article also touches upon pseudoreligious interpretations of the event, suggesting that the UFO landing in Suffolk is being presented as a CE III case.

Further Investigation into the Suffolk Incident

The magazine then presents material from "QUEST," the publication of the YORKSHIRE UFO SOCIETY (YUFOS). It details Brenda Butler's investigation into a reported UFO crash in Rendlesham Forest, which Steve Roberts (USAF) had mentioned. The investigation faced difficulties with dating the event, with conflicting accounts ranging from December 26 to 30, 1980. The article mentions efforts to obtain information through the Freedom of Information Act and the role of Bob Todd and Larry Fawcett. It notes that the "News of the World" also covered the story, and that the BBC attempted to explain the sighting as the Orford Ness lighthouse. The book "SKY CRASH" is mentioned as showing how this film was "cobbled together."

Police Investigations and Alternative Scenarios

Police investigations in Suffolk found no records of unusual activities. However, a later review revealed a recording of reports received by Suffolk Police on December 26, 1980, concerning unusual lights over Woodbridge. The article also discusses the possibility of the satellite KOSMOS 749 reentering the atmosphere and burning up. Mark Birdsall of the YUFOS research department suggests that the Holt-tape might have been constructed to suggest a simple IFO (Identified Flying Object). The article poses the question of whether the entire Suffolk case is a complex entanglement of coincidental events, including the sighting of a descending fireball, misidentification of a lighthouse as "UFO-rays," and the involvement of a rescue squadron.

The UFO of Nordmøre

Another section, "DAS UFO VON NORDMORE" (The UFO of Nordmøre), with the subtitle "Hinweis auf Hoax?" (Hint of Hoax?), written by Hansjürgen Köhler, revisits the photo-UFO case from Nordmøre. Based on further information from Denmark, Norway, and the USA, the authors consider their previous conclusion of a trick to be confirmed. CENAP had previously indicated a possible forgery in a model photograph, and this was independently corroborated by an analysis from the US-Ground Saucer Watch (GSW). The article states that the GSW's analysis of a magnified photograph sent by Norwegian friends from the NIVFO institute, returned in early February 1985, confirmed the findings.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

Throughout the issue, there is a recurring theme of attempting to demystify UFO sightings by providing scientific explanations, such as meteor showers and satellite reentries. The magazine appears to adopt a critical stance towards sensationalist reporting and emphasizes the importance of rigorous investigation. It highlights instances where initial UFO reports were later identified as natural phenomena or man-made objects. The editorial stance leans towards skepticism and a preference for evidence-based explanations, while acknowledging the public fascination with UFOs.

This issue of the magazine, presented as an 'INFORMATION REPORT' with report number SO 57499x and dated February 11, 1952, focuses on UFO and UAP sightings, primarily drawing from declassified CIA documents. The content highlights reports originating from the Soviet Union and a naval encounter in the North Atlantic. The magazine's approach is to present 'UNBEWERTETE INFORMATION' (unevaluated information), indicating that the CIA collected these reports for intelligence purposes without necessarily confirming their nature.

Reports from the Soviet Union

The primary focus is on reports from the USSR. One significant report, dated February 11, 1952, details observations from May to September 1947 in the Tashkent region of the Uzbek SSR. It describes three 'light phenomena' occurring almost nightly between 9 and 10 PM, observed from the PW-Kamp in Pakhta Aral, southwest of Tashkent. These phenomena were seen moving in an east-southeasterly direction. A specific observation on one night involved a dark red fireball that developed a fire trail, changing color from pale green to white. The fireball reached its apex after about six seconds and was estimated to be between 5,000 and 12,000 meters high, appearing to be about one-fifth the size of the full moon at its zenith. No smoke, noise, or detonations were noted. The estimated distance of the trajectory was 60 to 80 km.

Another section discusses a CIA document (CS-X-11085) concerning 'Fiery Glow observed at Rostov Air Base' from September 1953. This report, received by the CIA in July 1955, describes a fiery light observed from the PW-Kamp in Rostov moving from NNO to SSW at a constant altitude of 1000-1500 meters. The light was described as yellowish-red in front and dark red at the back, with no smoke trail or sound. It was observed for over 3 seconds, covering a distance of over 1250 meters, and was deemed unlikely to be an aircraft due to the lack of observed air activity at the time.

A more detailed report (CS-X-67481) from the Shakhty area, also from August 1953, describes three flying objects observed over the Ayuta PW-Kamp. These objects moved from southeast to northwest at a 70-75 degree vertical angle. The first object was seen at 21:45, the second at 22:45, and the third at 23:45. They disappeared in a fiery glow over the Ayuta Mines. The objects' course shifted vertically northward by over 70 degrees. No sound was perceived, and their speed could not be compared to aircraft. One object disappeared towards the Ayuta Mines in 3-4 seconds, and another followed shortly after. The objects were described as having a fiery glow of reddish color, similar to the planet Mars, resembling a comet or shooting star.

Field commentaries throughout these reports emphasize that the information is unevaluated and that the phenomena might be related to rockets or ramjet engines, rather than extraterrestrial craft. The CIA's interest is framed within the context of the Cold War and missile development.

Naval Encounter in the North Atlantic

Report Nr. 00-B-19864 details a UFO sighting at sea in the North Atlantic on August 4, 1950. The report was communicated to the CIA the same day. The location was 39°35' North latitude and 72°24 1/2' West longitude. The ship's third mate reported seeing a flying object off the starboard bow. The object was described as egg-shaped and cylindrical, about 10 feet in diameter, with a metallic white color. It moved with a rotational or wobbly movement at an estimated speed of 25 mph, passing the ship's lights. It was observed for about a minute and a half, disappearing towards the northeast. Later, it reappeared, having increased its speed significantly, estimated at 400-500 mph. The object was seen about 70 feet above the water, approximately 10 miles away, and cast a shadow on the water. The length was estimated to be six times the width, and the depth about 2-5 feet. The witness described it as one of the most frightening experiences he had ever had.

Interviews with the captain, chief mate, and third mate by intelligence officers revealed a discrepancy in speed estimations but a shared conviction that they had witnessed something unusual, not a conventional aircraft. One interpretation suggested the object might have been a balloon that deformed due to pressure changes and then regained its shape.

Analysis and Context

The magazine notes that the CIA's role was to gather and evaluate information relevant to state security. The 'UNBEWERTETE INFORMATION' designation suggests that UFO reports were collected as part of a broader intelligence-gathering effort, particularly during the Cold War and the era of rocket development. The collected archives are presented not as undeniable proof of alien visitations but as reports whose authenticity requires further evaluation. The issue concludes by stating that the analysis of these reports is ongoing.

Invitation to CENAP UFO/UAP Meeting

The final pages contain an invitation to the 6th CENAP UFO/UAP meeting in Luxembourg in September 1985. This meeting is described as a non-public event for German-speaking UFO research groups and independent researchers to exchange experiences, views, and research findings. Participants are encouraged to present discussion topics or ongoing investigations to foster collaborative progress in UFO research.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue revolve around unexplained aerial phenomena, primarily documented through intelligence reports from the CIA. The editorial stance appears to be one of presenting raw, unevaluated data, emphasizing the intelligence-gathering aspect of these sightings rather than endorsing any specific conclusions about their origin. The focus on Soviet reports highlights the geopolitical context of UFO investigations during the Cold War. The magazine aims to document these phenomena and encourage further research and discussion within the UFO community, as evidenced by the invitation to the CENAP meeting.