RIAP bulletin - Vol 07 No 2-3 - April-September 2001 ver 2

Magazine Overview

Title: RIAP BULLETIN
Issue: Volume 7, Number 2-3
Date: April-September 2001
Publisher: Research Institute on Anomalous Phenomena (RIAP)
Country: UKRAINE
Language: English

This issue of the RIAP Bulletin focuses on the history of anomalous phenomena research, particularly within the Soviet Union, and features detailed accounts of the Petrozavodsk phenomenon.

Contents

The issue includes articles such as "The Petrozavodsk Trigger" by L. M. Gindilis, "RB Questions and Answers: Dr. Lev Gindilis," and "There Were in the USSR Abduction Cases and UFO Landings!" by V. K. Zhuravlev. Future issues are previewed with topics like "Mysterious Rescue in the Steppe" and "A Thousand Years of Russian UFOs."

RIAP Scientific Council and Advisory Board

The publication lists its Scientific Council and Advisory Board, comprising numerous scientists and specialists from Russia, Ukraine, Spain, the United Kingdom, Belgium, and the USA, indicating a broad international engagement in the field.

The Petrozavodsk Trigger

Lev M. Gindilis provides a historical account of the Petrozavodsk phenomenon, which occurred in September 1977. He details how UFO studies in the USSR were initially suppressed due to ideological reasons, leading to amateur efforts and circulation of information through unofficial channels like Samizdat. Despite the official ban, military and secret services reportedly showed interest.

Gindilis recounts the revival of public interest in UFOs in the mid-1970s, spurred by lectures and amplified by debunking articles. He notes that even official persons who experienced UFO sightings paid attention to the problem. The Petrozavodsk phenomenon is described as a significant event that impacted the development of ufological studies in the USSR.

UFO Studies in the USSR

The article highlights that UFO studies in foreign countries were often better known than domestic ones, partly due to perceived secrecy and ideological bans. Amateur studies were prevalent, and information circulated informally. The official stance of the USSR Academy of Sciences was that UFOs did not exist. However, Gindilis suggests that Soviet military and secret services may have investigated the issue. He mentions early lectures on UFOs by Y. A. Fomin and F. Y. Zigel, and an influential Pravda interview by Academician L. A. Artsimovich that attributed sightings to natural atmospheric effects.

A UFO Commission was established in 1967 under the All-Union Space-Exploration Committee, with Major-General P. A. Stolyarov and Dr. F. Y. Zigel. However, after an appeal for UFO reports on Central TV, the commission was disbanded. Despite ideological pressure, public interest grew, and the problem attracted attention from secret services and officials.

Why I Became Interested in UFOs

Gindilis explains his initial focus on SETI (Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence) studies, where the prevailing view was that interstellar flights were impractical for contact due to vast distances and the limitations of rocket propulsion. He considered direct contact less preferable than remote (radio) contacts. However, he became intrigued by the UFO problem when he noticed the strong bias and perceived dishonesty in articles attempting to debunk UFO sightings. This prompted him to investigate the UFO problem himself and conclude that the prevailing negative opinion was due to ignorance, prejudice, and a reluctance to study the subject fairly.

He notes that at the time, the scientific community and government officials generally believed UFOs did not exist, attributing sightings to known natural phenomena or technical experiments. Observers were often dismissed as uninformed individuals prone to exaggeration.

First Reports from Petrozavodsk

Gindilis recounts receiving a call from Felix Yurievich Zigel on September 22, 1977, about a singular phenomenon observed over Petrozavodsk. He was also contacted by A. N. Makarov from the USSR Academy of Sciences, who provided reports and proposed a joint study. The phenomenon was reported in leading Soviet newspapers. Initial reports came via teletype from the Petrozavodsk Hydrometeorological Observatory director, Y. A. Gromov, giving them official status.

Subsequent reports included sightings from September 14 and 26. Makarov actively collected materials and negotiated with the press, showing considerable interest. The phenomenon of September 20 was observed by research workers of a geophysical expedition near Lehta, Karelia, and information about an ionospheric sounding experiment was also received, though skeptics from the DGPA seized upon this as a potential explanation.

The Petrozavodsk Phenomenon and Official Response

As reports accumulated, Gindilis attempted to draw attention to the UFO problem among his colleagues at the All-Union Astronomical and Geodetical Society, but without success. He later participated in the construction of the RATAN-600 radio telescope, which involved collaboration with the Academy of Sciences. When information about the Petrozavodsk phenomenon reached the Academy, Gindilis was involved in collecting and analyzing the data.

He describes discussions with officials like Orlov from the Section of Applied Problems and Deputy Academician-Secretary V. V. Migulin, who headed IZMIRAN. These discussions led to the involvement of the Department of Mechanics and Guidance Systems, headed by Academician B. N. Petrov. The involvement of Petrov's department was seen as more constructive than the cautious approach of the DGPA heads.

An inquiry about the Petrozavodsk phenomenon was reportedly made by a member of the Politburo of the Communist Party of the USSR, possibly Yuriy Vladimirovich Andropov, who had ties to Karelia. This inquiry spurred action, suggesting a slight irritation within the bureaucracy with the ideological ban on UFO studies.

A joint meeting of participants was held on November 1, 1977, at the Institute of Space Studies (ISS) of the USSR Academy of Sciences. Gindilis presented a preliminary report on the phenomenon, concluding that its scale was too large to be explained by technical experiments on satellite orbits. The meeting recommended the establishment of a special Commission to investigate the phenomenon.

Bureaucratic Games

Despite the recommendation for a commission, the process became mired in bureaucracy. Academician A. P. Alexandrov, President of the Academy of Sciences, was slow to act. Instead of a commission, a narrow circle meeting was planned at the office of L. V. Smirnov, Deputy Chairman of the USSR Council of Ministers, to discuss the nature of the phenomenon. Gindilis compiled a memo emphasizing the need for strict verification of all facts and avoiding preconceived notions.

Efforts were made to establish a working group at the Military-Industrial Commission (MIC) to study anomalous phenomena, not just the Petrozavodsk event. Gindilis proposed the term "anomalous aerospace phenomena" or "anomalous phenomena" to replace the discredited term "UFO." The MIC was charged with preparing a questionnaire for other official bodies.

Trip to Petrozavodsk

In October 1977, reports continued to arrive, and by the end of the year, dozens of UFO reports had been accumulated. A trip to Petrozavodsk was deemed necessary. Preparations for the trip involved official letters from the Academy of Sciences requesting assistance from local authorities. The trip, undertaken in January 1978, involved an interdepartmental group, including Gindilis, A. N. Makarov, I. G. Petrovskaya, and B. A. Sokolov. They met with local authorities, including the army commander, and gathered information.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue revolve around the historical suppression and eventual, albeit slow and bureaucratic, investigation of anomalous phenomena in the Soviet Union. The editorial stance appears to be one of advocating for serious, evidence-based study of UFOs and related phenomena, challenging ideological biases and promoting a more open scientific approach. The publication itself, RIAP Bulletin, serves as a platform for disseminating research and fostering discussion in this field.

This issue of the RIAP Bulletin, Vol. 7, No. 2-3, published in 2001, focuses on UFO phenomena and research, particularly within the former USSR. The cover headline highlights "THERE WERE IN THE USSR ABDUCTION CASES AND UFO LANDINGS!", indicating a key theme of the publication. The issue includes a detailed account of the Petrozavodsk phenomenon, a Q&A section with Dr. Lev M. Gindilis, and a letter to the editor discussing the publication of research on Soviet UFO studies.

The Petrozavodsk Phenomenon

The article details the author's involvement in investigating the Petrozavodsk phenomenon, which occurred on the night of September 19-20. The author, initially part of a Ministry of Defense group, presented his findings and was questioned by a commander about observations in Leningrad. He explained that weather conditions prevented astronomical observations there, but air traffic controllers and pilots at Pulkovo airport had witnessed the event. A curious incident at the Petrozavodsk airport involved a militiaman detaining the author for passport inspection, seemingly on orders.

In Petrozavodsk, the author interviewed eyewitnesses, including poet and philosopher Yuriy Vladimirovich Linnik, who provided a unique description of the object's motion. A scientific collaboration with A. G. Mezentsev of Petrozavodsk University was established to determine the spatial position of the object using theodolites. This retrospective questioning aimed to triangulate the object's position, though memory limitations led to an "ellipse of dispersion." The investigation revealed the object was at an altitude of 6 to 11 km (20,000 to 62,000 ft.), a finding that complicated simpler explanations like satellite sightings.

Preliminary conclusions suggested that similar luminous objects were observed independently at low altitudes from widely separated locations. The timing of the phenomenon's second stage was refined by air traffic controller reports to be between 3.55–3.57 AM over Leningrad, potentially predating the Kosmos-955 satellite launch. The article notes that while some descriptions might align with satellite launches, the overall phenomenon was more complex, involving deceleration, hovering, and sharp directional changes with complex light beam structures. The division into phases became problematic, suggesting a continuous event over two hours. The authors emphasized the need for more serious, multidisciplinary investigation, which, unfortunately, was not implemented.

Preliminary Conclusions and Broader Context

The "Supplement to the Report," completed in January 1978, refined the observation area to south of latitude 67° N and west of longitude 35° E. Meteorological data did not explain this zone. The timing of the second stage's beginning was narrowed down to 3.55–3.57 AM over Leningrad, based on air traffic controller reports. The report acknowledges that some observers might have seen phenomena related to the Kosmos-955 satellite launch, but the overall picture was more complex. The phenomenon was not considered absolutely unique, fitting into a class of unexplained atmospheric phenomena. The USSR had previously neglected the study of these phenomena, and the authors called for systematic investigations.

References

A list of references is provided, including works by F. Zigel, articles from Pravda and Komsomolskaya Pravda, and a 1994 publication from Terminator magazine.

RB Questions and Answers: Dr. Lev M. Gindilis

This section features an interview with Dr. Lev M. Gindilis, a Russian radio astronomer and SETI pioneer. He defines contemporary anomalistics as the study of phenomena outside the common scientific worldview, with the task of revealing their nature and place in science. He states that the UFO problem is not currently scientific but is a "problem in the making," requiring scientific methods for investigation. Gindilis believes the solution lies in establishing the true nature and place of UFOs in the scientific picture of the world, ideally with the scientific community adopting a positive attitude and utilizing modern science's potential. He suggests that the current negative attitude might change once the nature of UFOs is understood. He notes that in the former USSR, the "informational environment" has been polluted, hindering serious studies, and that UFOs have become part of mass culture. Gindilis sees little prospect for "big science" participation due to the problem's perceived marginality and media-driven discrediting. He posits that UFOs are borderland phenomena between our three-dimensional world and higher dimensions, suggesting that as science explores higher dimensions, UFOs will find a natural explanation.

Letter to the Editor

This section discusses the publication of the paper "History of State-Directed UFO Research in the USSR" by Yuliy Platov and Boris Sokolov. The author of the letter, Victor K. Zhuravlev, Ph.D., notes the significance of this paper in breaking the secrecy surrounding Soviet UFO studies from 1978–1991. Zhuravlev, who participated in some of these programs, offers an insider's perspective, contrasting it with an outsider's view. He criticizes the paper for not including results from specific programs like Setka AN and Galaktika, and for omitting researchers like V. S. Troitsky and A. N. Dmitriev. Zhuravlev points out that the Soviet UFO program was driven by circumstances and the military-industrial complex, focusing on "mysteries of the military-industrial complex" rather than natural phenomena. He argues that the program's "economy" led to false conclusions and self-deception, particularly regarding abduction cases and strange craft that defied explanation by known physics. Zhuravlev believes that a Second State Program of UFO Studies is likely in the future, with new researchers taking steps towards the truth.

Editor's Note

The editor, Vladimir V. Rubtsov of RIAP, provides contact information for the bulletin.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue revolve around the historical investigation of UFO phenomena, particularly within the Soviet Union and Russia. There's a strong emphasis on the challenges of scientific inquiry into anomalous phenomena, the role of official versus unofficial research, and the impact of secrecy and media portrayal. The editorial stance appears to be one of advocating for more rigorous, open, and scientifically grounded investigation into UFOs, while acknowledging the difficulties and historical obstacles encountered. The inclusion of Dr. Gindilis's perspective and the critical analysis of past Soviet research suggest a desire to move towards a more comprehensive understanding of these phenomena.