Pentagon UFO REPORT
1THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSEALL-DOMAIN ANOMALY RESOLUTION OFFICEReport on the Historical Record of U.S. Government Involvementwith Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP)Volume IFebruary 2024
2Table of ContentsSECTION I: Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 6 SECTION II: Executive Summary .............................................................................................................. 7 SECTION III: Scope & Assumptions ........................................................................................................ 11 Scope ......................................................................................................................................... 11 Assumptions .............................................................................................................................. 11 Note on “UAP” Nomenclature .................................................................................................. 12 Congressional Oversight ........................................................................................................... 12 AARO’s HR2 Program of Analysis .......................................................................................... 12 SECTION IV: Accounts of USG UAP Investigatory Programs Since 1945 ............................................. 13 Summary ................................................................................................................................... 13 Project SAUCER (1946/1947–January 1948)........................................................................... 13 Project SIGN (January 1948–February 1949) ........................................................................... 14 Project GRUDGE (Original Organization) (February–December 1949) ................................. 15 Project TWINKLE (Summer 1949–Summer 1950) .................................................................. 15 Project GRUDGE (Reestablishment) (October 1951–March 1952) ......................................... 15 Project BEAR (Late 1951–Late 1954) ...................................................................................... 16 CIA Special Study Group (1952) .............................................................................................. 16 The Robertson Panel (January 1953) ........................................................................................ 17 The Durant Report (February 1953).......................................................................................... 17 Project BLUE BOOK (March 1952–December 1969) ............................................................. 18 CIA Evaluation of UFOs (1964) ............................................................................................... 19 O’Brien Committee (1964) ....................................................................................................... 19 The Condon Report (April 1968) .............................................................................................. 19 National Academy of Sciences Assessment of the Condon Report (Late 1968) ...................... 20 Carter Administration Tasking to National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)(1977) ........................................................................................................................................ 21 Roswell Investigations/Inquiries (1992-2001) .......................................................................... 21 Advanced Aerospace Weapons System Application Program (AAWSAP) (2009–2012)/Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP)................................................. 22 Unidentified Aerial Phenomena Task Force (UAPTF) (August 2020-November 2021) ......... 24 Preliminary Assessment: Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (June 2021) .................................. 24
3Airborne Object Identification and Management Synchronization Group (AOIMSG) /Airborne Object Identification and Management Executive Management Committee(AOIMEXEC) (November 2021-June 2022) ............................................................................ 24 UAP Independent Study Team (UAPIST) (June 2022-September 2023)................................. 25 All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO) (Established July 15, 2022) ....................... 25 Foreign and Academic Investigatory Efforts ............................................................................ 26 Key Findings ............................................................................................................................. 27 SECTION V: Assessment of Interviewee Claims of USG Involvement in Hidden UAP Programs ......... 28 Summary ................................................................................................................................... 28 Primary Narrative ...................................................................................................................... 28 Secondary Narrative .................................................................................................................. 30 Findings............................................................................................................................................... 30 No Official UAP Nondisclosure Agreements Discovered .................................................................. 30 Former CIA Official Involvement in Movement of Alleged Material Recovered from a UAP CrashDenied on the Record .......................................................................................................................... 31 The 1961 Special National Intelligence Estimate on “UFOs” Assessed to be Not Authentic ............ 31 Aliens Observing Material Test a Likely Misunderstanding of an Authentic, Non-UAP ProgramActivity ............................................................................................................................................... 31 Allegation that a Former U.S. military Service Member Touched an Extraterrestrial Spacecraft ...... 32 The UAP with Peculiar Characteristics Refers to an Authentic, Non-UAP-Related SAP .................. 32 Extraterrestrial Disclosure Study Confirmed; Not White House-Sponsored ...................................... 32 Aerospace Companies Denied Involvement in Recovering Extraterrestrial Craft.............................. 32 Sample of Alleged Alien Spacecraft is an Ordinary, Terrestrial, Metal Alloy ................................... 32 AARO Investigating Unresolved Historical Nuclear-Related UAP Cases ......................................... 33 SECTION VI: Investigation into Named USG Sensitive Programs .......................................................... 33 Summary ................................................................................................................................... 33 Process for Protecting Sensitive Programs while Investigating Interviewee Claims ................ 34 Findings ..................................................................................................................................... 34 One Private Program Mistaken for USG Program .............................................................................. 34 KONA BLUE: A Proposed UAP Recovery and Reverse-Engineering Program ............................... 34 Unnecessary IC Program Expansion ................................................................................................... 35 Nexus of Proponents of the USG UAP Reverse-Engineering Allegation .......................................... 35 SECTION VII: Historical Context of UAP Investigatory Efforts Since 1945 .......................................... 36 Summary ................................................................................................................................... 36 Commonalities of 20th and 21st Century UAP Investigations ................................................... 37 4International Security Environment and Technological Surprise ....................................................... 37 Secrecy ................................................................................................................................................ 37 Public Interest ..................................................................................................................................... 38 Alleged Bureaucratic Barriers ............................................................................................................. 38 Insufficient Data and Information ....................................................................................................... 38 Perceived Deception ........................................................................................................................... 38 Differences between 20th and 21st Century UAP Investigations ............................................... 39 Decreased Public Trust ....................................................................................................................... 39 Popular Culture ................................................................................................................................... 39 SECTION VIII: Testing and Development of U.S. National Security and Space Programs Most LikelyAccounted for Some Portion of UAP Sightings ......................................................................................... 39 Summary ................................................................................................................................... 39 Manhattan Project (August 1942) ............................................................................................. 40 V-173/XF5U-1 “Flying Pancake” (1942) ................................................................................. 40 Project Mogul (1947-1949) ....................................................................................................... 40 Project High Dive (1950s)......................................................................................................... 40 Project Aquatone/Dragon Lady (1954) ..................................................................................... 41 WS-117L/CORONA (Late 1956) ............................................................................................. 41 VZ-9AV Avrocar/Project Silver Bug (1958) ............................................................................ 41 Explorer 1 (January 1958) ......................................................................................................... 41 Oxcart/A-12/SR-71 (1958) ........................................................................................................ 41 Project Mercury (1958-1963) .................................................................................................... 42 TATTLETALE/GRAB (September 1960)................................................................................ 42 Project Gemini (1961-1966)...................................................................................................... 42 Project Apollo (1961-1972) ...................................................................................................... 42 Poppy (1962-1977) .................................................................................................................... 42 Gambit (1963-1971) .................................................................................................................. 42 Hexagon (1971- 1986) .............................................................................................................. 42 Space Transportation System/Space Shuttle (1972 - 2011) ...................................................... 43 HAVE Blue/F-117A Nighthawk/TACIT Blue (1975) .............................................................. 43 Advanced Technology Bomber/B-2 Spirit (1980) .................................................................... 43 Strategic Defense Initiative (March 1983) ................................................................................ 43 Advent of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles 1980s-Present............................................................... 43 5GNAT 750 .......................................................................................................................................... 44 Predator ............................................................................................................................................... 44 Reaper ................................................................................................................................................. 44 Dark Star ............................................................................................................................................. 44 Polecat ................................................................................................................................................ 45 Sentinel ............................................................................................................................................... 45 Global Hawk ...................................................................................................................................... 45 SECTION IX: Conclusion ......................................................................................................................... 45 6
SECTION I:
[edit | edit source]IntroductionThis report represents Volume I of the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office’s(AARO) Historical Record Report (HR2) which reviews the record of the United StatesGovernment (USG) pertaining to unidentified anomalous phenomena (UAP). In completing thisreport, AARO reviewed all official USG investigatory efforts since 1945, researched classifiedand unclassified archives, conducted approximately 30 interviews, and partnered withIntelligence Community (IC) and Department of Defense (DoD) officials responsible forcontrolled and special access program oversight, respectively. AARO will publish Volume II inaccordance with the date established in Section 6802 of the National Defense Authorization Actfor Fiscal Year 2023 (FY23); Volume II will provide analysis of information acquired by AAROafter the date of the publication of Volume I.Since 1945, the USG has funded and supported UAP investigations with the goal ofdetermining whether UAP represented a flight safety risk, technological leaps by competitornations, or evidence of off-world technology under intelligent control. These investigations weremanaged and implemented by a range of experts, scientists, academics, military, and intelligenceofficials under differing leaders—all of whom held their own perspectives that led them to particular conclusions on the origins of UAP. However, they all had in common the belief thatUAP represented an unknown and, therefore, theoretically posed a potential threat of anindeterminate nature.AARO’s mission is similar to that of these earlier organizations. AARO methodologyapplies both the scientific method and intelligence analysis tradecraft to identify and helpmitigate risks UAP may pose to domain safety and to discover, characterize, and attribute potential competitor technological systems.A consistent theme in popular culture involves a particularly persistent narrative that theUSG—or a secretive organization within it—recovered several off-world spacecraft andextraterrestrial biological remains, that it operates a program or programs to reverse engineer therecovered technology, and that it has conspired since the 1940s to keep this effort hidden fromthe United States Congress and the American public.AARO recognizes that many people sincerely hold versions of these beliefs which are based on their perception of past experiences, the experiences of others whom they trust, ormedia and online outlets they believe to be sources of credible and verifiable information. The proliferation of television programs, books, movies, and the vast amount of internet and socialmedia content centered on UAP-related topics most likely has influenced the public conversationon this topic, and reinforced these beliefs within some sections of the population.The goal of this report is not to prove or disprove any particular belief set, but rather touse a rigorous analytic and scientific approach to investigate past USG-sponsored UAPinvestigation efforts and the claims made by interviewees that the USG and various contractorshave recovered and are hiding off-world technology and biological material. AARO hasapproached this project with the widest possible aperture, thoroughly investigating these
Assertions and claims without any particular pre-conceived conclusion or hypothesis. AARO iscommitted to reaching conclusions based on empirical evidence.Lastly, AARO thanks all participants in this review who made this report possible, toinclude the interviewees who came forward with information.SECTION II: Executive Summary AARO found no evidence that any USG investigation, academic-sponsored research,or official review panel has confirmed that any sighting of a UAP represented extraterrestrialtechnology.All investigative efforts, at all levels of classification, concluded that most sightingswere ordinary objects and phenomena and the result of misidentification. Although not the focusof this report, it is worthwhile to note that all official foreign UAP investigatory efforts to datehave reached the same general conclusions as USG investigations.• Although many UAP reports remain unsolved or unidentified, AARO assesses that ifmore and better quality data were available, most of these cases also could beidentified and resolved as ordinary objects or phenomena. Sensors and visualobservations are imperfect; the vast majority of cases lack actionable data or the dataavailable is limited or of poor quality.• Resources and staffing for these programs largely have been irregular and sporadic,challenging investigatory efforts and hindering effective knowledge transfer.• The vast majority of reports almost certainly are the result of misidentification and adirect consequence of the lack of domain awareness; there is a direct correlation between the amount and quality of available information on a case with the ability toconclusively resolve it. AARO found no empirical evidence for claims that the USG and private companieshave been reverse-engineering extraterrestrial technology. AARO determined, based on allinformation provided to date, that claims involving specific people, known locations,technological tests, and documents allegedly involved in or related to the reverse-engineeringof extraterrestrial technology, are inaccurate. Additional claims will be addressed in Volume II.AARO successfully located the USG and industry programs, officials, companies,executives, and documents identified by interviewees. In many cases, the interviewees namedauthentic USG classified programs well-known and understood to those appropriately accessedto them in the Executive Branch and Legislative Branch; however, the interviewees mistakenlyassociated these authentic USG programs with alien and extraterrestrial activity. AARO hasreached the following, high confidence conclusions related to: • UAP Nondisclosure Agreements (NDA): AARO has found no evidence of anyauthentic UAP-related NDA or other evidence threatening death or violence fordisclosing UAP information.
36
regarding the recovery or existence of extraterrestrial beings or crafts. Although AAROcontinues to conduct interviews, research programs, and pursue investigatory leads, AARO’swork has resulted in disproving the majority of these claims using the verifiable informationmade within those claims.AARO researched and interviewed numerous people, programs, and leads. It hasdetermined that modern allegations that the USG is hiding off-world technology and beingslargely originate from the same group of individuals who have ties to the cancelledAAWSAP/AATIP program and a private sector organization’s paranormal research efforts.These individuals have worked with each other consistently in various UAP-related efforts.• Persons 1-5 and Interviewees 1, 3, 9, 12, 13, and 14 have repeatedly voiced theseclaims in various public and private venues, and they have petitioned Congress invarious capacities on UAP issues. They have not provided any empirical evidence oftheir claims to AARO. 120 • Persons 1 and 3 and Interviewees 1, 3, and 12 were involved with the paranormalresearch conducted under AAWSAP/AATIP.121 • Person 5 and Interviewees 3, 9 and 14 were involved with the alleged crashed UAPmaterials that were provided to the U.S. Army and subsequently to AARO forexamination.122 • Persons 4, 7, and 8 and Interviewees 1, 3, and 13 investigated UAP on their own andwere responsible for successfully ex panding the remit of an existing IC program toinclude UAP exploitation language.123 • AARO notes that Persons 1 and 4 never formally sat down with AARO to provideofficial, signed statements; these individuals have been mentioned by otherinterviewees frequently as sources of their claims. Person 8 held an informalinterview and Interviewee 14 sat for an official interview but has not signed thememo for the record documenting this interview.SECTION VII: Historical Context of UAP Investigatory Efforts Since 1945Summary AARO assesses that the incidents of UAP sightings reported to USG organizations, theclaims that some constitute extraterrestrial craft, and the claims that the USG has secured andis experimenting on alien technology, most likely are the result of a range of cultural, political, and technological factors.AARO bases this conclusion on the aggregate findings ofall USG investigations to date, the misinterpretation of all reported named sensitive programs,the lack of empirical evidence to support the USG reverse-engineering narrative, and AARO’sassessment that the piece of metal alleged to be recovered from an alien spacecraft in the late1940s is ordinary, of terrestrial origin, and possesses no exceptional qualities.• Although many cases remain unsolved—primarily because of the lack of actionableand researchable data—AARO and its predecessor organizations concluded that the vast majority of cases report on events that amount to ordinary objects, atmosphericand natural phenomena, and observer misidentification.• Although many UAP/UFO cases remain unsolved, based on the lack of evidence ofthe extraterrestrial origin of even one UAP report and the assessment that all resolvedcases to date have ordinary explanations, AARO assess sightings and claims ofextraterrestrial visitations have been influenced by a range of factors.Commonalities of 20th and 21st Century UAP InvestigationsInternational Security Environment and Technological SurpriseIn both periods, changes in the international order brought uncertainty. Concern aboutthe Soviet Union’s desire for regional hegemony and military and political superioritycontributed to U.S. involvement with conflicts in Korea, Vietnam, and elsewhere, sparked a boom in U.S. technological innovation, and led to widespread fear within society about Sovietcapabilities and intentions.One primary means of competing with the Soviet Union was to collect intelligence onSoviet leadership intentions and military capabilities. The means by which the U.S.accomplished this goal was to develop a range of air- and space-based reconnaissance systems tocollect an array of intelligence on the Soviet Union—especially over its territory. During someearly UFO investigation efforts, it was deemed essential to determine if UFOs were Soviet“secret weapons” or psychological warfare operations aimed at causing public fear andgenerating hysteria to undermine U.S. societal morale.Today’s global security environment is similarly dynamic. Both the Russian Federationand the PRC seek to alter the international system at the expense of the security of the UnitedStates. AARO recognizes that concern with competitor technological surprise is still a real andlegitimate driver of UAP investigations today. It is imperative to determine whether or not thesesightings represent a risk to flight safety, and whether these sightings represent technologicaladvances that could pose counterintelligence and national security threats.SecrecyThe USG’s need to maintain secrecy to protect classified information about intelligencesources and methods, military operations and technology, and U.S. vulnerabilities is also ashared context among all UAP investigations. While secrecy is essential to protect U.S. nationalsecurity interests, it can reduce the public’s trust in government. With a gap in information aboutUFO/UAP investigations, other information sources and narratives, including private UFOinvestigative organizations and “UFOlogy” emerged to fill that gap. AARO assesses that theclassification of prior USG investigations have fueled speculation that the government washiding knowledge of extraterrestrials, when, in fact, secrecy was and still is intended todeliberately and thoughtfully protect sensitive military and intelligence community programs,capabilities, sources, and methods.
Public InterestSegments of the American public have been interested in this topic since the term “flyingsaucer” emerged after Arnold’s sighting in 1947, as evidenced by the proliferation of television, books, movies, and podcasts today on the topic. The subject is deeply rooted in popular culturewith its own themes, mythologies, and conspiracy theories. Capt Ruppelt, who was involvedwith three UFO investigations efforts, including being the initial leader of Project BLUE BOOK,noted that there would be spikes in reported sightings after official press events mentioningUFOs; suggesting that reports of sightings can influence the incidence of additional reportedsightings.124 Alleged Bureaucratic BarriersAlleged bureaucratic barriers including indifference, cognitive dissonance, lack ofsupport or resources, and deliberate obstruction are also similarities. Some members ofinvestigatory panels have claimed official obstruction, ranging from lack of access to seniordecision-makers to insufficient staff and resources.Insufficient Data and InformationPrevious and current investigations have been challenged by insufficient data andinformation for intelligence and scientific analysis to resolve anomalous incidents. Insufficientdata and information was compounded by inconsistent reporting and lack of continuity amonginvestigations and investigative practices. Capt Ruppelt, the first director of Project BLUEBOOK, noted that the inability to collect the UFO’s altitude, size, and speed was a recurring andsignificant obstacle to resolving cases.125 A similar challenge remains today, even with theadvancement in technology. Most UAP sightings have no data associated with them beyond anoften vague narrative account; and when there is hard data, it is often incomplete or of poorquality. In terms of military reporting, the sensors on which UAP most frequently are capturedare calibrated and optimized for combat. UAP are not routinely captured by exquisite, high-definition, multi-capability, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance collection platforms— a threshold which is often required to successfully resolve a case.Perceived DeceptionThere is a conviction among some Americans that the USG has conducted a deceptionoperation to conceal the fact that it has recovered extraterrestrial spacecraft and alien beings aswell as systematically exploited and reverse-engineered extraterrestrial technology.126 This perception probably has been fueled by key UFO investigators’ public comments. For example,J. Allen Hynek of Project BLUE BOOK, said that the USAF expected him to perform the role ofdebunker; and Capt Ruppelt, the first chief of BLUE BOOK, later wrote that he was expected toexplain away every report and that the USAF sought to produce press stories in alignment withthe USAF’s position.127
Differences between 20th and 21st Century UAP InvestigationsDecreased Public TrustPolling data on public trust reflects Americans’ changing views over time. According tothe Pew Research Center, polling on this topic began in 1958, when about 75 percent ofAmericans trusted the USG “to do the right thing almost always or most of the time.” Since2007, however, that figure has not risen above 30 percent. This lack of trust probably hascontributed to the belief held by some subset of the U.S. population that the USG has not beentruthful regarding knowledge of extraterrestrial craft.128 Popular CultureThough there were waves of public interest in UAP in popular culture during the ColdWar, especially during the 1950s, AARO assesses that UAP content in popular culture is more pervasive now than ever. The speed of discovery, and the ubiquity of information availablethrough the internet on the topic is unprecedented. Frequent exposure to the topic thoughtraditional and social media has increased the number of Americans who believe that UAP are ofextraterrestrial origin, based on a 2021 Gallup poll.129 Aside from hoaxes and forgeries, misinformation and disinformation is more prevalentand easier to disseminate now than ever before, especially with today’s advanced photo, video,and computer generated imagery tools. Internet search and content recommendation algorithmsserve to reinforce individuals’ preconceptions and confirmation biases just as much as to helpeducate and inform.SECTION VIII: Testing and Development of U.S. National Security and Space ProgramsMost Likely Accounted for Some Portion of UAP SightingsSummaryWe assess that the majority of UAP sightings in the earlier decades of UAP investigationswere the result of misidentification of ordinary phenomena and objects, based on AARO’sfindings of its own cases to date and the findings of all past investigatory efforts. However, weassess that some portion of these misidentifications almost certainly were a result of the surge innew technologies that observers would have understandably reported as UFOs.Along with these systems, a broad and varying technology industry emerged along with anetwork of highly secretive national laboratories across the United States to support these efforts. AARO’s review of Project BLUE BOOK cases shows a spike in reported UAP sightings from 1952-1957 and another spike in 1960.130 These reporting spikes most likely are attributed toob servers unknowingly having witnessed new technological advancements and testing andreporting them as UFOs. The below examples represent formerly classified and sensitive programs that involved thousands of test flights, rocket launches, and extensive experimentation which AARO assess most likely were the cause of many UAP reports. AARO assesses that thiscommon and understandable occurrence—the misidentification of new technologies for UAP— is present today, such as in cases where rocket exhaust plumes, micro-satellite trains, and UAS systems with odd morphologies are reported as UAP.The below examples represent a sample of the unclassified and declassified authentic national security programs that AARO assesses probably were associated with erroneous UAP reporting: Manhattan Project (August 1942)The U.S. effort to build an atomic bomb, the Manhattan Project, was named after the location of its initial offices in what became known as the Manhattan Engineer District at 270 Broadway, Manhattan, New York City. General Leslie R. Groves, head of the project, followed the custom of naming the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ districts after the city in which they were located.131 The secrecy surrounding the Manhattan Project and the establishment of several other national laboratories, such as Los Alamos National Laboratories, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Sandia National Laboratories, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, and Oak Ridge National Laboratory to support this effort probably contributed to the spike in reported UAP.132 V-173/XF5U-1 “Flying Pancake” (1942)The V-173 aircraft flew for the first time on November 23, 1942.133 It was believed that maintaining a uniform airflow over the wingspan—or “pancake” fuselage—would allow the aircraft to take off and land at exceptionally low speeds without sacrificing high-speed performance qualities that appealed to the USN for its fighter aircraft.134 The V-173 could takeoff vertically, had a circular wing 23.3 feet in diameter, and could almost hover. The XF5U-1’s design was largely similar to the V-173. However, the USN cancelled the project in 1948 in favor of a switch to turbojet engines.135 Project Mogul (1947-1949)The U.S. Army Air Force Air Materiel Command operated Project Mogul between 1947 and 1949. The aim of this program was to secure intelligence on Soviet nuclear weapons testing and to provide an early warning mechanism for Soviet ballistic missiles. Specifically, Project Mogul scientists worked on developing high-altitude balloons that would carry sensors capable of detecting long-range sound waves from weapons tests or missiles traveling through the atmosphere. A crashed balloon associated with Project Mogul outside of Roswell, New Mexico,is assessed to be the source of early UFO claims.136 Project High Dive (1950s)Project High Dive was a program that conducted tests on large balloons and used test dummies in its experimentation. The goal of this program was to research the effects on pilots when they ejected from aircraft, especially pilots’ tolerance to deceleration from wind drag.137
Project Aquatone/Dragon Lady (1954) President Eisenhower authorized Project Aquatone to develop the U-2 Dragon Lady, a high-altitude reconnaissance aircraft to collect intelligence on Soviet nuclear deployments. More than half of the UFO reports investigated in the 1950s and 1960s were assessed to be U.S.reconnaissance flights, according to a declassified CIA assessment on reconnaissance aircraft.138 The report noted that UFO reports would spike when the U-2 was in flight, especially from airline pilots to Air Traffic Control. At that time, commercial flights typically flew below 20,000 feet while the U-2 flew at 60,000 feet. The report noted that when commercial pilots were flying east to west, with the sun below the horizon, the sunlight would illuminate the U-2.139 WS-117L/CORONA (Late 1956)In 1956, the USAF initiated the WS-117L satellite reconnaissance program equipped with a film-return vehicle. Following the launch of Sputnik, the Eisenhower Administration made this program a high-priority. In February 1958, President Eisenhower decided the CIA would have the lead role in the program, called “CORONA,” and that it would be jointly managed alongside the USAF. The CORONA program performed 140 launches between 1959 and 1972, with many returning film from space to the Earth for recovery.140 VZ-9AV Avrocar/Project Silver Bug (1958)Canada initially led an effort to develop a supersonic, vertical takeoff and landing fighter- bomber in the early 1950s. A.V. Roe (Avro) Aircraft Limited (later Avro Canada) led the design for the concept, and this effort yielded the Avrocar, an aircraft with a circular shape that gave it astereo typical “flying saucer” appearance.141 Canada pulled its support when the project became too expensive. The U.S. Army and U.S. USAF took over the project in 1958 when Avro offered it to the USG, when it became known as “Project Silver Bug.”142 143 Avro built two test vehicles that were designated as the VZ-9AV Avrocar, but the project was cancelled in December 1961 when the vehicle could not lift more than a few feet off the ground.144 Project Silver Bug was declassified in 1997.145 Explorer 1 (January 1958)The United States launched its first satellite, Explorer 1, into space on January 31, 1958.Explorer 1 carried a cosmic ray detector and was designed, built, and operated by the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory.146 Oxcart/A-12/SR-71 (1958)President Eisenhower approved this CIA-led program to develop a successor to the U-2spy plane in 1958, which became fully operational in 1965.147 The U-2’s successor, the A-12OXCART sustained a speed of Mach 3.2 at 90,000 feet altitude.148 By the time the A-12 was deployed by the CIA in 1967, CORONA satellites were being used to collect imagery of deniedare as with less provocation than aircraft overflights.149 In 1968, President Johnson ordered the retirement of the A-12 when it was replaced by the SR-71, which itself was a modified version ofthe A-12.150
Project Mercury (1958-1963)Project Mercury, America’s first human space program made six flights. The objectives of the program were to orbit a manned spacecraft around Earth, investigate humans’ ability to function in space, and recover astronauts and spacecraft safely.151 TATTLETALE/GRAB (September 1960)The United States was the first nation to deliver a reconnaissance satellite to space. This electronic intelligence (ELINT) satellite was developed by the Naval Research Laboratory in early 1958 under the code name “TATTLETALE” with the mission of intercepting Soviet radar signals.152 The program later became known as GRAB (Galactic Radiation and Background),after public disclosure of the ELINT satellite project.153 154 Project Gemini (1961-1966) The Gemini program was a U.S. human spaceflight program that took place between the Mercury and Apollo programs. Similar to Project Mercury, Project Gemini spacecraft was launched using ballistic missiles that were designed to carry nuclear payloads.155 Project Gemini conducted 12 missions.156 Project Apollo (1961-1972)Project Apollo was a NASA human spaceflight program conducted after Project Mercury and Project Gemini.157 Project Apollo totaled 14 missions, 11 spaceflights, and 12 astronauts walking on the moon.158 Poppy (1962-1977)The successor to GRAB, Poppy was an ELINT satellite system developed by the National Research Laboratory that operated from 1962 to 1977 to collect Soviet radar emissions.159 A total of seven Poppy missions were launched between December 1962 and December 1971.160 The program was declassified in 2004.161 Gambit (1963-1971)The National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) launched its first high-resolution photo reconnaissance satellite system in 1963, which became known by its code name, Gambit.162 Two Gambit systems were developed: Gambit 1, initially launched in 1963, and Gambit 3,which was first launched in 1966.163 The Gambit 1 satellite’s exposed film was returned to Earth in reentry vehicles, or “buckets,” that separated from the satellite, fell through the atmosphere and descended by parachute until obtained by USAF aircraft at about 15,000 feet altitude.164 Gambit was declassified in 2011.Hexagon (1971- 1986)Similar to Gambit, Hexagon was an NRO photoreconnaissance satellite system. It waslaunched in 1971 to conduct wide-area searches of denied territory.165 From 1971-1986, 19missions collected imagery over 877 million square miles of the Earth’s surface.166
The Hexagon system was the last satellite employing film reentry vehicles.167 Hexagon wasdeclassified in 2011.168 Space Transportation System/Space Shuttle (1972 - 2011)The Space Shuttle program was NASA’s fourth human spaceflight program and wascomprised of the first reusable spacecraft to carry humans into Earth’s orbit.169 The space shuttlefleet—Columbia, Challenger, Discovery, Atlantis, and Endeavour—flew 135 missions, servicedthe Hubble space telescope, and helped construct the International Space Station.170 The firstshuttle launch, Columbia, was conducted on April 12, 1981.171 HAVE Blue/F-117A Nighthawk/TACIT Blue (1975)The Defense Advanced Research Project Agency (DARPA) oversaw the development ofHAVE Blue in the mid-1970s, which was the first practical, combat-stealth aircraft. HAVE Bluecompleted its first test flight in 1977, and the success of this program led the USAF to later produce the F-117A Nighthawk, as well as the TACIT Blue aircraft. The HAVE Blue, F-117A Nighthawk, and TACIT Blue programs laid the foundations for the later development of the B-2stealth bomber.172 Advanced Technology Bomber/B-2 Spirit (1980)The B-2 is a USAF low-observable stealth bomber capable of delivering conventionaland nuclear payloads. It uses a combination of reduced infrared, acoustic, and electromagneticsignatures. It was first publicly displayed on November 22, 1988 in Palmdale, California andconducted its first flight on July 17, 1989. The first aircraft was delivered on December 17,1993.173 Strategic Defense Initiative (March 1983)At the initiative of President Ronald Reagan, the Strategic Defense Initiative Organization was established in 1984 to explore a multi-layered strategic defense against ballistic missiles; this program involved research into space-based and ground-based systems including laser and interceptor missiles. This intensive research effort involved national laboratories and academia. Some of the technologies researched were determined to be years from development, and funding was reduced. The program ended in 1993 and was replaced bythe Ballistic Missile Defense Organization.174 Advent of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles 1980s-Present The research and development, flight testing, evaluation, deployment, and the operation of drones—Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS), Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV), Remotely Piloted Aircraft (RPA), and Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems (RPAS)—almost certainly resulted in reported sightings of UAP. Some of these systems had a “saucer” or triangle-shaped appearance and were capable of loitering aloft.The USG acquired and operated a number of systems for a range of missions including intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, and strike, among others. The below systems represent a sample of those that have been operationally deployed since the 1994 Bosnia conflict and subsequently employed in counter terrorism operations around the world.175 Since then, their form and use have spread to civil and commercial applications.GNAT 750The GNAT 750 was developed in the late 1980s by General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc. The prototype served as the basis for a more advanced design under DARPA176 It was first used in 1994 during the Bosnia conflict where satellites were not optimized to collect for extended times over such small are a sand where the airspace was heavily defended by capable anti-aircraft missile systems.177 Predator The Predator system, also built by General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc., was based on the GNAT-750.178 It was initially a joint USN and U.S. Army project but transitioned to the USAF in 1996.179 It was known as the RQ-1.180 The system possessed synthetic aperture radar, electro-optical, and infrared sensors.181 It was used to support United Nations and North Atlantic Treaty Organization efforts in Bosnia and was widely used in counter terrorism operations.182 It became a platform with a wide array of technical capabilities that performed a variety of missions—such as close air support, combat search , precision strike, convoy/raid over watch, target development and terminal air guidance. 183 The USAF retired the fleet in 2018.184 Reaper General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc. also built the MQ-9 Reaper — a newer,larger version of the MQ-1 Predator UAV.185 This platform is faster, equipped with more advanced sensors, can carry more munitions than the Predator, and can be easily tailored with a variety of mission-specific capabilities.186 The system requires a pilot to control the aircraft and an aircrew member to operate the sensors and weapons.187 188 It has an operational altitude of 50,000 feet.189 The aircraft is operated out of a variety of locations worldwide, including Creech Air Force Base (AFB) in Nevada.190 Dark Star The RQ-3 Dark Star was a remote pilot-assisted stealth system intended to conduct reconnaissance missions in high-threat areas. Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and DARPA developed Dark Star in the mid-to-late 1990s.191 It never entered production, but the research conducted on Dark Star led to subsequent advances used on other platforms. Some observers asserted that Dark Star resembled a flying saucer with long narrow wings.192 It was designed to be fully autonomous from its launch, mission engagement, and return.It used satellite links to transmit sensor data. The first prototype flew in 1996, but crashed a month later on its second flight. The system completed five test flights before DoD terminated the program in 1999 due to cost and instability problems.193
