Redmond Police-FAA Radar-Visual UFO Case

“Police officer Robert Dickerson first reported a meteor-like object that stopped and hovered; at the airport, FAA specialist Laverne Werta and others viewed a round flat object through binoculars as its color shifted from bright white to reddish orange.”

“Hall says FAA logs recorded the report to Seattle Center, a Klamath Falls GCI radar observation, an F-102 scramble from Portland, and a rapid climb/disappearance as a high-speed aircraft approached.”

“Section VIII’s photographic catalogue lists the September 24, 1959 Redmond FAA case and discusses an All-Sky camera film copy.”

“The source also says radar continued to show a UFO south of Redmond for about two hours after the visual departure.”

“Hall characterizes the available Redmond film copy as poor and inconclusive, so the film is not treated as independent confirmation of the object’s nature.”

“Hall documents a sequence of Redmond dispositions: “insufficient information,” a probable-balloon suggestion, later denial that the radar target was the visual UFO with the radar return attributed to a fixed gap-filler antenna, and a 1963 information sheet attributing the visual object to refraction of Venus.”

“Hall cites FAA logs as reporting six scrambled interceptors and height-finder altitudes varying from roughly 6,000 to 54,000 feet, while later Air Force correspondence described the radar return as stationary.”

“Hall argues that airline and military pilots are unusually experienced sky observers because their work requires repeated exposure to weather, aircraft, meteors, planets, and aviation hazards.”

“Hall groups pilot reports into three broad patterns: geometrical objects, maneuvering or gyrating lights, and cigar-shaped or rocket-like objects.”

“Hall notes that airline pilots were included in the CIRVIS vital-intelligence reporting system and cites 1954 meetings between airline representatives and MATS intelligence to speed reporting of unusual aerial objects.”

“Hall distinguishes diffuse/intermittent meteorological radar returns, sharp persistent targets resembling solid objects, and slow-moving radar “angels,” and argues that specialized radar patterns require case-specific analysis.”

“Hall considers simultaneous radar-visual cases stronger than radar-only cases because two modes of observation can constrain explanations.”

“Hall’s photographic table contains 64 cases and uses explicit ratings: strongest (*), potentially strong ((*)), worth analysis/context (#), dubious/negative (X), and incomplete (Inc), alongside film-data/status codes.”