.
A very talented individual I met in the JREF forums did this little item for me. He wants to remain anonymous but he wants the image credited to “Psycho Clown”. I think the artwork does say something.
.
About a year ago, I was made aware of James Carlson’s personal knowledge about the Malmstrom AFB missile shutdown incident. This case had become a staple of UFO folklore as one of the best cases indicating that UFOs present a serious threat to national security and I was curious what he could add to the body of knowledge that existed. I contacted Mr. Carlson and asked him if he would write an article on the matter and he agreed to do so. I was surprised at the lengthy piece he wrote and quickly determined that it could not fit into SUNlite. Initially, I thought of editing it down but then decided it would not be fair to his work. Instead, I decided that he should post it on the internet and I would add a summary of it here in SUNlite.
I think it is important to understand who James Carlson is. He describes his position early on in his manuscript:
At this point, in all fairness to those propagating the March 16, 1967 UFO fables, and in the interests of full transparency, it should be noted that the author of this narrative is the second son of Captain Eric D. Carlson, who on March 16, 1967 was the ranking commander at Echo Flight, the missile station attached to Malmstrom AFB’s 10th Missile Squadron that suffered an equipment malfunction that resulted in the entire flight of ten Minuteman Missiles going offline and reporting a “No-Go” status.
My father has always maintained that the missiles went offline due to an equipment malfunction that was thoroughly investigated by both civilian and military representatives. Contrary to suggestions by a number of individuals that he has confirmed their insulting and ridiculous assertions that one or more UFOs hijacked from one to three flights of nuclear missiles during his watch, he has repeatedly insisted that UFOs had absolutely nothing´to do with the malfunctions that did occur on that date, a claim supported by the undeniable fact that UFOs were never reported by civilian or military observers on March 16, 1967. That deserves to be repeated: there were no UFOs reported on March 16, 1967 by anybody*. 1
* Mr. Carlson is stating that nobody made these reports in 1967. He is not including the stories told decades later in this remark.
I also would like to point out the James Carlson has been the target of some rather abusive responses by those defending Robert Salas and his story. While Carlson comes across as heavy handed, one can understand his point of view on the subject when you see people saying unkind things about him and his father. He and I have discussed this at length and I can not change his attitude about the matter. I may not completely agree with how he approached his manuscript but I think it is worth reading. With that being said, let’s examine the major points of his document.
Does Robert Salas have that bad a memory or is he a liar?
Carlson spends a great deal of time recounting the various versions of the Salas story. What becomes clear is that Salas, the primary witness to the Malmstrom UFO event, has shifted his story over the years and can’t seem to keep his story straight.
He initially felt he was part of Echo
• flight, which did have its missiles shutdown on March 16, 1967. Echo flight was part of the 10th missile squadron.
When it was discovered he was not
• part of Echo flight, he changed his position to being part of November flight (490th missile squadron) and stated their missiles shutdown as well. There is no evidence to indicate that November flight’s missiles shut down like Echo flight. However, there
is mention in the unit history that a security team was sent to investigate November flight at the time of the Echo flight incident.
After further investigation it was revealed that Salas did not belong to either Echo or November flight. Instead
he was attached to Oscar flight (490th missile squadron).
He later would shift the date of his • missile shutdown to the morning of March 24, 1967 to match the new testimony of Bob Jamison. There is no evidence that any missile shutdown happened on that day. It is not in any unit history even though the Echo flight shutdown and subsequent investigation is there.
For a man who happens to have a vivid memory of the event, he seemed to have a problem even remembering where he served and when the event actually happened.
Other points about the Salas testimony are brought up by Carlson:
Salas claims that his Launch Control • Center (LCC)) was in communication with Echo flight. Carlson’s father, who was in charge of Echo flight, denies such communication occurred. There would be no reason for Echo flight to contact November/Oscar flight, which was part of a completely different missile squadron. Salas would later refute his own claim by stating first that it was not Echo Flight that told them about Echo flight but the “command post” and then it became “another Launch Control Center (LCC)”. Changing the date of the shutdown to March 24th, which was not the day of the Echo flight shutdown implies that the story he told about the phone call was something he probably made up Salas claims that he was in communi• cation with a security detail topside that was investigating a UFO and that a member of the security team was injured (possibly by the UFO). There is no evidence in the unit history to verify this and Salas tends to change the story over time with varying embellishments. No names are ever mentioned concerning the security detail. Apparently, in the days that followed Salas was not interested in their identities or for the welfare of the injured man. His most recent claim (A story apparently never told prior to this) is that another unnamed member of the security detail contacted him shortly after the event wanting to talk to someone about it. Salas states that he turned this person away because he had given an oath not to discuss the matter.
To this day, no security personnel from this group have ever stepped forward to tell this story. Claims of being sworn to secrecy just don’t wash because Salas has violated his security oath (at least he claims he signed a non-disclosure agreement about this event) and has suffered no repercussions. Salas states it was dark outside when • the event transpired. According to the unit history, the time of the Echo shutdown was 0845 local time. This is well after sunrise. With the shifting of the date to March 24th, he has eliminated this discrepancy.
In my over twenty years of Naval service, there are no events that I can not remember to the point where I would keep shifting the date of the event and the unit to which I belonged. My father, about to turn 80 years old, is a wealth of information regarding his naval career. He can recount many events when we talk. He may not remember the exact date of these events at his age but he does not forget the units or names of key individuals.
Since my retirement, I have communicated widely with numerous members of the military (including Mr. Carlson). All seem to have no difficulty in recalling personnel and units associated with major events in their careers. Some may have trouble recollecting exact dates but their memories are not so bad that they have to keep revising what happened when or where.
The key point here is that Mr. Salas can not seem to remember the major details about the most important event in his military career. Would a D-day veteran fail to recall the date and beach he landed upon or his unit? Nobody is questioning that he was present at Malmstrom. However, in light of the fact that he has so much trouble with identifying the major details, we have to seriously question his recollections. Such story shifting demonstrates a desire to make a story better and discard items that have been shown to be inaccurate. I find it amusing that Mr. Salas recently wrote the following:
At least for the sake of that airman I spoke with, and for all the other officers and men in the Air Force who have had to keep silent about what they experienced with these objects, I, without reservation, accuse the U.S. Department of the Air Force of blatant, pervasive and a continuing cover-up of the facts, deception, distortion, and lying to the public about the reality of the UFO phenomenon.
2 By presenting the USAF as a target, Salas is creating an emotional appeal for the UFO community to ignore his constantly shifting story and focus their attention on a conspiracy theory they will accept.
USAF Histories
Mr. Carlson moves on to inform us about unit histories and the problems associated with them in the 1960s. He notes that the unit history was written by Airman second class (E-2) David Gamble, who was assigned the task of Wing Historian. Assigning an E-2 as the caretaker of the unit history indicates it was not considered a very important task. In 1967, Gamble was probably a desk clerk under the supervision of a junior officer. Looking at the documents at the blackvault regarding this event, one can see that the unit historians pretty much copied the messages and reports without any embellishments. Gamble has since been interviewed and stated he was told to write the entry into the history about UFO rumors being disproven. However, the same entry is footnoted as being taken from the report made by the investigating team so is this really true? Gamble told UFO investigators that he tried to investigate but received no cooperation from anybody. It is no surprise that an E-2, which is one of the lowest ranks in the USAF, did not get cooperation from the senior enlisted men/officers. The actual team of investigators led by a Major was conducting interviews with these officers and men. It is unlikely they would give the time of day to an E-2 clerk, who was making inquiries about the same time. The bottom line in all of this is that
the histories were as accurate as an airman
second class could make them. Any reading between the lines at what they mean is just guesswork.
Rationalizing the documents
James Carlson moves on to argue about how UFOlogists have tried to make all sorts of speculation concerning the unit history entry. Brad Sparks’ states at the NICAP web site that the National Security Agency (NSA) shifted responsibility for the case to the Boeing Company in order to hide the fact that UFOs were involved. By stating that all rumors of UFO activity turned out to be unsupported, the NSA could hide the fact that UFOs caused the shutdown. This forced the Boeing Company to conduct an expensive wild goose chase. Carlson points out that the NSA had nothing to do with such events and it was an agency designed for gathering intelligence about other countries by employing sensors. Why it would be interested in the missile shutdown is not explained by Sparks and James declares this to be a “paranoid fantasy”. He also points out that the Boeing Company was not the only group involved and the investigation was headed by a Major James H. Schraff. Mr. Carlson also mentions that the entry about UFO rumors were originally an “unclassified” entry in the unit history meaning the information was not that important. Most important is that Bluebook had no entries about UFO reports from Malmstrom on the 16th of March. There is also no evidence that Lt. Col. Lewis D. Chase was involved in the Echo flight investigation. Being the Malmstrom UFO officer, he would have had to file the reports with Bluebook and investigated them. Finally, any UFOs present would have been reported by the civilian community and would have made headlines the way the Belt, Montana sighting made headlines on the 24th of March. Remember, this was not the middle of the night but around 9AM local time. The absence of any such reports
indicates a lack of UFO activity on March 16th.
Of course, the recent shift by Salas to the 24th appears to be to match up with the Belt, Montana UFO sighting. However, this was at 9PM on the night of the 24th and not early in the morning as described by Salas. It implies that the Belt Montana UFO sighting/landing has little to do with anything described by Salas.
.
The supporting cast
Carlson points out that there is very little confirmation about Salas’ version of events. Salas originally presented his watch commander, Frederick Meiwald as some sort of confirmation but his testimony seems to be limited to what Salas tells us. I am unaware of anybody performing an “on the record” interview with Mr. Meiwald. According to Carlson, it was probably Meiwald’s revelations that forced Salas to change his location from November to Oscar flight.
Lt. Walt Figel was interviewed by Robert Hastings and he reported that maintenance teams were working on Echo flight the day before and the morning of the Echo flight shutdown. Documents revealed by Carlson demonstrated that a lot of problems existed with various system components and they were frequently being replaced. So it seems likely the missile systems were being repaired or upgraded to prevent failure. Figel talked to the maintenance teams about the shutdown and there is some discussion about a potential UFO sighting. Carlson suggests it is basically banter between Figel and the maintenance team. One can not say for sure but it does appear to be some light-hearted discussion and not something that was being taken seriously.
Carlson’s father was with Lt. Figel in the capsule and reports that UFOs had nothing to do with the shutdown.
Another important supporting witness is Bob Jamison, who was interviewed by Robert Hastings. Jamison reports being involved in a “restart” of an entire flight of ten missiles at Malmstrom near Lewiston, Montana. According to Hastings, Jamison was ordered to stay at the base until all the UFO reports ceased in the area. He also received a special briefing to make sure they reported any UFOs near the site. It is concluded that this happened on March 24/25 and it was Oscar flight Ja
mison was sent to restart. It is not hard to determine why the date selected was the 24th. It has a lot to do with the Belt sighting.
Belt, Montana is some 15 miles from Malmstrom AFB but about 80 miles from Lewiston. If the Belt sighting was holding back activity near Lewiston, it seems odd. Carlson points out, and I agree, that this testimony appears absurd. Why would the USAF not try to restore a missile flight simply because of “UFO reports”, which posed absolutely no threat? If the UFOs were truly a threat as implied by this testimony, the USAF would establish a combat air patrol (CAP) over the affected area(s). Certainly, the USAF could spare a few armed interceptors designated for air defense of the United States above the silos, base, and UFO location while the team went to restore these missiles that were vitally important to the defense of the country. This version of events appears to be more of a “sea story” full of some exaggerations and/or embellishments. Perhaps Jamison was recalling the Echo flight incident (which also was near Lewiston) and the UFO part had to do with those “rumors” that were circulating around the base. As suggested by Carlson, it was probably Hastings prompting that inspired Jamison to come up with the date of the March 24th.
The real story behind the missile shutdown
I have never seen any of the investigators of this case mention a TOP SECRET document titled USAF ballistic missile programs 1967-1968 by Bernard C. Nalty. Nalty was a professional historian, who’s resume’ includes many books on military history. Carlson points out that much of the material was highly classified and indicated that Nalty would have had access to any classified documents associated with the missile shutdown(s). Strangely, Nalty only discussed the Echo flight shutdown and there is no mention of any other shutdown of this nature.
Nalty’s history identifies many problems with the minuteman systems. Contrary to popular belief, it seems that, in 1967, guidance and control system failures were far too common in the Minuteman silos. They were susceptible to electronic noise and this is what apparently shutdown
Echo flight that day.
Extensive tests at Malmstrom, Ogden Air Material Area, and at the Boeing plant in Seattle revealed that an electronic noise pulse had shut down the flight. In effect, this surge of noise was similar to the electromagnetic pulse generated by nuclear explosions. The component of the Minuteman I that was most vulnerable to noise pulse was the logic coupler of the guidance and control system. Subsequent tests showed that the same part in Minuteman II was equally sensitive to the same phenomenon.
At the end of the fiscal year 1968, however, filters were being installed to suppress electromagnetic effects, and these might screen out noise.
3 Carlson’s argument is that the source of the signal is not an electromagnetic pulse but electronic/electrostatic noise pulse that acted like an electromagnetic pulse (EMP).
James Carlson devotes many pages trying to explain the similarities between an EMP produced from a nuclear explosion and a noise pulse produced electronically.
UFOlogists want everyone to believe that the pulse which shutdown the missiles have everything to do with the UFOs producing an EMP into the system. Of course, the question remains, why didn’t the EMP event affect other systems such as radio communications. It seems that one can more logically conclude the source of the pulse was internal to the missile complex and not from some external source, which would definitely affect other systems. This is the argument presented in the unit history and other documents surrounding the Echo flight shutdown. This is why the USAF spent thousands/millions of dollars and man-hours chasing the problem. If the AF knew that a UFO was the cause, there would have been no need for the investigative team to conduct all this effort.
Despite the extensive effort by the investigative team, it seems they were never able to duplicate the no-go shutdown every time they tried. They came close and were able to duplicate the Echo-flight shutdown signals 60% of the time. They had pinpointed the cause as coming from the logic coupler but could never pinpoint the exact source of the noise pulse. They did eliminate the source being from commercial power sources, which led them to conclude that the source of the pulse was internally generated.
I would not consider the difficulty in locating the precise source of the pulse as unusual. Trying to establish the exact same conditions that existed is a very difficult task and one weak component, which was never identified, could have been the source. The more complex the system, the more difficult it would be to reproduce the exact conditions of the shutdown.
Is this the answer?
When examining the information presented by James Carlson, we have to seriously question the various stories told about any missile shutdown beyond the Echo flight on March 16, 1967. Only a few people have come forward to even provide testimony that might support Salas’ tale. Some of it has been subjectively interpreted by over eager UFO investigators wanting to promote their books and research. Meanwhile, there seems to be a perfectly logical explanation for what caused the missile shutdown. In my skeptical
opinion, it seems that James Carlson provides a very good case for what transpired at Malmstrom that spring and there is no reason to suspect that UFOs were involved in any way.
.
Quelle: SUNlite 2/2010
5690 Views