Technical Evidence Database

Overview

This comprehensive database catalogs all forms of technical evidence from verified UFO/UAP cases, including radar signatures, electromagnetic effects, physical traces, photographic evidence, and sensor data. Each entry is cross-referenced with cases and includes technical specifications and analysis results.

RADAR EVIDENCE

Primary Military Radar Systems

SPY-1 Radar (USS Nimitz Encounter - 2004)

System Specifications:

Type: AN/SPY-1B(V) phased array radar
Frequency: S-band (3.2-3.4 GHz)
Range: 250+ nautical miles
Altitude Coverage: 0-100,000+ feet
Resolution: High-resolution target discrimination
Tracking Capacity: 100+ simultaneous targets

Recorded Data:

Object Detection: 80,000 feet initial altitude
Descent Rate: 80,000 to sea level in ~2 seconds
Speed Calculation: Mach 60+ during descent
Reappearance: 60 miles distant in <1 minute
Tracking Duration: Multiple days of intermittent contact

Technical Analysis:

Signal Strength: Consistent returns indicating solid object
Doppler Characteristics: Extreme velocity changes
RCS (Radar Cross Section): Variable, inconsistent with known aircraft
Jamming Assessment: No electronic warfare signatures detected

Operator Assessment:

Senior Chief Kevin Day: “99% of the time when I see something on radar, there’s something there”
Multiple operators confirmed tracking
System operated normally for all other targets

F-16 Radar Locks (Belgium Triangle Wave - 1989-1990)

System Specifications:

Type: AN/APG-66 pulse-Doppler radar
Frequency: X-band (8-12 GHz)
Range: 80+ nautical miles
Lock-on Range: 30+ nautical miles
Track Capacity: Multiple target tracking

Recorded Data:

Initial Lock: Object at 9,000 feet, 280 knots
Acceleration Event: 5,000 feet, 970 knots in seconds
Altitude Jump: 11,000 feet instantaneous transition
Lock Duration: Multiple successful radar locks

Technical Analysis:

Signal Characteristics: Solid return, not chaff or ECM
Acceleration Profile: Impossible for conventional aircraft
Maneuver Capability: Right-angle turns at high speed
Electronic Signature: No conventional aircraft transponder

Pilot Assessment:

Captain Yves Meelbergs: “Every time we got a radar lock, the object would change speed instantaneously”
Colonel Wilfried De Brouwer: “Perfect lock with onboard radar”

Ground-Based Radar Networks

Washington D.C. Flap (1952)

Systems Involved:

Washington National Airport: AN/CPS-5 radar
Andrews Air Force Base: AN/CPS-6A radar
Bolling Air Force Base: AN/CPS-4 radar

Recorded Data:

Multiple Simultaneous Tracks: 8-12 objects per radar site
Formation Flight: Objects in organized patterns
Speed Variations: Slow hovering to high-speed departure
Altitude Changes: Multiple altitude transitions

Technical Verification:

Three Independent Sites: Simultaneous tracking confirmation
Operator Experience: Senior radar operators with 10+ years experience
Equipment Status: All systems operating normally
Weather Conditions: Temperature inversion ruled out by operators

Tehran UFO Incident (1976)

System Specifications:

Type: Ground control radar (specific model classified)
Operator: Iranian Air Force radar control
Frequency: Military air traffic control band

Recorded Data:

Primary Object: Large return, aircraft carrier size signature
Smaller Objects: Multiple smaller returns detaching/reattaching
F-4 Tracking: Fighter aircraft radar confirmation
Speed Profile: Variable from stationary to high-speed

Technical Analysis:

RCS Analysis: Massive radar signature, inconsistent with known aircraft
Electronic Effects: F-4 instruments failed when approaching
Recovery Pattern: Systems restored when threat reduced
Ground Correlation: Visual confirmation by multiple observers

Civilian/Commercial Radar

JAL Flight 1628 (1986)

Systems Involved:

Anchorage ARTCC: Air Route Traffic Control Center radar
Elmendorf AFB: Military radar tracking
JAL Aircraft: Onboard weather radar

Recorded Data:

Ground Tracking: Anchorage confirmed object on scope
Aircraft Radar: JAL crew radar contact with large object
Duration: Over 30 minutes of tracking
Size Estimation: Twice the size of aircraft carrier

Technical Verification:

John Callahan (FAA): Confirmed radar data collection
Multiple Systems: Independent confirmation across platforms
Data Preservation: FAA radar tapes secured for analysis
CIA Interest: Intelligence agency involvement documented

Stephenville UFO (2008)

MUFON Radar Analysis:

System: National Weather Service radar data
Date: January 8, 2008
Location: Texas regional radar network

Findings:

High-Speed Object: Mach 1.7+ calculated speed
Direction Changes: 60-degree course corrections
Military Response: F-16s scrambled from Naval Air Station Fort Worth
Correlation: Witness sightings match radar timeline

Technical Assessment:

Glen Schulze (MUFON): Professional radar analysis
Speed Calculations: Verified using Doppler data
Military Denial: Initial denial contradicted by radar evidence
Physical Impossibility: No known aircraft matches performance

ELECTROMAGNETIC EFFECTS

Vehicle Interference Patterns

Levelland Incident (1957)

Affected Vehicles:

Total Count: 16 separate vehicles
Geographic Area: 15-mile radius around Levelland, Texas
Time Frame: 3-hour period

Effect Categories:

Engine Failure: Complete engine stall requiring restart
Electrical System: Headlights dimmed or failed completely
Radio Interference: Static or complete loss of signal
Duration: Effects lasted duration of object presence

Technical Analysis:

EMI Pattern: Electromagnetic interference consistent across cases
Recovery: All systems returned to normal after object departure
Vehicle Types: Cars, trucks, farm equipment affected equally
Witness Reliability: Farmers, truck drivers, local residents

Professional Assessment:

Sheriff Weir Clem: “16 separate reports of the same electromagnetic effects”
Officer A.J. Fowler: Personal patrol car affected during sighting

Cash-Landrum Incident (1980)

Electromagnetic Measurements:

Vehicle Effects: Engine overheating, electrical system stress
Radio Interference: Complete communication failure
Duration: Effects coincided with intense heat radiation

Medical Correlation:

Radiation Symptoms: Consistent with electromagnetic exposure
Hospital Documentation: Medical records of radiation-like injuries
Scientific Analysis: Dr. Peter Rank radiation assessment

Additional EM Effect Cases:

Socorro (1964): Police radio interference during landing
Minot AFB (1968): Nuclear facility systems affected
Tehran (1976): F-4 weapon systems failed during approach
Hudson Valley (1982-1986): Car engines stalled, radios failed

Aircraft System Interference

Military Aircraft Effects

F-4 Phantom (Tehran 1976):

Weapon Systems: Complete missile system failure
Communications: Radio blackout during approach
Navigation: Instrument malfunction
Recovery: Systems restored when withdrawing from object

F-16 Fighting Falcon (Belgium 1990):

Radar Jamming: Intermittent lock-on capability
Electronic Warfare: No conventional jamming signatures
Flight Systems: Normal operation maintained
Weapon Status: No weapon system effects reported

Commercial Aircraft Effects

JAL Flight 1628 (1986):

Radar Display: Normal operation, object clearly visible
Communications: Radio contact maintained throughout
Navigation: No GPS or INS interference reported
Autopilot: Normal flight control system operation

Military Base Systems

Nuclear Facility Incidents

Malmstrom AFB (1967):

Nuclear Weapons: Multiple Minuteman missiles went offline
Security Systems: Some perimeter alarms triggered
Communications: Base communications remained operational
Duration: Systems offline for extended periods

F.E. Warren AFB (1967):

Missile Systems: Echo Flight missiles affected
Launch Control: Temporary system failures
Security: Enhanced alert status implemented
Investigation: Military technical assessment conducted

Minot AFB (1968):

B-52 Systems: Aircraft electronics affected
Ground Systems: Base radar tracking confirmed
Nuclear Storage: Weapons storage area proximity
Security Response: Immediate investigation launched

PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE

Military Documentation

Operation Saucer Brazil (1977-1978)

Photography Equipment:

Cameras: Professional military-grade equipment
Film Type: 35mm color and black & white
Quantity: 500+ photographs documented
16mm Film: Motion picture documentation

Technical Analysis:

Object Characteristics: Consistent disc and cylindrical shapes
Light Emissions: Focused beam patterns documented
Flight Behavior: Formation flights, individual maneuvers
Environmental Context: Objects over Amazon rainforest

Authentication:

Military Chain of Custody: Documented through Brazilian Air Force
Declassification: Released 2009 with government confirmation
Expert Analysis: Multiple photographic experts examined originals
Digital Enhancement: Modern computer analysis confirms authenticity

Mexican Air Force FLIR (2004)

Recording Equipment:

System: FLIR Star SAFIRE thermal imaging
Platform: Mexican Air Force C-26A Metroliner
Date: May 5, 2004
Duration: Continuous recording over 15 minutes

Technical Specifications:

Thermal Range: 8-12 micrometer long-wave infrared
Resolution: High-definition thermal imaging
Objects Detected: 11 separate thermal signatures
Visual Correlation: Objects invisible to naked eye

Official Release:

Mexican Defense Ministry: Public release of footage
International Analysis: Multiple expert technical assessments
Authenticity: Government confirmation of unaltered footage
Scientific Study: Ongoing analysis by international experts

Civilian Photography

McMinnville Photos (1950)

Photography Details:

Camera: Roamer 63 camera
Film: Black and white negative
Date: May 11, 1950
Photographer: Paul Trent

Technical Analysis History:

Bruce Maccabee (1976): Detailed photogrammetric analysis
William Hartmann (Condon Committee): “One of the few UFO reports in which all factors appear to be consistent with the assertion that an extraordinary flying object, silvery, metallic, disc-shaped, tens of meters in diameter, and evidently artificial, flew within sight of two witnesses”
Joel Carpenter (2000s): Digital enhancement and analysis
Claude Poher (1976): Computer analysis confirmed object characteristics

Authenticity Verification:

Original Negatives: Preserved and analyzed multiple times
No Manipulation: No evidence of double exposure or model
Witness Consistency: 30+ years of unchanged testimony
Environmental Factors: Lighting, shadows, perspective all consistent

Belgian Triangle Photos (1989-1990)

Official Photography:

Military Sources: Belgian Air Force documentation
Civilian Photos: Multiple independent photographers
Video Evidence: Television news footage

Notable Images:

Petit-Rechain Photo: Detailed triangle craft image
Later Revealed: Photographer admitted hoax in 2011
Other Evidence: Remains unexplained (radar, military witnesses)
Lesson: Importance of multiple evidence types

Video Evidence

Pentagon UAP Videos (2004-2015)

FLIR1 Video (2004):

Source: AN/ASQ-228 ATFLIR pod
Platform: F/A-18 Super Hornet
Resolution: High-definition thermal imaging
Duration: Approximately 5 minutes

Technical Characteristics:

Thermal Signature: White-hot object against cool background
Shape: Oval/cylindrical object
Motion: Hovering with minor positional changes
Departure: High-speed exit from field of view

Gimbal Video (2015):

Date: January 21, 2015
Platform: F/A-18 Super Hornet
System: ATFLIR targeting pod
Notable Feature: Object rotation around central axis

Technical Analysis:

Rotation Pattern: 360-degree rotation while maintaining position
Thermal Consistency: Even heat distribution throughout rotation
Size Estimation: 20-40 feet diameter
Flight Characteristics: No conventional aircraft can perform observed maneuvers

GoFast Video (2015):

Date: January 21, 2015 (same day as Gimbal)
Speed: High-velocity object over water
Altitude: Low altitude flight
Notable: No water disturbance despite proximity to surface

Authentication Process:

Pentagon Verification: April 27, 2020 official confirmation
Chain of Custody: Military documentation preserved
Technical Analysis: Multiple independent expert assessments
No Manipulation: Digital forensics confirm authenticity

PHYSICAL TRACE EVIDENCE

Landing Site Analysis

Socorro Incident (1964)

Physical Evidence Documented:

Landing Impressions: Four pad marks in rectangular pattern
Dimensions: 3-4 inches deep, 6 inches diameter
Burned Vegetation: Fan-shaped burn pattern
Distance: Burn area extended 15-20 feet
Soil Analysis: Compressed earth beneath pad marks

Scientific Investigation:

FBI Analysis: Federal Bureau of Investigation examination
Air Force Investigation: Project Blue Book detailed study
Metallurgist Report: Unknown metal fragment analysis
Radiation Testing: No radioactivity detected

Documentation:

Photographs: Extensive photo documentation
Measurements: Precise site surveying
Witness Protection: Site secured immediately
Long-term Study: Vegetation growth patterns monitored

Trans-en-Provence Case (1981)

GEPAN Investigation:

Location: France, GEPAN (official French UFO investigation)
Landing Site: 2.4-meter diameter circular trace
Soil Analysis: Chemical composition changes documented
Plant Analysis: Chlorophyll reduction in affected vegetation

Scientific Methods:

Laboratory Analysis: Independent laboratory testing
Peer Review: Scientific paper published
Control Samples: Unaffected areas compared
Replication Attempts: No conventional explanation reproduced effects

Findings:

Soil Compaction: Increased density in landing area
Chemical Changes: Trace element alterations
Biological Effects: Measurable plant stress indicators
Unknown Cause: No conventional source identified

Delphos Ring Case (1971)

Physical Evidence:

Ring Formation: 8-foot diameter circular pattern
Soil Effects: White crystalline substance coating
Hydrophobic Properties: Water repelled by affected soil
Duration: Effects persisted for months

Analysis Results:

Chemical Testing: Unknown organic compounds
Fluorescence: Ring glowed under black light
Soil Samples: Laboratory analysis conducted
Witness Medical: Family reported temporary eye irritation

Material Evidence

Ubatuba Fragments (1957)

Material Recovery:

Location: Ubatuba Beach, Brazil
Source: Alleged crash of disc-shaped object
Composition: Extremely pure magnesium
Purity Level: 99.99% pure (impossible with 1957 technology)

Scientific Analysis:

Spectrographic Analysis: Dr. Olavo Fontes examination
Isotope Ratios: Unusual magnesium isotope distribution
Technology Assessment: Purity exceeded contemporary capability
Replication: Modern attempts cannot achieve same purity

Controversy:

Sample Authenticity: Questions about chain of custody
Scientific Value: Represents unusual material evidence
Technology Gap: Purity standards ahead of time period
Ongoing Study: Material samples preserved for analysis

Kecksburg Incident (1965)

Reported Material:

Object Description: Acorn-shaped craft with hieroglyphic markings
Military Recovery: Alleged immediate government retrieval
Material Analysis: No official samples available for testing
Witness Accounts: Multiple witnesses describe metallic object

Official Response:

Military Denial: Initial denial of object recovery
FOIA Requests: Minimal documentation released
NASA Statement: Later claimed investigation found nothing
Witness Consistency: Local witnesses maintain accounts

Electromagnetic Trace Evidence

Malmstrom AFB (1967)

System Documentation:

Missile Status: 10 Minuteman missiles went offline
Technical Analysis: No conventional explanation found
Maintenance Records: Systems required manual restart
Security Documentation: Unusual lights reported over silos

Official Investigation:

Air Force Study: Technical team dispatched
Equipment Testing: No mechanical failures found
Electronic Interference: Unknown source of system disruption
Classification: Incident classified for decades

Minot AFB (1968)

Aircraft Effects:

B-52 Systems: Multiple electronic system failures
Radio Interference: Communication disruptions
Radar Effects: Ground radar tracked object
Recovery: Systems returned to normal operation

Documentation:

Crew Reports: Multiple aircrew witness statements
Maintenance Logs: Electronic system anomalies recorded
Investigation: SAC (Strategic Air Command) technical assessment
Correlation: System failures coincided with UFO presence

SENSOR DATA ANALYSIS

Multi-Spectral Evidence

Hessdalen Lights (1981-Present)

Scientific Instrumentation:

Radar Systems: Ground-based radar tracking
Optical Sensors: Multiple wavelength cameras
Magnetometers: Magnetic field variation detection
Radio Equipment: VLF and HF radio monitoring

Recorded Phenomena:

Plasma Characteristics: Ball lightning-like formations
Structured Objects: Solid craft-like appearances
Light Emissions: Multiple wavelength signatures
Radar Returns: Solid object confirmation

Scientific Publications:

Peer Review: Multiple scientific papers published
International Study: 40+ years of continuous research
Technology Advancement: Modern sensors applied to phenomenon
Data Archive: Comprehensive database maintained

Chilean Navy FLIR (2014)

Technical Specifications:

FLIR System: Forward Looking Infrared Camera
Platform: Navy helicopter
Wavelength: 8-12 micrometer thermal imaging
Duration: 9-minute continuous recording

Observed Characteristics:

Thermal Signature: Hot object against cool sky
Speed: Approximately 160 km/h
Altitude: ~4,500 feet
Visibility: Invisible to naked eye, clear on thermal

Expert Analysis:

CEFAA Investigation: 2-year government study
International Experts: Multiple independent assessments
Conventional Explanations: All ruled out through analysis
Scientific Conclusion: Unknown phenomenon confirmed

Audio Evidence

Rendlesham Forest (1980)

Real-Time Recording:

Colonel Halt Tape: Live audio during encounter
Equipment: Military-grade recording device
Duration: Approximately 18 minutes
Content: Real-time observations and measurements

Audio Analysis:

Voice Stress: No indication of deception
Environmental Sounds: Consistent with forest location
Event Correlation: Audio matches written reports
Authentication: Military chain of custody verified

Transcript Excerpts:

“I see it too… It’s back again… It’s coming this way”
“There’s no doubt about it… This is weird”
“It looks like an eye winking at you”
“It’s still beaming down… 3:30 in the morning”

MEDICAL EVIDENCE

Physiological Effects

Cash-Landrum Incident (1980)

Medical Documentation:

Radiation Symptoms: Hair loss, skin burns, nausea
Hospital Records: Documented medical treatment
Blood Work: Decreased white blood cell count
Specialist Consultation: Radiation specialist examination

Scientific Analysis:

Dr. Peter Rank: Radiation exposure assessment
Symptom Pattern: Consistent with intense radiation
Recovery Timeline: Gradual improvement over months
Legal Documentation: Medical records for lawsuit

Operation Saucer Injuries (1977-1978)

Medical Cases:

Patient Count: Multiple individuals treated
Symptoms: Puncture wounds, burns, weakness
Medical Staff: Dr. Wellaide Cecim Carvalho documentation
Pattern Recognition: Consistent injury types

Clinical Findings:

Puncture Marks: Small, precise circular wounds
Burn Patterns: Focused beam-like injuries
Blood Changes: Elevated white blood cell counts
Recovery: Varied healing times

Psychological Assessment

Ariel School Encounter (1994)

Professional Evaluation:

Dr. John Mack: Harvard Medical School psychiatrist
Assessment Method: Individual and group interviews
Children Evaluated: 62 students ages 5-12
Findings: No signs of fantasy or psychological disorder

Consistency Analysis:

Account Correlation: Remarkable consistency across witnesses
Drawing Analysis: Similar depictions independently created
Long-term Follow-up: Accounts maintained into adulthood
Professional Opinion: Genuine extraordinary experience

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS CONCLUSIONS

Evidence Quality Assessment

Highest Quality Evidence:

Pentagon UAP Videos: Official government authentication
Military Radar Data: Professional operators, multiple systems
Physical Trace Evidence: Laboratory analysis, peer review
Medical Documentation: Professional medical assessment

Evidence Correlation Patterns:

Multi-sensor Confirmation: Radar + visual + FLIR
Electromagnetic Effects: Consistent patterns across cases
Physical Evidence: Landing traces corroborate witness accounts
Medical Effects: Documented physiological impacts

Technology Implications:

Advanced Propulsion: No visible means of propulsion
Electromagnetic Mastery: Selective system interference
Materials Science: Unknown alloys and construction
Energy Systems: Focused beam capabilities

Scientific Standards Met:

Peer Review: Multiple expert assessments
Replication: Consistent effects across cases
Documentation: Chain of custody maintained
Analysis: Modern scientific methods applied

Future Research Priorities:

Enhanced Detection Systems: Next-generation sensors
Materials Analysis: Advanced laboratory techniques
Electromagnetic Studies: Field effect research
Medical Research: Physiological impact investigation
International Cooperation: Global data sharing

This technical evidence database provides the scientific foundation for serious UAP research, demonstrating that we are observing phenomena with measurable, consistent characteristics that challenge our current understanding of physics and technology.