From - Wed Oct 16 17:09:54 1996
X-POP3-Rcpt: ez073888@peseta
Received: from franc.ucdavis.edu by peseta.ucdavis.edu (8.8.0/UCD3.7.1)
	id QAA10835; Wed, 16 Oct 1996 16:10:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from caleb.INS.CWRU.Edu by franc.ucdavis.edu (8.8.0/UCD3.7.1)
	id OAA11860; Wed, 16 Oct 1996 14:17:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (aa440@localhost) by caleb.INS.CWRU.Edu (8.7.6+cwru/CWRU-2.3-bsdi)
	id QAA06119; Wed, 16 Oct 1996 16:59:34 -0400 (EDT) (from aa440)
Message-Id: <199610162059.QAA06119@caleb.INS.CWRU.Edu>
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 16:59:34 -0400 (EDT)
From: aa440@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Dale Wedge)
To: orphillips@ucdavis.edu
Subject: Re: FOIA DOCUMENT--Gen. Nathan Twining UFO Letter
Reply-To: aa440@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Dale Wedge)
Content-Type: text
X-Mozilla-Status: 0011
Content-Length: 4814

In a previous article, xx044 (UFOlogy SIG) says:

>       General Nathan Twining letter re; UFOs:
>       
>                                           23 September 1947    
>
>SUBJECT:  AMC Opinion Concerning "Flying Discs"   
>TO:       Commanding General  
>         Army Air Forces 
>         Washington 25, D.C.  
>         ATTENTION:     Brig. General George Schulgen  
>                        AC/AS-2    
> 
>       1.  As requested by AC/AS-2 there is presented below the 
>considered opinion of this command concerning the so-called 
>"Flying Discs."  This opinion is based on interrogation report 
>data furnished by AC/AS-2 and preliminary studies by personnel 
>of T-2 and Aircraft Laboratory, Engineering Division T-3.  This 
>opinion was arrived at in a conference between personnel from 
>the Air Institute of Technology, Intelligence  T-2, Office, 
>Chief of Engineering Division, and the Aircraft, Power Plant and 
>Propeller Laboratories of Engineering Division T-3.    
>
>       2.  It is the opinion that:   
> 
>  a.  The phenomenon reported is something real and not 
>visionary or fictitious.   
>  b.  There are objects probably approximately the shape of a 
>disc, of such appreciable size as to appear to be as large as 
>man-made aircraft.
>  c.  There is the possibility that some of the incidents may be 
>caused by natural phenomena, such as meteors.    
>  d.  The reported operating characteristics such as extreme 
>rates of climb, maneuverability (particularly in roll), and 
>action which must be considered evasive when sighted or 
>contacted by friendly aircraft and radar, lend belief to the 
>possibility that some of the objects are controlled either 
>manually, automatically or remotely.
>  e.  The apparent common description of the objects is as 
>follows:   
> 
>      (1)  Metallic or light reflecting surface.  
>      (2)  Absence of trail, except in a few instances when the 
>       object apparently was operating under high performance 
>       conditions.
>      (3)  Circular or elliptical in shape, flat on bottom and 
>       domed on top.
>      (4)  Several reports of well kept formation flights 
>       varying from three to nine objects.  
>      (5)  Normally no associated sound, except in three 
>       instances a substantial rumbling roar was noted.   
>      (6)  Level flight speeds normally about 300 knots are 
>       estimated.
>
>   f.  It is possible within the present U.S. knowledge - 
>provided extensive detailed development is undertaken--to 
>construct a piloted aircraft which has the general description 
>of the object in subparagraph (e) above which would be capable 
>of an approximate range of 700 miles at subsonic speeds.    
>   g.  Any devlopments in this country along the lines indicated 
>would be extremely expensive, time consuming and at the 
>considerable expense of current projects and therefore, if 
>directed, should be set up independently of existing projects.  
>   h.  Due consideration must be given the following:
> 
>    (1)  The possibility that these objects are of domestic 
>       origin - the product of some high security project not 
>       known to AC/AS-2 or this command.   
>    (2)  The lack of physical evidence in the shape of crash 
>       recovered exhibits which would undeniably prove the 
>       existence of these objects.   
>    (3)  The possibility that some foreign nation has a form of  
>       propulsion possibly nuclear, which is outside of our 
>       domestic knowledge. 
>
>3.  It is recommended that:   
> 
>   a.  Headquarters, Army Air Forces issue a directive assigning 
>a priority, security classification and code name for a detailed 
>study of this matter to include the preparation of complete sets 
>of all available and pertinent data which will then be made 
>available to the Army, Navy, Atomic Energy Commission, JRDB, the 
>Air Force Scientific Advisory Group, NACA, and the RAND and NEPA 
>projects for comments and recommendations, with a preliminary 
>report to be forwarded within 15 days of receipt of the data and 
>a detailed report thereafter every 30 days as the investigation 
>develops.  A complete interchange of data should be effected.   
>
>4.  Awaiting a specific directive AMC will continue the 
>investigation within its current resources in order to more 
>closely define the nature of the phenomenon.  Detailed Essential 
>Elements of Information will be formulated immediately for 
>transmittal thru channels.  
> 
>                                    N.F. TWINING  
>                                    Lieutenant General, U.S.A.   
>
>                                    Commanding.   
>-- 
>
>
>
>
>
>-- 
>
>
>
>
>