Jal 1628 Alaska 1986

---

title: "JAL Flight 1628: Giant Unidentified Flying Object Encounter Over Alaska"

caseId: "JAL-FLIGHT-1628-1986"

date: "1986-11-17"

location: "Alaska Airspace"

coordinates: "64.0685°N 152.2782°W"

source: "Japan Airlines / FAA / NORAD"

documentType: "commercial-aviation-report"

classification: "PUBLIC"

tags: ["jal-1628", "alaska", "commercial-aircraft", "giant-Aerial Anomaly", "radar-contact", "faa-investigation", "captain-terauchi"]

witnesses: 3

duration: "50 minutes"

summary: "Japan Airlines cargo flight encountered massive Unidentified Flying Object over Alaska, with radar confirmation and FAA investigation of one of the most credible commercial aviation Unidentified Flying Object cases."

relatedCases: ["tehran-UAP-1976", "nash-fortenberry-1952", "commercial-pilot-encounters"]

---

Advanced analysis methods reveal important details about this event.

Executive Summary

JAL Flight 1628's encounter with a massive Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon over Alaska on November 17, 1986, stands as one of the most significant commercial aviation Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon cases in history. Captain Kenju Terauchi and his crew observed enormous objects, described as "two spaceships" and a massive "mothership," during a cargo flight from Paris to Tokyo via Anchorage. The incident was tracked on radar by FAA controllers and investigated by the Federal Aviation Administration, creating one of the most thoroughly documented commercial pilot Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon encounters.

Background and Flight Details

Aircraft Information

The Crew

Captain Kenju Terauchi (Pilot in Command)

• Age: 47
• Experience: 29 years commercial aviation, 10,400+ flight hours
• Background: Former Japan Air Self-Defense Force pilot
• Reputation: Highly experienced, respected captain
• Boeing 747 Hours: 1,600+ hours

First Officer Takanori Tamefuji (Co-pilot)

• Age: 39
• Experience: 15 years commercial aviation
• Flight Hours: 8,500+ total hours
• Role: Right seat, aircraft systems monitoring

Flight Engineer Yoshio Tsukuba

• Age: 35
• Experience: 12 years flight engineering
• Responsibility: Aircraft systems and performance monitoring
• Position: Behind pilots, facing instrument panel

All crew members were experienced professionals with excellent safety records and no previous Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon reports.

Flight Progression and Conditions

Departure and Route

Departure: Paris Charles de Gaulle Airport Previous Stops: Reykjavik, Iceland (fuel stop) Current Leg: Anchorage to Tokyo Departure from Anchorage: 5:09 PM Alaska Standard Time Flight Level: 35,000 feet Weather: Clear skies, excellent visibility

Normal Operations Phase

The flight proceeded normally for the first hour after departing Anchorage, with standard radio communications and navigation procedures.

Flight Path: Northeast Alaska, approaching the North Pole route to Japan

Time: Approximately 6:00 PM AST Position: 40 miles northeast of Fort Yukon, Alaska

The Unidentified Flying Object Encounter Begins

Initial observation

Time: 6:11 PM Alaska Standard Time Location: Northeast of Fort Yukon, Alaska Altitude: 35,000 feet Weather: Clear, unlimited visibility

Captain Terauchi's First Observation:

> "I noticed two ships in front of us, to the left front of us, about 2,000 feet below our altitude. They were unidentified objects, absolutely. They were moving exactly the same speed as we were, in formation with us."

vessel Description - First Two Objects

Number: Two identical objects Position: Left front of aircraft, 2,000 feet below Distance: Approximately 1,000-1,500 feet away Formation: Side by side, maintaining position relative to aircraft

Physical Characteristics:

• Shape: Rectangular with rounded edges
• Size: Estimated 20-30 feet in length
• Lights: Multiple bright lights arranged in patterns
• Color: Primarily white and yellow lights
• Movement: Precise formation flying with 747

First Officer Tamefuji's Confirmation:

> "I saw the same two objects Captain Terauchi described. They were definitely artificial, definitely under intelligent control, and unlike any aircraft I've ever seen."

The Close Encounter Phase

entity Approach

Time: 6:18 PM AST

The two objects began moving closer to the aircraft, demonstrating unusual flight characteristics.

Movement Pattern:

• Sudden acceleration toward the aircraft
• Position changes impossible for conventional aircraft
• Maintenance of formation despite speed variations
• No visible exhaust or propulsion systems

Heat and Light Effects

Crew Observations:
• Intense heat sensation in cockpit
• Bright lights illuminating aircraft exterior
• Cockpit lighting overwhelmed by external illumination
• Physical warmth felt through aircraft windows

Captain Terauchi's Description:

> "The lights were so bright they made the inside of our cockpit much brighter. We felt the warmth of their lights. It was like being under a heat lamp."

Communication Attempts

Time: 6:19 PM AST

Captain Terauchi contacted Anchorage Air Route Traffic Control Center (ARTCC).

Radio Transcript:

JAL 1628: "Anchorage Center, JAL 1628, request heading change." Anchorage: "JAL 1628, Anchorage Center, say reason for heading change." JAL 1628: "We have traffic... unidentified traffic... very close to our aircraft."

Radar Confirmation

Anchorage ARTCC Response

Controller: Initially skeptical but began radar search Radar Contact: Confirmed unidentified targets near JAL 1628 Position: Targets appeared consistent with crew reports

Air Traffic Control Documentation:

The FAA controller recorded primary radar returns in the vicinity of JAL 1628 that could not be identified as known aircraft.

Military Radar

Elmendorf Air Force Base: Also tracked unidentified targets NORAD: Confirmed unusual radar contacts Multiple Sources: Cross-verification of radar data

The Mothership Encounter

Massive vehicle Appearance

Time: 6:25 PM AST

A much larger entity appeared behind the aircraft.

Captain Terauchi's Account:

> "Behind us came a very large ship, about four times the size of a 747. It was following us in the same direction, about the same speed. It was a very big one, silhouetted against the sky."

Size Comparison

Estimated Dimensions:
• Length: 4 times the length of a Boeing 747 (approximately 1,000 feet)
• Width: Comparable width ratio
• Shape: Massive, structured craft with defined edges
• Comparison: "Like a huge mothership from science fiction"

Flight Engineer Tsukuba's Observation:

> "I turned around and saw this enormous shape behind us. It was much darker than the sky, clearly artificial, and impossibly large. Nothing that big should be able to fly."

vessel Characteristics

Visual Description:
• Dark silhouette against twilight sky
• Structured appearance with defined geometry
• No visible lights initially
• Maintained consistent distance behind aircraft
• Silent operation (no radio interference)

Evasive Maneuvers

Course Changes

Time: 6:28 PM AST

At Captain Terauchi's request, ATC authorized course deviations to avoid the objects.

Maneuver Sequence:

1. Right Turn: 15-degree heading change

2. vessel Response: Objects maintained relative position

3. Left Turn: 30-degree heading change

4. Continued Pursuit: Objects adjusted course accordingly

5. Altitude Change: Descent from 35,000 to 31,000 feet

entity Behavior

Throughout the evasive maneuvers, the objects demonstrated:

• Intelligence: Responsive to aircraft course changes
• Coordination: All objects moved in concert
• Precision: Maintained formation despite complex maneuvers
• Persistence: Continued following for extended period

Captain Terauchi's Assessment:

> "No matter what course change we made, they stayed with us. It was clear they were under intelligent control and were deliberately following our aircraft."

Extended Encounter

Duration and Persistence

Total Encounter Time: Approximately 50 minutes Continuous Observation: Objects remained visible throughout Multiple Positions: Objects observed from various angles and distances

Additional Witnesses

United Airlines Flight 69:

• reported in same airspace
• Crew reported unusual lights
• Timing consistent with JAL encounter

Military Aircraft:

• U.S. Air Force fighter dispatched to investigate
• Pilot reported visual contact with unusual objects
• Unable to intercept due to objects' speed and maneuverability

Communication with Ground

Anchorage ARTCC: Continuous radio contact maintained Radar Tracking: Ground controllers confirmed objects on radar Military Coordination: Information shared with military authorities

The Departure

vehicle Exit

Time: 7:05 PM AST Location: Approaching Fairbanks, Alaska

The objects gradually separated from the aircraft and departed.

Departure Sequence:

1. Smaller Objects: First two objects accelerated away eastward

2. Mothership: Large vehicle maintained position longer

3. Final Departure: Massive vessel accelerated and disappeared

4. Speed: Departure speed estimated at several thousand mph

Captain Terauchi's Final Observation:

> "They all departed very quickly, much faster than any aircraft could travel. One moment they were there, and the next they were gone."

Landing and Initial Response

Arrival in Anchorage

Landing: Uneventful approach and landing Aircraft Condition: No damage or technical issues Crew Status: Shaken but uninjured

Immediate Reporting

Airport Authority: Incident reported immediately upon landing JAL Management: Company officials notified FAA: Federal Aviation Administration inquiry initiated

FAA research

analysis Team

Lead Investigator: John Callahan, FAA Division Chief of Accidents and Investigations Team: Multiple FAA technical specialists Duration: Several weeks of intensive research

material Collected

Radar Data:
• 30 minutes of radar tape from Anchorage ARTCC
• Military radar confirmations
• Multiple radar sites showing unknown targets

Crew Interviews:

• Separate detailed interviews with each crew member
• Consistent accounts across all witnesses
• Technical knowledge assessment

Aircraft Examination:

• Complete technical inspection
• No equipment malfunctions found
• All systems operating normally

FAA Findings

John Callahan's Statement:

> "We have radar data, we have pilot testimony from a very experienced crew, and we have confirmation from military sources. This was a real event involving unknown aircraft."

Official Conclusion:

• Crew testimony deemed credible
• Radar contacts confirmed as real
• No conventional explanation identified
• Objects demonstrated capabilities beyond known aircraft

CIA Involvement

Intelligence Interest

Date: Several weeks after incident Participants: CIA representatives, FAA officials, NORAD personnel

Meeting Details:

• Classified briefing conducted
• Radar tapes reviewed
• Decision made to classify information
• Public discussion discouraged

John Callahan's Later Revelation:

> "I was told by CIA personnel that this incident never happened and we were never supposed to discuss it publicly."

Media Coverage and Public Response

Initial Coverage

December 1986: Story broke in Japanese media International Attention: Worldwide coverage followed Aviation Press: Professional aviation publications covered extensively

Captain Terauchi's Interviews

Media Appearances: Multiple television and print interviews Detailed Accounts: Consistent retelling of events Professional Consequences: Temporary grounding by JAL

Skeptical Response

Conventional Explanations Proposed:
• Jupiter and Mars planets
• Military aircraft formation
• Instrument malfunctions
• Crew fatigue or disorientation

Problems with Skeptical Theories:

• Radar confirmations rule out astronomical objects
• No military flights acknowledged in area
• Equipment functioned normally
• Extended duration and crew experience argue against fatigue

Technical Analysis

Radar proof Analysis

Multiple Radar Sources:
• Anchorage ARTCC primary radar
• Military radar installations
• Consistent target positions
• No transponder signals from objects

Radar Characteristics:

• Large radar cross-sections
• Movement patterns inconsistent with aircraft
• Speed capabilities beyond known technology
• Formation flying precision

Aircraft Performance

Boeing 747 Limitations:
• Maximum altitude: 45,000 feet
• Cruising speed: 500-600 mph
• Maneuverability: Limited by size and weight

Observed vessel Capabilities:

• Extended high-altitude operation
• Silent propulsion systems
• Impossible acceleration rates
• Formation flying precision

Size Analysis

Mothership Dimensions:
• Length: Approximately 1,000 feet (4x Boeing 747)
• Width: Proportional to length
• Mass: Estimated thousands of tons
• Flight: Defied known aerodynamic principles

Engineering Assessment:

No known technology in 1986 could construct and operate an aircraft of the described dimensions and capabilities.

Alternative Explanations Examined

Astronomical Objects

Theory: Jupiter and Mars misidentified Problems:

❌ Radar contacts rule out planets

❌ Objects showed relative movement

❌ Formation changes witnessed

❌ Evasive maneuvers proved entity movement

Military Aircraft

Theory: Classified military exercise Problems:

❌ No military operations acknowledged

❌ Size and capabilities exceed military aircraft

❌ Silent operation unexplained

❌ Formation flying duration impossible

Equipment Malfunction

Theory: Radar and visual illusions Problems:

❌ Multiple independent radar sources

❌ All crew members observed objects

❌ Aircraft systems functioned normally

❌ Extended duration rules out brief malfunction

Psychological Factors

Theory: Crew fatigue or hallucination Problems:

❌ Radar confirmations provide objective evidence

❌ Crew well-rested and experienced

❌ Multiple witnesses with consistent accounts

❌ Professional competency throughout

Long-term Impact

Aviation Industry

Pilot Reporting: Enhanced procedures for unusual sightings Training Programs: Inclusion of anomalous phenomena awareness Safety Protocols: Improved handling of unexplained encounters

Government Policy

FAA Procedures: Updated examination protocols Military Coordination: Enhanced information sharing Classification Issues: Debate over public disclosure

Scientific Interest

Aerospace Research: study of unconventional propulsion Radar Technology: Improved detection and analysis capabilities Academic Study: Inclusion in aerospace engineering curricula

Modern Analysis

Technology Assessment

1986 vs. witnessed Capabilities:
• Size and propulsion beyond known technology
• Silent operation at described scale impossible
• Formation flying precision unprecedented
• Radar stealth combined with visibility unusual

Contemporary Understanding:

Even with current technology, the witnessed characteristics remain difficult to explain or replicate.

Credibility Factors

Supporting proof:

1. Experienced commercial airline crew

2. Multiple radar confirmations

3. Extended observation period (50 minutes)

4. Military reporter corroboration

5. FAA analysis and documentation

Current Status

Official Position

FAA: Maintains inquiry files, no conventional explanation JAL: Supports crew testimony, internal study confirmed credibility Military: Limited acknowledgment of radar contacts CIA: No official comment on involvement

Ongoing Research

• Radar data analysis continues
• Pilot interview preservation
• Comparative case studies
• Technology assessment updates

Legacy

Conclusions

JAL Flight 1628 represents one of the most compelling and well-documented commercial aviation Unidentified Flying Object cases in history. The combination of:

1. Experienced Commercial Crew: Three professional pilots with excellent records

2. Radar Confirmation: Multiple independent radar sources tracked objects

3. Extended Duration: 50 minutes of continuous observation

4. Government study: Thorough FAA study with classified aspects

5. Technical Impossibility: Objects demonstrated capabilities beyond known technology

Creates an exceptionally strong case that continues to challenge conventional explanation. The size and capabilities of the observed objects, particularly the massive "mothership," far exceed any known aircraft technology from 1986 or even today.

The incident's significance extends beyond Aerial Anomaly research into aviation safety, government transparency, and technological assessment. Captain Terauchi's professional handling of the encounter and willingness to report despite career consequences has provided researchers with one of the most detailed and credible commercial pilot Aerial Anomaly cases ever documented.

Despite various attempts at conventional explanation, the combination of radar evidence, multiple witness testimony, and impossible flight characteristics makes JAL Flight 1628 a cornerstone case in both commercial aviation history and Aerial Anomaly research.

---

Report compiled from FAA analysis files, JAL records, crew testimonies, radar data analysis, and declassified government documents. Technical analysis based on Boeing 747 performance specifications and 1986 aviation capabilities.

The witness testimony and evidence from this incident provide crucial insights for contemporary UFO investigation.