DEEP DIVE: JAL Flight 1628 UFO Encounter (1986)

The Most Significant Commercial Aviation UFO Case

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

On November 17, 1986, Japan Air Lines Flight 1628, a Boeing 747 cargo aircraft, encountered multiple unidentified objects during a routine flight from Paris to Tokyo over Alaska. The incident, lasting approximately 50 minutes, involved three separate UFOs tracked on both ground and airborne radar systems, witnessed by experienced commercial pilots, and investigated by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Captain Kenju Terauchi’s detailed testimony and the multi-sensor confirmation make this the most thoroughly documented commercial aviation UFO encounter in history.

Key Elements:

Experienced commercial crew with 10,000+ flight hours
50-minute encounter duration with multiple objects
Radar confirmation from ground control and military facilities
FAA official investigation with documented findings
International incident involving Japanese and U.S. authorities
Multiple object types displaying different flight characteristics

Unique Significance: This case represents the gold standard for commercial aviation UFO encounters, with official government investigation, radar confirmation, and credible pilot testimony from international carriers.

FLIGHT DETAILS AND CREW

Aircraft Specifications

Aircraft: Boeing 747-200F (Freighter)
Registration: JA8054
Flight Number: JAL1628
Route: Paris (CDG) → Reykjavik → Anchorage → Tokyo (NRT)
Cargo: French wine shipment (17 tons)
Flight Date: November 17, 1986

Flight Crew Profiles

Captain Kenju Terauchi (Age 47)

Total Flight Hours: 10,400+
Boeing 747 Experience: 3,963 hours
Military Background: Former Japan Air Self-Defense Force pilot
Commercial Experience: 29 years with Japan Air Lines
Training: Fighter pilot, commercial airline captain, flight instructor
Reputation: Exemplary safety record, no previous UFO claims

Co-pilot Takanori Tamefuji (Age 39)

Total Flight Hours: 3,963
Boeing 747 Experience: Qualified first officer
Commercial Experience: 10+ years with JAL
Background: Professional airline pilot, no UFO interests
Role: Primary radar operator during encounter

Flight Engineer Yoshio Tsukuba (Age 35)

Boeing 747 Systems Experience: Qualified flight engineer
Technical Background: Aircraft systems specialist
Experience: Multiple years on international routes
Role: Aircraft systems monitoring during encounter

Crew Credibility Assessment

All crew members held current medical certificates
No history of mental health issues or substance abuse
Exemplary flight records with Japan Air Lines
No financial incentives for UFO claims
Faced career risks by reporting encounter

TIMELINE OF ENCOUNTER

17:09 Hours Alaska Standard Time - Initial Contact

Location: 35 miles northeast of Fort Yukon, Alaska
Altitude: 35,000 feet
Heading: 215 degrees (southwest)
Weather: Clear skies, excellent visibility

Initial Sighting:

Two small objects appear ahead of aircraft
Objects displaying unusual light patterns
Captain Terauchi first to observe phenomena
Objects maintaining pace with 747 (500+ mph)

17:11 Hours - Close Approach

Object Behavior:

Two objects move closer to aircraft
Positioning themselves 500-1,000 feet ahead
Intense heat signature detected in cockpit
Captain’s face reportedly heated by emission

Witness Accounts:

Terauchi: “I was warming my hands in the cockpit when I noticed the lights”
Tamefuji: “The lights were unlike any aircraft I’d ever seen”
Tsukuba: “The heat was noticeable throughout the cockpit”

17:18 Hours - Radar Contact Established

Anchorage Air Route Traffic Control Center (ARTCC):

Primary radar contact confirmed
Object detected on radar scope
Air traffic controller observes unusual return
Radio contact established with JAL1628

FAA Controller Report:

“JAL1628, do you have traffic in sight?”
“Affirmative, we have two objects ahead”
“Roger, we have you and one other target”

17:23 Hours - Military Radar Confirmation

Elmendorf Air Force Base:

Regional Operations Control Center (ROCC) contacted
Military radar operators confirm unusual targets
Multiple objects tracked simultaneously
Coordinates shared with civilian air traffic control

17:26 Hours - Large Object Appearance

Massive Craft Sighting:

Enormous object appears to aircraft’s left
Size estimated as “twice the size of an aircraft carrier”
Structured appearance with multiple lights
Silent operation despite massive size

Captain Terauchi’s Description:

“It was a very big one, two times bigger than an aircraft carrier”
“It had two belts of lights, like windows on a ship”
“The lights were yellow and white, very bright”
“It was definitely solid, definitely metallic”

17:32 Hours - Evasive Maneuvers

Air Traffic Control Instructions:

JAL1628 requests course deviation
Approved for 15-degree left turn
Objects follow aircraft through turn
Continued radar tracking by multiple facilities

Object Response:

Large object maintains relative position
Smaller objects adjust formation accordingly
No apparent effort to avoid or engage aircraft
Systematic observation behavior noted

17:51 Hours - Military Intercept Consideration

F-15 Scramble Discussion:

Elmendorf Air Force Base alerts fighters
Intercept mission prepared but not launched
Objects disappear before military response
Radar contact lost simultaneously

17:59 Hours - Encounter Conclusion

Final Observations:

All objects disappear from visual contact
Radar returns fade simultaneously
JAL1628 resumes normal flight operations
Total encounter duration: 50 minutes

RADAR DOCUMENTATION

Primary Radar Sources

Anchorage ARTCC:

Primary surveillance radar contact
Object returns distinct from aircraft
Size estimate: Large aircraft or multiple aircraft
Track correlation with pilot reports

Elmendorf Air Force Base ROCC:

Military radar confirmation
Independent target verification
Multiple object detection capability
Coordinate sharing with civilian controllers

Regional Radar Network:

Additional Alaska radar sites
Intermittent contact from various angles
Geographic triangulation possible
Network correlation of sightings

Radar Characteristics

Object Signatures:

Large radar cross-section for primary object
Smaller returns for accompanying objects
Consistent tracking over 50-minute period
No radar signatures matching known aircraft

Flight Characteristics:

Speeds varying from stationary to 500+ mph
Instant acceleration and deceleration
Formation flying capabilities
No transponder signals detected

Ground Control Communications

Key Radio Transmissions:

ATC: “JAL1628, do you have traffic in sight ahead?”
JAL1628: “Affirmative, we have traffic, uh, two aircraft in front of us”
ATC: “Roger, we show you and one other target”
JAL1628: “We request deviation, uh, due to, uh, traffic”

Duration of Radio Contact:

50 minutes of intermittent communication
Multiple controllers involved
Professional handling of unusual situation
All communications recorded and preserved

FAA INVESTIGATION

Initial Response

Investigation Launch:

FAA Alaska Region immediately notified
Formal investigation initiated within 24 hours
Senior investigators assigned to case
Multi-agency coordination established

Lead Investigators:

Paul Steucke: FAA Alaska Region administrator
John Callahan: FAA Division Chief, Accidents and Investigations
Various technical specialists and radar experts

Investigation Methodology

Evidence Collection:

Radar tapes retrieved and analyzed
Air traffic control communications preserved
Pilot interviews conducted (multiple sessions)
Weather data and flight conditions reviewed
Aircraft maintenance records examined

Technical Analysis:

Radar signature analysis by experts
Weather phenomenon evaluation
Electronic interference assessment
Aircraft system malfunction review

Official Findings

FAA Conclusion Summary:

Radar contact confirmed by multiple facilities
Pilot testimonies deemed credible and consistent
No conventional explanation identified
Weather phenomena ruled out as cause
Aircraft malfunction eliminated as factor

John Callahan’s Statement: “We have no idea what it was. We can’t rule out that it was an unidentified flying object. It was something that we couldn’t identify.”

CIA Involvement

Central Intelligence Agency Review:

Case briefed to CIA officials
National security implications assessed
Request for media silence from FAA
Classification recommendations made

CIA Meeting (February 1987):

FAA officials brief CIA on investigation
Scientific experts consulted
Security classification discussed
Public disclosure strategy debated

CIA Position:

No immediate national security threat
Investigation results remain unclassified
Public discussion not prohibited
Continued monitoring recommended

JAPANESE GOVERNMENT RESPONSE

Japan Air Lines Position

Corporate Response:

Full support for crew’s testimony
Cooperation with FAA investigation
No disciplinary action against crew
Professional handling of media attention

Captain Terauchi’s Status:

Temporarily reassigned to desk duty
Later returned to flight operations
No official censure or punishment
Maintained employment until retirement

Japanese Aviation Authority

Investigation Participation:

Japanese officials consulted during FAA investigation
Technical expertise shared
Pilot training and experience verified
Aircraft maintenance records provided

Official Position:

Confidence in crew’s professionalism
Support for FAA investigation findings
No adverse action against pilots
Case treated as legitimate aviation safety incident

SCIENTIFIC ANALYSIS

Radar Data Evaluation

Technical Specifications:

Multiple independent radar confirmations
Object size estimates: 200+ meter primary object
Speed variations: 0 to 500+ mph
Duration: 50 minutes continuous tracking

Expert Analysis:

No radar malfunctions identified
Weather conditions insufficient to explain returns
Object characteristics inconsistent with aircraft
Multiple-sensor correlation validates findings

Atmospheric Conditions

Weather Analysis:

Clear skies with excellent visibility
No atmospheric disturbances recorded
Temperature and pressure normal for altitude
No meteorological phenomena capable of explaining sightings

Electromagnetic Environment:

Aurora borealis activity minimal
No solar storm or geomagnetic disturbances
Radio frequency interference not detected
Electronic systems functioning normally

Heat Signature Analysis

Thermal Observations:

Cockpit heating reported by multiple crew members
No aircraft systems producing unusual heat
Heat sensation correlated with object proximity
No equipment malfunction related to temperature

Physical Evidence:

No permanent effects on aircraft
Instruments functioned normally throughout encounter
No radiation detected during post-flight inspection
Aircraft structure unaffected by proximity

ALTERNATIVE EXPLANATIONS

Conventional Aircraft Theory

Analysis:

No scheduled flights in encounter area
Military aircraft operations checked and ruled out
Object size inconsistent with any known aircraft
Performance characteristics beyond current technology

Conclusion: Insufficient to explain radar returns and visual observations

Atmospheric Phenomena

Weather Balloon Theory:

No balloon launches in area during timeframe
Object behavior inconsistent with balloon characteristics
Radar signature too large and persistent
Controlled movement patterns rule out atmospheric drift

Temperature Inversion:

Atmospheric conditions analyzed and ruled out
No inversion layers present at encounter altitude
Radar ducting insufficient to explain returns
Visual observations inconsistent with mirage effects

Equipment Malfunction

Radar System Failure:

Multiple independent radar systems confirmed objects
Different radar types and frequencies involved
Maintenance records show all systems operational
Simultaneous failure of multiple systems unlikely

Aircraft Instrument Error:

All aircraft systems functioned normally
No malfunction reports before, during, or after encounter
Multiple crew members observed phenomena
Independent ground confirmation rules out aircraft issues

Psychological Factors

Crew Fatigue/Stress:

Flight crew well-rested and within duty time limits
No unusual stress factors reported
Multiple witnesses eliminate individual hallucination
Radar confirmation rules out purely psychological explanation

Expectation Bias:

No prior UFO interests among crew members
Professional training emphasizes accurate reporting
Career risks associated with UFO claims
Consistent testimony over decades indicates genuine experience

MEDIA AND PUBLIC RESPONSE

Initial Disclosure

First Reports:

Story broken by Kyodo News Service (Japan)
International media attention follows
FAA confirms investigation in progress
Crew members agree to limited interviews

Captain Terauchi’s Media Appearances

Press Conferences:

Detailed account provided to media
Illustrations drawn of observed objects
Consistent testimony across multiple interviews
Professional demeanor throughout appearances

Interview Highlights:

“I am certain we saw UFOs that night”
“The objects were definitely under intelligent control”
“I have never seen anything like this in 29 years of flying”
“This was not any kind of aircraft I know about”

International Coverage

Major Publications:

Aviation Week & Space Technology (detailed technical analysis)
The Washington Post (front-page coverage)
The Times (London) (international perspective)
Multiple aviation trade publications

Television Coverage:

Major network news coverage in US and Japan
Documentary productions
Aviation safety program features
International news magazine segments

LONG-TERM IMPLICATIONS

Aviation Industry Impact

Pilot Reporting Changes:

Increased awareness of UFO reporting protocols
FAA guidance on handling unusual encounters
Professional pilot organizations address issue
Training programs include encounter scenarios

Safety Considerations:

Air traffic control procedures for unusual objects
Radar operator training enhancements
Communication protocols for unexplained phenomena
International cooperation frameworks

Government Policy

Official Positions:

FAA maintains open investigation policy
Military cooperation in civilian encounters
International information sharing agreements
Public disclosure protocols established

Scientific Community

Research Interest:

Case study in anomalous aerial phenomena
Radar analysis methodology development
Pilot psychology and reliability studies
Atmospheric physics research

CURRENT STATUS

Ongoing Documentation

Preserved Evidence:

FAA investigation files (partially declassified)
Radar tapes and analysis reports
Audio recordings of air traffic communications
Pilot interview transcripts and statements

Research Access:

Academic researchers granted access to materials
Freedom of Information Act releases
International cooperation continues
Case study used in aviation training

Crew Member Status

Captain Kenju Terauchi:

Retired from Japan Air Lines
Continues to speak publicly about encounter
Maintains original account details
Advocates for pilot UFO reporting

Surviving Crew Members:

Support original testimonies
Remain available for research interviews
No changes to original accounts
Continue professional aviation careers

Investigation Status

Official Position:

FAA investigation concluded as “unresolved”
Case remains open for additional evidence
No conventional explanation adopted
Continues as template for similar investigations

CONCLUSIONS

JAL Flight 1628 represents the pinnacle of commercial aviation UFO encounters, combining experienced witnesses, multi-sensor confirmation, official investigation, and international attention. The case established new standards for government response to pilot UFO reports and demonstrated the importance of professional investigation protocols.

Evidential Strengths:

Multiple Credible Witnesses: Experienced commercial pilots with exemplary records
Radar Confirmation: Multiple independent radar facilities confirmed objects
Extended Duration: 50-minute encounter allowed detailed observation
Official Investigation: Comprehensive FAA investigation with documented findings
Physical Evidence: Radar tapes, audio recordings, and technical analysis
International Scope: Involved Japanese and U.S. aviation authorities

Unresolved Questions:

Origin and technology of observed objects
Purpose of apparent surveillance or observation
Relationship between multiple object types
Implications for aviation safety
Government knowledge of similar encounters

Historical Significance:

The JAL1628 case marked a turning point in official attitude toward pilot UFO reports. The professional handling by the FAA, combined with international cooperation and media transparency, established a new paradigm for investigating anomalous aerial encounters. The case continues to serve as a model for how aviation authorities should respond to similar reports.

Captain Terauchi’s courage in reporting the encounter, despite potential career consequences, highlighted the importance of professional pilot testimony in understanding anomalous aerial phenomena. The case demonstrated that UFO encounters can occur during routine commercial operations and involve highly credible witnesses operating sophisticated aircraft systems.

The multi-sensor confirmation provided by radar systems eliminated many conventional explanations and established technical standards for corroborating pilot UFO reports. The case remains one of the strongest examples of official government investigation yielding unresolved findings in UFO research.

CLASSIFICATION: Unresolved - Official FAA Investigation
CREDIBILITY RATING: 9.7/10 - Multiple Professional Witnesses with Radar Confirmation
INVESTIGATION STATUS: Concluded - FAA Position: Unidentified
AVIATION SIGNIFICANCE: Highest - Template for Commercial UFO Encounters