RB-47 Electronic Intelligence Encounter - July 17, 1957

Executive Summary

On July 17, 1957, a U.S. Air Force RB-47 electronic reconnaissance aircraft encountered an unidentified object during a routine training mission over the Gulf of Mexico and southern United States. The six-man crew tracked the object for over one hour using multiple electronic systems, with corroborating ground radar confirmation. This case is considered one of the most significant radar-visual UFO encounters due to the sophisticated electronic intelligence equipment aboard the aircraft and the technical expertise of the crew.

Aircraft and Mission Profile

RB-47 Specifications

Aircraft Type: Boeing RB-47E Stratojet
Mission: Electronic reconnaissance and countermeasures training
Crew: Six-man specialist team
Electronic Equipment: Advanced ECM (Electronic Countermeasures) suite
Radar Systems: Multiple radar and direction-finding equipment

Mission Details

Date: July 17, 1957
Departure: Forbes Air Force Base, Kansas
Route: Gulf of Mexico training area
Duration: Extended training flight
Classification: Routine ECM training mission

Crew Composition

Flight Crew

Aircraft Commander: Major Lewis Chase
Co-pilot: Captain James McCoid
Navigator: Captain James Partin

Electronic Warfare Specialists

Monitor #1: Master Sergeant Ray Provenzano
Monitor #2: Staff Sergeant Joseph Tuchscherer
Operator #3: Technical Sergeant Norvell Monkhouse

Crew Qualifications: All crew members were experienced electronic warfare specialists with extensive training in radar and communications equipment operation.

Timeline of Encounter

Initial Detection (10:30 PM CST)

Location: Over Gulf of Mexico, south of Louisiana
Equipment: ALA-6 radar monitoring equipment
Signal: Strong signal at 2800 megacycles
Direction: Signal bearing changing rapidly
Speed: Electronic track indicating extremely high velocity

Visual Confirmation (10:39 PM)

Observer: Co-pilot Captain McCoid
Description: Large light moving across sky at high speed
Duration: Several seconds of visual observation
Correlation: Visual sighting corresponded with electronic detection

Ground Radar Correlation (10:42 PM)

Location: Duncanville, Texas (ADC radar site)
Confirmation: Ground radar detected object at same position
Speed: Radar calculated speed at 600+ mph
Altitude: Approximately 34,000 feet

Extended Tracking (10:45 PM - 11:40 PM)

Duration: Nearly one hour of continuous tracking
Equipment: Multiple onboard systems
Behavior: Object paced aircraft, performed rapid maneuvers
Ground Correlation: Continued radar confirmation from ground sites

Electronic Intelligence Data

Signal Characteristics

Frequency: 2800 megacycles (S-band)
Signal Strength: Extremely strong, consistent with close proximity
Modulation: No identifiable modulation pattern
Interference: No interference with aircraft systems

Direction Finding Analysis

Bearing Changes: Rapid directional changes indicating high maneuverability
Distance Estimation: Electronic ranging suggested object within 5-10 miles
Speed Calculations: Instantaneous acceleration and deceleration
Pattern Recognition: Intelligent flight behavior patterns

Multiple System Confirmation

ALA-6 Monitoring: Primary detection system
APS-54 Radar: Secondary confirmation
Direction Finding: Triangulation capabilities
Communications: No radio emissions detected from object

Ground Radar Correlation

Duncanville AFS, Texas

Radar Type: Long-range surveillance radar
Detection Time: 10:42 PM - 11:10 PM
Object Characteristics: Large, fast-moving target
Speed: 600+ mph confirmed
Altitude: 34,000+ feet

Oklahoma City AFS

Secondary Confirmation: Additional radar site detection
Time Overlap: Partial tracking correlation
Consistency: Speed and altitude consistent with other sources

Carswell AFB, Texas

Military Installation: Strategic Air Command base
Radar Contact: Brief detection during object transit
Protocol: Standard unknown aircraft procedures followed

Crew Testimonies

Major Lewis Chase (Aircraft Commander)

“The object appeared to be under intelligent control… It would pace us, then accelerate away at speeds that were impossible for any known aircraft.”

Captain James McCoid (Co-pilot)

“I observed a large light that appeared to be much larger than any conventional aircraft. It moved in ways that defied explanation.”

Master Sergeant Ray Provenzano (ECM Operator)

“The electronic signature was unlike anything we had encountered. The signal strength indicated close proximity, but the characteristics were unknown.”

Technical Analysis

Electronic Warfare Assessment

Signal Analysis: No match with known aircraft or missile signatures
Electronic Profile: Unique characteristics not in intelligence databases
Countermeasures: Object showed no response to ECM activation
Intelligence Value: Significant unknown technology indicators

Flight Performance Analysis

Acceleration: Instantaneous acceleration beyond known capabilities
Maneuverability: Sharp turns at high speed without deceleration
Altitude Changes: Rapid vertical movement capabilities
Speed Range: From stationary to 600+ mph instantaneously

Radar Cross Section

Ground Radar: Large radar return suggesting significant size
Airborne Radar: Intermittent returns indicating possible stealth characteristics
Consistency: Size estimates varied between detection methods

Official Investigation

Air Force Response

Initial Classification: Classified immediately upon landing
Investigation Team: Electronic intelligence specialists
Analysis Period: Extensive technical analysis conducted
Conclusion: Case remained officially unidentified

Project Blue Book

Case Number: Classified under multiple case files
Investigation: Extensive interviews and technical analysis
Findings: No conventional explanation identified
Classification: Remained “unidentified” in final assessment

Intelligence Community Interest

CIA Involvement: Case reviewed for national security implications
Technical Analysis: Electronic warfare specialists consulted
Foreign Technology: Assessed for potential enemy capabilities
Classification Level: Maintained high security classification

Significance and Implications

Electronic Intelligence Value

Technology Assessment: Object demonstrated unknown electronic capabilities
Signal Intelligence: Unique electronic signature documented
Countermeasures: Resistance to electronic warfare techniques
National Security: Potential advanced technology implications

Scientific Importance

Multiple Sensor Confirmation: Radar, visual, and electronic detection
Crew Expertise: Highly trained electronic warfare specialists
Duration: Extended observation period with continuous tracking
Data Quality: Sophisticated instrumentation provided detailed data

UFO Research Impact

Credibility Standard: Established benchmark for military encounters
Technical Documentation: Most detailed electronic intelligence UFO case
Investigation Model: Set standards for technical UFO investigation
Scientific Evidence: Demonstrated importance of instrumented observations

Alternative Explanations

Conventional Aircraft

Speed Performance: No known aircraft capable of observed performance
Electronic Signature: No match with known aircraft electronics
Altitude Capability: Performance exceeded known aircraft limits
Availability: No conventional aircraft in area during encounter

Atmospheric Phenomena

Electronic Effects: Atmospheric phenomena don’t generate electronic signals
Radar Returns: Natural phenomena inconsistent with observed radar patterns
Duration: Extended encounter duration unlikely for natural phenomena
Intelligence: Behavior patterns suggested intelligent control

Experimental Technology

Classified Programs: Possible secret military technology testing
Performance Levels: Capabilities exceeded known experimental aircraft
Electronic Warfare: Unknown ECM technology assessment
Plausibility: Most likely conventional explanation

Long-term Follow-up

Crew Career Impact

Security Clearances: All crew maintained high-level clearances
Professional Standing: No adverse career effects from reporting
Continued Service: Crew members continued distinguished service
Consistency: Maintained consistent accounts throughout careers

Declassification Process

FOIA Releases: Partial documentation released decades later
Censorship: Significant portions remain classified
Technical Details: Electronic intelligence data heavily redacted
Public Access: Limited information available for civilian research

Research Community Interest

Academic Study: Case studied by atmospheric physicists
UFO Research: Considered premier electronic intelligence case
Technical Analysis: Ongoing analysis of available data
Historical Significance: Recognized as major UFO encounter

Contemporary Military Encounters

Lakenheath-Bentwaters (1956): British radar-visual case
Washington D.C. Flap (1952): Multiple radar confirmations
Minot AFB (1968): Nuclear facility radar encounters

Electronic Intelligence Parallels

USS Nimitz Encounters (2004): Modern electronic sensor confirmations
Pentagon UAP Videos: Electronic detection and tracking
Commercial Aviation: Pilot reports with radar confirmation

Documentation Status

Classified Materials

Original Reports: Remain classified at high levels
Technical Data: Electronic intelligence details restricted
Crew Interviews: Extensive testimonies partially available
Analysis Results: Government conclusions largely classified

Available Information

FOIA Releases: Limited documentation available
Crew Testimonies: Public interviews and statements
Technical Summaries: Declassified overview materials
Research Publications: Academic and civilian analysis

Conclusions

The RB-47 electronic intelligence encounter of July 17, 1957, represents one of the most technically sophisticated UFO cases on record. The combination of experienced electronic warfare specialists, advanced detection equipment, extended observation time, and ground radar correlation provides multiple layers of evidence for an genuinely anomalous aerial phenomenon.

The case’s significance extends beyond typical UFO reports due to the technical expertise of the witnesses and the sophisticated instrumentation involved. The electronic intelligence data, while largely classified, suggests technology capabilities that exceeded known aerospace developments of the 1950s.

The encounter demonstrates the value of professional military witnesses and instrumented observations in UFO research, providing a model for scientific investigation of anomalous aerial phenomena. The continued classification of technical details indicates ongoing government interest in the case’s implications for national security and technology assessment.

References

McDonald, James E. “UFOs - An International Scientific Problem.” Paper presented to American Meteorological Society, 1968.
Hynek, J. Allen. “The UFO Experience: A Scientific Inquiry.” Henry Regnery Company, 1972.
Clark, Jerome. “The UFO Encyclopedia.” Omnigraphics, 1998.
Ruppelt, Edward J. “The Report on Unidentified Flying Objects.” Doubleday, 1956.
Hall, Richard H. “The UFO Evidence.” NICAP, 1964.