The Blue Book files noted, "Thus two radar sets [that is, Lakenheath GCA and the RATCC radars] and three ground observers report substantially the same thing… the fact that radar and ground visual observations were made on its rapid acceleration and abrupt stops certainly lend credulance (sic) to the report."
But Klass, in his analysis of the case, finds what he believes to the be fatal flaw here too. He seizes on the point that the blip stopped to hover. He wrote, "With the radar operating in the moving-target-indicator (MTI) mode, only moving targets should appear on the scope — IF the MTI is functioning properly. In radars of that early vintage, MTI was a relatively new feature and one that often caused problems. For example, the instruction book for the MPN-11A [the designation of that particular radar set design] radar, which also had MTI, specifically warned radar operators and maintenance personnel of the possibility of spurious signals being caused by an MTI malfunction. In chapter 5, on page 12, the Technical Order (as the instruction book is called) warned that MTI "circuits are complex; the stability requirements are severe; the tolerances are close." And on page 18 of chapter 4, the same manual warns operators of still another potential source of spurious signals that can result from what is called "extra-time-around signals." (Emphasis in original).
What Klass is suggesting, without going into a complex and detailed discussion of the workings of radars that are now more than forty years old, is that "this condition can arise during anomalous-propagation weather conditions when echoes from distant fixed targets on the ground far beyond the selected maximum radar operating range defeat the MTI function. Under this condition, the Tech Order warned, 'the signal from this distant fixed target may appear as a false moving target… ' (Klass's added emphasis)."
Klass is arguing, based on the technical specifications of the radars in use, that the blips during this first sighting are anomalous propagation. In other words, the returns were not of real craft but a "phantom" created by the weather conditions outside and the electronic characteristics of the radars being used.
About midnight, one of the operators at Lakenheath called the chief fighter controller at the RAF Station at Neatishead, Norfolk in England, and reported a strange object buzzing the base. F.H.C. Wimbledon would later say, "I scrambled a Venom night fighter from the Battle Flight through Sector, and my controller in the Interception Control team would consist of one Fighter Controller, a Corporal, a tracker and a height reader. That is, four highly trained personnel in addition to myself could now see the object on our radarscopes."
Blue Book files, which are often confusing, suggest that it took the two-man fighter between 30 and 45 minutes to arrive at Lakenheath. As the aircraft approached, according to the reports, "Pilot advised he had a bright light in sight and would investigate. At 13 miles west, he reported loss of target and white light."
Immediately afterwards the interceptor was directed to another target over Bedford, and the navigator locked on it with his radar. He said it was the "clearest target I have ever seen on radar."
The radar contact was broken, and the Lakenheath controllers reported that the object had passed the Venom fighter and was now behind it, that is, at the six o'clock position, in the lingo of fighter pilots. The pilot acknowledged the message and tried various maneuvers to reverse the situation, that is, to get behind the object. Unable to shake the object, the pilot asked for assistance.
But the Venom was now low and fuel and the pilot decided to return to base. According to the Blue Book documents, "Second Venom was vectored to other radar targets but was unable to make contact." The second aircraft returned to the base and no other fighters were sent. By 3:30 a.m., all targets were gone."
When the Condon Committee, also known as the University of Colorado study, the Air Force sponsored investigation into UFOs, began, one of the controllers who had been on duty that night at Bentwaters, sent a letter describing the events. Although it had been about a dozen years, the memory seemed to be well etched. Naturally there were some discrepancies in the letter but nothing of a significant nature.
The man pointed out that he had not told anyone of the events because he was "pretty sure it is considered (or was) classified, and the only reason I feel free to give you details is because you are an official government agency."
His long letter then described most of the events of that night. He provided a detailed look at the attempted intercept. He made a number of interesting observations in the letter, including the information about the intercept. He wrote, "The first movement of the UFO was so swift (circling behind the interceptor), I missed it entirely, but it was seen by other controllers. However, the fact that his had occurred was confirmed by the pilot of the interceptor. The pilot of the interceptor told us he would try to shake the UFO and would try it again. He tried everything — he climbed, dived, circled, etc., but the UFO acted like it was glued right behind him, always the same distance, very close, but we always had two distinct targets. Note: Target resolution on our radar at the range they were from the antenna (about 10 to 30 miles, all in the southerly sectors from Lakenheath) would be between 200 and 600 feet probably. Closer than that we would have got one target from both aircraft and UFO. Most specifications say 500 feet is the minimum but I believe it varies and 200 to 600 feet is closer to the truth… "
What all this boils down to are a series of radar observations of objects that displayed characteristics that were outside the capabilities of aircraft of the day. In at least one of the reports from Bentwaters, the radar sightings coincided with visual observations on the ground and by a pilot in the C-47 (the sighting that Klass had "identified" as a meteor). This should not be confused with the observation of Mars made by tower personnel. That aspect of the case has been resolved to the satisfaction of everyone whether a believer or a skeptic or an Air Force investigator.
On the ground at Lakenheath were witnesses who saw two luminous objects in fast flight. They witnessed the course reversals and the dead stops. The maneuvers rule out meteors which some have suggested were responsible for the sightings.
Dr. James McDonald in his paper, "Science in Default," published in 'UFOs A Scientific Debate, wrote, "The file does, however, include a lengthy dispatch that proposes a series of what I must term wholly irrelevant hypotheses about Perseid meteors with 'ionized gases in their wake which may be traced on radarscopes,' and inversions that 'may cause interference between two radar stations some distance apart.' Such basically irrelevant remarks are all too typical of Bluebook critique over the years."
He also pointed out that "Not only are the radar frequencies here about two orders of magnitude too high to afford even marginal likelihood of meteor- wake returns, but there is absolutely no kinematic similarity between the reported UFO movements and the essentially straight-line hypersonic movement of a meteor, to cite just a few of the objections to meteor hypotheses."
Two separate radars at Lakenheath, having different radar parameters, were concurrently observing movements of one or more unknown targets over an extended period of time. One of the ways that the reliability of a return on one radar is checked is to compare it to another. If they are operating at different frequencies, then an inversion layer, if affecting the returns, will be different on the two sets. Or one will show it and the second will not. It eliminates the possibility of a spurious target.
That is not to mention the fact that the Blue Book files suggest that some of the two-radar sightings were coincident with the visual observations on the ground. In other words, not only were the objects seen on multiple radars, but there were people outside who saw the lights in the sky.