Foo Fighters

What the file holds

The only papers from the time in the US releases are one file of Air Staff, Supreme Headquarters Allied Expeditionary Force (SHAEF), numbered 37153, which the publisher’s file name places in Record Group 331. It came out in PURSUE release 01. Its 17 pages run from the newest to the oldest and follow one inquiry from a squadron up to the Air Ministry and back:

• 16 January 1945. XII Tactical Air Command quotes the “training and tactical information supplied by the 415th Night Fighter Squadron for the month of December 1944” and asks the First Tactical Air Force (Prov.) for more information (p. 14).
• 20 January. The First Tactical Air Force answers: “There have been no instances reported as above.” Before anything can be investigated, it wants “more complete information, such as colors of the lights, their intensity, size, duration, and at what altitudes seen” (p. 14).
• 30 January. The squadron sends 14 extracts from its sortie reports (pp. 15–17).
• 5 February. The First Tactical Air Force forwards them to SHAEF (p. 13).
• 11 February. SHAEF writes to Headquarters, USSTAF, and to the First Tactical Air Force (pp. 11–12).
• 17 February. A.D.I.(K) of the Air Ministry answers a SHAEF note of 14 February (p. 10).
• 13 March. The Air Ministry replies (p. 2), and on 18 March SHAEF passes the reply on (p. 1).

Filed under the same number, but a separate matter, is a report of 1 March 1945 from IX Tactical Air Command: “An aluminum colored cylinder shaped object, about 12 ft long and 1 ft in diameter was observed floating in the air at 9,000 ft.” It “was attacked and partially deflated” (p. 9), and the photographs of it “were unsuccessful” (p. 6). Pages 3 and 6–9 deal with that report and pp. 4–5 with another subject; neither is part of this case.

Not in the file: the sortie reports themselves, any record of the calls the crews made, the reports of Bomber Command crews the Air Ministry mentions, the CX report and A.D.I.(K) report cited on p. 10, and any answer from SHAEF’s Scientific Investigation Division.

The squadron’s reports

The chain begins with the squadron’s own words for December 1944, which XII Tactical Air Command quoted on 16 January 1945:

“We have encountered a phenomenon which we cannot explain; crews have been followed by lights that blink on and off changing colors etc. The lights come very close and fly formation with our planes. They are agitating and keep the crews on edge when they encounter them, mainly because they cannot explain them. It is requested further information be furnished on this subject, such as similar experiences of other night units”. (p. 14)

Asked for details, the squadron sent on 30 January “extracts from the Sortie Reports of various pilots who have encountered the Night Phenomenon” (p. 15), signed by its intelligence officer, Captain F. B. Ringwald, with a footnote: “Foofighters is the name given these phenomenon by combat crews of this Squadron.” (p. 17) There are 14 extracts from ten nights, by our count: three on p. 15, ten on p. 16 and one on p. 17. None names a pilot. Heights are given in feet or as “Angels” with a number, which the file does not explain; times are as the extracts write them.

• 14/15 December 1944. “In vicinity of Erstein (V-9381) flying at 1000 ft. observed large red light at 2000 ft. going East at 18:40 hrs. Travelling at approximately 200 MPH” (p. 15)
• 16/17 December. “20 miles North of Breisach (W-0173) at 800 ft. observed 5 or 6 flashing red and green lights in ‘T’ shape. Thought they were flak. About 10 minutes later saw the same lights much closer and behind me. We turned port and Starboard and the lights followed. They closed in to about 8 O’clock and 1000 ft. and remained in that position for several minutes and then disappeared.” (p. 15)
• 22/23 December. “Patrolling at Angels 10 from Sarrebourg to Strasbourg North and South of highway. At 06:00 hrs. saw two lights coming towards A/C from the ground. Upon reaching altitude of plane, they leveled off and stayed on my tail for approximately 2 minutes. Lights appeared to be a large orange glow. After staying with A/C for approximately 2 minutes, they would peel off and turn away, fly along level for a few minutes and then go out. They appeared to be under perfect control at all times. Lights were seen somewhere in vicinity of Hagenau.” (p. 15)
• 23/24 December, two extracts. “Observed reddish colored flames at considerable distance and at approximately 10,000 ft.” And: “Approximately 10 miles South of Point X (Q6745) noticed to NE approximately 5 miles a glowing red object shooting straight up. Changed suddenly to plane view of A/C doing a wing over and going into a dive and disappearing.” (p. 16)
• 26/27 December, three extracts. “At 01:45 hrs. saw two yellow streaks of flame flying at same level at approximately 3000 ft. off port side. We also saw red balls of fire that stayed up for 10 seconds approximately 45 miles away.” The same extract goes on: “Noticed several groups of lights off port while patrolling in vicinity of Q-9050 and R-1556 Lights made distinct lines somewhat like arrows.” Another: “While on vector 090 near V-7050 during patrol we observed airborne white lights. They were staggered evenly vertically and we could see from 1 to 4 swing at once. They appeared stationary at 10,000 ft.” A third: “Observed light at same altitude while in vicinity of Worms Observer saw light come within 100 ft. Peeled off and took evasive action but light continued to follow for 5 minutes. Light then pulled up rapidly and went out of sight.” (p. 16)
• 27/28 December, two extracts. Near Q-1378, lights “suspended in air moving slowly and would then disappear. Were orange in color. Lights appeared singly and in pairs.” And: “Eight miles NE of Luneville at 19:10 hrs. saw three sets of three lights (red and white) one on starboard and one on port from 1000 ft. to 2000 ft. to rear and closing in at Angels 10. Pulled up to Angels 8 and lights went out.” (p. 16)
• 30/31 December. “Saw a group of lights flying through the air 30 or 40 miles East of base while flying at Angels 9 - 10.” (p. 16)
• 1/2 January 1945. “Saw* Foofighters North of Strasbourg and North of Saverne”. (p. 16)
• 14/15 January. “Observed a large orange glow in sky approx. 5 ft. in diameter in vicinity of Ingweiller at 6000 ft. at 20:00 hrs.” (p. 16)
• 29/30 January. “At about 00:10 hrs. sighted a Foofighter about half way between Weissembourg and Landau. Foofighter was off to the starboard and rear at Angels 2. Lights were amber and one was 20 - 50 ft. above the other and of about 30 seconds duration. Foofighter was about 1000 ft. away and following. The lights were about a foot in diameter. Lights disappeared when Travel 34 turned into them.” (p. 17)

Two extracts record calls the crews made. On 26/27 December: “Called GCI Blunder and asked if any E/A were in vicinity. They answered No.” On 27/28 December: “Called Churchman to see if there was anything in area. Received a negative reply.” (p. 16) The squadron’s letter sums it up: “In every case where pilot called GCI Control and asked if there was a Bogey A/C in the area he received a negative answer.” (p. 17) It does not say how many such calls there were, and the file holds no record of them from the other end.

Where the lights were seen

The extracts name eleven places, spelled as they spell them: Erstein, Breisach, Sarrebourg, Strasbourg, Hagenau, Worms, Luneville, Saverne, Ingweiller, Weissembourg and Landau. By OpenStreetMap, eight of them lie in France (Erstein, Sarrebourg, Strasbourg, Haguenau, Lunéville, Saverne, Ingwiller, Wissembourg) and three in Germany (Breisach am Rhein, Worms, Landau in der Pfalz). Matching the spellings to those names is our own reading: OpenStreetMap gives Hagenau, Ingweiler and Weißenburg as the German names of Haguenau, Ingwiller and Wissembourg. The extracts also give grid references, V-9381, W-0173, Q6745 (“Point X”), Q-9050, R-1556, V-7050 and Q-1378; the file does not say which grid they belong to, and we have not converted them.

The pin is OpenStreetMap’s point for Strasbourg (relation 71033), rounded by us to 48.58° N, 7.75° E. Strasbourg is named in two extracts; the pin marks no particular sighting.

What SHAEF and the Air Ministry made of them

The First Tactical Air Force forwarded the extracts on 5 February: “This headquarters has no further information or explanation in connection with these phenomena.” And: “It is believed that further investigation is warranted. Since appropriate technical personnel are not available within the First Tactical Air Force, the matter is forwarded for such further investigation as may be advisable.” (p. 13)

On 11 February Air Commodore C. M. Grierson, for SHAEF, wrote to Headquarters, USSTAF:

“From the number of reports quoted in the 2nd W/Ind from the 415th Night Fighter Squadron, it would seem that there must be something more than mere imagination behind the matter, and in view of the fact that pilots and crews are becoming slightly worried by them, it is considered that everything possible should be done to get to the root of the matter.” (p. 11)

Copies went to the Air Ministry, “and the Scientific Investigation Division of this Headquarters (Mr. Robertson) has also been asked to consider the problem”; he suggested that an Air Technical Intelligence Officer visit the squadron and “obtain reports and impressions at first hand from aircrew personnel” (p. 11). To the First Tactical Air Force he wrote the same day that “there is no information at this Headquarters which might explain the nature and cause of the lights and other phenomena described by the pilots of this Squadron” (p. 12). No answer from the Scientific Investigation Division and no report of a visit is in the file.

On 17 February Wing Commander S. D. Felkin of A.D.I.(K), Air Ministry, answered a SHAEF note of 14 February “with the attached CX report”: “this probably refers to ‘Flak Bombe’ mentioned in A.D.I.(K) Report No.562/1944, paragraphs 128 and 129.” (p. 10) Neither the note of 14 February, nor the CX report, nor A.D.I.(K) Report No. 562/1944 is in the file, so it is not known what the CX report described.

The Air Ministry’s reply came on 13 March, under the heading “BALLS OF FIRE - RED.” The papers had been “carefully examined and discussed with the various other Departments concerned”, and Bomber Command crews “have for some time been reporting” similar phenomena. Then:

“A few of the alleged aircraft may have been Me. 262 and for the rest, flak rockets are suggested as the most likely explanation. The whole affair is still something of a mystery and the evidence is very sketchy and varied so that no definite and satisfactory explanation can yet be given.” (p. 2)

On 18 March SHAEF passed that view on to the First Tactical Air Force, ending: “It is regretted that no further, or more definite, information can be given.” (p. 1) That is the last paper in the file.

What later documents say

• 1952. An article by the Harvard astronomer Donald H. Menzel, “The Truth About Flying Saucers”, in LOOK of 17 June 1952, clipped into the FBI’s file, asks in passing whether the green fireballs “are or are not related to the luminous ‘Foo Fighters’ that occasionally seem to accompany a plane or even engage it in a mysterious sort of shadowboxing?” (FBI file 62-HQ-83894, Section 6, p. 260)
• 1953. F. C. Durant’s report of the meetings of the Scientific Advisory Panel on Unidentified Flying Objects, convened by the CIA’s Office of Scientific Intelligence on 14–18 January 1953, records under “ON LACK OF DANGER”: “Instances of ‘Foo Fighters’ were cited. These were unexplained phenomena sighted by aircraft pilots during World War II in both European and Far East theaters of operation wherein ‘balls of light’ would fly near or with the aircraft and maneuver rapidly. They were believed to be electrostatic (similar to St. Elmo’s fire) or electromagnetic phenomena or possibly light reflections from ice crystals in the air, but their exact cause or nature was never defined.” It adds that “Both Robertson and Alvarez had been concerned in the investigation of these phenomena”, and: “If the term ‘flying saucers’ had been popular in 1943 - 1945, these objects would have been so labeled.” (CIA-UAP-002, PDF pp. 18–19) The panel’s chairman was Dr. H. P. Robertson (p. 12). SHAEF’s letter of 11 February 1945 names a “Mr. Robertson” of its Scientific Investigation Division; the documents do not say whether he is the same man. The same paragraph is in the file of the Air Force’s committee to review Project Blue Book, 1966–1967, in a copy stamped “UNCLASSIFIED” with Alvarez’s name blanked out (DOW-UAP-D092, PDF pp. 56–57).
• 1999. A report of the French association COMETA, in an English translation filed in the release, dates the sightings “From 1940 to 1945” and says they “were reported in all theaters of operation as of the start of the war”. It says the Allied authorities “believed them to be a secret German process in the beginning. It became clearly apparent at the end of the war that it was nothing of the sort.” And: “It seems that, for their part, the German pilots had been persuaded that it was a case of a secret U.S. weapon. A board of inquiry reportedly was even created in Berlin to study the matter.” (pp. 75–76 of the file) It gives no source for any of it.

We searched the text of all 265 files in the six releases; 39 of them, mostly photographs and renderings, have no text to search. Foo fighters appear only in the documents cited here. No document from the time speaks of German crews seeing such lights or of a German inquiry.

Why this scores where it does

Witnesses: 3. Aircrews of a night fighter squadron, writing in their own sortie reports at the time. But the extracts come from one squadron, name no one, and do not say how many crews saw what.

Radar: 1. In every case where a pilot asked GCI control whether there was “a Bogey A/C in the area”, the answer was negative. A memorandum for record of 11 July 1955 in the releases calls the returns of one object over Newfoundland both “ground radar returns” and “GCI radar returns” (DOW-UAP-D095, PDF p. 40). But the file holds the answers only as the crews wrote them down, with no record from the other end.

Optics and physical trace: 0. No photograph, film or trace is mentioned for these lights. The unsuccessful photographs in the file belong to the separate report of 1 March 1945.

Multi-channel: 2. The crews’ observations and the negative answers from GCI control. The Air Ministry mentions reports from Bomber Command crews but gives no details, and they are not in the file.

Documentation: 3. One file from the time, with dates, places, grid references, heights and times for 14 extracts, and the correspondence they set off. The sortie reports themselves are not in it.

Anomaly: 2. The Air Ministry put a few of the reports down to Me 262s and the rest, most likely, to flak rockets, and in the same letter called the whole affair “still something of a mystery”. Several extracts describe lights that followed an aircraft for minutes, which the file leaves unexplained.

Data today: 2. The file is public and legible; the reports it summarises are not in the release.

The overall is 1.5: class D, testimony only.

What would settle it

• The full sortie reports of the 415th Night Fighter Squadron for December 1944 and January 1945, and any record of their calls to “GCI Blunder”, “Churchman” and “GCI Control”.
• A.D.I.(K) Report No. 562/1944, paragraphs 128 and 129, and the CX report SHAEF sent on 14 February 1945, which would show what a “Flak Bombe” was and what the CX report described.
• The reports of Bomber Command crews that the Air Ministry mentions.
• Whatever SHAEF’s Scientific Investigation Division made of the papers, and the report of any visit by a technical intelligence officer to the squadron.