JAL 1628

What the file holds

The FAA’s Alaskan Region released its file on the flight on 5 March 1987. It is in the National Archives as the series “Information Releases Relating to Unidentified Flying Object” (Record Group 237, NAID 733667): 41 file units with 1,569 digital objects, all of them online. Among them:

• the Anchorage Air Route Traffic Control Center’s chronology of 18 December 1986 and the statements of its controllers and specialists (NAIDs 40587180, 40587240);
• the transcript of the radio communications and the printout of the centre’s recorded radar data (40587205, 40587258);
• notes of the interview of the crew on the evening of the flight, the captain’s written statement and the FAA’s interviews of the three crew members in January 1987 (40586960, 40586988, 40587003, 40587024, 40587049);
• the FAA’s incident record, its analyses of the radar data and its news releases (40586906, 40587480, 40587486);
• notes of calls with the Air Force, correspondence with Philip J. Klass and Richard F. Haines, newspaper clippings and letters from the public (40587497, 40586911, 40587582 and others).

The US releases mention the flight once, in a newspaper article of 2001 (see “How the story grew”).

Times below are UTC, as in the Anchorage Center’s chronology; the evening of 17 November in Alaska was 18 November in UTC. The file is not consistent on local time: the alert report to the Administrator and the public affairs chronology give 6:19 pm, the incident record “1720 AST”.

The flight, as the crew told it

The aircraft was “an all cargo Boeing 747” that “was en route from Keflavik, Iceland to Anchorage, Alaska” (incident record, NAID 40586906, image 2). The Anchorage Center’s chronology follows the radio (NAID 40587180, images 3, 4):

“0219 - The pilot of JL1628 requested traffic information from the ZAN Sector 15 controller. When the controller advised there was no traffic in the vicinity, JL1628 responded that they had same direction traffic, approximately 1 mile in front, and it appeared to be at their altitude. When queried about any identifiable markings, the pilot responded that they could only see white and yellow strobes.

0225 - JL1628 informed ZAN that the traffic was now visible on their radar, in their 11 o’clock position at 8 miles.”

At 0231 the “plane” was “quite big”; at 0232 the 747 descended from FL350 to FL310, and the pilot said the traffic was descending “in formation”; near Fairbanks it made a 360-degree turn. At 0253 “JL1628 advised they no longer had contact with the traffic.”

The captain wrote his own account, which the FAA received on 2 January 1987 (NAID 40586988). After the turn onto the course to Talkeetna, “we saw lights that looked like aircraft lights, 30 degrees left front, 2,000 feet (600 meters) below us, moving exactly in the same direction and with the same speed as we were” (image 3). Then:

“It was about seven or so minutes since we began paying attention to the lights, most unexpectedly two spaceships stopped in front of our face, shooting off lights. The inside cockpit shined brightly and I felt warm in the face.” (image 6)

On the weather radar, set to 20 miles, “There it was, on the screen, a large, green, and a round object had appeared in seven or eight miles” (image 8). He tried to take a photograph, but “the shutter would not close” (image 5). When the United flight came alongside, “the spaceship disappeared suddenly and there was nothing but the light of moon” (image 12). “It comprised approximately 50 minutes of flight time.” (image 13)

How the account changed between the evening of the flight and January is set out under “How the story grew”.

What the radars showed

At the time, two ground radars showed something where the pilot reported traffic. The chronology: “The ROCC advised that they were receiving a primary radar return in JL1628’s 10 o’clock position at 8 miles” (0226), and a minute later “they were no longer receiving any radar returns in the vicinity of JL1628”. At 0238 “The ROCC called ZAN advising they had confirmed a ‘flight of two’ in JL1628’s position. They advised they had some ‘other equipment watching this’, and one was a primary target only.” (NAID 40587180, image 3) The ROCC was the military Regional Operations Control Center at Elmendorf.

The controllers’ statements (NAID 40587240):

• Carl E. Henley, 19 November 1986: “ROCC did have primary target in the same position JL1628 reported. Several times I had single primary returns where JL1628 reported traffic.” (image 1) On 6 January 1987 he added that he had seen “three types of targets”, and that his words about the traffic staying with the 747 “through turns and descent” came from the pilot: “this information was what I received from JL 1628.” (image 2)
• Samuel J. Rich: “there was a radar return in the position the pilot had reported traffic”, and the ROCC “advised that they had traffic near JL 1628 in the same position we did.” (image 3)
• The area supervisor, Joseph Rollins: “at no time observed any radar data that in my opinion, conclusively indicated traffic for the JL1628 flight.” (image 5)

Other checks found nothing. At 0235 Fairbanks Approach Control, asked whether it had returns near the 747, “advised they did not”; at 0250 “The northbound United Flight advised they had the Japan Airlines flight in sight, against a light background, and could not see any other traffic.” (images 3, 4) A military C-130 “also had no contact” (Henley, image 1). The 747’s weather radar display was not recorded.

What the FAA concluded

On the radar, the FAA’s answer is in its own data:

• The Anchorage Center, 18 December 1986: “Radar data recorded by Anchorage Center does not confirm the presence of the traffic reported by Flight 1628.” (NAID 40587180, image 2) The two specialists who read the recording, Manfred F. Keller and Anthony M. Wylie, “could not find any indications of other target information” and “could not find any target information in the vicinity of the reported traffic” (NAID 40587240, images 7, 8).
• The Technical Center, in the release of 5 March 1987: “They determined that a second radar target near the JAL flight at the time of the reported sighting was not another aircraft but rather a split radar return from the JAL Boeing 747.” (NAID 40587486, image 3)
• The analysis behind it, 25 February 1987: “Approximately 61 minutes of data was extracted from the EARTS CDR printouts”, and “Review of the data involving this incident did not show any abnormalities that could be associated with any type of target as indicated by the pilot of JAL-1628.” (NAID 40587480, image 4)
• The Air Force, in FAA notes of calls on 2 January 1987: “AF INTERPRETED INCIDENT AS SPURIOUS SIGNALS ON A.F. RADAR” and “AF DID NOT SCRAMBLE”; later that day: “TAPES HAVE BEEN REUSED” (NAID 40587497, image 3). The alert report of 31 December 1986 had the military “informing media that it was ‘clutter’” (image 2).

The release concluded that the FAA was “unable to confirm the event” and “is satisfied that the safety of the air traffic control system was not compromised” (NAID 40587486, image 3).

The FAA did not look at the lights, and said so. The release: the FAA “normally does not investigate UFO sightings but pursued the JAL incident in its role as the operator of the air traffic control system”, to determine “if there was an unreported aircraft in the vicinity of the JAL flight that could present a safety hazard” (image 3). A statement of the same day:

“The FAA does not have the resources or the Congressional mandate to investigate sightings of unidentified flying objects.

We have not tried to determine what the crew of Japan Airlines flight 1628 saw based on scientific analysis of the stars, planets, magnetic fields, angle of view, etc.” (image 6)

The planet and the moonlight: Klass’s reading

Philip J. Klass, who chaired the UFO subcommittee of the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal, sent the FAA his own analyses. They are a later private reading, not an FAA finding.

In January 1987 the Associated Press reported his view that the pilot was “actually seeing an unusually bright image of the planet Jupiter and possibly Mars” (NAID 40587582, image 8). His “Summary White Paper” of 27 March 1987 split the sighting in two. For the first lights: “This suggests that the amber-white lights observed by the crew were caused by bright moonlight reflecting off spotty clouds of ice crystals.” For the later part, near the United flight: “the JAL pilot was looking in the direction of a very bright planet Jupiter, then low on the horizon.” (NAID 40586911, image 33) In a letter to the FAA dated 21 March 1987, whose second page is headed “May 21, 1987”, he wrote:

“While I am convinced that Jupiter was the ‘UFO’ for the latter portion of the flight from Nenana south, I no longer think it was the ‘culprit’ for the earlier portion of the flight” (images 24, 25)

The FAA tested neither reading. For a later sighting by the same captain, on 11 January 1987, it wrote that it “agrees with the Captain that the phenomena was most likely caused by ice crystals created by the reported temperature inversion” (NAID 40587486, image 5).

How the story grew

• 17 November, at Anchorage. Special Agent James Derry: “They stated that all they could see were the lights and at no time could they see any craft. However, they did show an object on their WX radar at about 7 miles.” (NAID 40586960, image 3) The FAA notes released on 30 December 1986 give “Size: ‘As big as B747 or larger, erratic movement.’” (NAID 40587486, image 2)
• 2 January 1987, the captain. His written statement: “Alas! there was a silhouette of a gigantic spaceship.” (NAID 40586988, image 10) In his interview that day the interviewer summed up: “were saying about two times as big as an aircraft carrier”, and he answered “Yeah, yeah, yeah.” (NAID 40587003, image 11)
• 5 January 1987, the first officer. Shown the captain’s sketch: “I don’t see ah, anything like this, but ah, as I told … and you if, we can connect these lights - are - it will be a big object” (NAID 40587024, image 21).
• 1 January 1987, the press. A UPI caption in the Anchorage Daily News: “The Federal Aviation Administration and the U.S. Air Force have confirmed that a UFO appeared on their radar.” (NAID 40587537, image 29) This was printed before the FAA released its file.
• 3 May 2001. An article by Leslie Kean in The Providence Journal: “Despite the Federal Aviation Administration’s determination that he and his crew were stable, competent and professional, he was grounded for speaking out.” (RG 255 413270, p. 90) The FAA file says nothing about the captain being grounded.

Where it was

The FAA’s incident record gives the location as “Fort Yukon, Alaska” (NAID 40586906, image 1). The crew first saw the lights “just after passing POTAT intersection inbound to Anchorage on J529” (Derry, NAID 40586960, image 3), and the FAA notes have the target breaking off “40 N of TKA (Talkeetna)” (NAID 40587486, image 2). The pin is OpenStreetMap’s point for the town of Fort Yukon (relation 16770856), rounded by us to 66.56° N, 145.27° W; it marks the town, not a position of the aircraft or of the lights.

Why this scores where it does

Witnesses: 4. Three airline crew members; the FAA’s notes of the interview at Anchorage record “Normal, professional, rational, no drug or alcohol involvement” (NAID 40587486, image 2). Not 5: the giant craft is the captain’s alone, and his crew described lights. Agent Ronald E. Mickle’s notes of 17 November carry an addendum: “Through a confidential source at Japan Airlines, it was stated to me that this was not the first sighting of an unidentified aircraft by Captain TERAUCHI.” (NAID 40586960, image 2) It is a second-hand report, and the file does not check it.

Radar: 2. At the time, the FAA’s and the military radars showed intermittent returns where the pilot reported traffic. The recorded data does not show them, the Technical Center attributed the second target to the 747 itself, the Air Force called its returns spurious, and its tapes were reused.

Optics: 0. No photograph: the captain’s camera failed. The radar photographs in the file are of simulated radar data (NAIDs 40587438, 40587465).

Physical trace: 0. None.

Multi-channel: 2. At the time there were the crew’s eyes, the 747’s weather radar and two ground radars. The checks that could be made came back empty: the Fairbanks approach radar, the United and C-130 crews, the recorded data.

Documentation: 5. Statements written within days, the radio transcript, the recorded radar data, the interviews, the analyses and the agency’s releases, all public.

Anomaly: 2. The radar part has an official explanation. The lights have none, because the FAA did not look at them, and what remains unusual rests on the captain’s account.

Data today: 4. The FAA file is complete and online. The Air Force’s radar data is gone, and the weather radar display was not recorded.

The overall is 2.3: class C, material gaps.

What would settle it

• The Air Force’s radar data of that evening; FAA notes of 2 January 1987 record: “TAPES HAVE BEEN REUSED” (NAID 40587497, image 3).
• A new reading of the Anchorage Center’s recorded radar data (NAID 40587258) against the Technical Center’s analysis.
• An analysis of the lights themselves, which the FAA did not make.