{ "slug": "dow-uap-d094", "title": "DOW-UAP-D094 Analysis-of-Flying-Object-Incidents-in-the-US 1949", "agency": "DoW", "year": "1949", "page_count": 34, "source_page": "https://wearenotalone.space/document/dow-uap-d094/", "original_file": "https://wearenotalone.space/Season 04/release_04_documents/Documents/DOW-UAP-D094_Analysis-of-Flying-Object-Incidents-in-the-US_1949.pdf", "license": "U.S. Government work — public domain. Text is machine OCR from the original scan; the page image is authoritative.", "pages": [ { "n": 1, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/dow-uap-d094/p01.jpg", "text": "Authority:\nNND 857011" }, { "n": 2, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/dow-uap-d094/p02.jpg", "text": "" }, { "n": 3, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/dow-uap-d094/p03.jpg", "text": ",. '\n1 •\nLO.Alf DOCUDIM'\nl\nT/S COITIOL 10.\n2-73.frl\n- ·---­\n'f\nOFYICE TO WHI~H LQlHD\nAFOill-2.A.\n________,__~\nI\n-\n■\nI\n·­\n•\n89A\nDiT! DUi IN AFOIM-C/DD _,l_l_ul;r ~-~52\nPLEASE RETURN THIS DOCUMF.JfT. OR DATE SPIClfliD !fK>VI TO AFOIN...C/DD. ROOII\n• IO. 50116 J.TTIITIOlh M' WM! COlffftOL 01'FICD\n•\nWhen the attached docum•nt 1s withdrawn\nthe clses1f1cat1on of thi• .. ahe•t wil1 be\nchan~•d to UlfCLASSIFIKD in accordance\nwith PAR 250, ll'R 205-1.i\n..." }, { "n": 4, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/dow-uap-d094/p04.jpg", "text": "...\nAir Intelligence Report No. 100-203-79.\nANALYSIS OF FLYING OB ECT INCIDENTS IN THE U. S.\nAir Intelligence Division Study No. 203\n10 December 1948.\nDirectorate of Intelligence and Office of Naval Intelligence\nDISTRIBUTION ''C''\nWARNING:\nThis document contains information affecting the national defense of the United States\nwithin the meaning of the Espionage Act, 60 U.S.C., 31 and 32, as amended.\nIts transmission or\nthe revelation of its contents in any manner to an . unauthorized person is prohibited by law.\nReproduction of the intelligence in this publication, under the provisions of Army Regulation\n380-5, is authorized for United States military agencies provided the source is indicated.\nDirectorate of Intelligence\nOffice of Naval Intelligence\nHeadquarters United States Air Force\nNavy Department\nWashington, D. C,\nDECLASSIFIED" }, { "n": 5, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/dow-uap-d094/p05.jpg", "text": "••\n..\nANALYSIS OF FLYING OB ECT lliCIDENTS IN THE U. S.\nINDEX\nPage\nSUM:MARY AND CONCLUSIONS .......... , ............ , ..\n1\nAPPENDIX \"A\" - ANALYSIS OF FLYING OB CT INCIDENTS IN THE U. S.\nIt\n3\nIritroduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n3\nSome Aspects Regarding Flying Object Incidents\n3\nPossible Origin of Unusual Flying Objects . . . . . . . . ' . .\n4\nPossible Reasons or Tactics for the Use of Soviet\nUnconventional Aircraft Over the U. S.\n. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n6\nConclusion\nAPPENDIX \"B\" ­\nAPPENDIX \"C,, - SELECTED REPORTS OF FLYING OBI CT INCIDENTS .. .\n8\n•\nAPPENDIX \"D\" - FLYING WING TYPE AIRCRAFT\n17\nGermany ...\n17\nGreat Britain\n•\n•\n♦\n•\n•\n•\n•\n, . 21\nUnited States\n. . .\n' . .\n23\n. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . .\nREPORTED SIGHTINGS OF FLYING\nCTS AS OF\n6\n' • 7\n- i ­" }, { "n": 6, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/dow-uap-d094/p06.jpg", "text": "MP l!Clt!,\nANALYSIS OF FLYING OB ECT INCIDENTS IN THE U. S.\nSUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS\nPROBLEM\n1. TO EXA:MlNE pattern of tactics of \"Flying Saucers\" (hereinafter referred to as flying objects)\nand to develop conclusions as to the possibility of existence.\nFACTS AND DISCUSSION\n2. A DETAILED discussion of information bearing on the problem as set forth above 1s attached\nas Appendix \"A\". The main points established therein are summarized below.\n3. THE FREQUENCY of reported incidents, the similarity in many of the characteristics attributed\nto the observed objects and the quality of observers considered as a whole, support the contention\nthat some type of flying object has been observed. Approximately 210 incidents have been reported.\n•\nAmong the observers reporting on such incidents are trained and experienced U.S. Weather Bureau\npersonnel, USAF rated officers, experienced civilian pilots, technicians associated with various re­\nsearch projects and technicians employed. by commercial airlines.\n4. THE POSSIBILITY that reported observations of flying objects over the U.S. were influenced by\nprevious sightings of unidentified phenomena in Europe, particularly over Scandinavia 1n 1948, • and\nthat the observers reporting such incidents may have been interested in obtaining personal pubUcity\nhave been considered as possible explanations. However, these posslb111t1es seem to be improbable\nwhen certain selected reports such as the one from U.S. Weather Bureau at Richmond are examined.\nDuring observations of weather balloons at the Richmond Bureau, one well trained observer has\nsighted strange metallic disks on three occasions and another observer has sighted a similar object\non one occasion. The last observation of un1denttf1ed objects was in Apr1i, 1947.\nOn all four occa­\nsions the weather balloon and the unidentified objects were in view through the theodolite. These\nobservations at the Richmond Bureau occurred several months before publ1city on the flying saucers\nappeared in a U.S. newspaper.\n5. DESCRIPTIONS OF the flying objects fall lnto three configurat1on categories:\n(1) disk-shaped\n(2) rough cigar-shaped {3) balls of fire. Varying conditions of visibility and differences in angles\nat which the objects may have been viewed introduces a possibility that a single type object may\nhave been observed rather than three different types. This possibility is further substantiated by\nthe fact that 1n the areas where such objects have been observed the ratio of the three general\nconfigurations is approximately the same.\n6. THEREFORE, IT appears that some object has been seen; however, the identification of that\nobject cannot be readily; accomplished on the basis of information reported on each incident. It\nls possible that the object, or objects, may have been domestically launched devices such as weather\nballoons, rockets, experimental flying wlng aircraft, or celestial phenomena. It is necessary to\nobtain information on such domestic activity to confirm or deny this possibility. Depending upon\nthe degree with which this may be accomplished, foreign devices must then be considered as a\n..\npossibility.\n7. THE PATTERN of sightings is definable. Sightings ~ave been most intense throughout the states\nbordering the Atlantic and Pacific coast lines, and the central states of Ohio and Kentucky. A map\nshowing location of sightings is attached as Appendix \"B\"\n~•• 11c11,\n- 1 ­" }, { "n": 7, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/dow-uap-d094/p07.jpg", "text": "8. THE ORIGIN of the devices is not ascertainable. There are two reasonable possibllltles:\n(1) The objects are domestic devices, and if so, their identification or origin can be established\nby a survey of all launchings of airborne objects. Domestic flying wing type aircraft observed\nin various aspects of flight might be responsible for some of the reported flying objects, particu­\nlarly those described as disks and rough cigar shapes.\n(See Appendices \"C\" and ''D\".) Among\nthose which have been operational in recent years are the XF5U-1 (\"Flying Flap3ack\") developed\nby Chance-Vaught, the Northrup B-35, and the turbo-jet powered Northrup YB-49. · The present\n.existence of any privately developed flying-wing type aircraft has not been determined but one\nsuch aircraft, the Arup tailless monoplane, was operational at South Bend, Indiana, prior to 1935.\n(2) Objects are foreign, and l:f so, it would seem most logical to consider that they are from a\nSoviet source. The Soviets possess information on a number of German flying-wing type aircraft\nsuch as the Gotha P60A, Junkers EF 130 long-range, high-speed jet bomber and the Horten 229\ntwin-jet fighter, which particularly resembles some of the description of un1denttfied flying objects\n(See Appendix \"D\"). As early as 1924 Tscheranowsky developed a \"Parabola\" aircraft, an all\nwing • design, which was the outcome of considerable Soviet experimentation with gliders of the\nsame general form. Soviet aircrait based on such designs might have speeds approaching trans­\n~;onic speeds attributed to some flying objects or greater over-all performance assuming the\nsuccessful development of some unusual propulsion device such as atomic energy engine.\n9. THAT THE Soviets have a current interest in flying-wing type aircraft is suggested by their\nutilization of Dr. Guenther Bock who, at the end of. World Wa:r IT, was in charge of the flylng­\nwlng program in Germany (See Appendix ''A\", paragraph 3, page 4 ) . Achievements satisfactory\nto the U.S.S.R. are indirectly indicated by the personal recognition he is reported to be receiving\nin the U.S.S.R. Recently 1t has been reported that the U.S.S.R. 1s planning to build a fleet of\n1,800 Horten flying-wing aircraft. Information· of low evaluation has been received stating that a\nregiment of jet night fighters, Model Horten xm, is at Kuzm1kha, an air base two mE.es south­\nwest of Irkutsk. Kuzmikha is identified as one of a number of airfields for the protection of an\natomic energy plant at Irkutsk. The Horten XIII as developed by Germany was a glider,\n10. ASSUMING THAT the objects might eventually be identified as foreign or foreign-sponsored\ndevices, the possible reason for their appearance over the U.S. requires consideration. Several\npossible explanations appear noteworthy, vi.z:\na. To negate U.S. confidence in the atom bomb as the most advanced and decisive weapon\nin warfare.\nb. To perform photographic reconnaissance missions,\nc. To test U. S. air defenses.\nd. To conduct familiarization flights over U.S. territory.\nCONCLUSIONS\n11. SINCE the Air Force is responsible for control of the air in the defense of the U.S., it is\nimperative that a.ll other agencies cooperate in confirming or denying the possibility that these\nobjects have a domestic origin. Otherwise, if it is firmly indicated that there 1s no domestic\nexplanation, the objects are a threat and warrant more active efforts of 1dent1fication and inter­\nception.\n12. rr MUST be accepted that some type of flying objects have bean observed, although their\nidentification and origin are not d1scernable. In the interest of national defense it would be\nunwise to overlook the possibility that some of these objects may be of foreign origin.\n- 2 ­\n-" }, { "n": 8, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/dow-uap-d094/p08.jpg", "text": ".iaa IEIIIE'l 0\nAPPENDIX \"A\"\nANALYSIS OF FLYING OB· CT INCIDENTS IN THE U. S.\nAND HYPOTHETICAL TACTICS EMPLOYED\n1. INTRODUCTION.\nTo formulate the possible tactics of flying objects reported over the U. S.\nassumes ?rom he outset that firm conclusions have been reached on .both the existence and origin\no! the reported flying objects. The current status of information on such incidents and over•all\nanalysis does not allow substantiation for such conclusions. However, the lack of such firm con­\nclusions points to the necessity for an immediate and sound statistical analysis of every aspect of\nthe situation and does not preclude a concurrent examination of the reported incidents to develop\nexplanations of their possible tactics. The latter will be useful at some future date should the\nexistence and origin of the flying objects be definitely established. Therefore, the following analy­\nsis of available information is advanced in order to present evidence on the actual existence of\nsome type flying object and to relate same to tactical purposes for which the objects are possibly\ndesigned. The following discussion must be considered a provisional analysis, pending a further\ndetailed analysis of all aspects of the problem.\n2. SOME ASPECTS REGARDING FLYING OB CT INCIDENTS. A cursory examination of evidence\non repo\nn\ns poss\ncertain generalities which it appears\nmay be borne out when detailed analyses have been completed.\nAmong the incidents reported there are many statements by reliable and experienced persons\nwhlch tend to confirm that flying objects have been seen. The description of such objects seems\nto fall roughly into three categories:\n(1) Silver disks or balls, approximating a Horten wing type\naircraft; (2) Balls of fire of various colors and intensities; (3) Cigar or pencil-shaped objects\nsimilar in appearance to V -2 type rockets in horizontal flight.\nThe numbers of configurations\nmight be further reduced with the following considerations in mind: Silver disks or balls have,\nfor the greater part, been observed in daylight and a number under clear weather conditions with\nvisibility unlimited. Iri most instances, balls of fire have been observed at night. Cigar, or\npencil-shaped objects have been sighted in fewer numbers but with about equal distrlbuUon 1n\ndayllght and at night. A few accounts tell of the disks having a rough cigar-shape when viewed\nwhile maneuvering. Some of the disks are described as having luminosity in daylight. It there­\nfore is possible that a single type of object may be involved in all slghtlngs, and differences ln\ndescription may result from viewing the objects at various angles and under dlffering conditions\nof visibility.\nThe above tends to indicate that some type object ha~ been seen and the possibility exists\nthat the object or objects seen are conventional domestic devices, such as weather balloons, test\nrockets, or jet-equipped aircraft with pancake or flying wing configurations.\nThe possibillty exists that the reporting of flying objects may have been influenced by earlier\nreports on similar incidents in Scandinavia and Central Europe. The publication in newspaper of\ndetails on such incidents, both foreign and domestic, may have induced eome of the description\nprovided in reported domestic incidents. However, one of the earliest reported sightings in the\nU.S. was the one observed by U.S. Weather Bureau personnel in April 1947, at Richmond, Virginia,\nand on the basis of this one report it appears that the disks are not balloons. It would seem that\nthis sighting was not influenced by the reports of foreign incidents, the newspaper accounts of\ndomestic incidents, nor by misident1.f1cation of a conventional object.\n:. 3 ­" }, { "n": 9, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/dow-uap-d094/p09.jpg", "text": "Although reported domestic incidents are widely scattered throughout the U.S., frequency of\nsighting and number of observers per sighting assumes a definable pattern. There ls a large con­\ncentration of sightings along the Eastern Seaboard; another large concentration throughout the\nWestern Coast states, and a few sightings in the Middle West. Distribution of. incidents by con-\n•\nfiguration af object and description of maneuverability is approximately equal 1n each of these\nareas and this ls belleved to further substantiate the possibility that one type of object might have\n.\nk\nbeen observed In dl:fferent aspects of flight.\n?f sightings are induced by rumor, it seems unusual that more incidents have not been reported\nfrom the areas with high concentration of population. Reports from such areas would also have\ngreater facility 1n channeling either to newspaper or official reporting agencies. For the most part,\nsightings have been made in fairly open country where there are few restrictions to visibility, which\nmay indicate that obstructed vision has reduced sightings 1n bullt-up areas.\nIt therefore seems that some type of flying object has been observed; the ldentlftcatlon of\nits origin requires the compet1on of other analyses.\n3. POSSIBLE ORlGIN OF UNUSUAL FLYING O\nCTS. Provided, upon the completion of. analyses,\nit is'ln and Dr. L. N. Cannon, Oculist. A comparison of all testimony revealed that one object\nwas sighted and that it consisted only of a small round ball of clear white light with no apparent\nshape attached.· It was about 6 to 8 inches in diamter. At times it traveled faster than the F-51\nand performed maneuvers in an evasive manner. When first sighted the ball of light was travel­\nt\ning at an estimated 250 miles per hour. Under this condition, the light was not continuous but\nblinked off and on. At high performance the white light was continuous, Subsequent investigation\neliminated the possibility that this incident may have been another aircraft or a meteorological\nballoon.\nt. On 18 November 1948 at approximately 2145 hours, three reserve pilots, 2nd Lt. Kenwood\nW. Jackson, 2nd Lt. Glen L. Stalker, and 2nd Lt. Henry G. Combs, flying near Andrews Field,\nMaryland, encountered an unidentified flying object. When first sighted, it appeared to be lighted\nand flying at about 1,700 feet. Three or four passes were made in an attempt to identify it. The\npilot of the aircraft stated that while diving his aircraft at approximately 240. miles per hour, the\nobject would climb vertically and then would drop below the aircraft from behind and continue to\ncircle.\nOn the last pass, the landing light was switched on and momentarily a dull gray glow\nfrom the object was observed. Lt. Combs stated he maintained contact for about ten minutes with\nthe object flying between the lights of Washington, D. C. and his aircraft. All that could be\nobserved was an oblong ball with one light, no wings and no exhaust flame. It finally made a\nvery tight turn and headed toward the east coast at all estimated 500 to 600 miles per hour. At\nthe same time Staff Sergeant John J. Kushner observed from the ground an unusual object in the\nair over Andrews Field. He stated that it was not very high and that it did not look like an\naircraft.\n3. REPORTS OF radar intercepts point to unusual air activity which may be related td flying\nobjects.\na. On 1 July 1947, a GCA radar at Hokkaido, Japan picked up an unidentified target at 16 miles,\nwith a speed in excess of 500 mph. This target split into two targets, each estimated to be larger\nthan a P-51.\nb. On 16 September 1947, an MEW radar at Fukuoka, Japan, picked up a target at 89 miles and\ntrailed it to 19 miles, where it faded. Speed was 840-900 mph. The speed measurement, made\nby a good crew through a 70-mlle track, is believed accurate.\n4. Investigations conducted by Headquarters, Air Materiel Command, have definitely established\nthe identification of 18 of approximately 210 so-called flying saucers which have been reported.\nApproximately nine per cent· of the total number of incidents are, therefore, eliminated from\nfurther specific consideration.\nAmong those incidents positively explained, three were hoaxes,\ntwo were from unreliable witnesses. In the remaining 13 eliminated incidents, objects were\nactually seen but investigation has shown that they were celestial bodies or phenomena, meteoro­\nlogical and carnival balloons, and airborne cosmic ray experimental equipment. The following\nexamples are presented for comparison of the information reported by witnesses and true identifi­\ncation of the object involved:\na. On 22 July 1948, Captain Henry Glover (Ordnance Reserve) and his wife observed at Van\nNuys, Calliornia, an object which they were unable to positively ldenttfy. Object at :first appeared\nto be round and looked like a weather balloon at about 2,000 feet but there was no characteristic\nbobbing. The wind was blowing on the ground but the object was quite steady. During the time\nit was under observation, about an hour, it traveled through a vertical arc of about twenty-:flve\n{250) degrees or more. The observer concluded that it was not a celestial body. It has a bluish\nluminescence and as the sun set, the object's color gradually changed to orange at dusk and ceased\nto be illuminated almost instantaneously. The outline was clear and the air was clear with\nvisibility unlimited. The object traveled from the east to the west.\nThis object was determined by investigation to have been a balloon carrying cosmic ray\n•\nequipment.\n- 15 ­" }, { "n": 21, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/dow-uap-d094/p21.jpg", "text": "I\nb. On 19 August 1848, at approximately 1060 hours an unidentified flying object was, visible\nfrom the ground at Godman Air Force Base, Kentucky.\nThis object was estimated to be at about\n30,000 to 40,000 feet altitude, spherical in shape, bright silver color and gave a bright reflection\nfrom the sun.\nAn F-61 was dispatched from standi:ford Air Force Base, Kentucky, to observe\nthe object. During observation from the ground, there was no change in the elevation of the object\nand it seemed to be moving southwest from God.man Air Force Base. The F-61 which was flying\nover Gedman AFB at an altitude of 30,000 to 35,000 feet reported that it was unable to locate the\nobject although it was still visible :from the ground with the naked eye. Azimuth and elevation\nreadings were taken by theodolite every minute and the path of the object was charted.\nThe object was determined to be the planet Venus by Mr. Moore, the head astronomer at\nthe University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky. It 1s believed that earller incidents at Gedman\nFleld (reference paragraph 2k, page 12, Appendix \"C0 ) may also have been observations of the\nplanet Venus.\n6. AMONG THOSE incidents still not positively explained, reported observations differ to some\nextent, but three general categories of sightings emerge -- the flying disk, the ball of flre and\nthe large jet rock~. Interesting observations that were noted are:\na. Most of the objects are a thin disk, round on top and flat on the bottom. The front half\nof the disk is often circular, sweeping back to a square tall across the full width.\nb. A high rate of cllmb as well as the apparent abllity to remain motionless or hover for a\nconsiderable length of time is indicated.\nc. Reported sizes have varied from that of a 25-cent piece to 260 feet ln diameter, and from\nthe size of a pursuit plane to the bulk of six B-29 airplanes.\nd. Speeds have been estimated throughout the entire range from very slow or hovering to\nsupersonic.\ne. Sounds and visual trails are not normally associated with the sightings.\n- 16 -\n~:II 111\"" }, { "n": 22, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/dow-uap-d094/p22.jpg", "text": "APPENDIX \"D\"\nFLYING WING TYPE Arn.CRAFT\n1. AERONAUTICAL ENGINEERS in several countries have been engaged for some tlme in the\ndesign, construction, and flight of flying wing type aircraft. The study of flying objects requires,\nat least, a brief examination of proposed and existing unconventional aircraft whose configurations,\nwhen seen by the uninitiated, could lead to reports of strange flying devices. A description of\nsome of. the more significant types by country follows,\n•\n2. GERMANY.\nAt the end of World War II, German aircraft designers had numerous projects\nunder way concerning tailless air.craft which conceivably could be mistaken for \"Fly~g Saucers\"\nor disc-like objects. It is not clear just what the Soviets are doing in the way of developing\nthese projects but it is considered that German studies on taflless, delta.-wlng, and related con­\nfigurations are available to the U .S.S.R.\na. ARADO NIGHT AND BAD WEATHER FIGHT\nI.\nThis is a tailless, low-wing\nmonop ane w\nswept-\ng a long, narrow fuselage.\nSpan\n80.3 feet\nLength\n42.5 feet\nPower Plant\n2 Hes 011 turbo jet units\nMax. Speed (sea level)\n441 mph\nMax. Speed (29,500 feet)\n503 mph\nb. ARADO E 581-4. A high-wing tailless single-seater with a single jet unit mounted in the\nfuselage.\nbi and ruader units are mounted on the wing midway between fuselage and wing tip\nat the trailing edge.\nSpan\n29.3 feet\nLength\n18.4 feet\nPower Plant\n1 HeS 011 turbo jet unit\nMax. Speed (sea level)\nMax. Speed (service celling)\nc. GOTHA P 60 A.\nThis was the first of the P 60 series of jet fighters. It ls a flying wing\ntype ~ot and observer 11e prone, there is no projecting canopy, thus permitting a\nparticularly clean design. The jet.units are mounted at the rear of the center sect1on1 one above\nand one below.\n•\nSpan\n40 feet 8 1/2 in.\nWing Area\n604 square feet\nPower Plant\n2 BMW 003 turbo jet units\nMax. Speed (23,000 feet)\n596 miles per hour\nd. HEINKEL P 1080. This is a single-seat fighter with a sharply swept-back wing, resembling\na flyi~having a single fin and rudder with no tail plane.\nSpan\n29.2 feet\nWing Area\n218 square feet\nNo performance estimates are available .\n•\n..,.,1111,1M.\n- 17 ­" }, { "n": 23, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/dow-uap-d094/p23.jpg", "text": "Iii IU! 1111 J ii ii IHI\ne, JUNKERS~ Of tlle flying w!ug type, this project was established a.s a long-range,\nhigh-~\nSpan\n78,8 feet\nWini A:rea\n1290 l!QUa.re feet\nPower Plallt\n4 HnS 011 turb:1 j&t imlts\nMax, SpDf,'lnes centrally loe:,ted in the w!n&'11 on each side of th\" stobby round.ed. fuaelege.\nSpan\n513 feet\nLength\n35.4 feet\nMax. Speed\n456-466 miles per hour\nPower Plant\n2 DB 603 reo!1,rocatlng engines\nI!· HORTEN WING. The closest .resemblsnce to the estl.maied con!1guratlon of \"Flying Dll'lts\"\nIs re~ Ho:rten Wini al:rcraft. Work on tJie I{orten 229, a tw!n jet flgbtel', had pro.\ni,'ressed to the final 11t11.ge11 at the end of World War II.\n!ts prototyps, a Horten illder, succeslil-\n•\n!{ully soared to an) altitode of H,200 feet as early as 11138, provlni,' tlla 1>0!11'.ldnoss ot this delillgn.\nFlge, 1, 2 and 3\n•\nFig. 1\nIIIFllllllliL" }, { "n": 24, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/dow-uap-d094/p24.jpg", "text": "•\n•" }, { "n": 25, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/dow-uap-d094/p25.jpg", "text": "•" }, { "n": 26, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/dow-uap-d094/p26.jpg", "text": "~\nII Pl I Ii NJIAli\n3. GREA'I' BRITAill.\na,\nG WHI'I'WORTH. The AW 52 G, t1 g.lldar, and the AW 68, a twl!i-jat air,\nplane, are B\nllircra:!t. The vertical sta.bll!zere are located at the tips\nof the swept-back wing.\n(Figa. n the AW 52 appear bolow.\nSpiln\n00 feet\nLai:,gth\n37 feet\nMro,:, Speed (sea level)\n435 knots\nMro,:. Speed {20,000 !eat)\n435 knots\nMu. Bp. ALTHOUGH APPENDIX \"D\" is not Intended to