Thursday, January 26, 2012

UFO Buzzes ICBM Launch Capsule at Minot AFB:

The Commander’s Control Panel “Lit Up”
Indicating Missiles Away!

UFO Buzzes ICBM Launch Capsule at Minot AFB

Bookmark and Share

Robert Hastings By Robert Hastings
© 1-24-12
     I have spent 39 years investigating the UFO-Nukes Connection. During that period, a number of former or retired U.S. Air Force officers have confirmed their involvement in incidents where UFOs had hovered over their Minuteman missile launch control facilities, sometimes shutting down or even temporarily activating the missiles. A few of those individuals participated in my September 27, 2010 press conference in Washington D.C., which CNN streamed live. The full-length video of that event may be viewed below:

In 2005, I posted a series of messages on the Yahoo missile_talk group’s bulletin board, summarizing my research. My hope was that some of the group’s members, largely made up of U.S. Air Force missileers, would be encouraged to come forth and discuss their own experiences. A few of them, including Larry Manross, did just that. He wrote, in two emails combined here:
Robert, you are right on. As a launch crew commander at Minot AFB from 1966-1970, I will tell you that there were UFO incidents. In one [during which I was present] the security team upstairs went into a defensive posture with lights turned out. They had called in a UFO sighting to the base and radar was tracking it. All of a sudden it buzzed the launch control center and that was when they cut the lights and took a defensive position.

The details are fairly slim on the incident [but it occurred sometime during] 1967 or ’68. It was treated by the Air Force as a non-incident. In other words, no report was asked for from the missile crew. I am not certain if the security team made a report, but the whole thing made you feel somewhat uneasy.

At the time, I was a 1st Lieutenant and was the junior officer in the capsule. The security team kept us informed of their concerns. Especially the buzzing of the launch control center. Sitting downstairs you obviously didn’t see a thing. I wish I had been upstairs when the incident took place, but as you know the launch crews were down in the capsules for 24 hour uninterrupted stretches. But base ops did confirm that they were tracking an unidentified object on radar.

I later asked Manross to elaborate on these statements. He responded:
I was in the 742nd [Strategic Missile Squadron]. The capsules we manned were Kilo, Lima, Mike, November, and Oscar. I was primarily assigned to Kilo or Lima. I do not remember the name of the senior officer during that [alert] assignment; he was not the usual commander I was assigned with. He was several years older than I and was a career officer, I believe. I was never assigned with him again and don't remember much about him. He may have been in a different squadron. Sometimes they mixed and matched us when they were having scheduling problems. The commanders I worked with while the junior officer were Capt. John Deresky and later Capt. Charles Brickley. Neither of them was with me that night.

The year was ’67 or ’68, before I moved up to the commander role. I was attempting to sleep while the commander was dealing with security upstairs and the base headquarters regarding some unidentified [flying] object. It was when his board lit-up like a Christmas tree for a moment that he got scared and asked for back-up. The lit-up board signals that the missiles have launched. It was a false signal but correlated with the incident taking place upstairs. It all happened quite fast. Then things returned to normal.

[Anyway,] that was when I became engaged. The commander was rattled and so was the security team upstairs. They reported that something had buzzed the LCF and that they had gone into a defensive posture, turning out the lights and drawing their weapons. They indicated it was very bright and traveling at a high rate of speed. They did not describe any shape, etc., other than it was bright. [Then] base headquarters reported that the unidentified object was no longer on radar and that was the last we heard of it.

There was no debriefing—nada. Just another day pulling an alert at Minot. I do remember the senior officer saying something about how I should not talk about the incident without getting authorization. [In spite of that,] all the officers talked about UFOs and what was going on. As you can imagine, there was quite a range of opinions. The common assumption among many [launch officers] was that the objects were somehow drawing power from the missile warheads.

The stories [we subsequently heard] were rampant. [One] concerned a security team stationed at one of the missile launchers because the radar surveillance was out. If the surveillance went down they always stationed a team on the site 24/7. As the story goes, there was an object that scared them to death, as it hovered over the launch pad. They discharged their weapons and claim they heard plinks as the bullets hit the object. As you know, discharging a weapon in the military is considered serious and requires reports, etc. Every security team I worked with said it was a true story and had taken place at Minot AFB. They even named the missile launcher where it took place and those who took part in it.

The number of UFO incidents at the time, during 1966-’70, were so frequent that in the summer the security team sometimes would put chairs in front of the building, or on the roof of the building, to watch for UFOs. Can you believe it?
Regarding this last statement, I told Manross that I had heard nearly identical stories from other former or retired USAF personnel who had been stationed at Ellsworth, F.E. Warren, and Malmstrom AFBs during that era. This particular side show is almost humorous: Nuclear missile security guards sitting outside Minuteman Launch Control Facilities at night looking for UFOs because the objects appeared above the missile field so frequently! If only the American media had been given that story at the time. But, of course, like everything else relating to these classified incidents, almost no information leaked out to the press or public.

Another former launch officer at Minot in the late 1960s, David Schuur, has independently told me of an incident involving a UFO actually activating nuclear missiles. His account is even more dramatic than the one provided by Larry Manross.

As is my custom, I have secured Manross’ and Schuur’s DD214 files, which confirm their presence at Minot AFB in the mid-to-late 1960s, as well as their roles as Minuteman launch officers in the squadrons they’ve indicated.

Now that this article has been posted, UFO debunker James Carlson will, predictably, post his usual nonsense about my being a liar and a fraud and how Manross’ and Schuur’s testimony is worthless.


To learn more about Carlson’s many falsehoods and delusions, please see my last article at The UFO Chronicles.


  1. Robert,

    I've been corresponding with a Minot missile combat crew commander, who happened to be on station during a portion of Mr. Manross' tour. This individual has a different take on the Minot "events." That will be posted in a future blog post.

    Thanks your response concerning Walter Figel's lack of affidavit and participation at the press conference. As far as labeling me as a "debunker"...whatever.

    It's been approximately five months since I posted "Case Closed! A Re-evaluation of the Echo Flight Incident" and wondered if you had any thoughts concerning the points that I had raised?

    Thanks Frank for relaying this for me.

  2. Anonymous5:20 PM

    Why should I, Tim? It would be a waste of my time. You are incapable of objectively evaluating the data you are presented with. For example, your starting position is that I am "using my ex-military sources to make money" when, in reality, they are my most ardent supporters. Did you see me holding a gun to the heads of the guys who participated in my press conference?!

    Your input and, ahem, "insights" just go downhill from there. I will respond on a case-by-case basis to your posts, when it suits me and I am in the mood.

  3. Good Day Tim,

    As you know, you took the time to send in another commentary and or retort to Robert's comments above–thank you. This was done on the 25th; I became aware of it on the "26th."

    In reading the comment, I felt it was written in the ad hominem rather then the issues; admittedly, same can be said for Robert's comments (above) for that matter.

    I mulled over the idea of publishing the comment, and during the interim I sent you an e-mail (on the 26th), although I wasn't sure I had the right address; hence I then left a comment at your web-site, allowing it to send the alert to you, basically just asking you to drop me a line, and then I deleted it.

    To date, I haven't heard a word.

    I wanted to discuss your commentary, and share my thoughts privately, and see if I could persuade you to rewrite it. In short, what I could see happening (by publishing it) is a "less then pleasant contestation" or back and forth between you and Robert, which I would prefer to avoid as you know.

    If the "issues" can't be discussed, using proper decorum, then I would prefer not to go down that path, which is why I opted not to post your comment.

    I see that you have posted it (your comment) at your site, and for those who are curious it may be read there:

    Finally, the arguments regarding The Echo Flight Incident have been going on for years, and I would urge the reader to do their own homework and analyze the evidence in toto (and leave the personalities out of it) in order to come to your own conclusions.


  4. Anonymous2:06 PM

    In my profession of archeology, often the number of artifacts recovered at a good paleo site makes a shoe box look empty. So it is with the facts that are available in regards to any given UFO incident. By the very nature of UFO occurrences, artifacts are nearly nonexistent. Eyewitness testimonies, no matter how credible the individuals may be, never fully convince those who review the account. Even the most receptive person that studies any UFO account suffers thoughts of doubt.

    So, when a honest or conspiratorial agent of the press denigrates any given UFO encounter a reader's natural doubts come to the forefront which easily causes a overall dismissal of the account.

    People in control stay in control by controlling all information and the possible presence of possible alien technology would be viciously coveted and concealed. So don't expect any revelations of UFOs anytime soon.

    In my humble opinion UFOs exist. Who owns the technology? It's anyone's guess. However, if I may take a stab at it, I venture to say the technology demonstrated by the UFO accounts is terrestrial. Several decades ago I asked my father-in-law, then president of Lockheed, who will develop the first anti-gravity aircraft. Up until that time we would briefly discuss scientific break throughs. The very moment after I asked that question technology discussions ceased completely. Good day...

  5. Good Day CY,

    Thank you for taking time to make comment.

    I think it important to clarify however, that the term, "UFO" does not equal "alien craft." The reality or existence of UFOs was established a long time ago, and the very acronym was borne by the Air Force (officially in 1952).

    Within the pages of UFO reports there exists sightings of seemingly unconventional nuts 'n' bolts craft; what's in question is who's piloting and or what is the origin of the strange craft.


  6. Tim,

    Just a note to acknowledge receipt of your comment, and per your request I won't post it (in toto).

    However, to answer a few things you wrote:

    " . . . I did check my e-mail, thinking the same, but there was no e-mail from you listed. It's possible that it was received in my wife's account . . .."

    I'm thinking it was your wife's account, but do please drop me a line so I have the proper e-mail address. My e-mail address is listed under "Publisher" at the bottom of the left side-bar.

    As the "etiquette notation" states above, your comments are welcomed; however, as you know emotions often run high with The Echo Flight Incident, and I don't want this platform to be used a "verbal sparring ground." I say this generally, and am not directing my comment to any one person.



Dear Contributor,

Your comments are greatly appreciated, and coveted; however, blatant mis-use of this site's bandwidth will not be tolerated (e.g., SPAM etc).

Additionally, healthy debate is invited; however, ad hominem and or vitriolic attacks will not be published, nor will "anonymous" criticisms. Please keep your arguments "to the issues" and present them with civility and proper decorum. -FW


Mutual UFO Network Logo