The 1976 Iran F4 UAP/UFO case

[Itsme]

The article mentions the idea that Yousafi may have been looking at Jupiter, that IIAF F4s rarely flew at night and that at the time of this article, no one is really sure where the plane went:

It seems that Klass started his debunking right after this case went public. I think he is the source of this. He's got nothing to back it up.

- No one is really sure where the planes went but the may have been looking at Jupiter..?
Jupiter was in the East, the first jet was sent to the North and lost all communications on approach, got it back again on retreat. The second jet had a radar lock-on:

- The claim that IIAF F4s rarely flew at night is based on hearsay from some technicians. I guess there were no nighttime exercises above Tehran, but the same is true for any large city.

 

[Duke]

It seems that Klass started his debunking right after this case went public. I think he is the source of this. He's got nothing to back it up.

I think Klass is probably also responsible for all the blather/confusion about the beacons. In this excerpt from his book as posted in #37 above, he claims Col Mooy told him ELTs are "ejected" automatically from crashing aircraft. Since this is not correct, I suspect Klass misunderstood and/or mixed a couple scenarios as related to him by Col Mooy.

Aircraft mounted ELTs are not ejected. They are placed in the aft most available space within an aircraft, usually in the tail, and are activated by a g switch from deceleration forces sustained in a mishap. They stay with the airframe unless thrown clear at impact.

Ejection seats carry a small ELT (called "personal locator beacons" or PLBs in this application) in their survival kits that automatically activates (unless manually turned off prior to ejection) at seat/man separation in the ejection process. The PLB stays with the ejected kit/crewman and will broadcast until it's turned off or the battery dies. C-141s were not equipped with ejection seats, however. Large cargo aircraft will carry PLBs within their survival gear/life rafts, but they are not ejected in flight or even accessible on the ground/water unless the gear/rafts are deployed post mishap.

I suspect Col Mooy explained all this to Klass, but Klass kluged the two separate scenarios into a single story. And in fairness to Klass, there is also the possibility Col Mooy may have not understood any of this himself and explained things exactly as Klass reported. After reading his obituary, it's pretty clear Col Mooy was not rated.

https://www.tributearchive.com/obituaries/21389901/Olin-Mooy

- The claim that IIAF F4s rarely flew at night is based on hearsay from some technicians. I guess there were no nighttime exercises above Tehran, but the same is true for any large city.

Having worked for 30+ years with both USAF maintainers and aircrew who served in that part of the world, I can say such stories about ineptitude and indifferance by those militaries are very common among our folks. So as not to offend anyone from those countries, I'll refrain from specific examples.

 

[Eburacum]

- No one is really sure where the planes went but the may have been looking at Jupiter..?
Jupiter was in the East, the first jet was sent to the North and lost all communications on approach, got it back again on retreat.

Bear in mind that the planes took off from Shahroki Air Base, which is now known as Hamadan Air Base; Hamadan air base is slightly south of west of Tehran, so for much of their flight the two planes would have been flying east. They would have been flying towards Jupiter, but also towards the bright star Capella and the thin, waning, recumbent crescent of the Moon.

 

[Eburacum]

- The claim that IIAF F4s rarely flew at night is based on hearsay from some technicians. I guess there were no nighttime exercises above Tehran, but the same is true for any large city.

Maccabee actually seems to have interviewed one of these technicians himself. The individual called 'Henry' in his account claimed that he lived close to the base, and would have been woken up by aircraft taking off at night.

When I talked to Henry in late 1982 he still remembered the night, 6 years before, when he was rudely awakened by the loud roar of jets taking off at full speed. At that time he lived close to the Shahroki Air Field in Hamadan, Iran. Jets taking off at full speed at night and "with afterburner" were a rarity, he said. Henry was an employee of the Westinghouse Corp. and he was in Iran to help maintain the avionics, including radar, in the F-4 Phantom jets that the Iranians had bought several years earlier.

Perhaps the night planes routinely took off with no afterburner, but this is a first hand (albeit anonymous) account.

 

[Eburacum]

Also from Maccabee's report is this map, showing the location of Shahroki base, the location of Pirouzi in Tehran, the location to which the planes were supposedly directed, and the direction of the Afghan border.

Although some accounts suggest the planes flew onwards towards Afghanistan, they may not have gone very far in that direction. The first plane in particular turned back quite quickly.

 

[NorCal Dave]

It seems that Klass started his debunking right after this case went public. I think he is the source of this. He's got nothing to back it up.

- No one is really sure where the planes went but the may have been looking at Jupiter..?
Jupiter was in the East, the first jet was sent to the North and lost all communications on approach, got it back again on retreat. The second jet had a radar lock-on:

I found it in the Omni article. While Klass was quoted towards the end of the article, he makes no mention of Yousafi or Jupiter as he was still looking into the case:

His book with his debunk didn't come out until 1983. I suppose he could have mentioned it to the writer of the article who then included it without saying it was from Klass. Or it could be, that looking at @Eburacum 's map as well as Maccabee's map, it seems the planes would be traveling East and North. Certianly not due North from Shahakori:

Flying due North would have put the jet near the Caspian Sea. The Afghan boarder is almost due East of Shahakori/Hamadan:

To get to the North East of Tehran from Hamedan/Shaharoki the plane has to go mostly East or North East.

Priouzi claims the calls were coming from the North East of the city, but he doesn't say where he looked in interview 1:

The second interview he says it was 5 miles from him to the North East of Tehran:

So here? EDIT: No not here, I read this map wrong, the location is too far away. New map below.

EDIT: Here is Tehran with Mehrabad Airport at 0 miles. 5 miles from there to the North East seems to be over the city:

But can he see a 7-8m (22'-26') object 5 miles away and 6000' in the air? I guess he's using binoculars, but he does mention seeing it with the naked eye.

None of the accounts say where Yousafi was or where he looked, just that he went out on his porch. If Priouzi is telling him to look to the North East of the city, he certainly could have looked East as part of scanning the sky. Or he simple walked out and saw Jupiter and looked at it.

I'll study the map and the claims about where the plane(s) went some more in a bit.

 

[NorCal Dave]

- No one is really sure where the planes went but the may have been looking at Jupiter..?
Jupiter was in the East, the first jet was sent to the North and lost all communications on approach, got it back again on retreat.

Let's just start with the first intercept. According to Cooy's summery of a debrief he attended (bold by me):

AT 01:30 HRS ON THE 19TH THE F-4 TOOK OFF AND PROCEEDED TO A POINT ABOUT 40 NM SOUTH OF TEHRAN. DUE TO ITS BRILLIANCE THE OBJECT WAS EASILY VISIBLE FROM 70 MILES AWAY.

So, from roughly the center of Tehran that would be about here, near Charmshahr correct?

So on a bigger map the flight would have looked something like this:

Almost exactly due East. And:

Jupiter was in the East,

Indeed. Cooy continues:

AS THE F-4 APPROACHED A RANGE OF 25 NM HE LOST ALL INSTRUMENTATION AND COMMUNICATIONS (UHF AND INTERCOM). HE BROKE OFF THE INTERCEPT AND HEADED BACK TO SHAHROKHI. WHEN THE F-4 TURNED AWAY FROM THE OBJECT AND APPARENTLY WAS NO LONGER A THREAT TO IT THE AIRCRAFT REGAINED ALL INSTRUMENTATION AND COMMUNICATIONS.

So, the UFO is somewhere here?

Then, after losing coms he turns and heads back. So, a flight path something like this:

There is nothing North about any of this. But, let's contrast this version with Priouzi's 2 versions. I'll list the version of the story from the Freelancer first and the version from John Checkley second. both are based on interviews with Priouzi:

Note the object has gone from 6000' when Priouzi first saw it to 12,000' in the first interview and then up to 15000' in the second interview. Now our flight looks something like this:

Still pretty Easterly. Then the pilot is vectored:

Something like this?

Then as the plane gets close it has electrical issues:

Or maybe not yet, according to the second interview the pilot was chasing it now at Mach 2:

In both versions the jet ends up near the Afghan boarder:

So, something like this?

Again due East.

Then he is ordered to shoot it down over the neighborhood of Rey in the first version but no mention of this is in the second version:

In the second version, the element of the emergency transponders is added again:

In both versions the second intercept arrives as the first heads home. I'll look at that one tomorrow.

 

[deirdre]

near Charmshahr correct?

NM probably means nautical miles.

so when he changes his story from 25nm from the ufo to 15 miles from the ufo..that's like half. Priouzi's story[ies] sounds all messed up.

 

[Itsme]

Let's just start with the first intercept. According to Cooy's summery of a debrief he attended (bold by me):

AT 01:30 HRS ON THE 19TH THE F-4 TOOK OFF AND PROCEEDED TO A POINT ABOUT 40 NM SOUTH OF TEHRAN. DUE TO ITS BRILLIANCE THE OBJECT WAS EASILY VISIBLE FROM 70 MILES AWAY.

South?? It appears there's an error in the transcript I posted ...

Mooy's (not Cooy's) memo says North:

I'll try and see if I can correct that (hopefully I can still edit my first post).

 

[Itsme]

It seems I can't - maybe the mods can do something about it? Because it's a pretty annoying error.

To me the chase is a bit like this (I'm in a hurry, so if requested I can provide backup materials later though they all have been posted earlier):
Pirouzi gets four calls from citizens living in the northeast of Tehran (source: Pratt file - calls also mentioned in Mooy's memo).
He get on the roof and with his binoculars sees a strange object to the northeast (source: Pratt file).
The object moves and jumps around a bit (source: Pratt file). Presumably it ends up a bit further north (my speculation).
Jets are vectored to a point 40 nm north of Tehran (source: Mooy's memo).

The second jet has the object on the nose, but then it starts making sudden 10 degree jumps to the right, until the jet has made a 70 degree turn. Below of the transcript of the relevant part of the video in post #8, it's the second pilot (Jafari) speaking (the same story is in Pratt's file, told by Pirouzi):

however after a few minutes when I was
3:10
looking straight ahead and going to
3:14
it toward it, it all of a sudden jumped out
3:19
about ten degrees to the right which I
3:23
couldn't imagine how fast it was and I'm
3:27
now thinking the acceleration of the
3:31
movement and also the G was taking of
3:39
that movement however each time I was
3:44
pointing the nose of the aircraft toward
3:47
this thing after a while it would jump another
3:52
ten degrees to my right until about
3:56
seventy degrees 10 he had little by
4:01
little turned to have it on the nose and

I think this was the moment they were heading in the direction of the Afghan border.

In Pratt's file, the question about heading to the Afghan border is asked in the interview with General Azarbarzin:

 

[Eburacum]

Note the object has gone from 6000' when Priouzi first saw it to 12,000' in the first interview and then up to 15000' in the second interview

There may be some basis in astronomy for this observation. The ecliptic was quite steeply inclined as seen from Tehran on this night, so Jupiter, the Moon and any bright stars such as Capella near the ecliptic would have been rising quite rapidly in altitude angle during the night. This would make them appear to be higher up the sky dome over time, so perhaps later observations would make them seem higher from the ground.

One thing occurs to me; civilian airports are generally quite brightly lit, so maybe Pirouzi's binocular observations may have been hindered somewhat by this. Certainly if I wanted to observe Jupiter and its moons, I'd go somewhere darker than an airport.

 

[JMartJr]

The ecliptic was quite steeply inclined as seen from Tehran on this night, so Jupiter, the Moon and any bright stars such as Capella near the ecliptic would have been rising quite rapidly in altitude angle during the night. This would make them appear to be higher up the sky dome over time, so perhaps later observations would make them seem higher from the ground.

Also, if you are in a plane trying to close on Jupiter by ascending towards it, it will of course stay "higher" than your plane no matter how high you climb. If you had misinterpretted Jupiter as an object flying around in your airspace, this could easily be mistaken for "when I fly up towards it, it just climbs higher."

 

[deirdre]

It seems I can't - maybe the mods can do something about it? Because it's a pretty annoying error.

they are most likely not paying attention, so you'd need to private message or tag them..ill do it here with a tag in public so you can see how to ask without making them read a whole thread to figure out what you are talking about.



@flarkey @Landru can you change the word "South" here (the OP) to "North"? He transcribed wrong. thanks
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/the-1976-iran-f4-uap-ufo-case.12965/

 

[flarkey]

they are most likely not paying attention, so you'd need to private message or tag them..ill do it here with a tag in public so you can see how to ask without making them read a whole thread to figure out what you are talking about.



@flarkey @Landru can you change the word "South" here (the OP) to "North"? He transcribed wrong. thanks
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/the-1976-iran-f4-uap-ufo-case.12965/

View attachment 59447

Checked the source:

And edited the OP.

 

[NorCal Dave]

South?? It appears there's an error in the transcript I posted ...

OK, got it. I'll rework my maps. Mooy says:

We have Pirouzi supposedly claiming (as noted in previous posts, there are no records, recordings or transcripts of interviews with Priouzi. All of his quotes are from a number of rather sensationalized unpublished National Inquirer stories in the Pratt file):

And:

So, he first sees the object here:

I can only put one measurement at a time on Google maps it would seem. Starting at the airport, Mooy's 40 NM is 46 ground miles and 46 miles North of Tehran would be here near the town of Manjir. Obviously if the 40 NM is from the city limits it would be even further out:

Priouzi is supposed to be looking North East, so maybe here towards the town of Kalaa:

And if he's looking further East, 46miles would be between Polor and Ask, or thereabouts:

So, the first intercept could have been sent anywhere on this arch more or less:

Kalaa is in the middle and is to the North East so let's use that. Bear in mind that in the Checkely article Priouzi says after seeing the object 5 miles from his tower it moves north a few miles further:

So, why if the craft is a 5-10 miles from the tower and over the Tehran, did they scramble a jet to an area 46 miles from town?

If we go with Mooy's assertions that the first jet went out to the 46 mile point and then after having comm trouble returned to base, we have something like this:

This also contradicts both versions of Priouzi's claims that the jet arrived over the Tehran, not 46 miles away:

I suppose we could try to merge the various versions. As noted in the previous thread, the Freelancer version of the story has Pirouzi vectoring the jet to "10:00":

The problem is we have no idea who's 10:00 or what Pirouzi or the pilots 12:00 was, so which direction is 10:00? IF Pirouzi is looking northeast as the jet gets to Tehran and Mooy has the jet ending up 46 miles to the northeast, then one could speculate that the pilots 10:00 was to the northeast. That would mean he could have approached Tehran heading due east, then was vectored to his 10:00 to the northeast.

He ended up ~46 miles out of town, then depending on the version of the story:

Mooy: the pilot gets to ~25nm of the UFO and experiences electrical failures and returns to base.

Freelancers' version of Priouzi interview: The pilot closes to ~15 miles of the UFO and then has electrical failures, but then the failures are corrected and he starts a Mach 2 chase heading due east to the Afghan boarder. Unable to chatch it, he returns to Tehran where the UFO has now reappeared and he is ordered to shoot it down over the city, his electronics again fail when he attempts this, and low on fuel he returns to base.

Checkely's version of Priouzi interview: The pilot chases the UFO at Mach 2 towards the Afghan border then returns to Tehran where the UFO has reappered and has multiple electronic failures when close to the UFO. I'll note at this point Priouzi has the UFO at 20 miles from his tower, so not that far from where it started.

Maybe something like this then:

He left Hamadan and came into Tehran from the west heading due east. He is vectored to the northeast, then at some point heads due east towards the Afghan border. He then gives up the chase and returns to Tehran were he encounters it again and may or may not have ordered to shoot it down. He has 1 or multiple electronics issues somewhere along this route and running low of fuel, returns to base.

I think it's safe to say, no one really seems to know where the first jet actually went. The only agreement is that it left Hamadan and went near Tehran before returning to base. But, regardless, these various possible flight plans all involve a lot of flying from west to east. Saying that Jupiter is in the east and the jet was flying north and could not have seen it doesn't seem to work out.

Are any of them seeing Jupiter? I don't know. We don't know where Yousefi looked and we're not sure where Priouzi was looking. The pilot chasing an object at Mach 2 and yet never catching up sounds a lot like other cases where a pilot was chasing celestial objects.

Of course, General Azarbarzin told reporter Cathcart that the jets never went near Afghanistan and that in fact the chase was in the west:

So, who do we believe?

 

[Itsme]

Based on my post above, this would roughly be Jafari's trajectory:

First heading to a point 40 NM north of Tehran, then a 70 degree turn to keep the object, which kept jumping to the right, 'on the nose', then a retreat back to the west.

Note that Jafari says he was in the air for one hour and twenty minutes (at the end of the video in post #8), so there probably was a lot more movement.

Also note that three eye witnesses reported the object itself was moving (a telephone witness, Pirouzi, and Jafari). The ability of the object to move was confirmed by Jafari's radar, which got a lock-on and reported a closure speed of 150 knots, which indicates movement as well (the object was able to stay ahead of the jet, save a speed difference of 150 knots).

 

[Itsme]

they are most likely not paying attention, so you'd need to private message or tag them..ill do it here with a tag in public so you can see how to ask without making them read a whole thread to figure out what you are talking about.

Thanks for your help!

 

[Itsme]

So, why if the craft is a 5-10 miles from the tower and over the Tehran, did they scramble a jet to an area 46 miles from town?

Because the object was able to move, even jump from one location to another. It took some time before the jets ultimately arrived and the object could have moved a great deal in that time. Why assume it was static if three witnesses reported it to move and a radar confirmed this? (see my previous post).

If we go with Mooy's assertions that the first jet went out to the 46 mile point and then after having comm trouble returned to base, we have something like this:

I disagree, Mooy's memo states 40 NM to the North, not to the northeast.

This also contradicts both versions of Priouzi's claims that the jet arrived over the Tehran, not 46 miles away:

Yes, your trajectory does because it's probably wrong. It's perfectly possible that a jet flying from Hamedan to 40 NM north of Tehran passes over the west of Tehran (see picture in my previous post). Jet trajectories have to comply with flight corridors which do not always follow a straight line from A to B.

The problem is we have no idea who's 10:00 or what Pirouzi or the pilots 12:00 was, so which direction is 10:00?

There is no way of knowing so I would disregard this piece of information since the general trajectory can already be derived from the rest of the information at hand.

But, regardless, these various possible flight plans all involve a lot of flying from west to east. Saying that Jupiter is in the east and the jet was flying north and could not have seen it doesn't seem to work out.

Yes it does seem to work out, by simply using the information at hand unmodified from Mooy's memo and Jafari's interview (see my previous post). No reporters or speculations in between are required.

 

[NorCal Dave]

Based on my post above, this would roughly be Jafari's trajectory:

Maybe, but we're talking past each other. I haven't mentioned Jafari's flight at all. I'm starting with the first flight. The first F4 that was scrambled. All of the descriptions I posted from the Pratt file and Mooy were talking about the first F4 sent to investigate. It's the first F4 that Priouzi twice claims had a Mach 2 chase to Afghanistan.

I don't know what Jafari's trajectory was, as I haven't gotten to it yet.

EDIT: Given what @Eburacum posted below I may be as confused as everybody else on who is in what jet. I thought Jafari's story jived more with Priouzis account of the second intercept, the second F4 scrambled and not the first one to arrive on sceane. But there seems to be no agreement on who is in which plane, so I'm not sure.

Yes it does seem to work out, by simply using the information at hand unmodified from Mooy's memo and Jafari's interview (see my previous post). No reporters or speculations in between are required.

I'm using your Mooy transcript from the OP as it seems correct and is just much easier to read (bold by me):

AT 01:30 HRS ON THE 19TH THE F-4 TOOK OFF AND PROCEEDED TO A POINT ABOUT 40 NM SOUTH NORTH (admin edit) OF TEHRAN

. DUE TO ITS BRILLIANCE THE OBJECT WAS EASILY VISIBLE FROM 70 MILES AWAY.
AS THE F-4 APPROACHED A RANGE OF 25 NM HE LOST ALL INSTRUMENTATION AND COMMUNICATIONS (UHF AND INTERCOM). HE BROKE OFF THE INTERCEPT AND HEADED BACK TO SHAHROKHI. WHEN THE F-4 TURNED AWAY FROM THE OBJECT AND APPARENTLY WAS NO LONGER A THREAT TO IT THE AIRCRAFT REGAINED ALL INSTRUMENTATION AND COMMUNICATIONS.

AT 01:40 HRS A SECOND F-4 WAS LAUNCHED. THE BACKSEATER ACQUIRED A RADAR LOCK ON AT 27 NM, 12 O'CLOCK HIGH POSITION WITH THE VD (RATE OF CLOSURE) AT 150 NMPH. AS THE RANGE DECREASED TO 25 NM THE OBJECT MOVED AWAY AT A SPEED THAT WAS VISIBLE ON THE RADAR SCOPE AND STAYED AT 25 NM.

The first F4 heads to a point 40 NM (46 miles) North of Tehran. The second F4, that's Jafari, is scrambled 10 minutes later and there is no mention of where it was sent. I guess we can assume it went to the same place, but if the UFO is moving and jumping and teleporting about the place, we don't know.

If we go solely with Mooy, then the first flight may look like this:

If we use Mooy for the second flight (bold by me):

AT 01:40 HRS A SECOND F-4 WAS LAUNCHED.

THE BACKSEATER ACQUIRED A RADAR LOCK ON AT 27 NM, 12 O'CLOCK HIGH POSITION WITH THE VD (RATE OF CLOSURE) AT 150 NMPH. AS THE RANGE DECREASED TO 25 NM THE OBJECT MOVED AWAY AT A SPEED THAT WAS VISIBLE ON THE RADAR SCOPE AND STAYED AT 25 NM.

THE SIZE OF THE RADAR RETURN WAS COMPARABLE TO THAT OF A 707 TANKER. THE VISUAL SIZE OF THE OBJECT WAS DIFFICULT TO DISCERN BECAUSE OF ITS INTENSE BRILLIANCE. THE LIGHT THAT IT GAVE OFF WAS THAT OF FLASHING STROBE LIGHTS ARRANGED IN A RECTANGULAR PATTERN AND ALTERNATING BLUE, GREEN, RED, AND ORANGE IN COLOR. THE SEQUENCE OF THE LIGHTS WAS SO FAST THAT ALL THE COLORS COULD BE SEEN AT ONCE.

THE OBJECT AND THE PURSUING F-4 CONTINUED ON A COURSE TO THE SOUTH OF TEHRAN WHEN ANOTHER BRIGHTLY LIGHTED OBJECT, ESTIMATED TO BE ONE HALF TO ONE THIRD THE APPARENT SIZE OF THE MOON, CAME OUT OF THE ORIGINAL OBJECT. THIS SECOND OBJECT HEADED STRAIGHT TOWARD THE F-4 AT A VERY FAST RATE OF SPEED. THE PILOT ATTEMPTED TO FIRE AN AIM-9 MISSILE AT THE OBJECT BUT AT THAT INSTANT HIS WEAPONS CONTROL PANEL WENT OFF AND HE LOST ALL COMMUNICATIONS (UHF AND INTERPHONE). AT THIS POINT THE PILOT INITIATED A TURN AND NEGATIVE G DIVE TO GET AWAY. AS HE TURNED THE OBJECT FELL IN TRAIL AT WHAT APPEARED TO BE ABOUT 3-4 NM. AS HE CONTINUED IN HIS TURN AWAY FROM THE PRIMARY OBJECT THE SECOND OBJECT WENT TO THE INSIDE OF HIS TURN THEN RETURNED TO THE PRIMARY OBJECT FOR A PERFECT REJOIN.

SHORTLY AFTER THE SECOND OBJECT JOINED UP WITH THE PRIMARY OBJECT ANOTHER OBJECT APPEARED TO COME OUT OF THE OTHER SIDE OF THE PRIMARY OBJECT GOING STRAIGHT DOWN, AT A GREAT RATE OF SPEED. THE F-4 CREW HAD REGAINED COMMUNICATIONS AND THE WEAPONS CONTROL PANEL AND WATCHED THE OBJECT APPROACH THE GROUND ANTICIPATING A LARGE EXPLOSION. THE OBJECT APPEARED TO COME TO REST GENTLY ON THE EARTH AND CAST A VERY BRIGHT LIGHT OVER AN AREA OF ABOUT 2-3 KILOMETERS.

THE CREW DESCENDED FROM THEIR ALTITUDE OF 25M TO 15M AND CONTINUED TO OBSERVE AND MARK THE OBJECT'S POSITION. THEY HAD SOME DIFFICULTY IN ADJUSTING THEIR NIGHT VISIBILITY FOR LANDING SO AFTER ORBITING MEHRABAD A FEW TIMES THEY WENT OUT FOR A STRAIGHT IN LANDING. THERE WAS A LOT OF INTERFERENCE ON THE UHF AND EACH TIME THEY PASSED THROUGH A MAG BEARING OF 150 DEGREES FROM FHRARAD THEY LOST THEIR COMMUNICATIONS (UHF AND INTERPHONE) AND THE INS FLUCTUATED FROM 30 DEGREES - 50 DEGREES.

Then our second flight could look something like this:

These have nothing to do with what Priouzi says. Depending on what version of his story we use he has the first flight, not Jafari, coming to Tehran, then being vectored somewhere before it ends up heading to Afghanistan at Mach 2, then returns to Tehran and maybe tries to shoot the UFO down. This all happens before Jafari ever shows up. At least according to the Pratt file.

I think one of the real problems here is the Pratt file and way too much of this story is based on it. It's just a collection of dramatic and hyperbolic National Inquire articles, much of which contradicts Mooy. For example. Mooy has the second F4, Jarari, attempting to shoot down the UFO, while the Freelancer version of Pirouzi's story has the first flight trying to shoot it down and the Checkley version of Pirouzi's story has no one trying to shoot it down.

The only transcript looking thing in the Pratt file is a possible interview with General Azarbarzin, who contradicts both versions of Pirouzi by saying no flight went near Afghanistan and somewhat contradicts Mooy by saying the chase was in the west not the south:

I think the Pratt file is rubbish, and little can be gleaned from it, including things like what people on the phone supposedly said. As noted, it's largely 2 over dramatized stories for the National Inquirer based entirely on a single witness, Priouzi.

Even the Mooy memo is just his retelling of a briefing he attended. There is some audio recordings from the YouTube video but what's presented is consistent with a pilot confused by something in the sky. There is an interview with Jafari, but that's from years later.

 

[Eburacum]

Concerning the crew in the first airplane, here is a short list of all the crews said to have been involved in this incident. I note that the details change over time, but later accounts seem to converge on a fairly consistent roster.
This is quoted from a post I made about this event in 2011 on a different forum, so some of the sources may no longer be available.

The Tehran Journal the next day had this information
Plane1
Lt. Jafari and one other (not named)
Plane2
(not named)
-----
Bob Pratt, writing a few months after the event, had the planes manned thus:
Plane 1
(not named)
Plane 2
First Lieutenant Jalal Damirian and Second Lieutenant Hossein Shokry (who died in 1980, during the Iran Iraq war)
-----
This website details the pilots of various Iranian Phantom missions, including the Tehran case
(site no longer available)
PlaneA (it is not made clear if this was the first or second plane)
Gen. Nader Jahanbani [executed during Revolution] and one other (not named)
PlaneB(it is not made clear if this was the first or second plane)
Lt. Parviz Jafari 2nd LT. Keyvan
-----
Sightings TV Program 1994
Ist plane
Yaddi Nazeri and one other
2nd Plane
Parviz Jafari and one other
-----
Jafari's own account gives his own rank as Major, which may be a misremembering
Plane 1
Not specified
Plane 2
Major Parviz Jafari and Lt Keyvan
-----
Wikipedia
Plane1
Captain Mohammad Reza Azizkhani and Yaddi Nazeri
Plane2
General Parviz Jafari (he is usually referred to as a general by UFO proponents but did not gain that rank till later) and one other

It seems likely that all the witnesses have now died, unfortunately.

 

[Eburacum]

When staring at a bright object it's not uncommon for it to appear to jump around, which I think is an artifact of the human eye. It's possible that an object gets into the "blind spot" of the eye and there's an instinctive attempt to refocus, so the eye itself is doing the jumping, not the object. My interpretation of the process may be incorrect, but the phenomenon itself is quite real, as can be seen if you try to gaze at a bare lightbulb.

I've seen this phenomenon also. Brighter lights can jump about when contrasted to a darker background. Sometimes brighter stars can seem to move against a carpet of dimmer stars. I think one contributing factor may be a difference in response times between the rods and cones in the retina, which detect different intensities of light.

 

[Itsme]

Concerning the crew in the first airplane, here is a short list of all the crews said to have been involved in this incident. I note that the details change over time, but later accounts seem to converge on a fairly consistent roster.

Parviz Jafari wrote chapter 9 of Leslie Kean's book: UFOs: Generals, Pilots, and Government Officials Go on the Record
In it, he gives all the names of the crewmembers involved:

The [first] F-4 carried two people, Captain Aziz Khani and First Lieutenant Hossein Shokri, the navigator.
[...]
About ten minutes later, I was ordered to take off in a second jet to approach the object, which I was piloting. It was now about 1:30 a.m. on September 19. First Lieutenant Jalal Damirian, my second pilot in the backseat, operated the radar and other equipment

 

[Itsme]

Maybe, but we're talking past each other. I haven't mentioned Jafari's flight at all. I'm starting with the first flight.

Ah, OK. You're right, there is not much info about that one.
Parviz Jafari wrote chapter 9 of Leslie Kean's book: UFOs: Generals, Pilots, and Government Officials Go on the Record
In it, he gives some more clues about his trajectory and that of the first jet:

Captain Khani had approached the Russian border, and at that point he was told to turn back. When he turned around, he said that he could see the object in front of him at twelve o'clock. I said, "Where exactly do you see it?" He said, "Over the dam, close to Tehran."
[...]
As he headed back, I looked over, and then I saw it. It was flashing with intense red, green, orange, and blue lights so bright that I was not able to see its body. The lights formed a diamond shape—just brilliant lights, no solid structure could be seen through or around them.
[...]
I approached, and I got close to it, maybe seventy miles or so in a climb situation. All of a sudden, it jumped about 10 degrees to the right. In an instant! Ten degrees ... and then again it jumped 10 degrees, and then again.... I had to turn 98 degrees to the right from my heading of 70 degrees, so we changed position 168 degrees toward the south of the capital city.

The dam close to Tehran must have been the Latyan Dam (the blue circle in the map below). A 70 degree heading from Hamedan Airport would take Jafari directly to that dam. The gradual 98 degree turn would change his course to an area south of Tehran, which is consistent with Mooy's memo:

THE OBJECT AND THE PURSUING F-4 CONTINUED ON A COURSE TO THE SOUTH OF TEHRAN WHEN ANOTHER BRIGHTLY LIGHTED OBJECT, ESTIMATED TO BE ONE HALF TO ONE THIRD THE APPARENT SIZE OF THE MOON, CAME OUT OF THE ORIGINAL OBJECT.

This would mean his course up to the moment the other object came into play was something like the white line:

 

[Eburacum]

The [first] F-4 carried two people, Captain Aziz Khani and First Lieutenant Hossein Shokri, the navigator.
[...]
About ten minutes later, I was ordered to take off in a second jet to approach the object, which I was piloting. It was now about 1:30 a.m. on September 19. First Lieutenant Jalal Damirian, my second pilot in the backseat, operated the radar and other equipment.

Note that this is significantly different to the current Wiki article, and doesn't agree exactly with any of the other options. I wonder if there are nicknames or exotic naming conventions involved here.

 

[Itsme]

I've seen this phenomenon also. Brighter lights can jump about when contrasted to a darker background.

It's called the autokinetic effect.
Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autokinetic_effect

I've seen it too, but never a series of 10 degree jumps in the same direction

 

[NorCal Dave]

Ah, OK. You're right, there is not much info about that one.

Well, there is lots of detailed and dramatic info about the first flight in the 2 Priouzi versions, but nowhere else. That's why I say, aside from maybe the Azarbarzin interview, the Pratt file is completely useless.

And it seems a lot of people, including Maccabee used that file to create the story as we now know it. Classic UFOlogy. A lot of hyped-up tall tales gets interwoven with a few possible facts to create something that is greater than the parts it's based on.

Parviz Jafari wrote chapter 9 of Leslie Kean's book: UFOs: Generals, Pilots, and Government Officials Go on the Record

OK, but now we've gone from the National Inquirer to Leslie (The Chilian Airforce UFO is the best ever, until it wasn't) Kean. She is a commited UFO proselytizer. It's a slight improvement, I guess. And that book came out in 2011, so whatever Jafari is recalling, it's over 30 years after the event and long after the canonical version had been public for a long time. Does he really remember what heading he was taking 30 years ago, or is he just inferring it from where he thought he went? There is just too much work that's been done to show how malleable memory is.

Even so, I'm still not getting what's going on. IF this is accurate (bold by me and Itsme):

Captain Khani had approached the Russian border, and at that point he was told to turn back. When he turned around, he said that he could see the object in front of him at twelve o'clock. I said, "Where exactly do you see it?" He said, "Over the dam, close to Tehran."

Then flight 1 is approaching the Soviet boarder either in the far northwest at the Soviet republic of Azerbaijan or in the far northeast at the Soviet republic of Turkmenistan. Or he's out over the Caspian Sea and I'm not sure where the international boarders are over the sea. Then he turns around and "sees" the object over a dam near Tehran from near the boarder?

Again, memory just doesn't work that way.

But if were talking about Kean, the Chilian UFO is I think quite similar to this one. Without going way off topic, recall, how the Chilian UFO was presented by Kean: Some crack helicopter crews from the Chilian air force were conduction nighttime operations, when there FLIR targeting equipment locked onto a UFO and followed it. There were no known aircraft in the area, and no one could account for the craft. Afterward, a blue-ribbon panel of top Chilian Airforce generals and other spent a year investigating, before declaring it a ligit ET/UOF. Kean then broke the story.

Within days, if not hours, the story came apart. Mick on Metabunk and others quickly identified the UFO as an Iberian airliner departing Santiago. Turned out the helicopter pilots maybe weren't that well trained. The FLIR system was new to them and they didn't know how to work it. The blue-ribbon panel of experts turned out to be a couple of UFO buffs who wanted to believe.

Kean had to begrudgingly admit it was just an airliner, but scolded people like Mick for being an amateur and that investigations should be left to more qualified people. Like the Chilian blue-ribbon panel I suppose.

I need to dig a bit more and get my evidence lined up, but I think there is something sorta similar going on here.

 

[Itsme]

Yes there's little information available about the headings and trajectories of the pilots. That's why I wonder where Dunning got his information from when he wrote:

Journalist Philip Klass suggested that it was the planet Jupiter, an explanation echoed by aerospace researcher James Oberg. Many UFOlogists have dismissed this explanation saying that Jupiter's direction in the sky was 90° wrong, but I found two reasons to give this suggestion some credence. First, the direction is not wrong. The F-4s were scrambled to northern Tehran, not to the light. Once they arrived, they saw the light just where Jupiter would have been. Second, Yousefi and the telephone witnesses all described the light as similar to a star but much brighter.

Source: https://skeptoid.com/episodes/4315

I think we can agree that both reasons given by Dunning to give the Jupiter suggestion some credence are not supported by the material available on the case.

 

[Eburacum]

That's not really true; to arrive anywhere near Tehran, they will have been flying towards Jupiter for quite an extended period. But Jupiter was not the only celestial object in the sky; the recumbent crescent moon was also rising in the East, and would have looked quite strange.

 

[Itsme]

That's not really true; to arrive anywhere near Tehran, they will have been flying towards Jupiter for quite an extended period.

They were flying to the northeast while Jupiter was in the east, yes.

But that is not Dunning's claim.
His claim is:

Once they arrived, they saw the light just where Jupiter would have been.

There is nothing to support this claim.

 

[Eburacum]

Well, it is debatable just how well the pilot and copilot of each plane could have seen their environment at all. Flying a transonic plane in the dark with all the associated vibrations and internal reflections may have made observing anything in the sky challenging, unless they were using some sort of visual aids.

This is a question I posed earlier in the thread, and I'm still interested in the answer; what kinds of visual aids would the pilot of an F-4 Phantom II have, and what were the failure modes of such a system, if any?

 

[Itsme]

Flying a transonic plane in the dark with all the associated vibrations and internal reflections may have made observing anything in the sky challenging, unless they were using some sort of visual aids.

In terms of being able to see things it's not more challenging than driving a car in the dark "with all the associated vibrations and internal reflections". Even at mach 2 a plane can be pretty stable:

And the view from a cockpit is pretty clear at night:

 

[Duke]

Well, it is debatable just how well the pilot and copilot of each plane could have seen their environment at all. Flying a transonic plane in the dark with all the associated vibrations and internal reflections may have made observing anything in the sky challenging, unless they were using some sort of visual aids.

This is a question I posed earlier in the thread, and I'm still interested in the answer; what kinds of visual aids would the pilot of an F-4 Phantom II have, and what were the failure modes of such a system, if any?

Not sure what you mean by "visual aids." If you're asking about personal equipment like NVGs or helmet mounted targeting systems, the answer is "none" in 1976. It's possible they could have carried handheld items like binoculars or a Starlight scope (very early night vision device), but even that's doubtful in a high performance, ejection seat eqipped aircraft.

 

[Eburacum]

In terms of being able to see things it's not more challenging than driving a car in the dark "with all the associated vibrations and internal reflections". Even at mach 2 a plane can be pretty stable:

Hmm. In the Concorde clip I don't see anything particularly detailed out of the window. In the clip showing a landing sequence, the lights of the airport and surrounding cityscape drown out any celestial bodies quite efficiently, making accurate observation difficult. In general observing a UAP from a moving car or a moving aircraft makes accurate observations quite challenging, because of parallax and restricted visibility. This has been demonstrated repeatedly with the recent US Navy pilot sightings, despite the fact that they have FLIR to fall back on.

It's possible they could have carried handheld items like binoculars or a Starlight scope (very early night vision device), but even that's doubtful in a high performance, ejection seat equipped aircraft.

Yes, a Starlight scope is one possibility I've considered, but it seems unlikely.

If the pilot and copilot had to rely on their own eyeballs, that could have been a source of observational error during this event, particularly when manoeuvring at speed or if they broke the sound barrier, which would have caused some vibration, I expect.

Of course they would also have had the radar to rely on (Jafari sometimes refers to the radar screen, so I suspect he could see it as well as his co-pilot could). If the radar was unreliable then the pilot would have had some difficulty locating the object accurately.

 

[Duke]

Hmm. In the Concorde clip I don't see anything particularly detailed out of the window. In the clip showing a landing sequence, the lights of the airport and surrounding cityscape drown out any celestial bodies quite efficiently, making accurate observation difficult. In general observing a UAP from a moving car or a moving aircraft makes accurate observations quite challenging, because of parallax and restricted visibility. This has been demonstrated repeatedly with the recent US Navy pilot sightings, despite the fact that they have FLIR to fall back on.

Apples and kumquats comparing crew stations and the view from a tactical a/c and a commercial transport. The view from every different a/c type's crew station is unique. The F-4 came from a generation of tactical a/c that had a lot of framing and acrylic transparency, as can be seen in the video below.


Source: https://youtu.be/cVfUtgABNbM


More modern a/c use primarily polycarbonate for transparencies and tend to have little to no framing blocking the pilot's view. Here's the view from the F-16.


Source: https://youtu.be/nHotDPmAxmw

 

[Itsme]

In general observing a UAP from a moving car or a moving aircraft makes accurate observations quite challenging, because of parallax and restricted visibility. This has been demonstrated repeatedly with the recent US Navy pilot sightings

Pardon? We only have ATFLIR footage of those, which is 2D, with a very limited FOV and with the camera locked to a moving target. We also have some videos made under similar circumstances to demonstrate the possible misinterpretations of such a setup. But this cannot be compared to a free view from the cockpit.

 

[Itsme]

Hmm. In the Concorde clip I don't see anything particularly detailed out of the window.

That is due to the limited dynamic range of the camera. The light from the windows is too bright and saturates the camera.

In the clip showing a landing sequence, the lights of the airport and surrounding cityscape drown out any celestial bodies quite efficiently, making accurate observation difficult.

Accurate observation of celestial bodies, yes. But an object brilliant enough to be seen from 70 NM, I don't think so.

 

[Eburacum]

But an object brilliant enough to be seen from 70 NM, I don't think so.

Jupiter is brilliant enough to be seen from 500 million miles. The question is, can it be observed accurately at night by a pilot flying an F-4 with an apparently dodgy radar?

 

[Eburacum]

We only have ATFLIR footage of those, which is 2D, with a very limited FOV and with the camera locked to a moving target. We also have some videos made under similar circumstances to demonstrate the possible misinterpretations of such a setup. But this cannot be compared to a free view from the cockpit.

This is a bit of a side-track, but the pilot who took FLIR1 could not see the object at all, so was entirely reliant on the FLIR. I do not know whether the pilots who filmed GOFAST or GIMBAL could see the targets visually either; they may have been only visible on the scope. So modern pilots have many advantages over 1976 pilots. They didn't even have efficient look-down/shoot down radar, as I understand it.

 

[Itsme]

The video below, at 52:35, shows a civilian eyewitness telling how he remembers perceiving the incident at the age of 12:

• The jets and their sonic booms caused windows to break and lots of people to come out of their houses.
• He remembers seeing the primary object and it was huge ("several stadiums" in size).
• He remembers seeing a jet and the secundary object, which was far outperforming the jet.
• When the secundary object landed, many people jumped in their cars and went to the southeast of the city to see what was out there. They were urged to stay inside.

 

[Eburacum]

He remembers seeing the primary object and it was huge ("several stadiums" in size).

Hmm. 12 year-old boys are a little unreliable as witnesses.
The estimated size depends very much on distance. Jupiter is 86 thousand miles in diameter, but it looks relatively small. Even Pirouzi described the object as star-like until observed by binoculars.