• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Los Angeles: Feb.1942 Incident (The Battle Of Los Angeles)

MrRING

Android Futureman
Joined
Aug 7, 2002
Messages
6,053
So, what can we conclude from this famopus bit of UFO history? Do we think it was the Japanese, or Nazis, or UFO's?

WIKI has some good info:
The West coast air raid, sometimes referred to as the Los Angeles air raid, Los Angeles Air Alarm or the battle of Los Angeles, was an unidentified flying object event which took place from late February 24 to early February 25, 1942 in which eyewitness reports of an unknown object or objects over Los Angeles, California triggered a massive anti-aircraft artillery barrage.

Initially the target of the barrage was thought to be an attacking force from Japan, but it was later suggested to be a lost weather balloon, a blimp, a Japanese fire balloon or psychological warfare technique, staged for the benefit of coastal industrial sites, or even an extraterrestrial aircraft. The true nature of the object or objects remains unknown.

The thing that seems interesting to me is that the newspaper photo would argue against the vague "mass hysteria" hypothesis...
 
It was discussed briefly here, but I feel it's worthy of its own thread so thanks for starting one :)

I'm not sure just what was seen, but I'm not convinced that it was merely searchlights illuminating low cloud cover :?

Here are some interesting pages I googled: -

1942 'Battle Of Los Angeles' Biggest Mass Sighting In History?

'Battle Of Los Angeles' Photographic Comparison

THE ARMY AIR FORCES IN WORLD WAR II; DEFENSE OF THE WESTERN HEMISPHERE “The Battle of Los Angeles”

The Battle of Los Angeles

Battle of Los Angeles
Link is dead. The MIA webpage can be accessed via the Wayback Machine:
https://web.archive.org/web/20070420214034/http://www.cosmicparadigm.com/BattleofLosAngeles.html


The Battle of Los Angeles
 
Last edited by a moderator:
My gut tells me that this whole episode was simply a bad case of post Pearl Harbor war jitters. Th event went for decades without ever being associated with the UFO phenomenon (was it is ever mentioned at all in the literature of the 50s, 60s or 70s?). Now people are trying to say that it was one of the best UFO incidents of all time. Of course, all the principals are dead and can't set the record straight.

I don't know why we insist on going back and reinventing history long after the fact. How long before someone tried to tell us the Titanic hit an unidentified submerged object?

S
 
I'm with Skeptical on this.

As I recall, there were many supposed sightings of Japanese planes at the time, sometimes whole squadrons of them - but I don't recally any actual UFO sightings at the time (or 'unknown types of aircraft' or whatever they would be called).

If you look at the non-UFO sites describing the occasion, they don't seem to mention any mystery aircraft at all.
 
Some other events from the time give you the flavour:

http://www.sfmuseum.org/hist9/aaf1.html

Disturbing rumors of enemy threats continued to mount on 9 December. Early that morning unidentified planes were reported off southern California, and the Eleventh Naval District ordered preparations made to repulse a raid by sea or air. Later the Navy relayed to the AAF a “red hot tip” which announced that thirty-four enemy vessels were standing off the coast near Los Angeles, waiting for the fog to lift before stage an attack. Army planes were dispatched and found that the alarm had been occasioned by the presence of a group of American fishing boats. Later in the day a report told with convincing detail of a “Japanese cruiser 20,000 yards off the west tip of Catalina Island.” Other witnesses insisted that a cruiser and three destroyers, flying Japanese flags, had been spotted off the coast. This of course was the period when whales were mistaken for enemy submarines, and when floating logs were bombed by inexperienced and overeager aircrews.

Such rumors and alerts were not confined to the Pacific coast. On 9 December an air raid warning, the first of the war, swept New York City and the northeast states. At noon, advices were received that hostile planes were only two hours’ distance away. Fighter aircraft from Mitchel Field took the air to intercept the raiders, and radio stations left the air. Since there was no system for warning the public —New York’s air raid sirens were not installed until February 1942 —the police took the initiative in spreading news of the alert. As a precautionary measure school children were hurriedly sent home.—No general hysteria was noted, but the warning was taken for the real thing on Wall Street, where a wave of selling on the exchanges brought security quotations down hundreds of millions of dollars in the worst slump of the stock market since the collapse of France. The alarm spread to Boston, where police shifted heavy stores of guns and ammunition from storage vaults to stations throughout the city, and where industrial establishments were advised to prepare for a raid.
 
One theory has it that the famous photo was a newspaperman's mock-up. created the next day in a darkroom using bits of card, photographic paper and a dim light. I've seen my brother do similar things with his ancient photographic equipment on occasion.
Certainly the 'analysis' by Maccabee seems flawed; the searchlights are illuminating the bottom of something, but there is no indication an edge to the object; it could be a Borg Cube or the underneath of the flying island of Laputa for all the information we can get from that photo.

Or, more likely, just the underneath of the smoke cloud caused by timed shells exploding at a preset height.
 
An interesting titbit is available on this page here;
http://www.maxwelldemille.com/air-raid.asp
Here's an excerpt from an article written for the Daily News by reporter Matt Weinstock. After the war he was talking to man who had served in one of those Army batteries and the gentleman recounted the following story.

"Early in the war things were pretty scary and the Army was setting up coastal defenses. At one of the new radar stations near Santa Monica, the crew tried in vain to arrange for some planes to fly by so that they could test the system. As no one could spare the planes at the time, they hit upon a novel way to test the radar. One of the guys bought a bag of nickel balloons and then filled them with hydrogen, attached metal wires, and let them go. Catching the offshore breeze, the balloons had the desired effect of showing up on the screens, proving the equipment was working. But after traveling a good distance offshore and to the south, the nightly onshore breeze started to push the balloons back towards the coastal cities. The coastal radar's picked up the metal wires and the searchlights swung automatically on the targets, looking on the screens as aircraft heading for the city. The ACK-ACK started firing and the rest was history."
Unfortunately, no names, no pack-drill; but I'd guess that the true explanation was something along those lines.
 
eburacum said:
One theory has it that the famous photo was a newspaperman's mock-up. created the next day in a darkroom using bits of card, photographic paper and a dim light. I've seen my brother do similar things with his ancient photographic equipment on occasion.
Certainly the 'analysis' by Maccabee seems flawed; the searchlights are illuminating the bottom of something, but there is no indication an edge to the object; it could be a Borg Cube or the underneath of the flying island of Laputa for all the information we can get from that photo.

Or, more likely, just the underneath of the smoke cloud caused by timed shells exploding at a preset height.

To me, the 'photo' looks like a painting - that was my first thought when I saw it.
 
I'd be interested to know what the exposure time was for the photo, as various things seem to suggest that it was fairly long. This would cause any of the 'UFO's to appear slightly mishapen - if, of course, the UFOs aren't merely something added at a later date.
 
Feb. 1942 Los Angeles UFO incident

I've searched the messageboard but can't find any mention of this incident, which to me seems the most convincing UFO encounter ever:- either that or the best hoax.My main reason for posting is to find out if anyone knows of any successful debunking of it.
To reprise events: on the night of 24th/25th February 1942 a very large UFO appeared over L.A. and hovered around for several hours. Suspecting a Japanese air raid the anti aircraft batteries fired at it and fghters were scrambled. Searchlights illuminated it , revealing that the shells were exploding just before hitting it, the fighters' machine guns had no effect and eventually it flew off over the horizon. Five people were killed by unexploded shells coming back down.
There must have been millions of witnesses, but not much has been written about it. I haven't seen any attempta at a cover-up, or debunking.Does anybody out there know anything about the present-day status of this case?
 
It rings a bell, isn't there a fairly well-known photograph of this incident?
 
there is indeed, showing the UFO caught in the beams of several searchlights with shells exploding around it.It's on UFO Chronicles and rense.com, which has an enhanced version.It looks like something from a sci-fi B-movie but apparently it's the genuine article.
 
There's already a thread on this incident (entitled 'Battle of Los Angeles') ...

(stu edit - link removed as threads merged)
 
Thanks EnolaGaia, I was sure there would be something somewhere on the message Board
 
I've now read the analyses of the photo and the 'balloons with metal wires' explanation.The photo still seems genuine and the object is far too large (and shell-proof) to be a cheap toy balloon trailing a wire.
If this was a mere exercise it was scandalously disorganised. Surely there would have been established exercise procedures that didn't involve civilian deaths and a sleepless night for an entire city?As far as I'm concerned the incident still escapes mundane explanation.
 
I would guess that it wasn't an exercise, just a complete balls-up. The crappy radar they had at the time either detected something that wasn't there, or a balloon released for some unknown reason which caused a panic.

The photo is very poor evidence - as I've pointed out elsewhere, none of the beams pass the object, so the actual extent and shape of the object is indeterminate. I suspect very strongly that it was a cloud illuminated by searchlights.

There is a second theory - that the picture was crudely faked in a 1940's photographer's lab; that is entirely possible, and can't be ruled out. It does explain why none of the beams pass the object. If the object was a saucer, some, many or most of the beams would continue past and illuminate the sky beyond: that does not happen, so it wasn't a saucer.
 
This is a brilliant story.

Leaving aside the vast amount of loaded movie cameras there must have been around Hollywood in 1942, I'll put my artist head back on have a look at the enhanced photo. Firstly, the picture seems 'composed'. Obviously the photographer had the skilled eye of an artist as it obeys the harmonious principles of the rule of thirds. The main action takes place a third of the way across and a third of the way down. This is not just an artistic composition thing, it's also extremely handy as an illustration for a double-page spread. You can almost see where the headline is supposed to go and on the right, where the body copy and a pic of a local witness could be placed.

While some of the searchlights look quite real, some almost look like airbrush work. In particular, the one pointing to 5 'o'clock seems sharp-edged and ragged. Of course, what's beautiful about this composition is that it perfectly illustrates how the eye reads an image like the page of a book from top left to bottom right.

While I'm not saying it's a fake, it does look, well...contrived.
 
I agree , the photo is almost too good to be true.It's odd that all the searchlights are aimed at the object rather than some searching for more of them.Timothy Good's "Above Top Secret" provides some useful info gleaned from offficial records:- the air raid sirens started at 2.25a.m. but the guns didn't start firing until 3.16 a. m., carrying on until 4.14a.m. That's a suspiciously early warning and a very long barrage considering planes would have limited fuel and no desire to stay over a well defended target for longer than necessary, which gives weight to the balls-up theory.

Yet noone saw any planes, and despite witness reports of fighters firing at the object the Army air Force has always denied scrambling any.
One witness at the Douglas Aircraft Company in Long Beach claims to have seen red lights at about 10 000feet which were also fired at.
The next day Chief of Staff George C. Marshall sent Roosevelt a report saying 15 non-military aircraft had "probably" been over LA the previous night but were probably commercial planes hired by spies for panic spreading and finding the AA batteries.It would be intriguing to know FDR's response or Gen. Marshall's career path after he sent that one in!

Either the good General was vicariously responsible for a night of lethal military idiocy or, as he claimed, some Axis spies had hired themselves a small air force for a night of psychological warfare and espionage. Either explanation would have severely jeopardised the General's pension, and the latter seems a very strange way to obfuscate the former. The event would surely warrant an inquiry whatever was going on.
I'm yet to find anything by believers or sceptics explaining what, if anything , the government did about this. Clearly Marshall didn't have a clue what had just happened . Yet no-one seems to have investigated the political fallout.The incident was denied by the Department of Defense until 1978 when someone used the FOIA to obtain Marshall's memo.

I'd like to believe in this one but the Army and government's behaviour is not easy to investigate. But it seems strange that with millions of potential photographers having an hour or so to take photos, there is only this one.
 
A true Urban Legend

I attended grade school in LA during the late 1940's and some of the old timers told me about this incident. A large residental section of LA was damaged/destroyed when the Japanese Air Force bombed LA.

One of my elementary school teachers was there and heard the bombs explode. The bombed out area was declared off limits until a large wooden fence was erected around this area. Many of the adults were ordered to not discuss what they saw or experienced.

This incident was included in the history books at the time: the Japanese were given full credit for the Pearl Harbor and mention was made of the attack on LA.

Given the facts in the report it is very likely that it was the AA battery and falling shells that the people experienced.

Here is a link to a You Tube video of the incident:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_jUEK9R1 ... ata_player
 
From Bigfoot73:
It would be intriguing to know FDR's response or Gen. Marshall's career path after he sent that one in!

Marshall remained Chief of Staff, and was on the Combined Chiefs of Staff until his retirement from the US Army and was the first 5 Star General, he was then Secretary of State under Truman and responsible for the Marshall Plan, the reconstruction of Europe after the war. He was also for a short while Secretary of Defense. He was Time Magazines Man of the Year in 1944 and 1948. Represented the US at the coronation of HM Elizabeth II and was awarded the Noble Peace Prize in 1953.

All in all, I don't think that his career path suffered all that much do you?
 
Oh, THAT George Marshall!
AFCSC's comments are intriguing: it's not often someone close to the origins of a story posts, and this story has always suffered from a dearth of personal accounts. It's also the first thread I have ever started anywhere (now merged of course ) and it's given rise to one of those rare occasions when someone's contribution changes the whole story. Thank you, AFCSC,I'm sure the other posters would agree with me in encouraging you to send this to rense.com or UFO Chronicles or a letter to the FT magazine.
Prior to this the only Japanese air raid on mainland USA I'd ever heard of was something about some single-engined floatplane carried in huge submarines bombing Portland Oregon (or maybe Seattle), without much success.A serious raid with casualties would have been a very sensitive issue.
It also gives weight to a certain strand of Roswell opinion, that the flying saucer explanation was propagated by the Air Force as a smokescreen for some sensitive but alien-free goings-on. A blame-it-on-the-aliens story takes on a life of it's own and never comes close to the truth.
This would certainly explain why the key evidence for the story is a single dodgy photo.
 
What I find interesting about this case is that it might serve as a template, particularly regarding the photo. Here we have a single large object with smaller 'craft' in a delta formation. This pattern is subsequently repeated in other sightings, most notably the Edwards AFB case in the 60s (funnily this case was also tracked by a radar station in the bay where the '42 incident happened).

That's quite significant regardless of whether the picture is misidentification, real or a fake.
 
The Battle of The Angels 1942: My UFO

The original photo shows of a dome ufo. I believe the "ufo" is encompassed by anti-aircraft rounds and the dome is also an anti-aircraft round. If one removes at least the anti-aircraft round above the "ufo" it all becomes too familiar to me. Making this ufo "my ufo". What a coincidence...


BattleOfLosAngeles.jpg
 
CHARACTERISTICS OF SEARCHLIGHTS

69370.jpg

Searchlights in action, Gibraltar 1940, looking south. ( Imperial War Museum)

stockphotopro_546720TNX_01200_30172_70.jpg


NaziAirShip.jpg

British civilian defense forces fire on German Navy airship caught in searchlights overhead during WWI.
Photo: Time Life Pictures/Time & Life Pictures/Getty Images ---- Jan. 01, 1916

worldwar2searchlight.jpg


Instruments Used to Detect Aircraft

1) SOUND LOCATOR - "Before radar, the first practical means of detecting airplanes at a distance at night was by listening to the noise of their engines with the aid of horns...operator listened to the top and bottom horns for elevation information. These units had been in use by the Army since the early 1920s, were phased out in the late 1930s, and replaced with the conical, rounded horns. These latter locators had a very short lifespan since the outbreak of hostilities in 1939 led to more aggressive advances in detection, including radar."

2) HEAT DETECTOR - "used to locate enemy aircraft in the late 1930s. Resembling a searchlight drum, this device was designed to sweep the sky and detect the heat emitted from the engines of overflying aircraft...Heat detectors relayed directional data to the on-board radio-control equipment and, via cable connections, to a searchlight. Tests conducted by the Coast Artillery Corps in 1936-37 showed that while adequate in detecting ships, heat detectors were inadequate for aircraft detection, and more emphasis was placed on developing radio-beat and pulse-echo methods (the forerunners of radar) for use by the fledgling antiaircraft branch."


3) RADAR LOCATOR - "As the war and technology progressed, radar was added to the list of locator devices used to point searchlights to light up enemy aircraft...Signals from the radar unit relayed to the light greatly increased the accuracy of the light beam. By the time the 225th began its training in 1942-43, the combination of the SCR-268 and the 60-inch searchlight was the primary method of detecting, tracking, and illuminating aerial targets for the U.S. Army antiaircraft artillery...The method for using the SCR-268 would be to use it to pick up the airplanes at night and to synchronize the radar plot with a searchlight through an already developed gun director. The director performed the basic mathematical function of taking the range and angle data out of the radar and aimed the searchlight in that direction. At the appropriate moment, when range and angle to target were known, the controller would order the searchlight turned on...It was also advantageous to wait as long as possible to turn on the light since the longer the beam remained on, the more vulnerable the light and crew was to retaliatory fire."

NEW TECHNOLOGY

"Three young British scientists — Chick, Eastwood and Oxford — first adapted a radar system to searchlights in June 1940...By 1942-43, the system (pictured above) became semi-automated and each searchlight (and antiaircraft guns) could be fitted with four-foot radar "mirrors" and could track a target automatically."

"PFC Homer Amay, USMC, of Williamsport, Pennsylvania, adjusts the detector controls on a 60-inch searchlight during training at the Marine Ordnance School, Quantico, Virginia on August 13, 1942."

"What was the final piece of the puzzle in U.S. efforts to put all of these technologies together and integrate them tactically? If one had to point to one moment, it surely had to be May 26, 1937. That evening, Mr. Harry Woodring, the Secretary of War, stood with a group of officers and civilian scientists on a field of the U.S. Army Signal Corps Laboratories at Fort Monmouth, New Jersey. Before them, spread over the field, were the transmitter and receivers of a radio detector, the SCR-268 prototype. Connected with the radar were the controls of a standard antiaircraft searchlight.

http://www.skylighters.org/howalightworks/index.html


1. So what searchlights were used during the raid?

2. Were these searchlights from the Los Angeles Air Base?

3. The searchlights are targeting "something" that is less than ?500ft? in the air in the pic I propose that looks like the shape of "my ufo".

4. The searchlights do not seem to be going past the object in question. Is this due to the type of technology of the searchlights?

5. If this was a cloud, why would the searchlights not just go past the mist (as in the first pic on this post)?

6. What type of artillery shells were used?

(I cant really find to much information on the Air Base the object seems to be right in the middle of)

Very interesting the moments before this raid happened, in regards to the radar, pursuant to wiki. Also people seeing many unknown objects in the sky during the incident are of very big interest. Some objects going slow, some going fast. :hmm:
 
In 1983, the Office of Air Force History concluded: "But early in the morning of the 25th renewed activity began. Radars picked up an unidentified target 120 miles west of Los Angeles. Antiaircraft batteries were alerted at 0215 and were put on Green Alert-ready to fire-a few minutes later. The AAF kept its pursuit planes on the ground, preferring to await indications of the scale and direction of any attack before committing its limited fighter fore. Radars tracked the approaching target to within a few miles of the coast, and at 0221 the regional controller ordered a blackout."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Los_Angeles

120 miles West of Cali. @ 2:15am +
2 miles (few?) of the Coast @ 2:21am
_____________________________________

Distance Covered: 118 miles per 6 minutes

Question: What goes 118 miles per 6 minutes in 1942? What goes 19 miles per minute in 1942? What goes 1140 miles per hour in 1942?

(This is if the radar pick-up of the ufo was immediately told to the Military Base, the second sentence does not clarify, but one can imagine that they would; especially after Pearl Harbor)

What was the fastest fighter plane of World War 2?

596 mph for the Me-163 Komet. 559 mph for the Me-262 Schwalbe.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_was_the_ ... orld_War_2
 
Re: The Battle of The Angels 1942: My UFO

scar7 said:
The original photo shows of a dome ufo. I believe the "ufo" is encompassed by anti-aircraft rounds and the dome is also an anti-aircraft round. If one removes at least the anti-aircraft round above the "ufo" it all becomes too familiar to me. Making this ufo "my ufo". What a coincidence...
I had pointed out this already existent thread elsewhere, in which I also pointed out you may find some replies, if not the answers you seek, to your questions. Anyway, to save time and effort I've bolted your new thread onto the existing one.

Furthermore, I think you may have already posted this exact passage elsewhere on this board. In fact, I know you have, here. This is spamming. Please don't do it again.
 
Re: The Battle of The Angels 1942: My UFO

stuneville said:
This is spamming. Please don't do it again.

Oh. Sorry. I emailed a moderator about where it went because I could not find it using search. Now I know to search other threads that may be similar to my own before posting a new one. Thanks for the help.
 
Re: A true Urban Legend

AFCSC said:
Given the facts in the report it is very likely that it was the AA battery and falling shells that the people experienced.

Interesting. I wonder how big of a part it played in the sightings reported.
 
Back
Top