Update 20/9/08
Since the previous update, we have received further responses from The Department for Transport, National Air Traffic Services (NATS), and South Wales Police. Summaries of these responses are detailed below.
A source at Cardiff Airport had already informed us that a transcript of the radio dialogue between the police helicopter and Air Traffic Control had been provided to South Wales Police. We had already established that the helicopter and pilot of the police helicopter were supplied under contract by Bond Air Services, and it was the transcript which we are trying to obtain a copy of. We were also aware that NATS is now a private company, and like Bond Air Services, not subject to the Freedom of Information Act.
With the above in mind, a message was sent to Bond Air Services, requesting that it be forwarded to the pilot of the aircraft, asking them to get in touch in confidence. No response has been received to that enquiry. This is a great shame, as if we could obtain the co-operation of the pilot, this would open doors as we discovered in the Guernsey case last year.
Although NATS isn't subject to the FoIA, it is under contract to the Department for Transport, which is subject to the act. They were approached and their response was that they held no records relevant to the request and suggesting that we should approach NATS, at the same time confirming what we already knew (that NATS is not subject to the FoIA).
NATS response was more helpful despite the fact that there was no obligation to respond at all. They wrote:
We are aware of the incident on June 8 to which you refer, and can confirm that a police helicopter reported to Air Traffic Control at Cardiff that they had sighted an unidentified object. The object they reported was extremely small, approximately 30-40cm in diameter. It did not appear on radar. I would recommend that you direct any further Inquiries to South Wales Police.
The response from South Wales Police was abysmal (as all dialogue with them has been throughout our dealings with them). When provided with evidence of the remarks from Cardiff Airport stating that they had provided SWP with a transcript of the radio dialogue, their response was:
...South Wales Police can neither confirm nor deny that it holds the information you have requested. In this case, the duty to confirm or deny under S1(1)(a) does not apply as to provide an explanation could in itself result in the release of exempt information...
...It is the view of South Wales Police, that the public interest balance supports the need to neither confirm nor deny that any information is held...
It is our intention to take this issue further with South Wales Police as their attitude to FoIA is disgraceful, and if necessary, appeal to the Information Commissioner's office. This will take some considerable time.
Gary Anthony, Dave Clarke, Joe McGonagle
27th June 2008
On Friday 20th June, the news broke that the South Wales Police helicopter had encountered a UFO. The Sun newspaper claimed the story as an 'exclusive', although it was also published in the London Metro and the Daily Telegraph at the same time. By 10:00 the story had world-wide coverage.
Gary Anthony picked up on the story initially and alerted the ufologyinuk list. He, I, and Dave Clarke then worked together to try and find out what the real story is. That activity is still on-going.
All of the initial coverage appeared to be based on the article in The Sun. According to the report, the helicopter was hovering at 500 feet awaiting clearance to land at RAF St. Athan which is where it is based. A saucer-shaped object encircled by flashing lights then 'attacked' the helicopter by 'zooming straight at it', the pilot having to take evasive action in order to avoid a collision. The Sun goes on to report that the helicopter then pursued the object until it ran short of fuel near the North Devon coast and had to return to St. Athan.
The article continued, saying that the crew were unable to capture the object on film, the object was not visible using night-vision goggles, and that the crew made a report to 'senior police officers' who in turn reported the matter to 'Britain's UFO investigators'. The Sun article was based on information from an anonymous source.
An FoIA request to the Ministry of Defence (MoD) produced the fastest response that I have come across from the MoD. The request was submitted at 09:11, and the response arrived at 10:51 - less than two hours later. In it, the MoD stated that other than media enquiries they had no record of the incident.
A seperate enquiry to the South Wales Police elicited the response confirming that an incident involving the South Wales Police helicopter occurred at 00:40 on 8th June, in which the crew reported a sighting of an unusual aircraft. They did not pursue the aircraft to the North Devon coast, and a report was submitted to 'the appropriate authorities'.
With the police statement in mind, the FoIA request was re-submitted to the MoD, this time asking them to verify with the Provost and Security Squadron and the Counter-terrorism and UK operations staff (who are responsible for airspace security in the UK) as to whether or not they had received any reports of the incident. The response was that the UFO desk, P&SS, and CT&UK Ops have not received any reports about the incident.
On 24th June, the BBC published an article which may provide the solution - there was a wedding party in the area and at the time of the UFO encounter, Chinese lanterns were being launched at the celebration which wasn't very far away from St. Athan.
In response to an enquiry with the Civil Aviation Authority they also said that they have not received a report about the encounter. In fact, the only 'official' report which has been acknowledged other than the Police report is that Cardiff Air Traffic Control were informed by the crew, and they passed the information on to National Air Traffic Services. Cardiff ATC also said that they were aware of Chinese lanterns being released at a wedding and that in the opinion of a spokesman, a link between the incident and the Chinese lanterns is viable. They also confirmed that nothing unusual was detected on radar.
As can be seen from the above, there is a great deal of distortion in the initial report in The Sun which was repeated throughout the international press.
The date and time of the occurrence was at 00:40 on the 8th June 2008, not the 7th as was reported. This could be due to the fact that Air Traffic Services operate on Greenwich Mean Time (GMT) which is one hour earlier than local time (British Summer Time, BST). ATC would have logged the report as 23:40 on the 7th of June. If this is the cause of the discrepancy, it also suggests that the source of the leak was someone with access to Air Traffic Services information.
South Wales Police denied that the object was described as 'saucer-shaped'. They also denied that the object was chased across the Bristol Channel by the helicopter and that the helicopter had to take any evasive action.
The Sun reported that senior police officers reported the matter to 'Britain's UFO investigators'. This comment is ambiguous, and it was initially assumed that this meant that a report had been submitted to the UFO desk at the MoD. Since the MoD are adamant that none of the relevant departments have received the report, it could mean that the report was given to civilian investigators. As yet, no civilian investigator has come forward to support that hypothesis either.
Cardiff airport advised that they received the report from the police helicopter, and relayed it to South Wales Police. Other than that, the only action they took was to check their radar for unusual traffic (they also checked primary radar) which was negative.
It now appears that the report dropped into a black hole, with the helicopter crew reporting the incident to Cardiff ATS, and Cardiff repeating the report to the police - the report was not progressed any further by ATS or the police. This could explain why both of them are so cautious in ther statements as to who what was reported to and when.
The coincidence that three different UK newspapers broke the story on the same morning, with one of them (The Sun) claiming it as an 'exclusive' is curious. The speed at which the story propogated around the world media may also suggest some form of media campaign. Sam Beckwith on the ufologyinuk mail list pointed out that a film 'The X-files:I want to believe' is due to be launched on 25th July this year. The film is produced and distributed by Twentieth Century-Fox, a subsidiary of the News Corporation. Another subsidiary of The News Corporation is 'The Sun' newspaper. A happy coincidence, or part of the Rupert Murdoch media machine? The Sun has been featuring several articles about UFOs since the 20th June, and Nick Pope recently wrote on the UFO UpDates mail list:
I've been working with The Sun (the UK's best-selling national daily newspaper) on this. They're taking it seriously and have further UFO news stories and features planned.
Nick's comments on this case have been quite sensationalised as in the following quote from him at ufomafia.com:
This is one of the most interesting UFO sightings in recent years and I'll be investigating this incident[My emphasis]. Whatever one believes about UFOs, this illustrates that the phenomenon raises serious defense and flight safety issues.
The quote from Nick Pope (above) that "I'll be investigating this incident" was seemingly contradicted during an interview with him at Manchester Radio Online when he said that Philip Mantle is "keeping him informed" about the case - not quite what I would call "investigating", but then he has always relied on other people to do the work for him - the only difference this time is that he acknowledged someone else's effort.
At the moment, there is little in the way of detail about this report, and consequently, speculation is rife. We can only hope that the outstanding investigations and FoIA requests will provide more substantial information. Most enquiries from ufologists and the media have been stonewalled, even Nick Pope's Chief Investigator was asking Dave Clarke for leads. One important avenue of investigation is still open and is being vigourously pursued, watch this space for an update shortly.