Project Sign and Project Grudge

The early U.S. Military projects that officially investigated the UFO phenomenon

Name	Project Sign and Project Grudge
Duration	Project Sign: January 22, 1948 to December 16, 1948 Project Grudge: February 11, 1949 to December 27, 1949
Purpose	Project Sign: To investigate the UFO sightings that occurred in 1947 Project Grudge: To provide prosaic explanations for these UFO sightings to reassure the public
Investigated by	A small team formed by the U.S. Air Force

The U.S. military, particularly the U.S. Air Force (USAF), created two pioneering yet short-lived UFO investigations: Project Sign and Project Grudge. These investigations would set the stage and influence future research on the subject. 

What Is Project Sign?

Project Sign, also known as Project Saucer, was established on January 22, 1948, within the Air Materiel Command’s (AMC) Technical Intelligence Division at the Wright-Patterson Air Force Base in Dayton, Ohio.

Its purpose was to investigate and explain the causes of the numerous unexplained aerial phenomena reported across the country in the summer of 1947. Its creation was triggered by the buzz around Mt. Rainier, which Kenneth Arnold witnessed. USAF was pressured even more for Project Sign to immediately begin its investigations due to the Mantell incident (more on this later).

Key Individuals Involved

Lead personnel and consultants were involved in Project Sign. The members of the core group were:

• Capt. Robert R. Sneider, the project chief
• Alfred Loedding, the T-3 veteran engineer
• Lawrence Truettner, the civilian engineer and nuclear and missile expert
• Albert B. Deyarmond, the civilian intelligence analyst

Assisting the core group were:

• Maj. Raymond Llewellyn, the special projects branch chief of MCIAT
• Lt. Howard W. Smith
• George W. Towles, a civilian
• External contacts when needed (for lab requests, field support, and expertise)

Methods and Findings

The team behind Project Sign was open-minded about any potential explanation. It reflected how seriously the team was approaching this unexplained phenomenon. 

According to the information outlined in the Project Sign Technical Report, they considered multiple angles in their investigations, including:

• Psychological analysis
• Information and analysis from agencies outside AMC

From there, they considered the following, as these had the potential to affect their analysis and evaluation:

• Operational considerations
• Technical considerations

Despite this rigorous process, they still found it impossible to “accurately identify any of the reported craft with respect to design and performance” due to an extreme lack of data from the reported UFO incidents. They’d be able to prove or disprove the theories regarding their origin if only they could get their hands on physical specimens of the aircraft. 

By the end, only 20% of the cases were definitively identified, whereas 80% remained unexplained.

Possible Causes for the Incidents

The team rooted out potential reasons as to why witnesses had seen these unexplained incidents. It might be that these were:

• Natural terrestrial phenomena, where it could be meteorological in nature, an intelligent animal, or a hallucination
• Man-made terrestrial phenomena, where it could be a Russian aircraft
• Extraterrestrial object, which could be a meteor, an extraterrestrial animal, or a spaceship

Grouping the Unidentified Aerial Objects

The team deduced that these unidentified aerial objects could be grouped into the following:

• Flying disks (saucers)
• Flying fuselages (torpedo or cigar-shaped bodies; no wings or fins visible in flight)
• Round objects (spherical or balloon-shaped objects; capable of hovering, ascending, descending, or traveling at high speed)
• Balls of light (no apparent physical form attached; capable of maneuvering, climbing, and traveling at high speed)

Notable UFO Cases

Project Sign had received and analyzed 243 domestic and 30 foreign cases. Out of all these, the most noteworthy are as follows:

The Mantell Incident

This incident was Project Sign’s first major case investigation. 

On January 7, 1948, Kentucky Air National Guard Capt. Thomas F. Mantell, Jr. was pursuing a “metallic object of tremendous size.” Despite receiving the order to call off the pursuit, he continued, reaching an altitude of more than 25,000 ft. He supposedly passed out from lack of oxygen, which resulted in his crash.

There were many reports that claimed what Mantell saw. It could have been the planet Venus, a secret balloon experiment under the Skyhook project, or of extraterrestrial origin. However, one thing’s for certain: Mantell’s death became a sensation, which marked the beginning of the public’s fear of flying saucers.

The Chiles-Whitted Sighting

This incident was the fuse for writing the Estimate of the Situation (more on this later).

On July 24, 1948, commercial plane pilots Clarence Chiles and John Whitted were flying near Montgomery, Alabama when they saw a “flying fuselage.” 

Here’s the description they gave of this object:

• About 100 ft. long
• Had a barrel diameter thrice the size of a B-29
• Could fly 500 mph in about 10 seconds
• Was dark at the front and had a blue glow underneath
• Spewed 30 ft. of red-orange jet exhaust 

The team at Project Sign pondered, “How could it fly?” It’s wingless and tailless, and to fly, it would have to be a super nuclear-powered aircraft. 

The Gorman “Dogfight” 

This incident was considered a classic UFO sighting.

On October 1, 1948. North Dakota Air National Guard Lt. George Gorman was about to land (after getting more flight time) when he noticed a taillight pass by. He took a closer look at the object, and this was his description of it:

• About 6–8 in. in diameter
• Was clear white in color
• Round with sharp, clear edges
• Had blinking lights

Gorman got into a “dogfight” with this object. When he came closer, the object flew away from him, but then came back and flew right at him. He thought he was going to crash at that moment. This encounter lasted for 27 minutes.

Official statements said that Gorman probably saw a weather balloon or a mirage of the planet Jupiter. However, he insisted that it wasn’t [the former], and that there was “definitive thought” behind the object’s maneuvers.

The Relevant Published Reports

In addition to the Project Sign Technical Report, the project has another report about it: the Estimate of the Situation.

The Estimate of the Situation

The affairs surrounding this report were perhaps the most controversial thing about Project Sign. 

The Estimate of the Situation was a classified document (stamped “TOP SECRET”) that the team submitted all through the USAF chain of command, including then-Chief of Staff Gen. Hoyt Vandenberg. It reportedly concluded that some of the UFO reports were genuinely unknown craft, possibly of extraterrestrial origin. 

However, Vandenberg didn’t buy that these were interplanetary crafts and thus rejected the Estimate due to a lack of supporting evidence. He also ordered all copies of it to be destroyed. We can just imagine the disappointment the Project Sign team felt at the time.

Vanderberg’s actions set a turning point for the military’s investigation of UFOs. According to Dr. Bruce Maccabee, he had “effectively set a non-science-based policy that UFOs could not be officially identified as extraterrestrial vehicles.”

Today, UFO/UAP community members can only speculate on its exact contents as no copies are known to have survived. 

What Is Project Grudge?

Project Grudge, which began on February 11, 1949, was the successor to Project Sign and marked a fundamental shift in the military’s approach to UFO investigations. 

Its purpose was to debunk UFO sightings and calm public hysteria. So, if Project Sign took an open-minded approach, then Project Grudge had a more skeptical stance. It sought conventional, prosaic explanations, as if nothing unusual was happening. 

Key Individuals Involved 

Project Grudge had a smaller team composition than Project Sign. What’s more, not much was known about its team members and structure. The few we could search were as follows:

• Lt. Col. Jerry Boggs, the initial project chief
• Mag. Gen. John A. Samford, who oversaw the project
• Capt. Edward J. Ruppelt, who became a member in the latter part of the project
• Lt. Jerry Cummings, one of the primary investigators
• Sgt. David Whelan, who handled the documentation and filing

Additionally, Project Grudge relied heavily on the analysis and evaluation of external consultants, as evident in its Technical Report. These included:

• Dr. J. Allen Hynek, an astronomer at the Ohio State University
• Dr. P. M. Fitts, a psychologist at the AMC Aero-Medical Laboratory
• Dr. G. E. Valley of the Scientific Advisory Committee
• Air Weather Services Headquarters
• Rand Corporation (a non-profit organization)
• 3160th Electronics Laboratory at the Cambridge Field Station, MA
• Weather Bureau at the U.S. Department of Commerce
• AMC Analysis and Engineering Divisions

Methods and Findings

In Project Grudge’s Technical Report, the team received 375 UFO incidents but was only able to investigate 244 of them. 

They, along with the AMC personnel who assisted them, used the AMC form, The Guide to Investigation Unidentified Flying Objects, when conducting these investigations. The guide ensured they investigated the UFO incident competently, and all reports were tabulated and analyzed by science and engineering technical personnel. 

Moreover, any “misrepresented and generally unfamiliar objects, hoax makers, and psychopathological reporters” identified would be eliminated from the study. 

This investigation method, while systematic, couldn’t cover up its purpose: to debunk these incidents as ordinary, everyday occurrences. Looking at the conclusion, the team put in the report simply reinforces this. 

• These UFOs did not pose a threat to U.S. national security.
• The reported UFO sightings were due to witnesses mistaking a conventional object as extraordinary, experiencing mild mass hysteria or “war nerves,” seeking publicity, or being a psychopathological person.
• These UFO sightings were planned and used to cause mass hysteria.

Only 23% of the cases remained unexplained due to insufficient data.

Notable UFO Cases

Project Grudge had interesting cases, and these three were the most memorable.

Norwood Searchlight Incident

Many witnessed this incident where a “series of 10 visual sightings of UFOs” occurred from August 19, 1949, to March 10, 1950. 

Further, actual evidences were taken by multiple people, including:

• Searchlight operator, Army Sgt. Donald R. Berger, who detailed his observations of this object in his logs
• Norwood Police Sgt. Leo Davidson took photos of the sighting that happened on October 23, 1949
• Rev. Gregory Miller possessed two reels of 25 ft. motion picture film on the October 1949 sighting

However, the team at Project Grudge attributed these sightings to astronomical phenomena, and witnesses disputed this explanation.

The Camp Hood Sightings

In March 1949, Killeen Base, Camp Hood, Texas, experienced a series of unexplained sightings. Little lights in V formation were flying through the sky every night, changing colors between bluish-white and orange and black every two seconds.

The camp sent reports to the AMC Air Technical Intelligence Center (ATIC), but they received no response. This meant that the higher-ups would take no action on this.

Fed up, the camp commander took the initiative to plan a trap for these little lights, where they would send out special UFO patrols equipped with sighting equipment. Each patrol would be stationed at a specific post, where they would coordinate to locate and capture these lights.

However, when they sent this plan to the USAF, it was rejected. Some at the camp speculated that it was because the USAF didn’t want many people to find out the truth about UFOs. Others just thought the USAF was being stupid.

The real reason, however, was the drastic change in the top brass’s attitude toward UFOs: “It can’t be, therefore it isn’t.” 

When the Project Grudge team investigated it, they concluded that the witnesses had observed aircraft lights under unusual atmospheric conditions. But this explanation failed to address several aspects of the objects’ reported behavior.

Fort Monmouth Incident 

This incident challenged the way Project Grudge investigated UFOs and marked a change in the USAF’s attitude towards it.

On September 10, 1951, a radar technician picked up a low-flying, fast-moving object. It was going over 700 mph, which was more than the capability of jets at that time.

About 15 minutes later, two T-33 jet pilots flying near Sandy Hook, New Jersey, spotted a big, silver object flying below them. The object was 40–50 ft. wide and was also flying over 700 mph.

The pilots’ accounts were reported in the local newspapers, drawing increasing interest in the UFO investigations. Project Grudge looked into it and stated the sightings were probably from the two balloons released by the Evans Signal Laboratory nearby around the same time. Also, the radar anomaly was simply an operator’s mistake.

The Relevant Published Reports

Project Grudge produced only one official report, the 600-page Technical Report, which was already mentioned above. 

If there’s a relevant report to introduce in this section, there’s no more deserving than Sidney Shalett’s article, What You Can Believe About Flying Saucers.

What You Can Believe About Flying Saucers

The Project Grudge team wanted to suppress the public’s interest and its willingness to report UFO sightings. To do that, they consorted with Shalett, a journalist for the Saturday Evening Post, who then wrote this two-part article. 

The article piqued the public’s interest, especially since this was the first time the USAF shared its UFO investigations openly. It contained many flying saucer stories, along with explanations that these incidents were simply normal activities that witnesses had misinterpreted. To Shalett’s credit, though, he pointed out that a handful of sightings remained unexplained. 

However, the team’s goal failed, as the public did the exact opposite of what they expected. Numerous UFO reports came in, and discussions about UFOs were happening everywhere in the country. 

As Ruppelt explained in his book, The Report on Unidentified Flying Objects, Shalett’s article planted a seed of doubt in the public, especially since UFOs were a serious subject matter just a few months ago. 

Significance to Modern Ufology

Projects Sign and Grudge’s investigation methodologies provided the foundation for future UFO research. 

Their contrasting approaches (where Sign’s open-minded and Grudge’s skeptical) created a lasting impression on the public as to how they should approach this unexplained aerial phenomenon. 

It led them to question official reports and explanations regarding it, to examine each presented case and evidence objectively before believing or contradicting them.

Further, the experiences of key personnel allowed us to understand how much these reported UFO cases affected the public’s interest and the government’s concern for national security.

FAQ

Why did Project Sign end?

Project Sign ended on December 16, 1948 due to the USAF’s shifting attitude toward UFO investigations. The military essentially wanted to explain the unexplained by conventional means.

Why did Project Grudge end?

Project Grudge ended on December 27, 1949, but it was later revealed that it continued in a passive capacity until late 1951. 

USAF ended the project due to the following reasons:

• Its members were dwindling, resulting in minimal activity.
• It didn’t conduct serious UFO investigations, receiving criticism from the military and the public.
• The military realized that the study of the UFO phenomena needed a new approach, which led to the establishment of Project Blue Book.