By Clas Svahn
UFO sightings in broad daylight involving several witnesses are not
common. However, such an incident took place at
Håknäs, 40 km outh of Umeå in the north of
Sweden, in the autumn of 1991. As long as the investigation is in
process, the witnesses must remain anonymous.
This is one of many cases where representatives of the Swedish
security police (SÄPO) have been ordered, by the military
forces, to investigate a UFO sighting.
It was shortly after 1900 hrs on August 25, 1991. A married couple
had just settled down in front of the TV set to watch the local news.
It was still almost two hours before sunset and the sky was blue
with a few clouds on the horizon. Shortly thereafter, their daughter arrived from Umeå. She drove up to the house, turned the engine off and got out of the car. This is her description of what followed:
- As I got out of the car, I heard the dull sound of an engine
from above. I looked up and saw an object above the red house in
the yard. It moved slowly across the sky. It was cylindrical and white.
It had a pointed front and it was blunt at the end. It looked like
a piece of piping.
- First I thought it was an aeroplane, but it had no windows or
wings, nothing. I ran up the steps to the front door and called out
to my mother and father to come outside and look. Her parents
hurried out and all three of them could see the strange object
moving across the blue evening sky.
- Yes, it is almost unbelievable, says her father. In fact, in my
opinion an object like that shouldn't be able to fly. I saw no wings
or fins and no opening, just a tube.
- We watched it for quite a while, perhaps for 30 seconds. I had the
time to run back into the house to search for a pair of binoculars,
which I didn't find, and back out again, before it disappeared.
The three astonished witnesses watched the object slowly moving in a northwesterly direction and disappearing into a small cloud on the horizon. By then it was at such a distance that no engine sound could be heard.
A piece of white piping
When I ask the daughter to estimate the size of the object, she says
that it was considerably larger than a hand on an outstretched arm.
It was so big that it would have been impossible to cover it with
her hand if she had held her arm up.
- The object was white, like a white car, but dark at the rear. There
was no shine there (in the back), while on the main body you could
see the sun shining, says the daughter.
Her father, who made a note of his observation the following day, is
also certain that the sun shone on the object.
- When I came out, we could only see it from behind, he says, but
there was no exhaust or lights. After a while it disappeared into a
thin cloud on the horizon.
- I assumed that it was a missile, but I may have misjudged the
altitude and the size. The moment I saw it I thought: It's as big as
an aeroplane. Once a thought is stuck in your mind, I suppose you
adjust your eyes to make the object fit into that category.
- But you never had any doubt that the object was not an
aeroplane?
- No, the sun shone on its side, so I could see it glistening. It
couldn't have travelled very fast. I saw it quite clearly. Then it
entered a cloud. It wasn't particularly cloudy, but there were a few
scattered clouds. I saw it gradually entering the cloud and
disappear.
No exhaust
- Did you see any exhaust?
- No, no. I didn't see anything dark at the rear, but my daughter
saw that it was dark there, and she also noticed that the front was
shaped like a cone. I didn't see that, because by the time I caught
sight of it, it had moved too far away.
- So you saw it diagonally from behind?
- Yes, that's right.
- What do you think it was made of?
- It's difficult to tell, but I thought it was shiny. The sun shone on it.
Apart from that, there was nothing. I didn't see anything, no wings,
fins, or anything. I couldn't understand what it was.
- I couldn't hear any engine sound. My hearing isn't perfect, but
both ladies say that they could hear the dull sound of an engine,
like a low speed engine. While I was watching, two cars drove past
and that may have distracted me.
The intelligence department at I20, the infantry regiment at
Umeå,
began investigating the incident after receiving a telephone call.
Eleven days after the incident the witnesses had a visit from
SÄPO,
the Swedish security police, who questioned them thoroughly. The
material was then classified.
Acccording to the infantry regiment no Swedish aircraft were in
the air at the time and one might ask why - if that would have been
the case - they iniitiated an investigation.
I contacted the investigator from the I20 security department who
has been handling this case. He is very hesitant and does not want
to tell us anything about their findings. He says that the military
sent no investigators of their own to the place, but does not mention
that the security police were ordered to go there. However, he
describes the witnesses as "very reliable".
Friends of the family express the same opnion to UFO-Sweden. Also,
their descriptions tally, and are free from exaggerations or self-
made interpretations.
Interview with the security police
- I have spent a lot of time and energy on this case. I wouldn't have
done so, if the witnesses had not been completely reliable. I don't
know what they saw, though. Perhaps it was a missile, but it could
also have been something else. This has been a difficult case. I am
very impressed by the witnesses. Their reliability is very high.
These are the comments by the investigator from the security
police (SÄPO) who's dealing with the Håknäs
incident. He interviewed all three witnesses. The daughter was
questioned at her place of work in Umeå, her parents in their
home. The result of the investigation: There is no indication that
the story is false. An unknown object violated the Swedish border.
The SÄPO report, which is six pages long, is classified for the
protection of the realm. We are now allowed to see it. We are,
however, allowed to talk to the security police officer, who
conducted the investigation. Let's call him AA. We may ask him
whatever questions we want and in this way we can obtain a verbal
report of an otherwise secret document.
- I have met these people and in my judgement they can be
trusted. They are sensible people. We have several witnesses who
have given us so many details. This makes it very interesting and
we have reason to trust these reports.
- As for what this could be... It could be one of several things. Some
phenomena can fool the eye a great deal. So this could have been a
missile or an airplane in an area reflecting hot air, or it could have
been something else.
A credible story
- The man describes the object as being cylindrical, as long as a
commercial aircraft and metallic, with the colour of aluminium,
without antenna, fins or tail. He says that it is soundless, has no
lights or exhaust trails, no windows or holes, and that it moves at a
comparatively low speed, with-out altering its course or altitude.
And, as you know, we have not just one witness, but several. This
makes the story a bit more credible than others. I see no reason to
doubt these people. I believe they are reliable.
- What is your final conclusion in this matter?
- We have not come to a final conclusion; we think that they have
perceived an object which could be a missile, but it could also be
something else. This is extremely difficult to judge. I have not been
able to obtain a reasonable explanation for this thing at
Håknäs, and I'm actually still thinking that it may be a
flying object belonging to the secret service of another country. I do
not consider that out of the question.
- Did you check the air traffic at that particular time?
- There couldn't have been anything in that aerial territory, at that
speed, at that time.
- So, as far as you can tell, this was not anything Swedish...
- No, No.
- ..and nothing was visible on radar?
- No, but we know that we shouldn't take the technical side of radar
too seriously. It isn't one hundred percent foolproof. Large objects
may not be visible. The radar systems cover different layers of the
atmosphere. Thet don't give a total coverage from the ground
upwards.
- I assume that you may have been in touch with the military, and
other authorities, in order to find an explanation?
- Of course I have made such contacts, yes.
- But they were not able to help you?
- No, the have no explanation and neither have I. They have neither
rejected nor accepted the theories we have put forward. It is an
open question. In Sweden, at least, we don't have anything at the
developing or testing stage to account for this. I have also
considered that it could have been an object on tow - a target
aircraft - but there were no such aircraft in the air in the county of
Västerbotten at that moment. So there is no ground for that
idea, either.
- You must have spent a lot of time on this case?
- Yes, when you meet witnesses like these, you spend extremely
many hours investigating. I made a very thorough personal
appraisal of these people and I find that they are the best of their
kind.
The engine sound
The most puzzling detail of the whole observation is the engine
sound. The man, who is slightly hard of hearing after many years
working in a sawmill, could not hear it, but his daughter descibes it
as a very low speed combustion engine. She told the security police
that "a V-8 engine in an old American car, a Chevrolet, for example,
is a high speed engine compared to this".
During my long conversation with AA, he admits that puzzles him.
In that case, the object would be driven by a combustion engine at
a very low pitch, which is technically possible, but disagrees
completely with all known information about missiles and their
operation.
- Could it have been something lighter than air? Some kind of a
Zeppelin?
- I considered that myself, but they cannot answer that question.
They say, however, that the shape was that of a commercial
aircraft. The body was metallic. In principle, we are talking about a
very big cigar. One of the witnesses says that the "cigar" had a large,
dark, vague hole at the rear. The front was cone-shaped, like a cigar
or the body of a commercial aircraft. So, at the rear there is this
vague, dark hole, which means it is a jet engine or something
similar, which has its exhaust there. This doesn't fit in with the
theory of the low-speed combustion engine.
A Zeppelin?
- It is difficult to understand how it works...
- Yes, it's very difficult. I have considered several technical
solutions. The fact that speaks in favour of a Zeppelin is the
rumbling sound of an engine. In that case, it would be driven by a
combustion engine which has a very low speed engine, and that is
technically possible. We have, however, other things which speak
against it. The speed of the object may speak in favour of it. It
moved in a straight northerly direction. If one may make a guess as
to what its course was then it seems that it came from the sea, from
Järsnäs. There is a boat club there, amongst other things.
It ought to have left Järsnäs on a straight, northerly
course. These people who observed it saw no change in altitude, or
change in direction, or speed. The altitude is even, the speed is
even, and the direction doesn't change.
- It should have been visible to more people along the way, don't
you think? Have you discovered anything like that?
- No, and that is not strange, really. If you look at a map you can
see that it moved over a large area of wilderness. It need not
necessarily have flown over any other village, apart from
Håknäs. It is actually quite possible that it continued on
a straight northerly course without passing over a built-up
area.
- There are villages there, but if you look at its course, you can see
that it could have managed to pass between them. The object
appears at a time when people have gone indoors to watch the local
news, which are on at 19.15 hours. You don't miss those!
- So time and direction seem to have been chosen in some way?
- Time and direction mean that the risk of discovery in minimal.
Our theory is that the direction is extremely well chosen if you wish
to fly over a certain area with the smallest possible chance of being
detected.
- Is this the best case you have ever investigated?
- Yes, because we have several sensible witnesses and many details,
and it had just happened! Many times, I have received similar
reports when they are a year, or two years old. Memories fade and
details vanish. I certainly talk to the people involved, but the
quality is often not acceptable. Here, I was called at an early stage.
It happened on the 25th of August and I was called in on the 3rd of
September.
- What did the family see? What could it have been?
- In my judgement, it was a missile, but I'm in doubt as to how it
was driven. It is impossible to tell which direction it came from. I
have carefully studied military literature concering similar events,
but I have not found anything that applies to this case. Nothing. I
have done a lot of work on this, but I haven't found like this before.
This is a difficult case.
Sources: Telephone interviews with two of the witnesses on March
2, 1992, several conversations with the security department at the
infantry regiment and with the security police officer.