SUBJECT: THE PHOENIX PROJECT FROM A GENIE FORUM              FILE: UFO2503



PART 6




   Filename: Phoenix6.Txt
   Type    : Editorial/Opinion
   Author  : Joseph Harris -CIS: 70714,3321
   Date    : 10/21/92
   Desc.   : Editorial on the K2 Report
   Cis Id# : 70714,3321

   -----------------------------------------------------------------------


                       The Validity of "THE K-2 REPORT"
                                        -Joseph Harris



   Some  time  ago  I  decided to further investigate the  claims  of  the
   Phoenix  Project  in  regards  to their K2   Report  about  a  supposed
   underground alien base located near Quincy CA.  This report  chronicles
   my  initial findings.  It is not my intention to discredit the  Phoenix
   Project, or Jack Mathias. They, as a scientific organization, should be
   able to appreciate any attempt at independant verification.

   The following is excerpted directly from the K-2 Report, and chronicles
   an "object" being pursued by 8 F-4 Phantoms.

   * * *

   Report # 1:  By Staff # 2:
   Date: August 10, 1989, Time:  2212 PDT.
   Location: Approximately 40 miles southwest of K-2.

   A  brightly  glowing  object  was observed from my  location.   It  was
   approximately 30-40 feet in diameter, moving slowly from south to north
   at 500 feet above the tree-tops.

   [text deleted for brevity]

     Within 10  minutes,  after the object left the area,  eight Air Force
   jet fighters (F-4s, judging from their sound and appearance) and moving
   very fast, went overhead traveling in the same direction the object had
   taken -- towards the North.  Four minutes later, the fighters returned,
   heading south.  I  presumed the object had been spotted by their radar.
   Their  quick  return  would indicate they lost radar contact  with  the
   object.

   * * *

   [text deleted for brevity]

   Memo
   August 12, 1989
   From Staff # 1
   To: Staff # 2

     Our contacts in the Air Force verify that on the night of August  10,
   1989,  at the time indicated in Report # 1 of that date,  that eight F-
   4's,  scrambled from Beale AFB,  CA. They had a brief radar-lock,  on a
   "bogie"  in the area described. However,  they lost the target,  due to
   ground clutter when it suddenly descended into the mountainous terrain.
   They  returned  to  the base when a further sweep of  the  area  proved
   fruitless.

     You're right,  the AF had a blip on their radar, but lost it when the
   ship  dropped into that 20-mile approach corridor between  the  valleys
   and the radar dead zone.

   * * *

   My Investigation.

   I  contacted  the Public Affairs office at Beale  AFB.   (916-634-8890)
   After identifying myself, and the information I needed, they transfered
   me to another office. The person who answered the phone identified both
   himself,   and  the office so swiftly,  I  couldn't make out who I  was
   talking to. (altho the point is moot..)

   The following is a -rough- transcript of the conversation,  although it
   is not verbatim. (I did not record the conversation.) The officer I was
   speaking to was quite candid, and informal. The conversation itself was
   spontaneous, so I do not believe that I was being fed a "canned" story.
   Besides,   as  you'll see in a moment,  the officer has  absoloutly  no
   reason  to lie about this.  I  read the above memo to the officer,  and
   then asked the following questions.

   Q: Has  Beale AFB operated F-4  Phantoms in an interceptor role at  any
      time, and specificly during August of 1989?

   A: No.  Beale AFB is a SAC [Strategic Air Command] base,  and has never
      operated  tactical aircraft in any capacity.  We have B-52s,  KC-130
      air refuelers,  and until recently, the SR-71.  We're a bomber base,
      not a fighter base.  There was an attempt made in an 89  air show to
      get 2 RF-4Cs to come here, but unfortunatly, they couldn't make it.

      [Note:  In conversation,  he told me the RF-4s were part of the High
      Roller squadron based here in Reno...Joe.]

   Q: Were F-4s ever used in an interceptor role as late as 1989?

   A: Not to my knowledge,  no. The F-4s have been relegated to ECM, "Wild
      Weasel" roles, and low level recce [Recon] roles for quite some time
      now. These types of F-4s are completely unarmed, therefor useless as
      fighters.   If an intercept mission was called out for northern  CA,
      the  response would come from only one of 2 AFB's.   Eilson<sp>   or
      Almendorf AFB in Alaska,  although I'm not sure which one,  and  the
      other  AFB  would  be  March AFB.  Both bases have a  wing  of  F-15
      interceptors that the AF have assigned to West Coast defense. The US
      Navy  also has NAS [Naval Air Stations] assigned to coastal defense,
      but I'm not sure which bases those are.  At any rate, the only Naval
      outfits  to  use the F-4  are the Marines,  and they also use it  as
      "Wild Weasel" and low level recce.

   Q: Has it ever been AF SOP to use eight aircraft in an intercept?

   A: For -one-  radar bogie? [he laughed at this point] That would insult
      most of the fighter pilots I've ever known. [another laugh] No, most
      AFB's only have 2 aircraft capable of being "scrambled" on a moments
      notice.  Even if an AFB had more aircraft available for a  scramble,
      they  would still only send 2 aircraft.  Operating an interceptor is
      extremly  expensive,   somwhere in the region of $4,000  per  flight
      hour.   This  is fuel,  oil,  hydraulics,  and air and  ground  crew
      salaries. The AF wouldn't spend $32,000 for something they know from
      experience would only take $8,000. Besides, we're still talking F-4s
      here right? [Yes] Well, for an intercept conducted by the AF, you're
      looking  at the F-15,  or the F-16.  Even if we had F-4s  that  were
      armed, they wouldn't use them. They're just not fast enough anymore.

   * * *

   There  was more to this conversation,  but we got to talking about  the
   High  Rollers and the Reno Air races..  the above is the  only  portion
   that pertains  to this report...

   Summary:

   1. Beale  AFB  is a SAC base,  and as such,  does not operate  tactical
      aircraft,   (ie fighters)  in any capacity,  and never  has.   Their
      primary aircraft types are bombers, hi-alt recon, and refuelers.

   2. The AF would never send eight ships to intercept a radar bogie. IMHO
      they wouldn't need to.

   3. There  are  no  F-4  Phantoms being used on the  West  Coast  in  an
      interceptor role. They are used in Recon, and ECM roles only, and as
      such, are totally unarmed.  If the AF were to scramble an intercept,
      they would use F-16s or F-15s.


   Possible Explanations:

   1. The AF is lieing.

      Not  likely.   They've  no  reason to hide the  fact  that  tactical
      aircraft do not operate from their base, nor have they any reason to
      lie about not using F-4s as interceptors.

   2. The Phoenix Project member mis-identified the aircraft.

      Unfortunatly,   the  Phoenix Project cannot use this as  a  defense,
      since they state that they "verified"  that 8 F-4s were scrambled to
      intercept the radar "bogie."

   3. The Phoenix  Project  deliberatly  falsified this  portion  of their
      report.

      Unfortunatly, this is the only explanation.

   Conclusion:

   It is my opinion that at least this portion of the Phoenix Project's K-
   2  report is a deliberate falsehood.  It can neither be a typographical
   error, nor an error in judgement, (since they "verified" the info using
   AF sources.) This also throws considerable doubt on the validity of the
   "object"  sighting, and on the K-2 report as a whole. However,  I  will
   let  others,   more  knowledgable and capable than  I,   determine  the
   validity of the remaining K-2 claims.

   Joe.




**********************************************
* THE U.F.O. BBS - http://www.ufobbs.com/ufo *
**********************************************