The Big Sur Incident: What Actually Happened in September 1964?
Hello everyone,
I hope this message finds you well.
Today, I want to dive into the mysterious Big Sur incident that allegedly unfolded during an Atlas-D missile test on September 15, 1964. Many of you have likely followed this intriguing case, which is precisely why I’m reaching out. I’ve come across new documentation that sheds light on important aspects of this event. I’m looking to gather insights and additional context from this community, so if you have anything to contribute, I’d love to hear it! The documents in question are the USAF Image Orthicon Report and the US Army Kwajalein Range Nike-X Report from 1965.
For a brief overview of the events, please check out the video below:
Big Sur Incident Overview Video
What follows is a breakdown of the day’s events, along with the claims made by Dr. Bob Jacobs, an officer with the USAF 1369th Photographic Squadron who was present that day.
Background and Timeline
Incident Overview:
The Big Sur UFO event centers around an Atlas missile test conducted in September 1964 at Vandenberg Air Force Base. The story was first publicly shared by Dr. Robert “Bob” Jacobs, a former USAF lieutenant, in 1982. He claims that during a missile launch filmed from Big Sur, California, a UFO appeared and interfered with the test warhead. Jacobs was in charge of an optical instrumentation team responsible for documenting Vandenberg ICBM launches. He alleges that on the day in question, a saucer-shaped object entered the camera’s view, circled the dummy nuclear warhead, and emitted flashes of light that allegedly caused the warhead to malfunction and veer off course. According to Jacobs, this remarkable footage was confiscated by two unknown men from Washington, whom he suspected were CIA agents, and he was instructed never to speak of it. The incident remained under wraps until Jacobs later went public.
The Evolution of Jacobs’s Account:
Initially, Jacobs misremembered certain details of the incident in a 1982 National Enquirer article, stating that the launch was an Atlas-F missile on January 8, 1965. However, subsequent investigations have firmly established that the actual date was September 15, 1964. Jacobs’s commanding officer at the time, Major Florenz J. Mansmann, corroborated his basic account in the mid-1980s, confirming that something extraordinary was captured on film. In an interview for OMNI magazine in January 1985, Mansmann affirmed that there was indeed something remarkable on the footage and estimated the date to be September 15, 1964. While Vandenberg’s spokesperson acknowledged an Atlas launch on that date, they denied any involvement from a UFO.
Jacobs later refined his timeline in a 1989 article, suggesting the possible missile type could be Atlas D instead of F, and indicating a preference for September 15 as the likely date. The confusion surrounding the dates has emerged as a key point of debate.
“Butterfly Net” vs. “Buzzing Bee” Launches:
Vandenberg had multiple Atlas launches in September 1964, each assigned a code name. The Atlas-D launch on September 15, 1964, was dubbed “Butterfly Net,” while another Atlas-D launch on September 22, 1964, was named “Buzzing Bee.” These code names appear in declassified US Army Kwajalein Range records, which inform us about the targets for the program’s missiles directed at the Marshall Islands. Jacobs and Mansmann believed the filmed UFO
Thank you for sharing such a detailed and comprehensive overview of the Big Sur incident from September 1964. It’s clear that a lot of effort has gone into compiling the various aspects, timelines, and claims surrounding this event.
I find the juxtaposition between Jacobs’s narrative and the skeptical analyses particularly compelling. Jacobs’s account, supported by his former commanding officer, certainly carries weight, especially given the emotional intensity behind their recollections. However, I also understand the skepticism surrounding their testimony, particularly when no corroborating evidence has emerged from declassified documents and official reports. The absence of the actual footage exacerbates the mystery and leaves plenty of room for doubt even as it fuels speculation.
Your mention of the two code-named launches, “Butterfly Net” and “Buzzing Bee,” and the different conditions under which they occurred provides important context. The suggestion that Jacobs may have misidentified the launch aligns with how eyewitness testimonies can occasionally falter due to the passage of time and the influence of subsequent events.
I also appreciate your point about the technical capabilities of the equipment used during the launches and the potential for optical illusions or misinterpretations of what was captured on film. This perspective nuance reinforces that even credible individuals can misinterpret extraordinary phenomena, especially when under the pressure of a highly classified military context.
Regarding the idea of a cover-up, it raises interesting questions about the accessibility of information and the motives behind disclosure policies in military contexts. While I lean toward a more skeptical perspective on the extraordinary claims of UFOs, it’s also difficult to ignore the conviction with which Jacobs presents his story.
That said, I’m curious what specific evidence or counterarguments you’d be interested in further exploring? It might also be valuable to hear more discussions surrounding the psychological aspects of UFO sightings, as this could provide insight into why certain narratives take hold despite lacking physical evidence.
I look forward to seeing where the community discussion leads. This case indeed seems rich with ideas worth unpacking, and your call for a logical, open-minded dialogue is essential in these discussions.