is a transcription of the original
document. The original format
has been retained as much as possible.)
OF THE AIR FORCE AFOIR-CO/Lt Col Garrett/mob/4544
28 Oct 47
A faked version of this "Schulgen
Memo" first surfaced in June, 1987. A full report on the faked version of this
document can be found here.
You can view the
original document here. (.pdf
This is a transcription of the Original
memo, which asked for everyone to be on the look-out for those "Flying
Saucer Type Aircraft" that were being reported in the press.
The version that is most frequently
referred to by UFO buffs, however, is a forgery--an altered version that cleverly modified
key portions of
the original to make it look like that "they" knew that "interplanetary
craft" were possibly the cause of all the sightings.
The altered version was
first exposed by Robert Todd, and
most UFO authorities, including organizations like Citizens Against UFO Secrecy (CAUS),
agree that is is a fake. But because of it's inclusion and endorsement
in popular books such as Above Top Secret and Beyond Top Secret (both by
Timothy Good) and the support of Stan Friedman,
there are still many who think the the faked copy is the genuine article
One of the major
alterations occurs on page three. A discussion of the fakery is included below.
You can view a .pdf copy of
the Original Draft of the Schulgen Memo here.
You can download images of the faked
These images are fairly large- over 100k-
so please be patient.
Intelligence Requirements on Flying Saucer Type
Hq. USAF - AFOIR
30 OCT 1947
Attn: Plans and Collection Branch
Lt Col Garrett/mob/4544
1. It is requested that a Collection Memorandum,
similar to the attached draft, be issued to the addresses indicated thereon. This is in
accordance with conversation between Lt. Colonel Smith and Lt. Colonel Garrett.
2. It will be appreciated if, at the time this
Memorandum is reproduced, ten (10) additional copies could be run off and sent to the
Directorate of Intelligence, Air Intelligence Requirements Division, Collection Branch,
for file purposes.
FOR THE SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE:
GEO. F. SCHULGEN Brigadier General, U.S.A.F.
1. Intelligence Requirements
Chief, Air Intelligence Requirements Div.
2. Draft of Collection Memorandum
Office of Ass't. Chief of Air Staff-2
DRAFT OF COLLECTION MEMORANDUM
1. This Memo sets forth the current intelligence
requirements in the field of Flying Saucer type aircraft.
1. An alleged "Flying Saucer" type aircraft
or object in flight, approximating the shape of a disc, has been reported by many
observers from widely scattered places, such as the United States, Alaska, Canada,
Hungary, the Island of Guam, and Japan. This object has been reported by many competent
observers, including USAF rated officers. Sightings have been made from the ground as well
as from the air.
2. Commonly reported features that are very significant and which may aid in the
investigation are as follows:
a. Relatively flat bottom with extreme light-reflecting ability.
b. Absence of sound except for an occasional roar when operating under super performance
c. Extreme maneuverability and apparent ability to almost hover.
d. A plan form approximating that of an oval or disc with a dome shape on the top surface.
e. The absence of an exhaust trail except in a few instances when it was reported to have
a bluish color, like a Diesel exhaust, which persisted for approximately one hour. Other
reports indicated a brownish smoke trail that could be the results of a special catalyst
or chemical agent for extra power.
f. The ability to quickly disappear by high speed or by complete disintegration.
g. The ability to suddenly appear without warning as if from an extremely high altitude.
h. The size most reported approximated that of a C-54 or Constellation type aircraft.
i. The ability to group together very quickly in a tight formation when more than one
aircraft are together.
j. Evasive action ability indicates possibility of being manually operated, or possibly by
electronic or remote control devices.
k. Under certain power conditions, the craft seems to have the ability to cut a clear path
through clouds -- width of path estimated to be approximately one-half mile. Only one
incident indicated this phenomenon.
3. The first sightings in the U.S. were reported
around the middle of May. The last reported sighting took place in Toronto, Canada, 14
September. The greatest activity in the U.S. was during the last week of June and the
first week of July.
4 is where one of the alterations took place. The faked copy reads:
"... accomplishments of the Germans, it is the considered opinion of some elements that
the object may in fact may represent an interplanetary craft of some kind."
Notice that the Original makes the very
clear assumption that the objects are of terrestrial origin, and that the author is clearly
worried that the Russians may have captured some German technology that would give them a
potent air weapon.
This memo sparked the
Walker Memo and resulted in the
investigations of the research
done by the Horten brothers
4. This strange object, or phenomenon, may be considered, in view of certain
observations, as long-range aircraft capable of a high rate of climb, high cruising speed
(possibly sub-sonic at all times) and highly maneuverable and capable of being flown in
very tight formation. For the purpose of analysis and evaluation of the so-called
"flying saucer" phenomenon, the object sighted is being assumed to be a manned
aircraft, of Russian origin, and based on the perspective thinking and actual
accomplishments of the Germans.
5. There is
also a possibility that the Horten brothers' perspective thinking may have inspired this
type of aircraft - particularly the "Parabola", which has a crescent plan form.
Records show that only a glider version was built of this type aircraft. It is reported to
have been built in Hellegenberg, Germany, but was destroyed by fire before having ever
been flown. The Horten brothers' latest trend of perspective thinking was definitely
toward aircraft configurations of low aspect ratio. The younger brother, Riemar, stated
that the "Parabola" configuration would have the least induced drag - which is a
very significant statement. The theory supporting this statement should be obtained if
6. The German High Command indicated a definite
interest in the Horten type of flying wing and were about to embark on a rigorous campaign
to develop such aircraft toward the end of the war. A Horten design, known as the IX,
which was designated as the Go-8-229 and the Go-P-60 (night fighter) was to be
manufactured by the Gotha Plant. It is reported that a contract for fifty such aircraft
was planned, but only three or four were built. This plant is now in the hands of the
Russians. A recent report indicates that the Russians are now planning to build a fleet of
1,800 Horten VIII (six engine pusher) type flying wing aircraft. The wing span is 131
feet. The sweepback angle is 30 degrees. The Russian version is reported to be jet
1. Requirements appear at Inclosure No. 1.
Control No. A-1917
1. To M.A.'s England, France, Sweden, Finland, USSR, Turkey, Greece, Iran, China, Norway,
Philippines, and to Commander-in-Chief, Far East, and Commanding General, United States
Air Forces in Europe, through Commanding General, EUCOM.
INCLOSURE NO. 1
1. Research and Development
a. What German scientists had a better-than-average
knowledge of the Horten brothers' work and perspective thinking; where are these
scientists now located, and what is their present activity? Should be contacted and in-
b. What Russian factories are building the Horten VIII design?
c. Why are the Russians building 1,800 of the Horten VIII design?
d. What is their contemplated tactical purpose?
e. What is the present activity of the Horten brothers, Walter and Riemar?
f. What is known of the whereabouts of the entire Horten family,
sister? All should be contacted and interrogated regarding any contemplated plans or
perspective thinking of the Horten brothers, and any interest shown by the Russians to
develop their aircraft.
g. Are any efforts being made to develop the Horten "Parabola" or modify this
configuration to approximate an oval or disc?
h. What is the Horten perspective thinking on internal controls or controls that are
effective mainly by streams of air or gas originating from within the aircraft to supplant
conventional external surface controls?
For any aircraft whose shape approximates that of an
oval, disc, or saucer, information regarding the following items is requested:
a. Boundary layer control method by suction, blowing, or a combination of both.
b. Special controls for effective maneuverability at very slow speeds or extremely high
Openings either in the leading edge top and bottom surfaces that are employed chiefly to
accomplish boundary layer control or for the purpose of reducing the induced drag. Any
openings in the leading edge should be reported and described as to shape, size, etc. This
investigation is significant to justify a disc shape configuration for long-range
d. Approximate airfoil shape in the center and near
e. Front view and rear view shape.
3. Items of Construction
a. Type of material, whether metal, ferrous, non-ferrous, or non-metallic.
b. Composite or sandwich construction utilizing various combinations of metals, plastics,
and perhaps balsa wood.
c. Unusual fabrication methods to achieve extreme light weight and structural stability
particularly in connection with great capacity for fuel storage.
4. Items of Arrangement
a. Special provisions such as retractable domes to provide unusual observation for the
pilot or crew members.
b. Crew number and accomodation facilities.
c. Pressurized cabin equipment.
d. High altitude or high speed escapement methods.
e. Methods of pressurization or supercharging from auxillary units or from the prime power
f. Provisions for towing - especially with short fixed bar, and for re-fueling in flight.
g. Provisions for assisted take off application.
h. Bomb bay provisions, such as dimensions, approximate location, and unusual features
regarding the opening and closing of the doors.
5. Landing Gear
a. Indicate type of landing gear - whether conventional, tricycle, multiple wheel, etc.
b. Retractable, and jettison features for hand gear.
c. Provisions for takeoff from ice, snow, or water.
d. Skid arrangements for either takeoff or landing.
6. Power Plant
a..Information is needed regarding the propulsion system used in the aircraft. Possible
types of engines that could be employed include:
(1) Reciprocating (piston type) engine or gas
turbine. Either or both of these could be used to drive propellers of conventional or
special design, rotating vanes, ducted fans, or compressors.
(2) Jet propulsion engines including turbo jets, rockets, ramjets, pulse jets, or a
combination of all four.
(3) Nuclear propulsion (atomic energy). Atomic energy engines would probably be unlike any
familiar type of engine, although atomic engines might be employed in combination with any
of the above types.
Aircraft would be characterized by lack of fuel
systems and fuel storage place.
b. The power plant would likely be an integral part
of the aircraft and could possibly not be distinguished as an item separate from the
aircraft. If jet propulsion is used, large air handling capacity, characterized by a large
air inlet and large exhaust nozzle, should be evident. The size of entrance and exit areas
would be of interest. It is possible that the propulsive jet is governed or influenced for
control of the aircraft. The presence of vanes or control surfaces in the exhaust or
methods of changing the direction of the object should be observed.
c.Information desired on the propulsion systems pertains to the following items:
(1) Type of power plant or power plants.
(2) General description.
(3) Rating (thrust, horsepower, or air flow).
(4) Type of fuel
(5) Catalytic agents for super-performance or normal cruising power.