Activism

Additionally, it is clear from examinations of audio recordings between ATC and Air crews that it is very difficult to discuss an observation or incident that might involve UAP. This stress is unnecessary and contributes to an atmosphere of bias against reporting UAP observations and incidents and may directly influence otherwise prudent precautions like the issuing of NOTAMs and other safety related measures.

The term Unidentified Aerial Phenomena or UAP is an attempt to address the fact that not all UAP are described as UFO. Many are simply described as unusual lights. NARCAP feels the term more accurately reflects the scope of descriptions in aviation reports as well as the possibility that these unsual phenomena may arise from several different sources. As yet, NARCAP has no position regarding possible sources of UAP and will allow the data to speak for themselves as research continues.

Indications of Institutional Bias

When investigative journalist Leslie Kean approached an influential, elected member of a prominent U.S. aviation union with questions about UAP and pilots, his reply was "If these things were happening don't you think I would know about it?"

Unexplained Sightings Met With Denial

Leslie Kean, 2001

While there is much more data to be collected there are certainly many excellent examples of aviation safety related incidents involving UAP that have occured over the entire history of powered flight.

So, why doesn't he know about it?

The history of government involvement in researching unidentified aerial phenomena combined with Cold War issues has contributed to a bias that is supported by the financial interests of the aviation industry and the image of aviation professionals that it supports.This image could be described as follows:   conservative responsible individuals - aviation professionals- do not see unusual things.

The issue of under-reporting bias in the US aviation system is addressed in some detail in:

NARCAP Techincal Report 8:  Aviation Safety in America- Unidentified Aerial Phenomena and Under-Reporting Bias.

Ted Roe, June 2004

When one pilot who flies for a major US air carrier tried to represent a NARCAP aircrew survey to his management, he found himself facing not one but two psychological evaluations before he quit trying. He hadn't claimed to have seen UAP, either to NARCAP or his management, but he was ostracized and persecuted for simply trying to raise the question.

On the other hand, another pilot for another carrier managed to get the NARCAP Aircrew survey to all the crews in his airline with the blessings of his management. To see the results click here:

NARCAP Technical Report Five:  Air Crew Survey Project.

Dr. Richard Haines and Ted Roe, 2002

A more generalized discussion of the bias in science against studying unidentified aerial phenomena may be found in the following papers:

Science and the Failure to Study Unidentified Aerial Phenomena.

Leslie Kean, 2003

UFO Critique: UFOs, Social Intelligence, and the Condon Committee

Diana Palmer Hoyt, April 2000

Science in Default: Twenty Two Years of Inadequate UFO Investigations

James E. McDonald, Ph.D.

134th meeting of The American Society for the Advancement of Science, December 1969

Some Recommendations

There are several small steps that, if taken, could make a big difference in the discussion regarding UAP and aviation safety.

1.)   Modify FAA, NTSB and ASRS reporting forms to reflect UAP profiles that would allow aviation professionals to report their experiences accurately.

This step would allow for the data to be collected that could be used in making the determination whether or not UAP indeed represent a threat to safe aviation.

2.)   Reduce the bias against reporting by openly and rationally addressing the issue of UAP and aviation safety from the top of the aviation system down. Encourage management to become familiar with the issue and the current status of the inquiry regarding these matters including the attempts to collect data.

3.)   Encourage the collection of UAP reports and their analysis or referral to NARCAP for analysis. This includes the timely acquisition of ATC communications, radar data, etc...

4.)   Establish a grassroots approach amongst aviation community members and encourage them to determine if the issue of UAP incidents involving aviation safety is important to them.