凯克斯伯格坠毁事件（KECKSBURG CRASH – 1965）

中文版

凯克斯堡UFO事件发生于1965年12月9日，地点在美国宾夕法尼亚州凯克斯堡。当时，美国至少六个州及加拿大安大略省的数千人目睹了一个巨大明亮的火球。它划过密歇根州底特律/安大略省温莎地区上空，据报道在密歇根州和俄亥俄州北部掉落炽热金属碎片，引发了一些草地火灾，并在宾夕法尼亚州西部产生音爆。在当局排除飞机失事、导弹测试失误或卫星残骸再入等解释后，媒体普遍将其报道为流星。

事件经过（据媒体报道）

然而，位于匹兹堡东南约30英里的小村庄凯克斯堡的目击者声称，有物体坠入树林。一名男孩称看到该物体着陆；他的母亲看到树林中升起一缕蓝烟，随即通知了当局。另一名目击者报告称，在物体据报着陆时感受到震动和”砰的一声”。其他凯克斯堡居民（包括当地志愿消防队成员）报告发现一个橡果形状、大小与大众甲壳虫汽车相当的物体。据称物体底部环绕着类似埃及象形文字的文字。目击者进一步报告称，大量军事人员（尤其是美国陆军）封锁了该区域，命令平民撤离，随后用平板卡车运走了该物体。但当时军方声称他们搜查了树林，发现”绝对没有任何东西”。

附近格林斯堡的《论坛评论报》派记者前往现场；次日早报头条为”不明飞行物坠落在凯克斯堡附近——陆军封锁区域”。文章写道：”物体着陆区域立即根据美国陆军和州警察官员的命令被封锁，据称是为可能坠落的任何物体进行’近距离检查’做准备……州警察官员下令封锁该区域，等待美国陆军工程师以及可能的民间科学家抵达。”然而，该报后续版本称当局搜查后未发现任何物体。

区域地图
官方对广泛目击的火球的解释是中型流星。但对凯克斯堡物体身份（若存在——报道说法不一）的猜测范围从外星飞船到苏联金星探测器”宇宙96号”的残骸（该探测器从未离开大气层）。

凯克斯堡事件与罗斯威尔UFO事件存在相似之处，因此前者常被称为”宾夕法尼亚州的罗斯威尔”。

科学文章
多篇关于该火球的科学文章发表于学术期刊。1966年2月《天空与望远镜》报道称，火球于美国东部时间下午4:44出现在底特律-温莎地区上空。联邦航空管理局收到23份飞行员报告，首份报告始于下午4:44。底特律西南25英里处的地震仪记录了火球穿越大气层时产生的冲击波。该文总结称”火球路径大致从西北向东南延伸”，终点”在伊利湖西部或附近”。

1967年，两位天文学家在《加拿大皇家天文学会杂志》上发表文章，利用地震记录将火球经过底特律地区的时间精确到下午4:43。此外，他们利用底特律北部两个不同地点拍摄的轨迹照片，通过三角测量确定了物体轨迹。他们得出结论：火球以陡峭角度下降，从西南向东北移动，很可能撞击在安大略省温莎附近的伊利湖西北岸。

《加拿大皇家天文学会杂志》提出的轨迹与《天空与望远镜》早先提出的轨迹几乎成直角，后者认为火球可能朝向宾夕法尼亚西部和凯克斯堡方向。因此，若该计算正确，则排除了火球与凯克斯堡事件相关的可能性。怀疑论者常引用该文章来驳斥凯克斯堡UFO坠毁的说法。

然而，《加拿大皇家天文学会杂志》的文章被批评缺乏误差分析。由于天文学家计算中使用的三角测量基线非常狭窄，即使方向测定中的微小误差也可能导致三角测量轨迹的巨大差异。略超过半度的测量误差即可使直线轨迹指向凯克斯堡地区，且下降角度比文章所述更平缓。另有观点指出，照片显示火球轨迹逐渐变细，表明物体远离相机方向移动，即朝向宾夕法尼亚州。若轨迹如文章所述与相机呈侧向，轨迹厚度应大致保持不变。

宇宙96号
曾有猜测（如NASA的詹姆斯·奥伯格）认为凯克斯堡事件的物体可能是苏联卫星”宇宙96号”的残骸。”宇宙96号”呈钟形或橡果形，与目击者报告的物体形状相似（但尺寸远小于目击者描述）。

然而，美国太空司令部1991年的报告得出结论：”宇宙96号”于1965年12月9日凌晨3:18坠毁在加拿大，比被认为与凯克斯堡物体相关的火球再入记录时间（下午4:45）早了约13小时。

此外，NASA约翰逊航天中心轨道碎片首席科学家尼古拉斯·L·约翰逊在2003年采访中表示：

我可以明确告诉你，宇宙96号的任何残骸绝无可能在下午4:45左右降落在宾夕法尼亚州……这是绝对的。轨道力学非常严格。

最新进展
2003年：科幻频道重新调查案件
2003年，科幻频道资助信息自由联盟对该区域及相关记录进行科学研究。科学团队最重要的发现是一排顶部断裂的受损树木，延伸至部分目击者称看到物体嵌入土壤的地点，同时伴有新鲜树木损伤。此外，树木年轮样本将损伤时间定为1965年。这提供了物理证据，表明当时可能有空中物体撞击树木并坠入树林，与军方”未发现任何物体”的官方说法相矛盾。（不过，其中一名科学家认为树木损伤可能由冰灾造成。）据称的着陆点还发现了轻微的土壤扰动。

同时，公众呼吁NASA公布相关文件。2003年11月1日，约40页文件被公布，但未透露关键信息。然而，空军”蓝皮书计划”文件显示，匹兹堡附近空军雷达站曾派出三人小组调查凯克斯堡坠毁事件。（当时部分报纸也报道了此事，并称”蓝皮书计划”正在调查但未予置评。）他们向”蓝皮书计划”报告称未发现任何物体。

2005年：NASA改口称”俄罗斯卫星”

2005年12月，凯克斯堡坠毁事件40周年纪念前夕，NASA发表声明称已检测物体金属碎片，并声称其来自再入大气层的”俄罗斯卫星”。发言人进一步声称相关记录已丢失。据美联社报道：

该物体似乎是再入大气层并解体的俄罗斯卫星。NASA专家研究了物体碎片，但相关发现记录在20世纪90年代丢失。

“通常我们不追踪UFO。我们能做的（而且20世纪60年代作为航天器专家显然做过的事）是检查任何物体并提供专家意见，”施泰茨说。”我们完成了检查，将（案件）封存，事情就此结束。不幸的是，支持这些结论的文件丢失了。”

——施泰茨

此外，该说法与记者莱斯利·基恩2003年从NASA轨道碎片首席科学家尼古拉斯·L·约翰逊处获得的信息相矛盾。作为科幻频道新调查的一部分，基恩请约翰逊重新核查1965年所有已知卫星轨道及其他记录。约翰逊告诉基恩，轨道力学绝对排除了”宇宙96号”金星探测器任何部件造成火球或凯克斯堡物体的可能性。约翰逊还表示，当天没有其他已知人造卫星或物体再入大气层。

基恩等人认为NASA丢失此类记录的说法极不可信。（不过，这对NASA而言并非孤例；例如，阿波罗11号登月电视直播的原始磁带曾被误放或重复使用。）

2005年12月，一项诉讼被提起，要求NASA更彻底地搜寻据称丢失的记录。

2007年10月26日，NASA在法院命令下同意搜寻这些记录。法官曾试图推动NASA行动超过三年，愤怒地将NASA此前的搜寻努力比作”一团乱麻”，从未充分回应请求，并补充道：”我能感受到原告的挫败感，因为我自己也很沮丧。”

在听证会上，美国国家航空航天局（NASA）公共联络官史蒂夫·麦康奈尔承认，凯克斯堡事件发生时的两箱文件已经丢失。几十年来一直担任凯克斯堡事件首席调查员的斯坦·戈登表示：“我毫不怀疑，政府对此事的了解远比向公众透露的要多。”

2008年，太空作家詹姆斯·奥伯格认为，NASA不太可能拥有任何此类文件，因为在他看来，调查现场的所谓NASA团队实际上很可能是空军人员，他们自称是NASA人员——这在20世纪60年代是穿便服的军事人员经常做的事情。他还进一步指出，莱斯利·基恩的诉讼不过是为其雇主谋利的“作秀行为”。

2009年11月，莱斯利·基恩提交了一份关于NASA搜索结果的报告。文件仍然缺失或据报已被销毁，与凯克斯堡案件相关的有价值信息寥寥无几。尤其引人关注的是，一箱据报已被销毁的“碎片学”文件失踪，这些文件涉及太空碎片的回收与检测。基恩表示，文件缺失可能由多种原因造成，包括归档系统不完善、记录放错位置、记录超出搜索范围、可能仍属机密的故意隐藏记录、被NASA员工带走但从未归还的文件（其中一人已被点名）、确实如报告所述被销毁的文件，以及档案管理员对搜索目标不熟悉。此外，原告只能相信NASA按照向法庭报告的方式进行了搜索，因为他们无权自行检查搜索材料。尽管对搜索的彻底性或准确性存有保留意见，基恩表示他们认为已用尽法律救济手段，并终止了对NASA的诉讼。

基恩指出，确实发现了一些有价值的线索，例如NASA普遍参与收集和分析太空碎片，包括关注大约同一时间观测到的较小流星火球。此外，NASA还向新闻机构发布了关于这些其他火球的新闻稿。但NASA对与凯克斯堡案件相关、被广泛报道和观测到的火球却没有任何记录，也未发布任何相关报道。

基恩还写道，她曾试图从NASA发言人戴维·施泰茨那里获取更多信息——此人曾在2005年发表惊人声明，称NASA确实检测了与凯克斯堡相关的碎片（据称来自一颗俄罗斯太空探测器）。但施泰茨从未回应。基恩尤其想知道施泰茨做出这一声明的信息来源，因为他同时表示没有留存记录，而法院下令的搜索也未找到相关记录。此外，还有目击者记录称，他们曾从该物体上“敲下”碎片。

English Version

The Kecksburg UFO incident occurred on December 9, 1965, at Kecksburg, Pennsylvania, USA. A large, brilliant fireball was seen by thousands in at least six U.S. states and Ontario, Canada. It streaked over the Detroit, Michigan/Windsor, Ontario area, reportedly dropped hot metal debris over Michigan and northern Ohio, starting some grass fires and caused sonic booms in Western Pennsylvania. It was generally assumed and reported by the press to be a meteor after authorities discounted other proposed explanations such as a plane crash, errant missile test, or reentering satellite debris.

The Incident (as reported)

However, eyewitnesses in the small village of Kecksburg, about 30 miles southeast of Pittsburgh, claimed something crashed in the woods. A boy said he saw the object land; his mother saw a wisp of blue smoke arising from the woods and alerted authorities. Another reported feeling a vibration and “a thump” about the time the object reportedly landed. Others from Kecksburg, including local volunteer fire department members, reported finding an object in the shape of an acorn and about as large as a Volkswagen Beetle. Writing resembling Egyptian hieroglyphics was also said to be in a band around the base of the object. Witnesses further reported that intense military presence, most notably the United States Army, secured the area, ordered civilians out, and then removed the object on a flatbed truck. At the time, however, the military claimed they searched the woods and found “absolutely nothing”

The Tribune-Review from nearby Greensburg had a reporter at the scene; the headline in the newspaper the next morning was “Unidentified Flying Object Falls near Kecksburg — Army Ropes off Area”. The article continued with, “The area where the object landed was immediately sealed off on the order of U.S. Army and State Police officials, reportedly in anticipation of a ‘close inspection’ of whatever may have fallen… State Police officials there ordered the area roped off to await the expected arrival of both U.S. Army engineers and possibly, civilian scientists.” However, a later edition of the newspaper stated that nothing reportedly had been found after authorities searched the area.

Map of the area 
The official explanation of the widely seen fireball was that it was a mid-sized meteor. However speculation as to the identity of the Kecksburg object (if there was one — reports vary) also range from it being an alien craft to debris from Cosmos 96, a Soviet Space Probe Intended for Venus but never left the atmosphere.

Similarities have been drawn between the Kecksburg incident and the Roswell UFO incident, leading to the former being referred to as “Pennsylvania’s Roswell.”

Scientific articlesSeveral articles were written about the fireball in science journals. The February 1966 issue of Sky & Telescope reported that the fireball was seen over the Detroit-Windsor area at about 4:44 p.m. EST. The Federal Aviation Administration had received 23 reports from aircraft pilots, the first starting at 4:44 p.m. A seismograph 25 miles southwest of Detroit had recorded the shock waves created by the fireball as it passed through the atmosphere. The Sky and Telescope article concluded that “the path of the fireball extended roughly from northwest to southeast” and ended “in or near the western part of Lake Erie”.

A 1967 article by two astronomers in the Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada (JRASC) used the seismographic record to pinpoint the time of passage over the Detroit area to 4:43 p.m. In addition, they used photographs of the trail taken north of Detroit at two different locations to triangulate the trajectory of the object. They concluded that the fireball was descending at a steep angle, moving from the southwest to the northeast, and likely impacted on the northwestern shore of Lake Erie near Windsor, Ontario.

The JRASC trajectory was at nearly right angles to that proposed earlier by Sky and Telescope, or a trajectory that would have taken the fireball in the direction of western Pennsylvania and Kecksburg. Thus, if the calculation was correct, this would rule out the fireball being involved in any way with what may or may not have happened in Kecksburg. The JRASC article is often cited by skeptics to debunk the notion of a UFO crash at Kecksburg.

However, the JRASC article has been criticized as lacking any error analysis. Since the triangulation base used by the astronomers in their calculations was very narrow, even very small errors in determination of directions could result in a very different triangulated trajectory. Measurement errors of slightly more than one-half degree would make possible a straight-line trajectory towards the Kecksburg area and a much shallower angle of descent than reported in the JRASC article. It was also pointed out that the photos used actually show the fireball trail becoming progressively thinner, suggesting motion away from the cameras, or in the direction of Pennsylvania. Had the trajectory been sideways to the cameras, as contended in the JRASC article, the trail would likely have remained roughly constant in thickness.

Kosmos 96There had been some speculation (e.g. NASA’s James Oberg) that the object in the Kecksburg Incident may have been debris from Kosmos 96, a Soviet satellite. Kosmos 96 had a bell- or acorn-like shape similar to the object reported by eyewitnesses (though much smaller than witnesses reported).

However, in a 1991 report, US Space Command concluded that Kosmos 96 crashed in Canada at 3.18am on December 9, 1965, about 13 hours before the fireball thought to be the Kecksburg object undergoing re-entry was recorded at 4:45pm.

In addition, in a 2003 interview Chief Scientist for Orbital Debris at the NASA Johnson Space Center Nicholas L. Johnson stated:

I can tell you categorically, that there is no way that any debris from Kosmos 96 could have landed in Pennsylvania anywhere around 4:45 p.m.[…] That’s an absolute. Orbital mechanics is very strict.

Recent developments 2003: Sci Fi Channel reinvestigates case
In 2003, the Sci Fi Channel sponsored a scientific study of the area and related records by the Coalition for Freedom of Information. The most significant finding of the scientific team was a line of damaged trees broken at the top leading to the site where some eyewitnesses said they saw the object embedded in the soil along with associated fresh tree damage. Furthermore, tree core samples dated the damage to 1965. This provided physical evidence that something airborne may have come crashing through the trees and landed in the woods there at the time, which would contradict the military’s official story of nothing being found. (However, one of the scientists instead suggested ice damage to the trees.) Minor soil disturbance was also found at the alleged landing site.

There was also a push for NASA to release pertinent documents on the subject. Some 40 pages of these documents were released on November 1, 2003, but were unrevealing. However, there are Air Force Project Blue Book documents indicating that a three-man team was sent from an Air Force radar-installation near Pittsburgh to investigate the Kecksburg crash. (This was also reported in some newspaper articles at the time, also that Blue Book was looking into it, but had no comment.) They reported back to Blue Book that nothing was found.

2005: NASA changes story to “Russian satellite”

In December 2005, just before the 40th anniversary of the Kecksburg crash, NASA released a statement to the effect that they had examined metallic fragments from the object and now claimed it was from a re-entering “Russian satellite”. The spokesman further claimed that the related records had been misplaced. According to an Associated Press story:

The object appeared to be a Russian satellite that re-entered the atmosphere and broke up. NASA experts studied fragments from the object, but records of what they found were lost in the 1990s.

As a rule, we don’t track UFOs. What we could do, and what we apparently did as experts in spacecraft in the 1960s, was to take a look at whatever it was and give our expert opinion,” Steitz said. “We did that, we boxed (the case) up and that was the end of it. Unfortunately, the documents supporting those findings were misplaced.

—Steitz,

Furthermore, the claim contradicts what journalist Leslie Kean was told in 2003 by Nicholas L. Johnson, NASA’s chief scientist for orbital debris. As part of the new Sci Fi investigation, Kean had Johnson recheck orbital paths of all known satellites and other records from the period in 1965. Johnson told Kean that orbital mechanics made it absolutely impossible for any part of the Cosmos 96 Venus probe to have accounted for either the fireball or any object at Kecksburg. Johnson also stated there were no other known man-made satellites or other objects that re-entered the atmosphere on that day.

Kean and others deem it highly questionable that NASA could actually lose such records. (However, this would not be a unique case for NASA; for example, the original tapes recorded during the televised Apollo 11 Moon landing were misplaced or reused.)

In December 2005, a lawsuit was filed to get NASA to search more diligently for the alleged lost records.

On October 26, 2007, NASA agreed to search for those records after being ordered by the court. The judge, who had tried to move NASA along for more than 3 years, angrily referred to NASA’s previous search efforts as a “ball of yarn” that never fully answered the request, adding, “I can sense the plaintiff’s frustration because I’m frustrated.”

During the hearing, Steve McConnell, NASA’s public liaison officer, admitted two boxes of papers from the time of the Kecksburg incident were missing. Stan Gordon, principal investigator of the Kecksburg incident for several decades, stated “I have no doubt the government knows a lot more about this than it has revealed to the public.”

In 2008 space writer James Oberg opined that NASA was unlikely to possess any such documents since, in his view, it was highly likely that the supposed NASA team who investigated the site were in fact Air Force personnel who identified themselves as NASA personnel, something regularly done by military personnel in civilian clothes during the 1960s. He further suggested that Leslie Kean’s lawsuit was no more than a “publicity stunt” for the benefit of Kean’s employers.

In November 2009, Leslie Kean filed a report on the results of the NASA search. Documents were still missing or reported destroyed and little of interest was turned up relevant to the Kecksburg case. Of particular interest was a missing box of “fragology” files, reported destroyed, related to recovery and examination of space debris. Kean said the missing files could be due to a number of reasons, including a poor filing system, misplaced records or records filed outside of the parameters of the search, deliberately concealed records, perhaps still classified, files removed by NASA employees but never returned (one such individual was named), files that were indeed destroyed as reported, and archivists unfamiliar with what was being searched for. In addition, the plaintiffs had to trust that NASA carried out the search as they reported to the court, since the plaintiffs were not allowed to examine the search materials for themselves. Despite reservations about the thoroughness or accuracy of the search, Kean said they felt they had exhausted their legal remedies and ended the lawsuit against NASA.

Kean noted that some items of interest did turn up, such as NASA’s general involvement in collecting space debris and analyzing it, including interest in sightings of lesser meteor fireball seen at about the same time. In addition, NASA sent out press releases to news agencies about these other fireballs. But NASA had nothing on the very widely reported and seen fireball associated with the Kecksburg case and issued no stories on it.

Kean also wrote that she tried to get more information from David Steitz, the NASA spokesperson who issued the surprising statement in 2005 that NASA had indeed examined debris related to Kecksburg, supposedly from a Russian space probe. But Steitz never responded. Kean was particularly interested in Steitz’s source of information to make such a statement, since he also indicated there were no surviving records and the court-ordered search also turned up no relevant records. There are also records of eye witnesses saying that they had “chipped” off pieces of the artifact.

[arf_affiliate product=”book-kean”]