Showing posts with label DAIG investigation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label DAIG investigation. Show all posts

Thursday, April 9, 2015

Cash-Landrum UFO: A Fresh Look by George Wingfield


"There was no evidence presented that would indicate that Army, National Guard, or Army Reserve helicopters were involved." 
That was the conclusion  of Lt. Col. George C. Sarran's report of his investigation for the Department of the Army's Inspector General’s office on the allegations of U.S. military helicopters being present during the Cash-Landrum UFO encounter.
(For further details, see, The DAIG Investigation of the Cash-Landrum UFO Incident )

This guest article by veteran UFO researcher, George Wingfield, provides a good look into the political backdrop of the Cash-Landrum UFO story, and examines the military forces that could have been involved. Also, he tries to offer a purpose and function for the UFO in this case.   






A Fresh Look at the Cash-Landrum Incident by George Wingfield


Having looked at Curt Collins' findings on George Sarran’s memo about 100 helicopters at Robert Gray Army Airfield, I accept that this was not the smoking gun that it appeared to be.  There is no reason to think that George Sarran was being untruthful in saying that the DAIG investigation, 18 months after the event, had failed in its quest to find whether any Army or USAF (or other military unit’s) helicopters were those seen by Betty Cash and the Landrums during the infamous incident.

However, there are very good reasons for thinking that the helicopters were real and were indeed ones belonging to the US military.  This fact probably had to be covered up because this exercise required the very highest level of secrecy without which its whole purpose would have been lost.  Only the helicopter crews and the senior officers who ordered the exercise would have had the slightest idea about its purpose.

To make any sense of the episode one cannot afford to ignore the grave international political situation that had consumed the attention of the United States, the President, and the US military for all of the year 1980.  This was of course the Iran hostage crisis which blighted Jimmy Carter’s presidency and concentrated minds both in government and in the military to find some way of rescuing the 52 Americans who were eventually held for 444 days.

Operation Eagle Claw used eight RH-53 helicopters and several C-130s in an attempt to rescue the hostages on April 24, 1980. It failed miserably with the loss of several aircraft and the lives of eight servicemen.  Subsequently the crisis deepened.  A second rescue attempt, Operation Credible Sport, was planned using highly modified YMC-130H Hercules aircraft, one of which crashed during a demonstration flight at Eglin AFB on October 29, 1980. This project was abandoned shortly afterwards and it was on November 2, 1980, the Iranian parliament set forth formal conditions for the US hostages’ release. At just this time Ronald Reagan was elected President, although obviously he would not take up office until eleven weeks later.

I believe that one cannot understand the strange Cash-Landrum affair without first setting the scene.  New urgent plans for the military to rescue the hostages in Iran were still being prepared as from October 1980 since few believed that the Iranians would keep their word on any agreements that had been reached.  These new plans resulted in the formation of the 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment (Airborne), the ‘Task Force 160’ that is referred to in John Alexander’s book UFOs –Myths, Conspiracies, and Realities.  The 160th and US Navy SEALs are most likely to have been the occupants of the helicopters involved in the Cash-Landrum incident.

There is known to have been a second projected rescue plan, known as Project Honey Badger, by the 160th to rescue the Iran hostages in early 1981. This was called off when President Reagan came into office and the hostages were released on January 20, 1981.  However, it is known that the Honey Badger exercises continued until well after the 1980 US presidential election. “Numerous special operations, applications, and techniques were developed which became part of the emerging USSOCOM repertoire”  --according to Wikipedia’s entry on Operation Eagle Claw.   I suggest that Honey Badger was what produced the Cash-Landrum incident which had near fatal results for Betty Cash, Vickie Landrum, and her grandson Colby.   

If that were the case, we need to explain what the flaming object was that descended on the country road near Huffman, TX.  My suggestion is that it was some kind of “THW”.  That is my unofficial acronym for “Trojan Horse Weapon” and something of this kind was going to be needed for the hostage rescue mission to have any chance of success.


Illustration from a TV re-enactment of the event.

Everyone is familiar with the story of the great wooden horse which the Greeks left outside the gates of Troy during the Trojan War (c. 1200 BC). The Trojans were very puzzled as to what this was but, thinking the Greek forces had sailed away, they took it inside the city anyway.  Inside the horse Greek soldiers were hidden and in the dead of night they climbed out and opened the city gates for their returning comrades to rush in.  This clever deception allowed the Greek army to destroy the city of Troy and bring the lengthy Trojan War to an end.

Any modern THW would have to be a totally unfamiliar object and one whose purpose was not obvious to the people it was intended to fool. Its objective would be to deceive, distract, and possibly even disable the enemy defenders at the position attacked. I don’t suggest that it was meant to look like a UFO but this THW would have to descend from the sky at night, land close to where the rescue operation was going to take place, and completely distract the Iranians guarding the hostages.  If it worked, the hostages could be rescued from the large building where they were being held in Tehran.  Task Force 160 men would descend onto the roof of the building from helicopters and blast their way into where the hostages were being held.

It may have been planned as a similar sort of mission to Operation Neptune Spear which was sent to Abbottabad, Pakistan, in May 2011 to kill Osama bin Laden. That was an easier proposition in that there were no hostages to rescue and few armed defenders in the bin Laden compound.  Even so, it involved several helicopters and a staging point in the desert for refueling of the aircraft and a holding position for the back-up CH-47 Chinooks. 

If the Cash-Landrum “UFO” was indeed a THW we can only guess at the role it was meant to play.  It may have been, primarily, an experimental nuclear lighting device powered by a small reactor that could have weighed 10 tons or more. Output would have been used to produce an exceptionally intense light source (or sources) for, if need be, an hour or more.  If it could be made to work as planned, it could have been flown into Tehran slung under a Chinook helicopter, and fired up when it was landed near the Teymour Bakhtiari mansion in Tehran where the hostages were being held as from November 1980.  The device’s intensely brilliant light(s) would blind any Iranian guards or soldiers who tried to resist the rescue mission which would have been carried out by Navy SEALs wearing special goggles to shield their eyes from the intense beam.  

A number of Task Force 160 helicopters could have carried such an operation and taken the rescued hostages to a waiting US Navy ship out at sea.  Such a THW –presumably unmanned—might have been intended to descend under its own power or else be lowered by cables from a Chinook helicopter high overhead.  During the Cash-Landrum incident the mystery object was said to be belching flames downward but whether that was from a descent rocket engine or simply part of its fearsome THW display is unclear.  It is most unlikely that any THW like this could fly the 400 miles between the Persian Gulf and Tehran under its own power and so it would have to be taken there inside a large aircraft --or else slung under a large helicopter-- before being deployed.    

If this scenario is correct, the operation that resulted in the Cash-Landrum fiasco was a dress rehearsal for the hostage rescue mission, probably flown from a US Navy carrier in the Gulf of Mexico.  The nuclear lighting device when fired up, intentionally or otherwise, presumably went out of control and it had to be put down on a road in Texas with the resulting radiation burns to the two unfortunate women who were in the car that stopped near it.

If this operation was as I have suggested, it was most certainly Top Secret --to the very highest level of security.  Whether or not such a Project Honey Badger rehearsal was sanctioned by President Carter in the last days of his presidency, we cannot tell.  It may well have been solely authorized by some senior figure in the Pentagon.  When it failed, all traces of the operation had to be concealed and it does seem quite likely that someone in the military may have promoted the wild idea that this was a UFO incident simply to prevent the real explanation becoming public knowledge.

This also raises the intriguing question of whether the “UFO” which landed in Rendlesham Forest and was approached by Jim Penniston and John Burroughs could have been a similar --or identical—Honey Badger THW being given a dress rehearsal test.  This is pure speculation but it seems no less likely than an alien spacecraft landing by mistake in Rendlesham Forest at the very same time as the Cash-Landrum episode in Texas.   If there ever was a US Trojan Horse Weapon being tested in December 1980, it never had to be used in anger since the Tehran embassy hostages were freed just three weeks later when President Reagan came into office.



George Wingfield has been researching and writing about the UFO phenomenon since 1987 and has contributed to numerous books and magazines on the topic. George is the co-author of  UFO: Strange Space on Earth with Paul Whitehead.



    

Friday, December 13, 2013

Kevin Randle on Cash-Landrum: A Military Perspective

Kevin Randle on the Cash-Landrum UFO case


As part the discussion of the Cash-Landrum UFO case, we'll be inviting others who have examined the case to share their opinions.

Author  Kevin D. Randle

In Kevin D. Randle's 1998 book, Project Moon Dust: Beyond Roswell-- Exposing The Government's Covert Investigations and Cover-ups, chapter 11 was a ten page analysis, titled, "December 29, 1980: The Cash-Landrum UFO Encounter." Kevin Randle is a retired Lieutenant Colonel, and his service and his experience as a helicopter pilot should aid in the understanding of the military involvement in this case.

Chapter 11: Cash-Landrum UFO Encounter

One resource that Randle had that most others did not, was the file on the case from the Center for UFO Studies. This allowed Randle to note the discrepancy in the account of Betty Cash as to whether she stopped the car's engine or it stopped on its own, apparently due to the proximity of the UFO. This detail was discovered in April 1981 by CUFOS investigator Allan Hendry, but went unmentioned until Randle's book. In Project Moon Dust, he does an excellent job of summarizing the case history based on materials available at the time, and also offers some analysis and commentary, a portion of which appears as the closing remarks for this entry.

Kevin Randle had occasion to discuss the case again in 2011, on his blog, A Different Perspective.
Reprinted here, with the author's kind permission.


Cash Landrum and Crash Retrievals 

SUNDAY, JANUARY 30, 2011


One of the strange things about writing a book is that sometimes the comments or criticisms come in a short period of time.

What do I mean?

My book, Crash: When UFOs Fall from the Sky was published in May and in the last week or ten days I have heard from several people who wished I had included the Cash-Landrum case in the book. That is an interesting case and I believe John Schuessler did a very comprehensive study of it which has been published.

The problem for me is that I don’t view the case as a crash/retrieval. I see it as something that might have been an emergency close approach, or just a close approach without the emergency, or some kind of terrestrially-based test, but not a crash of an extraterrestrial vehicle. For that reason, I left it out.
Cash-Landrum not included
What I know about the case is what everyone else knows and is based on the research of those who studied it in person. I have never spoken to any of those who were originally involved, though I do know John Schuessler. He is one of those who has devoted a great deal of time to the study of UFOs and this case took place almost in his backyard.

It was December 29, 1980, when Betty Cash, Vickie Landrum and Landrum’s seven-year-old grandson, Colby saw the strange object as they returned from dinner. Thinking that it was an airplane heading to a nearby airport, they thought nothing of it. But as they rounded a curve on the rural road, they saw the light approaching them at treetop level.

Fearing that they would be burned alive, Landrum screamed for Cash to stop. The road was narrow and Cash was unable to turn to car so that they could escape. But there was no other traffic, so Cash got out, walking to the front of the vehicle. Landrum also got out but her grandson so upset she got back in.

They could feel heat from the diamond-shaped object that was about 100 feet away. The car became too hot to touch and Landrum put her hand on the dashboard and left an imprint. Cash needed to use part of her leather jacket to protect her hand so that she could open the door.

There was a final blast of heat and the object ascended slowly. As it cleared the treetops, helicopters appeared from all directions. The object and the helicopters then disappeared from sight.

When her eyes adjusted to the darkness, Cash started the car and they began to head home. As they rounded another curve on that same road, they saw the object again, and Cash counted 23 helicopters near it. Landrum thought there were 25 or 26 of them. Cash was able to pull off the road. When the object and the helicopters were again out of sight, Cash then drove home.



Schuessler depiction of the UFO
Later that evening Cash became sick, the symptoms like that of radiation poisoning, at least according to some. She was hospitalized twice for treatment. The Landrums were also sick, but not to the same degree as Cash, which might be as simple as Cash being outside the car longer and her exposure greater.

The case was, of course, investigated. Cash eventually sued the government for 20 million dollars alleging that her illnesses were caused by the close approach of the craft. She was eventually treated for various cancers 25 times and had undergone two operations. The helicopters were obviously US government and they should have been protecting her. The case was dismissed in 1986. Cash died some twenty yeas later.

The suit was dismissed, according to the ruling, because there was no evidence that the diamond-shaped craft was any type of government test vehicle and they were hard pressed to find witnesses to the formation of helicopters. A few witnesses were found who said they had seen the fleet, but no physical evidence or documentation was ever located.

I will point out here, based on my experience as a helicopter pilot, that I find it difficult to believe they could hide an air operation of this magnitude. The helicopters would have had a crew of three and maybe four meaning almost 100 men (and given the date of this, I wouldn’t expect any women in the flight crews), not to mention the logistical support necessary. You’d have to supply a refueling point, as well as other considerations but no trace of any of that was ever found or documented. Something like that, on that scale, would be impossible to hide.

Nearly everyone, skeptics and believers alike, suggest that the illnesses sounded like radiation sickness. One of those who doesn’t is Brad Sparks. He presented a number of reasons including the rapid onset of the symptoms and the lingering nature of them as reason to suspect another cause. Philip Klass was interested in the health of the three victims prior to the encounter.

The bottom line for me, and my book on UFO crashes, is that there is no hint of a crash here. A close encounter of the second kind, meaning a close approach of a UFO, but not a crash. For that reason, I didn’t even consider this case for my book.
  _ _ _

Kevin Randle's Conclusion


 Lt. Col. Kevin D. Randle. ret.

Randle closes the chapter on the Cash-Landrum story in Project Moon Dust, with a summary of the problems in evaluating the case.

"There is nothing to prove that the three were in perfect health prior to the events and that those events caused an erosion of their health. Betty Cash's cancer may have been a pre-existing condition, though there is no record of it prior to the events. A comprehensive search by military officers and civilian researchers has failed to produce any evidence that the sighting took place.  
Once again we are left with nothing except our beliefs. Was the craft extraterrestrial? Was there any craft at all? Or was it some kind of elaborate hoax invented by the women (though neither has a history of creating practical jokes)? Without more data, we just can't answer any of these questions satisfactorily."


A special thanks to Kevin Randle for permission to reprint his column.

Sunday, December 1, 2013

The Weather: Evidence in the Cash-Landrum UFO Case

Weather Data for December 29, 1980


The recent release of Wim van Utrecht's article on how reflections on ice crystals could have resulted in the formation of a "light pillar" ( see: Cash-Landrum Theory & Analysis: Unpublished 2002 Wim van Utrecht Article) spurred discussion over how plausible this optical phenomenon could be in explaining the Cash-Landrum UFO. In the comments section, Tim Printy, author of SUNlite (Skeptical UFO Newsletter) was skeptical that the necessary weather conditions were present to produce the phenomenon.

Wim van Utrecht replied:
"Tim writes "Houston, Texas is not really an area where ice crystals can form except at high elevations". That's right, but the explanation I suggested for the CASH/LANDRUM sighting IS about “Artificial Light Pillars in HIGH Cloud”, not about light pillars forming in ice mist or in ice-crystal layers drifting a couple of hundred meter above the ground. From Table I at http://www.caelestia.be/article01b.html one can deduce that the reflections we are concerned with occur at altitudes roughly between 3 and 7 km (10,000 and 23,000 feet), and naturally halfway between the observer and the light source. We are talking about elongated mirrored images of very bright lights (like the 100 feet high flames that can be seen when gases are burned off at petrochemical plants). Nothing to do with lights illuminating a low cloud deck, but everything with billions of tiny ice-crystals plates tumbling down and forming a gigantic mirror in the sky. Contrary to what I assumed when I first started studying this phenomenon, the reflections can also occur in the Summer (see the aforementioned table). Low latitudes are not a problem either. 

In an earlier mail to Curt, I wrote that the Houston area had a long history of flares at petrochemical plants creating strange lights in the sky (see also note 3 at http://www.caelestia.be/article01a.html). Actually, light pillars in high cloud have been observed over refineries since the early years of oil production. Attached is a PDF file of a couple of observations that were published in the 
Texas Observers’ Bulletin during the 1930s and 1940s. 

Also from the Houston area is this picture - out of focus, alas - of a series of light pillars photographed from the George Observatory at Houston: 
http://www.caelestia.be/OP-PH-08.html.
Photo by James BENTON near Houston, Tx, 8:12 pm, 3/29/2003. 


Just to point out that I’m not inventing things here.

Very best regards, Wim"
NOTE: I've uploaded Wim's PDF attachment: Texas Observers’ Bulletin


Tim Printy relied:
"I stand corrected regarding such effects being visible in Houston. I am impressed and feel a bit more confidence in this potential explanation.
Something not addressed is the weather that night. Was it cloudy or clear? It appears to have been an overcast sky based on weather underground. I thought I had read it was cold and clear?"

Weather Data in the Media and Case Documents

While I had previously searched for statements made about the Moon visibility and rain, I had to review the earliest articles and documents for any references to cloud conditions on 12/29/1981. There are only a few:

"(Vickie) Landrum said once home she saturated herself and Colby with baby oil because they both were sunburned about the face and neck. “I thought maybe we’d been chapped by the wind or something because we’d been out most of the day,” she said. “there wasn’t no sun that day. it was real cloudy. it couldn’t have been sunburn from the sun.”The Courier (Conroe Texas) story by Cathy Gordon Feb. 22, 1981
John F. Schuessler: “…the sky was relatively clear and the rain had stopped…”1981 CUFOS Symposium
Narration- not JS quote:
“It was a cold cloudy evening on Dec. 29…”The Houston Chronicle, TX, Sept 25, 1981
John F. Schuessler: “The day of 29 December 1980 had been damp and overcast in Texas.” and "Light from the third-quarter Moon, supplemented an airglow from the lights in the surrounding area, made the sky bright and the visibility good."                              The Unexplained Mysteries of Mind, Space and Time, Vol 9, Issue 107, 1982.  (Later collected in The Age of the UFO, P. Brookesmith, 1984)

LL Walker: “...I looked a little bit closer and you could see some lower lights back off in the distance quite a ways back. I'd say about % of a mile — real good visibility that night...”
MUFON Journal October 1982 (from the 1982 interview)
J. Schuessler: "The weather ranged from clear and hot to cold, damp, windy, and chilly. Houston, Texas air contains a lot of moisture which acts like little crystals that catch all light from the city, moon and cars and reflect it in an airglow manner that leaves the sky very light much of the time. A deep, dark night in the Houston area is unusual. pg 5
"The weather on December 29, 1980 was chilly. The witnesses reported the intermittent misty rain earlier in the day. By evening that had stopped. The clouds were high and broken and the moon was in the third quarter. The air was damp and full of moisture. The airglow of Houston was bright. The conditions were correct for being able to see helicopters flying at night. pg. 6"MUFON Journal September 1983 
John F. Schuessler: “The sky had partially cleared and the moon was visible in the night sky.” and “Because of the light of the moon and the helicopters’ running lights, the craft were clearly visible.”
Fate Magazine, May 1984 (Volume 37, No. 5 Issue 410) Clark Publishing Co. pg 32-36 (Victims of a Close Encounter 

Not entirely harmonious.

What Does the Record show? 


Tim Printy checked for historical weather information in the area for for December 29, 1980:

Houston:
  
Time (CST)
Temp.
Windchill
Dew Point
Humidity
Pressure
Visibility
Wind Dir
Wind Speed
Gust Speed
Precip
Events
Conditions
12:00 AM
42.1 °F
-
37.9 °F
85%
30.17 in
10.0 mi
Calm
Calm
-
N/A

Clear
1:00 AM
41.0 °F
-
37.9 °F
89%
30.16 in
7.0 mi
Calm
Calm
-
N/A

Clear
2:00 AM
39.9 °F
-
37.0 °F
89%
30.15 in
7.0 mi
Calm
Calm
-
N/A

Clear
3:00 AM
39.9 °F
-
36.0 °F
86%
30.15 in
7.0 mi
Calm
Calm
-
N/A

Clear
4:00 AM
39.9 °F
-
36.0 °F
86%
30.15 in
7.0 mi
Calm
Calm
-
N/A

Clear
5:00 AM
39.9 °F
36.7 °F
35.1 °F
83%
30.16 in
7.0 mi
NNW
4.6 mph
-
N/A

Clear
6:00 AM
39.0 °F
35.7 °F
34.0 °F
82%
30.16 in
7.0 mi
NNE
4.6 mph
-
N/A

Clear
7:00 AM
39.9 °F
36.7 °F
37.0 °F
89%
30.18 in
7.0 mi
NE
4.6 mph
-
N/A

Scattered Clouds
8:00 AM
43.0 °F
39.5 °F
39.9 °F
89%
30.21 in
5.0 mi
North
5.8 mph
-
N/A
Fog
Fog
9:00 AM
48.9 °F
-
44.1 °F
83%
30.23 in
3.0 mi
North
6.9 mph
-
N/A
Fog
Fog
10:00 AM
55.9 °F
-
44.1 °F
64%
30.25 in
5.0 mi
NNE
3.5 mph
-
N/A

Smoke
11:00 AM
60.1 °F
-
37.9 °F
44%
30.24 in
5.0 mi
Calm
Calm
-
N/A

Smoke
12:00 PM
64.9 °F
-
42.1 °F
43%
30.21 in
6.0 mi
WNW
9.2 mph
-
N/A

Smoke
1:00 PM
66.9 °F
-
39.9 °F
37%
30.17 in
10.0 mi
WNW
13.8 mph
-
N/A

Scattered Clouds
2:00 PM
66.0 °F
-
46.9 °F
50%
30.15 in
10.0 mi
NNW
12.7 mph
-
N/A

Mostly Cloudy
3:00 PM
64.9 °F
-
48.0 °F
54%
30.15 in
10.0 mi
WNW
13.8 mph
-
N/A

Overcast
4:00 PM
64.9 °F
-
48.0 °F
54%
30.15 in
10.0 mi
NNW
15.0 mph
-
N/A

Overcast
5:00 PM
63.0 °F
-
50.0 °F
63%
30.15 in
10.0 mi
WNW
13.8 mph
-
N/A

Overcast
6:00 PM
60.1 °F
-
50.0 °F
69%
30.16 in
10.0 mi
NW
13.8 mph
-
N/A

Overcast
7:00 PM
60.1 °F
-
50.0 °F
69%
30.17 in
10.0 mi
NW
16.1 mph
-
N/A

Overcast
8:00 PM
57.9 °F
-
48.9 °F
72%
30.19 in
10.0 mi
NNW
13.8 mph
-
N/A

Overcast
9:00 PM
57.0 °F
-
48.0 °F
72%
30.21 in
10.0 mi
NW
15.0 mph
-
N/A

Overcast
10:00 PM
55.9 °F
-
42.1 °F
60%
30.23 in
10.0 mi
North
19.6 mph
24.2 mph
N/A

Overcast
11:00 PM
54.0 °F
-
39.0 °F
57%
30.24 in
10.0 mi
North
13.8 mph
-
N/A

Overcast















Galveston:
  
Time (CST)
Temp.
Windchill
Dew Point
Humidity
Pressure
Visibility
Wind Dir
Wind Speed
Gust Speed
Precip
Events
Conditions
12:00 AM
53.6 °F
-
42.8 °F
67%
30.16 in
7.0 mi
SE
4.6 mph
-
N/A

Clear
1:00 AM
46.0 °F
-
43.0 °F
89%
30.00 in
6.0 mi
ESE
1.2 mph
-
N/A

Clear
2:00 AM
45.0 °F
-
42.1 °F
90%
30.00 in
6.0 mi
ESE
2.3 mph
-
N/A

Clear
3:00 AM
45.0 °F
-
43.0 °F
93%
30.00 in
6.0 mi
ESE
1.2 mph
-
N/A

Clear
4:00 AM
46.9 °F
-
45.0 °F
93%
30.00 in
6.0 mi
ENE
2.3 mph
-
N/A

Clear
5:00 AM
46.0 °F
-
44.1 °F
93%
30.00 in
6.0 mi
NNE
2.3 mph
-
N/A

Clear
6:00 AM
46.0 °F
43.9 °F
45.0 °F
96%
30.15 in
4.0 mi
North
4.6 mph
-
N/A
Fog
Fog
7:00 AM
46.0 °F
43.9 °F
45.0 °F
96%
30.17 in
4.0 mi
North
4.6 mph
-
N/A
Fog
Fog
8:00 AM
50.0 °F
-
48.0 °F
93%
30.20 in
4.0 mi
NE
5.8 mph
-
N/A
Fog
Fog
9:00 AM
51.1 °F
-
48.9 °F
92%
30.22 in
7.0 mi
NNE
9.2 mph
-
N/A

Overcast
10:00 AM
54.0 °F
-
48.9 °F
83%
30.25 in
7.0 mi
NNE
8.1 mph
-
N/A

Scattered Clouds
11:00 AM
55.0 °F
-
46.9 °F
74%
30.25 in
4.0 mi
North
8.1 mph
-
N/A

Drizzle
12:00 PM
61.0 °F
-
43.0 °F
52%
30.22 in
5.0 mi
NE
6.9 mph
-
N/A

Drizzle
1:00 PM
63.0 °F
-
43.0 °F
48%
30.17 in
5.0 mi
ESE
3.5 mph
-
N/A

Drizzle
2:00 PM
62.1 °F
-
46.9 °F
58%
30.14 in
5.0 mi
SE
6.9 mph
-
N/A

Drizzle
3:00 PM
60.1 °F
-
46.0 °F
60%
30.13 in
5.0 mi
SSE
4.6 mph
-
N/A

Smoke
4:00 PM
57.9 °F
-
48.0 °F
70%
30.00 in
4.0 mi
SSW
5.8 mph
-
N/A

Smoke
6:00 PM
57.0 °F
-
48.9 °F
74%
30.14 in
5.0 mi
West
3.5 mph
-
N/A

Drizzle
7:00 PM
57.0 °F
-
50.0 °F
77%
30.16 in
7.0 mi
WNW
4.6 mph
-
N/A

Overcast
8:00 PM
60.1 °F
-
51.1 °F
72%
30.18 in
7.0 mi
NW
8.1 mph
-
N/A

Overcast
9:00 PM
59.0 °F
-
52.0 °F
78%
30.19 in
7.0 mi
NNW
9.2 mph
-
N/A

Overcast
10:00 PM
57.9 °F
-
48.0 °F
70%
30.21 in
7.0 mi
NNW
17.3 mph
-
N/A

Overcast
11:00 PM
55.0 °F
-
44.1 °F
67%
30.00 in
6.0 mi
North
18.4 mph
-
N/A

Clear


Beaumont:

Time (CST)
Temp.
Windchill
Dew Point
Humidity
Pressure
Visibility
Wind Dir
Wind Speed
Gust Speed
Precip
Events
Conditions
12:00 AM
42.1 °F
40.2 °F
39.0 °F
89%
30.18 in
7.0 mi
NNW
3.5 mph
-
N/A

Clear
1:00 AM
39.9 °F
36.7 °F
39.0 °F
97%
30.16 in
7.0 mi
North
4.6 mph
-
N/A

Clear
2:00 AM
39.9 °F
37.8 °F
37.0 °F
89%
30.16 in
7.0 mi
ENE
3.5 mph
-
N/A

Clear
3:00 AM
39.9 °F
37.8 °F
37.0 °F
89%
30.16 in
7.0 mi
ENE
3.5 mph
-
N/A

Clear
4:00 AM
39.0 °F
35.7 °F
37.0 °F
93%
30.16 in
3.0 mi
ENE
4.6 mph
-
N/A
Fog
Fog
5:00 AM
37.9 °F
35.5 °F
36.0 °F
93%
30.16 in
3.0 mi
NE
3.5 mph
-
N/A
Fog
Fog
6:00 AM
37.9 °F
35.5 °F
37.0 °F
97%
30.17 in
5.0 mi
NNE
3.5 mph
-
N/A
Fog
Fog
7:00 AM
36.0 °F
29.6 °F
35.1 °F
97%
30.19 in
3.0 mi
NNW
8.1 mph
-
N/A
Fog
Fog
7:23 AM
-
-
-
N/A%
30.20 in
10.5 mi
North
6.9 mph
-
N/A
Fog
Fog
8:00 AM
37.9 °F
33.5 °F
37.0 °F
97%
30.21 in
10.5 mi
North
5.8 mph
-
N/A
Fog
Fog
8:27 AM
-
-
-
N/A%
30.22 in
3.0 mi
North
5.8 mph
-
N/A
Fog
Fog
9:00 AM
46.9 °F
-
45.0 °F
93%
30.24 in
3.0 mi
North
6.9 mph
-
N/A
Fog
Fog
10:00 AM
53.1 °F
-
45.0 °F
74%
30.24 in
3.0 mi
NNW
5.8 mph
-
N/A
Fog
Fog
12:00 PM
64.0 °F
-
39.9 °F
41%
30.20 in
6.0 mi
North
6.9 mph
-
N/A

Drizzle
1:00 PM
64.9 °F
-
41.0 °F
42%
30.17 in
7.0 mi
NW
8.1 mph
-
N/A

Mostly Cloudy
2:00 PM
-
-
-
N/A%
0.00 in
6.0 mi
NW
57.5 mph
-
N/A

Clear
3:00 PM
66.0 °F
-
42.1 °F
42%
30.12 in
7.0 mi
NW
11.5 mph
-
N/A

Mostly Cloudy
4:00 PM
66.0 °F
-
45.0 °F
47%
30.13 in
7.0 mi
NW
11.5 mph
-
N/A

Mostly Cloudy
5:00 PM
63.0 °F
-
52.0 °F
67%
30.13 in
7.0 mi
NW
11.5 mph
-
N/A

Mostly Cloudy
6:00 PM
61.0 °F
-
52.0 °F
72%
30.14 in
7.0 mi
NW
8.1 mph
-
N/A

Overcast
7:00 PM
59.0 °F
-
52.0 °F
78%
30.15 in
7.0 mi
NW
11.5 mph
-
N/A

Overcast
8:00 PM
57.9 °F
-
32.0 °F
37%
30.17 in
7.0 mi
West
6.9 mph
-
N/A

Overcast
9:00 PM
55.9 °F
-
51.1 °F
84%
30.19 in
7.0 mi
WNW
10.4 mph
-
N/A

Scattered Clouds
10:00 PM
54.0 °F
-
51.1 °F
90%
30.19 in
7.0 mi
NW
10.4 mph
-
N/A

Overcast
11:00 PM
55.0 °F
-
48.0 °F
77%
30.21 in
7.0 mi
North
12.7 mph
-
N/A

Mostly Cloudy




Seeking independent confirmation of Printy's data, I emailed the science operations officer at the NOAA station for the Galveston/Houston area requesting a trustworthy source for historical weather data. His reply:
"The easiest way to get this data is to go to http://www.wunderground.com/ and under the weather tab, select airport weather history. Then, put in your date and airport code (HOU, IAH). I was able to view the decoded hourly obs for both of these sites for your requested date. The hourly data will be at the bottom of the page."
NOAA independently endorsed the source of Printy's data as reliable. After sending Printy the article quotes seen above, Tim replied:
"It seems that, like the moon, nobody has bothered to look into this aspect of the case closely.  I think one can safely say that it was not clear that night and there probably was a significant cloud cover that night."

In an investigation of any kind, one of the first things done is to establish the "scene of the crime". In the case of the Cash-Landrum investigation, several key elements were not well documented: the precise location of the sighting, the position of the Moon, we've seen here, the weather conditions.




NOTE: I'd like to give special thanks to Wim van Utrecht and Tim Printy for their contributions to this discussion.