Two Cases Of Unusual Sky-Fall Aluminum Metal From Ohio

N. A. Reiter and Patricia Mason

24 June, 2008

Background:

In early spring of 2003, a solidified blob of aluminum alloy was discovered in the yard of a rural northwestern Ohio home. It was apparent to the homeowners that the metal had somehow fallen or was deposited in their yard over the course of the winter. The nature of the metal piece was such that it appeared to have fallen onto the winter's ice and snow pack in a molten state, and solidified on impact, or had cooled from a molten to a solid state during free-fall. No UFO or unusual aerial activity was reported by the homeowners over that winter. However no plausible "non-aerial" explanation for the appearance of the metal could be determined either. The sample was originally analyzed using EDS (Energy Dispersive Spectroscopy) by Nick Reiter, and a portion of the metal was given to Reiter's family as a gift.

In late 2006, an uncannily similar account came to our attention, by way of the Ohio UFO investigative community. A similar appearing blob of solidified aluminum alloy had been recovered by a home-owner in central Ohio, after an unusual rectangular craft had been observed to fly over the house in question. The original event had occurred in the summer of 1996, however for nearly 10 years, the owner of the metal artifact had lost track of the piece, over the course of several home moves. In 2006 the piece was re-discovered by the owner, and in late 2006 and early 2007, the sample was analyzed by EDS and IR spectroscopy.

In this report, we will discuss both samples, their forms and composition, and speculate about their origins.

The Tiffin, Ohio Case - 2003:

In March of 2003, Nick Reiter received a phone call from his father Bruce Reiter concerning an interesting bit of news from his old rural neighborhood, north of Tiffin, Ohio. His father related to Nick that his nearest neighbor "Ed" - had found a mysterious piece of metal in his side yard, while raking up the last fall's leaves and twigs. The object had been obscured over the winter by two heavy snowfalls and numerous lesser ones. Ed had no explanation for the irregular metal blob, which was roughly six inches by two and a half inches, with a maximum thickness of one half inch or so. The blob had very apparently been molten at some point, and had solidified against a fairly flat or solid surface. While the piece had been found in the yard on the earth, the bottom side of the blob when found was generally smooth with some white oxides present.

By reviewing the weather over the course of the winter that year, we concluded that the metal – if it had not been placed by artifice at a later post-snow date – had apparently fallen onto a hard packed ice crusted snow drift that had remained since January of the year, up until the thaw in March. The blob may have then melted into the snow and ice a ways, but then apparently was covered over by February snowfalls.

That same month, Nick interviewed Ed carefully, and borrowed his blob of mystery metal. He was granted permission to cut it open as desired. Nick ended up sawing a roughly 2 inch portion from the main blob. The interior of the metal appeared homogeneous. A small shaving was taken from both the interior and the surface and analyzed by Nick with a Jeol 840 scanning electron microscope fitted with EDS.

PHOTO A shows the portion of the sawed sample retained by Bruce and Nick Reiter.

(click pic to enlarge)

At the time, EDS disclosed that the metal was primarily aluminum, with traces of carbon and silicon. A crude Archimedian test of density indicated that the aluminum was within a couple percent of appropriate mass weight, thus meaning it was likely not an unusual isotope. It was not noticeably radioactive when surveyed with our Baird Atomic ratemeter (Geiger counter).

The matter for Nick remained a mystery, and for his part in helping with the affair, Ed permitted Nick's father to keep the smaller portion of the metal blob as a souvenir. Little more could be added to the story, as neither Ed nor anyone else could say for sure where the metal came from. It appeared to have fallen from the sky on an unknown snowy day or night in early 2003. From what height, or from what source, was inscrutable.

Shortly after information came to Nick's attention concerning the second case of apparent sky-fall aluminum in November of 2006, he made a futile search for the EDS data from 2003, for Ed's sample. The data had been saved on a diskette that had been misplaced or mislabeled. We were left for the time with only memory to relate to...

The Newark, Ohio -1996 to 2006 Case:

It was in November of 2006, that the following story was brought to Nick's attention by Pat Mason:

On a summer's afternoon in 1996, a Vietnam veteran named Bennie Foggin living in rural central Ohio, southeast of Newark, observed a large dark box-like UFO glide over his home at an altitude of 100 to 200 feet. The UFO as reported by Bennie was at least the length of a commercial jet liner. While for the most part silent, the craft was claimed to have emitted a rhythmic sound near one end that reminded Bennie of the drum of a washing machine scraping on bad bushings. As this noisy end of the craft passed over, Bennie heard a dull "thud" from somewhere nearby, but was transfixed by the dramatic object above.

It was only after the craft had vanished to the west over the tree-line that Bennie thought to look for the source of the thud sound from a few minutes before. He discovered it lying in his gravel and dirt driveway. The material appeared to be a blob of solidified and still hot aluminum. Bennie recovered the metal, and saved it in a box, intending to show it to some of the Ohio UFO research community. However domestic and personal issues at the time prompted him to delay, and within a few months, the box had been misplaced, and Bennie and his wife had by that time moved to a new home in the area.

In December of 2007, we visited Bennie and were taken by him out to the property where the UFO fly-over had originally occurred. It is interesting to note that the property lies near the eastern terminus of the famous Ohio geological feature called Flint Ridge. PHOTO B shows the location, with an arrow added showing the approximate trajectory or path of the rectangular craft. (click pic to enlarge)

In early 2006, Bennie found the box containing the mysterious metal, and took it to Ohio researcher Joe Stets, in Columbus. Joe apparently had an un-named party at his own work establishment take an informal analytical look at the material, however another piece of the aluminum blob was also sawed off, and sent to Phyllis Budinger of Frontier Analytical Services, Cleveland, who has done high quality analysis on "unusual event" residues and artifacts for some years. Phyllis performed Infrared Spectroscopy on the sample, and EDS was performed in turn by a colleague of Phyllis', Dr. Sampath Ayengar. Dr. Ayengar is also well known as analytical expert on matters of unusual or anomalous artifacts and materials. With permission granted from Frontier Analytical, a copy of the EDS spectrum plot is included herewith.

EDS and IR analysis were in close agreement. The Bennie sample was primarily aluminum, with a smaller percentage of silicon (Si), carbon (C), magnesium (Mg), and calcium (Ca) present. By early 2007, when these results had become available to me, I assisted in comparing the composition of the Bennie sample to known industrial and commercial alloys of aluminum. No standard alloy appeared to match perfectly, however the presence of Si suggested that it was similar to a 4000 series industrial alloy grade. See PHOTO D, showing the EDS data plot for the interior of the Bennie sample.

In June of 2007, Nick had been in communication with Joe Stets and had offered to coordinate some further analysis on the Bennie sample, primarily an X-ray scan that would hopefully show internal structure, features, or inclusions of different material, if any. Joe and Benny both agreed that this was desirable, and so the primary Bennie sample (minus the small portion analyzed by Budinger and Ayengar, and the other portion retained by Mr. Stets) was sent to Nick. We contacted a nearby industrial X-ray service, US Diagnostics, and arranged for an X-ray photo to be taken of the sample. This was accomplished with no problems. The X-ray photo is shown as PHOTO D, and the Bennie sample as received by me is shown in PHOTO E.

As may be seen, the X-ray scan of the Bennie sample shows a primarily homogeneous internal structure, with some small (<1mm) spots or speckles that appear to be bubbles.

(click pics to enlarge)

Re-analysis of the Tiffin, Ohio Sample:

In December of 2007, a small slice sawed from the Reiter family portion of Ed's sample was sent to Dr. Ayengar via Phyllis Budinger for EDS analysis. Results were obtained in early January 2008. PHOTO F shows the EDS plot and quantitative breakdown (interior surface). (click pic to enlarge)

As may be seen, the Ed sample, similar to the Bennie sample, is an impure alloy of aluminum, containing a small amount of silicon (Si), along with carbon (C) and a small iron (Fe) content.

Re-analysis of the Newark, Ohio Sample – the Red Spot:

In mid June of 2008, we completed one last physical evaluation task on Bennie's sample. It had been observed that on the "ground side" or bottom of the blob, a small region about 15mm across that originally had shown a faint berry-red stain when Bennie had found it, had become brighter and "pinker" over time. We also noted that with a bright enough black light (300 watt long wave UV lamp), smaller regions of the now more vivid pink area fluoresced a reddish pink color. After some months of anticipation, Nick was able to once again perform SEM and EDS work on a new JEOL 6390 scope with an EDAX Genesis EDS. A small shaving of Bennie's sample, exhibiting the heavy pinkish deposit, was examined. A copy of the data report is here. As may be seen, the pink stain area appears to contain oxidized species of Al, Si, Ca, Na, P, Mg, and S. It may have been a differentiated feature that melted and formed a spot of "slag" on the Al surface.

Comparison of Samples:

After comparing analytical results and manually examining both Ed’s and Bennie's samples, we are struck with a number of uncanny similarities. Both metal blobs appear to have solidified in an unconfined manner from a molten state. The (presumed) upper surface finish and textures are nearly identical, while the lower (impact side) surfaces seem to exhibit properties both visible and chemical that are indicative of the surface the metal apparently fell and cooled against. In Ed's case, the lower surface exhibits more white oxides, potentially from cooling in the presence of water (ice or hard snow), while Bennie's appears to show chemical and physical traces of earth or sod. Both blobs appear to have solidified to approximately the same thickness (about 15 mm), and in their original un-partitioned states even were likely to have been about the same mass / weight (about 180 grams).

In early 2008, we were able to place both Ed's and Bennie's metal samples side by side for a memorable photo, PHOTO H. (Contour lines added to show original sizes and shapes of the samples.)

The composition of the two samples as discerned by EDS appears interestingly similar, although not exotic or unearthly in the sense that it often seems popular "UFOlogy" is prone to be fixated on. Both Ed's and Bennie's metal appear to be an aluminum alloy containing silicon (Si), carbon (C), iron (Fe) and calcium (Ca). We must state that EDS' accuracy below .5% is generally discounted. Some conservative operators find interpreting any values less than 1% to be risky. Thus while compositional values for Ed's metal were reported by Frontier Analytical to .1% (due to the EDS software), they should be rounded to the nearest single digit for consideration. While performed by the same operator, the composition for Bennie's metal – analyzed one year earlier - was reported graphically, without quantitative numerical values. It may be seen from comparison of spectra that the amount of carbon in Ed's metal is somewhat higher than in Bennie’s metal. The numerical quantitative analysis values for Ed's metal are reported thus: Aluminum – 76.5%, Silicon – 2.4%, Iron – 2.9%, Carbon – 10.1%, Oxygen – 8.2%, Calcium - .2%

The anonymous informal EDS analysis provided by Joe Stets shows a similar profile, however the EDS system used was not apparently fitted with light element detection, thus both carbon and oxygen are not reported. The numerical values reported were as follows: Aluminum – 89.1%, Silicon – 9.9%, Iron - .8%, Mg - .2%

It is necessary to note also that while Mg was observed graphically in the analysis of Bennie's metal, it was not reported numerically due to its low concentration. In the analysis of Ed's metal, a very minor calcium peak is observed, while Mg, if present, is below the resolution of the EDS used.

Another interesting clue provided by the anonymous EDS work is that of in-homogeneity of the sample. Bennie's metal does not appear to be an entirely homogeneous alloy – segregation of Si, C, and Fe appears to exist. Thus an EDS scan taken at point A may be somewhat different than one taken a millimeter away at point B. For in-depth compositional analysis, a multiplicity of scans would be needed and a range of values acquired for each element.

Our conclusion would be that while not identical in composition within the limited amount of analysis performed, Bennie's metal and Ed's metal are quite similar.

Other Claims of Anomalous Sky Fall Metal:

The uncanny coincidence of two independent cases of unknown sky-fall metal occurring in the same state, seven years apart in time, but coming to the attention of the same investigators continues to give us pause to think. The presumption that we preferred to adopt – and still do – is that the sort of Al-Si blobs found by Bennie and Ed must not be unique, and that similar artifacts must surely abound. Perhaps the appearance of metal blobs is unremarkable enough that many might be plowed under in fields, or never found in woodlands, or are discarded by homeowners with a shrug of the shoulders. After all, they are not blinking whirring alien looking artifacts. They look like a melted beer can.

At the time of the analysis of Bennie’s metal, we began an exhaustive search through UFO literature for accounts stating that mysterious recovered "pieces" or artifacts were found to have a composition similar to Bennie and Ed's metal. However, we found this to not be the case. As reported by Jacques Vallee, who conducted a similar inquiry, crash retrieval and UFO ejecta span a broad range of compositions. Some ferrous, some composed of copper, zinc, or magnesium alloys; very little coherency is apparent. Of course, none of this presupposes ANY of the cases from the past fifty years to be other than mis-identified industrial waste or artifacts, or out-and-out hoaxes. We cannot presume authenticity on any such case – and if authenticity is defined as meaning truly extraterrestrial – we cannot presume it in ours either.

However, in early 2008, we came across some fascinating details of a high profile UFO artifact case which both of us had heard about in passing, through the UFO grapevine, but which had been mutually assumed to be too sensationalized or over-the-top to give much notice to. The case in question is that of the famous Bob White UFO-ejected sky fall metal. For those unfamiliar with this story, we summarize the essential claimed story here.

In 1985, Las Vegas entertainer and businessman Bob White and a friend were driving from Denver back to Las Vegas. They were near the Nevada border, at about 2:00AM when the pair observed a large bright UFO on the road ahead. The white glowing object flew up into the sky and joined up with an even larger craft said to be hovering overhead. White and his companion then witnessed a glowing orange ember or spurt fall downward toward the ground from the large craft, which shot off eastward. When the pair found the place where the glowing mass had struck the dry earth, they found it to be an aerodynamically tear-drop shaped blob of light metal, still fiercely hot. The metal blob was approximately 8 inches long and about 2 inches across at the broad end. White and companion waited for the metal to cool enough to pick up, they took it and went on their way.

In the twenty three years since White found the mystery object, he and his colleagues have attempted to prove the extraterrestrial nature of the artifact. To this day, it is the centerpiece of a small museum built privately by White in his home state of Missouri. Over the years, it has been recorded that several attempts were made to characterize and identify the metal alloy involved. The documentation that came our way personally was generated by Dr. Colm Kelleher of the National Institute for Discovery Science (NIDS) in 1996. In his report, Kelleher outlines the analysis performed at New Mexico Tech, which was in turn primarily based on EDS.

We were astonished to find that according to the 1996 report, the Bob White metal was an aluminum-silicon alloy of non-homogeneous compositional ratio. We quote Dr. Kelleher:

"...A scan of the entire bulk sample identified as major constituents: 85 wt % Al and 9 wt % Si, and minor constituents: 2 wt% Fe, 0.9 wt% Ca, 0.7 wt% S, 0.6 wt% C1, and 0.6 wt% Na along with several other elements..."

In form, the White metal does not resemble Ed's or Bennie's artifact. The White artifact has a teardrop or pinecone shaped appearance that seems to be consistent with genuine high velocity air cooling of a liquid metal mass. However, the composition of the White metal very closely parallels that of both the Ed and Bennie metal artifacts.

We offer as a sidebar commentary note the following – throughout the history of the White metal, repeated analysis of the object has been comparatively consistent. However, many of those interpreting the results of this analysis, in what we perceive to a somewhat myopic attitude, have turned away when it became apparent that the White metal was composed of unremarkable components or isotopes. The presumption that the UFO phenomenon MUST be validated by the appearance of unearthly alloys or materials is a paradigm we find no reason to embrace. The components of a terrestrial planet orbiting a star 500 light years away are likely very similar to our earth's. And a race building a physical spacecraft there would likely use the same alloys and metals we would use. Besides, we have never stated we necessarily believe the UFO phenomenon has anything to do with extraterrestrial spacecraft of a traditionally implied sort anyways...

Our suspicion still tells us that there should be more of this material out there. Requests for contact from people finding unusual metallic artifacts have been sent out on several internet discussion boards and venues, and we look forward to further data points in this matter.

An Evaluation of Possible Terrestrial Sources for Similar Alloys:

One of the early questions we regarded with respect to the composition of the Ed and Bennie metal samples was that of potential similarity to identifiable known aluminum alloys. Some thorough perusal through engineering handbooks disclosed for us that in general, Al-Si alloys are indeed used extensively, and have been for many years. However, they are used primarily for two metallurgical tasks – the casting of commercial parts where precise expansion and dimensionality are required (such as pistons, engine connecting rods, cast wheels) or for aluminum welding purposes. We have been unable to show that Al-Si alloys have any extensive use in aerospace applications, except where cast parts already noted would be used on an airplane or rocket. Unfortunately, data on satellite components seems to be somewhat regulated, and we have not yet been able to form a clear opinion on the usage of Al-Si alloys in satellite apps.

Another possible source for sky-fall aluminum that was tendered early in our investigation was incompletely combusted solid rocket fuel, either from commercial rockets or large amateur rockets. We have not been able to form a firm opinion on this possibility either, although such anecdotal descriptions as we have found suggest that generally poorly combusted fuel aluminum is ejected in finely divided form and ends up rapidly oxidizing outside of the rocket nozzle. It is also debatable as to why aluminum fuel powder would be of an alloy so rich in silicon, that combustion would be impeded and large amounts of waste would be produced.

One of the most common series of commercially available Al-Si alloys is the 4000 series. It was a quantity of this material that we used to perform some attempts at "sky fall" replication, described next.

An Evaluation of Cooling and Solidification Clues:

In early 2008, it occurred to us that some valuable forensic evidence for both the Ed and Bennie cases could be obtained by attempting to replicate the form of the aluminum blobs. Could we discern and verify a particular height from which both samples originated? If we assume a liquid starting condition, and a drop through some distance of air, would aluminum when it hit the ground look like the blob forms observed?

To simulate Ed’s and Bennie’s metal, we procured some 4043 aluminum welding rod – an Al-Si alloy. Enough welding rod was added to a silica crucible to make about 100ml of liquid, when melted with a small hand held torch. This charge of molten aluminum was then poured onto the ground (outdoors) under several different conditions, and from different heights. A small sheathed K type thermocouple was used to measure the temperature of the liquid aluminum before pouring. Each pour was made at a temperature of between 680 and 700 degrees Celsius.

PHOTOS I, J, and K show three of these conditions. PHOTO I was essentially a zero height drop – the aluminum was poured out onto the ground from perhaps 3 inches or so. PHOTO J shows a drop of 100ml of liquid aluminum from about 60 inches. PHOTO K shows results of dropping the molten charge from 60 inches onto a hard compacted snow drift.

Photo I (click pic to enlarge)	Photo J (click pic to enlarge)	Photo K (click pic to enlarge)

As may be seen, only the near ground "zero-height" drop resembles the form of Ed or Bennie's metal. Even a modest height of dropping for liquid aluminum at about 680C starting temperature shows much spatter and solidified droplet formation.

What can we say about this? This seems to be a valuable clue. The implication might generally suggest that Ed and Bennie's metal blobs were pre-solidified against a surface before landing in their yard or driveway (which the presence of mineral dust and oxides on the bottom side would argue with), or that the metal blobs were at a very nearly solid or high viscosity point, when they hit the ground (which is a bit difficult to reconcile with the form of the blobs, suggesting cooling under a state of undisturbed surface tension), OR that both Ed's and Bennie's metal blobs represent "something" that actually melted and dropped to the ground from only a short distance above the earth – inches at most. This last possibility is difficult – though not impossible, as we will discuss shortly – to reconcile with Bennie's testimony of the appearance of the blob on that summer's day in 1996.

Putting It Together – What Can we Say?

The analysis of not just Ed and Bennie's metal samples, but of the very stories presented for each, and the situational forensics we have attempted to perform, have led us to a place where, to quote Frank Herbert's character Duncan Idaho, "I suspect so much..." Yet we can say so little.

To summarize:

Two unknown metal specimens of nearly identical composition, and similar mass and appearance were found at locations in the same state, seven years apart. In one case, a close range sighting of a UFO accompanied the discovery of the metal sample. In both cases, the composition of the samples was clearly determined by a reliable and well known laboratory method. The composition of the metal samples was unremarkable, but when aspects of the composition and circumstances are considered, the cases take on a level of strangeness. We cannot show that this strangeness is outside of the realm of mundane explanation, by composition or metal form alone. However, if we take on the role of the detective and allow anecdote to carry some amount of weight, the situation becomes even less probable. A third, well publicized case of UFO related sky fall metal from the late 1980s, written off by a number of researchers as unremarkable, shares some attributes of the two Ohio cases.

Were the Ed and Bennie samples residues from UFOs? We do not know this. What do we suspect?

It has been our contention and conclusion that the testimony of both Bennie and Ed has been truthful and faithful, to the best of their recollections, and in Bennie’s case, perceptions. The reconstruction of events to the best of our ability shows it to be unlikely that the metal alloy forming the samples was ejected from any considerable altitude in a fully molten form. There appear to be three primary possibilities to consider here:

1. The Bennie and Ed samples were dropped from an altitude in a cooled or mostly cooled form approximating their final shape and size upon discovery.
2. The Bennie and Ed samples were formed from the melting of an object composed primarily of aluminum and silicon very close to the ground. While Bennie did not see the object that he found fall, it was his presumption that it came from the large UFO overhead. However, there may have been time or opportunity for "something else" of a much smaller size to melt close to the ground, while Bennie was not looking, or was transfixed by the large object overhead.
3. Both metal pieces were placed as part of an elaborate and almost surreal hoax… a hoax not perpetrated by Bennie or Ed, but upon them, and us as well. While the seasoned UFO researcher or paranormal investigator knows that the chameleon-like forces of "The Phenomenon" are never far away, it becomes an exercise in paranoid frustration to fall back upon this concept as a matter of regularity.

Could the large UFOs seen by so many experiencers be some form of projection or perceptual cloaking induced by a much "smaller" source/object/craft/UFO? What if these "real" UFOs are something along the lines of disposable drones or probes, that decompose or self destruct when done with their task. Perhaps in most cases, the residua are either never found, or look like melted beer cans to an extent that they are passed by, by all observers.

We simply do not know, and will not know until more cases resembling these come along. Our hope and trust is that others will come to our attention.

In closing, we would like to acknowledge the help and input of the following individuals: Ed and Bennie, Mr. Bruce Reiter, Ms. Phyllis Budinger, Dr. Sampath Ayengar, Mr. Joe Stets, Mr. Bill Jones of MUFON Ohio, Ms. Nancy Talbott of BLT Research Inc., Dr. Colm Kelleher, Mr. Keith Nagel, Dr. Sam Faile, and Mrs. Rachael Jones.

Resources:

1. "Physical Analyses in Ten Cases of Unexplained Aerial Objects", Jacques F. Vallee (1998). J. Scientific Exploration, Vol. 12, No. 3
2. "Sample Analysis Report – Sample #2", Dr. Paul Fuierer, submitted to the National Institute for Discovery Science, 1996, reported by Dr. Colm Kelleher – public disclosure.
3. "26th Edition Machinery's Handbook", Erik Oberg, Franklin D. Jones, Holbrook L. Horton, Henry H. Ryffell, Industrial Press Inc. NY, NY 2000.
4. "Ryerson Stock List – Guide to Selection Aluminum Coil / Sheet / Plate" Ryerson, Inc., Chicago, IL, date unknown.

Back to top