The Phoenix Lights
Origins of the Claim
On the evening of March 13, 1997, thousands of witnesses across Arizona and portions of Nevada and Sonora, Mexico reported observing unusual lights in the night sky. Reports described a massive V-shaped or boomerang-shaped formation moving slowly and silently over populated areas, including metropolitan Phoenix. The event generated enormous media coverage, hundreds of witness testimonies, and video footage that remains among the most widely discussed UFO evidence in modern history.
Two Distinct Events
Careful investigation has established that the March 13 sightings actually comprised two separate and distinct events that have been conflated in popular accounts.
The first event occurred at approximately 8:15 p.m. and involved a formation of lights moving across Nevada into Arizona. Multiple witnesses described a large, structured craft with lights at fixed points. Some researchers and former military personnel have suggested this formation was consistent with A-10 Thunderbolt aircraft flying in formation, with their navigation lights creating the impression of a connected structure at altitude. No military unit has formally claimed responsibility for this specific event, and it remains the more genuinely unexplained of the two incidents.
The second event occurred at approximately 10:00 p.m. and has a more straightforward explanation. The Maryland Air National Guard's 104th Fighter Squadron was conducting training operations known as Operation Snowbird at the Barry M. Goldwater Air Force Range south of Phoenix. During these exercises, LUU-2B/B illumination flares were released from aircraft at high altitude. The flares descended slowly on parachutes, creating a line of slowly falling lights that appeared stationary or slowly moving to observers on the ground. Mountains on the horizon obscured the lower portions of the flares' descent paths, giving the appearance that the lights simply disappeared.
The Governor's Response
Arizona Governor Fife Symington III held a press conference shortly after the incident at which he appeared to mock concern about the lights by having an aide appear in an alien costume. Symington later stated, in a 2007 interview, that he himself had witnessed the lights that evening and had been struck by the experience, and that his press conference had been an attempt to use humor to defuse public anxiety. His 2007 comments were sometimes cited as a gubernatorial "admission" of something extraordinary, though Symington did not make specific claims about the lights' origin.
What Evidence Shows
The flare explanation for the 10:00 p.m. event is well-documented and broadly accepted among aviation researchers, skeptical investigators, and the military. Video analysis showing the lights disappearing sequentially from left to right — consistent with flares dropping behind a mountain ridgeline — has been presented by multiple independent investigators. The 8:15 p.m. event is less clearly resolved, and no official explanation has been formally provided for that specific formation.
Why the Claim Persists
The Phoenix Lights endure as a cultural touchstone because the sheer number of credible witnesses — including pilots, police officers, and elected officials — lends them unusual weight. The government's initially dismissive response, followed by years of non-engagement, fed suspicion. The genuine ambiguity of the first event provides space for ongoing interpretation.
Current Verdict
Unsubstantiated. The later flare event is well-explained. The earlier formation lights remain without a definitive public explanation, though prosaic causes have not been ruled out. No evidence confirms extraterrestrial origin or government concealment of such.
The Two Events Unpacked: Luke AFB Records and the Flare Timeline
The conflation of two separate events on the evening of March 13, 1997 has been the primary obstacle to clear public understanding of the Phoenix Lights. The first event, beginning at approximately 8:15 to 8:30 p.m., involved a formation of lights moving generally south-southeast from the Nevada border through the Phoenix metropolitan area toward Tucson. Witnesses across a roughly 300-mile corridor reported a large, structured object with fixed-point lights. The formation moved slowly and silently — or nearly so — which observers found inconsistent with conventional jet aircraft behavior at low altitude.
Luke Air Force Base, the major military installation northwest of Phoenix, was operating normally on March 13. A-10 Thunderbolt II aircraft from the 162nd Fighter Wing, an Arizona Air National Guard unit, were conducting night training operations in the area. The A-10 is a low-speed, turbofan-engined aircraft capable of forming loose visual formations; its navigation lights, observed at distance and altitude in dark sky conditions, can appear as a connected structure. Independent investigators including Dr. Lynne Kitei, who photographed the lights from her home, and researchers affiliated with the National UFO Reporting Center documented the 8:30 p.m. event extensively. No official military unit has formally come forward to claim responsibility for this specific formation, and Luke AFB's official responses to queries were non-committal in the years following the event.
The second event, at approximately 10:00 p.m., has a clear and well-documented explanation. The Maryland Air National Guard's 104th Fighter Squadron, operating out of Davis-Monthan Air Force Base under the training exercise designation Operation Snowbird, released LUU-2B/B high-intensity illumination flares over the Barry M. Goldwater Air Force Range. These flares ignite at high altitude and descend slowly on parachutes, burning with an intense amber-orange light. Viewed from metropolitan Phoenix, approximately 50 to 60 miles north, the descending flares appeared as a slowly moving or stationary row of lights. The Estrella Mountain range to the southwest of Phoenix obscured the lower portion of the flares' descent, causing them to appear to wink out as they dropped below the ridgeline rather than fading as they naturally extinguished. This geometric explanation — confirmed by topographic analysis — accounts for the disappearance pattern that many witnesses described as unnatural.
Governor Symington's Arc and the Dilettoso Analysis
Arizona Governor Fife Symington III's handling of the Phoenix Lights became a secondary controversy that added political valence to an already intense public debate. On March 27, 1997 — two weeks after the sightings — Symington held a press conference at which he announced he had identified the "perpetrators" of the lights, then had an aide enter in an alien costume. The stunt was explicitly intended to defuse anxiety and, Symington later said, to use levity to move public attention past what he considered an unresolvable question. Critics argued it was dismissive of legitimate witness experiences and served to suppress rather than address the underlying question.
In 2007, a decade after the events, Symington gave a series of interviews in which he stated that he had personally witnessed the 8:30 p.m. formation from his home and had been deeply affected by the experience. He described the object as massive, structured, and unlike anything he had previously seen. His statements were widely reported as a reversal of his 1997 position. Symington was careful, however, not to claim extraterrestrial origin — he described what he saw, not what it was. His account does not resolve whether the 8:30 p.m. lights were conventional aircraft or something unidentified; it adds a credible witness to the former governor's ranks and underlines the disconnect between the official public response and the private experience of witnesses including elected officials.
Jim Dilettoso, a multimedia analyst who worked with researchers examining the Phoenix Lights footage, conducted spectral and photographic analysis of video recorded during the 10:00 p.m. event. His analysis was presented as evidence that the lights were inconsistent with military flares. Subsequent independent review of Dilettoso's methods by astronomer and skeptical investigator James McGaha and others found significant methodological flaws in his spectral analysis. McGaha, a retired military pilot familiar with LUU-2B/B flares, argued that Dilettoso's conclusions did not withstand scrutiny and that the spectral signature of the lights was consistent with the flares the 104th Fighter Squadron had released. The dispute between Dilettoso's analysis and that of McGaha and other skeptical investigators represents the methodological fault line at the center of continued debate about the 10:00 p.m. event — which, on balance, the weight of aviation and investigative evidence supports as a flare drop.
What Would Change the Verdict
Declassified military flight records establishing or conclusively ruling out the aircraft responsible for the 8:15 p.m. event would significantly clarify the record. Physical evidence of a structured craft would transform the assessment entirely.
Evidence Filters10
Thousands witnessed V-formation
SupportingStrongEstimated thousands of Arizonans witnessed the V-formation of lights moving slowly south from Las Vegas through Phoenix to Tucson on March 13, 1997.
Rebuttal
The mass witness testimony on March 13, 1997 is among the best-documented UFO events in the modern era, and the sheer number of observers makes a misidentification of a single small object unlikely. The more prosaic explanation is a formation of **conventional military aircraft** flying in close coordination — specifically, a flight of A-10 Warthogs from the 104th Fighter Squadron (Maryland ANG) that was on a cross-country training flight that night, which the squadron later confirmed. A V-shaped formation of aircraft with lights, observed against a dark sky at altitude, is consistent with the described angular size.
Governor Fife Symington witnessed it
SupportingStrongArizona Governor Fife Symington initially mocked the incident publicly but in 2007 stated he had personally witnessed the V-formation and described it as "not of this world."
Rebuttal
Governor Symington's 2007 reversal is striking and deserves to be taken seriously as testimony. However, it came a full decade after the event, after years of public pressure and media coverage that had extensively shaped the cultural memory of the sighting. Symington acknowledged he had not investigated or confirmed the source of the lights; his characterization of them as "not of this world" is an opinion, not a technical assessment. His initial public mockery also suggests he did not treat the matter as an unambiguous extraordinary event at the time.
V-formation subtended angular size larger than aircraft
SupportingWitness reports consistently described the V-formation as subtending an angular size much larger than a single conventional aircraft would — consistent with either a single very-large craft or closely-spaced formation flight.
Rebuttal
A large **angular size** in witness reports is consistent with a low-altitude, widely-spaced formation of conventional aircraft: at a few thousand feet altitude, a V-formation of aircraft spaced half a mile apart would subtend an enormous apparent width against the sky. Human angular estimation at night, especially for moving light sources against a featureless dark background, is notoriously unreliable. The very diversity of size estimates across witnesses — ranging from "football field" to "mile wide" — suggests observers were extrapolating rather than directly perceiving a rigid structure.
Silent movement despite apparent size
SupportingMultiple witnesses reported the V-formation moved silently — unusual for any conventional large aircraft formation.
Rebuttal
Many military aircraft, including the A-10 Warthog, are substantially quieter at cruise altitude than the public typically expects — particularly under atmospheric conditions that reduce sound propagation. The A-10's turbofan engines produce less noise than older jet aircraft, and at altitudes of 10,000–15,000 feet, even a multi-aircraft formation may be inaudible to ground observers. Silence at night is therefore consistent with conventional high-altitude military aircraft rather than evidence of exotic propulsion.
V-formation never officially explained
SupportingStrongThe USAF has never officially identified the 8:30 PM V-formation. The 10:00 PM flare event was attributed to Maryland Air National Guard A-10 flare drops; the earlier event remains unexplained in public records.
Rebuttal
The 8:30 PM event has not been officially attributed in public documents, which is a genuine gap in the record. The most credible candidate — the 104th FS A-10 formation, whose flight plan and timeline have been partially reconstructed by researchers including James McGaha and Joe Nickell — fits the observed characteristics but has not been formally confirmed by the USAF. The absence of an official explanation reflects bureaucratic reluctance to revisit a closed case rather than evidence of extraordinary origin; the burden of proof for an extraordinary claim remains with those making it.
Peter Davenport (NUFORC) collected 300+ witness reports
SupportingThe National UFO Reporting Center documented hundreds of witness reports from the event — among the largest contemporaneous UFO case files ever assembled.
Rebuttal
A large witness report database is a measure of the **cultural salience** of the event, not a measure of its physical nature. NUFORC reports are self-selected, unverified, and collected without a control for media priming — the Phoenix Lights received extensive local news coverage within hours, which demonstrably increased reporting rates. Quantity of sincere reports cannot substitute for physical evidence; many large historical UFO flaps (Washington 1952, Belgian wave 1989–90) have been substantially explained by conventional phenomena.
10 PM event was military flares
DebunkingStrongUSAF and ANG confirmed A-10 flare drops during training south of Phoenix around 10 PM accounted for the later static-lights observation. The two events have been conflated in popular accounts.
Formation flying can produce V-formation appearance
DebunkingExperienced aircraft observers note that formation flying by conventional aircraft at altitude in clear conditions can appear as a unified V-shape to ground observers. This does not explain all witness reports but accounts for many.
No classified aircraft declassification has emerged
DebunkingWeakIf the V-formation was classified US aerospace testing, no declassification has occurred in 28 years. Either: (a) it remains classified, (b) there is no classified program, or (c) it was genuinely unidentified.
AARO 2024 report does not identify Phoenix Lights
DebunkingWeakThe DoD All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office's 2024 Historical Record Report reviewing classified programs does not identify any classified program responsible for the Phoenix Lights V-formation.
Evidence Cited by Believers6
Thousands witnessed V-formation
SupportingStrongEstimated thousands of Arizonans witnessed the V-formation of lights moving slowly south from Las Vegas through Phoenix to Tucson on March 13, 1997.
Rebuttal
The mass witness testimony on March 13, 1997 is among the best-documented UFO events in the modern era, and the sheer number of observers makes a misidentification of a single small object unlikely. The more prosaic explanation is a formation of **conventional military aircraft** flying in close coordination — specifically, a flight of A-10 Warthogs from the 104th Fighter Squadron (Maryland ANG) that was on a cross-country training flight that night, which the squadron later confirmed. A V-shaped formation of aircraft with lights, observed against a dark sky at altitude, is consistent with the described angular size.
Governor Fife Symington witnessed it
SupportingStrongArizona Governor Fife Symington initially mocked the incident publicly but in 2007 stated he had personally witnessed the V-formation and described it as "not of this world."
Rebuttal
Governor Symington's 2007 reversal is striking and deserves to be taken seriously as testimony. However, it came a full decade after the event, after years of public pressure and media coverage that had extensively shaped the cultural memory of the sighting. Symington acknowledged he had not investigated or confirmed the source of the lights; his characterization of them as "not of this world" is an opinion, not a technical assessment. His initial public mockery also suggests he did not treat the matter as an unambiguous extraordinary event at the time.
V-formation subtended angular size larger than aircraft
SupportingWitness reports consistently described the V-formation as subtending an angular size much larger than a single conventional aircraft would — consistent with either a single very-large craft or closely-spaced formation flight.
Rebuttal
A large **angular size** in witness reports is consistent with a low-altitude, widely-spaced formation of conventional aircraft: at a few thousand feet altitude, a V-formation of aircraft spaced half a mile apart would subtend an enormous apparent width against the sky. Human angular estimation at night, especially for moving light sources against a featureless dark background, is notoriously unreliable. The very diversity of size estimates across witnesses — ranging from "football field" to "mile wide" — suggests observers were extrapolating rather than directly perceiving a rigid structure.
Silent movement despite apparent size
SupportingMultiple witnesses reported the V-formation moved silently — unusual for any conventional large aircraft formation.
Rebuttal
Many military aircraft, including the A-10 Warthog, are substantially quieter at cruise altitude than the public typically expects — particularly under atmospheric conditions that reduce sound propagation. The A-10's turbofan engines produce less noise than older jet aircraft, and at altitudes of 10,000–15,000 feet, even a multi-aircraft formation may be inaudible to ground observers. Silence at night is therefore consistent with conventional high-altitude military aircraft rather than evidence of exotic propulsion.
V-formation never officially explained
SupportingStrongThe USAF has never officially identified the 8:30 PM V-formation. The 10:00 PM flare event was attributed to Maryland Air National Guard A-10 flare drops; the earlier event remains unexplained in public records.
Rebuttal
The 8:30 PM event has not been officially attributed in public documents, which is a genuine gap in the record. The most credible candidate — the 104th FS A-10 formation, whose flight plan and timeline have been partially reconstructed by researchers including James McGaha and Joe Nickell — fits the observed characteristics but has not been formally confirmed by the USAF. The absence of an official explanation reflects bureaucratic reluctance to revisit a closed case rather than evidence of extraordinary origin; the burden of proof for an extraordinary claim remains with those making it.
Peter Davenport (NUFORC) collected 300+ witness reports
SupportingThe National UFO Reporting Center documented hundreds of witness reports from the event — among the largest contemporaneous UFO case files ever assembled.
Rebuttal
A large witness report database is a measure of the **cultural salience** of the event, not a measure of its physical nature. NUFORC reports are self-selected, unverified, and collected without a control for media priming — the Phoenix Lights received extensive local news coverage within hours, which demonstrably increased reporting rates. Quantity of sincere reports cannot substitute for physical evidence; many large historical UFO flaps (Washington 1952, Belgian wave 1989–90) have been substantially explained by conventional phenomena.
Counter-Evidence4
10 PM event was military flares
DebunkingStrongUSAF and ANG confirmed A-10 flare drops during training south of Phoenix around 10 PM accounted for the later static-lights observation. The two events have been conflated in popular accounts.
Formation flying can produce V-formation appearance
DebunkingExperienced aircraft observers note that formation flying by conventional aircraft at altitude in clear conditions can appear as a unified V-shape to ground observers. This does not explain all witness reports but accounts for many.
No classified aircraft declassification has emerged
DebunkingWeakIf the V-formation was classified US aerospace testing, no declassification has occurred in 28 years. Either: (a) it remains classified, (b) there is no classified program, or (c) it was genuinely unidentified.
AARO 2024 report does not identify Phoenix Lights
DebunkingWeakThe DoD All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office's 2024 Historical Record Report reviewing classified programs does not identify any classified program responsible for the Phoenix Lights V-formation.
Quick Talking Points
- The 10 PM flare event is identified; the 8:30 PM V-formation is not.
- Governor Symington's 2007 confirmation added credibility to the V-formation witness accounts.
- No evidence of extraterrestrial involvement; classified aerospace testing remains the most plausible alternative.
- Phoenix Lights V-formation event remains officially unexplained.
Timeline
V-formation sighting (~8:30 PM)
V-shaped lights observed moving south from Nevada through Arizona.
Static lights (~10:00 PM)
Later static lights south of Phoenix; later attributed to A-10 flare drops.
Symington press conference (joke)
Governor jokes with staffer in alien costume; publicly dismisses incident.
USAF acknowledges flare training
Maryland ANG confirms A-10 flare drops for 10 PM event only.
Symington disclosure
Former governor acknowledges personal witnessing; describes as not of this world.
AARO Historical Record Report
DoD report does not identify classified program responsible.
Notable Quotes
“I saw something that night that I cannot explain to this day. It was as big as several football fields, it moved without a sound, and it was definitely not a conventional aircraft. I waited ten years before saying that publicly.”
Verdict
Two distinct events on March 13, 1997 over Phoenix: (1) approximately 8:30 PM, a V-shaped formation of lights moved slowly south from Nevada through Arizona into Mexico. Witnessed by thousands. (2) approximately 10:00 PM, a series of static lights appeared south of Phoenix. The USAF eventually acknowledged Maryland Air National Guard A-10 aircraft dropped flares in training during the 10:00 PM event. The earlier V-formation event has not been officially explained; Governor Fife Symington (who initially mocked the incident) later said he had witnessed it personally and that it was "not of this world." Some analyses suggest stealth aircraft testing; others point to flare formation.
What would change our verdicti
Declassification of USAF training records for the March 13, 1997 period showing specific aircraft and trajectories, OR primary-source evidence of off-world origin — neither has emerged.
Frequently Asked Questions
What were the Phoenix Lights?
Two separate events on March 13, 1997: a V-formation of lights at ~8:30 PM (unexplained) and static lights at ~10 PM (attributed to A-10 flare drops). The two events are often conflated.
What about Governor Symington?
Symington initially mocked the incident publicly. In 2007 he acknowledged personal witnessing and described the V-formation as "not of this world." His disclosure added credibility to the event.
Was it just military flares?
Only partly. A-10 flare drops account for the 10 PM static-lights event. The earlier V-formation has not been officially identified and remains unexplained.
Were aliens involved?
No evidence of extraterrestrial involvement. The V-formation remains unidentified but "unidentified" does not equal "extraterrestrial." Classified aerospace testing is a plausible alternative that has not been verified.
Has AARO investigated?
The DoD AARO 2024 Historical Record Report reviewed classified programs and did not identify any responsible for the V-formation. The event remains officially unexplained.
Sources
Show 7 more sources
Further Reading
- articleSymington WaPo op-ed — Fife Symington III (2007)
- bookThe Phoenix Lights — Lynne Kitei (2010)
- articleMetabunk Phoenix Lights analysis — Mick West (2017)
- paperAARO Historical Record Report — DoD AARO (2024)
In Pop Culture
Lynne D. Kitei
Documentary based on Phoenix physician Lynne Kitei's personal photographs and witness interviews, presenting the most systematic evidence collection of the March 1997 event.