What does Newhouse Films Formation Over Tremonton, 1952 reveal?

Newhouse's 11 August 1952 letter to the commanding officer of Hill Air Force Base enclosed one 50-foot roll of processed 16mm color film and fixed the particulars: about 7 miles north of Tremonton on U.S. Highway 30S, 1110 on Wednesday 2 July 1952, a hand-held B&H Automaster with a 3-inch telephoto lens at 16 frames per second, the first few feet at f:8…

Which agency produced Newhouse Films Formation Over Tremonton, 1952?

Newhouse Films Formation Over Tremonton, 1952 is a primary-source record from Department of War. Its original classification was UNCLASSIFIED on release; individual items originally marked RESTRICTED or CONFIDENTIAL with DOD DIR 5200.10 downgrade stamps.

When is Newhouse Films Formation Over Tremonton, 1952 dated?

Newhouse Films Formation Over Tremonton, 1952 is dated 1952-07-02 (incident); file items dated 11 August 1952 through 1 June 1956. It was disclosed 2026-09-18.

What programs and topics appear in Newhouse Films Formation Over Tremonton, 1952?

Newhouse Films Formation Over Tremonton, 1952 references Project Blue Book, Crusade for Freedom pillow balloon releases (checked as a candidate source), Navy Skyhook balloon flights (Tillamook, Oregon, September 1952, obtained for comparison), Tremonton Utah, daylight formation of 10 to 14 objects and single object reversing course.

← Files

DISCLOSURE / FILE

Newhouse Films Formation Over Tremonton, 1952

DOW-UAP-D102, Project Blue Book File on Tremonton Film, Utah, 1952

Project Blue Book's case file on the 2 July 1952 Tremonton, Utah color film shot by U.S. Navy Chief Photographer Delbert C. Newhouse, tracing the Air Force and Navy laboratory analyses, the balloon and seagull inquiries, the 1953 release debate, and the paper trail of a deteriorating original.

Brief

Delbert C. Newhouse, a U.S. Navy Chief Photographer (service number 177283) with a 1935 Naval Photographic School diploma and more than 1,000 logged aerial-photography hours, exposed about 30 feet of 16mm Kodachrome at 11:10 MST on 2 July 1952, seven miles north of Tremonton on U.S. Highway 30S, after his wife spotted a group of bright objects, ten or twelve by his 1952 count, milling in a rough formation. The Wright Field Photo Reconnaissance Laboratory counted ten objects, judged their brightness beyond that of any bird, and clocked a lone reversing object at 2.1 degrees per second; the Navy Photographic Interpretation Center, in a study the Air Force put at about 1,000 man-hours, called the images light sources and computed 378 to 2,457 mph and up to 965 g on an admittedly arbitrary five-mile range. ATIC ran the film for balloon experts in Minneapolis (consensus: pillow balloons, though none were traced to the area), weighed a gull reading it could not confirm, and in February 1953 recorded that releasing the film without comment was a "calculated" risk of another big "flap". By 1956 the Air Force position had settled on seagulls reflecting sunlight, while the file's own letters show the original film damaged by repeated showings, duplicated to preserve it, and misdescribed as 35mm in ATIC correspondence.

Metadata

Agency: Department of War
Release: 9/18/26
Incident: 7/2/52
Location: Tremonton, Utah
Type: PDF • .pdf
Length: 156 pages
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED on release; individual items originally marked RESTRICTED or CONFIDENTIAL with DOD DIR 5200.10 downgrade stamps
Programs: Project Blue Book, Crusade for Freedom pillow balloon releases (checked as a candidate source), Navy Skyhook balloon flights (Tillamook, Oregon, September 1952, obtained for comparison)
Tags: Tremonton Utah, 1952, Project Blue Book, daylight formation of 10 to 14 objects, single object reversing course, 16mm Kodachrome motion picture film, Bell & Howell Auto Master camera, oblate or disk shape (Navy reading), light sources versus reflections, seagull hypothesis, pillow balloon hypothesis, Photo Reconnaissance Laboratory Wright Field, Naval Photographic Interpretation Center, Douglas Aircraft photogrammetric analysis, Montana 1950 film co-analyzed, family of four witnesses

Key points

Newhouse's 11 August 1952 letter to the commanding officer of Hill Air Force Base enclosed one 50-foot roll of processed 16mm color film and fixed the particulars: about 7 miles north of Tremonton on U.S. Highway 30S, 1110 on Wednesday 2 July 1952, a hand-held B&H Automaster with a 3-inch telephoto lens at 16 frames per second, the first few feet at f:8 and the balance at f:16, roughly thirty feet exposed, and no reference point in the sky for estimating speed, size, altitude or distance.p.113
The 28th Air Division's 12 September 1952 message records that Newhouse, his wife, his 14-year-old son and his 12-year-old daughter were all interviewed at their Berkeley home, that none had sighted unidentified objects before, that Newhouse and his wife appeared extremely honest and reliable, and that he was a 1935 graduate of the Naval Photographic School claiming over 1,000 hours in the air on aerial-photography missions, enough for the interviewer to class him as an expert photographer.p.6
The Wright Field Photo Reconnaissance Laboratory's October 1952 answers found ten objects in every sequence but the last, judged their reflection brightness to exceed that of any natural diffusing reflector such as white birds, ruled out large translucent spherical balloons but not bright aluminum-surfaced aircraft, measured the single reversing object at about 2.1 degrees per second (plus or minus 15 percent), and concluded the photography would be extremely difficult to imitate for fraudulent purposes.p.100
On 24 October 1952 AFOIN-2A2 asked the Director of Naval Intelligence for an independent laboratory interpretation, calling the movies possibly the best documentary evidence yet obtained on unidentified flying objects, and noted that the detached Idaho mountain footage showed almost no camera motion from Newhouse's hand-holding, a deduction the Air Force then applied to the single-object sequence.p.124
The Navy Photographic Interpretation Center's 5 December 1952 progress report and 4 May 1953 final report read the images as light sources rather than reflections, found no bird known to be sufficiently actinic, excluded aircraft and balloons, described the objects as oblate or disk shaped and blue-white, and, on the stated assumptions of a steady camera, motion perpendicular to the optical axis and an arbitrary five-mile range, computed velocities of 378 to 2,457 mph from 55 measurements, sizes of 16 to 98 feet, and accelerations from 50 g to 965 g.p.75
ATIC's balloon inquiry took Lt. A. G. Flues to Minneapolis on 29 to 31 December 1952, where Office of Naval Research and General Mills balloon staff watched the film eight times and agreed the objects closely resembled pillow balloons in flight and did nothing pillows would not do; General Mills' J. R. Smith was the least convinced, finding them a bit too bright and a bit too fast, and no one present trusted the angular-velocity computations because they assumed a still camera.p.28
A February 1953 ATIC memorandum for record lays out the release debate: the Air Force lab was reasonably certain the images were brighter than any bird, two astronomers who heard a Navy briefing said the Navy's brightness-measurement method was wrong, the Navy study had taken about 1,000 man-hours, and the plan to release the movies without comment and hope no one asked about the Navy report was recorded as a calculated risk of another big flap.p.39
Douglas Aircraft's R. M. L. Baker Jr, analyzing a 35mm reprint for the 1956 Green-Rouse documentary, weighed aircraft, chaff, birds, ballooning spiders, mirages and camera artifacts and wrote on 16 May 1956 that the evidence remained contradictory, that no single natural hypothesis yet suggested completely accounted for the objects, and that no definite conclusion could be obtained.p.88
The original's fate runs through the 1953 to 1954 letters: Newhouse asked for it back on 17 December 1953 because his copy had been damaged in a defective projector, Col. William A. Adams replied that the 16mm Kodachrome original had been damaged by repeated showings, ATIC wrote in January 1954 that it appeared to have deteriorated beyond the point where it could be copied, and NPIC's 18 March 1954 reply stated it had never held the original, kept one 16mm color copy plus 35mm color-positive and black-and-white-negative blowups, and corrected ATIC's description of the original as 35mm.p.45
Col. John G. Eriksen's 1 June 1956 memo for the Air Force press room stated that a fresh analysis by photo specialists unaware of the case history read the bright spots as bird reflections in strong sunlight and that the unanimity of opinion left little reasonable doubt the objects were seagulls, a characterization the Photo Reconnaissance Laboratory's own October 1952 answers in this file do not match.p.127

Verbatim

There was a group of about ten or twelve objects - that bore no relation to anything I had seen before - milling about in a rough formation and proceeding in a westerly direction.
p.113
The attached movies (see Incl. 1) are possibly the best documentary evidence yet obtained on unidentified flying objects.
p.124
They are reasonably certain that the brightness of the images on the film exceeds that of any bird.
p.37
It is the majority opinion of the group conducting this analysis that these images are light sources.
p.74
If aircraft is assumed to be close enough to permit velocities of present aircraft, they would be close enough for positive identification. If they are too far away for positive identification, then the velocity is too great for any aircraft as we know them.
p.131
It was brought out by two astronomers who heard a Navy briefing on the analysis of the movies that the method used to measure the brightness of each spot was wrong, therefore, the results of the entire study were wrong.
p.39
J. R. Smith was the least convinced of this hypothesis; however, he felt that the objects were a bit too bright and maneuvered a bit too fast.
p.28
This color film provides an instance of a sighting being substantiated by motion pictures and confirms the faith of the USAF in the veracity of the many citizens who have reported sightings of unidentified objects or phenomena in the air.
p.42

Most interesting

The file disagrees with itself about the camera: Newhouse's own statement names a hand-held Bell & Howell Automaster with a 3-inch telephoto lens (page 113), while NPIC's 18 March 1954 letter says the photography was taken with a Revere 16mm magazine-loading camera with an F1.9 lens (page 45).
Newhouse's description of the objects changes between accounts: the September 1952 interview has them about as long as they were wide, thin, identical in shape and light colored (page 5); the Douglas report of 1956 relays his description of gun-metal-colored objects shaped like two saucers, one inverted atop the other, subtending about the angle of a B-29 at 10,000 feet (page 83). His flying hours also grow, from over 1,000 in the 1952 interview (page 6) to some 2,200 in the 1956 report (page 83).
Hill Air Force Base reported weather balloons released at 0200 and 0800 on 2 July 1952, hours before the 11:10 sighting, with winds generally from the west at 10 to 12 knots (page 24); its 2100Z sounding that day showed a 70 degree F surface temperature and no inversion layer (page 62).
Douglas's R. M. L. Baker Jr. considered ballooning spiders, whose wind-borne silk streamers reflect sunlight as bright moving points, as a candidate, then doubted their reflections could be intense enough against a bright sky and noted that no streamers appear in the footage (page 87).
NPIC did its densitometry with a Welch Scientific Densichron Model 2150 at 22 times magnification on a duplicate of a copy, and flagged that the centers of the images might have burned out in duplication (page 73); the spectrophotometric analysis of the original that the Air Force requested never happened because NPIC never received the original (page 45). NPIC's December 1952 progress report ends with Conclusions: None and Recommendations: None (page 133).
The 1956 Eriksen memo describes the 1952 Photo Reconnaissance Laboratory conclusion as a strong possibility of seagulls, credited to identifiable seagulls in some frames (page 126); the laboratory's October 1952 answers in this same file say the brightness exceeded that of white birds against the sky and describe ten unknown aerial objects (page 100).
Filed with the case is an illustrated pamphlet reproducing Maj. Donald E. Keyhoe's 2 October 1953 telegram to Brig. Gen. Sory Smith, which asserts that a planned Air Force press showing was cancelled and asks where the original film went; the pamphlet gives the film length as about 40 feet, against the roughly 30 feet in Newhouse's own statement (pages 145 to 146).
A page of unsigned, undated handwritten notes lists a breakdown of 20% research (US), 20% unknown phenomena, 30% psycho. and 30% extraterrestrial next to a reference to OPNAV notice 3820; the file gives no context for who wrote it or what the percentages describe (page 111).
Same-date paperwork unrelated to Tremonton rides along: a Phoenix report of a seven-inch ball of flame with an eight-foot trail seen at 0420 on 2 July 1952 by Mrs. Arthur Wolf (page 3), a Lexington, Massachusetts report by Capt. Robert E. Metcalf of a milky white elongated oval seen 1 July 1952 (page 151), and a Los Angeles police officer's report of a bright object breaking into 6 or 8 pieces at 1945 on 2 July 1952 (page 155).

Cross-references

PDF1953 Film Lab Flags Utah And Montana ObjectsDepartment of War
PDFCPO Newhouse's Tremonton Film, Pillow-Balloon AnalysisDepartment of War
VIDNewhouse's Tremonton UFO Film, 1952Department of War
PDFSenator Sparkman's Alabama Meteorite Referral to ATICDepartment of War
PDFTwo UFO Films Sent to Naval Intelligence, 1952Department of War
PDFRuppelt's Eight Hundred Cases, Twenty Percent UnexplainedDepartment of War
PDFPentagon's Blue Book Facing Rigorous Scientific Review, 1966Department of War
PDFProject Sign Opens With 100 Sightings, 1948Department of War

Cited in

FINDINGWright Field's lab found brightness beyond any bird. By 1956, the answer was seagulls.War.gov September 18, 2026
TAKEAWAYTremonton: Four Readings, One Film, No Rangep.113War.gov September 18, 2026

Related research

PAPERTransients in the Palomar Observatory Sky Survey may be associated with nuclear testing and reports of unidentified anomalous phenomenaBruehl & Villarroel · 2025
PAPERUAP Indications Analysis 1945-1975: United States Atomic Warfare ComplexGrosvenor et al. · 2025
PAPERThe New Science of Unidentified Aerospace-Undersea Phenomena (UAP)Knuth et al. · 2025
PAPERThe UFO Enigma: A Call for US Government DisclosureNell · 2025

Common questions

What is Newhouse Films Formation Over Tremonton, 1952?: Project Blue Book's case file on the 2 July 1952 Tremonton, Utah color film shot by U.S. Navy Chief Photographer Delbert C. Newhouse, tracing the Air Force and Navy laboratory analyses, the balloon and seagull inquiries, the 1953 release debate, and the paper trail of a deteriorating original.
What does Newhouse Films Formation Over Tremonton, 1952 reveal?: Newhouse's 11 August 1952 letter to the commanding officer of Hill Air Force Base enclosed one 50-foot roll of processed 16mm color film and fixed the particulars: about 7 miles north of Tremonton on U.S. Highway 30S, 1110 on Wednesday 2 July 1952, a hand-held B&H Automaster with a 3-inch telephoto lens at 16 frames per second, the first few feet at f:8…
Which agency produced Newhouse Films Formation Over Tremonton, 1952?: Newhouse Films Formation Over Tremonton, 1952 is a primary-source record from Department of War. Its original classification was UNCLASSIFIED on release; individual items originally marked RESTRICTED or CONFIDENTIAL with DOD DIR 5200.10 downgrade stamps.
When is Newhouse Films Formation Over Tremonton, 1952 dated?: Newhouse Films Formation Over Tremonton, 1952 is dated 1952-07-02 (incident); file items dated 11 August 1952 through 1 June 1956. It was disclosed 2026-09-18.
What programs and topics appear in Newhouse Films Formation Over Tremonton, 1952?: Newhouse Films Formation Over Tremonton, 1952 references Project Blue Book, Crusade for Freedom pillow balloon releases (checked as a candidate source), Navy Skyhook balloon flights (Tillamook, Oregon, September 1952, obtained for comparison), Tremonton Utah, daylight formation of 10 to 14 objects and single object reversing course.
What does Newhouse Films Formation Over Tremonton, 1952 say, in its own words?: "There was a group of about ten or twelve objects - that bore no relation to anything I had seen before - milling about in a rough formation and proceeding in a westerly direction." (source p. 113).

SharePost Reddit

loading viewer...

Extracted text · Page 1

Newhouse Films Formation Over Tremonton, 1952

Page 1 Page 2 Page 156

Page 1 · vision OCR

1377/1415
Tremonton, Utah
7/2/52
2

DECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007

Page 2 · born-digital extraction

. I, J - ~ ..., J v-< I.). - r L , - ,J _,-_. , .,v .., ..., { J'J., - ... vS rs? ' 'Ct.., ~ . , . "' - l •'- ( :- ...·~-.., ' \,; .. ~ .... - '") . .. u ~ , . - - /, ~J .,~ , ,. 3) u o_ ... v :n:.. co::.o! ..oi:..i.,n -., . - - . -- .,; ~ _,:; ,c'- \,-., be LL.:: "-- '"'✓ - "' -· I, - c:,, . I See, ~-,\ 'fV\ 1 - ~ .., 4- CS - 3 'f- S DECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007

Page 156 · born-digital extraction

J c_,. I ::r-c c-- XI C C. rn - ,.. .... c:-; rr . C)l CJ) '- - fTI c.., 0 ..... DECLASSIFIED Aul.horny NND 923007

Full transcript156 pages · 29,235 words›

Concatenated page-by-page transcript. Born-digital pages came through pdf.js; scanned pages were transcribed by Claude vision OCR. Pages marked unreadable failed multiple OCR retries (heavy redaction, microfilm artifacts, or blank separators) and are kept in place for audit.

Page 1vision OCR

1377/1415
Tremonton, Utah
7/2/52
2

DECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007

Page 2born-digital extraction

. I, J - ~ ..., J v-< I.). - r L , - ,J _,-_. , .,v .., ..., { J'J., - ... vS rs? ' 'Ct.., ~ . , . "' - l •'- ( :- ...·~-.., ' \,; .. ~ .... - '") . .. u ~ , . - - /, ~J .,~ , ,. 3) u o_ ... v :n:.. co::.o! ..oi:..i.,n -., . - - . -- .,; ~ _,:; ,c'- \,-., be LL.:: "-- '"'✓ - "' -· I, - c:,, . I See, ~-,\ 'fV\ 1 - ~ .., 4- CS - 3 'f- S DECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007

Page 3born-digital extraction

--- • • ,I • • oe 53 • aE095 • ~ WPB065 \JNCLASSlf lED • YMX063H XYA126 • XMX062. • XXB049 JWPUK 019 • ~- ,. • RR/NMNM JEPHQ JEDWP JEDEN JEDST JWFDL 555 DE JWPUK 03 R 1021502 • FM~HQ~127TH PLT TNG WG LUKE AFB ARIZ - • TO JEPHQ/D/I HQ USAF WASH 25 DC / JEDWP/ATIC WRIGHT PATTERSON AFB OHI • .... JEDEN/CG ENT AFB COLORADO SPRINGS COLO • JINFO V JEDSTICG ATRC SCOTT AFB ILL e • .., JWFDL/J...IC'"CTAF RANDOLPH AFB SAN ANTONIO TEX , • ATTN:ATIAA-2C.:!FLYOBRPT , ,. ••• • • (1) SEVEN INCH BALL OF FLAME WITH EIGHT FOOT TRAIL SIGHTED• NO .. , ,,. . ' SOUND OR LIGHTS RESEMBLING KNOWN FLYING OBJ~crs. • (2) SIGHTED AT 0420 ON 2 JULY 1952 FOR 3 TO 4 MINUTES. . • (3) VISUAL OVSERVATION FROM GROUND• (4) FROM 1717 NORTH 1ST AVE, PHOENIX, ARIZ• OBJECT APPEARED NORTHWEST, • ... .. ,. ,.. ,. . . TRAVELED ARC TO SOUTHWEST• AGLE OF ELEVATION 40 DEGREES NORTHWEST, 30 DEGREES WEST, 15 DEGREES SOUTHWEST• ESTIMATED DISTANCE SEVEN TO • ~ TEN MILES• • .. (5) OBSERVER MRS ARTHUR WOLF, WIFE OF ARMY ORDNANCE ·coLONEL· ,,,_ • • PAGE TWO JWPUK 03 • (6) WEATHER AT 0430 CEILING CLEAR: VISIBILITY 15 PLUS MILES: WIND 4 KNOTS FROM NORTH• • C7AND 8) NONE (. 9) PRESUME OBJECT MADE GROUND CONTACT SOUTHWEST OF PHOENIX• • . SEARCH HAS BEEN REQUESTED • • . . (10) NO AIRCRAFT OR BALLONS REPORTED• POSSIBILITY OF CROP DUSTERS• 10/22212 JUL JWPUK • UNCLA.SSIFIED "' - V .. ,. I ., ,. ~r r . ., • • •

Page 4born-digital extraction

_,.., ('1 .. . I --~ J XDC170 DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE . STAFF MESSAGE DIVISION JHPML 185 PU7 3 - ~'l .JEDUP JEDEN JEPIIQ JUPH!. 444 DE J'{-JPNL 20F ✓ 11 121,cS50Z ZNJ v FH CG 2STH AD HAFB CALIF . v TO ~llIEF A.TIC URIGHT-PATl'ERSON P.FB O!IIC ~ , - , ✓ IrJFO ~G Ail? EI~! /\f,B COLO SPRYNGS COLO AF U.tlSHINGTON 2!3 DC · UPJ)F H/\.FB CALIF 917i ATTU DIH OF INTITT,. YN l?EPLY TO A.FOIN 21\2 J\ND UtillF t- ~SG UDOID 29149~ FOL LJf.0 TIEQ BY HQ USAF HAS BEB'iJ , . OBTAINED DY Ilfi'ERVIEtJ WITH CPO DELD~T C J3EUHOUSE, 77213 AVU • ,; # r r I SUi DEP, NATAL SUP CEt'J OAitLAt-ID CALIF IlEGAP.DiMG UNIDEtJTIFIED , J • I , I I DLi ODJS AND MOVIE FIUJ ON S!GliT!NC 2 JUL 52 NEAP TREMON'i'O."\J~ UTAIIa r r • I -' CPO NEGHOUSE~ UIS UIFE, SON /-l!'JD Di11JGHTER WERE J\LL INTERVIEWE.!") !>.T . . , TUE NEtr,.ou...,E HOME INBEillIBLEY, CALIF on 10 SEP 52 BY DIRECTOR O'F .,. I ,,- 4 - .,. INTELL.tGEtlCE 28TH AIR DIV (DEF)~ FOL t.NSUEnS !O QUEsr::ons 1 tHRU ... . .. 13 !N USAF P€UUE5T AHE SUi3fJIT1'ED 8 - , , .,, . no SOUND i-1Ei\1ID DtYnING on-:.;mvATlOi'i 2(1 N EXllAUST J, i\ILS OR DAF IN ! 65202 (12 Sep 52) Page 1 of 3 agea 4 Bi--\ Q; l(// -/ -' ·r k DOWNGRADED AT r . ,\.R DJ''i'ERY!\1~ : :1 > (lo DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS. I.-- ~ 1 DOD DIR 0200.10 ,rv ..! (i~{ ~f ~ I J. ) 1'>) Pe c. AFHQ FORM Q-3Q9g 19 JAN 51 {IY;, r . PR EV IOUS EDITIONS.Of T HIS EOR M MAY BE USED. lf!-M7M -l * u.; GOVERNMeiTPRIHTltfGClfl'ICE, 1951-<>-927◄ ,o UNCLASSJFIE

Page 5born-digital extraction

• • DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE STAFF MESSAGE DIVISION PAGE n,o OF .t@F - CR C TRAILS ~ :>BSERVED.~ .:,:. no A CRAFT DIRDS BALLOONS 0~ OTHER IDV .NTIFIABLE OBJECTS SEEN lN AIR U1r:1EDIA,E .Y BEFORE, DURING» Oft . , , . i•JHEDIATELY .AFTER 0$EP.VATION • 4 SINGLE OBJECT '0HICH DETACHED I • , iTSELF FRO 1 GROUP DTD BEAD IN DIREC'fION OPPOSITE ORIGINAL ~ ~ ... , , COURSE AND DISAPi.~ EARED FROM VIEU UHILE S fILL 'ffil\VELING IN THIS ,# • - • ,, DIRECTIOl"'iJ 5e CAt1ERA POINTED AT ESTIHATE 70 DEGREES EIJl:VAT'.'"ON ' AND DEsClUBED AND ARC FROi1 f¼PPROX DUE EAST TO DUE trEST ' , , TilEN FROM DUE WES"' TO APPROX 60 DEGI EES FRON NORTH.!.~ PllOTOGRAPHil G , , , DETACHED OBJ IIEADI£JG IN DIRECTION o0 POSITE ORIGINAL . . . . ~ counsE { i ti SUN tJAS APPROX OVJ1THIEAD OF OB.SERVER OBJECTS UEP.E . ; . , ., AT AP! .::O'}r ··1@ DEGREES .ABOV~ TRRliiN or1 A COURSE SEVERAL l1ILFS -•R_OM , .# • I OOOERVER#j 7 HEATHER CONDITIONS BRIGHT SUNUGHT, CLEAR , APFROX 00 . ... .,. DEGREES TEt1PE1:ATUP.E~ SLIGHT BFE~E ~R9M ~AST Oil'fH _EAST APPROX TO 5 t·lP-L 5 NO METEOROLOG!CAL 1\CT!VITY rmTED DUR NG THAT DAY , , , , .. 9e OPINION REGARD ~1G FOLLOUING CLN A'J LIGHT J.i'Rot1 OBJECTS . ' .... CAUSED BY REFl.ECTIONi D OBJECTS J'~PEARED PPROX AS LONG AS THEY , ., . ~ WERE HIDE AND TH N C,, P.PPEt\RED IDENT ~CAL .! SHAPE; D 2 TO ' . , -· .. OBtJECTS E ~.LL APPEA.llED LIGH'.f COLOPp F tlO OPIN. O!:J G APPE!h1E;) , . , ~ ... ~ ... , .. TO HAVE SM%" TYPE OF I·10T O~! EXCEPT FOR ONE OBJECT WHICH REVERSED ITS , , COURSE~ H D SAPPEARED FROrl VIEH BY HOVING OUT OF RANGE OF OAF !N: 65202 (1~ Sep 52) Page 2 of 3 g~s DOWNGRADED Arr .~ • •• .. . • -~ ' jlPl"'IT A <'<SIFrr . : . . ~ • i ..:.RV ALIJ ~'-'.&JAC> •• • .1 .!.2 YEAR& UNCLASSIFIED ~ :; · DOD D.t!t 5200.10 .. ~ AFHQ FORM Q-3Q9g 19 JAN ~1 PREVIOUS EDITION~ OF T Hl. ~ FORM MA Y BE USED. 16-63734- 1 * U.S GOVERNMENT PRINTING OfFICE : 1 951 -<>-927440 DECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007

Page 6born-digital extraction

• DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE PAGE THREE OF 201i' . EYESlGllT • 10 • NO FILTERS TIILL 2 OR 3 HILES TO ._., ,_ ... ,. • r RIGHT OF' US ltvY 3(J DASH S UITH OBSERVER FACING MORTJI.,1.0CATED . , , . . ' .. APPROX !O f1!l.ES NORTH TREr-lONTorJ, UTAH-, 12 o OTHER PERSO!JS . . SIGHTING OBJECTS UEREt Ii?S D., Co NEUHOUSF: UIFE D~LBERT c,, . . , .. NE\<JHOUSE1 JRi $ON9 f-\GE 14t AUNE NEHHOUSE1 DAUGl-ITER, AGE 12 o WHOLE • " ., # ., ,6 , .. . - t1JD:,YHOUSE FAUILY INCLt.IDED lll INTF.RUifili o:. 13 CPO NEHHOUSE MID FllI·iILY ., .. , . , ~ .. HA~JE NEVER SIGIITED UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS DEFORE" NEWHOUSE .. , ., ., .. STATED THAT HE NEVER BELIEVED HE UOLlLD JOIN RAf1I{.S OF THOSE , .. .,, ,, REPORT .. NG SUCH OBJECTS PRIOR TO THIS OBSERVfi1' Oi.~ CPO NEUOOUSE . . A..f'v1) I-ms NEUlfOUSE APPEARED TO BE EXTnEr1E!.Y HONEST /\ND RELIABLE . .. .. ., , , PERSONSi) Cf-0 NEHHOUSE STATED HE HAS !3EEtJ iiJ THE Ni\JAL sn:r~VICE FOR ,,,, - , , .. WER 1 ~ YEARS tJ 1TH SE!lVIC E A5 f\ Conn~s I Of· JED OFF It: ER DUR IriG . , WH 2~ NfiliHOUSF.: !S GUADUATE OF NitVAL PHOTQ1Rt\Pll!C SCHOOL IN 19.35 MID C,..AIIt; OVEl"' 1000 Hot.ms IN THE l-iIR ilS L. PHOTOGRAPHER CiJ ACTUAL , AERIAL PH0703IlAPH Nl.SSimiS tt llEUHOltJE f1LSO DOES COrlSlDER" Di 17 G1 Olit'TD , PHOTOGRl\PTIY.., !'r IS BELIEVED NEUHOUSE COULD BE CLASSIFIJ!D AS fill EXPER ..... PHOTOGRAPHE11., STAFF MESSAGE DIVISION NOTE : 291!!9 ia not identi.fied in SMD .. ~ lN!i'O . OIN., OOP CAF Ill : 65202 (12 se· 52 Page 3 of 3 pages JI-Ii /oo - * U. S GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFlCE : 19Sl-<>-927••o AFHQ FORM Q-3Q9g 19_ l~JI 5 1 _ _ PREVIOUS EDITIONS OF THIS FORM MAY BE USED. 10--6:173'-l

Page 7born-digital extraction

• , l\DQUl\:~TEn.s HEQUES TED BY • Sl!DC027 HQD0 '-9 UNCLAS$1FIED - - - . - . J DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE STAFF MESSAGE DIVISION JUPUL 12 RU JEDHP JEPHQ 222 DE JUPi iL 5GJ 28T] 1 lR DIV CD£F) Hf\ 11LTotl /\FTJ~ GLAU'" ✓ T? ~Ci XEF ~ !'.T!"! HflIG1IT·-Pl\TTEi1S OIJ l\FD, OH10 ✓ LiFO; -- - ) Il~EGTOH or TIJTEl.L:CGErJCE usrff s ui us:CNGTOU 2s,D c 9171 I J REPLY TO I\FOJ'.l1-2A'2 FOLLO\·JIHG 1tJFffiI1l\TIOil lil\S DEEtl ODThiJED DY TELEPHONS COliVfil1SATim~ ETH cno D&U3El1T C ti m~u 10usr::, 3.772739 AVt~ SUP DEP9 tJAV i. SUP ca T:SU . , . )A1{L(.\!'JD Cf.\L!F O 17 · GMDliJG AtJ /\DD !7'IO Jli.L our..,Tlor ft BOUT MOVXE FIL~1 (Xj . TO PHOTOCirnPU t-10 1lT!',IP SCE ,E rr !DrilIO UliICII 1\PFEt.R 00 li 1rrn1 FOO'f[\GE - IIELD __ ~~ ,, 09/2:'.i2 ~ OCT ,J 1~ !-1L IfPO : OIU ( 10 Ci; .. 2 ) UNCLA.SSIFlED AFHQ FORM Q-3Q9g 19 JAN 51 PREVIOUS EOlTIONS OF THIS FORM MAY BE USED. 1-7U- l * U.S GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE d 851---<>-9Z7«0 COPY " 7l/,J CAFNV 7 o ' - ✓

Page 8vision OCR

1140
[ILLEGIBLE] 357

Ed.

Excellent analysis by film lab.!
[ILLEGIBLE] mode analysis was "on the ball", doing
a thorough job.

Elzey

8-25 Film

10day travel

[REDACTED] [REDACTED] [ILLEGIBLE] [REDACTED] [REDACTED]

TREMONTON CASE (NEW HOUSE)
D893.90

DECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007

Page 9born-digital extraction

DISPOSITION FORM FILE NO. I SUBJECT 35nm. F.ilm and Analysis o AFOI Att.n: N,-2A2 Major Fournet, FROM ATIC DATE 1 5 OCT 1952 COMMENT NO. 1 Capt Ruppelt/jos 65365/B263D/PD2B l . "As per your request inclosed herein f or your inspection is the 3~ film from Tremonton, Utah, showing unidentified aerial objects. 2. Also inclosed is a photostatic copy of an analysis performed by the Photo Reconnaissance Laboratory, Wright Field. 3. The 35mm roll is the original film and no duplicate has been made• 4. It is the opinion of ATIAA-5 that the film should be submitted to an orni thologist, perhaps at the Smithsonian Institute in Washington, to obtain an opinion as to whether the objects may not possibly be birds in flight. 2 Incls a/s ·, 16-6 tSOJ-3 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1952 0. 9Be8?5 DD 1 ~i':r 50 9 6 REPLAcES NME FORM 96. 1 ocr 48. wH1cH w.v eE USED DECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007

Page 10vision OCR

[ILLEGIBLE]

RECEIVED
OCT 20 [ILLEGIBLE] 10.52
DIR/INTELLIGENCE
HQ USAF

Page 11born-digital extraction

---- -- • UNCLASSIFIED A(-OIJ ------. UNCLASSIFIED DOWNGRADED AT 8 YEAR 1N'r1-:: 1 1v.\'.t.at DECLASSIFIED ~ 12 YEARS. . .DODJllBt~o..10 ' '

Page 12vision OCR

UNCLASSIFIED

(5) AT APPROXIMATELY WHAT ELEVATION AND IN WHAT DIRECTION (BEARING) WAS
CAMERA POINTED DURING EXPOSURE OF FILM?

(6) WHAT WAS POSITION OF SUN RELATIVE TO OBJECTS AND TO HIM?

(7) WHAT WERE WEATHER CONDITIONS? APPROXIMATE TEMPERATURE? HAZY OR CLEAR?
WIND DIRECTION AND SPEED?

(8) ANY METEOROLOGICAL ACTIVITY NOTICED DURING THAT DAY?

(9) DOES HE HAVE ANY OPINION REGARDING FOLLOWING:

(a) WAS LIGHT FROM OBJECTS CAUSED BY REFLECTION OR WERE THEY SOURCE
OF LIGHT?

(b) SHAPE OF OBJECTS?

(c) WERE THEY ALL APPROXIMATELY THE SAME SHAPE?

(d) COLOR OF OBJECTS?

(e) WERE THEY ALL SAME COLOR?

(f) TYPE MOTION ATTRIBUTABLE TO OBJECTS, BOTH ABOUT OWN AXIS AND AXIS
OF FLIGHT PATH?

[REDACTED]                    2   3

DOWNGRADED AT 3 YEAR INTERVALS;
DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS.
DOD DIR 5200.10

UNCLASSIFIED

Page 13born-digital extraction

I I • lJNCLASSIFIED DOWNGRADED AT g YB.An 1NTERV ~ 1~ .. DECLASSIFIED Af."'l~ER 12 YEARS. DOD Dm μ200.10 UNCLASSIFIED

Page 14born-digital extraction

• UNCLASSIFIED - , r CopY TWX CAFIN 6~202 R l21.650Z ZNJ ffl CG 2.STH AD HAFl3 CALIF TO CHIEF ATlC lJRIGllT- PATTERSOM AFB OHIO INFO CG AOC ENT AFB 001.D SPRINGS COIO DOWNGRADED AT ~ YE.AR 11\"'TERVAli8~ USAF rtASHDSGION 25 00 DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEAkS • DOD, D~ ~200.10 _ .. • • CG WADF ffAFB CALIF RES'l'RlCTJ?D/9171. Ami DIR OF INTEL. D:l RE.PLY ro AFOIN-2A2 AND iiADF J!'SG ~DOID 2<ll49 FOL INFO ~ BI }l~ USAF Hi\S Bml OBTAINED Br INTERVIE Y wm CPO DELBERT C. NE!mOUSB. 17/Z'/'J, AVN SUP DE?, llAVAL SUP CEN, OAKLAND, CAI.IF REG/.RDING UNIOOOIFIED BLY OBJS .A?ID l!OVIE Filll ON SIGJfl'ING 2 JUI 52 llF.AR TRWONTON, UTAH. CPO NEiuIOUSE, HIS WIFE, SON AND DAUGilrER 17ERE ALL INTER,. VIlfflED AT THE REraIOUSE HOllE IN BERKELEY, CALIF Oii 10 SEP 52 BY DIRroTOR OF INTELLIGFWE, 28TH Am DIV (DEF). FOL ANSWERS TO Q UESTIONS l. THRU l3 IN USAF WUEST ARE SUIDAITrED: 1. NO SOUND HEARD DUPJ:NG OBSE'RVA'l'ION. 2. ?lO EXHAUST TRAILS OR CONTR.UIS OBSERVED. 3. NO AIRCRAFT, BIRDS, BUJ..OONS, OR OTHER IDEtrrIFIABLE OBJECTS SEEN IN AIR IlllEDIATELY BEFORE, DUP.DlG., OR Dl!EDIATELY AFI'ER OBSERVATION. 4. snmLE OBJECT mIICH DETACim> ITSELF FOOM GROUP DID HEAD DJ DIRmTlOU 01'1'0SlTE ORIGINAL COURSE AND DISAPPEARED FRl)Y VIFrl mIIE STILL TRAVELING IN THIS DIRD'.:TION. 5. CAUERA POINrED AT ESTil.!ATED 70 D.IOC;REES ELEVATION AtID DESCRIBED AND All: Fro!! APPROX DUE EAST TO DUE ~ 1&5'? Tflm FRC?.t DUE \'iEST TO AP.PR.OX 00 DEGREES 0011 NORTH IN PHCJrOORAPHING DEI'ACHID OBJ HEADING m OPP Dnt:roTIOll OIIDOSITE ORIGINAL COURSE. 6. SUN WAS APPROX OVERHEAD OF OBSERVER. OBJJ!PTS WERE AT APPROX 70 DEG-RI®, ABOVE TRRAIN ON A COURSE SEVERAJ, UI1.ES FROU OBSERVER. 7 • WEATHER COND:rrIONS: BRIGRr StmUGHl', CLEAR., APPROX 00 DEGREE'S TEMPFllATURE, SLIGH!' =-"~" - RrH EAST APPROX 3 'ro 5 l!PH. - F _,......., 8. NO HE:rEOROIDGICAL ACTIVlTJJiii jURDtC Tlwt DAY. 9. oPnUOH REGARDDm rou.omuG CI.N A. LIGHT m ( OBJWTS CAUSED B R:EFI.mTlON: B. ODJEOTS ~ - Y UNCLASSIFJ ED

Page 15born-digital extraction

- - •• ' .. I' ,' .. UNCLASSIFIED PR.OX s GAS THEr ERE PEARED IDENTIC 12 l4 0 CS. • F. 0 OP G. RED T HAVES - JICH ED pp ITS cot.ms. I{. • 10. 0 0 0 US H. 30 DASH S APPROX 10 IIF..S . 13. C E OP EPT R DIS BY VING our OF USED• ll. m LO HI 2 OR 3 LES 1TH O VER ;, C G ORTH. I.OC 12. ;y CLUDED EDU?JI IF FLmG OBJ TS BEFORE. B IEVED HE .um Jon RANKS O T E RIOR TO TH 0 ND .PEFlS01G • CPO HE V LS 19.&.J.ll\1~ O CER DURING USE IS GRADU TE O • AV L 1935 D CLA OVER l.OCX) HOURS IN THE AIR A PHOTOGRA nm ER.I J, OT GRAPH S IONS. DO• i'HUSE COUID CL\SSI IFD -...n.TGRADED AT 8 YEAlt ~~; UVTI ECLASSIFIED AFI'ER 12 YEAAO• D l)OD Dm 5200.10 :

Page 16vision OCR

UNCLASSIFIED

FROM: HQ USAF                         7 Oct 52     [REDACTED]
                                       ACTION: ROUTINE  INFO: ROUTINE

TO:    CG28th AIRDIV HAMILTON AFB CALIF   CRYPTOPRECAUTION: NO

INFO:  CHIEF ATIC WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB OHIO   IDENTIFICATION: 9171 is
                                               CAF IN 65202
                                               (12 Sep 52)

                              CLASSIFICATION: [REDACTED]


FROM: AFOIN 59782

    ATTENTION: Director of Intelligence.  Reference your message
9171 dated 12 Sep 52.  Request CPO Newhouse be asked following
additional question:  Was tripod used to photograph mountain
scene in Idaho which appears on final footage of film in
question?  Forward information by electrical means to ATIC with
information this headquarters.  In response reply to AFOIN-2A2


COORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2_______________ AFOIN-2A ________________

                         [REDACTED]                    PAGE 1

DRAFTER'S NAME:                         RELEASING OFFICER'S SIGNATURE:

   Maj. Dewey J. Fournet                DONALD E BREBE, Captain, USAF
                                         Executive Officer, Topical Division
AFOIN-2A2                               Deputy Director for Estimates
                                         Directorate of Intelligence, DCS/O

          TELEPHONE:  75990    DOWNGRADED AT 3 YEAR INTERVALS;
                                DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS.
                                DOD DIR 5200.10

UNCLASSIFIED

Incl

[REDACTED]

Page 17born-digital extraction

• C 74o96 (10 0c 5 ) UNCLASSIFIED D.C. 1952. DOWNGRADED AT S Y: . R 1N'rEEVA ; DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS. DOD DIR p200..J.O

Page 18born-digital extraction

• UNCLASSIFlED - com. J\ND AUD , 1)00:;t s. ., 71016 UNCLASSIFIED

Page 19born-digital extraction

, ' le I.../ e..<;1/, ar:!J - .. .,.,... - Requirements 1. 2 color duplicates and 1 black & white print (exclusive of portion Vflth sound track whieh is spliced to the end of the film}. 2. Request the original be handled with utmost care (it is already 1fi fairly poor condition, and wear very anxious that 1t suffer no further damage). 3. Request the original be cleaned as carefu]y as posslble prior to duplication. 4. Request utmost effort in controlling duplication to extent that resulting copies wUl be as ldentlca.I to or.lglnal as po ible ln image and color reproduction. 6. The loos (unspllced) porlton of 17 frames belongs at the end of the footage havlrig a deep blue background and no sound track. The la t frame of thls loo e portion s mmediat ly adjacent to the spllce with the broken frame having the sound track. 6. Can the stripp d sprocket holes 1n·the loose portion of the orlgtna.l (see 5) be repair d ln any way - sufficiently to make it possible to run thls part a ong with the remamder of film without malfunction?

Page 20born-digital extraction

,. f NCLASSIFIED • • • ACTIO /f T;S RPBiSl 1-}--r I • ~ j ;(!~ TYE263 • TDB241 . I JEPHQ E004 / RR JWPML JE~ 222 • DE JEPHQ 94A / R 0718062 2£ / • FM HQ USAF WASHD< • TO JWPML/CG28TH AIRDIV HAM ILTON AFB C~ INFO JEDWP/CHIEF ATIC WPAFB OHIO ../ • FROM CLN AFOIN 59782 ATTENTION CLN DIRECTOR . • OF INTELLIGENCE. REFERE CE YOUR M ESSAGE 9171 DATED 12 SEP 52. REQUEST CPO NEWHOUSE BE ASKED FOLLOWING ADDITIONAL QUESTION CLN • WAS TRIPOD USED TO PHOTOGRAPH MOUNTAIN SCENE IN IDAHO WHICH APPEARS • ON FINAL FOOTAGE OF FILM IN QUESTION QUES FORWARD INFORMATION BY ELECTRICAL M ENNS TO ATIC WITH INFORMATION THIS HEADQUARTERS. • I RESPONSE REPLY TO AFOIN-2A2. • 07/20342 OCT JEPHQ • • A ON • • • UNCLASSIFIED ·• DECLASS IFIED Authority NND 923007

Page 21born-digital extraction

COORDINATJON INSERT ORGNL CODE AND PULL SIGNATURE , 177283 Your coo . ,r tion d rvic our V truly, .•• ~,. - ,,. , • . ~· .· DESIGNATE AUTHD OFPICE OF RECORD OFFICIAL FlLE COPY AMC Form 8 (Bev I 'I' llla,7 SO) Sa11'e111edet1 AMC Form 8, Bev 1 £pr ,a, which wilt be used. Air Forc•WPAFB-L-IS JUL 52. 3600

Page 22born-digital extraction

\ .. .., •• f, , DECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007

Page 23born-digital extraction

. , ' . . - ACTJQf\.~ • • I ~ I I 1,v,.04 I • Jg I • XDB016 ~ r 9 )Q(B006 : :, JWPML 12 .- • JEDWP JEPHQ 222 • JWPML 56J R 0923282 • FM JWPML/CG 28TH AIR DIV (DEF) HAMIL1'0N AFB, CLAIF. c-- - • , JEDWP/CHIEF, ATIC WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB, OHIO TO : JWPHQ/DIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE • HEADQUARTERS USAF, WAHSINGTON 25,D.c. • 9171 IN REPLY TO AFOIN-2A2 FOLLOWING INFORMATION . BY HQ. USAF HAS BEEN OBTAINED BY TELEPHONE CONVERSATION • WITH OPO DELBERT C. NEWHOUSE, 177273, AVN SUP DEP, NAVAL SUP CENTER, • OAKLAND, CALIF . REGARDING AN UNIDENTIFIED OBJECT SIGHTING TO PHOTOGRAPH MOUNTAIN SCENE OF FILM IN QUESTION"? ANSWER: HELD. OCT JWPML ADDITIONAL QUESTION ABOUT MOVIE FILM ON ON 2 JULY 1952. QUESTION:"WAS TRIPOD USED • IN IDAHO WHICH APPEARS ON FINAL FOOTAGE • NEGATIVE, ENTIRE ROLL OF FILM WAS HAND DOWNGRADED AT $ Vb • DECLASSIFIED ~ !N'rER-v .,, .., ~: DOD DIR r,200.1lf ?RS. IJNCLASSIFlED v>; • 11 cr10~: DECLASSIFIED Authority NNO 923007

Page 24vision OCR

UNCLASSIFIED

Applies to Tremonton, Utah
2 Jul 52

1. Atic.
2. Atiaa
4. C files
3. Atio

1952   ACTION INFOR.  A.G.O. 1  INFOR.
NOV 18 PM 3:47

RB123 VO
JWPHL F021
RR JEDWP
DE JWPHL 020D
R 181630Z
FM HQ OOAMA HILL AFB UTAH
TO CG ATIC WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB OHIO

[REDACTED] FROM OOIP 11-15-E RE URMSG FM AFOIN-ATIAA-11-3-E
PROJECT BLUE BOOK 1 WEA BLN EA RELSD 0200 AND 0800  2 JUL 52
TRAJECTORY SW TO NE THENCE W TO E THENCE NW TO SE DURING ASCENSION
WINDS GENLY FR W SPEED 10-12 KNOTS NO OTHER INFO AVAL THIS COMD ON
2JUL52 RE UNIDENTIFIED OBJS
18/1842Z NOV JWPHL


Requested info on balloons launched

1140 MST
3 Jul 52


DOWNGRADED AT 3 YEAR INTERVALS;
DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS.
DOD DIR 5200.10

UNCLASSIFIED

18 Nov 52

Page 25born-digital extraction

COMMUNICATIONS CENTER - NO. JOINT MESSAGEFORM ; JulJ-.jh , ~ tit,L/) ;Ji~) UNCLASSIFIED ,________ SPACE ABOVE FOR COMMUNICATIONS CENTER ONLY ,-----------. - DATE-TIME GROUP FROM: (Orit1instor) □ ORIGINAL MESSAGE □ BOOK MESSAGE CRYPTOPRECAUTION □ MULTIPLE ADDRESS □ YES □ NO REFERS TO MESSAGE: IDENTIFICATION ICLASSIFICATION INFO: .. DOWNGRADED AT S 2 ...iJt INTERVAua. DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 l"EAll& • DOD DIR 0200.10 UNCLASSIFIED RaEASING OFFICER 'S SIGNATURE OFFICIAL TITLE SYMBOL REPLACES WO AGO FORM 1H68, 15 JUN 1945, AND WO AGO FORM 0990. 18-ffl23-'l * u. s. GOVERN111ENT PRINTING OFFICE , mo--0-875948 i APR 1946, 9JHICH MAY BE lJSEb. DD, ~illf49173

Page 26born-digital extraction

J Whom it may cA rn ATIAA-5/Lt Fiue. os/65365/ l; Dec -~2 MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD PROBLEM: Tremont~ -f' Utah, sighting. FACTS AND DISCUSSION: On 15 Dec 52 Lt A.G. Flues telephoned Lt Malcom Ross, USN, at the Of fice of Naval Research, University of Afinnesota. The purpose was to deter mine whether pillow balloon releases could account for the Tremon~..,_,Utah, incident of 2 Jul 52. Lt Ross had seen the Tremon-tP1n'ovies and it was his opinion, as well as that of Lt Lewis, ONR, that the objects photogr~phed were pill-0w balloons. However, Lt Ross said that the Navy had not . f:el~ased any pillow balloons in or near that area at that time. Lt Ross po~nted out that General Mills, Inc., Minneapolis, is, in so far as he knows, the ·sole manufacturer of pillow bal loons and suggested that ATIC contact-1,±'~ J. R. Smith of General Mills to determine what organizations and ageheies had purchased pillow balloons. Lt Ross also stated that in the winter of 1952, the 11 Crusade for Freedom" pur chased many pillow balloons from General M ills. These were sent to various cities in the United States and released periodically. Lt Ross did not know the exact times, dates, or points of these releases, but he suggested that ATIC contact the 11 Crusade for Freedom". REOOMdENDATI0N: That ATIAA-5 contact Mr. J. R. &iith and the 11 Crusade for Freedom"~ .- .t:·?~ DECLASSIFIED Aulhority NND 923007

Page 27born-digital extraction

...,., • TO: Whom it May Concern SUBJECT: Tremonton, Utah, incident of 2 Jul 52 On 16 Dec 52 Lt A.G. flues called l . J. R. Snith, Director, Balloon Re search, General N~lls, Inc., Atlnneapolis, nnesota, to determine whether or not a pillow balloon release could have caused the Tremonton incident. 'r. Smith pointed out that in the winter of 1951, his company, the only known manufacturer of this type balloon, produced a large number of pillows for the 11 Crusade for Freedom 11 • These balloons were distributed to both national and local offices of that organization and GMI was unable to say exactly what the organization did with them after receipt. However, G did say that they were released sporadically for publicity purposes from widely separated areas in the United States. In the "Crusade for Freedom 11 organization there have since been 100% personnel shifts, top to bottom and J. R. Smith was not too encouraging when Lt F1ues suggested contacting the organization. However, he agreed to forward all shipping lists which will tell A1IC iho the consignees ere and JJJSt what numbers each received. Mr. Smith pointed out that in 1951 and until Nov 52, helium and hydrogen gasses were in short supply. The two companies which furnish these gasses are Air Reduction Company and The Linde Company. r. Smith suggested contacting their distributors in the area of the sighting. Reconnnendationa: That A'ITC follow-up with the lists Mr. Smith will provide and that ATIC check distributors of hydrogen and helium in the Utah area.

Page 28born-digital extraction

.,. • Travel Report - Minneapolis, Minnesota 29, :30, 31 December 1952 On 29 Dec 52, Lt A.G. Flues went to Minneapolis, Minnesota, t.o contact the Field Representative of ONR and the General Mills Corporation there. The purpose was to determine if' the UFO's in the Tremonton, Uteh, movies of 2 July 52 might be pillow balloons. On 30 Dec the films were run off 1n the balloon room of the Physics Building, ' University of Minnesota. The following were in attendance, Lt Malcolm Ross, USN S2C Leroy Harger, USN CPO Lewis, USN Dr. Nye, u. of Minn. Balloon lights and geophysics Dr. Winkler, u. of Minn. Balloon nights and geophysics Frank c. Jewett, Exec. Vice-President, Research Dept., General Milla, Ino. J .. · R. Smith, Chief', Meteorology Dept., General Mills, Inc. There were various others present all of whom have had experience in fiying pillow balloons. The films were run off eight times, at various speeds, and were frequently stopped at good frames. All were informed of the background data. It was the consensus of opinion that the objects resembled pillow balloons 1n flight very closely and did nothing that pillows would not do in similar circumstances. J. R. Smith was the least convinced of this hypothesis; however, he felt that the objects were a bit too bright and maneuvered a bit too fast. The head meteorologist of GMI pointed out that winds to' 8,000 rt. at Hill AFB would probably be different trom those at Tremonton because of topography and land-sea effect. The extreme stability of the atmosphere on that dq would, he added, make aseent very slow and would tend to stabilize a pillow at a given altitude . .Additionally, wind direction is capable or a 180° shift within perhaps DECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007

Page 29born-digital extraction

• ,. 500 ft. of altitude which could account for a high or low balloon, with relation to the group, to proceed in an apparently- opposite direction. If the objects are pillows, the consensus was that they- are not over 6,000 1 altitude, probably- much less. If this is so, they cannot possibly- have been aloft for more than 12 hours, and this only if filled with warm air or underinflated with gas or ballasted for a given altitude. There is a much greater probability that they are ascending and have been released from a nearly point not over 1/2 hour before. None of the persons present placed much faith in the computations of angular velocity, since all were predicated upon Newhouse's holding the camera still. Lt Flues went over to GMI later on and obtained. from J. R. Smith the names and addresses of consignees who received. pillow balloons during the period Sep 51 - 2 Jul 52. Also Lt Flues picked up some photos of pillow balloons and the flight tracks of three Navy Skyhook.a released in Sept 52 from Tillamook, Ore. Gen eral Mills had no movies of pillows which approximated the Tremonton films aa GMI 1 s footage seemed to be, shot against cloud background and when the balloons were lower. However, they will be launching pillows from Wendover, Utah, in Feb 5.3 and will make movies then. The course of action recommended was for ATIC to check all persons in the western u.s. who received pillows. There were some other shipments to Gl1I home and farm appliance stores, and J. R. Smith agreed to send ATIO the names and addresses of such consignees. List of consignees: 2 DECLASSIFIED Authority NNO 923007

Page 30born-digital extraction

• • • • UNCLASSIFIED -- .. . 7[ b' • ... ~ ;f.~~.s \ FO MAT\ON DOWNGRADED AT 8 YP'.,,AR I~T JHVAl..iS; DECLASSIFIED AJ?TER 12 YEARS. DOD DIR 5200.10 0 .. . ··• • • r C • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Page 31born-digital extraction

• • • • • • • • • • • • DOWNGRADED AT S UAR tN'l"E" 1 ... "'·t ~ : DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEA'1 ...~,. • J)..0:0 ;pm p200.10 • • • .

Page 32born-digital extraction

• • I • - ' , UNCLAsSIFIEO DECLASSIFIED Aulhorilv NND 923007

Page 33born-digital extraction

.. ,, ROUTING FROM: (Or<"ainatoc) TO: DD FOAM I GCT 49 173 JOINT MESSAGEFORM COMMUNICATIONS CENTER NO. UNCLASSIFIED UNCLAss REPLACES NME FORM 173, I MAY 49. WHICH MAY BE USED, DATE-TlME GROUP □ BOOK MESSAGE □ ORIGINAL MESSAGE CRYPTOPRECAUTION □ MULTIPLE ADDRESS □ YES .[] NO REFERS TO MESSAGE: IDENTIFICATION DOWNGRADED AT 8 YltAR l'NTERVAU3; DECLASSIFIED Alt"TER 12 YEARS, DOD DIR. 0200.lQ • RELEASING OFFICER'5 SIGNATURE OFFICIAL TITLE IG-53023-3 * U, S. GiOV~.tHlllf.NT .--RIHTIN(. 01',ICt

Page 34born-digital extraction

• • • • • •!P. L 180 ----- JID P UP''L 35F 0718312 CG 28TH A!:R DIV (DEF) HAMILTON AFB CALIF - - - CG AIR TECHNICAL INTELLIGENCE CE TER WRIGHT- PATTERSON AFB DAYTON 28TH OID 01176. CITE: PROJECT BLUE BOOK . THE FOLLOW! G INFOR1ATION REQUESTED BY AFOIN - ATIAE - 2-1-E HAS BEEN OBTAINED BY TELEPHONE CO VERSATION WITH CHIEF PHOTOGRAPHER DELBERT C. NEWHOUSE, 177273, AVN SUP DEP, NAVAL SUP CENT R, OAKLA 1D, CALIF., REGA DING ADDITIONAL OUT :"!OVIE FILM O l !.%:IDE TIFIED SIGHTHG ON 2 JULY 1952. iS NEWHOUS DESIRE HIS 02IGifAL FIL i RETUR ED OR '10ULD ACCEPT A COYP OF THEO IGINAL?" A 1SWEa: HE 'ILL ACCEPT A COPY TE ORIGINAL. QUESTro,: "IS THEDE A ·y OBJECTiotl TO USING .A:'-'t IN T ... OFF IC !AL RELEASE ?1 • A!-.S W::R: t EGP.T IV , BUT ES I :-5 CO...ECT OFFICIAL TITLE: US:SD. CORRECT TITLr.- STATED vY .!.WHOUS[ PAGE TWO JUPML 35F IS CHL:.F PHOTOGRAPHER, A CO L'iISSIONED WARRANT OFFICER IN USN. B J •jPML DECLASSIFIED Aulhority NND 923007 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . ,

Page 35born-digital extraction

TELECONFERENCE MESSAGE FORM I ., • (See structions on reverse side oft. s page) 1. 4. ITEM NO. 2. FROM: (Name & Symbol) SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 5. TOt J. DATE TRANSMfflED (Nan-.e & Symbol) (If more space 1s needed, continue on a plain sheet of paper.) 7. ORIGINATED BY : (Name, Symbol, Date) 8. COORDINATED BY: ( Name, 5-ymbol, Date) 9. AUTHORIZED BY: Air Adj'!!i'tant General, ATIPA

Page 36born-digital extraction

• • INSTRUCTIONS FOR PREPARING AND SUBMTI'TING FORM 1, Si;a:tmit ONE copy of the completed form to ATIPA by 1000 hours of dAy message is to be sent. Unless special arrangements are made with ATIPA fer late submission, messages received after 1000 hours will not be sent until the following conference. 2. Complete fonr. as follows: Block 1. Preparing office cir.it. Will be completed by telecon operator . Block 2. If a classified messace, stamp in security classification. If not a classified messaee, enter "Unclassifiedu. Block:-'• Enter elate the message will be sent, not date prepared. Block 4. Enter name and symbol of sender. Block 5. Enter name and symbol of receiver. Block 6. If a classified. message, enter as the first two words of the message "Security Information," then proceed with the message. If not a classified messace, omit the words "Security Infor mation". Block 7. Originator enter signature an<l symbol. (:•1ay or may not be the same person whose name appears in Block u.) Block 8. Coordinators enter name and symbol. Block 9. Air Adjutant General Enter signature. Bottom of form. If a classified message, stamp in security classification.

Page 37born-digital extraction

• UNCLASSIFIED Memorandum for Record 1. During a trip to Washington, D. c., on 29 Jan 53 Capt Ruppelt was informed that the press had learned about the Tremonton, Utah, movies and that Mr. Al Chop of the Office of Public Information., Department of Defense, Col Teaberg of AFOIN-2, and others believe that the movies should be re leased in accordance with the promise made this summer to the press that no information on the subject of Unidentified nying Objects would be withheld. Capt Ruppelt agreed with this point and it was decided that the factual data on the incident would be sent to Capt Harry B. Smith, AFOIN-2A2, who would pass it on to Mr. Chop who in turn would write the release. The telecon also requested that the release bef!orwarded to ATIC for coordination. The subject telecon is TT15, 5 Feb 53, Item 2. ~ 2. On 9 Feb 53 Mr. Chop called that het.!.:tten the release and shewed it to Col Smith of AFOIN-2A. They believe that there would be a question asked as to the findings of the Air Force and Navy photo labs and that these reports would have to be released. If they weren 1 t released, the press would begin to think they contained some "hot" material and that the Air Force was holding back some important data. ATIC concurred that this could happen., and that if it did happen it could create a great deal of excitement. 3. The Air Force lab analysis concludes that: a. They are reasonably certain that the brightness of the images on the film exceeds that of any bird. ,8f:£~AJ _i~ 1.N'I'EftVA.'(.11, b. '!he objects. are not spherical ;~el]~-~ - • DOD DIR Ai20o.~ 2 .t.EAR& - \(( • The objects could be aircraft. (Note: the absence 0£ sound /11J -""~t rules out aircraft. Aircraft in a "dogfight" can be heard at almost ~ltitude. air ,spaee- area and it is such flying would be carried on in the airways.) UNCLASSIFIELl DECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007

Page 38born-digital extraction

c. Have two aircraft do maneuvers at various altitudes and photo graph them. d. Request that the Navy re-do the study using the methods of density measurement that are prescribed by the astronomers. Conclusion 6. If it is deemed advisable to release the movies quickly, state that the Air Force cannot positively identify the objects but they are reasonably sure that they are balloons or gulls consequently no :further effort is going to be put into the incident. If tbe Navy and Air Force reports are requested, state that due to the meager data they used, the reports must be discounted. I,!.J!ould b~rather po~licy to state that the Navy had made a~ror in t~beginning of their ana~ia... 7. If it is too much of a risk to do this (suggestion in paragraph 6) immediately go ahead with items a, b, and c of paragraph 5 on a high priority basis. Recommendations 8•• It is recommended that the above plan be given to AFOIN-2A2 and let them confer with the Director of Intelligence on the subject of a release. DOWNGRADED AT ,, ~ . . ..:- 2 4-A.H Il\ l"J'.8R"T ~-Ll'.'. DECLAS SIFIED Altl'ER l2 YEARS :., DOD DIR 0200.10 . • UNCLASSIFIED

Page 39born-digital extraction

UNCLASSIFIED The Navy report says the objects are: - - a. Self-luminous or light sources b. Could not be aircraft or balloons ird is known is reflect enough light to cause the images shown on the film, It.can be noted that tbe Na:vy people deduced tbis from tbeir analysis of the~or the image on each frame. This required about a 1 1 000 manhours. It was brought out by two astronomers who heard a Navy briefing on the analysis of the movies that the method used to measure the brightness of each spot was wrong, therefore, the results of the entire study were wrong. 4. The subject of the release was discussed with Lt Col Johnston and Col McDuffy and it was decided that the movies would be released without com ment as to what they were and hope that no questions were asked about the Navy report. This is a "calculated" risk of another big "flap". 5. The other alternative is to quickly get more data on the subject. Several things can be done and are listed below in the order of how soon they DOWNGRADED AT o YEAR !NTJ!R could be accomplished: DECLASSIFIED AFTER l2 V~ DOD DIB. p200J.O .. ~ • a. As far as gulls are concerned the big question is, how much _ M •.-..6~ ... .. ,.Jfff• light will be reflected? Can you see a gull reflecting light and not recog nize that it is a gull? To check this it would be necessary to go to a loca tion where you have a lot of gulls and bright sunlight and talce movies with a 3-inch lens. It would be necessary to know how far the gulls were away each time a movie was taken. At this time of the year florid.a is the only place where sunshine and gulls can be assured. b. Using special funds, have General Mills release a group of pillow balloons arranged in the same sequence as the objects are in the reovies and measuring the distance at which taken. lJNCLASSlFIED .,;., ;,..,--h,.~"- k? ~ )- ~ • .s-,.._ -i.... ~ \A"-'\. s~?R -~1.J2-t1~ - ~ f',c,.,L<. ~/ .L, 4...f'/ /4,I ' DECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007

Page 40born-digital extraction

• ' UNCLASSIFIED CSAr l'l'FM 2 ( 0 7f" I ] 0 I C r ~Tl~/~ ""\ ., 0 TOI CA PT F.J> RUPPJi:t.T , A-C!lA/r'5 r r~ _...,r-, RREA-St Of 1'RlMONTW-f'itMS STi.i..L DJ:ING ST'Wtlll)- 1{J,n£-,. WltL FORWARD NF.XT Tf.Lf.CON. F.ND CSAF lnM 2 ( DOWNGRADED AT 9 Yll DECLASSIFIED Al<"'TE~T\~!~• DOD DIR 5200.10 ~w:,. UNCLASSIFIED DECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007

Page 41born-digital extraction

I e :_-7, ·1 - /m '/'>~IOI" ./ , • O ' , ·pe./-s ,, un.9 ./ , &I.I ,r r)~ c-'. ~ {)/Jdvl.11-hh,1 -l-fty1/1f /4x) /l,,;tihl' vt-1" r',; :- -'· a';(i-~c. ~ @ .S-a; yd-a :::. d/ mj'-S I&) 0 y/4 ,,.. ,j'.,,. ,-nl'h @ ..rooD fM = NIO a?,Ph @ /~ P()O -;/d,o .: tf', 0 R'J"I, IS- ~t)l,,./rtJlled -f'll_jJ,/..

Page 42born-digital extraction

• • UNCLASSIFIED COPY CSAF ITEM 2/; TT-27 26 Feb 1953 ATI OLOUl, YOUNG Reference Item 2 ATIC Telecon 15, 5 Feb 53 the following statement is for ATIC coordination prior to release to PIO: I- This color film provides an instance of a sighting being substantiated by motion pictures and confirms the faith of the USAF in the veracity of the many citizens who have reported sightings of unidentified objects or phenomena in the air. ' The film was forwarded to the USAF by Warrant Officer Delbert c. Newhouse , Aviation Supply Depot, Naval Supply Center, Oakland, California.1 Warrent Officer Newhouse stated that the film was exposed 7 miles North of Tremonton, Utah, on the U.S. Highway 30 at 11:00 a.m. MST, 2 July 52: and that he was using a Bell and Howell Auto Master(hand-held) with a three inch telephoto lens at F/8 for the first few feet of the film and the balance at F/16 all at sixteen frames per second. Examination of the film to date allows a deduction that the images were caused by surfaces having good reflective qualities, (:mch as seagulls o~ balloon~., or by bodies or substances possessing high intensity light sources. Images appearing on the film are nonsufficiently defined to permit identification or determination of form or substance and should have been caused by unknown objects or undetermined known obJects. The absence of any reference ooints, even clouds, in the bac·ground has made it impossible to estimate the distance of the obJects from the camera, thus precluding a I determination of aiz.e 'and linear speed. Measurements of angular UNCLASSIFIED DECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007

Page 43born-digital extraction

• • UNCLASSIFIED velocity have not indicated true linear speed as the apparent motion is shown in only two dimensions . To date the evidence on unidentified phenomena has shown no threat to the United States , and the majority of the sightings have been directly tied to known causes . ½:id CSAF ITEM NBR 2/ DOWNGRADED AT 8 ..,.".... DECLASSl.FIEJj A ~~ mnm, r ., ., ''-.J ' Tlnn ~ .tER 12 YEA ·., • • ' ._ ,. . ,.,..-r.c JU1r. lS20D.10 • ...:,. COPY UNCLA55\F\E0 DECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007

Page 44vision OCR

COORDINATION
INSERT
ORGNL CODE AND
FULL SIGNATURE

[ILLEGIBLE] ATIAE-5 13 Feb 53
[ILLEGIBLE] ATIAE 13 Feb 53
L C Breckenridge Capt ATIA 16 Feb '53

ATIAE-5/EJR/vs

In reply refer to
AFOIN-ATIAE-5

                                                            17 FEB 1953

Warrant Officer Delbert C. Newhouse
177273
Aviation Supply Depot
Naval Supply Center
Oakland, California

Dear Sir:

    A copy of the original movie film taken by you near Tremonton,
Utah, on 2 July 1952 is being returned.

    This Center and the Air Force wish to thank you for submitting
the film, answering the many additional questions that arose during
the analysis of the film, and for allowing the Air Force to keep the
original film.

                                        Yours very truly,


1 Incl
   Movie film                          ROBERT C. BROWN
                                        Major, USAF
                                        Air Adj. Gen.

[ILLEGIBLE]

                                                  DESIGNATE AUTHD OFFICE OF RECORD




                                   OFFICIAL FILE COPY
AMC Form 8  (Rev 17 May 50)     Supersedes AMC Form 8, Rev 1 Apr 48, which will be used.     Air Force-WPAFB-L-23 JUL 52 3600M

Page 45born-digital extraction

C. WHFA'll.EY DECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007 i U . S . NAVAL PHOTOGRAPHIC INTERPRETATION CENTER U. S. Naval Receiving Station Washington 25, D. C. In reply refer to Code 082 Jl2•1 MAR 1 8 195432 5 Serial: From: Commanding Officer To: C0mrnanding Officer, Air Technical Intelligence Center, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio Subj: Tremonton, Utah Film Ref': (a) ATIC W•PAFB Ohio ltr AFOIN-ATIAE-5 dtd 27 Jan 1954 1. Reference (a) requested iot'ormation concerning the disposition ot the original Tremonton, Utah f'ilm and whether or not any copies of the f'1lm are currently heJ.d by the Center. 2. It is advised that this Center bas never had possession of the original film and does not have in:formation concerning its whereabouts. However, it is suggested that Major Fourney, an AF Special Investigator who was formerly stationed in this area, be contacted regarding this matter. Major Fourney at one time advised that the original "Would be made available to this Center for spectrophotometric analysis. This analysis never materialized, theref'o:rt. the original 'Was not requested. 3. This Center is presently holding one 16mm color film copy which was received f'rom the Air Force. In addition, 35m col.or positive and 35mm black and white negative duplicate blowups are held. 4. Reference (a) referred to the original. film as being 35mm. It is understood tbat the photography was taken With a Revere., 16mm, magazine loading type, with an Fl.9 wide-angle, telephoto l.ens. (51.Q~ B. Acting Copy to: CNO ( Op 322V/ jc

Page 46born-digital extraction

INSERT ORGNL CODE AND FULL SIGNATURE CAH/jos/73147 2 7 JAN 1 954 ; (Vnci) 7remonton, Utah Film Chief Ott1ce ot a"8l. Intelligence Uavy~tment esb1~on 25, . 0. l. !I'he ir Technical Intelligence Center: ia atteziQtUng to oc te the ori~ ot a 35 mm film ot 14entU1ed flying obJecta n ~ a • D. C. Rnb ee near 'l'relrlonton, Utah# on 2 Jul 52. ie tilm s e.nalygecl by the JC during the early ~t ot 953. 2. In a report 1ea cl b7 NPJC, . u.'bj: 8 lnterpretation ot lea at VA14entit1e4 ObJ_ecta", ■eial n: lber 0105, ftA1r-.-... 4 May 3, it is stated in paai-t, "Tile :f'ilia. expo.ea in tall is in very oor co ditlon, dry, bi'ittle, an4 ¥1th tenaency tQ br • Mt.er n1tial nevtn , 4upllc tio or the t1la pertormea in order to ,erve ti:.e tilll." t.rliere a: a.ra to - be no reference ea to .............. 'the original t1lJI was aeatroye4 or returned. 3. It 1• NqUeltea that any &"811 ble Warma"ti n be f\lrni•hed o the Air Technical Intel.Ugence Center aa to the diepoaition of • film after the 1nterpret&~ion vu completed. 4. Informat1 ia turtber requested ta ther or not any op1ea ot 'thi 1'11111 are on banc1 there. FO R THE COMMANDER AR l'I ,A ' ,- , N ,,.., , -..! [! o'}{ 1 1"\ '• • V .J l ...1. , .., 1st Lt . USAF P_ssistant Adjutant . DESIGNATE AUTBD OFFICE OF RECORD OFFICIAL FIL)] COPY /dtJ7J ELECTRONfCS BRANCH OllTJCU.L FILE COPY Office of Record (Rev 17 lllaJ' 58) Sa11ened1111 AMC Form 8, Bev l A.pr 48, whldl '!'Ill be uecl. Afr Jl'oree-WPAi'B-L-U .JUL GZ 8608111 DECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007

Page 47born-digital extraction

. e. nhouae t hotographer, J)erby Stz-eet ley, California ue torwr41ng aa Inclosur t1lm a The Ali 'l'echn1cal tntell1 re~ts. 0 I y COOR&INATIO* INSERT ORGNL COD]: AND FULL SIGNATURE reply :reter to IN-ATIAE- CAfl/ jos/73147 2 3 FEB 1954 • 1. one capy or your Tremonton, pramieea in O\lr letter ot 27 Jan 1954. ce Center hopes this v1ll tuli'Ul 1ncere17. Incl R C. SCHUM Env containing CWO, USAF ref film COORDINATION: Asst. Adj. ATIAELT CO ti= DATE 1 Zl-1td AT I" DESIGNATE AUTBD OFFICE OF RECORD OFFICIAL FILE COPY I007d ;fLfCTRONICS BRANCH f ':'i • •• •of i?""· •r,l OFFICIAL FILE COPY Supen,edeo AMC Form 8, Rn I Apr 48, which will be used. AF•WP-L-25 MAB 53 3,130,000

Page 48vision OCR
```
[ILLEGIBLE]
```

Page 49born-digital extraction

INSERT • ORGNL CODE A.ND FULL SIGNATURE CAH./jos/73147 "I JAN 19 • reply rder to OD--Afl.Q-5 evhoUft pber, • Street Calitarn1a • nhouae: chnical Intelligence Center 1a not 1n 1.mme41 te oaaea - 1g1.nal ot '1'10.'f ~!!llntlm' , Utah, f11JG; ha1Mver, eorre ■ - been initiate« to recowr it. It a:ppeara tbat the 1g1nal y ha aeteriaratecl beyonl the pout where 1t caull be auc ... saf'uUJ copiet. fter are two copl • of the film here. One or th.ea ha1 been t to the 'Photographic Labarator7 "1th reque■ t tor a44itional a.pie • mi c . letion, Vhicb will take about :three weeks, one of cop.lea will mallet! to you. It 1a b~ that thh v1U fill. ill your "tequtrements. The Air Technical In:tell.igence Center Ylahee to e'Zpl'ea ■ pin ta appreci tion to you tor your cooper t1on throughout the entire nftlatiption of the cue. incerely, G0. L. WERTfl BAKE • DATE olone!, uA • ~+-'!~~..,A-~_,,; :i F . mander '...:ZSf.::t:fi~~~~::::;;DATE.,,~-,." I ~~FMr~"'ll"iit-,,ib-......;DATE 2-. JAJJ > : / Colonel, USAF Directorate of' Intelligence DESIGNATE AUTBD OFFICE OF RECORD j/Jd 7.J r • Ol'l'JCIAL FILE COPY' AMC Form B (Re. 17 M&T 50) Sapened• AMC Form 8, BeY l Apr ta, which will be a.ud. Air Foree-WPAFB-L-U JUL 6% H0~M

Page 50born-digital extraction

• DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE . HEAOQUARTERS UNITEO STATES AIR°FORCE WASHINGTON 25, D. C. 29 December 1953 AFOIN-2A Brigadier General William M. Garland commander Air Technical Intelligence Center Wright-Patterson Air Force Base Dayton, Ohio Dear General Garland: Inclosed is a copy of the letter sent, this date, to Mr. Newhouse who provided us with the Tremonton, Utah, unidentified flying object pictures. Our records show that the original of the film is in your files . If the original film is still of value to you, it may be more desirable to give Mr, Newhouse another duplicate rather than to risk the loss of it by loan. With best personal wishes to you and your staff for a very successful and Happy New Year, Sincerely yours, 1 Incl WILLIAM A. ADAMS cy of ltr dtd 29 Dec 53 to Colonel, USAF Directorate of Intelligence Mr. Newhouse ., f r . ,..

Page 51born-digital extraction

• • .,, ~ ,-c • . ,4,i ,. - " . \ ti f z DECLASS IFI ED Authority NND 923007

Page 52vision OCR

AFOIN-2A                                                   29 December 1953


Mr. D. C. Newhouse                                    Re:  File No. 177283
Chief Photographer, USN
1948 Derby Street
Berkeley, California

Dear Mr. Newhouse:

    The original of 16mm Kodachrome film taken of the unidentified
flying objects near Tremonton, Utah, was forwarded to the Air
Technical Intelligence Center with the understanding that they
would provide you with a good reproduction copy since the original
had been damaged somewhat by numerous showings.  General Garland has
custody of the film and I am sure that you will hear from him in
response to your letter of 17 December.

    May I take this opportunity of expressing to you once again
how much we in the Air Force appreciate your cooperation in making
the film available to us.  It still remains one of the most interesting
incidents that we have investigated.

                                        Very truly yours,


cc:  Brig Gen Garland                  WILLIAM A. ADAMS
                                        Colonel, USAF
                                        Directorate of Intelligence

[ILLEGIBLE]

Page 53vision OCR
```
[ILLEGIBLE]
```

Page 54vision OCR

to Photo

                                                            17 December 1953

Colonel W.A. Adams, U.S.A.F.
Topical Intelligence Division, U.S.A.F.
Room 4D865, The Pentagon
Washington, D.C.

Dear Sir:

    About a year ago I mailed for evaluation a 16mm Kodachrome original
film to the Commanding Officer, Hill Air Force Base in Utah.  The film was
of unidentified flying objects sighted by my wife, my children and myself
near Tremonton, Utah on 2 July 1952.  It was forwarded to the Air Technical
Intelligence Center, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio; and,
later, to your office.

    I gave the Air Force permission to retain the original for use in
the investigation of UFOs and a duplicate copy was forwarded to me.  My
copy of the film has been damaged by showing in a defective projector.

    If the Air Force has completed its evaluation of the film and has
no further use for it, I would appreciate the return of the original to me
at this time.  If, however, there is a continuing need for the film, I
would like to "borrow" the original film for a period of about four weeks
to enable me to make a good duplicate print from it.

    I am forwarding a copy of this letter to the office of General
Garland, in case the film is now located there.

    Your early attention to this request will be appreciated.

                                        Sincerely,

                                        [ILLEGIBLE]
                                        Chief Photographer D.C. Newhouse
cc:  Major General Garland             File Number 177283
     Commanding Officer                United States Navy
     Air Technical Intelligence Center 1948 Derby Street
     Wright-Patterson AFB              Berkeley, California
     Dayton, Ohio

Page 55born-digital extraction

-.i. I (I lo' • • ' • • • I • ' • • ' <+. ' ' ,,. •

Page 56vision OCR

Slant Range
10,000
9,000
8,000
7,000
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000

[ILLEGIBLE]

Slant Range in feet
vs
MPH

Assuming 2.1°/sec angular velocity

50        100        MPH        200        300

Page 57born-digital extraction

] Yes ..J Yes 0JEC'£ 10073 WORKS!ili'ET • • I. G~NERAL 2. LOCAT ON • 'l'H!E .... Ye~ C!fNakod Eye CJ Binoculars D 'l'eleacope 0 1'heodolita AR? 0 Yos D By Ona Set □ By 1wo Sets D Three Set., • WAS OBJECT OBSERVED FROM THE AIR? □ Yes . _A/C Observed Object Cl Interception Attempted 0 No Intex-ce t Atta tad 7 • WERE AIRCRAFT SCRAMBLED TO INTERCEPT? D Yes . _ A/ C Scrambled D Visual Cont1.1ct Made 0 A/I Contact Made 0 No Contact Mada NGE DIRECTION AT ANY TIME? ~ es ONo CEJNo.rmal CJ-Violent IF OBJE T WAS A "LIGH'ftt , WAS IT: D gl..inking [3"staad LENGTH IGH't: □ - 5 Seconds 0 1-5 Minutes [7 Over 10 Minutes HEPORTING AGENCY Unit Number and Wailing Address ~lJ I II. ASTRONOMICAL DATA 12. W.HAT ASTRLlNOMICAL AC'.rIVITY WAS NOTED? DID OBJECT HAVE A TAIL? DID 0BJEC'r APPEAR TO DISINTEGRATg? • TIME OF SIGH'rING RE:LATIV-E TO SUNRISE R SUNSE·r Data From r Almanac □ Night C:1 Day 0 Sunrise [ _1 Sunset III. AIRCRAFT DATA 17. WERE AIRCRAFT NOTlD IN ARgA? □ Yes LJ One Aircraft 0 ~~re Than One Ait•craft 18. WAS AkY S0U t/D HEARD? ~-------- 'J Yes ---·---=-N:-:-o---. 19. WETtE 1HERE lNDlCA 7 11.UNS OFhlGH BACKGROUND NOISE:•.. ~ Yos CJ No 20. WAS ,,'fHE 0BJEc·.r VH, ' ',Yl!:D ABOVE 450 ELEVA..,,..'1·-=-ro""'N"""?c----~p~Y,....es-------------=□ ~N:-:-0-; \ ATIC Test Form 334 (13 Au~ 52)

Page 58born-digital extraction

--------- DECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007 • IV. BALLOON DATA • ONS RELEASE N AREA J S cJm:DULED BAil.oON RELEASE: QNo , Minutes -------- Location DOWNWIND F SIOHTING: 8 V. EVALUATION EVALUATION OF SOURCEz D Excellent □ Oood □ Fair □ Poor D Unreliable D F.xtremely Doubtful □ Hoax 22. DETAILS OF REPORTz □ Good □ Fair □ Poor D Insufficient to Evaluate D Was Balloon D Probably Balloon D Possibly Balloon D Was Airoratt D Probably Aircraft D Possibly Aircraft CJ Was Astronomical D Probably A nomical D Possibl:y A~ , . , ..11omical D othert □ Insufficient Data For Evaluation [22J'tJn1cnown Test Fonu 334 (13 Aug 52)

Page 59born-digital extraction

.. ' . . P. CT 10073 ViEAThER DAT A S~'T • J:. DATE OF OBSllRVATION 2, THIE OF OBSERVJ.TIOIJ 13• STATION Oll<illRVING ~:Iv f;Z/ (J ;M ]' B , ...4.t.. !IIDf§ Jμ,QF! :_ - - - - - - ,.... - - - - - - - - ,.... - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - ALTITUDE VELOCITY f DIRECTION ALTITUDE 'IE:LOCITY DIRECTION l==~{=fe=e=t~)===.t::::::::~( kn=o=t==s~ }:t===(=d=e~g=re::e::::s=:):=::t-t:::=:::-::?-(:::: f e~~]_ ,,,_ _ ( knots ) .{ge 17rees} 25,000 0 /(_ ?-?V --,-1-----------+------1 --- 1,000 IS- ?--1l ----+-------+--- =~ ~ 30.000 2,000 - ------ ' 1)---~ - 35,000 3,000 40,000 -,JI Q_'t- '/1 , 4,000 I / , s C 45.000 5,000 ~< '360 50,000 6,000 ~ ,.;e 551000 7.000 'i f-,, C 60,000 8,000 'i\ 65 ,ooo - I 9,000 70,000 !"""')II_ I I 1 - 1ur 'JJ~ 10,000 75,000 - - ---,1---------+------r - - 12,000 \ I 80,000 14,000 2~ ~?o 85,000 16,000 ,< 'J-4() 90,,000 . - ----- t------- 18,000 __L? _ ;;lrt) 95,000 100,000 20,000 ,~ ,:_q 0 5. WAS AN INVERSION LAn:RNO'IBD_?___....___.......______ _.__ ______,~ ---- □ Yes ) □ Yes _ _j.::If~y..:.e=..:s,~e.:.:.t....:.w::.::h=a:..:.t....:.e.l=.:t=..i t:.:.u:.d--::.:.e:....? -==========-!~=---- _,,. 6. WERE ANY THlJNDERSTORMS NOT.IW IN AREA? --------::[!l'=:,t"N """ o- -- ( If yes, at what quadrant? 7. CLOUD COVER: __ tenths at __ feet. __ tenths e.t __ feet. '9. ~I ll/1 "" " RO T,::H ) tenths at feet. -- --- tenths at feet. -- a. VISIBILITY WAS ~A I/c/ tiULES. ------- -------------- - DECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007 ATIC Test Form 333 (13 Aug 52)

Page 60born-digital extraction

.. - ... . -,> • .. . .. . . , . , • ,._,, r ' ' " - ooo{ cJJ, 3S'JO ;fr ,, - Oo0 ti ,, ;j - loooo ~ ~ ?o l 0 It Q <f;'llOQ A~ l ~a 0 /, 'v1t..,(J () /0 ' ' I 0 C 0 I f 0 (.) / ?() ~ I ~ :, c) I (;0 ;Jyoo I I '3 ~o o o q I ~ - I lo /.> 7o -") c:) b o (.) '3C vo 'tf 0 <> ;)_ 9 ¥ c~ ;, D ()~ 0 (.) ~ ) -oo If C o 0 10 II l ~Io o I U.s, 'J-; 0 0 01 tJ7 ti I I 0 1?o dt? I 0 u O I ? 0 (.) -'3 ·c C oc I ()o () ',v o o a ~ 0 0 li"oo c> (J u \) ?O 6 I

Page 61born-digital extraction

/6 /11f F,£-/7 ..:TLtly z, /~r')..... fk e:-,-o/i)pf/)~ {.ff,trf; ,ve-~/,,4qscr File 71=- /Jl>3:J>'-/S- 04-sfocJr VF Al/dlo- l//$'4AL ,f Hd/Ve.s

Page 62vision OCR

Alt          2100Z   2 JUL 52       Hill AFB, Utah
(MB)                  Base Alt.  4,370'
              No inversion layer present

                                        Surface temp   70° F

                                        C = 5/9 (F-32)

                                        C = 21°

0
50
100
40,000' 200   Tropopause evidently here
30,000' 300                    Lapse Rate approx 2.5°C/1,000' (normal)
400
   20,000'
20,000' 500
600                    10,000'    No Lapse Rate
10,000' 700                            700 MB reading probably is +9°C (If so, lapse
800          6000'    Lapse rate approx 5°C/1000'               rate is normal)
4,000' 900                                                        approx 2°C/1000'
                                    Base altitude

-70  -60  -50  -40  -30  -20  -10   0   10   20   30   40   50   60   70   80

                    Temp °C

Page 63vision OCR

TREMONTON CASE

BIRDS (SEAGULLS)

2 JULY 52

Page 64born-digital extraction

JJNCLASS!f: lE:.B 1ti rleor I 1d t1t1 d Fl 1118 Objects• of r 2. rd f cul and doc inion n ry. vitb a r , tn tn oli to _ _., ,. --i UNCLASSJf-'IED DECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007

Page 65born-digital extraction

iJNCLASSIFIED ~. Tl'N&l91 Ca!t • (l) V. 4o ao, •ll'N vt \he tUa•• CvlWlluaiom •not alrcrart 1 not ~lloooa, not• rd ■.• 4 OOililarathe analy1e ■ vae ade of • oon trca the orts•al Illa atrlp. and. th.a\ ■ bovn 117 ClreeA-RouM "1 Major lllllller and MIJor Buclaouter, ATIC pl&o\o 1peclalt ■ t1. The original tlla ahova the preeeDOf' ot ... l'lll• on • llllaber ot tra..a. fl:lla la not ■howo la U.. tlollJWOOd, 'Hr■ ton. (2) l'llr\ner, 1, h ""' aooe_.,. to ololo ,hot a perUcular ■pecloa of - gull ore pr<alneat la certain Jll rta or Olah, It ohow.4 N polnlod Ollt tbat tho Uteb • .,,...1.. lo alactit: JNN•vbhe ln oolor, l.a oontraat to it ■ aa:>k, or are7...,r'.ad --cout C<NaJn. C.,) IA Ibo opllllcm of ATl~ pilot> apeclalhto, t.D1 ullder ,_,.. of tbHO - gull ■ ■caiD•t a hlgb-llgblod ak7 """14 toa4 \o 'vaab °"'' 4elolla ot tb~ bod.7 and vlng o t• llM ot tbe 11.ul•• &i'Yl.Ag th.ea • vb.he olrcu.l ■ r •~~aranl!e &I a dleh.noe. (0tt1oer Hevbouaa openly ad..idUed in the tUa tllat Ila Wider o:q,oaed bh 'ob>to•,) (II) Till• la o<Jlltlna4 by tho orlglaal analyolo In our rnee, -. la earl7 195l "1 tho Photo flecoanala ■ance laboratory, WJ.DC. Tb.ea ■ report ■ vere not abovn to Majors • lllllie:r and llllclraat1r tor reTtew uctll after tnelr analyaea (1teu l, •• and ' •-l VON •-l•to4, a. Mu.Stll CpffL COnclua1'lll8 ot tbe Afr r1rce are th.at Ct:pt. • i..nloll ... lljlpm'\lDtl7 tryioe to l•krcopt • f••t rUJ.na 'Sky Ho,:.k• balloo•· Tllr'Slr;J Hool<' pl'Ojoc\ ,... known :G.17 to tew people at that ti..,, llnllke ••otnor baUocma •at, llook" llollocmo vere bu,. (100 fut 1D dl...ter), cotnold\D.£ wHb C:..,pt. Mantell'• atateMn't tbat •it'• treirendou ■ lo lthel• Capt, "'1pol\ otmflr• tloe fact tba\ I\ ,.. o llolloall la blo boolc •Aoport 011 crQa•, - 60, Jr'll poragn,p1>, 4. br«g cue, Our tu,. !Dcllcalo tl>at tbla VH w,doubtedly on enw\le aoTtDC Nlloca vMoA Lt. Cbrw.n eneouDtered.. Capt. ~ppelt aho CJ.l• rl- tbh la Illa -. - 67, top. •• 4,lrllRt PUotl C.u• ,Mt POr1:nay9id OD th• 1creet1 tb1e Sa an •.PJIIU'eAt attempl to 4o~, \b.e •GbUe1-1tb.StW eue•. U eo, our coanent; A 4o■ crlpUOD ot tho uro alhged to i,a,.. been alOHly obooned by each of IMN ftteru Za•hl'D 1lrl!nN pllot ■ wfll be fCNDd 1n P8l• 8l. ot tbe Pro;ect BllMboolc'• llopon 111', 14 'Allal1•la of ~llontlflo4 fl;log 0bJeot••. Htougb bo~ obMn.r•• wei. il '.int: ;· : lo rrb. other u,11 obeel"Tn:d tbe NJll8 objoct ~tb•r• tile ■tetcb. • ; Net llo N.PU"ltlly oannot be . id tv bt,- a ~ h:"" • UNCLASSIFIED DOWNGRADED AT 11 DECLAsSIFJED A~JIR lNTFJRVA:f$ DOD Dlll. 620~.112 YEARS. ' • •

Page 66born-digital extraction

.. . .. . .. .. . UNCLASSIFIED r DOWNGRADED AT S YEAR 1 1 '.,R \l~; DECLASSIFIED Al• 1 1'ER 12 YEARS. DOD DlR 6200.10 . - - L• .J a UNCLASSIFIED

Page 67vision OCR

SECURITY CLASSIFICATION (If any) FP-Chapman
28 Sept

DISPOSITION FORM

FILE NO. SUBJECT
(Uncl) Analysis of Photographs

TO WCEFP FROM ATIAA-5 DATE 16 Sept 52 COMMENT NO. 1
Attn: Mr. Chapman Lt Rothstein/jos
65365/B263D/PD28

Request following be completed as expeditiously as possible on 35mm film deli-
vered by Lt Rothstein to Mr. Chapman:

a. A complete analysis of 35mm film to determine subject matter and to
answer inclosed questions.

b. A copy be made of the portion of film containing unidentified aerial
phenomena.

c. The portion containing the unidentified aerial phenomena be separated
from the rest of the film and the remainder be returned.

[ILLEGIBLE] Capt USAF
for DONALD L. BOWER, Colonel, USAF
2 Incls Chief, Technical Analysis Division
1. Ques regarding film Air Technical Intelligence Center
2. Statement by source

TO ATIAA-5 FROM WCLFP-2 DATE OCT 10 1952 COMMENT NO. 2
Attn: Lt Rothstein Mr. J. Chapman/ms
31381/B17/R119

1. The 16 mm. Kodachrome film has been examined in detail, and the best avail-
able answers to the submitted questions are inclosed, along with additional findings.

2. The aerial phenomena portion of the film will be submitted for duplication
as soon as the immediate need for inspection has passed. It is doubtful that the
duplicate will be of much value for detailed inspection, as explained by the small
spot size and general graininess of the film.

3. The remainder of the film, not associated with the aerial phenomena, has
been separated and has been forwarded to Captain Ruppelt of your office.

[ILLEGIBLE]
4 Incls for MELVIN B. AVERY, Colonel, USAF
Added 2 Incls Chief, Photo Reconnaissance Lab
3. Answers to stated questions Directorate of Laboratories
4. Remainder of film (Und Sep Cov)

CONCURRENCE:
[ILLEGIBLE] WCLFP-2

9-432

DD FORM 96 REPLACES NME FORM 96, 1 OCT 48, WHICH MAY BE USED 16-54801-3 U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1952 O - 986875
1 FEB 50

Page 68born-digital extraction

• • .,, ► • • • ... DECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007

Page 69born-digital extraction

r QUESTIONS REGARDING ANALYSio OF Fillf 1. Are images made ~ light source or reflection? 2. Any indication of what kind of objects could have caused images? Is there any bird sufficiently actinic to cause images? Could they have been caused by aircraft or balloons? 3. What causes the impression that same objects at times appear to become 2 or 3 objects,at times appear to merge into one? 4. Do all objects have same characteristics? a. Same apparent shape? b. Same relative size? c. Same Color? d. Same general motion? 5. What are shape(s), color(s), and relative size(s) of objects? 6. To what can the "fade-in" and "fade-out" of the objects be attri buted? 7. What type motion is attributable to the objects (about their own axis as well as about the a.xis of flight path)? g. Is there any acceleration evident in their motion along flight path axis? 9. Can the motion of the camera (panning and joggling) be allowed for sufficiently to permit determination of the angular velocity of objects which cross the field of view? (Reference particularly the single object which crosses field; photographer states that camera was held motionless while ob ject crossed field of view.) 10. Determine patterns of flight from position plots for each frame~ then: a. Is there any recurring pattern in the relative position of the objects? b. Do they maintain same relative positions in formation during ~ maneuvers,·particularly violent maneuvers? c. Is relative position maintained coincidental with movement about their axes? d. If undulating motion is present among a number of objects llhich are maintaining a semblance of formation, do those objects undulate in phase? Ditto for tumbling motion. e. Is there any indication of abrupt changes in direction of flight path through fairly large angles (e.g., 90° or more during interval of 2 or 3 frames)? DECLASSIFIED Au thority NN D 923007

Page 70born-digital extraction

.. .. •. p • ,,, ·, If ... • ' ,. ' - • STATEMENT BY SOURCE Place: - ,,,,os About 7 miles north of Tremonton, Utah, on u.s. ~ghway No • .._ Time: - 1110 1 Wednesday, 2 July 1952. Camera: - B&H Automaster, magazine load, 3" telephoto lens, 16 frames per second. Handheld. Exposure: - First few feet - f:S. Balance - f:16. Clear sun, cloudless sky. EKCO Kodachrome film - Daylight. Exposure was changed with the mistaken idea of darkening the sky to gain greater contrast. The result was merely general underexposure. Background: - Driving from Washington, n.c., to Portland, Oregon, on the morning of 2 July, my wife noticed a group of objects in the sky that she could not iden tify. She asked me to stop the car and look. There was a group of about ten or twelve objects that bore no relation to anything I had seen before, milling about in a rough formation and proceeding in a westerly direction. I opened the luggage compartment of the car and got my camera out of a aui tease. Load ing it hurriedly, I exposed approximately thirty feet of fila. There was no reference point in the sky and it was impossible for me to uake any estimate of speed, size, altitude or distance. Toward the end one of the objects re versed course and proceeded away from the main group. I held the camera still and allowed this single one to cross the field of view, picking it up again and repeating for 3 or 4 such passes. By thiE time all of the objects had disappeared. I expended the balance of the film late that afternoon on a mountain somewhere in Idaho. DECLASSI FIED Authority NND 923007

Page 71born-digital extraction

r • U. S. NAVAL PHOI'OGRAPHIC INTERPRETATION CENTER U. S. NAVAL RECEIVING STATION Washington 25, D. c. Code 01/HWW/lbll Jl2 .UNCLASSlflED Serial: (1 I From: Officer in Charge To: Director of Naval Intelligence (OP-322H4D) Subj: Interpretation of Movies of Unidentified Obje/.; progress report on Ref': (a) Cont ltr DNI OP:,22Y5/rtm., dtd 27 Oct 1952 Vi.th enclosures thereto (b) Conf memo, Chief, Topical Division, USAF, AFOIN 2A2, dtd 24 Nov 1952 with enclosures thereto (c) PIC Conf ltr 01/RWW/gcl, ser 0263 dtd 5 Dec 1952 (d) Rest memo, Chief, Topical Division, USAF, AFOIN 2A2, dtcl 16 Feb 1953 Encl: (1) Charts 2-13 1. Reference (a) is a request from U, s. Air Force for the i nterpretation of movies of unidentified objects taken in Utah, 2 J~y 1952. Included among the enclosures are approximately 30 feet of processed, 16aun color motion picture film and a list of questions for guidance in determining the type of analysis desired. Reference (b) requested interpretation of additional movies taken in Montana, 1950. This report supercedes reference (c) and presents the test procedures and methods designed to answer the questions contained in enclosure 7 of reference (a). The results and analysis were performed b y the Photogrammetry Division, Evaluation Department of this Center and do not necessarily represent the official attitude of the Depart ment of the Navy or this Center. 2. Tests and Procedure. a. Plots. rThe film exposed in Utah ie i n very poor condition; dry, brittle, a nd with a tendency to break. After initial viewing, duplication of the film was peri"ormed in order to preserve the f~ - In the duplication process some color coITection was made to permit better viewing of the objects. To prepare plots of the objects, a stop trame projector was rigidly mounted at a fi.Xed distance from a finely-ground glass screen. The magnification was 22 times giving a format size or 14.2 11 wide. This proved very satisfactory a nd provided a shadow free image upon which overlay plots could be made. DOWNGRADED A! & YE A'R !N'l'Jm, 1 A~~ DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS. UNCLA DOD DIR 5200.10 • SSJFJED DECLASSI FIED Authority NND 923007 l

Page 72born-digital extraction

,. . . Code 01/mrw/J.bb • '112 UNCLASSIFIED Serial: ""' MAY 4 1953 Subj: Interpretation of Movies of Unidentified Objects; progress report on A preliminary detailed stud of the Utah film 'W8.S ma.de and 1t was decided that: a, Brightly colored spots of red and green lasting only one or two frames were not to be considered. b. Water spots could be detected easily and eliminated from the study. c. The color of the objects was fairly constant as blue-white. d, Size and luminosity of an object varied through-out the film. For convenience in interpretation, the film was divided into three parts, each part being considered a.n entity. Part I consisted of the footage taken at f8; Part II, the :footage taken at fl6 with a panning motion; and Part III, the footage taken at fl6 during which the camera w.s held steady. Three definite groups of lights were observed through out the film and plots were recorded as follows: TABLE I PLOTS OF POSITIONS Chart Control Utah Parts I II III Holding to lOYer group Not enclosed I II Holding to one object 2 and 3 and at.1muth of another I Arbitrary 1/2 inch 4 correction per frame for panning Holding to frame outline 5a and 5b III One image held to base 6 I line . Every tenth frame to show changes withth apparent formations DOWNGRADED AT ~ YEAR INTER"V AL'S: DECLASSIFIED' AFTER 12 YEARS. Montana DOD DIR 5200.10 UNCLASSlfil.ED Terrestial Objects 7a. and '7b 2

Page 73born-digital extraction

·code 01/Jrtrw/lbh J12 UNCLASSIFIED Serial: Subj: Interpretation o:f Movies of Unidenti.f'ied Objects; progress report on b. Densitometric teets: Densitometric data were obtained with a Densichron, Mod.el 2150 manufactured b : - the Welch Scienti.f'ic Company. The 'D,nsichron has a scale range or 0-3 . The procedure was to project each f'rame at approximately 22 times magnification onto a finely-grained-glass screen. The back ground. (sky) was then measured at several places and the density set to 3.0 (variations in background densities were in the order of 0.02 and were regarded as uniform) . A set of three readings were made of each of seven objects in Part I, and of the single object in Part III of the Utah Film. Readings were made o:f the entire Montana film. Enclosure (6a and 8b) are graphs ot the density readings obtained of the two lower groups of objects in frames l-129 of the Utah film. Enclosure (9) is a density graph of the single object (94 frames) in Part III. Enclosure {10) is a graph where six successive Densichron readings were averaged and advanced one reading each deter minant. Of the M:>ntana film, densities were plotted as above and are enclosures (ll) and (12). The results of' the density readings may be questioned in that these objects varied in size so that at the minimum sizes the densichron probe was measuring the entire object, and at the maximum size the probe was measuring only a portion of the objects . Because of this situation only the largest readings obtained b scanning the objects were uaed. It is understood that normal procedure would be to read the entire object. This was illlpossible with the equipment on hand. In addition the film, with which this investigation was conducted, is a duplicate of a copy. Thie raises the question as to whether the central portion of the objects were burnt out during the duplication processing. Density readings were made to compare the clear areas and the objects. It was :found that the minimum difference is 0.4. This indicates that relative luminosity may still be obtained with the pro cedure used. Concurrent with the density readings, relative sizes of the objects were noted in order to correlate distance and luminosity. Enclosure (13) is a plot of the same object wherein the relationship of distance and luminosity can be detected in Utah .film. • l>OWNGRADED AT S YRAR ~'.J,...T"T>Y n .-n. DEC.LASS - ~ L"i"'' 3 Answers to Questions IFIED AFTER 12 YEARS. • • DOD DIR 5200.10 Answers keyed to the questions contained in enclosure {7) of reference {a) are hereb:,- presented. They supercede those contained in reference (c) and present the final analysis as requested. UNCLASSIFIED

Page 74born-digital extraction

co~ 01/IDIW/lbh · .n2 Serial: e • UNCLASSIFlED MAY 4 1 ~5 · n Subj: Interpretation of Movies of Unidentified Objects; progress report on L Analysis of the graph correlating luminosity and size indicate that as the luminosity of the objects increase, the size is larger also. This couJ..d be the effect of viewing directly, a reflecting surface. This is considered not probable because of the length of time they were viewed continuously on the film, approxi mately 90 seconds, and because of the angle through which they were photographed, approXimately 6o degrees. ' It is felt that if these images are reflective surfaces, blinking would occur during a period of 90 seconds while passing through a n angle of E,o degrees when photographed at the rate of 16 frames per second. This premise would permit highly reflective ball oons or spheroids to be a possibility . However, the velocit :,, and acceleration computations (sub paragraph 8) rule this possibility out. It appears, therefore, that if these objects are a reflecting surface, they are of a design, speed, and power not commonly known. The velocity and acceleration attributed to the objects may be caused by light reflected off a highly refl ective surface onto a n atomospheric screen where a slight angular turn of the reflective surface wouJ..d appear as high acceleration. This possibility is considered not probable because of the sun angle and atmospheric condition reported at the time of photography and because of the variations in luminosity which, under the above conditions would remain constant. It is the majority opinion of the group conducting this analysis that these images are light sources. This will explain the non-blinking and variations i n luminosity - but not the velocity or acceleration faciors. In either case, light source or reflective surface, it appears as ti' the objects are of a nature which we are not able to identify in terms of natural phe nomena or cpmmonly known man-taade objects. 2. There is no indication of what kind of objects could have caused the images except that they must be of a construction , design, and mater ial not commonly knovn. This is indicated b y the computed acceleration rate and elocity (answer 8). For the same reasons, birds, airers.ft and balloons are ruled out. 3. An analysis of the charts relative to movement indicate that there were group and ind.1vidual moveme nt. W1thin a group it appears as if the individual objects were moving counter-clock-wise aJ.ong an elliptical or similar track. Thus \then two objects crossed the camera line of sight they will appear to fuse i nto one. As they continued along their paths it will appear as if one objec t became two. Thie occured at reglar intervals at approXimately every 25th frame as plotted in chart s 5a and 5b. DOWNGRADED A'!, 3 YEAR Th 'T'J'ERVA'u13; DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS. DOD DIR 6200.10 4 DECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007

Page 75born-digital extraction

' COdi! 01/m,w/lbh Jl2 • UNCLASSlFLED Serial: MA Y 4 Subj: Interpretation of Movies of Unidentified Objects; progress report on 4. All objects appear to have the same characterist ics in regards to shape, color, size and rel&tive motion. 5. The shape of the objects appears to be oblate or disk shaped, color; blue-white, and maximum and minimum size; 98 and 16 feet. The size is baaed on the assumpt ion that the objects are five miles from the observer. 6. Fade in and fade out of the objects were ana.J.-rzed as i n 3 above. In this case the group movement was such that the distance between the objects and camera was increased so that the objects could not be recorded on the film thereby ca.using the apparent fade out. Fade-in as attributed to a shortening of the distance from the fa.de-out area to the c.e.mera station . 7. Plots of the groups i ndicate that the objects move counter clock-wise relative to the axis of flight path. However, nothing he.a been detected which indicates motion of t he i ndividual objects about their own axis although this motion appears to be likely . 8. In determining the velocity of the objects three assumptiorus were ma.de: a. The camera was held steady during Part III of the film. b. The objects were moving perpendicular to the optical axis, and c. The objects were five miles from the camera. It is obvious that (b) is a fallacy; however, this assumption will give the minimum velocity and the actual velocity is greater than computed. The assumption that the objects are five miles f'rom the camera is a n arbitrary one. However, based on the emulsion speed and focal length, an object 50 feet in diameter and five miles - from the camera will be recorded on the film with sufficient resolution to identify major details of the object. It is felt that if these objects were closer than five miles at the time of recording, <ll.etails would appear on the film. Velocity is computed to be 3780 mph for a snift of 1 mm per frame 1f the object is five miles from the observer. From 55 measurements taken from Pa.rt III of the Utah f'ilm, the maximum and minimum velocities DOWNGRADED A'f 8' ffiAR 11'1TERYAL"8. DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS ' DOD DlR 6200.10 • 5

Page 76born-digital extraction

. - .,. • .. • . Code 01/INW/lbh Jl2 .UNCLASSIFIED n · ,, Serial: lJ ' Qr_':' l MAY .i Subj: Interpretation of Movies of Unidentified Objects; progress report on were 2457 and 378 mph respectively. These figures differ from those given in reference (c) and were computed from measurements obtained under more controlled conditions. Acceleration was determined from the formula : a: Vf - VO .-.1.e e· T wu r . a= Acceleration Vf: final velocity VO= initial velocity T: time= 1/16 second Since "g" is equal to 32.17 .ft/sec 2 it was computed that: Maximum acceleration= 21,168 mph/sec= 965 g Minimum acceleration: 1,104 mph/sec= 50 g Maximum deceleration= 32,448 mph/sec ■ 1479 g Minimum deceleration: 272 mph/sec= 12 g Velocit and acceleration determinations were also made from the Montana film. I n this case, terrestial objects appeared in the film and were held to as control. Subsequently, the velocity and acceleration determinations are considered to be more reliable. On the assumption of (b) and (c) above the maximum and minimum velocities of the le.ft object are 1374 and 361 mph respect.fully . For the right object they are 1117 and 189 mph. Accelerations vere computed as: Le.ft Object Right Object Maximum acceleration mph/sec 14,016.639 g 12646. 57 6g Minimum acceleration mph/sec 0 :r O g O • Og Maximum deceleration mph/sec 13,184: 6o1 g 14288 = 651g Minimum deceleration mph/sec 0 • 0 g O "' Og The above determinations were ma.de from a total of 322 measure ments. It was noted that the acceleration and determinations were i n multiples o.f 12.5 approximately . This may be of significance although no study has been conducted to determine this. ' 9. Velocity and acceleration were treated in sub-paragraph 8 above. Paragraph 2a indicates the controls used during this investi - gation. DOWNGRADED AT B DECLASSIFIED' ~AR IN'.rERv .\ 1:5{. DOD DIR 620~.1~2 YEAR& , 6 • UNCLASSIFIED ,4 DECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007

Page 77born-digital extraction

• I O .. . C~ ·of/f!WW /lbh J12 ' Serial: UNCLASSIFIED OIOS" Subj: Interpretation of Movies of Unidenti:f'ied Objects; progress report on 10. a. There is no recurring pattern in the relative position of the objects i n :formation . It appears however, as if the shi:f't in relative positions were regular a nd that the origi nal format ion would be recovered if the continuing action has been recorded. b. No. However, the same formation is maintained with objects changing positions. c. No detection of relative positions being maintained coincidental with movement about their axis. d. No detection of unduJ.ating motion of objects i n phase either i n format ion or tumbling motion. e . There is evidence of abrupt changes i n direction of flight path through fairly large angles. f. Certain objects dD appear to remain motionless while other move about. g. Certain objects disappear while still well within the field of viev. This is discussed i n sub-paragraph 6 above. 4. Discussion . During the study and i nvestigation of the unidentified objects, tb.e preliminary data uncovered were revealed to experts (with proper seourity clearance) in the fields of astronomy a nd physics. Although they presented certain natural phenomena theories to explain the cause o:f the objects under certain conditions they were not able t o do so under the conditions during which the photography was taken, nor were they able to recognize these objects as man-made. As to the resuJ.ts of the investigations being reported, no attempt was made tooorroborate the ppinions presented. Because of the lack of proper e ui ment, money and e onnel the in on was 1 . There are ob OWi sts which can be conducted to prove or disprove some of the findinge presented. It is suggested that these be undertaken. 5 . Reference ( d) requests spectrophotometric anaJ.yeis of the Utah f'ilm be made. Preliminary plan of test is underway . y~I ~~:,/ L.W. ~ UNCLASSIFIED DOWNGRADED AT 8 YEAR lNrr<~ 'RV Al,1;: Copy to: DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS. CNO {OP553) DOD DIR- 5200.10 BuAer (PH) DECLASSIFIED Aulhority NND 923007

Page 78born-digital extraction

:1c1i11iowM, 1712?3 kd Uon 1'ro TELECONFERENCE MESSAGE FORM (See . tructions on reverse side oft. page) 1. TI'EM NO. 2 • SECURrrY CLASSIFICAT ON UNCLA SIFIED ). DATE TRANSMITTED 3 F ebrue:M' 1953 4. FROM: (Name & Syn-.bol) 5. TO: (Name & Symbol) C epho C tor ooordin&- tion. 30S at lllO v1 • .c., to ot 2 Juq 52 ot r no lation to or, he a ut in a h n 1n an t tar~ n. l nt o , g t th p1o • int in it (If rr~re space is needed, continue on a plain sheet of paper.) 7. ORIGINATED BY: (Name, Symbol, Date) 8. OOOR.DINATED BY: (Name, Symbol., Date) 9. AUTHORIZED BY: A NALY~I:> DiVUON FILE l I I ~> 7 -~ i.. ~ - ----"='• ··"--- - DOWNGRADED AT ~ YEhR TN 'ERVAL~t I Fil[ N.UM '.J[R DECLASSIFIED AF''l'ER 12 EARS. DOD DIR 5200.10 L IN'!!A~ s _ __D AT£ _J Air Adjli't,ant GeneralJ ATIPA DECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007

Page 79born-digital extraction

• • INSTRUCTIONS FOR PREPARING AND SUBMITTING FORM I 1. Submit ONE copy of the c:tompleted form to rA.TIPA by 1000 hours of da.y message is to be sent. Unless special arrangements are made with ATIPA fer late submissioa, messages received after 1000 hours will not be sent until the following conference~ 2. Complete fonn as follows: Block 1. Preparing office orr~t. Will be completed by telecon operator . Block 2. If a classified messace, stamp in security classific~tion. If not a classified message, enter "Unclassified". Block ,. Enter date the m.-ssage will be sent, not date prepared. Block 4- Enter na.Jr.e and symbol of sender. Block s. Enter name and symbol of receiver. Block 6. If a classified message , enter as the first two words of the message nsecurity Information," then proceed with the message. If not a classifieit messar.e, omit the words "Security Infor mation". Block 7. Originator enter signature and symbol. (Aay or may not be the same person whose name appears in Block 4.) Block 8. Coordinators enter name and symbol. ,Block 9. Air Adjutant General Enter signature. Bottom of form. If a classified message, stamp in security classification. DECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007

Page 80born-digital extraction

------ - - • UNCLASSIFIED him to make any estimates as to size, speed, or distance.· Toward the end of his observation one of the objects reversed course and proceeded ava, from the rest of the group. He held the camera still and all owed this ingle object to pass aaross the fiel~ of view of the cpmera picking it Up again later in ita travel. He repeated this for two or three passes. By this time all the objects had disappeared. The movies have been studied by the Photo Beconnaiaeance J.abora~~ \lr~ A1r Develo~nt Center yright-Pat'kuon AFB, Ohio 1 and by the u.s. Navy Phou, Inter pretation Center, Washington, D. C. Since there was no known obj ect auoh a.a a cloud, tree, or mountain 1n the film, it waa hipose1ble to make even a. rough eatimate as to the speed, di tanae, or size. The size of the images on the movie film were too small to show BJlT details. ~e movie have been studied by persons engaged in work with balloons end the appearance and action of the objects ve s1mUar to that of pillow belloona. These balloons are called pillow bw.loona due to their e1mile.r1ty to a pillow.. Hundreds of these balloons were JllSde and nown 1n the u.s. end overseas during the Crusade for Freedom. Attenq)ts to trace these balloons to determine whether &n7 left over from the Crusade for Freedom ootild have been launched 1n the Tremonton area. were negative. Another strong poeeibility is t.bat the objeot vere sea gulls soaring thermal. a1r current• . ~ • Movies of sea s taken una.er e1m'3ar lighting conditions showed the sea gulla present time the Air Force contemplates no :future action will be taken to ident1f'y the objeats. UNCLASSIFIED DECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007 ANALYSIS DIVIS:ON F,LE --'- /O _ o].3 FILE N U, BER INITIALS

Page 81born-digital extraction

-~-- I --------- - ROUTIRG COMMWNICATIONS CENTER NO. I JOINT MESSAGEFORM ,~) - t- /1 UNCLASSIFIE t-------• SPACE ABOVE FOR COMMUNICATIONS CENTER ONLY ,....______________ FROM: (Originator) DA~tJ!t::z I SECURITY C TO: INFO: □ BOOK MESSAGE □ MULTIPLE ADDRESS I INFORMATION ~IGINAL MESSAGE CRYPTOPRECAUTION □ YE:s REFERS TO MESSAGE: IDENTIFICATION I CLASSlFICATION DOWNGRADED AT S YS! _"'R Nl:E:RV A'.LJS.1---- - ---::-:--:t, - DECLASSIFIED APTER 12 YEARS. ANA L 'tSlS DIV\$\ON F:LE DOD DlR 5200.10 /1>0 7J _ ..,... f tlE~iui iBER DD FORM 173 I OCT 49 REPU.CES WHICH MAY BE USED. UNCLASSIFIED OFFICIAL TITLE NME FORM !73, I MAY 49, l&---G89'23-3 * u. s. GO'l£RNMENT HINTING o,r1ct DECLASSIFIED Authorily NND 923007

Page 82born-digital extraction

I --- AIRERAFT EOfflPADY, IDE. Analysis of Photographic x~?terial P.d0'..:GG:?.A.:i:~ 1 -.!iTRIC AHALYflIS OF rr·•:IE. "U'7l\.H" FILM 'I' JACKING UFO I S SANTA MONICA DIVISION .I ,~ I ' • ' DECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007

Page 83born-digital extraction

- / Analysis ot Photographic Material Serial 02 PHorOJRAMM:rfi'RIC ANALYSIS CF THE "ur.AH" FIIM TRACKOO UFO'S Several Unidentified Flying Objects (UFO'e) were sighted and photo graphed at about 11:10 MST on Juzy 2, 1952 by Delbert c. Newhouse at a point on State Highway 30, seven miles north ot Tremonton, Utah (latitude 41° 50', longitude 112° 10' ). Mr. Newhouse, a Chief Warrant Officer in the U. s. Navy*, wee in transit f'ran Washington, D. c. to Portland, Oregon. A map or the area is included as f'igure l. He, his wife and their two children were making the trip by car. Shortly af'ter passing through the city of Tremonton, his wife noticed a group ot strange bright shining objects in the air off towards the east ern horizon. She called them to her husband's attention and prevailed upon him to atop the car. When he got out, he observed the objects (twelve to f'ourteen ot them) to be directly overhead and milling about. He described them as "gun metal colored objects shaped like two saucers, one inverted on top ot the other". He estimated that they subtended 11 about the same angle as B-29's at 10 1 000 :feet" (about halt a degree - Le., about the angular diameter of the moon). Next, he ran to the trunk of hie car, took out his Bell and Bowell Autanaster lanm movie camera equipped with a 3" telephoto lens, loaded it, focused it et in:fiD.ity and began shooting. There was no reference point above the horizon so he was unable to estimate absolute size, speed or distance. He reports that one of the objects reversed its course and proceeded away fran the rest of the group; he held the camera still and all.owed this sil'.lgle object to pass across the f'ield ot view of the camera, picking it up later in its course. He repeated this for three passes. 4 ,,,..-V4s During the filming, Newhouee 1 changed the iris stop of the camera fran t/8 to t/16. The density ot the film can be seen to change markedly at a point about 3~ through the sequence (figure 5(b) at t/8 and the other blowups at t/16). The camera was operated at 16 fps. The color film (Daylight Kodachrane) af'ter processing was submitted to his superiors. The Navy forwarded the f'ilm to the USAF-ATIC where the :film was studied tor several. months. According to Al Chop (then with ATIC and present'.cy vith DAC) Air Force personnel were convinced that the objects were not airplanes; on the other hand the eypothesis that the camera might have been out of' focus and the objects soaring gulls could neither be confirmed nor denied. Mr. Chop's remarks are essentially substantiated by Capt. Edward Ruppelt, reference (1) then head at Project "Blue Booktt tor ATIC. * At the time he had already logged sane 2,200 hours as a chief photographer with the Navy.

Page 84born-digital extraction

Photogrammetric • -2- Serial ~ ~sis ot "utah" Film This "utah" tilm clip together with a ''Montana" UFO tilm clip (~is ot Photographic Material, Serial 01) came into the possession of Green-Rouse Productions at Samuel Goldwyn Studios, 1041 North Fo:nDOsa Street, Hollywood, vho incorporated both tilm clips as s:f8n1t1cant evidence in a Documentary Film, "Unidenti.tied FqiDg <J,jects' 1 tor release by United Artists to public theaters by May 9, 1956. A 35mm reprint ot the Newhouse "Utah" film was submitted by the Studio to Douglas Aircraft C~ tor e.xamin.Btion. Visual study ot the reprints on the Recordak and astronomical plate measuring engine revealed the toll.ow ing: the tilm comprises about 1,200 frames; on most ot the frames there appear JDBDY' round white dots, some elliptical. The dots often seem clustered in cODStellations, or formations which are recasnizable tor as long as seven teen seconds. A relatiTe motion plot (obtained tran an overlay vellmn trace on the Recor4ak) ot two typical formations are presented 1n figures 2a and 2b. The objects seem to cluster 1n groups ot two's and three's, see actual blowups, 4a, 5b, and 6c. On same t'remes they flare up and then disappear tran view in 0.25 secon4s or less and sometmes they appear as a rand~ scattered "tv1nkling" of dots. The dot images themaelTes show no stnicture; they are White and have no oolor ~inges. Exam1n.-tion under a microscope shO\ls the camera to be well focused as the e<!ges ot the inlagee are sharp and clear on many ot the properly exposed ~emes. .Angular diameters range from about 0.0016 to O.ooo4 radians. Their pattern of motion is essentially a curvi linear milling about as shown in tigure 2a and 2b. Sam.etimes the objects ap pear to circle about each other. There are no other objects 1n the field at v1ev- which might give a clue as to the absolute motion of the cluster. In the overlay trace, tigure 2, the trane ot reference is determined by a certain object whose relative motion during a sequence of frames remains rather constant (indicated 1n the figures). T'h.1e object is used as a refer- enae PQint and the lower edge ot the trame as abscissa. Assuming the camera to have been kept reasonabl;y uncanted., the abscissa vould be horizontal and the ordinate vertical. In the overlay trace, figves 3a and 3b, the particular frame 1tsell 1e used as the ref'erence. Assuming the camera vae held ste~ (there is an unconsciCIIJS tendency to pan with a lDGVing object) the coordinate system is (llasi-ti.xed. It is realized that both of these coordinate systems are in actuality moving, possibly possessing both velocity and accelerati011. No alt1t\14e or azimllth determination can be made because ot lack ot background. The only measurable quantities of interest &re theref'ore the relative angular distances between the objects and their time derivatives. Graphs ot two typical time variations ot relative angular separation and velocity are 1nclJ1ded as figures 7 and 8. The relative angular velocity is seen to vary t'rom zero to O.oo65 radians per second. The relative angular acceleration had a maximum value at 0.0036 radians per second squared. Bupposing the camera vas kept stationary the average angular velocities tor the object moving across the tield. are 0.039 and 0.031 radians per second tor tigu.res 3• and. 3b. The angular velocities in these sequences scmetimes vary erratic~ t'rcm 0.07 to 0.01 radians per second. This variation may be attributed in part to camera "JiggliDg" and in part to the object's DECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007

Page 85born-digital extraction

- ·Photogram:netr1c -3- Serial C12 ~is ot "Utah" Film motion. Th decrease in average angular veloc:1ty between 3(e.) and 3(b) could be due to the obJeot's hav1Dg regressed betveen f'ilminge J\lat as was reported by Bewhouse. Also the average image diameter decreases about 3~ ayer the entire tillll, 1ndicat1Dg a possible over-all regression of the obJects. The tollow1.ng tabulation imlicates the hypothetical transverse companent ot relati-,e Tel.ocitie■ and accelerations at various distances. It is noted that th transver e Telooity may be cmq a fraction ot the total velocity so that the numbers act\tal..q indicate m1 n1mn Y&lues. It the obJeat'a Its transverse Its transverse ac- Velocity ot distance vae veloai~ was celeration vas single obJect was 100 teet o.6, tt/sec 0.36 n/sec 2 3!'8 ft.sec 01" o.44 Jll'h or 0.011 g or 2.7JJJPh 1000 teet 6.~ tt/sec 3.6 -rt/sec 2 39 -rt/sea or 4. mph or 0.11 8 or 27 mph 2000 teet 13 tt/sec 7.2 ft/sec 2 78 -rt/sec or 8.8 mph or 0.22 g or 54 mph lllile 23 mph 0.56 8 135 1IQ}h 5 miles u, 2.8 s 670 J!U)h • 10 miles 230 mph 5.6 I 1300 m,ph The objects in the "Utllh" and "Montana" tilE can ~ be correlated on the basis at two :rather weak points. First, their structure, er rather lack at it, 1s fl1m1Jar. Tims as shown 1n the "blow-ups", figures 6a and 6b, there are no recognizable ditterenoes between them*• Seccnd, the objects on the "Montanan t1lm are numit'est~ a s~le pair J CJD the "Utah" tilm perhaps 3~ ot the trames ahoW ehstera at objects aeemiJlsq also grouped in pairs. See figures 6c and. 5b. The veather report was obtained by- the author tram the Ail'port Statian at Salt take City. The nearest station Yith available data is Corinne wich re - ported a. maxt.mnm t rature ot 84°, a m1n1'DI\Jm at 4.7° and no precipitation. A high pressure cell the Pacific Northwest spread over Northern Utah dur· 1Dg ~ 2, the pressure at Tl'elllO.Uton would hne ri.811:lg trend, the vis1 - bilit)r good, and the v1.n4s relatively light. The absence ot clouds and the apparentq excellent Visiblllt7 shown on the ti wow4 seem to be 1n agree ment with this report. ~ use at references (2) and (3), the sun's az th :Nl.32°E &ltitude 650 was oaupgted. Ro shadows were anilable to coa:tim the time ot f1Jm1ng. * The 11MSea on the "Utah" film appear to be a little br1ghter. However, possible nriations in dEJV'elopllent techniqaes wotild not allow qunti tative ~is in this regazid. DECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007

Page 86born-digital extraction

• • Photogrammetrio -4- Serial 02 Analysis ot "utah" Film The image size being roughly that of the ?oontana film (a tew at the objects being perhaps 1~ larger than the largest on the Montana) the eame remarks as to airplane reflections apply, i.e., they might haVe been caused by sun reflections tram airplanes Within one to three miles at the observer, although at these distances they should have been identif"ied as conventiOZJ.al aircraft by the til.m or the observer. No specific conclusions as to sun reflection angles oan be drawn since the line of motion of the objects cannot be confirmed. However, the reported E to 'W motion of the UFO and their pass ing overhead coupled with the SE azimuth of the sun would make the achieve ment of optimal sun reflections rather di.:f'tioult. That the images coul.d have been produced by aluminum foil "chaff"* seems possible, et least on the basis of the images shown, as very intense specular sun ref'leotions from ribbons of ahaft might flare out to about the size ot the UFO. Examination ot figures 4b, 5a, and 5c, obtained f"rom the pbotogrammetric experiment-· reference Analysis of Photographic Mater1a1, Serial 01 1 Appendix II, show that no significant broadening is produced by flat white di.tf'use reflec - tors such as birds, bits of paper, etc. at f/16 under the conditions of the filming. Actual measurements shOW' a slight "bleeding" or flar1.Ilg ate.bout 1~ to 2()%. The rectangular flat Vhite cardboards ot the aforementioned experiments represented verz !"9' 1 &),Jy the cont:tsurati ot l>irds. The light reflected by such a surtace is probably greater than that fran a curved f'eather surface ot • bird. Figure 4(b) shows the appearance of one and two foot birds. ff (Se arrows.) as they might appear on a 16mm trame taken With a 3" telephoto lens f/16 at a distance ot 1200', tigure 5(a) at 3000' and figure 5(c) at 3300•. Maey of the images on the "Utah" t'ilm have an angular diameter ot 0.0012 radians (acme as large as 0.0016 radians), thus they might be interpreted as mie foot birds at 600 1 to 8oo 1 , two toot birds at 1200' to 1600 1 or three :toot birds at 2400 1 to 3200'. At these distances, it is doubted it birds would give the appearance or round dotsJ also they would have been identifi able by the c era if' not visually. H011ever, actual movies of birds in flight would have to be taken to completely confirm this conclusion. The toll.owing type ot gulls have been known to fly at times over th1e locali : California rr G a CCl!DOn summer res n , R ng- ed. Gull and the Fork-Tailed Gull, see reference (4). The images are probably not those ar balloons as their number is too great aud the phenanenon ot tlaricg up to a constant brightness for several seconds, and then dying out again cannot well be associated with au:, known balloon observations. * Bita of a1nm1 mm toil dumped overboard by planes, often utilized as a. countermeasure against ant1-a1rcratt radar. This material might possibly be in the form ot large ribbons several feet lODg and several inches across. H The dimensions refer to ving spread. The actual exposed white area of a bird is usua1ly less and depends upon the perspective of the observer. This dif'terence has been roug~ accounted tor 1n the data given, bowe'Yer, ~the~ were the principal. reflector the distance given show.d be re duced by tactor ~ 2 c,r 3. DECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007

Page 87born-digital extraction

Photogramnetric -5- Serial 00 Ana.lysia ot HUtah" Film Certain soaring insects - notably "ballooning spiders" (reference (5) and (6)) produce bright moving points of' light. The author has witnessed such a phenomenon. It is produced by sun reflections ott tbe streamers of silken threads spun by many types ot spiders. Caught by the wind, these streamers serve as a means ot lecanotion floating the spider high into the air. They oocaeionally have the appearance of vast numbers of silken tlakes which till the air and 1n some recorded instances extend over many square miles and to a height of several hundred feet. The reflection, being off silk threads, is not as bright as ditruse reflection h-om a flat white board. Thus no :t'laring ot the images could be expected. The author noted that the sections at the "web" that reflected measured f'ran 1/4 11 to 1/2 11 tor the largest specimenS. Thus the images might be ttributed_ to balloon iIJg spiders at distances ot 50 to 100 feet. However, these web ref'lections ordinar1]3 show up~ against a rather dark background and it is doubted U their intensity would be great enough to produce the intense UFO images against a bright sq. No quantitative densitaneter examination at image brightness could be made, as the film was available. is understood Al original not It from Chop that the gOYermnent analysts did make measurements ot this kind on the original films and touud the Utah images to be very intense*• Besides the above remarks, pertinent to the actual. images, several tacts can be gleaned trcm the motion of objects. The observations are not apt to support the supposition that the objects were cOIIVentional a1rcra1"t as the maneUTers are too erratic, the relative accelerations probably rul - ing out aircraft at distances ot aver five miles. Several observers familiar with the appearance of chatt have seen the and concluded that the per film sistence of the nontwinkHng oonstellationa, their small quantity, and the reported absence ot aircratt overhead makes chatt unl.ikely. Furthermore, the single object passing across the tield. or view would be most d.1.tticult to explain on the basis or chatt. These same remarks would apply also to bits of paper swept up in thermal updrafts. The relative angular velocity might be canpatible with soaring bird speeds at distances at less than one mile, the angular velocity ot the single objeot coul.d be attributed to a bird within about one thousand feet. There is a tendency to pan With a movillg object - not against it - so the Telocities in the table probably represent a lower bound. The motion of the obJects is not exact~ what one would eJr:pect tran a f'latlt of soaring birds (not the slightest indieation of a decrease in brightness due to periodic turning with the Wind or f'lapping) and no cumulus clouds are present which might betray the presence of a strong thermal updratt. On the other hand the s1Dgle object might represent a single soaring bird Which broke away in search of a new thermal -- quite a ccmnon oocrurrence among gulls - - see reference (7). * In tact, "burned right down to the cellu1oid baokiDg". See also ref'erence (l). DECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007

Page 88born-digital extraction

Photogramnetric -6- Serial 0'2 Analysis ot "Utah" Film That the air turbulence necessary to account tor their movement if' they were nearby inspects (even the single obJect's motion!) is possible, can be concluded. trom examination of reference (8). However, if the objects were nearby spider vebs the lack ot observed or photographed streamers is unusual. Furthermore, the f'aet that they were visible from a moving car for several minutes is hard to reconcile with localized insect activity. The phenomenon of atmospheric mirages, reference (9), might conceivabJ.¥ account tor the images. Such a hypothesis is hampered by the clear weather conditions and the persistence and clarity of the images. Also no "shi.Jmler ing" can be detected end the motion is steady. Again the object which breaks awec, would be dif'f'icult to explain. It has been suggested that spurious optical ref'lect·1ons or light leaks in the camera might be responsible. Examples of' such effects have been ex amined and found to be quite different from the UFO's. The evidence remains rather contradictory and no si:cgle hypothesis of a natural phenomenon yet suggested seems to completely account for the UFO involved. The possibility of multiple hypotheses, i.e. that the utah UFO's ere the result of two simultaneous natural phenomena might possibzy yield the answer. However, as in the case of the "Montana" analysis, no definite conclusion could be obtained. R. M. L. Baker, Jr. May 16, 1956

Page 89vision OCR

Photogrammetric                              -7-                              Serial  02
Analysis of "Utah" Film

American Falls Reservoir
Aberdeen
Alameda
Pocatello
Portneuf Reservoir
Wayan
Blackfoot River Reservoir
Thaynes
Bedford
Turnerville
Auburn
Salt River Range
Smoot
Minidoka
Wapi
Lake Walcott Reservoir
Inkom
Chesterfield
Bancroft
Conda
Soda Springs
Fairview
Meade Peak
Georgetown
Bennington
Geneva
Montpelier
Dingle
Rockland
Deep Creek Peak
Bannock Peak
McCammon
Arimo
Lava Hot Springs
Central
Grace
Sherman Peak
Lago
Liberty
Idahome
Malta
Elba
Sublett
Holbrook
Downey
Virginia
Cleveland
Treasureton
Ovid
Paris
Oxford
Clifton
Mink Creek
Bloomington
Pegram
Samaria
Malad City
Dayton
Preston
Fish Haven
St. Charles
Bear Lake
Cokeville
Naf
Strevell
Stone
Weston
Franklin
Newiston
Cove
Garden City
Raft River Mountains
Kelton Pass
Snowville
Portage
Clarkston
Trenton
Richmond
Laketown
Sage
Park Valley
Observation
Riverside
Plymouth
Fielding
Newton
Collinston
Smithfield
Kelton
Cedar Sprs.
Bothwell
Tremonton
Dewyville
Hyde Park
Logan
Providence
Randolph
Spring Bay
Elwood
Mendon
Millville
Hyrum
Woodruff
Promontory
Bear River City
Corinne
Honeyville
Wellsville
Almy
Evanston
Great Salt Lake
Bear River Bay
Willard
Brigham
Mantua
Gunnison Island
Promontory Point
Plain City
North Ogden
Huntsville
Wasatch
Knight
Desert Peak
Fremont Island
Hooper
Roy
Clearfield
Weber
Morgan
Devils Slide
Echo City
Bird I.
Carrington I.
Syracuse
Kaysville
Farmington
Bountiful Peak
Coalville
Hoytsville
Antelope Island
Centerville
Bountiful
Woods Cross
Fort Douglas
Wanship
Rockport
Oakley
Hayden Peak
Knolls
Clive
Delle
North Salt Lake
Salt Lake City
Peoa
Hoyt Peak
Kamas
Garfield
Magna
Park City
Grantsville
Lake Point
Bacchus
Murray
Midvale
Sandy
Keetley
Heber
Deseret Peak
Tooele
Bingham Canyon
Lark
Riverton
Alpine
Draper
Midway
Charleston
Timpanogos Cave Nat. Monument
Stockton
Johnson's Pass
Ophir
Lehi
Orem
Pleasant Grove
Wallsburg
Currant Creek Peak

N
W          E
S

FIGURE 1

Page 90born-digital extraction

Fi:3 u re 2.. Rela.-five 0 m 0 i; (J) (J) :;:; iii 0 )> C: Mo t-/6tJ of LIFO Systent 5' 0 :J. '< z z I 0 .,, <f "' g "' .... b.) /_00 Second Jh t~rw, I 0 .0). Rad/011s/ Inch

Page 91born-digital extraction

Photogremet:ric -A Serial 02 Anaqs1s ar autah9'1lm ~ t: ~ l-1 ~ -~ .., $ "' . 0 ~ ... ~ ~ ~ ~ ,'() (:) - ~ ~ q; ~ . 'i.J ,--.... M ~ ~ cr -0 L. ~ ...... " ~ :l - a ! O") ... · - ~ ~ s.'. ll ~ ~ ~ 1 Q '-J - ~ ~ ~ ;.. t - '() () ~ DECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007

Page 92born-digital extraction

..J.Q.. Photogrmametric Serial 02 .Anal1'81s ot "Utah" Film FmUHE 4 Enlaz'Sed trlllles taken tran 16nm Da711ght Ko4achrme film at f /16, 16 tps.• a) The array at obJects photographed. b) Photograph tram the phot~B111Detric experi ment. c) Actual shot taken frcm tbe "Utah" film. * All trws are et the same magnffi.catiOn.

Page 93born-digital extraction

PhotogrSDIJletrio -u- Serial 00 ~is or "Utah" Film FJDURE § Enlarged trmnes taken trcm lcmn Dalyigbt Kodachrane film at r/Jf,, 16 tps. * .. a) Photqp-am frcm the photC61"amnetric eJ;per1 - ment. b) Actual shot taken from the "Utah" film (at f /8). c) Photcgraph from the pbotogr81!111etr1c exper1• ment. • All trame1 are ot the saae megntftcation. DECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007

Page 94born-digital extraction

-14 - Serial 02 Photc,grammetric Analysis of "Utah" Film FIDURE 6 Enlarged frames taken tram. 16:mn Daylight Kodacbrcme film at t/lf:,, 16 rps. * a) Actual shot taken tran the .. utah" tilm. b) Actual shot taken frca the "Montana" film (at t/22.). e) Aatllal shot taken trcn the "Utah" film. * All tranes are~ th e same magnification.

Page 95born-digital extraction

.. ~ .. ~ z . .., ,: ~ .. :;10 IAI :x Photcgraametria (12 Ana~1s or "Ut ilm -13- Serial I F O R M 25 BS Page ,_____ C REV. '1•421 Prepared by K.f1. L. 8Atx£t1 :f.i. DOUGLAS AIRCRAFT C PANY, INC, Mode..__ _ _ _ Date Aets[J 11 J, 1 r;c, Plant Report No 02_ - .J - ..J ..

Page 96born-digital extraction

Photqpwwwtnc ~is or "utah" Film .ir... Serial 02 l">.GE:_______ ~REP>.RE~ BY: f< M,J..& . M . DOUGLAS AIRCRAFT COMP.. Y, INC. PORM 25 ua RE:V. 3•54) CHECKED IIY::-------- ~ -~ A aiJ. 8, ,,a D>.TE: _______________DIVISION MODEi.- · ------ - TITLE·-------------------------------- -

Page 97born-digital extraction

• • -15 - Serial 02 Photogrammetric Analysis ot "Utah" Film (1) Ruppelt, E. J. "The Report on Unidentified Flyi.og Objects". Doubleday and Co. , 1956. (2) The "American Nautical Almanac'', 1952. (3) H.O. No. 214z. ''Tables of Computed A1titude and Azimuth for Latitudes 4ou to 49°. (4) "Report on Ornithological Specimens", Engineering Department, U.S. Army, Washington, 1874. ( 5) Warburton, C. "Spiders" , Cambridge 1921, p. 34. (6) McCook, "American Spiders and Their Spinning Work", Philadelphia, 1893. ( 7) Headley, F. W. , "The Flight of Birds", Witherby and Co. , 1912. (8) Geiger, Rudolf, "The Climate Near the Ground", Harvard Univ. Press, 1950. (9) Menzel, D. H., "Flying Saucers", Harvard Univ. Press, 1953• • •

Page 98vision OCR
[page intentionally blank]

Page 99vision OCR

Figure II.  Plot of first sequence, 7 second duration

Page 100vision OCR

ANALYSIS OF 16 MM. MOTION PICTURE PHOTOGRAPHY OF UNIDENTIFIED AERIAL OBJECTS.

INTRODUCTION

    The motion picture was examined both by normal and slow motion projection,
and by low power microscope.  At the start it was found that the images are
much too small to show any detail in the objects; the only effect visible on
the film by microscopic examination is a collection of small white spots.  They
are frequently elongated in the direction of motion with respect to the camera
position, but no other significant shape features can be seen.

    A Bell & Howell Model D-1-B projector was used to examine the motion of the
objects.  This projector permits the operator to reverse the motion during motor-
driven projection, or to examine any length of film frame-by-frame, by means of
a hand crank and frame counter.  It was found that the objects are ten in number,
in every one but the last of the motion sequences photographed.  Occasionally
some of these objects moved out of the camera's field of view momentarily.

    A list of questions, accompanying the request for this evaluation, are
answered below.

ANSWERS TO STATED QUESTIONS

    1.  It cannot be stated definitely whether the objects are seen by reflected
sunlight or because they are self-powered light sources.  However, it can be de-
duced that, if they are light-reflecting only, they are decidedly non-spherical
in shape.  During part of their flight paths they shine brightly, while at other
times they are so dim as almost to escape detection.  Furthermore, those objects
which are following similar courses show similar brightness fluctuations, which
could be caused by their taking similar flight attitudes.

    2.  It is believed to be reasonably certain that the reflection brightness
of these objects exceeds that of any natural diffusing type of reflecting object,
such as white birds against the sky.  Also, there is no known bird that could
emit such a radiation as would be required to produce the observed brightness.
Either a large metallic surface of nearly flat shape, or a self-luminous source,
is thought to be responsible.  This statement, and the deduction of a non-spheri-
cal shape, combine to rule out large translucent spherical balloons, but not
bright aluminum-surfaced aircraft.

    3.  Slow motion studies of the objects disclose that, in several instances,
two objects on a nearly parallel course pass very close to each other, producing
the blending effect.  However, in each instance the two separate objects reappear
after a moment.

    4. and 5.  As stated above, the only detail that can be seen is the small
bright spot on the blue film, so no object shape can be determined.  However,
the maximum brightness of all the different spots appears to be the same, when
they do become bright.  The color at maximum brightness appears to be a clear
white.  At reduced brightness the spots remain essentially a neutral or grayish

Incl 3

Page 101vision OCR

white; no strong colors are noted.  As to similar motion, a definite grouping
of objects is noticeable.  The first two sequences, taken with the sky as a
light blue, show what probably are two groups of three objects each, and two
groups of two each.  The final sequence, against the dark blue sky, shows four
pairs of objects, with the fifth pair having drifted upwards, out of the camera's
field of view.

    6.  If the objects are reflecting, the "fade-in" and fade-out" are caused
by changes in attitude of decidedly non-spherical objects, as in Answer 1 above.
On the other hand, if they are light sources, the variation could be associated
with their maneuvering activity.

    7. and 8.  As explained in the opening paragraph, the objects are only
small bright spots on the film.  When they dim sufficiently, they become invis-
ible; no dark spots can be identified with these objects.  The only visible
motion in any single frame is with respect to the camera's field of view.  Slow
motion examination of successive frames suggests a general flight pattern of
sweeping skew curves in space.  This concept of object motions produces no sharp
breaks in their apparent flight paths, and also makes it practically impossible
to detect rapid accelerations or decelerations along these paths.

    9.  In the sequences during which the camera was held motionless, to record
the angular velocity of a single object, it is possible to measure this velocity.
Three such passes can be seen.  The first was incomplete, picking up the object
near the center of the frame.  The second and third passes were complete, from
one edge of the field of view to the other.

    Figure I shows the actual tracings of the object from frame to frame for
both Passes No. 2 and No. 3.  The distance from lens to screen was 100 inches.
The focal length of the projection lens was 2 inches.  The enlargement of
Figure I over the actual negative size is therefore 50 times.  Camera and pro-
jector errors, plus small hand-held camera motions, probably account for the
deviations from a straight line path.  The average calculated angular velocity
for both paths is about 2.1 degrees per second.  Detailed computations are given
in Appendix I.

    10a.  A slow motion viewing, plus single frame position plots, suggest that
the objects are maneuvering in definite formations.  However, successive identical
positions are not indicated when position plots from any two frames in a sequence
are superimposed.  For instance, the first sequence of movement lasts 160 frames
or 10 seconds.  During the first seven seconds, clear plots for all 10 objects
can be made.  These plots were made at half second intervals or 8 frames apart.

    10b.  Figure II represents a possible set of flight paths for this interval,
derived as explained in Appendix II.  It should be remembered that Figure II
very likely contains some indeterminate and non-constant camera motion, both
horizontal and vertical, caused by tracking the formations.  This means that the
directions and curvatures as shown may be appreciably different from what a
stationary camera would have recorded.  However, Figure II does help visualize

2

Page 102vision OCR

the type of motion shown by the objects, moving from right to left, or generally
from east to west as the camera was situated.  This agrees with Figure I, show-
ing the single object reversing course from left to right, or west to east.

    10c and d.  The relative positions of these objects in the first sequence
follow a definite formation plan of either three pairs, a trio, and a single,
or perhaps five pairs (if one of the trio and the single are actually a nearby
pair).  It appears that the objects tend to remain in position for curved path
maneuvering.  A possible shift in formation appears at the start of the trio
paths.  Otherwise, the objects definitely appear to undulate in phase in this
sequence; as in the other sequences also.

    10e and f.  Several repeated slow motion viewings of the entire film do not
indicate clearly any abrupt changes in flight path of any part of the formation.
At times the camera appears to lag in following the entire group, and some of the
ten objects then move outside the field of view momentarily.  Whether or not a
particular object remains motionless for a moment depends upon the relationship
of group movement to camera movement.

    10g.  As explained in Paragraph 10f, sometimes objects may move out of the
field of view.  In a few instances, however, certain objects may change in
brightness considerably, and practically appear or disappear well within the
field of view.  In the second sequence, which lasts about 14 seconds, the lower
two pairs in Figure II flare up suddenly near the center of the field of view,
being invisible a moment before.  As they flare up, they appear to curve more
rapidly to the left and upwards than the center trio.  Reversing this sequence
in slow motion shows that these four objects were faintly visible just before
they disappeared at about the same position.

    A tabulation of flight sequences and durations is listed in Appendix III.

CONCLUSIONS

    1.  Subject motion picture film apparently records the motions of ten un-
known aerial objects, all alike in observed characteristics of movement and size.

    2.  The exact nature of these objects cannot be determined, because they
are visible only as small spots of light.  It can be deduced, however, that they
are either non-spherical in shape and similar to bright metal in reflectance, or
else variably self-luminous by some means.

    3.  There is apparently a coordination of movement to some extent among
these objects.  They seem to move in formations which are probably three-dimen-
sional in arrangement.  The largest angular size of the entire group is on the
order of 6 to 8 degrees of arc.

    4.  The movements of these objects suggest flight paths consisting of skew
curves in space.  In one instance a single object changed course and followed a
nearly straight line path with reasonable uniformity of motion at an angular
velocity of about 2.1 degrees.  During this straight line flight it remained
reasonably uniform in brightness.

3

Page 103vision OCR

5.  It would probably be extremely difficult to imitate this photography
for fraudulent purposes.

4

Page 104vision OCR

STATEMENT BY SOURCE

Place:-

About 7 miles north of Tremonton, Utah, on U.S. Highway No. 305.

Time:-

1110, Wednesday, 2 July 1952.

Camera:-

B&H Automaster, magazine load, 3" telephoto lens, 16 frames per second. Handheld.

Exposure:-

First few feet - f:8. Balance - f:16. Clear sun, cloudless sky. EKCO Kodachrome film - Daylight. Exposure was changed with the mistaken idea of darkening the sky to gain greater contrast. The result was merely general underexposure.

Background:-

Driving from Washington, D.C., to Portland, Oregon, on the morning of 2 July, my wife noticed a group of objects in the sky that she could not identify. She asked me to stop the car and look. There was a group of about ten or twelve objects that bore no relation to anything I had seen before, milling about in a rough formation and proceeding in a westerly direction. I opened the luggage compartment of the car and got my camera out of a suitcase. Loading it hurriedly, I exposed approximately thirty feet of film. There was no reference point in the sky and it was impossible for me to make any estimate of speed, size, altitude or distance. Toward the end one of the objects reversed course and proceeded away from the main group. I held the camera still and allowed this single one to cross the field of view, picking it up again and repeating for 3 or 4 such passes. By this time all of the objects had disappeared. I expended the balance of the film late that afternoon on a mountain somewhere in Idaho.

Incl 2

Page 105vision OCR

Appendix I

Calculation of Angular Velocity of Single Aerial Object:

Pass No. 2: 48 spot positions are plotted, representing an elapsed time interval of 47 frames. At 16 frames per second, this gives:

	47
	-- = 3.0 seconds elapsed time
	16

The measured distance on the screen is 15.1 inches. This gives approximately
15.1
----  or 5.0 inches per second for image velocity on the screen.
3.0

Pass No. 3: 44 spot positions are plotted, for 43 frames of elapsed time. This time is  43
            -- = 2.7 seconds.
            16

The distance travelled is 15.7 inches. This gives  15.7
                                                     ---- = 5.8 inches per second
                                                     2.7

on the screen. Average of these 2 values is 5.4 inches per second; with an estimated precision of ±15 per cent.

Conversion to Angular Velocity:

	Distance from projector lens to screen = 100 inches
	Focal length of projector lens = 2 inches
	Enlargement of film on screen = 50 times
	Image velocity on film = 5.4 = .11 inches per second
	                        50

	Focal length of camera taking lens = 3 inches

	It is adequately precise to divide the image velocity by the focal length
to get the angular velocity in radians per second, then to convert to degrees.
We have:

		Angular velocity =  .11 x 57.3  = 2.1 degrees per second
		                       3

The precision of this value is also conservatively set at ±15% or ±0.3 degrees per second.

Page 106vision OCR

Appendix II

Plotting a Set of Flight Paths from Single Frame Position Plots, with no Reference Points

1. In a case like this, it would be highly desirable if the movement of these objects could be recorded with a stationary motion picture camera. Position plots could be superimposed by observing proper registery of frame edges to indicate the speed and direction of object flight paths.

2. However, it apparently was necessary in this case to follow the formation of objects, to keep them all in view. Therefore no position guide for registering the position plots is available, since no fixed points appear in the sky. Other principles must be used instead.

3. It is stated that the general drift of the entire formation was to the west. A later sequence shows a single object, which had reversed course, moving from left to right in the camera's view. It can therefore be supposed that plotted paths should show a drift from right to left.

4. This is one guide to be used. Another is that position plots should be superimposed without any rotation, since the frames were plotted without rotation. This assumes that the camera was not rotated; but merely moved in combined horizontal and vertical motions.

5. Another general guide is that most of the objects should appear to move in smooth, continuous paths. Several plots, at least 4, should be superimposed on a viewing table, and should be shifted until all or nearly all paths are smooth and show reasonably uniform motion. This compound plot can be transferred to a single sheet, and further plots can be added in the same manner.

6. Figure II was prepared in just this way, using the same 50 diameter enlargement as in Figure I. It will be noted that the final positions of two objects in the central trio are missing. They became so faint that they were lost; no further plotting of this sequence was tried.

Page 107vision OCR

Appendix III

Sequence   Frame Number       Number of   Approx time of   Sky Color
Number     Start    Finish    Frames      Seq. in Seconds

  1          0        160        160            10            Light

  2         161        386        225            14            Light

  3         387        700        313          19 1/2          Dark

  4         700        970        270            17            Dark

  5         970       1010         40           2 1/2          Dark

  6        1010       1080         70           4 1/2          Dark

  7        1080       1140         60             4            Dark

Page 108vision OCR

QUESTIONS REGARDING ANALYSIS OF FILM

1. Are images made by light source or reflection?

2. Any indication of what kind of objects could have caused images? Is there any bird sufficiently actinic to cause images? Could they have been caused by aircraft or balloons?

3. What causes the impression that some objects at times appear to become 2 or 3 objects, at times appear to merge into one?

4. Do all objects have same characteristics?

a. Same apparent shape?
b. Same relative size?
c. Same Color?
d. Same general motion?

5. What are shape(s), color(s), and relative size(s) of objects?

6. To what can the "fade-in" and "fade-out" of the objects be attri-
buted?

7. What type motion is attributable to the objects (about their own axis as well as about the axis of flight path)?

8. Is there any acceleration evident in their motion along flight path axis?

9. Can the motion of the camera (panning and joggling) be allowed for sufficiently to permit determination of the angular velocity of objects which cross the field of view? (Reference particularly the single object which crosses field; photographer states that camera was held motionless while object crossed field of view.)

10. Determine patterns of flight from position plots for each frame, then:

a. Is there any recurring pattern in the relative position of the
objects?

b. Do they maintain same relative positions in formation during any
maneuvers, particularly violent maneuvers?

c. Is relative position maintained coincidental with movement about
their axes?

d. If undulating motion is present among a number of objects which
are maintaining a semblance of formation, do those objects undulate in phase?
Ditto for tumbling motion.

e. Is there any indication of abrupt changes in direction of flight
path through fairly large angles (e.g., 90° or more during interval of 2 or 3
frames)?

Incl 7

Page 109vision OCR

f. Do any objects appear to remain motionless at the same time
that others move about?

	g. Can all objects be accounted for at all times or do some liter-
ally disappear while still well within field of view?

2

Page 110vision OCR

FIGURE I   Plot of single object, stationary camera

Page 111vision OCR

(1) OPNAV notice 3820

(2) Temp inversion — reflection & ionization

(3) 20% - research (US)
    20% - unknown phenomena
    30% - psycho.
    30% - extraterrestrial
    — Recomm[ILLEGIBLE] — cont'd study, collect data -- tracking
    sta (in [ILLEGIBLE] [ILLEGIBLE] atomic install radar & [ILLEGIBLE]
    telescope)

(4) Telescopes spinning — prohibit extraterrestrial
    (a) Small angle of coverage
    (b) 5/40

(5) Atomic residue

(6) 6/44 explained — % covered now
    (% psycho.)  —> 90% psycho.

(7)

[ILLEGIBLE]
[ILLEGIBLE]

Page 112born-digital extraction

(/2t's CA-5€ I,,c(t< d-es ONb (J.} 7 ½. t/ X//" pAtJ/.o '"f/.tJ ONc; (.i) z.Y~/'x 2Ylf,,,, ptto+o,

Page 113born-digital extraction

....... r • Addna Repb' To OFFICElt-IN-CBARGR And Refer To No. NT4-28/ 8310/177283 AVIATION SUPPLY DEPOT NAVAL SUPPLY CENTER. OAKLAND 4, CALIFORNIA 11 August 1952 From: 1Chief Photographer Delbert C. Newhouse, 177283, U. s. N. To: Comm.anding Officer, Hill Air Force Base, Ogden, Utah Subj: Motion Pictures of Unidentified Objects in Air El:l,cl: (1) One (1) fifty-foot roll of processed 16mm color motion picture film 1. Enclosure (1) is forwarded herewith for whatever value it may have in con nection with your investigatio~ of the so-called nFlying Saucers". Pertinent data follows: Place: About 7 miles north of Tremonton, Utah on U.S. Highway No . 30S. Time: 1110 W ednesday 2 July 1952. Camera: B&H Automs.ster, magazine load, 3 11 telephoto lens, 16 frames per second. Handheld. Exposure: First few feet - f:8. Balance - f:16. Clear sun, cloudless sky. EKCo Kodachrome film - Daylight. Exposure was changed with the mistaken idea of darkening the sky to gain greater contrast. The result was merely general under exposure. General Background: Driving from Washington, D. C. to Portland, Oregon, on the morning of 2 July my wife noticed a group of objects in the sky that she could not identify. She asked me to stop the car and look. There was a group of about ten or twelve objects - that bore no relation to anything I had seen before - milling about in a rough formation and proceeding in a westerly direction. I opened the luggage compartment of the car and got my camera out of a suit case. Loading it hurriedly, I exposed approximately thirty feet of film. There was no reference point in the sky and it was impossible for me to make any estimate of speed, size, altitude or distance. Toward the end one of the objects reversed course and proceeded away from the main group. I held the camera still and allowed this single one to cross the field of view, picking it up again and re peating for three or four such passes. By this time all of the ob jects had disappeared. I expended the balance of the film late that afternoon on a mountain somewhere in Idaho. DECLASS IFIED Authority NND 923007

Page 114born-digital extraction

'·· .. . UNCLASSIFIED , .-.,,~,·. :.7'".~ ;7!;~~ _.,_,_.- ~ ~7-'t_: , .. ~~:-, 4;':-. ,~ ..,. ~-· ,._ ··_ ·. - ... ( ... - . ~ ~· Nt4-28/8310/177283 Subj: Motion Picture s of Unidentified Objects in Air 00I (11 Aug 52) 1st Ind - HQ 00AMA, Hill Air Force Base, Utah, 28 August 19.52 TO: 1lirector of Intelligence, Headquarters, USAF, Washington 25, D. C. 1. This report of unidentified flying objects is submitted in accor dance with AFL 200-5, dated 29 April 1952. 2. This report is submitted in this form in lieu of submission of AF Form 112, Air Intelligence Information Report, since all information available on this subject is contained in the basic communication. FOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL: / l Incl KERMIT R. { 50 1 roll of processed Colonel, USAF film Inspector General Info cy: Air Technical Intelligence Center, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio ~ Doi~gLASRADSEI•FDIEADTASr..1TE R n,TTERV A. ·t, .. ,,EA' ~ J! R 12 YE · • ••• ' DOD DIR 6200.10 ARS• • }..,, ..... • H : . 0 ' ~ DECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007

Page 115born-digital extraction

• ... .' . n..,. ....... .,., . DECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007

Page 116born-digital extraction

. . ATION (If an11) • _ DISPOSITION FORM UNCLASSIFI D FILE NO. I SUBJECT (Restricted) Movie Film of Flying Objects Taken 2 Jul 52, Vicinity of Tremonton, Utah TO FROM DATE t7' £;-,_,/ COMMENT NO. 1 Chief, Air Technical Dept of the Air ~orce ~ - - Maj Fournet/fu/ Intelligence Center Hq USAF Air0IIT-2A2 71016 Wright-Patterson AFB L Subject i'ilm, received this o:ffice 5 Sep 52, is inclosed for appropriate action. Duplicate of report submitted by the photographer, CPO Delbert C. Newhouse (177283, usn), is inclosed for your information in the event that the copy forwarded to you by the IG, Hill AFB, Utah has not been received . 2 . A message was dispatched to the CG, WADF on 6 Sep 52, with information copy to you, requesting that an intelligence officer interview CPO Uewliouse and determine additional details of the sighting, if available . 3. A message was~lso dispatched to the CO, Hill AFB, Utah requesting weather informa.tion for the pe~d and vicinity in question . An information copy was dispatched to you. 4 . It has been ascertained from the Naval Observatory , Washington, D. C. that the position of the sun at the time(1810Z hours, 2 July 52) and the location (4145N - ll210W) in question was 64.5° elevation and 131° azimuth . • 5. Suggest the film be submitted to the WADC Photo Lab for complete analysis as soon as possible. The following are suggested questions for this analysis which, if answered, should facilitate evaluation of the incident: a . Are images made by light source or reflection'? b . Any indication of what kind of objects could have caused images? Is there any bird sufficiently actinic to cause images? Could they have been caused by aircraft or balloons? c . What causes impression that some objects at times appear to become 2 or 3 where there was originally one, or, conversely, 2 or 3 objects at times appear to merge into one . d . Do all objects have same characteristics? (1) S0llle apparent shape? (2) Sa1ne color? (3) Same relative size? (4) Same general motion? e . What are shape(s), color(s) and relative size(s) of objects? f . To what can the "fade-in" and 11 fade-out 11 of the objects be attributed? g. What type motion is attributable to the objects (about their own axis as well as about axis of flight path)? h . Is there any accelleration evident in their motion along flight path axis . i. Can the motion of the camera (pa.M.ing and joggling) be allowed for DOWNGRADED AT~ YEAR IllTE!fVAl&i DECLASSIFIED· AFTER 12 YEARS _. DOD Dm 6200.10 . ' ,, ,~ ..... -. •• ~<,¾-~, L . -·--UNCLASSIFIED. a&-16-54.801-1 UT S, GOV£RNMEHT PRINTING OFFICE DA AGO FORM 897 Replaces WD AGO Fo1m 897, 1 May 46, which may be used. I OCT 47 DECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007

Page 117born-digital extraction

-- I .. • ' 't_' " • ?- r•' .. j.. DECLASSIFIED Authority NNO 923007

Page 118born-digital extraction

-- .. .; __ .~ r ,.. :""' UNCLASSlF!i;.u ~ ' . ... ' 1 sufficiently to permit determination of the angular velocity of objects which cross the field of view? (Reference particularly the si ngle object which crosses field; photographer states that camera was held motionless while object crossed field of view.) j. Determine patterns of flight from position plots for each frame , then: (1) Is there any recurring pattern in the relative position of the objects? (2) Do they maintain same relative positions in formation during any maneuvers, particularly violent maneuvers? ( 3) Is relative position maintained coincidental with movement about their axes? (4) If undulating motion is present among a number of objects which are maintaining a semblance of formation, do those objects undulate in phase? Ditto for tumbling motion? (5) Is there any indication of abrupt changes in direction of flight path through fairly large angles (e . g. 900 or more during interval of 2 or 3 frames)? (6) Do any objects appear to remain motionless at the same time that others move about? (7) Can all objects be accounted for at all times or do some literally disappear while still well within field of view? 6. Although CPO Newhouse did not request that the film be returned to him, it is reco:imnended that the final footage (of the mountain scenery) be returned to him immediately and that he be asked if he . is willing to accept a duplicate of the initial footage in lieu of the original. If his reply is affirmative, suggest the duplicate be forwarded whenever available, 7, Request advice of the analytical results as soon as available . 2 I ncls : (w/orig only) WILLI.AM A. ADAMS 1 , Cy of ltr fr CPO Newhouse, Colonel, USAF dtd 11 Aug 52 Chief, Topical Division 2 . Roll of exposed 16nnn film . Deputy Director for Estimates Directorate of Intelligence DOWNGRADED AT C: " r,>, ,, ,,;':"t:-n v " ·u-n • DECLASSIFIED Alil'DR 12- YEAH& :> • DOD DIR 5200.10 . -·· UNCLASSIFrED 2 DECLASSIFIED Aulhority NND 923007

Page 119vision OCR
```
[ILLEGIBLE]
```

Page 120born-digital extraction

Nt4-28/8Jl0/17728J Subj: !Otior. rict.ur s or Unidentiried Objects in Air OOI (11 Aug 52) 1st Ind HQ OOAUA, !Iill Air Foroe Base, Utah, 28 August 1952 TO: DirMtor o! Intelligence, Headquarters, U~AF, Washington 2S., D. C. 1. Tuis ruport ot uni entitled £lying objects ie uub'!i'.itted in aooor dnnee 1'11th AFL 200-5, dated 29 April 19,2. 2. This report ia subl%1ittej in this for~ in lieu of eub:nimaion or AF Form 112, Air Intelligence Inrorrcation Report, sinoe all inrorf:iation available on thifl subject is c tained in the basic comt!un1o tion. 1 Incl 50 • roll ot processed Colonel, UtAF film Iru,pector Oene~al v1Info cys Air Teohnio~l Intell.igev.ee Center, l'fright-Patternon AFB, Ohio DECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007

Page 121born-digital extraction

.. COPY ., AVIATION SUPPLY DEroI' VAL , UPPLY .CENTER N1'4-28/8310/177283 OAKLAND 4, CALIFORNIA 11 August 1952 From: Chief Photoarapher Delbert C. Newhouse, 177283, U.S. N. To: Coomanding Officer, Hill Air Force Base, Ogden, Utah Subj: Motion Pictures of Unidentified Objects in Air Encl: (1) One (1) fifty-foot roll of propessed 16mm color motion picture film 1. Enclosure (1) is forwarded herewith for whatever value:it may have in con nection 1th your investigation of the so-called "Flying c>aucers 11 • Pertinent data folla,rs: Places About 7 mil snorth of Tr~monton, Utah on U. S. Higmray No. 30S. Time: 1110 ednesday 2 July 1952. Camera: B&H Automaster, magazine load, 311 telephoto lens, 16 frames per second. Handheld. Exposure: First few feet - r:B. Balance - f:16. Clear sun, cloudless sky. EKCo Kodachrome film - ll!lylight. Exposure was changed With the mistaken idea of darkening the sky to gain greater oort rast. The result was merely general under exposure. General Background: Driving from Washington, D. C. to Portland, Oregon, on the morning of 2 July my wife notioed a group of objects in the sky that she could not identify. She asked me to stop the car and look. There was a group of about ten or twelve objects - that bore no relation to acyth.ing I had seen before - milling about in a rought formation and proceeding in a westerly direction. I opened the luggage compartment of the car anJ uot my camera out of a suit case. Loading it hurrie ly, I exposed approximtely thirty feet of film. There was no reference ooint in t e sky an:i it was impo sible for me to make any e stimate of speed, size, altitude or istance. Toward the end one of t he objects reversed oourso and proceeded away from the main group. I held the camera still and allowed this single one to cross the field of view, picking it up again and re peating for three or four SJ.ch passes. By this t i me all of the ob jects had disappear d. I expended the balance of t e film late that afternoon on a mounta l n scrnewhere in Idaho. /s/ lbert c. Newhouse DECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007

Page 122vision OCR
```
[ILLEGIBLE]
```

Page 123born-digital extraction

----- • ------------ ----- ------------ -- ..... -------------- ---------;--- UNCLAss1F;£L; A DOWNGRADED .AT g '!.'lN.r. U'lT1>v , , ..,; DECLASSIFIED AP1'ER 12 YE \.RS. DOD D.IR 0200.10 . .. ........___ UNCLASSIFIED ----

Page 124vision OCR

AFOIN-2A2 Ma[ILLEGIBLE]ournet/fh/75990/Rm 4B 864
wrtn 24 Oct 52

[REDACTED]

AFOIN-2A2 UNCLASSIFIED

MEMORANDUM FOR: Director of Naval Intelligence
Attention: Op 322Y5

SUBJECT: Interpretation of Movies of Unidentified Flying Objects

1. The attached movies (see Incl. 1) are possibly the best documentary evidence yet obtained on unidentified flying objects. They have been analyzed by an Air Force photographic laboratory. However, it is our desire to obtain an independent analysis by a separate laboratory in order that we may better interpret the implications of these data. For this reason, it is requested that as complete an interpretation as possible be rendered by a Navy activity.

2. Circumstances surrounding the photography are summarized in Inclosure 2. Additional details were requested by messages which are included as Inclosures 3 and 5 and were obtained in the replies attached as Inclosures 4 and 6. With regard to Inclosures 5 and 6, the final footage of film referred to has been detached and returned to CPO Newhouse. However, it was deduced from this portion that Newhouse obtained excellent results while hand-holding the camera; there was almost no camera motion evident. This deduction was applied to the analysis of that portion of the film depicting the motion of the single object which detached itself from the group as explained in Inclosure 2.

3. A list of representative questions for the interpretation is attached as Inclosure 7. These questions are indicative of the type data desired. Any additional data which can be obtained would be most welcome, particularly as concerns the light intensity of the objects, the formations (including three-dimensional renditions, if possible), comments regarding the possibility that the images were caused by aircraft and the conditions which must have prevailed for aircraft to produce such images, etc.

4. It was determined from the Naval Observatory, Washington, D.C. that the position of the sun at the time and location of the photography was 64.5° elevation and 131° azimuth.

5. Your cooperation in satifying this request at the earliest practicable time is earnestly solicited.

[REDACTED] DOWNGRADED AT 3 YEAR INTERVALS;
DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS
DOD DIR 5200.10

UNCLASSIFIED

AFOIN-2A2 Stayback copy

Page 125vision OCR

UNCLASSIFIED                    [REDACTED]

Memorandum for:  Director of Naval Intelligence, Attn:  Op 322Y5
Subject:  Interpretation of Movies of Unidentified
          Flying Objects (continued)

	6. For additional data or referral of specific questions, Colonel W.H. Smith of the Current Intelligence Branch may be contacted direct. His telephone number is 71016.


7 Incls.
	1. Movie (w/orig only)
	2. Cy of ltr fr
	      CPO Newhouse
	3. Cy of AFOIN 57264
	4. Cy of CAFIN 65202
	5. Cy of AFOIN 59782
	6. Cy of CAFIN 74096
	7. List of questions




DOWNGRADED AT 3 YEAR INTERVALS;
DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS.
DOD DIR 5200.10

UNCLASSIFIED

2

Page 126born-digital extraction

Mr: M. A. Monts Air Force Press Room Room ZE761, Pentagon 1 Jun 19 6 ME ORANDU l"O DIRECTOR OF INTELLIOENC g b.O Attu: Lt Colonel T. . John•on, AFOIN-X n1 ~ Q.) SUB CT (Uncl ) UFO Movie ~ l. Th f 11 wing •tatem ta conceming two of the UFO aightl ga d •crib din the rec ntly relea ■ ed vie, ar aub - s mitted in re•pon•e to r. onta' r que ■ t of 29 May 956. 0 0 ~ a. Th aria.nna Ca1e - ontana - 1950. The ol'lginal Air Force concluaion. ■ ed on the interrogation of witn •• • s 0 and th evaluation of the ata, aa that the UFO, e, i all ~ 0 probability, two Air F rce F-94 fighter aircraft own to Ill in th vicinity at the time. fll Q.) J.-1 ~ Shnulat d otogr b ■ of aircraft at v riou1 dl1 c • • u Q.) made by an &il'craft manufacturing firm in a recent independent 0 J.-1 and un ■ olicited analyst• of the Marl a film, •how atrl ing ~ ■ imilarity to the two white blopa in thi ■ film. 1,-1 < u d on th d gre of credibility accorded tbla early A IC evaluation aiMl the tron corroborative vidence aupplte y the recent independent analyaia. the Air Fore ha1 o com llin r aaon to alter tta original concluaion. b. Th New ouae Ca ■ e - Ut - 1952. The ori inal film w s a lYJSe by Air ore Photo Recormaiaaance Laboratory ■hortly after the •iahttn1. Th concluaion reac ed waa that a •trong poa ■ ibiUty exlated that th ri1ht apot• of light appearing on the film were cauaed by • agull11 ■ oaring in thermal air cur rent ■. Th credibility 0£ the concl ion waa undoubtedly ■ up ported by th pr ■ ence of identifiable ea3ulla in •ome f the frame ■. Thia concluaio wa• further strengthened by movie• of seagull ■• ta.ken at varioua diatancea, which ■howed them aa bright apota of light aimllar to thoae th New ouae film.

Page 127born-digital extraction

Memo to D/1 (OIN-X). (U) UFO Movie, 1 .Jun 56 A recent analyaia of the Newhouae film, male by Air .Force photo apeclali•t• totally unaware of the previous hiatory o! thi• case, yielded the opinion that the bright spote of light on the film were bird refiecti0t1a in the strong aunlight. The unanimity of opinion preeent in all evaluations made in thi• caae leaves little reasonable doubt that the UFO• in the Newhoue film were indeed •eagulla. 2. Attached is a 'lt-y o; thi• memo to be given to Mr. M. A. Monts in the Air Force Presa Room in the Pentagon.. JOHN G. ERIKSEN Colonel, USAF Deputy Commander 2

Page 128born-digital extraction

., .. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY OFFICE OF T H E CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS WASHINGTON 25, D. C. UNCLASSIFIED IN REPLY REFER T O Op•322Y5/rt■ S December 1952 FIRST ENDORSEMENT on PIC ltr ser 0263 of 5 Dec 1952 From: To: Director of Naval Intelligence Chief', Topical Division, USAF, AFOIN 2A2 Subj: Interpretation of Movies of Unidentified Flying Objects; progress report on Ref: (c) Dept of Air Force ltr file AFOIN-2A2 of 24 Oct 1952 1. Readdressed and forwarded in compliance with the request contained in reference (c) above aDd reference (b) of the basic letter• . UNCLASSIFIED

Page 129born-digital extraction

.. UNCLASSJFlED U . S . NAVAL PHOTOGRAPHIC INTERPRETATION CENTER 01/HWW:gcl U. S. Naval Receiving Station SAVINGS BONDS All Washington 25, D. C. EC ' From: Officer 1n Charge To: Chief', Naval Operations Subj: Interpretation of Movies of Unidentified Flying Objects; progress report on Ref: (a) Conf ltr DNI OP322Y5/rtm, dtd 27 Oct 1952 ~1th enclosures thereto (b) Memo, Chief, Topical Division, USAF, AFOlN 2A2 dtd 24 Nov 1952 with enclosures thereto Encl: (1) Copy of enclosure 7 of reference (a) l. Reference (a) directed the interpretation of movies of unidentified objects taken in Utah, 1952. Included among the enclosures are approxima.tely 30 feet of pro cessed 16mm. color motion picture film and a list of ques tions for guidance in determining the type of analysis desired. This progress report presents the procedures a.nd methods designed to answer some of the questions con tained 1n enclosure 7 and the results obtained as of this date by the Photogrammetry Division, Evaluation Department of this Center. 2. Tests and Procedure. The film exposed in Utah is in very poor condition; dry, brittle and with a tendency to break. After initial viewing, duplication of the film was performed in order to preserve the one originally re ceived. This conswned approximately two weeks. In the duplication process, some color correction was made to permit better viewing of the objects. For convenience in interpretation, the film was divided into three parts, each part being considered an entity. Part I consisted of the footage taken at f8; part II, the footage taken DOWNGRADED AT 8 YEAR 'IN't'rnR'V: DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YE'aiJ. • DOD DIR 6200.10 UNCLASSIFIED

Page 130born-digital extraction

11.NCLAS.SIFIED DEC 5 195 ~ at fl6 with a panning motion; and Part III, the footage at fl6 during which the camera was held steady. Three definite groups of lights were observed throughout the film and plots were recorded as follows: Control ~ Par1B I and II Holding to one group Parts I and II Holding to one light and direction of another Parts I and II Arbitrary 1/2 inch correction per frame for panning Part III Holding to frame outline Parts I and II None. Every tenth frame to show changes in two apparent formations. In addition to the above plots; blowups of exposures on opaque and transparent materials were made for stereoscopic study, assignment of magnitudes of light intensities were made frame by frame, and preliminary studies of colored lights conducted. 3. Comments. From the above plots and studies, the following comments keyed to the list of questions contained in enclosure l are: 1. It appears to be a light source rather than reflected light. . 2. No indication of kind of objects. No bird known to be sufficiently actinic. Could not have been caused by air crart or balloons. 3. Comments held in abeyance until further stereoscopic study. 4. Objects have same apparent shape, color,and general motion. Relative size is still under study. 5. Images are circular in shall) and bluish-white in color. 6. Comments in abeyance. 7. Comments in abeyance. 8. Acelleration is evident. 9. Velocity was computed to be 3780 mph for a shift of 1mm per frame if the .object is five miles from the observer. Do~gftfs,?1EA:,DT Ar. YRAR lN"f'ERV _AJ~ • n~ D FTER 12 YEARS. ' ~v~ IR 6200.10 -2- ..,.. ..,. , UNCLASSIFlED I DECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007

Page 131born-digital extraction

~UNCLAS. SIFIEO DEC 5 1952 From 34 measurements taken from Part III of the film, the maximum and minimum per frame were 0.2889 and 0.0667mm respectively with a mean shift of 0.1729mm. On this basis the mean velocity is 653.5 mph. Differences in mean vel ocities due to assumption of variance in distance from the observer may be determined by x/5 times 653.5. lOa. There is no recurring pattern in the relative position of the objects in formation. It appears, however, as if the shift in relative positions were regular and that the original formation would be recovered if the continuing action had been recorded. This should be substantiated or' refuted upon completion of the stereoscopic study. b. Comments held in abeyance c. Comments held in abeyance d. Comments held in abeyance e. Yes f . Comments held in abeyance g. Certain objects disappear while still well within the field of view. 4. Discussion. There are many theories and conditions concerning the images photographed ~hich can be explained as natural phenomena. In the analysis conducted, no attempt is made to explain the phenomena nor are the comments tem pered by knowledge of present day science (although its influence was felt). Comments are as seen, as analyzed, and as computed; and as such, are partly at variance with the natural phenomena theories. a. Light Source. The opinion that these images are light sources is based on the time they can be viewed continuously on the film, approximately 90 seconds, and on the a.Dgle through which they were photographed, approx imately 60 degrees. It is felt that if these images were reflected light, blinking would occur during a period of 90 seconds while passing through an angle of 60 degrees when photographed at the rate of 16 frames per second. Although this premise would permit aircraft and balloons to be the source, they are ruled out because of the velocity determination. If aircraft is assumed to be close enough to permit velocities of present aircraft, they would be close enough for positive identification. If they are too far away for positive identification, then the velocity is too great for any aircraft as we know them. b. Color. Colors were noted as shades of red, green, • blue .and- lu h-white. It appears however, that except for D01NGRADED A.T R Yl"A ECLAssrFJJi:.P A.l"1'ER n IN>rEnv Arr~; -3- (;...._ DOl) DLR 6200. 12 YEA.RS . .UNCLASSIFIED U) ·N~, - DECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007

Page 132born-digital extraction

DEC 5 1952 UNCLASSIFIED the bluish-white, the colors noted are due to color aber rations in the lens and to processing defects, and are not of the objects themselves which can be observed throughout the entire or major portion of the film. It should be pointed out at this point that unless an image appeared in at least five successive frames, it was regarded as a pro cessing defect. This process of elimination left only 11 images analyzed as the objects. c. Velocity. In the determination of the velocity of the objects, two assumptions were made; (a) the camera was held steady during Part III of the fim, and (b) the objects were movi~ perpendicular to theoptical axis. It is obvious that (bJ 1s a fallacy; however, this assumption will give the minimum velocity and that the actual velocity is greater than computed. It may be possible to apply a correction factor after the completion of the stereoscopic study, although thi s is doubtful . With these assumptions and knowing the focal length of the camera, the only unknown in the determination of the velocity is the distance from the observer to the object. This was arbitrarily set at five miles. d. Size, Pattern and Formation. Analysis ha.snot progressed to the stage where the relative sizes of these images can be stated. This applies also to patterns and formations although it appears as if they do occur. It is expected that stereoscopic analysis of the objects will furnish much information on this subject. 5. Reference (b) requested interpretation of additional movies, approximately 10 feet, taken in Montana, 1950. This film is also in poor condition but is suitable for analyzing the movie. One plot wa.s made of the light path in the area where stationary objects are visible to hold to as control. Analysis of this movie is not sufficiently complete to offer any comment other than the pa.th of light is undulating and . is similar to that plotted for the Utah movie. In the ana lysis of the Montana movie it will be most helpful if the following information can be furnished~ a.. Focal length of taking lens. b. Location and actual distance of observer to the center of the tower. c . Dimensions of the tower. d. Lengths of bracing on the tower . e. :Vertical spacing of the bracing or the spacing between bracing measured along the legs of the tower. It is felt that, since this movie was taken in 1950, the DOWNGRADED AT s DECLAsSIFIED A};"'~:nJ.r-.~v A~; -4- DOD DIR 6200.10 EARS. UNCLASSIFIED DECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007

Page 133born-digital extraction

UNCLASSIFIED DEC 5 1952 above requested information has been obtained for other agencies to assist in their interpretation of the uniden tified objects and therefore is available. 6. Interpretation of movies of unidentified flying objects are continuing and upon completion of the analysis a final report will be prepared. Two copie~ of the report and reference {a) will be sent to your office. 7. Conclusions: None. 8. Recommendations: None. DOWNGRADED AT' s 1'. :Z· ~ R IN'rER DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12. YEAiis'\i,~ : DOD DIR 6200.10 • UNCLASSlFlED DECLASS IFIED Authority NN D 923007

Page 134born-digital extraction

• ~S FOR ANALYSIS UNCLASSIFIED The following questions are suggested for guidance regarding the general. type of aialyeis desired: l. Are imagis made by light source or reflection? 2. Any indication of what kind of objects could have caused images? Is there any bird sufficiently actinic to cause images? Could they have been caused by aircraft. or balloons? 3. What. causes impression that. some objects at times appear to become 2 or 3 'Where there -was originally on~ or, conversely, 2 or 3 objects at times appear to merge into one. 4. Do all objects have same characteristics? a. Same apparent shape? b. Same Color? c. Same relative size? d. Same general motion? 5. What are shape(e), color(s) and relative size(s) of objects? 6. To what can the ·n:rade-iri" and '"fade-out·n of the objects be attributed? 7. What type motion is attributable to the objects about their own axis as well as about axis of flight path)? 8. Is there any accellerat ion evident in their motion along light, path axis? 9. Can the motion of the camera (panning and joggling) be allowed for sufficiently to pennit determination of the angular velosity of objects Vihich cross the field of Viewl (Reference particularly the single object which crosses field; photographer state• that camera was held motionless while object crossed field of view.) DOWNGRADED DECLASSIF1;ff & l''Ji\~\~ fNT DOD Ddt'I'ER, 12. y1}VAt.I!,: - . 0200.10 .Rs. UNCLASSIFIED DECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007 I

Page 135born-digital extraction

' . . . " 0NCLA$$JFIED 10. Detemine patterns of night from position plots for each frame, then: a. Is there any recurring pattern in the relative position of the objects? b. Do they maintain same relative positions in formation during · any maneuvers, particularly violent maneuvers? c. Is relative position maintained coincidental with moVE111.ent about their axis? d. If lllldulating motion is present among a number of objects which are maintaining a semblance of fomation, db those objects undulate in phase? Ditto for tumbling motion? e. Is there any indication of abrupt changes in direction of flight path through fairly large angles (e.g. 90 degrees or more during interval of 2 or 3 frames)? f. Do any objects appear to rsa1n.· •~ lilt tM ma t1Jlt& • that others move about? g. Can all objects be accounted for at all times or do sane literally disappear while still well wi.thin field of view? DOWNGRADED AT 8 n,An Th""TERV A1'.153 . DECLASSIFIED Af."TER 12 :YEARS. • ' DOD DIR 6200.10 UNCLASSIFIED

Page 136born-digital extraction

•·. ~1ilLALYSIS OF 16 i!U . MOTI ON PICTURE PHOTOORAPHY ill"' tnUDENTIFIElJ .AERIAL OBJECTS. IlilTRODITCTIOi1 The motion picture was examined both by normal and slow motion projection, and by low nower microscope. At the start it was found that the images are much too small to show any detail in the objects; the only effect visible on t he film by microscopic examination is a collection of small white spots. They are freouently elongated in the direction of motion with respect to the camera position, but no other significant sha;oe features can be seen. A :Bell & Rowell Hodel D-1-B projector was used to examine the motion of the objects. This nrojector permits the operator to reverse the motion during motor driven projection, or to examine any length of film frame-by-frame, by means of a band crank and frame counter. It was found that the objects are te::i in number, in every one but the last of the motion sequences photograpnect . Occasionally some of these objects moved out of the camera's field of view momentarily. A list of questions, accompanying the reouest for this evaluation, are answered below. 1 . It cannot be stated definitely whether the objects are seen by reflected sunlit;ht or because they are self- powered light sources. However, it can be de duced that, if they are light-reflectiug only, they are decidedly non-spherical in shape. During part of their flight paths they shine brightly, while at other times they .are so nim as almost to escape detection. Furthermore, those objects which are following similar courses show similar brightness fluctuations, which could be caused by their taking similar flight attitudes. 2. It is believed to be reasonably certain that the reflection brightness of these objects exceeds that of any natural diffusing type of reflecting object, such as "'hite birds against the sky. Also, there is no knm"ll bira. that could emit such a radiation as would be required to produce the observed brightness. ~ither a large metallic surface of nearly flat shape, or a self-luminous source, is thought to be responsible. This statement, and the deduction of a non-suheri cal shaue, combine to rule out large translucent spherical balloons, but not bright aluminum-surfaced aircraft . 3. Slow motion studies of the objects disclose tha.t, in several instances, two objects on a nearly uarallel course pass very close to each other, producing the blending effect . However, in each instance the two separ2.te objects reanpear after a moment. 4. and 5. As stated above , the only detail that can be seen is the small bright spot on the blue film, so no object sba.pe can be determined. However, the maximum brightness of all the different spots appears to be the same, when they do become bright. The color at maximum brightness appears to be a clear white . At reduced brigntness the spots remain essentially a neutrcl or grayish DECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007

Page 137born-digital extraction

white; no strong colors are notea. As to similar motion, a definite grouping of objects is noticeable. The first two sequences, taken with the slcy as a light blue , show what probably are two groups of three objects each, and two groups of two each. The final sequence, against the dark blue slcy, shows four pairs of objects, with the fifth pair having drifted upwards , out of the camera' s field of view. 6. If the objects are reflecting, the 11 fade-in 11 and fad.e-out 11 are caused by changes in attitude of decidedly non-spherical objects, as in .Answer 1 above. On the other hand, if they are light sources, the variation could be associated with their maneuvering activity. 7. and 8 . As explained in the o'Oening paragraph, the objects are only small bright s-oots on the film. When they dim sufficiently, they become invis ible ; no dark spots can be identified with these objects. The only visible motion in any single frame is with respect to the camera's field of view. Slow motion examination of successive frames suggests a general flight pattern of sweeping skew curves in space. This concept of object motions -produces no sharp breaks in their apparent flight paths , and also makes it practically impossible to detect rapid accelerations or decelerations along these patns. 9. In the seouences during which the camera \\'as held motionless , to record the angular velocity of a single object, it is possible to measure this velocity. Three such passes can be seen. Tae first was incomplete, picking up the object near the center of the frame . The second and. third passes were complete, from one ec..ge of the field of view to the other. J?i;..";tll'e I shov,s the actual tracings of the object from frame to frame for both Passes No. 2 and No. 3. The distance from lens to screen ~,as 100 inches. The focal length of the projection lens \.,as 2 inches. The enlargement of Figure I over the actual negative size is therefore 50 times. Camera and pro jector errors, plus small band- held camera motions , probably account for the deviations from a straignt line path. The average calculated angular velocity for both paths is about 2.1 degrees per second. Detailed computations are given in Append.ix I. 10a. A slow motion viewing, plus single frame position plots, suggest that the objects are maneuvering in definite formations. However, successive identical positions are not indicated when position plots from any t~o frames in a sequence are superimposed. For instance, the first sequence of movement lasts 160 frames or 10 seconds. During the first seven seconds, clear plots for all 10 objects can be made. These plots were made at half second intervals or 8 frames apart. 10b. Figure II represents a possible set of flight paths for this interval, derived as explained in Appendix II. It should be remembered that Figure II very likely contains some indeterminate and non-constant camera motion, botn horizontal and vertical, caused by tracking the formations . This means th?.t the directions and curvatures as sho1:-m may be a9oreciably different from ,,·bat a --stationary camera would have recorded. However , Figure II does help visualize 2 DECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007

Page 138born-digital extraction

... . .. .A • the type of motion shown by the objects, moving from right to left, or generally from east to west ~s the ce.mera was situated. This agrees with Figure I, show ing the single object reversing course from left to right 1 or west to east. 10c and d. The relative positions of these objects in the first sequence follow a definite formation plan of either three pairs, a trio, and a single, or uerhaps five pairs (if one of the trio and the si le are actually a nearby pair). It ap!)Ek'U'S that the objects tend to remain in -oosition for curved uath maneuvering. A possible shift in formation aunears at the start of the trio paths. otherwise, the objects definitely anpear to undulate in -obase in this secuence; as in the other seouences also. lOe and f. Several repeated slow motion viev.riri~·s of the entire film do not indicate clearly any abrupt chP..nges in flight nath of any part of the formation. At times the camera am:>ears to lag in followin{r the entire grou;p 1 and some of the ten objects then move outside the field of view momentarily. Whether or not a particular object remains motionless for a moment deuends uuon the rela.tionship of group movement to camera movement. 10g. As exo12ined in ParafTa-;:>h lOf, sometimes objects may move out of the field of view. In a few instances, n0Fcver 1 certain objects may change in brightness considerably I and uractically appear or disanpear ,rell within tne field of view. In the second seouence, which lasts about 14 St::Conds, the lower two pairs in Figure II flare up suddenly ne& r the center of the field of view, being invisible cl moment before. As they fl<.Xe uo, they appe to curve more rapidly to the left and. u:p,.\iards than the center trio. Reversing this seauence in slow motion shm·1 s thc.t t.nese four oojects were faintly visible just before they disanoeared at about the same position. tabulation of flight sequences and durations is listed in .A_?pendix III. COllCIBSICJllJS 1. Subject motion picture film apparently recora.s the motions of ten un known aerial objects, all alike in observed characteristics of movement and size. 2. The exact nature of these objects cc.nnot be determined, because they are visible only as small spots of light. It can be deduced, however, that they are either non-s _ Jherical in shape and similc1__r to bright mete.l in reflectance, or else variably self-luminous by some means. 3. There is apparently a coordination of movement to some extent among these objects. They seem to move in formations \·'hich c:-re probably three-dimen sional in arrangement. The l ar gest anoue.r size of the entire group is on the order of 6 to 8 de~rees of arc. 4. The movements of these objects sug,_o-est flight paths consist~· of skew curves in space. In one instance a single object changed course ana. followed a nearly straight line path with reasonable uniformi t--,1 of motion t an a.ngu.lar velocity of about 2.1 dee,;rees. During this straight line flight it remained reasonably uniform in brightness. 3 DECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007

Page 139born-digital extraction

... , ... 5. It would nrobably be extremely difficult to imitate this nhotograpey for fraudulent purposes . 4

Page 140born-digital extraction

Appendix I Calculation of Angular Velocity of Single Aerial Object: Pass o. 2: 48 spot positions c..re plotted, representing an elapsed time interval of 47 frames. At 16 frames per second, this gives : 3. 0 seconds elapsed time The measure distance on the screen is 15.1 inches. Ta.is gives approximately 15 .1 or 5.0 inches per second for image velocity on the screen. ~ . Pass Ho . 44 spot nositions are plotted, for 43 frames of elapsed time. This time is 2.7 seconds. The distance travelled is 15.7 inches. This gives 15. t_ 5.8 inches -oer second '°l - I': . on the screen. Average of these 2 values is 5.4 inches per second; with an es - timated prec4sion of ±15 per cent. Conversion to Angular Velocity: Distance from projector lens to screen= 100 inches Focal length of projector lens= 2 inches EnJ.areement of film on screen= 50 times Image velocity on film=~= ,11 inches per second Focal length of camera taking lens= 3 inches It is adequately precise to divide the in:age velocity by the focal length to get the angular velocity in radians per second, then to convert to degrees. 1•re ba.ve: Angular velocity= .11 x 57 .3 = 2. 1 degrees per second 3 The ~recision of this value is also conservatively set at ±151 or ±0.3 degrees per second.

Page 141born-digital extraction

.. . • Appendix II Plotting e Set of Flight Pats from Single rame Position Plots, with no Reference Points 1. In a case liKe this, it would be highly desirable if t e ovement of these objects could be recoro.ed with a stationary motion picture camera. Position plots could be s~r· 2ose by observing proper registery of frame edges to in dicate the speed an direction of object flight paths . 2. However , it apparently was necessary in this case to follow the form ation of objec~s , to keep them all in view. Therefore no position guide for registering the position plots is available , since no fixed points appear in the sky. Other ~rinciules must be used instead. 3. It is stated that the general drift of the entire formation was to the west . A later secuence shows a siDFle object , hich bad reversed course , moving from left to right in the camera 1 svi.ew . It can therefore be suouosed that ulotted paths should show a drift from right to left . 4. This is one guide to be used . Another is that uosition ulots should be superimposed ~~thout any rotation , since the frames were ulotted without rotation. This assumes that the camera was not rotted. ; but merely moved in combined horizontal and vertical motions. 5. Another general guide is that most of the objects should appe(" r to move in smooth, cont·nuous paths . Several plots, at least 4, snould be superimoosed on a viewing table, and should be shifted until all or nearly all paths are smooth and show reaso:nabJ..i uniform motion . This co _ound plot can be transferred to a single sheet, anu further plots can be added in the same manner. 6. Figure II was prepa.red in just this ,,:ay, using the same 50 diameter en largement as in Figure I . It will be noted that the final positions of two objects in the central trio are missing . They became so faint that they were lost; no further plotting of this sequence was tried. DECLASSIFI ED Authority NND 923007

Page 142born-digital extraction

.... Appendix I II Sequence Frame Number Number of Approx time of Sky Color Number Start Finish Frames Seq. in Seconds 1 0 160 160 10 Light 2 161 386 225 14 Light 3 387 700 313 19 1/2 Dark 4 700 970 270 17 Dark 5 970 1010 4o 2 1/2 Dark 6 1010 1080 70 4 1/2 Dark 7 1080 114o 60 4 Dark DECLASS IFIED Authority NND 923007

Page 143born-digital extraction

- - - --+-- - --- - -- ... - ---- - _ ..... - --- - --- -+- -- 7 •• ......... ....... - ..... ..,.__ - .,..- u· : i ?1

Page 144vision OCR

FIGURE I   Plot of single object, stationary camera

Page 145born-digital extraction

(111, I ' ' . . , I I 'I. ,' ' I ' ( f MAJOR /JONAUJ £. KEYHOE, U.S. MAIUNE CORPS.RET.,IN A TELEGRAM SENT TO 8RIGAOIER GENERAL SORY SMITH MOTO SECRETARY OF THEAIRf'"ORCE HAROLD E. TALBOTT, TOLD THIS STORY1 ON .IULYI. /95#, NAVY WARRANT OFFICER IJ£1./IEIITC. NUHOU$£ WAS EN ROUTE TO PORTL NO, 0 ~ • AT 11!!0 A;_ ., A POINT ON HIGH - WAY 30, SEVEN MILES NORTH OF rREIIONTON, UTAH. OENLY, He SAW A GROUP CK' ROUNO, EXTREMELY BRIGHT OBJECTS MOVING WEST AT A VERY HIGH SPEED.. _ - •As A NAVAL AVIATION PHOTOGRAPHER,NEWHOUSE "'NEAR TI4E EN0 1 ONE OF THE OBJECT~ REVERSED ITS COURSE l<NEW THEY WERE NOT AIRCRAFT. USING A BELL AND LEFT THE FORMATION ... '' ANI'> HOWEU AUTO MASTER MOVIE CAMERA WITH A .;;;..;;~.;...,;,.;.;.;...:..;:;.:.;;;.;:.;.;..;,.;.:.;,;.;;;__..,__________, THREE INCH TELEFOTO LENS, HE SHOT ABOUT 40 FEET OF FILM...'' c:::::' c:? "THE LABORATORIES CAME TO THESE "THE PICTURES WERE STUDIED FOR IIONTH$ BY THE CONCLUSIONS: AIR FORCE PHOTO- RECONNAISSANCE LABORA rDRY AT OAYTON,P.NO LATER .9Y THE NAYY PH0i0 - IN7ERPll£TAT/ON CENTER AT WASHINGTON:" 6. THE SIGHTING COULD OT BE EXPLAINED BY ANY CONVENTIONAL ANSWER ..:' • •

Page 146born-digital extraction

. . "THE AIR FOftCE HAD-PLANH£0 TOSHO" IS Fl LIii TO TH!'. PIIE86 AND TO MAK£ A 8TA~IIENT TO TH£ PV/IUC. THIS STATEMENT,'tlQ.IU)Al!)FAL THE OFFICIAL ANALYSIS-·" PREPARE FOR A PRESS $HOWIN8 AND PU8l/C STATEMENT CON CERNING THE UTAH PICTURES/ MAJOR K£YH0£, WHO HAO BEEN fJIV£N THE A1Rf'ORC£0ATA ON THE UTAH PICTURES BEFORE "WHE TH£ COMIIIIEO AIR FORCE ANO NAVY ANAl.YSIS SHOW!:O TMAT tN£ AUCEltS CO&M.0 IIOT et ANY IXJIIIIEN TIONAI. OIi.iS/i'S. AUt fORCEOfFICIALS IJl8A8REE/J AJ TO WHAT SttOUUl IE TOI./J THE PUBLIC. THE PLAN FOR A PUBLIC DISCLOSURE WAS THEN K/1.I.E/J ..... THERE WILL BE NO PRESS ----- - SHOW/I#, CANCEi. PLANS... IN A llltESS IIEL£ASE, DAt'ED SEPT. 2t, lte:J, 4 P..... HENAY HOLT ANO COMPANY ANNOUNCED .•• THE .OFFICIALS WHO FAVOREO A PU8UC STATE MENT HAO IEEN OVERRULED, THEN DECIDED TO INC/.U/)£ THIS INFORMATION IN HIS BOOK, * ..F/.YIN8 SAUCERS FROM OUTER SPACE"... THE CAT WAS OUT OF THE BAG. IN IMMEDIATE RETALIATION,THE OFFICE OF AIR FORCE INFORMATION ISSUED A PRESS RELEASE ON SEPT. 29, 1953 ... THE TIIEMOTON PICTURES WERE RETURNED TO WARRANT OFFICER NEWHOUSE. THEY WERE OF NO IMPORTANCE.' ntE A/II FORfJE HA$ SECRET I/OT/ON PICTVllES OF Fl.YINtl SAV(JERS WHICH PROVE THn ARE INTER PLANETARY CRAFT, MAJOR DONALD E. KEYHOE, A RETIRED Ml\lUNE CORPS OfflCER...DECLAREO TODAY.HIS CLAIM ,HE SAl~,IS /IACKEIJ BY OFFICIAL A/II FOIi&,( POCUMENi"8 CONTAINED IN HIS FORTHCOMING BOOK ••• TH/$ WAS TltE IIEA$0N FOR MAJOR THE TELEGRAM WAS DATED KEYHOE'S TEt.£8RAII. HE SAID! OCT. 2,1953. MAJOR IC!YHOf. .---~~~=~~=""':":=":"!:'~----. WAS NEVER BROUGHT UP OPt SEPT. 29, YOUR OFFICE 'IUCLY FOR DISCIPLINARY ACTION. II/PLIED THAT 1 1118/tEl'ltEGENTED TH£ AIR FORCE ANALYSIS OF THE UTAH WASN'T THE OTAH. FI.YINIJ SAUCER l'ICTVIIES tN MY FILM RE.TURNED TO SOOK ... IF THIS IS TIIV£, THEN AS A W. 0. NEWHOUSE MEREU' HETIIIED I/ARIN£ CO/IP8 OFFICER, A 'POOR COPY? t SHDULO 8IE: $ 118.IECTF.IJ TO IJl8CI• I PI./NA/fY ACTION...IF MY IJl.A/118 WEREN'T THERE MANY ~ INCORRECT, TH£N I. ftnPECTFULLY COPIES MADE AND SUGGEST THAT••. I BE COll/fT•MAlfTIALEIJ STUDIED? FOR MAKING FALSE STATEMENTS ABOUT THE AIR FORCE ANM.YS/8.* WHERE IS THE ORIGINAL? WHAT NEWSPAPER CHAIN HAS BEEN DENIED A SHOWING WITH THE CLAIM THAT ALL COPIES WERE BURNED UP FROM OVERUSE? ZI DECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007

Page 147born-digital extraction

A r-o (/ o-f lv1o-/-,•orJ p ,'(_, + L(t,. ,e_ IC", IM . 7 - 3 7 l/ 5- - s St 5 -

Page 148vision OCR
```
TREMONTON UTAH
```
Page 149vision OCR
[page intentionally blank]

Page 150vision OCR

End of Tremonton, Utah
case 1377

7/2/52

Page 151born-digital extraction

l.I).-0$1 24-0-257 SfCT I?;'T:,tt n?.Rc,s Rf.f2R1' f SUDJEO'i's (Unolus1fied) Reporting o! Ini'ormtion on Unconventional Airoratt SPECIAL INQ Umt TOt D1rectQr of Special Investiga~iona Headquarters, US.AF ,asbington 25, D. O. SlNOPSISa On 2 July 1952, ctaptain ROBERT E. m:trCAμ", lOOl Ma.eoachueett.s AYenue, Le~o.u,.Jlau...aq.l}_~ett.s 1 reported that he and two ot.ber persons o1,served one unidentified airborne object bet'l1een 0730 and 0740 hours, wr, on 1 Jul.1 l952. No activity or condition developed that acoounta for eighting. DETAILS, At appronmately 2000 hotU"e, 2 Jl.lly 1952, Capte.in ROBERT E. lIB?CAI.1', lOOl M.aesa.chueett• Avenue, Lexington,, Massacbuaette, reported the obs-el' vation o! on., unidentified airborne- ob~et. betl'jeen 0730 and 0740 houre on l July 1952 tc Special Agent USLIE S. HUBBSU>. On ) July 19"52, Captain METCALF was interviewed by Special Agent JULIUS B• .POPPltlGA, and tu.rm.shed the foll.<miag Wormation: a. Description ot objects O.ne (1) milky ,white object, shaped like an ne1ongated oval" bu:t, ittatt'E>r than a cigar", about 100 feet in length or slightly larger than a f olll'-engine &irline-r, having indistinct outlines at the rear r~sembling either a vary short emaust or a blurr~d tail section, with a narrow ridge along the top side, but t'lithout ~ings o~ any clear aet"od,Jnamic features, Object p?'od.uced no sound, and left ~ no vapor trail ox- exhaust other than described above. Speed was estimated ,,,..- -~ to be approxima.te1.y that or jet aircraft, bu,t observer believed the object \ "hung" in mid-air for a few aeconds on two occasions and then proceedtd. 'ADED' AT 3 YP..AR iNtF.l\~ - ONlT ASSU'lED AFTER 12 ~ ~ • • DOD. DIR 6200.lQ DECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007

Page 152born-digital extraction

' . D,OWNGMA1lED AT 3 YJt~<\R J.N:f'~Y· DECLASS]}'I~D AFTER 12 YEAT~ bOD um 5200 .1.0

Page 153born-digital extraction

ll),.,O 1 24-o.:l57 ........ 3 Jul.f 1952, STlNfl nn4 00.SH 'ltcre aeparatol_y intvnettod by Spooial ,igent JUUUS o. roP.?lNGA. Tim.0 1 locot1on_, :!ICthod ot eigbtlna, wea.tbff eondiUona, db-eotion ot flight, and dli~pellranee JR)Jte iden't1cel t.o that, ~rt.Gd b,- W!rCAl.P. Several dllterencea ~m be noted, howcwor, r•lo.t.ive w tho desaript..ton or ~hfJ object. j. S'l'lN.&n de,croibed tho obJeet at1 1"0t.1embliile a omall bl.imp, hav1ng & blunt. trontt, cigar-eh&~, Md a:ledl&l" to an "aiJlplAn• m.tbout winge or tail nasombl.r." STlHm notioed no oxbaust or noise~ and M change~ of alt.1.tutle or coarae. Lm,t.b ot the object•• oatiml:&ted u two tQ three hlindrod fNt. 1 and no ta.it teAt.uroo, mnti, or ~O f~tllf.W of an, kind,._.. obtened, fitI.NEll aatimted the altitude of th• object to be about 20,ooo teGt.. Be doaor1bod itu rornard aotion to be irregular, til'at ba~ imrrlrltl, 4n4 then p;rt>aNdif.la o.t "about th• apeod of a.~?." k. OOSH advieed that ml ,could not eat:iutlt.e the BUO or the object., but deeoribed it ae o,al--ahat>$4 1 and bel10YOd that it wu tr»ile4 b1 t,'IJO dlft-1.not ft}>Or tr.-.ile I ojmilar to that uaociated :dt.h <»n Yentiooal &ircr•tt o.t Yff-1 greut oltitUdf.lS • OOSH not1old no Tarl.at.ion 1n the apoed, eJ.tituwa. or lin ot tllght., and ut.ooted 'the apee(I to be about 130 tnllea per- ho\11" and the altitude t.o bo ''OYOl' 30;000 .r--.. a &:)SH not.iced no noi••. tUld stated that he collld di.atinsnah no ld.ng or ta.U eurtaees. lie added tho.t. 'ltbUe both STUUU a.nCS UEl'CAlJl used &WI glaas.. whil• obeentng tha obJeate, he did not.. Md that. bis vision was .tmpaiNd b7 the brightneoa or t.h& •kf and the auu. l. ldentitying 1ntom-1t.ion on ~lt and lllSJb 11 Sgt. STIWll ia ,0 ,eai-a <>f o.ge, and nae eorved 19 ,oara with the l;l'OWld forces and 4 yecu,s "'1th the Ail' Force. Ile lae nO'Nl' been on an air crew, and ol.Aima m apociel MO"lllodge pertaining t,o iu.raratt. 1 but adTisi!kl that he ?iaa ~ cbeer\'ed en airplane 1n £light, nt. ~ anglo > Naemblins the object. deaerJ.bod, and.,., li.itsre ot no known obJoct :which aigbt Q<:Count. tor it. s~ oosn 1• ,2 :,eara of age, and hae sel"Ved 117-.rs with the Au Fora., ~ in 11,speot.ion nnd ittvest~ation work. OOSlt adrined he ~t'J dona considerable reading in NlAt!Qn to un.conTentional a.b'cratt• but eouJ.d not a.QcOQnt tor the ohJeat ctesor:1bcd ill an, ua,. •• Thia sif)lttng appt>llt'a to bo o veritioation a.tad on$ o.nd the eue u eigl\ting Obscn'ed by ~rJIN • N!WON 'bctlfOon O'!Jl and 0734 flour• wr on l Jul.J' 19'2 arid re~ in lat Ui:ttrict. 051 tUe 44....Q..2'6 on 3 Jul¥ 19'2. • DOWNGRADED AT 3 y ,gAR ,JN}'~-,Y~• ' DECLASSIFIED AFTER lll Y"EJ\l-1S. non· DIR 6200.1.U DECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007

Page 154born-digital extraction

• FOR OFFICIAL U S f O - M. T 'I."' - . --~ ·- . ,_....~.: ........... -..:.. ..... ~, A01QN: Ho further action is contemplated by Wa Viatr1ct Offj,Ce. Two (2) eopiee of thils report will " !Ol'YW"ded to the Coms.nding General, Air M.ntc·l.oul ~d• Attention, UC:W • ROBEhT ., • UN Lt Colonel, JF D1 st.Pict; Colriml.nder cc, 00 1 A~C (du.p) ~ OFFIEIAL USE OW • 4

Page 155born-digital extraction

{ . 22. 23. 24. Bef'erenco CIRVIS ~port 030ull2Z J1.Lcy' submitted by Marcil Fllght Service Oentor. ~ An oxtremo4" b:r.i,8ht object was oboorwd for poriod or evoi-Dl. ~a at 194SJ> on 2 ~ July 1952. 11:~ observer plotted objoct 11it.h n F9tractor and estin:ated it to be 34 to , 38 do3roas alx>vo the. horizon nt ·on aDJlo of 175 degrees. ' Cbjcct broke up into 6 or 8 piocen ,mich ep];>earcd to descond to-ward tho IJX'()und at a high ra.to or q,aod. • 25. oather unlalown. • 26. itnoss1 Ur. Subl.otte, ~l" Lt>s Angeles Police Do~. nidonco ~otu b924 J4ncoln Awnue., lljghland Park, Call.fornia. Telephone not given. • 1 •l ..... :-J 27. Air trllffic information nnt given. I 28. Commonts of PrEl~ orticar: a. Tho sigh'Ung reports 1:liltcd abow are unaonti.nradJ i.ricoq,loto 1 end, in eone oases, orronooua~ aubmitted. lumawr, in tho interost or maintninin3 cO!ltirm.ity of no,, of sighting reports throueb the maey concarncd agonc:ios 1 it no considored d.osi.reable to sulxlit ell for informo.tion pui:poses. fhe evident laol~ of value of ih~l.oto 1•8PQ11;a hna boon brought to tbo attention of CM and Flight Sorv1ca units and, w:tthin tho Flicht Servi.cs otructure 1 lU)eci.81 trainine; progrs:lS havo boan insti tuted Gicb hould preclude future r 1e_v errors. UNCLASSiflED DECLASSIFIED Aulhority NND 923007

Page 156born-digital extraction

J c_,. I ::r-c c-- XI C C. rn - ,.. .... c:-; rr . C)l CJ) '- - fTI c.., 0 ..... DECLASSIFIED Aul.horny NND 923007

DISCLOSURE / FILE

Newhouse Films Formation Over Tremonton, 1952

Newhouse Films Formation Over Tremonton, 1952

Brief

Metadata

Key points

Verbatim

Most interesting

Cross-references

Cited in

Related research

Related topics

Common questions

Newhouse Films Formation Over Tremonton, 1952

Newhouse Films Formation Over Tremonton, 1952

Newhouse Films Formation Over Tremonton, 1952

Brief

Metadata

Key points

Verbatim

Most interesting

Cross-references

Cited in

Related research

Related topics

Common questions

Newhouse Films Formation Over Tremonton, 1952