PROJECT BLUE BOOK

PROJECT 10073 RECORD CARD
I. DATE .LOCATION 12. CONCLUSIONS
o Was Balloon
7 November 1957 Harlingen AFB, Texas 0 Probably Belleon
3. DATE-TIME GROUP 4. TYPE OF OBSERVATION Possibly Bolloon
Local Ground-Visual xa Ground-Radar Was Aircraft
0 Probobly Aircraft
GMT 07/1538Z AirVisual Air-Intercept Radar Possibly Aircraft
5. PHOTOS SOURCE 0 Was Astronomical
Yes 0 Probably Astronomical
DNo Military o Possibly Astronomieal
7. LENGTH OF.OBSERVATION B. NUMBER OBJECTS . COURSE xxother Malfunction.
E to N 00 Insufficient Data for Evaluation
2 to 3 minutes Unknown
one then W
0. BRIEF SUMMARY OF SIGHTING 11. COMMENTS
Faint radar target similar to T-29 Obj not substantiated by any other
a/c. Target appeared l0 mi NE going W evidence and was a faint target
to about 14 mi and disappeared l4 mi which appeared whle the operator
NW. Reappeared 10 NW. Reappeared 1 mi SW mi SW going E for going E for was working an a'e in traffic was working an a'e in traffic
10 mi then turned 10 mi then tui N for for i0 mi then 10 mi then pattern. There is a possibility pattern. There is a possibility
turned W turned W and disappeared at 15 mi. at 15 mi. of radar malfunction.
Speed of target est an excoss of l900 target est an excoss of 1900
mph.
ATIC FORM 329 (REV 26 SEP 52) ATIC FORM 329 (REV 26 SEP 52)
,
4
4

.
7/15382
1 Mui
SUBJEcT: Request - Analysis and Comments, Electronic UFO Reports
DATE: 3 Feb 59 COMMENT NR.2
FROM: AFCIN-4E1 AFCIN-4Ela/W. Pickiesimer/jc
TO: AFCIN-4E4
74201/Bldg 828/Rm 241
leven (11)
Reference is made to your request for review and
1.
UFO reports.
Corments follow in order of inclosure numbers.
2. by any other evidence
Inclosure #1: This UFO was not substantiated was working an aircraft in
a. which appeared while the operator of a
and was a faint target Operations Officer indicated a possibility
a traffic pattern. Assistant Wing possible.
radar malfunction.. This office concurs that a radar malfunction was
.
.

NAOK. (C) SCATTERED-2M: (C) SCATTERED-2M:
(2) 7/10 (F) NO RW OR RW OR TSM IN
VICINITY:
C
IN AREA WSSSSSSSSSSSS ONSCORD AT TINE OF INCIDENT (I1) ASSISTANT WING OPER OPER
OPERATIONS OFFICER: POSSIBIIITY EXISTS UNYNONN TARGET WAS DUE TO FADAR TARGET WAS DUE TO RADAR
NCE OF A UFOB NOT CONFIMLEL DUE TO NO OTHER SUBSTANTIATION (IE) NONE
C I LINE 11 CP 3 THRU 7 SHUD FEAD I" UAS ON SCOPE AT TIME
C LINE 1I ZSY-Y GP IS SAME AS 1 ON LINE 13
7 0310Z HOV fJNTHG
-
1.

RJENDN RJEDY S PHO Nov  df 7 41 5707
TE 2 4x22
RJNFKG 55
R 2721587
TO RJEEDN/COMER ADC ENT AFB
RJEDKE/COMDR CADF RICHARDS-GEBAUR AFB at 357
FJEWP/CONDR AIR TECH INTELLIGENCE CENTER WPAFB T18 (
RJEPHA/BIRECTOR INTELLIGENCE HO USAF
ET
UNCLAS FROM OSI3L
UFOB REPORT AS FOLLOUS: () (A) UNDETERMINEL. (B) TARGET SIMILAR (A) UNDETERMINEL. (B) TARGET SIVILAR TO A TO
()N/A GF) NONE (G) HONE (ID) NONE (ID) NONE ()(A) UNNOU
APPEARED ON RADAR SCOPE UHILE OPETATOR NAS APPEARED 'ON RADAR SCOPE WHILE OPETATOR WAS NOPKING T-9 ACFT NER 33L76 WOPKING T-9 ACFT NSR 33476
IN TRAFFIC PATTEFN (B) AZIUTH IN TRAFFIC PATTERN (3) AZIUTH 1 C29 DIGREES 229 DIGREES (C) AZIMUTH (C) AZIMUTH 273 DECPEES 273 DECPEES
(D) TARGET APPEARED TEN MILES MILES
AND DISAPPEANED 14 MILES NOPTHVEST. SOUTH-
WEST GOING BAST FOR T H MILES T THEN TURNED HORTH FOR TEN MILES THEN
4.

UFOB INDEX CARD
ATS8-IFOB-520-57
1. DATE 7Mo-57 2 LOCATION 12. CONCLUSIONS
2-Jan-58. Harlingen AFB, Texcas Was Balloon
000 Probably Balloon
3. DATE-TIME GROUP 4. TYPE OF OBSERVATION Possibly Balloon
07/15382 Now 57 #/Aund-Visual Ground-Radar Was Aircraft
000 Probably Aircraft
AinVisual Air-Intercept Radar Possibly Aircraft
5. PHOTOS SOURCE 0 Was Astronomical
Ys 00 Probably Astronomical
No Military PossiblyAstronomical
7. LENGTH OF OBSERVATION 8. NUMBER OF OBJECTS 9. COURSE db0 Onth aib8tion
#4 Two to three mimutes One See below Unknown
10. BRIEF SUMMARY OF SIGHTING 11. COMMENTS
One faint radar target similar to a-T-29. Concur with Reporting Officer that
Objest appeared in NE going W, then SW, them this aighting was possibly caused by
E then N then W. Object was going estimated radar malfunction.
1900MPH. Object was in aight for two to three
mimates.
AISOP Form 5 (15 Oct 54) 0P. s-9 52095, 10.0 0*. s-(9t $2 05, 10.8
1
&
4

aircraft passing 3 through the area.
e. Inclosure #31
is likely that the radar sighting was due to unidentified aircraft.
d. Inolosure #4: cates
e. Inclosure #5: There are several unusual things about this reported
UFOB sighting. First, the equipment was evidently y under control of maintenance
personnel at the time of sighting. This could mean that the radar equipment was
not in perfect a adjustment, or some sort of t target simlator or other special equipment
was being used in connection with the maintenance operation. (There is no mention
of this in the report, however.) Also, the report gives no indication of any yattempt
to rotate the antenna to new bearing to determine whether the signal originated
f. Inclosure . indicates the
possibility that radar reflections from clouds s or rain storms caused the unexplained
blips. Equipments which operate at S-band usually are more susceptible to weather
phenomena than L-band equipments. It is assumed that the search equipment which
did not pick ,up th was ope ing in the L-band.
g. Inclosure #7: It is difficult to understand how 3600 mph targets
or anomolous pre ion caused the reported radar blips.
h. Inclosure #8: Same sighting aa Inclosure #7.

SECURITY CLASSIFICATION (WI)
DISPOSITION FORM
FILE NO. SUBJECT Request  Analysis and Comments, Electronic
UFO Reports
TO FROM AFCIN-4E4 DATE 15 April 1958 COMMENT NO. 1
AFCIN-4E1
Colonel Hoffman AFCIN-4E4g/Capt Gregory/ko
Ext 6-9216/Bldg. 263
l. Attached are eleven (ll) official UFo reports received from various
Air Force radar units for your review and analysis.
2. These represent only that number which this division has found a
little difficult to evaluate or conclude.
3. It should be pointed out that radar UFO reports have inereased
noticeably the last six (6) months; and it appears that this trend will contimue
in the future.
4. This matter vas discussed with your staff earlier this year, in the
possibility that your office may consider obtaining the services of either
an electronics Uro specialist or consultant. Reference your DF, Coument Nr. 2,
dated 13 Jan 58, copy attached.
Henyhmiley
2 Inels:
1. Folder containing Chief, Air Sciences Division
111 UFO Radar Reports AFCIN-4E4
DD T FEB 50 FORM. 96 REPLACES NME FORM 96.1 OCT 48, WHICH MAY BE USED. 10--84801-3 . &. GOVERNNENT PRINTING OFFICE

SUBJECT: Requsat - Analysis and Comment Electronie Uro Reports
1. Inclosure #9: Since no confirming evidence wes presented, it is
d track.
j. Inclosure #10 Radar reported target not given.
Thus,  possible important clue is missing. The possibility
unidentified aircrart cannot be ruled out completely.
k. Inelosur #11: Thi: reported uFOB possibly could have been one
object or two objeats one time. Both sightings were of such nature as to
indicate unidentified aireraft. High rate of speed was mentioned in the report,
but no attent was made to estimte the speed. The objeet seemed to reverse
direction but so can an aircraft, pecially light aircraft of a
helicopter Suggestion is made that the radar station should have made every
possible identiry the object at the time of sighting.
1 Incl GORDON C. HOFTMAN
Incl Nr. 2 w/a Colonel, USA
Ms.a wya AFCIN-4E1 AFCIN-4E1
1