PROJECT BLUE BOOK

4 -
1. DATE ·TIME GROUP 2. LOCATION
4irh 2 Mald, Mdand:
3. SOURCE 10. CONCLUSION .
CMn LIT
4. NUMBER OF OBJECTS G ,yas nob vith padabs. to souust ade TOr hoto an lyss.
MLAA 7
5. LENGTH OF O3SERVATION 11. SRIEF SUMMARY AND ANALYSIS
Hot Stated Photos ahdital :d0 latbar royuisilg ovadiution.
6. TYPE OF OBSERVATION 6. TYPE OF OBSERVATION 24
Gutund-Visunl Gnund-Visunl
7. COURSE
3/A
. PHOTOS 3. PHOTOS
No
9. PHYSICAL PHYSICAL EVIDENCE VIDENCE
D Yes D Yes
LNo LNo
FORM
FTD SEP 63 0-329 (TDE) Previous editions of thls form may be used.
1
1

MATERIAL FURNISHED: is
1 Chats
REMARKS/ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
.
RECEIPT FOR PHOTOGRAPHIC WORK K
I certify that I have recelved_ originals, negatives and__ 1 __prints, all to be
.
uSed In the SerVICe of the UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT ONLY.
TD-D4c WORK ORDER NO.
NAME RANK DATE 3
FTD JULU 153 FORM This formastumersedes ATIC Form 153, Apr 59, which is obsolete.

.
.

I
2 4March 7962
15ffone date f
telt
(t14)
12 Moon Crescent 12 Hoor Crescext
K Mosherough, Shffisd Mosherough, Shffised
. Englal Englad
.
.
I

SheffieLD, ENgLAND 4 Mar62
CASE NCLUDES
oNe () 4'3"×7" photo \fr$
oNe(1) negATIVE
DP7559 1/22/75.
.

probably
and some sun and ice particl cinted out.
" In the Sheffield area smoke and nerally,
cloud formations at various altitudes and ried. Pockets
of warm ai rising from city woul nperature
inversions these conditions, reflected efracted light
can cause peculiar effects in that this
attracted attr the attention of of and his friends and that the photo- and his friends a t the photo-
graph kind. It is also a possibility that the
photo flvin objects is the result imperfect
expos To sum up, the photograph ca
terms and does not mean that so-called unidentified mus t
have been over Sheffield at
This was purported the explanations of the Air Ministry,
which, if interest subsists, undoubtedly could give you their views
in this matter.
51

in any Ic own planet.
3. In regard 2of your letter. Sightings from close
range, such as you mentioned, are i interesting and undoubtedly the
witness or v witness or witnesses are reporting what they believe has happened. has happened.
Many reports of close Many reports of close range sightings are in the AF files and the
Air Force cannot explain explain these reports. Again, these are Again, these are reports reports
of what of what people people thought they saw. they saw. They opinions and inter-
pretations of pretations the observers. observers.
a. As to whether is a CLOSE RANGE sighting or not
- is questionable. There are many many cases of Star/Planet observa-
tions reported as close renge sightings. This point is made clear
in the case. This case is undoubtedly considered a
close range sighting since he reported the object as attacking his
# 2
pr2f
-

4. Considering the "common characteristics" of cases which are
unidentified and thus assuming qualitive proof of the reality of
an un.cnown flying object, would certainly not result in a con-
clusion of validity or reliability. Many Many of these "common char- of these "common char-
acteristics" of the so called flying saucers saucers are present in cases
with firm evaluations of aircraft, ba lloons ane Planets.
5. No positive evaluation of
be made without the negative. the negative.
a. It is possible that the i It is possible that the images are real, images are real, however, the however, the spots spots
on the print the print are similar tothose are similar tothose on other prints on other prints which have been
attributed to either flaws in the negative, a flaw in the film
itself, emulsion spots on the negative or poor photo processing.
2

(4) Photographic experts viewed the negatives and
find no fault or deception. could
Here again they offer no explanation
for these images merely stating that there is no fault or
with the negative. How photographic tampering
one or more the 'experts" would fail tocffer
possible causes of images on this print is not
understandable, unless ourse their statements
out of context, are being quoted
possible/probable causes being omitted
and stating or negative showed no indication
of tampering".
6. We o. 2 appreciate appreciate your your opinions opinions and
States States Air Force Air your interest in the United interest in the United
Force position position regarding unidentified unidentified flying objects. flying objects.
We are returning your photograph your graph and three duplicate thre duplicate copies.
copies.
Sincerely,
.
a
T
3

landed on it O without little creatures around it. Here I make
Lghting reports the super-
stitious tales an agree-
ment in details c re9, the tilting
and fluttering turn, the radia-
rught, the hirin sound when taking
off from the ground, nid smell landed saucer and even
Peonle oountnieg
information about their appes e and
behavior". compares the characteristics and classifies his is
precisely what I have done in the past and arrived Ht my concluaions
by logical induction. But dr Menzel as well the Air Force do not
find any strikin eements ss to characteristics Menzel comments
on the"earying shapes". ihile he repeatedly shows how the atmosphere
distorts the shape of a common object, wnich leads to misinterpreta-
tions, it stands to reason that tne same kind of distortions may
A
four Lndia e liti ga,

14, was his home, 1 Moor Crescent,
Losusough, eld, England, wi
take a snapshot with dinary box The boys
louked at the sky and saw five objects ; raised his
camera and snapped. Later 'when the lm was developed, everybody
co
from a list Lghtings howed the common chars 'acteristics of
proof ol the reality unknown
flying object. could be
the world authority on UFOs
for what they may be worth and if you see fit to make any
comments I should be very huppy to receiy ve then. 0
Sincerily
.

No Case (Information Only) 4 March 1962
Sheffield, England
LYIN_SAUCER REVIEL-Mar-April 1963......
ENoLawEShefrield has baen the scene of nu-
merois reports in 1962-63. On Man 4 1962,
Aiex Burrch, 14, photographed five objects
in the sky about 50o-J0o0' up. They were
stationaly, never changed position, and
then disappeared. With him at the time
were David Brownlow, 1, and l6-year-old
Stuart Dixon. Under questioning the three
boys' stories showed no discrepancies.
The Air Ministry opined that these
neffects" were the result of atmos phetic
conditions. Temperature Inversions caused
the reflection and bending the bending of hgnc to pro- of light to pro-
duce the peculiar effects. duce the peculiar effects. The The NoV.-Dec. Nov.-Dec.
editicn of Flying Saucer carried edition of Flying Saucer carried anothor
I picture taken in the Sheffield area. Both
pictures have been under study by the Bri-
tish Air Ministry. tish Air Ministry.
Note: The first information as to information as to
. Alex Burch does not tally in all particu-
lars with the latest lars with the latest reports-All reports-All in in Fly-
ing Saucer Review. ing Saucer Review.