PROJECT BLUE BOOK

B
PROJECT AMS RECORD
TCOUP 2. OCATION
5 APR 67 6/0755z K15017, 2316, 10
10. CONCLUSION 10. CONCLUSION but
but
UPPIOIENT OUPPIOIENT DATA F T EVALUAPTON DATA F I EVALUAPTON inFarndios! iTrentios!
ML JER OF OSLECTS
deys. Will re-evul .te if received. days. Will re-eval .te if received.
ATION TION 11. . BRIEF SUMMARY AND ANALYSIS BRIEF SUMMARY AND ANALYSIS
. . observation. Date of repore being
Diserepancy Discrepancy in date o in date or
TYPEOF OBSERVATION prepared is prepared is given is 5 March 67 while date of cbservation date or cbservation
is 6 April. Form iéh sent to clarify Form ié4 sent to clarify this and other
details. (See case)
R02
es
x
SICAL EVIDENCE
X
FORH
COA 1.3N9 (TDE) Previoua editicnu of thta form may be ueed.

close directly over her car, and yet said there was no sound at all.
Unless one is willing to call this an absolute hallucination. and
that there was no physical outfit present whatever, the e"anation
"aircraft" simply won't hold up.
This case is sufficiently interesting for me to interviev the
witnesses, as there were two rather than one as stated. They were
independent and talked about it only after each had seen it separately.
I will make this personal investigation and report Lat
23. 3 April 1967, Roseville, Michigan.
I would I would agree agree with the evaluation of possible birds. in i
suppose to be fair we should suppose to be fair we should also add, possible unidentiri (data also add, possible unidentiti, (data
insufficient, no followup). - The card indicates one object, and
the report, however, clearly indicates that 10 to 12 lights were
observed flying in V formation. This actually strengthens the
24. 4 April 1967, Wheeling, W. Virginia.
les.
25. 5 April 1967, Westminister, Colorado
Since the 164 was not returned the evaluation "insufficient data",
I suppose, is entirely correct, but the case itself is interc-ting
in that there were 15 witnesses. Here is one case the Condon Conumittee
should have looked into, since it was right at their back door. They
should have looked into it particularly since there were l5 witnesses.
Also the object was visible for 15 minutes, and it was observed through
a telescope. Even at this late date this might be worth a call. As
a matter of fact, when I am in Boulder this July I will look into it
myself, but for the statistics, the evaluation "insufficient data"
certainly holds.

6Op67
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
HEADQUARTERS FOREIGN TECHNOLOGY DIVISION (AFSC)
WRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FOMCE BASE. OHID 43433
REPLY TO
ATTN OF TDET/UFO 14 Apet 1967
SUDJECT UFO vation, 6 Apr 67
TO:
Westminister, Colo 80030
Reference your unidentified observation. The information which
we have received is not sufficient for a scientific evaluation.
Request you complete the attached FTD Form 164 and return it in
the envelope Tvelope provrusd. lhank you Tor reportlng your ooservacion provide your observation
to the Air Force.
JAMES C. MANATT, Colonel, USAF 1 Atch
Director of Technology of Technology and Subsystems FTD Form 164 w/envelope FTD Form 164 w/envelope

.
attention of observer(s) to the object(s)?
S1za, in to the 3tars.
(2) Angle or elevation and azimuth object(s) When first
observed. 20,000
=
Straigas and lavel (20,000).
(4) D Description of flight path and maneuvers of object(s).
.
(5) Howdid the object(s) disappear? (Instantaneously to north, etc.)
(6) now long was object(s) visible. (Be specific, 5 minutes, 1 hour, etc)
-1iutos. 15ciauces.
c. Manner of Observation: Manner of Observation:
(1) Use one or any combination of following items: Ground-visual,
ground - electronic, air electronic ronic, specif radar.)
Groud-visoal.
(2) Statement as to optical forth).
used and descriptio thereof.
made while airbore, give type of aircraft,
identification number, altitude, heading, speed, and home station.
d Time and date of sighting:
(2) Zulu time-date-group of sighting. 05/07558 A5211 1367
2

XPCP.
a. Description of the Object(s):
(1) Shape, wa3.14 lighi.
compared to a known object (use one of the following terms:
Head ofa pin, pea, dime, nickel, quarter, half dollar, silver dollar, baseball,
grapefruit, or basketball) held in the hand at about m's length.
Bnawball. Bneeball.
3 Color.Whi ddish greenian Bparkling exhaust, exhaust.
(4) Number. Cn. Number. Cnu.
5) Formation, if more than one. Mam.
Any discrenible features Beal large "glob of ligit"
aporosehing from Sa to W.
(7) Tail, trail, or exhaust, including size same compared size
of object(s). haust to aise Bide).
If heard, desc sound. Hoss.
bit10 mimatea.
cend 164

i. Interceotion of identification action taken (such action may be taken
whenever feasible, complying with existing Air Defense directives).
j. Location, appro ximate altitude, and gener direction of
air traffic in area of sighting.
k. Position title and comments of the preparing officer, including his
preliminary analysis of possible cause e sighting(s). -
1. Existence of physical evi vidence, such as materials and photographs.
i roxiataly 3 adulta awd 6 hia
Cvond E ya M
Cved
4

(2) Light conditions. Night, day,
dawn, dusk)
Location of Observer(s).
and/or geographical posit position with reference to a known landmark
also should be given in electrical reports, such as "2mi N of Deeville; "3mi
SW of Blue Lake". I Typographical errors or "garbling" often results in electrically
transmitted messages, making location plots difficult or impossible.
EXAMPLE: 89 45N, 192 71W for 39 45N, 102 21W.
2/12 Gollage).
f. Identifying Information on Observer(s):
(1) mailing address, occupation, and estimate of
reliab treloum Co.
(2) Milit rade, organization, duty, and estimate of organization, duty, , and estimate of
reliability.
g. Weather and winds -- Aloft conditions at time and place of sightings:
(1) Clear. Stars reedily
(2) Report from nearest AWS or U.S. Weather Bureau Office of wind
diection and velocity incgrees and knots at surface, 6,ooo' 16,000',
20,000',
(3) Ceiling. Clea
(4) Visibility. _2
(5) Amount of cloud cover.Eoz
(6). Bono. 29ap 45.
3