Declassified UFO / UAP Document
Project 10073 Record: Defective Film Report - Gemini 5 Launch
AI-Generated Summary
Photographs taken by James R. Peek during the Gemini 5 launch were investigated by the Air Force and RCA. The analysis concluded the images were film defects rather than unidentified aerial phenomena.
This document collection details the investigation into photographic evidence submitted by James R. Peek of Malabar, Florida, following the Gemini 5 launch on August 21, 1965. Mr. Peek, an engineering laboratory technician and amateur photographer, claimed to have captured images of three or four unidentified flying objects near the launch site. He described the objects as brilliant green phosphorescent lights that performed an S-turn maneuver before changing into a disc shape. The film was submitted to the Air Force for evaluation. RCA Quality Control personnel at Patrick Air Force Base conducted a technical analysis of the slides. Their findings, documented in a memorandum dated September 23, 1965, concluded that the images were not of aerial objects but were instead the result of film defects. Specifically, the analysts identified 'streaks and spots' caused by extraneous particles within the film and spurious exposure, possibly due to internal camera reflections or pressure on the emulsion. The Air Force communicated these findings to Mr. Peek through Colonel W. T. Coleman. The matter was closed with the determination that the images were purely photographic artifacts, and no further investigation was deemed necessary by the Air Force Eastern Test Range.
All three spots on slide 6 originate from extraneous particles within the spot. In the case of the biggest spot, the edges indicate a decided blistering action during processing.
PDF not loading? Download the PDF directly
Official Assessment
The objects depicted were defects in the film (emulsion flaws).
Analysis by RCA Quality Control determined that the spots and streaks on the film were caused by extraneous particles within the film and spurious exposure, likely due to internal reflection in the camera or pressure/strain on the emulsion.
Witnesses
- James R. Peeksenior engineering laboratory technician
Key Persons
- Sgt MoodyFTD (TDEW)
- Colonel ColemanInformation Officer
- H. A. StarbirdPhotographic Quality Control
- Sara B. HuntCivil Branch, Community Relations Division