PROJECT 10073 RECORD . . 2. LOCATION 1. DATE TIME GROUP . (1 Witness) 3. s,')Uf:CE . 10, CONCLUSION INSUFFICmrl' DATA roa EVALUATION 4. NUMBER OF OBJECTS PHOIO: No di. scemible em be identl11 eel. 5. LENGTH Ofl OBSERVATION 11. BRIEF SUMMARY AND ANALYSIS Not Repartecl Object was fir'....ng \'I to E. It was quite high. ~ J1cJ:5 tas and mde no conccnsa.ti.on trai J, but, the pattem that !". aroun1 it was not; visible to the naked Q8. The --was 6. TYPE OF OBSERVATION Ground-Visual behinl the observer x: i :4t whED he took the picture. Observer . stated the photo was not a doubls exapoaure. . 9. PHYSICAL EVIDENCE FrD ( TDE'l'R) Wright-Patterson 14 October 1966 Al'B, Ohio Please excuse the delay in replying to your letter of 25 April 1966 photo and camera data vaa sent to photo analyst personnel, here at Wright-Patterson AP'B. Their only CODliDents were that there vas no discernible object that could be identified on the photograph and that the light colored areas on the photograph could have been caused by sun flare. .. . . ... Since you stated in your letter that we may keep the photo, we aze .. placiDg it in the case files vith your report. Thank you for reporting your ~bserfat1on to :the Air Force. .. . Sincere~, . "'~ QJJNTANILLA, Jr, Major, USAF f_.._ie~i ~roject Blue Book .. . . PHOTO JOURNALISM 1-iajor Hector Quintanella Jr. \vright Patterson Air Force Base Dayton, Ohio Dear 1-lajor Quinta nella, After tr)ing in vain to find an explaination to this photograph I am sending a print of the slide to you. I hope you \dll be able to explain it to me. I am a member of the Profesnional Photographers of ~mmrica and the National Press Photographers ~ssociation. I was r esently employed by th~ local news pnper, for sino. DATA.:Obj ect t.Jns flying west td east, camera \-taB looking e~s t-south- east; so obj:.3ct was going from right mo l eft in the fram, :!nd was photographed after it reac hed the far lef t side of fram. It wad quiet, high flying, f ast,and made no con trail; but oifcourse the pattern that 3ppers onound it HBS not there to the naked eye. The sun was behind me. This is not a double exposure. You may keep this print if you like. Film; Kodacrome Type F 35mm f;.Ue.r;_Da:~lle~lt ( colo;r corection ) (1\odak Pony lV; '~ ..... amera / Place; Courner of Columbia and Pearl st.,Union C:tty, Indiana. I personaly have given up trying to explai n the pattern that developped on the film and hope you can hP.lp me. Thank you, PHOTO ANAL VSIS REPORT DATE OF REPORT 1 August 1966 SUBJECT UNIDatTII'IED FLYING OBJECT LOCATION UNION CIT!", ntDIANA DATE 6 JUNE 1960 PHOTOGRAPHY 1 color rint $ X 7 letter from 1. PURPOSE: This report is a joint response by the Photo Processin~ and Photo Analysis Divisions to Work Order Number 66-61 from Major H. Quintanilla, Jr. {TDE'IT/UFO) who n.,vto analysis of one color print taken in Union City, Indiana on June 6, 1960 by 2. ANALYSIS: No discernib1.e object can be identified on the attached photograph. The light colore d areas on the photograph could have been caused by sun flare. PHOTO .AJ.'lALYSIS BY: GERALD SCHEIMAN Intelligence Research specialist APPROVED BY: RICHARD L. CHANCE Capt, USAF -. Chief, Phot a~sis Division l R PRICE, JR. \ J ' Photo Exploitation Directorate D ENGINEERING ANALYSIS [i] PHOTO ANALYSIS D MACHIN COMPUTATION PPT NUMBER: A6o10301 DESCRIPTION OF WORK a Requet photo OD the attached print. Wbat are the 1D t.b1 pr1Dt. ible cau tor the REFERENCE MATERIAL~ 0De eo print, letter REQUESTED BY Request aU aaterial be re1~urJrte I CERTIFY THAT THIS WORK IS AUTHORIZED BY ME AND THAT IT HAS THE FOLLOWING PRIORITY AND DEADLINE WITHIN MY DIVISION. DEADLINE DATE SIGNATURE OF APPROVING DIVISION CHIEF ENGINEERING SUPPORT F!NAL 'NORK TO 8 IN FORM OF : D C::NGINERI NG NOTE D COMPUTATION DPI REPORT OoRAWtNG WORK REQUEST APPROVED BY: DEADLINE DATE PRIORITY NUMBER WOitK OltOIIt N U M II It