2. LOCATtOH 12. CONCLUSIONS Easton, Maaeachuaette 0 Prolaolaly Balloon 3. OATETIIIE OIOW . 4. TYPE OF GaSERVATION Ausuat 1963 -.;. a Aircraft Locol u c:.. .. ~Ya.v.e D Groun4R .. er a Prol.oWy Alrcr.lt ls. PHO'IO$ i.. ~ Wo Aatronolcal Meteor D Yee D ProltaWy Aslronolcol B... ciril\!!!_=-----:----------10 PouiWy Astranlcel 0 Insufficient Oat for Evlu.tlon not reported one not reported a unown .10. IRIEP OP IIOMTIMO Day duration, direction etc not included ObJect described aa f~ paralell to srround. Brilliazat lipt, red on outer e48e Y1 tba white center. lllite tail about 2X. size of object. ATIC PORM J2t (1l&Y H laP fl) 11. coIMTS L11ted data indicates meteor aa a likely cause. MEMO ROUTING SLIP N VEJC US FOR APPROVALS. DISAPPROVALS. CONCUR1tNC S, OR SIM ILAR ACTI ONS I .NA f\R TITLE ORGANIZATION ANO LOCATION on COOIIOINATION INI'ORMATION SIGNA TUft e ~ e:~ c tJ.AA.. o FROM NAME OR TITLE I ORGANIZAT ION AND LOCATION TELEitHON Replacn DA .-\00 Form 8~.S, 1 Apr 48, 11nd AFHQ Form 12. 10 Xo\ f7, which may bf' ustd. HEADQUA~TERS FOREIGN TECHNOLOGY D IVIS:OI"l AI'R FORCE SYSTEMS COMM 4.NO UNITEO STATES .... FORCE WRIGHTP.-.TTIUUON AIR ~ORCE BASF, OHIO I." 'lljlll'l \ s JiiJt :Request for UFO Informatio ro:Hq USAF SP.FOI-PB (Mrs Gaiser ) Wa:sh 25 D C 1. The following a letter from correspondence from him. is provide~ to assist you in answering Our records indicate no previous 2. There is no point in discussing the belief that UFO's 1, extraterrestrial and under intelligence control with r.u- Acceptance of these points are done with an act of faith, without scientific support. There is also no point in sending him an informaticn sheet. However, since he has requested information relative to u~s the information should provide him with the Air Force's position. 3. Regarding the sighting at Easton, Massachusetts, August 1963, it is appar ent:.:r a meteor observation, however, the duration wa s not reported and motion of tthe o~ject not included. If t he flight was straight and the ion short this would be the Air Force evaluation. If Mr desires further information, it is suggested that be fill out the form 164 and fo~vard the completed form to your o i:~. 4. The informa-ti on provided on the South .-laymouth, ~-1assacbusetts sighting is insufficient for even a tentat ive analysis. FOR THE COM!-fP.?iD:::3 ~--eputy for Technology Subsyste!nS This is 1n reply to your recent letter in which you reported the sighting of an Unidentified F1y1ng Object 1n Easton# Mass. 1n August of 1963# and one seen by your mother-in-law 1n South Weymouth. sighting at Easton is tly a meteor observation, however, the duration was not reported and motion or the object waa not included 1n your letter. The 1nto~a~t1on provided on the South Weymouth sighting is insufficient for even a tentative analysis. In over 8,000 caeea during the past 16 years# there ~ has never been any evidence or indication that Unidentified # Flying Objects represent spaceships from other planets. On the contrary# Air Force investigations have proved amoat conclusively that there is a logical explanation for all aerial phenomena# whether created and sent aloft by man, generated b y atmospheric conditions# or caused by celestial bodies and their residue or meteors, etc. Rockland, Mass Sincerely, MASTON M. JACKS MaJor# USAF Public Information Division Office or Information