1. DAlE : r"i;E' GROUP PROJECT "i:M73 fcECORD 2. LOCATION Saigon, South Viet Nam 10. CONCLUSION other ( I:o!tTION OF THI AIRCRAFT) t. NliMl\ER OF OBJECTS S. LENGTH OF OBSERVATION 11. '8RIEF suARY AND ANALYIIS N/A Obeet c-& t uok A pit:ture in the air. An unidentified object t- -.--T-Y_P_E_O_F_O_B_S_E_R_VA_T_I_ON ppeared ln the f ilm and the observer asked tor an analysis. Air-Visual 8. Pt-tOTOS. 9. PHYSICAL EVIDEMC! Hector QuintaDilla,jr 11a3 or, tJSAr Wrigbt-Patter1on APB, Ohio Saigon, Vie-t Bam !hulk J'OU tor yonr letter ot' 2' March. I quite agree that the picture looks like some portion ot the aircraft that I took it trom. However wi~h tm exception ot the outerpart that oo~d be ~he wings leading edge, I can't tind a damn tbing on the air- P that resembles the rest of it. fheretore I am enclosing three negatives that I toot at the same time and the following data that I can rember. a) The cara was a Japanese Mioya b) Pocal length was infinity c) Altitude was 6-7000 M. I.BL d) Pro the pilots window ot a C-46 e) Locality wa near the Plain ot Jars, Laos I will be leaving for home vacation on May 15th. so I request that your reply be sent to the ad- ress listed below Major Hector Quintanilla,jr Chiet, Projec-t m.ue Book Wright-Patterson APB,Obio 4543' Maaaachuaetta fOIEI&I TECHIOlO&Y DIVISIOI,lfSC UICWSiflll : ; .. ~TECHIOl06Y DIYISIOI,AFSC IICWSiflll SUBJECT: UFO REPORT A!{ALYST: TSgt MOODY UNCLASSIFIED PI: KINNEY This report is in response to Work Ordar 65-62 submitted by TSgt D. N. Moody, 'i'UE~l/UFO requesting an analysis of a fjlm strip (3 frames) taken in Laos, March 1965, of an alleged UFO. The photographs show an aerial terrain view with the unidentified object along the lo\ver one-fourth of tho frames. A positive identification of the object could not be mado utjlizing the limited material furnished. It doos appoar however, that the object photographed was in close ranee -both to tha camera ann tho aircraft fro.u which the photographs were taken. The loft nlde of the objcc t. :u; viewed in the photographs appears to be draped with some sort of material or cloth thereby obscuring that portion of the object which rinos to a point in the extrema left portion of the print. The apparent short rang~ of tho object from the camera, tog9thor with the image sharpness as co~pared rlith the torrajn backgroWld, and the fact that subject photograpey was taken from the pilot s window of an aircraft., tends to suggest the following possib1J1 ties: The ledge or the pilot s _window, together with an Wlidentiied object thereon, including the draping~ is the object depicted. Additionally the "alleged pi tot tube is merely' tM visible portion or some part of the ai rcratt. . Wright-Patterson APB 8 Febnaary 1966 Captain R. Pomeroy c/o 1 Ottiee (AAM) APO Fz aneta eo, Calitontia Dear Captain Pomeroy, we are returning your negative and a copy of the photo analysis report. Photo analysts feel that the object depicted represents a portion of the window ledge. Sincerely, AYB, Cllio ~5433 o/o Tftftl ortlce (AMI) co, C<fbrnJa 9v t'/3 lefuence letter of 15 Mar 1965 or a "'-~>"'..a JW han . 'Dle 1D ]eft hand of ......... photo to be a portion ot the at rcratt ..._ 1ibidl JUl the Howner tiona ot photosz'aph are DOt .-de v1t!olt tbe n C811era data eueh u, tJC of c& era, aett1Jl&, focal etc. MaJor, USD Cbie:t, PI oJect Blue Book SL:;JECT: UFO REPORT ~ALYST: TSgt MOODY DATE: 19 JAN 66 'Ibis report is in response to Work Ordsr 6.5-62 submit ted by TSgt D. N. Moody, m::~I/UFO requesting an analysis o a film strip (3 frames) taken in Laos, March 1965, ot a..'"l ged UFO. 'lhe photographs show an aerial terrain view w1 th the unidentified object along the lotier one-fourth of the frames. A positive id~ntitication or the object could not be made ut1 1 izing the. 11m1 ted material turnished. It does appear however, that the object photographed was in close range -both to the ca!nera and the aircraft ro31 which the photop-aphs were taken. The lett side o the object as viewed in the photographs appears to be draped w1 th some sort o material or cloth thereby obscuring that portion o the objec!t which rises to a point in the extra.-ne lett port,ion of the print. '!he apparent sh~rt rnp o the object f'rom the camera, together with the image sharpness as co;npared w1 th the terra1 n backlroWld, and the tact that subject photograph1' was taken f'rom the pilot s window of an aircraft, tends to suggest the following possibilities: The ledge o the pUot s window, together with a..., unidentified object thereon, including the draping~ is the object depicted. Additionally the "alleged" pitot tube is merely the visible portion or some part of the aircraft Commanding Otficer Project Blue Book Wright-Patterson ArB Dayton, Ohio Sa1gon,V1et Nam Enclosed is a picture I have n from the air. Can you tell me what it is? Looka to ma like an airfoil o~ aome sort including a pitot tube, ra~ir intake and a very nnuaal sort ot power plant. This is mr only copy, please return. o/ o Travel Ottioe(AA.II) APO Pr cmco, Cal. D ENGINEER~NG ANALYStS [1] PHOTO ANALYSIS PPT NUMBER 1 ,'63oo2 D MACHI~[ COMPUTATION DESCRIPTION OF WORK a Request Photo J'\.lml:fSiS of the attached print:J RtF!:RENCE MATERIAL: :bre~ Printa, stri!) of film with th,.ee f:rm:1e3J two ltrs fm r .20nard Ponieroy, 20 A-pr 6; !Uld 15 Har 65. Request all :11aterial be returned upon completion ct cV3luat1on. I CERTI'Y THAT THIS WORK IS AUTHO .. IZED DEADLINE WITHIN MY DIVISION. BY ME AND THAT IT HAS THE 'OLLOWING PRIOftiTV AND DEADLINE DATE SIGNATURE OF APPROVING DIVISION CHIEF ENGINEERING SUPPORT MONITOR ASSISTANT FINAL WORK TO IE IN 'ORM 0' : D ENGINEERING NOT[ OcoMPUTATtON OPt REPOR~ WORK REQUEST APPROVED IY: DEADLINE DATE WOIUC ORO~ "UMal FT 0 OCT 6 I 462 Prel- .diUen "'~ be ueetl. APO San J'ranciaco c ing Otticer Project Blue Book Wright-Patterson Dayton, Ohio CORREO AEREO PAR AV''J"-J