Declassified UFO / UAP Document

Project 10073 Record: Sighting in Rochester, New York, February 24, 1966

📅 24 February 1966 📍 Rochester, New York 🏛 Foreign Technology Division, AFSC 📄 Sighting report and photographic analysis

Ever wanted to host your own late-night paranormal radio show?

Across the Airwaves · Narrative Sim · Windows · $2.95

You're on the air. Callers bring Mothman, Fresno Nightcrawlers, UFO sightings, reptilian autopsies, and whispers about AATIP and Project Blue Book. Every reply shapes how the night goes.

UFO & UAP Cryptids Paranormal Government Secrets Classified Files High Strangeness Strange Creatures
The night is long. The lines are open →

AI-Generated Summary

TL;DR

A 15-year-old witness reported a silent, bowl-shaped UFO in Rochester, NY, in 1966. The Air Force's analysis of the submitted photograph was inconclusive because the witness provided a copy negative rather than the original.

This document contains the records of a UFO sighting reported by a 15-year-old male in Rochester, New York, on February 24, 1966. The witness reported observing a large, yellowish-white object shaped like an inverted soup bowl for approximately 90 seconds. The object was silent and traveled in a north-westerly direction before disappearing over the horizon. The witness, who was outdoors in a residential area, provided a sketch of the object and its motion. The witness also submitted a photograph of the object, which was taken with an Imperial Satellite II camera using Kodak 127 black and white film. The witness later expressed frustration regarding the delay in the analysis of his submission, noting that he had sent the material over four weeks prior to his August 28, 1967, follow-up letter. The Foreign Technology Division (FTD) at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base conducted a photo analysis under Work Order 67-117. The final report, dated September 8, 1967, concluded that the provided photograph was a copy negative rather than an original, which precluded a reliable sensitometric examination. Consequently, the FTD determined that there was insufficient data to identify the object or determine the exact stimulus. The case was closed with the conclusion that the lack of image definition and the absence of the original negative made further investigation impossible.

The evidence presented is actually insufficient in terms of determining the exact stimulus.

Official Assessment

Lack of image definition precludes identification of the object. The evidence presented is actually insufficient in terms of determining the exact stimulus.

The negative provided was a copy negative and lacked the granular structure of the original, making a reliable sensitometric examination impossible.

Witnesses

Key Persons

Military Units