Documents / Case file
This U.S. Air Force Project Blue Book file compiles 1952 and 1953 messages, memos and reports on the movie film Navy Chief Photographer Delbert C. Newhouse shot on 2 July 1952 near Tremonton, Utah. It records interviews with Newhouse's family, requests about the film, and Navy and General Mills balloon experts judging that the objects closely resembled pillow balloons. It also covers internal debate about releasing the film to the press. Unrelated reports from Phoenix, Lexington and Highland Park sightings are included too.
From the source:Release of 2026-09-18 Incident: 7/2/52, Tremonton, Utah. This document records the Project Blue Book investigation and subsequent assessments of an incident near Tremonton, Utah, on July 2, 1952. Project Blue Book was a 1952-1969 U.S. Air Force program to investigate the nature and origin of unidentified flying objects (UFOs). The file describes the Air Force’s assessment of the principal witness, Delbert C. Newhouse, a U.S. Navy Warrant Officer specializing in photography, as honest and reliable, and as an expert with more than 1,000 hours of aerial-photography experience. Newhouse reported observing 12 to 14 reflective objects and recorded the event on color motion-picture film using a handheld Bell & Howell Auto Master camera. The file reflects an evolving Air Force assessment of the imagery over several years. Early documentation considered several possible explanations, including sunlight reflecting from birds or balloons, and a mirage effect, and did not identify the objects conclusively. Later assessments became more confident that the objects were seabirds reflecting sunlight, citing identifiable seabirds and similar films showing seabirds as bright points of light under comparable conditions. However, the film’s limited detail and lack of fixed reference points prevented reliable determination of the objects’ distance, size, altitude, or linear speed from the film alone. AARO Comment: The file contains conflicting references to the film format. Several documents describe a 35mm film, while contemporaneous submission documentation identifies the original as a 50-foot roll of processed 16mm Kodachrome color motion-picture film recorded with a handheld Bell & Howell Auto Master camera. Newhouse reported exposing approximately 30 feet of the roll during the incident and using the remaining film later that day to record unrelated mountain scenery in Idaho. Other records show that 35mm positive and negative duplicate blowups were produced from the original 16mm material. The file also indicates that the original film was duplicated for preservation, citing its deteriorating condition. The footage retained by the National Archives and Records Administration and presented in this collection as DOW-UAP-PR159 is a digitization of a 16mm print.
“Cooper”1 page
co~ 01/IDIW/lbh·.n2 Serial: e •UNCLASSIFlED MAY 4 1~5 ·n Subj: Interpretation of Movies of Unidentified Objects; progress report on L Analysis of the graph correlating luminosity and size indicate that as the luminosity of the objects increase, the size is larger also. This couJ..d be the effect of viewing directly, a reflecting surface. This is considered not probable because of the length of time they were viewed continuously on the film, approxi mately 90 seconds, and because of the angle through which they were photographed, approXimately 6o degrees. 'It is felt that if these images are reflective surfaces, blinking would occur during a period of 90 seconds while passing through a n angle of E,o degrees when photographed at the rate of 16 frames per second. This premise would permit highly reflective ball oons or spheroids to be a possibility . However, the velocit :,, and acceleration computations (sub paragraph 8) rule this possibility out. It appears, therefore, that if these objects are a reflecting surface, they are of a design, speed, and power not commonly known. The velocity and acceleration attributed to the objects may be caused by light reflected off a highly refl ective surface onto a n atomospheric screen where a slight angular turn of the reflective surface wouJ..d appear as high acceleration. This possibility is considered not probable because of the sun angle and atmospheric condition reported at the time of photography and because of the variations in luminosity which, under the above conditions would remain constant. It is the majority opinion of the group conducting this analysis that these images are light sources. This will explain the non-blinking and variations i n luminosity - but not the velocity or acceleration faciors. In either case, light source or reflective surface, it appears as ti' the objects are of a nature which we are not able to identify in terms of natural phe nomena or cpmmonly known man-taade objects. 2. There is no indication of what kind of objects could have caused the images except that they must be of a construction , design, and mater ial not commonly knovn. This is indicated b y the computed acceleration rate and elocity (answer 8). For the same reasons, birds, airers.ft and balloons are ruled out. 3. An analysis of the charts relative to movement indicate that there were group and ind.1vidual moveme nt. W1thin a group it appears as if the individual objects were moving counter-clock-wise aJ.ong an elliptical or similar track. Thus \then two objects crossed the camera line of sight they will appear to fuse i nto one. As they continued along their paths it will appear as if one objec t became two. Thie occured at reglar intervals at approXimately every 25th frame as plotted in chart s 5a and 5b. DOWNGRADED A'!, 3 YEAR Th'T'J'ERVA'u13; DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS. DOD DIR 6200.10 4 DECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007
Case file, from the pursue collection. The PDF is mirrored here; the original link is under it. 156 pages are in the text index: search them above, or from the library's search.