Project Blue Book

1 Previous projects

Project Blue Book was one of a series of systematic studies of unidentied ying objects (UFOs) conducted by
the United States Air Force. It started in 1952, and it
was the third study of its kind (the rst two were projects
Sign (1947) and Grudge (1949)). A termination order
was given for the study in December 1969, and all activity under its auspices ceased in January 1970.

Public USAF UFO studies were rst initiated under

Project Sign at the end of 1947, following many widely
publicized UFO reports (see Kenneth Arnold). Project
Sign was initiated specically at the request of General Nathan Twining, chief of the Air Force Materiel
Command at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base. WrightPatterson was also to be the home of Project Sign and all
subsequent ocial USAF public investigations.

Project Blue Book had two goals:

1. To determine if UFOs were a threat to national security, and

Sign was ocially inconclusive regarding the cause of

the sightings. However, according to US Air Force Captain Edward J. Ruppelt (the rst director of Project Blue
Book), Signs initial intelligence estimate (the so-called
Estimate of the Situation) written in the late summer of
1948, concluded that the ying saucers were real craft,
were not made by either the Russians or US, and were
likely extraterrestrial in origin. (See also extraterrestrial
hypothesis.) This estimate was forwarded to the Pentagon, but subsequently ordered destroyed by Gen. Hoyt
Vandenberg, USAF Chief of Sta, citing a lack of physical proof. Vandenberg subsequently dismantled Project
Sign.

2. To scientically analyze UFO-related data.

Thousands of UFO reports were collected, analyzed and
led. As the result of the Condon Report (1968), which
concluded there was nothing anomalous about UFOs,
Project Blue Book was ordered shut down in December
1969 and the Air Force continues to provide the following
summary of its investigations:
1. No UFO reported, investigated and
evaluated by the Air Force was ever an
indication of threat to our national security;

Project Sign was succeeded at the end of 1948 by Project

Grudge, which was criticized as having a debunking mandate. Ruppelt referred to the era of Project Grudge as the
dark ages of early USAF UFO investigation. Grudge
concluded that all UFOs were natural phenomena or other
misinterpretations, although it also stated that 23 percent
of the reports could not be explained.

2. There was no evidence submitted to or

discovered by the Air Force that sightings
categorized as unidentied represented
technological developments or principles
beyond the range of modern scientic
knowledge; and

1.1 The Captain Ruppelt era

3. There was no evidence indicating that

sightings categorized as unidentied
were extraterrestrial vehicles.[1]

According to Captain Edward J. Ruppelt, by the end of

1951, several high-ranking, very inuential USAF generals were so dissatised with the state of Air Force UFO
investigations that they dismantled Project Grudge and
replaced it with Project Blue Book in March 1952. One
of these men was Gen. Charles P. Cabell. Another
important change came when General William Garland
joined Cabells sta; Garland thought the UFO question deserved serious scrutiny because he had witnessed
a UFO.[3]

By the time Project Blue Book ended, it had collected

12,618 UFO reports, and concluded that most of them
were misidentications of natural phenomena (clouds,
stars, etc.) or conventional aircraft. According to the
National Reconnaissance Oce a number of the reports
could be explained by ights of the formerly secret reconnaissance planes U-2 and A-12.[2] A small percentage of UFO reports were classied as unexplained, even
after stringent analysis. The UFO reports were archived
and are available under the Freedom of Information Act,
but names and other personal information of all witnesses
have been redacted.

The new name, Project Blue Book, was selected to refer to the blue booklets used for testing at some colleges
and universities. The name was inspired, said Ruppelt,
by the close attention that high-ranking ocers were giving the new project; it felt as if the study of UFOs was
1

PREVIOUS PROJECTS

as important as a college nal exam. Blue Book was also Jacques Vallee,[8] Ruppelt started the trend, largely folupgraded in status from Project Grudge, with the creation lowed by later Blue Book investigations, of not giving seof the Aerial Phenomenon Branch.[4]
rious consideration to numerous reports of UFO landings
Ruppelt was the rst head of the project. He was an ex- and/or interaction with purported UFO occupants.
perienced airman, having been decorated for his eorts
with the Army Air Corps during World War II, and having afterward earned an aeronautics degree. He ocially
coined the term Unidentied Flying Object, to replace
the many terms (ying saucer ying disk and so on)
the military had previously used; Ruppelt thought that
unidentied ying object was a more neutral and accurate term. Ruppelt resigned from the Air Force some
years later, and wrote the book The Report on Unidentied Flying Objects, which described the study of UFOs
by United States Air Force from 1947 to 1955. American
scientist Michael D. Swords wrote that Ruppelt would
lead the last genuine eort to analyze UFOs.[5]

Astronomer Dr. J. Allen Hynek was the scientic consultant of the project, as he had been with Projects Sign and
Grudge. He worked for the project up to its termination
and initially created the categorization which has been extended and is known today as Close encounters. He was
a pronounced skeptic when he started, but said that his
feelings changed to a more wavering skepticism during
the research, after encountering a minority of UFO reports he thought were unexplainable.

Ruppelt left Blue Book in February 1953 for a temporary reassignment. He returned a few months later to
nd his sta reduced from more than ten, to two subordinates. Frustrated, Ruppelt suggested that an Air DeRuppelt implemented a number of changes: He stream- fense Command unit (the 4602nd Air Intelligence Serlined the manner in which UFOs were reported to (and vice Squadron) be charged with UFO investigations.
by) military ocials, partly in hopes of alleviating the
stigma and ridicule associated with UFO witnesses. Ruppelt also ordered the development of a standard question- 1.1.1 Robertson panel
naire for UFO witnesses, hoping to uncover data which
could be subject to statistical analysis. He commissioned Main article: Robertson Panel
the Battelle Memorial Institute to create the questionnaire
and computerize the data. Using case reports and the
In July 1952, after a build-up of hundreds of sightings
computerized data, Battelle then conducted a massive sciover the previous few months, a series of radar detections
entic and statistical study of all Air Force UFO cases,
coincident with visual sightings were observed near the
completed in 1954 and known as "Project Blue Book SpeNational Airport in Washington, D.C. (see 1952 Washcial Report No. 14" (see summary below).
ington D.C. UFO incident). Future Arizona Senator and
Knowing that factionalism had harmed the progress of 2008 presidential nominee John McCain is alleged to be
Project Sign, Ruppelt did his best to avoid the kinds one of these witnesses.
of open-ended speculation that had led to Signs perAfter much publicity, these sightings led the Central Insonnel being split among advocates and critics of the
telligence Agency to establish a panel of scientists headed
extraterrestrial hypothesis. As Michael Hall writes,
by Dr. H. P. Robertson, a physicist of the California
Ruppelt not only took the job seriously but expected his
Institute of Technology, which included various physista to do so as well. If anyone under him either becists, meteorologists, and engineers, and one astronomer
came too skeptical or too convinced of one particular the(Hynek). The Robertson Panel rst met on January 14,
[6]
ory, they soon found themselves o the project. In his
1953 in order to formulate a response to the overwhelmbook, Ruppelt reported that he red three personnel very
ing public interest in UFOs.
early in the project because they were either too pro or
too con one hypothesis or another. Ruppelt sought the Ruppelt, Hynek, and others presented the best evidence,
advice of many scientists and experts, and issued regular including movie footage, that had been collected by Blue
press releases (along with classied monthly reports for Book. After spending 12 hours reviewing 6 years of data,
the Robertson Panel concluded that most UFO reports
military intelligence).
had prosaic explanations, and that all could be explained
Each U.S. Air Force Base had a Blue Book ocer to colwith further investigation, which they deemed not worth
lect UFO reports and forward them to Ruppelt.[7] During
the eort.
most of Ruppelts tenure, he and his team were authorized to interview any and all military personnel who wit- In their nal report, they stressed that low-grade, unverinessed UFOs, and were not required to follow the chain able UFO reports were overloading intelligence channels,
of command. This unprecedented authority underlined with the risk of missing a genuine conventional threat to
the U.S. Therefore, they recommended the Air Force dethe seriousness of Blue Books investigation.
emphasize the subject of UFOs and embark on a debunkUnder Ruppelts direction, Blue Book investigated a
ing campaign to lessen public interest. They suggested
number of well-known UFO cases, including the sodebunkery through the mass media, including Walt Discalled Lubbock Lights, and a widely publicized 1952
ney Productions, and using psychologists, astronomers,
radar/visual case over Washington D.C.. According to
and celebrities to ridicule the phenomenon and put for-

1.2

The Captain Hardin era

ward prosaic explanations. Furthermore, civilian UFO

groups should be watched because of their potentially
great inuence on mass thinking The apparent irresponsibility and the possible use of such groups for subversive purposes should be kept in mind.

3
unidentied, the media was to be told only that the situation was being analyzed. Blue Book was also ordered to
reduce the number of unidentied to a minimum.
All this was done secretly. The public face of Blue Book
continued to be the ocial Air Force investigation of
UFOs, but the reality was it had essentially been reduced
to doing very little serious investigation, and had become
almost solely a public relations outt with a debunking
mandate. To cite one example, by the end of 1956, the
number of cases listed as unsolved had dipped to barely
0.4 percent, from the 20 to 30% only a few years earlier.

It is the conclusion of many researchers[7][9] that the

Robertson Panel was recommending controlling public
opinion through a program of ocial propaganda and
spying. They also believe these recommendations helped
shape Air Force policy regarding UFO study not only immediately afterward, but also into the present day. There
is evidence that the Panels recommendations were being Eventually, Ruppelt requested reassignment; at his decarried out at least two decades after its conclusions were parture in August 1953, his sta had been reduced from
issued (see the main article for details and citations).
more than ten (precise numbers of personnel varied) to
In December 1953, Joint Army-Navy-Air Force Regula- just two subordinates and himself. His temporary retion number 146 made it a crime for military personnel placement was a noncommissioned ocer. Most who
to discuss classied UFO reports with unauthorized per- succeeded him as Blue Book director exhibited either apsons. Violators faced up to two years in prison and/or athy or outright hostility to the subject of UFOs, or were
nes of up to $10,000.
hampered by a lack of funding and ocial support.

UFO investigators often regard Ruppelts brief tenure at

Blue Book as the high-water mark of public Air Force
1.1.2 Aftermath of Robertson panel
investigations of UFOs, when UFO investigations were
treated seriously and had support at high levels.[9] Thereafter,
Project Blue Book descended into a new Dark
In his book (see external links) Ruppelt described the
Ages
from which many UFO investigators argue it never
demoralization of the Blue Book sta and the stripping
[9]
emerged.
However, Ruppelt later came to embrace the
of their investigative duties following the Robertson
Blue
Book
perspective
that there was nothing extraordiPanel.
nary about UFOs; he even labeled the subject a Space
Age Myth.
As an immediate consequence of the Robertson Panel
recommendations, in February 1953, the Air Force issued Regulation 200-2, ordering air base ocers to pub- 1.2 The Captain Hardin era
licly discuss UFO incidents only if they were judged to
have been solved, and to classify all the unsolved cases to In March 1954, Captain Charles Hardin was appointed
keep them out of the public eye.
the head of Blue Book. However, most UFO investigaThe same month, investigative duties started to be
taken on by the newly formed 4602nd Air Intelligence
Squadron (AISS) of the Air Defense Command. The
4602nd AISS was tasked with investigating only the most
important UFO cases with intelligence or national security implications. These were deliberately siphoned away
from Blue Book, leaving Blue Book to deal with the more
trivial reports.

tions were conducted by the 4602nd, and Hardin had no

objection. Ruppelt wrote that Hardin thinks that anyone who is even interested [in UFOs] is crazy. They bore
him.[10]

In 1955, the Air Force decided that the goal of Blue Book
should be not to investigate UFO reports, but rather to reduce the number of unidentied UFO reports to a minimum. By late 1956, the number of unidentied sightings
General Nathan Twining, who got Project Sign started had dropped from the 20-25% of the Ruppelt era, to less
back in 1947, was now Air Force Chief of Sta. In Au- than 1%.
gust 1954, he was to further codify the responsibilities of
the 4602nd AISS by issuing an updated Air Force Regulation 200-2. In addition, UFOs (called UFOBs) were 1.3 The Captain Gregory era
dened as any airborne object which by performance,
aerodynamic characteristics, or unusual features, does not Captain George T. Gregory took over as Blue Books diconform to any presently known aircraft or missile type, rector in 1956. Clark writes that Gregory led Blue Book
rmer anti-UFO direction than the apathetic
or which cannot be positively identied as a familiar ob- in an even
[10]
Hardin.
The 4602nd was dissolved, and the 1066th
ject. Investigation of UFOs was stated to be for the purAir
Intelligence
Service Squadron was charged with UFO
poses of national security and to ascertain technical asinvestigations.
pects. AFR 200-2 again stated that Blue Book could
discuss UFO cases with the media only if they were re- In fact, there was actually little or no investigation of UFO
garded as having a conventional explanation. If they were reports; a revised AFR 200-2 issued during Gregorys

PREVIOUS PROJECTS

tenure emphasized that unexplained UFO reports must forts, and it was under his direction that Blue Book rebe reduced to a minimum.
ceived some of its sharpest criticism. UFO researcher
that, by this time,
One way that Gregory reduced the number of unex- Jerome Clark goes so far as to write
[11]
Blue
Book
had
lost
all
credibility.
plained UFOs was by simple reclassication. Possible
cases became probable, and probable cases were upgraded to certainties. By this logic, a possible comet became a probable comet, while a probable comet was atly
declared to have been a misidentied comet. Similarly, if
a witness reported an observation of an unusual balloonlike object, Blue Book usually classied it as a balloon,
with no research and qualication. These procedures became standard for most of Blue Books later investigations; see Hyneks comments below.

Physicist and UFO researcher Dr. James E. McDonald once atly declared that Quintanilla was not
competent from either a scientic or an investigative
perspective.[12] However, McDonald also stressed that
Quintanilla shouldn't be held accountable for it, as he
was chosen for his position by a superior ocer, and was
following orders in directing Blue Book.[12]

Blue Books explanations of UFO reports were not universally accepted, however, and critics including some
scientists suggested that Project Blue Book was engaged in questionable research or, worse, perpetrating
1.4 The Major Friend era
cover up.[9] This criticism grew especially strong and
Major Robert J. Friend was appointed the head of Blue widespread in the 1960s.
Book in 1958. Friend made some attempts to reverse Take for example, the many mostly nighttime UFO rethe direction Blue Book had taken since 1954. Clark ports from the midwestern and southeastern United States
writes that Friends eorts to upgrade the les and cata- in the summer of 1965: Witnesses in Texas reported
log sightings according to various observed statistics were multicolored lights and large aerial objects shaped like
frustrated by a lack of funding and assistance.[10]
eggs or diamonds.[9] The Oklahoma Highway Patrol reHeartened by Friends eorts, Hynek organized the rst ported that Tinker Air Force Base (near Oklahoma City)
of several meetings between Blue Book staers and ATIC had tracked up to four UFOs simultaneously, and that
personnel in 1959. Hynek suggested that some older several of them had descended very rapidly: from about
[9]
UFO reports should be reevaluated, with the ostensible 22000 feet to about 4000 feet in just a few seconds, an
action
well
beyond
the
capabilities
of
conventional
airaim of moving them from the unknown to the identicraft
of
the
era.
John
Shockley,
a
meteorologist
from
ed category. Hyneks plans came to naught.
Wichita, Kansas, reported that, using the state Weather
During Friends tenure, ATIC contemplated passing Bureau radar, he tracked a number of odd aerial objects
oversight Blue Book to another Air Force agency, but nei- ying at altitudes between about 6000 and 9000 feet.[9]
ther the Air Research and Development Center, nor the These and other reports received wide publicity.
Oce of Information for the Secretary of the Air Force
Project Blue Book ocially determined[9] the witnesses
was interested.
had mistaken Jupiter or bright stars (such as Rigel or
In 1960, there were U.S. Congressional hearings regard- Betelgeuse) for something else.
ing UFOs. Civilian UFO research group NICAP had
publicly charged Blue Book with covering up UFO ev- Blue Books explanation was widely criticized as inaccuidence, and had also acquired a few allies in the U.S. rate. Robert Riser, director of the Oklahoma Science and
Congress. Blue Book was investigated by the Congress Art Foundation Planetarium oered a strongly worded
and the CIA, with criticsmost notably the civilian UFO rebuke of Project Blue Book that was widely circulated:
group NICAP[9] asserting that Blue Book was lacking as That is as far from the truth as you can get. These stars
a scientic study. In response, ATIC added personnel and planets are on the opposite side of the earth from Okhave
(increasing the total personnel to three military person- lahoma City at this time of year. The Air Force must
[9]
had
its
star
nder
upside-down
during
August.
nel, plus civilian secretaries) and increased Blue Books
budget. This seemed to mollify some of Blue Books A newspaper editorial from the Richmond News Leader
critics,[9] that but it was only temporary. A few years later opined that Attempts to dismiss the reported sightings
(see below), the criticism would be even louder.
under the rationale as exhibited by Project Bluebook (sic)
By the time he was transferred from Blue Book in 1963, won't solve the mystery and serve only to heighten
there that the air
Friend thought that Blue Book was eectively useless and the suspicion that theres something out
[9]
while a Wichitaforce
doesn't
want
us
to
know
about,
ought to be dissolved, even if it caused an outcry amongst
UPI
reporter
noted
that
Ordinary
radar does not
based
the public.
pick up planets and stars.[9]
Another case that Blue Books critics seized upon was
the so-called Portage County UFO Chase, which began
at about 5.00am, near Ravenna, Ohio on April 17, 1966.
Major Hector Quintanilla took over as Blue Books leader Police ocers Dale Spaur and Wilbur Ne spotted what
in August 1963. He largely continued the debunking ef-

1.5

The Major Quintanilla era

1.6

Congressional Hearing

they described as a disc-shaped, silvery object with a

bright light emanating from its underside, at about 1000
feet in altitude.[9][13] They began following the object
(which they reported sometimes descended as low as 50
feet), and police from several other jurisdictions were involved in the pursuit. The chase ended about 30 minutes
later near Freedom, Pennsylvania, some 85 miles away.
The UFO chase made national news, and the police
submitted detailed reports to Blue Book. Five days
later, following brief interviews with only one of the police ocers (but none of the other ground witnesses),
Blue Books director, Major Hector Quintanilla, announced their conclusions: The police (one of them an
Air Force gunner during the Korean War) had rst chased
a communications satellite, then the planet Venus.
This conclusion was widely derided,[9] and was strenuously rejected by the police ocers. In his dissenting
conclusion, Hynek described Blue Books conclusions as
absurd: in their reports, several of the police had unknowingly described the moon, Venus and the UFO, though
they unknowingly described Venus as a bright star very
near the moon. Ohio Congressman William Stanton said
that The Air Force has suered a great loss of prestige in
this community Once people entrusted with the public
welfare no longer think the people can handle the truth,
then the people, in return, will no longer trust the government.

5
cases ... and on peripheral public relations tasks.
Concentration could be on two or three potentially
scientic signicant cases per month [instead of being] spread thin over 40 to 70 cases per month.
6. The information input to Blue Book is grossly inadequate. An impossible load is placed on Blue Book
by the almost consistent failure of UFO ocers at
local air bases to transmit adequate information...
7. The basic attitude and approach within Blue Book is
illogical and unscientic...
8. Inadequate use had been made of the Project scientic consultant [Hynek himself]. Only cases that the
project monitor deems worthwhile are brought to his
attention. His scope of operation ... has been consistently thwarted ... He often learns of interesting
cases only a month or two after the receipt of the
report at Blue Book.[15]
Despite Sleepers request for criticism, none of Hyneks
commentary resulted in any substantial changes in Blue
Book.
Quintanillas own perspective on the project is documented in his manuscript, "UFOs, An Air Force
Dilemma. Lt. Col Quintanilla wrote the manuscript in
1975, but it was not published until after his death. Quintanilla states in the text that he personally believed it arrogant to think human beings were the only intelligent life
in the universe. Yet, while he found it highly likely that
intelligent life existed beyond earth, he had no hard evidence of any extra terrestrial visitation.[16]

In September 1968, Hynek received a letter from Colonel

Raymond Sleeper of the Foreign Technology Division.
Sleeper noted that Hynek had publicly accused Blue Book
of shoddy science, and further asked Hynek to oer
advice on how Blue Book could improve its scientic
methodology. Hynek was to later declare that Sleepers
letter was the rst time in my 20 year association with 1.6 Congressional Hearing
the air force as scientic consultant that I had been ofcially asked for criticism and advice [regarding] the In 1966, a string of UFO sightings in Massachusetts and
UFO problem.[14]
New Hampshire provoked a Congressional Hearing by
[17]
AccordHynek wrote a detailed response, dated October 7, 1968, the House Committee on Armed Services.
ing
to
attachments
to
the
hearing,
the
Air
Force
had at
suggesting several areas where Blue Book could improve.
rst
stated
that
the
sightings
were
the
result
of
a
trainIn part, he wrote:
ing exercise happening in the area.[18] But NICAP, the
1. ... neither of the two missions of Blue Book [de- National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomof a plane ying
termining if UFOs are a threat to national security ena, reported that there was no record
[19]
Another
report alat
the
time
the
sightings
occurred.
and using scientic data gathered by Blue Book] are
leged
that
the
UFO
was
actually
a
ying
billboard
promotbeing adequately executed.
ing the gasoline.[20] Raymond Fowler (of NICAP) added
2. The sta of Blue Book, both in numbers and in sci- his own interviews with the locals, who saw Air Force
ocers conscating newspapers with the story of UFOs
entic training, is grossly inadequate...
and telling them not to report what they had seen.[21]
3. Blue Book suers in that it is a closed system ... Two police ocers who had witnessed the UFOs, Euthere is virtually no scientic dialogue between Blue gene Bertrand and David Hunt, wrote a letter to Major
Book and the outside scientic world...
Quintanilla stating that they felt their reputations were de4. The statistical methods employed by Blue Book are stroyed by the Air Force. It was impossible to mistake
what we saw for any kind of military operation, regardless
nothing less than a travesty.
of altitude, the irritated ocers wrote, adding that there
5. There has been a lack of attention to signicant was no way it could have been a balloon or helicopter.[22]
UFO cases ... and too much time spent on routine According to Secretary Harold Brown of the Air Force,

2 USAF CURRENT OFFICIAL STATEMENT ON UFOS

Blue Book consisted of three steps: investigation, analysis, and the distribution of information gathered to interested parties.[23] After Brown gave permission, the press
were invited into the hearing.[24] By the time of the hearing, Blue Book had identied and explained 95% of the
reported UFO sightings. None of these were extraterrestrial or a threat to national security.[25] Brown himself
proclaimed, I know of no one of scientic standing or
executive standing with a detailed knowledge of this, in
our organization who believes that they came from extraterrestrial sources. [25] Dr. J. Allen Hynek, a science
consultant to Blue Book, suggested in an unedited statement that a civilian panel of physical and social scientists be formed for the express purpose of determining whether a major problem really exist in regards to
UFOs.[26] Hynek remarked that he has not seen any evidence to conrm extraterrestrials, nor do I know any
competent scientist who has, or who believes that any
kind of extraterrestrial intelligence is involved. [27]

ping into a fourth decade, and thus altered the date of

Blue Books closure in ocial les.

1.7

The Condon Committee

Main article: Condon Committee

Blue Books les were sent to the Air Force Archives at

Maxwell Air Force Base in Alabama. Major David Shea
was to later claim that Maxwell was chosen because it was
accessible yet not too inviting.[28]
Ultimately, Project Blue Book stated that UFOs sightings
were generated as a result of:
A mild form of mass hysteria.
Individuals who fabricate such reports to perpetrate
a hoax or seek publicity.
Psychopathological persons.
Misidentication of various conventional objects.
These ocial conclusions were directly contradicted by
the USAFs own commissioned Blue Book Special Report
#14. Psychological factors and hoaxes actually constituted less than 10% of all cases and 22% of all sightings,
particularly the better-documented cases, remained unsolved. (See section below for details and Identied ying
object.)

Criticism of Blue Book continued to grow through the

As of April 2003, the USAF has publicly indicated that
mid-1960s. NICAP's membership ballooned to about
there are no immediate plans to re-establish any ocial
15,000, and the group charged the U.S. Government with
government UFO study programs.[30]
a cover-up of UFO evidence.
Following U.S. Congressional hearings, the Condon
Committee was established in 1966, ostensibly as a neu- 2 USAF current ocial statement
tral scientic research body. However, the Committee
on UFOs
became mired in controversy, with some members charging director Edward U. Condon with bias, and critics
would question the validity and the scientic rigor of the Below is the United States Air Forces ocial statement
Condon Report.
regarding UFOs, as noted in USAF Fact Sheet 95-03:[30]
In the end, the Condon Committee suggested that there
was nothing extraordinary about UFOs, and while it left a
From 1947 to 1969, the Air Force inminority of cases unexplained, the report also argued that
vestigated Unidentied Flying Objects under
further research would not be likely to yield signicant
Project Blue Book. The project, headquartered
results.
at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, was
terminated December 17, 1969. Of a total
of 12,618 sightings reported to Project Blue
1.8 The End
Book, 701 remained unidentied.
The decision to discontinue UFO investigations was based on an evaluation of a report
In response to the Condon Committees conclusions, Secprepared by the University of Colorado entiretary of the Air Force Robert C. Seamans, Jr. antled, "Scientic Study of Unidentied Flying
nounced that Blue Book would soon be closed, because
Objects;" a review of the University of Colfurther funding cannot be justied either on the grounds
orados report by the National Academy of Sciof national security or in the interest of science.[28] The
ences; previous UFO studies and Air Force
last publicly acknowledged day of Blue Book operations
experience investigating UFO reports during
was December 17, 1969. However, researcher Brad
1940 to 1969.
Sparks,[29] citing research from the May, 1970 issue of
NICAPs UFO Investigator, reports that the last day of
As a result of these investigations, studies
Blue Book activity was actually January 30, 1970. Acand experience gained from investigating UFO
cording to Sparks, Air Force ocials wanted to keep the
reports since 1948, the conclusions of Project
Air Forces reaction to the UFO problem from overlapBlue Book were:

7
1. No UFO reported, investigated, and evaluated by the Air Force has ever given any
indication of threat to our national security.
2. There has been no evidence submitted to
or discovered by the Air Force that sightings categorized as unidentied represent technological developments or principles beyond the range of present day
scientic knowledge.
3. There has been no evidence indicating
the sightings categorized as unidentied are extraterrestrial vehicles.
With the termination of Project Blue Book,
the Air Force regulation establishing and controlling the program for investigating and analyzing UFOs was rescinded. Documentation regarding the former Blue Book investigation was permanently transferred to the Modern Military Branch, National Archives and
Records Service, and is available for public review and analysis.
Since the termination of Project Blue
Book, nothing has occurred that would support
a resumption of UFO investigations by the Air
Force.
There are a number of universities and
professional scientic organizations that have
considered UFO phenomena during periodic
meetings and seminars. A list of private organizations interested in aerial phenomena may
be found in Encyclopaedia of Associations,
published by Gale Research. Interest in and
timely review of UFO reports by private groups
ensures that sound evidence is not overlooked
by the scientic community. Persons wishing
to report UFO sightings should be advised to
contact local law enforcement agencies.

to the mid-1970s that occurred at U.S. military facilities

with nuclear weapons. Blum writes that some of these
ocial documents depart drastically from the normally
dry and bureaucratic wording of government paperwork,
making obvious the sense of terror that these UFO incidents inspired in many U.S.A.F. personnel.

3 Project Blue Book Special Report

No. 14
In late December 1951, Ruppelt met with members of the
Battelle Memorial Institute, a think tank based in Columbus, Ohio. Ruppelt wanted their experts to assist them
in making the Air Force UFO study more scientic. It
was the Battelle Institute that devised the standardized
reporting form. Starting in late March 1952, the Institute
started analyzing existing sighting reports and encoding
about 30 report characteristics onto IBM punched cards
for computer analysis.
Project Blue Book Special Report No. 14 was their massive statistical analysis of Blue Book cases to date, some
3200 by the time the report was completed in 1954, after Ruppelt had left Blue Book. Even today, it represents
the largest such study ever undertaken. Battelle employed
four scientic analysts, who sought to divide cases into
knowns, unknowns, and a third category of insufcient information. They also broke down knowns and
unknowns into four categories of quality, from excellent
to poor. E.g., cases deemed excellent might typically
involve experienced witnesses such as airline pilots or
trained military personnel, multiple witnesses, corroborating evidence such as radar contact or photographs, etc.
In order for a case to be deemed a known, only two analysts had to independently agree on a solution. However,
for a case to be called an unknown, all four analysts had
to agree. Thus the criterion for an unknown was quite
stringent.
In addition, sightings were broken down into six dierent

2.1

Post-Blue Book U.S.A.F. UFO activi- characteristics color, number, duration of observation,
brightness, shape, and speed and then these characterties

istics were compared between knowns and unknowns to

An Air Force memorandum (released via the Freedom see if there was a statistically signicant dierence.
of Information Act) dated October 20, 1969 and signed The main results of the statistical analysis were:
by Brigadier General C.H. Bolander states that even after Blue Book was dissolved, that reports of UFOs
About 69% of the cases were judged known or idenwould still continue to be handled through the standard
tied (38% were considered conclusively identied
Air Force procedure designed for this purpose. Furtherwhile 31% were still doubtfully explained); about
more, wrote Bolander, Reports of unidentied ying ob9% fell into insucient information. About 22%
jects which could aect national security are not part
were deemed unknown, down from the earlier
[31]
of the Blue Book system. To date, these other inves28% value of the Air Force studies.
tigation channels, agencies or groups are unknown.
Additionally, Blum reports[7] that Freedom of Information Act requests show that the U.S. Air Force has continued to catalog and track UFO sightings, particularly a
series of dozens of UFO encounters from the late 1960s

In the known category, 86% of the knowns were

aircraft, balloons, or had astronomical explanations.
Only 1.5% of all cases were judged to be psychological or "crackpot" cases. A miscellaneous cat-

5 PROJECT BLUE BOOK IN FICTION

egory comprised 8% of all cases and included possible hoaxes.
The higher the quality of the case, the more likely it
was to be classied unknown. 35% of the excellent
cases were deemed unknowns, as opposed to only
18% of the poorest cases.
In all six studied sighting characteristics, the unknowns were dierent from the knowns at a highly
statistically signicant level: in ve of the six measures the odds of knowns diering from unknowns
by chance was only 1% or less. When all six characteristics were considered together, the probability
of a match between knowns and unknowns was less
than 1 in a billion.

(More detailed statistics can be found at Identied ying

objects.)
Despite this, the summary section of the Battelle Institutes nal report declared it was highly improbable that
any of the reports of unidentied aerial objects... represent observations of technological developments outside
the range of present-day knowledge. A number of researchers, including Dr. Bruce Maccabee, who extensively reviewed the data, have noted that the conclusions
of the analysts were usually at odds with their own statistical results, displayed in 240 charts, tables, graphs and
maps. Some conjecture that the analysts may simply have
had trouble accepting their own results or may have written the conclusions to satisfy the new political climate
within Blue Book following the Robertson Panel.
When the Air Force nally made Special Report #14 public in October 1955, it was claimed that the report scientically proved that UFOs did not exist. Critics of this
claim note that the report actually proved that the unknowns were distinctly dierent from the knowns at
a very high statistical signicance level. The Air Force
also incorrectly claimed that only 3% of the cases studied
were unknowns, instead of the actual 22%. They further
claimed that the residual 3% would probably disappear if
more complete data were available. Critics counter that
this ignored the fact that the analysts had already thrown
such cases into the category of insucient information,
whereas both knowns and unknowns were deemed
to have sucient information to make a determination.
Also the unknowns tended to represent the higher quality cases, q.e. reports that already had better information
and witnesses.
The result of the monumental BMI study were echoed by
a 1979 French GEPAN report which stated that about a
quarter of over 1,600 closely studied UFO cases deed
explanation, stating, in part, These cases pose a real
question.[32] When GEPANs successor SEPRA closed
in 2004, 5800 cases had been analyzed, and the percentage of inexplicable unknowns had dropped to about 14%.
The head of SEPRA, Dr. Jean-Jacques Velasco, found
the evidence of extraterrestrial origins so convincing in

these remaining unknowns, that he wrote a book about it

in 2005.[33]

4 Hyneks criticism
Hynek was an associate member of the Robertson Panel,
which recommended that UFOs needed debunking. A
few years later, however, Hyneks opinions about UFOs
changed, and he thought they represented an unsolved
mystery deserving scientic scrutiny. As the only scientist involved with US Government UFO studies from the
beginning to the end, he could oer a unique perspective
on Projects Sign, Grudge, and Blue Book.
After what he described as a promising beginning with
a potential for scientic research, Hynek grew increasingly disenchanted with Blue Book during his tenure with
the project, leveling accusations of indierence, incompetence, and of shoddy research on the part of Air Force
personnel. Hynek notes that during its existence, critics
dubbed Blue Book The Society for the Explanation of
the Uninvestigated.[34]
Blue Book was headed by Ruppelt, then Captain Hardin,
Captain Gregory, Major Friend, and nally Major Hector Quintanilla. Hynek had kind words only for Ruppelt
and Friend. Of Ruppelt, he wrote In my contacts with
him I found him to be honest and seriously puzzled about
the whole phenomenon.[35] Of Friend, he wrote Of all
the ocers I worked with in Blue Book, Colonel Friend
earned my respect. Whatever private views he may have
held, he was a total and practical realist, and sitting where
he could see the scoreboard, he recognized the limitations
of his oce but conducted himself with dignity and a total lack of the bombast that characterized several of the
other Blue Book heads.[36]
He held Quintanilla in especially low regard: Quintanillas method was simple: disregard any evidence that
was counter to his hypothesis.[37] Hynek wrote that during Air Force Major Hector Quintanilla's tenure as Blue
Books director, the ag of the utter nonsense school
was ying at its highest on the mast. Hynek reported
that Sergeant David Moody, one of Quintanillas subordinates, epitomized the conviction-before-trial method.
Anything that he didn't understand or didn't like was
immediately put into the psychological category, which
meant crackpot'.
Hynek reported bitter exchanges with Moody when the
latter refused to research UFO sightings thoroughly, describing Moody as the master of the possible: possible
balloon, possible aircraft, possible birds, which then became, by his own hand (and I argued with him violently
at times) the probable.

5 Project Blue Book in Fiction

5.1

Project U.F.O.

Project Blue Book was the inspiration for the 19781979

TV show Project U.F.O. (which was known as Project Blue
Book in some countries), which was supposedly based on
Project Blue Book cases. However, the show frequently
went against the actual project conclusions, suggesting on
many occasions that some sightings were real extraterrestrials.

5.2

Twin Peaks

Project Blue Book played a major role in the second season of the 19901991 TV series Twin Peaks. Major Garland Briggs, an Air Force ocer who worked on the program, approaches protagonist Dale Cooper and reveals
that Coopers name turned up in an otherwise nonsensical radio transmission intercepted by the Air Force, which
inexplicably originated from the woods surrounding the
town of Twin Peaks. As the season progresses, it is revealed that the source of the transmission is the transdimensional realm of the Black Lodge, inhabited by beings
which feed on the human emotions of pain and suering;
it eventually comes out that Briggs worked with Coopers
rival, corrupt FBI agent Windom Earle, on Project Blue
Book, and that the two men apparently uncovered evidence of the Lodge during the course of their work.

5.3

Galactica 1980

[7] Blum, Howard, Out There: The Governments Secret Quest

for Extraterrestrials, Simon and Schuster, 1990
[8] Jacques Vallee, Passport to Magonia: On UFOs, Folklore
and Parallel Worlds (1969)
[9] Jerome Clark, The UFO Book: Encyclopedia of the Extraterrestrial, 1998; Detroit: Visible Ink Press, ISBN 157859-029-9
[10] Jerome Clark, The UFO Book: Encyclopedia of the Extraterrestrial, p468
[11] Jerome Clark, The UFO Book: Encyclopedia of the Extraterrestrial, p592
[12] Ann Druel; Firestorm: Dr. James E. McDonalds Fight
for UFO Science; 2003, Wild Flower Press; ISBN 0926524-58-5, p63
[13] see also Portage County UFO chase page for further details
[14] Jerome Clark, The UFO Book: Encyclopedia of the Extraterrestrial, p477
[15] Jerome Clark, The UFO Book: Encyclopedia of the Extraterrestrial, 1998; Detroit: Visible Ink Press, p478479;
emphasis as in original
[16] http://www.nidsci.org/pdf/quintanilla.pdf | Quintanilla,
H. (1974). UFOs, An Air Force Dilemma.
[17] Unidentied Flying Objects. (No. 55) Electronic
Record. Hearing Committee of Armed Services of the
House of Representatives. 89th Congress, Second Session. 5 April 1966. (50-066 O) U.S. Government Printing
Oce: Washington, D.C. 1966.

Every episode of the original Battlestar Galactica spin-o

series Galactica 1980 ended with a short statement about [18] Pentagon Doesn't Believe UFO Exeter Sightings. Exthe U.S. Air Forces 1969 Project Blue Book ndings that
cerpt from italic Haverhill Gazette italic. 25 October
UFOs are not proven to exist and are not a threat to na1965. in Fowler, Raymond E. Addendum IIA. NICAP
tional security.
Massachusetts Subcommittee. In Unidentied Flying
Objects. 6015.

References

[1] UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS AND AIR

FORCE PROJECT BLUE BOOK URL accessed
February 21, 2010
[2] National Reconnaissance Oce Review and Redaction
Guide: Appendix C - Glossary of Code Words and
Terms (PDF). National Reconnaissance Oce. 2008.
[3] Dr. Michael D. Swords; UFOs, the Military, and the
Early Cold War Era, pages 82-121 in UFOs and Abductions: Challenging the Borders of Knowledge David M.
Jacobs, editor; 2000, University Press of Kansas, ISBN
0-7006-1032-4; p103.
[4] see Clark, 1998
[5] Dr. Michael D. Swords; UFOs, the Military, and the
Early Cold War Era, p102
[6] http://www.nicap.dabsol.co.uk/51-69.htm

[19] Fowler, Raymond E. Addendum IV, UFO Report, 3 Sept.

1965. NICAP Massachusetts Subcommittee. In Unidentied Flying Objects. 6015-6016.
[20] UFO Identied as Ad Gimmick. italics Amesbury News
italics. 6 October 1965. In Fowler, Raymond E. Addendum IV, UFO Report, 3 September 1965. 6016.
[21] Fowler, Raymond. UFO Summary Sheet. (UFO
Reports--Sept. 3, 1966). In Addendum IV, UFO Report,
3 Sept. 1965. 6020.
[22] Bertrand, Eugene, and Hunt, David. Letter to Major Hector Quintanilla, Jr. 2 Dec. 1965. Wright Patterson Air
Force Base, Dayton, OH. In Unidentied Flying Objects. 6039-6040.
[23] Brown, Harold. Unidentied Flying Objects. 5992.
[24] Rivers, Mendel. Unidentied Flying Objects. 6003.
[25] Brown, Harold. Unidentied Flying Objects. 6005.
[26] Hynek, J. Allen. Unidentied Flying Objects. 6008.

10

[27] Hynek."Unidentied Flying Objects. 6046.

[28] Jerome Clark, The UFO Book: Encyclopedia of the Extraterrestrial, p480
[29] Proceedings of the Sign Historical Group UFO History
Workshop
[30] USAF Fact Sheet 95-03
[31] Jenny Randles and Peter Houghe; The Complete Book of
UFOs: An Investigation into Alien Contact and Encounters;
Sterling Publishing Co, Inc, 1994; ISBN 0-8069-8132-6,
p179
[32] Jenny Randles and Peter Houghe; The Complete Book of
UFOs: An Investigation into Alien Contact and Encounters;
Sterling Publishing Co, Inc, 1994; ISBN 0-8069-8132-6,
p202
[33] http://www.ufoevidence.org/documents/doc1627.htm
[34] J. Allen Hynek; The UFO Experience: A Scientic Inquiry;
1972; Henry Regenery Company, p180
[35] J. Allen Hynek; The UFO Experience: A Scientic Inquiry;
1972; Henry Regenery Company, p175
[36] J. Allen Hynek; The UFO Experience: A Scientic Inquiry;
1972; Henry Regenery Company, p187
[37] J. Allen Hynek; The UFO Experience: A Scientic Inquiry;
1972; Henry Regenery Company, p103

External links
Gen. John Samford Announces Project Blue Book
Findings on YouTube
Project Blue Book Archive Online version of USAF
Project Blue Book microlm
The Project Bluebook
UFO.Whipnet.org

Story

and

Facts

The Report on Unidentied Flying Objects Edward

J. Ruppelt The book on-line
Project Blue Book in FBIs FOIA reading room A
summary of the project
Fold3 Project Blue Book Archive View the unclassied Project Blue Book documents from the National
Archives (NARA) from their microlm collection.
Ocial U.S. Air Force factsheet
Informal Dept of Defense collection of references
on the web
10,000 collected Project Blue Book reports on the
Internet Archive
[https://archive.org/details/
nationalsecurityarchive?and{[}{]}=subject%
3A%22Project%20Blue%20Book%22 Individual
Project Blue Book reports] on the Internet Archive

EXTERNAL LINKS

11

Text and image sources, contributors, and licenses

8.1

Text

Project Blue Book Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Blue_Book?oldid=726553615 Contributors: Mjb, Frecklefoot, Ronz,

Whkoh, Timwi, Silvonen, Nilmerg, Clngre, Hadal, Pifactorial, Rsduhamel, David Gerard, Niteowlneils, Mboverload, NB2004, Tyhji,
AndrewTheLott, Neutrality, Humblefool, Discospinster, Brianhe, Vsmith, Spug, Unquietwiki, I9Q79oL78KiL0QTFHgyc, LuoShengli,
Krellis, Kjetil, Echuck215, Titanium Dragon, Polyphilo, Evil Monkey, Runtime, Tony Sidaway, Djsasso, Mosesofmason, RyanGerbil10,
Postrach, AirBa~enwiki, SP-KP, Willwise, SDC, Zzyzx11, Estarriol, Allen3, Xcuref1endx, Tim!, Bubba73, Gadig, Bgura, FlaBot, Old
Moonraker, Shultzc, AI, RobyWayne, Dr Fil, YurikBot, RussBot, Pelago, Lowe4091, Howcheng, Claudemonet~enwiki, Jpbowen, Czernobog~enwiki, Jonathan.s.kt, Rwwww, SmackBot, Mira, CRKingston, Eskimbot, Ohnoitsjamie, Martial Law, Westsider, Chris the
speller, Studioskillet, Colonies Chris, Frap, Nima Baghaei, Azumanga1, Salamurai, John, Euchiasmus, Sharnak, Novangelis, Sxeptomaniac, TheFarix, Clinkerbuilt, Pjbynn, BruceGrubb, FinnHK, LinuxSneaker, Machrisr, Doug Weller, JustAGal, Davidhorman, Nick Number, KrakatoaKatie, Darklilac, MECU, Kent Witham, Xhienne, Dianoetic, Dricherby, Magioladitis, ***Ria777, Glen, Tgeairn, BigrTex,
Maurice Carbonaro, Ndunruh, VolkovBot, Science4sail, XavierGreen, Chris-marsh-usa, Room429, StillTrill, Robert1947, Billinghurst,
Graymornings, Gatkinso, Bmds, DepecheSinner87, J496, Redmercury82, Zer0431, Sfan00 IMG, ClueBot, WurmWoode, Wikievil666,
Ktr101, Carriearchdale, Threecharlie, Playa1313, XLinkBot, For (;;), Addbot, Unforgiven666, Tide rolls, Zorrobot, Luckas-bot, Yobot,
Evans1982, Againme, AnomieBOT, Majirinki, ArthurBot, Xqbot, Eroman~enwiki, Jezhotwells, A.amitkumar, FrescoBot, LucienBOT,
Javert, FOIAngel, Degen Earthfast, Thinking of England, Serols, Oberono, Full-date unlinking bot, Enemenemu, Johnbrockbank, MrX,
TjBot, EmausBot, Mz7, ZroBot, ElationAviation, Esandaas, ClueBot NG, Satellizer, Frietjes, Rezabot, Supraplex, AvocatoBot, Cyberbot
II, Nigeld906, Toddeture, Transphasic, Themikebest, RonJansDeEerste and Anonymous: 146

8.2

Images

File:Question_book-new.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/99/Question_book-new.svg License: Cc-by-sa-3.0

Contributors:
Created from scratch in Adobe Illustrator. Based on Image:Question book.png created by User:Equazcion Original artist:
Tkgd2007
File:Seal_of_the_US_Air_Force.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/23/Seal_of_the_US_Air_Force.svg
License: Public domain Contributors: SVG created from this image Original artist: Arthur E. DuBois, according to [1]
File:Wikisource-logo.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4c/Wikisource-logo.svg License: CC BY-SA 3.0
Contributors: Rei-artur Original artist: Nicholas Moreau

8.3

Content license

Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0