---------------------------------------------------------------- ================================================================ PROJECT 10073 RECORD CARD -- TRANSCRIPTION File: 1962-05-8666103-Westfield-Massachusetts.pdf Transcribed by Claude Sonnet 4.6 for GlitchyMatrix.com/bluebook/ ================================================================ FIELD 1 -- DATE: 26 May 1962 FIELD 2 -- LOCATION: Westfield, Massachusetts FIELD 3 -- DATE-TIME GROUP: Local [blank] / GMT 27/0345Z [Local field blank on card. 0345Z 27 May converts to approximately 2345 EDT 26 May. Multiple witness questionnaires confirm 11:45-11:50 PM local time.] FIELD 4 -- TYPE OF OBSERVATION: Ground-Visual [X] Ground-Radar [ ] Air-Visual [ ] Air-Intercept Radar [ ] FIELD 5 -- PHOTOS: No FIELD 6 -- SOURCE: Civilian FIELD 7 -- LENGTH OF OBS: 3 - 10 mins FIELD 8 -- NUMBER OF OBJECTS: one FIELD 9 -- COURSE: slow descent FIELD 10 -- BRIEF SUMMARY: Rnd, slightly oval, bright red obj giving off sparks fm top & bottom slowly descending fm 30-45 deg elev to 10 deg elev where obj disappeared behind trees. Center color described as yellowish or white. Observation fm car during drive of two miles. FIELD 11 -- COMMENTS: Possibility suggested is hot air balloon as indicated by the slow descent & sparks. There is not enough info for valid conclusion & the case is listed as unidentified. [Text runs to column edge on card; "unidenti-" breaks across the column boundary; reconstructed as complete word.] FIELD 12 -- CONCLUSIONS: [ ] Was balloon [ ] Probably balloon [ ] Possibly balloon [ ] Was aircraft [ ] Probably aircraft [ ] Possibly aircraft [ ] Was astronomical [ ] Probably astronomical [ ] Possibly astronomical [X] Other: UNIDENTIFIED [ ] Insufficient data for evaluation [ ] Unknown Form: ATIC FORM 329 (REV 26 SEP 52) [Record card present in two copies; second copy is a faint duplicate, less legible. No supplemental form numbers noted.] Supplemental documents present: 1. Official File Copy letter, Col. Edward H. Wynn, USAF, Deputy for Science and Components, 22 October 1962. To-2/Col Wynn header; addresses primary witness by name [redacted]; references sighting of 26 May 1962; encloses four AF Form 164 questionnaires for completion and return; Attachments listed: 4 Atchs / 4 AF Form 164. 2. Incoming Teletype, Dept. of Air Force Staff Message Branch, Unclassified Message, AF IN: 52905, 1 Jun 62, 4 pages. Routing: FM 57AIRDIV WESTOVER AFB MASS / TO RJWFAL/ADC ENT AFB COLO / PJEZSN/26AIRDIV HANCOCK FLD NY / PJEDSS/ ATIC WPAFB OHIO / PJEZHQ/CSAF / PJEZHQ/OSAF WASH DC. Action: CIN-17. Info: SAFS-3, OOP-2, OOP-CP-1, DIA-8 (32). Reference: AFR 200-2, Para 15. Message code: KZCHGB4 44ZCYJE229. Relay: PP RJEZHE / DE RJEXDH 66. Time: P 011551Z. 12-part structured sighting report. Transmitted: 01/1601Z JUN RJEXDH. 3. Four FTD JUL 61 164 questionnaires (U.S. Air Force Technical Information Sheet), each accompanied by a Summary Data sheet. All civilian witness names redacted on questionnaires; completed and returned October 1962. Witness demographics (from teletype, Part F): Primary: age 19, Westfield, MA; occupation stock clerk Witness 2: age 18, Westfield, MA; student Witness 3: age 15, Blanford [sic], MA; student Witness 4: age 16, Blanford [sic], MA; student [Questionnaire age entries partially legible; teletype ages treated as authoritative. "Blanford" spelling in teletype; modern spelling is Blandford, MA.] ================================================================ SEARCH INDEX TERMS ================================================================ Westfield Massachusetts Hampden-County Blandford 1962 May 1960s Route-23 Route-20 Westover-AFB 57th-Air-Division 99th-Bomb-Wing Strategic-Air-Command Chicopee SAC B-52 TSGT-Liebberman civilian four-witnesses multiple-witnesses teenagers youth DeMolay night-sighting ground-visual oval round red sparks descent yellowish white center slow-descent behind-trees hills half-dollar sun-like solid no-sound no-radar unidentified hot-air-balloon-hypothesis diamond-shape FTD-164 teletype-report five-month-delay documentation-gap television-documentary inebriation-ruled-out ================================================================ ================================================================ CASE ANALYSIS -- Claude Sonnet 4.6 ================================================================ THE OFFICIAL CONCLUSION ----------------------- The record card marks this UNIDENTIFIED under "Other," with Field 11 suggesting a hot air balloon based on the slow descent and sparks but conceding insufficient information for a firm conclusion. The substantive investigative record is the 1 June 1962 teletype from 57th Air Division, Westover AFB -- a 12-part structured report filed within days of the event by TSGT Melvin Liebberman, NCOIC, Combat Intelligence Branch, 99th Bomb Wing. Liebberman's final assessment: "No logical explanation of the sighting is offered." Four AF Form 164 questionnaires were collected separately in October 1962 following a letter from Col. Edward H. Wynn. WHAT THE EVIDENCE SHOWS ----------------------- At approximately 2345 EDT on 26 May 1962, four civilians -- two from Westfield and two from Blandford, ages 15 to 19 -- spotted the object while northbound on Massachusetts Route 23, near its junction with Route 20 roughly three-quarters of a mile to the south. They were returning from a DeMolay event. The night was clear, dry, and the car windows were open. Duration: 3 to 10 minutes. The four witnesses agreed on the core description: round to slightly oval, bright red, emitting sparks from both top and bottom, with a yellowish or white center. Apparent angular size approximately that of a matchhead at arm's length; two witnesses independently compared apparent size to a half- dollar held close. No sound at any point. The object descended from roughly 30-45 degrees elevation to approximately 10 degrees before disappearing behind trees on the hills to the south. The teletype gives initial azimuth approximately 220 degrees (SSW) descending to 210 degrees. [Note on bearings: Witness questionnaires variously record the viewing direction as "Northwest" or approximately 270 degrees, in tension with the 220-210-degree figure from the teletype. The discrepancy likely reflects the car's heading and orientation as the witnesses pulled over and backtracked. The terrain verification by Liebberman provides better ground truth than the witnesses' compass estimates.] Liebberman physically retraced the observation route afterward and confirmed terrain and direction descriptions matched. He ruled out windshield or window reflections given the weather and open windows. He noted the area to the south and southwest of the sighting point contained no factories or large towns. He also addressed the obvious credibility concern: "This, plus their ages, can discount the possibility of inebriation." Inebriation aside, the witnesses' young ages and lack of observational training are still relevant to weighting the account. Meteorological data from the teletype shows surface winds from 350 degrees (NNW) at 5 knots, backing to 310-322 degrees at altitude. An object drifting in these winds would travel toward the SSE -- broadly consistent with the reported southward descent and disappearance behind the hills to the south. POINTS OF INTEREST / WHAT GIVES ME PAUSE ----------------------------------------- The hot air balloon candidate suggested in Field 11 is not implausible given the slow descent and wind direction, but it does not comfortably account for two reported features. First, sparks from the top and bottom simultaneously: a standard hot air balloon burner projects flame upward into the envelope interior and would not produce sparks from the bottom of the envelope as viewed externally. A malfunctioning burner or some secondary source might produce visible sparks from the top, but the "top and bottom" detail is consistent across accounts and unusual for any balloon scenario. Second, two witnesses independently described the object's shape as "a red diamond with slightly rounded edges" -- a specific morphology that does not obviously correspond to a balloon envelope, though angle and distance could distort apparent shape. The October 1962 questionnaires, completed approximately five months after the sighting, produced some details absent from the June 1962 teletype report. One witness added in her Summary Data sheet that after the object descended toward the earth, it "appeared back in the sky about the same place it started from" after a few minutes. This return-trip element is not referenced in the contemporaneous teletype account. Liebberman explicitly noted that a local television documentary on UFOs had aired in the week preceding the sighting and that it had not been confirmed whether the witnesses saw it. The five-month gap and the possible media influence both argue for treating these late-added details cautiously. The teletype is unusually thorough for a civilian case of this era: physical route verification, four separately obtained accounts, full meteorological data, and a 12-part structured report filed within a week. Liebberman's investiga-tion is credible and conscientious, which makes his "no logical explanation" conclusion worth taking at face value rather than dismissing as a failure to close out an obvious case. No radar contact was reported (Part Eight: None). No intercept was attempted (Part Nine: None). Westover AFB, home of the 99th Bomb Wing (SAC), is approximately 12 miles northeast of the sighting location; no alert activity is mentioned in the file. BOTTOM LINE ----------- The UNIDENTIFIED classification reflects a genuine evidential gap, not a dramatic unexplained event. Something in the sky over Route 23 -- slow-moving, descending, apparently large enough to terrify four people in a car -- could not be identified by a capable field investigator who retraced the route and filed a careful report. The hot air balloon hypothesis remains the most viable conventional explanation: wind direction, descent profile, and luminous appearance are all consistent. But "most viable" is not "confirmed," and the sparks-from-below detail and the diamond-shape descriptions provide just enough friction to keep this genuinely open. What the record does not show is any systematic effort to check for balloon launches in the area or to consult civilian balloon operators, which would have been the logical next step. That information gap is what keeps the case officially unresolved -- and it is unlikely to close sixty-plus years later. ================================================================ https://glitchymatrix.com/bluebook/ GlitchyMatrix Project Blue Book Archive All 10,808 declassified USAF UFO case files, 1945-1969 ================================================================ ----------------------------------------------------------------