Skip to content
Project NikolaosNescis quid serus vesper vehat

Twentieth-century state investigation

Project Blue Book - the record cards

1952–1969 · United States · United States Air Force

A printed and typewritten form on a ruled grid, photographed from microfilm. Numbered boxes hold the date, place, time, type of observation, source, length of observation, number of objects and course. A column at the right lists conclusions as checkboxes in graded sets. Two boxes at the foot hold a typed summary of the sighting and a short comment.

The standard Blue Book record card: a report on the left, a checkbox for the explanation on the right.

Source & rights
What this is
Documentary record
Object
Document
Title
Project 10073 Record Card, Woodside, California, 3 August 1959
Creator
United States Air Force, Project Blue Book
Date
1959
Held by
United States National Archives, via Wikimedia Commons
Page
Page 1 of the scanned file
Licence
Public domain
Rights basis
Public domain (work of the United States federal government)
This copy
One page rendered from the source PDF at 2200 × 2749, with the blank scan margin trimmed; the page itself is unaltered.
Retrieved
2026-08-29

An administrative record of a report having been made. It documents the reporting, not the thing reported.

The form is the argument. Its conclusions column offers Was, Probably and Possibly for each of balloon, aircraft and astronomical, and then Other, Insufficient Data for Evaluation and Unknown. A bureaucracy printed degrees of confidence onto a form and required an officer to pick one, which is more epistemic discipline than most of the material in this archive ever received.

Source recordLicence

From 1952 to 1969 the United States Air Force ran a standing office to collect and evaluate reports of things seen in the sky. Its central artefact is not a conclusion but a form: the Project 10073 Record Card, a single sheet with the report on the left and the explanation on the right.

The right-hand column is the interesting part. It does not offer a yes and a no. It offers, for each candidate explanation, three degrees - was, probably, possibly - and then Other, Insufficient Data for Evaluation, and Unknown. Somebody had to choose one, initial it, and file it.

What the source is

A record series of several thousand case files, each typically containing a summary record card, correspondence, witness statements and any supporting material, produced by an Air Force office between 1952 and 1969 and now held by the United States National Archives.

The individual card reproduced here is from a sighting reported at Woodside, California, on 3 August 1959, and was evaluated as probably aircraft.

The report

Original

Brief summary of sighting - Silver or gold obj, looked like jet fighter. Had stubby swept wings, very little fuselage. Had straight level path faded out of sight. Appeared 60' NE; disappeared 60° SW. Comments - Probably a/c Conclusions - Probably Aircraft (checked)
Project 10073 Record Card, Woodside, California, 3 August 1959. Transcribed from the scanned card reproduced on this page; Wikimedia Commons, from United States National Archives microfilm; retrieved 29 August 2026.

No English translation is published. None has been prepared and reviewed, and an unchecked rendering of the only text on this page would be the one thing this record cannot afford.

One phrase, closely

Source
Appeared 60' NE; disappeared 60° SW
Literal
first seen at sixty degrees elevation to the north-east, lost at sixty degrees to the south-west
Rendered as
As typed, with a prime mark in the first instance and a degree sign in the second

Four sentences of description, two words of judgement. What the observer supplied is shape, colour, wing form, path and bearing; what the office supplied is a category. The card keeps them in separate boxes, and does not pretend the second was derived from the first by anything more than an officer's opinion.

Why it is in this archive

For the form, not for the sightings. This is the only source in the collection where the people receiving reports designed an instrument for grading their own confidence, printed it, and were obliged to use it every time.

The vocabulary is better than most of what has been written about this material since. Was, probably, possibly, insufficient data, unknown - five positions on a scale that a fourth-century hagiography, a nineteenth-century compiler and a modern museum catalogue all collapse into one. That the scale existed on a printed form in an office in Ohio is the interesting historical fact.

The limits are equally clear and are not hidden by the card. The office had institutional reasons to prefer explanations to non-explanations, evaluations were made by officers of varying interest and competence, the witnesses were often not re-interviewed, and a great deal turns on who filled in which box. A graded scale used badly still produces a number.

The correspondence filed alongside is kept for a different reason. The routing marks across the face of a letter are the chain of transmission made visible - who read it, when, and what they were told to do next. Everywhere else in this archive that chain has to be inferred from the text that survived it.

The words the source uses

Given in the language they were written in, with a plain rendering. None is treated as equivalent to a term from another tradition.

Insufficient Data for Evaluation
there is not enough here to decide
A printed option on the form, distinct from Unknown. The distinction is exact and this archive has no better one: a report that cannot be assessed is a different object from a report that has been assessed and not explained.
Unknown
assessed, and not accounted for
The form's own word. It records the state of the evaluation, not a claim about the object, and the difference is the whole reason the card is worth reproducing here.

How close is the source?

Recorded by someone close to the witness or the event, but not dictation.

  1. 01 · Observed by

    A civilian observer, unnamed on the card

    The card records the source as civilian and does not name the person.

  2. 02 · Reported to

    An Air Force base receiving the report

  3. 03 · Evaluated by

    An officer of the Project Blue Book office, completing the record card

    The evaluation on this card is Probably Aircraft, with the comment probably a/c.

  4. 04 · Filed and microfilmed by

    The United States National Archives

  5. 05 · Digitised and republished by

    Wikimedia Commons, from the National Archives microfilm

    The scans reproduced here are of the microfilm, not of the original paper.

Source gallery

Every image is labelled with what it is evidence for. Select one to see it whole.

Project Nikolaos annotation

Written by this project. Not part of the source, and not a translation of anything in it.

W.W. · Earlier notebook
Was, probably, possibly, insufficient data, unknown. Printed on the form, so that the person filling it in could not avoid saying how sure they were. I have not found a better scale and I am not sure there is one.
Details, provenance and rights
Experiencer state
Awake
Reported agency
Unidentified agency
Locomotion claim
None
Physical trace
None reported · Unresolved
Witness or speaker
Civilian and military observers, usually named in the file and not on the card
Recorder / translator
Air Force officers completing a standard form, and the clerks who routed it
Edition
Project 10073 Record Card and associated correspondence, 1959; National Archives microfilm, digitised
Rights
May be reproduced from a verified public-domain edition
Cultural sensitivity
Ordinary historical context

Provenance notes

  • The scanned file from which these pages come contains material of more than one date. The record card is dated August 1959 and the correspondence October 1959, and this project has not established that they concern the same matter. Each image is described as what it is.
  • This project has not consulted the National Archives original, only the published scan.
  • Nothing here is offered in support of, or against, any claim about aerial phenomena. The entry concerns an investigative instrument and how it recorded confidence.
  • The names of observers are not reproduced. Several appear redacted in the scan, and this archive does not restore redactions.

Works of the United States federal government are not subject to copyright. The pages here were extracted from public-domain scans and the licence was verified against the file record.

Source record