THINK ABOUTIT UFO|UAP ENCOUNTER REPORT

1952 Salem, Massachusetts UFO Photo: Blue Book’s Two Contradictory Explanations

At 9:35 on the morning of July 16, 1952, Coast Guard photographer Shell Alpert, working in his photo lab at the air station near Beverly and Salem, Massachusetts, aimed his camera through a window screen and captured four elliptical blobs of light in formation — a photograph that would go on to be reproduced repeatedly in the Salem Evening News, examined twice by Project Blue Book (first dismissed as a probable double-exposure hoax, then reconsidered as probable streetlamp reflections), and ultimately left on the books as officially “unexplained.”

Date: July 16, 1952 (Project Blue Book Case No. 1501)

Sighting Time: 9:35 a.m.

Day/Night: Day

Location: Coast Guard air station near Beverly, Massachusetts (published/categorized under nearby Salem, MA)

Urban or Rural: Rural/coastal military installation

No. of Entity(‘s): Not Applicable

Entity Type: Not Applicable

Entity Description: Not Applicable

Hynek Classification: CE-I (Close Encounter, First Kind — object observed in close proximity, within 500 ft)

Duration: Not specified; a single photographic exposure

No. of Object(s): 4

Description of the Object(s): Roughly elliptical blobs of light, captured in formation, photographed through a window screen

Shape/Size/Color of Object(s): Elliptical/blob-like; size and color not precisely specified in surviving documentation

Distance to Object(s): Not specified

Height & Speed: Not specified

Number of Witnesses: 1 photographer (Shell Alpert); the same original incident is documented in this archive’s July 15-21, 1952 weekly index with a second witness, Hospitalman 1st Class Thomas E. Flaherty, who Alpert called over to see the lights before photographing them

Special Features/Characteristics: The objects dimmed, then brightened suddenly, prompting Alpert to grab his camera; photographed through a window screen using Super XX cut film, 4×5 inch format, lens set at infinity, aperture f/4.7, 1/30 second exposure; Blue Book’s analysis reversed itself between two passes (hoax, then reflections) before the case was finally left unexplained

Case Status: Officially Unexplained per Project Blue Book, following two separate and contradictory analysis attempts

Source: National Archives Record Group 341, Project Blue Book Case No. 1501, NARA microfilm reading room; Secrets of the Unknown: The UFOs, Time-Life Books, ISBN 90-6182-993-3; Salem (MA) Evening News

Summary/Description: At 9:35 a.m. on July 16, 1952, Shell Alpert, a Coast Guard seaman assigned to the air station near Beverly and Salem, Massachusetts, photographed four roughly elliptical blobs of light in formation through the window of his photographic laboratory, after the lights dimmed and then brightened suddenly. The photograph was widely published, appearing repeatedly in the Salem Evening News and later in Time-Life’s Secrets of the Unknown: The UFOs. Project Blue Book’s first analysis concluded the image was “probably” a double-exposure hoax; a second analysis instead concluded it was “probably” reflections of streetlamps on the window. Neither explanation was considered definitive, and the case was ultimately classified as unexplained. The complete declassified case file is held at the National Archives (Record Group 341, Project Blue Book Case No. 1501).

Related Cases: This is the same underlying incident documented, with a second named witness (Hospitalman 1st Class Thomas E. Flaherty) and additional photographic detail, in this archive’s July 15-21, 1952 weekly index page under “Beverly, Massachusetts” — presented as one incident across two location names, not two separate cases.

Detailed Report

The case survives principally through a single, widely reproduced photograph. At 9:35 a.m. on July 16, 1952, Shell Alpert, a Coast Guard seaman working as a photographer at an air station near Beverly and Salem, Massachusetts, was in his photo laboratory when he saw four roughly elliptical blobs of light through the window screen. As documented elsewhere in this archive’s records of the same incident, Alpert called a colleague, Hospitalman 1st Class Thomas E. Flaherty, over from sick bay to also witness the lights. When the objects dimmed and then brightened suddenly, Alpert grabbed a camera and captured the now-famous image — shot on Super XX cut film in 4×5 inch format, with the lens set at infinity, an aperture of f/4.7, and a 1/30 second exposure.

The photograph achieved wide circulation, appearing repeatedly in the Salem Evening News in the years following the sighting, and was later reproduced in the book Secrets of the Unknown: The UFOs, published by Time-Life Books.

Project Blue Book’s handling of the case is itself notable for its inconsistency. The first official analysis concluded the image was “probably” the result of a double-exposure hoax. A subsequent, second analysis instead concluded the lights were “probably” reflections of nearby streetlamps on the window glass. Neither theory was presented with enough confidence to be adopted as the case’s final determination, and Blue Book ultimately left the case listed as unexplained rather than resolving it to either the hoax or reflection theory.

The complete declassified case file, including the original photograph in higher quality than most published reproductions, is held at the National Archives in Washington, D.C., under Record Group 341, Project Blue Book Case No. 1501, available to researchers in NARA’s microfilm reading room.

RESEARCHER’S NOTES

The Alpert Photograph — Two Contradictory Official Explanations, Neither Adopted

• The Air Force’s own contradictory analysis is the case’s most telling feature. A first pass concluding “probable hoax” followed by a second pass concluding “probable reflection” — two mutually exclusive theories — followed by an official classification of “unexplained,” suggests Blue Book itself couldn’t settle on a confident mundane explanation, rather than simply lacking investigative attention.
• The photographer’s professional background adds some credibility weight. A Coast Guard photographer, presumably familiar with camera operation and exposure settings, choosing to photograph an unusual sighting rather than simply describing it afterward is a stronger evidentiary starting point than an untrained witness’s verbal account alone.
• The photograph through a window screen introduces a real, specific technical variable worth weighing. Shooting through a screen could plausibly introduce diffraction or reflection artifacts — a detail that neither this archive’s sources nor the original Blue Book analyses appear to have addressed directly.
• This case is the same incident as the “Beverly, Massachusetts” entry documented elsewhere in this archive’s July 1952 weekly records. The two location names reflect where the sighting occurred (Beverly) versus where it was categorized and widely published (Salem) — not two separate events.
• The case’s long-term public visibility, through repeated newspaper and book reproduction, distinguishes it from many single-witness photographic cases that never circulated beyond a private file. Wide publication doesn’t establish authenticity, but it does mean the photograph has been available for decades of independent public scrutiny.

The Alpert photograph stands as a genuinely puzzling case precisely because the Air Force itself couldn’t settle on an explanation, offering two contradictory theories before ultimately filing it as unresolved. Whatever caused the four lights in Alpert’s photograph, it wasn’t confidently identified by the very investigators tasked with explaining it away.

“The first analysis by US Air Force’s Project Blue Book concluded it was ‘probably’ a double exposure hoax. A second analysis… concluded that it was ‘probably’ reflections of street lamps… the case was considered ‘unexplained.'”
— Project Blue Book Case No. 1501 case history