Within Flight 105
Why the Flight 105 Witnesses Mattered
The pilots and stewardess of Flight 105 provided one of the most influential multi-witness UFO reports of the early flying saucer era.
On this page
- Captain Smith and Ralph Stevens observations
- Marty Morrow's independent sighting
- Limits of eyewitness reliability
Page outline Jump by section
Introduction
The Flight 105 sighting became one of the most discussed early UFO reports because its witnesses were not casual observers but trained airline professionals: United Air Lines Captain Emil J. Smith, First Officer Ralph Stevens, and stewardess Marty Morrow. Their testimony did not prove what the objects were, but it changed the evidential character of the 1947 “flying saucer” reports by adding multiple aviation witnesses who attempted to identify the objects using normal flight experience rather than immediately assuming something extraordinary.[Project 1947]project1947.comProject 1947PROJECT 1947: UAL Flight 105, July 4, 1947 - Capt E. J. Smith…
The credibility of the Flight 105 crew rests on several factors: the pilots’ professional background, the independent confirmation provided by Morrow, the length of the observation, and the crew’s initial attempt to interpret the objects as conventional aircraft. At the same time, the case illustrates a central issue in UFO investigations: reliable witnesses can provide strong evidence that an unusual observation occurred, while leaving open the separate question of what was actually observed.[Project 1947]project1947.comProject 1947PROJECT 1947: UAL Flight 105, July 4, 1947 - Capt E. J. Smith…
Why the Flight 105 witnesses stood out
Captain Smith and Ralph Stevens observations
The two pilots formed the core of the report. Flight 105 departed Boise, Idaho, on the evening of 4 July 1947, with Captain Emil J. Smith in command and First Officer Ralph Stevens at the controls. According to contemporary accounts, Stevens first noticed an object that he believed might be another aircraft. He responded as an aviator would in a potentially confusing airspace situation: he flashed the DC-3’s landing lights as a signal. Only after observing the objects more carefully did the pilots conclude that they could not identify conventional aircraft features such as wings or tails.[Project 1947]project1947.comProject 1947PROJECT 1947 - UFO REPORTS: 1947…
This detail became important for later assessments of credibility. The pilots were not initially looking for confirmation of a UFO claim; their first interpretation was ordinary aviation traffic. Supporters of the case have argued that this sequence reduced the likelihood that they simply mislabelled an unfamiliar sight because of pre-existing expectations. Smith, in particular, had publicly expressed scepticism about earlier “flying saucer” reports before his own sighting, reportedly joking that he would believe in such objects when he saw them himself.[Project 1947]project1947.comProject 1947PROJECT 1947: UAL Flight 105, July 4, 1947 - Capt E. J. Smith…
The pilots reported seeing several disc-like objects, including a larger object among a formation. They described watching the objects for several minutes and reported changes in formation before the objects disappeared. Later accounts varied in exact details, including numbers and movements, but the central testimony remained consistent: the crew saw unusual objects in the sky during the flight and could not match them to known aircraft.[Project 1947]project1947.comProject 1947PROJECT 1947: UAL Flight 105, July 4, 1947 - Capt E. J. Smith…
The significance of Smith and Stevens was therefore not simply that they were experienced observers, but that their professional training shaped how they approached the event. They tried to classify the objects within normal aviation categories before treating them as unidentified. This made the case more influential among UFO researchers than many contemporary reports from single, untrained witnesses.[Project 1947]project1947.comProject 1947PROJECT 1947: UAL Flight 105, July 4, 1947 - Capt E. J. Smith…
Marty Morrow’s role as an independent witness
The presence of stewardess Marty Morrow strengthened the case because she provided a third observation from outside the pilots’ immediate decision-making process. After Smith and Stevens noticed the objects, they called Morrow to the cockpit so she could view them herself. Contemporary reports state that she confirmed seeing the objects, adding a separate witness who was not responsible for interpreting the flight situation.[Project 1947]project1947.comProject 1947PROJECT 1947 - UFO REPORTS: 1947…
Her testimony mattered because multi-witness cases are often considered stronger than single-observer reports when the witnesses make their observations independently. In Flight 105’s case, the witnesses shared the same environment and viewing conditions, so their accounts were not completely independent. However, Morrow’s involvement meant the report was not based solely on the perceptions of the two pilots who were already discussing what they were seeing.[Project 1947]project1947.comProject 1947PROJECT 1947: UAL Flight 105, July 4, 1947 - Capt E. J. Smith…
The case also contained an important limitation: although the crew saw the objects, no passenger testimony became part of the main record. The available accounts emphasise the cockpit view, where the pilots had the clearest line of sight, rather than a broad cabin-wide observation. The lack of passenger confirmation did not invalidate the crew’s report, but it meant that the number of direct witnesses remained limited.[Wikipedia]WikipediaFlight 105 UFO sightingFlight 105 UFO sighting
What credibility can and cannot establish
Strengths of the testimony
The strongest argument for the Flight 105 witnesses is the combination of professional experience and contemporaneous reporting. The witnesses were aviation personnel familiar with aircraft identification, weather conditions, and normal flight operations. The event was also reported quickly, with Smith communicating the sighting to aviation personnel after the flight, which reduced concerns that the account was created only after later UFO publicity developed.[Project 1947]project1947.comProject 1947PROJECT 1947: UAL Flight 105, July 4, 1947 - Capt E. J. Smith…
UFO researcher James E. McDonald later highlighted the case as historically important because it involved experienced observers, a prolonged observation period, and multiple witnesses. In testimony prepared for a 1968 US congressional symposium, McDonald described Flight 105 as a significant unidentified case because of these factors.[Project 1947]project1947.comProject 1947PROJECT 1947: UAL Flight 105, July 4, 1947 - Capt E. J. Smith…
The crew’s behaviour during the sighting also contributed to its reputation. They attempted radio communication and sought possible confirmation rather than simply reporting an extraordinary event without investigation. This pattern of cautious observation is one reason the case remained prominent in later discussions of witness reliability.[Project 1947]project1947.comProject 1947PROJECT 1947: UAL Flight 105, July 4, 1947 - Capt E. J. Smith…
Limits of eyewitness evidence
Despite these strengths, experienced witnesses are not immune to misidentification. Aviation professionals are highly trained in recognising aircraft, but unusual observations can still be affected by distance estimates, lighting conditions, perspective, atmospheric effects, and assumptions about speed or movement. A witness can be entirely honest and accurately describe what they perceived while still being mistaken about the object’s identity.
This distinction became central to official UFO investigations. Later Air Force studies examined large numbers of sightings and concluded that many reports could be explained by ordinary aircraft, balloons, astronomical objects, atmospheric phenomena, or misperception, while some remained unidentified because information was insufficient.[U.S. Air Force]af.milOpen source on af.mil. Flight 105’s lasting status came from the fact that the crew’s observations were credible as observations, even though credibility alone could not determine the physical explanation.
Why Flight 105 remained influential
The importance of the Flight 105 testimony lies in the gap between observation and explanation. The case provided one of the earliest examples in the modern UFO era where trained aviation personnel publicly reported an unexplained aerial event. That gave the 1947 wave of sightings a new level of public attention because the witnesses appeared qualified to judge ordinary aircraft.[Project 1947]project1947.comProject 1947PROJECT 1947: UAL Flight 105, July 4, 1947 - Capt E. J. Smith…
For supporters of the case, the crew’s professionalism remains the strongest reason to take the report seriously. For sceptical analysts, the same evidence demonstrates a different lesson: credible witnesses increase confidence that something unusual was seen, but they do not by themselves establish that the object represented unknown technology or an extraordinary origin.
Flight 105 therefore remains valuable as a study in witness credibility itself. It shows both the strength of trained observers in documenting unusual events and the limits of human perception when the available evidence does not include physical traces, recordings, or independent measurements.[Project 1947]project1947.comProject 1947PROJECT 1947: UAL Flight 105, July 4, 1947 - Capt E. J. Smith…
Amazon book picks
Further Reading
Books and field guides related to Why the Flight 105 Witnesses Mattered. Use these as the next step if you want deeper reading beyond the article.
The Report on Unidentified Flying Objects
The Report on Unidentified Flying Objects, written by Captain Edward Ruppelt in 1956, was the first serious, unbiased account written abo...
The UFO Experience: A Scientific Inquiry
Cited by the New York Review of Books as "the best brief for visitation," this classic study presents an analysis of UFO reports and conc...
UFOs: Generals, Pilots, and Government Officials Go on the Re...
NEW YORK TIMES BESTSELLER • Impeccably researched, this riveting journalistic investigation separates fact from fiction, and documents th...
The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark
Are we on the brink of a new Dark Age of irrationality and superstition? In this book, the writer shows how scientific thinking is necess...
eBay marketplace picks
Marketplace Samples
Live-tested eBay searches with available results related to this page.
Selected fromaviation poster oneBay.co.uk.
Endnotes
1.
Source: project1947.com
Link:https://www.project1947.com/fig/ual105.htm
Source snippet
Project 1947PROJECT 1947: UAL Flight 105, July 4, 1947 - Capt E. J. Smith...
Published: July 4, 1947
2.
Source: project1947.com
Link:https://project1947.com/fig/1947d.htm
Source snippet
Project 1947PROJECT 1947 - UFO REPORTS: 1947...
3.
Source: project1947.com
Link:https://www.project1947.com/articles/flying750.htm
Source snippet
Project 1947PROJECT 1947: FLYING Magazine: The Flying Saucers - Fact or Fiction? - July, 1950...
4.
Source: Wikipedia
Title: Flight 105 UFO sighting
Link:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_105_UFO_sighting
6.
Source: project1947.com
Link:https://project1947.com/fig/1950a.htm
7.
Source: project1947.com
Link:https://project1947.com/fig/ka.htm
8.
Source: af.mil
Link:https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/104590/unidentified-flying-objects-and-air-force-project-blue-book/
9.
Source: arewealoneinthisuniverse.fandom.com
Title: Flight 105 UFO sighting
Link:https://arewealoneinthisuniverse.fandom.com/wiki/Flight_105_UFO_sighting
Additional References
10.
Source: archives.gov
Link:https://www.archives.gov/news/articles/project-blue-book-50th-anniversary
Source snippet
December 5, 2019 — PUBLIC INTEREST IN UFOS PERSISTS 50 YEARS AFTER PROJECT BLUE BOOK TERMINATION By Jonathan Marker | National Archives N...
Published: December 5, 2019
11.
Source: thedebrief.org
Title: Smith, took off from Boise, Idaho, at just after 9:00 pm
Link:https://thedebrief.org/summer-of-the-saucers/
Source snippet
Summer of the Saucers - The DebriefJune 21, 2022 — UNITED AIRLINES FLIGHT 105 On July 4th, just eleven days after Kenneth Arnold’s sighti...
Published: June 21, 2022
12.
Source: uap-files.org
Title: It summarizes
Link:https://uap-files.org/documento/4e191615a53faf81
Source snippet
USAF Project SIGN file (1948) — Air Materiel Command (AMC) | Declassified UFO/UAP File · UAP ArchivesJuly 10, 2026 — USAF PROJECT SIGN FI...
Published: July 10, 2026
13.
Source: ufologie.patrickgross.org
Link:https://www.ufologie.patrickgross.org/acufo/1947-07-06-claycenter.htm
Source snippet
Howard W. Smith] Jan 5 1949 MCIAXO SUBJECT: Project "SIGN" T: Chef, Air Weather Service, Andrews Air Force Base, Washington 25, D.C. ATTN...
14.
Source: disclosurearchives.com
Link:https://disclosurearchives.com/project-sign
15.
Source: sacred-texts.com
Link:https://sacred-texts.com/ufo/fsar/fsar04.htm
16.
Source: nicap.org
Link:https://www.nicap.org/bluebook/unknowns.htm
17.
Source: gutenberg.org
Link:https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/17346/pg17346.html
18.
Source: ufosightingsdaily.com
Link:https://www.ufosightingsdaily.com/p/pilot-sightings-49.html
19.
Source: secretsdeclassified.af.mil
Link:https://www.secretsdeclassified.af.mil/Historical-Documents/Unidentified-Flying-Objects/