An account in Loiret, France

In addition to processing routine testimonies, GEIPAN re-examines old cases classified at the time as type "D" and published on its site. Thanks to new technical means (software) and the investigation experience acquired over all these recent years, this re-examination sometimes leads to new remarks or even a change of classification explained in an investigation note. This old observation case formerly named CLERY SAINT-ANDRE (45) 1981 is one of the cases classified as "D" by GEPAN and recently re-examined. On January 29, 1981, around 7:15 PM, a witness notices in the sky a very bright point that he cannot explain. The UAP shows color variations as well as small movements. At 7:20 PM, the witness calls the gendarmerie to report the facts. Two gendarmes go immediately to the main witness's home. Together, they observe the UAP until 9:00 PM. At the end of the observation, the UAP is still visible. A night patrol from another brigade will later report that the UAP was "still visible at 12:00 AM and 4:00 AM." Photos were taken by the gendarmes, but turned out blank. The description of the observation location and the UAP is precise, which allows this case to be analyzed in more detail (see the investigation note). It should be noted that the testimonies of the witness and the gendarmes are perfectly consistent with each other, which shows the reality of the phenomenon. The case is consistent (three witnesses, including two gendarmes), the description of the observed UAP is fairly precise, except for the elevation in the sky, which can be described as low by deduction from other indications (for example "between the horizon and the lowest of the stars"). The described phenomenon presents many common characteristics (observation duration, shape, size, color) with a perfectly known astronomical object: Sirius. Indeed Sirius is located exactly in the direction of the main observation (from 7 PM to 9 PM). The main witness rejects the hypothesis of a misidentification with a star, because the UAP changes color and moves erratically, but: - the angular height of Sirius remains low throughout the observation (20° at 9:00 PM), and can explain the twinkling (effects of light rays passing through the atmosphere) in a color palette fully consistent with the witnesses' statements. - the other unusual aspect of the movements (of limited amplitude) may be due to twinkling or may result from the autokinetic phenomenon (see the article on the autokinetic effect). The mention of the UAP's presence at 12:00 AM then at 4:00 AM is compatible with the Sirius hypothesis. Indeed this is noted only by another gendarmerie team that is not reported as having made the initial observation of the UAP. Sirius is then no longer in the southeast direction reported for the UAP. On the other hand, it is very likely that this second team noticed another strangeness in the sky created by Jupiter in conjunction with Saturn. Present indeed in the southeast, Jupiter surpasses the other stars in brightness and presents that evening a double glow due to the conjunction. This second team could legitimately think that this strange glow was that of the UAP that had been reported to them in the southeast at 9 PM. The very great consistency between all the observations and the view that Sirius could give on the evening of the observation from 7 PM to 9 PM (and that which the Jupiter-Saturn conjunction could give at 12:00 AM and 4:00 AM) leaves little doubt about the misidentification with Sirius as far as the main observation between 7 PM and 9 PM is concerned. The strangeness produced by Sirius is fairly classic (twinkling and/or autokinetic) and remains the cause of many misidentifications (see on the GEIPAN site with keyword Sirius, see also for example the Grand-Couronne (76) case 04.17.2016). Consequently GEIPAN classifies the case as A: observation of Sirius.