An account in Var, France

GEIPAN continues to publish all of its archives on its public website www.geipan.fr. Among its publications are old cases classified at the time (A, B, C, or D) that are now being re-examined, with the sole aim of being more relevant in the conclusions. Thanks to new technical means (software) and the investigation experience gained over all these recent years, this re-examination sometimes leads to new remarks or even a change in classification. This observation case, previously classified D, is part of a set of cases recently re-examined. On October 14, 1981, between 2:30 PM and 2:45 PM, two witnesses observed for one minute the silent movement in the sky of an object of cylindrical shape. No wing or fin was noticed. Of moderate strangeness and good consistency (2 dependent witnesses), this case turns out to be a probable misidentification with an airplane (see the investigation report). Several details in the testimonies strongly suggest the hypothesis of a misidentification with an airplane, notably the appearance of a fuselage without wings, now well known to GEIPAN: the witness-airplane-sun geometry means that the sun's rays are only reflected on the fuselage and not on the wings (one being masked and the other having a reflection surface limited to its edge). An air approach corridor for Marseille airport passes just north of the observation location, with an orientation perfectly consistent with the trajectory of the UAP. The strangeness of the case rests mainly on the fact that the witnesses did not see a wing or fin on the UAP, and that it was estimated to be close to the witnesses. However, the witnesses, another classic error when one does not recognize an object or phenomenon, could not correctly estimate the actual distance separating them from the UAP. The hypothesis of a misidentification with a weather balloon can also be put forward based on the testimonies, but it turns out that the results of a local radiosonde show that the winds were contrary to the direction of movement of the UAP. The case is classified B, probable misidentification with an airplane.