An account in Moselle, France

On October 15, 2014, at around 10:35–10:40 PM, a female driver (W1) in the municipality of Vescheim (57) is intrigued by the presence in the sky of a luminous phenomenon with fixed colors. This UAP approaches the witness very quickly and silently and strongly frightens her. Once home, she reports her sighting to her relatives and on a social network. A second female driver (W2), independently of the first, reports that while driving in the municipality of Vilsberg (57) at around 11:45 PM on October 15, 2014, she observed the presence in the sky of continuous lights and a circular shape that intrigued her. After reporting the facts to her entourage and on the same social network as W1, the two drivers get in touch with each other. Due to the unusual but highly consistent nature of the descriptions provided by 2 independent witnesses, the declared absence of aircraft in the area, and the negative results of various searches related to luminous phenomena produced locally by projectors or by model aircraft, it is currently impossible to support an explanation (see the investigation report). GEIPAN classifies this case as unexplained, in category D1; the great observation distance, the dynamic behavior of the phenomenon without exceptional character, the limited duration of each observation, the fact that the witnesses were constantly in motion (even slow) and mostly observed through a car window are a set of points that do not allow classification in D2. The consistency of the testimonies (information and reliability) is good and allows validating the strange character of the observation. If it happened that potential observers present in the car or truck mentioned by the witnesses came forward, the classification could be subject to modification. Note that the observation collected following the appeal for witnesses (made by a newspaper) reinforces the idea that our two witnesses may have actually observed something unusual. Note: the anomalies reported regarding W1's car, on the one hand not having been examined with sufficient attention, and on the other hand being offset in time and space relative to the manifestation of the UAP, it does not seem objectively possible (unless additional elements come to light) to consider them as linked to the observation. GEIPAN classifies this case as unexplained in D1.