Red lights in Eure, France

In the night of February 23 to 24, 2016, around midnight, several people in cars are intrigued by the passage at very low altitude of an imposing object with lights of different colors, either steady or flashing. The witnesses describe a circular or triangular object moving slowly in the sky at treetop height. Four witnesses make statements to the gendarmerie. It turns out that witnesses T1, T2, and T3 from the same vehicle, and the isolated witness, observed a C130 aircraft, perfectly identified (air traffic), which took off from Base 105 in Évreux heading southwest, then passed south of Conches-en-Ouche at low altitude with a heading of about 210° (see the attached investigation report). Here we have a perfect illustration of what an aircraft, combined with other factors, can produce in terms of fear, emotion, and misidentification, especially when: - the aircraft is unusual (large military plane), causing fear in the witness from Conches-en-Ouche. The plane was too big and flew too slowly for the witness. Indeed, it is already known that Airbus A380s and A320s passing during takeoff or landing do not give at all the same impression of speed and altitude, even though everything is identical. - There is an illusion of hovering (for the witnesses driving on the RD830) resulting from a "pivot effect" when the witness and the phenomenon are both in motion and the axis joining them pivots around a fixed point or zone that is then taken for the stationary point of the phenomenon. The impression of pivoting is favored here by the presence of a fairly continuous foreground of trees that blurs spatial reference. - The lighting is very particular, here the full Moon, which is not seen directly but which, by reflection on the aircraft or diffusion through the treetops, creates disc, cone, and halo light effects that can indeed contribute to the strangeness. The more complete analysis is the subject of the attached document, notably including: - the radar trajectory of the C130 aircraft. - the cartographic reconstruction of the observations with the aircraft's trajectory, the witnesses' positions, and their direction of observation. GEIPAN classifies the case as A: misidentification with an aircraft. More generally, the case illustrates the richness and fragility of human testimony in the face of an unrecognized phenomenon, under observation conditions far from ideal, and moreover, in a state of emotion caused by strangeness. The witnesses from the same car estimate very different distances (300 m to 10 km), they see the aircraft mainly in a circular or round shape but with strong variations, while the witness from Conches-en-Ouche sees a triangle. The red lights can be steady or flashing depending on the witness. The driver of the car is sure he stopped the vehicle while the passengers assert the opposite. One can also wonder about a possible influence effect between witnesses or a "strangeness priming" when a witness detects the phenomenon and shows it to the others while calling it a UFO.