An account in Bas-Rhin, France

On May 9, 2018 at about 7:30 PM, a witness from a rugby field is intrigued by the passage in the sky of a very bright cylindrical ball and a black ball. The latter comes from the NE and heads toward the SW. No noise is heard. The observation lasts about a minute before the witness loses sight of the UAP. Nevertheless, the witness has time to take three photographs. No other testimony will be collected at GEIPAN. The witness is both excited and bothered by his observation in the sense that he really wants an explanation (or a non-explanation?). He has indeed made other strange observations in the past (without reporting to GEIPAN), he is documented on UFOs, and this time hopes are high because he took photos. He may be disappointed by an explanation that would not live up to his expectations. Indeed, the speed of movement as well as the appearance of the UAP in the photo strongly suggest a commercial airliner. In the unzoomed photo, equivalent to the naked eye, the plane is only a bright point without a contrail (contrails not being automatic) and typical of an airplane. The strangeness for the witness must have arisen from the zoom (or from particularly sharp natural vision) which reveals the elongated shape without wings. Multiple examples processed at GEIPAN show that it is common for only the fuselage to reflect the sun and for the plane to appear thus without wings, like a cigar. This is especially the case when the sun is transverse to the fuselage and only "sees" the thickness of the wing, as here with a sun at 282° azimuth orthogonal to the NE-SW trajectory described for this UAP. And proof is established, since we find the airplane "in question." As shown in the attached reconstruction, at 7:29 PM (time of the photo), we have an airplane going from NE to SW whose evolution seen from the rugby field matches the testimony. In particular, the photo allows, thanks to the IPACO software, identification of the height of the UAP relative to the treetops of the first trees bordering the rugby field to the south. These trees are about a hundred meters away, assuming the witness is in the middle of the stands. The treetop height is between 5° and 10° depending on whether the tree height is 5 or 15 m (there are two trees of different heights in the photo). This places the UAP at a height in the sky around 35°, when adding the heights measured on the photo. And this is indeed the order of magnitude of the height of the airplane on the radar capture at 12 km and 10.6 km altitude, i.e., at 41° of height in the sky. The difference is explained by the unknowns and errors in the witness's position along the stands, knowledge of the tree heights, and the synchronization between the photo and the radar capture of the airplane. The latter moving away quickly while decreasing in height in the sky. The black UAPs mentioned by the witness are rather dirt on the lens; they are moreover numerous. Consequently, GEIPAN classifies the case as A: airplane.