ALSACAT ▶ Home ☰

Cette page en français

ALSACAT:

◀ Previous case Next case ▶

Case of Lutterbach, on February 22, 1977:

Case number:

ALSACAT-1977-02-22-LUTTERBACH-1

Summary:

In the ufology magazine Lumières Dans la Nuit #221-222 for November / December 1982, local ufologist J. Journot reported on his investigation into a case à in Kaysersberg in 1982; on thos occation ufologiyt Fernand Lagarde made his comments, and listed some other sightings around this town, including one noted "Lautenbach" on February 22, 1977.

The case was included without further information in the "Catalogue of observations year 1977" of the Comité Nord-Est des Groupements Ufologiques (CNEGU) (North-East Committee of Ufological Groups), around 1987.

Subsequently, I found out that this case was the subject of a file in the archive of the ufology magazine Lumières Dans La Nuit in the 1970s or 1980s.

The sheet included the report of a witness herself, Marie-Thérèse Paslawski, resident of Jebsheim, no profession, 28 at the time of the observation.

This lady reported that on February 22, 1977, around 05:55 p.m., she was the passenger in the car driven by her gendarme husband, on the departmental road linking Thann to Mulhouse.

Night was about to fall and the sky was getting darker, when, finding themselves in the open countryside about 10 kilometers from Mulhouse on the outskirts of the commune of Lutterbach, they both saw "an extremely luminous ball of silvery clarity."

She estimated that the shiny ball was about 8 to 10 kilometers from them, and that its altitude was 500 or 1000 meters. At eyesight, she estimated that it must have been located significantly above the western outskirts of Mulhouse, above the localities of Bourtzwiller or Illzach.

Her husband had to stop his observation after about 2 to 3 seconds because he was looking at the luminous dot while driving; she was then alone in observing what happened next: the round object "instantly transformed into an oval shape, pale yellow surrounded by a white halo." In the space of a short moment, which she estimated to be around 2 seconds, she saw this oval shape gradually diminish before immediately disappearing.

She added that "the craft was surrounded by a very luminous white ring."

She estimated the total duration of her observation at around 5 seconds, with the phenomenon remaining still and silent for the duration of the observation. She thought that seen "from a distance" the circular object "must have had a diameter of approximately one centimeter, which suggests that the craft must have been relatively large."

She expressed her astonishment to have noted that there were no other witnesses, no press article having reported the facts. She assured she was trustworthy, as well as her gendarme husband.

Data:

Temporal data:

Geographical data:

Witnesses data:

Ufology data:

Classifications:

Sources:

[Ref. aldl:] MRS. GUEUDELOT, "LUMIERES DANS LA NUIT" ARCHIVE:

[Ref. ldl1:] UFOLOGY MAGAZINE "LUMIERES DANS LA NUIT":

Notes: In the years 1960-1980, ufologist Fernand Lagarde searched for "connections" between UFO observations places and, among other things, "geological faults". Without wishing to specify what such a link would demonstrate, he had often commented on reports of investigations by local investigators published in the ufology magazine Lumières Dans La Nuit, intending to show that such geographic connections did exist.

In the case of Alsace, the task is easy: the whole of the plain of Alsace is a basin of collapse of the old Hercynian mountain range top, of which only the "edges" remain, the Vosges and the Black Forest on the other side of the Rhine River, in Germany. As a result, one should claim that all observations in Alsace are located on a geological fault! Is there anything to be concluded from this as to the nature of the observations? In my opinion, absolutely nothing.

As for "BAVIC", mentioned by Lagarde, it was about a line across France passing by the cities of BAyonne and VIChy, on which the pioneer ufologist Aimé Michel had thought in the years 1950, that on September 24, 1954, there were such a large number of "aligned" sightings on this line that mere chance could not account for it.

Michel, not having the resources to go check each observation report, argued that this alignment signified the reality and the remarkable nature of these observations since hallucinations, lies and misinterpretation could not be propagated on such a straight line.

In reality, the "statistically improbable" character of this alignment has been questioned, but above all, most if not all of the cases he cited for this day are not only explained by trivial causes (mistakes, hoaxes ...), not only were they badly dated and almost never occurred on September 24, 1954, but also, Aimé Michel had not at all been aware of all the cases of that day.

Aimé Michel, at the end of the 1960s, admitted that the "BAVIC line" had no reality; but many others like Fernand Lagarde continued to promote it as a "fact", "extending" the line geographically all around the world and extending it temporally to any observation on this line whatever the date, but without ever verifying that it there would really be a statistical anomaly in this.

[Ref. cnu1:] UFOLOGY GROUP "CNEGU":

Discussion:

The witnesses are in "W", 10 km from Mulhouse, on the road linking Thann to Lutterbach:

The "ball" is located by the witness towards the Illzach - Bourtzwiller area, therefore between 88° and 105°.

The distance and altitude estimates, in themselves, are not worth much since we have an unknown "object", certainly outside of stereoscopic vision at 50 m, and without background landmarks. However, the distance - height relationship may suggest that the object was not very high. The indicator gives a distance of 8 to 10 km, an altitude of 0.5 to 1 km:

We can then think of a helicopter or airplane headlight, the white halo surrounding it possibly being caused by fog - it is February. The disappearance can be explained if the craft veered. Immobility does not pose a problem since the witnesses are moving and the observation is very brief.

An astronomical explanation is more doubtful: it is not yet really dark, and the sky map for this place does not show anything particular towards the East of the witnesses, in particular, absence of Venus which is at 234°.

Evaluation:

Possible plane or helicopter.

Sources references:

* = Source is available to me.
? = Source I am told about but could not get so far. Help needed.

• [ald1] * Record of the archive by Mrs. Gueudelot, of the ufology magazine Lumières Dans La Nuit (LDLN), France, not dated, published circa 2020 by the ufology association SCEAU, France, at https://sceau-archives-ovni.org/fonds/fond_gueudelot/base_guy_jpr_fiches_gueudelot.html
• [ldl1] * In comments by Fernand Lagarde in "Phénomène à Kaysersberg (Ht-Rhin)", investigation report by J. Journot, in the ufology magazine Lumières Dans La Nuit (LDLN), France, #221-222, page 32, November / December 1982.
• [cnu1] * "Catalogue des observations année 1977, catalogue by the Comité Nord-Est des Groupements Ufologiques (CNEGU), France, page 7, not dated, circa 1987.

File history:

Authoring:

Changes history:

Feedback  |  Top  |  Back  |  Forward  |  Map  |  List |  Home

This page was last updated on September 7, 2023.