ALSACATHome 

Cette page en françaisCliquez!

ALSACAT:

ALSACAT is my comprehensive catalog of UFO sighting reports in Alsace, the region is the North-East of France, whether they are "explained" or "unexplained".

The ALSACAT catalog is made of case files with a case number, summary, quantitative information (date, location, number of witnesses...), classifications, all sources mentioning the case with their references, a discussion of the case in order to evaluate its causes, and a history of the changes made to the file. A general index and thematic sub-catalogs give access to these Alsatian case files.

◀ Previous case Next case ▶

Case of Carspach, on November 12, 2008:

Case number:

ALSACAT-2008-11-12-CARSPACH-1

Summary:

On November 13, 2008, the GEIPAN, public service which in France is in charge of studying and informing on "Unidentified Aerospace Phenomena" received a questionnaire spontaneously sent by the only witness to this observation, who reported:

"Hello, this evening I made an observation in the sky and I would like to share with you, in order firstly to help your research and secondly to perhaps satisfy my curiosity."

"The sighting took place at around 10:40 p.m.; I was driving on the main road between Altkirch and Carspach (dept 68). Straight ahead of me (so guessing south of my position) I suddenly saw a green light. My first thought was that it was fireworks, because the light was similar to the green of fireworks. But the problem is that instead of going up the light was going down; it followed a straight line to the right and down (it was actually falling).

"I was also amazed by the size of the light. The sighting only lasted a few seconds, hard to estimate the size, but relative to the occupied size in the sky, I'd say 1/2 moon if that makes sense to you. Other information, there was a cone-shaped trail (I believe) on the back, about twice the length of the light. Everything went very quickly, on the one hand because I was driving and was hampered by the trees, on the other hand because everything moved very quickly. That's all for observation.

"My friend and I being quite interested in celestial phenomena and UFOs, we did some quick research on the Internet. I saw 1 video of a meteorite crossing the sky, the color and speed of which was approaching my observation, which leads me to believe that this may be what I saw."

The case is therefore almost what in ufology is called a "negative case", since the witness himself found an ordinary explanation for his observation.

GEIPAN dug into the case all the same, reopening the case in 2017, identifying the meteor shower to which this one belonged, and finding other similar testimonies in France which clearly show that a meteor is the explanation.

Data:

Temporal data:

Date: November 12, 2008
Time: 10:40 p.m.
Duration: Secondes.
First known report date: November 13, 2008
Reporting delay: 1 day.

Geographical data:

Department: Haut-Rhin
City: Carspach
Place: Driving in car.
Latitude: 47.615
Longitude: 7.218
Uncertainty radius: 200 m.

Witnesses data:

Number of alleged witnesses: 1
Number of known witnesses: 1
Number of named witnesses: 0
Witness(es) ages: 27
Witness(es) types: Communications officer.

Ufology data:

Reporting channel: To the GEIPAN.
Type of location: In car driving on country road.
Visibility conditions: Night, clouded.
UFO observed: Yes
UFO arrival observed: Yes
UFO departure observed: Yes
Entities: No
Photographs: No.
Sketch(s) by witness(es): No.
Sketch(es) approved by witness(es): No.
Witness(es) feelings: Puzzled.
Witnesses interpretation: ?

Classifications:

Hynek: NL
ALSACAT: Meteor.

Sources:

[Ref. gei1:] GROUPE D'ETUDES ET D'INFORMATIONS SUR LES PHENOMENES AEROSPATIAUX NON IDENTIFIES (G.E.I.P.A.N.):

CARSPACH (68) 11/12/2008

SUMMARY

Short observation by a motorist of the downward curve of a green light with a cone-shaped trail: probable atmospheric re-entry

DESCRIPTION

On November 12, 2008 at approximately 10:40 p.m., a motorist observed the downward curve of a green light followed by a cone-shaped trail. The sighting only lasted a few seconds.

The testimony is consistent and the phenomenon is corroborated by two other independent witnesses (found on a web board) and very distant, even by a radio recording (see the report of the investigation).

This observation corresponds well, as the witness predicted after some research, to the re-entry into the atmosphere of a meteor. In reality, it comes from the "North" Taurid swarm which produces beautiful, fairly slow fireballs. The day also corresponds to the maximum activity of this swarm which, observed elsewhere, was active at that time. Two testimonies from the Bordeaux region, compatible in time, description and trajectory confirm, given the distance separating Bordeaux from Carspach, that the UAP was necessarily at high altitude. This further reinforces the hypothesis adopted.

Consequently the GEIPAN classifies the case as A: meteoroid reentry.

WITNESS

DATE OF THE OBSERVATION 11/12/2008
GENDER F

CONDITION

ENVIRONMENT GROUND OCCUPATION Artificialized territories - Urban areas - Discountinuous urban terrain
WEATHER CONDITIONS Very cloudy or overcast
LOCAL DATE AND TIME 11/12/2008 10:40:00 p.m.
REFERENCE FRAME Contry Landscape
DISTANCE BETWEEN PHENOMENON AND WITNESS impossible to determine impossible to determine
START OF THE OBSERVATION Conditions of appearance provoked by the phenomenon
END OF THE OBSERVATION Conditions of disappearance provoked by the phenomenon

LOCALIZATION

ANGLE OF SITE ELEVATION 0.00 0.00
HORIZONTAL DIRECTION OF OBSERVATION 0.00 0.00
HEADING left to right left to right
NATURE OF THE OBSERVATION OR DESCRIPTIVE TERMS Descriptive terms (lights, shape, etc.)
CHARACTERISTIC OF THE OBSERVATION Trail, tail; Luminous Halo(s)
GLOBAL SHAPEE 1D - Beam, line ; 3D - 1 axis of symmetry - Droplet
COLOR Green
APPARENT SIZE 1/2 Moon
APPARENT SPEED Very fast
NOISE _Unknown; None, Total silence
NUMBER OF OBSERVED PHENOMENA 1

Scan.

Message

Page 1 / 1

From: Geipan
Sent: Tuesday November 18, 2008 11:00
To: []
Object: RE: questionnaire

Hello,

we have received the questionnaire relating to your observation of November 12, 2008 and we thank you for it; your testimony will be taken into consideration.

Later on, we invite you to connect to the website, under the heading "Search"

http://www.geipan.fr/geipan/recherche.html where your testimony will appear when it is treated.

Best regards,
GEIPAN
Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales

-----Original message-----

From: [-]
Sent: Thursday November 13, 2008 01:46
To: Geipan
Object: questionnaire

Hello,

See attached questionnaire.

Best regards

Scan.

cnes
NATIONAL CENTER FOR SPATIAL STUDIES

ASSISTANT MANAGEMENT OF THE TOULOUSE SPACE CENTER

STUDY AND INFORMATION GROUP ON THE
UNIDENTIFIED AEROSPACE PHENOMENA

Head: J. Patenet geipan@cnes.fr

FOREWORD

As part of CNES's activity of expertise in unidentified aerospace phenomena, GEIPAN works to collect, analyze and rigorously study the testimonies collected during UFO sightings, while guaranteeing the witnesses the level of discretion they want. The rigor of the scientific approach requires us to gather the most precise, complete and detailed information possible, with a minimum of intermediaries. This means that the best information document is the one that is freely written by the witness himself. This is why we have established the attached questionnaire so that the witness can fill it independently.

This questionnaire begins with a free narration of the observation and continues with a list of more specific questions. It is important to begin by freely writing down all the memories preserved during this observation and this, before reading the questionnaire. Then, you will have to fill it in as completely as possible (you can, however, skip the questions that you could not or would not like to answer). The questionnaire may have brought back memories or inspired comments. We invite you to fill in the final pages provided for this purpose.

The questionnaire that you will send back to us, after having filled it, will then be studied with the other documents dealing with the same phenomenon. When the work is completed, we will let you know the conclusions that we may have been able to draw. We thank you in advance for your contribution to our work.

The head of GEIPAN
J.PATENET

NATIONAL SPACE STUDIES CENTER

Headquarters
2 place Maurice Quentin - 75039 Paris Cedex 01
Phone: 01 44 76 75 00 / Fax: 01 44 76 76 76

Center of Toulouse
18, avenue Edouard Belin - 31401 Toulouse Cedex 9
Phone: 05 61 27 31 31 / Fax: 05 61 27 31 79

Website: http\\www.cnes.fr
RCS PARIS B 775 665 912 - SIRET 775 665 912 000 82 / CODE APE 731 Z
VAT identification number: FR 49 775 665 912

Scan.

This page and the following are intended to be used to independently write the narrative of your observation.

You are entirely free to choose the form, content and duration of your story (you can add additional pages if necessary).

However, if you believe you have already made such a narration in writing (in a previous correspondence, for example), report it and proceed immediately to the questionnaire.


Hello, this evening I made an observation in the sky and I would like to share it with you, firstly to help your research and secondly to satisfy my curiosity.

The sighting took place at approximately 10:40 p.m.; I was driving on the main road in Altkirch and Carspach (dept 68). Straight ahead of me (thus guessing south of my position) I suddenly saw a green light. My first thought was that it was fireworks, because the light was similar to the green of fireworks. But the problem is that instead of going up the light went down; it followed a straight line to the right and down (it was actually falling). I was also surprised by the size of the light. The sighting only lasted a few seconds, hard to estimate the size, but relative to the occupied size in the sky, I'd say 1/2 moon if that makes sense to you. Other information, there was a cone-shaped trail (I believe) on the back, about twice the length of the light. Everything went very quickly, on the one hand because I was driving and was hampered by the trees, on the other hand because everything moved very quickly. That's all for the observation.

My friend and I being quite interested in celestial phenomena and UFOs, we did some quick research on the Internet. I saw 1 video of a meteorite crossing the sky, the color and speed of which was approaching my observation, which leads me to think that this may be what I saw.

_ full_questionnaire.doc /

Scan.

(J'omet les pages de narration libre restées vides.)

We ask you to provide us with a certain amount of information on the circumstances and content of your observation, by answering the following questionnaire.

This is for you to report what you personally did, saw, heard, smelled, felt, etc., regardless of what other people (whether or not they participated in the same observation) have may have said or suggested to you, then or later.

If some questions seem inappropriate or embarrass you for one reason or another, you can of course not answer them. In any case, CNES is committed to respecting the level of discretion you desire.

INFORMATION ON THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE SIGHTING

INDICATIONS ON THE ENVIRONMENT

10:40 p.m. to within 3 minutes (Paris winter time), November 12, 2008

_ full_questionnaire.doc /

Scan.

D432 road, between Altkirch and Carspach, direction Carspach, just about when entering this village. I was driving, probably around 60 km/h

_ full_questionnaire.doc /

Scan.

It was dark and cold (about 5°C), no rain. Didn't pay attention to the wind. Overcast weather.

Hill to my left with houses, The Ill [river] to my right and below. Presence of trees in my field of vision which quickly obscured my visibility of the phenomenon.

N/A (no idea of the distance of the phenomenon from my position)

_ full_questionnaire.doc /

Scan.

VIEWING CONDITIONS

Presence of tall trees in front and to my right, behind which the light disappeared

I did not meet a car during the time I was on this stretch of road. Nothing more to say.

no

_ full_questionnaire.doc /

Scan.

I was wearing my contact lenses!

SITUATION OF THE WITNESS IN RELATION TO THE OBSERVATION

This part of the questionnaire is intended to help better understand the circumstances in which the observation was made, the state of preparation or unpreparedness of the witness vis-à-vis his observation.

27

Communication Officer

Bac ES (with honors) - BTS commerce - IUP multimedia communication

_ full_questionnaire.doc /

Scan.

See answers above.

"oh cool a firework!, but it's weird because the light is coming down... a distress flare? no, it's too big..." in short, a bit of a surprise but nothing more, I didn't stop driving. Needless to say, there was nothing to do. I tried to see more when I turned towards the center of the village, but nothing.

See answer above. Of course, I imagined an extra-terrestrial phenomenon for a moment, but the usual observations show something that is stable, or vertical, not falling.

_ full_questionnaire.doc /

Scan.

Moderate interest (observing the stars and the sky with the naked eye)

I have already done some quick research on the asteroid apophis which must pass close to the earth. The question doesn't really concern me

same

To my friend, who was watching reports on the b2 and the haarp project... he had no particular reaction, and we looked together for possible solutions.

_ full_questionnaire.doc /

Scan.

Badminton - cooking - reading (mystery novels, science fiction novels)

?

Doesn't concern me

_ full_questionnaire.doc /

Scan.

No (too hard to explain at this time, sorry...)

INFORMATION ON THE CONTENT OF THE OBSERVATION

GENERAL INFORMATION ON THE BEGINNING AND END OF THE OBSERVATION

Light in my field of vision

_ full_questionnaire.doc /

Scan.

Route D432 towards carspach, so I was going roughly south. Phenomenon in front of me, which moved to the right (east)

_ full_questionnaire.doc /

Scan.

-

Impossible to say

10 seconds

See answers above

DETAILED INFORMATION ON THE EVOLUTION OF THE PHENOMENON

_ full_questionnaire.doc /

Scan.

Some phenomena are complex and give rise to the observation of several visible forms, either simultaneously or successively. The visible shapes can either be of the same type or of different types. The questionnaire is designed to describe separately and in detail each type of visible form, to indicate how many visible forms of each type have been observed, and then to describe the relative evolutions in time and space of these forms.

Each type of visible form must therefore first be described in detail as if it were alone. In particular, if there is a change in appearance, each phase of the change will first be described independently of those that follow or precede.

1st type of visible shape

cf. answers above

regular

Fuzzy contours, like fireworks (light with halo

_ full_questionnaire.doc /

Scan.

Round with a streak

See. answers above

_ full_questionnaire.doc /

Scan.

Firework type or distress flare

_ full_questionnaire.doc /

Scan.

Impossible to estimate distance and therefore size

no

_ full_questionnaire.doc /

The following pages, intended to answer the same questions for one or more subsequent phases of the observed phenomenon, remained empty.

A question about possible other witnesses has the answer "Not to my knowledge.

The question on the level of discretion requested has the following answer:

You can contact me, talk about my testimony, but I don't think it's useful to make myself known and mention my name for an observation of this type. Do not mention or distribute my contact details

Scan.

cnes
NATIONAL CENTER
FOR SPATIAL STUDIES

Geipan

Deputy Director of Orbital Systems
Group for Studies and Information on Unidentified Aerospace Phenomena

Toulouse, 04/16/2018
DSO/DA//GP

INVESTIGATION REPORT

CARSPACH (68) 12.11.2008
CASE OF OBSERVATION

1 - CONTEXT

On 11/13/2008, the GEIPAN received a questionnaire spontaneously transmitted by the only witness to this observation. He acknowledges receipt on 18/11 and invites the witness to keep informed of the follow-up via the GEIPAN website. The description of the case showing a slight strangeness and suggesting a prosaic identification of the observed phenomenon, no investigation is immediately undertaken. The case is re-opened in 2017 in order to finalize the classification of the case.

2 - CASE DESCRIPTION

The spontaneous account provided by the witness summarizes the facts very well:

"Hello, this evening I made an observation in the sky and I would like to share it with you, firstly to advance your research and secondly to perhaps satisfy my curiosity. The sighting took place at around 10:40 p.m., I was driving on the main road in Altkirch and Carspach (dept 68) Straight ahead of me (so guessing south of my position) I suddenly saw a green light. My first thought was that it was fireworks, because the light was similar to the green of fireworks, but the problem is that instead of going up the light went down, it followed a rectilinear trajectory to the right and down (it was actually falling). I was also surprised by the size of the light. The observation having lasted only a few seconds, difficult to estimate the size, but compared at the height occupied in the sky, I would say ½ moon if that makes sense to you. Other info, there was a cone-shaped trail (I believe) at the back, about twice the lumen in length. Everything went very quickly, on the one hand because I was driving and was hampered by the trees, on the other hand because everything moved very quickly. That's it for observation. My friend and I being quite interested in celestial phenomena and UFOs, we did some quick research on the Internet. I saw 1 video of a meteorite crossing the sky, the color and speed of which was approaching my sighting, which leads me to believe that this may be what I saw." (SIC)

Scan.

2/15

It is therefore a nocturnal observation lasting only a few seconds, carried out by a single witness, located in a moving vehicle and who did not expect to see this phenomenon. In addition, the description evokes that of a "fireball" which seems to be the explanation favored by the witness himself.

3 - PROCEDURE OF THE INVESTIGATION

In view of the description and the time that has elapsed since the observation, it was agreed to carry out a remote investigation aimed at trying to verify the hypothesis of a meteor.

The objective is therefore to find, on the one hand, whether the astronomical context favors the vision of a meteor from a known swarm and, on the other hand, whether there are still traces of testimonies or recordings of such a meteor, possibly of the "sporadic" type.

Failing this, carry out a search in the ufological archives in order to extract other unusual testimonies that are spatially and temporally compatible in order to compare the characteristics reported.

First, contact with the witness seems necessary in order to better specify (if possible) the location of the vehicle at the time of the observation. Indeed, the road is not straight, an error in estimating the location can taint the apparent trajectory of the phenomenon.

An email contact is attempted but does not receive a response despite a positive delivery acknowledgement. The email address still seems to be operational but may no longer be consulted.

The witness being found (with high probability) through his profession and the Linkedln network, contact is attempted via this professional social network. No further response.

A final attempt is made from information gleaned from the "white pages".

The name having changed but the first name remaining the same, contact is therefore attempted by post with the person currently residing at the address initially mentioned by the witness, in the questionnaire: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

The contact is finally established and it turns out that it is the same person:

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Thanks to the possibilities offered by the Street-view option of GoogleMaps, the witness can further specify the location of his vehicle at the time of the observation as well as the environment elements allowing him to better locate the position of the phenomenon (almost 10 years after the sighting).

These elements make it possible to determine the global direction of observation, namely the direction of the road, i.e. the azimuth 203°/NG. The disappearance of the PAN having taken place slightly beyond this azimuth.

Geographical location of the sighting:

Scan.

3/15

Carspach, a small town in Alsace (Grand-Est region and Haut-Rhin department), has just over 2,000 inhabitants. Its average altitude is around 300m.

The observation took place on the outskirts of the village, the witness driving on the D432 road in the Altkirch-Carspach direction, i.e. generally from the northeast to the southwest. The vehicle was in the small straight line circled in red on the map below:

On this aerial view (Google-Maps) a vehicle occupies substantially the position of that of the witness. The yellow arrow indicates approximately the final direction of observation and the area colored in pink materializes the probable field of observation of the UAP.

Scan.

4/15

GoogleMaps 3D view showing vehicle position and probable sighting area.

GoogleStreetView view produced by the witness who specifies that the phenomenon disappeared hidden by the trees located to the right of the white house, itself located to the right, beyond the intersection.

Scan.

5/15

Astronomical background:

In parallel with this research with the witness, a verification of the celestial activity at the level of the meteors easily reveals that at the beginning of November, two well-known swarms are active. These are that of the Taurids and that of the Leonids. These two swarms are rightly known to produce superb fireballs.

For the second, whose maximum activity is around 11/17, the radian was in the vicinity of the star Regulus (main star of the constellation of Leo), i.e. at azimuth ~ 53°11 ' and at ~ -14°27' high, so below the horizon and behind the witness. A fireball coming from this region of the sky could not have had a trajectory compatible with the observation.

On the other hand, for the first, one of the activity maxima corresponds to 12/11, i.e. precisely the day of the observation! In addition, its radian, located near the star Alcyone (? Taurus), was at the time of observation at ~120° azimuth and ~55° altitude.

To be easily observable by the witness who was heading generally towards the south-south-west by car (therefore with a privileged field of observation limited to the windshield), a meteor produced by this swarm should have moved from its left to its right with a high probability of descent.

Exactly what the witness describes!!

Let us specify that the Taurid swarm (from comet 2P/Encke) is composed of two sub-swarms (North and South) but that 12/11 corresponds to the maximum of the North swarm (maximum on 10/ 10 for the southern swarm).

The shooting stars or fireballs produced are slow: 29km/s for the North and 27km/s for the South (the speed of the meteors generally being between 12 and 72 km/s). This relative slowness facilitates observation by increasing the duration of visibility of the phenomenon. The strangeness felt is also amplified.

See Annex 1 - Astronomical situation
The Stellarium simulation indicates the respective positions of the two radians of the Taurids.

At this stage, the hypothesis favored by the witness already seems largely confirmed by the astronomical context, but it remains to verify the meteorological situation in order to know if the cloud cover could have prevented the observation of meteors.

Because of the age of the observation, an Internet search seemed sufficient at first and could, if necessary, be deepened later.

Recall that according to the witness: "It was dark and cold (approx. 5°C), no rain. Didn't pay attention to the wind. Overcast weather." (SIC)

See Annex 2 - Weather situation

Media background:

The observation in question did not have any media coverage. On the one hand because the witness did not publicly report his observation but had the good reflex to quickly file his testimony with the GEIPAN.

The hypothesis that the witness observed the passage of a meteor implies a high probability that this meteor was observed by many witnesses, spread over a large territory. However, it should be remembered that the sky was very largely overcast over France and neighboring countries, which could explain the apparent absence of press articles mentioning a similar observation, as is generally the case in this area. In some areas, however, the sky was clearer, which opens up possibilities.

A search on the Internet is therefore necessary in order to seek possible corroboration that would have left a trace, even if it was discreet.

Scan.

6/15

This search took some effort but was ultimately crowned with success since a fireball is mentioned on the forum: http://meteorites.superforum.fr/t2174-meteorite

Here is an excerpt:

Author Message
Guest
Guest

Subject: Meteorite?? Thu 13 Nov - 20:06

Good evening, I saw last night, around 10:40 p.m., above Bordeaux, a shooting star that turned into a big ball, like fireworks. Probably very high, because no audible noise. Direction North to South roughly, quite a long phenomenon, probably more than a second. I'm thinking of a weather balloon because of the "explosion", if anyone has an idea??? If it was a meteorite, I can't find any reference to its fall, however spectacular.... See you soon.

.../...
stivel
Regular Member

Subject: Re: Meteorite?? Thu 13 Nov - 22:22

Good evening Jeannot, I also saw the phenomenon last night, I confirm for the hour 10:40 p.m. I made a big "Wow" seeing it, beautiful. For me the duration was about 2 seconds and I listened if detonation but nothing. The trail had several colors: from green to blue and red it seems to me. Stivel

Guest
Guest

Subject: Re: Meteorite?? Fri 14 Nov - 22:17

Hello everyone! Thank you for posting this topic it proves to me that I was not hallucinating Wednesday night. I was on the A63 2O min from Bordeaux (I was going there). I confirm the time of 10:40 p.m. Personally, I first saw a large white flash illuminating a large part of the sky, then as has been said, a rather green light left the origin of the flash with a long trail. It lasted between 1 and 2 seconds. The direction was roughly northeast (knowing that I had north in front and the moon on my right was like 40° to the right of north (the moon being roughly 90°)) to the south west. I'm not a star connoisseur so I don't have more details but if there is any info I really want to know what it was because it was downright beautiful from beau!!

stivel
Regular Member

Subject: Re: Meteorite?? Fri 14 Nov - 23:13

Hello everyone. For my part, after checking, I find about 100° (to the right of North) for the beginning of the phenomenon and 47° (to the right of North) for the point of fall by replacing myself at the place of observation. The distance is not too easy to estimate (I would venture to say between 4 and 10 km from my observation point). The trajectory was slightly curved. I started working this evening on Google Earth and defined a "reasonable" prospecting area for this weekend.

.../...
Guest
Guest

Subject: Re: Meteorite?? Sun 16 Nov 2008, 1:27 pm

1) Lagoueyte Bastien

Scan.

7/15

2) 10:40 p.m. on Nov 12, 2008

3) A 63 around Marcheprime

4) Clear and bright sky because of the moon, only the brightest stars could be seen

5) 7)b I don't have any of the sizes or the altitude since I have no point of comparison, especially in the middle of the night, I don't know how you can estimate a distance or an altitude

6) Indeed I hadn't noticed that the A63 is no longer at all to the North at this point so I would say roughly like Stivelentre 90° and 100° to the right in relation to the North

7) a Slightly curved but leaning more towards the horizontal than the vertical I would say 30° to 40° inclination

8) 1 big second at least

9) Unless you stop in the middle of the highway no

10) Very high brightness especially the flash (by the way why was there a flash??)

11) Shiny Green Head Trail

12) Trail visible on almost the entire trajectory very long compared to the shooting stars that can be seen in summer

13) No, I don't think there was any fragmentation

14) Between medium and fast

15) 16) No idea I had the radio and by car it's closed anyway

17) No, it stopped in the air quite high anyway

18) petitbusy@hotmail.fr

19) No Sorry I'm not very precise but I really don't know anything about coordinates and everything. But it's weird that only three of us saw it because it was really seeing, especially the flash... What caused this flash??

It appears that despite a bad orientation of the trajectory (later corrected) of the first speaker (Guest), the two testimonies from the Bordeaux region are consistent with the present testimony. The time, duration, aspect and trajectory correspond, which cannot be the result of chance.

In addition, the discussion between the members of the forum shows that:

- there was a nice meteoric activity that evening (normal since maximum of the Northern Taurids),

- the hypothesis of a Taurids is proposed by Vivien Pic (occasional collaborator of GEIPAN),

- many fireballs were recorded by radio detection that evening, especially between 10:32 p.m. and 10:48 p.m. (LT). One of them, whose spectrogram was recorded at 10:43:50 p.m., could well match. Source: Laurent Duval (pseudo: "itestoo") - Former Geipan IPN.

Note: the witness indicates: “10:40 p.m. to within 3 min (Paris winter time)”

As the graph below shows on a map of France, if we place (in pink) the field of observation of the fireball indicated by the Bordeaux witness ("stivel") and overlaid by a orange arrow the overall direction indicated by the indicator located on the A63 near Marcheprime (33380), this points towards the northeast and therefore towards Carspach.

Scan.

8/15

It is clear that the whole takes on its full coherence, especially since the three witnesses mention the green color which is generally only described for certain meteors.

Note: the indications provided by the Marcheprime witness are approximate and confusing, but this is explained by the fact that he is driving a car and that the overall orientation such as taking precise landmarks are rendered very random. However, he seems to confirm the directions given by "stivel" and the city of Bordeaux constitutes for him a landmark pointing very clearly towards the northeast.

Scan.

3.1. SUMMARY OF COLLECTED ELEMENTS

WITNESS #1

3 QUESTION ANSWER (AFTER INVESTIGATION)
A1. Commune and witness observation department (ex: Paris (75)) CARSPACH (68)
A2. (opt) if town unknown (during a trip): Town of start of trip; End of move municipality N/A
A3. (opt) if during a trip: name of Boat, Route or Flight / aircraft number N/A
Observation conditions of the phenomenon (for each witness)
B1. Occupation of the witness before the sighting Routes
B2. Precise location of the place of observation Lat. 47.6104350000 Lon. 7.2245360000
B3. Description of the place of observation Artificialized territories - Urbanized areas - Discontinuous urban fabric Rural landscape
B4. Observation date (DD/MM/YYYY) 12/11/2008
B5. Observation start time (HH:MM:SS)~ 22:40:00
B6. Duration of observation (s) or End time (HH:MM:SS) 10s
B7. Other witnesses? If yes, how much? No
B8. (opt) If yes, what is the link with other cookies? ---
B9. Continuous or discontinuous observation? Continue
B10. If discontinuous, why did the observation stop? N/A
B11. What caused the observation to end? Hidden by trees almost on the horizon
B12. Phenomenon directly observed? No
B13. UAP observed with an instrument? (which one?) No (but windscreen lenses)
B14. Weather Very cloudy or overcast
B15. Astronomical conditions Weak / Few stars or A few stars or Few visible (the stars)
B16. Equipment on or active car headlights
B17. Known external noise sources Car engine
Description of the perceived phenomenon
C1. Number of phenomena observed? 1
C2. Shape? 1D - Beam, Line; 3D - 1 axis of symmetry - Drop
C3. Color? Green
C4. Brightness? Intensity - Strong or bright, ex: bulb (mag. -15 to -10)
C5. Trail or halo? drag
C6. Apparent size? (maximum) ~0.25°
C7. Noise coming from the phenomenon? Unknown; None, Total Silence
C8. Estimated distance? Unknown
C9. Azimuth of appearance of the UAP (°) 0.00
C10. UAP appearance height (°) 0.00
C11. Azimuth of disappearance of the UAP (°) 0.00
C12. Height of disappearance of the UAP (°) 0.00
C13. Trajectory of the phenomenon Linear or Rectilinear; Descending; Without change direction

Scan.

10/15

C14. Portion du ciel parcourue par le PAN (°) SSE à SSW
C15. Effet(s) sur l'environnement ...
Pour les éléments suivants, veuillez reporter les réponses du témoin ou sinon indiquez simplement si ce dernier a répondu à ces questions
E1. Quelles sont les émotions ressenties par le témoin pendant et après l'observation? Etonnement puis curiosité
E2. Qu'a fait le témoin après l'observation? Mon ami et moi étant assez intéressés par les phénomènes célestes et ovnis, nous avons fait quelques rapides recherches sur Internet.
E3. Quelle interprétation donne-t-il à ce qu'il a observé? J'ai vu 1 vidéo d'une météorite traversant le ciel, dont la couleur et la vitesse étaient approchant de mon observation, ce qui m'amène à penser que c'est peut-être ce que j'ai vu.
E4. Avant son observation, quel intérêt le témoin portait aux PAN? Intérêt partagé avec son ami pour les phénomènes célestes et ovnis.
E5. L'observation a-t-elle changé l'avis du témoin sur les PAN? Non
E6. Le témoin pense-t-il que la science donnera une explication aux PAN? .
E7./td> Pense-t-il que l'expérience vécue a modifié quelque chose dans sa vie? Quel est son ressenti? Non
Documents et pièces jointes
D1. Y-a-t-il eu reconstitution sur plan ou photo/croquis de l'observation? Oui
C14. Portion of the sky covered by the PAN (°) SSE to SSW
C15. Effect(s) on the environment ...
For the following items, please report the witness's answers or otherwise simply indicate whether the witness answered these questions
E1. What are the emotions felt by the witness during and after the observation? Amazement then curiosity
E2. What did the witness do after the sighting? My friend and I being quite interested in celestial phenomena and UFOs, we did some quick research on the Internet.
E3. How does he interpret what he observed? I saw 1 video of a meteorite crossing the sky, the color and speed of which was approaching my sighting, leading me to believe that may be what I saw.
E4. Before his observation, what interest did the witness have in UAPs? Shared interest with his friend in celestial phenomena and UFOs.
E5. Did the sighting change the witness's opinion of UAPs? No
E6. Does the witness think science will explain UAPs? .
E7./td> Does he think the experience changed anything in his life? How does he feel? No
Documents and attachments
D1. Has there been reconstruction on plan or photo/sketch of the observation? Yes

4- HYPOTHESES ENVISAGEES

1.1.1. 4.1. SYNTHESE DES HYPOTHESES

HYPOTHESE(S) EVALUATION*
1. Bolide météorique 0.96
*Fiabilité de l'hypothèse estimée par l'enquêteur: certaine (100%) ; forte (>80%) ; moyenne (40% à 60%) ; faible (20% à 40%) ; très faible (<20%) ; nulle (0%)
1. Bolide météorique - Evaluation des éléments pour l'hypothèse
ITEM ARGUMENTS POUR ARGUMENTS CONTRE ou MARGE D'ERREUR POUR/CONTRE
Forme forme indéfinie aux contours flous 0.95
Couleur verte Compatible avec l'hypothèse 1.00
Taille apparente 1/2 Lune Compatible avec un beau bolide 0.95
Trajectoire ~rectiligne Généralement observée pour les bolides 1.00
Vitesse apparente ~6°/s Vitesse classique pour un bolide assez lent 0.90
Impression de chute C'est effectivement la réalité même si ce n'est qu'une affaire de perspective 1.00
Date du 12/11 Maximum d'activité de l'essaim "Nord" des Taurides 1.00
Heure Compatible avec d'autres témoins indépendants radio-enregistrements 1.00
Provenance Totalement compatible avec le radian des Taurides "Nord" 1.00
Trainée lumineuse Caractéristique de ce type de phénomène 1.00

4- ASSUMPTIONS CONSIDERED

1.1.1. 4.1. SUMMARY OF ASSUMPTIONS

HYPOTHESIS(S) ASSESSMENT*
1. Meteor Bolide 0.96
*Reliability of the hypothesis estimated by the interviewer: certain (100%); strong (>80%); medium (40% to 60%); low (20% to 40%); very low (<20%); null (0%)
1. Meteor bolide - Evaluation of the elements for the hypothesis
ITEM ARGUMENTS FOR ARGUMENTS AGAINST or MARGIN OF ERROR FOR/AGAINST
Shape undefined shape with fuzzy outlines 0.95
Green color Compatible with hypothesis 1.00
Apparent size 1/2 Moon Compatible with a beautiful car 0.95
~straight path Generally observed for speedsters 1.00
Apparent speed ~6°/s Classic speed for a fairly slow car 0.90
Fall impression It is indeed the reality even if it is only a matter of perspective 1.00
Date 12/11 Maximum activity of the "Northern" Taurid swarm 1.00
Time Compatible with other independent witnesses radio-recordings 1.00
Origin Completely compatible with the radian of the Taurids "North" 1.00
Light Trail Characteristic of this type of phenomenon 1.00

Scan.

11/15

5- CONCLUSION

The testimony is consistent and the phenomenon is corroborated by two other independent and very distant witnesses (found on a web forum), even by a radio recording.

This observation corresponds well, as the witness predicted after some research, to the re-entry into the atmosphere of a meteor. In reality, it comes from the "North" Taurid swarm which produces beautiful, fairly slow bolides. The day also corresponds to the maximum activity of this swarm which, observed elsewhere, was active at that time. Two testimonies from the Bordeaux region, compatible in time, description and trajectory confirm, given the distance separating Bordeaux from Carspach, that the UAP was necessarily at high altitude. This further reinforces the hypothesis adopted.

GEIPAN classifies the case as A: observation of a meteoroid.

5.1. RATING

[Chart.]

Scan.

12/15

Appendix 1
Astronomical situation

Stellar panorama theoretically visible to the witness on a clear night. (Stellarium V0.17)

Source: http://pgj.pagesperso-orange.fr/meteor-carte.htm#NTA

Scan.

13/15

Appendix 2
Weather situation

The "Weather underground" Website provides the following indications for Colmar (68), Mulhouse (86)-Bâle (Switzerland) and Luxeuil-Saint-Sauveur (70)

https://www.wunderground.com/history/airport/LFSC/2008/11/12/DailyHistory.html?req_city=Colmar&req_state=68&req_statename=France&reqdb.zip=00000&reqdb.magic=134&reqdb.wmo=07197

[Data.]

Discussion:

Map.

The case is perfectly explained.

Evaluation:

Meteor.

Sources references:

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

File history:

Authoring:

Main author: Patrick Gross
Contributors: None
Reviewers: None
Editor: Patrick Gross

Changes history:

Version: Create/changed by: Date: Description:
0.1 Patrick Gross March 18, 2023 Creation, [gei1].
1.0 Patrick Gross March 18, 2023 First published.

Valid XHTML 1.0 Strict



 Feedback  |  Top  |  Back  |  Forward  |  Map  |  List |  Home
This page was last updated on March 18, 2023.