BOUEXIERE (LA) (35) 08.10.2018

The title dates this case 8 October 2018, while the narrative states Wednesday, 10 October 2018. On that narrative date, at 5:30 a.m., the witness smokes a cigarette on the doorstep, when she observes for several minutes, the passage of a white light point in the night sky. With her mobile phone at hand, she filmed the observation. She contacts the GEIPAN the same day and will file a questionnaire and a video, 2 days later. Only one testimony will be collected regarding this phenomenon. The point, larger and brighter than a star according to the witness, appeared to her to the northwest and crosses the sky with a linear downward trajectory and a speed that seems constant. After about 5 minutes, it disappeared on the south-east horizon (see the investigation report). The appearance of the UAP (white, larger than a star, constant light), its trajectory (linear, the UAP disappears on the horizon) and the duration of observation (about 5 min) evokes the passage of an artificial satellite into the sky. The estimation of its angular velocity, made by the description of the witness, remains consistent with this hypothesis. Calsky's data indicate that the ISS (International Space Station) was not visible at this time, but the source states that a number of “geostationary” satellites passed through the witness’s sky, two of which had a trajectory similar to that described by the witness. These satellites are, most of the time, invisible to the naked eye, because they are weakly luminous. But there are periods in the year (periods preceding and following the equinoxes) during which they can be temporarily illuminated by the sun. Their trajectory is favorable, so they are lighted enough to be visible to the naked eye. Calsky indicates that the moment of observation - about 3 hours before sunrise corresponds to one of these periods, namely a period favorable to this type of observation. Due to the recording conditions and the low quality (mobile phone held at arm's length), the video provided by the witness is not usable. This case has a low strangeness and a medium evidential quality (single witness, fairly precise description but unusable video).GEIPAN considers the sighting very likely to involve what the source calls a geostationary satellite, temporarily visible to the naked eye because of the time of year. GEIPAN classifies the case A, a very probable satellite misidentification.