METZ (57) 20.07.2020

On 20 July 2020 at about 23:35, a witness outdoors in METZ (57) to observe comet Neowise through binoculars noticed a phenomenon to the north-northwest that initially resembled an airliner turning at low altitude. The V-shaped display had a red central light surrounded by several bright, steady colored lights that mask the contours of the object. The phenomenon first moved slowly, then was lost from view for 15 seconds. It reappeared as a dazzling white light, viewed through binoculars near the end of its path. The observation, totally silent, lasts between 45 seconds and a minute before the phenomenon disappears eastward behind the treetop. A single testimony was collected. These two distinct sequences led to the division of the analysis into two phases. The coincidence in time and position of these two independent events contributed to the witness' sense of strangeness. The evidential quality of the case, initially assessed as “medium,” was reassessed as “good” following the field investigation. The witness’s cooperation helped compensate for the isolated account and absence of photographic or video evidence. *According to the GEIPAN criteria, evidential quality is the amount of information collected for an account that is considered reliable and objectively established. Several hypotheses were explored for both phases (see investigation report): Phase 1: that of a civilian or military aircraft, an illuminated balloon or a sky lantern. Phase 2: International Space Station (ISS) passage. Regarding Phase 1, the observation hypothesis of a civilian or military aircraft was studied, while the others (LED balloons or Chinese lanterns) were too inconsistent with the characteristics of the UAP. Although the CAPCODA* map does not reveal a radar trace of an aircraft that could correspond to the UAP, some parameters are consistent with the observation of a military "heavy" transport aircraft, type Hercules C-130 or A400M conducting a very-low-altitude (TBA*) exercise, and in particular: - the presence of fixed red light (an observation confirmed during the field investigation) and at least 1 steady green light, similar to the position lights. The absence of anti-collision lights is quite possible during military exercises, since these lights may not be lit. -the change in shape (from the alignment of the lights to a more or less pronounced inverted V) is caused by the change of perspective, with the aircraft turning. -the apparent size is described by the witness as “having the wingspan of a large airliner” with the witness who first thinks of "a low-altitude airliner". -the speed is described by the witness as being "very low", which is typical of the description of the observation of military transport aircraft, which have relatively low travel speeds (sometimes less than 200 km/h). The investigation also found that a major military exercise, called CASEX, began on observation day involving many French and German aircraft within a restricted area. Although this exercise is located at a significant distance from the witness's position, the possibility that a military aircraft flying at very low altitude had escaped radar or flown with its transponder switched off was examined. However, the GEIPAN military aviation expert considers the presence of such an aircraft to be very unlikely in this context. This conclusion is reinforced by the total absence of audible sound during the sighting, even though the wind conditions were favourable to the sound propagation. With regard to Phase 2, the records obtained during the investigation confirm that the International Space Station (ISS) was passing that evening along the path described for the phenomenon. Overall appearance, timing, duration of observation and total absence of perceived noise are converging elements in favour of this identification. The mention of flashes and glare following binocular observation and the vaporous appearance around the UAP are not consistent with this hypothesis and the investigators could not determine with certainty whether the conditions in which the binoculars were used might have intensified those perceptions. If the object observed had not been the ISS, the fact that the witness did not see the space station while it was passing at the same time along the same path remains inexplicable, and this lack of simultaneous detection of a second object reinforces the hypothesis of confusion between the phenomenon and the station's passage. By separating the observation into 2 phases, GEIPAN found no known phenomenon that satisfactorily reduced the strangeness of the first phase, but obtained a well-supported hypothesis for the second. As a result, GEIPAN classifies observation phase 1 as "D", a phenomenon not identified after investigation and Phase 2 in "B", likely ISS observation. *CAPCODA: Air Operations Planning and Conduct and Air Defence Centre (French Air and Space Force). *TBA : Very low Altitude.