[RN4] DE BRUGNY-VAUDANCOURT (51) VERS NANCY (54) 27.03.2021

On 27 March 2021 at about 04:50, a witness left Brugny-Vaudancourt (51) by car with his son and joined the RN4 toward Nancy (54). Near Soudé (51), he saw many lights resembling an “antenna” illuminated by successive white lights, one above another. The passage was silent. He estimated 50–100 lights. The shape was to his left, northward, and covered a large portion of the sky. He woke his sleeping son to see it. As he drove, the “antenna” seemed to follow him. He expected to overtake it, but it kept pace, then moved toward Vitry-le-François (51), accelerated past him very rapidly and disappeared over about 10 seconds. He estimated the whole observation at 40–50 seconds. Only one account was collected. The apparent path extended northwest to east, oblique to the car’s movement. He estimated the formation’s angular height from 15° at its base to 60° at its top, disappearing due east. The description suggests a Starlink satellite train. SpaceX’s Falcon 9 launch number 22 took place on 24 March at 08:00. Sixty satellites passed over Côte-d’Or on 25 March at about 05:05, when several people reported an identical phenomenon. A check using Heavens Above confirmed the formation for the date and time reported here. The train appeared north-northwest and disappeared eastward; the pass time matches the sighting. GEIPAN connects the low 15° position with the illuminated-antenna impression and interprets the apparent final acceleration as the lights disappearing: sudden disappearance can be mistaken for increasing speed. GEIPAN cautions that distance cannot be estimated without comparison with a recognized object. The witness gave 100 m because the phenomenon seemed substantial, here described as 60 lights. His size estimate of “40–50 m,” called angular size in the source despite the linear units, likewise conveyed a large appearance. A size of 40–50 m at about 100 m corresponds to 22–28°. The report gives 7–8° as an accepted average angular size for a Starlink train and therefore finds a factor-of-3–4 overestimate, which it describes as common among witnesses. GEIPAN finds no strong strangeness, and the proposed explanation reduces it considerably. The witness’s subjective feeling remains difficult to quantify. The precise description gives the file useful evidential substance; both driver and son saw the object, although the son did not give a statement. The study concludes a misidentification involving Starlink launch 22. GEIPAN classifies the case A: Starlink satellites number 22.