MARZAN (56) 19.03.2022

On 19 March 2022, the witness observed from his garden in Marzan (56) a UAP which he described as a bright white ball, similar to a big star, moving straight and evenly in a cloudy sky. After a few minutes of observation, the witness observed the UAP slowing down and then ascending into the clouds which it illuminates before disappearing. According to the GEIPAN criteria, the evidential quality of the case, defined by the quality and quantity of reliable information, is considered to be average. The case is based on a single testimony accompanied by a video deemed unusable, although the testimony is relatively complete and accurate. Two hypotheses were explored (see the investigation report): the observation of the International Space Station (ISS) and the observation of an illuminated balloon carried by the wind at altitude. Both of these hypotheses allow us to account for the appearance of the UAP, similar to a bright white star, as well as the initial, regular and straight trajectory. As for the ISS, although it is present in the observation time range, the witness reports having observed an aircraft shortly after the passage of the UAP. The map provided by the CNOA (National Air Operations Centre) indicates that only one aircraft was present in the observation area, passing at about 20:38–20:39, before the passage of the ISS which emerged from the south-west horizon at 20:42 and disappeared behind the east-northeast horizon at 20:53. There is therefore a contradiction between the time of observation of the UAP reported by the witness (20:45–20:48) and the time of passage of this plane, identified with certainty (20:38–20:39). GEIPAN therefore concludes that the UAP was not the ISS, which in any event does not change course as the witness described. The hypothesis of observing an illuminated balloon, in addition to adequately matching the appearance and initial trajectory of the UAP, also allows us to better explain the only real strangeness present, namely its change of course and its effective disappearance in the clouds. We know, thanks to the study of the AROME fine mesh data provided by Météo France, that there was a wind corridor oriented west-southwest at 2000 m and 2250 m altitude completely favorable to the displacement of this balloon. Because the winds were also light and potentially variable, the balloon could have changed course near the end of its path and then enter the cloud layer (cloud base at 2200 m), as described by the witness, and illuminate the clouds before disappearing. However, it is surprising that an LED balloon could be identified at such a high altitude. GEIPAN classifies the case B, probable observation of an illuminated balloon.