BAYEUX (14) 22.10.2023

On 22 October 2023 at 00:05, the sole witness was alone in a garden in Bayeux when he saw a UAP. Initially described as a ball of steady red light, it moved rapidly in a straight line from southeast to east-southeast. It stopped, revealing red and green lights flashing alternately every second. A pale-yellow conical beam then swept the ground. This phase lasted 6–7 seconds before the UAP instantly moved eastward, zigzagged for about 2 seconds and disappeared. The case had moderate substantiation, with 1 witness and no photographs or video. GEIPAN defines substantiation as the amount of reliable, objectively established information collected for an account. Two hypotheses were examined: a helicopter or a drone (see investigation report). The lights matched red and green navigation lighting, which can be steady or flashing, except that a helicopter's green right-hand navigation light must be steady, according to the source. Rapid flight and hovering are common to both, but an instantaneous stop and a restart at maximum speed without perceptible acceleration are more characteristic of a drone. The departure zigzags also matched drone maneuverability. Either type of aircraft could carry the pale-yellow searchlight. A helicopter could use it for searching or signaling, while a drone might also use it recreationally. The source notes that such powerful searchlights are readily available to the public. The National Air Operations Center (CNOA) reported no radar track at the observation location and time. The investigation found no evidence of helicopter use that night by the military, civil protection services, Le Havre Airport or a private hotel. The witness's lack of audible sound was not decisive: the wind was not carrying sound toward him, and distance could also reduce audibility. Under the drone hypothesis, the source states that its owner would have violated several prohibitions, including nighttime and urban operation and overflight restrictions shown on Géoportail. The drone explanation was more plausible because zigzags and abrupt stops and starts better matched its maneuvering capabilities. GEIPAN classified the case B as a probable drone sighting.