BANNE (07) 23.09.2024

On 23 September 2024 in Banne, Ardèche, T1 and his wife T2 were on holiday in their motorhome, parked with 5 other motorhomes behind the village church. At 22:05, T1 went outside to check the vehicle's remote control and saw a bright point to the north-northeast, apparently oscillating and changing from yellowish white to red. He alerted his wife, fetched his smartphone and recorded a 1-minute-14-second video at 22:08, followed by 3 burst photographs at 22:09. He continued watching intermittently, returned outside at 22:12 to record a 1-minute-54-second video, and took 6 more photographs at 22:55. The phenomenon was still visible throughout these observation periods. He then went to bed. GEIPAN found good evidential support despite having no account from T2. Photographs and videos were provided, and video analysis assisted the investigation. GEIPAN defines evidential support as the amount of information collected for an account that is considered reliable and objectively established. The only hypothesis investigated was the first-magnitude star Capella. A geographical reconstruction placed the UAP close to its position. Stellarium gave Capella an azimuth of 32° and elevation of 10° (carte_astro_1). T1's questionnaire gave north-northeast and 45° elevation. The reconstruction photograph confirmed the direction, though his approximate position prevented an exact azimuth (carte_geo_1). GEIPAN attributed the roughly 35° elevation discrepancy to the frequent overestimation of angular height by witnesses. It also cited strong atmospheric turbulence producing scintillation and rapid colour changes in a star low on the horizon, and the long duration typical of a celestial object. Although the sky was entirely overcast with no stars visible elsewhere, GEIPAN considered a distant low-horizon opening capable of revealing a first-magnitude star. The unusual feature was apparent movement in the videos despite the light staying in the same place for a long time. GEIPAN attributed this to tiny hand movements magnified by strong zoom. T1 himself noted that no landscape reference was visible in the videos; such a reference would have helped demonstrate that the light was stationary. It remained unclear whether movement had also been perceived with the naked eye. GEIPAN suggested small eye movements as a possible explanation if it had. The source relates this case to SAINT-URCIZE (15) 20.09.2024, reported by the same witness. GEIPAN classified the case A: Capella.