GEIPAN Case 2020-06-51034 — AUNAY-LES-BOIS (61) 03.06.2020

Brief

At approximately 00h30 on 3 June 2020, three adults gathered outdoors at a farmhouse in Aunay-les-Bois (Orne, France) observed a phenomenon consisting of two widely-spaced bright bluish points of light with smaller points beneath them traversing roughly one quarter of the visible sky in an estimated five seconds on a level, east-trending trajectory. No sound was heard, no optical instrument was used, and the witnesses explicitly eliminated comet, aircraft, drone, electrical arc, and satellite as explanations. GEIPAN, the UAP investigation unit of the French space agency CNES, assigned the case Classification D — unidentified after inquiry.

Metadata

Agency

GEIPAN / CNES

Release

2007-03-22

Type

PDF • .pdf

Length

15 pages

Classification

Class D (unidentified after investigation)

Programs

GEIPAN, GEPAN, SEPRA

Tags

Class D, bluish lights, blue halo, silent, linear trajectory, two light points, Normandy France, rural, 2020, GEIPAN-2020-06-51034

Key points

• Three adult civilian witnesses observed the phenomenon simultaneously from the garden of a rural property in Aunay-les-Bois (61), Orne department, Normandy.p.3
• The phenomenon appeared as two principal bluish light sources with smaller subordinate points below, carrying a visible blue halo with no trailing emission.p.6
• Observation duration was approximately five seconds; the event began near midnight (00h–01h local time) on 3 June 2020.p.3
• The trajectory was strictly linear and parallel to the horizon at constant velocity, moving from approximately 150° SE to due East at roughly 15° elevation.p.7
• Angular separation between the two main light points was estimated at 30 mm on a ruler held at arm's length, implying a significant apparent size.p.6
• No sound of any kind was perceived; the ambient environment was quiet enough that animal cries and cattle had been audible minutes before the event.p.5
• The witnesses methodically ruled out comet, aircraft, drone, electrical arc on power lines, satellite, and weather balloon before contacting GEIPAN.p.2
• No photographic or video record exists; observation was naked-eye only and no optical instruments were used.p.4
• Sky conditions were clear with no wind; the Moon was in its last crescent phase and Venus was visible, confirming good observing conditions.p.4
• Two witnesses independently drew sketches of the object post-observation; comparison of the drawings confirmed that all three had seen the same configuration.p.12

Verbatim

• Dans la nuit du mardi 2 juin au mercredi 3 juin, entre 00h30 et 1h00, nous somme 3 adultes à avoir vu un phénomène lumineux se déplacer dans le ciel.

  p.2

• On pouvait voir 2 points lumineux assez espacés semblant appartenir à un même objet avec en dessous plusieurs petits points lumineux. La couleur des lumières était légèrement bleutée. Il n'y avait aucun bruit de moteur perceptible et pas de vent ce soir là.

  p.2

• Nous avons pensé ensuite au drone, mais l'espace entre les deux lumières nous paraissait vraiment trop important pour que cela soit un drone…

  p.2

• Luminosité proche d'un éclairage d'avion mais semblait encore plus gros et irradiant. (halo autour des lumières)

  p.6

• Oui, un halo bleu était présent autour des lumières. Pas de trainée.

  p.6

• Lorsque mon conjoint s'est exclamé « Une Comète ! » Ma réaction en le voyant a été tout de suite crier que ce n'était pas une comète mais un « ovni » . La troisième personne arrivée quelques secondes plus tard a répété en boucle « c'est avion, c'est un avion.. » l'air apeurée.

  p.12

Most interesting

• GEIPAN assigns Class D — its highest unresolved tier — to cases where the phenomenon cannot be attributed to any known natural, meteorological, or man-made source after a full inquiry; this case received that designation.
• Two witnesses independently drew sketches of the object by firelight after the event; when compared, the drawings matched, providing a rudimentary but uncollaborated corroboration without prior conferral.
• The 30 mm arm's-length angular estimate for the separation between the two main lights implies an apparent separation of roughly 3.4 degrees — at the witnesses' rough distance estimate of 1–2 km, that corresponds to a physical gap of approximately 60–120 meters if the distance estimate is even roughly correct.
• The witnesses were in deep rural darkness and had registered animal sounds and cattle minutes before the event, indicating deliberate attention to their acoustic environment and reinforcing their confidence that the object was genuinely silent.
• A fourth person present at the property who had not witnessed the phenomenon dismissed the accounts afterward and offered rational explanations; the witnesses found none of them convincing.
• The release date logged for this document (2007-03-22) predates the 2020 observation by a decade, almost certainly a system metadata artifact from the GEIPAN case management platform rather than the actual publication date of the case file.