GEIPAN Case 2009-07-02361 — RIXHEIM (68) 26.07.2009

Brief

On the evening of 26 July 2009, a witness in Rixheim (68170) observed a white luminous point moving in a linear south-to-north path at 25–35° elevation before it changed direction and apparently accelerated, then faded into deep sky. The document is not a narrative report but a two-page annotated star chart produced by GEIPAN's Investigateur Principal (IPN), who plotted the witness's estimated trajectory points — gathered during a daytime reconstruction session — against the celestial sphere at 23h45 local time. The IPN cautions that projecting a spherical sky onto a flat chart, combined with the after-the-fact daytime nature of the reconstruction, introduces substantial positional error. Jupiter (magnitude −2.38) was in the sky that night but hidden from the witness by an adjacent building.

Metadata

Agency

GEIPAN / CNES

Release

2007-03-22

Type

PDF • .pdf

Length

2 pages

Classification

UNCLASSIFIED (GEIPAN D1)

Programs

GEIPAN, GEPAN, SEPRA

Tags

white luminous point, direction change, acceleration, naked eye, France, Alsace, 2009, GEIPAN D1, sky chart reconstruction, Rixheim

Key points

• The observation site is precisely geo-referenced: Lat 47°44'40.52" N, Long 7°24'38.74" E, altitude 239 m — Rixheim, Alsace, near the French-Swiss-German tripoint.p.1
• The star chart is drawn for 23h45 HL, creating an apparent discrepancy with the ~22h20 observation time cited in the GEIPAN case description.p.1
• The IPN divided the trajectory into two phases: Phase 1 (points 1–2, regular linear satellite-like motion) and Phase 2 (points 3–7, curved path with apparent approach, culmination to the south-east, then progressive recession).p.2
• The Phase 2 yellow curve was explicitly smoothed by the IPN to reflect the witness's qualitative description rather than raw point measurements, limiting its precision.p.2
• The trajectory reconstruction was performed during daylight hours, which the IPN flags as a material source of error in azimuth and elevation estimates.p.2
• Jupiter was present at magnitude −2.38 (azimuth 131°19', height 14°16') but was obscured by a neighboring house and ruled out as the observed object.p.2
• The final phase of the phenomenon is described as a 'progressive recession before disappearance in open sky' — the witness had an impression of the object sinking toward deep sky rather than passing behind an obstruction.p.2

Verbatim

• Le trait jaune correspond à la trajectoire apparente présumée.

  p.2

• Les points étoilés et numérotés correspondent aux points estimés (mesures) par le témoin durant la reconstitution (diurne !).

  p.2

• une progression régulière et apparemment rectiligne (style satellite artificiel)

  p.2

• éloignement progressif avant disparition en plein ciel (avec impression de « s'enfoncer ver le ciel profond»)

  p.2

• la déformation de la sphère céleste projetée sur un plan rend difficile la visualisation mentale de cette trajectoire présumée

  p.2

• la planète Jupiter (mag : -2.38 - Azimut : 131° 19' - Hauteur : 14°16') était masquée à la vue du témoin par la maison voisine.

  p.2

• La courbe jaune (en phase 2) a été «lissée » pour donner une trajectoire souple et progressive telle que décrite par le témoin.

  p.2

Most interesting

• The document is a celestial chart, not a narrative report — the primary analytical artifact here is the IPN's plotted trajectory overlay on a star field, treating the sky itself as the evidentiary surface.
• Jupiter at magnitude −2.38 was one of the brightest objects in the sky that night but was blocked from view by a building, preemptively eliminating a common misidentification vector.
• The IPN's own note that the daytime reconstruction introduces 'important' margin of error on azimuth and elevation is an unusually candid epistemic caveat for an official investigation document.
• GEIPAN classification D1 is the lower of two 'unexplained' tiers: 'not very strange, remains unexplained' — meaning the behavior was mildly anomalous but investigators found no obvious prosaic explanation.
• The star chart is timestamped 23h45 HL, roughly 85 minutes after the reported observation time of ~22h20, suggesting the chart may depict the sky at a reconstructed or corrected time rather than the exact moment of sighting.
• Rixheim sits in the Rhine plain near Basel, in one of France's densest cross-border air corridors — yet the IPN's Phase 2 curve does not match a standard aircraft turn profile, which is noted implicitly by describing it as 'type changement de cap d'un avion' while acknowledging the smoothed approximation.