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

Brief

A single civilian witness observed a white luminous point from his home terrace in Rixheim (Haut-Rhin), with the sighting concluding at 23h48 by radio-controlled clock on 26 July 2009. He tracked it south-to-north for 7-8 seconds as a probable satellite before briefly looking away, then reacquired it mid-westward turn, watched it brighten and accelerate nearly overhead, and saw it vanish in open sky — total duration 10-12 seconds, no sound. ELVIRA multi-radar returned no aircraft trace over Rixheim in the 23h30-00h00 window. The GEIPAN-contracted investigator (IPN) eliminated aircraft, astronomical objects, balloons, remote-controlled craft, and hoax, while noting that the best satellite candidate, Cosmos 1151-Rocket, showed an angular-velocity discrepancy of roughly 2:1 and would have required a near-retrograde orbit to match phase 2 geometry. The case was assigned GEIPAN classification D1: low strangeness but unexplained.

Metadata

Agency

GEIPAN / CNES

Release

2007-03-22

Type

PDF • .pdf

Length

10 pages

Classification

D1

Programs

GEIPAN, ELVIRA, COSMOS 1151-Rocket

Tags

white point of light, direction change, acceleration, silent, naked eye, Rixheim France, 2009, D1 low strangeness, ELVIRA radar negative

Key points

• Single civilian witness settled on terrace at approximately 22h20; the UAP sighting itself ended at 23h48 by an immediately-checked radio-controlled clock, placing the event roughly 90 minutes after he went outside.p.3
• Phase 1: white point tracked south-to-north for 7-8 seconds at 20-26° elevation / 109°-92° azimuth (NM); witness initially categorized it as a satellite.p.2
• Phase 2: light reacquired mid-westward turn at ~38° elevation / 66°/NM, then brightened, accelerated, peaked at ~66° elevation, and disappeared in open sky at ~34° elevation / 225°/NM.p.5
• Total observation duration 10-12 seconds; no sound heard at any point during either phase.p.1
• ELVIRA multi-radar review found no aircraft trace over Rixheim in the 23h30-00h00 window; Basel-Mulhouse international airport was closed at the observation time.p.6
• Cosmos 1151-Rocket (1980-005-B, NORAD 11672, mag. ~4) emerged from Earth's shadow at ~23h45:54 HL near the observation azimuth but its apparent angular velocity (~1°/sec) was roughly half the ~2.25-2.5°/sec implied by the witness's data.p.8
• Phase 2 geometry would require a near-retrograde east-to-west orbit for any satellite match, which the IPN described as 'particularly remarkable.'p.7
• IPN conducted daytime trajectory reconstruction at the witness's home on 09 October 2009, recording seven angular waypoints with a digital-inclinometer set square and reticle compass.p.5
• Meteor offered the only angular-speed match for phase 2 (~26-35°/sec) but was dismissed for absence of luminous trail, sparks, fragmentation, and color change.p.8
• GEIPAN conclusion: aircraft, astronomical bodies, and Cosmos 1151-Rocket all invalidated; phenomenon assigned D1 — unexplained despite low strangeness.p.9

Verbatim

• Le témoin reste intrigué par la trajectoire globale du point lumineux incluant un changement de direction et l'accélération importante du phénomène sans qu'aucun bruit ne soit entendu.

  p.1

• Conscient du caractère insolite de ce qu'il vient d'observer, le témoin rentre aussitôt pour consulter l'heure sur une horloge radio pilotée (image ci contre) : il est alors 23h 48 HL ! (et non 47 !)

  p.3

• Les conditions d'observation étaient bonnes puisque le témoin bénéficiait de conditions météorologiques agréables. Il était seul, en situation relaxante donc très calme au départ de l'observation. Aucune influence ou interaction avec d'autres personnes. Aucun obstacle ne vint gêner son observation.

  p.6

• Après relecture ELVIRA , aucune trace multiradar sur Rixheim dans le créneau horaire 23h30 => 00h00.

  p.6

• Le PAN en lui-même ne présente pas un caractère de haute étrangeté, tant sur le plan de son aspect que sur celui de son évolution.

  p.7

• La faible étrangeté inciterait à penser à la présence (exceptionnelle) dans le ciel d'un aéronef de type avion, hélicoptère ou drone, dont la trajectoire aurait pu conduire à un virage puis un quasi survol du domicile.

  p.8

• En résumé, il ne parait pas simple actuellement d'expliquer rationnellement l'observation du témoin, même en scindant arbitrairement le phénomène rapporté en deux événements indépendants.

  p.9

Most interesting

• The witness had been on his terrace since approximately 22h20 but the sighting itself occurred nearly 90 minutes later, ending at 23h48 by radio-controlled clock — an unusually precise timing anchor for a single-witness visual case.
• The IPN raised the possibility that phases 1 and 2 were two entirely separate objects: the witness's attention may have shifted from a dimmer first stimulus to a brighter second, making the apparent mid-air turn an observational artifact rather than a genuine maneuver.
• Jupiter was visible that night at azimuth 131°/NG to the southeast but was blocked from the witness's sightline by his own house, ruling it out as a misidentification candidate.
• The angular speed required for phase 2 — approximately 26-35°/sec — falls squarely in the meteor range, yet the observation displayed none of the standard meteor signatures: no trail, sparks, fragmentation, or color change.
• Cosmos 1151-Rocket's phase 1 candidacy was further weakened by the suburban light-pollution environment in Rixheim: detecting a magnitude +4 object at 40° elevation from a peri-urban terrace was judged uncertain enough to require in-situ verification that was never completed.
• The IPN used a set square fitted with a digital inclinometer and a reticle compass during a daytime site visit to reconstruct the witness's recalled angular positions — a degree of field instrumentation uncommon in civilian UAP pre-inquiries.