GEIPAN Case 2022-09-51395 — RUFFEC (16) 13.09.2022

Brief

On September 13, 2022 at approximately 21:00 local time, a single civilian witness in Ruffec (Charente) observed a white point of light cycling through appearance and disappearance at roughly 6-second intervals for approximately five minutes, moving in a straight arc toward the northeast before vanishing in a clear section of sky. The witness independently proposed a rotating-sphere model to explain the cyclic pattern. GEIPAN evaluated four hypotheses — commercial aircraft, skytrackers, Starlink satellite flashes, and atmospheric ice-crystal reflections — and found none fully consistent with the observed behavior, particularly the estimated 20–30 rapid cycles and the unexplained disappearance in clear sky. The report, finalized December 3, 2025, assigns the case Classification D: unidentified after investigation.

Metadata

Agency

GEIPAN / CNES

Release

2007-03-22

Type

PDF • .pdf

Length

30 pages

Classification

Non sensible

Programs

GEIPAN

Tags

white point light, cyclic appearance/disappearance, arc trajectory, naked eye, Ruffec France, 2022, Classification D, unidentified, nautical twilight, single witness

Key points

• Single civilian witness observed a white luminous point cycling through appearance and disappearance at approximately 6-second intervals for about 5 minutes from his garden in Ruffec (Charente) on September 13, 2022, starting at 21:00.p.2
• The witness independently proposed a 'light on a rotating sphere' model: a fixed light on a sphere's surface would appear to move in a straight arc and cyclically disappear and reappear at the same sky positions for a stationary observer.p.2
• GEIPAN corrected the initially reported direction of observation from southwest to west, a correction confirmed by the witness in a September 2025 follow-up email.p.4
• The observation occurred during nautical twilight — after the end of civil twilight (20:45) but before the end of nautical twilight (21:21) — with twilight glow visible to the west.p.5
• Approximately 12 commercial aircraft transited the observation corridor (southwest to northeast) between 20:55 and 21:10 per Flightradar24 reconstruction, consistent with the UAP's trajectory but insufficient to account for the 20–30 cycles the witness estimated.p.9
• Aircraft hypothesis assessed as insufficient: the reported 6-second appearance/disappearance cycle is too rapid for individual aircraft passages, the estimated 20–30 cycles exceed the ~12 aircraft logged, and the disappearance of lights in clear sky remains unexplained.p.19
• Skytracker hypothesis rejected: no suitable venue within 40km (nearest discotheque in Angouleme, 40km south), horizontal visibility of 60km made a visible beam column unlikely, and fine-mesh AROME atmospheric data showed insufficient mid-level cloud cover in the direction of observation to serve as a reflective surface.p.22
• GEIPAN queried Météo France directly for AROME fine-mesh nebulosity data — beyond standard weather station records — to assess whether mid-level clouds could have supported a skytracker reflection; the data showed only very weak to weak cloud presence in the observation direction.p.21
• The witness measured the UAP's apparent size with a ruler held at arm's length: approximately 3mm in diameter traversing approximately 15cm of arc — comparable in size and brightness to aircraft navigation lights or a star.p.16
• The witness reported a prior UAP sighting approximately 25 years earlier as a child, from a moving vehicle with his parents: multiple luminous spheres that moved, also never explained.p.17

Verbatim

• j'ai observé un phénomène que j'ai tout d'abord pris pour un avion mais qui revenait de manière cyclique. Face à mon champ de vison au sud-ouest, j'ai vu une lumière blanche comparable à celle des feux de position d'un avion en terme de taille et intensité qui se déplaçait en direction du nord-est sur une ligne droite puis qui a rapidement disparu, comme si l'objet était passé au travers d'un nuage alors que cet endroit était parfaitement dégagé.

  p.2

• Si j'avais à reproduire ce phénomène, je placerais une lumière sur la surface d'une sphère en rotation : l'observateur immobile verrait donc la lumière par intermittence, dès qu'elle entre dans son champ de vision et aurait l'impression d'un objet se déplaçant en ligne droite, effectuant en boucle le même trajet en disparaissant et réapparaissant aux mêmes endroits.

  p.2

• La nature du phénomène observé était discontinue et revenait de manière cyclique, comme une lumière placée sur une sphère en rotation sur elle-même.

  p.16

• Je ne parviens pas à interpréter ce phénomène qui présente des caractéristiques différentes de ce que je peux observer habituellement en regardant le ciel la nuit (avions, étoiles, ect)

  p.17

• J'ai observé un PAN il y a environ 25 ans lorsque j'étais enfant avec mes parents, nous étions en voiture. Il s'agissait de plusieurs boules lumineuses qui se déplaçaient. Nous n'avons jamais trouvé d'explication à ce phénomène

  p.17

• Toutefois, les cycles de réapparitions et disparitions du PAN paraissent trop rapides pour correspondre aux passages d'avions, dans la mesure où le témoin a indiqué que le PAN était visible 6 secondes environ, avant de disparaitre pendant 5 à 7 secondes

  p.18

• une formation orageuse qui finissait de se dissiper à l'ouest mais dont les éclairs illuminaient encore le ciel par moments

  p.20

Most interesting

• The witness was on the phone with his mother throughout the entire observation and described the phenomenon to her in real time — she served as an indirect contemporaneous witness, though she was not physically present.
• The investigation spanned more than three years: observation September 13, 2022; report finalized December 3, 2025.
• GEIPAN's reconstruction employed at least seven external digital tools: Stellarium, Heavens-Above, Flightradar24, MétéoCiel, Géoportail, Météo France publitheque, and In-The-Sky.org — an unusually dense multi-source verification stack for a single civilian sighting.
• The witness measured the UAP's apparent size by holding a ruler at arm's length — a methodical self-measurement rarely documented in civilian UAP reports, and one GEIPAN appears to have accepted as usable data.
• Météo France was directly consulted to provide AROME fine-mesh atmospheric model data specifically to test whether mid-level cloud layers existed that could have reflected a ground-based projector; the data showed insufficient coverage to support that hypothesis.
• The observation zone is described as 'très rurale et constituée de petits hameaux' — ruling out commercial skytracker venues while leaving open the unprovable possibility of private use by an individual.
• The witness's independently derived rotating-sphere model accurately describes the apparent behavior of a retroreflective or pulsing object in a repeating orbital pass — a mechanism he arrived at without external prompting.
• Two hypotheses — Starlink satellite flashes and ice-crystal atmospheric reflections — were formally announced on page 18 as under investigation, but their full analyses fall within the truncated final 8 pages and their conclusions are not available from the released excerpt.