Why Are There No Class D Cases?

Introduction

Indre-et-Loire’s public UFO record is striking less for dramatic unsolved cases than for the absence of any GEIPAN class D case in the currently visible public index. GEIPAN is the French public body within CNES that collects, analyses, archives and publishes reports of unusual aerospace phenomena. Its national figures still include a small unresolved category, but Indre-et-Loire’s public GEIPAN-derived record is different: an independent department page based on GEIPAN data lists 34 cases, with 15 class A, 12 class B, 7 class C and 0 class D.[CNES]cnes.frGEIPAN7 Jul 2025 — GEIPAN, the French UAP research and information group created by CNES in 1977, collects, analyses and archives inf… Overview image for GEIPAN Record That does not mean nobody in the department has reported strange things. It means that, once the available testimony, photos, videos, astronomy, weather, local context and witness detail are assessed, the public record for Indre-et-Loire mainly resolves into identified phenomena, probable explanations, or files too thin to support a firm conclusion. For this department, the central lesson is the difference between a sighting that felt mysterious at the time and a case that remains unidentified after investigation.

What GEIPAN Counts and Classifies

GEIPAN’s role is not to validate folklore or decide whether a witness has “seen a UFO” in the popular sense. CNES describes GEIPAN as the French UAP research and information group, created in 1977, whose work is to collect, analyse and archive eyewitness accounts of unidentified aerospace phenomena and inform the public. Its partners include the Gendarmerie, Police, Air and Space Force, CNRS and Météo-France, which matters because many cases depend on mundane checks: aircraft, weather, satellites, astronomical bodies, local activity and document analysis.[CNES]cnes.frGEIPAN7 Jul 2025 — GEIPAN, the French UAP research and information group created by CNES in 1977, collects, analyses and archives inf…

The classification system is the key to understanding Indre-et-Loire’s “no class D” pattern. GEIPAN defines class A as a phenomenon identified after investigation, class B as probably identified, class C as not identified because of insufficient data or information, and class D as not identified after investigation. GEIPAN also notes that C and D cases can be revisited if new information is later supplied.[Geipan]cnes-geipan.frGeipanMethodologyClassification C: Phenomenon not identified due to lack of data or information. Classification D: Phenomenon not identif…

This distinction is easy to miss. A class C case is not a stronger mystery than a class A or B case. It is usually a weaker evidential file. A short, single-witness observation with no photograph, no video, no corroboration and uncertain location data may remain unclassified not because it is especially strange, but because there is not enough reliable information to test it. By contrast, a case with photographs, video, precise timing and a co-operative witness may be easier to explain, even if it initially looked more impressive.

GEIPAN’s own method reinforces this point. Its classification is based on two broad criteria: the consistency of the file, meaning the quantity and reliability of the available information, and the residual strangeness after investigation. Since 2008, GEIPAN has used a more detailed A/B/C/D1/D2 approach built around those two criteria.[Geipan]cnes-geipan.frOpen source on cnes-geipan.fr. GEIPAN Record illustration 1

What Indre-et-Loire’s Public Record Shows

The public pattern for Indre-et-Loire is unusually tidy. CarteOvni, an independent map using public GEIPAN data, lists 34 GEIPAN-recognised cases in the department and says none are class D. Its department summary gives the split as 15 class A, 12 class B and 7 class C, with 0 class D. It also lists Tours as the most represented commune, followed by smaller clusters such as Savigné-sur-Lathan and Joué-lès-Tours.[CarteOvni.fr]carteovni.frOVNI dans le Indre-et-Loire (37) — CarteOvni.frLe département Indre-et-Loire compte 34 cas recensés par le GEIPAN, dont 0 non identifiés…

This should be read carefully. CarteOvni is not GEIPAN or CNES, and its page is an index rather than the official archive itself. Still, it is useful because it organises the official public cases geographically and makes the pattern visible at department scale. The underlying case pages show the same broad picture: Indre-et-Loire’s public record is dominated by stars, planets, lanterns, ground lights, probable human activity, and reports that lack enough reliable information.

The contrast with national GEIPAN figures is important. CNES’s current GEIPAN project page gives national key figures of 24.6% clearly identified phenomena, 39.7% probably identified, 32.4% unidentified for lack of data, and 3.3% unidentified after investigation. Indre-et-Loire’s public pattern, as indexed by CarteOvni, therefore has a lower unresolved-after-investigation share than the national headline figure: 0 class D in that department list rather than a small but real national class D proportion.[CNES]cnes.frGEIPAN7 Jul 2025 — GEIPAN, the French UAP research and information group created by CNES in 1977, collects, analyses and archives inf…

The most useful way to read this is not “Indre-et-Loire has no mysteries”. It is “Indre-et-Loire has no public GEIPAN case, in this indexed set, that has survived investigation as a class D unknown.” That is a narrower, more evidence-led statement, and it fits the files better.

The Pattern Becomes Clear in the Cases

Several Indre-et-Loire files show how the classification process changes the meaning of a witness report. They are not interchangeable anecdotes; each illustrates a different route out of the “UFO” label.

The 2023 Tours case is a good modern example because it included photographs and video. A witness saw a bright, scintillating point of light at about 1:30 am and again around 3:00 am, with colour changes that seemed unusual. GEIPAN concluded that the observation involved two stars, Betelgeuse and Procyon, seen in separate phases. The report explains that atmospheric effects such as diffraction, turbulence, refraction, absorption and scattering can produce rapid colour changes, and GEIPAN classified the case A.[Geipan]geipan.frOpen source on geipan.fr.

That case matters because it shows how extra evidence can reduce mystery rather than increase it. The video and photographs did not prove an exotic object; they helped investigators understand viewing direction, timing, apparent immobility and the witness’s interpretation. The case also shows a common mechanism in UFO reports: a sincere observer can think they are watching one persistent phenomenon when changing viewing conditions, buildings and the movement of the sky make two ordinary objects appear connected.

The 2022 Sainte-Maure-de-Touraine case points in a different direction. The witness filmed coloured lights at night and was concerned by what appeared on several videos. GEIPAN found that the lights were close to the ground rather than in the sky and linked them to firefighting vehicles monitoring the site of a forest fire at Le Plessis. The case was classified A as ground lights showing human activity following a forest fire.[Geipan]geipan.frOpen source on geipan.fr.

This is a particularly useful Indre-et-Loire example because the original experience had emotional force. The witness was tired, awake at night, filming from a window and trying to make sense of lights in darkness. The eventual explanation did not require the witness to be dishonest or foolish. It required a local fact that the witness did not have: emergency activity after a nearby fire.

The 2020 Panzoult case shows the role of astronomy and perception. A witness observed a bright point of light in cloudy conditions and later saw a similar point in another direction, interpreting the movement as irregular. GEIPAN concluded that the witness had successively observed Capella and Mars, with the apparent irregular motion affected by autokinesis, a perceptual effect in which a fixed light can appear to move. The case was classified A.[Geipan]geipan.frOpen source on geipan.fr.

The 1993 Chinon case sits in the probable rather than fully identified category. Witnesses reported a recurring rotating white luminous form for about 90 minutes, with some mention of a buzzing sound. GEIPAN classified the case B, with the summary giving a probable discotheque laser beam at about 10 kilometres’ distance, made plausible by the cloud layer and line of sight.[Geipan]geipan.frOpen source on geipan.fr.

This type of case is important because it explains why class B is not a casual dismissal. A probable explanation still leaves some uncertainty, but the uncertainty is bounded. The pattern, recurrence, cloud conditions and local line of sight make a human light source more plausible than an unknown craft. The classification reflects that balance.

Why Weak Evidence Is Not the Same as Mystery

The 1976 Chambourg-sur-Indre case is the clearest reminder that “not explained” can mean “not enough to work with”. GEIPAN records a brief observation of a luminous circular green-emeral object with a copper-red halo moving from west to east at 5:50 pm. It was silent, disappeared quickly behind the landscape and then at the horizon, and no other testimony was collected. GEIPAN classifies it C because the file lacks reliable information.[Geipan]geipan.frOpen source on geipan.fr.

For a reader, this is one of the most important cases in the department precisely because it resists exaggeration. The description is vivid, but the file is thin. There is no public trail of multiple witnesses, instrument data, photographs, video, radar or later corroboration. It is therefore not a class D case, because GEIPAN’s class D is for a phenomenon still not identified after investigation, not for every old report that cannot now be reconstructed.

That distinction changes the tone of the whole department history. A class C file can remain intriguing as a human report, especially when the witness describes colour, speed, silence or an unusual trajectory. But as evidence, it is weaker than many explained cases. The better documented a case is, the more opportunities investigators have to test astronomy, weather, aircraft, local activity, image artefacts and witness geometry.

This is why the no-class-D pattern should not be treated as proof that every witness “only saw something ordinary” in a simplistic way. Some witnesses really did see something they could not identify. GEIPAN’s record simply shows that the public files either resolve into ordinary causes, probably resolve into ordinary causes, or lack enough information to carry the case into the stronger unresolved category. GEIPAN Record illustration 3

Why the Modern Files Often End as Class A or B

Recent Indre-et-Loire cases show why modern documentation does not automatically make a sighting more mysterious. Smartphones, videos and photographs can preserve a witness’s experience, but they also give investigators more material to test. GEIPAN uses tools and methods for photo and video analysis, and CNES has described IPACO as software used to authenticate and analyse witness-provided photos and videos, including checking image documents and identifying artefacts such as reflections or optical aberrations.[Geipan]cnes-geipan.frOpen source on cnes-geipan.fr.

In the 2023 Tours case, the images did not capture a structured object; GEIPAN noted that the phenomenon remained blurred on the video and photographs, probably because of strong zoom. The key evidence came from matching the timing, direction and behaviour of the lights to Betelgeuse and Procyon.[Geipan]geipan.frOpen source on geipan.fr.

In the 2022 Sainte-Maure-de-Touraine case, videos helped show that the lights were near the ground and allowed the investigators to compare what was filmed with the local context of a forest fire and firefighting vehicles.[Geipan]geipan.frOpen source on geipan.fr.

In the 2025 Château-Renault case, the explanation was different again. GEIPAN recorded a single witness observing a silent orange spherical light moving slowly and disappearing behind trees after about 40 seconds. The file was only of medium consistency because there was one witness and no photo or video of the phenomenon, but the reconstruction, mapped observation axes and local wind data supported a very probable sky lantern explanation. GEIPAN classified it A.[Geipan]geipan.frOpen source on geipan.fr.

That case is especially revealing because its features are familiar in UFO reporting: orange colour, silence, slow movement, fluctuating intensity, short duration and disappearance behind trees. In a less structured account, those features might be used to heighten mystery. In GEIPAN’s analysis, they point towards a known object with a small flame, moving with weak local air currents on a calm summer night. GEIPAN Record illustration 2

What the Absence of Class D Does and Does Not Prove

The absence of public class D cases in Indre-et-Loire is meaningful, but it has limits. It does show that, in the visible GEIPAN-derived record, the department does not currently offer a flagship official unresolved case comparable to those sometimes discussed in national French UFO history. The local public record is more useful as a study in sorting: how strange lights become stars, planets, lanterns, lasers, ground activity, aircraft-like explanations or thin files.

It does not prove that every unusual observation in Indre-et-Loire has been reported, investigated or published. GEIPAN’s public archive depends on reports reaching the system, on witnesses providing enough detail, and on cases being processed and made available. CNES says GEIPAN receives eyewitness accounts directly through its website or through authorities such as the gendarmerie and civil aviation, then analyses and publishes documented cases.[CNES]cnes.frGEIPAN7 Jul 2025 — GEIPAN, the French UAP research and information group created by CNES in 1977, collects, analyses and archives inf…

It also does not mean the department is unimportant in UFO history. Indre-et-Loire is useful precisely because it lowers the temperature. It shows how a department can have decades of reports without producing a public official residue of class D cases. For public readers, that is a better lesson than another dramatic retelling of an isolated sighting: the evidential category matters more than the emotional charge of the original observation.

The local pattern also helps distinguish three questions that often get blurred:

Was the witness sincere? Often, yes; GEIPAN’s files frequently begin with ordinary people reporting something that genuinely puzzled them.
Was the sighting unusual to the witness? Yes, in many cases; the point of the report is that the observer did not recognise it at the time.

How to Read Indre-et-Loire’s GEIPAN Record Fairly

A fair reading of Indre-et-Loire’s GEIPAN files avoids two opposite mistakes. The first is to treat every report as evidence of an extraordinary craft just because the witness was surprised. The second is to treat every explanation as if it makes the witness irrelevant. The files themselves suggest a more careful middle ground: witnesses often report sincerely, but their first interpretation is only the start of the investigation.

The stronger cases are not necessarily the strangest-sounding ones. A well-documented class A file can teach more than a thin class C file because it shows the mechanism of misidentification. The 2023 Tours case teaches how bright stars, atmospheric scintillation and interrupted viewing can create a puzzling experience. The 2022 Sainte-Maure-de-Touraine case teaches how ground activity can be mistaken for sky activity at night. The 1993 Chinon case teaches how a likely entertainment laser can become a recurring luminous aerial form when seen against cloud.[Geipan+2Geipan]geipan.frOpen source on geipan.fr.

For the wider Indre-et-Loire UFO project, this page therefore functions as the evidential baseline. Other local pages can examine individual sightings, witness clusters, press treatment or folklore, but the GEIPAN record sets the public official frame: there are reports, there are investigations, and there is currently no public class D pattern in the department. That makes Indre-et-Loire less a showcase of unresolved aerial mysteries than a useful example of how official classification can turn a scattered UFO history into a clearer map of evidence quality.

Amazon book picks

Marketplace Samples

Live-tested eBay searches with available results related to this page.

Example eBay listing

Alien Xenomorph 3D Printed Gold Wall Plaque Relief Art Sci-Fi Movie Decor Gift

SearcheBay.co.uk: alien wall art

Browse similar oneBay.co.uk

Example eBay listing

Aliens Face Hugger Wall Decor Wall Art

SearcheBay.co.uk: alien wall art

Browse similar oneBay.co.uk

Example eBay listing

ALIENS FILM MOVIE POSTER ALIEN CLASSIC PRINT LARGE WALL ART SIZE -A4 A3 A2 A1

SearcheBay.co.uk: alien wall art

Browse similar oneBay.co.uk

Browse more oneBay.co.uk

Example items shown for inspiration; availability and pricing can change. Branchoria may earn a commission if you purchase through outbound eBay links.

Endnotes

1. Source: cnes.fr
Link:https://cnes.fr/en/projects/geipan

<summary>Source snippet</summary>GEIPAN7 Jul 2025 — GEIPAN, the French UAP research and information group created by CNES in 1977, collects, analyses and archives inf…

2. Source: carteovni.fr
Link:https://carteovni.fr/departement/indre-et-loire

<summary>Source snippet</summary>OVNI dans le Indre-et-Loire (37) — CarteOvni.frLe département Indre-et-Loire compte 34 cas recensés par le GEIPAN, dont 0 non identifiés…

3. Source: geipan.fr
Link:https://www.geipan.fr/en/faq-page

4. Source: geipan.fr
Link:https://www.geipan.fr/fr/cas/2023-02-51420

5. Source: geipan.fr
Link:https://www.geipan.fr/fr/cas/2022-08-51380?field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_document_existe_ou_pas_value=All&field_is_new_value=All&field_is_revisited_value=All&field_latitude_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_latitude_value%5Bmin%5D=&field_longitude_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_longitude_value%5Bmin%5D=&field_type_de_cas_target_id=All&order=field_date_d_observation&page=10&sort=desc

6. Source: geipan.fr
Link:https://geipan.fr/fr/cas/2020-08-51055?field_agregation_index_value=&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmin%5D=&field_date_value=2007-03-01&field_departement_target_id=&field_document_existe_ou_pas_value=All&field_is_new_value=All&field_is_revisited_value=All&field_latitude_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_latitude_value%5Bmin%5D=&field_longitude_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_longitude_value%5Bmin%5D=&field_phenomene_target_id=&field_type_de_cas_target_id=All&order=field_classification_des_cas&page=154%2C11&sort=desc

7. Source: geipan.fr
Link:https://www.geipan.fr/en/node/51798?field_is_new_value=All&field_is_revisited_value=All&field_type_de_cas_target_id=All&order=field_date_d_observation&page=122&s=09&sort=desc

8. Source: geipan.fr
Link:https://geipan.fr/fr/cas/1976-01-02676

9. Source: geipan.fr
Link:https://www.geipan.fr/fr/cas/2025-08-51671

10. Source: cnes.fr
Link:https://cnes.fr/projets/geipan

11. Source: geipan.fr
Link:https://www.geipan.fr/sites/default/files/15_VALLEE_full.pdf

12. Source: geipan.fr
Link:https://www.geipan.fr/en/node/59595

13. Source: geipan.fr
Link:https://geipan.fr/sites/default/files/Questionnaire%20terre-R570.pdf

14. Source: youtube.com
Title: France’s Official UFO Investigation Agency (GEIPAN)
Link:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lXi5B0NTwVc

<summary>Source snippet</summary>GEIPAN: France’s Official UFO Investigation Program Since 2005…

15. Source: youtube.com
Link:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NA2JSly-tQ4

<summary>Source snippet</summary>French Government DECLASSIFIED UFO Report: The COMETA Files Explained…

16. Source: youtube.com
Link:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WwGGuQljl4

<summary>Source snippet</summary>GEIPAN UFO classification system CNES Geipan: la France aussi s’intéresse aux ovnis C dans l'air - France Télévisions…

17. Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/en/node/58788

<summary>Source snippet</summary>GeipanMethodologyClassification C: Phenomenon not identified due to lack of data or information. Classification D: Phenomenon not identif…

18. Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/en/node/58791

19. Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/en/node/58787

20. Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/en/node/51797

21. Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://cnes-geipan.fr/en/node/58961

22. Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/sites/default/files/08_COUSYN_LOUANGE_full_EN.pdf

23. Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/en/node/58792

24. Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/en/faq-page

25. Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/en/stats

26. Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/en/missions-methodes-et-resultats

27. Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/en/what-did-i-see/step-1

28. Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/

29. Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://cnes-geipan.fr/en/node/51795