Within Cotes d'Armor UFOs
Why Binic and Dinan Still Stand Out
The two strongest Cotes-d'Armor cases remain unresolved, but their value rests on witness detail rather than proof of a craft.
On this page
- What witnesses reported
- What GEIPAN could not identify
- What the evidence still cannot prove
Page outline Jump by section
Introduction
Binic in 1990 and Dinan in 1999 are the two Côtes-d’Armor sightings that still stand out because they remain officially unresolved, not because they prove the presence of a craft. In GEIPAN’s public archive, both are classed as D cases: reports judged strange, with medium to strong evidential consistency, after investigation failed to identify the phenomenon. Binic involves several early-morning witnesses describing an orange, low-altitude object and unusual lights near the coast. Dinan centres on a late-night amateur astronomer who reported a silent, dark, barrel-like form changing course while he was observing the sky.[cnes-geipan.fr]cnes-geipan.frBINIC (22) 22.03.1990 | GEIPAN…
Their value is therefore narrow but important. They are not rich photographic or radar cases, and they should not be treated as proof of anything exotic. They matter because, in a department where many later reports have been explained as aircraft, meteors, satellites, balloons or drones, these two files remain the clearest official examples of witness-led cases that resisted straightforward identification.[CarteOvni.fr]carteovni.frOVNI dans le Côtes-d'Armor (22) — CarteOvni.frToutes les observations d'OVNI dans le département… Observations OVNI dans le Côtes-d'Ar…
Why these two cases carry more weight than most local reports
GEIPAN is not a private UFO group. It is the French space agency CNES unit that collects, analyses, archives and publishes reports of unidentified aerospace phenomena. CNES describes GEIPAN as having partners including the gendarmerie, police, the Air and Space Force, CNRS and Météo-France, which is why its stronger files can include witness statements, aviation checks, weather context and official enquiries rather than only press retellings.[CNES]cnes.frGEIPAN7 Jul 2025 — GEIPAN, the French UAP research and information group created by CNES in 1977, collects, analyses and archives inf…
The key point is the meaning of a D classification. GEIPAN says its classification process weighs two ideas: residual strangeness after comparison with known phenomena, and consistency, meaning the quantity and reliability of the data gathered. A D case is not “confirmed alien”; it is an observation that remains unidentified after the available checks.[cnes-geipan.fr]cnes-geipan.frOpen source on cnes-geipan.fr.
That distinction is especially useful in Côtes-d’Armor. Independent mapping of GEIPAN’s public data lists 34 Côtes-d’Armor cases, with only two classed as D: Binic on 22 March 1990 and Dinan on 7 September 1999. The same departmental list contains many A, B and C cases, showing that “strange at first” often becomes “identified”, “probably explained” or “too weakly documented” once investigators compare the sighting with ordinary causes.[CarteOvni.fr]carteovni.frOVNI dans le Côtes-d'Armor (22) — CarteOvni.frToutes les observations d'OVNI dans le département… Observations OVNI dans le Côtes-d'Ar…
What witnesses reported at Binic in March 1990
The Binic file concerns an observation on 22 March 1990 in the coastal commune then known as Binic, now part of Binic-Étables-sur-Mer. GEIPAN’s summary describes “a flying craft at low altitude and strange lights”. Its public case description says three witnesses saw, separately and more than once, a strange luminous phenomenon. One witness reported being overflown by an orange disc that made an unusual rushing-air sound, and was frightened enough to fall from a moped. Another reported twice seeing a similar object and strange lights behind hills.[cnes-geipan.fr]cnes-geipan.frBINIC (22) 22.03.1990 | GEIPAN…
The witness sheets add useful texture. One witness, a 40-year-old woman, is recorded as observing the sky at 04:50. GEIPAN lists the environment as an urbanised area, the distance as one or two kilometres, the direction as 135 degrees, and the phenomenon as a single orange, yellow or amber object or light. The same sheet records no sound for that witness.[cnes-geipan.fr]cnes-geipan.frOpen source on cnes-geipan.fr.
A second 40-year-old witness, a man, is recorded at 05:15. In his sheet, the phenomenon is described as an object or craft with lights, globally ovoid in form, orange and green in colour, five to six metres long, fast-moving, and associated with a mechanical whistling sound.[cnes-geipan.fr]cnes-geipan.frOpen source on cnes-geipan.fr.
This makes Binic more interesting than a simple “light in the sky” case. The official summary combines several features that are hard to reconcile neatly: repeated sightings, more than one witness, reported low altitude, colour detail, a claimed sound, and a frightening close-passage element. At the same time, those details do not turn the file into physical proof. There is no public photograph, no published instrument record, and no independent measurement of size, distance or speed.
What GEIPAN could not identify at Binic
The official conclusion is short but important: GEIPAN says the investigation did not find an explanation for the Binic phenomenon. The case is listed as D and as a “strange to very strange” phenomenon with medium to strong consistency.[cnes-geipan.fr]cnes-geipan.frBINIC (22) 22.03.1990 | GEIPAN…
The unresolved status rests mainly on witness detail. The case has two public witness entries and a summary referring to three witnesses, but the publicly visible material does not provide a technical reconstruction strong enough to test every ordinary possibility. This is a common problem in older cases. The more precise a witness becomes about shape, altitude or distance, the more tempting the story is; but unless those quantities are independently measured, they can remain estimates made under surprise and stress.
Several ordinary explanations remain difficult but not impossible in principle:<div class="content-enhancement content-enhancement--caution" markdown="1">
- Aircraft or helicopter: sound, apparent low altitude and lights could suggest aviation, but the reported ovoid form, orange disc description and repeated hill lights do not settle easily into a simple aircraft account.
- Vehicle, farm or coastal lighting: strange lights behind hills can sometimes come from ground sources, but that would not by itself explain an alleged overhead object.
- Meteor or re-entry: these can produce vivid lights, but they are less compatible with repeated local sightings and an object described as low, structured and noisy.
- Misjudged distance and speed: this is always a risk in night observations, especially when the sky, horizon and terrain are involved.</div>
The cautious reading is that Binic is unresolved because it combines enough witness detail to resist a quick dismissal, but not enough independent data to prove what was actually seen.
What witnesses reported at Dinan in September 1999
The Dinan case is different in feel. It is not a close, frightening, low-altitude encounter. It is a skywatching report from a 60-year-old male witness, recorded in GEIPAN’s public testimony page as occurring in an urbanised environment under clear night conditions, between 23:30 and 01:30. The observation frame is the sky, the phenomenon is a single object, its speed is described as slow, and the sound is listed as unknown in the witness-data fields.[cnes-geipan.fr]cnes-geipan.frOpen source on cnes-geipan.fr.
GEIPAN’s fuller case description says the witness was an amateur astronomer observing the Andromeda galaxy with the naked eye when he saw an object moving at constant speed on a north-south trajectory. After a few moments, it reportedly changed direction sharply towards north-north-west, then returned north. The phenomenon was described as silent, non-luminous, brown, and barrel-shaped in the witness sketch. The observation lasted about one minute.[geipan.fr]geipan.frDINAN (22) 07.09.1999 | GEIPAN…
That combination is why Dinan is intriguing. A non-luminous brown object is much less typical than the bright lights that dominate many UFO reports. The witness context also matters: an amateur astronomer is not automatically infallible, but someone already observing the night sky may be more attentive to angular movement, sky direction and the difference between a star-like light and a darker shape.
There is one caution in the public file: the case title and observation date give 7 September 1999, while the French description says “the night of 7 to 8 August 1999”. The same page elsewhere lists the observation date as 07/09/1999. That internal inconsistency does not erase the case, but it is a reminder that public archive summaries can contain transcription or dating problems, and that readers should be careful about treating every line as equally precise.[geipan.fr]geipan.frDINAN (22) 07.09.1999 | GEIPAN…
What GEIPAN could not identify at Dinan
Dinan’s unresolved status is stronger in one specific respect: the official description says enquiries with neighbouring aerodromes and civil and military authorities did not associate the observation with an aircraft, either through air-traffic examination or radar traces. GEIPAN therefore left the phenomenon unexplained and classed the case as D.[geipan.fr]geipan.frDINAN (22) 07.09.1999 | GEIPAN…
That does not mean no aircraft, balloon, bird, satellite or other object could possibly have been involved. It means the checks described in the file did not connect the report to an identified aircraft movement or radar record. For a one-minute naked-eye observation of a non-luminous object, the absence of a match is significant but not decisive.
Dinan’s main evidential strengths are:<div class="content-enhancement content-enhancement--insight-grid" markdown="1">
- Witness context: an amateur astronomer already watching the sky.
- Specific behaviour: a constant movement followed by abrupt direction changes.
- Official aviation checks: enquiries reportedly covered nearby aerodromes and civil and military authorities.
- Unusual description: a silent, dark, barrel-like form rather than a generic bright light.</div>
Its main weaknesses are just as important:<div class="content-enhancement content-enhancement--insight-grid" markdown="1">
- Single witness: unlike Binic, the public case rests on one witness.
- No public image or instrument capture: the sketch helps interpretation but is not independent evidence.
- Uncertain date wording: the public summary contains a mismatch between September and August.
- Hard-to-test appearance: a dark object at night is difficult to estimate for size, distance and altitude.</div>
For readers, the result is a credible unresolved report, not a solved mystery with a hidden answer. The most defensible statement is that GEIPAN could not tie the Dinan observation to known air traffic or radar traces, while the available evidence still falls short of identifying the object.
Why Binic and Dinan should be read together
Binic and Dinan are best understood as a pair because they show two different ways a local case can remain unresolved.
Binic is a multi-witness, early-morning, coastal case with stronger sensory drama: orange and green colours, a reported ovoid or disc-like form, sound, low altitude, repeated sightings and lights behind hills. Its weakness is that the public record does not show a rich technical trail. The case is vivid because witnesses supplied striking details, but those details are still largely testimonial.[cnes-geipan.fr+2cnes-geipan.fr]cnes-geipan.frBINIC (22) 22.03.1990 | GEIPAN…
Dinan is quieter but more methodical. It has one witness rather than several, and its object was not luminous, but the witness was engaged in sky observation and GEIPAN’s description explicitly mentions enquiries into air traffic and radar traces. Its unresolved value therefore comes less from drama and more from the failure of aviation checks to produce a match.[geipan.fr]geipan.frDINAN (22) 07.09.1999 | GEIPAN…
Together, they also prevent a common misunderstanding about Côtes-d’Armor’s UFO history. The department is not packed with famous unsolved incidents. Its record is more modest: a small number of unresolved or poorly documented older files, surrounded by many reports later explained or downgraded. That makes Binic and Dinan useful starting points precisely because they are not sensationalised national legends. They are compact case studies in what an official unresolved file can and cannot show.[CarteOvni.fr]carteovni.frOVNI dans le Côtes-d'Armor (22) — CarteOvni.frToutes les observations d'OVNI dans le département… Observations OVNI dans le Côtes-d'Ar…
What the evidence still cannot prove
The strongest honest conclusion is that both cases remain unidentified in the official record, but neither proves the presence of an extraordinary craft. GEIPAN’s own method does not treat a D classification as proof of origin. It reflects the result of an investigation after known explanations have been considered against the available data.[cnes-geipan.fr]cnes-geipan.frOpen source on cnes-geipan.fr.
For Binic, the missing pieces are independent measurement and technical corroboration. If there had been a photograph, radar track, multiple timed statements with precise bearings, or a confirmed local aviation exclusion, the case would be much stronger. Instead, its weight rests on the consistency and unusual detail of witness reports.
For Dinan, the official aviation and radar checks make the case harder to dismiss casually, but the report remains a single-witness naked-eye observation of a dark object. The one-minute duration, lack of image, and date inconsistency in the public wording keep the case from becoming a clean evidential benchmark.
These limitations are not failures of the witnesses. They are the normal limits of retrospective sighting investigation. People can report sincerely and carefully while still misjudging distance, size, motion or context. Equally, investigators can make reasonable checks and still fail to identify a real but ordinary object.
Why they still stand out in Côtes-d’Armor
Binic and Dinan stand out because they occupy the narrow middle ground that makes UFO history worth studying: too detailed to ignore, too thin to prove. They are not the department’s answer to the great national UFO legends, and they do not justify grand claims. Their importance is local, evidential and comparative.
For Côtes-d’Armor, they provide two useful reference points. Binic shows how a multi-witness coastal report can remain unresolved when the descriptions are vivid but the technical record is limited. Dinan shows how a quieter observation can remain unresolved when an attentive skywatcher reports unusual movement and official checks do not identify air traffic or radar traces.
The best public reading is therefore balanced: Binic and Dinan are the two strongest unresolved Côtes-d’Armor cases in GEIPAN’s public record, but their strength lies in witness detail and failed identification, not in proof of an unknown vehicle. They remain open questions, not confirmed answers.
Amazon book picks
Further Reading
Books and field guides related to Why Binic and Dinan Still Stand Out. Use these as the next step if you want deeper reading beyond the article.
UFOs
Focuses on credible unresolved cases and official investigations, matching the GEIPAN unresolved-case theme.
The UFO Experience
Examines how unexplained sightings are evaluated and classified rather than assuming extraordinary conclusions.
In Plain Sight: an Investigation Into UFOs and Impossible Sci...
Explores contemporary unresolved reports and the limits of available evidence.
Dimensions
Reviews puzzling historical cases and competing interpretations of unexplained reports.
eBay marketplace picks
Marketplace Samples
Live-tested eBay searches with available results related to this page.
Endnotes
1.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/en/node/50239?field_classification_des_cas_target_id%5B0%5D=14&page=%2C4
2.
Source: geipan.fr
Link:https://www.geipan.fr/fr/cas/1999-09-01538?field_classification_des_cas_target_id%5B0%5D=14
3.
Source: carteovni.fr
Link:https://carteovni.fr/departement/c-otes-d-armor
4.
Source: cnes.fr
Link:https://cnes.fr/en/projects/geipan
5.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/en/node/58788
6.
Source: geipan.fr
Link:https://www.geipan.fr/fr/cas/1990-03-01196?field_agregation_index_value=&field_classification_des_cas_target_id%5B0%5D=13&field_classification_des_cas_target_id%5B1%5D=14&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmin%5D=&field_departement_target_id=&field_document_existe_ou_pas_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=52&select-category-export=nothing&sort=asc
7.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/fr/temoignage/4748
8.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://cnes-geipan.fr/fr/temoignage/4749
9.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/fr/temoignage/6228
10.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/fr/recherche/cas/tab?field_agregation_index_value=&field_classification_des_cas_target_id%5B0%5D=13&field_classification_des_cas_target_id%5B1%5D=14&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmin%5D=&field_date_value=&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_date_d_observation&page=28%2C20&select-category-export=nothing&sort=asc
11.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/en/recherche/cas/tab?field_agregation_index_value=&field_classification_des_cas_target_id%5B0%5D=14&field_classification_des_cas_target_id%5B1%5D=15&field_classification_des_cas_target_id%5B2%5D=16&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmin%5D=&field_departement_target_id=&field_document_existe_ou_pas_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_departement_textuel&page=1&select-category-export=nothing&sort=asc
12.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://cnes-geipan.fr/fr/recherche/cas/tab?field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmin%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=111&sort=desc
13.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/fr/recherche/cas/tab?field_agregation_index_value=&field_classification_des_cas_target_id%5B0%5D=14&field_classification_des_cas_target_id%5B1%5D=15&field_classification_des_cas_target_id%5B2%5D=16&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmin%5D=&field_departement_target_id=&field_document_existe_ou_pas_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_departement_textuel&page=1&select-category-export=nothing&sort=asc
14.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://cnes-geipan.fr/fr/cas/1951-06-00002
15.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/fr/recherche/cas/tab?field_agregation_index_value=orange&field_is_new_value=All&field_is_revisited_value=All&field_type_de_cas_target_id=All&order=field_date&page=%2C16&sort=asc
16.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/en/recherche/cas/tab?field_agregation_index_value=&field_classification_des_cas_target_id%5B13%5D=13&field_classification_des_cas_target_id%5B14%5D=14&field_classification_des_cas_target_id%5B15%5D=15&field_classification_des_cas_target_id%5B16%5D=16&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmin%5D=&field_date_value=&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_date_d_observation&page=26&select-category-export=nothing&sort=desc
17.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://cnes-geipan.fr/en/search/cas?field_agregation_index_value=&field_classification_des_cas_target_id%255B11%255D=11&field_date_d_observation_value%255Bmax%255D=&field_date_d_observation_value%255Bmin%255D=&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmin%5D=&field_date_value=&field_departement_target_id=&field_document_existe_ou_pas_value=All&field_is_new_value=All&field_is_revisited_value=All&field_latitude_value%255Bmax%255D=&field_latitude_value%255Bmin%255D=&field_latitude_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_latitude_value%5Bmin%5D=&field_longitude_value%255Bmax%255D=&field_longitude_value%255Bmin%255D=&field_longitude_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_longitude_value%5Bmin%5D=&field_phenomene_target_id=&field_type_de_cas_target_id=All&order=title&page=%2C421&sort=desc
18.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/fr/recherche/cas?page=%2C424&undefined=
19.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/en/search/cas?field_agregation_index_value=Gard&field_is_new_value=All&field_is_revisited_value=All&field_type_de_cas_target_id=All&order=field_date&page=%2C50&sort=asc
20.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/en/node/58894?page=%2C45
21.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/en/node/58791
22.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/en/faq-page
23.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/en/missions-methodes-et-resultats
24.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://cnes-geipan.fr/en/node/46706
25.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/en/mentions_legales
26.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/en/node/430
27.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://cnes-geipan.fr/en/node/56062
28.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://cnes-geipan.fr/en/node/57226
29.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://cnes-geipan.fr/en/node/58478?page=9&undefined=
30.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/en/node/56846?page=%2C126
31.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://cnes-geipan.fr/en/node/61319?field_date_value=2021-11-23&field_is_new_value=1&order=title&page=12&sort=asc
32.
Source: cnes-geipan.fr
Link:https://www.cnes-geipan.fr/fr/recherche/cas/tab?field_agregation_index_value=&field_classification_des_cas_target_id%5B14%5D=14&field_classification_des_cas_target_id%5B15%5D=15&field_classification_des_cas_target_id%5B16%5D=16&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmin%5D=&field_date_value=&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_date_d_observation_textuel&page=4&select-category-export=nothing&sort=desc
33.
Source: dinan.fr
Title: L’histoire à chaque pas
Link:https://www.dinan.fr/vivre-a-dinan/je-minstalle-a-dinan/lhistoire-a-chaque-pas/
34.
Source: geipan.fr
Link:https://geipan.fr/fr/recherche/cas/tab?field_agregation_index_value=&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmin%5D=&field_date_value=&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=3&sort=desc
35.
Source: geipan.fr
Link:https://geipan.fr/fr/recherche/cas/tab?field_date_value=2004-04-23&field_is_new_value=All&field_is_revisited_value=All&field_type_de_cas_target_id=All&order=field_date&page=10&sort=asc
36.
Source: geipan.fr
Link:https://www.geipan.fr/fr/recherche/cas/tab?field_agregation_index_value=&field_classification_des_cas_target_id%5B14%5D=14&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmin%5D=&field_date_value=&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_date&page=%2C4&sort=asc
37.
Source: geipan.fr
Link:https://www.geipan.fr/en/recherche/cas/tab?field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmin%5D=&field_document_existe_ou_pas_value=All&field_is_new_value=All&field_is_revisited_value=All&field_latitude_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_longitude_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_longitude_value%5Bmin%5D=&field_type_de_cas_target_id=All&order=field_date&page=152&sort=desc
38.
Source: geipan.fr
Link:https://geipan.fr/fr/recherche/cas/tab?field_date_value=2007-03-01&field_is_new_value=All&field_is_revisited_value=All&field_type_de_cas_target_id=All&order=field_date&page=19&sort=asc
39.
Source: geipan.fr
Link:https://www.geipan.fr/fr/recherche/cas/tab?field_agregation_index_value=&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmax%5D=&field_date_d_observation_value%5Bmin%5D=&field_date_value=&field_departement_target_id=&field_document_existe_ou_pas_value=All&field_is_new_value=All&field_is_revisited_value=1&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=title&page=8%2C24&sort=desc
40.
Source: geipan.fr
Link:https://geipan.fr/fr/recherche/cas/tab?field_is_new_value=All&field_is_revisited_value=All&field_type_de_cas_target_id=116&order=field_classification_des_cas&page=162&select-category-export=nothing&sort=asc
41.
Source: carteovni.fr
Title: binic 1990 0301196
Link:https://carteovni.fr/cas/binic-1990-0301196
42.
Source: carteovni.fr
Title: binic 22
Link:https://carteovni.fr/commune/binic-22
43.
Source: carteovni.fr
Title: Cas OVNI non identifiés (classe D) en France
Link:https://carteovni.fr/classification/d
44.
Source: Wikipedia
Link:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GEIPAN
45.
Source: newspaceeconomy.ca
Title: GEIPA N: Frances UAP Investigation Unit
Link:https://newspaceeconomy.ca/2025/07/29/geipan-frances-uap-investigation-unit/
Additional References
46.
Source: youtube.com
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2mPKigf2ps
47.
Source: youtube.com
Title: GEIPAN: Everything You Need to Know About UFOs and Aerial Phenomena
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K-dgmfIOYBE
48.
Source: youtube.com
Title: Meeting France’s UFO detectives • FRANCE 24 English
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zczcBLukQ6s
49.
Source: facebook.com
Link:https://www.facebook.com/France3Occitanie/posts/comment-fonctionne-le-geipan-le-groupe-d%C3%A9tudes-et-dinformations-sur-les-ph%C3%A9nom%C3%A8n/971177045625594/
50.
Source: academieairespace.com
Link:https://academieairespace.com/event/geipan-studies-uaps-ufos/?lang=en
51.
Source: flickr.com
Link:https://www.flickr.com/photos/radio53/14755598242
52.
Source: france-science.com
Link:https://france-science.com/en/caipan-ii-international-conference-on-unidentified-aerospace-phenomena-organized-by-geipan-in-toulouse/
53.
Source: cotesdarmor.fr
Title: colonie anglaise de dinan 1800 1940 cosme de satge relate les belles annees
Link:https://cotesdarmor.fr/actualites/colonie-anglaise-de-dinan-1800-1940-cosme-de-satge-relate-les-belles-annees
54.
Source: youtube.com
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hn2xTieploU
55.
Source: youtube.com
Title: Pierre Bescond: Why France Studied UFOs at the Highest Level
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jWKfvL0666E
Topic Tree