Human-world claims below are kept separate from Fred and Visitor editorial/lore. Translation changes language, not evidence status.
Witness typescommercial flight crews
Sensor typesradar
Evidence typescrew reports, short radar trace, official GEIPAN investigation
The case observation date was April 14, 2010.
Claim #19538 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 100% extraction confidence
“Observation date
14/04/2010”
Source: [AERO 2xRYR, RAM, EIN] BORDEAUX (33) 14.04.2010
// [[T0001]] Case details
The case is associated with the Aquitaine region and Gironde department.
Claim #19539 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 100% extraction confidence
“Region
Aquitaine
Department
Gironde”
Source: [AERO 2xRYR, RAM, EIN] BORDEAUX (33) 14.04.2010
// [[T0001]] Case details
GEIPAN classified the case as B.
Claim #19540 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 100% extraction confidence
“Classification
B”
Source: [AERO 2xRYR, RAM, EIN] BORDEAUX (33) 14.04.2010
// [[T0001]] Case details
The listed phenomenon type is Venus.
Claim #19541 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 100% extraction confidence
“Phenomenon type
Venus”
Source: [AERO 2xRYR, RAM, EIN] BORDEAUX (33) 14.04.2010
// [[T0001]] Case details
Several flight crews observed a light with variations in color, and the source describes the observations as very probably involving the planet Venus on the horizon.
Claim #19542 // ATTRIBUTED CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“Observations by several flight crews of the presence of a light with variations in color: very probable observations of the planet Venus on the horizon.”
Source: [AERO 2xRYR, RAM, EIN] BORDEAUX (33) 14.04.2010
// [[T0001]] Summary
At 22:44 on April 14, 2010, a total of five commercial flight crews observed a point of varying color in the sky toward the west-northwest.
Claim #19543 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence
“On April 14, 2010, at 22:44, a total of five commercial flight crews observed a point of varying color in the sky toward the west-northwest.”
Source: [AERO 2xRYR, RAM, EIN] BORDEAUX (33) 14.04.2010
// [[T0001]] Description
For flights RYR57ZB and RAM697, the observation was assessed as very consistent with a misidentification caused by Venus.
Claim #19544 // ASSESSMENT // SOURCED // 95% extraction confidence
“the observation seems very consistent with a misidentification caused by Venus”
Source: [AERO 2xRYR, RAM, EIN] BORDEAUX (33) 14.04.2010
// [[T0001]] Description
For flights RYR8CW, RYR7CT, and EIN577, the visibility of Venus was uncertain because of possible obstruction by the aircraft nose.
Claim #19545 // ASSESSMENT // SOURCED // 95% extraction confidence
“the question of Venus's visibility arises given a possible obstruction by the nose of the aircraft.”
Source: [AERO 2xRYR, RAM, EIN] BORDEAUX (33) 14.04.2010
// [[T0002]] Description
A short radar trace was present, but its interpretation was difficult and the consistency was considered too weak to conclude that it represented an unknown object in the absence of detailed testimonies from the crews.
Claim #19546 // ASSESSMENT // SOURCED // 96% extraction confidence
“The presence of a short radar trace, whose interpretation is difficult, could lead to the conclusion that it was an unknown object, but the consistency remains too weak in the absence of detailed testimonies from the different crews.”
Source: [AERO 2xRYR, RAM, EIN] BORDEAUX (33) 14.04.2010
// [[T0002]] Description
The observed multicolored scintillation was explained as dispersion of Venus's light through atmospheric layers, combined with aircraft movement and Earth's rotation.
Claim #19547 // ASSESSMENT // SOURCED // 98% extraction confidence
“The scintillation observed in several colors is due to the dispersion of Venus's light as it passes through the different layers of the atmosphere and varies according to fluctuations in those layers, as well as the rapid movement of the aircraft in cruise flight combined with the rotation of the Earth.”
Source: [AERO 2xRYR, RAM, EIN] BORDEAUX (33) 14.04.2010
// [[T0002]] Description
GEIPAN states that the case initially had a high degree of strangeness but ultimately proved moderate, while its consistency was very good because of multiple brief testimonies.
Claim #19548 // ASSESSMENT // SOURCED // 98% extraction confidence
“This case initially has a high degree of strangeness, but ultimately proves to be moderate. Its consistency is very good, due to the multiplicity of testimonies, unfortunately very brief.”
Source: [AERO 2xRYR, RAM, EIN] BORDEAUX (33) 14.04.2010
// [[T0002]] Description
GEIPAN classifies the case as B, meaning very probable observations of the planet Venus on the horizon.
Claim #19549 // ATTRIBUTED CLAIM // SOURCED // 100% extraction confidence
“GEIPAN classifies this case as “B”: very probable observations of the planet Venus on the horizon.”
Source: [AERO 2xRYR, RAM, EIN] BORDEAUX (33) 14.04.2010
// [[T0002]] Description
