The Trans-en-Provence UFO event occurred on January 8, 1981 and was observed by a single witness. Due to the French privacy laws, the case was originally published with the witness name replaced with the pseudonym Renato Collini; however the witness name is by now well known to the UFO community as Renato Nicolai.

The account provided by the witness to the police authorities is as follows:

I have lived in Trans-en-Province at my current address for nearly 14 years. My wife and I live alone. She is the cleaning lady at the social security office in Draguignan. I have not worked since November 1979. I was previously an employee of the SCNI company.

This firm went out of business and I was laid off. I recieve a disability pension because I suffered from a heart problem since 1973.

Yesterday, January 8. 1981, I was busy around the house as I am practically every day. I was behind the house, which is built over a restanque (raised level). I was building a concrete shelter for a water pump. Behind my house on the same level is an expanse of flat ground.

It is reached through a path along the base of the house.

It was about 5 PM. The weather was turning colder. My attention was attracted by a slight noise, a sort of faint whistling. I turned around and saw a device in the air at the height of a big pine tree at the edge of the property.

This device, which was not spinning, was coming lower toward the ground. I was only hearing a slight whistling sound. I was not seeing any flames, either below or around this device.

While it was continuing to come down, I went closer by walking towards the stone cabin above my house. When I placed myself against the wall of the cabin, I could see very well over the roof, since this cabin too is built over a raised level. I was on the higher level, about 1.2 m from the roof.

From that position, I clearly saw the device resting on the ground. Right away it lifted off, still emitting a slight whistling sound. Reaching a point above the trees, it left at high speed toward the forest of Trans, that is, towards the northeast.

When the device lifted off, I saw four openings below, through which neither flame nor smoke were escaping. The device kicked off a little dust when it left the ground.

At that instant, I was about 30 m away from the landing site. Later I went to the spot and I noticed a circle about 2 m in in diameter. At certain places along the circumference of the circle were traces like abrasions…

The device had the shape of two saucers, one inverted on top of the other. It must have measured about 1.5 m in height. It was the color of lead. This device had a ridge all the way around its circumference. Under the machine I saw two kinds of pieces as it was lifting off. They could be reactors or feet.

There were also two other circles which looked like trapdoors. The two reactors, or feet, extended about 20 cm below the body of the machine.

I have not felt any disturbance of the sense of vision or hearing.[2]

Parts of the account obtained by a civilian investigator are also relevant:

There [the witness] discovers a sort of ovoid vehicle, with the general shape of two half spheres of unequal volume, clearly separated by a flat ledge, extending at least 15 cm and forming a ring around the metallic mass which has a… height of between 2 and 2.5 m/…

The machine lifts off, making a slight amount of dust and with a soft whistling. Then it seems to tilt, exposing its underside, and it takes off at lightning speed, passing exactly between the two tall trees, at the exact spot from which it had seemed to fall.

The witness has noted that the landing trajectory is not identical to the takeoff trajectory.[3]

GEPAN (a department of the French Space Agency responsible for the investigation of UFO reports) also reconstructed the trajectory and duration.

Trajectory The witness states he began to perceive the phenomenon in the sky above the trees at the back end of the large platform, more precisely between the two tall conifers that tower above the wood.

Mr. Nicolai states that the motion was fast and continuous, without sudden changes in speed, and that there was no stop until the time when contact was established with the ground… The departure path is described by the witness as similar to the path of arrival…

Sound … He compares it to a wind blowing fairly strongly. He does not say[4] whether or not the sound stopped during the landing. The shock at the impact point was recalled like that of a stone falling to the ground[5]…

The Takeoff Phase… the object was resting on the ground for several seconds[6] before it suddenly rose vertically over several meters, tilted… continued to rise in this position and disappeared in the sky.[7]

Note that this object is engaging in the behavior I have termed “drop-in”, where the object arrives on a steep trajectory and departs on a steep trajectory, with only a short period in the landing or near landing location.

Detailed Sequence Of Events

Of importance to determining the point or range of events in the sequence which might correspond to the creation of the trace, is a detailed and measured sequence of events, which, based on the reference, seems to be as follows:

Elapsed Time Event Comments

0-3 secs Witness first sees the object which appears to be above two tall conifers approx 35 m from the impact point. Distance estimate is based on map and statement that the cabin is 35 m away from impact point; comparison of that distance on the map[8] with the distance to the tree suggests an additional 35 m to the tree.

3 secs Object strikes the ground with a sound like a stone falling. The motion from the trees to the impact point is fast and continuous. Assuming the distance from the impact point to be 35m for the top of the tree, and assuming the altitude to be above the tree (stated to be “dozens of meters high”[9],[10]); because of the error in translation, resolved to 10 m, we take 10 m as the altitude of the object; the distance traversed between first sight and impact is therefore 14 m.

The following assume a constant deceleration:

The deceleration based on a 3 second time to cross this distance is -0.32G from a speed of 34 kph.

According to Velasco, an upper limit to the weight based on the ground trace is 700 kg. To accomplish the noted deceleration at that weight would require a thrust of 7,171 kg.

4-25 secs Object is on the ground and the witness is continuing to move to a new location. Assuming 8 secs to walk 10m (a reasonably brisk walk), walking 30 m takes 24 secs, of which it is assumed 1-2 secs are used while object is descending, since the report refers to “while it was continuing to come down, I went closer by walking”.

25-28 secs Witness observes the object on the ground. According to the statement: “several seconds”; also, “From that position I clearly saw the device resting on the ground.”

28-35 secs Object lifts from the ground, tilts, and departs. Altitude appears to be that of the tops of the trees, here estimated to be 10 m (“it lifted off… reaching a point above the trees, it left at high speed”[11]).

It took from 1-3 secs to accomplish this.

The following assume a constant acceleration / deceleration:

If it took 3 sec, then it accelerated at approximately 0.45 G for 1.5 sec to 5 m and then decelerated at -0.45G to 10 m; the thrust required in the acceleration phase is 10,204 kg assuming a 700 kg weight.

If it took 1 sec, it accelerated at approximately 4G for 0.5 sec to 5 m and then decelerated at -4G for 0.5 sec to 10 m; the thrust required in the acceleration phase is 91,840 kg, assuming a 700 kg weight.

The GEPAN account differs somewhat, claiming “it rose vertically over several meters, tilted above the platform, continued to rise in this position and disappeared in the sky.” Hopefully “several” is 10 or so.

Description Of The Trace

The trace was found by the witness immediately after the departure of the object. The trace was circular, 2.4 m in diameter, and had the form of a ring, 0.2 m in width (it is claimed that there is a “crown” to the trace which is only 0.1 m in width[12],[13]).

Note that the witness reported the object surrounded by a shelf approximately 0.15 m in width[14].

Photographs[15] show the trace as lighter in color than the surrounding dirt. Vegetation remains (leaves and sticks) from the edges of the path where the object landed are seen to cross the trace (as of the next day). There does not appear to be any preferential orientation for this material, nor does it appear affected by pressure or heating. In combination, this indicates the possibility that either a) the force which produced the trace had no outward and no inward components, or b) the material was swept back over the trace either at or after the object departure.

Note that the witness mentioned the object’s departure as having raised some dust.

The soil of the trace is lighter than neighboring soil, appears to be slightly raised or crusty, and bears radial striations. These striations are not perfectly radial, but are slightly curved in a clockwise direction, and are slightly irregular.

The trace ring shows these formations most prominently on the directly east and west sides of the ring. The north side of the trace shows a slightly lower degree of the same effect.

The width of the ring as photographed and diagrammed shows no notable deviation, nor does the circularity of the ring show any notable deviation.

Hypothesis Concerning The Time When The Trace Was Formed

The following hypotheses are possible with regard to when the trace was formed:

The trace was formed at the time the object decelerated.
The trace was formed when the object impacted the ground.
The trace was formed when the object was resting on the ground.
The trace was formed when the object rose from the ground.
The trace was formed when the object hovered before accelerating away.
For the purpose of these hypothesis it is presumed that the trace is a side effect of a force exerted by the object.


There are discriminators which can help select the most likely of the hypotheses:

Geometric discriminators relate to expectations of the geometry of the trace based on the dynamic behavior of the object.

Energetic discriminators relate to whether a given hypothesis can, from the present or required kinetic energy, generate the temperature change expected based on the trace analysis.

Important Facts

The trace is circular, in the form of a ring. No notable deviation from circularity appears to be present. No other traces are visible.

Most prominent trace effects are E, W, and slightly less to the N on the ring.

The trace shows the effects of heating to below 600 degrees C. This heating was thought to be due to friction or impact[16],[17].

The trace is a ring either 0.2 or 0.1 m in width. The outer diameter is 2.4 m. If the inner diameter is 2.2 m, the area of the ring is 41.4 sq m. If the inner diameter is 2.3 m, the area of the ring is 21.15 sq m.

The trace shows effects to a depth of 1 cm in the thickest area of the trace.

The volume of the trace is thus 0.04 cu m.


The object mass is 700 kg. The acceleration due to gravity is 9.8 m / sec / sec, and the speed after falling 10 m is 14 m / sec or 50 kph. The kinetic energy of the 700 kg mass at the end of that fall is 6.86 x 10^11 ergs (6.86 x 10^6 joules).

The object engaged in forward motion during descent. It was first observed 35 m from the impact point. The forward speed is 34 kph, assuming a constant deceleration over 3 secs to a speed of 0. The forward kinetic energy is thus, at first appearance, 3.07 x 10^11 ergs (3.07 x 10^6 joules).

The total energy of the object (kinetic and potential) at its first appearance, is 9.93 x 10^11 ergs (9.93 x 10^6 joules).

This is, in essence, the energy budget of the object, which it is assumed must be dissipated prior to or at the time of intersection with the ground.

A force was emitted as a cylinder with a wall 0.1-0.2 m thick and that cylinder extended perpendicular from the rim of the object, and this force was the means by which the trace was formed.

This is supported by the correspondence between the width of the rim and the width of the circle.
The material of the object has a specific heat similar to magnesium (1.01 / g – degree C or 1001 / kg – degree C)[18]
The ground has a specific heat 1/5 that of water (838 joules / kg – degree C)[19].


1. The trace was formed at the time the object decelerated
This is not supported, since

Forward motion would smear the trace away from circularity, which is not observed.

Forward motion with the force cylinder pointed toward the trace would cause the force cylinder to have an oval intersection with the ground, which would approach circularity as the object approached the trace site. This is not observed.

There is no preferential effect on any part of the trace which is along the line of travel (WNW). Preferential effects do not show a correlation with the line of travel.

2. The trace was formed when the object impacted the ground
This is not supported, since:

If the object retained any forward motion, the objections raised to the previous hypothesis still hold.

If the object had dissipated all forward motion, the only remaining motion would be downward. If all of the vertical potential energy, now kinetic, were dissipated into the trace, a temperature increase of only 1.36 degrees C would be the result. This is insufficient to cause the observed effect. Addition of the forward motion only increases the temperature by 0.61 degrees C.

The imprint of an impact would show an the “feet” rather than the shape of the rim, unless the feet were not extended until departure. If the feet were not present, the imprint would take the form of the bottom of the object. In either case, the expected imprint is not observed.

3. The trace was formed when the object was resting on the ground
This is not supported, since:

The imprint of the object resting on the ground would show an imprint of the feet rather than the shape of the rim, unless the feet were not extended until departure. The expected imprint is not observed.

A weight of 700 kg undergoing gravitational acceleration cannot produce the levels of heat observed.

4. The trace was formed when the object rose from the ground. This is supported by the shape of the trace, which indicates that the force was applied in a nearly circular pattern; if released from the rim of the object, which is suggested by the dimensions of the trace, there are no apparent variations in geometry which might be attributed to wobble or to a sweep of the force cylinder to one side or the other.

There are several possibilities as to how the trace might have been formed at this time:

The full force of the thrust was expressed as pressure on the ground within the area of the ring. If this is the only contributor to trace formation, this pressure must be sufficient to heat the ground to some affective temperature below 600 degrees C.

The thrust was expressed in the kinetic energy of particles which dissipated their energy as heat upon impact with the ground. These particles might be molecular, atomic or subatomic (i.e. electrons, protons, etc.)

Electromagnetic radiation was dissipated as heat within the area of the trace. This radiation might be a side effect of the thrust.

Subhypothesis 1 is not supported, since the maximum suggested thrust (91,840 kg in the 0.5 sec to 5 m scenario) creates a pressure of only 2 atm, or 23,000 kg / sq m. This is not sufficient to produce the indicated heating.

Assuming the kinetic energy of the particles of subhypothesis 2 to be the same as the kinetic energy of the object at the end of the acceleration phase, the highest degree of heating produced would be near 3 degrees C. Thus, subhypothesis 2 is not supported.

Insufficient information is available to assess subhypothesis 3. Since we do not know much about the spectrum of possible radiation, it is difficult to make any estimates as to how much energy might be needed to created the observed heating.

All of these hypotheses and figures should be examined, keeping in mind that the weight estimate is based on the weight effects on the trace, and if the weight of the object did not cause the trace, the trace forces may simply reflect the weight of the object combined with the force of the thrust.

Under these circumstances, thrust, energy and weight estimates used above would be much less meaningful, except insofar as they provide upper limits to the actual values.

5. The trace was formed when the object hovered before accelerating away
Given that the thrusts and energies of hypothesis 4 (except for subhypothesis 3) are insufficient to produce the trace, the forces in a hover at a higher altitude would also be insufficient.

Further evidence that this is the case comes from a geometric analysis, which shows that the subsequent tilt of the object would have produced an elongation of the trace, or a variety of parabolic or hyperbolic secondary traces, none of which were observed.


Geometric evidence indicates that the trace was not formed on approach, impact or during the tilt to final departure phase.

Kinetic energy to heat conversion evidence indicates that the trace was not formed on impact or by the object resting on the ground, or by the thrust of the object on departure expressed either as pressure or as the kinetic energy of particles ejected from the rim of the object.

These findings support the idea that the Trans-en-Provence trace represents an unconventional event.

These findings also place certain limiting conditions on the forces used by the Trans-en-Provence object. For instance, it seems that the object did not generate trace-producing force on the ground during the approach phase, despite the need to dissipate apparently considerable kinetic energy in the downward and forward direction.

Furthermore, it apparently did not generate trace-producing force on the ground during the tilt to depart phase. In both of these phases, the altitude appears to have been approximately 10 m.

This indicates an extremely localized force. A similarly sized helicopter, for instance, hovering at 10 m would create a large disturbance on the ground due to the downward flow of air from the rotors.

Suggestions For Future Trace Investigations

Weight measurements are critical. Even an upper or lower bound weight can be helpful in dynamic simulations. But no information about the weight of the object can be inferred without measurements of the resistance of the soil to penetration.

Depth of the trace or pressure resistance of the trace is meaningless without control measurements outside and at some distance from the trace.

Dimensional measurements need to be precise. The area around a trace must be checked for subsidiary traces. These geometric characteristics need to be able to be checked for the slightest irregularity or deformation.

If possible, core samples should be obtained across the trace and in control areas outside the trace.

Sample depths of up to 1 foot are preferred. These allow analysts to infer more about the nature of the cause of the trace, and also preserve information which can otherwise quickly decay.

If evidence of heating can be found, it can assist in dynamic modeling.


The Trans-en-Provence UFO observation lasted under a minute. However, in that minute, information was gained by an alert witness and extracted by focused and experienced investigators which allow an analyst to form and validate hypotheses about the nature of the object.

The Trans-en-Provence UFO was able to dissipate considerable kinetic energy without affecting the ground beneath it. This may have resulted in the observed “whistling” sound, which indicates a motion of air away from the object.

The object was then able to create close to 600 degrees C of ground heating on departure, despite the apparent insufficiency of mere thrust pressure to produce those temperatures. It then departed after tilting, and did not produce any further effects on the environment at that time.

Many previous observations have indicated that the UFO rim is a source of energetic phenomena. The Trans-en-Provence case continues to support that pattern. NOTE: The above mage is CGI.










At 11:00 am on Wednesday, 6 April 1966, a class of students and a teacher from Westall High School were just completing sports on the main oval when an object, described as being a grey saucer shaped craft with a slight purple hue and being about twice the size of a family car was spotted.  According to the witnesses the object descended and then crossed and flew over the high school’s south-west corner, travelling in a south-easterly direction before disappearing from sight. It descended behind a group of trees and into a paddock at The Grange which was in front of the Westall State School.  During the incident a young student, Victor Zakruzny, stood to the left close to the object, three other students stood around in close proximity to the second object. A teacher and at least a dozen other students crowded along the high fence to get a view. The two objects rose up from the grass and took off, one to the west and the other flew up and orbited a small plane before flying off to the south west, with students in pursuit. The UFOs were described as about 1.5 metres in height and approximately 5.4 metres in width. Also described as being a “grey saucer shaped craft with a slight purple hue”. It was twice the size of a family car, very round and large at the base but thinner at the top. Like an upside down saucer from a tea cup.   It was also reported that there were two other smaller craft of similar design that hovered over the dirt roadway at the front of the school, they did not land but just hovered above.  Additional reports suggest that the larger main craft which had landed in the paddock may have had some sort of problem and that the two smaller craft were there to assist it. One of the students, a girl, ran towards the craft that had landed and reached it before the other students had arrived. She was found in a collapsed and dazed state. An ambulance was called and she was taken to hospital. This student that was taken to hospital never returned to Westall High school. Her family moved out of the family home that night, never to return.  NOTE: The above image is CGI.










MARCH 1967   ……….. COAST OF CUBA

One day in March, 1967, the Spanish-speaking intercept operators of Detachment “A” located at Key West Naval Air Station in Florida heard Cuban air defense radar controllers report an unidentified “bogey” approaching Cuba from the northeast. The unidentified aircraft entered Cuban air space at a height of about 10,000 meters (about 33,000 feet) and sped off at nearly Mach 1 (nearly 660 mph). The Cuban airforce scrambled two MIG-21 jet fighters to intercept. The jets were guided to within five kilometers (three miles) of the UFO by Cuban ground control intercept radar personnel. The flight leader radioed that the object was a bright metallic spheroid disc with no visible markings or appendages. When a try at radio contact failed, Cuban air defense headquarters ordered the flight leader to arm his weapons and destroy the object. The leader reported his radar was locked onto the bogey and his missiles were armed and ready to engage. Seconds later, the wingman screamed to the ground controller that his leader’s jet had exploded. When he gained his composure, the wing man radioed there was no smoke or flame, that his leader’s MIG-21 had disintegrated in mid air


. Cuban radar then reported the UFO quickly accelerated and climbed above 30,000 meters (98,000 feet). At last report, it was heading south-southeast towards South America. Within hours, Personnel of the Detachment received orders to ship all tapes and pertinent data to NSA and to list the Cuban aircraft loss in squadron files as due to “equipment malfunction.” At least fifteen to twenty people in the Detachment were said to be fully informed of the incident. Presumably, the data sent to NSA included direction-finding measurements that NSA might later combine with other site’s data to triangulate the location and altitude of the MIG-21 flight paths. If the AFSS equipment in Florida was sensitive enough, the UFO could have been tracked by its reflection of the Cuban ground and airborne radar.  NOTE: The above image is CGI.











The sighting occurred Saturday, May 20, 1967, in an area near Falcon Lake, Manitoba, Canada, approximately 75 kilometres north of the American border in the rocky edge of the great Canadian Shield. Stefan Michalak was an amateur geologist and had worked the area many times. In his pursuit in finding silver deposits he traveled from his home in Winnipeg to Falcon Lake to try his luck. Around 12:15 p.m while working, Michalak was startled by the cackling of some geese, who were obviously disturbed by something. He looked up and was surprised to see two cigar-shaped objects with “bumps”. The objects now clearly a disc-shaped objects descent together from the SW at an angle of 15°-20° above the horizon. One stopped 10-12 ft. above the ground; the other continued downward, and landed on the flat top of a rock outcropping 160 ft. from him.  The one in the air when departed was changing colours from a bright red to orange to grey and so on as it flew into the west, where it disappeared into the distance. Now focusing his attention to the object on the ground, Michalak saw that it, too, was turning from bright red to orange to grey, until it finally was the colour of iridescence of hot stainless steel, surrounded by a golden-hued glow. The craft had no markings. Intense purple light shone from apertures around the dome of the craft. For the next half-hour he stayed near the rock, making a sketch of the object and noting various features.

The craft was saucer-shaped, about 35 to 40 feet in diameter and approximately 8 feet high. Its upper cupola or dome was an additional three feet high. Michalak became aware of waves of warm air radiating from the craft, accompanied by the “smell of sulphur.” He also heard the whirring of what sounded like a fast electric motor, and a hissing, as if air were being taken in.  He noticed that a hatch on the side of the craft had opened. Initially, he could see nothing inside, because the light was too bright after adjusting his googles he can see like beams of purple light forming a column on the centre of the craft. Michalak approached to within 60 feet of the craft, and heard two humanlike voices, one with a higher pitch than the other. He was sure that the craft was an American experimental test vehicle, and walked closer to it, sarcastically asking, “Okay, Yankee boys, having trouble? Come on out and we’ll see what we can do about it.” When no response was heard, he tried Russian, German, Italian, French, and Ukrainian. The voices stopped. Suddenly, three panels slid over the opening, sealing it “like a camera shutter.” Michalak had noticed that the craft’s walls were about 20 in. thick, with a honeycombed look or something similar to what he described as “grate pattern”.  After the hatch closed, Michalak touched the craft with his gloved hand, burning the fingertips of his glove. The craft tilted slightly and started to spin rapidly. He was standing near a patterned ventilation or exhaust area on the craft’s side. When the craft started moving, a blast from this opening burned his upper abdomen and set his shirt and undershirt afire. He tore off the shirts and threw them to the ground, stamping out the fire. His outer shirt was almost totally burned, but he retrieved the remains of his undershirt. A hole also was burned in the front of the top of the cap he was wearing. He was left with burns on his abdomen and sickened, apparently as a result of inhalation of vapours from the machine. He looked up in time to see the craft depart like the first, and felt a rush of air as it ascended. The craft was turning orange and was clocking speed far exceeding known aircraft capability and disappeared in the direction from which it came

When the craft had left, Michalak noticed a strong smell of burning electrical circuits mixed with the original smell of sulphur. He walked over to where he had left his belongings, and saw that the needle on his compass was spinning erratically. He went back over to the landing site and immediately felt nauseous and a surge of pain from a headache. He reached the highway and requested help from a constable of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) who was driving by. The constable refused to help. He also failed to get help at the park headquarters and went back to his motel were he stayed the night before. After several hours, he took a bus to Winnipeg. While waiting for the bus, he telephoned the Winnipeg Tribune to request assistance, asking, at the same time, he said, that they give his experience no publicity. Michalak was met by his son, who took him to hospital for medical attention. The burns on his abdomen were diagnosed as superficial, and returned home. He continued to complain of nausea, headache, offensive odour from his lungs, lack of appetite, and rapid weight loss.  Two days after the alleged event, Michalak was attended to by a personal physician, whom he had not visited since Spring 1966. The following day he was taken to hospital to be checked for radiation trauma by the hospital’s Department of Nuclear Medicine. A radiation pathologist found no evidence of the effects of radiation on the burned area, in his blood, or on his clothing. He reported that the burn was thermal. A week after his sighting MIchalak was checked in the whole-body radiation counter at an Atomic Power Installation. This counter detects and measures gamma radiation from isotopes in the body. The test showed no count above normal background. MIchalak said he lost a total of 22 lb. over the next seven days, but had regained his strength and some weight 11 days after his sighting.













A UFO, about 20 to 30 feet in diameter, was caught on camera hovering for around one to two minutes at approximately 60-70 feet. UFO researcher Yusuke J. Matsumura at Flying Saucer Research group in Japan had snapped a picture of the object before it was able to take off at an estimated Mach 152 in 70- degree elevation. The witness was outside his resident at 1687 Hama Isogo Ku Yokohama at around 13 minutes to 10 in the morning when the incident took place. He said that he was leaving his house to go to Tokyo when he saw a metallic flash just above his house. He managed to get his primoflex automatic – Japanese rollei automat – camera and took a picture. After hovering for a minute or two, the large UFO took off toward southeast in general direction of Tokyo Bay.










During the second part of the night of November 1 to the morning of November 2 of 1968 Dr. X, was sleeping in his room when he was awakened by his son’s calls (he was not crying). Seeing his wife was still asleep, the Doctor rose up with some difficulty without turning on the light, and crossed the corridor from one room to the other. At that point, he became aware, although not paying attention to it, that a storm seemed imminent. He found his son standing up in his crib exclaiming and pointing very excitedly towards the window. The window blinds were of the solid kind and closed, but the small openings at the top and sides allowed the doctor to see the intermittent light of what he at first assumed to be flashes of lightning. While he was switching on the room light, it seemed like there was a mighty wind blowing above the house, while the rain whipped against the walls, the tiles, and the blinds.  Curious about those flashes of light The Doctor decide to investigate their source. Looking through one of the windows he saw what appeared to be two identical luminous objects, the one on the right seeming to be a little smaller and slightly above and behind the other one. Initially the Doctor was under the impression of being either two cigars or two circular objects seen in profile. Each object consists of two superimposed parts that are markedly symmetrical throughout their horizontal extent, the upper portion appearing perhaps to be thicker. The colour of the upper part appears to be a luminous silvery white, but much less so than the full moon. The colour of the under part is a deep sunset red, brighter at the top than at the bottom. No structure can be distinguished in either the white or the red portion. No variations either.

He can distinguish some vertical antennas on them.  They seem to be as the same colour and the same luminosity as the upper parts of the objects. The length is apparently equal to the thickness of the object. The bases of these two antennae are thicker than their upper part. The two other horizontal antennae seems to be of the same colour and brightness and apparently of the same length. However this horizontal antennae are more slender and do not appear to be thicker out at the base. They are seen as a silhouette in the red portion of each object and extend beyond it slightly. Their bases are located at the junction point where the red and the white parts meet. They are parallel and pointing slightly towards the left of the witness. At this moment only one horizontal “antenna” is visible on each object, any other possible “antennae” being hidden by the objects.  The lower centre part of each object is emitting a vertical cylindrical white shaft of light – brighter throughout its whole extent than the witness could have expected from a simple beam of light – which, as it passes through it, illuminates the thin storm mist hanging in the valley.  The source of the two beams of light is not discernible at that point. The two objects display in unison a cyclic luminous activity of a periodicity that is perceived to be about equal to one second. It begins with white flashes that give the witness the impression that they are “entering” through their external antennae, then another flash shoots out between the two objects, linking the tip of their horizontal antennas. The Doctor felt a strong impression that the flash shooting out between the two objects is a consequence of the external flashes, He says: “It seemed to me that the two objects were sucking in the atmospheric electricity and that I could see it entering through the antennae and then exploding between the two objects, the whole thing producing one single glow of light.”  The flashes are white, not dazzling, and are silent. The form they take is a slight prolongation of the antennae in a straight line, without any spreading, and with a slight trembling movement. Their intensity is the same as the intensity of the vertical beams of light.


At the beginning of the sighting, the two objects were moving as one unit towards the left, at the same time approaching slightly nearer to the Doctor. The two objects continue their movement in the same direction and at the same apparent speed. Then the two objects perform a rotation on their axes, the witness now discovers that the external horizontal antennae are performing the same luminous “absorption”activity as the inner antennae, They seem to lie on one single straight line which appears to be parallel to the trajectory of the two objects seen by the witness. Now located side by side, the Doctor described the objects of identical size, and presenting their horizontal antennae symmetrically. At the same time, the sources of the light beams become visible on the lower surfaces of the objects: it is a sort of protuberance of the same red colour as the lower surface, but of a darker shade. The two objects commence a new manoeuvre that consists in drawing near to each other increasing their the luminous activity. At this moment the witness observes that the lower spotlights of the beams are approaching each other, then they interpenetrate each other and become only one spotlight. For a brief instant afterwards, the inner antennae touch, and at once all the luminous activity ceases on all the antennae, which however remain luminous.  Darkness falls once more over the countryside. Meanwhile the two objects continue to draw closer to each other. The inner antennae interpenetrate each other and then disappear entirely when the two objects come into contact. There is now only one object, absolutely identical with the two antecedent objects except for one detail … at the precise moment of their complete unification, Dr. X sees for the first time “something that is moving” in the red (lower) portion of the object.

At the same time, the leftward movement stops, and the object begins to come straight towards the witness, growing rapidly in size, while the light-beam cuts a straight path across the plain towards the house, and the moving structures of the red portion appear more and more clearly visible. The object grows in size until it is enormous. Around the light-beam, its light and the light from the object dimly light up the houses and the trees. When it halts, the lateral antennae are seen as precise prolongations of the juncture points of the two portions, upper and lower, ”like a chicken on a spit”. The white upper part presents nothing singular as regards either colour or brightness. The upper antenna is merely an extension upwards. The device from which the cylindrical light-beam shone out had the appearance of a ringed corona, on which Dr. X is able to count, bounded by black lines, six sections on the side that is visible. These sections appear with the distortion due to perspective, wide in the centre and narrowing towards the edges. But it is the domed red (lower) part that presented the most impressive features. This part was also divided into ”sections” but, it seems, in violation of the laws of perspective. Of the eleven visible sections five (the paired sections) were traversed from top to bottom in about four seconds by a dark horizontal line “like the lines that move across a TV screen when you are adjusting it”. The moving line descending cyclically appeared like an intense deepening of the colour, with shading off on each side. The witness was unable to detect any coordination between the respective movements of the five lines. It merely seemed to him that when one line was disappearing towards the bottom, another one was appearing above. All the red portion of the object gave the impression of incandescent metal or of internal lighting.

Although all this animation of the red portion seems to have occurred in violation of the laws of perspective, the vertical bands were wider towards the centre, right opposite the witness. The activity in the red portion lasts for a period that the witness is unable to estimate subjectively, for he is obsessed with the movements of the horizontal lines. Meanwhile, after a period of time which seems long to him and during which the object remains totally immobile, he sees the spotlight move towards him, slowly at first, over a distance of a few metres, lighting up one by one the telephone poles and reaching the top pole.  This movement of the spotlight was the result, not of the objects having come nearer, but of a rotation around the axis formed by the two horizontal antennae, which rotation tipped the upper part of the object towards the valley and revealed progressively more and more of the lower surface. Suddenly the rotation speeded up in an astonishing fashion and the doctor was hit by the light beam, which shone all over him as well as probably over the whole front of the house. The total duration of the rotation was brief – of the order of a second. Meanwhile, Dr. X had sufficient time to observe the lower surface of the object, which appeared to be circular and divided into radial sections. He does not remember whether the movement of the lines was still visible in the sections. He had the impression that the corona from which the beam of light emerged was growing wider towards the periphery as the object tipped. During the tipping, the witness was frightened, and at the moment when the light-beam reached him he instinctively covered his face by a reflex action.

At the moment when the object was presenting its lower surface vertically, there was heard the first sound since the beginning of the sighting, namely a sort of “bang” while, according to Dr. X , “the object dematerialized”, leaving behind nothing but a cloudy, whitish, fleecy shape which at once disintegrated and was borne away eastwards by the wind. At the same time there came, from the centre of the space occupied up till then by the object, a sort of very luminous, fine, white, straight thread, which shot out vertically in a fraction of a second towards the sky and vanished there, forming, apparently at a height of several hundred metres, a small white shining dot which itself then vanished with the noise of a firework. The darkness having returned to the valley, the witness experienced a nervous breakdown. Deeply shaken, he immediately went back in the house and went to the previously-mentioned clock to see the time: it is 4.05 a.m. Ten minutes have elapsed since his first visit to the kitchen. He gets a notepad and writes down the details of his sighting along with sketches. Then he awakens his wife and tells her what he has seen. Both are very deeply moved. Suddenly Mrs. X cries: “Your leg!” And, in fact, Dr. X, who is walking to and fro, talking excitedly, no longer limps, and has completely forgotten his leg injury that was produced recently while chopping wood. Dumbfounded, he turns up the pyjama trouser-leg: the wound is healed and the swelling has disappeared along with the pain – never to return.

Dr. X and his wife discuss the incident for half an hour and then go back to bed. Ten minutes after he has fallen asleep again, Dr. X starts talking in his sleep – something that has never happened to him in his life before. Disturbed, his wife listens for a while and then finding that what he is saying relates to the phenomenon seen by him, she turns on the light and takes notes. She puts down this statement: “Contact will be re-established by falling down the stairs on November 2nd.” At about 7:00 a.m. the doctor stops talking. Mrs. X turns out the light and goes to sleep. She awakens again at about 10.00 a.m. and, seeing that her husband is still sleeping, she gets up without waking him. He sleeps on until 2 o’clock in the afternoon.

The mysterious triangular mark

In the days that follow, the doctor is under the impression that the wounds inflicted during his service in the Algerian War (which had remained unchanged for ten years) have completely healed. The nervous breakdown and the distress that had followed the events of November 2 are however so painful that he feels ill and cannot be sure of their disappearance.  He has lost weight and his features show great wear.  That same day, cramps and pains appear in the umbilical region. They persist, more or less acute, throughout the following week. On the evening of November 17, he begins to feel an itching and tingling around his navel, and a red cutaneous pigmentation of striated appearance develops. By midday on November 18, this pigmentation has assumed its final form, namely the shape of a perfectly geometrical isosceles triangle with a well-defined perimeter, measuring 17 cm. on the base and 14-15 cm. along the sides. At the same time the pains, itching and tingling cease suddenly and entirely. More and more worried about this preposterous phenomenon, the doctor and his wife telephone French ufo investigator Aimé Michel. This triangle certainly has no known precedent in the annals of Ufology, but he is reminded of the cases of irradiation reported on several occasions, and advises him to have a thorough medical examination. This is done, that same day. The medical examination is negative: the dermatologist can find no explanation for the phenomenon, which he considers so astonishing that he wants to make a report about it to the Academy of Medicine. Dr. X is little inclined to such publicity. Curiously, the next day, he calls Aimé Michel again, and says: “I think we must discard the psychosomatic explanation because the same triangle appeared last night on the stomach of my son. It is exactly like mine and located in just the same place. It doesn’t seem to be painful, for the child pays no attention to it.  It’s important to point out that similar objects to the one described by “Dr. X” were seen in Spain on the same day and on the previous evening, and then again on December 7 in Morocco and on December 9.

Photographs of the strange triangular marks experienced by Dr. X and his son.