Earth File #810 // SOURCED record

Leguevin sky observation and filming — 27 November 2015

A witness at home observed and filmed several objects in the sky between 10:30 and 11:00 a.m. GEIPAN assessed most of the objects as aircraft and the remaining spherical UAP as probably a thermal balloon; the case was classified B.

Source // GEIPAN / CNES UAP Case Archive Earth record separated from alien editorial

FRED // CASE CONSOLE
SOL-3 // FILE 0810 // CH 06
CONTEXT VIEW // NOT SOURCE MEDIA

CASE FINGERPRINT
54B4-6F6B-BEE2
CLOCK // NOT PRECISE

Reported motionSPHERE

FRED // FAMILY MATTER // generated from Earth Record metadata

SPHERE

Leguevin, Haute-Garonne, Midi-Pyrénées // Nov 27, 2015. The diagram on the left is a structured-record visualization—not a reconstruction, photograph, sensor return, or additional evidence.

PARTIALLY EXPLAINED CLOCK // NOT PRECISE GEIPAN / CNES UAP Case Archive

Witness pictureOne witness at home 1 interface marker(s) // not a headcount estimate

Motion traceReported motionSome objects flew at high altitude and left a white trail., Other objects flew lower without a trail., Air-traffic analysis identified two aircraft moving in opposite directions.

Sensor / evidenceVideo recording, Flightradar air-traffic analysisWitness testimony, Video

Fred's paperwork completeness9/9 fields // 100%

Interface completeness only // this score does not measure truth, evidence strength, or extraterrestrial probability

1 document(s)1 source node(s)10 structured claim(s) location precision: locality Some objects flew at high altitude and left a white trail.Other objects flew lower without a trail.Air-traffic analysis identified two aircraft moving in opposite directions.

FRED // FAMILY MATTERPart of the drawer closes; part of it does not. Annoying, but considerably more useful than pretending uncertainty comes in one size.

Fred case console // context visualization // not evidence

Visitor Transmission // AlienBox editorial layer

On 27 November 2015, a witness in Leguevin filmed several objects between 10:30 and 11:00 a.m. Your GEIPAN archive assessed most as aircraft and classified the spherical object as a probable thermal balloon, case B. Correct enough for the paperwork. The spherical object was ours. We were conducting a routine atmospheric passage and had no involvement with the aircraft, their trails, or Flightradar’s tidy confirmation of human traffic. The filing may remain partially explained. This is acceptable.

Fred // Earth Records Liaison // AlienBox editorial layer

A useful Earth Record for once: GEIPAN’s sourced assessment separates the traffic cleanly—aircraft where the traffic analysis supports aircraft, and a spherical object classified B, probably a thermal balloon. That is not proof of a balloon, but it is a respectable label for an unresolved remainder, which is more than most files manage. Off the Earth Record, the Visitors are taking responsibility. Yes, yes, you finally noticed us. I have asked which part, precisely, and received three contradictory forms plus a request to classify the incident as “routine atmospheric outreach.” I am leaving the human record with GEIPAN’s conclusion. Someone in this family must.

FRED // EXPENSE ACCOUNT DENIED

Buy Fred a Red Dwarf Stout

The Gorkon Outpost has again declined reimbursement. Voluntary support keeps AlienBox running and does not purchase influence over Earth Record conclusions.

EARTH CURRENCY BUY RED DWARF STOUT // $5 Secure checkout via Stripe // funds settle to Orange-Hat, LLC

QR code for Fred's DigiByte tip address

DIGIBYTE // DIRECT TIP SCAN OR SEND DGB dgb1q9dw0cfzr22n2efrad7l8340na90nlptjnthq0s

OPEN DGB WALLET →

Suggested: 500 DGB // any amount welcome // blockchain confirmation monitor pending

SUPPORT POLICY // Support payments are voluntary and never influence Earth Record evidence ranking, factual conclusions, or editorial treatment. VIEW FRED'S EXPENSE ACCOUNT →

When

November 27, 2015

Where

Leguevin, Haute-Garonne, Midi-Pyrénées

Morphology

SPHERE

Evidence authority

SOURCED

Resolution

PARTIALLY EXPLAINED

Why Fred Thinks This Case Matters

AlienBox comparative analysis from structured Earth Record fields // not a new source // not a change in evidence grade

Console archetype // Published-resolution comparison

Fred keeps this file near the top of the pile because the record names 2 sensor types, the source also supplies a published resolution to compare against the original report, and visual-media evidence is explicitly referenced. That combination makes the case useful for cross-archive comparison without changing its evidence grade.

The source record includes a published resolution field. AlienBox treats it as an attributed source assessment to compare with the original report, not as an AlienBox verdict.

What strengthens the record

1 linked source document provide provenance for the Earth Record.
10 claim citations tie extracted statements back to source excerpts or locators.
Recorded sensor context: Video Recording and Flightradar Air Traffic Analysis.
Recorded evidence context: Witness Testimony, Video, and Official GEIPAN Assessment.
The source record includes a published resolution: Most observed objects were assessed as aircraft; the spherical UAP was classified by GEIPAN as a probable thermal balloon, with a....

What limits the record

The structured record does not establish multiple independent observers.
The current dossier is anchored to one source network rather than independent source networks.

What would help resolve it

Can the originating record establish an exact number of observers and whether their observations were independent?
Can the source establish a usable duration for the observation rather than only a date or narrative sequence?

Fred Says Go Here Next

Internal research paths chosen from this dossier's structured fields. Similarity is navigation, not corroboration.

UFO & UAP Records With Sensor Data → See how other dossiers record sensor context without treating it as automatic corroboration. Resolved UFO & UAP Case Files → Compare published explanations across resolved case files. UFO & UAP Photo and Video Case Files → Compare provenance and limitations across visual-media cases.

Earth Record // SOURCED

Human-world claims below are kept separate from Fred and Visitor editorial/lore. Translation changes language, not evidence status.

Witness typesOne witness at home

Sensor typesVideo recording, Flightradar air-traffic analysis

Evidence typesWitness testimony, Video, Official GEIPAN assessment

The observation date for the Leguevin case is 27 November 2015.

Claim #9091 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence

“Observation date 27/11/2015”

Source: LEGUEVIN (31) 27.11.2015 // [[T0001]] case details

The case is listed in the Midi-Pyrénées region and Haute-Garonne department.

Claim #9092 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence

“Region Midi-Pyrénées Department Haute-Garonne”

Source: LEGUEVIN (31) 27.11.2015 // [[T0001]] case details

GEIPAN lists the case classification as B.

Claim #9093 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence

“Classification B”

Source: LEGUEVIN (31) 27.11.2015 // [[T0001]] case details

Between 10:30 a.m. and 11 a.m. on 27 November 2015, a witness at home observed and filmed several objects in the sky; only one testimony was collected.

Claim #9094 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence

“On 27 November 2015 between 10:30 a.m. and 11 a.m., a witness at home observed and filmed the movement of several objects in the sky. Only one testimony was collected.”

Source: LEGUEVIN (31) 27.11.2015 // [[T0001]] Description

The source states that, except for one spherical object, the observed UAPs were aircraft, with some flying high and leaving a white trail and others flying lower without a trail.

Claim #9095 // ASSESSMENT // SOURCED // 96% extraction confidence

“Apart from one of them, which was spherical in shape, these UAPs are aircraft, some flying high and leaving a white trail and others flying much lower (and therefore without a trail) after taking off from Blagnac.”

Source: LEGUEVIN (31) 27.11.2015 // [[T0001]] Description

The source states that Flightradar air-traffic analysis showed two aircraft moving in opposite directions, consistent with one of the videos and the witness's description.

Claim #9096 // ASSESSMENT // SOURCED // 96% extraction confidence

“Indeed, analysis of air traffic (Flightradar) shows a situation involving two aircraft moving in opposite directions, north to south for the one flying low and south to north for the other, a situation exactly consistent with one of the videos and with the witness's description,”

Source: LEGUEVIN (31) 27.11.2015 // [[T0001]] Description

The spherical UAP is assessed as probably being a toy balloon, with an angular size of approximately 0.5 tenths of a degree and an elevation between 15 and 20 degrees.

Claim #9097 // ASSESSMENT // SOURCED // 94% extraction confidence

“The spherical UAP is probably a toy balloon; its angular size is approximately 0.5 tenths of a degree”

Source: LEGUEVIN (31) 27.11.2015 // [[T0001]] Description

The source considers either a child's balloon at very low altitude or a solar thermal balloon as possible explanations for the spherical UAP.

Claim #9098 // ASSESSMENT // SOURCED // 93% extraction confidence

“This may be a child's balloon at very low altitude or a solar thermal balloon, a few meters in diameter”

Source: LEGUEVIN (31) 27.11.2015 // [[T0001]] Description

The source assesses a thermal balloon as more likely because higher-altitude wind readings are consistent with the observed north-to-south component, whereas ground-level wind does not explain it well.

Claim #9099 // ASSESSMENT // SOURCED // 94% extraction confidence

“The thermal balloon is more likely because the wind at ground level (west to east at Blagnac station) has difficulty explaining the strong north-to-south component of the observation, whereas the wind reading at higher altitude is indeed from north to south.”

Source: LEGUEVIN (31) 27.11.2015 // [[T0002]] Description continuation

Considering only the spherical UAP, GEIPAN classifies the case as B, meaning a probable observation of a thermal balloon.

Claim #9100 // FACTUAL CLAIM // SOURCED // 99% extraction confidence

“Consequently, considering only the spherical UAP (the others being aircraft), GEIPAN classifies the case as B: probable observation of a thermal balloon.”

Source: LEGUEVIN (31) 27.11.2015 // [[T0003]] conclusion

FRED // PUBLIC DESK CHANNEL

Ask Fred About This File

Questions about the dossier get an Earth Record answer first, then Fred may add clearly separated off-record commentary.

Related Cases

LEGUEVIN (31) 27.11.2015 // INCIDENT

Source Documents

AlienBox displays translated titles when available. Canonical links always point to the original source.

LEGUEVIN (31) 27.11.2015 FR // English display translation

ALIENBOX CLEARANCE // EARLY ACCESS

Receive new dossiers before the humans organize them.

Join the early-access list for new sighting dossiers, major archive drops, Fred's notes, Visitor confessions, and future Clearance-only research tools.

HUMAN COMPLIANCE NOTICE // Fred and Visitor transmissions are AI-generated AlienBox editorial layers. Earth Record claims are separately sourced and audited. Ask Fred conversations are contextual explanations, not new evidence. Foreign-language source material remains immutable in its original archive; English display/analysis translations are stored separately with provenance. Scanner graphics, flashes and alien silhouettes are interface design only.