CENAP Report - No 047

Magazine Overview

This issue of CENAP REPORT, number 47, dated January 1980, focuses on the widely reported case of Franck Fontaine, a young Frenchman who claimed to have been abducted by a UFO. The report compiles various media accounts and internal CENAP material to provide an overview of the incident and its aftermath.

The Franck Fontaine Case: "Spacenapping"???

The report begins by referencing the 1973 Pascagoula incident where two anglers were reportedly taken aboard a UFO. It notes that since then, reports of "Spacenappings" (abductions by UFOs) have been less frequent until the case of Franck Fontaine in late 1979 generated significant media attention. CENAP aims to provide a news overview supported by photos and illustrations.

The central question posed is whether the young Frenchman was genuinely abducted by a flying saucer and held by alien beings, or if it was a strange phenomenon involving unknown powers. The report includes a map of France highlighting the area of the incident.

Media Coverage and Initial Reports

The issue extensively quotes and references various newspapers. The DAILY EXPRESS (December 4, 1979) reported Fontaine's return, stating he appeared fit and well, with no memory of his week-long absence. He was wearing the same clothes he disappeared in. Police were involved, and there was a threat of prosecution if the incident was found to be a hoax.

The Abendpost/Nachtausgabe (November 27, 1979) reported that two Frenchmen reported a UFO sighting and the disappearance of their friend. The police initiated an investigation. The report details how Fontaine and his two friends were loading their car early in the morning when a luminous phenomenon approached. While his friends went to get a camera, Fontaine allegedly went towards the light. Upon their return, their car was 200 meters away, surrounded by a luminous ring and points of light, and Fontaine was gone. The police found no trace of him, and the camera had no film.

The RHEIN-NECKAR-ZEITUNG (November 27, 1979) questioned "UFO? Or crime?", while the Münchner ABENDZEITUNG (same day) asked if a man was abducted by a UFO. The report notes that the Heidelberg RHEIN-NECKAR-ZEITUNG's report was particularly prominent.

A Frankfurter ABENDPOST editor (November 28, 1979) suggested that the return of the "swallowed" person was highly probable, as no one had yet been abducted by extraterrestrials. The editor acknowledged the existence of unidentified flying objects but categorized them as debris, meteors, or aircraft, advising against over-interpreting the case.

Further Media Reactions and Speculation

Reporter J.P. Nicol from France Dimanche (December 10-16, 1979) is cited, with an illustration depicting the UFO encounter. The KURIER/Wien (November 29) sarcastically titled it "UFO abducted to flea market." The BILD newspaper (November 30) reported: "19-year-old disappeared in a luminous cloud: abducted by UFO?" It mentioned numerous speculations and details that emerged, with hundreds of residents reporting being awakened by strange noises and vibrations, and witnessing luminous phenomena.

France-Soir (December 3, 1979) ran the headline "The 'disappeared' from the UFO reappears." The article stated that Franck Fontaine, 19, reappeared on Tuesday morning at his friend Jean-Pierre Prevot's place, in the same mysterious manner he disappeared. Prevot recounted that Fontaine appeared at his door at 4:30 AM, and when asked, Fontaine stated he had no memory of the past eight days, feeling as if he had not been on Earth. He found himself back in the same area where he had seen the UFO a week prior.

France-Soir also included a photo of Franck Fontaine with an unidentified female friend, captioned "Franck Fontaine (19 ans), le héros de cette troublante affaire, et une amie." The newspaper questioned if the case was a "Canular?" (hoax), noting Fontaine did not appear tired and was still wearing his original clothes. The report mentioned that specialists from GEPAN (a specialized group for paranormal phenomena) were expected to investigate.

Details of the Disappearance and Reappearance

According to France-Soir (December 4, 1979), Fontaine stated, "I woke up in front of my friends' house. It was something inexplicable, but what? I certainly didn't sleep during those eight days, and I feel normal, even if my report is doubted." He was questioned by the deputy public prosecutor for 2.5 hours and released. The authorities found no grounds to apply criminal law. Fontaine described being alone in the car when a bright fog enveloped him, the engine died, and a large, bright sphere grew larger. He felt paralyzed and hypnotized, then fell asleep. He awoke later in the same area.

Jean-Pierre Prevot and Salomon N'Diaye, Fontaine's friends, were repeatedly interviewed and maintained their initial statements. They described seeing a long, white trail in the sky with flickering lights, descending obliquely. Fontaine exclaimed, "I'm going, I want to know what it is!" His friends returned with a camera to find the car 200 meters away, enveloped in a halo, with three or four small spheres moving within it, and Fontaine gone.

The Italian Case: Fortunato Zanfretta

The report also details the case of Fortunato Zanfretta, an Italian security guard from Genoa, who claimed to have been abducted by a UFO for three hours on the night of December 2, 1979. He stated he was taken aboard the craft with his car. He could not recall what happened inside the spaceship between 11 PM and 2 AM, when he was released. His employer alerted the police when he couldn't reach him. Zanfretta claimed that when the carabinieri arrived, the UFO was still present, and they fired shots at it, which the police deny.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue are UFO sightings, alleged alien abductions, and the media's role in reporting such events. CENAP, as a central research network for extraordinary phenomena, presents these cases with a degree of journalistic neutrality, compiling reports from various sources. While acknowledging the existence of UFOs, the report also includes skeptical viewpoints and questions the veracity of the claims, particularly in the case of Franck Fontaine, hinting at the possibility of a hoax or a misinterpretation of events. The editorial stance appears to be one of open investigation into unexplained phenomena, while also being cautious about sensationalism and encouraging a grounded perspective, as suggested by the Frankfurter ABENDPOST editor's advice to keep one's feet on the ground.

This issue of UFO-Nachrichten, dated December 7, 1979, delves into various UFO and unexplained phenomena reports, featuring witness testimonies, photographic analysis, and radar data.

"L'OVNI était comme ça" (The UFO was like this)

The cover story highlights the testimony of Henri Lucas, a 37-year-old mason from Sion-les-Mines, Loire-Atlantique, France. Lucas claims to have seen a UFO on a Monday evening while on his way home. He described it as a large, orange, spherical object with an estimated diameter of three meters. He reported that the object enveloped his car in a luminous sphere. Another witness, 9-year-old Lionel Simon, corroborated seeing an orange sphere moving from west to east. The report mentions that the case was investigated by the Groupe d'Etudes des Phenomenes Aerospatiaux (GEPAN), involving a psychologist, biologist, and physicist, who offered no comment on their initial findings.

UND WIEDER WAR'S KEIN FLUGOBJEKT (And Again It Was No Flying Object)

This section, researched by Klaus Webner, critically examines a case reported in UFO-Nachrichten Nr. 259 concerning a "cone-shaped flying object" near Löhne (Teuteb. Wald). Gerhard A. from Hiddenhausen had developed a film showing a spot that he believed originated from a flying object. The article features an interview with Joachim Abel, the son of Gerhard A. and the actual photographer. Joachim Abel explains that he was taking landscape photos and only noticed the "dot" after developing the film himself. He initially ruled out a bird due to its size and symmetry, describing it as having a circle with four wings. However, through detailed analysis, including enlargement and projection, Webner concludes that the "object" was a film emulsion error. He notes that the object appeared as an out-of-focus spot, unlike sharp foreground and background elements, and that the exposure time would not have caused such a blur if it were a physical object. Abel eventually admits that it was likely a film defect, though he had previously been convinced it was a real object.

Technical Data of the Photograph

• The technical details of the photograph are provided:
• Date of capture: July 1, 1979
• Location: North slope of Schweichler Berg, Eilshausen district
• Time: Around midday
• Camera: PENTAX MX SLR
• Lens: 1:1.4 / 50 mm
• Film: Ilford Pan F
• Aperture: f/8
• Shutter speed: 1/125 sec.
• Developer: Ultrafin
• Development tank: Jobo

Joachim Abel developed the film himself. The original negative, consisting of shots 20A/21 and 2IA/22, taken from the same location in different directions within a three-minute interval, was provided. The phenomenon was on frame 21A/22.

Analysis of the Photograph

Upon close examination of the negative, only a tiny white dot, approximately 0.15 mm in diameter, was visible to the naked eye. With magnification, it was observed that while the nearby post and distant hills were sharply focused, the "object" appeared as an out-of-focus blur. The analysis suggests that if it were a flying object, it would have passed very close to the camera, causing a blur and appearing about 10 cm in diameter, being outside the depth of field. The blur extended only up to the post. The article dismisses the possibility of a bird due to the object's sharp definition relative to its surroundings and the fact that it was not a blurred streak. Further examination of a photographic enlargement on Ilfospeed Nr. 2 paper revealed that the "object" was not a photographed object at all, but rather fine, branching structures emanating from an irregularly shaped spot of varying density. The original negative showed other black spots, making the alleged "object" stand out excessively.

Conclusion on the Photograph Case

Klaus Webner concludes that there is no doubt that this was a film emulsion defect. He advises investigators to always request film material (plan films, slides, or negatives) and not just paper prints for scientific purposes. He also criticizes the reporting style of DUIST (a group mentioned in the context of UFO research) as being sensationalist and rumor-mongering, lacking proper investigation.

Book Reviews

• "Geheimnisse im Weltall" (Secrets in Space) by Thomas Trent: A reprint of a 1955 work, available for 15.80 DM, containing 94 pages with illustrations.
• "UFO-Beweise" (UFO Evidence) by Gansberg: This book, presented as a translation of the US edition "Direct Encounters," is criticized for not providing any actual UFO evidence and is seen as catering to contactees and abductees.

Radarbeobachtung auf dänischem Schiff (Radar Observation on a Danish Ship)

This section reports on an unidentified object observed on radar by a Danish ship in the Atlantic Ocean in the autumn of 1978. The report is based on testimony from Steen Sehested, the 1st Mate of the M/S Bretagne. The incident occurred on January 11, 1978, at 0408 GMT, when the ship was en route from the Azores to the Panama Canal. The position was 28°54'N, 53°51'W. The radar (Kelvin Hughes 21-16, 10 cm, set to 24-mile range) detected an object approaching at high speed from the southwest on a northeast course.

The radar echo was visible for 62 minutes, varying in speed between 200 and 1200 knots (370-2,200 km/h). The object moved in a straight and curved path. Sehested initially suspected a fast, ordinary aircraft, supported by the echo's size. The object passed within approximately 1.5 miles of the ship's port side and disappeared 20 miles behind. The echo was sometimes so close that it was a common sight on the radar screen, but it could not be observed visually or heard due to its distance and the ship's engine noise.

Simultaneously, another ship, identified as German and possibly the M/S Rhein Express, was detected on radar approaching from the northeast. This ship also visually confirmed the object. The two ships maintained radio contact and tracked the object together. The radio connection ceased at 0510 GMT when the other ship was 22 miles northeast of the M/S Bretagne.

Analysis and Corroboration

Steen Sehested, an officer since 1959 with extensive worldwide experience, stated that he had never reported such an incident before. He found the object's behavior unusual, noting that it "patrolled" near their ship for over an hour, 600 miles east-southeast of Bermuda (not in the Bermuda Triangle). The object flew so low that it was visible on radar, 20° above the horizon, during a dark night. Despite coming very close several times, it could not be seen or heard. Sehested concluded that the object's behavior did not suggest a conventional aircraft.

Attempts to confirm the sighting were made by SUFOI, contacting the Howard Air Force Base in Panama, Hapag-Lloyd in Hamburg, and the lookout on the M/S Bretagne. However, the response from the M/S Rhein Express's captain indicated that his ship was in the Pacific Ocean at the time, far from the reported location. The U.S. Air Force confirmed receipt of Sehested's report but stated that no other similar reports had been received and that they no longer investigate UFOs. They advised reporting such incidents to local police.

Conclusion on the Radar Incident

SUFOI considers the matter unresolved and seeks reader assistance in identifying the German ship. The article questions the practicality of reporting such an incident to police when it occurs in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

This issue of UFO-Nachrichten demonstrates a commitment to rigorous investigation and critical analysis, particularly concerning photographic evidence. The magazine distinguishes between genuine unexplained phenomena and misidentifications or technical errors, as exemplified by the analysis of Joachim Abel's photograph. There is a clear emphasis on the need for verifiable data and a skepticism towards sensationalist reporting. The publication also highlights the challenges in corroborating UFO reports, especially those involving radar data and international waters, and actively seeks reader input to resolve such cases. The editorial stance appears to be one of open-minded inquiry combined with a demand for scientific rigor.

Title: CENAP REPORT
Issue: 11
Date: December 1979

This issue of CENAP REPORT focuses on UFO phenomena in France, particularly the perplexing case of Franck Fontaine and other reported sightings.

The Franck Fontaine Case: Cergy-Pontoise Mystery

The central article, "Das Rätsel um das OVNI von Cergy-Pontoise" (The Riddle of the UFO of Cergy-Pontoise), details the disappearance and reappearance of Franck Fontaine. Fontaine vanished from Cergy-Pontoise on November 26, 1979, at 4:30 AM and reappeared eight days later in the same location. His disappearance occupied a company of gendarmes and caused concern within his family. The case was under judicial investigation, with Public Prosecutor Herr Brun stating that they were proceeding cautiously and would make statements after the investigation was complete, noting that the statute of limitations was three years away.

Commandant Cochereau, who centralizes abnormal phenomena reports for the Gendarmerie, found the three young men involved (Fontaine, Jean-Pierre Prevot, and Salomon N'Diaye) increasingly credible. He noted that they provided many details but were reluctant to speak with scientists, who asked difficult questions. The police had to repeatedly ask Franck to be examined by specialized UFO researchers. The article suggests that Franck's friends, Prevot and N'Diaye, did not witness his disappearance, only seeing a luminous sphere.

Franck Fontaine himself stated that after returning to Earth, the details of his journey became clearer, and he felt everything was pleasant. He agreed to speak publicly only if accompanied by his doctor and if two conditions were met: that he could fully piece together his experiences and that the court acknowledged they never intended to fool people.

Hypnosis and Investigation

Jimmy Guieu, President of the I'Institut mondial de Sciences avancees/IMSA, attempted to question Franck under hypnosis at the site of the alleged abduction. The article notes that this case is not unique, with a dozen similar cases reported in Europe. Many individuals who were granted anonymity spoke under hypnosis. The serious English newspaper TINES is quoted, with a statement from Gendarmerie Commander Herr Courcous, who described the situation with the word "bump," implying memory loss, blows, or repression. The article suggests that for many, Franck Fontaine has become a "made man" through this story, and it's difficult for him to retract it.

An investigator described Franck as wearing "a mask," indicating that what lies beneath is not visible. The possibility is raised that Franck might be hiding behind a memory lapse to protect himself from consequences if he is entangled in something he wishes to avoid.

Other UFO Sightings in France

The issue also reports on other UFO encounters occurring in France around the same time:

• Alps of Haute-Provence (December 1, 1979): Witnesses observed a very luminous sphere crossing the sky for several minutes with incredible speed.
• Loire-Atlantique (December 4, 1979): M. Lucas, a 37-year-old mason, reported seeing a vehicle following him. It then disappeared under a large sphere with a diameter of 2-3 meters. This sphere covered his car, moved to a field, and created a large smoke cloud. The occupants of the car disappeared. When Lucas returned with his sons, the sphere had moved and then pursued his car for about 2 km before vanishing.
• Near Annot (December 4, 1979): M. Devincenzi, a baker, was returning from deliveries when his surroundings were suddenly illuminated as if by a spotlight. He noticed a fireball in the air that followed his truck, sometimes in front, sometimes behind, changing position so rapidly that he became disoriented. He panicked and wondered how to react if it came onto the road. The object disappeared after a 4 km pursuit.

Witness Credibility and Analysis

Investigating officers described M. Devincenzi as a solid, four-time Algerian war veteran, not prone to fear, well-known, and respected in his region. An investigator stated, "He is a steadfast man with both feet on the ground." A doctor who saw Devincenzi the following day noted he had nightmares.

J.-C. Bourret, a radio speaker and author, comments on the drawings and the Fontaine case, noting that Fontaine continues to keep people guessing. Bourret suggests that the objects described are easy to dismiss and that people can easily agree on a story without much risk. He posits that Franck reappears alone and spends three hours with his comrades before alerting the police, after which a memory gap occurs, allowing for a fabricated story that seems solid.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue are the investigation of UFO phenomena, witness testimony, the challenges of distinguishing between genuine encounters and hoaxes, and the role of scientific versus official investigations. The editorial stance appears to be one of serious inquiry into these unexplained events, presenting detailed accounts and witness statements while acknowledging the complexities and potential for misinterpretation or fabrication. The magazine seems committed to documenting these cases for its readers, as indicated by the extension of the issue to include more information.