[This is the original version of the article, published on December 24th, 2025. An updated version was published on January 27th, 2026 on UAP Check web site]

The annual survey of European UFO sighting reports had a significant improvement in 2024: five additional national organizations joined the initiative and two international collections contributed to reaching a total of 29 European countries monitored.

Scope, Sources, and Objectives of the 2025 Update

This updated report represents a significant step forward compared to the previous edition published in June 2024 [1].  While last year’s work focused on raw reporting data from eleven European countries, the present update considerably expands both the geographical coverage and the institutional basis of the dataset. For the first time, this annual overview can rely not only on long-standing national civilian organisations and official bodies, but also on newly established or revitalised networks and an unprecedented level of international data sharing. Two major developments have shaped this year’s update.

The first is the integration of five additional European countries for which reliable national-level inputs could be obtained through the creation, reactivation, or continuation of local organisations. In the Czech Republic, the former Projekt Záře has been successfully revitalised under the new name Tým Záře, restoring national data-collection efforts that had stalled after 2020. In Greece, the establishment of GRUFON (Greek UFO Network) in September 2025 marks the first attempt in decades to structure a sustained national framework for UAP reporting and analysis. Spain has also made important progress with the inclusion of Project CUCO (created in 2002), which finally extends systematic data collection beyond the long-standing but geographically limited activity of the CEI (Centre d’Estudis Interplanetaris), focused on Catalonia. In Portugal, the creation of CTEC Stellar in 2023 has reintroduced a national structure for the systematic collection of UAP reports, filling a long-standing gap in the Iberian peninsula. Finally, despite extraordinary circumstances, Ukraine has managed to contribute updated, though necessarily partial, data through SRCAA Zond, an organisation operating under the Aerospace Society of Ukraine. ZOND continues a scientific tradition initiated in the early 1980s under the National Academy of Sciences and has pursued the investigation of anomalous phenomena continuously since 2004, including throughout the ongoing war.

The second major development is methodological and arguably even more consequential. For the first time, the world’s largest civilian UFO organisation, MUFON has agreed to share its European data with EuroUfo.Net. This cooperation makes it possible to incorporate reports from European countries where no national civilian or official UAP organisation currently exists, thereby addressing one of the most persistent structural weaknesses of continental-level analyses. Founded in 1969, MUFON is the oldest and largest civilian UFO investigation and research network in the world.

Thanks to this cooperation, data from 21 additional European countries, previously missing from continental overviews, can now be included in a dedicated section of this report (see Part 3). For the 2019–2024 reference period, these MUFON-sourced inputs alone represent a total of 3,353 reported events across 29 countries, significantly broadening the empirical base of the EuroUFO Barometer.   

As a result, this year’s update goes well beyond a simple annual refresh. It now combines the original core group of European countries with long-standing national UAP organisations, newly integrated countries with direct organisational contacts, and a large additional set of countries represented through MUFON’s standardised reporting system. Taken together, these sources allow for the most extensive and inclusive overview of European UAP reporting activity assembled to date.

To account for this diversity of data sources, the analytical framework of the report is deliberately differentiated. Graphical analyses and longitudinal comparisons are limited to countries with resident organisations and continuous national data collection, while MUFON-sourced data are presented separately in tabular form only. On this basis, the report is organised into two main sections. The first examines the evolution and characteristics of UAP reporting in countries with established national organisations. The second presents UAP reports submitted to MUFON’s Case Management System from European countries without national collection structures, as a descriptive overview highlighting baseline reporting activity and future potential.

As in previous editions, it is important to emphasise that the figures presented in this report primarily reflect reported observations, rather than confirmed anomalous phenomena. It is well known among researchers and investigators across Europe that the vast majority of these testimonies ultimately correspond to misidentifications of natural or human-made phenomena, including satellites (notably Starlink constellations), the International Space Station, drones, aircraft, atmospheric effects, and common celestial objects such as stars and planets. While such cases dominate national datasets, their systematic collection remains valuable for understanding reporting dynamics, public perception, and the recurring sources of confusion that shape UAP statistics.

Only a very small fraction of cases remain unresolved after investigation, and even these rarely display strong evidential consistency. For example, within the French GEIPAN framework, the most recent case classified as an “unidentified phenomenon” of moderate consistency dates back to 2020, with the previous comparable case recorded in 2018. A dedicated, cross-national analysis focusing specifically on the small subset of unresolved cases over the past five to ten years would therefore constitute a particularly relevant avenue for future research, but lies beyond the scope of the present report.

At the same time, important structural limitations persist. Despite gradual improvements in data sharing and consolidation, Europe still lacks a harmonised institutional framework for UAP data collection and analysis. In many countries, national datasets depend heavily on the sustained efforts of a very small number of volunteers, rendering reporting systems vulnerable to temporary interruptions or discontinuities. This fragility is illustrated by the absence of consolidated national data for the United Kingdom in 2024, as well as by partial gaps in the Italian dataset for also 2024.

In this context, EuroUfo.Net plays a useful coordinating role by providing a stable platform for collaboration, information exchange, and methodological discussion among national organisations and independent researchers across Europe. Although EuroUfo.Net does not constitute a formal institutional body, it facilitates continuity by maintaining long-term points of contact, encouraging data sharing, and promoting comparative approaches to national statistics. This informal but persistent network contributes to greater coherence in European-level analyses and helps mitigate, to some extent, the structural fragmentation that characterises UAP data collection at the continental scale.

Nevertheless, the progress achieved since the previous report demonstrates that incremental, cooperative efforts, particularly across borders, can substantially improve the quality and scope of European UAP monitoring. The continued development of collaborative frameworks, both formal and informal, remains essential for advancing a more consistent and transparent understanding of reported UAP activity in Europe.     

1. Annual Volume of Reported UAP Events in Europe (2019–2024)

Before examining country-level distributions, it is useful to consider the overall evolution of reported UAP events in Europe over the 2019–2024 period. Over the six-year reference period, a total of 32,253 UAP-related events were reported across the European countries covered in this update. Annual totals fluctuate within a relatively narrow range, from a minimum of 4,833 reports in 2021 to a peak of 6,679 in 2020, with an overall average of approximately 5,375 reports per year. This general stability suggests that, at a continental scale, UAP reporting in Europe has remained broadly consistent over time, notwithstanding short-term variations linked to specific national contexts or external factors.

Table 1. Annual dataset values from 2019 to 2024

Note: 2024 data are incomplete for Italy and the UK, so total is underestimated.

Regarding the noticeable peak between 2019 and 2020, it has been previously noticed that the sharp increase could be attributed to three countries: Belgium, Germany and the Netherlands. One strong hypothesis behind this increase is that that year was the beginning of the operational launches for the Starlink satellites by SpaceX. Confusion between these  satellites and UAPs  is common because newly launched satellites appear as eerie, bright, straight lines or “trains” of lights in the night sky, resembling unusual aerial phenomena, even for pilots, leading to numerous reports of UAP before they spread out into their operational orbits and become harder to see. These “satellite trains” are simply batches of 50-60 satellites released together, reflecting sunlight, and are easily visible during twilight hours, mistakenly identified as potential UAP.

In early 2020, another contextual consideration that was discussed by some researchers was the potential influence of COVID-19–related behavioural changes (such as changes in outdoor activity and sky-watching patterns during lockdowns) on the volume of UAP reports. However, empirical investigation into this hypothesis has not supported a causal link: for example, a study published in the Journal of Scientific Exploration found no evidence that pandemic-related behavioural shifts significantly affected UAP reporting rates in the United States[2]. While this context is interesting from a historical perspective, it should not be interpreted as a substantive explanatory factor for the 2020 peak in European data.

Of this six-year total, 28,900 reports (approximately 90%) originate from national civilian or official UAP organisations forming the primary analytical dataset, while 3,353 reports (around 10%) derive from the MUFON Case Management System (CMS). Although numerically smaller, the MUFON contribution plays a disproportionate role in extending geographical coverage. Thanks to this cooperation, reports from 21 additional European countries, previously missing from previous EuroUfo.Net continental overviews, are now included in this Barometer. As a result, the 2025 update incorporates data from 37 European countries in total, substantially expanding both the demographic and territorial scope of the analysis (see Figure 1).

Figure 1. Basic Political map of Europe (for geographic orientation)  

The comparatively lower total observed for 2024 should therefore be interpreted with caution. As discussed earlier, consolidated annual data are still missing for three organisations that normally contribute substantial volumes, most notably in the United Kingdom and Italy. Based on recent historical levels, the inclusion of these missing inputs would likely add several hundred additional reports, on the order of 700 to 800 cases, bringing the 2024 total close to that observed in 2023. The apparent decline in 2024 thus reflects limitations in data availability rather than a meaningful reduction in reporting activity.

Beyond absolute numbers, the present dataset represents a major step forward compared with earlier European overviews. Whereas previous Barometers were typically limited to fewer than a dozen countries, the current compilation spans a large proportion of Europe’s population and geographical area, covering Western, Northern, Southern, Central, and parts of Eastern Europe. It should nevertheless be noted that MUFON-derived data likely represent only a fraction of the actual reporting activity in these additional countries, as they capture reports primarily from individuals who are aware of the US-based organisation and motivated to submit their observations through a foreign reporting platform rather than through local or national structures.

Even with this caveat, the expanded coverage substantially reinforces the value of the EuroUFO Barometer as an indicator of continental-scale reporting dynamics, while simultaneously underscoring the importance of continued institutional cooperation to improve completeness and representativeness in future editions.

Taken together, the 37 European countries included in this edition of the Barometer represent a clear majority of Europe’s population and geographical area. They encompass all major population centres in Western Europe, the Nordic countries, Southern Europe, and much of Central and Eastern Europe, while also including geographically extensive states such as Norway, Sweden and Russia. Although precise population-weighted comparisons remain approximate due to varying definitions of “Europe,” the countries covered in this report plausibly account for well over two thirds of Europe’s inhabitants and a comparable share of its landmass.

Nevertheless, important gaps persist. Several European countries still lack any identifiable national civilian or official structure for the systematic collection of UAP reports and are therefore absent from the primary analytical dataset. Notably, this includes Austria, Poland and Switzerland, three geographically and demographically significant European states whose absence highlights the uneven development of UAP reporting infrastructures across the continent. The lack of data from these countries should not be interpreted as an absence of UAP observations, but rather as an indication of ongoing structural and institutional limitations in European-level monitoring.         

2. Primary Analytical Dataset: Countries with Established National UAP Organisations 

The tables and charts in this section summarize the raw data on UFO/IFO observations reported to 23 organisations across 16 European countries, for which consolidated national statistics are available. Data for the UK in 2024 are currently missing but are expected to be released next year, and information from one major Italian association is also not yet available. These countries share a key structural feature: the presence of resident civilian UAP associations or official bodies that have maintained continuous, long-term data collection and stable points of contact with EuroUfo.Net over several years (Table 2).

In these countries, UAP reports are collected within a well-defined national context, using established reporting channels and investigation procedures, and are supported by local archival practices and institutional memory. This continuity allows for the examination of interannual variations, longer-term trends, and cross-country comparisons with a reasonable degree of methodological consistency. For these reasons, only this subset of countries is included in the graphical analyses and trend-based interpretations presented below.

The data presented here have been compiled through the voluntary contributions of member organisations within the EuroUfo.Net virtual community, supplemented by publicly available statistics published by national institutions of GEIPAN in France and the Aeronautica Militare in Italy. Although differences in reporting practices and public visibility persist between countries, this primary analytical dataset represents the most robust and internally coherent foundation currently available for assessing the evolution of reported UAP activity across Europe.          

Table 2. National organisations contributing data to the primary analytical dataset, with year of establishment and online reporting resources.

As in previous editions, it must be emphasised that these figures reflect reported observations rather than confirmed anomalous events. The vast majority of cases ultimately correspond to misidentifications of natural or human-made phenomena. Nevertheless, the systematic collection and comparison of such reports remain essential for understanding reporting dynamics, identifying recurrent patterns, and isolating the small subset of cases that may warrant deeper investigation.

With respect to the most difficult-to-explain cases, a separate analysis focusing specifically on currently unexplained events reported over the past five to ten years would be particularly valuable. At present, such an analysis is only realistically feasible for France, where the GEIPAN makes detailed case classifications publicly available. Based on these published data, the most recent cases classified in the unexplained categories (D/D1/D2) date from 2022 (three cases), with earlier occurrences recorded in 2020 (two cases) and 2019 (one case).        

Preliminary data for 2024 seems to indicate a slight decline in the total number of reported UAP observations across the 16 countries included in this analysis, with 4,695 reports compared to 5,069 in 2023. This apparent decrease should be interpreted cautiously, as contributions from two UK organizations and one Italian organization are still missing. Given the historically high reporting levels in these countries, the actual number of observations for 2024 is likely to be in fact higher.

Compared to last year, the dataset has also expanded in geographic scope. While the 2023 report included 11 countries (Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Norway, Portugal, Romania, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the Netherlands), the 2024 dataset encompasses 16 countries (Belgium, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Norway, Portugal, Romania, Spain, Sweden, the United Kingdom, Ukraine, and the Netherlands). This larger set of 16 countries continues to represent a substantial majority of Europe’s inhabitants. The added countries: Czech Republic, Greece, Spain, and Ukraine, contribute notable population shares in their regions, further broadening the geographical and demographic scope of the EuroUFO Barometer. From a numerical standpoint, the 16-country dataset now includes over 31,503 reported cases from 2019 to 2024, compared with approximately 23,800 cases from 2019 to 2023, reflecting both the inclusion of additional countries and the accumulation of new annual reports.

Table 3. Country-level totals of reported events per year

Among countries with complete data, reporting levels in 2024 vary considerably. Germany continues to show elevated activity, with reports increasing from 1,148 in 2023 to 1,436 in 2024, reflecting well-established reporting lines and clear institutional associations, while Belgium and France recorded decreases, reaching 222 and 175 reports, respectively. Denmark and Finland saw modest increases, with 121 and 99 reports, while smaller reporting countries, including Greece, Norway, Portugal, Romania, Spain, Sweden, Ukraine, and the Netherlands, remained largely stable.

As in previous years, it is important to consider contextual factors that may influence reporting levels. For example, the Netherlands reports observations exclusively via the website of the only currently active organisation in the country. The Netherlands also has one of the highest population densities in Western Europe, with over 500 people per square kilometer. By comparison, Belgium has 380, the United Kingdom 280, Germany 240, Italy 200, and France 120 people per square kilometer. These factors, population density and the organization of reporting channels, certainly contribute to the observed differences in the number of reports between countries.

Overall, the preliminary 2024 data highlight the continuity of high reporting activity in some countries, such as Germany, and moderate declines in others, including Belgium and France. Smaller reporting countries remain largely stable. The expansion of the dataset to include 16 countries, together with the cumulative total exceeding 31,500 reports, underscores both the persistence of organised reporting efforts and the value of a broader European perspective in understanding trends in reported UAP activity.

Table 4. Participating countries and reporting organisations included in the dataset

Interannual Variations and General Pattern

To limit the risk of over-interpretation, the analysis of interannual variations in this report focuses primarily on year-to-year changes between 2023 and 2024. Longer-term evolutions are discussed qualitatively, as differences in reporting structures, public awareness, and investigation practices constrain the interpretability of percentage-based comparisons over extended periods.

At the European level, the preliminary 2024 data suggest a modest decline in the total number of reported observations compared to 2023. This decrease must be interpreted cautiously, however, as the 2024 dataset remains incomplete. Consequently, comparisons involving these countries are not directly comparable to previous years.

Among countries with complete data, several patterns can nevertheless be identified. Germany continues to display consistently high reporting levels and shows a further increase in 2024, reinforcing a long-term pattern of sustained reporting activity. By contrast, a number of countries that experienced elevated reporting around 2020, such as Belgium, France, Sweden, and the Netherlands, show more moderate levels in recent years, suggesting a stabilisation following earlier peaks. Other countries, including Denmark, Finland, and Romania, exhibit gradual increases from relatively low baselines, likely reflecting improved reporting visibility or organisational continuity rather than abrupt changes in observed phenomena.

Overall, these patterns point to the predominance of structural and contextual factors, such as population density, reporting channels, and organisational capacity, in shaping national reporting levels. While short-term variations provide useful indicators of reporting dynamics, the data do not support simple interpretations in terms of changes in underlying UAP activity. It is also noteworthy that, at the European level, no sudden or general peak in reporting has been observed since the Belgium UFO wave of 1989-1990, highlighting the relative stability of reporting patterns in the decades since.      

Table 5. Country-level totals of reported events and interannual variation (2023–2024)

Notes:
1. Incomplete data: 2023 and/or 2024 data are incomplete;
corresponding percentage variations are therefore not shown.
2. Low-count countries: Percentage variations based on very small absolute numbers
should be interpreted with caution and are not shown.       
3, MUFON data availability: MUFON Spanish data are included for 2024 only;
percentage variations are therefore not shown.

3. Complementary Dataset: UAP Reports Submitted to the MUFON Case Management System (CMS)

In addition to extending coverage to countries without resident national UAP organisations, MUFON CMS data have also been integrated, where available, into the datasets of eight countries that already possess established national reporting structures (see Table 5). In these cases, MUFON inputs serve as a supplementary source and are included alongside national statistics, without replacing them.

Beyond these integrations, MUFON CMS data provide a standalone complementary dataset covering 21 additional European countries not represented in the primary analytical sample. For the 2019–2024 reference period, these MUFON-only inputs amount to a total of 750 reported events, offering a broader, though necessarily more heterogeneous, geographic perspective on UAP reporting activity across Europe.

Table 6. MUFON CMS–sourced UAP reports in European countries
without resident national reporting organisations (2019–2024) 
           

This section presents a complementary set of UAP reports submitted to the MUFON Case Management System (CMS) from European countries where no long-standing national UAP organisation currently exists, or where no consolidated national statistics are publicly available. Unlike the primary analytical dataset examined in the previous section, these data originate from a centralized international reporting framework rather than from resident national structures embedded in local social, cultural, and institutional contexts.

All reports included in this dataset follow MUFON’s standardized intake and investigation procedure. Witnesses submit detailed reports through the MUFON CMS, after which each case is assigned to a trained field investigator who is required to establish contact with the witness within 72 hours. Additional information is collected, and the case is reviewed, classified, and closed, typically within a 60-day timeframe. This uniform process ensures a high level of procedural consistency across countries, even in the absence of local organisations.

However, important structural differences distinguish this dataset from the primary one. Reporting volumes in MUFON-only countries are influenced by factors such as public awareness of MUFON, language accessibility, internet usage, and media exposure, rather than by sustained national outreach or locally anchored investigative activity. Annual case numbers are generally low and discontinuous, making longitudinal trend analysis or graphical interpretation statistically fragile and potentially misleading.

For these reasons, the MUFON-sourced data presented here are limited to tabular form and are provided strictly for descriptive purposes. They are not included in the charts or comparative analyses applied to countries with resident organisations. Their primary value lies in extending the geographic coverage of the EuroUFO Barometer, offering baseline indicators of reporting activity, and highlighting regions where the development of local data-collection structures could significantly enhance future monitoring efforts.

Despite their descriptive nature, several broad observations can be drawn from the MUFON-sourced dataset. First, reporting volumes remain very low in most countries, often limited to single-digit annual figures, underscoring the absence of sustained national reporting infrastructures. Within this context, Russia stands out with consistently higher numbers across the reference period, a pattern that can largely be attributed to the presence of an established civilian reporting channel, complemented by a smaller number of submissions via the MUFON Case Management System. This concentration effect, rather than any inference regarding underlying phenomena, accounts for the higher aggregate figures observed for this country.

The table 6 also highlights notable structural gaps in central and eastern Europe. Countries such as Austria and Switzerland, located at the geographic core of Europe and characterised by high levels of technological development and public connectivity, continue to rely exclusively on external reporting mechanisms. Similarly, Poland, one of Europe’s largest countries by population and territory, shows recurrent but discontinuous reporting activity, reinforcing the need for locally anchored organisations capable of providing continuity, outreach, and national-level aggregation. In this respect, the MUFON dataset serves not only as a complementary statistical input, but also as an indicator of regions where the establishment of resident data-collection structures could substantially enhance future European-wide monitoring efforts.    

4. Conclusion

The 2025 update of the EuroUFO Barometer represents a clear step forward in both the breadth and depth of continental UAP reporting. Compared to previous editions, the dataset now integrates a larger number of countries, including newly established or revitalised national organisations, as well as a complementary set of reports sourced from MUFON’s Case Management System covering nations without resident UAP structures. Taken together, these developments provide the most comprehensive overview of European UAP reporting activity compiled to date, spanning 37 countries and over 32,000 recorded events from 2019 to 2024.

While these figures mark an important advance, it is crucial to interpret them with caution. Reporting levels remain strongly influenced by structural and contextual factors such as the presence of national organisations, population density, public awareness, language barriers, and local reporting channels. Some national datasets are incomplete, and a small number of duplicate or backdated reports may exist. Moreover, the vast majority of cases correspond to misidentifications of natural or human-made phenomena, with only a very small fraction remaining unresolved after investigation. As such, inter-country or interannual comparisons should be treated as indicative rather than definitive.

Despite these limitations, the update underscores the value of incremental, cooperative efforts, both formal and informal, in enhancing the quality, resilience, and scope of UAP monitoring across Europe. Networks such as EuroUfo.Net and UAP Check play a vital role in fostering continuity, methodological exchange, and collaboration, helping to overcome the fragmentation and gaps that have historically limited continental analyses. The report also highlights regions, including central and eastern Europe, where locally anchored data-collection structures remain absent, pointing to opportunities for further institutional development.

Overall, the 2025 update demonstrates that a broader, more inclusive EuroUFO Barometer is both feasible and already taking shape. Continued cooperation, transparency, and sustained effort by national researchers and volunteer organisations will be essential to consolidate this progress, improve data completeness, and deepen our understanding of the long-term dynamics of reported UAP activity in Europe.

In this perspective, it is worth noting a recent initiative emerging within EuroUfo.Net that directly complements the annual statistical work presented in this report. Following discussions among European researchers at the SOL Symposium in Baveno in 2025, EuroUfo.Net and UAP Check launched a joint pilot project aimed at creating a public “Euro UFO Index”. The objective of this initiative is not to provide an additional analytical dataset, but rather a simple, transparent catalogue listing basic data or reported UFO/UAP observations, such as date, location, and broad sighting type, while linking each entry to the original source organisation for further details.

As a first, deliberately limited experiment, participating organisations have been invited to contribute a small subset of records for the year 2024 only, thereby minimising the workload and allowing a practical assessment of feasibility and willingness to cooperate. At the time of writing, a beta version of the Euro Ufo Index is already online[3] and includes approximately 1,500 reports contributed by several national partners, out of an expected total of around 4,700 entries for the pilot phase.

Although the Euro Ufo Index is not intended as a research tool, it offers a clear continental overview of when and where UFO/UAP reports are being submitted in Europe, and it provides a concrete foundation for future cooperation. Together with the annual statistical barometer, this initiative illustrates how modest, cooperative steps can gradually strengthen European-level visibility, continuity, and transparency in the documentation of UAP reporting activity.         

[This is the original version of the article, published on December 24th, 2025. An updated version was published on January 26th, 2026 on UAP Check web site]

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The author sincerely thanks all national coordinators and researchers who, on a yearly basis, make their data freely available for this study and whose sustained dedication and voluntary efforts form the foundation of European-level UAP research. Their long-term commitment to data collection, investigation, and transparency is essential to the continuity and credibility of this work.        
Special thanks are extended to Edoardo Russo (CISU), founding member of EuroUfo.Net and UAP Check board member, for his valuable assistance and continued support in the preparation of this annual report. The author also gratefully acknowledges Robert Spearing, MUFON Director of International Investigations, for authorising the use of MUFON Case Management System (CMS) data, thereby significantly expanding the geographic scope of this research.     
The author further wishes to thank Giorgio Abraini for reviewing the manuscript and offering constructive comments and suggestions that helped improve the clarity and overall quality of the report.     

As a result of an unprecedented international cooperation, this article is also published on the participating organizations’ websites in their own  different languages.
    
 

---

[1] Philippe Ailleris (2024, June 30), European UAP sightings in 2019–2023: Raw data by country and year, EuroUfoNet.

[2] Cockrell, R. C., Murphy, L., & Rodeghier, M. (2023). Social Factors and UFO Reports: Was the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic Associated with an Increase in UFO Reporting? Journal of Scientific Exploration, 36(4), 641–656. https://doi.org/10.31275/20222681

[3] https://www.euroufo.net/euroufo-index/

Philippe Ailleris is a Senior Project Controller at the Space Research and Technology Centre of the European Space Agency (ESA) in the Netherlands. He works in the Earth Observation Projects Department, specifically for the Sentinel-1 and CO2M satellite missions of the EU Copernicus Programme. A French citizen, Ailleris has been interested in the UAP topic since the creation of the French UAP research and information group (CNES/GEIPAN) in 1977. His research focuses on the scientific examination of UAP observations and the creation of a systematic and rigorous science of the UAP phenomena. In 2009, he founded the UAP Observations Reporting Scheme Project. Since 2015, he has been actively involved in the UFODATA project, developing a large international network of automated surveillance stations to monitor the skies for UAP. His latest research focuses on using Earth Observation civilian satellites to detect anomalous aerial events.