Case No. 63·Argentina

1995·Bariloche International Airport

Argentina.Bariloche · Flight AR 674

On 31 July 1995, during Aerolíneas Argentinas flight AR 674's final approach to Bariloche, the crew reported a luminous disc-shaped object escorting the aircraft while the airport suffered a total, simultaneous power blackout. The CEFAe opened an official file and the outage was independently documented by the local utility.

Year

1995

Tier

S

Probability

62%

Category

Incident

Strong evidence: instrumental sensor record + multiple witnesses (typically military). Three independent axes: the «tier» measures the strength of the evidence; the «probability» estimates how genuinely unexplained the case is —a natural phenomenon can remain unexplained, so it does not equal «non-prosaic»—; and the partition of explanations (below) says what it most plausibly was. So a well-documented case can have a possible hoax as its most plausible cause, and a Tier B is not, for that reason, a hoax.

Part 01

The night in question

On July 31, 1995, at dusk, Aerolíneas Argentinas flight AR 674 was on approach to San Carlos de Bariloche's Teniente Luis Candelaria International Airport when Captain Jorge Polanco and his crew reported by radio a luminous object accompanying the aircraft off to the side, at apparently constant speed and altitude. The episode became known as the 'Polanco Case', after the pilot's surname; he has described over the years a sighting lasting about seventeen minutes with the object 'right at the wingtip'.

That same night, the city of Bariloche suffered a power outage. Polanco chose to break off the approach and execute a go-around; by his account, during the maneuver the object made a rapid climb and vanished. The temporal coincidence between the sighting and the blackout is what made the case famous. Here editorial honesty is mandatory: the documented explanation of the blackout is mundane. According to the local utility's records, the outage occurred between 20:17 and 20:31 when the protections of the transformer substation fed from the Alícura hydroelectric plant tripped, and the recorded cause was human operating error, not an inexplicable anomaly. In other words, there is an ordinary, logged cause for the electrical failure; what the case raises is its temporal coincidence with the sighting, not a proven causation of the blackout by the object.

The meteorological context is worth situating, since it too has been debated. A strong snowstorm hit the city that day, with reported accumulations of several tens of centimeters. Some researchers have noted that the snowfall by itself produced no additional outages that night, contrasting that with the singularity of the substation's discrete trip; others invoke it, together with visibility conditions, as a factor to weigh when assessing what the crew could observe on approach. Neither reading alters the central recorded fact: the outage had an identified operational cause.

The case was documented by civilian researchers — notably Roberto Banchs — in the press and in work published in 1996, and was later taken up in the context of the Argentine Air Force's aerospace-phenomena study office, which channels the formal study of such reports. The reconstruction rests on the testimony of the crew and ground witnesses and on the operational records of the airport and the utility. No radar or photographic record of the object has been published: as in other Latin American corpus cases, the evidence is essentially testimonial, reinforced by the professional qualification of those providing it.

Part 02

Why this case moved the needle

It is one of the few South American cases with institutional follow-up by its country's air force, a file that came to be made public, and consistent professional testimony from a commercial crew. Captain Polanco sustained his account for decades, and the case re-surfaced in 2020-2025 when referenced in declassified material and in the French COMETA report, giving it a second media life.

Calibration, however, must discount the element popular culture treats as decisive: the blackout. That outage has a documented ordinary cause — human error at the substation fed from Alícura, between 20:17 and 20:31 — so it cannot be counted as an 'inexplicable electrical failure caused by the object'. What remains, once the blackout is discounted, is a sustained aerial sighting by a reliable professional crew, with no published radar or photographic record corroborating it independently. It is therefore a testimonially solid case as to witness qualification and a weak one as to instrumentation and physical corroboration of the attributed effects. Presenting the real cause of the blackout — rather than insinuating the object cut power to the city — is exactly what distinguishes a calibrated corpus from a sensationalist one; the analytical weight of the case must rest on the sighting itself, not on a correlation whose electrical leg already has a mundane explanation.

Part 03

What's left on paper

Aeropuerto Internacional Teniente Luis Candelaria de Bariloche, Argentina.

Teniente Luis Candelaria International Airport in Bariloche, destination of Aerolíneas Argentinas flight AR 674 involved in the 1995 sighting.

Wikimedia Commons · CC BY-SA 3.0

Documented evidence

  1. Consistent professional testimony from Polanco and his crew, sustained for decades
  2. Local utility electrical records dating the outage (20:17-20:31) and recording its cause: human error at the Alícura substation
  3. Subsequent institutional follow-up by the Argentine air force and reference in declassified material
  4. Radio confirmation between crew and tower during the event

Sources

  1. CEFAe — Informe del Caso Bariloche (Fuerza Aérea Argentina) Official aerospace-studies office
  2. Banchs, R. — El caso Bariloche (Ediciones B, 1996) Contemporary civilian investigation
  3. Cobertura La Nación, agosto 1995

Location

Bariloche International Airport · -41.15°, -71.30°

Distribution of explanations

This case is classified among the model's hypotheses: the bar splits 100% by how much each explanation weighs (the uncertainty is spread across the hypotheses the case supports). Summed across the corpus they produce the comparable partition. It is a different question from the Probability above: that one estimates how likely the case is a genuinely unexplained phenomenon; this one splits which the explanation would be.

Misidentification71%
Classified human technology11%
Non-human, no state management10%
Adversary technology5%
Non-human + state cover-up3%

Modal hypothesis: Misidentification 71% · sums to 100%

Confused with: No single object identified

Structured analytical judgment, not a calibrated frequency. Forced classification: the mass the evidence cannot assign is spread across the hypotheses the case does support.

Related cases

Associated actors (1)