Arica Radar-Visual UFO Incident (1997)

Background

Arica is a port city in Chile's far north, close to the Peruvian border and the Atacama Desert. Its Chacalluta International Airport handles commercial and military traffic, and its control tower has radar coverage that is coordinated with regional control centres. The Arica episode is the best-known Chilean case in which an official aviation body put its name to radar returns, which is why it is cited in later discussions of Chilean policy on unidentified aerial phenomena.

The night of 31 March 1997

According to a compilation of Chilean official statements preserved by the Patrick Gross UFO archive, the sighting began around 12:55 a.m. on Monday 31 March 1997 and lasted about two hours. Staff in the control tower reported three objects that hovered at an estimated 3,000 to 4,500 metres and showed blue, red, green and yellow lights. Airport director Julio Schettner is quoted describing the objects. The objects were reported over the Pacific near Morro de Arica before moving at high speed toward the Andes.

The tower's own radar reportedly could not hold the targets, so controllers called radar rooms in Arequipa, Peru, and Santiago, Chile. Neither had aircraft registered in Arica at that time. Eyewitness speed estimates were very high, and figures of up to 8,000 mph and 12,800 km/h circulate in ufology sources. The higher figure is not confirmed by any official document located for this entry and should be treated as unverified.

The date is not settled. Several secondary sources place the events on 2 April 1997 instead, and the sighting times and durations differ between accounts.

Official response and CEFAA

On 2 April 1997, Chile's Direccion General de Aeronautica Civil (DGAC) reportedly announced that the objects had been confirmed on both DGAC radar and Fuerza Aerea de Chile (FACh) radar. Chilean newspaper La Cuarta carried the story the same day. A DGAC spokesman is reported to have said in Santiago that Chile was experiencing UFO sightings. Skywatch International's Chilean director, Luis Sanchez, presented the event as the first time a civilian organisation had publicly endorsed a confirmed UFO observation. The original DGAC statement and La Cuarta article were not located in this research, so the radar confirmation rests on secondary reproductions.

The Arica case is linked to the creation of the Committee for the Study of Anomalous Aerial Phenomena (CEFAA). CEFAA's own website dates its founding to 3 October 1997. Accounts credit DGAC director Gonzalo Miranda Aguirre with establishing it, and retired FACh general Ramon Vega, a former air force commander who later became a senator, with promoting the idea. Colonel Enzo Dinocera, director of the School of Civil Aeronautics, is named as its first head, and Gustavo Rodriguez Navarro, a retired air traffic controller, as secretary. CEFAA is described as studying aircraft and radar cases and not accepting public sighting reports. Its leadership dates vary between sources.

Assessment and current status

The committee and the DGAC's Sección de Estudios de Fenómenos Aéreos Anómalos (SEFAA) have continued to receive reports. A June 2026 T13 television report says SEFAA has logged more than 2,200 reports since 1997 and quotes retired FACh commander Danilo Catalan describing a high-altitude luminous object that he called an "esfera". Earlier CEFAA reporting, cited in 2004, counted 15 unexplained cases, and the committee's officials have said that unexplained does not mean extraterrestrial.

Skeptical readers should note that the Arica account is documented mainly through ufology compilations, with no published radar plots or official incident report available for this entry. Tower reports of lights at night are commonly explained by aircraft, flares, meteors or lights on the ground, and the speed figures are inconsistent with the other details. Supporters point to the fact that a civil aviation authority publicly confirmed radar returns, which is unusual, and to the institutional follow-up. The case therefore sits between a documented official acknowledgement and an unresolved set of observations, and it is rated contested here.