The Canary Islands UAP Incident (1976)

June 22, 1976, evening falls over the Canary Islands when a fierce star seems to lift off the western horizon. It swells into a vast, translucent dome, bands of white, blue, then red, hanging in place for half an hour as a thinner light peels away and climbs in a slow spiral. Phones ring across Tenerife, Gran Canaria, La Palma, La Gomera; technicians at Izaña watch; at sea, the Navy corvette Atrevida logs the event and, far south, the freighter Osaka Bay sketches a growing disc through which stars remain visible. The glow is so bright some swear it lights sea and land.

Spain’s Air Force opened a case, Expediente 760622, later declassified, calling it an unidentified aerial phenomenon. One dramatic outlier emerges: a doctor and taxi driver claim a clear sphere near Gáldar with two tall figures inside. Investigators doubt it; no one else sees anything like it.

Decades on, cross-checks tighten the picture. Twilight physics fits the colors and longevity; the date matches U.S. Navy Poseidon C-3 missile tests likely west of the islands. The verdict hardens: mass sighting, verified; core phenomenon, probably a twilight rocket plume; “occupants”, disputed. And the case endures, a lesson in how light, sky, and secrecy can enchant a whole archipelago.

Executive Summary

• When & where: 22 June 1976, after astronomical twilight began on the islands (around 22:20–22:30 local). The phenomenon was seen from Tenerife, La Palma, La Gomera, Gran Canaria, and from at least one merchant ship hundreds of kilometers to the south, as well as by the Spanish Navy corvette Atrevida operating off Fuerteventura. Naukas
• What: Witnesses describe a bright point rising near the horizon that expanded into a huge luminous half-sphere/“bell” with color changes (yellow-white, blue, red). Some observers saw a secondary, smaller light separating from the main source and a column/beam or layered bands beneath. The luminous halo persisted ~40 minutes. Naukas
• Who recorded it officially: The Spanish Air Force compiled Expediente 760622 (declassified June 1994), which includes the captain’s report from Atrevida, multiple military/civil statements, sketches, and press clippings. The government file classed the event as a “fenómeno aéreo no identificado” (unidentified aerial phenomenon) given the data then available. Naukas
• Why it matters: The case illustrates how mass sightings, lighting geometry, and classified defense testing can collide in public perception. Later cross-disciplinary work has associated the display with U.S. Navy Poseidon C-3 missile tests conducted that exact evening in the Atlantic Test Range, a scenario that accords with twilight rocket optics (“space jellyfish”/twilight phenomenon). nuclearcompanion.com

What’s public and durable

The declassified dossier (Expediente 760622)

Spain’s Ministry of Defense maintains a dedicated “Expedientes OVNI” microsite that indexes the declassified case series (80 files; ~1,900 pages) and points to Canary incidents. Several Canary items (including 19 Nov 1976) are accessible directly in the catalog; the 22 Jun 1976 file is widely mirrored and cited by Spanish researchers and press and was explicitly declassified in June 1994. bibliotecavirtual.defensa.gob.es

Key excerpt – Atrevida log (file p. 66 as quoted): At 21:27Z (22:27 local), a “yellow-blue intense focus” rose from near the horizon toward the ship, halted at ~15–18° elevation, and produced a large, luminous halo that remained almost fixed for ~40 minutes, even as the originating light split, with one component ascending spirally and fading. The halo lit both sea and land, creating an impression of proximity despite its actual distance. Naukas

Mass sighting details (civil + military + maritime)

• Multiple islands: Newspapers the next morning ruled out “local illusion ”simultaneous calls came from Tenerife, La Palma, La Gomera, and Gran Canaria; a TVE transmitter crew at Izaña (Tenerife) reported it, and a ferry logged a time around 22:20. Naukas
• Maritime corroboration far afield: The cargo ship Osaka Bay, ~400 km south of La Gomera, sketched a growing, translucent disc through which stars remained visible, classic high-altitude exhaust under sunlight lasting ~25 minutes. Naukas
• Duration: The persistent halo roughly half an hour to forty minutes, is a crucial physical clue; such long-lived, expanding light clouds are typical of high-altitude rocket exhaust seen in darkness but lit by the sun.

The “occupants” claim

A medical doctor from Santa María de Guía (Gran Canaria) and a taxi driver reported a transparent sphere allegedly showing two tall figures in red at panels, unique among the many testimonies that night. The Air Force’s appointed investigating judge interviewed them but regarded the CE-III detail as dubious; later commentators (including the Air Force lieutenant general who commissioned the inquiry) concurred.

Spanish analysts Ricardo Campo and Manuel Borraz later tracked the doctor’s evolving narrative across decades of interviews, noting increasing subjective/experiential elements absent in the broader witness base. Their work anchors our Claims Taxonomy below. Naukas

Sensor and observation context

Lighting geometry & “astronomical angles”

• Observer vs. Sun: At the islands (≈28°N, 16°–18°W) at ~22:30 local in late June, the ground is fully dark while the mesosphere/thermosphere above 50–90 km can remain lit by sunlight from below the horizon. A rocket exhaust cloud expanding at those altitudes becomes a sun-lit, colored “jellyfish” against a dark sky. 
• Color/shape dynamics: Reported blue/white cores, reddish bands, fan/semispherical halos, and spiral/zig-zag traces are the textbook morphology of twilight rocket plumes in sheared winds and in stage events (separations, attitude changes). 
• Persistence: A 30–40 min luminous cloud is inconsistent with meteors, aircraft lights, or flares, but normal for diffusing exhaust in sunlit upper air. 

Aerospace test correlation (data-based)

• U.S. Navy Poseidon (C-3) SLBM: The official Navy chronology (compiled/derived from Strategic Systems Program data) records that USS Von Steuben (SSBN-632/682) conducted two Poseidon C-3 launches on 22 June 1976 during an operational test window precisely matching the Canary event’s date. nuclearcompanion.com
• Independent aerospace cataloging: Space-history compendia by Jonathan McDowell and others list launches demonstrating that post-sunset tests can produce vast, visible plumes far from the range. Although McDowell’s master logs are primarily orbital launches, his research has been widely cited in correlating SLBM tests with twilight displays seen from shore. 
• Spanish technical analyses: A set of peer-circulated papers (Campo Pérez, Ballester Olmos) explicitly reconstruct the June 22, 1976 and March 5, 1979 Canary displays as Poseidon launches to the west of the islands, giving minimum distance (≈760 km) and altitude (≈46–90 km) envelopes derived from press timings, reported elevations, and ballistic flight profiles. Naukas

Data take-away: The lighting, colors, evolution, duration, and date/time are self-consistent with a twilight rocket exhaust seen at long range; the SLBM chronology gives an independent, named program and platform operating that same night.

Timeline (reconstructed from official file & press)

• ~22:15–22:30 local, 22 June 1976: First calls hit news desks; multiple islands report a bright source rising from the western horizon, growing into a huge semi-sphere or bell. TVE Izaña technicians watch from high ground on Tenerife. Naukas
• ~22:27–22:30: Atrevida log (Air Force expediente p. 66): initial yellow-blue focus, then fixed halo; secondary light splits and climbs in spiral; halo remains illuminating sea/land. Naukas
• ~22:30–23:00: Phenomenon persists; many witnesses eventually peel off. A merchant vessel far south (Osaka Bay) sketches a translucent disc growing to ~25° elevation before fading; stars seen through the cloud. Naukas
• Aftermath (23 June): Front pages across the archipelago carry variations of “spectacular luminous phenomenon” with times clustering tightly around 22:20–22:30 and directions consistent with a single distant source to the west/northwest. Naukas

Media archive notes

• Newspaper timing convergence: El Día, La Tarde, El Eco de Canarias, La Provincia, and others cite calls and sightings within minutes of one another, reinforcing a single external stimulus (not scattered local events). Naukas
• Television & radio: Reportorial notes from TVE Izaña are included in narrative reconstructions; the public discourse formed quickly, including phone-in recollections and island-to-island comparisons the following day. Naukas
• Books & digests: The case entered anthologies and international digests; later, online archives compounded the record once Spain’s MoD digitalized the Expedientes. bibliotecavirtual.defensa.gob.es

The “two giants in a blue sphere”-  How to weigh it

What’s the claim? In Gáldar (Gran Canaria), a physician traveling by taxi reported approaching a transparent sphere parked near ground level containing two tall, red-clad figures at consoles. It is the only such account among a broad witness base reporting a distant expanding light. Academia

What the official inquiry said: The Air Force judge recorded the testimony but regarded the occupant detail as not credible, a judgment subsequently echoed by senior Air Force leadership. The overall case remained “unidentified” in 1976 because the missile test context (if known informally) was not available for formal inclusion at the time. 

What later researchers found: Tracking the physician’s interviews from 1976 → 1990s, analysts noted progressive embellishment and subjective/experiential elements (e.g., emotional/“clarividencia” effects) inconsistent with the multi-island, distant-phenomenon consensus. No independent corroboration for a ground-proximate sphere with occupants has surfaced. Naukas

Data-first read: The mass sighting is well attested; the CE-III annex lacks corroboration and conflicts with the optics and geometry implied by the rest of the dataset.

Alternative readings (and how the data treats them)

1. Ballistic-rocket twilight plume (Poseidon C-3)
   Fit to data: Date/time match, color/shape evolution, long persistence, spatial coherence across islands, merchant-ship observations, and lighting geometry all support this. The U.S. Navy chronology explicitly lists two Poseidon launches on 22 June 1976, and Spanish technical work reconstructs distance (~≥ 760 km W) and altitude (46–90 km) envelopes consistent with sun-lit exhaust. Status: strong Probable explanation for the core luminous phenomenon. nuclearcompanion.com
2. Aurora/astronomical rare event
   Fit: The semispherical, multicolor, structured glow lasting tens of minutes can superficially resemble auroral arcs, but geomagnetic latitude and timing make a storm-driven aurora unlikely over the Canaries; moreover, witnesses saw stars through the expanding disc, a translucent exhaust cloud signature. Status: Unlikely for this specific night; Misidentification relative to the data. (See “twilight phenomenon” and “space jellyfish.”) 
3. Multiple local sources (flares, aircraft, balloons)
   Fit: Cannot account for the island-wide simultaneity, coherent azimuth, duration, and the maritime report hundreds of kilometers away. Status: Rejected by the timing/geometry constraints in the file and press record. Naukas

Implications

1. Declassification works, even when identity is mundane. Spain’s 1994 release (and 2016 digitization) let researchers map testimonies across islands, integrate naval, civil, and press records, and cross-reference aerospace timelines to produce a coherent physical model. Transparency reduced speculation while preserving a high-value historical case. bibliotecavirtual.defensa.gob.es
2. Lighting physics is decisive in mass sightings. Without astronomical angles and upper-air illumination in the analysis, a twilight rocket plume looks impossible; with them, the behavior becomes predictable, including the “fixed halo” and spiral ascent reports. 
3. Unique claims require unique evidence. The CE-III element (two tall figures) stands alone in the record. In a mass-witness event with broadly consistent distant descriptions, outlier proximity/occupant claims need independent corroboration to shift the case classification. Naukas
4. Context: a cluster of similar Canary displays (1974–1979). Spanish defense files and later studies catalog multiple dates (22 Nov 1974; 22 Jun 1976; 19 Nov 1976; 24 Mar 1977; 5 Mar 1979) with nearly identical optical signatures, now linked to naval missile testing. Pattern matters. bibliotecavirtual.defensa.gob.es

What would further settle lingering questions

• Primary U.S. test documentation: Release of exact launch times/coordinates for 22 June 1976 Poseidon tests would close the loop quantitatively for Spanish archives. (Open sources already name the submarine and date). nuclearcompanion.com
• Digitized, searchable Spanish dossiers: Continued expansion of the BVD portal with OCR text for expediente 760622 pages would streamline public verification of quotes and diagrams. bibliotecavirtual.defensa.gob.es
• Photographic negatives: Locating any original photos (press or private) with metadata could refine elevation/time constraints beyond press quotes.

Bottom line

The Canary Islands UAP of 22 June 1976 is a verified, multi-island, multi-service observation of a long-lived luminous phenomenon. The patterns a bright source rising on the western horizon, expanding into a semispherical halo with color changes, secondary lights climbing spirally, and ~40 minutes of persistence are high-fidelity matches to twilight rocket exhaust illuminated by the Sun at high altitude. Independent naval missile chronology anchors that very date to Poseidon C-3 tests, and Spanish technical reconstructions put the source hundreds of kilometers west at tens of kilometers altitude, where sunlight would produce exactly what the islands saw.

The close-encounter sub-narrative remains disputed not just culturally, but within the official file because it stands alone against a broad, self-consistent dataset favoring a single, distant aerospace cause. In UAP terms, the core phenomenon is best classified Probable (identified), with a Verified mass sighting record and a Disputed CE-III annex.

That doesn’t shrink the case’s value. On the contrary: West-of-Europe twilight missile plumes will recur as long as sea-launched tests exist. The 1976 Canary file is a teaching case a reminder that defense transparency, astronomical angles, and patient cross-checking can resolve some of the most spectacular UAP displays without dismissing witnesses or the historical import of what they saw.

References

• Spain MoD | “Expedientes OVNI” microsite (digitized collection; index of Canary cases & context). bibliotecavirtual.defensa.gob.es
• UAP over Canaries (22 Jun 1976) declassified file reference & quotations (Spanish Air Force Expediente 760622, declassified June 1994; excerpts and images). Naukas
• Navy test chronology: Poseidon (C-3) Missile Chronology (22 June 1976– two launches by USS Von Steuben). nuclearcompanion.com
• Twilight phenomenon / “space jellyfish” (rocket-plume optics at dusk/dawn: mechanism, colors, duration). 
• Spanish analytical reconstructions:
  • Ricardo Campo, “Dos gigantes rojos cabalgando un misil” (media timings, Atrevida text, Osaka Bay drawing; geometric minima). Naukas
  • Campo Pérez (Zenodo): “Remarkable Missile Sightings from the Canary Islands in 1976 and 1979.” Zenodo
  • V-J Ballester Olmos, “Los OVNIs de Canarias fueron misiles Poseidon.” Academia
• MoD digital catalog entries for related Canary cases (Nov 1976) (demonstrating series pattern). bibliotecavirtual.defensa.gob.es
• General background: English-language overview citing 1994 declassification and official stance on the CE-III claim. 

Speculation labels 

• Hypothesis (Ballistic test, long-range): The display arose from Poseidon C-3 SLBM launches west of the Canaries; sunlit exhaust produced the semi-sphere and spiral effects seen from multiple islands and ships.
  For: Navy chronology, lighting physics, island-wide simultaneity, Atrevida log, merchant-ship sketch, duration.
  Against: Some witness statements perceive proximity (halo “lighting sea/land”) a known range illusion with large distant plumes; lack of an official U.S. release naming the exact firing position/time in Spanish archives (unsurprising for the era).
  Label: Hypothesis → Probable for the core phenomenon. nuclearcompanion.com
• Witness Interpretation (CE-III): The Gáldar physician’s two beings in a transparent sphere.
  For: A named witness repeating the claim over years.
  Against: No corroboration, conflicts with the long-range twilight-plume model, official skepticism by the Air Force’s own investigator, and marked evolution of the narrative.
  Label: Witness Interpretation → Disputed. Naukas
• Researcher Opinion: The June 22, 1976 file remains a model for how a nation’s UAP archives, press, and independent aerospace data can be cross-joined to close a mass sighting without diminishing its historical significance.
  Label: Researcher Opinion, grounded in MoD releases and cross-data work cited here. bibliotecavirtual.defensa.gob.es

Claims Taxonomy by Claim

• Claim A – A large, long-duration luminous phenomenon was witnessed across multiple Canary Islands and at sea on 22 June 1976. Classification: Verified. Evidence: Expediente 760622 (declassified), Atrevida report, multi-island press timing, maritime corroboration. Naukas
• Claim B – The Spanish Air Force classified the case as “unidentified” in 1976; the dossier was declassified in 1994 and Canary files were later digitized. Classification: Verified. Evidence: MoD declassification (1994) and Biblioteca Virtual de Defensa (2016) program.
• Claim C – The phenomenon matches the optics and timing of a U.S. Navy Poseidon SLBM test west of the Canaries that night. Classification: Probable. Evidence: Poseidon chronology (two launches on 22 Jun 1976), twilight-plume physics, independent Spanish reconstructions of distance/altitude. nuclearcompanion.com
• Claim D –  A close-encounter occurred in Gáldar with two tall entities inside a sphere. Classification: Disputed. Evidence: Single witness pair; Air Force investigator judged the “occupants” detail not credible; no corroborating records beyond interviews. 
• Claim E –  The 22 June event was an aurora or purely astronomical display. Classification: Misidentification. Evidence: Morphology and duration fit twilight rocket exhaust, not mid-latitude aurora; stars visible through translucent disc consistent with exhaust cloud. 
• Claim F –  The case proves non-human craft over the Canaries. Classification: Unresolved (insufficient evidence). Evidence: The mass-sighting data strongly align with a ballistic test; the CE-III sub-claim is disputed.

Claims Taxonomy by Type

• Verified: Mass sighting across multiple islands and at sea on 22 Jun 1976 with ~40 min persistence; Spanish Air Force dossier declassified 1994 (Exp. 760622). Naukas
• Probable: Poseidon C-3 missile test (U.S. Navy) produced the twilight plume seen from the Canaries; date-matched chronology; physical/optical behavior aligned. nuclearcompanion.com
• Disputed: CE-III claim of two tall figures inside a transparent sphere near Gáldar (unique testimony; officially viewed as dubious; no corroboration). 
• Misidentification: Auroral/astronomical explanation for the June 22 event (lighting, morphology contradict). 
• Legend: “A million and a half witnesses” trope, colorful press shorthand; the documented witness base is large but not rigorously counted. (Press hyperbole noted in later summaries.)

SEO keywords

• Canary Islands UAP 1976; Expediente 760622; Atrevida corvette UAP report; Poseidon C-3 missile test Canary; twilight phenomenon space jellyfish; La Palma La Gomera Gran Canaria UAP; Spanish Air Force declassified OVNI files 1994; Biblioteca Virtual de Defensa UAP; Manuel Borraz Ricardo Campo analysis; Osaka Bay ship sighting; UAP mass sighting Spain 1970s; SLBM rocket plume optics; UAP occupants claim Gáldar