Incident: 13 October 2026, around 02:45, Puente Alto, Chile. SEFAA case 2294: reported 13 October, resolution 20 October, released 2 November 2026. Classification: resolved; drone/RPA assessment.
The witness account describes three lights with a triangular appearance and changing colours. The released inquiry examined a smaller evidential question: what was visible in the submitted recordings, and whether its appearance fitted an ordinary aircraft operating nearby.
Testimony and supplied material
According to the 15-page SEFAA report, three witnesses described roughly 45 minutes of activity to the east. Three videos and six photographs were subsequently supplied. The clips last 33, 48 and 95 seconds; their listed start times span about 20 minutes. The recordings therefore total 2 minutes 56 seconds, not 20 minutes of continuous coverage.
SEFAA compared the visible star field and scene direction, looked at recorded air traffic, and examined the coloured light sequence. Its conclusion favoured a drone or remotely piloted aircraft. The inquiry did not identify an operator or model. Its final classification was resolved, with no aviation risk identified.
One filmed light and three reported lights
The account and the images should be kept distinct. A statement describing three objects is not automatically demonstrated by a recording showing one point. Equally, the limited recorded portion cannot be substituted for the entire reported experience.
UKPX reviewed every report page, including the star-field comparison, selected frames and photographic panels. The comparison supplies a more grounded direction reference than a featureless crop alone. It also provides the context for the investigator’s reading of changes associated with handheld camera movement.
Reading the clock and traffic checks
There are inconsistencies in the report’s prose times compared with its table, including a 03:47 reference where a listed clip begins at 02:47. UKPX uses the tabulated sequence when describing the supplied clips and does not conceal the discrepancy by claiming a perfectly reconstructed minute-by-minute event.
An absence of a matching ADS-B track should not be expanded into a claim that all aircraft were ruled out. The relevant question is what that dataset could register. The report’s small-aircraft interpretation also rests on the appearance of the coloured lights and the ability to remain in place, rather than on a named airliner track.
What remains available for review
The public PDF allows readers to inspect SEFAA’s reasoning. UKPX has not downloaded the original device files or repeated the authority’s digital-forensic checks. The conclusion is presented as SEFAA’s drone assessment, with no invented operator, flight plan or aircraft dimensions.
The source is part of the official October release. It is not the drone-camera incident of 7 October, which has its own file and different explanation. A shared city pin represents locality, not a claim that the observations occurred at the same home.
Location and source record
Approximate public Puente Alto city reference, rounded from the UNGEGN city record; not the residential backyard or an aircraft position. Coordinates follow the checked geographical reference.
UKPX reference added 6 November 2026. Incident year: 2026. Browse Historical Cases · More UFO / UAP / USO references.