Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
TomCochrane
Trad climber
Santa Cruz Mountains and Monterey Bay
|
|
|
Nov 14, 2010 - 02:02am PT
|
rocket contrails tend to squirm all over the place within a few minutes because of high speed winds going different directions at different altitudes.
a corkscrew rocket trail can also be caused by variations in thrust vector engine control yawing as the control system compensates for changes in wind direction and atmospheric density and dynamic instabilities in the rocket body. One of the early SpaceX Falcon 1 flights did this to such a degree that the liquid fuel in the tanks sloshed to the outside of the tank and starved the engine before attaining orbit, even though there was still adequate fuel remaining in the tank.
Edit: I can tell you interesting stories about some of the pictures just above.
|
|
Reilly
Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
|
|
|
Nov 14, 2010 - 02:48am PT
|
Klim,
I wasn't talking about the missile's track, read more carefully.
I wasn't thinking about the big boys that have multiple exhausts that
could cause the contrail to develope a spiral pattern. If it came outta
the water per your theory then most likely it would have been a solid fuel
single exhaust and therefore not likely to cause a spiral pattern within the contrail itself.
Besides, didn't you remember that I told you a few pages back my JPL friend
was backing you up at least as far as Fattrad's assertion that it was the
IDF's sub ISS Meshuga?
|
|
TomCochrane
Trad climber
Santa Cruz Mountains and Monterey Bay
|
|
|
Nov 14, 2010 - 03:02am PT
|
solid rockets are steered and stabilized by thrust vector control i.e. with hydraulic rams that move the rocket nozzle around. the loopy trident shot from the sub was caused by a stuck thrust vector control (short version of story). a solid rocket can definitely leave a spiral track.
|
|
graniteclimber
Trad climber
The Illuminati
|
|
|
Nov 14, 2010 - 03:02am PT
|
This one is typical of a rocket launch from Vanguard 20 minutes after a launch. The contrail starts straight as a ruler but gets blown around by the winds going different ways at different heights.
If it had been an ICBM launch, the contrail would have looked like this 20 minutes later. Also, the contrail would continue to be illuminated for a while long after the sun stopped illuminating the clouds and everything else was dark.
But hypothetically Klimmer could be right. If someone launched a large cruise missile (the size of a jet airliner) from Honolulu to Phoenix along the path of U.S. Airways Flight 808, it would have left a contrail that looked like the one in the video.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Nov 14, 2010 - 03:12am PT
|
Klimmer - you are convinced...
but you should check out the aviation chart approaches to LAX (not that it would matter to you), you will see that the flights are pretty consistently brought in from the SW along the "Control Area Pacific Low" over Santa Catalina I. then routed to where ever they are going...
The sterograms aren't going to help much since you are very far from the object, and the parallax isn't so great on the images... you should be able to work that out yourself.
The optical distortion of the contrail, the wind direction, the location of the path of the aircraft, the uncommon view out over the ocean, the sunset,... I don't see this as any reason to believe in a missile.
The Navy said "not ours." They have no reason to deny it... so what if they launched a missile? the entire chart of that area both nautical and aviation, have many warnings concern the fact that these are "National Defense Operating Areas"
you are a nut case when it comes to suspecting conspiracies, go for it dude...
|
|
Tony Bird
climber
Northridge, CA
|
|
|
Nov 14, 2010 - 10:36am PT
|
bottom line in this flap is that the public is being kept in the dark. the thickheads on here trying to explain it away forget that the government owes us an explanation, and it failed--or refused--to give one. if it were just an airplane and normal circumstances, the explanation would've been a piece of cake.
this thing looked like a missile enough to make the A-wire. nobody wants to admit what it was, whatever it was. that in itself is the greatest proof that it's worthy of suspicion.
enjoy the view in the dark, because it ain't gonna get lighter if no one demands it.
|
|
Klimmer
Mountain climber
San Diego
|
|
|
Nov 14, 2010 - 10:47am PT
|
The stereograms aren't going to help much since you are very far from the object, and the parallax isn't so great on the images... you should be able to work that out yourself.
Ed,
You are very wrong. The parallax is very sufficient. I used the video from the cameraman in the helicopter that was moving as he shot the video. The parallax is more than sufficient to see in 3D and to see the direction of the exhaust plume.
Yes, you can easily tell that the base of the exhaust/vapor plume is closer to you the observer, and the top of the plume further away. The whole exhaust/vapor plume is steeply leaning to the W - WNW and is back-lit by the settting Sun.
Why don't you look at it in stereo and stop speculating.
Or is it now common for scientists to just wave their hand and dismiss evidence without investigation?
C'mon Ed.
|
|
Klimmer
Mountain climber
San Diego
|
|
|
Nov 14, 2010 - 10:55am PT
|
Alex Jones interviews Wayne Madsen and talks about the Missile off the coast of CA. Very interesting . . . this situation is not over by any means.
The Chinese angle does have merit. Very worth the listen.
I would say this is very, very important to know what happened off of CA. To call this silly or to pooh-pooh this then you must also be saying Officers in the DoD caring about this is silly. And guess what? They care.
http://www.infowars.com/infowars.asx
http://www.infowars.com/
|
|
Klimmer
Mountain climber
San Diego
|
|
|
Nov 14, 2010 - 11:07am PT
|
Richross,
Why don't you view the full video from KCAL that I posted. It is a Chinook Helicopter moving across the view.
C'mon.
Raw Video: Mystery Missile Appears over Southern California. Helicopter CAM "no audio"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAZLYn44FeQ&feature=related
'video shot by a KCBS/KCAL Cameraman Gil Leyvas News helicopter in Los Angeles that shows an object shooting across the sky and leaving a large contrail, or vapor trail, over the Pacific Ocean. Pentagon Can't Explain 'Missile' Off California Coast.
"Whatever it was, it was spinning up into the sky kind of like a spiral," and was easy to distinguish from condensation trails from jets, he said. "It was quite a sight to see. It was spectacular" said the cameraman.'
|
|
monolith
climber
Berkeley, CA
|
|
|
Nov 14, 2010 - 11:57am PT
|
Dude, show your work on the "240" degree line as to it's path in the harbor.
"I lined it up again" doesn't count.
Do I have to hold your hand again?
|
|
Mike Bolte
Trad climber
Planet Earth
|
|
|
Nov 14, 2010 - 12:09pm PT
|
http://contrailscience.com/
There are some nice updates at this site. Note in particular the timestamped satellite video and the projected path of the Hawaii flight.
Also posted is this shot from the next day, same time. Either another rocket on some kind of mysterious schedule or the same flight on its known schedule.
EDIT: Glenn do you realize how ridiculous it makes you look to rely on people like Wayne Madsen to do your thinking for you? This is like your other trusted source on UFOs who insisted he had been remotely cured of liver cancer by a distance healer. Here is why Wayne resigned from the Navy (OK, this is according to Wikipedia which is not always the last word in truth, but this is pretty consistent with Wayne's mindset).
"He resigned from the Navy in 1985 as a Lieutenant, having been passed over for promotion. Madsen described himself as the "most senior lieutentant in the Navy"[10] at the time of his resignation and has blamed his lack of advance on a powerful group of pedophiles hidden in the top of the U.S. Navy ranks."
EDIT 2: Seems a little small to point out, but you also undermine your own case by using "scientific" terms incorrectly. I know you are thinking that saying "Note the emitted specular light from the engine that is facing toward the observer" makes you sound a little extra credible but it just shows up a bit of ignorance! If you want to play the science thing, you need to learn some science.
EDIT 3: Glenn, do you know the difference between the Washington Post and the Washington Times (that you linked to)? Are you also a follower of Reverend Moon?
|
|
tomtom
Social climber
Seattle, Wa
|
|
|
Nov 14, 2010 - 12:21pm PT
|
I've got a Mystery Missile of Love.
|
|
graniteclimber
Trad climber
The Illuminati
|
|
|
Nov 14, 2010 - 12:24pm PT
|
This is not directed towards Glenn.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Nov 14, 2010 - 12:32pm PT
|
no Klimmer, I asked you to do the calculation of the effect of the parallax, together with the uncertainty of the position of the helicopter, on your hypothetical explanation...
...that is the scientific way to proceed, not your typical ad hominem about unreasonable scientists...
...either you are blowing smoke or you're not, but if you're not, you can back up your claims with real evidence and not your totally stupid line of bullsh#t, "gee, that's what it looks like" doesn't cut it...
so, when you do that calculation, you might just find you cannot resolve the 3d position of the object, and you might also find that there are other solutions to the 3D reconstruction which would not rule out the possibility that it is "just an aircraft contrail"
You can do yourself a big favor in actually producing the goods here...
|
|
Klimmer
Mountain climber
San Diego
|
|
|
Nov 14, 2010 - 12:52pm PT
|
By the way, before I go to Church, I would just like to mention there is another way to prove it (but I already hit it out of the park with the setting Sun, the way the sun fully illuminates the high Cirrus Cloud completely from below that is in the fore-ground, yet back-lites the exhaust/vapor plume of the missile that is clearly higher than the Cirrus cloud that is leaning to the W - WNW direction, and then not to mention the fact that I provided a series of stereograms with more than sufficient parallax to clearly see the exhaust/vapor plume back-lit and leaning to the W -WNW and climbing at a very steep angle away from the coast) . . .
There exists good footage now and with this and Trig we can also prove it. The ole photogrammetry coming into to play . . .
Approach it very similar to how the British mapped and proved the elevations and distances to the high points (including Mt. Everest) within the Himalaya Mountains during The Great India Survey.
The elevation of the helicopter was known more or less, with key screen shots and lines plotted, angles measured, you can triangulate the horizontal distances to the base of the plume and to the max height of the plume. This could be plotted on Google Earth and see where these points are located. My theory, (more than a hypothesis now because I have overwhelming and outstanding evidence already,) is that this line plotted horizontally on a Google Earth map plot would be pointing in the W - WNW direction.
With a little more work and Trig you could also get close to the actual elevation of the tip of the exhaust/vapor plume, and prove that it goes much higher than any commercial jets go.
Someone should do this. I could do this, but it would take time to do.
Another means of proof waiting to be done.
C'mon people.
Edit:
Apparently Ed you think every 3D stereogram image must be mathematically evaluated and proved to show that you are actually seeing it in 3D and with depth of field, and that you are actually seeing what you are indeed seeing. Ed do you go around mathmatically proving that you are seeing in 3D and with depth of field?
Ed that is laughable.
Yes, we can do that, to prove an extremely obvious point. Parallax measurements in photogrammetry are usually done to calculate the height of things you are looking at in vertical aerial photography. But it can also be done for oblique and applied as well.
You do not then know how simple stereophotography works and the power of photogrammetry. Yes, I could calculate the parallax but in this case it isn't necessary. Anyone with a simple stereoscope can view the stereograms without doing the photogrammetry and calculating the parallax to see the exhaust/vapor plume is leaning away to the W -WNW. That is the point. Anyone can see it. They do not have to calculate it. Many people wouldn't know how to. I could do all the angle calculations and the trig involved, to calculate the parallax, but then why stop there? See the above argument.
Ed you are blowing serious smoke.
Further Edit:
Mike Bolte you are also blowing serious smoke.
Can you attempt to prove anything here? You just sit back criticize and try to debunk. You attack everyone's credibility except your own. You are the classic skeptic debunker who doesn't ever attempt to prove anything, at least not here. Just constant ridicule.
At least Wayne Madsen attends the press conferences and has the contacts within the DoD and has a look into the inside. He is interviewed often, his articles are published, and has very credible intel at times. He would be the first to tell you disinfo happens. But you have to be willing to wade through it and get to the truth. Why aren't you willing to do any of that?
Are you debunking the pedophile ring within the government, that was proven to have happened? Do you really want to go there? Do you really want to open that can of worms? Why even bring that up when that has nothing to do with what happened off of LA on Monday?
Well Mike since you brought it up . . .
Conspiracy of Silence - US Politicians Pedophile Ring
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=359924937663867563#
Consiracy of Silence video, Child sex ring that reached Bush Sr's Whitehouse. Cover up.
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2003/03/04/15796131.php
Washington Times Story: 1989 story about Bush Sr. Whitehouse call Boy sex ring
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2003/02/06/15709461.php
|
|
Mike Bolte
Trad climber
Planet Earth
|
|
|
Nov 14, 2010 - 02:01pm PT
|
Glenn keeps going on about the lighting and how he has somehow proven something. The logic is completely garbled and he doesn't even seem to be looking at the same photos as everyone else. And, why did you ignore this very sensible post by Paul Martzen? In addition to a sensible, simple statement about the lighting of the contrail which is consistent with an east-bound plane he asks the very sensible question: "where are the 100s of photos/phone videos from everywhere else?" There are none. Perhaps that is because this looked like a very ordinary airplane contrail from all but one vantage point.
I know it is silly to post on this topic, but feeling silly maybe.
If it was a rocket we would get reports from a very wide range of vantage points. If it came out of the sea from northwest of Catalina Island, then we would get the most reports from Catalina and from Ventura, Santa Barbara, etc. When rockets launch from Vandenburg they are visible over a huge area. Ships all around the area would report it. Airplanes would report it. Flight 808 would have seen it and reported it, since they were in exactly the same place at the same time. Instead we keep reexamining a couple sets of photos and videos all taken from similar vantage point.
In the second photo above, the back of the plume is in sunlight while the front of the plume is in shade, since it is taken after sunset. If it was a rocket, the lower part of the plume would be in shade and the higher part of the plume would be in sunlight as the rocket climbed out of earths shadow into the high sunlight. If it is a jet contrail then the back of the contrail can be in sunlight because it is further west and the sun has not set on that part of the contrail yet. The contrail goes dark as it goes east and passes into earth's shadow.
What I thought was particularly interesting about the story was how it immediately became certain that it was a rocket and that it originated from a specific location. How all responses from officials were so easily twisted from, "We don't know what you are talking about. There were no rocket launches." to "They have no idea who might have launched this rocket or why!"
They did not bother to call anybody in Catalina or Ventura or Santa Barbara. They just made up their minds and ran with the story as it was. Which I guess, is probably a good way to create some excitement on a slow news day.
|
|
Tony Bird
climber
Northridge, CA
|
|
|
Nov 14, 2010 - 02:54pm PT
|
ah, granite's all cranked up again. knew it would happen.
|
|
Klimmer
Mountain climber
San Diego
|
|
|
Nov 14, 2010 - 03:31pm PT
|
Oh, boy.
Yes, I can see that you all have some serious egg on your face and are desperately trying to some how extradite yourself from the embarrassment. Just be embarrassed. It happens. You'll live. Perhaps one day you'll find it within yourself to apologize.
These people are far more credible witnesses and have credible testimonies than anyone here at ST blowing smoke:
The original cameraman and pilot for KCAL . . . from before:
Yea, that KCAL photographer on the Helicopter didn't really know what he saw when he witnessed the spiralling effect of the missile launch . . .
Nope, he didn't know what he was talking about. What a bad, bad observer.
All images taken from this copy of the original video footage shot by KCAL:
Raw Video: Mystery Missile Appears over Southern California. Helicopter CAM "no audio"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAZLYn44FeQ&feature=related
'video shot by a KCBS/KCAL Cameraman Gil Leyvas News helicopter in Los Angeles that shows an object shooting across the sky and leaving a large contrail, or vapor trail, over the Pacific Ocean. Pentagon Can't Explain 'Missile' Off California Coast.
"Whatever it was, it was spinning up into the sky kind of like a spiral," and was easy to distinguish from condensation trails from jets, he said. "It was quite a sight to see. It was spectacular" said the cameraman.'
Wayne Madsen came out very soon after 11-8-10 with the story from his intel contacts. Amazing how telling the truth and being brave and stepping out gets you in front of the rest of the pack . . .
Yes, more than likely the DoD was telling the truth when they said "It wasn't ours." Well then if it wasn't ours it sure was somebodies. I can just imagine the backroom talks at the DoD/Pentagon . . .
"Well then if it wasn't ours it sure was somebodies. Well, uh, wait, ahhhh . . . that isn't gonna make us look good either. That's gonna make us look like idiots since we didn't know anyone else was out there and was capable of pulling off this very public display and stunt just off of LA.
Let's go with public disinfo plan B. Let's let them feel like idiots. Let's get them to think it was a contrail from a commercial jet. We'll use that as long as possible. Send out our best debunkers ASAP. All the typical naive sheep will follow along."
Wayne Madsen: Ballistic Missile was Fired by Chinese Submarine! - Alex Jones Tv 1/2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c1qsPWeWh8k
Wayne Madsen: Ballistic Missile was Fired by Chinese Submarine! - Alex Jones Tv 2/2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u7ekoPpSozI&feature=related
Great listen. Listen to the whole thing especially 8:36 minutes in. That is so true, especially for here at ST. Lol.
Once again . . . I'm holding your hands here:
May I sugggest Pokescope if you do not have a pair:
http://www.pokescope.com/
|
|
Mike Bolte
Trad climber
Planet Earth
|
|
|
Nov 14, 2010 - 03:53pm PT
|
Glenn, here is your chance to do some debunking! How come this was only noted as out of the ordinary and reported from one vantage point? The rest of the 10 million good citizens in LA were all cooking dinner? Not one southern californian out on the beach enjoying the sunset? And, what do you think of this seemingly careful work (with each step explained and following from the previous step) at that website you don't seem to want to comment on?
EDIT: seems to be a limit to figure caption length. But, if you are intrigued, just go to this site:
http://contrailscience.com/
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!