Skip to comments.
Pentagon Can't Explain Missile Off California
AOL News ^
| 10/11/10
| Pauline Jelinek
Posted on 11/10/2010 10:59:19 AM PST by Eleutheria5
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100, 101-120, 121-140, 141-145 next last
To: SeeSac
Rocket contrails consist of chemical products of combustion, not water vapor. Those solid products reflect light, water vapor passes it through. I don't have a good explanation on the lighting because I can't tell the perspective of the observer to a known horizon.
The only apparent evidence of movement is: is the object getting bigger or smaller as it moves? It seems to be getting smaller or going away from the observer.
Pinning down movement is subjective here. What seems more telling is the density of the contrail and the explosive lateral expansion of the apparent hot gases as they are issued. That contrail is much more aggressive than a water vapor or ice crystal contrail.
Again, the unity of the contrail is more that of a rocket motor.
101
posted on
11/10/2010 1:10:51 PM PST
by
gandalftb
(OK State, 8-1, Go Cowboys!)
To: mbarker12474
At least we know the background of the person making the claims from Russia and judge his statements accordingly. We know his agenda.
Why can’t we know the background of the Anonymous blogger at ContrailsScience so we can judge his statements accordingly, too? What is his agenda? How is he making his money? Don’t you want to know?
To: wrench
If it were a contrail, that shape is only possible from a center line thrust aircraft. Problem with that theory is there are no centerline thrust aircraft used in the flight profile being touted as the answer. Only acft like 747, 757, 767, airbus 3XX, etc. How about this one?
103
posted on
11/10/2010 1:11:58 PM PST
by
SeeSac
To: SeeSac
It’s a password access only forum rather than a blogsite.
104
posted on
11/10/2010 1:12:22 PM PST
by
gandalftb
(OK State, 8-1, Go Cowboys!)
To: SeeSac
Do you have video of the photo in #103?
To: gandalftb
Those solid products reflect light, water vapor passes it through.Uh, the contrail of a jet cruising at FL39 is formed by solids.
106
posted on
11/10/2010 1:16:15 PM PST
by
SeeSac
To: gandalftb
Its a password access only forum rather than a blogsite. Send me the link. I will sign up.
107
posted on
11/10/2010 1:17:26 PM PST
by
SeeSac
To: gandalftb
What seems more telling is the density of the contrail and the explosive lateral expansion of the apparent hot gases as they are issued. That contrail is much more aggressive than a water vapor or ice crystal contrail. Like this one?
108
posted on
11/10/2010 1:19:57 PM PST
by
SeeSac
To: jimbo123
Why cant we know the background of the Anonymous blogger at ContrailsScience so we can judge his statements accordingly, too? What is his agenda? How is he making his money? Dont you want to know? For an anomalous incident that occurred a few days ago? No.
Have a blessed weekend.
109
posted on
11/10/2010 1:22:54 PM PST
by
mbarker12474
(If thine enemy offend thee, give his childe a drum.)
To: RobRoy
110
posted on
11/10/2010 1:26:58 PM PST
by
RetSignman
("It's about saving our Republic, STUPID")
To: SeeSac
BTW, several of the posters are military pilots in the area. They also agree that it is not an aircraft. They agree that the area is a naval-launched missile test area centered around San Clemente Island Training Area.
Again, all of those experts are just guessing here, like us.
111
posted on
11/10/2010 1:31:44 PM PST
by
gandalftb
(OK State, 8-1, Go Cowboys!)
To: gandalftb
BTW, several of the posters are military pilots in the area.Link please. Thanks.
112
posted on
11/10/2010 1:33:26 PM PST
by
SeeSac
To: gandalftb
113
posted on
11/10/2010 1:33:26 PM PST
by
Pagey
(B. Hussein Obama has no experience running anything, except his pedestrian mouth.)
To: gandalftb
114
posted on
11/10/2010 1:33:26 PM PST
by
Pagey
(B. Hussein Obama has no experience running anything, except his pedestrian mouth.)
To: mbarker12474
To: SeeSac
It’s not a “sign-up” forum, I was sponsored in. The forum has considerable skepticism that there could be an accidental launch, and a purposed launch should not take place in crowded air space. If this was a planned military event, there would be NOTAMs and they agree there were none issued. They have little doubt that is a solid-fuel rocket contrail.
116
posted on
11/10/2010 1:41:34 PM PST
by
gandalftb
(OK State, 8-1, Go Cowboys!)
To: gandalftb
Its not a sign-up forum, I was sponsored in. The forum has considerable skepticism that there could be an accidental launch, and a purposed launch should not take place in crowded air space. If this was a planned military event, there would be NOTAMs and they agree there were none issued. They have little doubt that is a solid-fuel rocket contrail. I am starting to be skeptical that your 'forum' really exists.
117
posted on
11/10/2010 1:50:27 PM PST
by
SeeSac
To: gandalftb
BTW, it is being referred to as a plume, not a contrail, because of the cone shaped discharge. Contrails are more parallel sided.
On close-up, the plume is too side-expansive right on discharge to be a jet exhaust and you can actually see the explosive rotational turbulence, on discharge. Jets don't do that, their thrust is more stable and linear.
118
posted on
11/10/2010 1:51:34 PM PST
by
gandalftb
(OK State, 8-1, Go Cowboys!)
To: SeeSac
OK, the message is more important than the messenger. I am not an expert, or even learned on this subject. Obviously, I got these ideas from somewhere. Not playing I've-got-a-secret.
What do you think of these ideas? I don't think the credibility of the source matters, since we are all guessing to a great degree. Can we just discuss the merits of the observed evidence and allow me to throw out any enlightenment for judging by all?
119
posted on
11/10/2010 1:57:41 PM PST
by
gandalftb
(OK State, 8-1, Go Cowboys!)
To: RobRoy
I don`t care what the Pentagon claims. That was NOT a plane contrail.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100, 101-120, 121-140, 141-145 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson