Amazing Interview: Air Force General says "Sub Launched Missile, 100% Certain"

Fox News Interview with Air Force General Tom McInerney | November 14th 2010 | Fox News Hannity Interview

[DontTreadOnMe2009]

Hannity was surprised to hear a famous ex Air Force General tell him “That Is A Missile, Shot From A Submarine!” I quote retired Air Force Lieutenant General Tom McInerney (ex commander of 11th Air Force in Alaska) “I spent 35 years flying fighters, and you can see the guidance system kick in, I have watched that film 10 times, I am absolutely certain that that is not an aircraft, but a sub launch ICBM missile!!!” See the video and judge his words for yourself. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LivRJOWrcpA&feature=player_embedded#! I will next post a clickable link.

[DontTreadOnMe2009]

Sorry charlie. Video plume cannot be AWE808. Absolutely impossible. On November 8th AWE808 was over the mainland of California in Orange County at 17:06:00. That is 9 minutes prior to the video taken to the southwest of Los Angeles. He got the flight wrong and he contradicts contrailscience. You can verify the flights position here. FlightMonitor Bob Hope

In addition, as I’ve said on other threads, if you LOOK AT A MAP, you’ll find the helicopter’s reported position of Santa Monica/Palisades is practically due north of Catalina. Flt 808 flew over Catalina around 5:00 pm and turned due east toward the mainland. How can an eastbound aircraft, being observed from the north, produce a contrail that curves to the right? Bottom line, it can’t. All this talk about an optical illusion is patently absurd. There may have been some optical illusion effect as the plane approached Catalina from the southwest, but once it turned east, it was traveling perpendicular to the cameraman’s point of view from the helicopter. At that point, any contrails it may have produced would have appeared as a horizontal line traveling from right to left. But, that is not what we saw in the video. Instead, we saw a contrail that angled right and then curved to the right, which corroborates the cameraman’s statements that the MISSILE traveled to the northwest.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2628295/posts?q=1&;page=1#1

[DontTreadOnMe2009]

“Doug Richardson is the editor of “Jane’s Missiles & Rockets”

---

Check.

He doesn’t know Rockets and Missiles, that’s how he got his job.

OK.

---

Please have your “rocket scientist” friends post their comments and observations, being sure to include their names and jobs and credentials, and then we will compare the two.

Plz.

[DontTreadOnMe2009]

Classic misapplication of science .

One look at the video identifes it as a missile launch by experts who know.

This is disinformation at its most ludicrous.

57 posted on November 17, 2010 12:08:28 PM GMT+09:00 by Candor7

[DontTreadOnMe2009]

“Question to ask yourself. If this aircraft made a contrail, where are the contrails from the other aircraft peppering the SoCal sky?

I have spent my life around aviation and particularly around missiles being fired from the surface. That was a solid rocket fuel, surface fired missile.”

As so many experts have pointed out.

[DontTreadOnMe2009]

“It WAS a rocket, likely solid fuel.

I have no doubt about it.

This contrail could not be produced by a fuel / air mixture engine. It is too dense, corkscrewed, with no gap between source and condensation.Jet aircraft cannot possibly mimick such a contrail , whatever atmospheric and light abherations are present. The contrail density , pattern and shear speak for itself.

And then we have this NOTAM:

A Notam was put out for that area for 20:00 yesterday.”

[DontTreadOnMe2009]

Good explanation:

“IF this had been a regular contrail, the aircraft would have had to be heading TOWARD the camera (within a few degrees of straight on) in order for it to be leaving a trail that appeared to be nearly vertical below the plane. In that case, the aircraft would appear to grow larger, and speed up as it became more nearly overhead.

As you watch the video, however, just the opposite is the case. Although the plume is below the object, which would be consistent for the contrail of an aircraft moving almost directly toward the camera position, the object producing the plume appears to grow smaller as the video goes along, and seems to slow down, which is consistent with an object moving AWAY from the camera position; NOT toward it.

An aircraft moving more or less directly AWAY from the camera position would have left a contrail that appeared to be nearly vertical, but would have been ABOVE the plane; NOT below it.

ONLY an ascending object moving AWAY from the camera could simultaneously appear to be at the top of a nearly vertical plume, appear to be growing smaller, and seem to be slowing down.”

[DontTreadOnMe2009]

Enjoyed the comments - here’s one of my favorites:

Bruce Cobb says:
November 9, 2010 at 5:33 pm
It changed course at one point, so definitely not a rocket. ….
*******
Rockets, whether liquid, solid, or hybrid easily can change course if equipped with thrust vector control systems – which most are.

Having spent my professional life in rocketry from war stuff to Space Shuttle, I’m in the Jeff Id/shunti camp. This was a rocket, probably solid and appeared to be launched from a submersible or sea platform. I’m not quite ready to go for the most exciting possibility, that of a foreign sub tweaking us.

Someone in the defense establishment has the answer – count on it. As to when or if they will let the rest of us in on it, that’s a big question.

[justa-hairyape]

Although it was odd that he would not clarify the nature of the “Chinese property,” I can only assume that it did not originate from Catalina Island or U.S. military ships in the area, as we still own those, at least to my knowledge.

Think I read a comment that might explain what they could mean by Chinese property. Someone posted a link to a conspiracy blog that has an article about this possibly being a Chinese launch. Now I do not personally think it is, but I keep an open mind about the topic. The comments were interesting. Someone posted, hey why the heck would the Chinese launch 1 missile ? Cannot win a war with one and if the US thought it was hostile they would have sink the sub. Someone responded with the following conjecture.

The Chinese could have launched in International waters. Within the Economic Zone, but outside the Territorial Zone. And the missile could have been aimed away from the US mainland. Now, what could the US do about that legally ? Perhaps that is what they mean above with the term Chinese Property ?

Just posting this for discussion purposes.

[DontTreadOnMe2009]

Jeff Id says:
November 9, 2010 at 4:59 pm
Anthony,

This was not a contrail from a plane although the angles aren’t proof. Besides the fact that you can clearly see the engines glow, this was actually a solid fuel booster. The keys are the density of the smoke – not water vapor- and the width. Were it vapor, we would know because the ‘smoke’ would form well behind the rocket because the stuff would need to cool before condensing. Also, visual trail width cues can be taken from the size of the billowing lumps in the trail.

From my perspective, this thing went straight up through some very high clouds in a fully guided fashion. The amount of fuel to create such a large width smoke trail and brightness combined with the burn time, preclude anything but at least a major suborbital rocket. Norad cannot miss these sorts of events the radar is too sensitive, they were fully aware of it the moment it happened. The fact that it appeared to make some sorts of subtle looking yet likely severe course corrections means that a sophisticated guidance system.

My aero eng view is that someone is hiding the incline.

[DontTreadOnMe2009]

shunt1 says:
November 9, 2010 at 5:27 pm

Having worked at WSMR and seen many missile launches over the years, that video was a rather large missile moving away from the observer. And yes, I have also seen missile launches from Vandengerg AFB, which would look simular, but this was too close to Los Angeles.

The video on YouTube is much better than the one being shown on Fox News, since you can see it in reference to another helicopter. Since LAX would have the radar track of the hellicopter which obtained the video, it should be rather easy to triangulate with the known surface objects visible and obtain a calibrated direction.

As meteorologists, you can also see how the exhaust plume was distorted by a wind shear, as it passed though the cloud layer.

Most interesting…

[Ronald_Magnus]

“Missiles spin, don’t they”

I would say no. I’m pretty certain guided missiles need to be relatively stable (not spinning) in order for their navigation equipment to function properly. I believe the corkscrewing we see in the contrail is caused by the wing vorticity effect. BTW I see none of your photos.

[Mr. Silverback]

By not being designed to specifications you seem to think are immutable. I recall the Soviets making extensive use of vaccuum tubes in their fighter aircraft well oast the 1970s...

OK, let's try thinking through this:

The "B" in "SLBM" stands for "Ballistic." The missile must acheive a ballistic trajectory to reach its target. To acheive that trajectory, it would have to reach a speed which makes it impossible for it to still be visible from Long Beach several minutes after the first sighting. Moreover, as you can see here...

...the object doesn't even travel far, and most of the photos in this overlay are taken after it finishes its "boost phase."

Building an SLBM like that would not be like building an interceptor with vacuum tubes in the radar. It wouldn't even be like building a transatlantic airliner with prop engines or wood and canvas construction. It would be like building a transatlantic airliner that carries 50 gallons of fuel, or an artillery shell that leaves the gun barell at 10 mph.

It is physically impossible for this object to be an SLBM and still be photographed several minutes after launch, much less in the same part of the sky with an off-the-shelf camera.

[Mr. Silverback]

Nothing about his background changes the evidence. If this was a missile, it’s a missile that travels too slowly to achieve a ballistic trajectory and follows the exact same course as a UPS MD-11.

[justa-hairyape]

Riddle me this Sherlock. The wind speed and direction during that image taking was about 25-30 mph northwest to southeast. Notice how far the plume (top to bottom) is moved to the left. Why is a plane traveling at 500 MPH toward a spot located 35 miles to the south of the camera, not moving much ?

[editor-surveyor]

> “You’ve been busted haven’t you?”

.
No, I once participated in that absurd self-gratification club, until I became sick of their symbolic harassment of gullible boating families.

[Mr. Silverback]

Yes I followed the link and I think it does look kind of like a contrail. I can’t say though that a contrail would expand in the way this plume does.

Here's a photo of a Delta launch's trail:

I'm not saying that all rocket trails are like that, but these things are subject to a lot of different factors and can't be put in easily defined catgories. Also, contrail often spread quite a bit. I've seen them mistaken for cirrus clouds within minutes of the jet's passage.

My suspicions were heightened when I say the color changes in the immediate exhaust. They are not from water vapor or Jet A soot.

With all due respect, at this distance and resolution I can't see how you can conclude that you're seeing the exhaust itself. Plus, why is the "flame" only visible for part of the video? If you watch footage of missile launches, the flame is visible pretty much at all times. Take these...

Trident II Launch goes wrong
Navy - Trident Missile Launch From a Submarine
Minuteman III Missile Launch - California to Kwajalein Atoll
MINUTEMAN III Missile Launch

That last one is mostly computer simulated footage from Northrop-Grumman, but notice the details of the flight provided in captions starting about 2:15. That ICBM passes through mach 1 at 8,300 feet...were there sonic booms reported in LA around 5:15 on the 8th? It reaches Mach 3 20 seconds later...does that object look like it was moving at Mach 3? At about 1 minute of flight time, the second stage ignites...and keep in mind that the SLBMs China has developed are two stage birds and the U.S./British Trident is a three stage. Do you see a stage separation in the CBS footage? At 2 minutes after launch the ICBM is 90 miles away from the launch site and 240,000 feet up...can the object in the CBS video be 90 miles away and 240,000 feet up or anywhere near it? Note also that if we have a three stage bird another stage separation should occur about now. Is there one on the CBS video?

There is no way this was an SLBM. To be a sub launched missile, this object would have to be a missile specifically developed to be fired off, stay below Mach one and hang in the sky for several minutes.

[Mr. Silverback]

I'm not sure I understand your question. Could you elaborate? Oh, and could you explain why there was no sonic boom heard even though an SLBM moves through Mach 1 less than a minute afterlaunch? Why there is no stage separation seen even though China's SLBMs are two stage and ours are three stage? Can you explain why a weapon designed to reach a target thousands of miles away in 10-15 minutes is still visible from Long Beach (in the same small portion of the sky, no less!) several minutes after launch?

If this was a missile, it was a missile especially designed to stay below Mach 1 and hang in the sky for a long time instead of going anywhere a missile would go. No sale.

[Fundamentally Fair]

303 and 308 are the same event photographed from different locations, correct?

[lbahneman]

Here's a snapshot from the video made available at this url, with geographic features highlighted:

http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2010/11/09/exclusive-raw-video-mysterious-missile-launch-off-california-coast/

This is the only portion of the video that provides identifiable landmarks: the headland and the Long Beach cargo terminal. This puts the helicopter over land at some point in a line from Point Delfin, over the terminal approximately toward Buena Park. Based on the footage, can anyone dispute this? Look at a map. Nothing photoshopped or secret there:

That points the camera pointing at the plume/contrail out to sea at a heading of SW/WSW. This also puts the field of view slightly to the north of Catalina Island.

With that basic information in the video, aligning Delfin Point and terminal with Google Earth's photo overlay feature allowed me to find a location (along that virtual line) a point that approximates the magnification, tilt and altitude of the helicopter camera. The lights of the terminal area align pretty well with the terminal as laid out in google earth.

Again, there's some margin for error, especially with regards to the actual spot over which the helicopter was at that point in time (less or more magnification moves it closer or farther from the terminal).

For the sake of reproducibility, here are the settings used:

The final image also includes UPS902's track as supplied by FlightAware.com and the FAA.

[Mr. Silverback]

Thank you for your open-mindedness. Here are some more questions:

Where was the sonic boom? An SLBM moves through Mach 1 less than a minute after launch (a Minuteman land-based ICBM does so before it reaches 10,000 feet)...were there reports of sonic booms in the LA area at around 5:15 on the 8th?

Where is the stage separation? Chinese SLBMs are two stage, ours are three stage. I’m not sure about the Trident, but the Minuteman lights the second stage two minutes into its flight...yet this bird never separates nor is there a plume from a stage ejected before the video begins.

Why is a weapon designed to reach a target thousands of miles away in 10-15 minutes is still visible from Long Beach (in the same small portion of the sky) several minutes after launch?

I understand why people think this is a missile. That’s what it looked like to me at first...but it wasn’t a missile. Not unless it was one specially designed to stay below Mach 1 and hang in the sky for several minutes.

Thanks for listening. It’s sad there are peopl on this thread treating each other like dirt over this.