BTW, talk about a tough call on credentials: A long time Freeper with missile experience who says “plane” vs a retired brigadier general in the U.S. Air Force who says “missile.” That’s not a joke: I’ve seen Freepers be right vs “authority” enough times to respect the knowledge found here. But I also respect generals (retired or not) who are willing to put their name to their opinions.
Enough to make one’s head spin (destabilize)...
Pit, you might be misreading Old Missileer's take. I have read all of his comments on this event (there aren't very many because as he said, he's kind of opted out of the discussion) and referred to them often for insight. He has not said "plane." He has said that IF the cameraman saw an item that created a plume for a duration of ten minutes, then it could not have been a missile, and therefore must have been a plane. Here's what he posted a few days ago on a different thread:
I have yet to see a ten minute clip of the object. If there is a video showing ten minutes of plume then it was an aircraft contrail. Missiles do not have a burn time of over five minutes at the most and that is for three stages. A Minuteman missile has a burn time of just over two minutes before PSRE separation. Trident is about the same and I would love to see the size of a missile that can burn for ten minutes and why there would be a need for that long of a burn.