[aruanan]

There is nothing about the televised video that would yield any power or velocity info, because it was shot after the fact, not during flight.

Shot "after the fact"? Ha ha ha. Come on, think just a little bit: if the trail being left was not a jet contrail, then it was a trail left by rocket combustion. That's not "after the fact." That's during flight. If it had been filmed over a period of ten minutes, then certain things follow:

1. That would be between 2 and 3 times longer powered flight phase than any ICBM.

2. If it were under observation over that period of time, then the distance it traversed was short enough that it had to have been traveling at a relatively, for missiles, slow velocity. Unless, of course, someone wants to maintain, as some have, that it was a cruise missile, in which case we would be back to relatively slow speeds and a contrail from jet exhaust.

[editor-surveyor]

Wake up!

All that we have seen was very much after the fact.

The only part of the video that was live flight was so far away, and by that point, on such a flat trajectory that no visual data is of use. (how good is your depth perception for something hundreds of miles away?)

The video begins with the vehicle a long distance away, in great circle flight. The initial launch was shown only in pan.

[TigersEye]

If it had been filmed over a period of ten minutes, then certain things follow:

"It" was not taped for ten minutes. That question has been settled now. "It" was observed for at most three minutes.