The final image also includes UPS902's track as supplied by FlightAware.com and the FAA.
Why is the track of UPS902, as supplied by FlightAware.com, perpendicular to the path of the contrail?
Posted on 11/13/2010 2:55:59 PM PST by 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.
Fine. Be aware that the people behind contrail science appear very much skilled at creating impressions. NONE OF THE PHOTOS from Long Beach are remotely verifiable. Those who cite contrail science as "evidence" of a plane are wholly, completely, and solely at the mercy of taking the site's word for it that the pictures from Long Beach are what they say they are. THAT'S ALL. On the other hand, the video's authenticity is not in dispute.
TX, I would be very interested to see a five-word post in answer to the following questions. I limit it to you and don't invite bahneman to answer because frankly, I woudln't trust him as far as I could throw him because I don't "know" him as a familiar FReeper, as I do you. In my book, his motiviations are highly suspect. Yours aren't.
Just a simple, five-word post (words would be: "yes" or "no") in answer will do:
1. Have you ever watched a missile launch live?
2. Have you watched more than five missile launches live from a range of 160 miles or less?
3. Have you lived for a year or more in the greater L.A. area from Malibu to Newport Beach within 25 or 30 miles of the coast?
4. Have you watched both airplanes and missile launches with the aid of binoculars?
5. Have you asked someone who has taught lighting and perspective at college levels (bonus points if that person also specializes in the same specifically with regard to aviation) what direction the object in the video is heading?
Jerry F. says:
November 10, 2010 at 8:32 am
Ockham’s razor, also spelled Occam’s razor, also called law of economy, or law of parsimony, principle stated by William of Ockham (1285–1347/49), a scholastic, that Pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitate; “Plurality should not be posited without necessity.” The principle gives precedence to simplicity; of two competing theories, the simplest explanation of an entity is to be preferred. The principle is also expressed “Entities are not to be multiplied beyond necessity.”
Correct.
It’s an airplane.
Poor conclusion. Parsimony clearly and largely favors a rocket explanation. A contrail explanation needs to invoke rare weather to explain why contrails like it aren’t regularly seen by the massive number of aircraft transiting that area and it also requires a number of optical illusions being invoked to explain the appearance of it. On the other hand a rocket requires no special circumstances to explain the observation and rockets are known to launch in the vicinity on rare occassions which explains why it isn’t an everyday observation.
“You would be wrong. Causing missiles to spin was a major advancement in rocketry technology.”
I said GUIDED missile. Try and read post CAREFULLY before you respond to them. It’ll make you look less foolish. Also, your Shuttle launch video is a lame attempt to try and explain why we’re unable to see the glow of the “missile’s” engine in the early part of the Nov 8th video. The camera location in the shuttle video is located in such close proximity to the launch pad (5 to 10 miles I would guess), that when the shuttle rises and starts heading out over the Atlantic, the camera is essentially directly behind the bottom of the shuttle, with the burning fuel being obscured by the plume. You’re “missile” on the other hand is being filmed from the right rear( if it is indeed heading West Northwest like you maintain), and at least 35 miles away, so we should reasonably expect to see the glow of the engine in the first part of the video, even more so than the latter part, because it would be closer.
I have a camera mounted on my house that does nothing but capture time-lapse videos of the weather. Several times a month, the conditions are right here in the Seattle area for contrail formation, most of which go unnoticed. It those dramatic sunset/sunrise-lit ones that catch the attention: they're beautifully illuminated and they're usually at near eye-level. Some locations might see way more vertical ones, with respect to the sun, than others, like those in the mid-west, with coast to coast flyovers.
Why is there not this "missile/contrial" confusion in the midwest? Because just over that horizon, where the "plume" would appear to originate, isn't open water. There's likely a city or town over there (or least a farm or ranch) that would have more readily reported an ICBM launch than the distant observer. There's no fixed observers out on the "open water" to verify an SLBM launch. If there were, transport, fishing, pleasure craft or otherwise, off the LA coast, where are their reports in this case?
"sunset contrails" are hardly rare, in fact, quite normal which could account for why they're so infrequently reported or misidentified, but often photographed:
http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=sunset+contrail 6000+ hits add "california" to that and it is still over 300.
That's just a single image hosting service.
The gap between the aircraft producing a contrail and the "start" of the contrail can vary depending on atmospheric conditions. It typically range from as little as half an plane length to as many as ten. Add in perspective of an approaching or departing airplane and it will appear more compressed (closer to the airplane) due to foreshortening. Elementary.
OK!
Title : Stability of Spinning ICBM (Intercontinental Ballistic Missile) in First Stage Boost Phase.Corporate Author : AIR FORCE INST OF TECH WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB OH SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING
Abstract : A computer program is developed to model a spinning intercontinental Ballistic Missile (IICBM) during the first stage boost phase. The equations of motion are derived and presented and a full rotation matrix is used to show the relationship between a launch-centered, nonrotating earth inertial reference frame and the missile body reference frame.
Subject Categories : SURFACE-LAUNCHED GUIDED MISSILES
Rear Admiral John Stufflebeem, retired US Navy, has also given his opinion that it was an aircraft contrail. Rear Admiral Stufflebeem has given TV interviews after reviewing the footage.
The photographer from Long Beach, Rick Warren, has uploaded his images on Flickr. View them on his Photostream
But, be advised, I have taken a GOOD look at the video you linked to in your # 803...
Why don't you contact him and ask him to upload the raw images to a hosting site? Perhaps he will be willing to send you the raw images?
William From Los Angeles says:
November 11, 2010 at 9:10 am
Long ago I was EOD stationed at White Sands Missile Range. I have seen hundreds of missile launches. This looks to me like a very large missile traveling away at an angle. It’s the angle that can make it look like it is going slow. Much like when you are on a straight road in the desert a car can look like it is sitting still when in fact it traveling at high speeds directly towards you.
The thickness of the plume makes me believe missile over an airplane. The light from the object and the blur you see suggests a long distance. You can only see the flame like that on the larger ones. I will never say I can’t be wrong but I feel certain on this one.
I think it’s only a matter of time before General Tom McInerney start singing a different tune himself.
Why am I not surprised? ;^)
To apply the law of economy, which is more common off coast of California: An SLBM launch or the formation of contrails?
Applying economy can get as granular or broad as you want, to suite your argument, too: which is simplest: airplanes fly over california west to east at sunset, missiles are launched from the sea WSW of Los Angeles to the northwest.
1. Because I have zero reason to take his word for anything he claims. The authenticity and veracity of the video, on the otherhand, isn't even in dispute and there's no reason it should be.
2. Because the object in the video is headed northwest, as revealed by the sunlight. Just like the camerman said (though the cameraman actually said it was headed west, but he also said it looked inbound, and as he was in Santa Monica -- you ARE familiar with the L.A. coastline, correct? -- it would look as if it was inbound if it was headed northwest).
The final image also includes UPS902's track as supplied by FlightAware.com and the FAA.
Why is the track of UPS902, as supplied by FlightAware.com, perpendicular to the path of the contrail?
Why not go onto Above Top Secret and debate it there? Have a look through posts by airline pilot Weedwhacker on the subject. Also look out for user name 'Phage'. Excellent information posted by these chaps on the subject of the events of 8th November.
You shouldn't be: I'm not you...
Causing missiles to spin was a major advancement in rocketry technology.
How Do Rockets and Missiles Work?
Missiles’ precision was improved in 1844, when William Hale introduced the stabilized torsion. The curbed propellers in the mouth of the evacuation hose made the rocket spin during its flight. This conferred stability, like the spin of a gyroscope. Shape or density irregularities were no more a problem. The spinning technique for stabilization had been achieved in 1400 for bullets, and in ancient times for arrows and spears.
And actually, I'll acknowledge that question #5 was tossed in there to point out an expert resource to whom I have easy access, but after the first few days, after watching the video at least 10 times, he got so sick of the subject that I don't dare ask him about it any more. I think he'd bite my head off because he's tired of the whole dispute and cares zilch whether or not you or anyone else sees what's obvious to him. For example, it isn't obvious to me because I am not, as he is, a professional expert in that specific area of lighting, perspective, and aviation. I think of Dirty Harry's words: "A good man knows his limitations." I know mine.
But as for the other four questions, I'll bet there are a surprising number of FReepers who could answer "Yes" to three or all four. In fact, I've already heard from one who answered yes to all four. Wonder of wonders ... he also understands that the contrail hocus-pocus is just that.
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.