Skip to content
November 9, 2010 / Mick

Jet contrails from some angles look like missile trails


THIS IS AN OUTDATED OVERFLOW SITE. PLEASE GO TO
contrailscience.com

UPDATEAfter geting a new photo of the trail, Liam Bahneman told me he was now siding with it being his second choice, UPS902.  Having reviewed the evidence, I fully agree that UPS902 is a much better fit than AWE808, especially when viewed against the composite photo.

UPS902 Turns out to be a much better fit

Note to the media – since this was almost certainly Flight UPS902 from Hawaii to Ontario, why not have a camera crew somewhere in the vicinity (does not need to be exact, or a chopper), next time the flight is scheduled to go by, and if the weather is right you’ll see the same trail again. (or check the web cam)

Note to everyone else – If you have photos of the Nov 8 contrail from any angle, please email them to uncinus@gmail.com

[This post was originally from Jan 19th, 2010.  I’ve updated it with information about the “Mystery Missile” contrail of Nov 8, 2010, at the bottom of this post.  Clearly it’s the same thing]

An interesting contrail cropped up off the coast of San Clemente, Orange County, California on December 31st 2009. The curious shape led some people to think it’s a missile launch, which it does kind of look like (all taken from San Clemente)

"Missile-like" contrail. Note this is the Dec 31st contrail, not the Nov 8th CBS one. That's at the bottom of the post.

This kind of contrail confusion is nothing new. This article appeared in The San Mateo Times, Jan 12, 1950:

Here’s some more shots of the same contrail. Click these for larger images:

The idea that it’s a missile launch comes from three misconceptions. Firstly that the trail is vertical – it’s not, it’s a horizontal trail, at around 32,000 feet (about six miles). It’s the same as this:

This contrail is no more vertical than the road is, and nor are the power lines at 45 degrees. Everything is horizontal – it’s the just the angle you are viewing it from. All of these show horizontal contrails.

Secondly there’s the misconception of direction, that it’s flying away from the viewer, when it’s actually flying towards the viewer. This is because the “base” of the contrail seems wider than the tip. Perspective tells the brain that this mean the base is closer. But actually you can see the base has been greatly spread by the wind. Since it’s so far away the effects of perspective are greatly diminished, meaning the actual width of the contrail is what is creating the illusion. Imagine if a plane with a 100 mile long spreading contrail were coming towards you; what would it look like? It would look exactly like this.

Thirdly there’s the idea that it goes all the way down to the ground. Now that might be true if the Earth was flat, but the Earth is round, and things go beneath the horizon eventually, no matter how high they are. A plane 200 miles away but five miles up is always below the horizon. If the horizon is raised (as it is here, with Catalina Island), then the distance is less. Here’s some math:

This diagram is not to scale, but the math is the same regardless. The solid curved line is the surface of the earth. The dot at the top is San Clemente. The little triangle is Catalina. “d” is the distance to Catalina (d=35 miles). “c” the amount of Catalina that is visible above the horizon (c=0.05 miles, really a bit more, but let’s be conservative). “a” is the altitude of the plane, (a = 6 miles). “r” is the radius of the earth (r=3963 miles).

The green wavy line is the contrail. Notice it’s at a fixed height above the surface of the earth, and is going directly towards the OC.

The point labeled (0,0) is the center of the earth. (0,0) means X=0, Y=0, where X is horizontal and Y is vertical. What we want to know is how far away the plane is, the value x. We do this with cartesian geometry, noting that the lowest visible point of the trail is at the intersection of the dotted line, which is a circle of radius (r+a), hence the equation x^2 + y^2 = (r+a)^2 and the line labeled “sight line”, which is has the equation y=r+x*c/d. Combining these equations to solve for x yields a quadratic equation, which we can solve with Wolfram Alpha:

intersection of (y=r+x*c/d) and (x^2+y^2 = (r+a)^2)

and with the real numbers:

intersection of (y=r+x*c/d) and (x^2+y^2 = (r+a)^2) where a=6 and d=35 and c=0.05 and r=3963

Which gives x = 212, meaning that the bottom of the contrail is around 200 miles away. So if the front of the contrail (the actual aircraft) is somewhere above and behind catalina, then that means the contrail is over 100 miles long. At 500 mph, that means it could have formed in 12-15 minutes, which seems consistent with the descriptions in the discussion above. (feel free to play around with the numbers there to see the affect of various assumptions)

Looking at the satellite image for noon on that day (12/31/2009) and the next day (1/1/2010), we see contrails in approximately the same position, and around 100 miles long, showing it’s quite possible, given the right weather.

Really what makes this odd looking is the position of the people taking the photo. Obviously the same contrail would be visible all the way up the coast, however the only people who though it was really odd were those who were lined up with it, in OC. People in LA would see a dramatic looking contrail, but more obviously just a contrail, so less worthy of writing to the newspaper about. I actually saw it myself, but was in a car, and could only get a poor cell-phone snapshot:

A cell-phone photo I took of the New Year Eve contrail, from an angle that shows it's just a jet contrail

That was from somewhere around San Diamas, on the 210 freeway, so I’m looking South West, probably around 45 degree the the contrail, which you can only see a bit of behind the Home Depot sign. It looked quite impressive at the time.  But  there are other photos of it from various other angles which show it’s contrail-ness more clearly, here’s one taken from Santa Monica (click photo for original):

The actual New Years Eve contrail, viewed from Santa Monica. This is what the CBS "missile" contrail would have looked like to most people in LA, which is why nobody reported it.

You can see from this angle (and taken a bit earlier) it looks far less interesting, as it’s very apparent it’s just a contrail.

Scott Methvin sent in these two images which shows the contrail in all it’s missile-like glory, but from a better angle.

The Dec 31st contrail, from Laguna Beach

Same contrail slightly later.

Here’s another angle of the New Year’s Eve contrail, this view is from Corona del Mar, about 20 miles Northeast of San Clemente:

Another angle on the New Years Eve contrail. See, it's all about perspective.

Here’s a similar photo (of a different contrail, obviously) on the same day at the other side of the country:

Not a missile launch.

Here’s some more contrails at sunset (From a very nice set of contrail photos), note how they look exactly the same as sections of the New Year contrail:

Obviously not missiles. But look at sections of the trails.

Not a missile launch, in Michigan.

[Update Nov 9 2010]

Now here’s the one everyone is actually talking about.  From Monday Nov 8th 2010, this time it video taken a local CBS news crew in a helicopter, so they were able to zoom in.

Jet contrail, misidentified as a missile launch, again.

Note it’s pretty much in the same location. Note also it’s not exactly moving at missile speed.  Note also it’s practically identical to the photos of plane contrails, above.

Same as last time, maybe even the same scheduled flight.

And once again millions of people failed to notice, because from any other angle it looked like what it was, a contrail, from a plane.  Must be a slow news day, as this went all the way up to Jim Miklaszewski asking people at the pentagon about it.

There are occasional flashes of light, which I think are reflections of the sun off a flat surface on the plane.  There’s also portions of the video where a bit of the trail behind the plane seems to glow.  I think thats just the last rays of the setting sun lighting that portion of the trail. See Scott Methvin’s photos, above for how the trail can be oddly lit from minute to minute.

Here’s a better video. You can see after about 0:50 it’s out of the contrail-persisting region of air, and is just leaving a short contrail. It’s also now out of the sun. It looks exactly like the short contrails of a jet coming towards the camera with perspective foreshortening.  The camera crew lost it in the darkness shortly after that.

http://www.necn.com/11/09/10/Mysterious-missile-launched-off-Californ/landing_scitech.html?blockID=348833&feedID=4213

The most likely flight is US Aiways flight 808 from Hawaii to Phoenix.

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/AWE808

US Airways flight 808, at around 5PM PST (Sunset)

I snapped the above web image at around 5:05PM today, about the same time as the video was taken yesterday.

Here’s the actual track from the 8th:

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/AWE808/history/20101108/1955Z/PHNL/KPHX

And here’s a photo I took (Nov 9th) two minutes earlier from Santa Monica.  I think it’s the same flight, just 24 hours later.  Note that the angle is exactly the same as the Dec 31st contrail that produced the original “missile” story.

Contrail from flight 808

Obviously the video would have to have been taken from way off to the right in this photo (I’m looking South West). The chopper would have been somewhere like Torrance.

[Update again]
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2010/11/cameraman-who-filmed-mystery-missile-describes-spectacular-sight.html

The cameraman reports:

Cameraman Gil Leyvas shot video of a luminous point hurtling through the sky followed by a long vapor trail. He said he was aboard the television station’s helicopter shooting footage of the sunset over the ocean about 5:15 p.m when he noticed the spiral-shaped vapor trail and zoomed in to get a better look.

The onboard camera showed a plume twisting up from the horizon and narrowing as it climbed into the sky near Catalina Island, about 35 miles west of Los Angeles, he said.

“Whatever it was, it was spinning up into the sky kind of like a spiral,” and was easy to distinguish from condensation trails from jets, he said. “It was quite a sight to see. It was spectacular.”

I suspect what he saw (which can only be what is on the video, I’d like to see it in HD) is the twisting of the contrails, this can be quite dramatic, especially from such a head-on angle. See this video of a similar perspective, and note the swirling twists in the contrails directly behind the jet.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xl6iR7w7a_Q

Here’s a grab from that video, showing the twist, and how it as accented by low sun.

Twisting contrails in low sun.

Liem Bahneman gives this excellent description of how flight AWE808 exactly matches the observations, including producing a near identical contrail the next day (which I also photographed, from Santa Monica, above)

This pretty much explains it.

And here’s some excellent points from a real rocket scientist, posting as “Michael”:

I’d like to add to all the evidence above that it was just a jet, because the plume is nothing like a rocket plume to the trained eye. I was a rocket safety inspector for 3 years, have seen countless launches and failures, and have a master’s degree in Astronautical Engineering. Here’s why it’s not a rocket:

It’s too slow (<— biggest reason).
There’s no engine flare.
There’s no expansion of the plume (as the chamber pressure exceeds the atmospheric pressure more and more during flight).
There’s no staging event.
There’s no sunset striations across the plume (which would look like this: http://tinyurl.com/2vklwu5).
In the wide shot there’s two contrails (off each wing!) instead of one.
The plume at the plane is twirling in different directions (very un-rocket-like).
The plume at the plane is twirling too much — that only happens in the case of a motor burn-through, which is a failure mode, meaning it would be seconds from exploding if it were a rocket.
The wind-blown plume is all wrong, vertical plumes go through several different wind shear layers, which makes it look very different than what the video shows.

The apparent direction of the jet is a bit of an illusion, as the trail is greatly distorted by the winds at altitude, which can also vary greatly from place to place. At 37,000 feet the wind can easily be in the 50-100 mph range.

Richard Warren of Los Angeles shot four close-up photos of the trail from a fixed position in Lon Beach. I’ve combined them here into one photo, where you can see the trail move with the wind, and the actual path that the plane takes is much more obviously passing to the south of Long Beach, matching flight 808.

And the fact that it’s a plane is way more apparent once it stops making a contrail (which is due to it moving between two regions of air – it’s colder and/or more humid out to sea than inland)

Richard took a fifth shot at a wider angle that shows the greater context. The jet is still visible as a dark speck (it’s still got a very short contrail). There’s also a very impressive crepuscular “edge” shadow that’s probably cast by part of the contrail that is over the horizon.

711 Comments

  1. Ron M / Nov 10 2010 2:28 am
    Ron M's avatar

    In your example of an airplane, the plume is smaller at the bottom and grows wider as the plane approaches the observer. The video shows a wide plume at the bottom with the contrail growing narrower as the object recedes from the camera. I’ve seen plenty of missle launches living close to White Sands Missile Range for 10 years, and it seems plain to me that this is a missile. It will probably get “explained away” as an airplance, but how come no airline is stepping forward to inform the public it was one of their jetliners. They know where these aircraft are at all times and morever the data is recorded. It looks like an ICBM launched from sea to me… Amazing how the “experts” in so many fields try to make people feel dumb for common sense observations and how often they are dead wrong.

  2. someguyinbc / Nov 10 2010 2:35 am
    someguyinbc's avatar

    Thanks for posting – first for explaining (definitively, I’d say) what’s going on here, and second for bringing the tinfoil hat crowd together so we can all have a good laugh.

  3. Ken / Nov 10 2010 2:36 am
    Ken's avatar

    if it was a jet wouldn’t they have had it on radar and if it was a unidentified jet that close to our shores I am sure the military would have attempted to make contact. herp derp.

  4. bob / Nov 10 2010 2:37 am
    bob's avatar

    Oh, Billy Bob!

    You silly Bob! Seriously? You think this is a plane? Have you ever seen such girth or thick and zesty concentration from an airplane contrail? What about the snaking adjustments in trajectory that the vapor trail shows? Did you watch the video or just view the courtroom artist’s sketchbook on the Headline News loop? Since when does a large plane make such radical, mid-air adjustments? What’s that Chinook helicopter doing there? Perhaps you think the dollar is a stable currency, and that no one other than the recipient reads your emails? Born yesterday? Ha! You could be dead tomorrow if you don’t shake that “American Dream” from your numb skull!

  5. Scott Methvin / Nov 10 2010 2:39 am
    Scott Methvin's avatar

    How do you post photos? I have two very clear photos from 12/31/09 that show it was a missle, from Laguna Beach.

  6. Scott Methvin / Nov 10 2010 2:40 am
    Scott Methvin's avatar
  7. The Watcher / Nov 10 2010 2:46 am
    The Watcher's avatar

    I agree with W0X0F:

    30 year meteorologist, air traffic controller, weather observer, that ain’t no contrail! It is a vapor plume from the exhaust of something? Obviously, fired into the sunset so that it would be brilliantly visible. Somebody is sending a message!

    It seems to me that someone is showing us that they got the subs and technology to get close to the mainland… Russians maybe? Or Chinese? That is why Pentagon is quiet… They are trying to figure out what the heck is going on cause they got no clue…

  8. james r. / Nov 10 2010 2:47 am
    james r.'s avatar

    Do you see?, any beacon lights!, ergo it is not the contrail of a commercial jetliner. As for ICBM test, it is the custom for the nation conducting said test?, in this case the U.S., to notify! other countries, such as the ‘PRC’,& RUSSIA so there are no misinterpretation of event. Although it has the appearence of a sub launched vehicle. Perhaps?, ‘AQ’ got hold of some surplus SRBM’s!, & a Charlie class sub.

  9. ACD / Nov 10 2010 2:47 am
    ACD's avatar

    and chinese airports closing. elobesus from contractor? arbair, the bar is wair the drinks? ya jo rc gv avec les plurs des mots pleuriereres. ancors. les faire du temps. 890543 ordo ab chao

  10. Joker / Nov 10 2010 2:52 am
    Joker's avatar

    Don’t you know the contrail is an inside job?!?! Wait for the coverup hehe

  11. Uncle Silas / Nov 10 2010 2:53 am
    Uncle Silas's avatar

    If it had been a missile launch at sunset, the trail would have been luminescent after sundown given its being in the upper atmosphere, and would have been nocto-luminous for some time after sundown. Given that it wasn’t and the plethora of other photos that are proven to be aircraft, those saying that it was a missie are grasping at straws. And I used to watch Apollo launches from the other side of Florida. I’ve seen Vandenburg launches, and they both looked nothing like this. If it was a missile, it was the slowest missile ever. Maybe the Nazis have a secret buzzbomb base out there.

  12. dan doherty / Nov 10 2010 2:54 am
    dan doherty's avatar

    Correct me if I am wrong,but wasn’t this video taped from a helicopter? Wouldn’t that make your geometry equation invalid? I would think you would have to change the siteline to be equal to the elevation of said helicopter.

  13. Dude / Nov 10 2010 2:54 am
    Dude's avatar

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtINbdVt7no This is a video of the trail from the GOES West Satellite. Could it be a plane? Possibly. But I’m still not 100% convinced. It’s definitely not Flight 808. Flight 808 flies south past Santa Catalina Island in a east / northeast direction. The trail from the satellite originates west of Vandenberg AFB and flies southwest, eventually dispersing over Catalina. Could be a test plane, could be a missile.

  14. KFB / Nov 10 2010 2:56 am
    KFB's avatar

    simple contrail you nob heads. contrail interacts with the wing tip vortex producing the “corkscrew”.

  15. Dude / Nov 10 2010 2:58 am
    Dude's avatar

    correction, I meant to say it flies southeast 😛

  16. MH / Nov 10 2010 3:00 am
    MH's avatar

    You missed the light.

    The bright light at the end of the contrail looks far more similar to to the exhaust flame from the rocket engine than anything else; a light of that brightness is kinda hard to justify as a “reflection” from an airplane – even a polished one like an American Airline’s jet. The time of day would be perfect for the intense reflection, but if the trail is actually towards the camera as you suppose then the angle is all wrong.

  17. Blackeneth / Nov 10 2010 3:06 am
    Blackeneth's avatar

    I find the contrail explanation presented here 99% convincing. Looks exactly like the prior pictures – plus the object is moving too slowly to be a missile.

    The 1% awaits explanation of, towards the end of the video, you can see “fire” coming from the object generating the contrail. Fire = consistent with missile. But I would suppose this is really just sunlight reflecting off the plane?

    In the original news report, at approximately 0:45 and 1:54 you see a green flash that appears like a stage separation of a missile.

    I expect to be 100% convinced shortly. In fact, I already am 100% convinced – but I would like an explanation of the “fire”.

  18. 00Billy / Nov 10 2010 3:12 am
    00Billy's avatar

    I’ll bet it was a drill gone wrong……

    All to scare us…..
    Market’s down 2% ? right after earnings season…hmmm…. lots of bombs, scary things…
    Flying monkeys are the only thing that scares me….

    but if India or China wanted to send a soft message,…thats right where a ssbn boat would be,…

  19. RD / Nov 10 2010 3:20 am
    RD's avatar

    DvD. w537 closure time: 09 NOV 20:00 2010 UNTIL 10 NOV 01:00 2010.
    Wrong day.

  20. John / Nov 10 2010 3:22 am
    John's avatar

    Ucinus, You have my thanks and my prayers. I don’t know what you did in a past life to deserve the number of nutz attracted to your site, but you’re dealing with them well.

    I do grieve over my nation, though, to see such poor reasoning ability tossed out by the losers in life’s brain give-away, and with such certainty and vehemence, too.

  21. Brucepall / Nov 10 2010 3:24 am
    Brucepall's avatar

    So to summarize things up:

    The angle of the observable engine infarction is directly proportional to the height of the plume divided by the refraction of the sun times the ambient temperature which must then be squared by the expanding vapor coefficient.

    And you folks are telling me, “Dude, you got way to much time on your hands?”

    Bwahahahahahah!

    Semper Fidelis –

  22. Dave / Nov 10 2010 3:29 am
    Dave's avatar

    Hey knuckleheads….these comments are all lame. I WAS IN SANTA BARBARA and saw the whole thing. It was 100% a missile …a very LARGE missile that blasted out of the ocean. You could hear the rumble of the engine as it climbed out of the sea and headed northwest until it was out of view. The question should be asked since WE didn’t launch it…WHO DID? Russia and China are the only superpowers with subs that can launch an ICBM….unless China sold subs to Iran…..a show of force? I warning? Funny how our Government was clueless..”Missile? What Missile? If we launched it our government would have had a cover story ALREADY IN PLACE for the media. We just got caught with our pants around our ankles.

  23. Kelly / Nov 10 2010 3:33 am
    Kelly's avatar

    It was George Bush. Obama told me.

  24. Denticles / Nov 10 2010 3:37 am
    Denticles's avatar

    Point is then, why are there (presumably large) aircraft in the sky that the military can’t identify? Isn’t that what radar is for?

    Probably not ETs, very probable exposure of massive security fail.
    Do the authorities frequently lose track of large objects or lack the ability to correlate visual observations with instrument readings or what??).

  25. Rob / Nov 10 2010 3:40 am
    Rob's avatar

    The problem with your theory is that the contrail from an airplane at that same angle would indicate that the plane was getting closer to the observer. In the video, it is clearly getting further from the observer, and gaining altitude.

  26. sonicalbert / Nov 10 2010 3:41 am
    sonicalbert's avatar

    If you look at the trajectory of the missile you’ll see it has a curved arc, not at all the pattern of high flying jets that cross the area. The flame from the rocket engine is clearly visible, and it’s very hard to believe that’s a reflection, given the angle of the object and the sun. It is what it appears to be: a missile launched from sea, heading west away from the observers.

  27. CastleBravo / Nov 10 2010 3:49 am
    CastleBravo's avatar

    It was definitely a contrail. I saw the contrail on the 8th, got several pictures/video of it. Today (the 9th), about 5 minutes before the time I saw it yesterday, it was there again, and because I saw it earlier I also saw it was an airplane. Using a high-powered scope it was clearly an airplane. I also took pictures/video of it today, and it was almost exactly the same as yesterday.

  28. KFB / Nov 10 2010 3:51 am
    KFB's avatar

    many many people here should never be allowed to vote.

  29. KFB / Nov 10 2010 3:52 am
    KFB's avatar

    yes I’m talking to you, nutters. you concoct conspiracies to explain things you can’t understand.

  30. Some Farker / Nov 10 2010 4:01 am
    Some Farker's avatar

    The level of full-on retard in these comments is astounding. Just because you have seen n launches or contrails in your 57 years of life, does not in any way qualify you as an expert.

    <— A relevant, albeit unrelated, picture.

    To the author: thank you for the information, and good job explaining this.

  31. Ramrod / Nov 10 2010 4:04 am
    Ramrod's avatar

    I criticized the author of the predecessor to this site mercilously a few years back for being a charlatan. Obviously nothing has changed. This hack is a joke that thrives on the fawning ignorance of others. Did that violate the “Politeness Policy?” My bad.

    As for the present case, living near Canaveral for some years now, I can assure you that is NOT an aircraft contrail. It is clearly the vapor trail from a rocket launch. And I would be skeptical of any attempt to explain it as a sea-launched ICBM. More than likely it was a secret payload out of Vandenberg, and of course the military says they have no clue. But it d**n sure isn’t some jet aircraft out spraying magic anti-global warming pixie dust.

  32. andy wilson / Nov 10 2010 4:06 am
    andy wilson's avatar

    At high altitudes the “winds aloft” as referred to by the local FSS, Flight Service Station are pretty gnarly ie… headwind tailwind crosswind depending on direction of flight. I have pics of some interesting contrails and some are straight across the sky and some skew with the wind and you can watch them change shape at various points along their route… Near Nashville you can watch the plane make a 30 degree turn from their course and then get ATC’d right back onto it a minute or two later. Get a VFR and IFR sectional map from local airport and learn why the airplanes fly where and how they do over your area. Look at how many intersections criss cross the sky and feed the routes across the US airspace and across the ocean. The route from Chicago O’hare to Narita, Japan carries you over Canada, tip of Alaska and Along Japan coast …..an arc leg not a straight line from Chicago around globe to Narita…. mark it on Google Earth and play with different routes. Great Circle Route it’s called… Remember these planes are flying straight lines around a circle.

  33. Albert / Nov 10 2010 4:10 am
    Albert's avatar

    Seems to me that someone in the Pentagon would take the flight path of US Airways flight 808 put it into one of their visualization tools (3D military version of Google Earth) and view the track from the reported location of the helicopter that made the video. I worked many years on these military visitations tools and you can very easily display a track from any perspective. You would be able to tell pretty quickly if the flight path of a plane matched the track seen on the video or not. Given that the Pentagon just came out and said again that they have no explanation (after more than 24 hours of working the data), means that they have likely done the analysis and it does not fit the track that is seen in the video. If it resembled the trail seen in the video, they would have come out and said that it matched the track of a scheduled domestic aircraft and provided the timing and track points and for everyone but the conspiracy theorist that would be the end of it. Seems like their is more to it.

  34. J Simpson / Nov 10 2010 4:14 am
    J Simpson's avatar

    During the part of the video with a close up of the object, you will notice the bright spot just at the tip of the contrail, that’s the tell tell of a rocket exhaust. This is very apparent during night launches. Unless the jet had afterburners there would be no bright spot, just heat vapor, and no military jet would leave a contrail like this. Make your story a little more creditable than “it’s a jet”. ..Dumbass

  35. T / Nov 10 2010 4:16 am
    T's avatar

    Please correct a typo in your post. You wrote y = x*c/d but (as Wolfram Alpha correctly shows) you meant to write y = r + x*c/d for the equation of the line. This matters to those who actually take the time to follow your math. Thanks!

  36. Falcon195 / Nov 10 2010 4:17 am
    Falcon195's avatar

    Convincing argument for a jet airplane contrail. The sun reflection simulating a rocket exhaust was an amazing coincidence. Videos of Trident launches show a far more vigorous exhaust plume and the thrust cone is long and extremely bright. I personally was very alarmed by the initial report by the retired deputy secretary of defence that it may have been a SLBM. The CBS map pinpointing the launch 10 miles NW of Catalina was also very troubling. All that combine wih the denials by the Pentagon had me heading to the grocery store and picking my son up early at school. Thank God it ws an optical illusion.

  37. NotDelusional / Nov 10 2010 4:22 am
    NotDelusional's avatar

    It’s a bird, it’s a plane, it’s NOT a contrail. Does anyone here even know what a Contrail is? The word Contrail is a contraction of Condensation Trail. A Condensation Trail is created from hot gases blown out the back end of a jet engine at proper altitude creating a Vapor Trail condensed from moisture in the atmosphere. But unlike what you see here a Contrail disappears very shortly after it is created – much the same way steam from a boiling pot of water on your electric range quickly dissipates once the heat in the steam comes to room temperature. Same thing is supposed to happen with ‘Contrails’ too… unless it could be something currently referred to as a Chemtrail that seems to linger for hours and spread like butter melting on your range. Or in the case of these photos it really could be a missile, ya know…
    Okay, flame away non-believers (you know, the ‘experts’ who chose to swallow the Blue Pill.)

  38. Falcon195 / Nov 10 2010 4:24 am
    Falcon195's avatar

    Now explain to us what a “cloud” is NotDelusional.

  39. Uncinus / Nov 10 2010 4:25 am
    Mick's avatar

    Fixed the math, thank’s T

    (Made no difference to the results, as you know, just mistyped the equation in the text)

  40. NotDelusional / Nov 10 2010 4:31 am
    NotDelusional's avatar

    Falcon195 obviously doesn’t understand the physics involved… we’ll have to cut him a break until he figures it all out. :o)

  41. Aircraft Tech / Nov 10 2010 4:33 am
    Aircraft Tech's avatar

    It has anti-collision beacons on. You can clearly see the flashes in some of the video. It’s an airplane you f*!@*ing idiots!

Trackbacks

  1. The Not-a-Missile Off the California Coast » FREE WHITEWATER
  2. This ain't Hell, but you can see it from here » Blog Archive » Mystery Missile Launch
  3. Was it a missile or a jet contrail? | Orange Juice
  4. AM 600 KOGO
  5. Mystery ‘missile’ likely a jet contrail, says expert | Cherry News
  6. Experts: Unexplained ‘Missile’ May Just Be a Jet Plane | Glenn Beck
  7. AM 600 KOGO | After Today News
  8. Twitted by bamapachyderm

Comments are closed.

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started