Has chemtrails ever?

T

Tikmovado

Temporal Novice
Been talked about here? If so, could you place a link please?
I would like to here this topic discussed by people from this forum.
To here the thoughts of the members about this in real time, is what I am seeking.
I feel this is my only way to communications with people that are highly intelligent.
I have my own thoughts that I would like to add, if even needed.
My first question would be: What is it?
My first thought is, it needs to be decided what Chemtrails are not.
My next move was here.


/ttiforum/images/graemlins/confused.gif
 
Probably no one wants to touch this because it belongs in a conspiracy forum. To me, they are just contrails and I see them whenever there is a convoy of planes coming from overseas and passing over Maine towards several destinations in the country. If we reach so low in our estimation of this country that we would consider that our leaders would "consciously" poison us with substances that are designed to turn us into sheep, then perhaps those who believe this should visit a country that might ACTUALLY do this to its own citizenry. The whole idea is ludicrous to me and doesn't belong in this forum. Go to a forum like Godlikeproductions and you will find quite a few people who would like to discuss this. Sorry.
 
I completely agree with you, Zerub.

And let me add this (cuz I never have short answers for anything!):

As an aerospace engineer, I know a lot about ideally-expanded, over-expanded, and under-expanded jet engine exhaust dynamics. And I don't know how many times I have tried to explain to the chemtrails conspiracy theorists the FACT that jet engines are designed to a SPECIFIC atmospheric condition for optimal performance. For some reason they think they know better than me (and yet they cannot explain their theory in mathematic terms like I can explain the natural state of jet exhaust expansion to them).

I have never (and that means never EVER) seen any quantified evidence that would demonstrate that any CONTRAIL that appears in the sky is anything more than a normally over-expanded jet exhaust operating in an atmospheric area where the water density is already high (almost saturated), and the passing of the jet engine through that atmospheric condition has caused the high water density to be condensed into visible exhaust plumes.

As part of my undergrad Aero studies I had to program a "generic jet engine" model. Some of its inputs are the atmospheric conditions in which the jet engine operates. This simple model can reliably predict and model contrails due to over-expansion of a jet engine nozzle. This is why you will never see someone with a degree in aerospace engineering endorsing the "chemtrail" conspiracy theory. We all know just how normal a CONTRAIL pattern is given the parameters which govern jet engine operation in a variable atmospheric condition.

RMT
 
Well Zerub thank you for telling me where to go for theories/speculations. I must not have been clear on my intentions. This is only for education. I will not add speculation/theories.
I thank you as well as respect you RainmanTime for telling me like it is. I am grateful to have this connection to someone with your knowledge, this was my only reason that I asked this question here. Not to anger or offend anyone, I am sorry if I have.

Now if RainmanTime or anyone else could give me a bit of education on contrails; how, why they appear? What is the break down?I have a few more questions I would like to know as well but I will wait.
Please and thank you.
 
Tikmovado,

NASA has a nice little set of web pages that explain the basics of contrails:

http://asd-www.larc.nasa.gov/GLOBE/science.html

As I mentioned above, the main parameter is how much moisture (humidity) is available in the surrounding atmosphere. There are also more complicated parameters that deal with whether the jet is operating at its optimum pressure altitude (what we call over-expanded or under-expanded nozzles).

Hope this helps,
RMT
 
Yes, now for the funny questions. What is the policy with the lines? Why do they make X’s and rows of lines side by side?
Are there no air traffic laws that keep planes from doing this? Or is this just plain fun for pilots to make sky designs?
I know that they are odd questions and I assure you this is stopping allot of madness talk that is going on around me. So I again THANK YOU!
 
You've almost answered your own questions:

Why do they make X’s and rows of lines side by side?
Are there no air traffic laws that keep planes from doing this?
Click to expand...
The "highways in the skies" are actually the very REASON they appear so regular! There are specific enroute "paths in the skies" that are called Victor Airways. They are a throwback to the days before GPS when aircraft would fly "FROM" one radio navigation sensor (abbreviated VOR for Very high Omni Range) "TO" another. (note: Victor airways comes from VOR). And in terminal areas (airports) there are very specific, published approach & departure routes which all pilots (and computer navigation systems) possess and know how to fly. Air Traffic Control is NOT a random science. Finally, there are also rules for assigned altitudes for aircraft to cruise. These rules go as follows:

For aircraft traveling on magnetic headings of 000 thru 179 degrees, they will be assigned an odd numbered altitude (for example, 31,000 feet).

For aircraft traveling on magnetic headgins of 180 thru 359 degrees, they will be assigned an even numbered altitude (for example, 32,000 feet).

This ensure separation, and also allows crossing contrail patterns.

The following is another set of NASA websites which you can read at leisure and learn all about the highly-technical, highly-coordinated "dance" of air traffic control operations in the US:

http://virtualskies.arc.nasa.gov/ATM/tutorial/tutorial1.html

RMT

PS - One reason for the "rows side by side" can be easily understood when you consider airplanes generally have two engines on their wings, or in the case of 747s 4 engines on their wings.
 
Two "Chemtrails" tens of miles apart would look like they are right next to each other. Military formations can easily create this effect aswell. A "Chemtrail" many miles above another, offset by the same distance, from your pserception could easily look like they were directly crossing.

There are far more effective ways for controlling people then "chemtrails".
 
Now I have questions about military planes. Do they have there own fly patterns or do they follow the same set of rules? Also when a plane leaves emissions this is just as a cars emissions right? Finally to end this, is there a cleaner way of flying that is on the table or in the hanger that you could tell me about?


oh and RainmanTime,do you work for NASA?
 
Now I have questions about military planes. Do they have there own fly patterns or do they follow the same set of rules?
Click to expand...
In general, military airplanes fly by the exact same rules and use the same air traffic control and management systems as non-military aircraft. The only exceptions to this are when military (or other special purpose flights) are operating in specifically designated areas of the airspace. MOAs are Military Operating Areas (such as gunnery and bombing ranges) where military aircraft are assured that no one will enter their airspace. This allows them to perform whatever maneuevers they need to in order to accomplish test and training exercises. There are several large MOAs in Arizona and Nevada (think Area 51!)....but these are not the only places MOAs exist. If you ever look at airways charts you will see these MOAs outlined on the maps.

There are also areas known as WARNING areas where ALL aircraft can operate and perform various maneuvers and tests knowing they are under positive radar control and outside the normal traffic flows. For example W-291 is a WARNING area off of the California coast west of San Diego near San Clemente Island. When I worked for McDonnell-Douglas on the MD-11 and the B-717 aircraft development programs we would often fly from Yuma, AZ to the W-291 area to perform flight tests where we had to do lots of variable maneuvers and tests.

Also when a plane leaves emissions this is just as a cars emissions right?
Click to expand...
Not "just as" a car's emissions, no. The emissions are quite different in terms of composition, temperatures, and most definitevly pressures!

Finally to end this, is there a cleaner way of flying that is on the table or in the hanger that you could tell me about?
Click to expand...
What do you mean by "cleaner"? Aircraft engines have constantly been improved in terms of reducing emissions, reducing noise, and increasing fuel efficiency.

oh and RainmanTime,do you work for NASA?
Click to expand...
Not directly, no. But NASA is currently one of my customers. I work for Northrop-Grumman Corporation (we designed and built the B-2 stealth bomber, and we also cooperate in building the Navy F-18s and the new F-35). I am currently working on the new NASA Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) to replace the Space Shuttle. My company is teamed with Boeing, and we will find out in early September if we have won the competition to build the new CEV. As noted above, I have also spent a lot of time working on commerical aircraft design and development projects, and I also teach Aerospace Engineering at a local Southern California university.

RMT
 
RainmanTime thank you for you time on this matter! You have cleared up everything I had questions with...Now on to September 11th....just kidding (kind of) I wish you could debunk that as well!
 
Tikmovado,
Now on to September 11th....just kidding (kind of) I wish you could debunk that as well!
Click to expand...
A much wilder (and wider) conspiracy theory than chemtrails. However, the same sorts of FACTS and how they are applied can be used to debunk various aspects of 9-11 conspiracy theories. Which ones did you have in mind?

For example, the types that are quite easy to debunk are ones like: "There is no way a bunch of inexperienced terrorists could possibly navigate and fly a giant jumbo jet straight into the trade centers and/or Pentagon." Such theories are virtually ALWAYS floated by people who have VERY limited information about how commercial aircraft work...and as such, with their limited knowledge, they come to the conclusion that they are exceedingly complex to fly and navigate. The reality is that they are quite easy to fly (with technologies called autopilots and flight management systems) ESPECIALLY if you never have to take off or land the airplane!

One of my jobs on the MD-11 program was spending countless hours and days in a full-up flight simulator testing the systems I mentioned above. Part of this work would include showing dignitaries the simulator, the flight deck, and how the airplane systems worked. I would pride myself on being able to teach ANYONE how to use the autopilot & flight management systems to fly and navigate the airplane in a matter of "once around the airport pattern" if I were to do the takeoffs and landings.

So you see... such pieces of the 9-11 conspiracy theories as these are easily debunked when you actually understand these aircraft systems. But then again, such conspiracy theorists will then add to their conspiracy tendencies by claiming I am a "disinformation agent", and that I am only PRETENDING to know all about these systems... to that I simply say "Investigate my professional history... I hide none of it, and it is a matter of enough public records that anyone could verify I am an expert in these areas." But of course doing that would not support their desperate need to believe their conspiracy theories! /ttiforum/images/graemlins/mad.gif

RMT
 
Well first I would like to know how the buildings came down. Has a Steal structure building fell in on itself before from a fire? How hot does the fuel on the plane burn? What temperatures does steal become molten? What Event causes lava like flow of dust and material like at the WTC? Why no mention of WTC#7? Why was there no plane wreckage at the pentagon and in the field where the plane went down? Is plane fuel capable of reaching temperatures hot enough to incinerate the parts of a plane? What metals make up the engine of the planes used? How is it that in our NORAD air space the plane went undetected for 40 some min? How big are the planes used? How it is that pentagon before the roof fell was all intact but a small hole in the side? Sorry this is a few of allot of questions that have never sat with me well?I have LOTS more.
I hope you can now put my mind at ease with facts that I bet you know of the top of your head.
 
Tikmovado,

Well, for me to try and allay your fears on ALL (and more) of these questions would certainly take this thread MUCH further off the Time Travel topic.
Well first I would like to know how the buildings came down. Has a Steal structure building fell in on itself before from a fire? How hot does the fuel on the plane burn? What temperatures does steal become molten? What Event causes lava like flow of dust and material like at the WTC? Why no mention of WTC#7?
Click to expand...
There are plenty of other websites out there, with analysis by respected civil engineers (and the like) where these issues are addressed and Conspiracy Theories related to them debunked. Use google. There are answers for all of them, but like I said I am not going to personally try to convince you on them if there is information out there you can find. I've read many of them and am satisfied by the explanations of those experts.
Why was there no plane wreckage at the pentagon and in the field where the plane went down?
Click to expand...
There most certainly was!
http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evidence/photos/hullpiece.html
How it is that pentagon before the roof fell was all intact but a small hole in the side?
Click to expand...
This has also been addressed by many people at many sites. The scientific explanation for this deals with MOMENTUM (which is the product of the mass of an object times its velocity). The mass of the airplane was certainly large, but the biggest reason for why the airplane penetrated the Pentagon, rather that exploding outwards from the building, is related to the VERY HIGH relative velocity between the moving aircraft (and its mass) and the stationary Pentagon. The high momentum is going to cause the moving airplane to deeply penetrate the stationary building, with very little debris spewing outwards or backwards from the impact point. A similar situation is inherent to the 2003 Columbia Space Shuttle damage sustained on launch. The piece of foam (not a very high mass) was traveling towards the orbiter's leading edge at unbelievabley high speeds (well in excess of the speed of sound!). That piece of foam did NOT "shatter" into a bunch of pieces. But rather it punched a hole into REINFORCED CARBON-CARBON structure!!

The point I am trying to make is that scientific reasons for why things happen are not always blatantly apparant to people without scientific training. As such, you should be VERY careful who you listen to when it comes to people spinning conspiracy theories about this stuff. In almost ALL cases the people spinning these yarns have the same (OR LESS!) education level as yourself on these technical issues. Pay attention to what the experts say, as they can back what they say with EQUATIONS. And as such, I can give you some sample equations with respect to momentum and force (if you wish) to show you just how much force is exerted when an airplane (with a given speed and momentum) goes from a very high speed, to zero in a very short period of time. The forces induced a HUGE!

RMT
 
Rainman I am quite stunned that you did not jump on the burn and incineration question of the plane, as well as what the engines parts are made of and there destruction points. I tried to avoid any real big conspiracy questions. I just wanted to here from you about the plane parts. I will let this die.
I apologize if I have ticked you/anyone off.
 
Now hijacking the thread a bit, Ray can you tell us anything neat about this CEV or is it top secret.

I suppose I'll pose some specific questions. Is it a reusable craft? Does it use space shuttle like heat tiles? Does it need external fuel and rockets to lift off? If you can't answer these I understand.
 
Hi Fletch,
Ray can you tell us anything neat about this CEV or is it top secret
Click to expand...
Much that is available already from NASA I can discuss. Those things proprietary to my team's approach (Northrop-Grumman/Boeing) I cannot discuss, but some will come out if we win and as we continue development.
Is it a reusable craft?
Click to expand...
Yes. NASA has spec'ed that they want each one to be capable of performing at least 10 earth re-entries (the most stressful part of any single mission).
Does it use space shuttle like heat tiles?
Click to expand...
It uses thermal protection, yes. The material selected is up to the contractors, as long as it meets the thermal heating rates and thermal mass requirements. It will not need to be "tiled", because this is a capsule configuration it only needs to be one big, round shield on the "butt" of the capsule.
Does it need external fuel and rockets to lift off?
Click to expand...
Yes, and this is being called the Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV). A two stage rocket with a solid booster (similar to shuttle solid booster) as the first stage, and a liquid rocket engine for the second stage.

RMT
 
Back
Top