Interest Video "Proof" of Chemtrail Plane

pretty convincing and not the best quality are two phrases that do not work well together!

a reply to: Zaphod58

And just curious to know how you feel about jet fuel causing the fires that burned the towers down?

To all the 'aviation experts' out there...

Isn't this just fuel venting rather than fuel dumping?

Position of plumes would suggest emanating from the wingtip fuel vents, as a result of plane changing altitudes/vapour pressure etc changing.

Are'nt the wing fuel dumps usually piped to the rear of one of the intermediate flap tracks on each wing?

Note position on the vid

a reply to: soulpowertothendegree

And just curious to know how you feel about jet fuel causing the fires that burned the towers down?

I imagine the same way he felt about the fuel in the last plane he flew in.

a reply to: CovertAgenda

It depends on the plane. The fuel dump could be out on the wingtip, outboard of the outer ailerons, or they could be near the inboard ailerons. They're not always on the flap tracks though. And they don't vent like that, even when climbing. This is a classic fuel dump.

don't forget all of that molten aluminum and fire suppression water...
a reply to: soulpowertothendegree

a reply to: Zaphod58

Yes depends upon the plane, but what are we looking at here a 747? (to me the wings dont look like a A380 but could be)
So where are the vents/dumps on these?

a reply to: CovertAgenda

A 747 dump vents are just inside the wingtips, exactly where they are in the video. On a 747-400 they're just inside where the winglets are. The A380 is in the flap track, on the second fairing in from the wingtip. So this is a 747.

Might be getting my vents and dumps confused...
Aint that life though..

;-)
a reply to: Zaphod58

It's a thai airlines 747 dumping fuel:

avherald.com...



Notice how the livery corresponds with the one shown in the video.

The markings look like one of the 2 new firefighting 727's or similar. They had new spray systems installed and were supposed to be going through certification/licensing. Could it be a test of their systems. I admit the first thing I thought was fuel dump until I saw the markings bear the tail.

ETA: Never mind, the firefighter 747's dump from the center rear.

a reply to: spirit_horse

The 727s are T-tailed, with three aft fuselage mounted engines. This is definitely a 747, and the firefighting 747 had the dump points under the center fuselage, not near the wingtips.

originally posted by: spirit_horse
The markings look like one of the 2 new firefighting 727's or similar. They had new spray systems installed and were supposed to be going through certification/licensing. Could it be a test of their systems. I admit the first thing I thought was fuel dump until I saw the markings bear the tail.

You may have alos noticed that the jet in the video looks quite unlike a 727. It is in fact a Thai Airlines 747. You can see the logo on the tailfin if you look carefully in the video.

a reply to: payt69

It looks like it was TG-925, Munich to Bangkok. They had a flap problem, and leveled off at FL180, dumped fuel and went back to Munich.

originally posted by: CovertAgenda
To all the 'aviation experts' out there...

Isn't this just fuel venting rather than fuel dumping?

Position of plumes would suggest emanating from the wingtip fuel vents, as a result of plane changing altitudes/vapour pressure etc changing.

Are'nt the wing fuel dumps usually piped to the rear of one of the intermediate flap tracks on each wing?

Note position on the vid

ump the afterburners

No, that is a dump. Most civil airliners dump near the wingtip. The vents are closer to the tanks. You want the dump away from the engines. Back when I was flying F-111s, we used to announce our arrival home with the "Torch." The dump point on the Aardvark was right between the 2 engines, so you could hit the dump switch and bump the afterburners igniting a nice long trail of dumped fuel. And as an example for the need to dump fuel, consider this. The maximum takeoff weight ofthe747-400 I fly is 910,000 pounds. The max landing weight is 652,000 pounds. So, if I take off with full fuel and full containers headed for Nairobi and something happens where I need to land right away, I've got to get rid of 258,000 pounds. The copilot doesn't weigh that much, and he could whip me in a fair fight,so a whole lot of fuel needs to go. We can dump about 2 tons a minute in the 747.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: payt69

It looks like it was TG-925, Munich to Bangkok. They had a flap problem, and leveled off at FL180, dumped fuel and went back to Munich.

Yup.. well I guess that should conclude this thread then.. mystery solved

Please dont talk f111 to me.... :-(

I cried the day we were made to bury our PIGS
You are a privileged man to have flown such a remarkable platform.

a reply to: F4guy

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: highfromphoenix

Because he's got a problem and would be too heavy to land safely if he didn't.

The fuel will evaporate before it hits the ground.

So therefore it won't hit the ground.





Don't worry.......I hear that ninjas slip and fall every once in a while.

a reply to: Zaphod58

good work Zap love it when you kill threads like this with your knowlege .


Member Applause!

originally posted by: CovertAgenda
Please dont talk f111 to me.... :-(

I cried the day we were made to bury our PIGS
You are a privileged man to have flown such a remarkable platform.

a reply to: F4guy

The Aussies kept using theirs for 10 years after we dumped ours.