Shooting a UFO, STS mission (video)

Leevi: "James, can you please share any information on unknown objects from the STS-115 mission if you have it.. I believe you can freely talk to any official from NASA about it and it would be wonderful to hear your personal opinion about the latest events.."

Although I was on vacation in the Southwest during those days, I did several appearances on MSNBC News to discuss the sightings. As the followup news indicated, the first object was identified as the shim that had been seen stuck between tiles near the ET feedline doors, during the tile inspection just before docking.

It and the other 'bogies' came loose during the period that the crew test fires all the different thrusters, to make sure they all work prior to diving back into the atmosphere.

One other piece that the crew got good telephoto images of, was an empty equipment bag left by the airlock door.

As I've always said, there are lots of sources for this kind of stuff and people pay attention to it, and also -- now let me stress this -- they also transmit images and verbal reports immediately and in the clear, for all the world to see and hear, is it did.

Heheheh,

You picked a hell of a time to go on vacation! Just when things were getting hot! Well, there is some weird video out there about the space junk.

There is one seen on YouTube where one of the 'rings' appears to flip over once, and only once. I've been trying to figure out how it could be an optical affect of the camera zoom, but so far, it looks like a single flip-over followed and proceeded by steady orientation. Kind of perplexing.

I know you know the people at NASA well and you know what these things are, but in the world of video-clip observation only, we see things like that and get excited.

I can understand that the see-through thing was an equipment bag left at an airlock door. That sounds reasonable. Was that left their during the ISS assembly missions, or during some other operation? Do we know what ever became of the bolts that floated away during construction? Did they show up as junk like the bag, shim, and rings?

Originally posted by Ectoterrestrial
There is one seen on YouTube where one of the 'rings' appears to flip over once, and only once. I've been trying to figure out how it could be an optical affect of the camera zoom, but so far, it looks like a single flip-over followed and proceeded by steady orientation. Kind of perplexing.

can you link this please?

Originally posted by JimO

Lots of ice came off the orbiters -- from thrusters, from water dump, from around the main engine bells, from the flash evaporators. Why do you keep referring to your dreams as 'facts' and insisting that I repeat them?

It's strange how you insist this is true and yet I watched LIVE on NASA T.V. for tens of hours and I didn't see any "ICE".

Of course water dumps produce "ICE" , but that's a known value that we've seen in action for years.

Tell the people how long that plume of "Ice" from a water dump persists in Space!

Tell the people why that "ICE" plume disappears!



You'd think that if normal operations generated "ICE" like you say it does we'd see "ICE" almost all the time.

Personally I'm glad that so many Shuttle missions are planned in succession over the next few years. I think it won't be that hard to show the Shuttle is relatively "ICE FREE" after the first 48 hours or so. i.e. Sublimation clears ambient "ICE" from crevasses whether the Sunlight is present or not.







[edit on 29-9-2006 by lost_shaman]

lost shaman, care to share with us your secret formula for the anti-reality vaccine that you've been using so effectively?

Originally posted by homeskillet

Originally posted by Ectoterrestrial
There is one seen on YouTube where one of the 'rings' appears to flip over once, and only once. I've been trying to figure out how it could be an optical affect of the camera zoom, but so far, it looks like a single flip-over followed and proceeded by steady orientation. Kind of perplexing.

can you link this please?

Yes. I downloaded that from youtube some time ago but lost the link, sorry.. But anyway, here it is. You need either FLVPlayer or VLC to play a flash media file (.flv)

www.sendspace.com...

This is the most spectacular piece of ice I have ever seen

[edit on 29-9-2006 by Leevi]

JimO : lost shaman, care to share with us your secret formula for the anti-reality vaccine that you've been using so effectively?

JimO the question was simple.

How long does a Plume of "Ice" from a water dump persist in Space?

The answer is not very long. In fact STS-29 preformed an experiment on orbit 49 of it's mission to study the "Ice" from the water dumps. Where the lifetime of ice particles with a typical radii of 0.2t, which are formed by forced water ejection from a conical nozzle with a small aperture, are determined to be > 250s , or around a little over 4 minutes (Pike et al., 1990).

Originally posted by Access Denied

That's not the point LS.

My point was to ask JimO to inform people how long ice from the water dumps persists in Space.

JimO ignored the question so I answered it. That was the point, ice sublimes quickly in the near vacuum of space.

Shaman: "My point was to ask JimO to inform people how long ice from the water dumps persists in Space. JimO ignored the question so I answered it. That was the point, ice sublimes quickly in the near vacuum of space. "

And the basis for your expertise is what? Well-practiced hard-wishing?

There's a great scene from STS-75 when a flock of ice flakes from a water dump half an hour earlier is flickering eerily against the Earth as the cloud, below and ahead of the shuttle, precedes it into darkness. Glenn's 'fireflies' writ large.

Ice attached to shuttle structure can surive for days. A good example on a late-1980's shuttle mission was a hunk of ice, two-fist sized, that formed along the rim of the left payload bay door which, in space, is swung open and is in line with one waste water vent behind the shuttle cabin door. It was there for several days. When the doors closed, it still clung to the outer edge line of the door, and after entry, as the shuttle rolled out on the KSC runway, about half of it was STILL there -- and it lasted another 5-10 minutes in Florida sea-level hot air.

how many times do we have to tell you no power on Earth could keep it secret?

Well, probably a few hundred more before I believe you, because the CIA essentially told me that earth shattering information is being kept secret. THe public nor the press has the fainted idea what is really going on in the world. THe press largely is too stupid to investigate and dig up the truth, and the rest of the time, plants control contamination of the news with truth. That is what I was told. This doesn't in any way imply alien craft, but your basic hypothesis that such information could not be controlled is simply false.

For example, Osama Bin Laden's location is known and has been known for some time. Just as information on crashed ships and sightings are occasionally related by personell to friends and relatives, the fact that we know where he is is was so related. But you won't get any more information than that out of people. They won't say more. But when they say we are 'searching for him' on CNN, they are lying. Are you willing to accept that what I have said might possibly be true, or is it simply too big a secret and it would be all over the press?

I wonder if even bigger issues would have even more stringent lies and regulations?

Now, as for the video tape in question here, I agree with you that many of the posters here are misinterpreting the video. But if you fall back on the 'no big secret could be kept line', please be aware that you are applying a false premise to your argument.

I think many of us suffer from a lack of knowledge of how the inside of NASA works. SOme people, particularly eastern EUropean posters, as I have noticed, seem to confuse NASA with the KGB. I know some NASA people and they are just friendly, smart scientists. I don't see any conspiracy. But then again, I have met similar journalists, and apparently their relatively uninquisitive nature is part of how their control works, according to the CIA.

So what is the stucture of NASA? What does it look like internally? How much is secret? Is a clearance to get on Langley enough to get around NASA beyond the library? Or are higher level clearances needed as one moves around? Maybe such a report or a book would be useful for ATS folks to get a better sense for the organization.

Access, would you careto relate the surface area to the mass of a comet, explain how this difffers from a small ice crystal, and explain to people here why that is relevant.

[edit on 3-10-2006 by Ectoterrestrial]

[edit on 3-10-2006 by Ectoterrestrial]

Re ice in space, also be aware that the black body temperature at this range from the Sun is well below freezing -- and the sunlight-induced warming is reduced even more if the target object is highlt reflective.

When the Russian Salyut-7 space station lost all power in 1985, its temperature dropped and all on-board water froze. It took a heroic rescue mission to repair the station and thaw the water and propellant tanks.

Earth itself is warmer, from the misnamed 'greenhouse effect', which is why shuttles coast with their payload bays to Earth instead of deep-cold deep space -- heat radiates outwards at a slower rate, it controls temperature extremes (also important when it comes to closing the doors -- if they are at different temperatures across the structure, there's enough thermal flexing that they might not latch securely).

Originally posted by JimO
Re ice in space, also be aware that the black body temperature at this range from the Sun is well below freezing -- and the sunlight-induced warming is reduced even more if the target object is highlt reflective.

I agree, JimO. Thats what I've always heard and I believe that a highly reflective object like an ice crystal would be even more cold than a 'black body radiator'. So in effect, the black body model would predict a temperature likely to be higher than that of an ice crystal. It would be generous in favor of those who are skeptical of the ice crystal theory. It sounds like a model we can agree to work as a group.

I think we could all agree to work out what the sublimation rate would be for a black body radiator orbiting the earth with the space shuttle. First we calculate the average temperature of the radiator as it circles the earth. Then we determine the sublimation rate given the ice's exposure to vacuum and some hard radiation. We could work it out and agree on the conclusion, and see where it takes us.

[edit on 3-10-2006 by Ectoterrestrial]

[edit on 3-10-2006 by Ectoterrestrial]

HERE'S why NASA is interested in anything spotted outside the windows:

NASA SpaceFlight.com -- Atlantis suffered major MMOD hit
By Chris Bergin, 10/4/2006 1:09:00 PM
www.nasaspaceflight.com...
Shuttle orbiter Atlantis was hit by a MMOD (micrometeoroid/orbiting debris) event during STS-115, which NASA is describing as the "first or second largest hit" in the history of the Shuttle program.
While the debris hit a radiator panel on the cargo bay doors, NASA are concerned, given the size of the MMOD, which they claim was large enough to have penetrated - possibly critically - Atlantis' heatshield.

Originally posted by JimO

HERE'S why NASA is interested in anything spotted outside the windows:

NASA knows that no-one could ever possibly see something a fraction of an inch in diameter traveling at tens of thousands of m/p/h.

Thus that does not explain why NASA is interested in anything spotted outside the windows.

Originally posted by JimO

Ice attached to shuttle structure can surive for days. A good example on a late-1980's shuttle mission was a hunk of ice, two-fist sized, that formed along the rim of the left payload bay door which, in space, is swung open and is in line with one waste water vent behind the shuttle cabin door. It was there for several days. When the doors closed, it still clung to the outer edge line of the door, and after entry, as the shuttle rolled out on the KSC runway, about half of it was STILL there -- and it lasted another 5-10 minutes in Florida sea-level hot air.

Sure it's possible for ice to exist for 2-3 day's if it's a very large piece of ice.

In this case STS-66 Atlantis OV-104 , the icicle was over four feet long. What your not telling everyone is that this was the result of mechanical failure of the supply water dump system and not a result of normal Shuttle operations.

A similar malfunction happened with OV-103 Discovery STS-41D resulting in another meter long icicle that required the use of Canada Arm to break it away from the Shuttle.

That instance was similar to the instance we discussed earlier on page 8 with "burping" phenomena.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

In that post I quoted from NASA.

www.jsc.nasa.gov...


The burping phenomenon has been noted on a number of OV-103 flights dating back to STS-29 (OV-103 flight 8). The phenomenon has also occurred sporadically on the OV-104 supply water dump system. No occurrences of burping have been noted on OV-102 or OV-105.

Another thing that needs to be said is NASA had to redesign the water dump nozzles, which at first were not even heated. And later had to add heaters. However, only OV-103 and OV-104 had these problems.

You call that a good example , but it really is an extreme example that only occurred because of malfunction.

Water dumps were scrutinized during operation in orbit , and normal operations produced no indications of ice formation.









[edit on 4-10-2006 by lost_shaman]

lost: "NASA knows that no-one could ever possibly see something a fraction of an inch in diameter traveling at tens of thousands of m/p/h. Thus that does not explain why NASA is interested in anything spotted outside the windows. "

Your passion to misunderstand exceeds all earthly bounds.

Pieces outside the windows are potential evidence of things knocked off the Orbiter by non-onservable high-speed impacts, or other internal causes. Have you even READ the 'moon pigeons' study from nineteen-frigging-seventy-ONE??

Originally posted by JimO
lost: "NASA knows that no-one could ever possibly see something a fraction of an inch in diameter traveling at tens of thousands of m/p/h. Thus that does not explain why NASA is interested in anything spotted outside the windows. "

Your passion to misunderstand exceeds all earthly bounds.

If you don't point out the little things , like these are not visible, then some people are going to run around thinking that's what you meant.

Just to clarify that.

Pieces outside the windows are potential evidence of things knocked off the Orbiter by non-onservable high-speed impacts, or other internal causes. Have you even READ the 'moon pigeons' study from nineteen-frigging-seventy-ONE??

No doubt that is true in part. That is not the only reason for any interest in things seen out of the windows.

Since you stated that as the case so confidently , then why didn't NASA "care" when Vingradov reported an "unknown object" Sept. 11, 06?

re the vinogradov alleged comment, why don't you ask NASA,
you're the one trying to whip up significance for it.
You make the case. I'll hold your coat and wait over here.

I think if NASA were to open its doors to the UFO 'nuts' and allow them to see a space shuttle/mars mission in action, and how things are known to be ice and debris, many reasonable UFO people would gain a greater understanding for what is going on.

I say, make some of the UFO people on this board special guests for the next shuttle mission. Give them passes and escort them around. Let them ask their questions, let them meet people. Let them hang around awhile. The cost would be miniscule compared to its long term payoff.

[edit on 5-10-2006 by Ectoterrestrial]

Ecyo: "Instead, partisans on both sides seem intent on presenting the most aggressive model of their view with limited information,"

I beg your pardon? Have you seen the long lists of links and citations I've been providing here in recent weeks? Have you read them, to decide they provide 'limited information'? If anything, it's informational overload, and it sure seems to have short-circuited a few minds on this thread. There's one side of this argument presenting genuine raw data (mostly never before published anywhere), experienced interpretations (they really ARE 'experts'), and fact-based explanations -- there's no symmetry here about 'both sides do blah blah', and if you think there is, you're part of the problem, not part of the solution.