Chemtrails being produced through nozzle at aft of jet engine?

I've noticed a change in the aircraft nozzle lately in commercial / govt aircraft.

RB211-524G entered service in 1989 with variants of the engine going back to 1972 - this engine was on a 747-400. The RB211-535E4 also had this in 1984, found on the 757 - haven't found photos of earlier variants which date back to around 1972.

Attack AC like the F18 do not have this nozzle

Fighter aircraft have low bypass engines with afterburners and a variable geometry nozzle, which precludes the visibility of such. If you can look up the nozzle, then yes, you will often see a hole.


General Electric F110 used on the F-14, F-15, F-16 with variants used in the U-2 spyplane, B-1 bomber, and B-2 bomber. The F110 entered service with the F-16 Block 30 in 1987.

This is a schematic of a normal commercial jet engine. Notice the nozzle.

That is not a schematic. In any case it's a diagramme of the basic functions of an jet engine. You cannot expect it to have anything detailed about the functions of vents and the complexities of a jet engine.

Gas Turbines - A Handbook of Air, Land, and Sea Applications.

Read that. Maybe it won't give you an answer, but it will help you understand the complexities and functions of jet engines. Also look into, "Core zone drain outlet". If you really want an answer ask on an aviation professional or maintainence forum - just don't mention chemtrails.

[edit on 26/7/2009 by C0bzz]

I watched the video. I noticed the hollow exhaust cone, with no explanation for the purpose of this being hollow. The chemicals could be introduced aft of the turbine blades (furthest aft of engine). Chemicals could then be introduce into the exhaust stream. That is why is protrudes so far aft. It's like a spray gun.

That engine entered service in 1982. It is nothing new.

Still, with all your supposed knowledge, as you seem to have an answer for everything, you cannot explain why there is a hole in the nozzle.

You haven't even come close to explaining the reason for the hole in the end of the exhaust cone/nozzle.

Problem is; neither have you. You are simply jumping to conclusions based off a lack of knowledge of the operation of a jet engine. Ask in the aviation board or on an aviation forum with professionals.

Silver is a heavy metal. Chronic ingestion of this will kill you. And I haven't even begun on Iodism.

Test jet fuel for silver and iodides then.

I will repeat it again for those lazy enough not to do any research on this subject.

Chemtrails will kill millions, if not billions. It is the worse crime EVER to be perpetuated on mankind.

Who you trying to convince? Me or YOU?

Chronic diseases are way up.
Reproduction rates are way down

Birds, bees, trees, fish, elk, etc are dying in droves and getting diseases made up in the last 10 yrs

Man will and have died from this. Chronic heart, lung disease, bone defects, birth defects, global warming, silver is way up.

Shall I go on, the list is endless.

There are hundreds of possible, and unlike yours, scientific, explanations for these problems. You have not proved that anything unusual comes out of the vent, nor do you clearly have any knowledge of jet engines. Simply put, you are making things up.

reply to post by wonderworld


Got a source for that photo or any more photos of the same flypast?

[edit on 26/7/2009 by C0bzz]

Well, I guess I'll have to give myself a win on this debate.

No one can tell my why there is a hole in the nozzle.

It serves no purpose except as a chemical sprayer, looking
like it's actually in the exhaust, yet a separate component from the
fuel.

No one has ever debunked chemtrails, contrary to claims in this thread.

I've asked what the RH% needs to be, but cannot get a straight answer, even using the Appleman Chart.

I've witnessed planes fly out of pattern to turn around and spray the other way.
Airplanes that look like commercial AC.

I've found documents claiming the military's desire to fight a global war through weather.

It has been proven that people are spraying a multitude of chemicals over our heads to manipulate weather, funding coming from water boards.

I never knew they were so rich.

The FAA/NASA has hidden incident records, claiming it would scare the public.

Yeah, if we knew actually how many chemtrail planes are up there...

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/81d513ac956f.jpg[/atsimg]
Picture source
Anyone who can say that picture above is perfectly normal, has their head up their....





[edit on 26-7-2009 by Udontknowme]

Maybe folks need even more convincing.

Corporate Author : NAVAL WEAPONS CENTER CHINA LAKE CA

Personal Author(s) : Carroz, John W. ; Durham, Mark F.

Report Date : JAN 1973

Pagination or Media Count : 33

Abstract : As part of a cold cloud modification subsystem, the Naval Weapons Center has designed, developed, and tested an airborne jet seeder (AJS), which operates on the ramjet principle. Under approximately 120-lb/sq in. pressure, a swirl nozzle sprays a solution of silver iodide, ammonium iodide, and acetone into a chamber, where it is mixed with air and burned. From each gram of silver iodide in the solution, about 10 to the 14th power silver iodide particles (nuclei), each with a radius of not more than 0.2 micron, are delivered from the aft end. Users can vary nozzle size and solution concentration to optimize the count for particular missions. The AJS operated successfully at various speeds and altitudes when flight-tested with a Cessna 337 aircraft. Acetone solutions containing up to 10% of silver iodide ignited and burned. Solutions of 10% lithium chloride dissolved in methanol and acetone burned, also. Under consideration are design modifications to adapt the AJS for burning other solutions that would produce particles useful for generating smoke, measuring air currents, picking up atmospheric contaminants, and for meteorological research. (Author)

oai.dtic.mil...

reply to post by Udontknowme


Debunk my post then. Better yet, I DARE you to. If you can't but instead again derail the topic, that will be why you're considered a joke.



FYI, since you're utterly incapable of using your own god given mental capacity, I'll have to do the research for you.

[edit on 26/7/2009 by C0bzz]

reply to post by Udontknowme


reply to post by Udontknowme

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I've brought this from another "chemtrail" thread, same response to an identical post by Udontknowme.

Originally posted by Udontknowme
The military was working on the apparatus back in the seventies. By about 1995, they figured out how to incorporate it into the actual jet engine, effectively making a sprayer out of any aircraft, civilian or military.

(My response):

NO. Where does your 'source' say anything of the sort???

BTW, know what a 'Cessna 337' is??? It is also known as a 'SkyMaster', it is a twin-engine push-pull configuration. There is a military variant, (the O-2), which is what they probably used. It is a small airplane, shares a wing wing that is similar to the Cessna 210, 207 and 206 family. (Cessna 210 is different, has a stronger spar, not struts).

The '337' has retractable landing gear, its earlier design, the '336', introduced in 1963, had fixed gear.

Let's see if I can find a picture....

Photo

Length: 29 ft 9 in (9.07 m)
Wingspan: 38 ft 0 in (11.58 m)
Height: 9 ft 4 in (2.84 m)
Wing area: 201 ft² (18.7 m²)
Empty weight: 2,655 lb (1,204 kg)
Max takeoff weight: 4,400 lb (2,000 kg)
Powerplant: 2× Continental IO-360-C piston engine, 210 hp (157 kW) each

Performance

Maximum speed: 200 mph (174 kn, 320 km/h)
Range: 764 mi (664 nmi, 1,220 km)
Service ceiling: 19,500 ft (5,944 m)

This part is interesting:

Operational history

From 1976 until the middle 1990s, the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection used O-2 variants of the 337 Skymaster as tactical aircraft during firefighting operations. These were replaced with North American OV-10 Broncos, starting in 1993.

en.wikipedia.org...


NOW...how did you make such an incredible leap from the facts above, to your assertion?

Really, the paper you cited merely described cloud seeding. They designed an apparatus that would fit their O-2s. Cloud seeding is no mystery, it's been done for decades.

The military was working on the apparatus back in the seventies. By about 1995, they figured out how to incorporate it into the actual jet engine, effectively making a sprayer out of any aircraft, civilian or military.

Wonder why the hole is on 1972 engines then. For #s and giggles I suppose.

[edit on 26/7/2009 by C0bzz]

Originally posted by Udontknowme
Well, I guess I'll have to give myself a win on this debate.

???

No one can tell my why there is a hole in the nozzle.

We have. Repeatedly.

It serves no purpose except as a chemical sprayer, looking
like it's actually in the exhaust, yet a separate component from the
fuel.

NO. That is incorrect, unfounded. It's just plain WRONG!

No one has ever debunked chemtrails, contrary to claims in this thread.

See the brilliant work done by OzWeatherman. Just click on his member name, review his threads.

...even using the Appleman Chart.

Appleman is very old, been superceded.

I've witnessed planes fly out of pattern to turn around and spray the other way.

Do you know what a 'holding pattern' is? Google it.

I've found documents claiming the military's desire to fight a global war through weather.

Yeah? So? Note the word, there..."desire". They are investigating its potential, not implementing it. "War through weather"...how ludicrous! Only the military would be that stupid.....

The FAA/NASA has hidden incident records, claiming it would scare the public.

Proof!!! AND, don't tell us it came from Carnicom, he's not reliable!

Earlier,
You posted THIS picture:
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/81d513ac956f.jpg[/atsimg]

AND the 'source':
Picture source

THEN, you wrote this:

Anyone who can say that picture above is perfectly normal, has their head up their....

YET, when I went to YOUR 'source', I found THIS:

Quote:

The Facts: Under certain meterological conditions, high-altitude contrails can serve as a catalyst for the growth of cirrus clouds that sometimes expand to enormous size. In other words, what starts out as a small contrail sometimes seeds the growth of a huge cirrus cloud. You will note that so-called "chemtrails" are seldom if ever seen except in the presence of cirrus clouds. However, if they were actually "posion spraying," this correlation would not exist, and they would be seen just as often in skies with cumulous clouds, or with no clouds at all.

enjoy.

Ummm....sorta blows your whole 'theory'.



[edit on 26 July 2009 by weedwhacker]

Originally posted by Udontknowme
Maybe folks need even more convincing.

Corporate Author : NAVAL WEAPONS CENTER CHINA LAKE CA

Personal Author(s) : Carroz, John W. ; Durham, Mark F.

Report Date : JAN 1973

Pagination or Media Count : 33

Abstract : As part of a cold cloud modification subsystem, the Naval Weapons Center has designed, developed, and tested an airborne jet seeder (AJS), which operates on the ramjet principle. Under approximately 120-lb/sq in. pressure, a swirl nozzle sprays a solution of silver iodide, ammonium iodide, and acetone into a chamber, where it is mixed with air and burned. From each gram of silver iodide in the solution, about 10 to the 14th power silver iodide particles (nuclei), each with a radius of not more than 0.2 micron, are delivered from the aft end. Users can vary nozzle size and solution concentration to optimize the count for particular missions. The AJS operated successfully at various speeds and altitudes when flight-tested with a Cessna 337 aircraft. Acetone solutions containing up to 10% of silver iodide ignited and burned. Solutions of 10% lithium chloride dissolved in methanol and acetone burned, also. Under consideration are design modifications to adapt the AJS for burning other solutions that would produce particles useful for generating smoke, measuring air currents, picking up atmospheric contaminants, and for meteorological research. (Author)

oai.dtic.mil...

Nice...

We can also recognize that NASA programmes such as the Global Aerosol Climateology Project might provide some interesting controversial data!
www.google.com...

[edit on 26-7-2009 by burntheships]

reply to post by burntheships

NASA programmes such as the Global Aerosol Climateology Project

You really need to read that more carefully. You missed a few bits.

ALSO, you either didn't bother to read my response to the 'Cessna 337' report from 1973, or you intentionally ignored it.

The snippet you extracted was simply describing cloud-seeding, for rain-making purposes. Period.

"Chemtrailers" read into stuff, it seems, and imagine things that aren't there.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by burntheships

 

NASA programmes such as the Global Aerosol Climateology Project

You really need to read that more carefully. You missed a few bits.

First, I did not reply to you. What makes you think I would bother to respond to your rabbit trail posts?

No not missing any bit. I am referring to a NASA Program GACP

I did not post snippets, I quoted the OP's post of Air Jet Seeding.

And I am more of the mind to refer to the possibility of chemicals in some contrails as Jet Streak Circulations.

And I dont care to follow your bunny trail on the 337, thanks for the invitation, but no thanks... that is why I did not reply to you.



[edit on 26-7-2009 by burntheships]

reply to post by burntheships

And I dont care to follow your bunny trail on the 337, thanks.

Well, continue to deny knowledge and embrace ignorance, then. What a shame.

As to the GACP, perhaps I gave too much benefit of the doubt. I will be more precise this time. READ what they say. Here's a snippet to help make my point:

Tropospheric aerosols are thought to cause a significant direct and indirect climate forcing, but the magnitude of this forcing remains highly uncertain because of poor knowledge of global aerosol characteristics and their temporal changes. The standard long-term global NOAA product, the one-channel AVHRR aerosol optical thickness over the ocean, relies on a single predefined aerosol model and can be inaccurate in many cases.

You see? Not yet?

OK, I'll make it simple. They are studying the effects of 'aerosols' in our atmosphere. 'Aerosol' is a generalized term for EVERYTHING that is both natural, and artificially introduced into the air --- specifically, they are looking at the troposphere and above, into the stratosphere, mostly.

THEY are not introducing these aerosols. They are merely examining the effects, and looking for any correlations to climate.


[edit on 26 July 2009 by weedwhacker]

reply to post by weedwhacker


Do you really believe everything the government says, puts forth as fact?
I do not.

The small snippet you posted from GACP was of couse as syrupy as could be. This is also from the front page...

A major outcome of this collective research effort is a 23-year global aerosol climatology compiled from channel-1 and -2 AVHRR data and supplemented by data from other satellites, field observations, and chemical-transport modeling.

Hummm I wonder about chemical transport modeling and aerosols; could possibly they be referring to anything other than just studying? The use of the word "modeling" really is curious, to me at least.

[edit on 26-7-2009 by burntheships]

reply to post by burntheships


Hi Ships, glad to see you over her. We need more females.
Yeah!

Isnt it fun arguing with weedwhacker he is one of my favorite debaters but is dead set against the possibility or even a REMOTE chance that our military does ANY sort of spaying.

Nothing personal against the guy but I think most 5th graders know about health and environmental consequences of biological spraying. Dating back before Agent orange was known about.

reply to post by burntheships

...chemical transport modeling and aerosols; could possibly they be referring to anything other than just studying? The use of the word "modeling" really is curious, to me at least.

Well, it shouldn't be. It's quite clear what is meant! Ever heard of a "computer model"??

Computer models are also used in weather forecasting. It's all about tyring to predict, using the best computing efforts possible, what has been observed, and what, if any, effects it will have.

ALL of the ideas and studies that are aimed at a possible attempt at climate 'control' are just theoretical.

YOU asked something about believing what the Government says. THEY AREN'T SAYING ANYTHING. Except, that they are studying. It is clear, in the reports that keep being brought up.

Look...those who 'believe' in "chemtrails" have to pick one angle, or the other. We have ATS members from around the world who ALL claim that THEY are being 'sprayed'!! There just aren't that many airplanes, people, and manhours available for such an immense (and completely "secret") operation. Most of these misguided folk think that they're being sprayed with poison, from 30,000 feet, which is totally illogical!! Poisons are better administered at low levels, like from the ground.

Or, we have the other camp, such as yourself (?) who are supposing some sort of nefarious plan of on-going weather manipulation....again, no proofs, just examples of studies being conducted into the possiblity and feasibility of such programs.

This is being whipped up by the internet...and is festering in misconception.

reply to post by wonderworld


Hey there! Stealh females!

Yes we grow up in the beginning and we think that eveyone is trustworthy...usually sometime in grade shcool we have realized that not all can be trusted. I remember stories from an Uncle that had two tours in Vietnam, who had malaria twice. As a young girl, I learned not to trust the government.

I also have a very close friend, who is a pilot of 30 years. He actually owns and operates a business that involves the use of certain chemicals from aircraft.. for West Nile...

A note to all who believe we are being sprayed...do not always think you will see the spraying. A lot of it happens at night.

Sad, but true. I do not know about the governemnt and thier large operations, but the stillness of the air at night is condusive for spraying for Nile Virus. Also, this takes place at about 1000 feet, so for most of us, we might not hear so easily...if it happens where there is more urban noise.

And by the way...they use a grid pattern, make no mistake about it.

So if anyone is observing an aircraft that flys in a grid pattern in the day time, the most reasonable conclusion to come to...chemical trails or not...they are spraying. We just do not know what...

Yet.





[edit on 26-7-2009 by burntheships]

reply to post by wonderworld

...but is dead set against the possibility or even a REMOTE chance that our military does ANY sort of spaying.

Once again, ww, you are misrepresenting me. Your use of the capitalized 'ANY' is disengenuous, and I think you know this already. I've been quite clear in my posts. What you choose to ignore is your business, but I'd prefer you don't try to smear me to others.

reply to post by burntheships

Also, this takes place at about 1000 feet...

You just proved MY point! Of COURSE there is aerial spraying, of that sort. WHen I was younger, in Los Angeles, one year there was a very bad mosquito problem, and it was in the news! They sprayed Malathion...at night, from low-flying helicopters. I think it was limited to the San Fernando Valey, and the Holywood Hills.

They did it at night because A) the air is more still and B) most people are indoors. Simple. Not mysterious. No foul play.

West Nile Virus is carried by mosquitos, is it not? I hate mosquitos. I say, kill 'em if we can.

Our crops are fumigated. Been going on for decades. 'Cropdusting' Sometimes by aircraft, sometimes by land-based sprayers. They are better at choosing the chemicals, trying for less toxicity of course.

I suppose this is why the "Organic" movement is such big business. Buy your produce that is labeled "Organic", and eat worry-free?? Well...maybe you should work on exposing THAT little scam, eh?

Originally posted by Udontknowme
No one has ever debunked chemtrails, contrary to claims in this thread.

I've asked what the RH% needs to be, but cannot get a straight answer, even using the Appleman Chart.

Humidity doesnt need to be that moist, usually over 35 percent will do it. Temperture however needs to be colder than -35%

Also, the Appleman chart is slightly outdated, and it is not widely used anymore to forecast persistent contrails. How do I know? Because Ive had to do it before in my job

It has been proven that people are spraying a multitude of chemicals over our heads to manipulate weather, funding coming from water boards.

That never been proven, if I we4re going to posion someone, I would do it by spiking the water supply, much easier....especially if it were the water board doing it

reply to post by burntheships


You are right my friend!

They usually pick cloudy days or spray at night. I also have a relative who worked At ____Aerospace and knows his stuff. I don’t trust the government either for similar yet more complicated reasons.

I’ll talk to you later about that.