Mysterious Missile Launch Over California - 11/8/2010

Originally posted by inbound
found this, guess the pentagon didnt get the memo
KZLA LOS ANGELES (ARTCC)PALMDALE, CA.
A2832/10 NOTAMN A) KZLA B) 1011092000 C) 1011100100
E) THE FOLLOWING RESTRICTIONS ARE REQUIRED DUE TO NAVAL AIR
WARFARE CENTER WEAPONS DIVISION ACTIVATION OF W537.
IN THE INTEREST OF SAFETY, ALL NON-PARTICIPATING PILOTS
ARE ADVISED TO AVOID W537. IFR TRAFFIC UNDER ATC JURISDICTION
SHOULD ANTICIPATE CLEARANCE AROUND W537 AND CAE 1176.
CAE 1155 WILL NOT BE AVAILABLE FOR OCEANIC TRANSITION.
CAE 1316 & CAE 1318 WILL NOT BE AVAILABLE FOR OCEANIC TRANSITION.
CAE 1177 WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR OCEANIC TRANSITION.
W537 ACTIVE, CAE 1176 CLOSED.
F) SURFACE G) FL390

Note the last line -- keep-out zone from surface to 39,000 ft.

Missile alert messages always specify surface to UNLIMITED.

Originally posted by inbound
found this, guess the pentagon didnt get the memo
KZLA LOS ANGELES (ARTCC)PALMDALE, CA.
A2832/10 NOTAMN A) KZLA B) 1011092000 C) 1011100100
E) THE FOLLOWING RESTRICTIONS ARE REQUIRED DUE TO NAVAL AIR
WARFARE CENTER WEAPONS DIVISION ACTIVATION OF W537.
IN THE INTEREST OF SAFETY, ALL NON-PARTICIPATING PILOTS
ARE ADVISED TO AVOID W537. IFR TRAFFIC UNDER ATC JURISDICTION
SHOULD ANTICIPATE CLEARANCE AROUND W537 AND CAE 1176.
CAE 1155 WILL NOT BE AVAILABLE FOR OCEANIC TRANSITION.
CAE 1316 & CAE 1318 WILL NOT BE AVAILABLE FOR OCEANIC TRANSITION.
CAE 1177 WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR OCEANIC TRANSITION.
W537 ACTIVE, CAE 1176 CLOSED.
F) SURFACE G) FL390

This is for the area mentioned--sorry about the all caps its posted that way on the site

Just what I wanted to see. If the FAA knew, the military knows. Funny how a navy admiral called the USAF and demanded to know if they fired off a missile. The AF response was "We don't have any missiles, sir".

Originally posted by backinblack

Originally posted by gwynned

Originally posted by Rinchon
Did anyone see this for themselves? I can't find any YouTube videos or eyewitness reports other than the lone helicopter pilot who took the video. Seems weird that there are not more eyewitness accounts. Maybe this is an elaborate hoax to get national news coverage.

BINGO!!! I'm certain now it is a hoax, though I'm not certain it ever even happened? Certainly makes a fool of the media!

No Bingo..Many people saw it.They just didnt film it.

Well, the LA area news media tried to find any, and couldn't. Please help them by giving a few names.

reply to post by Gazrok


This thread was posted early this AM (US EST).

Worth a look, as a "possible". Unless, the facts don't fit the observations.....

This was a shot over the bow by Russia. Former US Ambassador to NATO Robert Ellsworth, who is also a former Deputy Secretary of Defense has stated that this could have very well have been a show of force when shown the video of the missile launch.

My case:

1 Russia warned that if the Federal Reserve followed thru with QE2, it would ruin the world's economy.

2 We are ramping up the military presence around Iran.

3 The sutinex computer vires in Iran, delaying the loading of the Russian reactor.

4 Obama is out of the country. Bush was attending the Olympics in China, Putin went into Georgia.

5 Putin loves a show of force. Be it probing airspace with 'bears' ,or warships in the contested waters of the arctic.

reply to post by JimOberg

Commercial pilots hardly ever go to 39,0000 feet.

Originally posted by firejack007
Didn't the helicopter pilot continue to watch this event? Cause if he did and it was a plane it would eventually changed how it looked as it flew overhead. Outbound planes (East to West) would start from the other side (land). If this starts at what looks like the horizon over the Pacific then it would be traveling inbound (West to East) and eventually easily be seen as a plane. I live in the midwest and we have airliners all the time traveling coast to coast. Many of them first look like something going straight up. But as you continue to watch they change to an obvious airliner flying overhead. Also, if this is a news camera on a helicopter, why isn't there more footage? They shoot wildfires and car chases for hours. Have a feeling KCBS knows what it is. There has to be more video.

Good question. What kind of helo was it and did it have overhead windows?

Originally posted by VitriolAndAngst
Looks like it is merely a contrail from an airplane at a steep angle. Wind currents are making it spread out more at the base and twist a bit. Good example HERE

What do you mean by steep angle?

Looks like it could be just a constant altitude flight headed eastbound.

Today I went to flashearth.com and I used the Nasa (updated daily) part of flash earth to look out over California to see if maybe this launch were captured. I am seeing like three very thick trails out in the ocean and one smaller trail. You can try this for yourself and see.

It was obviously Cobra commander testing his new nano-tech missile, mystery solved!

But seriously, how many times have we heard an explanation after time has passed that seems like a lame attempt to dismiss something with more to it?
Example, Norway spiral? They took their time before coming up with a story didn't they?
How many times have they been caught and some time had passed before changing a story with a lame explanation.
Probably the first example was Roswell with a major change with a major lame cover with some time after the fact.
You could have an engineer from Boeing take video of something and he would be discredited by the so called experts, even though they have no proof either.

Originally posted by wayouttheredude
Now the military is saying that it was not a missile. What the heck. It sure looks like one and every expert says it was so why would the military now be saying this I wonder.

Military Says Missile-Like Object Wasn't Missile

This is why I don't like the title of Peter Jenning's "seeing is believing" documentary or James Fox's "I know what I saw", because, no, seeing is not believing and no, we don't know what we saw. People see things and we are sure about what we are seeing, when we shouldn't be, like the guy who filmed this and is sure it wasn't an airplane.

We are all too easily fooled by optical illusions, that's what this looks like. So maybe the military is saying it because it's true?

reply to post by JimOberg


Would that not effectivly close all of their (civilian) airspace then? I know little to nothing about aviation, but Ive never flown commercially over 36K feet. To the best of my limited knowledge the only people that fly over that are military

I don't know if anyone has noticed. But, the missile launch here that occurred yesterday is the same date as 9/11. except in reverse. 11/9?

This is an evening missile launch. Notice the brighter light from the sun at the top of the trail and shadow at the bottom due to the contrail being closer to the ground at the bottom and at a higher altitude at the top..



This is an evening contrail from a plane photographed in Dec 2009. Notice the even distribution of sunset colour due to the contrail being at consistently the same altitude.

Originally posted by JakobLemyZook
I don't know if anyone has noticed. But, the missile launch here that occurred yesterday is the same date as 9/11. except in reverse. 11/9?

For the third time, the "launch" in question occured on the 8th, not the 9th.

Phage,

Are you still trying to convince people this chemtrail was caused by a plane? Sometimes, it is better to admit your wrong then get caught with your pants down. Oh well, cheers for your vigorous efforts.

Could this be a warning shot sent over the bow? Maybe an underwater starship of some sort? Also, I don't know if anyone has noticed. But, the missile launch here that occurred yesterday is the same date as 9/11. except in reverse. 11/9? A warning about what's to come? I'm stocking up on food and heading underground for a few days until this gets resolved.

Here is another take on it, not sure if this has been mentioned, but here it goes. What if the Chinese or North Koreans blasted this missile out of the ocean to make it look like the U.S. did it. Then, hopefully not, hits South Korea, Iran, or some other location, everyone blames the U.S. for first strike causing more war.

Originally posted by Gazrok
If it truly is a plane, then should be no trouble announcing which flight, etc. The fact that they HAVEN'T done this yet (or immediately after the hoopla started), really points to a lousy cover story. I've seen jet contrails that resemble rockets before, but this doesn't seem to fit the footage I saw.

This could definitely be a contrail, and I suspect it is, but I am amazed that they didn't come out within 24 hours and officially say which flight it was. But 24 hours later we got a clue when we see a similar contrail in a similar location, right? Isn't this the way flight schedules work?

Mystery Missile II - 11/9/10

One day later, a second contrail appears in the same location as the "Mystery Missile". This is NOT the same contrail sited by CBS News on 11/8/10. I don't know what it is, but it sure seems strange.

Hunch....
The military fired the missile to test the airborne laser (They test it at Pt. Mugu), and it didn't work. Not good press. Consequently they 'have no idea what it was.'

Possible?