Mysterious Missile Launch Over California - 11/8/2010

reply to post by tommyjo

So very conveniently the missile was launched and then slowed down to mimic an incoming airliner.

And don't forget the trail appeared vertical for the first 100 miles then conveniently blew left with the wind to mimic a contrail

I think it may have been Gamera.

Originally posted by BoatRock1
I think it may have been Gamera.

Out of all of the Japanese mega-monsters, why did you pick Gamera? LOL

I read the first three days worth of reply's to this thread I just want to say that beyond a doubt, it was a MISSILE. This time Phage was wrong, sorry....

Originally posted by USpatriot
I read the first three days worth of reply's to this thread I just want to say that beyond a doubt, it was a MISSILE. This time Phage was wrong, sorry....

Believe it or not, I wasn't sure what it was and only wanted proof.
But now I am leaning to missile...

If it was a plane the contrail would not appear vertical for the first 12 minutes and then suddenly start drifting quickly south..
The plane remained at a constand speed, if anything it slowed for approach...
This trail was accelerating given the pics and timestamps we have seen..
Contrailscience actually shows the acceleration clearly...

Some great analysis on the edited video on the following link. Is it another CBS-Gate?

'RAW VIDEO: Mysterious Contrail Off Calif. (Another "CBS-Gate"?)'

www.microlith.com...

www.freerepublic.com...

TJ

reply to post by tommyjo


Thanks for the links Tommy..

What I still don't understand is if it is flight 902 then what kind of zoom can show such a clear picture of the contrail forming over 160 miles away??
It's showing this contrail in incredible clarity if in fact it is that far away..

Call me stubborn or stupid but can you please explain that to me or show me examples of moving things filmed so clearly at that distance?

Edit to add some perspective...
Lets look at the great wall of china..Quite a substantial object..

A more controversial question is whether the Wall is visible from low earth orbit (an altitude of as little as 100 miles (160 km)). NASA claims that it is barely visible, and only under nearly perfect conditions; it is no more conspicuous than many other man-made objects.[18] Other authors have argued that due to limitations of the optics of the eye and the spacing of photoreceptors on the retina, it is impossible to see the wall with the naked eye, even from low orbit, and would require visual acuity of 20/3 (7.7 times better than normal).[17]

en.wikipedia.org...

So 100 miles away and the Great Wall of China is NOT visible but I'm supposed to believe this contrail was visible to the naked eye from over 240 miles away and clearly filmed in detail from around 160 miles away??

Or, it was something seen from much closer???

Lets look at what a real view looks like at around that distance to get a better perspective..
Here's a pic of earth from a shuttle near the ISS.
spaceflight.nasa.gov...
Do you think that contrail would be so clearly visible from 240 miles?
A distance similar to this pic?

reply to post by backinblack


No problem, Backinblack.

Gil Leyvas explains in the following video that he zoomed in and used a two-times extender on the lens to get a closer look. By using the 2x extender he is doubling the focal length of his camera. That is how he managed to zoom in on the head of the trail.

losangeles.cbslocal.com...

The two-times extender is going to cause massive foreshortening. It highlights the extreme distance that he was filming at. He also mentions that he saw something similar the previous week on the Thursday. That is quite interesting as UPS902 McDonnell Douglas MD-11 is quite active between Honolulu and Ontario, California. The records only go back to the 8th. It would be interesting to see if the MD-11 was active on the Thursday that Gil Leyvas is referring to? That would make it Thursday 4th November. You need to be registered to check further dates.

flightaware.com...

Some independent footage of the 8th November. Unfortunately it is short.



TJ

reply to post by tommyjo


Thanks again Tommy, but did you look at this link?
spaceflight.nasa.gov...

That's what you see at a range of around 240 miles...
All pics and video clearly show this trail has it's widest point at the base...
It's actually very visible to the naked eye and very wide considering (If Flight 902) it is over 240 miles away..
Given the view of perspective the pics from the ISS show then if it is flight 902, that contrail is frikkin HUGE...
I'm talking the size of something like Tasmania...
Especially considering the UPS plane is quite small compared to other planes...

Originally posted by tommyjo
Edited footage fooled a lot of people. Consider the fact that the 'light/burner' sequence was slowed down for effect? Oh look a burner they cry! Doug Richardson of Jane's has since retracted his initial assessment after seeing the later footage. He was fooled by the persistent contrail footage.

TJ, can you please share a link on that statement?

Originally posted by JimOberg

Originally posted by tommyjo
Edited footage fooled a lot of people. Consider the fact that the 'light/burner' sequence was slowed down for effect? Oh look a burner they cry! Doug Richardson of Jane's has since retracted his initial assessment after seeing the later footage. He was fooled by the persistent contrail footage.

TJ, can you please share a link on that statement?

Fooled by the persistent contrail footage???
Well if you believe it was flight 902 then it was there for 20 minutes and still counting..
And thats a FACT!!!

I think the bigger question that I have not seen an answer to is why has only one contrail been seen when there was more than one plane that was coming from that direction around the same time at the same altitude as UPS 902. I would think if one plane would be able to produce this one contrail then wouldn't a second plane flying in almost the same exact flight path and yes both at 37000 feet also produce one? Funny we only see one in the pics and the video. Also yes it can be shown that two planes came from the same place and was incoming at 37000 feet around the same time but only one contrail, interesting if someone can explain that to me.

Originally posted by tsurfer2000h
I think the bigger question that I have not seen an answer to is why has only one contrail been seen when there was more than one plane that was coming from that direction around the same time at the same altitude as UPS 902.

I've seen it answered about 10 times...they weren't the same altitude.

A few thousand feet difference in altitude can affect whether the contrail forms or not.

Airliners do not leave super long corkscrew contrails with a flame at the top.

I keep going back and forth on it. I guess one of my reservations on this whole "plane contrail" explanation is that as I look at stills of the footage, I see two sets of clouds ...one bank at the horizon, and one dark gray bank higher up in the photos.

I'm sure this has already been covered on one of the other 184 pages in this thread that I refuse to go back and sift through, and I may be appearing a simpleton here, but the contrail appears to pass in front of the lower bank of clouds at the horizon level, and behind the higher one to the foreground. To me, if this is the continuous contrail of a plane flying at +/- 35,000ft, that contrail should appear to be behind or over both sets of clouds because that plane should be above them from the horizon to the foreground.



I know different clouds will sit at different altitudes in the sky and higher cirrus clouds can form at elevations as high as 40,000ft, during the warmer months of the year in temperate regions such as LA. In my research, though, I read that they won't approach that height though as the weather cools off into October and November. And especially on this particular day in the region, where storms and a cold front were apparently moving through.

To me, it looks like whatever that thing is either came from the water or a nearby island or platform on the water.

While the plane contrail appears to be the accepted cause of this by many, I personally am not totally convinced yet. The fact that experts on both sides of the debate continue to go back and forth about it tells me that neither side can fully 100% explain what it was. We are 2 weeks later and still in theory mode, when in my opinion this should have been put to bed already within the first 24 hours if it was a plane contrail.

I do hope it was just a plane though because, if it was a missile, the implications are a little disconcerting ...

Originally posted by tsurfer2000h
Also yes it can be shown that two planes came from the same place and was incoming at 37000 feet around the same time but only one contrail, interesting if someone can explain that to me.

Show it.

You say it can be done -- please prove that.

Following on from my previous post. Gil Leyvas mentions something very interesting in his CBS interview. He mentions seeing something similar on the Thursday 4th November.

Interview link at following.

losangeles.cbslocal.com...

Gil Leyvas stated:

"Well, I realized that it was something that we saw earlier from the week before -- we saw something very similar the past Thursday, and immediately I realized that it was something very similar, and called on the 2-way there to our assignment desk to let them know that we were seeing it again. It's not as dramatic as the one from yesterday"

UPS902 using a McDonnell Douglas MD-11 flew the same route/time on the 4th from Honolulu to Ontario, California. I wonder if Gil Leyvas still has film from the 4th November as it might just put this whole event to rest? Was Gil filming the UPS MD-11 on 4th November at sunset?

From 4th November - UPS902. I had to register to view so possibly the link won't form? Details recorded have the 4th November UPS902 flight arriving at Ontario (KONT) at 18:05 PST. On the 8th November UPS902 arrived at Ontario (KONT) at 18:02 PST.

flightaware.com...

flightaware.com...

8th November for comparison.

flightaware.com...

TJ

Has anybody already suggested that this "rocket" was a rushed demonstration for the financiers of the Space Experience Curaçao (SXC)...??

Dutch airline company KLM has shown interest in the project and they expect to be able to have the project up and running in the second quarter of 2011 (that's three years sooner than expected!!!). They have been visiting XCOR extensively in the last month for demonstrations.

XCOR

Headlines are saying 2014, inside information is saying 2th quarter 2011..... just saying. (Secrecy is a big issue for the money boys)

Peace

reply to post by commonsense2010


read the thread rather than just posting, the "flame on top" is sunlight reflecting off the plane

2nd line

Originally posted by woogleuk
reply to post by commonsense2010

 

read the thread rather than just posting, the "flame on top" is sunlight reflecting off the plane

2nd line

I have read the thread thank you. And from watching the video over and over many times, I don't believe the light to be a "reflection from the sun" more than I can throw Rosie O'Donnell across a football field.

Airliners can leave short corkscrew contrails, but I can't see how an airliner could even remotely leave a corkscrew contrail as long as and as huge as this one. One only has to examine the stills and see the enormous corkscrew shape to see it is not a regular airliner.

I keep reading how slow this thing is going and how the sun is reflecting off of an airliner. Bunch of rubbage. I go with what the experts state and most independent experts have stated that this is not a regular airliner.