Chopper 2 Films Red-Hot Streak Moving Behind Emp. State Bldg

reply to post by harrytuttle


harry, excellent efforts, but I'm afraid that sort of logic and science will fall on deaf eyes Or, is it blind ears??

I've been typing my fingers blue in the face, trying to point out relative motion, point-of-view of the camera doing the filming, the motion of the platform that carries the camera, the apparent relative motion of the buildings in the foreground, versus the object at "infinity" (in photography speak, regarding the focal length), etc, etc, etc....

All to no avail.

Is it a bit like trying to explain how a television works, to someone from the 16th century...if you could bring that person here?

Or, is it like trying to teach algebra to my cat???

reply to post by DJW001


This whole Con-missile debate is ridiculous. One plane (out of dozens if not hundreds) doesn't just make one contrail. If the conditions are favorable to contrails/condensation then why weren't other 'planes' leaving these trails?
What? The camera just happened to capture ONE contrail at a serendipitous altitude at the right time over major cities? (very reminiscent of the coincidental "spiral")

It's just freakin' ridiculous people.
Those who say these were regular airplanes------ (which apparently no one could figure out for 2 days) that were taking off from regular airports and carrying regular people or parcel------ are down right insulting to the regular brain!

reply to post by Human_Alien

The camera just happened to capture ONE contrail at a serendipitous altitude at the right time over major cities?

Yes.

Tell ya what...if you want, I'll hunt through all the flights on similar flight plans (only need to focus on the ones that flew the "Foxtrot" route from Hawai'i...that is the R-578 technically) westbound, at 37,000 either a few minutes ahead of USAir 808, or a few minutes after. A difference in altitude, even on the same route, may or may not mean a contrail will be formed. So will a significant difference in time passing, when an airplane flies the same route and altitude. The atmosphere is in constant motion, and ever-changing.

SO, I'll do some sleuthing for ya....

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Oh, jumping from the California to the NYC contrail sightings....well, I did the searching for the California one, and have some answers. BUT, to the NYC contrail. Yes, it is possible for the one, at that time, to be the only flight in that particular area, to make a contrail. (I also discovered why there is only one, in the LA area too....). We didn't see him (either of them, LA or NYC) filming for hours and hours, did we? He (they) happened to catch one flight and contrail (each), shot it and then hyped it. Simple.

reply to post by Human_Alien


Excuse me... where did I say I thought it was a contrail? I clearly stated that I think it is a reflection of the sunset. Furthermore, I will go so far as to say that the cameraman knew it was a reflection at the time. If he thought for a moment there was the slightest possibility that it was a missile, don't you think he would have notified the Air Force and City Emergency Services? After all, New Yorkers can be very skittish when it comes possible airborne terrorist attacks. Remember the hue and cry last year when Air Force 1 flew too low over the Statue of Liberty? This was yet another cynical attempt to pass off non-news as something mysterious and terrifying. People all over the country are looking up into the sky seeing missiles. It's ridiculous.

reply to post by neonitus


I saw a contrail yesterday that was only about 10 times the length of the jet and consistently ended that far behind it. So short contrails do exist. It didn't look quite like that, but similar in proportion.

Let's see Contrails making news daily now?

I don't buy it, they have been around for as longs as jet planes.

Something is up.

Thanks for posting this up OP. I'd believe this was a contrail made from an aircraft if it was an SR71 with the throttles shoved through the firewalls while it's dumping fuel. But since thats not the case I believe it's another missile/rocket type craft. I think everyone should go outside today at sunset and watch the skies with something to record it with. Since the sun never sets on ATS we should have quick global coverage and see exactly how many other places this is happening.

Contrail? NO. I have never seen a contrail move like that. Jet plane flies along puts out contrail, contrail stays put and gets longer. This "contrail" was moving very fast, and was HUGE. I wish someone could come up with some size estimate.

Until someone comes along with some better explanation, far as I am concerned it was a UFO.

reply to post by 2ndFUTURE


In the new spirit of civility breaking out on these boards I will refrain from the expletive ridden post I would like to type in response to this.

This to me looks like a normal sunset obscured by clouds. At certain points of the video the anomaly changes shape, you can just see the lights leading edge is curved.

The apparent motion is due to:

1. Perspective, as has already been explained. The sun is at infinity and the buildings are very close.
2. The camera is moving as it is inside the chopper. It is not panning from a fixed point. Also the helicopter may itself be flying along a curved flight path.
3. It is even possible that the video has been speeded up somewhat.

To check this out, someone cleverer than me needs to do some kind of photo analysis of the scene to see if any further light can be observed/teased out from behind the clouds etc.

Also we should check where the sun would have been in that place at that time of day. This would be the easiest way to prove me wrong. Please someone do it. Because I want to believe, it's just life tends to be more mundane..

Even the female news anchor couldn't contain her disbelief.
Let's see if she ever shows up again or if she has been "let out of her contract" for personal reasons or something...

Ok can someone explain this to me like I was 5 years old....

So when I see this in the sky, they are not chemtrails but contrails from planes and perfectly natural?



But when I see something streaking across the sky, that remains the same size and leaves no trail behind it at all it is a contrail also?

Am I missing something here or is that basically the message?

Originally posted by cj6
reply to post by Steve8511

 

If it were a missile, and im not saying it isnt, then that would make 2 missiles launches since yesterday and my question is where are these missiles going?? Shouldnt there be a blast and possible ppl being injured or some kind of damage?? Im just saying if they are missiles they wouldnt just be flyin through the air and then disappearing...

Why does there have to be a 'blast' and people being injured/damage? It is quite possible that a weapon could be silent and deadly. Just look at the Gulf.

reply to post by MrWendal


Your linked photo is showing a snapshot, a moment in time captured, of a variety of contrails that formed when conditions were ripe for them to remain persistent.

The event over NYC showed an airplane making a contrail that dissipated at a particular rate, based on the conditions that existed at THAT time and location and altitude, on that day.

For that stretch of time it flew through a relatively homogeneous area, an air mass that was about the same in relative humidity for several miles in expanse, the contrail formed, and then after a certain length of time it evaporated, back into water vapor. Just as clouds will do. (I will find some time-lapse examples to show you, at the bottom).

So, depending on how long the contrail remained, before it evaporated, determines its apparent "length" behind the airplane.

The apparent "motion" (and extreme "velocity") of the airplane/contrail combination was, as explained already, an ILLUSION caused by the motion of the camera as it filmed. Either intentionally by the cameraman (knowing as he likely does, about perspective and apparent relative motion effects, in-camera), or just by happenstance. Either way, when they present it as they did (IF they did) they were being deceptive (or ignorant) or both.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Here is one example of clouds. In the video there are several angles, as the view cuts from different fixed locations. Each time, you can see that a wind is blowing form one direction (most times, from left to right, in the video). Note how the clouds form, and don't "move" with the wind, but "evolve" and grow and change, while staying roughly in the same location. This is because where the clouds are existing, it is humid enough for the water vapor to precipitate into visible form...this case, liquid water droplets. In fact, the water and vapor ARE all flowing with the wind, but the vapor state is invisible to your eye....then, it condenses out, you see the clouds, and then as the wind continues, what water there was evaporates back into invisible vapor.

It is harder to write it out, than to just show and describe it, but this will have to do:



Maybe somewhere online is an instructional video, that also explains it, perhaps better than I can.....

I think its moving a little too fast to be a contrail?

Also contrails only happen above a certain altitude don't they? depending on weather variations of course, but looks a little low to be a plane producing a contrail.

Can anyone share what the weather was like in NY when this was filmed please?

To me it reminds me of the fireball footage that was taken at a Ball game some time back, does anyone remember the footage I mean?

I found a couple to show you what I mean, if my memory serves me right we are going through the remnants of a Comet trail? one of the annual Meteor shows we have.







Obviously I am not saying it is a Meteor for certain, but if I can I would like to share some thoughts I had over the past few days, if we are going through the remains of a Comet trail, perhaps there are several that they spotted that are a little to large for comfort, and that is what they were shooting at with the Missile off the Californian coast, and the other one reported from Phoenix, that many have thought was mistaken for the official launch at Edwards I think it was.

There has been a lot going on this week in the skies and around the World with both Obama and Cameron visiting India and China (not together) I also heard there are a couple of other European leaders out there as well, I don't know if its even significant or even connected.

I just refuse to accept the Californian event was a Contrail, all of a sudden its become the excuse of the month it seems, maybe I am seeing a pattern that doesn't exist as I said a lot going on for everyone.

I would love to hear if anyone else has an opinion though.



Anyhow that is what this reminds me of

saw alot of shiny sundown contrails...and nothing unusual on this...but..

wat makes me thinking was....its pretty fast for a usual plane isnt it?

reply to post by angrydog

Let's have a look at part of the California "missile" video from Monday. Please make note of the parts where the ground is in view.

KCBS video

Notice how the object's trail and the clouds appear to be moving relative to the ground? Especially at to thirteen to seventeen seconds mark.

Now here's the New York City object.

CBS video

This shot is much tighter. The object appears to be traveling at a high rate of speed relative to the building in the foreground. But it really isn't. The illusion is caused by the camera being on a moving platform. The same as in the California video. The effect is not as pronounced in the first video because its a much wider shot.

reply to post by weedwhacker


No offense dude, but that is an over estimation of your analytical skills. The majority of military officers, for example General McInerny, have stated with 100 percent certainty it is a rocket/missile. Remember, condesention and knowlege are in no way related. And I personally don't believe that you could explain how television works any better than Obama's grandmother in Kenya.

reply to post by weedwhacker


All I know is this. I've lived near Barksdale AFB for fifty years. As you may imagine, I know what a contrail looks like. That was not a contrail. In fact, it wasn't a chem trail. It was a rocket plume. Part of the reason this country is in such deep trouble is that too many people employ the "willful suspension of disbelief" and support whatever the government tells them. It was no optical illusion, it was no cloud. As most of the military officers have stated, it was a rocket plume.
Let me also point out that a number of posters here and on other similar sites are employed by the gummint. Notice how when a credible post is made regarding planet x, fema camps, or anything that may contradict the kenyan's agenda, and this is particularly true on youtube, a blizzard of professionally produced video's are there to rebuff the post within the hour.
As an example, when a photo was leaked from the south pole telescope, 300 rebuttals that looked as if they were produced by Steven Speilberg suddenly appeared.
Mind you, I'm not putting you in that category (after all, you're a klingon) , but these are amazingly easy to spot.
If you posted a clip of one of Obama's girly first pitches at a ballgame, within 30 minutes you'd have 58 videos of retired liberal baseball players who would attest that Obama threw so hard it was a miracle the catcher didn't break his hand, and that the Yankees plan on signing him for the 2013 season.

reply to post by weedwhacker


The relative motion you speak of would make the objects in the foreground in this case the buildings, look like they are moving quickly in comparison to the distant object. Not the other way around. Maybe you should get your cat to teach you some algebra, amongst other things.

reply to post by WeAreAllGod


You still don't understand the perspective thing?

The camera has the "object" (airplane and contrail) centered in the frame, as the platform the camera is on is moving (the helicopter).

Try it with your own video camera, sometime. From a moving car. Set up a situaiton, distant object in the sky, something in the foreground, bottom of frame, keep distant object centered and videotape it. You will see.....

OR....have a look through your in-home movie collection perhaps. Watch them with sound off, and just pay attention to camera movements, and optical illusions with foregrounds/backgrounds and realtive motions/speeds.

You will see....