It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
So odd....I've been flying for almost forty years, and the sky STILL looks exactly the same to me....because I have the understanding, knowledge and life experience to tell the differences. IF something were "odd", it wold be obvious to me.
Requests for access to research flight hours begin with the submission of an Initial Request for Aircraft Support (Word (35kb), PDF (30kb)) to the manager of the facility. Based on information provided on this form, a DOE-empowered advisory panel recommends to DOE an award of flight hours for the proposed use. Then the user completes a more detailed Research Aircraft Deployment Document (RADD: Word (180kb), PDF (85kb)) in coordination with the RAF manager. RAF users not associated with the DOE Atmospheric Science Program will need to work with the RAF manager on an estimate of the cost of offsite aircraft logistics such as 1) landing fees, 2) hangar rental, 3) ground support facilities, and 4) labor and expenses for a PNNL flight crew of two pilots and two scientific support personnel. During the preparation of RADD, schedules are confirmed and safety and environmental compliance requirements are addressed.
The RAF does not cover the cost of engineering studies and airframe modifications needed for custom installation of project-specific equipment and instrumentation. Such costs must be budgeted separately through a contract with PNNL or Battelle. When requested, RAF staff will assist users in estimating these costs.
Source
Gulfstream-1 Research Aircraft
The G-1 is a large twin turboprop with performance characteristics of contemporary production aircraft. It is capable of measurements to altitudes approaching 30,000 feet over ranges of 1500 nautical miles, and can be operated at speeds that enable both relatively slow sampling and rapid deployment to field sites throughout the world. The aircraft is configured for versatile research applications. It accommodates a variety of external probes for aerosol, radiation, and turbulence measurements and internal sampling systems for a wide range of measurements. The G-1 has sufficient cabin volume, electrical power and payload capabilities, and flight characteristics to accommodate a variety of instrument systems and experimental equipment configurations. Internal instrumentation is mounted in removable racks to enable rapid reconfiguration as necessary. Data from most systems are acquired on a central computer that is tailored to airborne research data acquisition. In addition to acquiring the various analog and digital input signals, it can be configured to communicate with and/or control other systems onboard, and to provide time synchronization to other computers.
Source
Originally posted by dellbboytrotter
reply to post by GobbledokTChipeater
A few years ago i wrote to my MP and asked him what these trails in the sky were, he wrote to john prescott and bob ainsworth MP and i had a reply saying it was the HN03 MIXED IN WITH THE JET FUEL.
Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
Originally posted by mydarkpassenger
reply to post by MathiasAndrew
Dude, there's a helluva lot more to be concerned about than some stupid conjecture about what turns out to be CONtrails. Sourcing another ATS thread doesn't cut it as evidence.
I have supplied about 20 pages of valid evidence in this thread. I am hardly sourcing from a different thread.
I'm just tired of the same dis-info agents maligning and ridiculing all the valid, credible evidence that is available. I at least would like to give some of you other dis-info agents a chance to debunk what I have found.
Go ahead and take your best shots at this video.
Bring me ONE pilot...of the THOUSANDS that would exist if this CHEMTRAIL HOAX were real. Bring me one.
Just one...please....
Originally posted by phantomjack
Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
Originally posted by mydarkpassenger
reply to post by MathiasAndrew
This video shows several commercial craft flying normal parallel flight routes leaving CONTRAILS in their wake. I am not sure what part of this video is proof of "CHEMTRAILS". Most often, commercial jets fly in almost identical direction and altitude, every day, even with the same flight numbers. The only variations occur would be with respect to weather conditions at that altitude that time of day, which vary day by day, hour by hour.
You have shown nothing.
Bring me ONE pilot...of the THOUSANDS that would exist if this CHEMTRAIL HOAX were real. Bring me one.
Just one...please....
you asked for a pilots perspective?
Here you go...
www.nmsr.org...
and should you want to do more due diligence, simple google "pilots against chemtrails"
Originally posted by Seagle
Anyone who doubts that the Government is sponsoring a range of atmospheric experiments just needs to look at all the various University research projects that have been fully funded by the Government. Each is just a piece in an overall puzzle.
Here is a pretty staggering statistic - The link below is to a website that is like a national register for aircraft owners, manufacturers, suppliers etc. You can search via company, Government dept, etc etc. I used the Government database and typed in University and was shocked because if I am seeing it right then US Universities own and operate a combined total of around 700 aircraft.
US National Register Airplane Owner/Supplier
Dis-info agens paid by the post.
Originally posted by lemmehowdt
Have read the entire thread up to this point - let's look at what we know and don't know. We know that some planes leave short trails called comtrails and others leave long trails that turn into clouds called chemtrails. We know that we have chemistry data from both air and water samples that have anomalous readings for barium, aluminum and strontium. We know that there is a whole field of science called geo-engineering. Is there an MSDS on the field?
There is a lot going on - the sun has been particularly active in sending out cosmic radiation. There are reports that we have moved into a cosmic cloud. The pace of life makes it seem that time is speeding up. 2012 is only a year away. The tensions are rising, because this topic is shrinking at some of the basics of the belief system. It is all breaking down and we are arguing semantics.
I agreed to be on ATS radio to talk about the chemistry of the alleged chemtrails. If you watched the movie, i tried to explain the toxicology of the materials in question there. The word expert is made of two parts - ex means former and we all know what a spurt is. I try to think in all fields using chemistry as a basis. If anyone on this thread wants to formulate good questions - we can address them live on air and really push the state of the myth forward.
Don't blindly trust the scientists. Think the answers to the questions through for yourself - in your personal world view. Does it all add up? What is it that we don't know. BTW - the holographic projection idea is a new spin to me - it really sounds like a viable alternative - how many more can we come up with?
Anyone want to help a chemist debunk all of chemistry?
Originally posted by Byteman
reply to post by mydarkpassenger
Well, then. You can do what EVERY other Chemtrail-denier FAILS to do.
Go find a video or a series of pictures that conclusively prove persistent spreading CONtrails. These materials must be from before 1990, in order to thoroughly avoid the period widely believed to be the start of CHEMtrails.