|
|
RidesTheWind
Joined: 27 Feb 2001
Posts: 1255
Location: The Void |
changing their tactics
 Sun Mar 25, 2001 9:19 pm
|
 |
|
It would appear that "THEY" are trying to develop less obvious chemtrails to deliver their goodies to the masses.Twice today I have had planes way up there,far enough up it makes photgraphing without a telephoto impossible...You can just see the white plane.Its short sort of and not pointed.More like a suppository shape.Thats where they need to put these planes.These trails fluff out into a thin white haze that covers the sky almost before you know it.Its not a heavy haze,just enough to obscure the planes
from being photograhed clearly...The white out is very quick.Its hard to follow patterns now with this new delivery system.
You can hear them clearly up there but you can't see them well.Anyone know of a camera that can photograph through fog??? In order to keep up with these fools we need to go high tech here.... |
| |
|
|
cydoniaquest
Joined: 12 Aug 2000
Posts: 797
Location: nowhere |
|
Sun Mar 25, 2001 9:33 pm
|
|
|
One thing I've noticed RTW, is that when the first layers of haze are laid, it can obscure aircraft flying above it...even though to a ground observer, the sky may appear relatively blue.
I would think by now that someone with a telephoto lense (besides Carnicom) would have gotten a damning close up picture of one of these things by now. I can't afford the equipment yet, but surely someone out there has something that will do the job.....you'd think... |
| |
|
|
Thermit
Joined: 08 Jul 2000
Posts: 3136
Location: Texas |
|
Sun Mar 25, 2001 9:43 pm
|
|
|
NorrinRadd has taken some decent shots.
This is one of his shots. He said it was laying long persistent trails, didn't have Flight Explorer so can't say for sure that it is military. I tried to compare the plane to various mil jets. It seems to most closely match a kc-10/dc-10 style. Although there is a discrepancy of length of the rear fuselage, that may or may not be due to angle of view. Any ideas? |
| |
|
|
RidesTheWind
Joined: 27 Feb 2001
Posts: 1255
Location: The Void |
|
Sun Mar 25, 2001 9:58 pm
|
|
|
Hey Thermit...Yep that looked like the plane
but the body seemed fatter.Thats why I called it the suppository...Very similar indeed. They are still out there laying very LONG lines and many short bursts of trails too. One plane appeared to have made a 90 degeee angle..Is this possible. |
| |
|
|
RidesTheWind
Joined: 27 Feb 2001
Posts: 1255
Location: The Void |
|
Sun Mar 25, 2001 10:02 pm
|
|
|
Cydoniaquest...I am without my camera as mine is on the fritz and no one to repair it.Would you believe I was taking pictures with a built in a box kind just now...You never know.The one day I did see a humdinger I had no camera at all.Will Thomas was sorry about that.It was the phantom all white suppository plane with a small white plane directly behind it in the trail.I guess it was checking levels of poison or something.
By the way...Is there a trucker webpage one could stir up the pot on about doing a truck-in in washington?
[Edited 1 times, lastly by RidesTheWind on 03-25-2001] |
| |
|
|
Dirk Digler
Joined: 16 Mar 2001
Posts: 126
|
|
Sun Mar 25, 2001 11:25 pm
|
|
|
hello guys,
this is a Boeing 767-300. i am fairly familiar with it as i spend alot of time flying it. cant tell what airline it is because i cant see the tail.
it is a very popular aircraft.
if you measure the distance between the egines and the distance between the trails where they begin then it is fairly obvious that the trails originate from the engines.
i know some have theorized that the chemical, or aluminum (metal) is put into the fuel. highly unlikely as any cheimcal or biological would be adversely effected by the burning of the fuel, and aluminum would not be very healthy for the engines
[Edited 1 times, lastly by Dirk Digler on 03-25-2001] |
| |
|
|
TintDude
Joined: 05 Feb 2001
Posts: 46
Location: nil |
|
Sun Mar 25, 2001 11:36 pm
|
|
|
i know some have theorized that the chemical, or aluminum (metal) is put into the fuel. highly unlikely as any cheimcal or biological would be adversely effected by the burning of the fuel, and aluminum would not be very healthy for the engines
Oh really, hmm, then I guess this site about aluminum used as a ram jet fuel must be preposterous. http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1951/naca-rm-e51b02/
[Edited 1 times, lastly by TintDude on 03-25-2001] |
| |
|
|
cydoniaquest
Joined: 12 Aug 2000
Posts: 797
Location: nowhere |
|
Mon Mar 26, 2001 1:55 am
|
|
|
That’s a great photo by marksky Thermit......but my difficulty with it is that the trails are perfectly aligned with the engines, like Dirk says, and I don’t think it therefore proves anything out of the ordinary. I would point out though that there is a working patent for aluminum containing fuel to pass through the engines without harming them. The inventor claims that this stuff just polishes the turbine blades after leaving the burner section, and apparently it's been tested. I’ll have to see if I can find that patent (I think Seeker knows the number and inventor).
Any way, the following photos are what I was talking about. It seems nobody but Carnicom as of yet has photos like these showing massive trails that do not align with engines. Notice on one of the photos that there even appears to be spray nozzles at regular intervals along the wingspan, and the trail seems to further divide into many little striations. I wish somebody could get more photos like these so we could get past the arguments that Carnicom had these doctored in some way.
|
| |
|
|
Thermit
Joined: 08 Jul 2000
Posts: 3136
Location: Texas |
|
Mon Mar 26, 2001 4:56 am
|
|
|
quote:
but my difficulty with it is that the trails are perfectly aligned with the engines
That is exactly what I would expect them to do, if they were attempting to hide a spraying operation. They know that some people will be looking closely. If they did anything other than place the dump location in line with the engines, they would lose way to much plausable denyability. |
| |
|
|
Dirk Digler
Joined: 16 Mar 2001
Posts: 126
|
|
Mon Mar 26, 2001 5:05 am
|
|
|
hello guys and gals,
i will be the first one to admit if i make a mistake. i was not aware of the patent for the aluminum. that is a new one to me. up until now, metal particles in jet engines was not a good thing.
i dont think that a connection has been made at this point but it is a start.
thermit, your second aircraft is a 767-200. just a slightly shorter fuselage than the
-300.
Cy, of all the "chemtrail" photos i have seen these are the most difficult to explain. most likely vapor being formed on top of the wing from the lift being generated. you see this alot at lower altitudes escpecially on take-off on very moist days.
but to look at it from another angle, if you believe that the pictures are not naturally occurring then you have to believe chemicals are being sprayed from the entire trailing edge of the wings, not just from a couple of nozzles. not sure that this can be down with any current airliners as all these nozzles would intervere with the flaps, ailerons not to mention the aerodynamic effects. i would point out that the photos do show common airliners (md80's 767's, etc)
[Edited 1 times, lastly by Dirk Digler on 03-25-2001] |
| |
|
|
cydoniaquest
Joined: 12 Aug 2000
Posts: 797
Location: nowhere |
|
Mon Mar 26, 2001 5:08 am
|
|
|
Excellent point Mark! I think I made this exact point some time back to "Canex"....or "Elvis Lives". After all, if I were designing a spray program this is exactly what I would do!! (Hate to give em ideas though) |
| |
|
|
cydoniaquest
Joined: 12 Aug 2000
Posts: 797
Location: nowhere |
|
Mon Mar 26, 2001 5:26 am
|
|
|
Dirk,
I'm no mechanical engineer, but even I could conceive of a simple piping/nozzle system that might not interfere with the ailerons or fowl the fowler flaps (ha ha)...when they are not deployed in cruising flight, that is. Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't most minor course corrections in flight on large aircraft achieved by spoilers on the top of the wing (as opposed to ailerons) anyway?
Such a plumbing system might even be external to the wing, and cause a bit of drag, yet not damage the lift and still be cost effective to retrofit. Now a tanker system in an aircraft not normally designed to be a tanker is another story altogether (as far as costs go)...so assuming a huge budget, these might be very customized systems indeed!
Due to the absolute volume and persistence of the plumes of contrails produced, I can't conceive of these being strake vortices or any product of vapor condensation. One thing is also certain...these are not being produced by the engines.
|
| |
|
|
Dirk Digler
Joined: 16 Mar 2001
Posts: 126
|
|
Mon Mar 26, 2001 5:29 am
|
|
|
just a follow up to the "aluminum in the jet engine" thing. while research has been done into the subject, it is obvious that it would have to be not just a modified but probably a whole new jet engine designed specifically for this.
its possible but my point is that this emiminates its use in airliners. some have speculated that the aluminum was being covertly combined with jet-A for use in your everyday scheduled airliners. thats not happening unless the chemtrail guys have figured out how to re-engine a AA757 in a matter of minutes. |
| |
|
|
cydoniaquest
Joined: 12 Aug 2000
Posts: 797
Location: nowhere |
|
Mon Mar 26, 2001 5:40 am
|
|
|
I'll look for this patent...but I think the inventor claims that this fuel with aluminum additive can be used in any turbine engine. The particles are aparently small enough to not cause FOD damage, yet at the same time, are somehow not consumed in the heat of the burners. Chemtrail guru William Thomas mentioned this patent on a recent Coast to Coast....so it must be true, right?
Anyway, if it has a patent number, it can be looked up. This information shouldn't be too hard to get. I think the stated purpose of this patent was even so blunt as to proclaim it as a form of weather mod! |
| |
|
|
 
|
|
 Goto page
1, 2, 3, 4 Next
All times are GMT. The time now is Sat May 26, 2012 2:29 am
|
|
|
|
|
Login
