|
|
graeme
Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 171
Location: Sebastopol, CA, USA |
 Tue Jun 10, 2003 5:43 am
|
 |
|
Can anyone even speculate on it? No one has given their thoughts on this, except one person just tells me that it's funny, but won't tell me why. |
| |
|
|
ChemCaptain
Joined: 23 Apr 2003
Posts: 495
Location: United States |
|
Tue Jun 10, 2003 6:27 am
|
|
|
The best I can say is it was probably something normal that looked unnatural...
Can't offer much else  |
| |
|
|
graeme
Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 171
Location: Sebastopol, CA, USA |
|
Sun Jun 15, 2003 7:10 am
|
|
|
dead thread |
| |
|
|
msu94
Joined: 16 Feb 2002
Posts: 207
Location: Tucson, AZ |
|
Sun Jun 15, 2003 8:38 am
|
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by graeme:
Hey Cptn. Glad to have you back. I'm gonna be without internet for the next week and am sort of looking forward to it. What's the range of a VOR? So planes have to fly relatively close to its location to pick up its signal?
.
Well yes, living near a VOR station will result in more aircraft traffic overhead most likely. Range depends on altitude of the recieving aircraft, and the power output of the VOR station.
There are VOR stations all over. They are the buildings with a round base and a cone on top, often in the vicinity of airports. I have seen many while driving along highways. But sometimes they are just out in the middle of nowhere too, to provide navigation signals for aircraft, as part of an "airway"
They are rather primitive though, having been developed in the 40s I believe.
But one VOR can have several intersecting airways coming thru it, so a lot of traffic might be utilizing it, depending on its location. If you see multiple trails intersecting at one place, thats probably where multiple airways all intersect
http://www.avweb.com/newspics/ifrenrl.gif
You can see a good example in the picture in this link. The station is inside the circle, and you can see all the airways that use it to define the airway. Several do, so there would be lots of traffic over that station most likely
[Edited 3 times, lastly by msu94 on 06-15-2003] |
| |
|
|
graeme
Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 171
Location: Sebastopol, CA, USA |
|
Mon Jun 16, 2003 7:54 am
|
|
|
msu-
Since you've done some flying, would you mind reading what I posted on page 3 of this thread about what I saw in Wyoming and post your explanation on it? |
| |
|
|
DvdGStwrt
Joined: 26 Nov 2002
Posts: 41
Location: Modesto, CA USA |
|
Thu Jul 10, 2003 5:17 pm
|
|
|
You can look at my number of posts. I rarely post here either, however I do read what is posted here.
As you may know, the atmosphere is not just a mass of oxygen and nitrogen that blankets the earth. It contains other gasses, water vapor and due to warming and cooling and even the spin of the earth it moves in many ways.
The atmosphere is not homogeneous from the surface to the stratosphere. There are layers which contain more of one substance/gas than others. For instance, the Stratosphere contains more ozone than we find at ground level (naturally occurring)
Winds at ground level can be felt some days, while directly above that there is a near calm, topped by the jet stream.
During storms with high and low clouds one can see the high clouds moving slowly while the clouds below are moving fast.
Humidity (content of water vapor) can be much higher at ground level than in higher layers of the atmosphere, thus the days 'weather' may appear to be one way where we are living while directly above there are different conditions prevailing.
The exhaust of jet craft is far from clean. The burning of any fuel leaves behind residual unburnt fuel, carbons, and other chemicals. The efficiency of petroleum fuels is a few percent conversion of mass to energy, depending on the carburetor (fuel to air controllers) and the grade of fuel being used. (this is not to suggest that jets have carburetors - this is to reflect on the air to fuel ratio - oxygen being important on the burning of any fuel)
The heat in a jet engine will reduce any left over fuel into vapor, hot vapor which each individual particle is very small, far smaller than one would find in a mist spray of water for instance. (along with gasses, such as carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, methane (in some cases) hydrogen and oxygen)
It is the combination of water vapor with these fine particles that produces a vapor cloud.
The formation of ice crystals as water vapor collects on each individual particle is like throwing a rock into a still pool, the ripples spreading out causing unorganized water vapor to 'clump' into larger droplets which usually freeze into ice particles.
This is like a domino affect, spreading outward from the source, depending on the turbulence of the air before the passage of the jet, the water vapor content and the amount of particulate matter in the exhaust of the jet engine, and the amount of naturally occurring dust and debris in the atmosphere, a contrail can spread outward from the source appearing to grow as more ice crystals are made.
Regular contrails can spread and appear to be like a chem-trail. This usually occurs in the higher atmosphere, unlike chem-trails which are reported as being far lower. (note particular weather patters must be in place, such as 'still' air and higher amounts of water vapor - thus contrails will form more during one season than another)
One nice theory I have heard is that there is more particulate solid matter (dust) in the atmosphere than a few decades ago due to the amount of jet aircraft flying high over head.
It has been demonstrated that dust from the Sahara can be lifted up and transported around the globe, this is due to natural phenomena at work. The theory suggests that since the unburnt mass of fuel is much smaller particulate matter than dust, that it has remained suspended in the upper layers of the atmosphere for decades.
We know that volcanic ash can remain in the upper atmosphere for years, thus I suppose smaller particles can remain up for longer, riding the wind currents.
Jet fuel is dirty, jet planes are bad polluters, always have been. It is easy to assume that the upper atmosphere has reached a saturation point and any disturbance can lead to wide spread cloud creation when a jet liner passes through dumping more pollutants behind it.
Contrails are said to happen high up in the atmosphere (usually the cruising altitude of jet liners) chem-trails are taking place far lower, low enough to where people can make out engines and finer details of the craft than one normally does of a cruising jet liner that appears as a mere cross (wings and fuselage).
The common misconception about chem-trails is that only one kind of craft is used (military) or that the amount of material is in the hundreds of tonnes.
Military craft are associated with the heavier sprays, the crosses, grids and other 'marking' flight patterns. however, commercial jets which fly in straight lines (usually) are also contributors to the "spray" program.
The Shield Program suggests to us that the desired affect is not a heavy layer of material, but a finely dispersed layer which reflects a relatively small amount of infrared and UV back into space. Ideally this 'Shield' would be constant made up of material that stays aloft for long periods of time and requires little in the way of additional spraying. Further, it is desired to have this 'Shield' spread out and cover the whole earth in a thin layer. Practically the material will clump with water vapor and precipitate out, further, the atmosphere is in constant movement, thus opening up holes in the Shield.
Thus the reports of polymers and other material which is used in these 'sprays' which obviously is an attempt to lighten the material so it stays suspended.
The material itself is light weight, Lead is not used being a denser material (for instance) however titanium, Aluminum and barium (all being relatively less massive) are reported as being the primary materials found.
The amount of material needed is far lower per plane than what is assumed. Those chem-trail lines continue to expand and spread out even when they are no longer seen - that is the desired affect - to have the material spread out over many miles of area until it becomes a layer of haze which is barely seen, but there to reflect UV and infrared and some visible light.
The amount of titanium, aluminum, barium and other materials being 'sprayed' out of an aircraft is far lower than the amount of unburnt fuel.
I note someone mentioned 'blaming allergies' on chem-trails. I would suggest that that individual check the records, more and more people are developing allergies than ever before. Along with cancers and other health issues which is directly related to our man made environment - chem-trails or other wise.
David |
| |
|
|
ChemCaptain
Joined: 23 Apr 2003
Posts: 495
Location: United States |
|
Fri Jul 11, 2003 9:16 am
|
|
|
Wow Dave, you started off pretty good there and then just hit a downward spiral . You did a nice job of killing a lot of very stupid arguements chemmies use..
"...unlike chem-trails which are reported as being far lower"
By whom? I see tons of photos of high altitude trails being refered to as chemtrails, as you saying that they are wrong, like we've all been saying?
Yes.. yes.. I know I only focused on one tiny excerpt.. No need to comment on it 
[Edited 1 times, lastly by ChemCaptain on 07-11-2003] |
| |
|
|
Feelin Kocky
Joined: 07 Jan 2003
Posts: 537
Location: Underground Weather Control Bunker |
|
Fri Jul 11, 2003 1:08 pm
|
|
|
I'll start with this one and continue when I get up this afternoon.
>>The atmosphere is not homogeneous<<
Hmmm. Homosphere: "...The homosphere is the region in which there is no gross change in atmospheric composition, that is, all of the atmosphere from the earth's surface to about 80 or 100km. See atmospheric shell." (Glossary of Meteorology - Second Edition)
F.K. |
| |
|
|
Feelin Kocky
Joined: 07 Jan 2003
Posts: 537
Location: Underground Weather Control Bunker |
|
Sat Jul 12, 2003 2:11 am
|
|
|
>>As you may know, the atmosphere is not just a mass of oxygen and nitrogen that blankets the earth. It contains other gasses, water vapor and due to warming and cooling and even the spin of the earth it moves in many ways.<<
Actually the atmosphere pretty much is just a mass of Oxegen and Nitorgen: 78.08% Nitrogen, 20.95% Oxegen for a total of about 99% total.
Everything else is more or less a trace gas. Water vapor can vary(the MOST varied gas in the atmosphere) from 0-4% but typically not over 2.5%. Carbon Dioxide is .034% and Ozone is .000004%. That 4 x 10E minus 6.
>>Winds at ground level can be felt some days, while directly above that there is a near calm, topped by the jet stream.<<
This is a very unlikey situation. If there is a jet above, the mid level winds will very likely NOT be calm. It is, however, not uncommon, especially at night, to have strong winds 1-2 thousand feet above ground through the upper troposphere and have very light winds at the ground. Then through mixing and momentum transfer, surface winds will increase shortly after sunrise. Please ask anybody who has every lived in western high plains of the U.S. about windy days and calm nights.
>>During storms with high and low clouds one can see the high clouds moving slowly while the clouds below are moving fast.<<
With good storms, the upper level clouds(winds) are probably moving much faster than the lower clouds(winds)...mostly.
>>Humidity (content of water vapor) can be much higher at ground level than in higher layers of the atmosphere, thus the days 'weather' may appear to be one way where we are living while directly above there are different conditions prevailing.<<
Humidity. Are you referring to specific or relative humidity?
>> (note particular weather patters must be in place, such as 'still' air and higher amounts of water vapor - thus contrails will form more during one season than another)<<
What bonehead fed you this load of horse s!@#? I bet it wasn't somebody who has even the smallest clue about how the atmosphere works. Please explain what "particular weather pattern" you are referring to.
>>Jet fuel is dirty<<
No it's not. Jet engines are acutally quite efficient though we may not like the bi-products of combustion (mostly CO2, CO).
>>The amount of titanium, aluminum, barium and other materials being 'sprayed' out of an aircraft is far lower than the amount of unburnt fuel. <<
Which can't be much cuase there is nearly zero uncombusted fuel.
Conclusion: Dave knows very little about jet engines and even less about how the atmosphere works. There is nothing worse than somebody with very little knowledge on a subject pretending to explain things in laymen's terms.
F.K. |
| |
|
|
ICU812
Joined: 30 Mar 2001
Posts: 103
Location: Edmonton, Canada |
|
Sat Jul 12, 2003 7:34 am
|
|
|
Nothing worse...... except for feelinkocky insulting individuals to feel superior as opposed to an equal with a differing opinion.
Most of what you write is fact Dave. It obviously stirred something within the bowels of someone who usually responds with statements as intelligent as........"whatever".
The personal insults aren't your style Feelin'. Got cramps?
Keep up the reports and research Dave.
Can someone explain this? http://www.lightwatcher.com/chemtrails/smoking_gun.html
|
| |
|
|
ChemCaptain
Joined: 23 Apr 2003
Posts: 495
Location: United States |
|
Sat Jul 12, 2003 7:44 am
|
|
|
What the hell ICU? FW respondes to specific segments of Dave's post, There was nothing remotely close to an 'insult thread' you might see by one of the chemmies..
I mean, did you even read what FK wrote before yelling at him for insults?
Infact, you did exactly what you yelled at FK for supposidly doing. You didn't even respond to one line of information FK posted (debunking Dave's info), all you did was come in and throw insults at him.
Hypocracy...
And.. As I've said it before.. $#@#! "boohoo you insulted me" posts are one of the biggest white flags around.
[Edited 2 times, lastly by ChemCaptain on 07-12-2003] |
| |
|
|
Feelin Kocky
Joined: 07 Jan 2003
Posts: 537
Location: Underground Weather Control Bunker |
|
Sat Jul 12, 2003 8:31 am
|
|
|
>>The personal insults aren't your style Feelin'.<<
True true. What exactly do you think I insulted? I wasn't exactly trying to give a differing opinion, but I was trying to point out the obvious errors in his statements, which go to his credibility. Or lack their of in this case.
Oh ya, cramps. Funny you should mention that. I just started running agian. Oh the pain, the pain. 
F.K. |
| |
|
|
 
|
|
 Goto page Previous
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
All times are GMT. The time now is Sat May 26, 2012 9:08 am
|
|
|
|
|
Login
