posted 07-30-2002 08:39 PM            

On the back of the book's cover is a little blurb by no other than our Imperial leader, GW Bush.

On the front of the book is a photo of an airplane making a chemtrail. The chemtrail extends from the edge of the book all across the front.

So what is this?

1)The book editor/publisher thought it was a niced photo and don't know anything about chemtrail. It is a goof?

posted 07-31-2002 02:14 AM            

That's what it looks like to me klondike.

The book can also be found here.

posted 07-31-2002 11:32 AM            

Therefore, anyone who questions chemtrails is questioning the heroic acts of true partiots.

Quite a mind control technique.

These people are clever, but so far from truth that their clever minds will eventually be their own ruination.

posted 08-03-2002 12:59 AM            

From your post at Carnicom's-

"Contrails, as I recall, eminate from the wingtips of planes or from the flaps and ailerons. Moisture gets trapped in those control flaps and creates the contrail which is wispy thin."

No, you're thinking of wingtip vortices, which are an entirely different thing. Wingtip vortices are formed when the airflow rushing over the wingtip forms a very tight high pressure vortex. As the air becomes pressurized, it causes the water to condense. This can also be seen at other points along the wing, including between engine nacelles and along the wing's cambered top surface.

The moisture doesn't come from water trapped in the flaps or ailerons. It comes from ambient moisture. That's why wingtip vortices are usually a low-altitude high-humidity occurance.

"Most flights create no or very little contrail activity. And contrails only haoppen at high altitude."

That first statement is not true. Many flights produce contrails of varying persistance and character. The second is correct, depending on what you define as "high altitude". High altitudes bring colder air masses. The colder the air mass, the smaller the capacity for that air mass to hold water. At temperatures of -40 on down, the relative water capacity is very low, and it takes only a very tiny amount of water to bring the air to saturation.

Most of the water vapor is already present in the air mass, but the engine brings soot particles to the equation, and it also compresses heats and then rapidly cools the air as it moves through the engine. This is what produces the billowy white contrails you see in the sky. The soot serves as a nucleus for the ice particles to form around.

"Rocket fuel, like what's in a giuded missiles, burns white smoke in its trail. But jet engines do not burn rocket fuel."

posted 08-03-2002 11:42 AM            

Sorry, but you are wrong. Contrails are not produced from the soot of jet engines or any other part of jet engine exhaust.

Jet engines do not, and have never, produced contrails. And jet engines burn relatively cleanly too.

As I say, the only thing that even comes close to the look of chemtrails is the burning of rocket fuel, which I've seen often enough from the deck of a warship.

The closest thing to chemtrail activity is a crop dusting spray plane. They look very similar.

Besides, contrails aren't controlled as the chemtrails are. A pilot, for instance, doesn't and can't turn on and off a contrail as it is caused by naturally occuring circumstances.

People,.please don't also confuse the smoke generated from planes during airshows with chemtrails.

And contrails do not cause drought, nor can they stop the rain or dry everything out, nor soak up the moisture from clouds nor make people sick.

Chemtrails are chemtrails are chemtrails.

posted 08-03-2002 03:27 PM            

What YOU are referring to are called wingtip vortices, and they are much smaller than contrails.

THIS is a page about wingtip condensation. http://www.af.mil/environment/contrails_wingtip.shtml
Yes, I know it's a USAF page, but this information can be found and confirmed by a host of other sources.

THIS is a page about contrails. http://cimss.ssec.wisc.edu/wxwise/class/contrail.html
This was written by Steve Ackerman, a professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, and director of the CIMSS program.

"Jet engines do not, and have never, produced contrails. And jet engines burn relatively cleanly too."

Contrails and condensation vortices are two entirely different things. And yes, jet engines are "clean burning", but they still produce soot. And by burning fuel at a rate of 2000+ lbs/hour, it can produce more than enough soot to produce contrails. Some days I can see the shadow of my contrail while flying over an overcast deck of clouds. So your idea that airplane engines "do not, and have never" produced a contrail is very very wrong.

"As I say, the only thing that even comes close to the look of chemtrails is the burning of rocket fuel, which I've seen often enough from the deck of a warship."

Ok, so now a sailor on a ship can tell a bunch of pilots that they are wrong about contrails. My, how this logic works.

"The closest thing to chemtrail activity is a crop dusting spray plane. They look very similar."

I'd say that cropdusting is the ONLY chemtrail activity. Having flown through what you call a "chemtrail" at altitude, it is several hundred feet in diameter....pretty large. And it looks alot like a cloud instead of a plume of chemicals.

Here is an example of what I see every time I fly:
http://www.geocities.com/pacerlj35/contrails.html

The jet leaving the contrail was a Gulfstream business jet headed to the Miami area.

I think you are very misinformed about contrails. Do yourself a service and spend some time reading up on the subject (outside the chemtrail websites).

posted 08-03-2002 03:53 PM            

Inventor(s):
Werle; Donald K. , Hillside, IL
Kasparas; Romas , Riverside, IL
Katz; Sidney , Chicago, IL

Applicant(s):
The United States of America as represented by the Secretary of the Navy, Washington, DC News, Profiles, Stocks and More about this company

Issued/Filed Dates: Aug. 12, 1975 / July 22, 1974

Application Number: US1974000490610

IPC Class: B64D 1/16;

Class: Current: 244/136; 040/213; 116/214; 241/005;
Original: 244/136; 040/213; 116/114.F; 241/005;

Field of Search: 244/136 040/213 241/5,29 222/3;4 239/171 116/28 R,114
R,114 F,114 N,124 R,124 B,124 C

Legal Status: Gazette date Code Description (remarks) List all possible codes for US
Aug. 12, 1975 A Patent
--
July 22, 1974 AE Application data
--

Abstract

Light scattering pigment powder particles, surface treated to minimize inparticle cohesive forces, are dispensed from a jet mill deagglomerator as separate single particles to produce a powder contrail having maximum visibility or radiation scattering ability for a given weight material.

Attorney, Agent, or Firm: Sciascia; Richard S.; St. Amand; Joseph M.; Primary/Assistant Examiners: Blix; Trygve M.; Kelmachter; Barry L.

U.S. References: Show the 1 patent that references this one

Patent Issued Inventor(s)
Title
US1619183* 3 /1927 Bradner et al.
US2045865* 6 /1936 Morey
US2591988* 4 /1952 Willcox
US3531310 9 /1970 Goodspeed et al. PRODUCTION OF IMPROVED METAL
OXIDE PIGMENT
USR0015771* 2 /1924 Savage

* some details unavailable

CLAIMS:

1. Contrail generation apparatus for producing a powder contrail having
maximum radiation
scattering ability for a given weight material, comprising:

a. an aerodynamic housing;
b. a jet tube means passing through said housing, said tube means having an inlet at a forward end of said housing and an exhaust at a rearward end thereof;
c. a powder storage means in said housing;
d. a deagglomeration means also in said housing;
e. means connecting said powder storage means with said deagglomeration
means for feeding
radiation scattering powder from said powder storage means to said deagglomeration means;
f. the output of said deagglomeration means dispensing directly into said jet tube means for
exhausting deagglomerated powder particles into the atmosphere to form a contrail; and
h. means for controlling the flow of said powder from said storage means to said deagglomeration means.

2. Apparatus as in claim 1 wherein said jet tube means is a ram air jet tube.
3. Apparatus as in claim 1 wherein an upstream deflector baffle is provided at the output of said
deagglomeration means into said jet tube means to produce a venturi effect for minimizing back
pressure on said powder feeding means.
4. Apparatus as in claim 1 wherein said deagglomerator means comprises:

a. means for subjecting powder particles from said powder storage means to a hammering action to aerate and precondition the powder; and
b. a jet mill means to further deagglomerate the powder into separate particles.

5. Apparatus as in claim 4 wherein pressurized gas means is provided for operating said
deagglomeration means.
6. Apparatus as in claim 1 wherein said radiation scattering powder
particles are titanium
dioxide pigment having a median particle size of about 0.3 microns.
7. Apparatus as in claim 1 wherein said radiation scattering powder
particles have a coating of extremely fine hydrophobic colloidal silica thereon to minimize interparticle cohesive forces.
8. Apparatus as in claim 1 wherein the formulation of said powder consists of 85% by weight of
TiO2 pigment of approximately 0.3 micron media particle size, 10% by weight of colloidal silica of
0.007 micron primary particle size, and 5% by weight of silica gel having an average particle size of 4.5 microns.
9. The method of producing a light radiation scattering contrail, comprising:

a. surface treating light scattering powder particles to minimize
interparticle cohesive forces;
b. deagglomerating said powder particles in two stages prior to dispensing into a jet tube
by subjecting said powder particles to a hammering action in the first stage to aerate and
precondition the powder, and by passing said powder through a jet mill in the second stage
to further deagglomerate the powder;
c. dispensing the deagglomerated powder from the jet mill directly into a jet tube for
exhausting said powder into the atmosphere, thus forming a contrail.

10. A method as in claim 9 wherein said light scattering powder particles is titanium dioxide pigment.
11. A method as in claim 9 wherein said powder particles are treated with a coating of extremely
fine hydrophobic colloidal silica to minimize interparticle cohesive forces.
12. A method as in claim 11 wherein said treated powder particles are further protected with a silica gel powder.

Background/Summary:

BACKGROUND

The present invention relates to method and apparatus for contrail generation and the like. An earlier known method in use for contrail generation involves oil smoke trails produced by injecting liquid oil directly into the hot jet exhaust of an aircraft target vehicle. The oil vaporizes and recondenses being the aircraft producing a brilliant white trail. Oil smoke trail production requires a minimum of equipment; and, the material is low in cost and readily available. However, oil smoke requires a heat source to vaporize the liquid oil and not all aircraft target vehicles, notably towed targets, have such a heat source. Also, at altitudes above about 25,000 feet oil smoke visibility degrades rapidly.

SUMMARY

The present invention is for a powder generator requiring no heat source to emit a "contrail" with sufficient visibility to aid in visual acquisition of an aircraft target vehicle and the like. The term "contrail" was adopted for convenience in identifying the visible powder trail of this invention. Aircraft target vehicles are used to simulate aerial threats for missile tests and often fly at altitudes between 5,000 and 20,000 feet at speeds of 300 and 400 knots or more. The present invention is also suitable for use in other aircraft vehicles to generate contrails or reflective screens for any desired purpose. The powder contail generator is normally carried on an aircraft in a pod containing a ram air tube and powder feed hopper. Powder particles, surface treated to minimize interparticle cohesive forces are fed from the hopper to a deagglomerator and then to the ram air tube for dispensing as separate single particles to produce a contrail having maximum visibility for a given weight material. Other object, advantages and novel features of the invention will become apparent from the following detailed description of the invention when considered in conjunction with the accompanying drawing.

Drawing Descriptions:

DESCRIPTION OF DRAWING

FIG. 1 is a schematic sectional side-view of a powder contrail generator of the present invention.

DESCRIPTION OF PREFERRED EMBODIMENT

The powder contail generator in pod 10, shown in FIG. 1, is provided with a powder feed hopper 12 positioned in the center section of the pod and which feeds a powder 13 to a deagglomerator 14 by means of screw conveyors 16 across the bottom of the hopper. The deagglomerator 14 produces two stages of action. In the first stage of deagglomeration, a shaft 18 having projecting radial rods 19 in compartment 20 is rotated by an air motor 21, or other suitable drive means. The shaft 18 is rotated at about 10,000 rpm, for example. As powder 13 descends through the first stage compartment 20 of the deagglomeration chamber, the hammering action of rotating rods 19 serves to aerate and precondition the powder before the second stage of deagglomeration takes place in the jet mill section 22. In the jet mill 22, a plurality of radial jets 24 (e.g., six 0.050 inch diamter radial jets) direct nitrogen gas (at e.g., 120 psig) inward to provide energy for further deagglomeration of the powder. The N2, or other suitable gas, is provided from storage tanks 25 and 26, for example, in the pod.

The jet mill 22 operates in a similar manner to commercial fluid energy mills except that there is no provision for recirculation of oversize particles. Tests with the deagglomerator show that at a feed rate of approximately 11/2 lb/min, treated titanium dioxide powder pigment is effectively dispersed as single particles with very few agglomerates evident.

The nitrogen gas stored in cylinder tanks 25 and 26 is charged to 1800 psig, for example. Two stages of pressure reduction, for example, by pressure reduction valves 28 and 29, bring the final delivery pressure at the radial jets 24 and to the air motor 21 to approximately 120 psig. A solenoid valve 30 on the 120 psig line is connected in parallel with the electric motor 32 which operates the powder feeder screws 16 for simultaneous starting and running of the powder feed, the air motor and the jet mill deagglomerator.

Air enters ram air tube 34 at its entrance 35 and the exhaust from the jet mill deagglomerator passes directly into the ram air tube. At the deagglomerator exhaust 36 into ram air tube 34, an upstream deflector baffle 38 produces a venturi effect which minimizes back pressure on the powder feed system. The powder is then jetted from the exhaust end 40 of the ram air tube to produce a contrail. A pressure equalization tube, not shown, can be used to connect the top of the closed hopper 12 to the deagglomeration chamber 14. A butterfly valve could be provided at the powder hopper outlet 39 to completely isolate and seal off the powder supply when not in use. Powder 13 could then be stored in hopper 12 for several weeks, without danger of picking up excessive moisture, and still be adequately dispensed.

Preparation of the light scatter powder 13 is of a critical importance to production of a powder "contrail" having maximum visibility for a given weight of material. It is essential that the pigment powder particles be dispensed as separate single particles rather than as agglomerates of two or more particles. The powder treatment produces the most easily dispersed powder through the use of surface treatments which minimize interparticle cohesive forces. Titanium dioxide pigment was selected as the primary light scattering material because of its highly efficient light scattering ability and commercially available pigment grades. Titanium dioxide pigment (e.g., DuPont R--931) with a median particle size of about 0.3µ has a high bulk density and is not readily aerosolizable as a submicron cloud without the consumption of a large amount of deagglomeration energy. In order to reduce the energy requirement for deagglomeration, the TiO2 powder is specially treated with a hydrophobic colloidal silica which coats and separates the individual TiO2 pigment particles. The extremely fine particulate nature (0.007µ primary particle size) of Cobot S--101 Silanox grade, for example, of colloidal silica minimizes the amount needed to coat and separate the TiO2 particles, and the hydrophobic surface minimizes the affinity of the powder for absorbtion of moisture from the atmosphere. Adsorbed moisture in powders causes liquid bridges at interparticle contacts and it then becomes necessary to overcome the adsorbed-liquid surface tension forces as well as the weaker Van der Waals' forces before the particles can be separated.

The Silanox treated titanium dioxide pigment is further protected from the deleterious effects of adsorbed moisture by incorporation of silica gel. The silica gel preferentially adsorbs water vapor that the powder may be exposed to after drying and before use. The silica gel used is a powder product, such as Syloid 65 from the W. R Grace and Co., Davison Chemical Division, and has an average particle size about 4.5µ and a large capacity for moisture at low humidities.

A typical powder composition used is shown in Table 1. This formulation was blended intimately with a Patterson-Kelley Co. twin shell dry LB-model LB--2161 with intensifier. Batches of 1500 g were blended for 15 min. each and packaged in 5-lb cans. The bulk density of the blended powder is 0.22 g/cc. Since deagglomeration is facilitated by having the powder bone dry, the powder should be predried before sealing the cans. In view of long periods (e.g., about 4 months) between powder preparation and use it is found preferable to spread the powder in a thin layer in an open container and place in a 400°F over two days before planned usage. The powder is removed and placed in the hopper about 2 hours before use.

Table 1
_______________________
CONTRAIL POWDER FORMULATION
Ingredient % by Weight
_______________________
TiO2 (e.g., DuPont R-931)
85
median particle size 0.3µ
Colloidal Silica (e.g., Cabot S-101 Silanox)
10
primary particle size 0.007µ
Silica gel (e.g., Syloid 65)
5
average particle size 4.5µ

posted 08-03-2002 04:07 PM            

In circumspection of U/T's point:

quote:

---

On December 14, 2000, the New England Journal of Medicine reported that inhaling particulate matter of a size 10 microns or smaller leads to "a 5 percent increased death rate within 24 hours."

---

posted 08-03-2002 11:06 PM            

You've posted 138 messages to this chemtrail forum and you don't believe the chemtrail phenomena exists.

Seems to me very strange to post to a forum in which you have no interest other than to discredit it.

I can tell you that I have seen many many contrails over the years and you can say whatever you want about vortices and soot discharged from a jet engine. Jet engines do not create contrails. Jet engines create jet engine exhaust. Period.

I know what I've seen. No airplane discharges a contrail from the exhaust in a billowing thick smoky pattern.

You're trying to confuse whoever might check in to read this forum. And it probably works most of the time.

With minimal observation from virtually anywhere in this country I suppose, anyone can observe a chemtrail and the resulting white haze and chemclouds. And if you breathe long enough you can feel the effects in your lungs.

Anyone can see these chemtrail airplanes turn on and off their spraying apparatus.

All of these chemtrail airplanes fly at relatively low altitudes. Military planes create contrails flying at much higher altitudes.

That you post to this forum for no other purpose than to discredit the information is rather strange.

posted 08-03-2002 11:24 PM            

It is the water that is condensing and forming the contrail that you see. Water that freezes into tiny ice chrystals, just like the clouds that are in the sky.

This is the same process that happens when you run your car on a cold day in winter. The water that comes out of the tailpipe forms a cloud. Now this cloud will dissipate rather quickly at ground level, due to the fact that the relative humidity is generally very low under these conditions.

In the upper atmosphere, as Pacer pointed out, the saturation level (dew point) is quite a bit less.

posted 08-03-2002 11:36 PM            

And if these are what you call chemtrails, then why am I not getting sick and having breathing problems after I fly through these "chemtrails"?

So, you are also saying that while cruising over a cloud deck, and seeing the Learjet's shadow, along with the shadow of a billowing contrail, that this is coming from my wingtips? Then why do I NOT see anything from my wingtips? Why is EVERY other contrail I see from all the other traffic that passes over or under me forming contrails from the engines? And why have I only seen wingtip vortices at cruise altitude ONCE (when I was aboard a KC-135 and the F-15E we had refueled was trailing tip vortices)?

And why is it that those who KNOW BETTER on this board at least attempt to educate this guy that contrails do come from engine exhaust? Or are you simply too afraid to look critical of a chemtrail believer?

Here are some links:
http://www.landings.com/evird.acgi$pass*47387110!_h-www.landings.com/_landings/forums/jb/misc/jb-misc-020.html
http://www.landings.com/evird.acgi$pass*47387110!_h-www.landings.com/_landings/forums/jb/meteor/jb-meteor-009.html

posted 08-04-2002 12:35 PM            

The smoke that comes out of a tailpipe in winter is caused by a cold tailpipe. As soon as the tailpipe heats up the smoking tailpipe stops smoking. Unless of course you're burning oil, then the white smoke becomes a whiteish blue smoke and off you go.

You're trying to confuse people with a lot of technical jargon. And you're probably succeeding in lots of cases.

Why post to this board so frequently if you don't believe a chemtrail is a chemtrail. I can tell by the posts that Tracer reads another chemtrail forum also. Why do you spend so much of your time reading and posting on issues you don't believe in?

Strange, eh?

Imagine a forum dedicated to discussing God and experiences with God and what is holy and sacred.

You two would be the types who, disbelieving in God, post on the forum nonetheless and try to convince believers that God doesn't exist. Why would anyone do that?

No good reason. Unless of course you were motivated the way a satanist might be and therefore felt God and believers in God were your sworn enemies. Why else spend so much time trying to discredit something for which you feel no affinity?

Jet engines create jet engine exhaust, fellas. Some airshow jets create smoke at will. But smoke is smoke and a contrail isn't smoke.

It's kind of funny and certainly ironic thinking about military aircraft designed to create their own intercept path in the form of a nice billowy thick contrail so that everyone all around can track the plane's course visually. Nice. Did Boeing come up with that or was it Raytheon?

You'd think that with all their technical know-how these airplane designers who spend so much time and money and materials making military aircraft radar invisible could at least find a way to dampen the thick smoky contrail making jet engines they use.

What a mess. And what a peculiar thing to ask pilots to fly missions with that pesky contrail generator affixed. I guess it makes it easy for air traffic control to track the plane's path when the radars go down, eh?

Great invention that contrail generating jet engine which is affixed to so many military aircraft. It helps anyone locate the plane visually and predict the flight path. Very nice.

Go look at the Dyn-O-Mat website. Here's a company that makes a talcum like substance that can be dispersed from a plane and form what looks like a thick billowy white cloud. They make several products. One soaks up moisture. They plan to use it to publicly to alter and diminish hurricanes.

Folks, use your own good sense. Watch how these planes fly back and forth across the sky at relatively low altitudes, at low speeeds, flying straight courses, doing nothing more than dispersing chemicals.

And watch how the entire sky transforms.

There is absolutely no reason for refueling aircraft to fly dozens upon dozens of missions, back and forth across the sky over populted areas and agricultural areas alike, at low altitude, low speed, flying straight paths .... They dump so many chemicals where I live that the entire sky, most mornings, is almost completely hazed over. This has been going on for months. And I live in an agricultural area with very few people in it and little or no industry.

This ain't H2O folks. It isn't water vapor.

As the web of deceit begins to unravel all over in almost every area of human endeavor, we will be left with little to test the validity of experience. Except of course our own good sense, using our own subjective presence.

The "experts" and pundits have lead the world's population to the brink of this global elite police state takoever. And we have given over our power of discernment by trusting the psuedo-science and fake history that passes for truth.

Time to own up to our own credibility, our own inner knowledge. To create a strong sense of personal grounding so that each of us, every one of us, becomes the expert of our own experience.

The internal experience is Holy. The subjective experience is closest to God.

Peace to all.

posted 08-04-2002 09:57 PM            

I'm a pilot. I'm a military pilot. And I'm also an airlift pilot who flies aircraft that are often cited as "chemtrailing". And I'm also a person who believes in the concept of "innocent until proven guilty", and I don't see any proof directly linking contrails to chemtrails. So there you have it...my motives. Let's also not forget that it's certainly my RIGHT to believe in my own position, and be as vocal about it as I wish, just as you are about your position.

It's awfully strange that the chemtrail believers, many of whom concede that many contrails are simply normal contrails, are silent in providing a little background to Klondike. I mean, having this guy go around and say that engines do not produce contrails only makes your believers look even less educated as a whole.

Funny. Thermit admits that at least some contrails are contrails, and he knows that contrails are produced by engine exhaust. Many chemtrail sites also talk about contrails being produced by engine exhaust. Meterologists and aviation experts all agree that contrails are produced by engine exhaust. Then there's lonely klondike, who believes that all those other people are mistaken, because you worked on a Navy ship and watched rockets fire into the sky. So somehow you've got this mysterious benefit of knowing more than every other pilot, meteorologist, and even many chemtrail activists. Outstanding.

posted 08-04-2002 10:13 PM            

Wrong. The smoke (cloud) that you see at the back of the tailpipe from a cold engine is not due to a cold tailpipe. It is due to the temperature of exhaust coming out of the tailpipe. When the engine warms up, the exhaust, unless you are deep winter in Siberia or soewhere, is hot enough so that it does not form a supersaturated mixture. Therefore, the mixture of the exhaust and ambient no longer condenses the cloud that you observed when the engine was cold.

posted 08-04-2002 11:28 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by klondike:
Dear Tracer and Bonehead:

The smoke that comes out of a tailpipe in winter is caused by a cold tailpipe. As soon as the tailpipe heats up the smoking tailpipe stops smoking. Unless of course you're burning oil, then the white smoke becomes a whiteish blue smoke and off you go.

You're trying to confuse people with a lot of technical jargon. And you're probably succeeding in lots of cases.

---

Apparently the only one confused here is you. This isn’t rocket science here, just basic, fundamental science. A little bit of chemistry, a little bit of physics, a little bit of meteorology, etc. I am sorry if you can not follow it.

quote:

---

Why post to this board so frequently if you don't believe a chemtrail is a chemtrail. I can tell by the posts that Tracer reads another chemtrail forum also. Why do you spend so much of your time reading and posting on issues you don't believe in?

Strange, eh?

Imagine a forum dedicated to discussing God and experiences with God and what is holy and sacred.

You two would be the types who, disbelieving in God, post on the forum nonetheless and try to convince believers that God doesn't exist. Why would anyone do that?

No good reason. Unless of course you were motivated the way a satanist might be and therefore felt God and believers in God were your sworn enemies. Why else spend so much time trying to discredit something for which you feel no affinity?

---

I don’t have to discredit the theory, you are doing a pretty good job yourself.

quote:

---

Jet engines create jet engine exhaust, fellas. Some airshow jets create smoke at will. But smoke is smoke and a contrail isn't smoke.

---

Well finally you get something right! Maybe there is hope for you yet.

Jet engines do create jet exhaust. And what is jet exhaust, but the combustion product of jet fuel.

Jet fuel is a mixture of hydrocarbons. That is it consists of various chemicals with a chain of carbon and hydrogen atoms. (see a chemistry web site if this confuses you) When these hydrocarbons are mixed with the oxygen in the air and ignited, they are converted into carbon dioxide (CO2), and water (H2O). This is jet exhaust. It takes a lot of fuel to push a fully loaded 747 500 mph though the sky.

Smoke on the other hand consists of unburned fuel (soot). Most modern jet engines no longer produce appreciable amounts of smoke.

quote:

---

It's kind of funny and certainly ironic thinking about military aircraft designed to create their own intercept path in the form of a nice billowy thick contrail so that everyone all around can track the plane's course visually. Nice. Did Boeing come up with that or was it Raytheon?

You'd think that with all their technical know-how these airplane designers who spend so much time and money and materials making military aircraft radar invisible could at least find a way to dampen the thick smoky contrail making jet engines they use.

What a mess. And what a peculiar thing to ask pilots to fly missions with that pesky contrail generator affixed. I guess it makes it easy for air traffic control to track the plane's path when the radars go down, eh?

Great invention that contrail generating jet engine which is affixed to so many military aircraft. It helps anyone locate the plane visually and predict the flight path. Very nice.

---

Actually it is a problem. See the following for accounts of contrails in warfare.

http://www.astro.ku.dk/~holger/IDA/notes.html#19

(warning, slow page)

quote:

---

This ain't H2O folks. It isn't water vapor.

---

I am sorry, but yes it is.

BTW, Klondike I am interested in how you can explain these historic photos of contrails from WWII:

Contrails over St. Paul’s Cathedral in the Battle of Briton

And how about this one from the September 1944 issue of Time Magazine:

Or this one:

Note that the planes at the lower altitude are hardly producing any contrails, yet the ones at higher altitudes are "spraying" all over the sky!