posted 02-17-2003 05:29 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by hitech_46253:
Again, we've seen planes at the SAME altitudes with the SAME conditions, some leaving lasting trails, others NOT. CONdensation does NOT stay in the sky for HOURS on end. Polymer fibers DO and this is what they are.

---

Apparently you've never watched Cirrus blow off the top of a thunderstorm.

F.K.

posted 02-17-2003 06:02 PM            

And we keep telling you that this is normal. Another thing that has an effect on contrail production is the type of engine. Some engines are more prone to making contrails than others. It actually seems that newer engines are more likely to create conrails than older engines, which may also be a reason why you see many more contrails now then you did in the 70s. Dont believe me?

The newer Airbus A340 is creating contrails
while the older Boeing 707 is not, but they are both no more than 300 ft from each other.

posted 02-17-2003 08:23 PM            

Im not sure which comments you made go to which photos (The WWII or airbus/707 argument photos), you kinda skipped around it seems, so if I mis-read your comments, its my fault.

Anyway, if by "I don't see the old contrails spreading into clouds" you are talking about the 1970ish contrail subject, I have seen photos in magazines from the 70s showing contrails that seem to have spread out to form clouds. I have dozens of Air Progress magazines from the 60s-80s and I see many photos showing clouds/contrails.

I've seen old WW2
photos of long contrails but this photo
looks more like a drawing

This looks like one comment, but Im assuming the second part is referring to the airbus/boeing photo.
I can assure you that the contrail you see is a real contrail and not a "drawing" or "exhaust and a rich fuel mixture". Like I said before, I have some training on Airbus Industrie aircraft and A340s cannnot spew exhaust like that under any circumstances while in flight. It is an absolutely normal contrail.

I know that "telling people
what contrails are doesnt mean that there
isn't a spray program going on.". But it does tell the people that see contrails as "unusual and poisonous chemicals being released in the atmosphere to harm us" that they are seeing normal contrail behavior, and that there is no need to hide under the table anytime American Airlines flight 726 to Seattle flys over.

Im trying to show you there is no need to be so paranoid. As you can see by the WWII photos, these long lasting contrails existed since the first plane produced them. They arent a government plot, they arent alien signaling devices, and they arent mind controlling agents.

posted 02-17-2003 08:49 PM            

No

Just because they, at one time, experimented with the stuff you just named doesnt mean that the 757 you see flying over is spraying crap on you!!!!!

They also experimented with mice at one time also, does that mean that the contrails spread out because they have mice in them???

No

You are taking one factual thing and, because of that, assuming another thing.

Your mind: I see contrails (fact) --> Gov. admits weather research (fact) --> they must be tied together somehow (opinion) --> the contrails I see must have chemicals in them (opinion)

posted 02-17-2003 10:12 PM            

Delicious: Please explain the following:

"chemmie fuel": What is this supposed to be? Jet Fuel? Chemicals? Never heard of it.

"obscurate": Ive never heard that word. I looked it up in the dictionary, and its not there. Please define.

"intentional reflective aerosol with mad scientist add-ons to make for a real witches brew: I dont even know what you are trying to say here.

posted 02-17-2003 10:43 PM            

Its hard to form a response to a comment that you cant even understand.

posted 02-17-2003 10:44 PM            

How about answering these two basic questions Delicious?

>>How much time passed between "Before" and "After" Delicious? What were the atmospheric readings at altitude at this time?<<

posted 02-17-2003 10:45 PM            

I think Delicious is trying to obfuscate the situation Houston...we have a problem?

posted 02-17-2003 11:59 PM            

Def: To make dim or indistinct: Smog obscured our view.

Obscurate, to reduce the visibility of the sky by artificial means, such as that produced by non-commercial jet fuel additives.

Elapsed Time: Probably 30-45 minutes.

posted 02-18-2003 10:56 AM            

Don't try and equate the weather you feel at the surface with what is going on 35Kft above you. They are not, can't be, never will be, the same. Not even close.

>>Please explain why the persistent trailsthat bring a clear blue sky to a whiteout always go eaast to west?<<

They all don't where I live. But I believe, and the pilots can chime in on this, that the majority of air routes are oriented from E-W/W-E.

I look forward to your pics.

posted 02-18-2003 11:03 AM            

The strict logic first of all Must have the right reference;
so the conclusions will be correct.

1) Take a point in the time axis (the origin) say O,

Now suppose that you are very very very lucky today : in the sky there is a very nice "mediterranean" sun !
Then look to the flowers, hear the birds twitting ....and wait.
suddenly in the sky a very big white airplane catch your attention !
You dont' know if you like it or not: simply watch!

2) sign in your time scale P, please.

In ten minutes you see the trail becoming more and more bigger.
Few minutes and the sun disappear from your sight almost completely.
But wait ! another airplane is coming! How lucky I am today!!
But where is the sun gone!
Now you feel cold...

3) sign in the time scale P'.

Ok, well done.

Now repeat the experience EVERY time you have a walk in a sunny day.

After several month, we can do some considerations about the stocastic process "clouds after trail in a sunny day".
we can plot the probability of having "sun after trail" vs time.
We could call the plot "avaiability of the sun" if you prefere.
Now, we have the opportunity to do some considerations and very important logic conclusions.

Since we have yet noticed that there are in the very same phisical conditions, different condensation trails
we must derive that there are different kinds of fuels.good.

But now a very clever guy says:

We love the sun and the life (fact) => we can chose only the fuel type that does not hurt the sun (fact), olè =>
=> EVERY day I see artificial and persistent clouds (fact) ...?!..???!!!

<==> I think we have a little big problem whith logic ....

posted 02-18-2003 04:43 PM            

They all don't where I live. But I believe, and the pilots can chime in on this, that the majority of air routes are oriented from E-W/W-E.

That is right. The majority of air traffic is a E-W/W-E movement. This is why air traffic that is traveling East is assigned an altitude that is an odd number (9,000ft) while traffic that is heading West is assigned even numbers (8,000ft). That is because more aircraft fly East/West than North/South. But, I see many long lasting contrails that run north-south though.