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.

 

Contrail Generators and the F-22.

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 21 2005 @ 08:33 PM
link   
I ran across a rather humorous mention in a fairly academic article.
The article makes reference to a couple of Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University folks observing a pair of F-22s dog-fighting, and, get this, mention of an alleged contrail suppression system, insinuating that the couple of F-22s dog-fighting were using contrail generators.


At any rate, here is the mention from the article:


DAY 2 of Operation "Blue Ribbon"

Morning came with a bang, literally, as a sonic boom woke us from our sleep. We figured that was a good sign for the day and got moving. With some fresh coffee digesting nicely, we stepped outside into the crisp air and looked up. To our joy, a pair of F-22 Raptors were dog fighting overhead. We watched as they flew around using the vectored thrust to make incredibly tight turns into each other. They were either using a smoke system to show their flight path, or were using the contrail suppression system we had heard about. Their contrails would turn on and off at precise times, almost as if they would use them to visually acquire each other and then shut them off and commence the fight. All three of us being pilots, we especially enjoyed this free air show. Soon the F-22s left and we saw an F-15 pop over the ridge from Area 51 and make a low pass over the town at around 1000 AGL. We waited for anything else cool to happen, but while there was a lull in the aerial entertainment, the smell of bacon crossed over from the restaurant and we willingly heeded its call.

Operation Blue Ribbon

I am assuming that these Embry Riddle folks failed to understand that contrails are a function of moisture at certain levels of the atmosphere, thus the viewed "off and on contrails=smoke/contrail generators" reported by those Embry Riddle folks were likely caused by one or more of the aircraft flying through the contrail layer and back into dryer air. Simply amazing, coming from Embry Riddle folks who certainly would know better, eh?

Anyhow, anyone think or believe otherwise?
Does the F-22 have the option to equip smoke/contrail generators and can they be simply switched off and on?





seekerof

[edit on 21-11-2005 by Seekerof]




posted on Nov, 21 2005 @ 09:23 PM
link   
We see F-15s out here generating contrails everytime they do an overhead break for landing. They leave a nice contrail off the wingtips. I guess Embry-Riddle fails to teach this to students.



posted on Nov, 21 2005 @ 09:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
I ran across a rather humorous mention in a fairly academic article.
The article makes reference to a couple of Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University folks observing a pair of F-22s dog-fighting, and, get this, mention of an alleged contrail suppression system, insinuating that the couple of F-22s dog-fighting were using contrail generators.


it's humorous, because you have taken two postures in a short period of text/time.
you have credited the folk with expert abilities, and yet, .......


Simply amazing, coming from Embry Riddle folks who certainly would know better, eh?
Anyhow, anyone think or believe otherwise?
Does the F-22 have the option to equip smoke/contrail generators and can they be simply switched off and on?


okay, so you insinuate that you 'know', and that the embry-riddle folk are ridiculous in their assumptions(observations), and then you query your fellow 'debunkers', lol, to see if they know something you don't. arr arr.



so, ...yeah.

me believes otherwise. me believes we don't know much, for sure, really.

HAHA!

you are attacking these accidental tourists like they are full-blown conspiracy theorists.
they are impartial observers who have no idea of the implications of what they are observing.

nice tell, dude. on it like white on rice.



posted on Nov, 21 2005 @ 10:02 PM
link   
Whether they have one or not isn't known, but what the Embry-Riddle folks SHOULD HAVE known is that it is quite possible to form contrails simply by pulling high G manuvers. There are plenty of other reasons for contrails to be formed in the way they described other than contrail generators/suppressors.



posted on Nov, 21 2005 @ 10:04 PM
link   
billybob....apparently you believe that the dueling F-22s were creating contrails because they were using some super-duper smoke/contrail generator, that can be switched on and off?

Other than your critique of my opinion of those decorated Embry Riddle aeronautical students/observors, your direct imput into this topic was what, exactly?






seekerof



posted on Nov, 21 2005 @ 10:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
Whether they have one or not isn't known, but what the Embry-Riddle folks SHOULD HAVE known is that it is quite possible to form contrails simply by pulling high G manuvers. There are plenty of other reasons for contrails to be formed in the way they described other than contrail generators/suppressors.


and yet, you are assuming they DON'T know?

granted, they had a few beers in em', but still, not a reason to totally discount their relatively impartial observations as aeronautics students.
afterall, they did wake up in the morning and decide to 'print' their observations.



posted on Nov, 21 2005 @ 10:42 PM
link   
If they knew, why post this at all then? There is no reason at all for an F-22 to carry something to GENERATE a contrail. All they would have to do is get on the radio and say "I'm over " and the other pilot would know where to look for him. Not to mention there are ways to make it visible to radar, so the other pilot would know where to find him.



posted on Nov, 21 2005 @ 10:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
billybob....apparently you believe that the dueling F-22s were creating contrails because they were using some super-duper smoke/contrail generator, that can be switched on and off?

Other than your critique of my opinion of those decorated Embry Riddle aeronautical students/observors, your direct imput into this topic was what, exactly?

seekerof


i need 'direct input', now? sheesh, more and more rules all the time.

my input is to point out that this rather super-minor footnote of history, has been attacked by you, and your attack could serve as another minor footnote in history as an argument against the ability of aircraft to affect their contrails.

i don't know what kind of tech is available to the shadow government, but i also don't refute what is impartially observed, as being a tool serving some kind of disinfo agenda.

it looks like these impartial observers watched aircraft voluntarily switching their contrails on and off, who am i to argue with the expert witnesses that observed it?



posted on Nov, 21 2005 @ 11:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by billybob
it looks like these impartial observers watched aircraft voluntarily switching their contrails on and off, who am i to argue with the expert witnesses that observed it?

Apparently, one not knowledged in aircraft and how contrails are formed?
Thats the point of this topic: you have a couple of Embry Riddle aeronautical folks, "experts" as you have asserted, that should know better. Did you?




seekerof

[edit on 21-11-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Nov, 21 2005 @ 11:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof

Originally posted by billybob
it looks like these impartial observers watched aircraft voluntarily switching their contrails on and off, who am i to argue with the expert witnesses that observed it?

Apparently, one not knowledged in aircraft and how contrails are formed?
Thats the point of this topic: you have a couple of Embry Riddle aeronautical folks, "experts" as you have asserted, that should know better. Did you?




seekerof

[edit on 21-11-2005 by Seekerof]


supersaturation is high school stuff. you don't need to be a rocket scientist to understand how clouds are formed when there is no longer sufficient volume to contain a chemical(water, in this case) in it's gaseous state.



posted on Nov, 22 2005 @ 05:35 AM
link   
I agree with seekerof, the apparent 'on-off' formation of contrails is something you would see at any airshow and the notion that the planes (any planes) are doing it deliberately is too daft to laugh at.



posted on Nov, 22 2005 @ 07:07 AM
link   
I was just waiting for someone to jump in with the old "chemtrail" bull and take us all away on a crazy tangent...thankfully no.Had to burst out laughing at the "contrail suppression system" part of the quoted text...



posted on Nov, 22 2005 @ 11:04 AM
link   
Howdie,

I remember reading about a system that had originally been frozen since WW2 in regards to this topic, basically it was a way to "dissolve" the contails before they could form for the high flying B-17s over germany, as this was one of the main ways of tracking the Bomber fleets.

It was resumed for the B-2 project, its some thing like choroflursonic acid, am sorry I can't quite remember the spelling, but it was simply to prevent contail creation at high altutides. Visual Stealth I suppose.

I am looking for the piece at the minute.

- Phil



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join