posted on Oct, 27 2012 @ 01:14 AM
Originally posted by mrlondon
I propose, once again, that it was a Russian SLBM taken out in boost phase by either a NATO rail-gun or high powered Laser/other classified energy
That's why there was a spiral formed by the expulsion of rocket fuel from an entry and exit punctuation that was symmetrical, if the rocket engine
ruptured or suffered structural failure through design or engineering flaws the rocket would have been far more likely to break apart and release all
fuel in a cloud causing the visual phenomena of a gaseous cloud or single trail, neither of which were evident from any of the photographic images of
Respectfully, I have to disagree with your "shot down" hypothesis.
As I described in my 3rd post (on page 1), the physics of a DAMAGED
missile in flight following a particular trajectory as the Russian missile
did, is incapable of producing the spiral effect as seen by many observers.
Recall that the best view of the spiral shows clearly the missile crossing the observers view from right to left and as such, a spiral shape that is
full on facing the observer is impossible to generate purely from the expulsion or leakage of propellant fuel.
Again, I'll take the opportunity to summarize what I said on page 1 regarding the implausibility of generating such a perfect "full on" spiral as
the missile crosses your view point from right to left.
All images of the event show the spiral being observed in full frontal view ... in other words, the spiral was seen with very little skewing,
distortion and definitely not edge on.
But here we have a problem especially as evident from the Skjervoy location.
At this location, the trajectory of the missile is approximately NNE and crossing the observers viewpoint from right to left. This trajectory is well
established and not open to dispute. Therefore we need to find a mechanism that will allow the full frontal creation and viewing of the spiral from
the observers point of view.
With the missile crossing from right to left, the missile must be in one of two distinct attitudes whilst in flight:
1 - The missile is stable and following the determined trajectory. The missile will also have spin imparted to assist with inflight stability. This
missile is essentially rotating around it's axis.
2 - The missile is unstable and tumbling end over end. There will also be residual rotation around its axis.
The following image shows the missile in stable mode along its trajectory and rotating around it's axis. The two "blowouts" have been indicated in
red and positioned 180 degrees apart as conjectured.
But if this is correct, then any spiral that forms can only be viewed by a Skjervoy observer from edge on ... almost 90 degrees displaced from what
was actually observed.
The following image shows scenario two whereby the missile has lost stability and is tumbling end over end.
The first problem here being that if the missile is tumbling, then it would be almost impossible for it to continue following its original trajectory
as thrust vectors would be constantly changing ... and consequently its path would likewise be changing ... and yet as can be readily seen from the
previously presented overlayed images (Image6), the spiral path adhered exactly to the established trajectory throughout the entire evolution of the
The second problem is that a combination of the 3 vectors comprising the forward motion, end over end tumbling and rotation around the missiles axis,
would prevent the formation of a near perfect spiral structure. Any spiral structure forming would very quickly lose stability and integrity.
So the inevitable conclusion is that a stable, front on viewed spiral would be impossible to create and maintain over an extended period of time based
on the possible missile flight attitude modes.
So if such a "full on facing" spiral is impossible to explain if we simply assume that the missile is damaged and leaking fuel, then we have to
seriously consider an alternative explanation, namely that the missile was actually performing as designed by the Russian scientists and was
demonstrating some highly advanced and sophisticated technology ... whether it be propulsion technology or offensive/defensive technology.