Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Mysterious light with spiral tail seen in Aussie sky

page: 27
116
<< 24  25  26    28  29  30 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 01:57 AM
link   
Well just for arguments sake lets say both this, and the Norway swirl was a HAARP Blue Beam project. The Norway spiral was blamed on a Russian missile, even though the military denied involvement initially. The fact that it was a military test of a classified military program, makes inventing a cover story very easy.

Could this be infighting between factions of Majestic. One group pushing for disclosure, while another tries to stifle it at all costs.

fast forward half a year and a very high profile rocket is making a pass over Australia, a perfect time to create a HAARP spiral, simply because anyone who follows science would instantly make a connection between the spiral seen the falcon 9 rocket.

This would force the faction of Majestic that wants a business as usual future to adopt the Falcon 9 cover story. The major difference here is that SpaceX had tuns of released information on the rocket prior to the spiral event.

Now we are beginning to pick apart the story, and it could eventually be proven this was indeed unidentified.





Also why is this thread not on the front page anymore? I only come to ATS for these type of mass sighting events.




posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 02:04 AM
link   
Hi guys
In the Images I am showing below you can clearly notice the roll that SpaceX boss Elon Musk was speaking about in a post i made yesterday.

for some reason I cannot post images on the page can someone past them so every one can see them on this page instead of the link.Thanks

The Images by frame clearly show the dramatic roll we have witnessed







Thanks

Ocker



posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 02:10 AM
link   
Here you go mate!







Usually, upload the images to your media account is the best method, however by replacing 'img' with 'ats' inside the brackets sometimes allows external images to be displayed.

IRM



posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 02:12 AM
link   
Here you go:







I also posted a video of the role a couple of pages back too.




posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 02:19 AM
link   
Thanks guys you rock

Spaceflight Now has up dates and the interview with Elon Musk

www.spaceflightnow.com...



Thanks again

Ocker



posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 02:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


If that is true and I dont dispute it, Russia,China and US cannot control their new hardware Im guessing they dont want their rockets to spin.

This artical you posted in the other thread states

news.cnet.com...



"We're really at the dawn of a new era," he said. "You had the sort of Apollo era, the space shuttle era--and those were government eras. And the government will continue to play a significant role in the future. But I think what you're really seeing is the rise of commercial as well, in many ways a partnership with government.


Im not really keen on the idea of a BP like company having an incident over my country. At the moment the side effects of a 'new era' creates great looking photos and gives the UFO community something to chatter about but what if these rockets spin into a city also transparency to the public on what is being shot around OUR planet will be minimal in this new era.

Im not 100% convinced that spinning rockets alone caused the Norway spiral but that is just a feeling I get from looking at video and pix I maybe wrong but the consequences for international private organizations firing dodgy rockets all around the globe and in low orbit could be very bad for your average worker bee.

bit of a derail rant, appoligies.






[edit on 7-6-2010 by deenuu]



posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 03:02 AM
link   
Misinformation and garbage has returned to this thread. So let me recap from an earlier post, along with some new information...

As an aerospace engineer I thought I'd put my ideas down in simple terms so that you can see that the Falcon 9 explanation is highly likely.

1. Falcon 9 is a 2-stage rocket that uses liquid oxygen and rocket grade kerosene (RP-1). Stage 1 sits at the bottom, then stage 2 above it and the payload on top.

2. Falcon 9 lifted off from Cape Canaveral, Florida on 4th June at 2:45pm EDT (or 1845 GMT). This is 4:45 am on 5th June (local time) on the east coast of Australia.

3. The rocket lifts off heading east and stage 1 burns for a bit over 3 minutes.

4. Once stage 1 is empty, it is jettisoned and falls back down into the Atlantic Ocean (east of Florida).

5. Stage 2 then ignites and burns for just under 6 minutes. During this burn, the vehicle develops an uncontrolled roll (see video). The cause of this roll is unknown at this stage.

6. Once stage 2 burn is complete, the vehicle is in orbit at an altitude of about 250 km (150-170 miles). It is orbiting around the earth in a west to east direction (at about 28,000 km/hr or 17,400 miles/hr).

7. Normally, stage 2 would be jettisoned once the burn was complete and it would either remain in orbit or another burn would be made to "de-orbit" the stage where it would burn up on re-entry.

8. However, stage 2 was left attached to the payload on this mission.

9. This orbit is an ellipse where the altitude above earth varies from 230 to 270 km. The orbit will trace a curved path on the earth's surface that will take into the northern hemisphere and down into the southern hemisphere. I've seen a number of images (2 in this thread) showing the orbital path (passing over east coast of Australia to the north of Sydney) but I'm uncertain of the source of the data. It may be based on actual orbital data or it is more likely to be the planned orbital track.

10. The orbit will take Falcon 9 east over Africa/Europe, then Asia/Australia and then back over the US. The time to do one orbit (once in orbit) is 89 minutes.

11. If you look at the distance from East Coast of US to East Coast of Australia (using Google Earth) as a fraction of a complete orbit, you will be looking at approximately 60 to 65 minutes (2/3 of orbital distance).

12. Therefore if you add 65 minutes to 1845 GMT you get 1950 GMT or 5:50am local time on the east coast of Australia. So the timing is spot on.

13. As for the spiral, this is possible if stage 2 is spinning and propellant is leaking or being released.

14. The video of launch shows that the rocket was going into a slow roll (clockwise) during ascent. If this was not corrected, the roll would continue while it was in orbit. It's in a vacuum so nothing to slow or stop the roll. We don't know what happened after the video ends. It is possible that the controllers may have tried to correct the roll and it may have possibly ended up rolling in the opposite direction if they over-corrected. The spiral may actually be the roll correction maneuver.

15. At an altitude of approximately 250 km, the vehicle can be theoretically seen from a distance of 1800 km away from the path the orbit traces on the ground.

16. If the vehicle is passing directly overhard, it will take about 7 minutes to go from western horizon to eastern horizon. Most witnesses first spotted the object after it had passed overhead and then followed it to the horizon. They indicate a time of about 2-3 minutes. This is consistent with speed of Falcon 9.

The only bits of information that are missing is the actual (official) orbital track that shows the path over the earth during the first orbit and the mission log showing whether anything happened at 1950 GMT. This is only something that SpaceX (or NASA ) can provide.

FYI, I'm an open-minded individual and I'm not willing to rule out something besides the Falcon 9, but the evidence leads me to be 99% certain it is.

[edit on 7/6/10 by LightningStrom]



posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 03:25 AM
link   
reply to post by LightningStrom
 


Why risk correcting the spin if the payload is safely in orbit?

It seems to me that spinning satellites, or missiles would be a common occurrence, so if they do make correcting burns this phenomena should be a monthly occurrence.



posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 03:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by jennybee35
O.K., now I guess I'm gonna' go and say something completely nuts. What if there is not an actual "object" in the spiral. What if the spirals are gateways? They move horizontally because they are not really in our sky, they only appear to move because the earth is rotating past them as they open. Maybe our eyes just don't understand what we are seeing come out of them?

Okay, I've never posted such a weird reply, but I actually feel that's right.

[edit on 6/5/10 by jennybee35]



That's very interesting Jennybee and i like what your thinking!!!



posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 03:40 AM
link   


Give me a break this is no rocket, near the beginning they zoom into the center, and you can see three distinct centers of light.



posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 03:46 AM
link   
reply to post by LightningStrom
 


That's a very good explanation LightningStorm, but as you said...

6. Once stage 2 burn is complete, the vehicle is in orbit at an altitude of about 250 km (150-170 miles). It is orbiting around the earth in an east to west direction (at about 28,000 km/hr or 17,400 miles/hr).

I live in Australia and i'm pretty sure i heard numerous times that the object was moving from south to east, but i may be wrong?



posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 04:16 AM
link   
reply to post by LightningStrom
 


LightningStrom.....

On the very slim chance you haven't noticed it, here is a link to Taustericus' analysis of the geometry of the launch & the subsequent spiral.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not



posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 04:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Project_Exo
reply to post by LightningStrom
 


Why risk correcting the spin if the payload is safely in orbit?

It seems to me that spinning satellites, or missiles would be a common occurrence, so if they do make correcting burns this phenomena should be a monthly occurrence.


It was a test flight, so they would have been extremely concerned about the roll and would want to make sure they can control it.



posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 04:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by docjohnson9
reply to post by LightningStrom
 


That's a very good explanation LightningStorm, but as you said...

6. Once stage 2 burn is complete, the vehicle is in orbit at an altitude of about 250 km (150-170 miles). It is orbiting around the earth in an east to west direction (at about 28,000 km/hr or 17,400 miles/hr).

I live in Australia and i'm pretty sure i heard numerous times that the object was moving from south to east, but i may be wrong?


Got me - I should have written from "west to east" but was typing in a rush. I've edited my post to reflect the correct direction.



posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 05:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Project_Exo
 


I suppose this isn't a rocket either right?






posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 05:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by FireMoon
What i find strange about this whole phenomenon is this...

We have been firing rockets into space for over 50 years now. In that time there have been hundreds of rocket launches and countless hours of telemetry and tape of them. Yes, some have been confused as UFOs and the photos show it. In every case there is, a clear trail of fuel, in a relatively straight line from the rear of the rocket across the sky. in that 50 years, until recently no-one as far as i know has reported this spiral shape appearing at a brightness of that of the moon. Now lets be straight here, surely, if it were that simple and it's something that is routine, we should have umpteen reports/pics etc and this wouldn't have even made a page of replies as it would have been nailed from the get go?


I urge you to read more widely in the astronomy and amateur sky-watching literature, such as the links below, and then come back and re-word your "puzzle".

Great East Coast UFO” of August 1986 – The Space Solution
www.csicop.org...

Dan Aykroyd reports telepathic contact from Aug 1986 pseudo-UFO
www.jamesoberg.com...

‘Asronomy’ mag, July 2002, describes cases from 1964, 1980 and 1986
www.jamesoberg.com...

space.com: 1987 Chinese ‘sky spiral’ solved
www.space.com...

March 1987 UFO in Alaska
www.jamesoberg.com...

Page on general cases of rockets causing UFO reports
www.jamesoberg.com...



posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 05:36 AM
link   
reply to post by JimOberg
 


Thanks for the Links Jim

Great work

Thanks

Ocker



posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 05:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by dragnet53
reply to post by FireMoon
 


I asked the same thing, but nobody could answer it. How come nobody spotted these "spirals" from the apollo missions?


You should rather be asking, "How could people have spotted and photographed fuel dump clouds from Apollo missions AND I IN MY OMNISCIENCE DON'T KNOW ABOUT IT?"

Then we can link to photographs of such fuel clouds (not spiraling because the S-4-B used stabilized non-rotational fuel dumping), and you can grin and slap your forehead and say, 'Wow, I never heard of that! Thanks for informing me!".

Want to try that process?

add: deenuu and Project_Exo are also invited to play this same game --


Originally posted by deenuu
50 years of rocket tests and this phenomenon has only just been seen in last 12 months.




Originally posted by Project_Exo
It seems to me that spinning satellites, or missiles would be a common occurrence, so if they do make correcting burns this phenomena should be a monthly occurrence.


Exo, your comment shows the beginning of wisdom. Now try this.

Assuming post-launch fuel clouds are 'a monthly occurrence', what two factors must be added to make 'VISIBLE post-launch fuel clouds' a monthly occurence? And to what degree would THOSE factors reduce the probability of a ground observer seeing such a phenomenon?




[edit on 7-6-2010 by JimOberg]



posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 05:43 AM
link   
Jim, if I may pick your brain:


Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by JimOberg
 


Thanks for stopping by Jim.

I'm wondering if not all is going well with the Falcon, particularly with the unexpected roll and that it may have been (or still is) going on too long.

Thoughts?



posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 05:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Project_Exo
Well just for arguments sake lets say both this, and the Norway swirl was a HAARP Blue Beam project. The Norway spiral was blamed on a Russian missile, even though the military denied involvement initially.


Not so. Some foreign embassy flunky proclaimed, "Russia is not at fault", the standard answer to every question, on page 1 of the 'How to preserve honor/glory of ex-USSR'. What else do you expect? I read the Russian-language reports, the Moscow MoD was sheepishly silent for a day or more -- but was never officially denying anything. Their new-generation ICBM program was in shambles -- again, how do you expect them to react?






top topics



 
116
<< 24  25  26    28  29  30 >>

log in

join