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.

 

BUSTED Easy Jet Airlines Caught Aersol Spraying in Europe.

page: 14
36
<< 11  12  13    15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 4 2011 @ 11:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
What if a military cargo plane(C-130) loaded with chemicals takes-off from a military base at night and everyone involved signed a non-disclosure agreement? You do realise some government jobs require security clearances and need-to-know?


Yeah, this worked really well in the Wikileaks case


And of course let's talk about pix, which are the ultimate proof

No C-130 there.




posted on Oct, 4 2011 @ 11:37 PM
link   
The discussion of how much spray material would be required is very interesting. Consider that a gallon for fuel produces 1.25 gallons of water, and in a persistent spreading contrail, the amount of ice in the eventual contrail is approximately 10,000 times the amount of ice in the initial contrail, then it follows that to make a trail with the same optical density as a contrail would require 10,000 times the weight of spray material as was fuel burnt in that time spraying.

Which would limit any such spraying to a matter of seconds. You essentially need an Evergreen supertanker dump of chemicals every few seconds, if the trails were not just water vapor.

And then there's the matter of why there's a gap between the engine and the trail...



posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 12:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

What if a military cargo plane(C-130) loaded with chemicals takes-off from a military base at night and everyone involved signed a non-disclosure agreement? You do realise some government jobs require security clearances and need-to-know?

Now mulitply this by x air force bases being done y times.......


Sure - now explain why it is that none of these ever get seen, and all that DOES get seen is planes that are, or at least look like, civilian airliners, flying at high altitude, matching the times and routes advertised for regular airline flights, and how they manage to make C-130's look like these??


Perhaps the answer is in holographic a/c ???




posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 12:43 AM
link   
reply to post by buddhasystem
 



.....engineers here may correct me, but I heard that every flight has a load coordinator.


Airline pilot here....close enough?



Yes. As mentioned already, each flight must have proper documentation to determine not only total weight, but its distribution. Commonly referred to as "Weight & Balance", which is taught in the first, most basic flight training to all fledgling, aspiring pilots.

In scheduled airline operations with large jets, there is a "load coordinator", even if each company uses a different in-house term for it. (My airline calls them "Load Planners", for example).

Nowadays, just about all of it is computerized and automated...only requires Humans to input the variables, and of course check the info to assure it is correct. There are checks and balances (no pun intended) procedures designed into the process and systems to weed out mistakes. On your modern jets, the pilots have very little hand-calculating to do anymore. BTW, the flight crew, and ultimately the Captain, are/is solely responsible for the final "numbers" --- though in terms of the cargo/baggage counts, we must rely on others. In the case of the baggage, that is matched per passenger, according to how many items he/she checked at the ticket counter.

Cargo is the responsibility of the Cargo department, and they co-ordinate with Load Planning. Another department that is in the mix is Dispatch. Every airline flight is under the supervision of a designated dispatcher, who begins work on it about two hours before scheduled departure. Checking weather, planning the fuel load required, and all this uses many sources of data that he/she pulls together, again much of it simply by calling it up on computer, and then filling in the computerized forms to assemble the info and details for that particular flight.

Typically, also, a dispatcher will be working six, seven or eight flights (or more) simultaneously, and during an eight-hour shift, will rotate to many more, as their duties require. Earlier flights will land, and then drop out of his/her bailiwick, even as more are added for the next round of monitoring.

So, from the Flight Crew's standpoint, it's rather simple (seems complex to layperson at first, but it is easy to understand with some practice):

Start with the airplane's OEW (Operating Empty Weight). This is unique to each airplane, according to its in-house "ship" number used to identify it. OEW the sum of the airframe, unusable fuel, all required and normally loaded fluids (engine oil, hydraulics, potable water, lavatory waste tanks, etc), and the normal operating crew (all pilots and flight attendants), using a "standard" weight per individual that is already approved by the FAA. Or, whichever governing authority for other countries' airlines.

Next, (usually, the order might vary), Fuel weight.

Then, the passenger count, and their "weight" (again, using an accepted average per person).

The total weight of the checked bags, and cargo (if carried).

Add all that up, and you have the Ramp Weight. Or, the weight at start of push-back from the gate. All jets have certificated structural maximum figure for ground operations, as well as one for Take Off. So, when at "Max", we can actually leave the gate legally, while technically over-weight for Take Off....since there is the allowance for weight burn-off, as fuel is used during the taxi to the runway. This is minor, typically 500 to around 1,000 pounds (USA, others might use Metric equivalents for all weight and liquid volume values), depending on airplane type and number of engines.

The final printed load sheet (printers are now in most cockpits, the data is up-linked. Years past, the final numbers were relayed via radio to the Flight Crew, who copied down the figures on blank forms, checked the math, made sure it all seemed reasonable, then all that paperwork was saved for at least 90 days. Now, it resides in computer memory, for later retrieval if any questions ever arise...usually, from the FAA...>groan



posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 10:03 AM
link   
reply to post by ProudBird
 


Thanks for providing so much professional detail on the issue I brought up. From what I read, my original assumption stays correct, i.e. it's impossible to stow away a large tank of a mystery liquid on a plane and not have people notice.



posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 12:16 PM
link   
Load coordinator/dispatcher right here. That's what I do with one of the larger international airlines. I guess that's why I feel so strongly about this and say that it's simply impossible for this to happen on regular passenger flights which are what all the pictures and videos show... unless of course it is some military clone type aircraft which is still pretty much impossible. They need flight plans, atc clearance and everything regular flights need. People may not know, but even military aircraft have to talk to ATC when they are in range too. So they need a valid registration, transponder, ect. Could it be faked? Maybe, buy why? Why wouldn't they just go up at night as a military aircraft and spray the chemtrails then when no one could see them, instead of disguising them selves so they can fly during the day?

So far this thread has an engineer, pilot, fueler, and me saying that this is impossible with airlines... how much does it take?

I kind of feel sorry for those who are putting so much time and effort into investigating something which quite simply is nonsense.

ETA: Forgot to say that my job makes me responsible for everything that is loaded on an aircraft, except for fuel as that's the engineers/mechanics job. Everything that is loaded goes through a security process, from the baggage, cargo, even the catering trucks and the dollies go through security, there is no weak link in this process. And nothing goes onto my airplane without someone asking me if it's okay. This is industry standard by the way, if it was any other way the aviation authority would have a hell of a lot to say about it.
edit on 5-10-2011 by gman1972 because: Add



posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 12:30 PM
link   
So, OP, can we all agree that your theory has been proven at least 99.9% false by all of us professionals ITT, or are you going to cry that we are all paid govt schills? I lol'd...



posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 02:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by gman1972
Load coordinator/dispatcher right here. That's what I do with one of the larger international airlines. I guess that's why I feel so strongly about this and say that it's simply impossible for this to happen on regular passenger flights which are what all the pictures and videos show...


I frankly didn't expect this thread to became the final resting place of that moronic chemtrail theory, and I'm glad we brought up relevant issues to make it happen.



posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 02:58 PM
link   
reply to post by buddhasystem
 



Sadly that simply isn't true.

The chemtrail "theory" does not rest on credible verifiable evidence - it rests on beleif, mistrust of authorities, paranoia and gullibility.

So facts don't actually stop people believing it much at all - occasionally someone will realise their mistake - but there's a bunch for which anything that contradicts their belief is simply more evidence that it is all a conspiracy!!

edit on 5-10-2011 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by waynos
 


you sir are f**king awesome lol

the great toberlone famine, brilliant,

Wee Mad



posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 03:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


Swooping generalisations don't help debunk theories and just because the noise-to-signal ratio is extremely high it does not mean we should accept *all is well, move along now*. I believe there is a slight possibility chemtrails are real but commercial aviation is not the weapon of choice.

Weather modification is a different ballgame and many scientists have admitted it holds potential and maybe necessary in the future. Connect the dots and see if weather modification is closely tied to chemtrails to seed the clouds or if it involves some sinister conspiracy to depopulate earth of humans.

People laugh about vampires, ufos, demons, ghosts, etc all the time cause 99% of the videos posted on youtube are absolute bs, yet documentaries on tv will give you plenty of classic real examples of the aforementioned. I guess it all comes down to what you perceive to be true!
edit on 10/5/2011 by EarthCitizen07 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 06:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by buddhasystem
 



Sadly that simply isn't true.

The chemtrail "theory" does not rest on credible verifiable evidence - it rests on beleif, mistrust of authorities, paranoia and gullibility.


Yeah I know. But I'm still proud we added a nail to at least an effigy of the coffin of that stupid thing, by finding pretty fresh angles at the claims and issues. You guys did fuel very well, I came up with the load distribution which was commented on by some real-life experts (always cool).



posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 06:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
Weather modification is a different ballgame and many scientists have admitted it holds potential and maybe necessary in the future. Connect the dots and see if weather modification is closely tied to chemtrails to seed the clouds or if it involves some sinister conspiracy to depopulate earth of humans.


Weather modification has been going for decades, with no secrecy. There's even a company called Weather Modification Inc. Cloud seeding (which is what they do), only modifies existing clouds, it does not create them.

www.weathermodification.com...

Aerial cloud seeding is the process of delivering a seeding agent by aircraft - either at the cloud base or cloud top. Top seeding allows for direct injection of the seeding agent into the supercooled cloud top. Base seeding is the release of the seeding agent in the updraft of a cloud base.


You are probably thinking of geoengineering, which is a totally different thing.
edit on 5-10-2011 by Uncinus because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 07:26 PM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


the entire "chemtrail " argument is an ad-hoc mass of sweeping generalisations [ often condtradictory ]



posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 08:23 PM
link   
Kind of surprised this thread is still active after all the aviation people added their knowledge, but there is one main point that ultimately debunks this whole fiasco.

Since it has been proven that it isn't commercial passenger carriers, why do the contrails exist from passenger airliners? And why do we have documented evidence of contrails from the start of high altitude flight?

Once the chemtrail folks wrap their heads around that one it should all fall into place.


I'm all for looking at a suspected conspiracy and hashing them out, but this one ranks up there with pyramids recharging batteries.



posted on Oct, 6 2011 @ 06:40 AM
link   
Err,.. has anyone else here noticed that the OP who was so full of comments in his initial post about conserving his strength against the arguments and disinfo to come, appears to have quietly taken my advice and simply slinked off?

As for the claim that they could hide these compartments in the cargo hold, utter BS. Any cargo loader who saw a bulkhead hiding a tank where a bulkhead shouldn't be would ask the question, "why is that there, and where do I put the passengers luggage now?".

As for hiding this chemtrail cocktail inside a fuel tank, I hold a confined space ticket (amongst other tickets) and go inside those tanks. There is NOTHING odd inside them or any practical way of concealing something in them. You cant just open up an aircrafts tanks an stick something in over night. It takes days to de fuel and purge, carry out any work and reseal, it needs to be done in a main maintenance base. And one very important point not raised here yet. Exactly HOW is this chemtrail mix loaded onboard? You cant use the normal fuel galleries via the underwing refuel points as any compound would be diluted and mixed with the aircraft fuel load, which may damage the compound or destroy it by running it through the engines at high temperatures. As well if you are trying to be discreet, running a compound like Beryllium or whatever through an engine will have an adverse affect on the engines operating parameters like ITT's and any compound will quite probably foul or interfere with fuel spray nozzles, EGT probes, bearing seals etc. This will immediately show up and cause investigation. In fact the information would be available in near real time and be ready for investigation before the aircraft has even landed. So if you cant use the standard refuel points you need another way of getting the chemtrail compound onboard. This means another port, but there is a problem here anything even slightly unusual would be almost immediately be picked up by an engineer on a walk around, it's what we are all trained to do. Put it this way, if I can pick up a missing 3/16" fastener from an outboard engine pylon 20 feet off the ground, against a black background, at night, Im sure as hell going to notice an unmarked and mysterious connection point somewhere. And if I did notice it I would immediately go straight to the manual and look for it. And when I couldn't find it I would straight away alert my leading hand/supervisor and have him look at it. Then I would contact our maintenance over watch, which would then lead to technical services, which would then lead to the manufacturer. It may even lead to the regulator at that point if no satisfactory answer can be found. But one thing is certain Im sure as hell going to ground that plane! And so would every other half decent and diligent engineer anywhere. You see as engineers we become intimately aware of every system, every nook and cranny. We may not and cannot recall everything but when something looks out of place we investigate and above all we ask and talk amongst ourselves. Some secret little compartment isn't going to remain secret for more than about 5 minutes.

I could add some further technical evidence as to why this whole thing sounds like the deluded ranting's of someone who has partaken in one to many bong hits, but I will wait and see.

LEE.



posted on Oct, 6 2011 @ 07:12 AM
link   
reply to post by thebozeian
 


how about :

standard air-freight container dimensions chart

as the killer argument why a " secret compartment " cannot be retro-fitted into a cargo plane ?

each section of the hold is designed to accept a given number of pods - and if you add a " scret compartment " - the last one will not fit

the chemtrailer proponents couinter argument :

"well the " secret compartment " is built into the design "

obviously requires a diffent rebuttal ,

edit to add :

also i am under the impression that aircraft bulkhads , pressure skins and structural members have to be regularly inspected - upto and including chemical and x-ray flaw deterction

not being an aircrat engineer i am ignorant of the exact scope and manner of such inspection - nut i expect them to be far more rigorous than the inspections i have had to do on road vehicles , marine instalations and civil engineering

lastly - rivet inspection and fastener torque checking - often needs access to both sides of the rivet / fastener - so another key reason why the presence of voids unknown the the maintainence engineers is impossible

last
edit on 6-10-2011 by ignorant_ape because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2011 @ 10:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Misterlondon
im no expert but the picture you use in your post lokks fake...


It is indeed very fake. The original image comes from a website where airline enthusiasts upload modified images. The purpose for this is that they like to see what aircraft would look like in different company liveries. Easyjet doesn't operate the Airbus A380. Apologies if anyone has already uploaded this info to the thread.

Image link

www.cardatabase.net...

From

www.cardatabase.net...

TJ

edit on 6-10-2011 by tommyjo because: Additional info added

edit on 6-10-2011 by tommyjo because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2011 @ 10:40 AM
link   
Here is one to get you all worked up, Human_Alien.


From October 3rd 2011

Will it generate a title from you 'British Airways busted spraying over Scotland'?

Image on following forum showing Boeing 747 over Scotland.

forums.airshows.co.uk...

See following link for recorded flight track and discussion.

www.airliners.net...

TJ
edit on 6-10-2011 by tommyjo because: link edited



posted on Oct, 6 2011 @ 12:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by ignorant_ape
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


the entire "chemtrail " argument is an ad-hoc mass of sweeping generalisations [ often condtradictory ]


Isn't that true for most conspiracy theories? Unlike others I am not here to debunk though, I am here to learn and add my views even if they are not "perfect".



new topics

top topics



 
36
<< 11  12  13    15 >>

log in

join