*Do you remember when contrails were contrails, and the sky never got tic tac toe'd?*

reply to post by FissionSurplus


Oh, FissionSurplus, sometimes I just want to hug you, you're so precious!!!

That is, except on days preceding a weather front. Then the jets come out, sometimes 4 or 5 at a time, spraying in advance of the front.

What a delicious softball that is!

The ironic thing is, you probably don't even realize it!


Now, to the claims:

I've seen a passenger jet fly leaving a normal contrail, while the jets from either Holloman or Cannon AFB in New Mexico are in the same sky, spraying their crap.

How 'bout some "proof"? (AKA 'evidence') of these claims?? That these jets you see are out of Holloman or Cannon? Photos, dear.....photos.

The contrail evaporates while the chemtrails stay put.

Oh, that?

Some contrails evaporate (sublimate is the more correct description) rapidly. Others linger...because (and get this)...because they ARE CLOUDS!!!!

I've even seen jets spraying in spurts, leaving broken lines like on a road. You people who say "oh, that's just contrails" crack me up. Explain to me how several jet planes can fly leaving broken contrails.

When you walk on the street after a rain shower.....are there puddles? If you walk through those puddles, do you leave wet footprints?. Can these puddles be physically separated from each other??

The atmosphere can be like that. Isolated areas of MORE humidity, and then areas of LESS humidity...to be followed by another area of MORE humidity, and so on.

reply to post by downtown436

In fact many of the same models of jet are still flying. For example the Boeing 737 is southwest airlines plane of choice, and maybe the only type of plane they fly. They flew 737's in the 1980's, just like they do now.

So what changed?

This is a very good question and is a good way to illustrate part of what changed. Apart from the growth in aircraft numbers there is also the technology change to take into account too.

Although these aircraft are still 737's, they are very different in many areas, the most crucial to contrail formation being the engine.

Here is an older Southwest 737, it is the 737-200



While here is one from the current fleet, a 737-700



You will notice the engines are much fatter on the newer model, this is due to the switch to what are called high bypass engines. The -200 was powered by the P&W JT-8D, this was an engine with a bypass ratio of 0.96:1, meaning slightly less air was ducted around the engine that was drawn through it, mixed with fuel and ignited. This bypass air was merely compressed and ejected with the exhaust. It increases thrust to do this with a jet, reduces noise, and, because you are not mixing it with fuel, increases fuel economy.

While the jet exhaust contains water vapour from the combustion, there is also water vapour naturally present in the bypass air and the sudden decompression as it leaves the back of the engine causes visible moisture (similar to when you open a can of soda and you get a little vapour around the ring pull). Now this will leave a visible trail and sometimes it lingers just like today, but the reason it is more visible now than then, and thus more noticeable, is because of the great strides in engine technology.

The -700 in the second photo is powered by the CFM-56 turbofan, this engine has a bypass ratio of 5.5:1, more than 5 times more air ducted around the engine than is ignited within it, hence the fatter cowling arounf the larger diameter fan at the front of the engine. The subsequent increase in the amount of bypass air results in naturally greater volumes of vapour being formed, trails are thicker, and, although they don't actually last longer than in the past, the fact they are so much thicker means more people see them.

On some larger transports today such as the 777, 787 or A380, the bypass ratio of the engines is approaching 10:1.

Some extra info (wiki for convenience, many more are available);

en.wikipedia.org...-200

en.wikipedia.org...

en.wikipedia.org...-7_series

I remember watching clouds as a child and the skies were not criss crossed with trails from planes. I realize traffic is heavy, I live by a small airport, and lots of little cessna's come out of it all the time. Jets are different, but we don't have any big jets right over our house (or all that nearby) due to the fact we are in one of the holding patterns for the smaller airport. This video was taken in my backyard a year ago. Since when do we have letters in the sky?? Well, 10 years ago we didn't.
Note: This was around the same time that Chicago got blasted with a blizzard and we had 3 feet or more of snow. Unsure if it's related. *hope the link works, it's my first embedded video. :-)

This variation in remembrance is one way in which the chemtrail theory debunks itself.

Think about it. If "chemtrail" operations started at the same time in, say, Los Angeles, then all the 10 million people in Los Angeles would have the same recollection of this.

But they don't. If you ask people when "chemtrails" started, you get answers from 1960 to 2012.

You also get people who remember what they thought of as normal contrails that look just like what people say are "Chemtrails".

So what if the people in LA who only just noticed it this year just happened not to have noticed them before? Well, that basically means that all this "I remember when there were no chemtrails" is nonsense.

reply to post by Uncinus


You have a point with that. I'm bad with dates, and to be honest I spent a lot of time indoors from 2002- 2004 due to raising a sickly child. However, pre-children, I did spend A LOT of time outdoors, and watching the clouds. I can honestly say that when I stepped back outside with my now-well child in 2004 they were a brand new thing to me. I have noticed the increases in them, and they don't really tie into airline traffic for O'Hare or Midway (our local major airports, not the small one I live by). When O'Hare or Midway get swamped during busy holidays, there are almost no chemtrails in the sky here. We see regular contrails all the time. They have no peak tendencies (i.e; summer,winter), they just happen seemingly randomly.

My own personal theory, take it or leave it, is that it's a big science experiment trying to keep radiation away from the surface of the Earth, during this very active solar period, with a weak magnetosphere.

Have a great day!

reply to post by FreedomLuva


Where do In begin? I surmise you live somewhere near Chicago? Maybe in the "burbs"?

I live by a small airport, and lots of little cessna's come out of it all the time.

OK, first and foremost, Cessnas and Pipers and Beechcraft are NOT making contrails, we can settle that.

Jets are different, but we don't have any big jets right over our house (or all that nearby) due to the fact we are in one of the holding patterns for the smaller airport.

Wait....hold up.....the phrase "holding patterns" is where I call a "Time Out!"......because, to an experienced pilot, a "Holding Pattern" has a particular meaning:

Holding Pattern (Wiki)

The "holding pattern" is primarily a way for Air Traffic Control to "contain" and "handle" an airplane when it cannot be accommodated into airspace under the jurisdiction of any particular ATC facility, at that time. This is a 'skill' that is learned only by those pilots who seek to obtain an "Instrument Rating", so that they can fly under "Instrument Flight Rules"....meaning, basically...in bad weather, and not under "Visual Flight Rules".

The 'Holding Pattern' is also a technique used in certain non-radar environments for the Instrument Approach Procedure.....although it is fast becoming obsolete in that regard, due to the technology of GPS instrumentation.

Here, this 'Approach Procedure' depicts the technique of a Holding Pattern as part of the Approach, in a situation where there is no radar to be used by ATC to vector the airplane:

Here is one example, at Telluride, Colorado

You see the Holding Pattern depicted, at the IAF (Initial Approach Fix) of "CONES" ( a VOR that is part of the LOW altitude navigation system).

An airplane that is NOT in radar contact will be navigating to the IAF ("CONES") from whatever direction it originally came from, then will either enter that "race-track" pattern in order to align with the final approach or:? If the approach was already "straight in", the race track would not be needed.....the concept, there, is to let the airplane change its course, and direction (needed for the final approach, on instruments only, since that is the point here) to the runway of intended landing.

The 'Holding Pattern' entry procedures are taught to, and learned by pilots.

So, the "Holding Pattern" can mean a few things:

It is a method used by ATC (Air Traffic Control) to 'delay' airplanes in flight....it is a "Holding" place for a flight that is operating under IFR rules (Instrument Flight Rules). It is a sort of "safety valve" when things get too busy. Etc...



NOW....back to you......and the 'A' in the sky......

Here......in case YOU are near Chicago ( by chance ).....HERE is a link to an actual Aeronautical Chart depiction over that area:

US Enroute High H-5

The black lines (with the 'J' numbers on them) are "Jet Airways".....(and believe me, that 'Wiki' link is NOT telling enough, I can describe much, much more....)...but then, I may have to begin to charge "ground school" rates, as part of the education curriculum.

(Just kidding).....

reply to post by FreedomLuva


Ask other people in the Chicago area when they first became aware of them. I'll bet you get answers both before 2002 (when you claim there were none) and after 2004 (when you noticed them).

I don't think there was ever any sudden onset. Persistent contrails have been increasing in number since the 1960s, and people have just focussed on them from time to time. Most people don't pay any attention to them, so they don't stick in their memories.

This thread confirms this:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by Uncinus


Hey, I appreciate you taking the time to sum all of that up for me. The holding pattern Dirty Dozen pdf really actually explained a lot. It's a shame I've been sitting on that video for a year with no real explanations as to how it happened. Not only did it explain my "A" but it also explains my "X's" however, i don't ever see rounded letters, so i'm assuming there is no contrail dispersion on turns? or the air just eats it up (completely unscientific, but I've been dealing with kids all morning)?

I wish more people were like you and could civily and clearly answer questions (with a bit of humor at that!). I still don't understand it all, but I'm learning.

reply to post by dawnprince


I seem to remember someone in another thread telling someone that they were far more likely to see contrails in rural areas than close to airports because close to airports the aircraft are lower ???
You chemtrail debunkers really should try keeping your stories straight you know !
Why dont you all head over to Uncinus's place and discuss it and get your plans together ?
Who wants it both ways ?
Hmmmmmm I wonder ?


Peace

Originally posted by FreedomLuva
reply to post by Uncinus

 

Hey, I appreciate you taking the time to sum all of that up for me. The holding pattern Dirty Dozen pdf really actually explained a lot. It's a shame I've been sitting on that video for a year with no real explanations as to how it happened. Not only did it explain my "A" but it also explains my "X's" however, i don't ever see rounded letters, so i'm assuming there is no contrail dispersion on turns? or the air just eats it up (completely unscientific, but I've been dealing with kids all morning)?

I wish more people were like you and could civily and clearly answer questions (with a bit of humor at that!). I still don't understand it all, but I'm learning.

I think your thanks were aimed at ProudBird, not me.

But regarding turns, contrails form and disperse just the same on turns, but the vast majority of planes fly in straight lines. So contrails in the shape of "rounded letters" are rare, but certainly happen. "U", "S" and "O" have been seen, and are the result of standard aircraft maneuvers.

Originally posted by ProRipp
reply to post by dawnprince

 

I seem to remember someone in another thread telling someone that they were far more likely to see contrails in rural areas than close to airports because close to airports the aircraft are lower ???
You chemtrail debunkers really should try keeping your stories straight you know !
Why dont you all head over to Uncinus's place and discuss it and get your plans together ?
Who wants it both ways ?
Hmmmmmm I wonder ?


Peace

You see contrails in flyover areas. i.e. in areas where planes fly over on their way between more distant locations.

An airport itself can be in a flyover location. For example here in Los Angeles we get a lot of flyover traffic from between the North West and San Diego and Mexico. Airports can also get flyover traffic as they are used as navigations points.

The point being that living by an airport does not automatically increase the amount of contrails you will see. As only the flyover traffic makes contrails. Living next to Maui's airport is not going to result in a lot of contrail sightings, for example.

Aye, if you live in SE England you're close to Gatwick and Heathrow - but also overflown by a lot of the flights between the Continent and the USA. For example.

On the other hand, if you live in SW England or the Scottish Highlands you're a long way from any major international airport - but still overflown by the majority of flights (spread across the 2 different areas, according to destination) between Europe and America.

Edit: the main difference is that in SE England you're more likely to also see lower flying aircraft which do not leave contrails, at the same time as those higher up do.

reply to post by Uncinus


Good points .
Exactly the points I was making when I said I live in a flight path , knowing that planes use airports as navigation points .

Cheers pal

Originally posted by ProRipp
reply to post by dawnprince

 

I seem to remember someone in another thread telling someone that they were far more likely to see contrails in rural areas than close to airports because close to airports the aircraft are lower ???
You chemtrail debunkers really should try keeping your stories straight you know !
Why dont you all head over to Uncinus's place and discuss it and get your plans together ?
Who wants it both ways ?
Hmmmmmm I wonder ?


Peace

We don't need to get together , because at the end of the day , anybody with an ounce of common sense knows that chemtrails are just an internet myth , perpetuated by boys in anoraks .

Peace

Funny you mention the tic tac toe..

Yesterday here, that's what it looked like in the sky.

reply to post by downtown436


couldn't agree more. a lot of people are going to claim that the new chemtrails are just "cloud seeding". this is bulljive, obviously.

yes, the chemtrails expand into cloudlike "clouds", but they are made with artificial ingredients, and not natural H20...to say the least. they are not natural clouds, they are floating toxic chemsoups. and, because they expand and remain in the atmosphere, they block out and filter our live-sustaining Sunlight. this is a very toxic filter.

there was a recent thread that you should definitely check out: Why do they block the sun?

P.S. this thread is going to be trolled big time. you'll probably be seeing the same ones that were in the block the sun thread. goodluck with them.

reply to post by Manhater


Whereabouts do you reside???

Funny you mention the tic tac toe.....

Because, if you do not understand the way airplanes can fly, in various directions?? AND, if you cannot understand how winds blow, and how contrails laid out by a passing airplane can then move, with the wind, before another jet, on THE SAME ROUTE, can come along several minutes later....AND how this can occur at multiple altitudes, and in multiple directions?

I mean....this is NOT "rocket science", people!!!!!

reply to post by metalshredmetal


NOPE!!! Not ever:

couldn't agree more. a lot of people are going to claim that the new chemtrails are just "cloud seeding". this is bulljive, obviously.

PLEASE try to get the terminology correct.

Just.....TRY....to understand, and stop the misinformation!!!

If anyones interested, there was a good show on Coast to Coast AM last night on chemtrails.

Listen to the first half of the show:

reply to post by chrismicha77


It's (the show) over two and a half hours long...I know you said to "listen" to the first half (about an hour, at least)....So, can you summarize, at least? Or point out specific time references that are of specific and particular interest?