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.
Kind of free about calling others liars, aren't you? You could have asked nicely and I would have been more than happy to search it out for you.
The Air Force goes on to report that contrails are safe, natural, and can result in grid patterns due to wind dispersal.
Claim: Grid patterns of contrails in the sky are evidence of a systematic spraying operation.
Fact: The National Airspace System of the United States is orientated in an east-west and north-south grid with aircraft flying at designated 2000 foot increments of elevation. Contrails formed by aircraft may appear to form a grid as the winds disperse the contrails. More contrails are seen in recent years due to the growth in the civil aviation market. The FAA is responsible for the NAS and Air Force aircraft operate under the same rules and procedures as civilian aircraft when using the NAS.
Originally posted by IpsissimusMagus
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
You are the one being argumentative here. You keep asking questions but you do not answer mine.
- www.abovetopsecret.com...
n fact it's guaranteed that they do both.
You claim to know already so why don't you answer your own question and quit playing dumb.
There are 2 completely different mechanisms at work. One is absorbtion of water - the other is coalescing.
Assuming we're talking about material that absorbs water. Are you saying it can't coalesce?
Answer the question and please quit wasting time with your ridiculous games.
Really? And what is your evidence for that? I thought you said it was "guaranteed that they will do both" (attributed to you) - not that they will only "almost always do both" - which is it?
The only reason it won't do both is if the material doesn't absorb moisture. Like metal for example.
Originally posted by Thorazine
Originally posted by IpsissimusMagus
The more hygroscopic the CCN is the larger the ice particles will be and longer they will last.
Alas, your understanding of the physics behind contrail formation and persistence is lacking.
The persistence of any contrail, regardless of the size of its CCN, is predicated on the ambient humidity level- not the size of the ice crystal.
If adding sulphur to the fuel would actually survive the combustion of the engine, it would not persist any more or less than any "normal" contrail...
So, seeing a persistent trail is not evidence of any nefarious activity...
I don't make stuff up.
Air traffic has decreased.
Originally posted by CherubBaby
reply to post by flyswatter
Well Luxor has produced a lot more than you. That's what I like a about you de-bunkers / Government Cheerleaders your easy to spot cause your usually lazy when it comes to reading what is provided to you.
I can be more persistent than any contrail you've ever seen.
Traffic Movements 2010 FINAL 3 LOS ANGELES CA, US(LAX) 666 938 4.8
Traffic Movements 2009 FINAL 4 LOS ANGELES CA, US (LAX) 634 383 ( 15.9)
Traffic Movements 2008 FINAL 4 LOS ANGELES CA (LAX) 622 506 ( 8.6)
Traffic Movements 2007 FINAL 4 LOS ANGELES CA (LAX) 680 954 3.7
Traffic Movements 2006 FINAL 4 LOS ANGELES CA (LAX) 656 842 1.0
Traffic Movements 2005 FINAL 4 LOS ANGELES, CA (LAX) 650 629 ( 0.7)
Traffic Movements 2004 FINAL 4 LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA (LAX) 655 097 5.3
Traffic Movements 2003 FINAL 4 LOS ANGELES (LAX) 622 378 ( 3.6)
Total Movements 2002 FINAL 4 LOS ANGELES (LAX) 645 424 ( 12.6)
Total Movements 2001 FINAL 4 LOS ANGELES (LAX) 738 114 (5.8)
Total Movements 2000 FINAL 4 LOS ANGELES (LAX) 783 433 0.6
Well Luxor has produced a lot more than you. That's what I like a about you de-bunkers / Government Cheerleaders your easy to spot cause your usually lazy when it comes to reading what is provided to you.
Originally posted by CherubBaby
reply to post by flyswatter
....That's what I like a about you de-bunkers / Government Cheerleaders your easy to spot cause your usually lazy when it comes to reading what is provided to you.
Oh gee, what is this? Looks like LAX lost over 100,000 landings/departures since the year 2000.
In 2011, LAX was the eighth busiest airport in the world after Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport, Beijing Capital International Airport, London Heathrow Airport, Suvarnabhumi Airport, Chicago O'Hare International Airport, Dubai International Airport, and Tokyo Haneda International Airport with 61,862,052 passengers.[3][4]
LAX is the busiest airport in the Greater Los Angeles Area, but other airports including Bob Hope Airport, John Wayne Airport, Long Beach Airport, and LA/Ontario International Airport also serve the region. LAX is also the busiest airport in California and the U.S. West Coast in terms of flight operations, passenger traffic and air cargo activity, leading it to be referred to as the "Gateway to the Pacific Rim."
Let's have the statistics, buddy. 'Busiest' is in the eye of the beholder.
LAX handled 28,861,477 enplanements, the total number of passengers boarding an aircraft, in 2008. This makes LAX the third busiest airport in the U.S. in terms of enplanements.[23]
It was the world's sixth-busiest airport by passenger traffic[24] and eleventh-busiest by cargo traffic,[25] serving over 60 million passengers and more than two million tons of freight in 2006. It is the busiest airport in the state of California, and the third-busiest airport by passenger traffic in the United States based on final 2006 statistics.[26]
In terms of international passengers, LAX is the second busiest in the U.S. (behind only JFK in New York City)[27] and 26th worldwide.[28] The airport also claims to be "the world's busiest origin and destination (O & D) airport"in 2011[29] — i.e., the busiest airport as measured by the number of passengers who are not changing planes. The number of aircraft operations (landings and takeoffs) has steadily increased to 603,912 in 2011, up from 575,875 in 2010. [4]
LAX connects 87 domestic and 69 international destinations in North America, Latin America, Europe, the Middle East, Asia and Oceania. Its most prominent airlines are United Airlines (18.24% of passenger traffic, combined with United Express traffic), American Airlines (14.73%) and Southwest Airlines (12.62%). Other airlines with a presence on a lesser scale include Delta Air Lines (11.12%) and Alaska Airlines (4.74%).[30]
What are you...the hall monitor?
Twisting is a term used in insurance to describe trickery and misrepresentation. Shame on you. You can do better than that.
Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by DenyObfuscation
Perhaps he'll use this graphic to prove the worldwide decrease in air traffic??
Boeing and Airbus entered the ongoing recessionary period with a considerable backlog of undelivered aircraft on their books (Airbus recorded a backlog of 3,715 and Boeing 3,714)
By one view, there is a growing supply of surplus aircraft in this market sector and it will take years for this surplus to be absorbed by a global airline industry currently operating at reduced capacity.
As for the second half of the statement, it seems to be a clumsily worded explanation as to how persistent contrails drift out of the established airlanes to create the illusion that planes have crossed the entire sky, when in fact, they have mostly stuck to a few relatively narrow bands.