Absolutely gorgeous video of A380s contrails

a reply to: smurfy

Interesting, i hadn't even noticed that splinter contrail, wow. What could have caused that? A blockage in the exhaust?

I was just taken in by the beautiful vortexes.

a reply to: Buddyman

How about you stop insulting peoples intelligence?

How did I do that? If I did, it was a lucky shot. I'm not proficient with such small targets.

This is an example of someone insulting people's intelligence

Apparently the earth has been stalled in it's orbit around the Sun since 2003.

www.abovetopsecret.com... That's from the one warning us about shills and disinfo agents. LOL

chem trails are very real and do indeed exist..don't ask me for evidence

So I should just believe you without asking for evidence? Is this some sort of cult here?

if people like you had a genuine need to know you would look for yourself

When I joined ATS I thought they were real. I did look for myself and found they are not real.

Obviously you don't..me thinks shill (isn't it a conspiracy how the shills get first post as well?...why not make a thread on it? lol)

I won't hold that one against you. Aside from being a pathetic attempt, it wouldn't be fair to blame the puppet for the master's work.

BTW, from what little I've read about it, it seems the paid posters are the ones that are encouraged to start threads.

originally posted by: pikestaff

originally posted by: Bilk22
If this was filmed from the cockpit of a commercial airliner, why was the A380 allowed to fly so close? Was the a government run spraying operation? Just asking

I think you may Be right, I thought all aircraft had to have 1,000 foot distance, above, below, left and right? Plus ahead and behind?

An A380 is 240 feet long. We don't know if the camera was using a zoom or not, but even if it wasn't, the separation did look as if it could be 1000 feet (a little more than four plane-lengths of the A380).

If we consider that the camera was maybe using a zoom, then it could have easily been 1000 feet.

originally posted by: Buddyman
chem trails are very real and do indeed exist..don't ask me for evidence

originally posted by: DenyObfuscationSo I should just believe you without asking for evidence? Is this some sort of cult here?

Some guy on the internet said they were real, and said that regular contrails don't persist and spread, nor ever have in the past.

Maybe that guy didn't offer up any logical or scientific reason for this, but isn't "his word" enough? Isn't that enough evidence for you to believe that those puffy trails you see in the sky are chemtrails? I mean "some-guy-on-the-internet" can't be wrong, nor can he make stuff up...can he?

Either way...just to slightly steer the topic back on track...contrail or (sigh..) chemtrail, i think all those who don't see anything sinister in the trails can agree it is a stunning video showing the sheer VOLUME of condensation that is created by the 4 huge beasts on the A380.

I didn't put it up to have the same chemtrail discussion we have all had thousands of times before, but of course, if it goes that way, that's fine. This is, after all, a discussion board.

Have a great weekend everyone. I'm outta here for now.

a reply to: 3danimator2014

It's a great video and cool contrail. thanks for posting it. It's a great way to show how the condensate trails come from the engine process. Not that anyone with a brain doubts that.

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People

originally posted by: pikestaff

originally posted by: Bilk22
If this was filmed from the cockpit of a commercial airliner, why was the A380 allowed to fly so close? Was the a government run spraying operation? Just asking

I think you may Be right, I thought all aircraft had to have 1,000 foot distance, above, below, left and right? Plus ahead and behind?

An A380 is 240 feet long. We don't know if the camera was using a zoom or not, but even if it wasn't, the separation did look as if it could be 1000 feet (a little more than four plane-lengths of the A380).

If we consider that the camera was maybe using a zoom, then it could have easily been 1000 feet.

So they can cross paths with a difference of 1000 vertical feet? Come on that doesn't sound right. I thought that was near collision distance and considered unsafe - when crossing paths. These weren't running parallel.

a reply to: Bilk22

So they can cross paths with a difference of 1000 vertical feet? Come on that doesn't sound right. I thought that was near collision distance and considered unsafe - when crossing paths. These weren't running parallel.

Here you go...

RVSM was implemented to reduce the vertical separation above flight level (FL) 290 from 2000-ft minimum to 1000-ft minimum. It allows aircraft to safely fly more optimum profiles, gain fuel savings and increase airspace capacity. The process of safely changing the separation standard required a study to assess the actual performance of airspace users under the old vertical separation standard of 2000-ft and potential performance under the new standard 1000-ft. In 1988, the ICAO Review of General Concept of Separation Panel (RGCSP) completed this study and concluded that safe implementation of the 1000-ft separation standard was technically feasible. RVSM was subsequently implemented and today RVSM represents a global standard for 1000-ft vertical separation

www.faa.gov...

a reply to: Bilk22

The vertical separation standards between planes are just that -- the vertical separation between two planes when the planes are cruising at level flight. That includes planes crossing over/under each other.

It should be noted that above 29,000 feet, the vertical separation is technically 2,000 feet -- unless the planes meet RVSM (Reduced Vertical Separation Minimum) criteria (known as DVRSM in the U.S.), in which case the vertical separation between two planes can be reduced to 1,000 feet. To meet RVSM criteria, planes need to have certain equipment that had been certified to do so, such as certified altimeters and autopilots -- but commercial airliners most likely comply with RVSM criteria.

U.S. Domestic Reduced Vertical Separation Minimum (DRVSM)

originally posted by: Bilk22

originally posted by: Aloysius the Gaul
a reply to: Bilk22

1000 foot vertical separation - it's a BIG aircraft!

What is the standard clearance for two aircraft? I thought this was well beyond close in terms of normal proximity of flights?

Now you know better.

Of course you could have avoided embarrassing yourself by doing a little research on the topic.

a reply to: Aloysius the Gaul

Re the vertical separation, I understood that north-south and east-west flight paths were assigned odd and even flight levels (or vice versa) so that two aircraft on the same flight path would always be 2000ft apart? So planes crossing perpendicular could be 1000ft apart but those passing head on, as in the video, would be 2000ft apart?

Or is that old information?

Edit: never mind, I was wrong about that.

Cool video, anyway. The "split" contrail may be an aerodynamic component as well as the exhaust component, perhaps?