Mysterious light with spiral tail seen in Aussie sky

Blogs / Bad Astronomy
« Atlantis schools Colbert
Followup: Falcon 9 spiral light video

Note how the path goes right over eastern Australia! The timing is perfect, too: about an hour later, the second stage would’ve been halfway around the world, matching the position and time of the UFO sightings.

The spiral pattern seen in Norway is known to be from gas leaking out of the booster. As the booster spins and the gas shoots out, it makes a water-sprinkler spiral pattern in the sky. As it happens, the second stage of the Falcon 9 was rotating; this was not supposed to happen and the SpaceX engineers are looking into it (it didn’t affect the launch adversely; the payload achieved orbit).

Of course, this isn’t enough for some UFO believers. ABC in Australia had this from Doug Moffett of the UFO Research NSW:

"Firstly, the time of the launch was 18.45 GMT, which translates to 4.45am EST, the duration of the flight was 9 minutes 38 seconds – this is a full hour before the reported sightings," he said.

"Secondly, where was the glow from the boosters or from the friction created by the craft moving through the atmosphere, where was the tail of the rocket?"

"Thirdly, why would anyone launch a rocket on a maiden test flight with a trajectory that would take it over the most heavily populated parts of Australia?

"And how big must this rocket have been to be seen so clearly, at the same time, over such a vast distance?"

I have to admit, it’s pretty rare to see somebody get so many things wrong in so few words! Let’s take them point by point:

1) This isn’t a starship, it’s a rocket, and takes time to go around the Earth. An orbit is usually 90 minutes in period, so it takes about 45 minutes or so to get from Florida to Australia. Plus, since this was a launch it wasn’t moving at top speed the whole time; it took a few minutes to accelerate to orbital speeds. That makes the timing about perfect.

spacex_secondstage2) Mr. Moffett needs to understand that a launch from Florida, tens of thousands of kilometers from Australia, gives the rocket plenty of time to get above our atmosphere (which is only a few kilometers high). Heck, the Falcon 9 was up and outside the atmosphere in the first few minutes of flight, when it was barely over the Atlantic! So by the time it was passing over Australia it would’ve been a couple of hundred kilometers up.

3) Again, Mr. Moffett’s grasp of scale is lacking. If the rocket failed, it would have done so over the Atlantic. That’s why we launch rockets from Florida in the first place! There’s essentially no way a failure could cause a rocket to crash in Australia; by the time it gets there it’s in orbit and safe.

4) This is the most telling point: anyone familiar with the sky knows that satellites are easy to spot with just your eye. Rockets can be even easier, especially when they’re spewing out gas! This is something I’ve been saying for years: if you know what you’re looking at in the sky — meteors, satellites, planets, and so on — a lot of UFO stories evaporate. The fact that so many reported UFOs turn out to be mundane objects is a pretty good sign that more than a few UFO enthusiasts aren’t terribly familiar with observing the sky. I find that highly ironic.

So despite the nonsense you’ll hear from the news sites and the bulletin boards that will claim this is some sort of transdimensional stargate warp, I think we have a pretty good idea that we actually do have a UFO here, as long as it’s an Übercool Falcon (in) Orbit.

blogs.discovermagazine.com...

Ocker

They are stating that this was a rocket set off from Cape Canaveral Florida. Now here is my question.....obviously at some point and time in our world...there are any number of countries that have set off rockets....why are they only now making spirals that no one has ever seen before?

Originally posted by Nkinga
They are stating that this was a rocket set off from Cape Canaveral Florida. Now here is my question.....obviously at some point and time in our world...there are any number of countries that have set off rockets....why are they only now making spirals that no one has ever seen before?

That is a very good question, and one I've been asking myself.

Perhaps it's something technical with the rockets/missiles themselves - it could be caused by new designs, new fuels, new hardware etc...

Or perhaps it's simply due to the fact that the whole world seems to be UFO obsessed these days, and thus anything odd in the sky gets videoed and uploaded onto Youtube... and in the blink of an eye it goes viral.

Originally posted by Nkinga
They are stating that this was a rocket set off from Cape Canaveral Florida. Now here is my question.....obviously at some point and time in our world...there are any number of countries that have set off rockets....why are they only now making spirals that no one has ever seen before?

My guess is that before the Norway spiral* nobody outside the space/military community cared about spiralling rockets.

*which was really over Russia.

Originally posted by cripmeister

Originally posted by Nkinga
They are stating that this was a rocket set off from Cape Canaveral Florida. Now here is my question.....obviously at some point and time in our world...there are any number of countries that have set off rockets....why are they only now making spirals that no one has ever seen before?

My guess is that before the Norway spiral* nobody outside the space/military community cared about spiralling rockets.

*which was really over Russia.

Cripmeister.....

As per my earlier post, I think it might also be a function of ideal viewing conditions for these particular cases, as per angle of sun, etc...

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

Originally posted by Dock9
reply to post by IAttackPeople

 

Nice to see you from 2007

For some reason, this story and the latest Israeli atrocity drew dozens of long-time-no-hear members out of the woodwork

I joined in 2007, genius.

So what would the rockets altitude have been 45 mins into the flight from a launch of 28.5 degrees ?

Well I just read this whole thread and that’s why I love this site, get allot more info to work with than the MSM will ever give. I Live on the south coast of NSW and would have had a great view of this; if I was awake, im quiet spewing I missed it.

My opinion I didn’t buy the missile exp given for the Norway spiral having read different arguments and just looking at vids and pix of the thing. I am more inclined to believe it this time given there was a missile launched from Florida and the whole orbit, sunlight, detach theory makes sense to me.... but I cant help but think we have be launching missiles for 50 years why has this spiral phenomena only been happening for about 1 year, with Norway, China, and now Australia. I’m curious about the fact some people say It’s a failed test others saying its part of the procedure of the launch?? It could be both but they produce the same effect. This spiral must have been a surprise effect as you would think observatories would have been notified to watch out for this, but the Syd observatory at first thought it was space junk????

I must admit im hoping to fall off the fence onto the twilight side. Still pretty cool we have an Aussie spiral.

Originally posted by heffo7
Your explanation seems plausible enough at first, but I'm left wondering why if the rocket is rolling why isn't the light in the spiral rolling too?

This is actually a good question. It would seem that since the rocket was rolling that the spiral plume would be rolling as well.

However, this is not the case because (other than the "forward" momentum) the only momentum imparted to the particles when they are ejected will take them directly away from the vehicle in a straight line.

It is sort of like that old physics experiment when you twirl a ball at the end of a string and let go. The ball will travel away from you in a straight path...



Or better yet, watch the Mythbusters try and shoot a bullet in a curved path by swinging the gun while firing. They find the bullet still flies in a straight trajectory...





[edit on 2010/6/6 by IAttackPeople]

Let me first start by saying that I believe the Falcon9 story is feasible and probably the most likely explanation, but I'm not 100% convinced yet.

It's been 24 hours now since this story hit the news worldwide. I'm surprised that SpaceX or NASA have not come forward and made a press release to say "yep - it was us, sorry for the confusion". I'm sure they've seen the story on the news and it would only take them 5 minutes to check their data and make a conclusion. So, it means either one of three things:

1. It wasn't Falcon 9, so they are staying quiet.
2. It was Falcom 9, but they are enjoying the press they are getting from this story so are letting it run for a while longer.
3. No-one at SpaceX or NASA bother to read/watch the news.

I suspect number 2, but let's wait and see.

reply to post by Maybe...maybe not


Of course but there must have been plenty of ideal conditions in the past too no? We have been launching rockets for a long time. The Norway spiral was a stunning event, maybe even unprecedented, and it caught the attention of many people around the world. It also caught the attention of Hoagland, Wilcock and countless other crackpots who turned it into a part of the "conspiracy". If it wasn't for the Norway spiral I think this spiralling rocket would probably have gone by largely unnoticed.

btw did you read Wilcocks latest blogging on the Aussie spiral? He going to talk to his mentor Hoagland about it, I can't wait. Cue WZN.

I too find it VERY ODD in 60 years of rocket tests we only just start seeing this NOW? Ok so camera's weren't to prevalent, but at least since the 90s and every increasingly so, these events should be common place around the world but its NOT, its just NOT. Once is a fluke, twice is compelling..lets see what happens next. I can see why the skeptics are throwing out wild theories that are even more outlandish..I like to see them scared, on the ropes lmao

Originally posted by LightningStrom
I'm surprised that SpaceX or NASA have not come forward and made a press release to say "yep - it was us, sorry for the confusion". I'm sure they've seen the story on the news and it would only take them 5 minutes to check their data and make a conclusion.

I'm pretty sure by now NASA have a policy not to answer UFO claims, for two reasons:

1) why should they?
2) if they had to answer for every UFO claim made against them they would have no time to make rockets and go into space and stuff...

Originally posted by cripmeister
reply to post by Maybe...maybe not

 

btw did you read Wilcocks latest blogging on the Aussie spiral? He going to talk to his mentor Hoagland about it, I can't wait. Cue WZN.

I think I'm gonna poke a pencil in my eye.....

Originally posted by ATSZOMBIE
I too find it VERY ODD in 60 years of rocket tests we only just start seeing this NOW? Ok so camera's weren't to prevalent, but at least since the 90s and every increasingly so, these events should be common place around the world but its NOT, its just NOT. Once is a fluke, twice is compelling..lets see what happens next. I can see why the skeptics are throwing out wild theories that are even more outlandish..I like to see them scared, on the ropes lmao

The fact that so many photos were taken of this spiralling rocket and the Norway spiralling rocket can be seen as part of the case against the existance of flying saucers and black triangles. Is that outlandish enough for you?

edit for clairity, sorry but I'm Swedish.

[edit on 5-6-2010 by cripmeister]

Originally posted by cripmeister

Originally posted by ATSZOMBIE
I too find it VERY ODD in 60 years of rocket tests we only just start seeing this NOW? Ok so camera's weren't to prevalent, but at least since the 90s and every increasingly so, these events should be common place around the world but its NOT, its just NOT. Once is a fluke, twice is compelling..lets see what happens next. I can see why the skeptics are throwing out wild theories that are even more outlandish..I like to see them scared, on the ropes lmao

The fact that so many photos were taken of this spiralling rocket and the Norway spiralling rocket can be seen as a case against flying saucers and black triangles. Is that outlandish enough for you?

thats fine by me , , I am very surprised this has not been seen before, I am asking what has changed,why have so many sighting or even photos not mentioned spirals before?

I asked before what was the altitude of the rocket 45 minutes into flight..

These spirals are something new , It has piqued my interest..

FYI I think the triangle phenomena was triggerd by the b2 if im honest...


JUST READ THIS

"The two stage, 180-foot rocket left the pad at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in Florida at about 2:45 p.m. Eastern. It achieved earth orbit nine minutes later.

Read More www.wired.com...
"

So the rocket was in earth orbit in 9 minutes approx 35 minutes before passing over australia , would it have bee possible to see it?with the naked eye?

Ps you need this avatar then ...image.guardian.co.uk...
sorry lol
[edit on 5-6-2010 by gambon]

[edit on 5-6-2010 by gambon]

[edit on 5-6-2010 by gambon]

[edit on 5-6-2010 by gambon]

There is a lot of poor information being spread on this thread, so 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 possible.

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 about 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.

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).

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, it is understood that the 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.

10. The orbit will take it 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 distances from East Coast of US to East Coast of Australia, 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 ast coast of Australia. So the timing is right.

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 showed that the rocket was going into a slow roll 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.

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.

So all we can do is wait for SpaceX to make an announcement and either confirm or deny that their rocket was responsible.

[edit on 5/6/10 by LightningStrom]

reply to post by LightningStrom


LightningStrom.....

Thanks for that clear, concise explanation.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

So could it be seen , at 250 km? altitude having been rolled out to 28.5 degrees? and reaching orbit in 9 minutes ...these new rockets seem to leak proppelant compared to those old leaky ones.....

[edit on 5-6-2010 by gambon]

reply to post by LightningStrom

Thank you for that excellent summary.

As you are an engineer, can you suggest a theory as to why these spirals seem to be more regular today than in the past?