In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
contrails/vapor trails
Apparently this "conspiracy theory" is gaining ground (that the white vapor/contrails from aircraft are actually chemicals being sprayed by our government for nefarious reasons).
Anyone here a believer?
Anyone here a believer?
Comments
It even says so on the internet, so there.[;)]
I don't believe it, it would serve no purpose. Why do you say its gaining ground have there been articles about it in the news?
Why do you say its gaining ground have there been articles about it in the news?
Yeah, there was a blurb this morning:
http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/slideshow/2017/03/20/stars-believe-what.html#/slide/hayden-panettiere
But I also had an employee at my last job who believed it, too. Coming from not only the Air Force, but from an aircraft maintenance career field within, I know how planes and their engines work, and have seen vapor trails being created first-hand.
I understand SCIENCE and how humidity, temperature, altitude, etc. create this "phenomena." It's the same as exhaling vapor from your mouth on a cold winter day.
Air is full of moisture, and can't be consumed by your lungs (or an aircraft engine), thus it is expelled as water vapor. Like I said.... SCIENCE.
If so, why did they stop and Trump was allowed to win?
So I would have to say: No, it isn't true. It is just water vapor.
Margaret Thatcher
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."
Mark Twain
I have lived my whole life in cold climates where your breath was visible on cold days when conditions were right. I have never seen my breath persist for hours and form clouds which expanded as I have witnessed chemtrails do.
Flawless logic, sir... you lungs obviously operate in the same way and at the same altitudes, temperatures, & atmospheric pressures as jet engines. How did we not think of this sooner?
If jet contrails are chemicals being sprayed on us by our government, the US would be the only place where contrails form and persist. It isn't. All jets from all countries make them, all over the planet.
The conspiracy theory is bullchips.
http://forums.GunBroker.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=643426
If you've ever seen a KC 135 dumping it's 'load' before landing at NAS Point Mugu (Oxnard, Ca) you know that Ski is correct
watch this, one of many available
skicat, have you ever exhaled at 40,000 feet? That just might make a difference.
If jet contrails are chemicals being sprayed on us by our government, the US would be the only place where contrails form and persist. It isn't. All jets from all countries make them, all over the planet.
The conspiracy theory is bullchips.
I understand what contrails are and the physics of how they occur. As far as I know, nobody is saying every time you see a vapor trail behind an aircraft, it is a nefarious govt scheme. It doesn't rule out some of the time it may be something other than a normal contrail.
Look at it this way, what better way to hide something than in the midst of something commonplace such as the contrails which do form normally behind aircraft? It is easier to pick out a whitetail deer standing alone in a 1000 acre pasture than it is to recognize the same deer in the midst of a herd of 1800 elk in the same pasture.
I have no idea what purpose may be behind any chemtrail spraying. All I know is I have seen trails which appear to behave differently than normal contrails. I also know people have measured elevated levels of various chemicals at ground level following the appearance of chemtrails whose origins remain unaccounted for. If, for whatever reason, the govt did have a reason to apply some chemistry over a large area without alarming the public, then releasing it in a fashion which mimics a normal contrail would be a very efficient way to accomplish it.
We know from past history, the govt has a track record of testing done on uninformed populations. One case being the exposure of civilians in San Francisco in 1950 to what they believed to be a benign bacteria for purposes of testing theories on chemical and biological warfare. People ended up contracting fatal infections. Whoops. So sorry. Move along, nothing to see here.
Why I pay attention.
because govts and large corporations are not always constrained by a moral compass.
Nor can you say that two things observed in close timeframe implies a causal relationship. Chemicals in the air after a contrail in the sky? Nothing whatever proves the two are even related, much less that one causes the other.
So, any cloud that forms at altitude is supposed to immediately dissipate? Funny that all those high cirrus clouds seem to persist, huh?
[:)]
These persisted at least 10 - 15 minutes after any aircraft/UFO was seen.
Brad Steele
With an NFPA 704 health hazard rating of 2, silver iodide can cause temporary incapacitation or possible residual injury to humans and mammals with intense or continued but not chronic exposure. However, there have been several detailed ecological studies that showed negligible environmental and health impacts.[15][16][17] The toxicity of silver and silver compounds (from silver iodide) was shown to be of low order in some studies. These findings likely result from the minute amounts of silver generated by cloud seeding, which are about one percent of industry emissions into the atmosphere in many parts of the world, or individual exposure from tooth fillings.[18]
Accumulations in the soil, vegetation, and surface runoff have not been large enough to measure above natural background.[19] A 1995 environmental assessment in the Sierra Nevada of California[20] and a 2004 independent panel of experts in Australia confirmed these earlier findings.[21]
"In 1978, an estimated 2,740 tonnes of silver were released into the US environment. This led the US Health Services and EPA to conduct studies regarding the potential for environmental and human health hazards related to silver. These agencies and other state agencies applied the Clean Water Act of 1977 and 1987 to establish regulations on this type of pollution."[22]
Cloud seeding over Kosciuszko National Park-a biosphere reserve-is problematic in that several rapid changes of environmental legislation were made to enable the trial. Environmentalists are concerned about the uptake of elemental silver in a highly sensitive environment affecting the pygmy possum among other species as well as recent high level algal blooms in once pristine glacial lakes. Research 50 years ago and analysis by the former Snowy Mountains Authority led to the cessation of the cloud seeding program in the 1950s with non-definitive results. Formerly, cloud seeding was rejected in Australia on environmental grounds because of concerns about the protected species, the pygmy possum.[23] Since silver iodide and not elemental silver is the cloud seeding material, the claims of negative environmental impact are disputed by peer-reviewed research as summarized by the international Weather Modification Association.[24]
It is also true that just because you (that's a generalized, not personal you) cannot explain something does not mean there isn't a natural, innocent explanation.
Nor can you say that two things observed in close timeframe implies a causal relationship. Chemicals in the air after a contrail in the sky? Nothing whatever proves the two are even related, much less that one causes the other.
You are correct but it also does not rule it out. These are things which don't cost me one minute of sleep at night. There are enough smoking guns out there I do pay attention to it. Bear in mind we live in a country which has officially accepted the hokum of climate change and I refuse to accept the science behind that as well. There is a similarity with the two ideas as well in that if one objects to the current theory of climate change they are demonized and no one then bothers with the actual argument. This is also the case with chemtrails.
So far the best argument I have encountered is the one Rocky puts forth where he points out there isn't necessarily a link between these events. Very true as it is an unproven thing at this point. Most people who argue chemtrails are hokum spend their entire argument on proving the existence of contrails which nobody in the chemtrail camp doubts. We know there are contrails.
Going back to my analogy of the whitetail standing amongst a large herd of elk, we don't need people to prove the existence of elk. We see the elk. We are just looking for people to recognize that we see a whitetail in the mix and perhaps discus his presence. What we get is people who refuse to consider a whitetail may be there and reply with "There have been elk here for thousands of years and any fool can see that is a herd of elk."
What about the whitetail?
So how is it being done? Aviation fuel would have to have the chemicals in it to go thru the Jet engine... and the exhaust would have to be tainted and survive the heat of the jet engine to spread this terrible chemical in the atmosphere. BS. Aviation fuel is tested. And why if the govt is doing this... wouldn't they just put it in the gasoline or diesel fuel at the local pump.
Ground level dispersal patterns are very inefficient.
Typically, major commercial carriers contract with the government and the chemical(s) is/are injected into the bypass air so they do not see the heat of combustion, but are accelerated around the engine to mix with the outside air more so than the combustion exhaust.
These carriers convert aircraft for routes that much shorter that the original design endurance, and use wing fuel tanks with the appropriate re-plumbing for the chemicals.
This practice has been in effect for at least the last two decades, and some think that it actually started in the late 70s or early 80s to continue the research that was started over Southeast Asia.
Brad Steele
And fiery auto crashes
Some will die in hot pursuit
While sifting through my ashes
Some will fall in love with life
And drink it from a fountain
That is pouring like an avalanche
Coming down the mountain
quote:Originally posted by select-fire
So how is it being done? Aviation fuel would have to have the chemicals in it to go thru the Jet engine... and the exhaust would have to be tainted and survive the heat of the jet engine to spread this terrible chemical in the atmosphere. BS. Aviation fuel is tested. And why if the govt is doing this... wouldn't they just put it in the gasoline or diesel fuel at the local pump.
Ground level dispersal patterns are very inefficient.
Typically, major commercial carriers contract with the government and the chemical(s) is/are injected into the bypass air so they do not see the heat of combustion, but are accelerated around the engine to mix with the outside air more so than the combustion exhaust.
These carriers convert aircraft for routes that much shorter that the original design endurance, and use wing fuel tanks with the appropriate re-plumbing for the chemicals.
This practice has been in effect for at least the last two decades, and some think that it actually started in the late 70s or early 80s to continue the research that was started over Southeast Asia.
Are you kidding me? And the inspector for that aircraft just turns his head and signs off. And I reckon the planes that fly overseas that leave these trails across the ocean are killing the shrimp population.
quote:Originally posted by select-fire
So how is it being done? Aviation fuel would have to have the chemicals in it to go thru the Jet engine... and the exhaust would have to be tainted and survive the heat of the jet engine to spread this terrible chemical in the atmosphere. BS. Aviation fuel is tested. And why if the govt is doing this... wouldn't they just put it in the gasoline or diesel fuel at the local pump.
Ground level dispersal patterns are very inefficient.
Typically, major commercial carriers contract with the government and the chemical(s) is/are injected into the bypass air so they do not see the heat of combustion, but are accelerated around the engine to mix with the outside air more so than the combustion exhaust.
These carriers convert aircraft for routes that much shorter that the original design endurance, and use wing fuel tanks with the appropriate re-plumbing for the chemicals.
This practice has been in effect for at least the last two decades, and some think that it actually started in the late 70s or early 80s to continue the research that was started over Southeast Asia.
Clearly you have not seen the inside of a cfm56-2a...the way you talk about this cracks me up. You can't just route stuff like that into the bypass section of a turbo fan.
Are chemicals like aluminum dioxide being exhausted out of jet engines? Yes! Are these mind control chemicals or other I'll intended chemicals? No! It's burn off from additive packages we use to give our engines the desired performance characteristics in the operating environment of high altitude Flight.
If we were trying to disperse mind control crap or some other chemicals it would have to be done at low altitude anyway....one of the reasons we have to dump fuel now above 10k feet is so it atomize and disperses and dilutes well before hitting the ground. In contrast agent orange (the closest thing we have ever used to Chem trail ideas) had to be dumped at altitudes generally less than 5k to be effective.
Not to mention any chemical that stays airborne at high altitude for long amounts of time can not be used to any degree of accuracy as winds would carry it away.
This stuff cracks me up!
If I only had a dollar for every gub'mint conspiracy theory, I'd be a pretty wealthy man by now...[V]
Assertions and hypotheses. Show me proof.
In science the hypothesis comes before the proof. You seem to want the proof before the hypothesis is tested.
Remember all the hulabaloo about the US Star Wars program. Under President Reagan we had the Soviet's (and US citizens) believing we had satellite's orbiting the earth with warheads on board aimed at strategic locations.
Pure BS! But it worked in escalating the costs the USSR had to spend to come up with counter measures, leading to the downfall of the Soviet gov't.
quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
quote:Originally posted by select-fire
So how is it being done? Aviation fuel would have to have the chemicals in it to go thru the Jet engine... and the exhaust would have to be tainted and survive the heat of the jet engine to spread this terrible chemical in the atmosphere. BS. Aviation fuel is tested. And why if the govt is doing this... wouldn't they just put it in the gasoline or diesel fuel at the local pump.
Ground level dispersal patterns are very inefficient.
Typically, major commercial carriers contract with the government and the chemical(s) is/are injected into the bypass air so they do not see the heat of combustion, but are accelerated around the engine to mix with the outside air more so than the combustion exhaust.
These carriers convert aircraft for routes that much shorter that the original design endurance, and use wing fuel tanks with the appropriate re-plumbing for the chemicals.
This practice has been in effect for at least the last two decades, and some think that it actually started in the late 70s or early 80s to continue the research that was started over Southeast Asia.
Clearly you have not seen the inside of a cfm56-2a...the way you talk about this cracks me up. You can't just route stuff like that into the bypass section of a turbo fan.
Are chemicals like aluminum dioxide being exhausted out of jet engines? Yes! Are these mind control chemicals or other I'll intended chemicals? No! It's burn off from additive packages we use to give our engines the desired performance characteristics in the operating environment of high altitude Flight.
If we were trying to disperse mind control crap or some other chemicals it would have to be done at low altitude anyway....one of the reasons we have to dump fuel now above 10k feet is so it atomize and disperses and dilutes well before hitting the ground. In contrast agent orange (the closest thing we have ever used to Chem trail ideas) had to be dumped at altitudes generally less than 5k to be effective.
Not to mention any chemical that stays airborne at high altitude for long amounts of time can not be used to any degree of accuracy as winds would carry it away.
This stuff cracks me up!
Hiding from reality will not make it go away.
Interesting that you mention the cfm56-2a, as the 737 is one of the most widely used platforms for chemical spraying. The advantage of the airframe, in addition to over 5,000 having been built, is that most are utilized for flights well under their design endurance, particularly the 737-700 and 737-800 platforms.
Also, the lower bypass ratio of the Cfm56-2a engines used in the 737 necessitate by the height of the wings results in a higher velocity (though smaller in area) airflow. This higher relative velocity to the outside air promotes better mixing over a wider altitude and velocity profile, something very valuable in a jet that can go through 8 to 9 flight cycles in a single day.
Really, the inside of a cfm56-2a? We are talking about bypass air, Mr. Irish. By definition it never sees the inside of the engine. Sheesh...
Brad Steele
While I have machined numerous fuel fittings for military and commercial aircraft, missiles, space shuttles, I do not recall any that were used to fabricate some sort of by pass for any engines. Please explain how one of these counterfeit fittings would appear on an aircraft? and how an Inspector of that aircraft would not see them? And what box on the check off ( sign off ) sheet would that fitting appear?
Please try to keep up.
Bypass air in a commercial engine is that air accelerated by the primary fan and never enters the engine. There is no 'bypass' of the fuel system, rather it is a separate system installed in specific aircraft to disperse product into this airstream. Originally the B-2 Stealth Bomber was designed to disperse chlorofluorosulfonic acid into this bypass air to reduce contrail formation, but it is now thought that this was not used and altitude and speed modifications were to be used to avoid the creation of contrails. Obviously, chlorofluorosulfonic acid, being an ozone killer had political liabilities that were tought to overcome.
There is not, however, concrete data available to confirm that the chemical delivery system was removed from the B-2. Not that it really matters, a production run of 40 aircraft (21 that have been acknowledged) doesn't make much of an impact. The dispersal technology, however, developed in the 80s is now widely used as noted previously.
Brad Steele
quote:Originally posted by kidthatsirish
quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
quote:Originally posted by select-fire
So how is it being done? Aviation fuel would have to have the chemicals in it to go thru the Jet engine... and the exhaust would have to be tainted and survive the heat of the jet engine to spread this terrible chemical in the atmosphere. BS. Aviation fuel is tested. And why if the govt is doing this... wouldn't they just put it in the gasoline or diesel fuel at the local pump.
Ground level dispersal patterns are very inefficient.
Typically, major commercial carriers contract with the government and the chemical(s) is/are injected into the bypass air so they do not see the heat of combustion, but are accelerated around the engine to mix with the outside air more so than the combustion exhaust.
These carriers convert aircraft for routes that much shorter that the original design endurance, and use wing fuel tanks with the appropriate re-plumbing for the chemicals.
This practice has been in effect for at least the last two decades, and some think that it actually started in the late 70s or early 80s to continue the research that was started over Southeast Asia.
Clearly you have not seen the inside of a cfm56-2a...the way you talk about this cracks me up. You can't just route stuff like that into the bypass section of a turbo fan.
Are chemicals like aluminum dioxide being exhausted out of jet engines? Yes! Are these mind control chemicals or other I'll intended chemicals? No! It's burn off from additive packages we use to give our engines the desired performance characteristics in the operating environment of high altitude Flight.
If we were trying to disperse mind control crap or some other chemicals it would have to be done at low altitude anyway....one of the reasons we have to dump fuel now above 10k feet is so it atomize and disperses and dilutes well before hitting the ground. In contrast agent orange (the closest thing we have ever used to Chem trail ideas) had to be dumped at altitudes generally less than 5k to be effective.
Not to mention any chemical that stays airborne at high altitude for long amounts of time can not be used to any degree of accuracy as winds would carry it away.
This stuff cracks me up!
Hiding from reality will not make it go away.
Interesting that you mention the cfm56-2a, as the 737 is one of the most widely used platforms for chemical spraying. The advantage of the airframe, in addition to over 5,000 having been built, is that most are utilized for flights well under their design endurance, particularly the 737-700 and 737-800 platforms.
Also, the lower bypass ratio of the Cfm56-2a engines used in the 737 necessitate by the height of the wings results in a higher velocity (though smaller in area) airflow. This higher relative velocity to the outside air promotes better mixing over a wider altitude and velocity profile, something very valuable in a jet that can go through 8 to 9 flight cycles in a single day.
Really, the inside of a cfm56-2a? We are talking about bypass air, Mr. Irish. By definition it never sees the inside of the engine. Sheesh...
You know well that the what is commonly referred to as an engine consists of the entire pod that includes the bypass section. You don't just add plumbing to engine areas and Cowlings without some kind of QA signing off on it and knowing what it does.
You also know that anything dispersed at high altitude is pretty well diluted and dispersed by the time it gets to the ground or water.
I'm not saying or government isn't shady and has not done shady or bad things in the past...or won't do bad things in the future...but this is not one of them...they would do much better to put things into a cities water supply to test chemicals if they wanted to....at least then they would have quantifiable data that is lest suspect to contamination.
quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
quote:Originally posted by kidthatsirish
quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
quote:Originally posted by select-fire
So how is it being done? Aviation fuel would have to have the chemicals in it to go thru the Jet engine... and the exhaust would have to be tainted and survive the heat of the jet engine to spread this terrible chemical in the atmosphere. BS. Aviation fuel is tested. And why if the govt is doing this... wouldn't they just put it in the gasoline or diesel fuel at the local pump.
Ground level dispersal patterns are very inefficient.
Typically, major commercial carriers contract with the government and the chemical(s) is/are injected into the bypass air so they do not see the heat of combustion, but are accelerated around the engine to mix with the outside air more so than the combustion exhaust.
These carriers convert aircraft for routes that much shorter that the original design endurance, and use wing fuel tanks with the appropriate re-plumbing for the chemicals.
This practice has been in effect for at least the last two decades, and some think that it actually started in the late 70s or early 80s to continue the research that was started over Southeast Asia.
Clearly you have not seen the inside of a cfm56-2a...the way you talk about this cracks me up. You can't just route stuff like that into the bypass section of a turbo fan.
Are chemicals like aluminum dioxide being exhausted out of jet engines? Yes! Are these mind control chemicals or other I'll intended chemicals? No! It's burn off from additive packages we use to give our engines the desired performance characteristics in the operating environment of high altitude Flight.
If we were trying to disperse mind control crap or some other chemicals it would have to be done at low altitude anyway....one of the reasons we have to dump fuel now above 10k feet is so it atomize and disperses and dilutes well before hitting the ground. In contrast agent orange (the closest thing we have ever used to Chem trail ideas) had to be dumped at altitudes generally less than 5k to be effective.
Not to mention any chemical that stays airborne at high altitude for long amounts of time can not be used to any degree of accuracy as winds would carry it away.
This stuff cracks me up!
Hiding from reality will not make it go away.
Interesting that you mention the cfm56-2a, as the 737 is one of the most widely used platforms for chemical spraying. The advantage of the airframe, in addition to over 5,000 having been built, is that most are utilized for flights well under their design endurance, particularly the 737-700 and 737-800 platforms.
Also, the lower bypass ratio of the Cfm56-2a engines used in the 737 necessitate by the height of the wings results in a higher velocity (though smaller in area) airflow. This higher relative velocity to the outside air promotes better mixing over a wider altitude and velocity profile, something very valuable in a jet that can go through 8 to 9 flight cycles in a single day.
Really, the inside of a cfm56-2a? We are talking about bypass air, Mr. Irish. By definition it never sees the inside of the engine. Sheesh...
You know well that the what is commonly referred to as an engine consists of the entire pod that includes the bypass section. You don't just add plumbing to engine areas and Cowlings without some kind of QA signing off on it and knowing what it does.
You also know that anything dispersed at high altitude is pretty well diluted and dispersed by the time it gets to the ground or water.
I'm not saying or government isn't shady and has not done shady or bad things in the past...or won't do bad things in the future...but this is not one of them...they would do much better to put things into a cities water supply to test chemicals if they wanted to....at least then they would have quantifiable data that is lest suspect to contamination.
Way Way above him... BTW... some hack cannot plumb into aircraft parts. I would explain but again well above you.
Like most conspiracy theories. BS...
And this one is getting less funny by the minute.
And fiery auto crashes
Some will die in hot pursuit
While sifting through my ashes
Some will fall in love with life
And drink it from a fountain
That is pouring like an avalanche
Coming down the mountain