Mysteries, Chemtrails, Aerosols :: Mysterious NZ New Zealand based Discussion Forums The strange & mysterious, archaeological anomalies, modern oddities... Current affairs, health & medical issues, Aerosol Spraying in NZ... ...and general interest: ARCHIVES
Joined: 23 Nov 2005
Posts: 1002
Location: Wellington NZ
Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 12:51 am Post Subject:
Hector said
Quote:
The sky was not clear! No one is suggesting that there is a shadow off thin air. You can plainly see from the photo that there is a contrail in the sky. The sun (not in the photo) is behind the contrail which is casting a shadow, and you were lucky enough to be looking at it edge-on by your position relative to the sun and the contrail.
Hold on a second buckaroo, I was referring to my own sighting as described at the start of the thread, as I have previously stated I havent been canny enough to photograph one of these events.
I you need further witnesses to the fact that the sky was completely clear at the time I can provide them.
It's a long time now, but I thought I'd better reply... (and besides, I have something else - see the next post.)
I apologise for confusing the photos you posted with your description of a sighting on another day.
In that description, you said:
Quote:
It was running straight through a long straight chemtrail that was broken overhead, the break in the trail was maybe 2km long at the most, it is hard to judge the distances by sight but there was a definate break of blue sky for a length in the trail overhead.
I would rewrite that part of my post as follows:
"The sky was not clear! No one is suggesting that there is a shadow off thin air. You said that there was a contrail in the sky (though you called it a 'chemtrail'). I suggest that the sun was behind the contrail (or inline with it from your view point) which was casting a shadow, and you were lucky enough to be looking at it edge-on by your position relative to the sun and the contrail."
Posted: Fri May 18, 2007 6:23 pm Post Subject: Contrail and 'beam' - Wellington 12:20pm Friday 18 May 2007
While riding north on the motorway in the vicinity of Aotea Quay, I saw a contrail fragment to the north of the city being formed by a jet moving east-northeast. I looked along the backward extension of the contrail to see where the sun was - it was on the same line! Then, looking forward of the jet I briefly saw a faint 'beam'.
The time was 12:20pm, and from a sun position calculator program, the sun was at azimuth 359 degrees and elevation 29 degrees (based on a location of Wellington City at 41 deg 17 min South and 174 deg 46 min East).
I reckon the jet was on the airway that goes over Cape Campbell, Porirua, Paraparaumu, then turns slightly left to Wanganui. (This flight vector is not shown on the Flight Vector Map published elsewhere on this site.) Most contrails seen forming over Wellington are on this track.
I saw the contrail when the jet was traversing the Porirua to Paraparaumu sector where its heading is 009 degrees magnetic, or approximately 031 degrees true.
The remarkable thing to me was that the contrail was fairly short but even so was sufficient to make a faint but discernable shadow. This is the first time I have seen this phenomenon, and I am still sure that it is a shadow and not a beam.
Joined: 05 Nov 2003
Posts: 387
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posted: Sat May 19, 2007 1:01 am Post Subject:
So you saw a shadow Hector, I guess that proves to you that all Black Line sightings are shadows. :roll: When you report a shadow on a clear blue sky, we might be impressed.
We have seen and photographed contrail shadows, plus we have seen and photographed Black Lines, (Black/Grey Beams, as they are alternatively called) and we do not confuse the two. They are distinctly different.
There are, by the way, two types of contrail shadows, has your ‘research’ enabled you to describe them?
If you think there are flight vectors that are not on our map, it would be a friendly act to advise us. If your theory proves, through investigation, and direct observation on Flight Explorer, to be correct, we can make an addition to the map – all in the spirit of accuracy. I rather feel though that this type of comment from you is an attempt to discredit the map so that if anyone reports anomalous aircraft contrail vectors, you can say that the map is not complete, or such like...
I've never said that anything "proves" anything here. You can guess what ever you like; I have always maintained that these so called Black/Grey Lines/Beams are shadows. I simply reported that I saw one and I described it, and I provided some information about the time and place. I saw the same thing that others have photographed and published on the Internet; nothing has changed. It doesn't "prove" anything to me, and I don't expect that it proves anything to anyone else.
Yes, John, a contrail can cast a shadow on the ground or on a lower cloud layer. And a contrail can cast a shadow in apparently clear sky that can be seen from certain view points. I suppose that is what you mean by "two types of contrail shadows". If my supposition is wrong, would you be so kind as to clarify the matter?
There are probably dozens of flight routes that aren't shown on the Flight Vector Map. People in central New Zealand (myself, elevate, smashdracs, Deano) have been reporting contrails on that route (Cape Campbell or WARDS to Porirua to Paraparaumu to Wanganui) for months and possibly years now. When Deano sees a contrail and describes the route as being along the coast near Himitangi, I suspect he's referring to this route. Contrails reported as being formed over Wellington, Hutt Valley, Porirua are all on this route. There's nothing new here; I've just described the route more accurately and mentioned that it's not on the Flight Vector Map on this occasion.
The Flight Vector Map notes say:
"As an aid to a more thorough understanding, we welcome forum reporting on any observed variations to the map, or anything that adds to our knowledge base."
We've all done this in our own friendly and noncritical ways.
What do you mean by "this type of comment from you"? It's regretable if you understood it to be criticism; that's certainly not the way it was meant. I've no intention or desire to discredit the map.
No, Deano, that is not what I am trying to say. I think you are trying to make trouble here.
Referring to my reply to John Anderson's lead about the types of shadow cast by a contrail,
Quote:
... a contrail can cast a shadow on the ground or on a lower cloud layer. And a contrail can cast a shadow in apparently clear sky that can be seen from certain view points.
... I said that these photos are all of contrail shadows of the second type, and I emphasised that the first and third photos certainly are. I'm now of the view that the second one certainly is, too.
Since John hasn't clarified the matter, it would be reasonable to suppose that the description I gave is of the two types of contrail shadows to which he alluded.
Anyway, "Whats eating the surrounding cloud?" ... what do you mean, smashdracs? Please explain. Also, in each of the photos, where was the plane, and what direction was it going?
Correction to an earlier post: Himitangi? no such place; I meant Tangimoana.
It may be ugly, but I like it. This one photo (and one reaction to it) very nicely illustrates some of the things I have been talking about in this topic and others.
It is a shadow, cast by the exhaust smoke plume of the rocket. All the parts of the plume in sunlight will be casting a shadow. There is a more-or-less straight section, and the view direction of the camera is into an edge of the resulting flat-ish shadowed region of the sky. (The requirement here is to visualise all 3 dimensions of the situation.)
That shadowed region looks dark because there is no direct sunlight reaching it to be scattered towards the camera (or any other direction).
Viewed from another direction, you would not see such a marked shadow because there would be insufficient contrast between fully sunlit sky and partially shaded sky.
Read that again: The "shadowed region looks dark because there is no direct sunlight reaching it to be scattered" or, more commonly, reflected. This is what a shadow is, after all. There's really only one kind of shadow, really.
This shadow is also a crepuscular ray; to be precise, an anticrepuscular ray because the shadow is converging to the anti-solar point.
The last time I mentioned crepuscular rays there was a sharp responce and I withdrew the comparison to avoid being sidetracked, etc. But look at the photo! Crepuscular rays (and their extensions to the anti-solar point) will have to come up in the conversation sooner or later. Well here they are; sooner.
Now that you mention it, secondfield, it does look like it's about to "crap out" even though there is a perspective clue in the tapering of the plume as the rocket goes further away. The curve of the plume makes it look like a typical balistic trajectory, and that it has reached maximum altitude and is now falling. That is illusory and due to the one-eyed nature of cameras and their photos. The little paralax information one would have if one observed the scene with two eyes has been removed by photographing it.
This should be remembered when assessing any photo, along with all the other reality-distorting capabilities of the genre.
Thanks, jay_gee, for bringing this very educational image to our attention. Over to you for the reference...
The same (see 'ugly' above) Shuttle launch from an aircraft...
http://www.airliners.net/open.file?id=0142049&size=M
USA - Florida, February 7, 2001
OV-104 Space Shuttle "Atlantis" (mission STS-98), taken from PA-28-235 at 5500 MSL
Photographer: Richard Hardoon
Excellent link, smashdracs, and apart from "Wow! Check these pics out!", I'm interested in your (or anyone elses) interpretation of the sequence of photos on that page.
Close Encounter with Black Beams along Florida Gulf Coast (July 17, 2007)
Subject: Re: Close encounter with a black beam
From: Spyke
Date: Mon, July 16, 2007
To: Editor
Ken,
I have been keeping up with your site for the past year and always appreciate the information you bring to light. Back in April I took a vacation on the gulf coast of Florida and had a rather odd experience that I wanted to share. I always keep an eye on the sky and try to gauge what is happening with the chemical spew that is being sprayed into the air along with trying to inform others of what they are not noticing in the sky above them.
One sunny afternoon while I was reading on my balcony at the hotel I was staying at, I caught something strange out of the corner of my eye. I looked down the beach and there was a narrow, dark line that was hundreds of feet long out in the ocean.
Quote:
At first I thought it was something that was in the ocean but then I noticed it ran all the way onto the beach like a shadow, but I couldn’t see anything that could possibly cause the shadow. It was so strange that I grabbed my phone and used the camera on it to take a picture (see the first picture above). I couldn’t see where the line ended, stretching out into the ocean, so I held my phone over the balcony and took another picture around the corner of the building (see second picture below ) to try to make sense of what I was seeing.
Quote:
The “shadow” quickly moved down the beach toward my hotel as I am still trying looking up into the sky and figure out what could be causing this strange effect. About a minute later in the sky above my balcony, suddenly, I saw a dark line in it and this was quickly joined by a chemtrail merging with it.
Quote:
This appeared to be what others have noted as a “black beam” and was honestly one of the strangest things I have ever seen. It is hard to get a feeling exactly what it looks like by looking at the pictures, but I think if you could imagine seeing a rainbow that was straight and only colored black that would be pretty close.
Over the next few seconds, I snapped pictures and watched as the black beam intensified and then faded and was finally gone, with only the chemtrail remaining (see final five pictures).
Quote:
The beam didn’t appear to go all the way to the ground, but I couldn’t see how far it went back in the sky because it extended past the ceiling on my balcony. I didn’t see anything like this again for the rest of the trip or since returning home.
You can see the beam a bit clearer if you use some image enhancements, but I am going to send the pictures to you unaltered so you have them in their original form. Thanks for taking the time to check this out and keep up the great work.
Joined: 23 Nov 2005
Posts: 1002
Location: Wellington NZ
Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2007 6:18 pm Post Subject: Boeing Installs High-Energy Laser On Laser Gunship Aircraft
Tuesday December 11, 2007
Boeing has installed a high-energy chemical laser aboard a C-130H aircraft, achieving a key milestone for the Advanced Tactical Laser (ATL) Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration program. Boeing completed the laser installation Dec. 4 at Kirtland Air Force Base, N.M. The laser, including its major subsystem, a 12,000-pound integrated laser module, was moved into place aboard the aircraft and aligned with the previously-installed beam control system, which will direct the laser beam to its target.
With the laser installed, Boeing is set to conduct a series of tests leading up to a demonstration in 2008 in which the program will fire the laser in-flight at mission-representative ground targets to demonstrate the military utility of high-energy lasers. The test team will fire the laser through a rotating turret that extends through the aircraft's belly.
"The installation of the high-energy laser shows that the ATL program continues to make tremendous progress toward giving the warfighter a speed-of-light, precision engagement capability that will dramatically reduce collateral damage," said Scott Fancher, vice president and general manager of Boeing Missile Defense Systems. "Next year, we will fire the laser at ground targets, demonstrating the military utility of this transformational directed energy weapon."
The program achieved two other major milestones earlier this year. "Low-power" flight tests were completed in June at Kirtland; the ATL aircraft used its flight demonstration hardware and a low-power laser to find and track moving and stationary ground targets. The flight demonstration hardware includes the beam control system; weapon system consoles, which display high-resolution imagery and enable the tracking of targets; and sensors.
The low-power laser, a surrogate for the high-energy laser, hit its intended target in each of more than a dozen tests. Also, in late July, the high-energy laser concluded laboratory testing at the Davis Advanced Laser Facility at Kirtland, demonstrating reliable operations in more than 50 firings.
ATL, which Boeing is developing for the U.S. Department of Defense, will destroy, damage or disable targets with little to no collateral damage, supporting missions on the battlefield and in urban operations. Boeing's Advanced Tactical Laser industry team includes L-3 Communications/Brashear, which made the laser turret, and HYTEC, Inc., which made various structural elements of the weapon system.
Joined: 15 May 2007
Posts: 977
Location: north-east victoria
Posted: Thu Dec 13, 2007 12:47 am Post Subject:
don't you love the magnificent humanity of the modern "warfighter"?
deeply concerned about reducing collateral damage!.......i'm deeply touched
what's the bet that this "weapon" is a con job?........the damage is inflicted using HAARP and chemtrail "battlefield modeling" ,transmitting electrical power to a precisely selected pinpoint , and the aeroplane and "laser" are just there to give us sheep something to explain it with?
same idea could give the capacity to map the position every rifle and piece of night-vision gear, over the whole earth ,(from certain factories), given that they can be fitted with an identifying transponder
The fairly fresh contrail was likely from a plane on the route Auckland-Christchurch; the contrail is more dissipated at the northern (older) end.
A faint "beam" extends from the solid part of the contrail to the horizon, apparently. Note that this "beam" would need to be projecting from the tail of the southbound plane and not the nose, as has been suggested so far (see posts above).
In fact the contrail is casting a shadow in the atmosphere, and it only appears to be a beam. Note the shadow from the chimney on the house in the middle foreground; the top-near corner of the chimney and its shadow make the same angle as the atmospheric shadow of the contrail. It is only coincidental that the chimney and the contrail shadow are in the same line. The shadow cast by Sky antenna on the same roof is not as clear as the one from the chimney; the same idea applies - it makes the same angle as the contrail shadow.
