L.A. contrail a missile launch? Retired general thinks so (op-ed)

Daily Inter Lake.com ^ | Sunday, November 21, 2010 2:00 am | Updated: 8:13 am, Sun Nov 21, 2010. | Jim Cash, retired brigadier general, U.S. Air Force

[TigersEye]

Sliding silently under the mud, muck and fog of national politics, is a current event that makes Bill Clinton’s excursion into the world of elderly sex look tame in comparison. This time the nation’s national security is truly threatened in my opinion, and it involves not only a weak president with limited problem-solving ability, but leadership at the highest levels in the Pentagon as well. The American people would do well to demand a full investigation by an unbiased group, and let the chips fall where they may.

I am referring to the “missile shot” taken off the California coast recently, and the lame response by NORAD, the Pentagon and the White House itself.

(snip)

In my opinion, there is absolutely no doubt that what was captured on video off the coast of California was a missile launch, was clearly observed by NORAD, assessed by a four-star general within minutes, and passed to the president immediately. That is the way the system works, and heads fall if there is a failure. This is one of the most important tenets of national defense and its sole purpose of protecting the American people. Even the smallest failure in this system gets intense scrutiny at the highest level.

Now, the question that still must be answered is why NORAD’s muted response was simply that North America was not threatened, and later our government approved the lame excuse that the picture recorded was simply an aircraft leaving a contrail. This decision was made far above the four-star level, and because the system in place demands it, was made by the president himself.

(More at link)

[Finny]

I think these are test fires of some sort. I have a lot of confidence in our missileers and the tech they come up with.

[TigersEye]

It took you about six posts to mention that you were talking about Rick Warren’s camera and not the Sky2 photographer’s camera. But you keep saying his pic is “five minutes into launch.” Launch of what?

[DontTreadOnMe2009]

What is also interesting, are those that believe this was merely an aircraft contrail claim these contrails can be seen daily, on a routine basis...All over the country.
If this is the case, why are they not providing video of them on a daily basis, so we can see the similarities as in the Southern California case?

You’d think we would have been inundated with similar video...daily...hourly, which depict simple contrails appearing as missiles.

---

“It was unique. It was spiraling. You could see the object spinning. It lit up the sky”

“Spectacular. Takes your breath away. Sub based missile launch”.

[DontTreadOnMe2009]

I have yet to see a ten minute clip of the object. If there is a video showing ten minutes of plume then it was an aircraft contrail. Missiles do not have a burn time of over five minutes at the most and that is for three stages. A Minuteman missile has a burn time of just over two minutes before PSRE separation. Trident is about the same and I would love to see the size of a missile that can burn for ten minutes and why there would be a need for that long of a burn.

---

No way to determine time as video not released ...

but LAX webcam said “Object was amazing, Unlike anything we have seen at LAX in our 20 years here. Disappeared in under 90 seconds ...”

So

90 seconds burn time???

Hmmm , sounds about right ...

[dragnet2]

That caught your attention?

lol..

I have yet to see another video depicting a contrail that appears as a missile, like the Southern California event.

Not one single video...

Yet some of these people claim to see contrails that appear as missiles *daily*.

Show me the video!

[Dagnabitt]

LOL Tell us more about those Iranian blue water / SLBM capabilites! I need another good laugh (at you). Come on MIL analyst.. Which class of submarine in the Iranian navy inventory motored over to Southern California and then launched a missile into the heavens? Which one?

(Secret submarines known only to you don't count)

[Mr. Silverback]

I don't believe there was a launch; the object is an MD-11. However, I phrase it as "launch" when I'm asking how an SLBM could still be photographed by Warren five minutes later. The idea is to make the missile person tell me how that's possible. So far, no one has. I've had people ignore it, one say he has no answer and others insult me or claim Warren's photos are fake without offering evidence.

TXnMA put up a thread you may have seen in which he proves CBS lied about the video and has only provided a heavily edited "raw" version. Here's a graphic from that thread, showing the video synched up with Warren's photos:

The orange line is the flight path of UPS 902, BTW. With these time indices, I'd say it's no stretch to say the object had been producing contrail (if a missile, rocketing upwards) for at least 17 seconds. That would put us at T+5:00 by the last Warren shot. It would also mean Warren is photographing an object in or near outer space and hundreds of miles downrange, yet it appears almost exactly the same size it was a minute or two minutes before.

NASA uses purpose-built tracking cameras to follow the shuttle for the first 165 seconds of flight. They may use them for longer from other locations, the article I'm linking too is unclear, but in any case, they use these hulking tracking cameras so big and expensive that they refer to them ats "mounts," like a gun on a ship. These turrets must be manned by a technician, with tracking systems so precise that the heartbeat of the technician can affect their tracking. Yet at T+5:00, Warren is doing the same thing with a $900 Nikon (and no long lens), and Sky2 is doing it with...well, I'm not sure what they were packing, but it wasn't a NASA tracking camera.

If the object is an MD-11, taking a picture of it with a $900 Nikon is no big deal. If it's an SLBM, it's physically impossible.

[Mr. Silverback]

Try about five minutes. Minimum. See post 227.

[Mr. Silverback]

Surely our Navy would have spotted that Iranian sub with their trusty ASW Chinook. So, no worries, must have been one of our missiles.

[=8 mrrabbit 8=]

Mind providing a link from the Navy providing all details including specs of surface ships, sub-surface ships and platforms to be used in the area during the window - or are you posting as a military insider with the permission of your CO to publish such a determination?

=8-)

[Ditto]

If the object is an MD-11, taking a picture of it with a $900 Nikon is no big deal. If it's an SLBM, it's physically impossible.

Ditto all that you said. Thank you.

This entire contrail thing is the dumbest ass stuff I have ever seen on Free Republic.

[sargon]

Where are the active (or retired) generals who say this was a contrail?

Why is is that every time I hear a general holding forth on this topic, they always say it was a missile and was not a contrail?

Are there any retired generals who DO say it was a contrail?

I'm not aware of any, though I could be mistaken.

From what I saw, it sure seemed to have some sort of flame/thrust emanating from it, which did not at all appear to be a simple reflection of sunlight.

In any event, I find the incivility and derision which has been accompanied this discussion to be highly distasteful. Can't people legitimately disagree on this subject without lapsing into nasty personal attacks?

[DontTreadOnMe2009]

The boost phase is seen in the video.

No one knows the timing: obviously.

A minute or so would be my guess

Based on the LAX webcam guys and others who tried to measure the tiny fraction that is known.

I assume your constant rants about the $900 Nikon still photos are about the smoke effluvia shown blowing in the offshore winds? Can’t smoke slowly drift away from an ocean level launch? More smoke at the base where it would accumulate before smearing to the left ? would assume so ...

The object disappeared upwards into the N/NW sky. The smoke lingered in the air for another 8 minutes. NO ONE has ever said here that it takes 10 minutes for a missile to rise - only goofy contrail doofuses have said that.

And by the way, if you live near Lake Michigan, you don’t know what you are talking about, as we Californians do, as we have seen MANY of these missile take off from Vandenberg, Pt. Mugu, and Yes near the Channel Islands.

Did you read the FR comments from the guy who worked at Cape Canaveral for 30 years?

He said “missile”.

[Mr. Silverback]

Thanks!

[TigersEye]

That's a freakin' joke, right?

This is from contrailscience.com.

The problem with these overlaid pictures is that the plane barely moves forward in this multiple overlay while the contrail moves a lot. That doesn't make sense.

[TigersEye]

Then there's this bit of comical CGI from Contrailscience.com.

Earlier, at 5:19, Rick Warren takes this image from his 10th floor balcony in Long Beach

Those two photos are clearly NOT taken from the same location OR the clouds moved quite a bit from one shot to the next. If the cloud moved a lot why didn't the vehicle leaving the contrail move significantly as well?

The second pic is obviously taken a little later than the first as the lighting of the sunset shows. But the vehicle is in the same approximate position and a good deal of the contrail has disappeared. The answer is simple. The vehicle is traveling away from the photographer to the west at a severe angle as the Sky2 photographer thought. Even a slow moving aircraft would have moved significantly more in the frame if it were coming towards the photographer to the east. As both UPS and flight 808 were supposed to be doing.

[TigersEye]

Here is another joke from Contrailscience.com.

The final image also includes UPS902's track as supplied by FlightAware.com and the FAA.

Why is the track of UPS902, as supplied by FlightAware.com, perpendicular to the path of the contrail?

[DontTreadOnMe2009]

To: Tolsti2

I think you’re witnessing a break.. A big seperation break from those with an IQ over 110 and those under.

---

Say, Tolsti — HOW many missile launches have you observed for real? And HOW familiar are you with L.A. area skies? Sorry if you’ve already mentioned it somewhere, but if you would be so kind as to oblige me with the answer, I would appreciate it.

No, we are all witnessing human nature and human behavior in action. We are witnessing one side that MUST, in order for its arguments to hold water, assume a huge amount of incompetence and stupidity on the part of a great many qualified people, most of them considerably more professionally and/or empirically qualified than the people arguing FOR the plane.

Very telling is what you and others resort to: the plane side resorts to ugly personal insults, like your words quoted at the top of this post, of those who challenge it. That tells a lot about the plane side, and a lot about human nature. It sheds zero light on the truth — which is that you are ignoring the warnings of people here on the ground and on the front lines, and your ego is naturally vested in thinking your own intellect is so much more superior to their powers of observation, empirical experience, and common sense. Again, human nature.

1,449 posted on November 22, 2010 4:11:17 AM GMT+09:00 by Finny

[Mr. Silverback]

The boost phase is seen in the video.

Speaking of which, where is the stage separation? Chinese SLBMs are two stage, ours are three stage. No photo or video shows it, and no eyewitness reported it.

I assume your constant rants about the $900 Nikon still photos are about the smoke effluvia shown blowing in the offshore winds?

You didn't read post 227 like I asked, did you?

And BTW, I know this will sound snarky, but it's the only way I can think to say it: Does it make you feel smart when you assume a grown man is so stupid that he would mistake filming rocket smoke at ground level as being the same as filming an object in outer space? Because that's the assumption you made when you figured I was talking about smoke. And the fact that you don't know about Rick Warren and his $900 Nikon means you've been spouting off grandly about this subject for days now while ignoring crucial evidence.

Lastly, not to nitpick, but asking a question is not ranting.

No one knows the timing: obviously. A minute or so would be my guess

Warren took his first photo at 5:19 and his last photo just before 5:24. By the time he took that first photo, the vehicle had been leaving a trail for quite some time...15 to 30m seconds at least. So let's err on the side of caution and say that if the vehicle is a missile there are five minutes between launch and Warren's last photo.

In Warren's last photo, the vehicle is clearly seen and is roughly the same size as it was in shots taken minutes before. If it's an MD-11, that's no big deal. If it's an SLBM, it's physically impossible. An SLBM would be in space by then and hundreds of miles downrange traveling at hypersonic speeds.

And by the way, if you live near Lake Michigan, you don’t know what you are talking about,

You have poor reading comprehension. I was talking about seeing a contrail from an airliner that had the same formations you say "scream" missile. I saw this twice today, and both of these trails appeared to be nearly vertical in the sky. In other words, I had "proof" right in front of me that they were SLBMs, but they were airliners.

Did you read the FR comments from the guy who worked at Cape Canaveral for 30 years? He said “missile”.

Is he aware of UPS 902 and Warren? Until I saw that evidence, I was certain it was a missile as well.

The media is screwing with you. Did you know that the CBS station released "raw video" that was heavily eited? Link in post 227.

[TigersEye]

In any event, I find the incivility and derision which has been accompanied this discussion to be highly distasteful. Can't people legitimately disagree on this subject without lapsing into nasty personal attacks?

Those with an agenda don't seem to be capable of that.