Mystery Ballistic Missile Off California Coast

Some images of the event taken from Hermosa Beach, California. You can see from the first image the true perspective of the event on 8th November. Shot at 20mm focal length other contrails are also visible.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/28003192@N04/5163222326/in/photostream/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/28003192@N04/5162058690/in/photostream/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/28003192@N04/5162058662/in/photostream/

TJ

But the Chinese did it…because….because…..because……they don’t want us to monetize our debt and figured YEA! Let’s launch a SLBM off the coast of LA, that will get them damn Yankees Attention!

For cryin out loud, that is all I hear from a bunch of people. I am definitely a bit of a conspiracy cook myself, but this missile idea is crazy.

…and quote me the law that says I have to. :rolleyes:

There is none, obviously. Even so, backing up one’s points is a prudent thing to do if you wish to be taken seriously.

One problem with your videos: none of them is even close to 10 minutes long, even though Shuttle SRBs are probably some of the longest burning solid propellant rocket motors in existence. In fact, they are dropped after slightly more than 2 minutes, a fraction of the time the alleged missile in California has been observed without any staging event taking place!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LplVxoO54ko

Suflanker,

Superb, thanks for posting the videos. Shuttle launches are always spectacular and nice reactions from the people watching!

There is a fundamental flaw in your observations. Perspective plays a major part in what you are trying to show. Nobody is disputing that aircraft contrails can look like ballistic missile launches but the key factor here is speed and time.

Watch the following simulation from Northrop Grumman.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2aHpqqhaHJ0

Note the time frame of events that take place during the launch? For the Californian 8th November event to be a ballistic missile it would be the slowest missile in the world!

From analysis of the video splicing you can see it linked into Rick Warren’s images.

From

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2630024/posts?page=1

Link to Rick Warren’s images. Feel free to contact Rick if you believe that the images are fake?

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ocean_rick/5165538062/in/photostream/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ocean_rick/with/5165538062/

Event of 8th November from LAX Pacific view webcam.

From

http://www.cargolaw.com/2000nightmare_singles.only.html

There is a contact e-mail address for Cargo Law and Cargo News if you believe that the images are fake?

Both the LAX webcam and Rick’s images prove that the ‘object’ was moving towards the coast and not away to the west as claimed by the cameraman Gil Leyvas.

I know that it is against everything that you stand for, but please take some time to read through the analysis from Contrail Science?

http://contrailscience.com/

TJ

As inadequate as you may consider that to be, it’s still a great deal more than you have done to support your argument.

…and quote me the law that says I have to. :rolleyes:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3OKNi9n0oM&feature=fvst

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bMvFGupDPUU&feature=related

Some more pretty videos.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LvbK93FB5kU&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-GivwKsBJY&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTVyd830FZY&feature=related

Gee TEEJ I can post pretty pictures too. The smoke trail from the solid rocket boosters from the space shuttle look similiar to what you call a contrail from your California aircraft.:rolleyes:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xv5J5cBwwFc

All TEEJ has done is post a bunch of pretty pictures. He hasn’t offered any solid proof that the vapor trail came from an aircraft.

As inadequate as you may consider that to be, it’s still a great deal more than you have done to support your argument.

Mercurius,
Excellent post. I concur.

—————————————————–

Suflanker,

The FAA have already made their viewpoint very clear. The FAA said that they saw no unidentified targets in the area and there were no reports of unusual sightings from pilots.

What does that mean to you? To me it means that there was nothing there that shouldn’t have been there! In that region there were two likely airliner candidates.

UPS902 from analysis of the flight data is the best fit for it being over the exact same area and time of this claimed missile launch. Note that the FAA also stated that there was no unusual sighting from pilots?

In addition to the pilots there have been no sightings reported from any other source. No reports from LAX Air Traffic Controllers on visual watch from the tower, no reports from mariners and nothing from the residents of the islands such at Catalina of this claimed ballistic launch. No reports of seeing missile plumes, staging events or anything else associated with a ballistic missile launch.

Some people are increasing the pressure on CBS to come clean on the edited footage that was shown. Remember this is the same footage that Jane’s Doug Richardson saw and was asked to comment on? CBS only show the edited footage and have since remained silent. The pressure is growing for CBS to release everything that Gil Leyvas filmed on that day. Analysis has already been completed on the tape. Why didn’t they simply show all the video or make it available? Why wasn’t all the footage made available to those people that they asked for analysis and opinion?

Some people are already calling it another ‘CBS-Gate’

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2630024/posts?page=1

Gil Leyvas, the news helicopter cameraman, revealed something interesting in a CBS interview. He revealed that on the 4th November (Thursday) he witnessed a similar event.

Video on the following link.

http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2010/11/09/exclusive-raw-video-mysterious-missile-launch-off-california-coast/

Transcription.

“It was unique, it was moving, it was growing in the sky. As I zoomed in I used a two-times extender on the lens to get a closer look, and you could tell that the object, whatever it was, was spriraling up in the sky. You could see the clouds were kind of swirling and as I zoomed in and got tighter on it, it appeared that it was spinning and going in a westerly direction.

“Well, I realized that it was something that we saw earlier from the week before — we saw something very similar the past Thursday, and immediately I realized that it was something very similar, and called on the 2-way there to our assignment desk to let them know that we were seeing it again. It’s not as dramatic as the one from yesterday — the one from yesterday was pretty spectacular. Like I said, it was growing in nature and continued to fly up into the sky, and at one point it seemed to separate. The smoke or the
plume seemed to stop and then continue further up in the sky and then finally disappear.”

What is interesting is that UPS Flight 902, a McDonnell Douglas MD-11 tri-engined airliner, was flying the exact same route on the 4th November as the 8th November. It leads me to think that possibly Gil Leyvas witnessed a persistent contrail generated by UPS902 on both the 4th and 8th November?

Details recorded have the 4th November flight arriving at Ontario (KONT) at 18:05 PST. On the 8th November UPS902 arrived at Ontario (KONT) at 18:02 PST.

UPS902 on 4th November.

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/UPS902/history/20101104/1955Z/PHNL/KONT

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/UPS902/history/20101104/1955Z/PHNL/KONT/tracklog

UPS902 on 8th November.

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/UPS902/history/20101108/2055Z/PHNL/KONT/tracklog

It would certainly be interesting if UPS 902 on the 4th November 2010 was captured on the LAX webcam?

Gil Leyvas has provided no timeline for the similar event on the 4th, but it does raise some questions. Was this another missile event, or did he misinterpret another persistent contrail made by an MD-11 flying the same route at the same time into Ontario International, California? If would interesting if he recorded footage of this 4th November event?

TJ

Source? TEEJ has given a wealth of info about two flights which were in the area at the time, it’s now on you to do some leg work for once and offer proof of what you claim.

What? You don’t know how to use the internet to find it yourself? You’ve already made your mind up anyway and I have a life. The local news media reported it in my neck of the woods. All TEEJ has done is post a bunch of pretty pictures. He hasn’t offered any solid proof that the vapor trail came from an aircraft.

Having spent some of my younger years viewing kinetheodolite footage of launches from the Woomera range, I see two points from the from the Jane’s story as good evidence that the US footage shows an airliner contrail.

Over time, the ‘plume’ being recorded does not develop the bell-like appearance of ballistic missile efflux at high altitude, and despite the length of the recording the imagery shows no signs of missile staging.

Had the object been a missile, its trajectory would have carried it ever-higher into the light of the setting sun, keeping it well illuminated. As the videorecording continued, the plume turned dark in appearance, indicating that it was no longer in sunlight. This would be consistent an object flying at a near-constant medium altitude that carried it out of the sunlight.

On the day after the incident I spoke to a well-known aerospace journalist, whose reaction to the initial heavily-edited footage first screened by CBS had been that this showed a missile. That indeed was my own initial reaction, and that of many other qualified observers. But we were all wrong.

Had it been a ballistic missile, we could have expected other recordings or photographs from different locations along the US coastline showing missile-like behaviour. If the object in question was not US Airways Flight 808, then we could have expected accounts and photographs from the passengers on that flight, who would have had a ‘grandstand view’ of whatever KCBS had seen.

And how to those who favour the missile hypothesis explain the appearance of a similar trail in the sky at the same time on the following day? CBS showed an image of that trail in a later news report and stated that it was “virtually identical” to that seen in the 8 November videorecording.

The FAA has stated that they have no info about any commerical aircraft in the area.

Source? TEEJ has given a wealth of info about two flights which were in the area at the time, it’s now on you to do some leg work for once and offer proof of what you claim.

TEEJ all you have is a theory. You have no proof. Do you have solid proof that there is an aircraft at the beginning of the contrail? Do you have the ATC radar/transponder data that would show that there was an aircraft up there and what airline it was? You you have the radio recordings of ATC in communication with said aircraft? The FAA has stated that they have no info about any commerical aircraft in the area.

I’ve discussed this with a few of my ex and current Air Force friends and based on our training and experience we argee it was a missle.

Some new footage from the 8th November. Remember that this matches up with a UPS MD-11? MD-11 being a tri-engined widebody and can produce contrails such as the following. Contrails can be persistent and non-persistent.

http://www.airliners.net/photo/Unknown/McDonnell-Douglas-MD-11/0613921/L/

New independent footage from 8th November.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VcUoqNyhIfQ

You can also view Rick Warren’s images of the event at the following links.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ocean_rick/5165538062/in/photostream/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ocean_rick/5165540970/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ocean_rick/with/5165538062/

Another ‘missile’ from California on the 9th November. Yet another example of how aircraft contrails can be misinterpreted.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O33I3-hpMKc

TJ

Suflanker,

Are they really missile launches? Just because it appears to be rising vertical, or near vertical,does not mean that it is a ballistic launch. Basic understanding of perspective comes into play here. You do understand perspective?

Aircraft contrails have been fooling people for years and especially at sunset. The light conditions accentuate the contrail, wind conditions altitudes can dissipate the contrail and the result due to perspective is interpreted as a ballistic missile launch. That is why with edited footage, as shown on CBS, observers such as Doug Richardson (Jane’s) can be fooled.

It also initially fooled Patrick Minnis from NASA. Mr Minnis is a contrail expert in the Science Directorate at NASA’s Langley Research Center in Hampton, Va.

“When Patrick Minnis saw video of the “mystery” contrail Nov. 9 that looked like a missile launch near Catalina Island off Los Angeles, he figured it the way most people did.””I assumed it was a missile,” said Minnis….”

http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/mystery-contrail.html

Going back to your claims of me posting ballistic launch videos as aircraft contrails.

Key West, Florida, New Years Eve 2008 video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9sVmjpDZLN0

Images from that event.

http://www.space.com/common/forums/viewtopic.php?t=22521

Read the following carefully.

http://keysnews.com/node/9385

On New Year’s Eve, some Florida Keys residents were awed by an unusual sight in the south to southwest skies off Key West. Recreational boaters, commercial fishermen and others snapped photographs they sent to the Navy, asking what the fast-moving object was that left a thick plume in its long wake, which glowed orange in the setting sun. Some speculated, and worried, that it was a rocket or missile, or military test. “To me, at first, it really looked like a missile,” said commercial fisherman Lee Starling. After seeing video of
the object on YouTube…

24 hours after the claimed ballistic missile launch on the 8th November, Californians were still reporting them! Go figure? Obviously to you it is the Chinese launching random ballistic missiles off the US coast!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1vNCCkd7Qsg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJi2L4QC_fk

The edited footage released by CBS is one of the key factors that confused many observers. One of the snippets was the slowed down part that appeared to show a rocket engine burning.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAZLYn44FeQ

The news helo cameraman, Gil Leyvas, featured with the helo camera package.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KVFWJv_Dplo

Airliners with their highly reflective paint schemes can and do produce glare and reflection. Gil Leyvas with his helo camera has zoomed into the contrail at extreme range. His optics have already foreshortened the persistent contrail. Now consider that light claimed to be a ‘rocket engine’ is acutally just reflection as the airliner continues its approach to the mainland?

Look at all the ‘rocket engines’ on this airliner! Now imagine that airliner being filmed at range and at the angle that Gil Leyvas filmed the event on 8th Nov?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_N5ZgYzj44

TJ

Thanks for posting. The time line matches up with the UPS McDonnell Douglas MD-11 rather than the America West Boeing 757…….

That’s insane! The Chinese are not dumb enough to launch a SLBN so near LA risking a nuclear retaliatory strike.

Another “conspiracy” explanation: It might be an undeclared American ABM test using a SLBM as target.

Jane’s website is reporting what the US military is reporting. They are not investigative journalists.

We could argue all day about what constitutes investigative journalism, and any evidence (or lack of it) for your statement.

But what I wrote to summarise the Jane’s account was “a longer-duration version [of the recording] that later emerged convinced them it was an aircraft contrail.” The Jane’s article cites the US DoD position, but draws its own conclusion and gives the reasoning behind it.

Let me add that the US Navy sends Carrier Battle Groups cruising off the Chinese coast to show that we can reach them so I wouldn’t put it past China to send a boomer off our coast and fire off a missle to say. “Hey, now we can reach you as well.”

Hey TEEJ you want to keep posting youtube videos of missle launches and calling them aircraft contrails be my guest. You want to keep posting images of vapors trails that state this United Airlines flight 609 over Kansas without any proof to back it up,go ahead. Since you found on the internet then it must be true.:rolleyes:

Jane’s website is reporting what the US military is reporting. They are not investigative journalists.

As for thinking that China isn’t capable of sneaking a sub close to a target I guess we all forgot about this 3 years ago.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-492804/The-uninvited-guest-Chinese-sub-pops-middle-U-S-Navy-exercise-leaving-military-chiefs-red-faced.html