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?
0
-
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...0 -
Jets are also quite capable of dumping raw fuel at high rates, anytime the need arises! External tanks can contain any kind of liquid that is pumped into them. 0 -
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? 0 -
quote:Originally posted by select-fire
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.0 -
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.0 -
0 -
quote:Originally posted by kidthatsirish
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.0 -
Like most conspiracy theories. BS... 0 -
if they can watch me give the finger from 22,000 miles from space then they sure are spraying us with low dose mind control drugs/chemicals , i blame the demicrats[}:)] 0 -
quote:Originally posted by wpageabc
Like most conspiracy theories. BS...
And this one is getting less funny by the minute.0 -
quote:Originally posted by kidthatsirish
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.
Well its been fun, I guess.
At first I thought you were playing along, but then it became apparent you are being serious, so I will stop. I wouldn't want you and SnowFlake to get all worked up over nothing.
[:I]0 -
I don't know what the rows of tanks in the cabin are, but I do know what the spray head on the refueling probe is. It is used to spray water during icing tests of a plane flying in trail formation behind and below the tanker aircraft. They test ice removal mechanisms, and aircraft performance under icing conditions this way.
If (a big if) the installed tanks are in the same aircraft as the spray head, they are there to hold the water for the tests.0 -
quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
quote:Originally posted by kidthatsirish
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.
Well its been fun, I guess.
At first I thought you were playing along, but then it became apparent you are being serious, so I will stop. I wouldn't want you and SnowFlake to get all worked up over nothing.
[:I]
I'll admit I thought it odd that was coming from you Don...you tend to be the sarcastic type....but yeah, I thought you were being serious. I was starting to wonder if I was that dumb, or if you were dumb...or if we both are.
At this point...I'm going with the last option...cheers![:p]
Edit...just read the part about the UFOs.....reverting back to option 1[B)]0 -
First of all Contrails are not new, they were an issue for our aircraft flying against the enemy in WWII. At the point of the trails was where you aimed your AA guns.
https://science-edu.larc.nasa.gov/contrail-edu/history.php
Also WEIGHT becomes an issue. To carry an agent of some nature would require a huge tank to carry it. If this nasty stuff is being put into passenger jets we would see a 757 with about 10 passengers on board and we do not see that.
Secrecy is impossible to maintain in civilian airports. Airplanes are flying overhead all the time General Aviation would see the tankers with XXX poison from the air and say, hey, WTH is he pouring into that 767? Ground workers would know about it and soon the nefarious deeds would be on CNN, with Bush getting the blame.
I think it would be best to relax for now; the collision of our Milky Way Galaxy with the Andromeda Galaxy will kill you before contrails do.0 -
McNuff is backtracking... 0 -
Belief in chemtrails is one of the better litmus tests for idiocy. 0 -
I believe there is something in vapor trails.
Exhaust.0 -
Seriously Don put the bong down. You guys are cracking me up.0 -
I made a chem trail in the toilet this morning. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by CaptFun
Seriously Don put the bong down. You guys are cracking me up.
Why do we have to wait before we what?0 -
We need someone who stayed at a Holiday Inn last night to explain this.[:o)] 0 -
quote:Originally posted by CaptFun
Seriously Don put the bong down. You guys are cracking me up.
[:D]0 -
I guess the climate change thing is real then... 0 -
Chemtrails turned me into a newt!
But I got better.0 -
quote:Originally posted by Barzillia
The Illuminati breathe the same air we do, don't they ?
I've not seen President Obama wearing any kind of respirator.
Of course, David Rockefeller just died....maybe he didn't know ?
Everybody knows he's a Reptilian and they're immune to the junk they're putting into the chemtrails. Sheesh! Try to keep up!0 -
quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
quote:Originally posted by kidthatsirish
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.
Well its been fun, I guess.
At first I thought you were playing along, but then it became apparent you are being serious, so I will stop. I wouldn't want you and SnowFlake to get all worked up over nothing.
[:I]
SnowFlake..., that is hilarious0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
56 comments