Mystery Missile Launch Seen off Calif. Coast

[Herding Cats]

Well, see...the whole thing about it's being an airline was discussed on John and Ken (KFI Los Angeles) this afternoon. They had the guy who shot the video on, and he said in the uncut version he shot, he panned left/south and caught a contrail, which he believes to be flight 808.

He also said he'd been flying LA airspace for more than 11 years, and has only seen contrails like that during launches...not typical flights that are nearly continuously flying overhead.

Further, if someone was heading to Phoenix, they would not be under say, 20,000 feet when coming over LA, I don't think. They probably wouldn't start their descent into Phoenix until probably quite a while later, but I am not a pilot and don't know the routes/heights/speed.

But what I am having the most difficulty with is that a contrail and a missle "footprint" (for lack of a better word) are very different from each other. I don't understand the trajectory issues if it were an airline flying west to east and not low at the coast.

I also don't understand why there has been talk about it being launched from a submerged vessel; why, if the weather conditions were correct, we didn't have a lot of contrails (LA is very busy airspace), and why we, as was said upthread, don't have information as to what flight/route/time/et cetera.

I'm willing to say we don't know what happened. I'm not willing to so rapidly dismiss this as an airline's daily flight from Hawai'i to Phoenix.

Something is not quite right here, but I don't think we'll ever find out.

Best-
Herding Cats

 

[mysterygirl]

If it were a plane, it seems like someone would have said......hey, it could be a, b, or c plane pretty quickly after the buzz went around.

But they didn't and I don't believe them either.

 

[JBean]

Well, see...the whole thing about it's being an airline was discussed on John and Ken (KFI Los Angeles) this afternoon. They had the guy who shot the video on, and he said in the uncut version he shot, he panned left/south and caught a contrail, which he believes to be flight 808.

He also said he'd been flying LA airspace for more than 11 years, and has only seen contrails like that during launches...not typical flights that are nearly continuously flying overhead.

Further, if someone was heading to Phoenix, they would not be under say, 20,000 feet when coming over LA, I don't think. They probably wouldn't start their descent into Phoenix until probably quite a while later, but I am not a pilot and don't know the routes/heights/speed.

But what I am having the most difficulty with is that a contrail and a missle "footprint" (for lack of a better word) are very different from each other. I don't understand the trajectory issues if it were an airline flying west to east and not low at the coast.

I also don't understand why there has been talk about it being launched from a submerged vessel; why, if the weather conditions were correct, we didn't have a lot of contrails (LA is very busy airspace), and why we, as was said upthread, don't have information as to what flight/route/time/et cetera.

I'm willing to say we don't know what happened. I'm not willing to so rapidly dismiss this as an airline's daily flight from Hawai'i to Phoenix.

Something is not quite right here, but I don't think we'll ever find out.

Best-
Herding Cats

Here is the John and Ken podcast

 

[Elphaba]

The atmosphere can play some pretty awesome tricks on the eyes...

Has there been any note made as to what elevation this image was shot from and with what kind of lens was used to film the object?

 

[LinasK]

The atmosphere can play some pretty awesome tricks on the eyes...

Has there been any note made as to what elevation this image was shot from and with what kind of lens was used to film the object?

We should call Mythbusters to re-create it!!!

 

[Melly53]

According to an MIT Professor who teaches about rocket/missile technology it was definitely a missile. Watch this report especially at approximately the 2:00 to 2:15 minute mark and you will see why he believes this. You can see a distinct flash followed by a larger flash seconds later.

http://www.cnn.com/video/?/video/us/2010/11/09/wian.missile.mystery.cnn

When you watch that part of the video it becomes obvious to me that had it been an airplane....it would have been one with a very, very serious problem.

If it was, in fact, a missile then I do not believe that our US military is going to confirm it and why should they? They would catch heck regardless. They can't exactly say that one was shot off by accident or they would receive extreme criticism for how unsafe and irresponsible that was. If they say it was a test, people would scream about why they were not forewarned so that it did not scare them. Then again if it was a test and people had been forewarned then people would be wanting to know "what" they were testing and "why". The environmentalists would have had a field day or else found a way to go to court and have any test halted until everything about it could be studied a zillion different ways. And if it was a new type of missile or rocket then the government might want to keep that information under-wraps which is just fine with me. There are times IMO when the general public does not need to know everything that the government knows or does. JMO

 

[Nova]

According to an MIT Professor who teaches about rocket/missile technology it was definitely a missile. Watch this report especially at approximately the 2:00 to 2:15 minute mark and you will see why he believes this. You can see a distinct flash followed by a larger flash seconds later.

http://www.cnn.com/video/?/video/us/2010/11/09/wian.missile.mystery.cnn

When you watch that part of the video it becomes obvious to me that had it been an airplane....it would have been one with a very, very serious problem.

If it was, in fact, a missile then I do not believe that our US military is going to confirm it and why should they? They would catch heck regardless. They can't exactly say that one was shot off by accident or they would receive extreme criticism for how unsafe and irresponsible that was. If they say it was a test, people would scream about why they were not forewarned so that it did not scare them. Then again if it was a test and people had been forewarned then people would be wanting to know "what" they were testing and "why". The environmentalists would have had a field day or else found a way to go to court and have any test halted until everything about it could be studied a zillion different ways. And if it was a new type of missile or rocket then the government might want to keep that information under-wraps which is just fine with me. There are times IMO when the general public does not need to know everything that the government knows or does. JMO

I agree with you in principle and yet I'm concerned about how, when and by whom the need for secrecy is to be determined.

We beat the Axis powers, the Soviet empire has collapsed, and our military forces have no equivalents, yet we're still acting (and spending money) as if we were fighting a world war.

I'm not saying the world isn't still a dangerous place, but as Eisenhower warned, military secrecy is the enemy of democracy. If not now, when does it end?

 

[Elphaba]

I agree with you in principle and yet I'm concerned about how, when and by whom the need for secrecy is to be determined.

We beat the Axis powers, the Soviet empire has collapsed, and our military forces have no equivalents, yet we're still acting (and spending money) as if we were fighting a world war.

I'm not saying the world isn't still a dangerous place, but as Eisenhower warned, military secrecy is the enemy of democracy. If not now, when does it end?

In my opinion: never... it is too profitable for the DoD.

 

[Elphaba]

A plane flying at high altitude could easily produce the flashes that were seen: it is all about angles, sunlight and line of sight. As can be detected in the video, the object is pretty darn high to the point that it is casting a really long shadow across the viewing screen (if you screen grab a frame and darken it down, you can see the long shadow in "front" of it)... just like high altitude plane contrails do, at times. At high altitude, the plane would be prime for "flashing" reflections of sunlight.


I love this stuff... the atmosphere is like one awesome magician.

 

[Melly53]

I agree with you in principle and yet I'm concerned about how, when and by whom the need for secrecy is to be determined.

We beat the Axis powers, the Soviet empire has collapsed, and our military forces have no equivalents, yet we're still acting (and spending money) as if we were fighting a world war.

I'm not saying the world isn't still a dangerous place, but as Eisenhower warned, military secrecy is the enemy of democracy. If not now, when does it end?

After some extensive research I found that the quote "military secrecy is the enemy of democracy" was not made by Eisenhower but by Pierre de Vos who writes a blog dealing with the political and social issues in South Africa.

It puzzled me because it did not seem to be in keeping with things that I knew about Eisenhower. As both our President and a military leader he certainly knew the value of and need for military/government secrecy. As the Supreme Allied Commander of Europe during World War II he was charged with planning and carrying out the Allied assault on the coast of Normandy in June 1944 under the code name "Operation Overlord" or D-Day as most call it today. Without secrecy that operation would never have succeeded.

I do believe that the world is a dangerous place and have only to look at China, Iran and North Korea to realize that. So far as our military spending I will defer to Eisenhower's wisdom: "Our real problem, then, is not our strength today; it is rather the vital necessity of action today to ensure our strength tomorrow. Do we spend the money today or cut our military spending and pay the price in the future?

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/sep/21/china-builds-its-own-high-tech-military/

I think people need to really distinguish what they "want" to know, or feel they have a "right" to know, from what we truly "need" to know, and "when" we need to know it, when discussing government/military secrecy and balance it against the greatest thing we have in America which is "Freedom"! Eisenhower expressed it best during his Inaugural address in 1953.
"A people that values it privileges above its principles soon loses both.

 

[fran]

This one seems a little spooky to me. The astronomer said it looks like a 'contrail' from an aircraft. But I wonder if it was moving at the speed as it appears on the video. If you watch it pass the sky-scrapers it's moving too fast to be a plane.

The reporter said it looks like a comet. It would, but it's not falling from the sky, it's zipping through the sky.


fran



http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2010/11/10/did-you-see-the-fire-in-the-nyc-sky/

Did You See The Fire In The NYC Sky?

Chopper 2 Films Red-Hot Streak Moving Behind Emp. State Bldg

NEW YORK (CBS 2) — Did you see it? Chopper 2 HD sure did.

It was a bizarre, glowing red-hot streak in the sky — right at sunset Wednesday — moving briskly behind the Manhattan skyline.

CBS 2 reached out to a top astronomer who looked at the video. He said it looks beautiful, but that is was like nothing more than what’s known as a “contrail” — condensation from a commercial or military jet.

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<full article and video at link>>>>>>>>>>>>

 

[Jolynna]

It was the separation of the second stage of a 2-stage missile. I think somebody just sent us a message...China or N. Korea or Iran.

Contrails are always straight and there aren't puffs of smoke coming out all over the place.

MOO

 

[Jolynna]

See the article entitled "China's Deadliest Game" on page 49 of this month's Popular Mechanics. According to the author of the article, Erik Sofge,China has spent billions developing and buying arms to sink American aircraft carriers. This includes over a dozen small Kilo-class electronic subs that are virtually invisible to both active and passive sonar.

Iran has also invested in Kilo-subs.

My opinion is that somebody was showing off.

 

[Jolynna]

The article that is in this month's popular mechanics is not available yet online. But here is another article about diesel-electric submarines and about the concerning rate at which they are proliferating especially in the Pacific.

http://www.entrepreneur.com/tradejournals/article/177991483_1.html

 

[Steely Dan]

I liked the one quote about them not firing off a test missile from an article earlier in this thread. I think this was some sort of computer and/or mechanical failure that made it launch spontaneously and I don't think they'd want to admit that. JMO

Link

NORAD claimed there was no “foreign threat”, although they could not confirm or deny that a missile had been launched. The Pentagon came out and said NORAD’s statement wasn’t good enough for them – they needed answers.

 

[Jolynna]

I liked the one quote about them not firing off a test missile from an article earlier in this thread. I think this was some sort of computer and/or mechanical failure that made it launch spontaneously and I don't think they'd want to admit that. JMO

Link

NORAD claimed there was no “foreign threat”, although they could not confirm or deny that a missile had been launched. The Pentagon came out and said NORAD’s statement wasn’t good enough for them – they needed answers.

I will agree with that more that i would believe it was an optical illusion. Don't rule out the foreigners...Russia has been selling a slew of Kilo-subs that are virtually undetectable to China, Iran and India, among others. And take a look at some of the new missile options.

http://www.economist.com/node/16295552

http://www.entrepreneur.com/tradejournals/article/177991483_1.html

 

[Elphaba]

Awesome site that not only carries an excellent explanation, but also uses math... as well, offers up a bevy of contrail images for comparison proof.

http://uncinus.wordpress.com/2010/11/09/4/

 

[Steely Dan]

Awesome site that not only carries an excellent explanation, but also uses math... as well, offers up a bevy of contrail images for comparison proof.

http://uncinus.wordpress.com/2010/11/09/4/

This is an image is from your article. I would bet dollars to donuts that it's a missile;

 

[Nova]

After some extensive research I found that the quote "military secrecy is the enemy of democracy" was not made by Eisenhower but by Pierre de Vos who writes a blog dealing with the political and social issues in South Africa.

It puzzled me because it did not seem to be in keeping with things that I knew about Eisenhower. As both our President and a military leader he certainly knew the value of and need for military/government secrecy. As the Supreme Allied Commander of Europe during World War II he was charged with planning and carrying out the Allied assault on the coast of Normandy in June 1944 under the code name "Operation Overlord" or D-Day as most call it today. Without secrecy that operation would never have succeeded.

I do believe that the world is a dangerous place and have only to look at China, Iran and North Korea to realize that. So far as our military spending I will defer to Eisenhower's wisdom: "Our real problem, then, is not our strength today; it is rather the vital necessity of action today to ensure our strength tomorrow. Do we spend the money today or cut our military spending and pay the price in the future?

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/sep/21/china-builds-its-own-high-tech-military/

I think people need to really distinguish what they "want" to know, or feel they have a "right" to know, from what we truly "need" to know, and "when" we need to know it, when discussing government/military secrecy and balance it against the greatest thing we have in America which is "Freedom"! Eisenhower expressed it best during his Inaugural address in 1953.
"A people that values it privileges above its principles soon loses both.

I appreciate the correction, Melly, but I was just paraphrasing and never meant to suggest those were Eisenhower's exact words.

What Eisenhower did originate was the phrase "military-industrial complex" and while he acknowledged the need for a strong military, he also warned against its becoming a self-perpetuating force unto itself. Here is the speech in question:

http://www.h-net.org/~hst306/documents/indust.html



Eisenhower was speaking at the height of the Cold War. While the world remains a dangerous place, and almost nobody thinks the military should be abolished entirely (even pacifists such as myself acknowledge the military's peacekeeping functions), his concerns are even more apt today.

 

[Nova]

Awesome site that not only carries an excellent explanation, but also uses math... as well, offers up a bevy of contrail images for comparison proof.

http://uncinus.wordpress.com/2010/11/09/4/

That is helpful. Thanks.