Thirty Contrails, Forty Years Ago
This photo has the largest number of contrails I’ve seen in a single photo:
There seem to be at least 30, possibly more (click the photo for a larger verision). What is even more remarkable is that it was taken sometime before 1967. That’s over forty years ago.
The photo is plate 113 of the book Cloud Studies in Colour, by Richard Scorer and Harry Wexler, published in 1967 by Pergamon Press. The photo was taken by Richard Scorer, probably in England. The accompanying text reads:
Condensation trails are left by aircraft when the air is sufficiently cold for the mixture of air and exhaust to be saturated. This does not usually happen except when the temperature is close to or below -40C, in which case the cloud freezes almost instantaneously and does not readily evaporate. The cloud is then spread out by any wind sheer which may be present.
Monday 17 Mar 2008 | Uncinus | contrails
This does not explain the weird dark shadows we are seeing today, the fact that even in plus forty weather these streak linger FOR HOURS on end and seem to criss cross eachother in weird patterns. Time lapse will reveal they decend into a hazz cloud. On recent new broadcasts someone that noticed the hazy cloud decending on the ground took a sample of it and seems to have high levels of barium that can weaken the immune system. And in 1967 why would thirty planes randomly seem to fly close to eachother..its like they need to gain some ground. If these were normal contrails then not only would they last for 20 minutes and dissapear but they wouldn;t linger for as long as they do and cover the ground. Why would the planes fly so close together and form patterns in the sky.
Just adolf reporting here
my indoctrination of modern weather science is going good we have convinced the public that these strange formations of our harmful chemicals we are spewing into the enviroment are normal condensation when its winter
but damn they look so notceable..
i wish we had a plan B
Joseph, the planes do not all have to fly close together. One could be several miles behind the others, just flying roughly the same route. None of those trails is probably within 1000 feet of another. Remember they are six miles up in the air.
Forty plus on the ground does not mean it is not forty below at 36,000 feet. How cold do you think it is at the top of Mt. Everest (30,000 feet)?
Dark lines have been explained:
http://contrailscience.com/contrails-dark-lines-chemtrails/
Contrails DO spread out sometime, and create haze, this is in the encyclopedia:
nice try. I’ve seen the spray turn on and off. I’ve seen contrails right next to chemtrails. Nice job of maintenence of public myths though.They’re teaching this disinformation in school now. creepy.
Both issues you mention have been addressed
For “I’ve seen the spray turn on and off.“, see:
http://contrailscience.com/broken-contrails/
For: “I’ve seen contrails right next to chemtrails., those are planes at differing altitudes. It only takes a thousand feet for one plane to form a contrail, and another not to.
Excellent work. Exhaustive work. And, nice job keeping your cool having to repeat the same science over and again. I believe in many true conspiracies (global banking), and am well-aware of government projects like HAARP, Operation Cloverleaf, Project Bluebeam and the like. What you present here is well documented and often self-evident once you turn the conspiracy spigot off for a second. Thanks for helping me turn the spigot off. Now, I have much more time and energy to fight the evil bankers.
Quoting, “This does not explain the weird dark shadows we are seeing today, the fact that even in plus forty weather these streak linger FOR HOURS on end and seem to criss cross eachother in weird patterns.”
RYAN - Whats weird about dark shadows? They are SHADOWS. Clouds/contrails produce shadows; anything between the sun and the ground will produce a shadow…right? Yeah, 40-plus temps on the ground may equal minus 40 degrees at altitude. What’s the big deal? I see it all the time. Criss crossing? Again, for the third time, what’s the problem with that? Have you ever heard of airlines flying in one direction? Are you that ignorant? We cross aircraft contrails on a daily basis at every degree imaginable. What do you want….right angles? 45-degree angles? Write the U.S FAA your concerns and request we all fly in one direction…
Quoting, “Time lapse will reveal they decend into a hazz cloud. On recent new broadcasts someone that noticed the hazy cloud decending on the ground took a sample of it and seems to have high levels of barium that can weaken the immune system.”
RYAN - Hazz cloud? You mean haze cloud, right? Anyway, this statement is the biggest waste of our time. Samples SEEM to have high levels of barium that can weaken the immune system? And your proof is where? Actually Barium occurs naturally in the environment where it combines with oxygen, sulfur and carbon. Look around you and see what the big polluters are. How about the car you drive. How about your fireplace. They produce the most pollutants. What about the coal refinery? Airplanes as the single contributor, come on. Don’t forget that Barium is the 14th-most abundant element on earth. And you thought it just came from planes.
Quoting, “And in 1967 why would thirty planes randomly seem to fly close to eachother..its like they need to gain some ground. If these were normal contrails then not only would they last for 20 minutes and dissapear but they wouldn;t linger for as long as they do and cover the ground. Why would the planes fly so close together and form patterns in the sky.”
RYAN - 1967, the dawn of the jet age. A new era in jet travel. Must I say more? Are these planes randomly flying close together? I don’t see evidence of that at all. To me, as an airline pilot, randomly close together would be another aircraft above and below at 1,000 feet. Maybe 15 of them were traveling in the OTHER direction. Ever think of that? Apparently not.
Ryan
jetBlue Pilot
Very informative site, Uncinus. You’ve definitely made me question the solidarity of this whole “chemtrail” uprising. Though, there is one thing that confuses me:
The irregular occurrence of being able to visualize contrails in the sky.
From what I understand the main modifier of a contrail is based on the temperature of the high altitude (~-40°C render it visible) at which the plane is flying. Yet, during the summer season, 105°F on the ground, there will be criss cross contrails to the horizon. Then the very next day, 100°F on the ground, and the sky is completely clear.
I think you know what I’m getting at. This alone gives me a slight impression that these lingering contrails are intentional, and really if you could give me a structural explanation as to the reason for this drastically changing sky we live in today I would be very grateful.
Also, do you happen to have any photographs of “chemtrails” in America that were taken before 1997? Before the Open Skies Treaty was established in this country? That would be helpful as well.
Thank you for your efforts!
I used http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/air-altitude-temperature-d_461.html?v=-40&units=degC# and
http://www.state.gov/www/global/arms/treaties/openskies/openskie02.html as a reference.
Two reasons - firstly the temperature on the ground is not always a good indicator of the temperature aloft, as an air mass could be moving in. Secondly it also depends on the humidity.
There are lots of photos of contrails (that look just like chemtrails) from before 1997, see:
http://contrailscience.com/contrail-photos-through-history/
And also:
http://contrailscience.com/persisting-and-spreading-contrails/
Especially note the 1970 US paper where they say:
“The spreading of jet contrails into extensive cirrus sheets is a familiar sight.”
Thanks again…
Do you know of anyway to get a temperature or hygrometer reading from altitudes of 30k+ feet?
I think I would be completely convinced that these chemtrail theorists are misinformed if I could go outside, see contrails in the sky, and be able to compare them to my readings, and vice versa.
Obviously that’s a complex task. Currently in the US, most of the data comes from weather balloons. These are no particularly accurate unless you happen to be right underneath one. They are only released at 12 hour intervals, and at weather stations that are on average 300 miles apart. Given that humidity can vary greatly over the space of of mile, it’s obviously no much help.
In fact, given that the formation of contrails is reasonably well understood, it’s sometimes more accurate to observe how long contrails last, in order to get a rough idea of the conditions aloft, rather than the other way around.
I did find something that may or may not spark interest.
Reference: http://adds.aviationweather.noaa.gov/winds/
Currently here in Reno, NV there’s not one cloud or contrail in the sky, its clear and blue to the horizon.
Yet, according to this validated analysis of the ADDS, it’s -40°C at 30,000FT as of 2200 Greenwich Mean Time.
Sure, the exact humidity readings aren’t available, but in these conditions there should be at least some sort of visible contrails, maybe some rapidly diminishing ones shortly behind the plane. Though, there is nothing in sight, and I speak the truth, considering I only want to find out the truth.
Your thoughts? Oh, great debunker.
I do not doubt your observations, but that simply indicates the humidity is not high enough for contrails to form.
Water in jet exhaust starts out as water vapor, a gas. Cold air can hold a certain amount of water vapour, so if the air is dry, then adding more water to it will not cause the water gas to change phase into a liquid or solid.
Rapidly diminishing contrails indicate that the humidity is high enough so the addition of the jet exhaust causes water to precipitate (as ice). However this is only local, and the surrounding air will even out the moisture, quickly evaporating (sublimating) the trail.
The more moisture in the air, the longer a trail will last.
I think I can help with the meteorology concerning contrails. I have developed a program that analyses a radiosonde data (weather ballon data) to see if contrails will form and if they will be persistent.
Here is a whole bunch of the resulting graphs for March 2008 in central New Zealand….
http://www.freewebs.com/diagnosis1contrails/0803Mar.htm
Click on a date to see the whole chart.
See that 1, 8, 11, and 13 were days with persistent contrails around this area.
This type of data is actually very useful for this but has not been widely used in the chemtrail/contrail controversy.
Contact me or see http://www.freewebs.com/contraildiagnosis/index.htm for more information.
I can make these charts using data from any radiosonde station and any date.
This implies that the occurrence of persistent contrails can be predicted to a certain extent, or that the absence of them can be explained in terms of the data. This means that these are not “chemtrails”.
The best reference for how to do this is the first link on the page here: http://www.freewebs.com/contraildiagnosis/Links.htm
Cheers
NVrep, I have had a look at the Reno radiosonde data for 0000 UTC 1 May 2008.
The temperature at F300 (30000 ft ISA) is -43.4C which is too warm for contrails to form with high bypass jet engines.
However, above F327 (32700 ft ISA) I would expect that high bypass jet engines would have been forming “normal” short contrails.
I have made the chart for that time available for you to examine at
http://www.freewebs.com/contraildiagnosis/Figures/REV_20080502_00Z_hb.PNG
Cheers.
Very intriguing bundle of accumulated data you got there, Ross. I will start running some studies myself and let you, and the chemtrail theorists, know if I see any persisting contrails in conditions that they shouldn’t be, and I’ll properly document it.
I’ve flown in -60 degree temps at 40,000 feet (FL400) and have had planes pass me at 41,000 feet leaving no contrail. However, I’ve looked down and have seen planes as 37,000 feet leaving long contrails. Temperature alone is not an indication that contrails will form. Relative humidity (plus temperature) is. Then again, I’ve seen temps well above -40 degrees C, with very high humidity and have passed airplanes (turboprops nonetheless) contrailing at 16,000 feet! The temperature was more like -20 degrees C. So it can happen! Normally, humidity decreases as altitude increases into the 40’s (40,000 feet-plus).
Ryan
JetBlue pilot
Ryan, you are quite correct; temperature alone does not determine if contrails will form. The temperature below which contrails will form depends on the pressure, and to a lesser extent on relative humidity (with respect to water, RHw), and to a lesser extent still on the engine type.
For instance, for high bypass engines at F300 (30,000 ft and 301 hPa), contrails will not form if the temperature is higher than (warmer than) -40.5 degrees C no matter how high the RHw is. If the temperature is less than -50.0°C, contrails will always form, even in bone-dry air. Between those temperatures, the formation of contrails depends on the RHw… temperature below -43.3°C at 95%, -45.6°C at 80% and -47.9°C at 50%.
For F410 (41,000 ft, 179hPa) and high bypass engines the critical temperatures are: -45.9°C at 100%, -48.5°C at 95%, -50.7°C at 80%, -52.8°C at 50% and -54.9°C at 0%.
For F160 (16,000 ft, 549 hPa) non-bypass engines the critical temperatures are: below -36.9°C at 100%, -39.7°C at 95%, -42.1°C at 80%, -44.5°C at 50%, -46.7°C at 0%. So, yes, at 16,000 feet and in high humidity, contrails will form in air warmer than -40.0°C
See “Calculations of Aircraft Contrail Formation Critical Temperatures” at http://ams.allenpress.com/perlserv/?request=get-document&issn=1520-0450&volume=036&issue=12&page=1725 for how all this is done.
According to the method described in that paper, for non-bypass engines (perhaps a high performance bomber or fighter ??) at F410, contrails will form in bone-dry air when the temperature is below -57.2°C. I would be interested to know where (geographically) and when you saw no contrails from a jet at F410 and -60°C. I will see if there is any nearby radiosonde data. What type of aircraft was it?
Finally, relative humidity does not necessarily decrease as altitude increases (and temperature decreases), but the moisture content of the air (specific humidity) certainly does. Above the tropopause, in the stratosphere (where the temperature is more or less constant with altitude), the air is very dry because tropospheric air seldom penetrates far there. The height of the tropopause varies; between quite high (F450) in the tropics and lower in higher latitudes.
Ross
Meteorologist