Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
graniteclimber
Trad climber
The Illuminati -- S.P.E.C.T.R.E. Division
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2010 - 07:50pm PT
|
Further enhancement using an updated version of Werner's software reveals the frightening truth.
|
|
monolith
climber
Berkeley, CA
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2010 - 07:50pm PT
|
Werner's missile could be spinning. I read they make it spin slowly so lasers can't heat up one spot.
GC finds the greatest pics. To bad Tony and Cochrane can't appreciate.
|
|
graniteclimber
Trad climber
The Illuminati -- S.P.E.C.T.R.E. Division
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2010 - 07:54pm PT
|
But then I used Locker's software. After some, err, "enhancement" we have this:
|
|
Reilly
Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2010 - 08:08pm PT
|
GC,
Do you have a higher res version of that? We can't tell if the contrail is spinning!
|
|
graniteclimber
Trad climber
The Illuminati -- S.P.E.C.T.R.E. Division
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2010 - 08:12pm PT
|
Contrail? I didn't notice any contrail. Not on that picture.
|
|
MisterAnswers
Social climber
Ark on the Moon
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2010 - 08:15pm PT
|
Mister Answers has a comment and question and an answer!
Comment: boy howdy, step away from SuperTopo for the weekend and you get a good feel for the volume of noise and smoke (get it?) that is generated every day! Don't any of you people with your rapid-fire posts have a life? (That makes it: one comment, TWO questions and one answer).
Question: Is Klimmer drifting toward a state where he is a danger to himself or others?
Answer: I am happy to say the answer is No! It was demonstrated for the entire viewing public that he is a simpleton, plain and simple. But, fortunately for his own self image, he is so completely deluded by his sense of great intelligence and shielded by his own remarkable lack of understanding that he did not even notice! This avoided the usual resentment that goes with being publicly humiliated so everything is fine. True, he is getting a bit testy and insulting, but this may be due to the persistent questions that get asked again and again for which he has no answer.
|
|
Reilly
Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2010 - 08:15pm PT
|
Sorry, I might have mis-spelled contrail.
|
|
graniteclimber
Trad climber
The Illuminati -- S.P.E.C.T.R.E. Division
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2010 - 08:21pm PT
|
Reilly, that makes you a contrite contrail speller.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2010 - 10:10pm PT
|
piss poor class and NO purpose.. I really do wish the insults and innuendos were less around here-its the worst out of any forum im on...
KISS MY ASS RON.
|
|
graniteclimber
Trad climber
The Illuminati -- S.P.E.C.T.R.E. Division
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2010 - 10:17pm PT
|
A stereo-gram is needed.
|
|
Shack
Big Wall climber
Reno NV
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2010 - 10:42pm PT
|
So because it "looks like a rocket" to some people it is enoughto convince them that it actually is a rocket.
The problem is, that in reality, it looks and acts nothing like a rocket.
It only looks like what you imagine a rocket should look like.
The only thing even close to resembling that would be an upclose view of a Saturn 5 lift off....not something 35 to 200 miles away.
Could someone post a link to a rocket launch that looks like that?
I have watched dozens and dozens of videos and NONE of them look anything like what Klimmer claims is a rocket.
None of them spin either.
|
|
monolith
climber
Berkeley, CA
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2010 - 11:02pm PT
|
A web cam side shot, from contrailscience
|
|
Shack
Big Wall climber
Reno NV
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2010 - 11:23pm PT
|
The side shot says it all.
|
|
monolith
climber
Berkeley, CA
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2010 - 11:24pm PT
|
And a number of characteristics match up with the lower shot. They are the same event.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2010 - 11:25pm PT
|
not sure what "evidence" means, but we can take your points, point-by-point and discuss your interpretation
1) Cameraman with a helicopter pilot couple of thousand feet off the deck had a very clear view. Shot good video of the event. Said it was a missile. He said he could see it spiraling. We could all see the emitted specular light and glow for ourselves. We can see the clock-wise spinning patterns in the exhaust/vapor plume of the missile.
The view from the helicopter was no better than anyone elses view. 3000 feet gets you a 55 mile horizon, the fact that they saw the object on the horizon, as did everyone else, indicates that that end originates from a point further away than the horizon.
Their witness is recorded in the camera footage, which does not show the object as it came up on the horizon, nor was there any image of the motion of the object early in its trajectory. The "spinning pattern" is just what everyone sees on the images, and is an interpretation of the patterns.
2) With the images and footage that the moving helicopter took it is easy to set-up stereograms with many different frames from the same footage. Did that. The paralax is more than enough to see the exhaust/vapor plume slanting steeply and upward to the W - WNW and that it is back-lit by the setting Sun. No matter who says you can not do this is absolutely wrong. I did it and I have viewed them over and over. I pretty much knew before doing the stereograms that is what I would see. Anyone who has half a brain can see the massive exhuast/vapor plume is back-lit from the setting Sun. This means the plume has to be facing away to the W - WNW.
The fact that the object is three dimensional is a given. The depth of field of the stereograms depends, absolutely, on the distance between the points that the images were taken and the difference in the bearing of the objects at each of those points. If the helicopter is moving at 60 mph, that is 88 ft/sec, and the camera is framing at 24 frames per second, there are 3.7 feet between each frame. Taking two frames, the angular difference between them to the object, say 50 miles away is 3.7 feet/50 miles = 14 microradians ~ 1 millidegree, or about 3 arcseconds. We established that the pictures might have 13.5 pixels per degree, the angular difference is then subpixel: 0.0135 pixels... in other words, you can't get a true stereogram out of successive frames.
But please note that we do not have the velocity of the helicopter (a necessary quantity, and a vector) nor do we have the position of the helicopter (also in three dimensions), and finally we do not know how much the camera is moving around...
...so it is safe to conclude that the three dimensionality of klimmer's stereogram is an artifact of many things that have nothing to do with the actual position of the object. There is simply insufficient information to make that stereogram useful.
3) The stereograms are visual proof. For Ed to say "No," is a joke. The exhaust/vapor plume is massive in size and at a very far distance. Plenty of paralax. View it and SEE!
klimmer, if you don't know what you are looking at then you have no idea how to interpret what you see. Please correct my calculation above, fill in the details.
4) Marking up an image from the original footage shot by the cameraman in the helicopter across the Long Beach Harbor, over the South end of the Palos Verdes Peninsula, and very North of Catalina Island, you can see the North end of the Island very South of the the exhaust/vapor plume, all lines up to about 240 degrees.
the actual position of the helicopter is unknown, so it is difficult to determine the bearings from the picture to any accuracy, certainly not to 5º, small changes in this position... what was the coordinate of the helicopter?
5) Also in the same image you can see that the very top of the exhaust/vapor plume is behind and much, much higher than the Cirrus cloud in the fore-ground that is evenly lit-up by the setting Sun. The Cirrus cloud is between 16,500 to 40,000 feet high. The tip of the exhaust plume is much higher than this since we can see it leaning away from the coast and still the tip is higher than the cirrus clouds. That high-end tip of the exhaust is very, very high. Has to be.
you have assumed a particular trajectory, an aircraft flying between 20,000' and 40,000' will fly above cirrus clouds, as you know, but we can probably even find out what the weather conditions are. Your reconstruction of the scene is possible, but it is far from unique.
6) Using 240 degrees from the South tip end of Palos Verdes and going North of Catalina, lines right up with the massive exhaust/vapor plume in the the GOES satellite images. Not only that, you can see the plume going up steeply to the WNW and then the missile plume turns more toward the W and continues to ascend. Then you can see the entire massive exhaust/vapor plume spread by the winds and widden, and then drifts a short distance to the SSE not far South from 240 degrees. The massive plume grows through time toward the W - WNW and elongates as the missile ascends. It all fits and exactly where I said it should be. Bingo.
if the object is oriented the way you said it is, then it is mostly vertical (see your assumption below) and will not make a very large segment on the satellite image. If the object is oriented at a constant altitude above the surface then there will be a long line...
perhaps you should draw a picture of what you think the trajectory looks like
7) Then doing the simple trig, as anyone can do so firing model rockets to determine the approx. max. altitude, it isn't hard to do. I have shown the altitude of the max. exhaust/vapor plume to be well over any altitude that any jet craft can attain, > 156,000 + feet.
you have made an assumption that the object is perpendicular to the plane that includes your observation point, a poor assumption not supported by any evidence. the calculation is not the same. in addition, missile trajectories are not vertical.
|
|
Shack
Big Wall climber
Reno NV
|
|
|
Nov 16, 2010 - 12:38am PT
|
Klimmer has been fooled by an optical illusion.
Your eyes deceived you, you formed a conclusion and again used your eyes
to "prove" only to yourself, that this is a rocket.
Just because it "looks" like it.
No flame.
Huge contrail, unlike any missile, land or sea launched, US or Chineese.
Totally wrong trajectory for a missile and too slow.
A missile launched from below the horizon some 50+ miles away and traveling W NW would have arced over toward the horizon, not some strange trajectory still visable for a long time. 3 minutes and the missile is gone out of site.
It doesnt even look like a missile.
Here is the exhaust trail of a Delta II...much larger than anything anyone could launch at sea, just minutes after lift off, already being twisted by the different wind speeds at the different altitudes...
Contrails don't do that.
Contrails don't always dissipate quickly and can stay around for hours,
because they are at the same altitude along their path and are made of condensed water vapor, like a cloud, and can last just as long if the conditions are right. Rocket exhaust is not water vapor, it is burnt rocket fuel.
Feel free to check out all the launches this guy has taken photo's of from Vandenburg. Try to find any that even slightly resemble the size and trajectory of the trail Klimmer claims is a rocket.
http://www.air-and-space.com/vafb.htm
|
|
Ghost
climber
A long way from where I started
|
|
|
Nov 16, 2010 - 12:40am PT
|
Whoo Hoo! I get Post # 500 on Supertopo's Silliest Thread Ever!!!!
|
|
TomCochrane
Trad climber
Santa Cruz Mountains and Monterey Bay
|
|
|
Nov 16, 2010 - 12:40am PT
|
Rockets develop a roll or spin as they ascend, due to imperfections in vehicle airframes and other factors such as wind shear, changes in vehicle weight and balance as fuel is consumed and sloshes in the tanks, uneven fuel burn, and airframe flexing.
Tail fins can be used to stabilize ballistic projectiles. Actuator controllable fins can be used within the atmosphere, as on an airplane.
Spin stabilization uses gyroscopic forces to offset aerodynamic tumbling forces. Obvious examples are an arrow or rifle bullet. Insufficient spin permits tumbling, and too much prevents correcting the angle-of-attack to the airstream as it traverses the trajectory. Drift of the trajectory can be created from various sources such as aerodynamic lift, airframe angle-of-attack, wind sheer, and rotation of the Earth.
Controllable aerodynamic fins are often not used on larger missiles, because of their rapid transition out of the atmosphere. Instead we use thrust vector control of the main engines as the primary guidance control mechanism. If you watch a shuttle launch on TV, you will see this mechanism being tested once the main engines are running and before the boosters are lit. You will see the main engine nozzles being moved around by hydraulic rams. We also use small roll-control thruster packs as part of the overall guidance, navigation, and control system.
Small errors and control feedback latencies in the attitude control system can quickly translate into spectacular deviations in vehicle attitude and flight path. All missiles have some degree of wobbling, depending upon the sophistication of the control system. The control algorithms are well understood; but reality has a way of throwing in surprises that have to be handled in flight testing. Accordingly it is not unusual to see a spiral missile track.
|
|
Shack
Big Wall climber
Reno NV
|
|
|
Nov 16, 2010 - 12:44am PT
|
Klimmer doesn't think it's silly....
He thinks,
it's a conspiracy!!!
Hahaha!
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!