Mystery Missile Launch Seen off Calif. Coast (video)

NPRs BS

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2010/11/10/131210536/mystery-missile

'Mystery Missile' May Have Been A Jet

Categories: National News
by Mark Memmott
missile_wide.jpg

Anonymous/KCSB/KCAL What's it look like to you?


Good morning.
Before we turn to the really serious stuff, an update on the "mystery missile" story from California.
When we last checked on this odd tale, no one — including the military folks who monitor the airspace above the U.S. — seemed to know just what was seen off the coast near Los Angeles Monday evening. But it sure looked like a missile had blasted into the sky.

Now, though, there's talk that it might have been something as simple as the exhaust from a jet. As ContrailScience.com writes, from some angles jet contrails can look like missile trails. And it's got photos to prove the point. (H/T Fox News.)
Still, as the Los Angeles Times reports, some experts who have watched video of the event say they're sure this wasn't just a passenger jet heading off toward the horizon:
"It can't belong to anyone but the military," said Marco Caceres, an analyst with Teal Group Corp., a Fairfax, Va.-based aerospace research firm. The appearance of such a massive rocket contrail near military bases that are known for regularly testing missiles is unlikely to be a coincidence, Caceres said.​
NPR's Tom Gjelten reported this morning that the Pentagon says "nothing leads the Defense Department to believe that a missile launch occurred, even inadvertently":

'Mystery Missile'?

Update at 4:05 p.m. ET: We've started a new post because some Internet sleuths say they've figured out which flight likely caused the contrail and that there's a web cam we all can watch that might show it happen again.

Update at 2:50 p.m. ET: Now the Pentagon is saying the trail was most likely created by an airplane. And KCBS-TV in Los Angeles has filed a new report.
 
Deborah K said:
KC wouldn't it depend on how far away it was? It was over the ocean. That could put it hundreds of miles away couldn't it?
Click to expand...


Very true - knowing the distances here would help a great deal. But it ultimately comes down to have far a human - or even a zoom camera lens - can see. An ICMB would be traveling at approximately 7 kilometers per second, which means it would travel approximately 2100 kilometers (1300 miles) in five minutes. This is approximately the distance from Los Angeles to Oklahoma City.

If the mystery object had been an ICBM, it would have flown out of visual range within three to four minutes maximum, even allowing for arc, and for that matter, even if it was flying straight up.


dannno said:
Have you seen 10 minutes of footage?
Click to expand...


No, I haven't seen 10 minutes of footage. I was basing that number on the direct quote from the cameraman who shot the footage. Go to the link in post #1 of this thread and watch the video, and at approximately 0:47 the cameraman says he filmed the object "for about ten minutes."

If the guy who shot the video is lying, then of course all bets are off. Is there any reason to believe the video guy is lying? (I'm asking this sincerely, I don't know anything about the guy.)


UtahApocalypse said:
Here is a space shuttle launch from over 20 miles away. Moves pretty "slow" doesn't it? Of course the blast from the space shuttle launch vehicle is much brighter because it is well - MUCH BIGGER than ... say a JL-1 medium range SLBM. However, it illustrates what a FAST moving missile or rocket looks like when launched from the ground and observed from many miles away.
Click to expand...


Granted, if you're viewing something fast from a distant vantage point, it will appear to be relatively slow. Obviously, the the greater the distance the slower it will appear. But as I mentioned above, an ICBM would be traveling at a speed of about 7 KPS. This is nearly, but not quite, enough speed to put something into orbit. Just doing the math on this precludes the object from being an ICBM:

Five minutes equals 300 seconds. 300 seconds X 7 kps equals 2100 kilometers, or approximately 1300 miles.

Let's go back to the YouTube shuttle launch video you gave as an illustration. This video shows about 2.5 minutes of shuttle flight, allowing for the 10 second lead time. At the end of the 2.5 minutes, the shuttle had basically disappeared into the sky, and had achieved an altitude where it wasn't leaving much of a contrail - no atmosphere to hold the condensation. I doubt if you would be able to find a video clip of a shuttle launch in which you could still see the shuttle and contrail continuing across the sky at the five minute mark.

As I mentioned above, the guy who shot the video of the mystery object stated that he filmed the object for TEN minutes. If his statement is true, there's no way this could have been an ICBM....



Okay. I'm set. I'm wearing kevlar, shoulder pads, a fireproof suit and a helmet. Fire away! :D ;)
 
KCIndy said:
Very true - knowing the distances here would help a great deal. But it ultimately comes down to have far a human - or even a zoom camera lens - can see. An ICMB would be traveling at approximately 7 kilometers per second, which means it would travel approximately 2100 kilometers (1300 miles) in five minutes. This is approximately the distance from Los Angeles to Oklahoma City.

If the mystery object had been an ICBM, it would have flown out of visual range within three to four minutes maximum, even allowing for arc, and for that matter, even if it was flying straight up.





No, I haven't seen 10 minutes of footage. I was basing that number on the direct quote from the cameraman who shot the footage. Go to the link in post #1 of this thread and watch the video, and at approximately 0:47 the cameraman says he filmed the object "for about ten minutes."

If the guy who shot the video is lying, then of course all bets are off. Is there any reason to believe the video guy is lying? (I'm asking this sincerely, I don't know anything about the guy.)





Granted, if you're viewing something fast from a distant vantage point, it will appear to be relatively slow. Obviously, the the greater the distance the slower it will appear. But as I mentioned above, an ICBM would be traveling at a speed of about 7 KPS. This is nearly, but not quite, enough speed to put something into orbit. Just doing the math on this precludes the object from being an ICBM:

Five minutes equals 300 seconds. 300 seconds X 7 kps equals 2100 kilometers, or approximately 1300 miles.

Let's go back to the YouTube shuttle launch video you gave as an illustration. This video shows about 2.5 minutes of shuttle flight, allowing for the 10 second lead time. At the end of the 2.5 minutes, the shuttle had basically disappeared into the sky, and had achieved an altitude where it wasn't leaving much of a contrail - no atmosphere to hold the condensation. I doubt if you would be able to find a video clip of a shuttle launch in which you could still see the shuttle and contrail continuing across the sky at the five minute mark.

As I mentioned above, the guy who shot the video of the mystery object stated that he filmed the object for TEN minutes. If his statement is true, there's no way this could have been an ICBM....



Okay. I'm set. I'm wearing kevlar, shoulder pads, a fireproof suit and a helmet. Fire away! :D ;)
Click to expand...

I think it would be pretty easy for the guy to be off on his time quite a bit . Not on purpose .
 
oyarde said:
Looks like a missile to me .
Click to expand...


It might well be a missile or rocket of some sort, but if it is, it's a lot smaller and slower than an ICBM.

Private launch from a rocket enthusiast/hobbyist perhaps? I know some of the guys who shoot rockets as a hobby hit some really good altitudes. But that wouldn't explain the (supposed) lack of tracking by NORAD, etc.
 
dannno said:
Have you seen 10 minutes of footage?
Click to expand...


Actually, has ANYONE seen the raw footage? Has it been released? I would love to see the full and unedited footage. Was it really ten minutes long, or much shorter?
Good question.
 
AGRP said:
Chalk it up to a failed false flag attack.
Click to expand...

Well, what if it was Russia? I doubt it, but if it wasn't us (and I'm not convinced we are getting the truth on that) and not China, well... how many other nations have subsurface launch capabilities? Switzerland?
 
osan said:
Well, what if it was Russia? I doubt it, but if it wasn't us (and I'm not convinced we are getting the truth on that) and not China, well... how many other nations have subsurface launch capabilities? Switzerland?
Click to expand...

It was us . No other reasonable explanation that I can think of .
 
KCIndy said:
It might well be a missile or rocket of some sort, but if it is, it's a lot smaller and slower than an ICBM.

Private launch from a rocket enthusiast/hobbyist perhaps? I know some of the guys who shoot rockets as a hobby hit some really good altitudes. But that wouldn't explain the (supposed) lack of tracking by NORAD, etc.
Click to expand...

If they can track missles, why wouldn't they be able to track planes? I ask because I don't know, you'd think they would be able to see all the planes in the area on their radar.
 
KCIndy said:
Actually, has ANYONE seen the raw footage? Has it been released? I would love to see the full and unedited footage. Was it really ten minutes long, or much shorter?
Good question.
Click to expand...

I cannot imagine anything staying in sight for ten minutes . If it was moving that slow could it still fly gaining altitude ?
 
Johnnybags said:
LOLOLOL, they already got the physics guys drawing parabolas and saying it was a jet contrail.
Click to expand...

There are several reasons why they are not contrails from jets. That aside, I've been to several launches and what we see on the footage is perfectly consistent with solid fuel motors. That, my friends, was a missile. No doubt.

So whose was it? Why would our people deny if it indeed was ours? Doesn't make a bit of sense. If there was an accident, if nothing else they could have lied and called it a test. So what motive have they to lie? That leaves "other" as the source. Who has subsurface launch capability? China? I doubt it - unless we leaked that technology to them as well - would not surprise me, actually. Russia - but why would they pull a stunt like that? Pretty dangerous foolery, that. You really do not want US subs hunting your ass en masse, and that is the risk you'd be taking.

Who else has such capabilities, assuming it was launched from below-grade?

Another possibility, since it is stated there were no ships in the vicinity, is a low altitude launch by aircraft. If the plane is hugging the deck and fires, if the missile makes a beeline for a ballistic path, from 35 miles away eyes will not be able to tell the difference. Plane lights out under radar for perhaps 500 miles and can then breathe easy. The only problem with this scenario is the apparent size of the vehicle in question. That missile looks large - like Trident-large. That was no Sparrow and it went way too high to be the booster to a cruise missile, whose burn is measured in seconds, as I recall.
 
Watching the video again, there's one thing that needs to be said about why it looks like a missile more than anything else: The large fireball behind the object. When do you see such a pronounced flame behind an airliner?

For example, here's a Boing 757 doing a flyby and then a full climb. I'd assume at full climb the jet-engines are approaching full thrust. I see no fire behind these engines.

YouTube - 757 vertical climb

And the couple-dozen other videos I've just watched of airliners either taking off, or what would otherwise appear them being at high-thrust - no visible flame.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

PAF
The Police State Has a New Playbook: Martial Law, One City at a Time
Replies
1
Views
108
PAF
PAF
PAF
The 9/11 Attacks Exposed Major Government Failure, But Americans Learned the Wrong Lessons
Replies
0
Views
70
PAF
PAF
PAF
Israel’s Biggest US Donor Now Owns CBS
Replies
1
Views
204
Firestarter
Firestarter
J
The End Fruit of the Israeli Attack on America on 9/11 is Here, Gen. Wes Clark, "...And Finishing off, Iran." Well Played, Khazars
Replies
4
Views
138
James_Madison_Lives
J
J
Israel and U.S. Neocons Did 9/11 to Drag U.S. into War with Israel’s Enemies
Replies
15
Views
758
unknown
unknown
Back
Top