IPBFacebook



POSTS MADE TO THIS FORUM ARE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AUTHOR AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF PILOTS FOR 911 TRUTH
FOR OFFICIAL PILOTS FOR 9/11 TRUTH STATEMENTS AND ANALYSIS, PLEASE VISIT PILOTSFOR911TRUTH.ORG


DIGITAL DOWNLOADS

WELCOME - PLEASE REGISTER OR LOG IN FOR FULL FORUM ACCESS ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Pilots Who See Chemtrails - See Chemtrails, Evidence by pilots of chemtrails: videos, interviews, reports, etc

JimMac
post Mar 5 2014, 03:38 AM
Post #1





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 600
Joined: 13-May 09
From: West coaster now in Ontario
Member No.: 4,315



COMMERCIAL PLANE COMING CLOSE TO CHEMTRAIL PLANES

I wonder what is the ground distance covered by a normal vapor trail, one that dissipates under typical air pressure conditions, say low humidity at 18,000 ft el and above.

Let's say the crew in this craft were cruising at 500 mph. The trail is seen in the video for 30 sec, and from there appears to stretch off into a visible horizon. So how long is it? We see about 5 miles in the video in 30 sec, and off into the distance it appears to stretch unending into the line of sight. It could be 30 mi in length, as the crow flies.

Can anyone identify the plane laying down the trail overhead? Transport plane, yes? C-17 ?

What elevation do you think the aerosol spraying plane is flying at? Above the troposphere i'd guess.

At 55 and 56 sec a cross-hatch of cirrus clouds can be seen at the lower elevation, clouds that were formed in this same manner, and compose the cloud layer canopy.

Jim

PS: http://cosmicconvergence.org/wp-content/up.../09/0856005.jpg

This post has been edited by JimMac: Mar 5 2014, 03:41 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
JimMac
post Mar 5 2014, 03:53 AM
Post #2





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 600
Joined: 13-May 09
From: West coaster now in Ontario
Member No.: 4,315



(Translated into English from German by Chrome, original available here:)

Pilot observation to produce chemtrails by 2 Globemaster C-17 cargo aircraft in 6000 m height above Germany
Description of an airliner pilots
Preliminary remarks on the pilot report
The editor of this site met the reporter a few months ago. Sometime in about 2 hour conversation course I asked what career he will pursue. Only after some insistence became apparent that he was professionally involved in the cockpit as a pilot. I then carefully brought the issue on Chemtrails and asked him whether he was aware of this term and the underlying assumptions that we are dealing with artificially-chemically produced contrails.
Thereupon came first hesitantly, "Yes, I have this on the internet a lot read ". When I gave then to realize that I was the editor of the website www.chemtrails-info.de was, and wanted to know how he really mean, and what he had possibly even observed from the cockpit, he told me: "I have initially doubted whether the arguments of those reports that are disseminated via chemtrails especially on the Internet, correspond to the facts. But then, I have seen something that has now convinced me that chemicals sprayed from aircraft, those lasting 'contrail 'produce, called chemtrails - to what purposes . Anyway "
Since I made no notes during the conversation, and wanted to clarify some details, I asked the pilot a few weeks later to get a detailed transcript of the experience. The description was written at 17:08:09 is reproduced below as a verbatim transcript. Only the headers are editorial insertions, additions are marked as such.
Strange Rise instructions by flight control center
"After the start of the Frankfurt airport aM ... we were in cruise climb north of Nuremberg.
It was in the afternoon around 14.00 clock. The visibility was very good, we did not fly through clouds. On the day ruled over Germany a sprawling high pressure weather system.
When passing from about 11-12000 foot one is then 'passed' to the next radar sector, which then gives further climb freely., these release Vedas handled quite generous as a rule. So you will then of 'München Radar usually equal to further released to flight level 250, ie 25,000 feet.
Not so on this day. The following approvals were made always in 1,000 increments. So then was the statement of the radar controllers' Climb 14,000 feet ', the next then' Climb 15,000 feet ',' Climb 16,000 feet '.
was clear to us that over us with an air traffic are needed, which had to have the same flight path near but could rise more slowly or wanted than we ourselves could have done.
On the so-called TCAS (Traffic Collision and Avoidance System), a monitoring tool, with which you can monitor the airspace around own aircraft around, then a traffic dropped us right by us and something in front of us. That was the good weather, we held out for the visually expected about us crossing traffic. This was not long in coming.
Chemtrailsausbringung by two cargo planes of the type C-17 Globemaster from the wings

It was a heavy transport aircraft of the American type Globemaster C-17 at a height of 18,000 feet. (6000 m)
Based on our observation of the airspace using the TCAS system we suspected another machine of this type in a few more miles distance in the same amount behind. This we could not visually represent, and I'm sure a second machine was available.
Hand to the rightWhat we accounts but make, was that the plane a thick 'contrails' duke behind. At this altitude and the prevailing season a 'not to be expected phenomenon'. Aircraft that flew still much higher in the dense airspace and also clearly seen, were not subjected to vapor trail behind it. So it MUST be here to a spreading of materials quoted, which can not be explained with the usual engine exhaust .
(Supplementary note: At the previously verbally made history I asked the pilot decidedly whether the banding from the engines of the Globemaster was C-17erfolgt He replied.! "Absolutely not", the substances that make up the described Chemtrails formed, so came from nozzles in the wings of the cargo planes , probably in the range of engines)
View from the cockpit (another plane, different situation)
(See also a video from another source with appropriate smoke / spray nozzles, and view from the cockpit on Chemtrails http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7vfnBfe1KA...player_embedded )
Other observations regarding this pilot Chemtrailszunahme
In my daily professional life (as a pilot, note), I notice that this 'spraying' increases greatly. This Ausbringungen, often by the media as' high fog are called ', I have the whole summer 2009, seen mostly at altitudes of approximately 18,000 -35 000 feet (6000-12000 m).
Images from the perspective of other pilots: http://weatherwars.info/?page_id=147
How different mist of fog chemtrails from contrails in height

Flight through chemtrails haze in altitude
It is often not easy to distinguish a contrail from engine exhaust of a chemtrail. But every day I see planes in the high sky, sometimes at close range when crossing the flight paths.
Here you can clearly see how a contrail looks like a chemtrail looks like. Especially on behavior in air can distinguish you. During a contrail somehow light and thin , and thereby dissipates fairly quickly in general, see chemtrails "heavy, sluggish and somehow tight" from. And so they behave.
, it happens that we leave in the morning on a day at an individual airport on its surroundings chemtrails were applied. Let us then hours later back to the landing, the chemtrails still exist and have spread to a tall gray veil , while in the wider area already exists different weather and wind was present.
Enormous spread of Chemtrails in height
When we are in cruise flight, we sometimes fly for hours in and about this 'high fog-fields'! Derlei observations I have made, many mid ... I have the impression that more frequent and more sprayed is. This is of course difficult to prove, but I think that I'm so right. "
Where can spray nozzles are attached to the stealthiest and most effective?
When I asked this question this professional pilots, he pondered for a few seconds and then said: "The application of the spray nozzles in the convection chamber of the engine would be the 'best, inconspicuous from the outside hiding place', whether they are spraying tanker aircraft, transport aircraft or airliners. " - A few months after this interview I found (Website owner) on an Italian side of a video that shows an engine intake of a machine Ryanair, where presumably such a spray nozzle can be seen in the engine air circulation area. (See spray nozzle (?) In the circulating air chamber of the engine of a Ryan-air machine http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IN8M2P8zRtQ...feature=related )
Meanwhile, from outside or below visible (and be photographed) nozzles hardly in use. If images of chemtrails sprays made with the greatest camera focal lengths to photograph no more spray nozzles. It is incomprehensible that contrails and Chemtrailsstreifen alike come from the engines. Since the chemtrails forming chemicals but not (more) contained in the fuel, they are also not as waste gases from the combustion chamber, but from another area of the engine, then where they but swirling with the exhaust gases of the engine and leave the engine.


Almost all of today's chemtrails jets are likely to spray nozzles in the circulating air chamber surrounding the combustion chamber, attached have. There, the spray material can swirl and mix with the exhaust jets. The chemtrails then act as if they were to come from the exhaust gases of kerosene burned and be 'normal contrails' (contrails) that would no longer exist only due to atmospheric conditions. (Supposedly 'persistent contrails')
Additional notes from oral interview
If the report of this professional pilots.
It is important to note that in the specified altitude (18,000 feet = 6 km altitude) no 'contrails' (conventional contrails) possible were, like the rest of the air traffic proved. It is therefore a unique Chemtrails spray event by two cargo planes.
Hand to the rightFurthermore, the pilot reported verbally that the communication of the flight control center was carried out with the sparkling planes on a completely different radio frequency than those with the commercial airliners ...
This can probably conclude that the Chemtrailssprühflugzeuge be treated differently than the regular service by the air traffic controllers (probably preferable because of some orders 'from above') - and it very well should be known in the flight control centers, that it is for these flights for special orders 'atmosphere influence' is.
Therefore it is not surprising that the flight control centers or the UBA with appropriate requests to give any information about these flights (may / want). Skyguide (CH) did in fact at nachbohrende questions of a Swiss journalist that such flights not registered in the official log book would ... Whether this is indeed the case, may, however, be doubted or classified as a semi-lie ...
No wonder that in view of such secrecy and denial of chemtrails at all levels of our politicians, Wetterberichtler the different transmitters, etc. can still pretend and lie that it simply would be no Chemtrailsflieger and cite this moronic seemingly counter-arguments ... ( more on this )
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
JimMac
post Mar 5 2014, 02:39 PM
Post #3





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 600
Joined: 13-May 09
From: West coaster now in Ontario
Member No.: 4,315



PILOT ALEX MERKLINER SPEAKS About CHEMTRAILS
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
almerie
post Mar 6 2014, 01:34 AM
Post #4





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 96
Joined: 13-March 10
Member No.: 4,959



QUOTE (JimMac @ Mar 5 2014, 02:39 PM) *


Sorry, nothing but hearsay and speculation.

Maybe there is a reason for why Alex Merklinger is not rated for jets pilotfly.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MikeR
post Mar 6 2014, 09:24 PM
Post #5





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 162
Joined: 29-February 12
Member No.: 6,710



QUOTE (almerie @ Mar 6 2014, 05:34 PM) *
Sorry, nothing but hearsay and speculation.

Maybe there is a reason for why Alex Merklinger is not rated for jets pilotfly.gif


Hey almerie ...

"Just Curious" on P4T (aka MikeR) is also unrated for jets.
He/me is not even rated for anything avionic or aviational.

What qualifications do I need before I avoid your insisting on broadcasting
your unqualified opinion of me or mine for the benefit of all here on P4T?

MikeR handsdown.gif

This post has been edited by MikeR: Mar 6 2014, 09:28 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
JimMac
post Mar 6 2014, 09:29 PM
Post #6





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 600
Joined: 13-May 09
From: West coaster now in Ontario
Member No.: 4,315



QUOTE (MikeR @ Mar 6 2014, 09:24 PM) *
Hey almerie ...

"Just Curious" on P4T (aka MikeR) is also unrated for jets.
He/me is not even rated for anything avionic or aviational.

What qualifications do I need before you would insist on broadcasting
your unqualified opinion of me or mine for the benefit of all here on P4T?

MikeR handsdown.gif

The general rule on all forums is 'do not feed the ________.'

As for the content of the other three posts, they are more than interesting.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
almerie
post Mar 6 2014, 11:25 PM
Post #7





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 96
Joined: 13-March 10
Member No.: 4,959



QUOTE (MikeR @ Mar 6 2014, 09:24 PM) *
Hey almerie ...

"Just Curious" on P4T (aka MikeR) is also unrated for jets.
He/me is not even rated for anything avionic or aviational.

What qualifications do I need before I avoid your insisting on broadcasting
your unqualified opinion of me or mine for the benefit of all here on P4T?

MikeR handsdown.gif


Why is it so hard to understand that the visual appearance of contrails are not evidence of anything, but can only be characterised as hearsay? More evidence is needed.

One does not need to be qualified to see this.

If you are not rated for anything avionic or aviational, then why not seek the opinion/advice of verifiable professionals in this area?

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MikeR
post Mar 7 2014, 07:31 AM
Post #8





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 162
Joined: 29-February 12
Member No.: 6,710



QUOTE (JimMac @ Mar 6 2014, 06:39 AM) *


What Alex says is irrefutable to any objective person with no contrarian agenda.

Also of greatest importance to the health and wellness of all of us on this forum,
is the general medical information and supremely valuable advise of naturopath Gwen Scott.
Gwen knows more about healing the effects that we are all exposed to
from the materials being illicitly and illegally introduced into the very air
we all are compelled to breathe than any Board Certified MD.

Gwen offers practical healing therapies far beyond anything your regular
Big Pharma motivated pill popping MD is able to handle .... and let's face it,
we're all flying into an increasingly-mysterious toxic environment.

Those of us who so stupidly refuse to investigate the blatantly-obvious
spray-program evidence visible in skies all over now, can still consult
a competant naturopath. They will obtain relief from mysterious symptoms,
even if they do continue to ignore that it's the toxic air that causes their illness.

MikeR

This post has been edited by MikeR: Mar 7 2014, 07:35 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MikeR
post Mar 17 2014, 04:33 AM
Post #9





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 162
Joined: 29-February 12
Member No.: 6,710



QUOTE (almerie @ Mar 7 2014, 03:25 PM) *
Why is it so hard to understand that the visual appearance of contrails are not evidence of anything, but can only be characterised as hearsay? More evidence is needed.
I agree.... we do indeed need more evidence.... as much as possible, perleeze

One does not need to be qualified to see this.
Correct.... 2 in a row, mate

If you are not rated for anything avionic or aviational, then why not seek the opinion/advice of verifiable professionals in this area?
BINGO ... precisely why I was talking to all the verifiable professionals in this area

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
almerie
post Mar 17 2014, 07:15 AM
Post #10





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 96
Joined: 13-March 10
Member No.: 4,959



QUOTE
BINGO ... precisely why I was talking to all the verifiable professionals in this area


First, you can not expect others to do your homework.
Find more facts so that people are interested.
Looking up at the sky is not useful for fact-finding.

Rob offered his help as a professional to collect samples directly from the chemtrails.
Why is his help rejected, when it apparently what exactly what some guy Hancke planned to do and which you emphasized as a scientific approach to chemtrails?

This post has been edited by almerie: Mar 17 2014, 07:16 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 




RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 21st November 2019 - 08:02 PM