And On Cue...
Welcome toThe ConTrail
Sign Upor Sign In
Or sign in with:
f you have any info connected to this story or a story similar, let me know at email@example.com.
Add a Comment
Join The ConTrail
Fair to say Martin but the majority of planes spraying shouldn't be blowing chemtrails either.
Excellent points, Martin. OF COURSE Stealth planes would have anti-contrail technology.
the whole idea of Stealth is invisibility, and a chemtrail/contrail is the antithesis of stealthiness. Stealth planes actually have employ anti contrail technology. Therefore a B2 sporting a very visible contrail is rather a silly giveaway that something's wrong.
Surely you'd use something more practical than a B2 for chemtrailling ops?
At Two Billion Dollars apiece these aircraft are used sparingly for special ops and there aren't many of them in service, plus the maintenance costs are astronomical.
I smell disinformation at work here.
From - Lifting options for stratospheric aerosol geoengineering: Interesting!!
" Systems based on aircraft have the advantage of using modified military
vehicles; they can loiter in the stratosphere long enough to disperse the particles effectively and would be reusable. They have the disadvantage that there would be a significant energy cost in getting to the required height, and there would be a significant modification cost. The analysis below is adapted from that given by Robock et al. .(i) Fast jets (F-15)The F-15 has a maximum payload of around 10 tonnes http://www.aerospaceweb.org/aircraft/fighter/f15, date accessed: 31 October 2010] so injecting 10million tonnes of aerosols into the atmosphere requires around a million flights per year. If each plane is capable of performing three 2 h flights per day, or roughly 1000 flights per year, a fleet of 1000 planes should be able to deliver the intended annual payload. The cost per plane is about £25 million. A fleet of 1000 modified planes would therefore incur a total capital cost of £25 billion. As the F-15 has a lifetime of only around 16 000 flight hours [http://www.fas.org/programs/ssp/man/uswpns/air/fighter/f15.html, date accessed: 31 October2010] the planes would need to be replaced every 8 years, the annualized average replacement cost would therefore be around £3 billion. The operating costs are classified, but for tanker planes such as the KC-135 a figure of $4.6 million is quoted for 435 flight hours in 2003 dollars, which translates to about £8000 per flight hour today [http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d03938t.Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A (2012)Downloaded from http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/ on May 31, 20154280 P. Davidson et al. pdf, date accessed: 31 October 2010]. It is assumed that costs for fast jets are at least as high. The annual operating costs for 1000 planes performing 2000 flight hours work out at £16 billion. The total cost for fast jets is thus £25 billion initial capital + £3 billion replacement p.a. + £16 billion operating costs p.a.(ii)Tanker jets (KC-10 and KC-135)The analysis is similar to the section above ............
I was sitting outside on the porch this morning. It was relatively clear....bright blue skies and no wind. Suddenly a little gust of wind blew through the bush in front of me. A bizarre cloud of mist came off the bush. Mind you, it had rained a few days ago so the bush had been washed. We had gusts up to 50 mph....so any deposits should have been recently blown or washed away.
I walked to the bush and wiggled a branch. A hideous amount of a misty looking cloud drifted off. Thinking it might be that kind of bush, I tried the Blue Spruce.
The amount of material being dumped on us is so much worse than it was a few years ago.
© 2017 Created by rose.
Report an Issue |
Terms of Service
Please check your browser settings or contact your system administrator.