Who just launched an ICBM 35 miles from SoCal coast?

<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/oyEvk-VTuEI?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/oyEvk-VTuEI?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>
 
Quote from hoodooman:

Notice that the contrail shows the effect of corkscrewing which indicates that the body was spinning. So I doubt very much that it was caused by an airplane unless the plane was doing aerobatics.

I, of course, didn't see it but my best guess from the looks of the contrail was that it was probably a missile.

If I had seen the contrail, I could have roughly calculated the spin rate and perhaps determined if the missile was guided or unguided and whether it was a surface to air or surface to surface type.

I am guessing it was a surface to air type.

That "scientist" who said "that is obviously an aircraft" is in my opinion, a bought and paid for son of a bitch and like so many others that I knew when I worked for the navy, air force and army.

Peter Daniels
aeroballistician/ flight dynamicist (retired)

Its moving too slow to be a missle and it changes course. Its a jet.
 
Quote from Arnie:

Its moving too slow to be a missle and it changes course. Its a jet.
I dunno Arnie. I'm not buying that optical illusion stuff. That's a steep trajectory, too steep for a commercial airline. And the plume appears way too large and thick to be an aircraft contrail. From 35 miles away it would appear to be moving slowly.
 
Quote from Lucrum:

I dunno Arnie. I'm not buying that optical illusion stuff. That's a steep trajectory, too steep for a commercial airline. And the plume appears way too large and thick to be an aircraft contrail. From 35 miles away it would appear to be moving slowly.

There have been others that look the same.

http://uncinus.wordpress.com/2010/11/09/4/

Preview-20100119-154110.jpg

"Missile-like" contrail. Note this is the Dec 31st contrail, not the Nov 8th CBS one.

scottcontrail1-20101109-215737.jpg

The Dec 31st contrail, from Laguna Beach

Same one as above, different angle of view

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010/11/mystery-missile-is-probably-a-jet/
 
Doug Richardson, the editor of Jane’s Missiles and Rockets, examined the video for the Times of London and said he was left with little doubt.

"It’s a solid propellant missile," he told the Times. "You can tell from the efflux [smoke]."

Richardson said it could have been a ballistic missile launched from a submarine or an interceptor, the defensive anti-missile weapon used by Navy surface ships.

:)
 
Quote from 377OHMS:

I've launched American rockets from Kennedy, Cape Canaveral and Vandenberg, European rockets from French Guiana, Chinese rockets from Xichang, Japanese rockets from Tanegashima and Russian rockets from Kazakstan and from a floating launch platform in the Pacific at 154-deg West.

I've worked with ICBM boosters and have personally hand-armed a 7500 lb MinuteMan upper stage in the cargo bay of the space shuttle used to circularize the orbit of a large satellite.

This looked like an SLBM. It looked American. The plume color, ascent angle and rotation looked familiar. Nobody launches West (retrograde) except ICBMs. Everything else is launched East (commerical and shuttle) or North (spy stuff in polar orbits). I saw no staging, no separations, no shroud ejection.

I would say it was a Navy SLBM test launch towards either PMRF (Kauai) or Kwajalein in support of the Missile Defense program.

QED
 
Back
Top