1. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    On May 12th, 2014, at a German Peace Demonstration in Dresden, a person who claimed to be a former aerospace engineer (later identified as "Jens") gave a brief talk, claiming to have have installed "chemtrail" spray equipment on planes. But his story fell apart after he presented his "evidence". The plane he claims to have worked on in 2008 was an 2003 icing test plane, retired in 2005.


    English transcript:
    Jens later "released" a more detailed text version of his speech, and six PDF documents that he said were evidence that his story was true. In fact the document demonstrate fairly clearly that his story holds very little water.

    Here's the translated version of the text he released:
    http://www.wahrheitsbewegung.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4331 (German version)
    The PDFs claim to provide supporting evidence, but do no such thing. The first one (2sprhspinne) is really all you need look at. Containing these two photos:

    Those Pictures show an Fairchild-Dornier DO-328JET Research-Vessel registered as "D-BJET" with built on Anti-Icing Test Equipment. Here is a 2003 photo of this plane:

    Note that in both photos there are identical strips of aluminum repair tape, or speed tape. This type of repair is unique to individual planes, and so demonstrates that these photos in the PDF are of D-BJET.

    Icing tests are performed by spraying water on a plane in flight in freezing temperatures, to ensure that the plane does not accumulate ice in a way that causes problems. Here's another example:

    The supposed "chemtrail" plane was owned by Dornier in 2003, and sold to PrivateWings in 2005, and converted to a normal passenger jet. Hence it could not have been a plane he was working on in 2008.

    Here's what the plane looked like in 2005, and still looks like today.

    The second PDF is a listing for a job vacancy at DLR (a German aviation company) from 2013. Hence again is nothing to do with what he was doing in 2008. The job itself is simply measuring ice crystals in clouds and contrails. Something DLR has been doing for many years as part of broader research on climate.

    The next three PDFs are not evidence at all, and are simple random articles on the "Chemtrails" theory that were copied from the internet. "Uran" is about a barrel of depleted Uranium. "CIA" is just some old speculation on using cloud seeding as weapons, "Chemtrails" is just a collection of links about the chemtrails theory, and the final PDF is the text that is translated above.


    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Dec 11, 2014
    • Like Like x 8
    • Informative Informative x 5
    • Winner Winner x 2
  2. FreiZeitGeist

    FreiZeitGeist Senior Member

    Thanks to Mick for picking up the main facts from the german source. Some short additions from the german Forum "Allmystery.de" that was used as Reference.

    Proof that this "spraying-device" on th Do-328 is realy for icing-tests:

    Before it was used on the DO-328 "D-BJET" it was mounted at a Do-228 owned by DLR:

    Source: http://www.icas.org/ICAS_ARCHIVE/ICAS2000/PAPERS/ICA1103.PDF

    Proof that the Job-Vacancy by DLR presented as PDF #2 was published 2013:

    • Like Like x 3
  3. Belfrey

    Belfrey Senior Member

    I cleaned up the translation of his written statement a bit, to reduce the "Yoda effect" that Google Translate sometimes has.
    • Informative Informative x 2
    • Useful Useful x 2
  4. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    Very minor point, the DO-328 is a turboprop plane (aka the 328-100), the plane in the photos is a variant of that, the DO-328JET (aka the 328-300)

    I mention this because the ICAS PDF that FZG linked to describes as 328 (the icing target in this case) as a turboprop, so it's good to make the distinction for clarity.
  5. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    Thanks, I've incorporated that into the OP.
  6. Strawman

    Strawman Active Member

    Nicely done, lads.
  7. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    Also added an infographic style debunking, for easy Facebook sharing.
    • Useful Useful x 3
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  8. skephu

    skephu Senior Member

    How do you know it's D-BJET? The registration number is not visible in the photos in the pdf.
  9. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    Because it looks exactly the same.
  10. skephu

    skephu Senior Member

    That's what I thought. But it could be a different plane of the same type.
    I was trying to look at the details.
    What is this? Duct tape?
  11. WeedWhacker

    WeedWhacker Senior Member

  12. skephu

    skephu Senior Member

    Thanks. Then it must be the same plane.

    On the other hand, it seems to me that the German guy never explicitly said that the photos in the pdf show the very plane he claims to have worked on.
    Maybe he just intended the photos as illustrations.
  13. KC-10FE

    KC-10FE Active Member

    kc10 tape.

    Yep, speed tape is quite common…and not very comforting
  14. Jason

    Jason Senior Member

    Not comforting in what sense, that they made repairs to a multimillion dollar asset with "speed tape" instead of doing it the right way, and I'm assuming the right way would put the plane out of commission for quite a while, otherwise they wouldn't resort to tape.

    Have any accidents ever been the result of this "speed tape", or the result of putting a band aid on the damage instead of fixing it the right way?
  15. KC-10FE

    KC-10FE Active Member

    It's more to cover up paint that has maybe chipped away, to prevent corrosion until the jet has its scheduled depot maintenance or paint input. It is definitely not used to hold anything together. It works quite well actually.
    • Useful Useful x 2
  16. solrey

    solrey Senior Member

    It ain't NASCAR...

    • Funny Funny x 2
  17. FreiZeitGeist

    FreiZeitGeist Senior Member

    We can only see the rear without the engines, so theoretical it could be also a "normal" Do-328 with Props.

    But there was only one Do-328 used by the manufacture Dornier in their company-paintings since 1998. It´s the DO-328Jet registrated as D-BJET .

    See the "Fairchild-Dornier"-Markings on the vertical stabilizer.
    • Like Like x 1
  18. skephu

    skephu Senior Member

    How do you know that?
  19. WeedWhacker

    WeedWhacker Senior Member

    I've seen (some mechanics jokingly refer to aluminium tape as "1,000 MPH tape") it used on leading edge slats, or other aluminium parts to cover very, very minor dings and dents, to smooth the airflow. But, of course, this is not a structural usage.
    • Funny Funny x 1
  20. Jason

    Jason Senior Member

    I remember the myth busters built a plane out of duct tape once.
    • Like Like x 1
  21. FreiZeitGeist

    FreiZeitGeist Senior Member

    Only 217 DO328 where bulid and only 110 of them are the JET-Version - it´s a rare Airplane.

    As this video appereared in Germany, I and some other german debunkers searched for it on the Planespotter-Pages and we found only this one. With this Spraying-Device and a visiblle registration. The main Research in the Opening Post was done in a german forum.

    By the way: The Company "Dornier" or (later) "Fairchild Dornier" doesn´t exist any more since 2005. So the Whistleblower must be lying if he claims he made this Photos 2008.
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  22. skephu

    skephu Senior Member

    OK but that's not really convincing to me as it assumes that all planes have photographs from all years on those web sites. Which I strongly doubt.
    • Disagree Disagree x 3
  23. Whitebeard

    Whitebeard Senior Member

    NEVER underestimate the power of a 'spotter'. just enter the type and registration ( Dornier Do-328JET-310 reg. D-BJET) into the search engine of your choice and see what you get...

    I did just that and in five minutes flat found out that planes entire history. it was built in 1998, the prototype for the D0-328jet, and was retained by Fairchild-Dornier as a test machine, and as such under-went several interior and equipment changes. then in 2003 when it was sold to Wells Fargo Bank North West where it was re-registered as N328FG. In 2005 it was transferred (leased or sold) to Private Wings Flugcharter for the executive charter market, with its German D-BJET registration restored, and has been active with that company ever since. and yes there are photo's of the plane through its entire career' Look here...

    And these days of the internet, social media, cheap good quality cameras etc, and given the enthusiasm of aviation enthusiasts it is more unusual NOT to have heap a photographs of a commercial aircraft year in year out following every change in that planes livery and location.
    Last edited: Dec 9, 2014
    • Like Like x 4
    • Informative Informative x 1
  24. skephu

    skephu Senior Member

    There are no photographs of D-BJET from 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, and 2004. That's four consecutive years and another year.
  25. MikeC

    MikeC Closed Account

    But the claim is the work was done in 2008, so not sure what a lack of photos for those years would indicate.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  26. WeedWhacker

    WeedWhacker Senior Member

    Airplanes, when sold, can have the Registration numbers changed. This is common. (The Serial numbers, and Manufacturing numbers do NOT change, of course). It's as if YOU sell your car to someone, who lives in another country. The VIN of your car remains the same....only the license plate changes!

    Especially if a high-value airplane is "moved" from one country to another. Of course then, the registration will change, as it is registered by the new owner.

    Here is a list of "registration" nomenclature, by country:


    ALSO here:
  27. MikeC

    MikeC Closed Account

    We know the Registration marks for this jet WW - that's not the issue.

    I think @skephu is saying that because there are no photos from those years therefore there is an opportunity for it to be doing nefarious things?

    but that's a red herring - the work was supposedly done in 2008, but the equipment has been clearly identified as to purpose and date, so the claim is provably wrong regardless.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  28. WeedWhacker

    WeedWhacker Senior Member


    Problem seems that many who are 'not' in the aviation field simply do not understand that airplanes are well-monitored...even more than automobiles.
  29. skephu

    skephu Senior Member

    Maybe if you read the earlier posts in this thread you wouldn't have to invent hypothetical explanations of why I wrote what I wrote.

    The registration is not visible in the photos published by the German guy. So I asked how the plane was identified as D-BJET, and I got the answer that it was identified on the basis that D-BJET was the only similar-looking plane found among the photos on the planespotter web sites. But that method of identification relies on the assumption that the planespotter web sites are complete, and contain photos of all planes in the world from all years.

    But D-BJET itself demonstrates that the planespotter web sites are incomplete as D-BJET has no photographs from several years.
    So there could be another plane that looks similar, but has no photo on the web.
    • Disagree Disagree x 2
  30. Whitebeard

    Whitebeard Senior Member

    Not hypothetical, logical. The livery shown is the corporate livery of the planes builders Fairchild-Dornier. As I said earlier when I laid out the planes service history, it was retained by the manufacturers for a period of 4 years as the development vehicle for the DO-328jet program before disposal into commercial service. Here is a full list of all DO-328's built, both the original turbo prop version and the jet variant of which D-BJET was the prototype.
    Now, by clicking on the airframe number you can get a full history of each plane built, a check through the list will show that D-BJET (airframe c/n3002) was the only one of the jet variants retained by Fairchild-Dornier, the rest were delivered straight into service.

    Now when a plane is delivered from new, it is NOT painted into the manufacturers livery for a delivery flight, it is normally painted into the customers livery at the factory, or delivered in a plain white livery. So with all planes accounted for, what plane was it? Are you suggesting that another DO-328jet was painted into Fairchild-Dornier corporate livery, in around 2008 for some nefarious purposes, right down to to the strip of tape on the tailplane being placed in exactly the same place? (we have already established that D-BJET was in Private Wings Flugcharter service by that date, when the 'whistleblower' claims to have done the work) If so which one and when, it is you making the claim that some plane other than D-BJET was in those colours, so to back up the claim you have to provide the evidence.

    And i'm still pretty sure that if you dig deep enough and look long enough the gaps in the photo history of D-BJET can be filled.
    Last edited: Dec 11, 2014
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Informative Informative x 1
  31. Efftup

    Efftup Senior Member

    Yes, even though in 2004 it would have been N328FG, as mentioned by Whitebeard, that is a fairly big gap.
  32. Trailblazer

    Trailblazer Moderator Staff Member

    No there couldn't. The planespotter photo explanation is a red herring. It's a way of finding photos, but it's not an official source. All planes that are manufactured and sold are registered. You can easily search the OFFICIAL records for aircraft of a given model that have been registered to a given company, especially with a relatively rare plane like this.

    It is a fact that this was the ONLY aircraft of this model that was retained by Fairchild-Dornier.
    • Agree Agree x 2
  33. skephu

    skephu Senior Member

    @Whitebeard My statement was that it is false to assume that all airplanes have photographs from all years on the planespotter web sites. It looks like you tried to claim the contrary, but you have failed to prove your point. In fact, as I looked through the list of DO-328s, I found a lot of planes without a single photograph over their entire lifetimes on the web. So no, not all planes are photographed every year and shown on the web.
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  34. skephu

    skephu Senior Member

    Where are those official records to be found?
  35. Pete Tar

    Pete Tar Moderator Staff Member

    I'm not sure that was the claim, I thought it was just that planespotter sites are a useful resource and research tool to use.
  36. MikeC

    MikeC Closed Account

    no I'm pretty sure skephu (in the posts I was replying to) was pointing out that there was a claim that here are photos of every jet every year - which is not true as he(?) has noted.

    Thus showing that absolutes are rarely useful in discussion as they can often be easily refuted!

    And as skephu has correctly pointed out the registration of the jet is not visible in the photos that accompany the claims.

    However it is also fairly obvious that he setup in the claims is the same as that for the icing rig from Fairchild-Dornier, and it is also true that Fairchild-Dornier did not exist in 2008 - having declared itself insolvent in 2002!

    so there are very good reasons to think that the photos doe show D-BJET, and the claims are BS!
    • Agree Agree x 3
  37. Trailblazer

    Trailblazer Moderator Staff Member

  38. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    I'd agree we don't have 100% coverage, especially if you go back to the 1990s and before, with no digital cameras.

    But do you actually think that it's at all likely that the plane in the OP was misidentified? That there might have been another identical plane in 2008, with the exact same livery (now out of date) and icing test equipment as D-BJET had in 2003?

    I think perhaps you are laboring a point that's not entirely relevant here.
    • Agree Agree x 5
  39. Whitebeard

    Whitebeard Senior Member

    Your now nit picking, and mentioned before chasing red herrings. My point is the history of planes is chronicled in great detail. The 'whistleblower' posted two pictures of the tail assembly of a DO-328jet in fairchild - dornier corporate livery with water spray nozzles attached. These two pictures were taken from a set that showed D-BJET the only plane known to have carried that livery and it carried that between dec 1998 and mid 2003, when it was involved the the companies test and development program other pictures from that set clearly show the planes number, and the presence of the aluminum tape on the tail assembly shows that the two out of context pictures the whistle blower claims are the plane he worked on are indeed of the same plane. Now as by the time he claims to have been part of the great conspiracy D-BJET looked like this...
    ...and as also mentioned in this thread Fairchild Dornier had ceased trading. Therefore he is either lying or a different plane was involved. So if it wasn't D-BJET what was it? Now your the one claiming there could be another DO-328jet around in Fairchild-Dornier livery, not me, so it's up to you to find the evidence for it, all I was doing was pointing in the direction that may help you find the evidence you need. I did say its very likely that there is a very comprehensive record of most planes over most of their careers* (and I stand by that), but I never claimed they would all be in the same place. To find them you will have to search every plane forum and its gallery, go through the facebook albums of plane spotters and plane spotting groups, watch a lot of youtube etc vids of take off and landings at various airports, the info is there, but you will have to dig for it.

    So go find me that plane....

    Edit- *Although as Mick says before the digital camera age, mid 90's the record will be patchier
    Last edited: Dec 11, 2014
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Like Like x 1
  40. Whitebeard

    Whitebeard Senior Member

    And, just for interest, here, at 1:21, is D-BJET at Valencia following the 2012 European Grand Prix

    • Like Like x 1