Debunked: Belfort Group "Case Orange" conclusions & recommendations

not really - your photo has the condensation coming from the entire wing, and I suspect the original shows the aircraft at high altitude?

The vietnam one has it coming from part of the wing only, yuo can see the jets from the individual nozzles, is clearly at low altitude, and if you could look at both planes up close you would find a spraying aparartus in Vietnam that is as obvious as dogs balls - you can see the wing boom in a photo on the 4th page of this article and the rear "tail" booms looked like this:

C123Boom.jpg

And you would find no spray "gear" of any description on the modern aircraft.
 
If those are aerodynamic contrails, why do they spread into persistent spreading contrails which are said to be from engines?

Why are these contrails not reported in weather forecasts if they are predictable?
 
If those are aerodynamic contrails, why do they spread into persistent spreading contrails which are said to be from engines?
Click to expand...

Because they are clouds and once formed can persist in the right conditions of supersaturated air just like any other cirrus cloud. Aerodynamic contrails at cruising altitudes will also mix with the exhaust contrails in the turbulence of the wingtip vortices.

Why are these contrails not reported in weather forecasts if they are predictable?
Click to expand...

Ah, but there are forecasts specifically for contrail formation. Since they don't affect the weather in any appreciable way there is no need to include contrail forecasts with general weather forecasts.

http://cloudsgate2.larc.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/site/showdoc?docid=33&cmd=latest
 
This study conflicts with your "they dont affect the weather in any appreciable way.

[h=1]Elemental composition and morphology of ice-crystal residual particles in cirrus clouds and contrails[/h]


  • a​ Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt (DLR), Institut für Physik der Atmosphäre, Oberpfaffenhofen, D-82234 Wessling, Germany
  • b​ Department of Meteorology, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden

If some fraction of the BC and metallic particles are effective ice nuclei, they should initiate ice formation whenever the exhaust plume reaches ice supersaturation. Thus, also under conditions which do not allow the formation of visible contrails, the formation of a sub-visible contrail inside the plume is possible that persists in ice supersaturated air and potentially grows into a cirrus cloud deck. Hence, jet exhaust aerosol can possibly affect in either case cloud formation in the upper troposphere resulting in a regional impact on the atmospheric radiation balance. To better quantify the ice forming ability of exhaust BC and metal particles, we therefore propose ice particle sampling in sub-visible contrails. Also the effects of BC and metal particle inclusions, which can be viewed as absorbing cores incorporated in a transparent ice particle, on the optical properties of the ice particles require further investigation, because light-scattering as well as absorbing properties directly affect the radiative behavior of cirrus clouds.

So let me ask again, why arent contrails forecasted in weather reports?

Ive seen plenty of days covered in artificial clouds from airplanes, which were predicted to be sunny. Are weathermen that far behind in technology?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Even heavy contrails will NOT effect the weather. It want change the temperature, it won't make it rain, it MIGHT reduce the chance of a sunburn a little bit.

Where is the evidence that metal particles are being sprayed?
 
[h=2]1. Introduction[/h]The impact of aviation on climate follows several pathways. Carbon dioxide and water vapour, both effective greenhouse gases, are emitted as well as nitric oxides, which influences the chemical composition of the upper troposphere. Soot and sulphuric oxides add to the ambient aerosol and have an impact on cirrus formation and cloud microphysical properties. Since the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) special report on Aviation and the Global Atmosphere (1999) it has been widely accepted that contrails, and the cirrus clouds they may form have a climate impact comparable to the CO2​ from the combustion process. These additional clouds reduce the incoming solar radiation as well as the outgoing thermal radiation in a way that the mean net balance at top of the atmosphere is slightly positive—i.e. they add to the greenhouse effect (Meerkötter et al., 1999). 1​

[h=1]A note on how to avoid contrail cirrus[/h]


  • Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt, Institut für Physik der Atmosphäre, Oberpfaffenhofen, 82230 Weßling, Germany
 
Last edited by a moderator:
But the 'proof is in the pudding'

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2002/08/020808075457.htm

External Quote:
he satellite photos show where contrails were occurring, mostly absent over the U.S. between Sept 11-14, but still occurring in Canada and northern Mexico.

"We show that there was an anomalous increase in the average diurnal temperature range for the period Sept. 11-14, 2001," the researchers reported in today's (Aug. 8) issue of the journal Nature. "Because persisting contrails can reduce the transfer of both incoming solar and outgoing infrared radiation and so reduce the daily temperature range, we attribute at least a portion of this anomaly to the absence of contrails."

The diurnal temperature range is the difference between the nighttime low temperature and the daytime high temperature, usually for a given day.
Temperatures went up slightly, not down.
 
A contrail, consisting of tiny ice particles, forms behind an aircraft if the ambient air is cold enough. The physics of this process is well understood and described by the so-called Schmidt–Appleman criterion (Schmidt, 1941; Appleman, 1953). In its present form (Schumann, 1996) this criterion also shows that any advance in total propulsion efficiency of air-planes will lead to more contrails, as the temperature limit for contrail formation increases when less energy is distributed to the air with the exhaust gases (Schumann et al., 2000). In dry air the contrails dissolve quickly and their impact is of minor importance, but in moist air which is super-saturated with respect to ice (Ice Super-Saturated Regions—ISSR), the contrails spread, grow with the uptake of ambient water vapour, and become 'contrail cirrus'. These aircraft induced cirrus clouds cannot be distinguished from natural cirrus either by ground based or satellite observations. In a later stage of their lifetime, the ice particles sediment into dryer layers or the air-mass warms due to subsidence—both effects lead to evaporation.

[h=2]4. Conclusions[/h]It is possible to reduce the climate impact of contrails significantly by only small changes in flight altitude. A general shift of the whole airtraffic, as it has been envisaged in various studies is probably not required. Necessary prerequisites for the introduction of such a system are the development towards a flexible free flight, the onboard detection of super-saturated air (a good hygrometer) or of contrails, and an assimilation system for the atmospheric state capable of handling super-saturation. All these factors are technically feasible. The most important factor is the ethical and political will to act for the mitigation of the climate impact of air traffic.

[h=1]A note on how to avoid contrail cirrus[/h]


  • Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt, Institut für Physik der Atmosphäre, Oberpfaffenhofen, 82230 Weßling, Germany
 
Last edited by a moderator:
So let me get this straight Cairenn, you said "Contrails will NOT affect the weather". Then you post a sciencedaily source stating that temps went up during the non flight period of 9/11.

Can you please explain to me how you did not just contradict yourself.

While my links support a warming effect, and yours support a cooling effect. There is an effect on the weather from contrails, correct?
 
Contrail mitigation by lowering flight trajectories globally at the expense of a fuel penalty is singled out as an example. Contrails are line-shaped ice clouds that form behind an aircraft when hot and moist exhaust gases mix with cold and sufficiently humid ambient air and saturation with respect to liquid water is reached (e.g.Schumann, 2005). Contrails may persist and transform to contrail cirrus (Burkhardt and Kärcher, 2011). Avoiding ice-supersaturated areas by flight re-routing has been identified as one of the most promising options to mitigate contrails (Sausen et al., 1998, Fichter et al., 2005, Mannstein et al., 2005 and Gierens et al., 2008).

Finally, we note some additional arguments suggesting a careful preparation of a contrail mitigation strategy: as a general lowering of flight levels represents a simplified approach and forms a fundamental intervention into the current air traffic system, it could be more convincing to initiate some technological change for the more efficient, climate-optimised flight trajectories. The fuel penalty, crucial for the evaluation outcome, has been taken here as invariant. It could, however, substantially be reduced by new aircraft design and flight performance such as cruise speed reduction (e.g. Egelhofer, 2009 and Filippone, 2010). Providing incentives for the pre-development of aircrafts which cruise with lower or no fuel penalty in lower flight altitudes is a promising first step. Further, a moderately delayed implementation of the mitigation strategy would provide the opportunity to combine expected progress in air traffic management system including operational aspects, weather forecast systems, and scientific understanding of the contrail climate impact (Frömming et al., 2012). An advanced future management system could facilitate a selective mitigation of only those linear contrail and contrail cirrus which are expected to induce a substantially positive RF during their lifetime (Mannstein et al., 2005). In one or two decades, when the need for short-term reduction is more pronounced as the rate of climate change becomes more remarkable a more efficient flight route management system could finally be implemented. Then, an improved scientific understanding also of regional climate change can be expected and will hopefully be accounted for in the management of flight trajectories.

[h=1]A physical metric-based framework for evaluating the climate trade-off between CO2​ and contrails—The case of lowering aircraft flight trajectories[/h]


  • a​ Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt (DLR), Institut für Physik der Atmosphäre, Münchner Straße 20, 82234 Oberpfaffenhofen-Wessling, Germany
  • b​ Dalton Research Institute, School of Science & the Environment, Manchester Metropolitan University, Chester Street, Manchester M1 5GD, United Kingdom
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Classified said:

So let me ask again, why arent contrails forecasted in weather reports?
Click to expand...

Why should they?

When the weathermen are putting out a forecast, they are putting out but a guess based on conditions that affect us the most: the way fronts move and their speeds, the way pressure systems move, trends, etc. On top of that, even with technology today, they won't be 100% accurate, because weather is based on more variables that can be mapped, such as the very color of your lawn. You want contrails forecasted? Good luck, for they'd have to track every flight that may or may not fly on a particular day, including the aircraft type, engines, and planned altitudes.
 
Classified said:
If those are aerodynamic contrails, why do they spread into persistent spreading contrails which are said to be from engines?

Why are these contrails not reported in weather forecasts if they are predictable?
Click to expand...

Because aerodynamic contrails behave just like any other contrail. It's the formation that is different, since it comes from the wings.

Wings fly because air above the wing move faster than the air below.

This creates a low pressure area on the top, and a high pressure area in the bottom. That's how it produces lift.

The natural gas law explains that low pressure comes with a reduction in temperature.

Cool moist air enough, and it condenses. Thus, condensation trail.

This information can be found in some aviation weather manuals, such as: http://www.aviationweather.ws/080_Condensation_Trails.php
 
I thought this was the debunking "chemtrails" forum; not the "mitigate contrails" one.

Classified, you seem to be trying to infer that since contrails aren't included in weather forecasts they must be something else? The extent of contrails are dependent on the conditions AND the amount of air traffic in a given area in a given time; which would not be included in any forecasting model. In the US, air traffic corridors vary from day to day and are designed to avoid areas of convective activity. That too would need to be included in the model; and it must be asked...to what end?
 
Im asking if 'contrail cirrus' are just water then why arent they forecasted since they can cover hundreds of miles?

Why am I told that contrails are just water vapor, when it contains all sorts of aerosols and black carbon?

Why are these contrail cirrus not being questioned with all the research on mitigation?
 
Cirrus clouds DO appear on aeronautical forecasts. Contrails are more likely to form when cirrus is forecast. It is not a contrail forecast per se, but it is related.
 
Example: The current area forecast for south eastern Australia. IN BOLD: The broken AC and AS is alto-cumulus and alto-stratus... classic pre-frontal cirrus cloud and almost certainly contrail producing.

AMEND AREA FORECAST 221100 TO 222300 AREA 30/32. AMD OVERVIEW:COLD FRONT FORECAST NEAR YLAO/YKII 11Z, TREST/YFLI 17Z AND E OF AREABY 23Z. ISOLATED SHOWERS S OF 36S. ISOLATED SHOWERS NEAR FRONT,TENDING SCATTERED WITHIN 120NM OF FRONT S 36S. POSSIBLE ISOLATEDTHUNDERSTORMS NEAR/WITHIN 120NM OF FRONT SEA/COAST TILL 13Z. LOWCLOUD WITH PRECIPITATION, ABOUT WINDWARD SLOPES OF RANGES AND LAND WOF FRONT; PARTICULARLY ABOUT WINDWARD RANGES. FOG/MIST PATCHESDEVELOPING LAND W OF FRONT AFTER 18Z, MOSTLY INLAND. SUBDIVISIONS:A: E OF COLD FRONTB: W OF COLD FRONT WIND: 2000 5000 7000 10000 14000 18500A: 290/25 280/25 270/30 270/35 MS02 280/40 MS09 280/40 MS16B: 240/25 240/25 240/25 240/35 ZERO 240/45 MS08 250/50 MS18REMARKS:1. WINDS 5000FT/BLW 15-20 KNOTS STRONGER AND VEERING UP TO 30 DEGREES NEAR/UP TO 120NM E OF COLD FRONT.2. TEMPERATURES 10000/16000 UP TO 6 DEGREES LOWER S OF 39S. AMD CLOUD:ISOL CB 3000/28000 NEAR/WITHIN 120NM OF FRONT SEA/COAST TILL 13Z.BKN ST 1000/3000 WITH PRECIPITATION, ABOUT WINDWARD SLOPES OF RANGESAND LAND W OF FRONT; PARTICULARLY ABOUT WINDWARD RANGES.BKN CU/SC 2500/10000 NEAR/E OF COLD FRONT; ISOL TCU TOPS TO 14000FTWITHIN 120NM OF COLD FRONT.SCT CU/SC 2500/6000 W OF COLD FRONT.BKN AC/AS ABV 10000FT SE SEA TILL 14Z AND WITHIN 200NM OF COLD FRONT. WEATHER:FG, BR, TSRA, SHRA. VISIBILITY:0500 FG, 2000M BR, 3000M TSRA, 4000M SHRA. FREEZING LEVEL:A: 9000/11000FT.B: 6000 IN S GRADING TO 11000FT IN NW. ICING:SEV IN CB/TCU.MOD IN CLOUD ABV FZL. TURBULENCE:SEV IN/NEAR CB/TCU.MOD IN CU/AC.MOD NEAR/LEE RANGES BLW 8000FT. AMD CRITICAL LOCALITIES:[HEIGHTS ABOVE MSL]KILMORE GAP [1200FT]: 9999 FEW ST 1500 SCT ST CU 3000 BKN SC 8000 BECMG 2213/2215 BKN ST 1200 [CLOUD ON GROUND] TEMPO 2211/2214 BKN ST 1200 [CLOUD ON GROUND] REMARKS:FOR MORE INFORMATION CALL (03) 9669 4850.
 
Seems to me the major problem with the chemtrail conspiracy "hysteria" is the misidentification of persistent contrails, contrail induced cirrus and cirrus cloud bank blooms . . . if people are made aware of the research and a healthy discussion is prompted within the target groups some of this hysteria may be mitigated. . . also if one mitigates persistent contrails you mitigate the chemtrail hysteria. . . rather simple actually. . . .;)

Unlike many other conspiracies Chemtrails have a visual, constant reminder of their existence. . . so it is In your face . . . accept the conspiracy or do research which is only available from the very agencies you have been conditioned to distrust. . . what a dilemma . . .
 
Classified said:
Why am I told that contrails are just water vapor, when it contains all sorts of aerosols and black carbon?
Click to expand...

Contrails are not water vapour. Water vapour is invisible. Contrails are water ICE.

Various pollutants from engine exhaust are normally invisible and present whether a contrail forms or not - they are not what you are seeing.
 
Interesting that you moved my comments to another thread, and then backdated the discussion to two days ago, while the barium questions just began today.

How is the questioning of barium in jet fuel not relevant to a chemtrail discussion?
 
Classified said:
Interesting that you moved my comments to another thread, and then backdated the discussion to two days ago, while the barium questions just began today.

How is the questioning of barium in jet fuel not relevant to a chemtrail discussion?
Click to expand...

I did not change any dates. You asked "So why is barium in jet fuel?" on April 20th, it is now April 22nd.

Barium in jet fuel IS a topic that comes up in chemtrail discussion a lot, so it deserves a thread of its own, which is now in the chemtrail forum.
 
F4Jock said:
Yes they do (release barium)...
Click to expand...

contrails do not "relase barium" - if there is barium in dust in the atmosphere it remains there because it was there already, and since barium is not a component of jet fuel, nor AFAIK used in jet engines there is no additional release by virtue of mechanical wear or "spraying"

Contrails are WATER ICE - nothing more or less - saying they "contain" soot or "other aerosols" is like saying they "contain" elemental nitrogen (N2) ....since that is present in the air "in" a contrail too!
 
As a glider pilot, I tend to side with Classified when it comes to the influence of spreading contrails.

Any dimming of sunlight has an impact on convection, a.k.a. thermals, that are caused by surface warming. It is in fact possible that jet traffic may create cirrus layers that would not form otherwise. These layers may in turn affect the creation of cumulus clouds that are caused by convection.

So, yes, contrails can affect the weather in principle.

They cannot make a low pressure system convert into a high pressure system though.

And they are still just water ice crystals.
 
JFDee said:
As a glider pilot, I tend to side with Classified when it comes to the influence of spreading contrails.

Any dimming of sunlight has an impact on convection, a.k.a. thermals, that are caused by surface warming. It is in fact possible that jet traffic may create cirrus layers that would not form otherwise. These layers may in turn affect the creation of cumulus clouds that are caused by convection.

So, yes, contrails can affect the weather in principle.

They cannot make a low pressure system convert into a high pressure system though.

And they are still just water ice crystals.
Click to expand...

So in theory, if any man made change in weather is considered weather modification, couldn't 'contrail cirrus' be classified as weather modification?
 
Classified said:
So in theory, if any man made change in weather is considered weather modification, couldn't 'contrail cirrus' be classified as weather modification?
Click to expand...
I think definitely as an unintentional side effect through the propagation of persistent contrail induced cirrus cloud banks . . . :) So when no attempt to mitigate and when mitigation is possible of a known side effect . . . . by omission is it now intentional???
 
Classified said:
So in theory, if any man made change in weather is considered weather modification, couldn't 'contrail cirrus' be classified as weather modification?
Click to expand...

Inadvertent slight weather modification yes. Like urban heat islands.

Weather modification generally refers to deliberate modification though, and more direct modification, like cloud seeding for precipitation enhancement, or hail mitigation.

If you want to get pedantic, you could say a parasol is a form of weather modification, just rather local.
 
So 'contrail cirrus' could be classified as unintentional weather modification?

So maybe there is some reason for concern about these man made clouds?
 
It seems that to you it is. What do you suggest that we do to stop it? Other than to stop using jets?

It is like the folks that decry the pollution problems of the automobile, without the knowledge that horses and mules were a Major pollution source.
 
MikeC said:
Contrails are WATER ICE - nothing more or less - saying they "contain" soot or "other aerosols" is like saying they "contain" elemental nitrogen (N2) ....since that is present in the air "in" a contrail too!
Click to expand...

This research does not support your claims Mike.


Soot and sulphuric oxides add to the ambient aerosol and have an impact on cirrus formation and cloud microphysical properties.
A note on how to avoid contrail cirrus






  • Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt, Institut für Physik der Atmosphäre, Oberpfaffenhofen, 82230 Weßling, Germany

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Mick West
Sean Kirkpatrick's Interview With Daniel Lavelle at The Guardian [Transcript]
Replies
26
Views
5K
MapperGuy
M
NorCal Dave
Claim: A UFO crashed in 1933 Italy and the US Recovered it
Replies
34
Views
7K
NorCal Dave
NorCal Dave
John J.
Is "Improved Instrumental Techniques...", Nolan, Vallee, Jiang, Lemke 2022 a useful paper?
2
Replies
45
Views
8K
Z.W. Wolf
Z.W. Wolf

Latest posts

Back
Top