Debunked: "The Snake" non-commercial chemtrail plane (China Eastern A330)

Trailblazer

Moderator
Staff member
Claim: this video shows a mystery non-commercial chemtrail plane flying over central Vancouver, not following any recognised flight path.

Reality: it shows an Airbus A330 operated by China Eastern Airlines, on approach to Vancouver airport. The flight number is almost certainly MU597 from Shanghai to Vancouver.



The plane has quite a distinctive livery with a dark "snake-like" pattern towards the rear.

upload_2014-11-16_14-37-22.png

The aircraft appears to be an Airbus A330 — identifiable by the four flap-track fairings under the wings, the "bulge" in the fuselage and the upturned winglets at the end of the wings (not visible in this screen grab). The "snake" pattern is easily identifiable as the livery of the SkyTeam airline alliance: https://www.skyteam.com/About-us/Press/Image-library/SkyTeam-Livery/



This angle also demonstrates that the claim that the aircraft has no windows is false — the row of windows runs through the top of the frontmost loop of the pattern, which is out of sight in the angle of the video.

Because the SkyTeam alliance has 20 members and this livery is used on many planes, identifying the airline itself is harder. However, in the grab at the top of this post, you can see six dark markings under the right wing, in three groups of two separated by the flap track fairings. This identifies it as a China Eastern plane — the six characters are the name of the airline in Chinese, 中國東方航空.

This photo of a China Eastern A330 — coincidentally taken at Vancouver — shows the characters are a perfect match: https://www.flickr.com/photos/41645839@N00/6783705700/

skyteam.jpg

So, what about the claim that the plane is not on a normal flight path? The video states that it was shot "one block from Vancouver City Hall", and a quick check on Street View pinpoints the location as W 13th Ave, near the intersection with Ash St, just southwest of City Hall, with the camera facing east: https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@49.2...ata=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1swn09M6W6z8uOQLVo2CiYRw!2e0

streetview.jpg

So the aircraft appears to be flying just south of east, and passed just to the north of the camera location (as the right hand side of the fuselage is slightly facing the camera).

Here is a page showing the aircraft routings into and out of Vancouver airport: http://www.yvr.ca/Libraries/ENV_Docs/Aircraft_Flight_Routings_-_Final.sflb.ashx

When the planes are landing in a westerly direction (Runway 26), the approach takes the aircraft ESE directly over central Vancouver, just to the north of the camera location:

flightpath.jpg

Based on historical observations, we typically see more take-offs and landings in an easterly
direction – Runway 08 active - during the Fall and Winter, and aircraft take-offs and landings in
a westerly direction – Runway 26 – during the Spring and Summer.
Content from External Source
The video was shot in March, when Runway 26 landings are therefore more likely.

Finally, what was the likely flight number? Until recently China Eastern operated two flights daily from Shanghai to Vancouver:

The double daily service will use Airbus 330-200 aircraft with comfort-optimized configuration, each offering a maximum capacity of 200 economy class and 30 business class seats. Flights operate daily as follows:

  • MU581 arrives at YVR at 9:10 a.m.; MU582 departs at 1:20 p.m.
  • MU597 arrives at YVR at 7:40 p.m.; MU598 departs at 1:30 a.m.
Content from External Source
(MU597 appears to have been discontinued now - the last flight with that number on FlightAware was on October 24 2014.)

Based on the lighting in the video (with the tall building at the left brightly sunlit and other areas in shadow), the sun was low in the west at the time, so this must have been an evening arrival, i.e., flight MU597.
 
Last edited:

Efftup

Senior Member.
yeah this is your classic CT by numbers video. VERRRY long with nothing much of interest, taking AGES to get to the point, with lots of slow motion zooms to planes that means nothing , accompanied by the usual scary music which is so loud and annoying that it actually drowns out the point the guy is trying to make half the time. and of course just has usual baseless accusations backed up by nothing.
 

Trailspotter

Senior Member.
I've searched for the airline that the first plane in the OP video may belong to:
Screen shot 2014-11-16 at 17.39.21.png
It is clearly a B737, so it is less likely to be a transcontinental flight, unlike China Eastern. The likely candidate is Air North Yukon's Airline:


 
Last edited:

Trailspotter

Senior Member.
I didn't even get from the video
what exactly was the supposed issue with that plane.

There was no issue. I've just tried to identify the first plane in the OP video (at 3:35), that was filmed before "The Snake" plane. The author of this video called each passing aircraft 'a sprayer', including a propeller plane and a helicopter.

The youtube video in my post above shows the Yukon' Airline logo on the B737 tail fin in somewhat similar orientation to that of the first "mystery plane" in the OP video.
 
Last edited:

Trailblazer

Moderator
Staff member
There was no issue. I've just tried to identify the first plane in the OP video (at 3:35), that was filmed before "The Snake" plane. The author of this video called each passing aircraft 'a sprayer', including a propeller plane and a helicopter.

The youtube video in my post above shows the Yukon' Airline logo on the B737 tail fin in somewhat similar orientation to that of the first "mystery plane" in the OP video.
Yes, good call. I tried to find a match but didn't have any luck. I was looking for cargo planes, because at that stage I hadn't realised that the passenger windows wouldn't be visible from that angle anyway.

I agree that it's a pretty baseless video. It was just a nice little project to identify the plane.
 
Last edited:

Rico

Senior Member.
I just wanted to add a couple things. While a season may perhaps indicate which runway is more "likely" to be in use, the real deciding factor is the wind at that particular moment. Active runways are chosen if they offer a headwind for arriving and departing traffic, unless the winds are relatively calm that day. If that is the case, either ends of the runway may be deemed as active.

Finally, the arrival flight path that crosses central Vancouver from the NW appears to be the KEINN arrival. An approach plate showing the exact waypoints can be found in the Canadian Air Pilot 2. Traffic from Asia and probably Alaska would be more likely to file this arrival (traffic from NW).

(EDIT: I made a mistake earlier when I said it was the SOUND arrival. According to the Canadian Flight Supplement, the KEINN arrival is a "preferred routing" for NW arrivals. Consequently, the last China Eastern flight 597 from Shanghai, as per flightaware, also utilized this arrival! [routing: PINSO A590 PUGGY R341 ODK J123 CJAYY B757 KATCH TR18 YZP J523 YZT V347 POWOL QUODY MUZON KEINN KEINN9])

keinnarrival.jpg
 
Last edited:

jaydeehess

Senior Member.
Sprayers now spray invisible chemtrails! I guess that's how they know they are sprayers now, they either have contrails or they don't.
 

WeedWhacker

Senior Member
(EDIT: I made a mistake earlier when I said it was the SOUND arrival. According to the Canadian Flight Supplement, the KEINN arrival is a "preferred routing" for NW arrivals. Consequently, the last China Eastern flight 597 from Shanghai, as per flightaware, also utilized this arrival! [routing: PINSO A590 PUGGY R341 ODK J123 CJAYY B757 KATCH TR18 YZP J523 YZT V347 POWOL QUODY MUZON KEINN KEINN9])

I make mistakes all the time. (It is about "managing our errors", though...in aviation. "CRM" and all that, eh??) ;)
 

Trailspotter

Senior Member.
Yes, good call. I tried to find a match but didn't have any luck. I was looking for cargo planes, because at that stage I hadn't realised that the passenger windows wouldn't be visible from that angle anyway.

I agree that it's a pretty baseless video. It was just a nice little project to identify the plane.

Yes, this is a rather addictive business;)

I have identified two more aircraft from the OP video.

The helicopter at 14:40 is a Sikorsky S-76:
Screen shot 2014-11-18 at 08.13.18.png
Its livery matches that of the Vancouver based Helijet with a pink ribbon of the Breast Cancer Foundation installed at a number of the aircraft in the beginning of the year.

http://www.bitconsulting.ca/www1/?cat=87

The plane at 24:00 has all characteristic features of a Fairchild Metro: low/straight wing; twin turboprops; mid-mounted swept tail
Screen shot 2014-11-17 at 11.49.44.png
It probably is operated by Carson Air.
Using Metro II and Metro III aircraft, Carson Air has one of the largest Metro fleets in Canada. All cargo operations are based out Calgary International and Vancouver International Airports with heavy maintenance performed at our Kelowna maintenance base.
Content from External Source
Here is one of their planes. Note the darker underside of the wing and tail flaps:


On a separate note, I have examined the images of damaged leaves. These leaves are from evergreen shrubs, as deciduous trees are still naked at that time of the year (21st March) in Vancouver. They the most likely have been damaged by frost and/or cold wind due to an unusually cold winter in North America.
 
Last edited:

WeedWhacker

Senior Member
One of my early jobs, before hitting the 'majors'!! ;) Was flying the Swearingen 226 or so-called "MetroLiner".

The photo above shows the four-bladed version, which IIRC is the SW-227. The ones I flew were the SW-226 variety.

(BUT, this was decades ago...I will need to do some research, to "refresh" those old memory engrams....).
 

Rico

Senior Member.
Those Metroliners are loud. I used to live close in-line with a runway at a local airport, and every morning I would hear them buzz around with those Garrett engines. I've taxied them around before, though never got the chance to take 'em airborne. Neat machine though.
 

Whitebeard

Senior Member.
If I can address the Ivy issue @ about 7mins in....

I think he has spotted a bad case of Ivy Leaf Spot....
http://www.donsgarden.co.uk/pests/262

To prevent leaf spot the most effective, apart from spraying with fungicide, is to prevent water from staying on the leaves for hours as this allows the fungi to germinate and infect the leaves. Removal of dead leaf build up as old leaves cary fungal spores. That said Ivy is a tough plant and can usually withstand most attacks. For bacterial control spray with a copper based fungicide.
Content from External Source
As for the other plants, I cannot say, i am not botanically minded (in fact I am an anti-botanist, I've even killed spider planets and cacti.) so I can't help him, but I suspect the deciduous tree may be under going natural autumnal die back, considering the time of the year the vid was shot, and asking help and posting photos on any gardeners forum will help him with is ever green shrub.

He also mentions pine trees that 'break all the time', did a bit of digging and think a likely cause is the Mountain Pine Beetle, a major pest in the west of Canada
http://www.nrcan.gc.ca/forests/insects-diseases/13381
 
Last edited:

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
mick. someone is already challenging you. make me happy.


Not me, trailblazer. But his objection don't make sense. It's very clear that it's an A330 with the Skyteam Livery that matched the China Airlines plane.

The original video is just a bunch of random planes, not even leaving trails, and some pictures of dead leaves. There's not even an explanation as to why he finds them suspicious. It's almost like a parody.
 
Last edited:

Trailblazer

Moderator
Staff member
mick. someone is already challenging you. make me happy.

Well that was pretty funny. The differences in the plane are entirely due to perspective.

When viewed from almost directly underneath, as in the video, an A330 does appear very skinny indeed:

image.jpg

The alignment of the logo is again due to perspective. From the underside, you can't see the front of the tail. If you compare the logo position to the horizontal stabilisers then you can see it is the same. Likewise with the landing gear compartment: the video draws lines at a very strange angle.

As for the Chinese characters spelling "4 2 6", that is pushing legibility way beyond the limits of the video. It also neatly ignores the fact that there are six characters, spaced on one wing only, exactly as they are on a China Eastern plane.

I'll add some graphics once I have time, to illustrate this.
 

Trailblazer

Moderator
Staff member
So, to take the "problems" in order:

debunk1.jpg

Clearly the paint is not "two-tone". The plane is unevenly illuminated by a low sun located behind and slightly to the right. (The plane is flying just south of east, and the sun is setting in the west - the film was shot on the spring equinox.)

debunk2.jpg
debunk3.jpg

The lines on the video have been drawn at a very skewed angle, and in any case you can't even see where the tail starts from the view in the video! To accurately compare the position of the logo, let's take a side view of a China Eastern A330: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/F...kyTeam_(China_Eastern_Airlines)_AN2275274.jpg

debunk4.jpg

The logo aligns very nicely indeed.

Now, what about the shape of the plane itself? Let's compare it to this view of a Qatar Airways A330 from directly underneath - not exactly the same view as in the video, but close.

[compare]
china.jpg qatar.jpg [/compare]

The angles aren't identical, so for example the port wing appears shorter in the video grab, but I think it is pretty clear that the planes are the same shape.

How about the engine mount claim? Again, comparison with the Qatar plane shows this is not true at all:

debunk5.jpg


Lastly, the Chinese characters. The quality of the video is quite poor, but clearly the characters are the same as in this photo of a China Eastern A300 (different plane, same logo). http://www.skybird-ev.de/p2f/2006/b2320wing.jpg

Reading from the top, the easiest similarities to spot are the vertical line through the first character, the square outline of the second, and the open bowl of the fourth.

debunk6.jpg

As they say in China (possibly), 被结案的案件 ;)
 
Last edited:

Trailspotter

Senior Member.
Another challenge:

hint: play the video at 2x speed, it is very boring otherwise.

It's rubbish; the guy is a publicity seeker. He has found himself a decent resolution image of Chinese Eastern A330 in the SkyTeam livery taken straight from under the plane:
http://www.airplane-pictures.net/photo/481458/b-5949-china-eastern-airlines-airbus-a330-200/

It may have a different registration number, but it is undoubtedly the same airframe and livery:

A330_1.jpgA330_2.jpg
I have a problem with 'compare' tags here, therefore I made the second image semitransparent and superimposed it on the first:
A330_superposition.jpg


In addition, there are several videos of Chinese Eastern A330 landing or taking off in the Vancouver airport (YVR):

China Eastern A330 + Air Canada B777 landing at YVR
Air China B773 and China Eastern A332 landing at YVR
Timelapse YVR - Heavy departures off Runway 08R in Low Visibility - AC/JL 777 + MU/CA A330
 
Last edited:

Rico

Senior Member.
This almost deserves to be in the Psychology of CT'ers thread. I actually had a good chuckle.

His main criticism is that you used a Qatar plane to make a comparison. And yet, even his claims are contradictory in themselves:

Snake was painted to look like a passenger plane.

The first thing that I thought when I read this is that he has finally come to terms that the livery is the same. I guess his defense is that his particular plane is still a chemtrail plane, but painted.

A qatar plane has been painted to match a chinese passenger plane

That one there puzzled me, because it made no sense. I can think of two things: Either his mind went off track there by being literal, or he is accusing you of manipulating the Qatar photo so that it somehow matched. Next thing you know, he will claim the above two images don't match up because there is dirt in one of them.

I'm not entirely sure what to make of this individual. It should be pretty clear it's the same airframe by now, and yet, even though it's been pointed out to him multiple times, he remains ignorant. I doubt it's primarily a publicity thing (he doesn't get a lot of views to begin with). But like many conspiracy theorists, defending his own belief may have more to do with the whole "chosen one" thing as discussed in another thread.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
At this stage, there's not a lot of point continuing to engage him. It's not even very clear what he's claiming.
 

WeedWhacker

Senior Member
At this stage, there's not a lot of point continuing to engage him. It's not even very clear what he's claiming.

I posted on that video (alternate YouTube account...tied to a gmail account at that moment).
Basically here we are seeing the comparison of various airline's livery, but also identifying the specific model of airliner.

Perhaps this confuses people? (The various paint schemes?)....or is being "used" to confuse?
 

Rico

Senior Member.
Looking at all the facts, I just can't for the life of me figure out how it would be confusing to any reasonable person. Vehicles can come in different colors and yet share the same model. We can just look at a car to figure this out. The plane in question has not just one, but multiple characteristic traits of an A330 (wingspan, length, fairings, hinges, power plants, and shape).

When it comes to nitpicking things down to how the colors are a shade different while neglecting the time of day, this requires a bit of... creativity, and something I'll not mention in honor of the politeness policy.
 

WeedWhacker

Senior Member
The plane in question has not just one, but multiple characteristic traits of an A330 (wingspan, length, fairings, hinges, power plants, and shape).

YES, exactly.....which is why I posted on the "2nd" video, which mentioned "MetaBunk" specifically.

"Nip it in the bud"! (I said!!!). ;)

The "casual public" are not normally as "focused" on airliner liveries, as those of us in the Industry might be.
 

Trailblazer

Moderator
Staff member
His videos all link to a dubious "money-making" website, too, so I think it's pretty clear he is just trying to generate traffic. I won't be giving him any more hits.
 
I think at this point it's obvious they are trolling for clicks, so I've just been ignoring them.

I've just found this thread.

Actually, I made the mistake of responding to one of his posts on a video on contrails where he says "We are being sprayed".
This resulted in a week of comments back and forth.
I had the same thoughts about him getting money for clicks on that site, but I ASSURE you with 100% certainty that this guy absolutely and totally believes this stuff. There is no question about it if you engage him and explain why "chemtrails" aren't real and get his replies.

He is polite and seems like a nice guy who means well (like I assume Dane Wigington to be), but he is "not calibrated with reality at this time" as I like to say. ;)

I think this was my last time engaging with a believer... of course I've said that before, but I've REALLY learned my lesson this time. :) The desire to help people to not be afraid of fiction ALWAYS turns into a colossal waste of time because the "wall" of confirmation bias. Eventually you start to realize that NOTHING you say or present can change what they want to think.

Unfortunately for him, he really believes this stuff.
He seems like a super nice guy who is living in real fear of ice crystals. :(
I tried to help him. A lot. YMMV
 
Top