More Strange lights in the Sky! [Short Sunlit Contrails]

Jarmey 657

Member
Here's a comment "notice the face top right mouth wide open.... ufo entry??"

They see faces in the clouds. Oh my.
This has no relevance to my thread?? In fact it's quite insulting to post it. Stick with the facts I have given and not link it with nonsense!
I have already mentioned my aim is to dispel the rubbish, not be linked with it!
 

Jarmey 657

Member
Just been told that the London pic was taken with the objects in the South East. Swindon is South West of London. If the Objects are the same objects seen from both places, then this means the objects seen from Swindon are a minimum of 80 miles away...
 

Oxymoron

Banned
Banned
Just been told that the London pic was taken with the objects in the South East.
So that would be Gatwick flight paths.

Swindon is South West of London. If the Objects are the same objects seen from both places, then this means the objects seen from Swindon are a minimum of 80 miles away...
And yet they appear no more distant than the ones in London but if they were the same objects the ones in London would be virtually overhead and there would be all the Heathrow traffic between Swindon and London.
 

JRBids

Senior Member.
This has no relevance to my thread?? In fact it's quite insulting to post it. Stick with the facts I have given and not link it with nonsense!
I have already mentioned my aim is to dispel the rubbish, not be linked with it!

It was in the link with the video M Borngong posted, and pointed out the comments. I read that one and though it was humorous.

I'll stick to the facts relevant to "YOUR" thread now. They're short contrails. Is there anything else that can be said about them?
 

Jarmey 657

Member
It was in the link with the video M Borngong posted, and pointed out the comments. I read that one and though it was humorous.

I'll stick to the facts relevant to "YOUR" thread now. They're short contrails. Is there anything else that can be said about them?
In your opinion, which unfortunately does not add up. 'They're short contrails' is just a statement, not a fact. If you don't feel anything else needs to be said about them please don't. Thanks.
 

Jarmey 657

Member
So that would be Gatwick flight paths.


And yet they appear no more distant than the ones in London but if they were the same objects the ones in London would be virtually overhead and there would be all the Heathrow traffic between Swindon and London.
Yes, baffling isn't it?
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Exactly! If you crop and enlarge then not only would the object appear larger, then so would the roof of the house. My pics show the roof closer and the objects are further away. I would have to decrease the view of my roof slightly to replicate the original pics, and by doing that, the object would be further away.

If you walked backwards, the roof would get smaller, but the object would say the same size.

Your photos of contrails look smaller, but it's impossible to say because:

A) We don't know the focal length of the cameras used, because we can't see original images with exif data.
B) Your photos were taken in daytime, the triad photos were taken pre-dawn, and that makes bright objects look a lot bigger due to glare.
 

Jarmey 657

Member
What is your hypothesis.
I don't have one, hence the thread on here. I love constructive viewpoints backed up with fact, which in the main we all get from this great site. I do however get a little frustrated when people make glib one liner statements saying it's 'Whatever' with no facts to back it up, apart from agreeing maybe with someone else. I do apologise to you if I have appeared a little hostile in my reply. I am trying to understand something that does not make sense and I have felt a little intimidated and mocked. Short contrails to me, unless it was by pure coincidence that at the same time 80 miles apart, two people photographed two different sets of 3 lights in a similar surrounding neither of which could have been visible by the other. With the pictures and testimonies I have provided surely this is apparent?
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Also, back to getting original images (by which I mean the original files out of the camera) it would be helpful to know the precise time the photos were taken.

They look like three planes flying east into Europe, probably around 100 miles from the viewer. So you would see a similar scene first in Swindon, and then ten minutes later 80 miles away in South London, with a lighter sky.
 

Jarmey 657

Member
If you walked backwards, the roof would get smaller, but the object would say the same size.

Your photos of contrails look smaller, but it's impossible to say because:

A) We don't know the focal length of the cameras used, because we can't see original images with exif data.
B) Your photos were taken in daytime, the triad photos were taken pre-dawn, and that makes bright objects look a lot bigger due to glare.
Understand fully Mick and appreciate your willingness to continue this with me. These are the original images taken by mobile phones uploaded straight to the site with no alteration, cropping or with use of Zoom, apologies as I don't understand what exif data is? If the two sightings were 20 30 miles apart then I would say yes, I think you have hit the nail on the head as It may just be visible! But the evidence I have provided says the distance must have been 80 miles apart minimum, so in my minds eye, it's either 2 or 3 if you consider Bracknell separate short contrail sightings (At he same time, miles apart) or it is something much larger which was visible over a minimum of an 80 mile distance.
 

Jarmey 657

Member
Also, back to getting original images (by which I mean the original files out of the camera) it would be helpful to know the precise time the photos were taken.

They look like three planes flying east into Europe, probably around 100 miles from the viewer. So you would see a similar scene first in Swindon, and then ten minutes later 80 miles away in South London, with a lighter sky.
That does sound plausible, the only timings I have are the verbal statements from the two people. Both claim the sightings were around 06:45, how that ties in with Bracknell I have not checked.
 

Trigger Hippie

Senior Member.
Let me take a crack at this and hopefully not embarrass myself.

If the distance to the horizon is Where h is the height of the object in feet and d is measured in miles.

Then a plane flying at 35000 feet would have a horizon line about 228 miles away. In other words, a plane flying at 35000 feet could conceivably be seen by a person on the ground from up to 228 miles away. Assuming clear atmospheric condition etc. Did I get that right?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Understand fully Mick and appreciate your willingness to continue this with me. These are the original images taken by mobile phones uploaded straight to the site with no alteration, cropping or with use of Zoom, apologies as I don't understand what exif data is? If the two sightings were 20 30 miles apart then I would say yes, I think you have hit the nail on the head as It may just be visible! But the evidence I have provided says the distance must have been 80 miles apart minimum, so in my minds eye, it's either 2 or 3 if you consider Bracknell separate short contrail sightings (At he same time, miles apart) or it is something much larger which was visible over a minimum of an 80 mile distance.

80 miles only needs 10 minutes for three planes going 100mph.

EXIF data is the information stored in a digital photo that says when it was taken, how long the exposure was, and what the zoom settings and focal length were.

When you upload this to Facebook, it creates a 640 wide version that has none of this data, and that's what you uploaded in the OP. The photos you uploaded seem to be originals, and have EXIF data.
 
Last edited:

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Let me take a crack at this and hopefully not embarrass myself.

if the distance to the horizon is Where h is the height of the object and d is measured in miles.

Then a plane flying at 35000 feet would have a horizon line about 228 miles away. In other words, a plane flying at 35000 feet could conceivably be seen by a person on the ground from up to 228 miles away. Assuming clear atmospheric condition etc. Did I get that right?

Why do math, when Wolfram Alpha can do it for you :)
http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=horizon+distance+35000+feet
 
Last edited:

Jarmey 657

Member
Let me take a crack at this and hopefully not embarrass myself.

if the distance to the horizon is Where h is the height of the object and d is measured in miles.

Then a plane flying at 35000 feet would have a horizon line about 228 miles away. In other words, a plane flying at 35000 feet could conceivably be seen from up to 228 miles away. Assuming clear atmospheric condition etc. Did I get that right?
Mick, Guy's I am still a little unsure, but I will again bow to your expertise and accept your explanation. Mick, you are becoming a bit of a legend in my mind. You are an absolute font of knowledge and patient with it! Hopefully my dear friends will give me a bit of a break and I can read other peoples threads, rather than post my own! Maybe I will gain a bit more knowledge myself that way. Apologies again JRBids, frustrations should not have been taken out on you....
 
Last edited by a moderator:

JRBids

Senior Member.
Mick, Guy's I am still a little unsure, but I will again bow to your expertise and accept your explanation. Mick, you are becoming a bit of a legend in my mind. You are an absolute font of knowledge and patient with it! Hopefully my dear friends will give me a bit of a break and I can read other peoples threads, rather than post my own! Maybe I will gain a bit more knowledge myself that way. Apologies again JRBids, frustrations should not have been taken out on you....

No harm, Jarmey. :)
 
Top