Mystery Missile Launch in California

[Ivan Seeking]

The Pentagon says it's trying to figure out whether a missile was launched off the coast of southern California and who might have launched it.

Officials with the navy, air force, Defence Department and North American Aerospace Defence Command say they are looking into a video posted on the website of Southern California television station KFMB.

The video appears to show a rocket or some other object shooting up into the sky and leaving a large contrail over the Pacific Ocean...

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/americas/pentagon-stumped-by-apparent-missile-launch-off-us-coast/article1791785/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CeXNC8k9FKU

 

[Topher925]

OK, who shot off their latest science project?

 

[leroyjenkens]

Where did it land? Did it land?

 

[Ivan Seeking]

At least one national security expert thinks its just an unusually distinct contrail from an aircraft. If it was approaching the camera from the horizon, it would appear to be rising.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Tsu asked a pretty obvious question that I've heard no one address yet: Didn't someone track this thing on RADAR?

Likewise, if it was just an aircraft, it should be possible to correlate the sighting with aircraft RADAR data.

 

[jtbell]

Maybe it was someone blowing off his top in a delayed reaction to last week's election.

 

[cshum00]

lol @Topher925 I laugher at your comment. Nice one.

 

[Lacy33]

CNN reports RADAR was checked.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/11/09/california.contrails/index.html?hpt=C1
We use to watch this launch event at sunset from the front lawn all the time growing up on the west coast. Asuming it was a launch. A launch did not look like this. It would look more spread out.

 

[Upisoft]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysTDh6R9N8E

They say previous launch was for Skynet(1:08). And you still wonder who launched it. Never watched "Terminator"?

:tongue2:

 

[Grep]

I admit when I first heard the "jet contrail" theory, I thought there was no way that could be a contrail. I've got to admit it's becoming by far the most plausible theory, to me. And the other options are way crazier, I think.

It also explains why Air Traffic Control and NORAD didn't see anything out of the ordinary. All they would see at the time would be a perfectly normal airplane.

Rather than go over all the points, here's an article that explains it: http://www.examiner.com/weather-in-los-angeles/missile-launch-over-southern-california-explained

You know, the "funny" thing is that, if it really is a jet contrail, many, many people won't believe it and will assume a conspiracy. I mean, let's face it, it really does look like a missile at first glance. Even that red "glow" that's likely just the sun looked rather like exhaust plasma to me. Mark my words, this one will not die off quickly! LOL

 

[Lacy33]

"camwyatt What's more chilling...? That they don't know what this was (or) that it has taken over 18 hours to tell us they don't know yet. Not feeling my defense shield right now."
4 hours ago
CNN comments
http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/11/09/california.contrails/index.html?hpt=C1
My emotion thingies are not working and I can not get that laughing guy!

 

[Q_Goest]

I've seen at least a dozen launches and that looks like a launch to me. Here's a Titan for example:

You can see the contrail stays together which is typical. Also, it seems to go up very slowly because the camera is so far away. Note the contrail isn't straight up, it bends over about a minute into a launch, which is typical.

If the thing is a missile though, then assuming the picture was taken from near LA and the launch begins where it says it does, it seems to be going north or north west because it's going to the right in the film. Could even be going due west, but if it's going north at all, it may end up over land, which would rule out any kind of government launch. Even some secret government agency wouldn't launch a missile such that it travels over a populated area.

 

[Topher925]

lol @Topher925 I laugher at your comment. Nice one.

That comment was meant to be a joke but I seriously do think this was just someone's science/hobby project. People are getting very smart these days. There are a lot of hobbyists that like to build and fly their own UAVs, high altitude balloons, and yes, even make their own rockets and missiles. I think this was probably just an unapproved AMA test launch by a couple of hobby level rocket scientists.

 

[Astronuc]

I wonder if the helicopter attempted to follow the trail back to the lauch site, or did they just follow it up into the sky, then go on to cover traffic.

 

[Proton Soup]

They say previous launch was for Skynet(1:08). And you still wonder who launched it. Never watched "Terminator"?

:tongue2:

no chance it could be an asian nation showing us what they can do?

 

[Pengwuino]

I wonder if the helicopter attempted to follow the trail back to the lauch site, or did they just follow it up into the sky, then go on to cover traffic.

That should be part of the job description. "If you see a mysterious plume of smoke, go hover above where it originated".

 

[Ivan Seeking]

no chance it could be an asian nation showing us what they can do?

To the best of my knowledge, there are no Asian nations in Southern California.

 

[Proton Soup]

To the best of my knowledge, there are no Asian nations in Southern California.

yeah, but they do have submarines

 

[Lacy33]

To the best of my knowledge, there are no Asian nations in Southern California.

:rofl:

 

[Ivan Seeking]

yeah, but they do have submarines

Ah, good point.

Trivia: Did you know that the Japanese once shelled Santa Barbara?

 

[Lacy33]

Ah, good point.

Trivia: Did you know that the Japanese once shelled Santa Barbara?

DAMN! That's a long way from Pearl Harbor.

 

[Grep]

If you're not yet convinced it could be a jet contrail, check this page out:

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

Perhaps it could really be a missile. But really, after reading that page, what do you think is really most likely?

Quite the convincing optical illusion though! But if I had any money, I'd bet it on the jet contrail theory.

 

[mugaliens]

SUNSET CONTRAIL in California

At least one national security expert thinks its just an unusually distinct contrail from an aircraft.

This is an appeal to authority. A former secretary of defense is primarily in management, not science and technology, even though they may have previously had a background in the latter.

Having flown for the U.S. Air Force for several thousand hours, I've seen contrails exactly like this dozens of times, similar ones hundreds of times. I've seen many contrails, thousands, perhaps tens of thousands of times.

This is a contrail, illuminated after sunset such that it appears reddish orange, caused by a high-altitude jetliner flying towards, and slightly to the right of the camera from over the horizon.

Calling it a "missile" launch is poor journalism at best, and over-sensationalistic at worst.

If you're not yet convinced it could be a jet contrail, check this page out:

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

...

Quite the convincing optical illusion though! But if I had any money, I'd bet it on the jet contrail theory.

As would I. Great link, Grep! The nearly identical picture really brings this issue home. Now if we could just get the media to visit PF once in a while, it might help keep them from flying off the deep end.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

This is an appeal to authority. A former secretary of defense is primarily in management, not science and technology, even though they may have previously had a background in the latter.

I didn't say he was the Secretary of Defense, and it wasn't an appeal to authority [learn your definitions and read what I post before throwing around accusations]. In fact, you have no idea who he was, and I was just repeating the statement made - one that you agree with in the next paragraph.

 

[mugaliens]

I didn't say he was the Secretary of Defense

The only "national security expert" that's I've seen in the news over this was http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysTDh6R9N8E&feature=player_embedded#!".

...it wasn't an appeal to authority...

It most certainly was, particularly if you declined to name the individual.

Which brings up the next obvious question: "Just who is your 'national security expert'?"

Regardless, http://uncinus.wordpress.com/2010/11/09/4/" .

 

[leroyjenkens]

Having flown for the U.S. Air Force for several thousand hours, I've seen contrails exactly like this dozens of times, similar ones hundreds of times. I've seen many contrails, thousands, perhaps tens of thousands of times.

This is a contrail, illuminated after sunset such that it appears reddish orange, caused by a high-altitude jetliner flying towards, and slightly to the right of the camera from over the horizon.

Calling it a "missile" launch is poor journalism at best, and over-sensationalistic at worst.

Why is this one getting so much attention? Shouldn't this be a common sight if it's what you say it is?

 

[NobodySpecial]

DAMN! That's a long way from Pearl Harbor.

It was his first day on the job, and one island looks pretty much like any other, and the pacific ocean is really big.

 

[Janus]

DAMN! That's a long way from Pearl Harbor.

They also shelled Fort Stevens (one of the gun implacements guarding the mouth of the Columbia river), sank two ships off the Oregon coast and dropped incendiary bombs in Southern Oregon (in an attempt to start forest fires).

 

[Ivan Seeking]

They also shelled Fort Stevens (one of the gun implacements guarding the mouth of the Columbia river), sank two ships off the Oregon coast and dropped incendiary bombs in Southern Oregon (in an attempt to start forest fires).

I knew about the incendiary bombs, and I knew a Japanese sub was once sighted in the Columbia, but I had never heard about the ships or Fort Stevens. Wow!

 

[edward]

It could be a contrail, but I have never seen one that wasn't split at its source. What was seen on radar?

 

[Grep]

It could be a contrail, but I have never seen one that wasn't split at its source. What was seen on radar?

No fast moving objects were seen on radar.

Just found this article on BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-11731014 titled "Pentagon says aircraft caused mystery 'missile' trail".

Not that I suspect that will stop conspiracy theories. LOL

 

[lisab]

No fast moving objects were seen on radar.

Just found this article on BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-11731014 titled "Pentagon says aircraft caused mystery 'missile' trail".

Not that I suspect that will stop conspiracy theories. LOL

From Grep's link:

Some physicists said earlier on Tuesday they believed the trail had been left by an aircraft, and that on a clear day vapour can appear to rise vertically as the result of an optical illusion.

...but no source is given for the physicists. Could they be referencing this thread, I wonder ?

 

[Andre]

The light / shadow on the trail suggests indeed that this contrail is at high level all the way, otherwise the bottom part would have been redder and darker in the setting sun.

Also a vertical launched missile will not appear on Air Traffic Control radar. (why?)

 

[BobG]

The light / shadow on the trail suggests indeed that this contrail is at high level all the way, otherwise the bottom part would have been redder and darker in the setting sun.

Also a vertical launched missile will not appear on Air Traffic Control radar. (why?)

I'm not familiar with ATC radar. However, for a radar to track an object over time, there would have to be some way to correlate the blips from one radar return to the next.

Doppler shift (i.e. range rate) would be a logical method. The object's blip in the next frame should roughly match the object's predicted location based on it's location and range rate from the previous frame. Actually, the predicted location would have to be a range of predicted locations since range rate would only yield the radial velocity, not the tangential component. Until the next position is received, the range rate from the first observation can't be completely interpreted.

The range rate from a vertical missile could be a problem for a system looking to correlate returns for objects moving mostly horizontally.

 

[Andre]

That's it indeed. both doppler and logic are used to filter out static clutter and slow moving targets in the horizontal plane (birds, precipitation areas etc).

However given the uncertainties in the system, primary tracking is hardly used, instead one relies mostly on secondary tracking of transponders, the radar sending out a particular interrogation signal and a responder on the aircraft answers, from which direction and range and altitude are derived. Consequently aircraft without working transponders are invisible for this method, so are missiles without transponders.

Reason why military radars will always maintain primary tracking. Also why the excuse- didn't see anything on radar - is moot.