| |
Main
Date: 30 Apr 2007 20:03:37
From: Andrew Smallshaw
Subject: Anyone suffering from contrails?
|
I was out this early this morning observing Jupiter - while it does
rise at about midnight it's too low in the sky to make it a late
night target at the moment. As it started to come light I took my
eye away from the EP and just looked at it naked eye.
I noticed the whole general area was littered with three roughly
parallel contrails that snaked right across the sky - they may
well have been responsible for some periods of particularly poor
seeing I had experienced. I looked around the sky and counted at
least 12 contrails of varying size scattered about.
I recall reading an article a while back saying that telescopes
may become useless in future decades because of them [1] but I
didn't believe it at the time. Now I'm starting to wonder. Since
the nearest major airport is 40 miles away I would imagine I'm in
far from the worst place in this regard. What is everyone else's
experience? Could this really turn into a new problem on a similar
scale to light pollution?
[1] http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4755996.stm
--
Andrew Smallshaw
andrews@sdf.lonestar.org
|
|
| |
Date: 04 May 2007 16:39:43
From: Rich
Subject: Re: Anyone suffering from contrails?
|
On Apr 30, 4:03 pm, Andrew Smallshaw <andr...@sdf.lonestar.org > wrote:
> I was out this early this morning observing Jupiter - while it does
> rise at about midnight it's too low in the sky to make it a late
> night target at the moment. As it started to come light I took my
> eye away from the EP and just looked at it naked eye.
>
> I noticed the whole general area was littered with three roughly
> parallel contrails that snaked right across the sky - they may
> well have been responsible for some periods of particularly poor
> seeing I had experienced. I looked around the sky and counted at
> least 12 contrails of varying size scattered about.
>
> I recall reading an article a while back saying that telescopes
> may become useless in future decades because of them [1] but I
> didn't believe it at the time. Now I'm starting to wonder. Since
> the nearest major airport is 40 miles away I would imagine I'm in
> far from the worst place in this regard. What is everyone else's
> experience? Could this really turn into a new problem on a similar
> scale to light pollution?
>
> [1]http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4755996.stm
>
> --
> Andrew Smallshaw
> andr...@sdf.lonestar.org
Apparently, sunshine hitting the Earth was 10% brighter because of the
lack of planes flying after Sept 11 2001.
|
| |
Date: 02 May 2007 09:21:31
From: Ben
Subject: Re: Anyone suffering from Shitetards SPAM entrails?
|
On May 2, 10:58 am, Borked Pseudo Mailed <Use-Author-Supplied-Address-
Header@[127.1] > wrote:
> shitetard <starl...@sidewalkastronomy.info> felched:>Glod ill ive in heh ut and droll dessert my arsehole area where ttre arev eryfe
> >my entrails and almost noon at night
> > they show the putrid decay and worms humid up there too and as boing is up in the
<slimesnip >
Hey Porked Pseudo Male,
These infantile rants of yours belong in scatology.amateur...
|
| | |
Date: 02 May 2007 12:06:21
From: Starlord
Subject: Re: Anyone suffering from Shitetards SPAM entrails?
|
He's even worst than DMJ as he can't even quote back anything I wrote
without totaly missing it up, the two of them should meet and join together.
What a Black Hole that would form!
The Lone Sidewalk Astronomer of Rosamond
Telescope Buyers FAQ
http://home.inreach.com/starlord
Sidewalk Astronomy
www.sidewalkastronomy.info
The Church of Eternity
http://home.inreach.com/starlord/church/Eternity.html
AD World
http://www.adworld.netfirms.com/
"Ben" <bet71743@netzero.com > wrote in message > Hey Porked Pseudo Male,
>
> These infantile rants of yours belong in scatology.amateur...
>
>
|
| | | |
Date: 02 May 2007 18:31:39
From: Mij Adyaw
Subject: Re: Anyone suffering from Shitetards SPAM entrails?
|
I was thinking that it would form some other kind of "hole", however, that
actually could be a "black hole".
"Starlord" <starlord@sidewalkastronomy.info > wrote in message
news:xtadne_-Y6VffKXbnZ2dnUVZ_tWhnZ2d@inreach.com...
> He's even worst than DMJ as he can't even quote back anything I wrote
> without totaly missing it up, the two of them should meet and join
> together. What a Black Hole that would form!
>
>
>
> The Lone Sidewalk Astronomer of Rosamond
> Telescope Buyers FAQ
> http://home.inreach.com/starlord
> Sidewalk Astronomy
> www.sidewalkastronomy.info
> The Church of Eternity
> http://home.inreach.com/starlord/church/Eternity.html
> AD World
> http://www.adworld.netfirms.com/
>
>
> "Ben" <bet71743@netzero.com> wrote in message > Hey Porked Pseudo Male,
>>
>> These infantile rants of yours belong in scatology.amateur...
>>
>>
>
>
|
| |
Date: 02 May 2007 04:44:22
From: Ben
Subject: Re: Anyone suffering from contrails?
|
> A good thing it's classed as desert all the
> way down into mexico.
Yeah, around here I've learned to wait for a high pressure
system to slide across Baja California. When it gets into
Texas the clockwise rotation pumps this great dry air in
from the West. The sky becomes a rich deep blue and
although it may be rowdy upstairs its CLEAR.
Ben
|
| |
Date: 01 May 2007 19:25:08
From: Ben
Subject: Re: Anyone suffering from contrails?
|
On May 1, 9:00 pm, "Matthew D. Mills" <m...@charter.net > wrote:
> I use contrails during the day to help judge how the night might turn out
> for viewing or imaging. Short contrails = good seeing. Long contrail =
> poor seeing.
> Matt Mills
>
> "gubbenimanen" <gubbenima...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
I do the same thing so I guess there's an upside to all. I live
about 35 mi N of Memphis, Tn so I get it from Memphis International
as well as Millington Naval Air Station.
We have a lot of humidity here in the Arkansas Delta and when
it gets high a single engine Cessena can leave a contrail.
Ben
|
| | |
Date: 02 May 2007 03:19:39
From: Starlord
Subject: Re: Anyone suffering from contrails?
|
" > We have a lot of humidity here in the Arkansas Delta and when
> it gets high a single engine Cessena can leave a contrail.
>
> Ben"
If it ever reached that point here it'd be super bad what with Fox Field
about 15 miles away, Plamdale airport about 35 miles and right here in
Rosamond the Rosamond air field, the combo of them on a bad day like yours
would have this area covered in no time and from Palmdale one of the
airlines is starting flights to San Franco up north on friday too and with
Vanderbug AFB to the west which is the west cost launching site and the
birds flying from there we'd get a top dressing down from them and the
cherry on top would be the B-52's from Edwards but their last flight was a
test of a new gas that burns clearner and no contails from them reported
even at top speed of 600+MPH and 45,000ft and I know they can get even
higher up the old c130's can reach that high on a overland flight and they
are prop jobs.
and almost everynight at about 9:30pm I see 3 of them coming in from the
east heading for someplace north. But thankfully we do't get that humidity
before it rains and drys out. A good thing it's classed as desert all the
way down into mexico.
--
"Ben" <bet71743@netzero.com > wrote in message
news:1178072708.647447.3530@y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
|
| |
Date: 01 May 2007 16:31:27
From: gubbenimanen
Subject: Re: Anyone suffering from contrails?
|
Some people swear they didn't see those kind of long contrails before
and introduced the chemtrail theory http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemtrail
. These contrails help against global warming by reflecting the sun
light. Global dimming http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_dimming -
oil industry receipt against global warming?
Roger Persson
|
| | |
Date: 01 May 2007 21:00:49
From: Matthew D. Mills
Subject: Re: Anyone suffering from contrails?
|
I use contrails during the day to help judge how the night might turn out
for viewing or imaging. Short contrails = good seeing. Long contrail =
poor seeing.
Matt Mills
"gubbenimanen" <gubbenimanen@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1178062287.118372.82060@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> Some people swear they didn't see those kind of long contrails before
> and introduced the chemtrail theory http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemtrail
> . These contrails help against global warming by reflecting the sun
> light. Global dimming http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_dimming -
> oil industry receipt against global warming?
>
> Roger Persson
>
|
| | | |
Date: 02 May 2007 13:06:43
From: John Banister
Subject: Re: Anyone suffering from contrails?
|
Would someone tell me what humidity has to do with jet contrails? And how
they are related to atmospheric stability, i.e. seeing? Thanks.
-John
"Matthew D. Mills" <mills@charter.net > wrote in message
news:KhSZh.179$fu.106@newsfe02.lga...
>I use contrails during the day to help judge how the night might turn out
>for viewing or imaging. Short contrails = good seeing. Long contrail =
>poor seeing.
> Matt Mills
>
> "gubbenimanen" <gubbenimanen@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1178062287.118372.82060@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>> Some people swear they didn't see those kind of long contrails before
>> and introduced the chemtrail theory
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemtrail
>> . These contrails help against global warming by reflecting the sun
>> light. Global dimming http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_dimming -
>> oil industry receipt against global warming?
>>
>> Roger Persson
>>
>
>
|
| | | | |
Date: 02 May 2007 19:39:59
From: Chris L Peterson
Subject: Re: Anyone suffering from contrails?
|
On Wed, 2 May 2007 13:06:43 -0500, "John Banister"
<jhbanister@sbcglobal.net > wrote:
>Would someone tell me what humidity has to do with jet contrails?
In the usual sense of the word, nothing. That is, there is no
relationship between surface humidity and contrail formation. It makes
no difference whether you live in the soggy deep south, or a dry desert:
contrails happen in both. However, contrails form at about the same
height as the thin clouds that affect astronomers the most (ignoring big
storm clouds, which are a different matter). When you see jets that are
leaving no contrail, it means the high altitude _relative_ humidity is
low, which means you are unlikely to have clouds forming soon. Also
favorable in terms of transparency are very short contrails that
dissipate rapidly.
>And how
>they are related to atmospheric stability, i.e. seeing? Thanks.
Seeing is usually better when the atmosphere at aircraft height is
stable (little wind). A good way to assess that stability is by contrail
persistence. The longer that contrails stay intact, the more stable the
air, so this is an indicator of likely good seeing. Of course, the
persistent contrails also mean that thin clouds will easily form, most
likely with the cooling of air after sunset. Your good seeing may well
be joined by poor transparency, which we all know is often the case.
An indicator of good all-around conditions is short contrails that take
a minute or so to dissipate, and that dissipation is by evaporation, not
dispersal. You see a razor sharp contrail that just continuously
disappears at its tail end. That indicates both a low RH and still air.
BTW, you need to be seeing this against a nice blue sky. If there's
already haze, it means there are water droplets at a different height
than the planes are at, so the contrails aren't really telling you much
about transparency.
_________________________________________________
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com
|
| | | | |
Date: 02 May 2007 14:40:14
From: Chris McMahan
Subject: Re: Anyone suffering from contrails?
|
Certainly!
The short version would be to think of contrails as clouds that have
formed around the particulates in the jet exhaust. Thus the conditions
for contrails to exist are the same conditions that favor cloud
formation at that altitude. These conditions include rleative
humidity, dewpoint and temperature.
Contrails are clouds...
- Chris
"John Banister" <jhbanister@sbcglobal.net > writes:
> Would someone tell me what humidity has to do with jet contrails? And how
> they are related to atmospheric stability, i.e. seeing? Thanks.
>
> -John
>
> "Matthew D. Mills" <mills@charter.net> wrote in message
> news:KhSZh.179$fu.106@newsfe02.lga...
>>I use contrails during the day to help judge how the night might turn out
>>for viewing or imaging. Short contrails = good seeing. Long contrail =
>>poor seeing.
>> Matt Mills
>>
>> "gubbenimanen" <gubbenimanen@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:1178062287.118372.82060@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>>> Some people swear they didn't see those kind of long contrails before
>>> and introduced the chemtrail theory
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemtrail
>>> . These contrails help against global warming by reflecting the sun
>>> light. Global dimming http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_dimming -
>>> oil industry receipt against global warming?
>>>
>>> Roger Persson
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
--
(. .)
=ooO=(_)=Ooo=====================================
Chris McMahan
|
| | | | | |
Date: 02 May 2007 20:52:23
From: John Banister
Subject: Re: Anyone suffering from contrails?
|
Chris, I have noticed that the astronomy community seems to think that high
altitude contrails (i.e. the type put out by airliners) are condensed water
vapor from the atmosphere when they are actually ice from the engine
exhaust. (In this sense they are similar to high altitude clouds, which are
ice also) They are completely different than
lower altitude clouds, which are made up of condensed water vapor and form
(simplistically) when the dew point and temperature meet.
Realizing that ground observed contrails occur in clear air, i.e. no clouds,
it cannot be a matter of the dewpoint and temperature meeting and producing
100% relative humidity. If this had happened it would already be cloudy
before the jet flew by!
What happens is that the exhaust from a jet (and a piston aircraft if it can
get high enough) contains particulates and water vapor. At the proper
altitude this water vapor freezes (aided by the particulates and whatever
uncondensed water vapor is
in the surrounding air) and forms a contrail. As with high altitude clouds,
this frozen vapor sinks very slowly and remains visible until it evaporates
due to sublimation or melts and evaporates.
Which means that local humidity has very little to do with high altitude
contrails. High altitude air is relatively dry anyway. The primary factor
is temperature. If the air at altitude is the correct temperature (with
some minor variation for high altitude humidity), contrails can be expected.
Shorter contrails are normally the result of the plane flying near the lower
limit of the temperature band and quickly they drop into warmer air and
melt.
As near as I can tell, there is no relation between contrails forming and
seeing, although I would like to hear of it if there is. Transparency may
be another thing, but contrails do form in very clear air and form over
deserts, oceans, polar regions, and jungles. They also form inside high
altitude clouds and are quite visible when flying formation.
-John
"Chris McMahan" <first_initiallastname@one.dot.net > wrote in message
news:ur6pz3w8h.fsf@one.dot.net...
> Certainly!
>
> The short version would be to think of contrails as clouds that have
> formed around the particulates in the jet exhaust. Thus the conditions
> for contrails to exist are the same conditions that favor cloud
> formation at that altitude. These conditions include rleative
> humidity, dewpoint and temperature.
>
> Contrails are clouds...
>
> - Chris
>
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 02 May 2007 21:39:04
From: Chris L Peterson
Subject: Re: Anyone suffering from contrails?
|
On Wed, 02 May 2007 20:52:23 GMT, "John Banister"
<jhbanister@sbcglobal.net > wrote:
>Which means that local humidity has very little to do with high altitude
>contrails. High altitude air is relatively dry anyway. The primary factor
>is temperature. If the air at altitude is the correct temperature (with
>some minor variation for high altitude humidity), contrails can be expected.
>Shorter contrails are normally the result of the plane flying near the lower
>limit of the temperature band and quickly they drop into warmer air and
>melt.
I disagree. What is important is the high altitude relative humidity,
which is of course influenced by temperature. The
evaporation/sublimation of the contrails is rapid when the RH is low,
and isn't much affected by the absolute temperature or the absolute
water vapor content. I think the case you describe, where highly
persistent trails slowly sink into different conditions doesn't describe
the majority of cases.
I receive the twice daily NOAA radiosonde reports from Grand Junction
and Denver, and between the two can frequently get a pretty good
estimate for my central Colorado location. It is when the high altitude
dew point is near the temperature that contrails are persistent.
>As near as I can tell, there is no relation between contrails forming and
>seeing, although I would like to hear of it if there is.
I agree there's no relation between seeing and contrails _forming_. But
there's a strong correlation between seeing and contrail stability.
Contrails that persist in place with little distortion over many minutes
portend good seeing (although the long persistence also predicts poor
transparency).
_________________________________________________
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 04 May 2007 10:52:31
From: John Banister
Subject: Re: Anyone suffering from contrails?
|
"Chris L Peterson" <clp@alumni.caltech.edu > wrote in message
news:380i33lvg0mbo84t9igh79hnahl983d3rp@4ax.com...
> I disagree. What is important is the high altitude relative humidity,
> which is of course influenced by temperature. The
> evaporation/sublimation of the contrails is rapid when the RH is low,
> and isn't much affected by the absolute temperature or the absolute
> water vapor content. I think the case you describe, where highly
> persistent trails slowly sink into different conditions doesn't describe
> the majority of cases.
>
> I receive the twice daily NOAA radiosonde reports from Grand Junction
> and Denver, and between the two can frequently get a pretty good
> estimate for my central Colorado location. It is when the high altitude
> dew point is near the temperature that contrails are persistent.
Chris, I wasn't only talking about very persistent contrails. It is not too
uncommon to see two jets conning, one with a fairly long contrail, say 20
miles, and the other with a much shorter one, say 5 miles. It is a very
good bet that the shorter one will be lower (and in warmer air), or more
accurately, lower in
relation to the con level.
This is commonly seen in large multi-ship jet aircraft formations where tens
of aircraft are stacked up at 500' or 1000' intervals. Lower aircraft will
not be conning, medium aircaft will, and (sometimes) the higher ones will
not. It is not too uncommon for the lower aircraft to have much shorter
contrails than those above them.
(There is an indepth discussion of multiple persistent contrails (60 miles
or greater)
at
http://ams.allenpress.com/perlserv/?request=get-document&issn=1520-0450&volume=036&issue=09&page=1211#S2 .
This discussion indicates that the best predictor of such contrails is total
total volume of water, not relative humidity. They feel that this is an
even better predictor of long contrails than temperature, which is the other
predictive variable, but they are trying to predict "contrail outbreaks"
rather than single contrails.
This is is at variance with the models used for many decades to predict
single
contrail formation, which look at temperature. These models were
experientally derived and were not particularly worried about contrail
length, which may be the reason or the difference. To the military, a 1
mile contrail is just about as bad as a 200 mile one. Both need to be
avoided in combat conditions.)
As I write this the 34000' temperature over Grand Junction is -51 deg. C.
What is the relative humidity (or dew point) at that altitude and how is it
measured? The reason I ask is that relative humidity at high altitude is
difficult to measure. Does the NOAA send up a balloon daily at both Grand
Junction and Denver?
-John
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 04 May 2007 16:48:16
From: Chris L Peterson
Subject: Re: Anyone suffering from contrails?
|
On Fri, 4 May 2007 10:52:31 -0500, "John Banister"
<jhbanister@sbcglobal.net > wrote:
>Chris, I wasn't only talking about very persistent contrails. It is not too
>uncommon to see two jets conning, one with a fairly long contrail, say 20
>miles, and the other with a much shorter one, say 5 miles. It is a very
>good bet that the shorter one will be lower (and in warmer air), or more
>accurately, lower in
>relation to the con level.
Yes, I often see this. My point was that it isn't temperature as such
that is the determinant, but RH. Actually, I look at dew point as the
primary measure, and calculate the RH from that and temperature.
>(There is an indepth discussion of multiple persistent contrails (60 miles
>or greater)
>at
>http://ams.allenpress.com/perlserv/?request=get-document&issn=1520-0450&volume=036&issue=09&page=1211#S2 .
>This discussion indicates that the best predictor of such contrails is total
>total volume of water, not relative humidity. They feel that this is an
>even better predictor of long contrails than temperature, which is the other
>predictive variable, but they are trying to predict "contrail outbreaks"
>rather than single contrails.
Interesting, but contrary to my observations. I can actually measure the
water vapor content (I have an 8-13um IR camera for cloud and vapor
monitoring) and I don't see much correlation between contrail
persistence and total water content. What I see is simple, and makes
good sense: if the dew point at some altitude is near the temperature at
that altitude, contrails are persistent.
>As I write this the 34000' temperature over Grand Junction is -51 deg. C.
>What is the relative humidity (or dew point) at that altitude and how is it
>measured? The reason I ask is that relative humidity at high altitude is
>difficult to measure. Does the NOAA send up a balloon daily at both Grand
>Junction and Denver?
I'm not familiar with the radiosonde instrumentation details. NOAA
launches balloons twice daily from both Grand Junction and Denver (at ~
0 and 12 UT). These are the only two regular monitoring stations in
Colorado. I also use the data from the Albuquerque balloon. The last
data from Grand Junction (12 UT, about 4 hours ago) gives the 35000'
temperature as -46.5, and the dew point as -51.5, which I would consider
a good indicator of persistent contrails.
_________________________________________________
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 02 May 2007 17:25:09
From: Chris McMahan
Subject: Re: Anyone suffering from contrails?
|
Thanks! An excellent clarification!
- Chris
"John Banister" <jhbanister@sbcglobal.net > writes:
> Chris, I have noticed that the astronomy community seems to think that high
> altitude contrails (i.e. the type put out by airliners) are condensed water
> vapor from the atmosphere when they are actually ice from the engine
> exhaust. (In this sense they are similar to high altitude clouds, which are
> ice also) They are completely different than
> lower altitude clouds, which are made up of condensed water vapor and form
> (simplistically) when the dew point and temperature meet.
>
> Realizing that ground observed contrails occur in clear air, i.e. no clouds,
> it cannot be a matter of the dewpoint and temperature meeting and producing
> 100% relative humidity. If this had happened it would already be cloudy
> before the jet flew by!
>
> What happens is that the exhaust from a jet (and a piston aircraft if it can
> get high enough) contains particulates and water vapor. At the proper
> altitude this water vapor freezes (aided by the particulates and whatever
> uncondensed water vapor is
> in the surrounding air) and forms a contrail. As with high altitude clouds,
> this frozen vapor sinks very slowly and remains visible until it evaporates
> due to sublimation or melts and evaporates.
>
> Which means that local humidity has very little to do with high altitude
> contrails. High altitude air is relatively dry anyway. The primary factor
> is temperature. If the air at altitude is the correct temperature (with
> some minor variation for high altitude humidity), contrails can be expected.
> Shorter contrails are normally the result of the plane flying near the lower
> limit of the temperature band and quickly they drop into warmer air and
> melt.
>
> As near as I can tell, there is no relation between contrails forming and
> seeing, although I would like to hear of it if there is. Transparency may
> be another thing, but contrails do form in very clear air and form over
> deserts, oceans, polar regions, and jungles. They also form inside high
> altitude clouds and are quite visible when flying formation.
>
> -John
>
> "Chris McMahan" <first_initiallastname@one.dot.net> wrote in message
> news:ur6pz3w8h.fsf@one.dot.net...
>> Certainly!
>>
>> The short version would be to think of contrails as clouds that have
>> formed around the particulates in the jet exhaust. Thus the conditions
>> for contrails to exist are the same conditions that favor cloud
>> formation at that altitude. These conditions include rleative
>> humidity, dewpoint and temperature.
>>
>> Contrails are clouds...
>>
>> - Chris
>>
>
>
--
(. .)
=ooO=(_)=Ooo=====================================
Chris McMahan
|
| |
Date: 01 May 2007 15:44:04
From: canopus56
Subject: Re: Anyone suffering from contrails?
|
On Apr 30, 2:03 pm, Andrew Smallshaw <andr...@sdf.lonestar.org > wrote:
<snip >
> I recall reading an article a while back saying that telescopes
> may become useless in future decades because of them
> [contrails from airplanes] but I
> didn't believe it at the time. Now I'm starting to wonder. . . .
> What is everyone else's experience?
Here's a couple of links that may be of interest.
APOD 10/13/2004 - Southeast U.S. contrails image
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap041013.html
NASA Contrail Project with sat images
http://asd-www.larc.nasa.gov/GLOBE/imagery.html
The worst contrail satellite image I ever saw (I lost the link) was of
the Pacific Northwest and Seattle area. The west half of Washington
state was completely covered by tracks.
In the Intermountain West, I usually work around individual contrails,
and just pick other targets till they pass. I have seen a few days a
year where there are so many that they then disperse and create a high-
altitude haze that increases extinction.
Canopus56
|
| | |
Date: 01 May 2007 17:42:40
From: Starlord
Subject: Re: Anyone suffering from contrails?
|
Glad I live in the HOT and DRY desert area where there are very few
contrails and almost none at night.
they show the humid southeast too. And as boing is up in the northwest and
it gets about as humid as they do I could understand that too.
"canopus56" <canopus56@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1178059444.886595.268840@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> On Apr 30, 2:03 pm, Andrew Smallshaw <andr...@sdf.lonestar.org> wrote:
> <snip>
>> I recall reading an article a while back saying that telescopes
>> may become useless in future decades because of them
>> [contrails from airplanes] but I
>> didn't believe it at the time. Now I'm starting to wonder. . . .
>> What is everyone else's experience?
>
> Here's a couple of links that may be of interest.
>
> APOD 10/13/2004 - Southeast U.S. contrails image
> http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap041013.html
>
> NASA Contrail Project with sat images
> http://asd-www.larc.nasa.gov/GLOBE/imagery.html
>
> The worst contrail satellite image I ever saw (I lost the link) was of
> the Pacific Northwest and Seattle area. The west half of Washington
> state was completely covered by tracks.
>
> In the Intermountain West, I usually work around individual contrails,
> and just pick other targets till they pass. I have seen a few days a
> year where there are so many that they then disperse and create a high-
> altitude haze that increases extinction.
>
> Canopus56
>
>
|
| | | |
Date: 02 May 2007 09:58:31
From: Borked Pseudo Mailed
Subject: Re: Anyone suffering from Shitetards SPAM entrails?
|
shitetard <starlord@sidewalkastronomy.info > felched:
>Glod ill ive in heh ut and droll dessert my arsehole area where ttre arev eryfe
>my entrails and almost noon at night
> they show the putrid decay and worms humid up there too and as boing is up in the
>entrails and it gurts about as my liquefying entrails spam as they do
> i could spam that too if i still had my decomposing entrails attached to my
>gaping sphincter roids inflamed roids with festering pustules on my puffy
> roids my arsehole is bleeding pongy shite and blood mixed together it itches
>and hurts my arsehole hurts please no star party this weekend
> fawk my arsehole cant take it
>
shitetard what happened to your gobshite spam siggy lines i need to rent a useless
space on your cripple donations spam board and peddle my friends chubby telescope
so it is hot and dry at the antelope valley trailer park today please keep us posted
shitetard we need to know if you see any more rattlesnakes crossing the fawking
rosamondo motorway while youre hobbling along up to the local off license too bad you
wrecked your hand me down rubbish van whats that make two wrecks in two months the
fawking 20th street telephone polls are creaking sighs of relief in the desert breeze as
shitetards little radio flyer wagon goes squeaking by lager in tow
squeak squeak squeak squeak
but what happened to shitetards siggy spam lines they have disappeared for some reason
you dont suppose all the fawking spam complaints finally got the better of shitetard
|
| |
Date: 01 May 2007 20:07:48
From: Davoud
Subject: Re: Anyone suffering from contrails?
|
Andrew Smallshaw wrote:
I live near Baltimore-Washington International (BWI) Airport, but
that's not my problem. The problem is military jets -- combat air
patrols -- guarding Mid-Atlantic region, especially Washington DC, I
suppose, against another 9/11 event. The problem frequently occurs very
late in the afternoon and it seems that the air is very calm at the
altitude at which they are flying. The contrails dissipate ever so
slowly and by the time darkness comes and I am ready to observe they
have dissolved into a think haze before what might have been a very
good sky.
Davoud
--
usenet *at* davidillig dawt com
|
| | |
Date: 01 May 2007 21:33:30
From: Andrew Smallshaw
Subject: Re: Anyone suffering from contrails?
|
On 2007-05-01, Davoud <star@sky.net > wrote:
> Andrew Smallshaw wrote:
>
> I live near Baltimore-Washington International (BWI) Airport, but
> that's not my problem. The problem is military jets -- combat air
> patrols -- guarding Mid-Atlantic region, especially Washington DC, I
> suppose, against another 9/11 event. The problem frequently occurs very
> late in the afternoon and it seems that the air is very calm at the
> altitude at which they are flying. The contrails dissipate ever so
> slowly and by the time darkness comes and I am ready to observe they
> have dissolved into a think haze before what might have been a very
> good sky.
Oddly enough the military jets don't cause a problem for me.
There's plenty of them about (it only occurred to me after I posted
that my home town is one of Britain's principal centres for military
aircraft production) but they rarely stream contrails - I think
that may be due to the fact that they're never at any significant
altitude. It's the civilian airliners that cause the problem.
--
Andrew Smallshaw
andrews@sdf.lonestar.org
|
| | | |
Date: 01 May 2007 17:34:13
From: Starlord
Subject: Re: Anyone suffering from contrails?
|
In the USA the boing company is in a nothwesten state, and the one don south
of me is closing shop and all test fights are done on either a special test
flight (next to or closby ) runway or if a mil craft it's all done on
Edwards like I've already seen the new jet that will replace the F117. It is
trucked to or flown to Edwards Air Force Base whihc is where they test all
kinds of crafs for a lot of them it's there first full flight too.
The airforce has always had a strong air-contrail for any flights but
demo's and props too.
So I would figure the BAF(?) would use the the same fuels.
--
"Andrew Smallshaw" <andrews@sdf.lonestar.org > wrote in message
news:slrnf3fch6.t4q.andrews@sdf.lonestar.org...
>
> Oddly enough the military jets don't cause a problem for me.
> There's plenty of them about (it only occurred to me after I posted
> that my home town is one of Britain's principal centres for military
> aircraft production) but they rarely stream contrails - I think
> that may be due to the fact that they're never at any significant
> altitude. It's the civilian airliners that cause the problem.
>
> --
> Andrew Smallshaw
> andrews@sdf.lonestar.org
|
| |
Date: 01 May 2007 11:49:11
From: Starlord
Subject: Re: Anyone suffering from contrails?
|
Well I live north of L.A.Calif.USA and the only time I see any night time
contrails it during a full moon and as Edwards AFB is busy in daytime I see
all kinds of trails and odd looking crafts from there, but not at night. and
Edwards is only 15 miles from me (the board is only 1 mile the flightline is
15 miles).
--
The Lone Sidewalk Astronomer of Rosamond
Telescope Buyers FAQ
http://home.inreach.com/starlord
Sidewalk Astronomy
www.sidewalkastronomy.info
The Church of Eternity
http://home.inreach.com/starlord/church/Eternity.html
AD World
http://www.adworld.netfirms.com/
"Andrew Smallshaw" <andrews@sdf.lonestar.org > wrote in message
news:slrnf3cism.km2.andrews@sdf.lonestar.org...
>I was out this early this morning observing Jupiter - while it does
> rise at about midnight it's too low in the sky to make it a late
> night target at the moment. As it started to come light I took my
> eye away from the EP and just looked at it naked eye.
>
> I noticed the whole general area was littered with three roughly
> parallel contrails that snaked right across the sky - they may
> well have been responsible for some periods of particularly poor
> seeing I had experienced. I looked around the sky and counted at
> least 12 contrails of varying size scattered about.
>
> I recall reading an article a while back saying that telescopes
> may become useless in future decades because of them [1] but I
> didn't believe it at the time. Now I'm starting to wonder. Since
> the nearest major airport is 40 miles away I would imagine I'm in
> far from the worst place in this regard. What is everyone else's
> experience? Could this really turn into a new problem on a similar
> scale to light pollution?
>
> [1] http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4755996.stm
>
> --
> Andrew Smallshaw
> andrews@sdf.lonestar.org
|
| |
Date: 01 May 2007 12:25:33
From: Shawn
Subject: Re: Anyone suffering from contrails?
|
Andrew Smallshaw wrote:
> I was out this early this morning observing Jupiter - while it does
> rise at about midnight it's too low in the sky to make it a late
> night target at the moment. As it started to come light I took my
> eye away from the EP and just looked at it naked eye.
>
> I noticed the whole general area was littered with three roughly
> parallel contrails that snaked right across the sky - they may
> well have been responsible for some periods of particularly poor
> seeing I had experienced. I looked around the sky and counted at
> least 12 contrails of varying size scattered about.
>
> I recall reading an article a while back saying that telescopes
> may become useless in future decades because of them [1] but I
> didn't believe it at the time. Now I'm starting to wonder. Since
> the nearest major airport is 40 miles away I would imagine I'm in
> far from the worst place in this regard. What is everyone else's
> experience? Could this really turn into a new problem on a similar
> scale to light pollution?
I've read those projections as well. Given the rise in fuel costs
(mostly due to increased Chinese and Indian demand), I find it difficult
to believe air travel will remain as popular in North America and Europe
over the next decade or so.
Shawn
|
| |
Date: 01 May 2007 17:19:28
From: Chris L Peterson
Subject: Re: Anyone suffering from contrails?
|
On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 20:03:37 +0000 (UTC), Andrew Smallshaw
<andrews@sdf.lonestar.org > wrote:
>I recall reading an article a while back saying that telescopes
>may become useless in future decades because of them [1] but I
>didn't believe it at the time. Now I'm starting to wonder. Since
>the nearest major airport is 40 miles away I would imagine I'm in
>far from the worst place in this regard. What is everyone else's
>experience? Could this really turn into a new problem on a similar
>scale to light pollution?
I've lost images due to contrails, mostly because a passing contrail
resulted in loss of the guide star. Several times each year I see
conditions that cause long lasting contrails to develop into a kind of
high, thin overcast that really damages transparency. I'm not located in
a high traffic area.
Hard to know how to compare this with light pollution, but it's a
potential problem for sure. The more sophisticated climate models are
including the effects of contrails as well.
_________________________________________________
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com
|
| | |
Date: 01 May 2007 20:25:25
From: Anthony Ayiomamitis
Subject: Re: Anyone suffering from contrails?
|
Chris L Peterson wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 20:03:37 +0000 (UTC), Andrew Smallshaw
> <andrews@sdf.lonestar.org> wrote:
>
> I've lost images due to contrails, mostly because a passing contrail
> resulted in loss of the guide star.
Me too Chris.
> Several times each year I see
> conditions that cause long lasting contrails to develop into a kind of
> high, thin overcast that really damages transparency. I'm not located in
> a high traffic area.
There is an interesting article on this particular issue in the latest
issue of Astronomy Now (Britain). It apparently impacts both the Hubble
and ISS as well.
Anthony.
|
|
