Oh, that's just great!- Updated and bumped

Update III: Yeah, I’m gonna go ahead and say it’s a contrail, which, because of an optical illusion, looks like a missile launch. It just doesn’t look right for a rocket plume, and second, how is it only the CBS chopper saw this right off the coast of Los Angeles. I’m thinking if it were a missile, people all over the place would have seen it. Think of how many people can see it when the Shuttle goes up. There’s no way this could have been a rocket launch without half the LA basin seeing it and going nuts.

Someone launches a mighty big missile right off the coast of Los Angeles, and no one seems to know who’s rocket it was!

I can’t get the video to embed, but you can see it here.  What say you? Put me some knowledge. Also, any aviators want to look up NOTAMs in the area? I know that’s near PMTR, but I’ve never really looked it up.

via Gabriel Malor on twitter, bu damned if I can figure out how to link him. Sorry buddy.

Update: Rocket Scientist McKittrick puts us some knowledge.

Update II: Contrail? I dunno. Maybe. I went back and watched the tape again. It could be a single engine plane moving from South to North.  There’s something about it that doesn’t look right to be a rocket plume, mainly that it isn’t moving fast enough, and doesn’t appear to be accelerating.  It should be easy to review the radar tapes vs. the timestamp on the video and see if there was traffic there.

21 thoughts on “Oh, that's just great!- Updated and bumped”

  1. SkyNET???

    Geez, don’t we have lasers n’ Anti-missle-missles for this kind of crap???

    Oh, its OUR crap…. never mind…

  2. Well, the missile was heading west. And it looks to me like it came from around San Nicholas Island, where the Navy does some stuff.

    We’ll see.

  3. There was a NOTAM in the air, but it’s for TODAY, not yesterday. Blocks off surface to FL390, IIRC.

    Apparently there was a report – for a very, very brief half-second – on Fox News that one of our units had a visit from a gentleman known as Mr. Cock-Up. I’m told that it vanished almost instantly, and I did not see it.

    So, who the hell knows?

  4. Only problem with it being a contrail is that the Pentagon’s spokesman appears to have said that it appeared to come from the water, about 35 miles offshore. He also backed off NORTHCOM’s statement that there was no National Security issue.

    I can’t find any text or video of the Pentagon’s statement, though. That’s annoying me greatly right now.

  5. Whether rocket or aircraft, wouldn’t it have have been visible on LAX’s, or any military radar in the region? Which could then be analyzed out the ying-yang for course, etc? I can’t believe any flying object that close to the coast would not have been recorded for ‘posterity’.

  6. “What the hell does a Pentagon spokesman know? He’s just talking out his ass.”

    Brad, that’s a very interesting observation. I’m not sure I fully understand, but let’s try. A Pentagon spokesman only says what the D.O.D./Military tell them to say, in essence an echo. Therefore, the question arises, are you saying the D.O.D./Military are just talking out their ass? Brad, By the way, if you say yes, I agree with you.

  7. I’m saying that the spokesman probably went a little off script. Dunno. But yeah, it’s not like the spokesman has any real info to work off of, so he’s blowing smoke.

  8. I don’t think it’s a missile launch. The craft is moving too slowly to be a missile. I can’t tell the direction the craft is moving from the pics or clip, but it’s too slow to be a missile.

  9. Optical illusion. We have the DSP stats that do nothing but LOOK for missile launches. They would have gone crazy if a missile was launched off our coast. Either NORAD was asleep at the switch or communication needs work.

  10. I think you’re all off target. Clearly this is SPECTRE and they were demonstrating their new flying sub to the UK and demanding one billion pounds sterling. Never fear though, James Bond will sort them out in the nick of time.

  11. Contrails? Honestly, I don’t know. We have many “experts” shooting off their mouth about that which they actually know little. There is an old proverb describe these “experts” as fools. Joke about it, fine. Nothing taken too seriously. My “half-fast” question would be this. Are we starting a “Maritime Version of Kelly Johnson’s Skunkworks”? Vets, enjoy your day!

  12. @Quartermaster, “Too slow…” I would suggest that you take a look at the pattern of this “contrail”. Would this not be consistent with a submarine launched missile? The first step, the missile is launched underwater, the only objective is to leave the sub and get out of the water. But as the second stage of the operation begins, the missile starts a new function, “Target Acquisition”. As it goes through this process, there appears to be some commonalities in the flight behaviors. Just a thought.

  13. Grumpy, the problem with a clip is it’s two dimensional and it is hard to sense direction when you impose 3D motion onto a flat plate. All you have to go on is what looks to be the speed of the craft, whatever it is. It does not appear to be a missile launch, just a contrail from something high with relatively slow speed with a contrail following in stable air. Unless NORAD or someone esle fesses up to something else, that’s my story and I’m stickin’ to it.

  14. FedGov has finally come right out and said it’s an aircraft. Jerry Pournelle has posted a bit on the matter and had the final word (for his site) on the matter. It was an aircraft. Only people with a certain vantage point said it was a missile launch. Others saw a contrail with an aircraft. No one, for example, from Catalina Island saw a missile launch, just an AC.

Comments are closed.