Slashdot Mirror
Airplanes Cause Accidental Cloud Seeding
An anonymous reader writes "A new study by a team of U.S. researchers found that commercial and private jetliners may be contributing to a form of accidental cloud seeding. When an airplane flies through a cloud, its propellers cause the expansion and cooling of the air behind them which can cause water droplets to spontaneously cool and crystals to form. The aircraft sets off a chain reaction in the cloud that can continue on for hours after the plane has passed by. The researchers also discovered that this phenomenon is more common near the poles, where many of Earth's weather monitoring systems are, and it could be skewing data that research teams are gathering in those areas."
Meteorologists have known about this for some time. They tend to form what is known as "Hole Punch" clouds.
Examples: http://bit.ly/lAxNQO
If our elected representatives no longer represent us, do we still live in a Democracy?
I mean seriously, this has been known for decades. There was even a study that looked at the 9-11 shutdown of air-traffic affected climate.
This has been known for a long time.
They're those things that spin around on a motor. They're quite useful, because they behave differently than jet engines in certain conditions.
Please quit wasting our tax money, seriously the people who did this study should have their funding removed as all they have done is have a "no shit mr 1934" moment over technology that is darn near extinct
Jetliners do not have propellers. ;)
This message was scanned by European governments and contains no terrorism.
Before the 2010 airplane crash that killed Polish president several top generals and tens of top politician, a mystery fog appeared. Could the fog be intentionally formed the Russian airplane that was flying around that place earlier?
Did you miss that first sentence of the summary where it clearly said " private and commercial"?
Contrails are real. Jet exhaust contains chemicals. Those chemicals are pollutants. They can cause respiratory problems and maybe birth defects. But they can't cause mind control, other than the ability to twist some people into a knot when their brain power meets their ignorance in a paranoid delusion and motivates them to make fools of themselves and enemies of everyone sane.
"commercial and private jetliners" "When an airplane flies through a cloud, its propellers"
The number of jetliners with "propellers" is mighty fucking few, though not zero.
Linking to the PARENT Science Daily piece
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/06/110630142835.htm
instead of the pointless Inhabitat bullshit summary would have been nice. There is NO excuse for the Inhabitat link other than SPAM.
AC is anonymous because he/she/it wants page hits for Inhabitat.
Now I know not to visit Inhabitat again. Fuck you too and thanks for nothing.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/06/110630142835.htm
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
weather its real or not.... its not only real but mentioned in weather modification and other paperwork from the US government.
I agree that whether modification its real weather people agree with it or not.
Ever heard of a Turboprop engine? They're extremely common.
I saw some yesterday, Dash-8s and there a lot of other propeller commercial aircraft out there.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombardier_Dash_8 - turboprop
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beech_1900 - turboprop
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cessna_406 - turboprop
We even have one of these flying out of Anchorage
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_L-100_Hercules along with
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DC-3
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DC-6
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Short_360
In commercial aircraft? Even private airliners use jet turbines...
Or it was just a fog.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fog#Characteristics
Fog forms when the difference between temperature and dew point is generally less than 2.5 C or 4 F
"Fog can form suddenly, and can dissipate just as rapidly, depending what side of the dew point the temperature is on. This phenomenon is known as flash fog."
I remember reading this at a popular news site over a year ago. Where could it have been? Oh, wait, here it is! http://science.slashdot.org/story/10/06/15/2020240/Airplanes-Unexpectedly-Modify-Weather
Conversely, there are fundemental limitations of what this muddy dirtball can handle, and limits to what technology can accomplish.
The ideal course is to understand both, and proceed accordingly.
To do otherwise is to invite disaster.
Chemtrails = bullshit. Abject, horrific bullshit, spread by idiots who don't have a fucking clue about meteorology, basic physics, and more importantly that a few documents mentioning cloud seeding do not instantly mean that even one single witnessed contrail is anything other than a contrail. Critical thinking - it works, bitches.
Yes - in *plenty*. It amazes me that people don't know that. There are a shit-tonne of turboprop aircraft the world over, including the US.
Not on my first/last/only flight 5 years ago.
Twin prop engine, only 4 seats wide, out of a small town airport on behalf of Delta. Not everything is a jumbojet out of LAX/Seatac/ect...
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it!
.. but when was the last time you saw a commercial plane with them?
Actually, just before the sun set - a DeHavilland/Bombardier Dash-8 of US Airways Express.
If you believe in privacy, and believe you have "nothing to hide" at the same time, you're a goddammed idiot
last time you saw a commercial plane with them?
Must have been a few days ago, I don't usually bother to look at every plane that goes by, but if I want I'll see a commercial propeller plane go by within the hour, I just have to go out and point my nose up.
You can't take the sky from me...
Constantly. US Air especially uses props for short-hop flights.
I do believe you did not look at the photos, so from another website, here is some text for you to read.
As a note, because of what ever technical reason stooped you looking a the lint, these clouds can and do look at times look like massive eyes or holes in the clouds, nothing at all like contrails, and in some cases can look like a massive gouge taken out of the clouds, kinda like a revers contrail.
http://www.weatherthings.com/HolePunch.html
"A “Hole Punch” cloud is a non-technical name given to a cloud formed from an aircraft dissipation hole or trail. They are also called "Punch Hole" clouds. Rather than extending as a line, Hole Punch clouds appear as a circular or oval hole in a deck or thin layer of supercooled water clouds. They are not uncommon where jet flight paths intersect altocumulus layers. What is uncommon is when they form in a perfect circle that persists for a length of time to be widely observed."
You have 5 Moderator Points!
Which Helpless Linux zealot/MS basher do you want to mod down today?
this entire thing stinks of stupid
You stink of stupid.
Domestic airports in relatively-major cities (relative to their surrounding area... think Bakersfield, Billings, etc) don't usually have big enough runways to support large jets, so they use regional jets and turboprops. The big airlines usually don't run their own small planes. Rather, they use a different banner (United Express, Ted, Delta Connections, etc) for their regional services and usually contract that out to smaller airlines. I used to fly from California to South Dakota for a hunting trip every year, and usually United would put me in a 737 from SFO to Denver, and I'd get in a United Express EMB120 operated by SkyWest. That is one tiny freaking plane. 30 passengers. It's a fun ride as you're descending through the bumpy South Dakotan air.
No, there aren't any 737-sized turboprops, but there are plenty of commercial planes with propellers.
Clearly, we must conquer more muddy dirtballs!
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
...of this? I used to wonder about this as a kid at least 15-ish years ago. Even without the stuff about propellers and pressure and such, it seemed obvious that a plane flying through a cloud would set off a reaction from the larger water drops formed from the condensation buildup on the body of it. Said larger drops fall off and through the cloud further causing a reaction.
Of course I never studied it or took it further, so it is quite possible I am wrong, but the point stands that I thought of it long ago, why is it only news now? Surely I am not the only one to think of it?
Just saying saying that some can say the plane cloud seeding spawned a tornado that killed some one / damaged your car / house / other stuff.
Oh, fer chrissake...google "Beech 1900" or "ATR-72" or "Embraer Bandeirante", among others.
rj
Did you miss that first sentence of the summary where it clearly said " private and commercial"?
I didn't miss it but apparently you missed the part about 'over the poles'. And they didn't mean poles as in Polish people.
The only prop aircraft over the poles is the (very) occasional TU95 Bear bomber.
propeller powered commercial jetliner
Turbo props are used for short distance commercial transport, especially between small airports and where demand is low. They use turbojet engines.
http://michaelsmith.id.au
I have never once seen a privately owned turboprop. They are basically workhorses for middle range airlines and commercial operations which need to carry a lot of stuff with short strip capability. Air ambulances for example.
http://michaelsmith.id.au
Smaller commercial planes are sometimes turboprop powered. I last flew on one 10 years ago, but I am sure they are still in service on small city to city routes of 300 miles or less.
Abject, horrific bullshit, spread by idiots who don't have a fucking clue about meteorology, basic physics, and more importantly that a few documents mentioning cloud seeding do not instantly mean that even one single witnessed contrail is anything other than a contrail.
Snicker snort. I bet you're attacking the non-arguments from the fringe of the fringe. It's a long jump from reality, where the military continually talks about ongoing plans and goals to "own the weather" with new papers published talking about how it can be done regularly, to "a few documents mentioning cloud seeding". I'm sure you think this is totally normal for example.
Critical thinking - it works, bitches.
though not for you.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Yeah, those private jets over the poles, why DO THEY DO IT??? Stop private planes flying over the poles. All zero of them.
And as others have mentioned, yeah "propellers" on the "jetliners". LOL! Sure.
I would rather blame rich guys with long noses who were originally made of wood.
Sure, it's Pinnochio. Just as real.
Looks like Slashdot let another potsmoker start a thread.
E
Did you miss the "commercial and private jetliners" in the first sentence?
A turbine is just a propeller with a hell of a lot more blades...it would logically have the same effect, if not more.
If the only way you can accept an assertion is by faith, then you are conceding that it can't be taken on its own merits
Oddly enough I made this time lapse with my phone the other day, see jet fly through on the left. http://youtu.be/2VBx1RHFM3c
The question i always have, and never get the answer to, when I see articles about these "studies" is: explain droughts in California over the past 30 years. California has a whole lot of air traffic all over the state and yet it goes multiple years on end with very little rain. If this happens so consistently to conclude there's a correlation why does California have droughts...like ever...?
"UNIX is very simple, it just needs a genius to understand its simplicity." -Dennis Ritchie
Most jet engines, these days, are high bypass turbofan engines. In many respects, not that much different from a Turboprop. The bulk of the thrust comes from the driven element, ie. the fan or prop, rather than the thrust from the turbine itself.
"To those who are overly cautious, everything is impossible. "
The big airlines usually don't run their own small planes. Rather, they use a different banner (United Express, Ted, Delta Connections, etc) for their regional services and usually contract that out to smaller airlines.
TED was never a small plane airline, it was a "vacation" subsidary of United. It never flew anything smaller than an A320. Now, Anything "Express, Connection" or pretty much most planes from Republic Air Holdings (short of the small fleet of A319s it acquired from Frontier) is RJ.
Yup and their numbers will probably increase, not decrease at least in the near future because of their fuel efficiency. A turboprop uses considerably less fuel than a jet, esp. for short to medium distances.
Monstar L
That was going to be my suggestion.
Fail. The LC-130H is commonly seen over both the Arctic and Antarctic, and it has 4 props and skis.
Impetuous! Homeric!
Mystery? What exactly was mysterious about it? Are all fogs mystery fogs?
Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
are you seriously supporting chemtrail bullshit?
Snowden and Manning are heroes.
FYI - a 'turboprop' engine is basically a jet engine (or "gas turbine") powering a propeller; the turbine powerplant is more efficient, more mechanically reliable, and has longer TBO's (time between overhaul; 3-5K hours vs 1-2K) than a reciprocating engine. These are just some of the reasons that turboprops are extremely commonly used as working, commercial aircraft, hauling passengers *and* freight, whether employed by large airlines, regionals, freight co's, and/or small independent operators (think bush pilot, air taxi, etc...). Planes like the Cessna Caravan are common, although I get a hoot out of the ex-DC-3 Basler Turbo-67 Turboprops are also quite commonly used on high-end civil and business aircraft, like Pilatus and Piaggio Avanti.
"...there are some things that can beat smartness and foresight. Awkwardness and stupidity can." ~ Mark Twain
You don't hang out at general aviation airports or with pilots much, then. See my comment below, and if you can at all arrange it, try going to EAA Airventure in Oshklosh, Wisconsin this August. You will learn. And have LOTS of fun.
"...there are some things that can beat smartness and foresight. Awkwardness and stupidity can." ~ Mark Twain
P-3s go around in the Arctic Ocean, even over the poles.
http://science.dodlive.mil/2011/03/25/icebridge-almost-to-the-north-pole/
Those airports used to support MD-80s, DC-9s, B-727s, B-737s, BAe 146s, but after deregulation and the consolidation of the airlines the planes got smaller and smaller.
From 1980 through 1995 I'd fly in and out of Pierre, Bismarck, Rapid City, Sioux Falls, or Billings out to Eugene, Portland, Spokane or Sacramento.
I've even seen L-1011s and DC-10s in Pierre and Aberdeen way back when.
There are quite a few general aviation turboprops, even see them at Merrill Field here in Anchorage.
Saw a Cessna 206 and Pilatus PC-6 without corporate colors June 30 flying
Yep, we get loads of commercial props around here. The Dash-8s hold about 40 passengers so they use them on routes where they can't fill Airbuses. I've been on quite a few of them, they fly pretty good and aren't noisy when you're inside them. Only problem is the top speed which is less than a jet.
No sig today...
I flew on a Dash-8 last summer from Seattle (KSEA) to Portland (KPDX) in the morning, pilot was able to take us right over Mt St. Helen's crater at about 12,000 feet, gorgeous flight.
My cousin flies A320s and whenever I mention Dash-8s his response is "Man, I love those planes."
From my research contrails are a completely normal part of air flight. My Grandpa was flying commercial passenger planes long ago. I asked him about it and he told me... "All engines emit water vapour, usually invisible. Given the right atmospheric conditions the vapour will condense into cloud. In the same way that normal cloud appears in many different forms, so contrails can be persistent, non-persistent, thick or thin and so can be short, long, narrow or wide and can remain as cloud similar to the Cirrus that you see at high level on a sunny day. Contrails are usually of ice and at high altitude. I must have released many 1000s of tons of water which became ice and cloud. So far no lumps have fallen on my head!"
I've also found plenty of evidence that chemtrails have been created in many different countries.
Here's a Germany news report which describes how the German Federal Army have been creating chemtrails: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=51FcITBszj8
There are subtitles in the video.
I don't think this is strictly chemtrails, but the Russians perform cloud seeding by adding silver iodide, dry ice and liquid nitrogen to the clouds to cause immediate precipitation: http://englishrussia.com/2011/05/18/manipulating-the-weather/
So far I have been unable to figure out if there is a way of visually distinguishing the difference between chemtrails and contrails.
Really my point is... when you see artificial clouds in the sky it /might/ be a chemtrail, but it is much more likely to be a completely normal contrail.
Yes, aircraft changing course is totally normal. Heck, large circles are even perfectly normal. Can you provide evidence as to how they are not normal? That's how critical thinking works. Apparently you don't understand that, which is why you believe this bullshit.
This is actually not about contrails, but quite the opposite. A contrail is a cloud created by the passage of an airplane (due to the vapor from the engine or simply the dynamic effect of stirring up oversaturated air). This study is about airplanes flying through clouds and causing those clouds to start raining. In a way, they are erasing clouds ("punching holes" in them)
"oh we know what they are, but when was the last time you saw a commercial plane with them?"
Yesterday, the day before and all the other days before.
Luxair De Havilland Canada DHC-8-402Q Dash 8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mLOSQ6bk8cM&feature=related
Dash-8s are everywhere here in Australia, I live under the flight path for both Tullamarine & Essendon airports here in Melbourne. Lot more prop traffic than jet traffic.
Anything from small Pipers/Cessnas through to DC-3s and other larger prop planes go over all day.
Add to this that, technically a turbofan (jet) engine is essentially an inside out turboprop with a higher blade density... well, the bullshit about not seeing aircraft with propellers is just someone wanting to look smart on /.
If you actually read the full article, or even dug a bit deeper and read some of the other articles that have been going around the net, you'd realise that it's all aircraft.
Less common here in Australia. The price of fuel may be a factor. People who can afford their own aircraft may get a vari-eze or a sailplane. There are a few helicopters in private ownership, I suppose they count as turboprops.
http://michaelsmith.id.au
No, it's basic fucking physics that causes lasting contrails. Basic. Fucking. Physics. Using high-altitude jets to disperse chemicals over populations is about the worst way you can do it - anything jettisoned from the plane would land thousands of miles away from where the plane was, and in an entirely unpredictable direction. The whole "idea" of chemtrails is born from abject ignorance coupled with paranoid hubris. It's despicable.
We run up into the sky so deep, it be crying. Yeah, you thought that was rain. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IU7VTJA0dNo
Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, START
Can you provide evidence as to how they are not normal?
Aircraft don't normally change direction over my house, and they double-extra don't normally come into the region from multiple different directions and then change direction as you can clearly see in-frame. After this picture was taken the trails spread out to cover the sky from horizon to horizon, even when I stand on the rise on my property from which I have a fairly amazing view.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
FTFA "When an airplane flies through a cloud, its propellers cause the expansion and cooling of the air behind them which can cause water droplets to spontaneously cool and crystals to form." However the picture shows a jet aircraft which if very different from a plane that has a standard propeller on the front. If the study took into account the differences between the two types of aircraft I'm reasonably sure that the effect would be different. Ergo there is a significant difference between a standard prop an a jet engine and the author of the article should have noted that. And will these scientists stop "rediscovering" that which has been known for years.
"We are just a war away from Amerikastan. When god vs god the undoing of man." Dave Mustaine
interesting. noctilucent clouds have also been on the rise during the period of modern aircraft, and are also seen primarily towards polar latitudes.
So basically you don't have evidence, you just have your opinion of what's normal and what isn't, all of which is based on your own personal experience and nothing more.
Planes change course for many different reasons. Engine difficulty, being re-routed, problems on board, weather patterns changing, or even military action, just to name a few. You have to show how none of those was responsible for the change in course of the plane that caused that contrail, before you can start attributing weird and exotic explanations for an otherwise mundane phenomenon.
Trails can linger for hours/days, and spread vast distances, simply due to the nature of what a contrail is. Heck, it's even covered in the article.
So, to sum up:
You don't know about planes or contrails, so therefore they must be some massive, ridiculously complicated and even more ridiculously pointless conspiracy that there is no evidence of.
Idiot.
Yes, I did miss that in the first sentence, because it ain't there. If you're going to quote, then put the words in the right order.
The article writer clearly didn't know much about aircraft when they put jetliners and propellers next to each other, so I'm ignoring those words and just going with "aircraft". As such, whether this phenomenon is caused by only jets or only props or both is entirely up to speculation, until somebody links to an article on the phenomenon written by somebody who has a clue about aircraft.
The article specifies private and commercial jetlines.
Military, prop, or turboprops don't fall into those categories.
Though the research may be valid, the summary article is a disaster, which is becoming quite common in the media today.
The "journalists" in science based reporting often have NO CLUE on basic scientific stats, ie odds ratios are routinely wrongly reported or commented on. But I've noticed even more basic factual errors aind inferences being drawn.
I've pretty much given up on media reports of science, I simply find the source article if it's at all interesting.
Meteorites cause cloud seeding. Most of them are really small and never make it to earth.
The book of Joshua was so special because those meteorites had been moving on track for so long that they gently entered the atmosphere at about thirty miles per hour.
the NPG electrode was replaced with carbon blac
No kidding? Thems some pretty short runways. Perhaps they're only flying small planes in and out of there nowadays because "Who the hell would want to fly to Sioux Falls?"
That's about a 350 mile each way trip to the Shetlands for work. But there are also commercial (if subsidized) air ferries in the area that use prop craft. And in some cases, don't even have runways, but land on the beach.
I'd be fairly surprised if there weren't other remote and/ or thinly settled regions where prop craft are still dominant.
Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
There's only one comment on the source website (and I'm not minded to sign up to the site to comment there) :
lazyreader says:
Would that be so much of a problem in drought prone areas?
Which is a perfectly good question, but begs the follow-up question of "what about the marginal or drought-prone areas downwind of your seeded area, where your seeding accidentally or deliberately wrings the water out of the clouds, so these areas get tipped into full-blown drought?"
I'm also somewhat minded of the climate research done in mid-September 2011, which showed that the US is probably cooled by around 1deg C (1 K) by it's normal shroud of contrails. (Travis, D.J.; A. Carleton and R.G. Lauritsen (8 2002). "Contrails reduce daily temperature range". Nature 418 (6898): 601. doi:10.1038/418601a. PMID 12167846.)
Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
Sioux Falls has a pair of 8,000 foot runways, Rapid City has a single 8,000.
Aberdeen is short (6500) so not sure why they had trijets other than a 727, but I remember an L-1011 taxing by blew the door of our Cessna 210 off the hinges once.
Eugene Oregon is another airport that used to have more bigger jets and it's all RJ and turboprop now.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugene_Airport#History
The article specifies private and commercial jetlines. Military, prop, or turboprops don't fall into those categories.
Though the research may be valid, the summary article is a disaster, which is becoming quite common in the media today.
The "journalists" in science based reporting often have NO CLUE on basic scientific stats, ie odds ratios are routinely wrongly reported or commented on. But I've noticed even more basic factual errors aind inferences being drawn. I've pretty much given up on media reports of science, I simply find the source article if it's at all interesting.
Can't blame journalists for quoting the scientists though: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/333/6038/77
Formation and Spread of Aircraft-Induced Holes in Clouds
Andrew J. Heymsfield1,*, Gregory Thompson1, Hugh Morrison1, Aaron Bansemer1, Roy M. Rasmussen1, Patrick Minnis2, Zhien Wang3, Damao Zhang3
1National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), Boulder, CO 80301, USA. 2NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA 23681, USA. 3Department of Atmospheric Sciences, University of Wyoming, Laramie, WY 82071, USA. *To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: heyms1@ncar.ucar.edu ABSTRACT
Hole-punch and canal clouds have been observed for more than 50 years, but the mechanisms of formation, development, duration, and thus the extent of their effect have largely been ignored. The holes have been associated with inadvertent seeding of clouds with ice particles generated by aircraft, produced through spontaneous freezing of cloud droplets in air cooled as it flows around aircraft propeller tips or over jet aircraft wings. Model simulations indicate that the growth of the ice particles can induce vertical motions with a duration of 1 hour or more, a process that expands the holes and canals in clouds. Global effects are minimal, but regionally near major airports, additional precipitation can be induced.
Fandroids hate facts.
DeHavilland / Bombardier Dash-8
Avion de Transport Regional 42, 72
Saab 340, 2000
Beech 1900D
Shorts 330, 360 [I remember when American Eagle flew these]
Dornier 228
Fairchild Metro
BAe Jetstream 31s, 41s
DC-3 [A couple of tourist companies use them, I think 1 in Canada, use a couple of DC-3s still]
etc etc, hard to believe that people don't know that turboprops were, and are still [relatively] widely used.
If you believe in privacy, and believe you have "nothing to hide" at the same time, you're a goddammed idiot
Thanks for proving my point. You clearly don't understand how contrails are formed. You are ignorant, but you somehow can't see it. You fucking idiot.