Cruise Missile caught in mid flight-PICTURE

[landmark]

that a/c looks plenty like these guys at Phoenix... and it's on the way to Salt Lake City...

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&q=38%C2%B013%2736.38%22N,+112%C2%B017%2756.59%22W&layer=&ie=UTF8&t=k&om=1&z=19&ll=33.437939,-111.995932&spn=0.001533,0.003374

I think we have a winner! The simplest solution is usually the right one in my experience. It's just a passenger jet.

 

[kubtastic]

What is the altitute of the people taking the pictures? Cruise missiles are usually 20 feet long or so, plus look at the wings, those are two short to be for a conventional plane. The scale is going to be different if the object isnt at ground level.

1. I take a picture of you on my Polaroid.
2. You walk to half that distance away from my camera.
3. I take another picture of you.
RESULT: On the 2nd Polaroid, you're twice as tall.

Other ratios also work. For example, 1:5.

The satellite is at a minimum altitude of 200 km. Low Earth Orbit bottoms out at 200km, which is the lowest such a satellite would fly at. For a 20 ft long object to appear as if it were 100 ft long on the surface of the Earth, it would have to be 1/5th distance away from the satellite. Every fifth of 200 km is 40 km.

***

If a 20ft long object is 40 km away, but the Earth's surface is 200 km away, then the 20ft long object appears to be 100 ft long.

***

200 km - 40 km = 160 km (two-hundred minus forty equals one hundred sixty)

Does the Tomohawk reach 160 km altitude? Let me say this very slowly: 160 km is 100 miles up, >500,000 ft in altitude. Can a cruise missile fly up 100 miles high?

At that altitude its engine doesn't operate. It's wings won't produce enough lift.

but there's more!

The satellite could very well be flying at 800 km. This would indicate the cruise missile is flying at 640 km (actually also in LEO). Our 20ft missile would have to be in ORBIT to appear to be 5x longer.

 

[Chero-King]

That is a drone missile for target practice or is a practice defense missile. It is not a jet liner. The tail is shaped in an upward "v" unlike any jetliner I have ever seen. Wing sweep angle is too narrow for jetliner. Wing tips are squared not tapered like jetliners. Forward fuselage is way too long in proprtion to a jetliner.

I'm not saying that you're wrong, but that picture does make sense..

 

[kubtastic]

Lastly: This aircraft is shooting a course for the VORTAC at Delta, Utah, which would be used to enter Salt Lake City airspace.

skyvector.com

 

[89Daytona]

Look at this missile base and another....

 

[BBeach]

1. I take a picture of you on my Polaroid.
2. You walk to half that distance away from my camera.
3. I take another picture of you.
RESULT: On the 2nd Polaroid, you're twice as tall.

Other ratios also work. For example, 1:5.

The satellite is at a minimum altitude of 200 km. Low Earth Orbit bottoms out at 200km, which is the lowest such a satellite would fly at. For a 20 ft long object to appear as if it were 100 ft long on the surface of the Earth, it would have to be 1/5th distance away from the satellite. Every fifth of 200 km is 40 km.

***

If a 20ft long object is 40 km away, but the Earth's surface is 200 km away, then the 20ft long object appears to be 100 ft long.

***

200 km - 40 km = 160 km (two-hundred minus forty equals one hundred sixty)

Does the Tomohawk reach 160 km altitude? Let me say this very slowly: 160 km is 100 miles up, >500,000 ft in altitude. Can a cruise missile fly up 100 miles high?

At that altitude its engine doesn't operate. It's wings won't produce enough lift.

but there's more!

The satellite could very well be flying at 800 km. This would indicate the cruise missile is flying at 640 km (actually also in LEO). Our 20ft missile would have to be in ORBIT to appear to be 5x longer.

I wasnt saying that it WAS one, I was just giving evidence because I dont know what it is myself. One guy said the scale was off a little bit saying its 90 feet or w/e at ground level. And another guy said that it was from a USGS flight, Im not sure thats with a satellite or a plane because I believe it is possible from a plane to take these. Say in the case that it was a plane, then perhaps that scale would better line up. But if you think about it, why would a cruise missile be flying through over there, and where was it heading to. Maybe if it was a little more to the south and the west then Id believe it.

 

[89Daytona]

If you copy the picture into paint and blow it up 450 times you can see the tail section, the wings, and the cockpit... it is obviously a plane.

 

[BBeach]

If you copy the picture into paint and blow it up 450 times you can see the tail section, the wings, and the cockpit... it is obviously a plane.

that must some special kind of paint, because mine goes to 8x...but in any case you see the outline of shadowed wings, possibly they were in a different color and weren't picked up?

 

[89Daytona]

I meant 450%.....so I guess thats 4.5x not 450x. Its regular ms paint.

 

[Sniggs]

It's Okie Terry's new buggy project. :conceited

 

[alsodon]

I never get tired of Google Earth. There are quite a few aircraft in flight that were caught by the Keyhole satellites and are viewable. The G. E. Community has assembled around 400 instances of aircraft in flight into a .kmz file. If you're interested, go to http://landiss.com/kmz/Aerospace/All%20Aircraft%20in%20Flight.kmz
and load the file "All Aircraft in Flight.kmz" in Google Earth. If you're not that adventurous, here's an MD-90 I found using that file so you can compare it for yourself:
35°44'20.69"N, 86°19'59.05"W
If you've never done it, it's easiest to just copy and paste the coordinates into the "Fly to" tab. Voila! (As mentioned earlier, the consensus of the "Aircraft in Flight" mavens in the Google Earth Community is that it is an MD-90. I agree with them).
Another interesting one to explore is any of the several "Secret Bases.kmz" files that are around. The amount of detailed information available is eye-popping.