UPDATE: Contrail Science writes:
Note to the media – since this was almost certainly Flight AWE808 (US Airways) from Hawaii to Phoenix, why not have a camera crew somewhere in the vicinity (does not need to be exact, or a chopper), at around 5-5:30 today, and if the weather is right you’ll see the same trail again.
Here’s the flight path below for 11/8/10. If anybody gets any new photos today, leave a comment and I’ll get them posted here.
Original post starts below:
There’s quite a buzz in the blogosphere about this video shot by a KCBS News helicopter. Explanations range from “Moonbeam Gov. Jerry Brown is headed home to visit relatives” to “missile launch kept secret by the Pentagon”.
Whatever it is, I’ve seen nothing like it. The speed doesn’t match a missile, but the trajectory and cloud pattern certainly seems to. Perhaps our readers can help figure this out. One alert reader “slp” posted in comments a link to a likely Occams Razor style explanation.
watch the video:
For people outside the USA that may not be able to see the first video, try this one:
For reference, here’s a certified missile shot from the Air Force Space Command:
I’m wondering if this isn’t some stunt plane practicing over the ocean (where the pilot doesn’t have to worry about buildings, power lines, towers, guy wires, FAA airspace permissions, etc.) with a smoke generator turned on? Watch this video from about 15-20 seconds in. That looks like what the “missile” video is. Add some red sunset lighting and you’ve got instant “slow moving missile”.
UPDATE: Thanks to alert reader “slp” who wrote: “Likely a contrail:”
Indeed it looks very much like this jet contrail seen off San Clemente, from Contrail Science Overflow, excerpted below:
Jet contrails from some angles look like missile trails
An interesting contrail cropped up off the coast of San Clemente, Orange County, California on December 31st 2009. The curious shape led some people to think it’s a missile launch, which it does kind of look like (all taken from San Clemente)
“Missile-like” contrail. Note this is the Dec 31st contrail, not the Nov 8th CBS one. That’s at the bottom of the post.
…
This view is from Corona del Mar, about 20 miles Northeast of San Clemente:
Here’s a similar photo (of a different contrail, obviously) on the same day at the other side of the country:
Not a missile launch.
…
Here’s the idea with math:
The idea that it’s a missile launch comes from three misconceptions. Firstly that the trail is vertical – it’s not, it’s a horizontal trail, at around 32,000 feet (about six miles). It’s the same as this:
This contrail is no more vertical than the road is, and nor are the power lines at 45 degrees. Everything is horizontal – it’s the just the angle you are viewing it from. All of these show horizontal contrails.
Secondly there’s the misconception of direction, that it’s flying away from the viewer, when it’s actually flying towards the viewer. This is because the “base” of the contrail seems wider than the tip. Perspective tells the brain that this mean the base is closer. But actually you can see the base has been greatly spread by the wind. Since it’s still so far away the effects of perspective are greatly diminished, meaning the actual width of the contrail is what is creating the illusion. Imagine is a plane with a 100 mile long spreading contrail were coming towards you; what would it look like? It would look exactly like this.
Thirdly there’s the idea that it goes all the way down to the ground. Now that might be true if the Earth was flat, but the Earth is round, and things go beneath the horizon eventually, no matter how high they are. A plane 200 miles away but five miles up is always below the horizon. If the horizon is raised (as it is here, with Catalina Island), then the distance is less. Here’s some math:
This diagram is not to scale, but the math is the same regardless. The solid curved line is the surface of the earth. The dot at the top is San Clemente. The little triangle is Catalina. “d” is the distance to Catalina (d=35 miles). “c” the amount of Catalina that is visible above the horizon (c=0.05 miles, really a bit more, but let’s be conservative). “a” is the altitude of the plane, (a = 6 miles). “r” is the radius of the earth (r=3963 miles).
The green wavy line is the contrail. Notice it’s at a fixed height above the surface of the earth, and is going directly towards the OC.
The point labeled (0,0) is the center of the earth. (0,0) means X=0, Y=0, where X is horizontal and Y is vertical. What we want to know is how far away the plane is, the value x. We do this with cartesian geometry, noting that the lowest visible point of the trail is at the intersection of the dotted line, which is a circle of radius (r+a), hence the equation x^2 + y^2 = (r+a)^2 and the line labeled “sight line”, which is has the equation y=x*c/d. Combining these equations to solve for x yields a quadratic equation, which we can solve with Wolfram Alpha:
intersection of (y=r+x*c/d) and (x^2+y^2 = (r+a)^2)
and with the real numbers:
intersection of (y=r+x*c/d) and (x^2+y^2 = (r+a)^2) where a=6 and d=35 and c=0.05 and r=3963
Which gives x = 212, meaning that the bottom of the contrail is around 200 miles away. So if the front of the contrail (the actual aircraft) is somewhere above and behind catalina, then that means the contrail is over 100 miles long. At 500 mph, that means it could have formed in 12-15 minutes, which seems consistent with the descriptions in the discussion above. (feel free to play around with the numbers there to see the affect of various assumptions)
Full post here: Jet contrails from some angles look like missile trails
http://edition.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2010/11/10/nr.missile.not.a.plane.cnn
Found the CNN video – MUST SEE
Jeremy says:
….. Also, here is what the shuttle launches at sunset look like:
http://centripetalnotion.com/images/shuttleshadow.jpg
Please notice how the BOTTOM of the rocket plume is DARKER than the top on the shuttle image. This is completely different from this supposed mystery missile.
******
The linked picture illustrates a couple of things. The Sun has set (behind the photographer) and the plume exhibits lighter shades of color as the vehicle rises into twilight that is progressively brighter until it is in full sun, when it becomes nearly white. The color is dominated by one of the exhaust products of the solid boosters, aluminum oxide.
The earliest portion of the plume (which has a sort of mushroom cap) consists of solid rocket exhaust which was diverted out and away from the launch pad by the water-cooled flame diverter structures under the pad. This plume contains a large amount of steam from the violently heated cooling water. This portion of the plume has much heat added and rises quickly. The usual high humidity of the area augments the whole process.
Once free of the solids, the orbiter main engines (burning liquid oxygen and liquid hydrogen) produces almost pure water vapor which is greatly diluted visually due to the expansion of the vapor out the nozzles of the engines.
I’m still voting for a rocket launch off San Clemente Island. The signatures of the plume and trajectory are just too familiar.
Has anyone suggested that all-time favorite explanation of mysterious things in the sky, the weather balloon?
More from the news:
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010/11/video-catches-mystery-missile-launching-near-l-a/
Jerry F. said:
“Go back to the 911 truther’s site. You have no powers here. This is place where rational people contemplate reality, free of sensationalistic nonsense.”
Jerry,
Rational people contemplating reality? Then MIT’s Theodore Postal (Science/Tech/National Security) must be a So-Called ‘Truther’ too (see CNN video a few posts up)? I’ve followed this website since before it was popular and linked it’s content hundreds, maybe a thousand times I imagine – because I believe Anthony is more or less right related to climate change and I fight the fight against the global warming alarmists. In this case I simply disagree with his assessment of this event – it doesn’t make him wrong or me right for that matter.
As far as ‘sensationalism’, you got me there. In my view (at least at this stage) discounting ‘completely’ a more sinister possibility related to the subject is lazy and counterproductive… as is name calling for that matter. Many experts have identified this as a missile/rocket – experts that apparently have been privy (maybe due to their expertise in National Security matters) to more than we are seeing. Pondering the many possibilities (much like we do related climate change – sun, THC, UHI, albedo, GCR’s etc.) is a healthy approach to issues like this I believe. What we are led to believe is often not the truth.
Sherlock Holmes Stated, “…when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.”
Is it impossible that this was a missile? Is it impossible that it was an aggressive act by China? I vote no on both accounts. It may not be probable but given the admission that the US did not fire the weapon and the distinct possibility it was in-fact a weapon, should we really take the path of least resistance and allow this event to just fade away as unexplained or explained away without thorough investigation?
If that is what being ‘realistic’ is, I’ll pass.
Maybe the news will take Anthony up on his challenge to recreate the video when that plane approaches again. If we see something even remotely as spectacular I will be the first to concede to being incorrect. I’m not going to hold my breath on that one though.
So the official Pentagon story is that it was a plane, and NOT a missile. They claim that it was an ordinary vapor contrail over 300 miles long from the horizon flying horizontally.
I’ve seen a lot of high flying aircraft vapor trails; never seen one like that. All the ones I have ever seen had a clear air gap behind the plane before the vapor trail cloud materializes.
And going back to the original CBS vidseo after learning that it is not a rocket; but a high flying aeroplane; I’m even more convinced that it was a rocket; and clearly flying in a curved trajectory. Vapor trails behind jets; after 300 miles would be widely dispersed and see through; this is clearly a rocket exhaust; the optical density is far too high to be a vapor trail; and aircraft don’t fly in non linear arcs like this bird did.
I will expect to see the video of flight 808 for the next couple of weeks to see how well it replicates this contrail path.
Now the Pentagon says it is coming from the Horizon; so where is it heading to; and if it is going to LAX; why is it still so high ?
Ockham’s razor, also spelled Occam’s razor, also called law of economy, or law of parsimony, principle stated by William of Ockham (1285–1347/49), a scholastic, that Pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitate; “Plurality should not be posited without necessity.” The principle gives precedence to simplicity; of two competing theories, the simplest explanation of an entity is to be preferred. The principle is also expressed “Entities are not to be multiplied beyond necessity.”
It’s an airplane.
mysearchfortruth, I appreciate your comments, I don’t buy into “sinister acts by the government” as you put it. You’re welcome to your opinions on this and AGW. The media has called this one, it was no rocket. I wish the media would be so kind as to admit that recent global warming is not “the end of the world as we know it” but they won’t. If your not a truther, then I retract that.
When I say “rational people discussing reality” What I mean is a contrast between this site that deals in truth, as opposed to sites like those that end with the word “progress”. Hopefully you do not subscribe to them.
As far as the truth goes, some of it is to be found here. That’s why I come here. If you agree then we have no conflict.
the picture I saw on the news it looked more like a missile. my opinion since the plume is thick and right at the engine.
a jet’s contrail usually starts slightly behind the aircraft and then fills out depending on the temperature. a minimum of minus 40 is required to make the contrail visible and lasting. also the contrails of jet aircraft are not normally as thick as that of a missile and you can often see the contrail of each engine before they blend together.
George, one possibility is that it was an eastbound flight (808) heading for Phoenix. I too would like to see a second video taken on a later day and at the same time in similar weather conditions. That would go a long way towards putting this to bed. Put another way, we need to see “Phoenix level” rather than rising again .
George E. Smith says:
November 10, 2010 at 5:23 pm
> Now the Pentagon says it is coming from the Horizon; so where is it heading to; and if it is going to LAX; why is it still so high ?
It’s not going to LAX. Flight AWE808 is a daily flight from Hawaii to Phoenix. There will be lots of people looking for it while its still approaching the coast during sunset.
No one ever said it was going to LAX that I’ve seen.
Hi Anthony,
You may want to update the article with both the fox news link posted by Crosspatch, along with the blogger’s page fox got the new contrail photo from. Both have some useful but different information.
The fox page contains newer info from the DOD/Military, e.g., that it wasn’t them either intentionally or inadvertently.
Hoping to be able to watch the new video contrail (e.g., day after initial ‘launch’) I followed the link from the fox page to the blogger, who identifies the original contrail as most likely from US Airways flight 808 (Honolulu , HI (PHNL) and ending in Phoenix (KPHX)), but possibly UPS flight 902: http://blog.bahneman.com/content/it-was-us-airways-flight-808
Unfortunately it sounds as if he saw the new video from a Newport Beach webcam – so there is only the still photo on his site (screen capture probably). He has some good discussion of why missile experts ‘see’ a missile, while aircraft experts ‘see’ an aircraft. :0)
A couple of other interesting bits winnowed from the comments section there. A link to: http://www.examiner.com/weather-in-los-angeles/missile-launch-over-southern-california-explained
Quotes S. Cal. top meteorologist stating that this sort of contrail isn’t uncommon there:
Another comment from the blog site addresses the ‘persistence’ and apparent width of the ‘base’ of the contrail with a research cite. I haven’t checked the actual article or even for its abstract, but frankly I’d be very surprised if its not correct as I’ve spent hours outdoors periodically noting a contrail go from very narrow to covering large portions of the sky when conditions are right (I’m sure plenty of others here have also and of course this is nothing new to you!)… but for what its worth, that commenter said:
Personally, I’d make a few observations in reply to some of the comments posted here by others. I believe the reason you don’t see the ‘gap’ between the object and the contrail as some expect if it were a plane is again a function of the angle. Because the plane is so high up, and coming almost directly toward you, the ‘gap’ seems to disappear. Someone said it couldn’t be a plane because you couldn’t see the plane’s running lights. A few issues there – first the plane was still in sunlight, where you wouldn’t be able to see the running lights anyhow. Next, the plane is passing into darkness (coming east meeting the line of dusk as it moves west), which is why the contrail would seem to start disappearing and then would disappear from sight – but its quite difficult to see running lights in dusk also, and by the time it was fully dark, you almost certainly wouldn’t be tracking where the plane was because of the optical illusion anyhow. Finally, when a plane is high enough it can be quite difficult if not impossible to see running lights at all.
As to how opaque the contrail is or isn’t – that’s also thrown totally out of wack by the sunset effect. Looking at a contrail lit up by sunset isn’t at all the same as looking at a typical contrail during the day… think of a rainbow, or better yet, any sunset where clouds that may be quite wispy a few minutes before become brilliant and much more substantial looking for a short time as the sun sets. Just how substantial a contrail looks even during the day when widely dispersed is also affected by the moisture content there happens to be at that particular time at that altitude (and maybe also by the number of condensate nuclei?).
Finally a thought on the ‘spiral’ of the contrail… frankly it looks to me to just be a function of dispersal as the winds push the contrail, and some different wind speeds or eddies along the path. Note how all of the movement seems to be in the same general direction, off to the left of the pictures or video. There was only a brief moment in one of the video’s where they zoomed in that a part of it did look possibly spiral to me, but I didn’t pause fast enough to take a closer look and didn’t go back to double check – but the spiral rocket contrail photos (or video) I’ve seen seem to have parts of the contrail moving clearly in one direction and parts in the opposite direction, and this one doesn’t, not even in that small part.
As to the rocket booster separation claims – I’d have to see that part of the video, but can picture how a change in the angle or part of an aircraft the sunlight was being reflected from could seem to be a booster separation and next engine firing up… or if its contrail gaps being talked about, that could easily be wind differentials or something along those lines causing gaps.
I hope someone does post the video from the second day’s plane contrail regardless!
Oh, and a few folks have said that FAA ought to have any plane on radar and be able to identify it that way…. Someone by all means correct me if I’m wrong – but I’m pretty sure that above a certain altitude, and/or a certain distance out from major airports, planes are off any official radar.
Oh, and anyone who’d like to see a really mind-blowing optical illusion (I know, there are a ton of them, but this one I promise will utterly amaze if you haven’t seen it before, even if you’ve seen a lot of different optical illusions), see:
Jerry Said:
“The principle gives precedence to simplicity; of two competing theories, the simplest explanation of an entity is to be preferred. The principle is also expressed “Entities are not to be multiplied beyond necessity.”
It’s an airplane.
mysearchfortruth, I appreciate your comments, I don’t buy into “sinister acts by the government” as you put it. You’re welcome to your opinions on this and AGW. The media has called this one, it was no rocket. I wish the media would be so kind as to admit that recent global warming is not “the end of the world as we know it” but they won’t. If your not a truther, then I retract that.”
Hi Jerry,
No worries about the ‘truther’ jab. I’ve been doing battle with the AGW crowd for years and have thick skin. However, I do notice contradictions in your response. First, your comment about Occam’s razor can be applied both ways. I could say that if it looks like a missile, flies like a missile and lights up the sky like a missile, and everyone thinks (or thought) it was a missile then chances are – IT’S A MISSILE. Applying the flimsy unsubstantiated evidence of ‘optical illusions’ to fortify your position and refute what appears contrary to more conventional wisdom (in this case provided by some rather compelling video evidence) is not enough. Ironically in the same papagraph you make a comment about the media having it all wrong on Global Warming.
The media is not the gatekeeper of truth… that is up to us these days.
Secondly, in your next comment you said that the media had ‘called it’ – if they did, so what? Show me something where the Pentagon admitted conclusively it was an airplane contrail to prove your comment because I don’t see it – not that I doubt it but show me something definitive please. I really have a hard time watching a massive Missile being launched vertically, adjust course, pick up speed, while spitting fire plumes and solid-fuel smoke and rocketing NW high into the upper atmosphere – and then having someone claim it was an effing commuter jet flying SE and was an optical illusion.
An I didn’t say a ‘sinister act by government’ but rather implied a rather generic ‘sinister’ potential threat. There is a difference.
IT’S A MISSILE – OF UNKNOWN ORIGIN! 🙂
I agree that is was probably flight AWE808. The flight track matches perfectly with the contrail we (Doug Spangenberg and I) observed in enhanced GOES-11 imagery taken between 0100 and 0200 UTC (5 – 6 PM PST). The persistent contrail was visible in the 4-km GOES data at 0130 UTC between 125 and 121°W. It pointed directly at Catalina Island and showed the same bend seen in the flight track. It advected to the south and broke up in the pursuing hour. Our persistent contrail forecast (nowcast) tool, based on the RUC,
http://www-angler.larc.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/site/showdoc?docid=33&cmd=forecast
showed conditions were right for persistent contrails west of 32 N, 121W, just about where the contrail cuts off in the image. The altitude had to be between 11 and 13 km to get ice saturation conditions at the ambient temperatures, -51 to -64C. The forecaster does not indicate good contrail conditions today.
The video shows the contrail relatively close to Catalina and the observer noted that it dissipated, if I am not mistaken. If it were at 12 km, it would be possible to see it up to 262 miles away from the LA coast. That would have permitted the observer to see at least 60 miles of the persistent contrail corresponding to that in the satellite image, in addition to the more rapidly dissipating trail closer to Catalina Island. Can post the images if anyone is interested.
Airplane – little evidence for it.
1. Why are there no other contrails? Should be a lot of flights.
2. I cannot see separate trails for multi-engines.
3. On of the pictures I looked at – starts dark, the gets brighter, then gets dark again.
This suggests coming from the ground then getting into the setting sun, then into darkness again as it heads east.
4. If it is an aircraft, they should be able to pinpoint it exactly.
Anyone following this controversy should find the following links interesting:
“Perhaps this NOTAM indicates the hunt is on now for the “Red November.”
Xinhui will be back with his level-headed editorial and analysis soon, until then here’s the launch video (no, those aren’t jet contrails…)”
http://china-defense.blogspot.com/2010/11/california-missile-launch-hunt-for-red.html
http://www.cbs8.com/Global/story.asp?S=13468118&hpt=T2
If a foreign government with capabilities to fire a missile were to do so, when would be the best time to fire it for maximum effect and minimal risk of being pounced on by our air-force or Navy?
Its the JATO car … its no longer a urban legend
why don’t they ask the people on that carnival cruise liner that’s drifting around out there.. wouldn’t that have been the closest possible vantage point to see where it came from?.. with 3300 passengers, there had to be somebody on deck that could have seen it.. or maybe run out to Catalina Island.. there has to be someone who witnessed where it came from.. If in fact it came from a ship or sub..
Don’t know if this is in comments yet:
…..Doug Richardson, the editor of Jane’s Missiles and Rockets, examined the video for the Times of London and said he was left with little doubt. “It’s a solid propellant missile,” he told the Times. “You can tell from the efflux [smoke].”
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/11/10/earlyshow/main7040379.shtml
“We may never know what it was.” These words are being echoed all around the internet. The truth is we can now say with some certainty that the mystery object was not a ballistic missile. We know this because of a seemingly inocuous statement made in a CBS report that aired on “The Early Show” this morning. We got a critical piece of informaton from David Martin who interviewed KCBS cameraman, Gil Leyvas, who recorded the object from a helicopter. Mr. Leyvas describes his observations of the object at this link (after the commercial about 40 seconds into the report).
Quoting David Martin referring to the cameraman “He zoomed in and stayed on it for about ten minutes”.
As I pointed out in a post last night,
“If you saw the ‘rocket’ thrusting longer than four minutes, you were watching a plane not a rocket.”
We just needed the length of time the thrusting object was recorded. The Trident missile boost phase lasts about three minutes for all three stages–then, no more contrail. Thus the Trident and for that matter all solid rocket ballistic missiles can be ruled out because the contrail was tracked as it continued to propel its payload downrange “about ten minutes”. If the object the other night was a ballistic missile, I suspect it unwittingly left the planet and can now be tracked in outer space.
This pretty much leaves everyone with the obvious conclusion, the mystery object landed at an airport somewhere “downrange”.
My apologies if I screwed up on posting the link. If there are still doubts, then let’s see that raw footage from CBS, then we can determine whether it was 4, 5, 10, or more minutes. I am betting on six minutes and 30 seconds or more.
Well I screwed the link up pretty bad and underlined a lot. Here is the link, cut and paste it yourself sorry.
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7040407n&tag=related;photovideo
For anyone interested, you can get many/most of the Vandenburg & S. Ca. launch schedules emailed to you, from: http://www.spacearchive.info/newsletter.htm <— & fyi that page has a small but spectacular photo of a 1997 evening twilight launch from Vandenberg AFB that folks might be interested in even if no interest in the launch alerts. The thing looks absolutely other-worldly.
From one of the emailed launch alerts:
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/launch-alert
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
launch-alert-request@mailman.qth.net
All sorts of info, links, photos of various missile launches/contrails, etc. at the sites' homepage: http://www.spacearchive.info/
10 to maybe 12 years ago I happened to be outside in the Las Vegas area right at dusk and saw a really incredibly bizzare contrail/cloud formation above/between the mountains to the west, very convoluted, with what appeared to be a very very bright spotlight shining down on it from above, and some other odd lighting effects at various places. The 'spotlight' from above looked rather like a searchlight from a helicopter, only it was obviously a tremendous distance away – e.g., no way it could have been anything like a spotlight. It did not look like anything one would expect with a missile launch, airplane, etc. but was pretty spectacular.
I watched for a few minutes, with little change, then had to turn away for literally only a split second, turned back, and the light below suddenly got brighter at the saame time the ‘spotlight’ was just suddenly gone. Some of the other odd lighting effects were still there and lingered for a little bit.
Well….I’ve always been of the opinion that while life almost certainly exists out in the universe, probably in a countless number of locations, the chances that we’re currently being ‘visited’ are exceedingly slim. This thing? It is literally the only time in my life that the thought crossed my mind that “maybe, just maybe…. but naw, awfully unlikely, gotta be some good explanation for it.” Nothing I could think of seemed to ‘fit’ what I’d seen.
Well, clearly I wasn’t the only one who had that thought cross their mind, apparently there were many calls to police etc., about a UFO, or odd lights, or odd clouds, or…. Radio stations, local talk radio were going on like mad about it. If I recall correctly it even made mention (although no photos) in the local late night newscast that night.
The next day, sure nuff’, turned out it was a launch from Vandenburg that had gone wrong and they’d destroyed the missile in flight. I want to say it was a minuteman, but that was a number of years ago and I really don’t recall for certain. It was really impressive, however – and wind conditions had definitely helped make the contrail and cloud mix very interesting, very bizarre looking – plus I imagine the missile going off course, which was why it had to be destroyed, helped a bit also.
I’ve never happened to see another launch from Vandenburg, but then I haven’t been really trying to either, even tho I get the launch alerts.
I don’t know what this thing was.. and quite frankly.. I don’t really care. In the larger scheme of things.. it is of little or no importance.
But to call it a “contrail”.. on a science site.. is THE MOST LUDICROUS thing I have read on WUWT.
Contrails are made from water vapour which dissipates within a few seconds of leaving the aircraft.. much like your breath does on a cold night.
Contrails do not hang around in the air after the plane has gone.
C’mon Anthony.. its science man.. science.
As huge fan and daily visitor to this site (since November last year anyway).. lately I have found myself very disappointed with the total LACK of scientific method applied to some recent stories.
If you aren’t going to put on your science hat when dealing with these issues Anthony.. then just leave them alone.. and stick to climate. At least that way you won’t alienate fans such as myself.
It’s not going to LAX. Flight AWE808 is a daily flight from Hawaii to Phoenix. There will be lots of people looking for it while its still approaching the coast during sunset.
So California only has one flight a day? I heard you had a bit of an economic recession, but it must be reeaaly dead out there.
On a contrailing day over Europe, the sky is obliterated by trails.