Localized humidity "pockets" and so-called stratification in the atmosphere are well-documented phenomena.
No, I mean that some days contrails do not form behind any airplanes at all. Whilst another day short dissapating trails do form. Surely you've noticed that?
so?
I've said it before but I'll say it again: Heads up. Today chemtrail enthusiasts in northern europe can look up at clear blue chemtrail-free skies.
Is the sky blue and cloudless because no chemtrailing was being done yesterday and today or is it because of very dry air in the atmosphere that the model has predicted?
Is there anything to that saying about correlation doesn't imply causation or something that the wizzkids and fact checkers keep babbling about?
I don't belive the "expert" Dane Wigington of geoengineeringwatch has ever explained how this correlation and possibility of prediction.
Apologies for any discomfort this post might have given...
Shocking new lab tests reveals CHEMTRAILS are weaponizing the air with toxic metals
"Without being present to determine the size of the area you're viewing, I'm going to estimate that you're viewing an approximately 25 square kilometer area. The clouds are approximately 2.5 kilometers in thickness. Altostratus clouds have an average weight of 0.35 grams per cubic meter. Calculating these averages, using only the area shown (which is only a portion of the cloud system in question) you end up with a weight of 21,875 metric tons. So let's build some comprehension of how much that is. A freight jet (747-8F) can carry 140 metric tons. So just to distribute this mass of cloud, there would have to have been 157 flights of these large jets in just that area to meet your claim. 157 - just for that visible area in the clip. Hindreds more, no doubt, since the clip only shows a limited area.
Do you really believe what you're saying now that you have an inkling of an idea of what it takes to accomplish what you're claiming?"
Captain Mike Glynn, who describes some of the conspiracy theorists as having "room temperature IQs", has attempted without success to reason with Kusznir and many others via willing online chat discussions, by providing scientific explanations for the contrails.
"The upper atmosphere is generally very dry but when conditions permit, such as before an approaching cold front which forces moisture high into the atmosphere, the relative humidity becomes so high that the water vapour in the jet exhaust condenses into ice crystals and a con(densation)-trail is formed," he said.
“AIRLINE pilots fear their jumbos could be shot down by conspiracy theorists who believe they are being poisoned by commercial aircraft.”
I stopped reading at that point….Obvious Government Propaganda is OBVIOUS. Since this was written in 2012, could you list examples of planes being shot down by conspiracy theorists? 13 years later there must be a few right?
Is all that white stuff we see behind the plane coming from hidden tanks being sprayed out, or is it simply condensation from the engines — like your breath turning white on a cold day?
When the trail suddenly ends, did the pilot switch off some kind of “chemtrail machine,” or is there a natural reason why contrails can appear and disappear depending on the air the plane is flying through?
Perhaps they reached the end of a tank and are switching to the next one?
The core of rational analysis is not starting with a conclusion and then bending every observation to fit it. It’s the other way around: start with the simplest testable questions, look at the evidence, and only then form a conclusion.
Rational = using reason rather than assumption, belief, or emotion to reach conclusions.
If someone skips your questions and jumps to “they reached the end of a tank” without first establishing that there even is a tank or spraying happening, that’s not analysis — that’s assuming what they’re trying to prove. That’s called begging the question (or circular reasoning).
A proper approach would be:
Jumping straight to “chemtrails exist” and ignoring the base questions is neither honest nor rational. It’s starting with a belief and treating it as evidence.
If you still want to go the “hidden tanks” route: Have there ever been any verifiable photographs, maintenance logs, or whistleblowers showing such tanks on civilian airliners?
And if you don’t ignore the first question about the source of the white material, you can actually do a some quick calculation. A contrail (or "chemtrail") that stretches from horizon to horizon contains thousands of tons of ice crystals spread over tens or hundreds of kilometres of sky. No airliner has tanks remotely large enough to carry and disperse that kind of mass.
That’s how rational analysis works: start with what’s physically possible, check for actual evidence, then form a conclusion — not the other way around.
So do you see a marked change of altitude here? Do you see a change in weather?
The absence of an obvious altitude or weather change from the ground does notmean the conditions aloft stayed constant. The physics of contrail formation are governed by micro-scale humidity and temperature differences invisible to the observer.
A plane can climb or descend a few hundred meters inside a cruise band without it being obvious from the ground. A 500-m altitude shift can take it from an ice-supersaturated layer (persistent contrail) into a drier layer (no contrail) instantly.
Pilots do this routinely for fuel efficiency or to avoid turbulence; the change in trail looks like it just “stops.”
These sources support the claim that pilots routinely change altitude for efficiency or turbulence, and that such changes can make contrails appear to “start” or “stop” as aircraft move between atmospheric layers.
“Pilots often change altitudes during a flight to avoid turbulence – changing altitudes to avoid contrails is nearly identical.”
https://sites.research.google/gr/contrails/
Peer-reviewed study quantifying how flights can avoid contrail zones by altitude shifts.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590198223002002
Experimental flights with tactical in-flight altitude changes to avoid predicted contrail formation zones.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s44172-024-00329-7
Shows small altitude adjustments (around 2,000 ft) help avoid humid layers where contrails form.
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/195294/small-altitude-changes-could-contrail-impact/
Models consider changing cruising altitudes (±2,000 ft or ±4,000 ft) as a viable contrail-mitigation strategy.
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20120016840/downloads/20120016840.pdf
Reports that diverting flights by ~2,000 ft could reduce contrail formation.
https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/a31021542/planes-altitude-contrails-climate-change/
Discusses routing changes (vertical or horizontal) as recommended strategies to avoid contrail-favorable regions.
https://cdn.catf.us/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/18113117/contrails-report.pdf
States that “one of the primary strategies ... to mitigate turbulence is changing altitude.”
https://www.bristol.gs/how-do-pilots-handle-turbulence/
Contrails don’t require visible “weather changes” at ground level.
Atmospheric conditions at cruising altitude (8–12 km) can change sharply over a few hundred meters of vertical or horizontal distance even when the sky looks uniform from the ground. Relative humidity and temperature at that altitude control whether a contrail forms or dissipates. These layers aren’t visible to someone looking up.
Do you have any scientific references on this, as to how the climate can vary greatly at the same altitude within short distances, sounds totally implausible, and sounds like excuses?
Sure, here's some research I put together using Perplexity Deep Research. (Link to session, including my prompt)
Scientific research overwhelmingly confirms that contrail variability — where contrails appear to start and stop suddenly without visible ground-level weather changes — is primarily explained by micro-scale atmospheric humidity variations and pilot altitude adjustments. Ice-supersaturated regions (ISSRs) in the upper troposphere are remarkably thin (typically 100-500 meters vertically) and patchy, creating narrow zones where persistent contrails can form. Small altitude changes of just 2,000 feet can move aircraft into or out of these contrail-forming layers, explaining sudden contrail appearance or disappearance.[1][2][3][4][5]
Atmospheric layers and contrail formation variability showing how aircraft encounter patchy ice-supersaturated regions
Vertical Scale: Research consistently shows that ice-supersaturated layers are remarkably thin. Studies document typical vertical extents of 100-500 meters, with some layers as thin as a few hundred meters. The Spichtinger & Gierens (2005) study found ISSR vertical extensions typically around 500m in northeastern Germany, though exceptional cases can reach 3km.[1:1][3:1][6][4:1]
Horizontal Variability: ISSRs exhibit significant horizontal patchiness. IAGOS aircraft measurements reveal that most ISSRs have horizontal extensions of 100-400 km, with 90% smaller than 500 km and less than 1% larger than 1,000 km. The heterogeneous nature of these regions means aircraft can encounter dramatically different humidity conditions over short flight distances.[7]
Sharp Boundaries: Critical to understanding contrail variability, these supersaturated regions are often "bordered both vertically and horizontally by strongly subsaturated air". This creates sharp transitions where contrails form in supersaturated layers but immediately dissipate when aircraft enter adjacent dry air masses.[4:2]
The fundamental physics of contrail formation, governed by the Schmidt-Appleman criterion, demonstrates extreme sensitivity to atmospheric conditions. Contrails form only when exhaust plume mixing achieves liquid water saturation, which depends critically on ambient temperature and humidity. For persistence, the ambient air must be ice-supersaturated (relative humidity with respect to ice > 100%).[8][9][10][11][12][13][14]
Threshold Effects: Even small changes in relative humidity around the saturation threshold can determine whether contrails form and persist. Research shows that reducing humidity thresholds from 100% to 95% increases contrail coverage areas by approximately a factor of 2.[15]
Operational Demonstrations: Multiple real-world studies confirm that small altitude adjustments effectively avoid contrail formation. The Imperial College study showed that altering altitudes of less than 2% of flights could reduce contrail-linked climate impact by 59%. German Aerospace Center (DLR) experiments successfully demonstrated contrail avoidance by diverting flights up or down by 2,000 feet (approximately 660 meters).[2:1][16]
Flight Operations Evidence: Pilots routinely observe that "a difference in flight level of 1,000 feet is enough for one aircraft to cause a contrail and the other not" even when aircraft appear to be at similar altitudes. This reflects the thin, layered nature of humidity variations that are invisible from the ground but critical for contrail formation.[17]
Near-Airport Contrail Avoidance: Recent feasibility studies using tactical altitude adjustments near airports achieved a 64% reduction in satellite-visible contrails with only a 2% increase in fuel burn per adjusted flight. These studies used delayed ascent or early descent maneuvers to avoid contrail-likely zones.[5:1]
Long-term aircraft-based humidity measurements from the MOZAIC and IAGOS programs provide crucial evidence for atmospheric variability. These high-resolution in-situ measurements reveal:[1:2][18][19]
Satellite observations consistently document contrails forming in patches that correspond to atmospheric humidity fields. Ground-based lidar systems detect the vertical structure of contrails and confirm their correlation with local atmospheric conditions. Studies combining satellite data with numerical weather predictions show that contrail formation closely follows predicted ice-supersaturated regions, validating the physical understanding.[15:1][20][21][22][23][24]
The Subsonic Aircraft: Contrail and Cloud Effects Special Study (SUCCESS) provided detailed in-situ measurements of contrail formation conditions. Key findings include:[11:1][25][14:1]
The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Committee on Aviation Environmental Protection has produced comprehensive reports on operational opportunities to reduce contrail climate effects. These documents confirm that:[26][27]
NASA technical reports, particularly Schumann (1996), establish that "persistent contrails occur only in regions of ice-supersaturation, often confined to thin layers a few hundred meters thick". NOAA's contrail FAQ explains that "conditions may change rapidly with altitude or distance, so contrails can begin or end suddenly as the plane passes between layers".[1:4]
The FAA's Aircraft Contrails Factsheet confirms that atmospheric temperature and humidity "undergo natural daily and seasonal variations and hence, are not always suitable for the formation of contrails". This variability, combined with the thin nature of suitable layers, explains the intermittent appearance of contrails.[28]
The IPCC AR5 Chapter 7 states that "contrail formation is highly sensitive to small-scale variations in temperature and relative humidity. Supersaturated layers can be thin (hundreds of meters) and patchy, resulting in contrails that start and stop abruptly".[1:5]
Current numerical weather prediction models struggle to accurately represent the fine-scale humidity variability crucial for contrail formation. ERA5 reanalysis data, with ~100km horizontal resolution, significantly underestimates the frequency and intensity of ice supersaturation compared to high-resolution aircraft observations.[19:3][29][30]
Scale Mismatch: The contrast between model grid scales (tens to hundreds of kilometers) and the actual scale of humidity variability (hundreds of meters to kilometers) creates fundamental prediction challenges. This explains why contrail formation often appears unpredictable despite sophisticated weather models.[19:4]
Humidity Prediction Accuracy: Relative humidity forecasts are inherently more uncertain than temperature predictions. The ECMWF has implemented specialized ice supersaturation schemes to better represent these conditions, showing improved contrail prediction skill.[31][29:1]
Atmospheric gravity waves contribute to creating the layered humidity structures that control contrail formation. These waves can create regions of enhanced cooling and lifting that promote ice supersaturation in narrow vertical bands. The vertical propagation of gravity waves helps explain the persistence of thin supersaturated layers over time.[32][33]
Large-scale weather patterns create the background conditions for contrail formation, but local processes determine the fine-scale variability. Warm conveyor belts associated with mid-latitude cyclones can induce ISSR formation in the upper troposphere. Deep convection in tropical regions transports moisture to flight levels, creating conditions favorable for contrail formation.[4:3][34][29:2]
The scientific evidence provides clear explanations for observed contrail behavior:
This research demonstrates that apparently mysterious atmospheric phenomena often have well-understood physical explanations. The key insights include:
The scientific consensus firmly establishes that contrail variability results from well-understood atmospheric physics rather than unexplained phenomena, providing a foundation for both education and climate mitigation strategies in aviation.
[35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53][54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61][62][63][64][65][66][67][68][69][70][71][72][73][74][75][76][77][78][79][80][81][82][83][84][85][86][87][88][89][90][91][92][93][94][95][96][97][98]
https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/24/5495/2024/ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/195294/small-altitude-changes-could-contrail-impact/ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎
https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/5/973/2005/ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎
https://www.nature.com/articles/s44172-024-00329-7 ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎
https://elib.dlr.de/134905/1/Gierens-etal-MZ2020.On_ice_supersaturation_over_the_Arctic.pdf ↩︎ ↩︎
https://www.iata.org/contentassets/726b8a2559ad48fe9decb6f2534549a6/aviation-contrails-climate-impact-report.pdf ↩︎
https://archive.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/sres/aviation/index.php?idp=38 ↩︎
https://research.tudelft.nl/files/151906511/sids22_paper_77.pdf ↩︎
https://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/downloads/k3569587k ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎
https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/23/287/2023/acp-23-287-2023.pdf ↩︎
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1029/97jd02808 ↩︎ ↩︎
https://www.dlr.de/en/latest/news/2023/04/changing-flight-altitudes-avoids-the-formation-of-climate-damaging-contrails ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/contrails-and-chemtrails-frequently-asked-questions/contrails ↩︎ ↩︎
https://centaur.reading.ac.uk/115929/8/acp-24-5495-2024.pdf ↩︎ ↩︎
https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/20/787/2020/ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20110015362/downloads/20110015362.pdf ↩︎
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0169809525005927 ↩︎
https://www.icao.int/sites/default/files/sp-files/environmental-protection/Documents/EnvironmentReport-2010/2025/Envreport2025_40.pdf ↩︎ ↩︎
https://www.icao.int/sites/default/files/environmental-protection/Documents/CAEP WG2/Report-on-Operational-Opportunities-to-Reduce-Contrails-and-Non-Co2-1.pdf ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎
https://www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/files/regulations_policies/policy_guidance/envir_policy/contrails.pdf ↩︎
https://www.ecmwf.int/sites/default/files/elibrary/2006/17952-ice-supersaturation-ecmwfs-integrated-forecast-system.pdf ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20240011983/downloads/SeasonalityPaperFormatted_110424.pdf ↩︎
https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/sola/1/0/1_0_69/_pdf ↩︎
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20220823-what-makes-up-a-planes-contrails ↩︎
https://boris-portal.unibe.ch/bitstreams/c6133f66-5184-4f2b-aece-3d90b3d28e29/download ↩︎
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1029/2007JD009314 ↩︎
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1364682620300614 ↩︎
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590198223002002 ↩︎
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2023AV000880 ↩︎
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0169809524004459 ↩︎
https://www.transportenvironment.org/articles/contrail-avoidance ↩︎
https://www.reddit.com/r/aviation/comments/1cpo86e/why_do_some_contrails_disappear_very_quickly/ ↩︎
https://iee.psu.edu/news/podcast/growing-impact-contrails-and-climate-change ↩︎
https://centaur.reading.ac.uk/109277/1/ipsl_radio_sonde_climatology.pdf ↩︎
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2007JD008449 ↩︎
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352146520308814 ↩︎
https://journals.open.tudelft.nl/joas/article/view/7209/5943 ↩︎
https://www.fzt.haw-hamburg.de/pers/Scholz/Aero/AERO_PRE_DLRK2024_ContrailManagementBasics_2024-10-02.pdf ↩︎
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20240007558/downloads/20240007558-contrail-frequency-AIAA-aviation_final.pdf ↩︎
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20230014633/downloads/NASA-TM-202300014633.pdf ↩︎
https://www.eurocontrol.int/sites/default/files/2023-12/2023-11-07-contrails-conference-session-003-barrett-observational-contrail-avoidance.pdf ↩︎
https://www.flightglobal.com/aerospace/icao-reviews-data-showing-contrail-reduction-more-important-than-net-zero-co2/164655.article ↩︎
https://www.eurocockpit.eu/news/qa-contrails-understanding-role-pilots-climate-neutrality ↩︎
https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/apl/contrails/contrails_research_roadmap.pdf ↩︎
https://www.icao.int/sites/default/files/environmental-protection/Documents/Guidance-on-SAF-policies-Version-3.pdf ↩︎
https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024EGUGA..2611247M/abstract ↩︎
https://www.rolandberger.com/en/Insights/Publications/Contrails-A-solvable-problem.html ↩︎
https://repository.library.noaa.gov/view/noaa/65929/noaa_65929_DS1.pdf ↩︎
https://climate.ec.europa.eu/eu-action/transport-decarbonisation/reducing-emissions-aviation_en ↩︎
https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2023/egusphere-2023-2601/ ↩︎
https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2025/egusphere-2025-3007/egusphere-2025-3007.pdf ↩︎
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2021GL096173 ↩︎
https://rmi.org/aviation-contrails-what-we-know-and-what-we-dont-about-this-warming-phenomenon/ ↩︎
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/6e81/5caa85d0eea9a4df9ce95ff0812769d1f247.pdf ↩︎
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/979e/a9e43db4c5ced0ce4f8ebb18b1a89d9771af.pdf ↩︎
https://elib.dlr.de/106428/1/USchu-Heyms-AMSMONOGRAPHS-D-16-0005.1.pdf ↩︎
https://acp.copernicus.org/preprints/acp-2018-1129/acp-2018-1129-manuscript-version3.pdf ↩︎
https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2025/egusphere-2025-1499/egusphere-2025-1499.pdf ↩︎
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1029/98JD02594 ↩︎
https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/12/381/2012/acp-12-381-2012.pdf ↩︎
https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2024/egusphere-2024-961/egusphere-2024-961-manuscript-version2.pdf ↩︎
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1631070505000563 ↩︎
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1352231005010708 ↩︎
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2014JD021837 ↩︎
https://acp.copernicus.org/preprints/acp-2016-773/acp-2016-773.pdf ↩︎
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20030020468/downloads/20030020468.pdf ↩︎
https://www.icas.org/icas_archive/icas2024/data/papers/icas2024_0502_paper.pdf ↩︎
https://www.cerfacs.fr/~cfdbib/repository/TR_CFD_04_18.pdf ↩︎
https://www.weather.gov/source/zhu/ZHU_Training_Page/Miscellaneous/gravity_wave/gravity_wave.html ↩︎
https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2025/egusphere-2025-3312/egusphere-2025-3312.pdf ↩︎
https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2025/egusphere-2025-1865/egusphere-2025-1865.pdf ↩︎
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2023JD039324 ↩︎
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1270963825007746 ↩︎
https://www.astronomycast.com/2025/02/742-atmospheric-gravity-waves/ ↩︎
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/aeronautical-journal/article/far-field-wake-vortex-evolution-of-two-aircraft-formation-flight-and-implications-on-young-contrails/0CAAB32CF84A8A763018F4DEF7E4598E ↩︎
https://ppl-ai-code-interpreter-files.s3.amazonaws.com/web/direct-files/d98f0456c493c77a395fab6f1250db6f/93e27c64-3163-44b0-bb95-907edf91e685/fdc9307f.csv ↩︎
Do you seriously see the plane moving 2000 feet UPWARDS OR DOWNWARDS in this few seconds footage?
https://www.citizendailypost.com/faq/what-is-the-climb-speed-of-a-747
What is the climb speed of a 747? During normal flights, the 747-400 & 747-8 has a climb rate ranging from 2000 to 4000 feet per minute. This is 16 seconds long, They go from on to off to on in 16 seconds, So I think we can discount your theory.
Since the gradients in the upper atmosphere are so sharp, there’s a point where the cutoff comes abruptly. At the boundary between a moist, ice-supersaturated layer and a drier one, contrail formation simply stops. Just a few meters can mean the difference between visible trails and clear sky, so when an aircraft crosses that boundary the change looks instantaneous from the ground. How far the plane travels isn’t the key issue by itself, because we don’t know the exact position of the humidity gradient or where to start measuring — the decisive factor is when the aircraft meets that invisible boundary.
Persistent Contrail Forecast Report Monday 29th September 2025 (12:00)
Overall:
Large areas of the UK & Ireland are saturated (dark blue = 100% humidity) at cruise levels FL300–FL340 from lunchtime. This means conditions are very favourable for persistent contrails across nearly all major airways. At FL390, humidity drops (65%), so persistence will be limited and patchier there.
Scotland
• Highlands / Inverness FIR: Airways UP18 / UN601 / UN512 are within a saturated zone at FL300–340, favouring persistent contrail formation across the Hebrides, Inverness, and Moray Firth sectors.
• Central Belt (Glasgow / Edinburgh): Moisture is high (85–95% RHi) along airways UL975 / UN864 / UN615, so trails from transatlantic and European flows over Glasgow, Stirling, and Edinburgh are expected to persist and spread extensively.
• North East Corridor (Aberdeen to North Sea): Strong humidity continues into the North Sea with UN601 / UP18 linking Scotland to Norway and Denmark. Contrails in this corridor will spread and expand into cirrus sheets over the sea and into Scandinavian airspace.
• FL390 across all regions: RHi drops to 40–55%, so contrails here will be short-lived or broken, with much lower chance of persistence compared to the saturated mid-levels.
Wales
• North Wales / Anglesey: Airways UL975 / UN57 over the Irish Sea and Menai Strait are saturated at FL300–340, making persistent contrails highly likely with trails spreading into cirrus across Gwynedd and Snowdonia.
• South Wales (Cardiff / Swansea): Airways UL9 / UN14 also show high humidity at FL300–340, so persistence is expected over the Severn Estuary, Swansea Bay, and into the Bristol Channel, with trails likely to spread into cirrus sheets.
• FL390: Across Wales, the upper layer is drier (50% RHi), meaning contrails at this altitude will be short-lived and less visible.
Ireland
• Dublin FIR: Airways UL975 / UN546 / UL607 sit in a saturated band at FL300–340, making persistent contrails almost certain across eastern and central Ireland.
• South-West Ireland (Kerry / Dingle): At the North Atlantic Track (NAT) entry points, conditions strongly favour long-lasting contrails, with spreading cirrus likely as transatlantic flows converge here.
• Douglas / Isle of Man: Along UL975, humidity at FL300–340 supports persistent contrails, with trails spreading eastwards into the Irish Sea.
• FL390: Across the whole region, the upper layer is much drier, meaning trails here will be short-lived and less likely to spread.
England
• North England (Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds, Hull, Newcastle): Airways UL975 / UN57 / UL602 / UN615 cross a saturated band at FL300–340, making persistent contrails very likely. Expect widespread trail formation along transatlantic arrivals and European flows, with spreading cirrus visible across the Pennines and eastern seaboard.
• Midlands (Birmingham, East Midlands, Stoke, Nottingham): Airways UL9 / UN14 / UL10 also lie within the moist layer at FL300–340, so high persistence is expected, with contrails lingering over central England and merging into cirrus fields that may extend north–south across the region.
• South East (London TMA – Heathrow, Gatwick, Stansted, Luton): Major corridors UL607 / UN864 / UL9 are fully saturated at FL300–340, meaning persistent contrails are highly likely. Heavy traffic density in and out of the London airports will result in layered and spreading contrail cirrus across the Home Counties and southern England.
• South West (Bristol, Exeter, Cornwall): Airways UN14 / UL9 and the NAT entry points west of Cornwall sit within the saturated layer at FL300–340, so persistent contrails are expected along transatlantic departures and arrivals. Spreading cirrus likely over the Bristol Channel and far southwest peninsula.
• FL390: Across England, conditions aloft are drier (<50–55% RHi), meaning contrails at this level will be short-lived and less widespread compared to the lower layers.
Neighbouring Regions
• Northern France (Nantes, Paris, Normandy, Brittany): Dark blue saturation at FL300/340 → persistent contrails expected.
• Belgium / Netherlands (Brussels, Amsterdam): 100% humidity → very favourable for persistence.
• Western Approaches (Atlantic flight paths into UK/Ireland): Saturated corridors → persistent contrails likely for transatlantic flights entering FIRs.
Summary:
• FL300–FL340 (30,000–34,000 ft): All areas shaded dark blue = highly susceptible to persistent contrails across UK, Ireland, N France, Benelux, and North Atlantic corridors.
• FL390 (39,000 ft): Humidity drops (~65%), so trails are
less likely to persist and will dissipate faster.
• Impact: Expect widespread contrail cirrus across UK & Ireland skies, especially concentrated along transatlantic routes and busy domestic/European corridors (London–Scotland, Dublin–London, Manchester–Amsterdam, etc).
#contrailreport #ChemtrailDebunker #AviationFacts #sciencenotconspiracy
Source
