Could this be true? https://www.facebook.com/migyal.imisyou/videos/2514422715448542/UzpfSTEwMDAwODE2OTc1NjA4NDoyMDQxMDc4Nzg2MTc0NDI3/ A friend has posted this - of course, I have been looking around to debunk it, maybe someone can give me an answer. thanks in advance.

  • 7
    $\begingroup$ Maybe you could include the relevant elements of the video in the question. $\endgroup$
    – Antzi
    Apr 11, 2018 at 2:02
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ You may first search for yourself and be more specific about why you think "this" is true or not. Remember not all aviation.SE users have a facebook account so you must explain what your link is about. $\endgroup$
    – Manu H
    Apr 11, 2018 at 5:49
  • $\begingroup$ This sort of question is a better fit for skeptics.SE, but please note that they only address notable claims, which may not include a random Facebook post $\endgroup$
    – Pondlife
    Apr 11, 2018 at 13:07

3 Answers 3


The fact that this even needs to be debunked is ridiculous. I have worked on both military and civilian aircraft of many, many different varieties. I have never once been called to a jet with a malfunctioning “Chemtrail” system. I have never seen a maintenance manual reference for it, never been trained on it, and have never even seen provisions for such a system that might be worked by some sort of “covert contractor.” It is either the aircraft system that all other aircraft systems should emulate, or it simply doesn’t exist.

This is perhaps the dumbest conspiracy theory ever and simply feeds on people’s innocent yet ignorant understanding of aviation. No. It is not a thing. It’s not even close to a thing.

  • $\begingroup$ The title is misleading, the video try to say that fuel cannot fit in an aircraft, cannot be pumped fast enough, and use poor photoshop to "prove" this. $\endgroup$
    – Antzi
    Apr 11, 2018 at 3:08
  • $\begingroup$ Still aircraft carry "extinction" probes used for scientific experiments on clouds (source), you can't say the contrary ;-) $\endgroup$
    – mins
    Jan 18, 2021 at 11:38

For those who did not watch the video (btw, I have no FB account and will never have one):

It is a polemic about the fuel load aircraft can take. The author claims:

  • we have been deceived by a conspiracy of airlines and aircraft manufacturers about the amount of fuel that goes into an aircraft.
  • the mass of the claimed fuel volume is too heavy to be lifted by an aircraft.
  • the volume would not fit into the wings.
  • the filling process would not allow to pump the claimed volume in the given time.
  • fuel sloshing would be an insurmountable problem.

and so on. I stopped watching after half the video because the ruse had long become obvious.

I have done many calculations on how much energy is contained in the fuel and how much is needed to move an aircraft over large distances. If you read some of my answers on the subject, the results can be found even on this site. Now for a rebuttal:

  • FB is the premier platform for spreading fake information. Whoever still believes what is posted there must have been living under a rock for the last decade. So the source makes this already suspect.
  • The fuel needed for a given flight is only a fraction of the maximum fuel load. This maximum is only needed for extreme range and can reach up to 40% of the take-off weight. So there is clearly enough lift capacity for the structure, the systems and the payload. Fuel mass is an issue, but it is manageable.
  • The tanks are in the wings, but also in the horizontal tail and the center wing which is inside the fuselage. The tanks are not special canisters like in a car, but integral tanks: The structure is sealed and riveted tight so the whole inside can be filled with fuel. The available volume is used to the extreme, and yes, it is sufficient.
  • Filling is done with special, high-performance equipment. I found the part about the claimed impossibility of the filling process to be especially ridiculous.
  • Yes, sloshing is also a problem with aircraft tanks, but they include baffles and sometimes even a special foam to reduce sloshing.

My conclusion: This is yet another silly conspiracy theory and clickbait for people who don't know enough about aircraft engineering.

  • $\begingroup$ Regarding "the volume would not fit into the wings", there's my answer to How is fuel weight calculated? which (in response to a comment on that question) discusses that issue specifically. I personally found that result somewhat surprising; if an A380 used the entire wing area for fuel tanks, and nothing else (neither of which is the case in practice), then the tanks would need to be less than 40 cm high to contain the referenced amount of fuel. $\endgroup$
    – user
    Apr 11, 2018 at 6:43
  • $\begingroup$ @MichaelKjörling: Yes, and Antzi has done the same in his answer. I will link to to your answer. $\endgroup$ Apr 11, 2018 at 6:52
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Upvoted for "no FB." $\endgroup$
    – acpilot
    Apr 11, 2018 at 19:35

Fuel capacity:

Funny how the video just insert non scaled fuel trucks next to the aircraft instead of... Doing the maths.

A380 wing area: 845m² Fuel capacity: 253T <=> 320 000L <=> 320m³

So how high does your wing need to be to contain that much fuel ?

322m³/845m² = 0.38m = 38.1cm

Obviously this is an over simplification but the answer is yes, it fits.


The tanks are divided to prevent that, research the site for more informations.

  • $\begingroup$ Sorry that I could give you only one upvote. Great response to that silly claim! $\endgroup$ Apr 11, 2018 at 6:47

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .