I've done quite a bit of seismic using towed eels. It is very very difficult to know what the fish is doing and where it is in the water. I could not imagine having one on a 6 KM cable. It would probably take half the day just to get it to depth and flying properly.
Missing 777
- Thread starter Tomtint
- Start date
- Views: 64662
I've done quite a bit of seismic using towed eels. It is very very difficult to know what the fish is doing and where it is in the water. I could not imagine having one on a 6 KM cable. It would probably take half the day just to get it to depth and flying properly.
RobertBrown
Veteran Member
I flew a kite once....it wasn't that hard at all....but I didn't fly it underwater... soooo.
Egon
Epic Contributor
You gota pick a place with a nice current. Neat thing here is you can fly it above or below yourself!
Egon
Epic Contributor
The chances of the US Navy being able to follow a vessel of interest without the use of a submarine is very feasible.p:thumbsup:
Egon
Epic Contributor
buickanddeere
Super Member
Does that mean submarines are lost as soon as they submerge?
Those inertial gyros are spinning for a reason.
farmgirl19
Elite Member
We navigated before the days of GPS. Didn't matter if in the sky, on or under water. All GPS has done is make mental cripples of most.
texasjohn
Super Member
100%
I don't believe it's a detraction, or even a distraction. I believe it's a fact.
First you search for pings..done...almost a miracle any were found at all
then you seek to locate the pinger on the seabed using the pings...in progress
This requires narrowing the search area...in progress, down from 30,000 square miles at one point to 500 square miles at present
At 3 miles deep in wild ocean waters, given the way sound happens in water, given thermoclines, etc...this isn't an easy task
When the pings stop, and they will soon because batteries DO give out after a while, a radar/visual search is the only thing left
This search is not only 3 miles deep but the bottom there is covered in silt, sometimes over 30 feet deep.
then, let's assume you know exactly where the plane is and that it's not broken open...now how do you get in there and remove two pingers and bring them back to the surface using robots...in the dark with silt obscuring everything. That's hard to do remotely by robot control, even if it were simply in the bottom of the Mississippi river.
You know, if we get over the ineptness of the initial way this was handled, perhaps there is no conspiracy involved in reporting that this task is going to take a while and be expensive...
I don't believe it's a detraction, or even a distraction. I believe it's a fact.
First you search for pings..done...almost a miracle any were found at all
then you seek to locate the pinger on the seabed using the pings...in progress
This requires narrowing the search area...in progress, down from 30,000 square miles at one point to 500 square miles at present
At 3 miles deep in wild ocean waters, given the way sound happens in water, given thermoclines, etc...this isn't an easy task
When the pings stop, and they will soon because batteries DO give out after a while, a radar/visual search is the only thing left
This search is not only 3 miles deep but the bottom there is covered in silt, sometimes over 30 feet deep.
then, let's assume you know exactly where the plane is and that it's not broken open...now how do you get in there and remove two pingers and bring them back to the surface using robots...in the dark with silt obscuring everything. That's hard to do remotely by robot control, even if it were simply in the bottom of the Mississippi river.
You know, if we get over the ineptness of the initial way this was handled, perhaps there is no conspiracy involved in reporting that this task is going to take a while and be expensive...
dave1949
Super Star Member
The recovery wouldn't be that tough to do in Hollywood. They are probably passing the first draft script around right now.
