Egon
Epic Contributor
Them pictures is serious stuff. Using the phone should be much cheaper than the regular camera!
Missing 777
- Thread starter Tomtint
- Start date
- Views: 66274
MossRoad
Super Moderator
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2001
- Messages
- 66,103
- Location
- South Bend, Indiana (near)
- Tractor
- Power Trac PT425 2001 Model Year
No plane found yet.
davrow
Veteran Member
I'm surprised this hasn't been mentioned before, considering the faith we all place in the Malaysian government: The flight never happened.
They used a plane to electronically appear to be 777, but the real flight 777 was 'stolen' days earlier.
k0ua
Epic Contributor
What did the 139 people board?
davrow
Veteran Member
They are still standing in line staring at the 'flight delayed' sign.
I mean, has anybody LOOKED? :stirthepot:
k0ua
Epic Contributor
Judging by the hundreds, of crying screaming relatives,, I would say they have looked..
davrow
Veteran Member
I'm sorry, no levity allowed?
k0ua
Epic Contributor
Soundguy
Old Timer
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2002
- Messages
- 52,424
- Location
- Central florida
- Tractor
- RK 55HC,ym1700, NH7610S, Ford 8N, 2N, NAA, 660, 850 x2, 541, 950, 941D, 951, 2000, 3000, 4000, 4600, 5000, 740, IH 'C' 'H', CUB, John Deere 'B', allis 'G', case VAC
facts are changing daily. what gives with that!
dave1949
Super Star Member
texasjohn
Super Member
I know. It's such a pain.
First is a fact. Then somebody tries to put it into a context, to determine its implication. Then somebody concludes an action to take, based on it.
Sadly, something happens next. Could be another fact. Or a different somebody determines a different context or implication. Or a different conclusion leading to a different action.
Sometimes, even, an assumption is taken to be a fact, then extrapolated forward in time and place, then repeated imperfectly, then someone becomes impatient with the details and summarizes it all for ears which do not have the patience or intelligence to take in all the details. Then the impatient ears assume that they have been maliciously misled by a governmental conspiracy which is withholding something. But they don't know what...perhaps because there never was a what to know.
I mean, the very presence of nothingness is proof enough!!
First is a fact. Then somebody tries to put it into a context, to determine its implication. Then somebody concludes an action to take, based on it.
Sadly, something happens next. Could be another fact. Or a different somebody determines a different context or implication. Or a different conclusion leading to a different action.
Sometimes, even, an assumption is taken to be a fact, then extrapolated forward in time and place, then repeated imperfectly, then someone becomes impatient with the details and summarizes it all for ears which do not have the patience or intelligence to take in all the details. Then the impatient ears assume that they have been maliciously misled by a governmental conspiracy which is withholding something. But they don't know what...perhaps because there never was a what to know.
I mean, the very presence of nothingness is proof enough!!
texasjohn
Super Member
And, that's a fact...think about it.
MossRoad
Super Moderator
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2001
- Messages
- 66,103
- Location
- South Bend, Indiana (near)
- Tractor
- Power Trac PT425 2001 Model Year
There's a person on CNN (can't remember her name, Maria S. or something) doing consulting on the story. I think she's now an attorney for airplane crash victims, but was formerly in some government role concerning aviation.... anyway, she keeps saying that the problem is people are coming up with theories, then trying to use the facts to prove them, rather than waiting for all the facts and then coming up with the truth. She's one of the few voices of reason in this whole thing.
buickanddeere
Super Member
Here is a question . Why are the authorities only admitting to using visual satellite data? And why is nobody asking about space based radar?
They can find a floating beer can from space . If there was floating metal instead of floating plastic fishing nets. The radar gets a far stronger reflection from metal.
Here is info on a 2nd generation bird which is very capable.
Radarsat-2 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
They can find a floating beer can from space . If there was floating metal instead of floating plastic fishing nets. The radar gets a far stronger reflection from metal.
Here is info on a 2nd generation bird which is very capable.
Radarsat-2 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
MossRoad
Super Moderator
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2001
- Messages
- 66,103
- Location
- South Bend, Indiana (near)
- Tractor
- Power Trac PT425 2001 Model Year
My guess is that that part of the ocean is so barren, remote and infrequently used that both military and civilian satellites are probably not going over that area on a regular basis. And most satellites like that are constantly orbiting the earth, only go over the same area once every X days (where X is determined by its owner). Its not like its in geosynchronous orbit over the same spot all the time.
Also, given the example that you linked to, that particular satellite has a normal resolution of 100m, meaning it will only see things about 100 yards long when doing wide swaths. If they cut it down to "beer can mode" so-to-speak, it would take many, many passes over the huge area to get high-res images of the open ocean. Then someone has to interpret those images, etc.... and that particular satellite it looks like completes one full mapping of the earth every 24 days. It can't just park over the area and start scanning.
So, if they suspect an area has something of interest to look at, they can certainly zoom in on that area the next time the satellite is scheduled to make a pass over that area. But that is one of the limiting factors on satellites.
MossRoad
Super Moderator
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2001
- Messages
- 66,103
- Location
- South Bend, Indiana (near)
- Tractor
- Power Trac PT425 2001 Model Year
Yeah. Watch the BBC or other foreign news orgs and you don't see the emotional newsfotainment that you get with CNN.
texasjohn
Super Member
Why did you say "they can find a floating beer can from space?" Nothing in your reference gives such detail of Radarsat accuracy.
Why are you inventing "facts?" When done in the context of this thread which seems to abhor misinformation or misstatements, it is quite revealing.
Why are you inventing "facts?" When done in the context of this thread which seems to abhor misinformation or misstatements, it is quite revealing.
buickanddeere
Super Member
Read the specs . They are posted.
Here are some similar links:
