Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 100 101 [102] 103 104 ... 108   Go Down

Author Topic: Still from ROV video  (Read 949955 times)

Martin X. Moleski, SJ

  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 2951
Re: Still from ROV video
« Reply #1515 on: October 20, 2012, 08:18:34 AM »

Thank you for providing Andrew McKenna's thoughts on scale. I cannot say that I can agree with them, in large part based upon my many hours of experience looking at ROV video in real time on the Niku VII expedition. The visual range is certainly sufficient to see the 25-30 feet he warns of, even in the absence of ambient light at depth. For example,

Different year (2010 vs 2012), different expedition (Niku VI vs. Niku VII), different equipment, different results.

I believe Andrew helped with the ROV used on Niku VI.  He certainly was involved with planning the expedition, has dived extensively at Niku, and seems to me to be "an authority."  That doesn't mean that he's right, but I give a lot of weight to what he says.

Quote
The numeral "2" is so clear to me in its shape, thickness of strokes, angles of strokes, and color that it warrants special attention, in my opinion, by those who have the talents and equipment to examine it in full detail. If someone can provide an alternate explanation of its identity, fine. If you are waiting until we find the actual Airworthiness Certificate before we declare success, then I don't think I have enough years left.

Might I just call this "An Inconvenient 2th".

I'm not asking more of TIGHAR than TIGHAR is able to provide.

I presume that Niku VIII will want to do more than just visit the Bevington area to find out what, in fact, is shown in the Niku VII HD video.  If all goes well--a big "if"!--that should only take a few dives, leaving a number of days to improve and extend the search.  The side-scan sonar seems to have been a big disappointment for identifying good targets to look at; just mowing the lawn with a good optical system seems to have borne better fruit.
LTM,

           Marty
           TIGHAR #2359A
 
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5521
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: Still from ROV video
« Reply #1516 on: October 20, 2012, 09:22:54 AM »

Different year (2010 vs 2012), different expedition (Niku VI vs. Niku VII), different equipment, different results.

To be specific, the 2010 expedition used a SeaBotix LBV the size of a carry-on bag.  The 2012 expedition used an SSI TRV-M the size of a large All Terrain Vehicle.
Both ROVs had four banks of LED lights (indicated by arrows in the photos) but the ones on the TRV-M were much larger and more powerful.

Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5521
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: Still from ROV video
« Reply #1517 on: October 20, 2012, 11:21:23 AM »

The "Wire & Rope" aka the Balderston Debris Field (sorry John) was videoed on June 7, 2010 at a depth of approximately 800 feet somewhere roughly west of Nessie.  We can't be more precise than that because the ROV's position-reporting capability was inoperative due to an earlier accident.  I've plotted the presumed position on the attached maps that show the ROV tracks from the 2012 expedition.  As you can see, we were in the general area but we did not see the objects videoed in 2010 - either because they are no longer there or because we just missed them.  I suspect the latter.

I've sent the various screen captures and opinions about objects in the video to Jeff Glickman and asked for his comments.
Logged

Tim Mellon

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 805
  • Blast off!
Re: Still from ROV video
« Reply #1518 on: October 20, 2012, 01:38:35 PM »

Quote from: Ric Gillespie link=tpic=571.msg20739#msg20739 date=1350753683
The "Wire & Rope"

I've sent the various screen captures and opinions about objects in the video to Jeff Glickman and asked for his comments.

Thank you, Ric.

Tim
Chairman,  CEO
PanAm Systems

TIGHAR #3372R
 
Logged

Tim Mellon

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 805
  • Blast off!
Re: Still from ROV video
« Reply #1519 on: October 26, 2012, 03:57:57 AM »

 Chris Johnson, I found the bi-valve you mentioned in Reply #1606 - it is at 13:37:37, frame 28, and appears to be a scallop shell. Its scale is consistent with the nearby rope.
Tim
Chairman,  CEO
PanAm Systems

TIGHAR #3372R
 
Logged

John Balderston

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 119
Re: Still from ROV video
« Reply #1520 on: October 30, 2012, 12:13:01 AM »

Tim Mellon's post in "Landing near the Norwich" (Message #20866) identifying the underside of the left wing got me looking at the first few seconds of the "Wire & Rope" video clip.  Admittedly this segment of the 2010 ROV video clip is the most difficult to interpret - limited light, contrast and resolution.  However as Tim points out to us there are several discernable features that can be used for comparison:

Tim: "(1) 13:43:14 frame 14 shows the underside of the wingtip of the left wing, with the clear line (pointing directly at the camera) dividing the wingtip from the inboard portion of the wing and the bottom of the left aileron; in addition, the bottom of the digit "0" can be seen to the right of this line. "

Attached find two frames with a photo of NR16020 underside of port wing for comparison.  To my eyes one more piece of visual evidence consistent with wreckage of a specific aircraft.  Pretty interesting!
John Balderston TIGHAR #3451R
 
Logged

Tim Mellon

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 805
  • Blast off!
Re: Still from ROV video
« Reply #1521 on: October 30, 2012, 06:14:27 AM »

  John, did you also notice (as I just have) that the outboard part of the "0" is obscured by a surface that appears to be the rear (movable) portion of a rudder (probably left rudder, since the fixed portion sits just to the right, bearing the Lockheed logo).                                     
Tim
Chairman,  CEO
PanAm Systems

TIGHAR #3372R
 
« Last Edit: October 30, 2012, 09:05:34 AM by Tim Mellon »
Logged

Tim Mellon

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 805
  • Blast off!
Re: Still from ROV video
« Reply #1522 on: October 30, 2012, 11:35:47 AM »

 The Titanic.
Tim
Chairman,  CEO
PanAm Systems

TIGHAR #3372R
 
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5521
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: Still from ROV video
« Reply #1523 on: October 30, 2012, 12:24:01 PM »

So, perhaps it comes down to desire, faith in mission and a willingness to apply brute effort in terms of resources and action.  Anyone committing to that ought to have both eyes wide open - what more can one say?

It has been my experience that rigorous research, sound reasoning, and good methodology will put you in the right place - but that's not enough.  You have to get lucky - and you have to be there in order to get lucky.
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5521
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: Still from ROV video
« Reply #1524 on: October 30, 2012, 12:29:04 PM »

This just in from Jeff Glickman:

"I have reviewed the referenced video several times and I am unable to locate the objects described in the email below [the summary Tim provided].  I would be happy to meet with Mr. Mellon and give him with the opportunity to provide me with further details and guidance.
 
Sincerely,
 
Jeff B. Glickman, BSCS, BCFE, FACFE, DABFE"
Logged

Tim Mellon

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 805
  • Blast off!
Re: Still from ROV video
« Reply #1525 on: October 30, 2012, 04:03:57 PM »

 
This just in from Jeff Glickman:

"I have reviewed the referenced video several times and I am unable to locate the objects described in the email below [the summary Tim provided].  I would be happy to meet with Mr. Mellon and give him with the opportunity to provide me with further details and guidance.
 
Sincerely,
 
Jeff B. Glickman, BSCS, BCFE, FACFE, DABFE"
     

Mr. Glickman, via Ric, I would be delighted, after November 6, at a place of your choosing and at a mutually convenient time. Please contact me at panam.captain@yahoo.com. You probably have better viewing equipment than I.                                             

P.S. Ric, could you kindly forward John Balderston and my observations of earlier today to Mr. Glickman.                          :)
Tim
Chairman,  CEO
PanAm Systems

TIGHAR #3372R
 
« Last Edit: October 30, 2012, 04:16:17 PM by Tim Mellon »
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5521
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: Still from ROV video
« Reply #1526 on: October 30, 2012, 06:30:55 PM »

Tim, I have forwarded your offer to Jeff Glickman.  I expect you'll be hearing form him soon.
Logged

John Balderston

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 119
Re: Still from ROV video
« Reply #1527 on: October 30, 2012, 06:35:37 PM »

. . .Do any of you really see enough here to warrant such a focused effort on this area, or should we perhaps be willing to accept that these are just 'possibilities' and widen the search, just in case?. . .

I'm crossing my fingers that careful review of the HD Debris Field video locates the wire/rope seen in Niku VI video.  To my eyes a bunch of wreckage came down the reef slope on the same path as the wire/rope/cable.  In April timeframe Leon White posted a composite of ROV video snapshots that started painting a pretty decent picture.  I've been thinking it may be worth picking up where Leon left off - the composite mosiac could be a helpful tool to get a more comprehensive sense of what's down there and why it looks like it does.  For instance, the first clip with "wing wreckage" in "Wire & Rope" occurs at 13:43; chronologically 5+ minutes later than the supposed "right nacelle" wreckage.  We see that at 13:43 the video image is much darker and less distinct, and that there appears to be a lot more debris lying on top.  Because of editing we can't tell the path the ROV operator took to get to 13:43.  But as I've tried to make sense of this I think it would be logical for the ROV driver keep following the same heading as the wire/rope.  The question in my mind - at 14:43 are we seeing evidence that the outer wing wreckage slid past the much heavier inner wing carry-through and engines, fell off the edge of a vertical cliff and came to rest on a shelf?  That would explain the darkness and the big-time accumulation of debris.

Conversely, the first clip in the "Object 10" video occurs at 13:36; a couple minutes earlier than the "nacelle".   The configuration at 13:36 shares a number of similarities to the "right nacelle".  Are we looking at the left side wreckage here?  Pretty interesting!

(Note: modified post to provide a direct link to Leon White's composite image.)
John Balderston TIGHAR #3451R
 
« Last Edit: October 30, 2012, 06:57:02 PM by John Balderston »
Logged

tom howard

  • T2
  • **
  • Posts: 87
Re: Still from ROV video
« Reply #1528 on: October 30, 2012, 07:40:27 PM »

John, the scenario you describe does sound logical enough.  And sort of like Ric said, it does take luck too - and if you aren't in place you can't be lucky - that is for certain. 

By recent comments it appears some of this is going to get a close audience between Messrs. Mellon and Glickman.  Cool enough - I wish you and Tim luck in that.  I do love to see people make their own luck and then to be in place for it to come their way, for sure.  It would be quite a find.


I saw a tire. Can I meet with Mr.glickman as well?
Logged

tom howard

  • T2
  • **
  • Posts: 87
Re: Still from ROV video
« Reply #1529 on: October 30, 2012, 10:22:26 PM »

John, the scenario you describe does sound logical enough.  And sort of like Ric said, it does take luck too - and if you aren't in place you can't be lucky - that is for certain. 

By recent comments it appears some of this is going to get a close audience between Messrs. Mellon and Glickman.  Cool enough - I wish you and Tim luck in that.  I do love to see people make their own luck and then to be in place for it to come their way, for sure.  It would be quite a find.


I saw a tire. Can I meet with Mr.glickman as well?

Don't ask me - ask Ric...  ;)

Go back to where this string started and you can read all about what I've 'seen' here myself...

If they DO go back to this area I'd like to know what the strut-shaped thing with the 'squiggly' really is, if it's still there.  That does intrigue me - almost as much as that piece of plexiglass that matches an L10 Lockheed's window in thickness and radius that was found ashore, I will confess.

Mr. Mellon has a point in 'keep on looking' - think how boring it would be if no one were willing to do so, AND NOT searching SOMEWHERE is the only way to guarantee a given outcome: DON'T search and you surely WON'T find.

That said I also would favor being able to search a wider area if it can be done, not just focusing on the stuff we see here.  Reason: if you are going to search Niku, search it thoroughly. 

No problem, right?  It can't be more than a few tens of square miles of very rough sea mount... for good measure, go all out and put a team of archeologists ashore for a few weeks for a thorough survey.

Priorities, priorities...

This whole thread has me perplexed. I thought we were having some good natured review of old film. John found some stuff, I found some stuff, Tim found some stuff.
Then Marty says its all been looked at before guys, nothing worth looking at.
Ok, that sounds like Marty.
 :)
Then Ric forwards some of Tim's suggestions to Glickman to re-look at. What the heck?
(I thought Glickman was working hard on the new film of the actual debris field???)
Now Ric has Tim meeting with Glickman to discuss some old film? Actually meeting with him?
Is Tighar out of work on the new debris field? Was nothing found worth going back for, because the last I heard 30% of the new debris field had been analyzed and Ric said it was something he would think long and hard about going back out for, that it just wasn't firm evidence at the moment. That's when I posted was this Bleak?
Now we have the photo guy meeting with Tim who sees stuff nobody else can see, like numbers on a plane, and that even Dr.Glickman doesn't see on a second rehash.

Now Jeff, you are talking about actually going back to this 2010 place and rehashing that? Like an actual expedition to it? What in the world.
First it's dismissed, then it's re-opened, then it's dismissed again, then we have new forum members wanting meetings with the photoanalyst that dismissed it, now Jeff is talking about expeditions to review the 2010 area.
What in the world happened to the new debris field? Is it shelved? Was nothing found of interest to merit the expenditure? Is Glickman meeting with new people that might have ideas Ric hasn't thought of? Ric already dismissed this 2010 area. I have areas I wouldn't mind researched if we are taking suggestions.
Very confused of the direction the group is headed and why? ???
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 100 101 [102] 103 104 ... 108   Go Up
 

Copyright 2019 by TIGHAR, a non-profit foundation. No portion of the TIGHAR Website may be reproduced by xerographic, photographic, digital or any other means for any purpose. No portion of the TIGHAR Website may be stored in a retrieval system, copied, transmitted or transferred in any form or by any means, whether electronic, mechanical, digital, photographic, magnetic or otherwise, for any purpose without the express, written permission of TIGHAR. All rights reserved.

Contact us at: info@tighar.org • Phone: 610-467-1937 • Membership formwebmaster@tighar.org

Powered by MySQL SMF 2.0.15 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines Powered by PHP