TIGHAR
Amelia Earhart Search Forum => General discussion => Topic started by: richie conroy on March 07, 2013, 03:18:07 PM
-
Hi All
Ric the image i have attached shows an anomaly below second cliff which arrow points too.
Do you have a closer sonar image with better detail ?
Didn't want too start new thread just for this, So will delete post in couple hours *(This post moved from "New TIGHAR Tracks" to new "Sonar Target" thread - JN)
Thank's Richie
-
Ric the image i have attached shows an anomaly below second cliff which arrow points too.
Do you have a closer sonar image with better detail ?
Well....that's pretty interesting. Nice work Richie. It's certainly an anomaly - as in, I don't see anything else like it. It has the appearance of being an object that has fallen off the the second cliff, hit the slope at the bottom of the cliff, and slid downhill on a southward trajectory leaving a gouged path deep enough to show up on the side-scan sonar. That would suggest that it's quite heavy. (Your second image is upside down). The object - if that is what it is - is quite large, maybe too large to be airplane wreckage. Hard to say. It did, however, come to rest at roughly the same depth as the stern of Norwich City, but it's too far north to be ship wreckage. I need to do some checking but I don't think Phoenix identified it as a target worth investigating. Whatever it is, we never went there with the ROV as you can see from the attached map showing the "snail trails" of all the ROV dives.
I'll go through the data and see what more I can find out about this target. You're right that it doesn't belong in this thread. I suggest you start a new topic called "Sonar target."
*(This post moved from "New TIGHAR Tracks" accordingly - JN)
-
Ric the image i have attached shows an anomaly below second cliff which arrow points too.
Do you have a closer sonar image with better detail ?
Well....that's pretty interesting. Nice work Richie. It's certainly an anomaly - as in, I don't see anything else like it. It has the appearance of being an object that has fallen off the the second cliff, hit the slope at the bottom of the cliff, and slid downhill on a southward trajectory leaving a gouged path deep enough to show up on the side-scan sonar. That would suggest that it's quite heavy. (Your second image is upside down). The object - if that is what it is - is quite large, maybe too large to be airplane wreckage. Hard to say. It did, however, come to rest at roughly the same depth as the stern of Norwich City, but it's too far north to be ship wreckage. I need to do some checking but I don't think Phoenix identified it as a target worth investigating. Whatever it is, we never went there with the ROV as you can see from the attached map showing the "snail trails" of all the ROV dives.
I'll go through the data and see what more I can find out about this target. You're right that it doesn't belong in this thread. I suggest you start a new topic called "Sonar target."
Ric, does this mean that we can discuss underwater images again? Has Jeff Glickman opined on this anomaly?
-
Ric, does this mean that we can discuss underwater images again? Has Jeff Glickman opined on this anomaly?
We'll confine discussions to the side-scan image and try to figure out if it's anything worth getting excited about. I haven't heard from Jeff lately and I know he has a trip to Southeast Asia coming up soon.
-
Ok Thank's Ric
-
Hi All
Ric Is it possible the area of Anomaly is same area of 2010 wire/rope video ?
the following image is from another angle of Anomaly, The red area is quite obvious, \However the Electra had orange on front edge of wings, But i believe this is just software related color. I.E Photoshop's interpretation of image.
Thanks Richie
-
Is it possible the area of Anomaly is same area of 2010 wire/rope video ?
Richie, the amber arrow points to where I think the location of the 2010 debris field is located (seen again in the first 2012 dive). Your object lies approximately 100 meters down, the debris field almost 300 meters (985-1015 feet). Of course, your object could be that "missing" engine.
-
Hi Leon
Ric speculated that the object was too big to be airplane wreckage, However he is looking into it.
Not sure what the T shaped object is.
In the following image i increased the shadow an seen the object arrow was pointing too funny shape don't ye think ?
my Bet is it's a tree or something to them lines
Thanks Richie
-
I've scaled the object as best I can and I make it something under 10 meters in length with a "tail' roughly four times that long. I've corresponded about this with the Hawaii Undersea Research Lab (HURL) scientist who was aboard KOK with us last summer. He agrees that it's an interesting target - certainly anomalous to anything else in the side-scan imagery. We're working on it. I'll let everyone know when we know more.
-
Hi All
Ric any chance off some footage off were anomaly would have slid across from nessie to were it lay now, As the rov goes over that area
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e5TALXiBUgk&list=PLniL708Xuz5zB37l7dCYb3tY7S3eky286&index=12
There seems to be strands of wire about the area at start and on 0:58 bottom right there is some thing on floor a black object, You don't see it in second part off video cos the camera goes down not up.
Also have you not heard no more off (HURL)about anomaly ?
Thanks Richie
-
Ric any chance off some footage off were anomaly would have slid across from nessie to were it lay now, As the rov goes over that area
We were never in that area with the ROV. The video clips (Standard and Hi-Def) that I put on YouTube are the closest video we have and they're roughly 50 meters north of the anomaly.
There seems to be strands of wire about the area at start and on 0:58 bottom right there is some thing on floor a black object, You don't see it in second part off video cos the camera goes down not up.
I don't see any man-made objects in that video. My only purpose in putting up those clips was to show the nature of the bottom.
Also have you not heard no more off (HURL)about anomaly ?
I'm still waiting to hear back from several side-scan sonar experts but we've done quite a bit work on pinning down exactly where and how big the anomaly is. I can tell you this much - we really, really like this sonar target.
-
Hi All
Hi Ric
The attached image i have added white line from nessie to anomaly resting place there are 3 snail trail's that go over the path the Anomaly took from nessie to were it lay, So my question is: Is there anything in the area's the Rov go over to suggest the anomaly came from nessie area ?
Thanks Richie
-
Hi Guys
I hadn't seen these U-Tubes before and don't know if these views have been discussed and conjectured over...but in the one called ropes/wires that looks like an aeronse (sp) control (prop or mixture control ?...would have run between engine and cockpit?
The one labeled "object studied 7-18-12 " there's all kinds of interesting stuff but figure I'm coming in late...
In the box right in the beginning (1:57- 2:00) it looks like two radio tubes inside it...clear enough that if it is, you can see the top plate in the tubes through the glass...but if that's already covered you guys will just laugh at me !?!
Might as well say that towards the end , after what looks like wing structure, that looks very much like a wing tip position light sticking up...but there again I'm guess in the blind here...don't know where this was found and what you guys think....certainly something there (wherever "there" is !!)
Any value in these thoughts?
Bill
-
The one labeled "object studied 7-18-12 " there's all kinds of interesting stuff but figure I'm coming in late...
In the box right in the beginning (1:57- 2:00) it looks like two radio tubes inside it...clear enough that if it is, you can see the top plate in the tubes through the glass...but if that's already covered you guys will just laugh at me !?!
Might as well say that towards the end , after what looks like wing structure, that looks very much like a wing tip position light sticking up...but there again I'm guess in the blind here...don't know where this was found and what you guys think....certainly something there (wherever "there" is !!)
Any value in these thoughts?
Bill
The entire dive represented by this video captures the debris field that is the Norwich City. At first it was thought that the ribbed panel might be an aircraft wing (correct dimension and shape), but closer examination revealed it to be a section of bulkhead or hatch cover from the ship.
-
Is there anything in the area's the Rov go over to suggest the anomaly came from nessie area ?
Yes, two things.
1. If the "tail" extending northward from the anomaly is a skid mark, scar, or furrow dug by the object as it hit the slope at the base of the cliff, it suggests that the object may have been moving in a southerly direction when it hit. I would expect a coral boulder to travel straight down. The current in that area runs southward which could account for a southerly trajectory if the sinking object was partially buoyant (such as wreckage of the airplane's fuselage). Of course, it could also be that the slope in that particular spot slopes off to the southward which could cause any impacting object to skid southward.
2. The area where the possible landing gear debris field appears in the ROV video is on the line you drew between Nessie and the anomaly. As shown in the attached diagrams, it is at a depth where the reef slope moderates between the first and second cliff.
In other words, things appear to be lining up. You can draw a straight line between any two points. Three points? Not so much. We didn't "back into" these three points. We didn't look for something where we wanted something to be. Nessie is where she is. The anomaly is where it is. The landing gear debris in the ROV video is the only feature of interest that Jeff Glickman spotted after reviewing something like 19 hours of video and when he spotted it he had no idea where on the reef the video was taken. But is the sonar anomaly really as good as it looks to us amateurs? Before we get too excited I want to hear from the pros.
-
I hadn't seen these U-Tubes before and don't know if these views have been discussed and conjectured over...
Yes. Ad nauseum. That way lies madness. With enough video to work with you can find anything you can imagine in that "snow" covered seascape. There may, in fact, be camels in the clouds but we won't know until we can go back and poke at them to see if they spit (how's that for an analogy?).
-
Thanks Ric and Tim...
(keep in mind that "madness" may be what brings me here !?! )
Bill
-
(keep in mind that "madness" may be what brings me here !?! )
You're in good company. None of us here are quite right.
-
Hi All
Ric i have to admit i was surprised given what you know of Water current an location of airplane pieces spotted by and around lagoon that yous never never searched the most likely area debris would have come to rest i.e between nessie and NC debris
Obviously i know it ok me saying an pointing this out now like, am just intrested in the thought process you's used when searching
Thank Richie
-
In the first image Richie posted in this thread there looks like semi circular ripples above the "tail". Possibly from an impact above the object that caused a landslide. Is the light colored line a ridge or gouge?
What are the other light colored trails below it that are roughly at a one elevation and continuous?
Edit: probably something like Stratum (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratum)
Also it looks like evidence of a landslide under the Norwich City, only much bigger
-
Ric i have to admit i was surprised given what you know of Water current an location of airplane pieces spotted by and around lagoon that yous never never searched the most likely area debris would have come to rest i.e between nessie and NC debris
Obviously i know it ok me saying an pointing this out now like, am just intrested in the thought process you's used when searching
It's a fair question Richie and I'm happy to answer it.
First of all, unlike previous TIGHAR searches, this one was contracted out to a company whose business is to conduct underwater remote-sensing searches and recoveries. We told them where we wanted to search. Our primary search area was the reef slope from Nessie south to the Norwich City. If nothing was found there we wanted to cover the entire reef slope down to 1,500 meters from the NW tip of the island down to well south of the shipwreck. It was the contractor's job to select the technology and then design and carry out the search. For this they were paid a great deal of money - in advance. TIGHAR's role was to provide technical representatives to assist the contractor "with the identification of TIGHAR identified recovery targets during the search operation."
The plan recommended by the contractor and agreed to by TIGHAR was a three-step process:
• First, the multi-beam sonar aboard KOK would map the reef slope. Multi-beam sonar does not have sufficient resolution to find wreckage but mapping the entire perimeter of the island would only take a few hours and would provide a good basic map to work from for the detailed side-scan sonar search.
• Next, an Autonomous Underwater Vehicle (AUV) equipped with side-scan sonar would begin surveying the western reef slope. After each AUV mission, the contractor would examine the sonar data collected and identify promising targets.
• Finally, the targets would be investigated with video cameras mounted on a Remote Operated Vehicle (ROV) provided by a subcontractor.
We figured we could cover the entire area in 10 days of searching.
That was the plan, but the transit to the island took longer than expected and we arrived with only 8 days to spend on-site. The multi-beam mapping went well but the first two days were wasted trying to get the AUV to work. At that point I was tempted to cancel it’s use altogether and do all the searching by “mowing the lawn” with the ROV. The contractor insisted on continuing to try to get the AUV working - so we made a deal. The contractor and his people would work with the AUV at night and I would take over the ROV search working with the ROV subcontractor during the day checking out targets the contractor identified in the side-scan data and otherwise “mowing the lawn” in the primary search area.
Our first operational ROV dive was Dive 3 on July 14. We started just below Nessie and explored southward along the shelf at the base of the first cliff. Jeff Glickman later spotted the “Fender” in the HD video from that part of Dive 3 but we couldn’t see HD video in real time. When got down to the area behind Norwich City we started seeing ship wreckage and went deeper. We made our way northward and started “mowing the lawn” up and down the reef slope in the area directly below the Nessie location.
Dive 4 later that day was aborted because of a generator failure.
Dive 5 on July 15 chased six side-scan targets identified by the contractor as worthy of investigation. All turned out to be either coral boulders or Norwich City wreckage.
Dives 6 and 7 on July 16 were spent in amongst the Norwich City stern wreckage trying to find the “wing” target and mowing the lawn in that area.
Dive 8 on July 17 was spent rescuing the AUV from the cave.
Dive 9 on July 18 was another attempt to find the “wing.”
Dive 10 on July 18 investigated an “almost certainly man-made” target identified by the contractor off the NW tip of the island. It was a rock.
Dive 11 on July 18 was yet another attempt to conclusively identify the “wing.”
Dive 12 on July 18 resumed “mowing the lawn” in the area behind Nessie. This is the closest we ever got to the anomaly. Had we known the target was there we certainly would have continued to run those lines and check it out.
Dive 13 on July 19 (our last day) we were out of ideas. We made another excursion along the base of the first cliff but found nothing.
Dive 14 on July 19 , a deep dive from the Norwich City wreckage to below the nessie location was our final dive.
-
Thank's Ric
I wish i had known the information you have shared, Before i posted the above :-X as i was certain your main objective was to cover the area between nessie an NC
And it appears they went every were apart from your preferred area ::)
Am confident your next expedition will be a Success under an above water :)
While looking for video's on interpreting sonar images, I came across this device http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=humminbird+side+imaging&oq=hummingbird+si&gs_l=youtube.1.1.0j0i10l2j0j0i10j0l2j0i10l3.4640.11312.0.14815.14.12.0.0.0.1.227.1470.7j4j1.12.0...0.0...1ac.1.11.youtube.pA-6qDXowdM
Seem's the device knows the difference between rock's an man made objects :)
Thank's Richie
-
In the first image Richie posted in this thread there looks like semi circular ripples above the "tail". Possibly from an impact above the object that caused a landslide. Is the light colored line a ridge or gouge?
What are the other light colored trails below it that are roughly at a one elevation and continuous?
Edit: probably something like Stratum (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratum)
Also it looks like evidence of a landslide under the Norwich City, only much bigger
Hi G
The following sonar image is what I speculate we are seeing I could be wrong though ;D
-
Richie, did you see the latest post on TIGHAR's Facebook page?
Also, there may be a "trail" running down the slope starting below the cliff, just under the anomaly.
And a few other "trails" to the north that seem to run down the slope a long way.
If they are evidence of slides and not ridges or grooves, they may be good paths to follow down. One of them seems to start away from the base of the cliff just below the Bevington Object, maybe something floated out before sinking and caused a slide starting at mid slope.
-
Also, there may be a "trail" running down the slope starting below the cliff, just under the anomaly.
And a few other "trails" to the north that seem to run down the slope a long way.
If they are evidence of slides and not ridges or grooves, they may be good paths to follow down. One of them seems to start away from the base of the cliff just below the Bevington Object, maybe something floated out before sinking and caused a slide starting at mid slope.
We've been looking at those "trails." They may be scarring from landslides. That area is prone to landslides. We set off a small one with the ROV while trying to untangle the tether from a coral outcropping. Scary. The marks that appear to be scarring appear in two areas along the western reef - behind the Norwich City wreck where we know big chunks of wreckage tumbled down the slope - and behind Nessie. Unfortunately, the "trails" below Nessie lead into an area where we have no side-scan data because the slope was too steep.
-
As I just told the Facebook gang, we've asked several independent sonar experts to look at the data and we're getting conflicting opinions (wouldn't you know it?).
Lots of technical questions going back and forth right now. We're hoping we can arrive at some kind of consensus.
-
From the first image in the thread is it possible to 'scale' the object (or is that something the experts are looking at)?
-
Ric and Richie...I don't know if you guys have seen this or not...but take the anomaly picture file, open it up, and zoom in a couple of clicks...but not much, and then turn it over on its side and tell me what you see. Does this appear that the plane is laying on its roof at an angle and what appears to be left of a broken wing burrowing itself into the shelf floor. If this is the case, then this would describe the Bennington photo completely. Basically, when the Electra started washing out with the waves, it caught that rut in the reef (area where the landing gear was spotted) and possibly snagged the wing breaking it off along with the landing gear. Thus, turning the rest of the plane over and causing it to slip further down the shelf!!!!!
-
For those of you who may think that I'm implying that this is the plane, I'm merely referring to the anomaly that has somewhat the characteritics of the Lockheed Electra!!! Sorry!!!!
-
Hi Randy
I Believe the plane is laying on it's right side tail being nearest to us, The shadow it creates is interesting, And also there appears to be light colored objects to right of anomaly if you look closely
Thank's Richie
-
From the first image in the thread is it possible to 'scale' the object (or is that something the experts are looking at)?
This is the anomaly with a scale I created by comparing its length to the length of other targets of known dimension in the same imagery. The scale is in meters.
-
Ric, do you remember Will, the Phoenix technician, who had a sonar scan of two meter-cubed aluminum objects connected to each other by four meter-long rods? One could not discern the aluminum cubes themselves, but only their shadows.
Are we looking at shadows here?
-
Ric, do you remember Will, the Phoenix technician, who had a sonar scan of two meter-cubed aluminum objects connected to each other by four meter-long rods? One could not discern the aluminum cubes themselves, but only their shadows.
You're speaking of Will O'Halloran, the Bluefin technician. Yes, he was showing us an experiment they did to demonstrate to the Navy that it's possible to construct an aluminum object that is virtually invisible to sonar. All you can see is the shadow.
Are we looking at shadows here?
Yes. The dark areas behind the anomaly are shadows but remember - these are sound shadows. Interpreting them is tricky.
-
Ric:
Do you have the original sonar data of the area around the anomaly in strip-chart ("waterfall") form? The sonar mosaics are great for identifying anomalies, but not so great in trying to figure out what shape the thing actually is. Having the data in a waterfall format would give a lot of clues that the mosaic does not.
-Walt
-
Do you have the original sonar data of the area around the anomaly in strip-chart ("waterfall") form? The sonar mosaics are great for identifying anomalies, but not so great in trying to figure out what shape the thing actually is. Having the data in a waterfall format would give a lot of clues that the mosaic does not.
I'm not familiar with the term "waterfall" format but I assume you mean the strip chart that shows the original data collected in the particular sonar line in which the anomaly appears. The various sonar lines, like individual photographs, are then used to construct a mosaic. Yes, we have that data in three formats - .swf (Small Web Format), .csf (Content Sealed Format), and .bmp (Bitmap). Reading the first two formats takes software that I don't have but I can read .bmp files. The .csf file provides the best resolution and one of the sonar experts has given me a screen capture of the image from that format. I've attached a detail of the anomaly from the .csf version. As far as I know, in terms of resolution this is the best we have. There's an interesting detail that shows up in this image that is not discernible in the lower-res images. See if you can spot it.
-
Not sure what you referring to. I see multiple objects to the left (larger) and just below (smaller) in addistion to many objects casting 'shadows'. Appears to be a lot of debre around this target. The one to the left could be the tail section or a piece of it. The smaller objects in front of the main object (main frame) could be engines and such. Plus, there is a 'shadow' cast all along the 'scar'...which would indicate it was fairly deep?
-
For my money, the shadow cast from the small object to the left reminds me of the landing gear from the 1937 photo. That is why I am not a part of the investigation team. I so badly want to see what is probably not there...
-
I so want to find this still in "shallow" water when Tighar returns.
-
Wow, Dan!
Intriguing...I went up to the barn and measured an old aero tire of the same dimension and it measured...as it is supposed to..With no air in it; 29 inches tall, and 13 inches across...the center takes a 6 inch wheel. ("30X13X6" my tire is worn smooth of tread)
All this is known, of course, but if a picture of it leaned against something would help anyone, I could take an iphone pic of it and email it...
Bill
-
I've attached a detail of the anomaly from the .csf version. As far as I know, in terms of resolution this is the best we have. There's an interesting detail that shows up in this image that is not discernible in the lower-res images. See if you can spot it.
The smaller shadow to the left. The shadow is an elipse with a line coming from it, extending vertically. Really interesting.
-
Hi All
Ric
When yous go back possibly 2014 an rov dive to anomaly, If it were to be identified as being Earhart s Electra would it be left in it's resting place or condition pending would it be raised ?
Thank's Richie
-
Hi All
Ric
When yous go back possibly 2014 an rov dive to anomaly, If it were to be identified as being Earhart s Electra would it be left in it's resting place or condition pending would it be raised ?
Thank's Richie
If the gun smoked I'd like it to be left in place and then time and resources used to finish off the seven site, look for camp zero and finalize the whole story.
-
We're getting waaaay ahead of ourselves here, but we've always said that if the plane, or whatever is left of it, is found it should be recovered and conserved - but you can't organize a responsible recovery until you know what there is to recover. So it's a multi-step process - find it; find out as much as you can about it without disturbing it; plan and equip the recovery expedition; execute the recovery; begin the conservation treatment.
-
Hi Ric
My original question i was going to ask was, Will Tighar take a salvage expert on 2014 expedition to evaluate if recovery is possible if it is confirmed the anomaly is the Electra, Irrelevant what experts say of anomaly as we know it will be 50/50 between yes and no before hand.
As i believe funds permitting, by taking an expert it would hasten the time between, finding, identifying, an retrieving, But thought a more cautious approach would have been better
-
My original question i was going to ask was, Will Tighar take a salvage expert on 2014 expedition to evaluate if recovery is possible if it is confirmed the anomaly is the Electra
We don't do salvage. We do archaeology. There's a big difference. We'll have an underwater archaeologist with us when we go back - just like we did on last summer's trip - but I can't imagine that we'd try to do a recovery at that at time unless there was an immediate "clear and present danger" to the artifact.
-
archaeology was the word i was looking for thanks Ric
Sorry for putting these question's here an now, however my kids have always asked why i spend my evenings looking at rocks underwater
And this subject i thought would quell there questions, How naive was i, Now it's were when an how
Thank's Richie
-
Hi Ric:
Here is what I meant by the classic "waterfall" stripchart display.
A sonar mosaic tries to put everything into a nice 2-D display but in the process hides a lot of the details about how the sonar beam is impinging upon the target. The waterfall display preserves all of the original information about the sonar beam. What you can't immediately see on it is where the AUV is (GPS coordinates), what the heading of the scan line was, and what the speed of the AUV was (i.e. scale in the vertical direction). Like you say, you need the software that comes from the manufacturer (EdgeTech, in this case) to pull out those details. But this is a case where you should really be looking at the raw data, since you have no idea looking at the mosaic what the computer has done to "adjust" the picture.
For instance, if the AUV navigation was set to overlap it's scan strips (this should have been done), then, depending upon the amount of overlap, it's either possible or quite likely that there are two different sonar images of the anomaly, taken at different angles. The mosaic software throws out much of this data in order to present what it assumes is a nice 2-D picture of the seabed.
-Walt
-
Here is what I meant by the classic "waterfall" stripchart display.
Ahh...thanks Walt. The screen shot of the anomaly from the .csf file that I posted on May 16 is actually from the "waterfall" strip chart. I rotated it to make it more understandable. I've attached it here in it's original orientation.
A sonar mosaic tries to put everything into a nice 2-D display but in the process hides a lot of the details about how the sonar beam is impinging upon the target. The waterfall display preserves all of the original information about the sonar beam. What you can't immediately see on it is where the AUV is (GPS coordinates), what the heading of the scan line was, and what the speed of the AUV was (i.e. scale in the vertical direction). Like you say, you need the software that comes from the manufacturer (EdgeTech, in this case) to pull out those details. But this is a case where you should really be looking at the raw data, since you have no idea looking at the mosaic what the computer has done to "adjust" the picture.
Yes. The sonar expert (I'll see if I can get permission to release his name) who examined the image had all of the raw data. His opinion, after several days of working on it, was:
"I looked over everything and agree that your missed target is viable and should be checked out. Very probably a manmade object. Only other option is that it is a rock ledge but it doesn't look like the other ledges seen from the entire SS mosaic."
In fairness, another expert who has not yet examined all of the data feels that it's "probably geology."
The ROV pilot I sat beside for day after day as we checked out sonar targets feels that the target looks "VERY promising, definitely NOT a rock." His full response is priceless but I need to get his permission before I can share it.
We're still casting the net for opinions but, as one expert pointed out, interpreting sonar imagery is an art, not a science.
For instance, if the AUV navigation was set to overlap it's scan strips (this should have been done), then, depending upon the amount of overlap, it's either possible or quite likely that there are two different sonar images of the anomaly, taken at different angles. The mosaic software throws out much of this data in order to present what it assumes is a nice 2-D picture of the seabed.
You make a good point. The runs did supposedly overlap. There should be a second image buried somewhere in the data but finding it could be difficult. The raw data is not organized in any way I can make sense of and I can only read the files that were rendered as .bmp. It's becoming apparent that the original contractor dropped the ball big time. I can get an assortment of experts to give us quick opinions on specifics but it may be that what we need is for someone with the software, knowledge and experience to really spend time digging into all the data to see what we have. That's going to cost money - money that we don't have right now.
-
If the big shadow has what may be windows, would they have to be broken?
-
If the big shadow has what may be windows, would they have to be broken?
I don't know, but based on other Electra wrecks (on land) the shell of the fuselage is quite fragile and tears open easily.
-
One detail that shows up in the hi def image Ric posted (in reply 35) is what looks like some vertical and parallel lines at the upper right corner of the big shadow. They could be exposed ribs/ frame pieces.
-
After seeing the latest sonar target pic file, I just remembered something that I think may become useful. Several years ago Ric, my uncle had done some training with NASA. My uncle works for a private government firm that deals with making maps. Anyway, while doing some training at NASA he inquired some lunar maps that were made into a 3 dimensional hologram per sorts. At first you didnt see it just looking at the sheet in front of you, that is until you held it flat, bout two feet away, and at eyes level with the paper. Anyway, when you held the paper out in front of you, the craters and the rocks came to life. It was really neat. So, I'm asking if Jeff knows about such technology and is it possible to use that technology on this so called anomaly photo. Therefore, if it is what everyone is saying...it will truly come to life. Something to look into!!!
-
I certainly wish I could see what you folks seem to. I would like to, but I can't make anything out of the images. Could someone give a hint (such as was done with the Bevington object) to make us blind folks see what is there?
-
I certainly wish I could see what you folks seem to. I would like to, but I can't make anything out of the images. Could someone give a hint (such as was done with the Bevington object) to make us blind folks see what is there?
I can (and will) put together an illustration of what I can imagine MIGHT be there. Others may feel inspired to do the same - but bear in mind that, unlike the Bevington Object, we're not dealing with a photographic image. A sonar image is a reflection of sound waves and much trickier to interpret.
-
I found this sonar image of a Beach Baron at only 56 meters.
-
I found this sonar image of a Beach Baron at only 56 meters.
Very interesting. Note that the wing ribs are visible through the skin. That's not unusual and it's why we were initially excited about the "wing" target that turned out to be almost certainly ship wreckage.
Note also how the side of the fuselage is illuminated and how irregular the shadow is. Fascinating. It would be great to see a photo of the wreck on the bottom to see how it compares to the sonar image.
-
Couldn't find a photo of it on the bottom, found one after they pulled it up....pretty mangled. It was reported that it was updaide down on the bottom. No way to know that from the sonar image.
-
I certainly wish I could see what you folks seem to. I would like to, but I can't make anything out of the images. Could someone give a hint (such as was done with the Bevington object) to make us blind folks see what is there?
Attached is a pdf with an illustration of hints I see so far.
-
Hi All
Thought i would post this link to some side sonar images :)
http://www.enviroscan.com/html/gallery.html
Thanks Richie
-
Most of those excellent pictures look like there on a 'flat bed'. Isn't ours on the side of a sea mount?
-
Hi All
Thought i would post this link to some side sonar images :)
http://www.enviroscan.com/html/gallery.html
Thanks Richie
Thanks for the link Richie. Interesting images.
-
The Drowning Victims images are how they found the remains of Donald Campbell (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Campbell).
-
Most of those excellent pictures look like there on a 'flat bed'. Isn't ours on the side of a sea mount?
Yes. That's what makes our images so difficult to interpret.
-
As promised, here are some illustrations:
• The first attachment shows the best-resolution image with the new detail I mentioned earlier. There appears to be a break in the object corroborated by a corresponding break in the shadow.
• The next attachment shows how an Electra is likely to break up based on its construction and how Model 10s have come apart in known accidents.
• The third attachment shows what I think we MIGHT be looking at - the Center Section/Fuselage lying somewhat on its side.
• The fourth attachment shows that the length of the anomaly is generally consistent with the length of an Electra Center Section/Fuselage.
-
Thanks for pic's Ric
Here is a link to a site on how to interpret sonar images, I found it helpful
https://www.blacklaserlearning.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=38&Itemid=46
Richie
-
Ric,
I looks very promissing and it is in the perfect spot! Considering currents, etc.
-
Hi Ric
Do you have an over head scan of area, like the wing anomaly scan ?
Thanks Richie
-
Do you have an over head scan of area, like the wing anomaly scan ?
No. We have multiple runs over the wing target because it was noticed and deemed worthy of further investigation at the time. The anomaly we've been talking about was completely unnoticed until you spotted it in March. This is all your fault. ;D
-
Thanks, Ric. Your overlays make a bit more sense to me. I just don't have the eye you guys do.
-
Hi Ric
Blame accepted ;)
-
We've just put up a research bulletin on the TIGHAR website that pulls all of the anomaly research together and offers some new explanations. See Is This the Earhart Electra? (http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/Bulletins/66_NikuVIIUpdate/66_NikuVIIUpdate.html)
-
Why does this statement fill me with dread? (think WOF)
This Target looks VERY promising, definitely NOT a Rock, it’s in the correct location on the Reef and also shows what I interpret as ‘drag’ markings on the Reef above and to the North behind the target as it obviously hasn’t quite settled into its final resting place yet, this movement is probably due to the occasional Storms or exceptional Tides that’ll move the target a few inches every time one blows through.
Question is, how long will the Target remain in that location before it gets the final nudge that will send it over the edge of the “Catchment” area and disappear down the 70 degree incline into the depths?
-
Why does this statement fill me with dread? (think WOF)
Dread-R-Us. However, even if the main body of wreckage went to visit Davey Jones, smaller pieces of debris would probably remain behind (he said with a grim smile).
-
Ric,
BTW nice peice. Suppose the positive view is that it only seems to move a lttle year by year so as long as there's a few feet to the edge we may just have time to rattle the collection tins :)
-
Suppose the positive view is that it only seems to move a lttle year by year so as long as there's a few feet to the edge we may just have time to rattle the collection tins :)
FWIW, I don't think it's moving. As I wrote in the article, it makes more sense that the "tail" behind the target is a debris field of components that spilled out when the fuselage hit the slope at the bottom of the cliff.
The hypothesis goes like this:
• The airplane on the reef gets knocked off its gear and pushed over the edge, leaving a landing gear assembly (the Bevington Object) behind just as it did in the Luke Field crash.
• The landing gear assembly stays there at least until October when Bevington took the photo, but at some point it breaks free and sinks, ending up in the catchment area at 200 feet where Glickman spotted the pieces of it in the video. To be clear - the theory is that the debris field in the video is the broken-up Bevington Object.
• The airplane gets busted up in the surf and sinks within a few minutes in the shallow water just past the reef edge. That's where it was, obscured by the surf, when Lambrecht and company flew over; when the Kiwis and Bushnell boys were there; and when Emily saw whatever part of it she saw in 1941.
• Eventually, the battered center section/fuselage goes over the second cliff, hits the slope at the bottom of the cliff at 600 feet, and skids along for a ways spilling its guts, before coming rest more or less on its side with the starboard-side wing stub sticking up. To be clear - the anomaly is the center section/fuselage wreckage with a trail of debris strung out behind.
-
Have the sonar experts run simulation programs to see what kind of shape and shadows that section of the plane would produce in that environment or am I, as usual, a step behind and that is why you are saying that it most likely is the fuselage.
-
Have the sonar experts run simulation programs to see what kind of shape and shadows that section of the plane would produce in that environment or am I, as usual, a step behind and that is why you are saying that it most likely is the fuselage.
I'm not aware of such simulation programs. My speculation that we're seeing the center section lying on its side is based upon the fact that the sonar image and shadow appear to be consistent with how the Electra in Alaska came apart. The technique is the same one we used to identify the Bevington Object.
• Is there anything about the image that disqualifies it as being aircraft wreckage?
• If the answer is no - proceed.
• If the object is wreckage from the Electra, what part might it logically be?
• Is there hard evidence that an Electra wreck can result in wreckage like that?
• If the answer is yes, you have a possibility.
• Is there another explanation for the object, examples of which are similarly documented?
• If the answer is no, you're closer to a probability.
• Does the location and theoretical composition of the object fit well with other unrelated evidence?
• If the answer is yes - you start to get really nervous.
-
Hi, I'm new to the Forum but have been following this fascinating search for a long time now. Kudos to Rick and co. for keeping the hunt alive.
The new anomaly is really exciting, and it's a shame TIGHAR can't go check it out sooner rather than later. This might be common knowledge, so forgive me if it's a dumb question, but how far off do you anticipate the next expedition being? What is the "magic number" from a fundraising perspective, and how is the progress going toward the goal? Would the government not consider backing (or subsidizing) an expedition? What about the Discovery Channel or some such entity?
Re: the anomaly itself, will the next expedition be sufficiently equipped to address the possibility that the object might have "fallen" down to a deeper depth in the intervening months? i.e. if the expedition doesn't find the anomaly where it was, will it be equipped to re-locate it on the fly and photograph it via ROV even if it's moved down to deeper water (due to storm activity, currents, or whatever)?
Are there any plans to also revisit the site of the presumed Bevington object pieces and photograph them in more detail (or recover them, perhaps with an identifying manufacturer plate or some such thing attached)?
Finally, while the anomaly is extremely exciting, is it the only angle being pursued at this point? Just wondering about the risk of putting all eggs into a single basket. If the next expedition photographs it and it turns out to be a reef or some such thing, what would be the next steps? Is there any additional excavation work planned on the island itself, at the presumed campsite, etc?
thanks,
-Skip
-
I just read the Research Bulletin on the Niku VII Analysis Update. Great work, Ric. And congratulations to Richie for spotting this anomaly. I just hope it's still there when you go back in 2014. Here's hoping for more money to come in so you can maybe go back sooner. Will be sending in my membership renewal, and hope many others do, too.
From Ric Gillespie:
FWIW, I don't think it's moving.
Ric, why don't you think it is moving?
-
Ric, why don't you think it is moving?
I don't think the nature of the "ground" in that area is such that a fuselage that is moving incrementally would create a furrow so deep that it would show up on sonar. There are a few spots where there are fairly large patches of "talus" (the stuff that looks like snow) a few inches deep but they're so soft and powdery that I can't imagine a furrow lasting for any length of time.
-
"It's becoming apparent that the original contractor dropped the ball big time."
*feels himself kicking into FAR-contractor mode* Then perhaps some kind of discount on services rendered is in order? Just sayin'.
LTM, who always reads all the fine print,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 CER
-
Just have to ask, does anyone know if this picture from 2010 (posted in 2012 by Tim) was taken anywhere close to Ritchie’s Sonar Target of 2012 ?
Re: Wire & Rope entire.mov (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,1006.msg21546.html#msg21546)
« Reply #160 on: November 14, 2012, 08:49:32 AM »
My own interpretation of this picture (now that I have looked at it hundreds of times) is that we are looking at the upside-down tail section of the airplane, with the tailwheel assembly, somewhat broken up, lying above the rather distinctively shaped "tailcone". The Harney drawings have a good presentation of the tailwheel assembly.
2012-11-14_143657.png (396.37 kB, 700x658 - viewed 283 times.)
Tim
Chairman, CEO
PanAm Systems
TIGHAR #3372R
Sonar Target: (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,1140.msg24808.html#msg24808)
break-in-anomaly.jpg (93.51 kB, 720x534 - viewed 315 times.)
break-up-planform.jpg (52.47 kB, 720x900 - viewed 172 times.)
Steve G #3911R
Links above inserted later by Bruce Thomas for reader convenience.
-
Yes, Steve, quite near: I estimate the sonar object to be about 50 meters further South and 200 meters uphill.
-
Dumb Question Time ::), If the sonar target proves to indeed be the center section of the electra, and it proves to be not totally destroyed i.e. (f.u.b.a.r), can you as an accident investigator glean some idea as to what condition the aircraft may have been in when it came to rest on the surface of the reef?
I have no experience in aircraft accidents, but you always see these documentaries that tell what aiplanes were doing when they crashed, what the instruments were reading, and so on. I was just wondering if you could tell the difference between damage suffered due to velocity vs damage due to wave action...
Almost a New Member...
-
Ric, why don't you think it is moving?
I don't think the nature of the "ground" in that area is such that a fuselage that is moving incrementally would create a furrow so deep that it would show up on sonar. There are a few spots where there are fairly large patches of "talus" (the stuff that looks like snow) a few inches deep but they're so soft and powdery that I can't imagine a furrow lasting for any length of time.
I don't want to be a wet blanket, but I was more convinced that this was significant when we thought it was something that had slid downslope/downcurrent and left a furrow in the reef. My problems now are:
1. imagining how we got such a well-organized collection of debris - all lined up like that, and
2. the second parallel shadow (formerly groove) that can be seen for much of the length of the feature.
I am now inclined to think that we are seeing geology.
Still, it has a lot going for it - location and size in particular. Worth a look for sure.
Jon Romig
-
As to your point #1, Jon Romig, I would point out that the debris in the Balderston debris field lies also in practically a straight line, although essentially vertical rather than diagonal along the slope. We cannot really know the effects of current versus gravity.
-
As to your point #1, Jon Romig, I would point out that the debris in the Balderston debris field lies also in practically a straight line, although essentially vertical rather than diagonal along the slope. We cannot really know the effects of current versus gravity.
Jon will do, Tim.
So velocity and angle of incidence could be factors in creating a straight line of debris. Do we know the current speed at this location? If we assume an origin point on the first ledge, we should be able to guesstimate how fast it might have been moving when it hit and broke up.
-
Above my pay scale, Jon.
-
Above my pay scale, Jon.
Should be pretty simple. Math types can check this for me.
I assume for this thought experiment that only a direct but angled impact at a "destructive" velocity would create this debris pattern.
H = height of first ledge above impact site
D = horizontal distance between impact site and assumed "departure" point from first ledge
C = speed of current (assumed parallel to plane path)
S = sink rate of Electra in still water
V = velocity of plane as it hits second ledge (assuming plane attains terminal velocity quickly)
Solve for S:
S/C = H/D
S = CH/D
Solve for V:
V = SQRT(S^2 + C^2)
A few shortcuts and assumptions, but it should give us a feel.
Note, for the debris to assemble in a straight line, it is unlikely that the plane is tumbling down the 70 degree slope (and i assume also coming apart), so that also tells us something about S - the sink rate must be pretty slow for the current to keep the plane off the slope.
I just can't envision a scenario that would create that debris pattern.
Jon Romig
-
FWIW, I don't think it's moving. As I wrote in the article, it makes more sense that the "tail" behind the target is a debris field of components that spilled out when the fuselage hit the slope at the bottom of the cliff.
The hypothesis goes like this:
• Eventually, the battered center section/fuselage goes over the second cliff, hits the slope at the bottom of the cliff at 600 feet, and skids along for a ways spilling its guts, before coming rest more or less on its side with the starboard-side wing stub sticking up. To be clear - the anomaly is the center section/fuselage wreckage with a trail of debris strung out behind.
If it is sliding down the slope rapidly enough to come apart as/after it hits, why do all the pieces go shooting off at that crazy angle ACROSS the shallow slope of the ledge?
Jon Romig
-
I may be wrong but I think the catchment areas may have moderate half hills, (Google"Talus Cones"), on them that slope south and north as well as the main west slope. They could be made up of rock piles from landslides and erosion over thousands of years. If you look at above water cliffs and canyons, you may see steep cliffs and at the bottom there are moderate sloped rocky piles (Talus cones). Plane parts could have run down the south slope of one of those rocky cones. See reply 58 for the debris trail3 pdf attached (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,1140.45.html) that shows what I am thinking. If you look at some of the sonar images where it fades to black at the cliff face you may be able to see hints of these moderate cones.
I think it is possible that a large section tumbled over the second cliff and when it hit the base it followed the slope of one of these rocky talus cones SW. This could have taken a long time, peeling skin and parts off on the jagged surface as in rolled down. See attachment and link (http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://imgc.allpostersimages.com/images/P-473-488-90/64/6467/W7TH100Z/posters/marli-miller-talus-cones-built-through-the-accumulation-of-rock-debris-fallen-from-the-cliffs-above.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.allposters.com/-sp/Talus-Cones-Built-Through-the-Accumulation-of-Rock-Debris-Fallen-from-the-Cliffs-Above-Posters_i9002342_.htm&h=355&w=473&sz=55&tbnid=NL_VH2wdNsS6eM:&tbnh=112&tbnw=149&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dtalus%2Bat%2Bcliff%2Bpictures%26tbm%3Disch%26tbo%3Du&zoom=1&q=talus+at+cliff+pictures&usg=__xj9clFunDR1QNeiMNQqFavToiTA=&docid=qMepXM59zAoC7M&hl=en&sa=X&ei=GdemUcbjDarP0wHY44HwAQ&sqi=2&ved=0CFYQ9QEwDQ&dur=0)
-
Greg, I think you are correct. I have pointed out in previous threads that the Balderston Debris Field is situated in the swale, or valley, between a ridge to the North and another to the South.
This feature was also apparent to us as the ROV maneuvered in real time on a course parallel to the shoreline.
-
I may be wrong but I think the catchment areas may have moderate half hills, (Google"Talus Cones"), on them that slope south and north as well as the main west slope. They could be made up of rock piles from landslides and erosion over thousands of years. If you look at above water cliffs and canyons, you may see steep cliffs and at the bottom there are moderate sloped rocky piles (Talus cones). Plane parts could have run down the south slope of one of those rocky cones. See reply 58 for the debris trail3 pdf attached (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,1140.45.html) that shows what I am thinking. If you look at some of the sonar images where it fades to black at the cliff face you may be able to see hints of these moderate cones.
I think it is possible that a large section tumbled over the second cliff and when it hit the base it followed the slope of one of these rocky talus cones SW. This could have taken a long time, peeling skin and parts off on the jagged surface as in rolled down. See attachment and link (http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://imgc.allpostersimages.com/images/P-473-488-90/64/6467/W7TH100Z/posters/marli-miller-talus-cones-built-through-the-accumulation-of-rock-debris-fallen-from-the-cliffs-above.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.allposters.com/-sp/Talus-Cones-Built-Through-the-Accumulation-of-Rock-Debris-Fallen-from-the-Cliffs-Above-Posters_i9002342_.htm&h=355&w=473&sz=55&tbnid=NL_VH2wdNsS6eM:&tbnh=112&tbnw=149&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dtalus%2Bat%2Bcliff%2Bpictures%26tbm%3Disch%26tbo%3Du&zoom=1&q=talus+at+cliff+pictures&usg=__xj9clFunDR1QNeiMNQqFavToiTA=&docid=qMepXM59zAoC7M&hl=en&sa=X&ei=GdemUcbjDarP0wHY44HwAQ&sqi=2&ved=0CFYQ9QEwDQ&dur=0)
Slightly off topic! But that kind of feature may be why they have been unable to locate the body of Andrew Irvine on Everest when they are sure they know of his body’s location. The theory being that searchers go up the slope in the natural gullies formed by the Tallus whereas his body if on the ‘ridge’ between the gullies (his route coming down from near the summit) Will look out for the link later
-
I just can't envision a scenario that would create that debris pattern.
We have to remember that the airframe has quite a bit of cable, wiring, conduit, piping, etc. routed
along it's length that will tend to hold it all together as the environmental forces try to disassemble it.
-
Slightly off topic! But that kind of feature may be why they have been unable to locate the body of Andrew Irvine on Everest when they are sure they know of his body’s location. The theory being that searchers go up the slope in the natural gullies formed by the Tallus whereas his body if on the ‘ridge’ between the gullies (his route coming down from near the summit) Will look out for the link later
Cf. "The Search for Andrew Irvine." (http://www.velocitypress.com/IrvineSearch.html)
-
Slightly off topic! But that kind of feature may be why they have been unable to locate the body of Andrew Irvine on Everest when they are sure they know of his body’s location. The theory being that searchers go up the slope in the natural gullies formed by the Tallus whereas his body if on the ‘ridge’ between the gullies (his route coming down from near the summit) Will look out for the link later
Cf. "The Search for Andrew Irvine." (http://www.velocitypress.com/IrvineSearch.html)
Beaten to it :( Thanks Marty :)
-
Nice write-up in Fox News. Even Richie got named in the article...Enjoy http://www.foxnews.com/science/2013/05/29/amelia-earhart-plane-found-sonar-images-may-have-pinpointed-wreck/?intcmp=features (http://www.foxnews.com/science/2013/05/29/amelia-earhart-plane-found-sonar-images-may-have-pinpointed-wreck/?intcmp=features)
LTM,
Don
-
Nice write-up in Fox News. Even Richie got named in the article...Enjoy http://www.foxnews.com/science/2013/05/29/amelia-earhart-plane-found-sonar-images-may-have-pinpointed-wreck/?intcmp=features (http://www.foxnews.com/science/2013/05/29/amelia-earhart-plane-found-sonar-images-may-have-pinpointed-wreck/?intcmp=features)
LTM,
Don
Bet only his Nan calls him Richard ;)
-
See pdf for the hints I see of the slopes at the base of the cliff.
-
Greg,
I see something that looks like Tallus but if you look at the first picture in post one you can see a whole lot of them which makes me wounder if its more to do with the action of the capture device?
-
Nice job Greg! Very helpful to visualize the scene. Thanks!
-
Ric,
Does the "Sonar Target" come to you as a "vidio" if so can you post it?
Ted Campbell
-
Hi All
Am currently on holiday in benidorm back sat look forward to reading up on latest developments an Ric love the research bullitin :)
Thanks Richie
-
Way to go, Richie! Front page on my AOL feed this morning.
Assuming this is the fuselage, might it be worth looking around other photos for the wings? The "T" shape Richie pointed out at the beginning of the thread might be a good candidate. If you could find a corresponding shape on the other side somewhere, that would be even more suggestive...just a thought, and probably not an original one.
-
With all the new visitors to the site based on the media coverage of the sonar image (the topic of this thread), perhaps discussion of the Explorers club photo and legal issues on using it should have its own thread.
-
With all the new visitors to the site based on the media coverage of the sonar image (the topic of this thread), perhaps discussion of the Exployers club photo and legal issues on using it should have its own thread.
I've have removed the posts from this thread and put them in the Admin area (not open to the public).
I am anxious not only about general copyright principles (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,1197.msg24949.html#msg24949) but also about TIGHAR's non-disclosure agreement with Cook, who holds the copyright to the image in question.
-
Dr King discusses the 'sonar object' Blog (http://ameliaearhartarchaeology.blogspot.co.uk/)
FWIW I would like to see the wreckage mapped, logged and otherwise recorded then left in on the reef that it has become part of. Not that I would be upset if TIGHAR decided otherwise :)
-
Hi Chris
The thing is, When Tighar go back an this is a big big IF. It is the Electra they will have to show the world the smoking gun, Which in turn will alert the gold diggers who have no conscience, An a piece of Amelia Earhart's lost plane i would imagine would go for more than what it would take to send Tighar back to see what the Anomaly is, Weather they retrieved it illegally or not in my opinion.
Thank's Richie
-
I know, its just a shame that someone out there could do that. First things first though - getting over there and finding it :)
-
Yup Agreed
Sooner the better i say :)
-
Hi All
For anyone interested
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22414584
German Dornier 17 bomber salvage: Diver interview
Thanks Richie
-
Not much press over here and no mention of Richie >:( Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/may/31/pacific-wreck-amelia-earharts-plane)
-
"The story changed in March this year, when a member of the public noticed an object in a sonar picture"
That's definitely Richie ;)
-
Should have been more specific and said no name dropping for the lad ;D
Richie! You need to get yourself an agent :P
-
Yes, Steve, quite near: I estimate the sonar object to be about 50 meters further South and 200 meters uphill.
Tim
"Aboard VvS1, the ROV found the first underwater man-made objects seen on this trip. On the ledge right off the "Nessie" location at about 265 metres they spotted a length of rope or line
and, a semi- circular piece of wire. The wire is 2 to 3 mm in diameter and light enough that the ROV's thrusters made it stir. But this is very exciting: the reef slope and ledge are not littered with debris and to find something right off the location where we have a photograph of something is huge...."
Don't know the exact or about location of the sonar return image in relation to the above on the Y axis though Tim.
-
Calling it the sonar target sounds so dull, how about the Conroy Object or Anomaly
-
Change happens Matt >:(
Poor old 'Nessie' is now known as the Bevington object. Doesn't quite have the same air of mystery to it but, who knows, it may have been a trade Mark infringement ;)
-
Calling it the sonar target sounds so dull, how about the Conroy Object or Anomaly
Noooo Sir how about Tighar Target 1 :)
-
I like the "Conroy" object. That gets my vote.
-
I like the "Conroy" object. That gets my vote.
Thanks :)
-
I second that!
-
Third it.
-
I like the "Conroy" object. That gets my vote.
I wouldn't do that to Richie. Suppose the anomaly turns out to be just a coral ridge that we all got way too excited about? Until we know more about it, it's just "the sonar anomaly."
-
Thank You Ric
My thoughts exactly
-
Until we know more about it, it's just "the sonar anomaly."
Not even the "please, Please, PLEASEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE Let This Be The One" anomaly? Nahhhh, too dramatic.
LTM, who still believes that miracles happen every day,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 CER
-
OK. Then "Nessie II"...or "Nessie's Mom". Even though Richie is the one that discovered it. But I don't blame Richie for not wanting the pressure.
-
"Nessie's Mom"
Now there's a scary concept. Sort of like Grendel's mother in the Beowulf epic.
-
I missed Jeff Glickman with Erin Burnett and can't seem to find it on CNN's site or.....anywhere on the internet.
Has it been posted yet? I was anxious to see it and missed the last two appearances due to seeing the notifications after the fact....my fault wasn't on FB or Tighar's site. I only caught Ric's on CBS.
-
I missed Jeff Glickman with Erin Burnett and can't seem to find it on CNN's site or.....anywhere on the internet.
Jeff was there and ready to go on but got pre-empted by the coverage of the Oklahoma tornadoes. There's no business like show business.
-
Richie...Good Morning....I was looking at the anomaly image this morning and noticed something very odd that I wanted to bring to your attention. I don't know if you and Ric noticed this before...but wanted to point it out in case you didn't see this. Anyway, if you take the spot what appears to have the shadow behind it...which might be the fuselage or what...This is on the right side of the photo. If you take this part and look back to the left of the photo...you will notice that it looks like there are sections. If you take the biggest part of this image and overlay it from right to left...it appears that they are identical in length. Anyway, I notated this in red hash marks to let you know what I'm talking about!
-
Seems the sonar image and the ROV track just missed each other. Needle in the haystack thing. WOW. If only the ROV's could have spent more time on site and REALLY mapped the area. Who knows what the CAMERAS, both still and video, would have seen.
Tom
-
Belated congrats Richie - good eyes! And way to go TIGHAR for positive media work! Along with raising broad public awareness it got my attention :-[ and inspired re-up at the full researcher level. Let's go Niku VIII in 2014!
-
Calling it the sonar target sounds so dull, how about the Conroy Object or Anomaly
We should call it "Richie's Anomaly".
If it turns out to be a coral ridge, it would still be called Richie's Anomaly, it just wouldn't be the Electra.
-
so---how you going to find out---or do we already know?
-
Hi Tom
Me personally find the sonar anomaly to much of coincidence given the Tighar hypothesis.
Don't You ?
-
Interesting question Richie----How ya doing anyway? Been a while!
I was just wondering (out loud) how you prove the anomaly is part of the Electra. I assume that there are pics of it--somewhere. Either from the 2012 trip---which I doubt, or the 2010 trip---which seemed to have more parts and pieces in it. Also assume that it would be best to put eyes on target, but that may be a daunting task.
-
Hi Tom
It has been a while, am not aware of any software you could use which can give u a better idea of what were seeing in sonar image obviously we know were 2012 debris field is, I think more needs to be done to a certain were exactly the 2010 wire/rope video was filmed allot of people including Ric and Jeff don't see anything I do an I bet the video was taking some were along that gouge that leads to anomaly,
The be all an end all though is untill we go back we don't know what it is for certain.
Just hope we don't have to wait till 2014 to find out i could get struck by lightning or knocked over by a plane before then haha
-
I think a under water metal detector is a must on next expedition as what ever anomaly is it will be covered in cement like sediment and hard to see.
Anyway best I do some work
Richie
-
Has anyone noticed the nice-sized chunk to the left of the anomaly that has its own sonar shadow? Is it possibly a cylindrical shape? Looks nice and close in relationship to the larger anomaly.
-
Has anyone noticed the nice-sized chunk to the left of the anomaly that has its own sonar shadow? Is it possibly a cylindrical shape? Looks nice and close in relationship to the larger anomaly.
A few people have seen it. See replies 7,23 and the pdf in post 100. It's an interesting target that seems to have a narrow vertical shadow. And it is very close to the path of Dive 12.
-
And it is very close to the path of Dive 12.
Yes but, unfortunately, we have no video for the portion of Dive 12 that comes closest to the anomaly. No Standard Def. No HD. Drives me nuts.
The Standard Def was being recorded on DVD in the command van, but the DVD filled up and didn't get changed - so no recorded Standard Def video for that part of the dive. The HD camera had a 6 hour recording limit that ran out a few minutes before that part of the dive. That last part of Dive 12 is the only period for which we have neither Standard Def nor HD video.
The theme song for Niku VII should be Ray Charles' "If It Wasn't For Bad Luck" [...I'd have no luck at all]
-
Hi Ric
Does bad luck follow u round haha, between the problems with the fish an rov, Then that happens with recording.
Amelia definitely don't want to be found for sure
-
Amelia definitely don't want to be found for sure
I don't think it's Amelia. It's the island's traditional guardian spirit Nei Manganibuka (translation: Ms. Old Lady of the Buka Trees). She and I have never gotten along.
-
I don't think it's Amelia. It's the island's traditional guardian spirit Nei Manganibuka (translation: Ms. Old Lady of the Buka Trees). She and I have never gotten along.
maybe a quick chat with a "local" on how to appease Ms. Old Lady, and a quick ceremony before getting down to business on the next Niku visit is in order :D
-
maybe a quick chat with a "local" on how to appease Ms. Old Lady, and a quick ceremony before getting down to business on the next Niku visit is in order :D
Been there. Done that. Tradition holds that whenever you go ashore on one of these islands, the first thing you do is put some island sand on your cheeks. That breeze you feel is the island's guardian spirit sniffing you. "Ahhh, this is a person of my island. I will not molest him."
We always do it, but it doesn't always work.
-
Has anyone noticed the nice-sized chunk to the left of the anomaly that has its own sonar shadow? Is it possibly a cylindrical shape? Looks nice and close in relationship to the larger anomaly.
Looks about the right size to be an Electra engine...
-
maybe a quick chat with a "local" on how to appease Ms. Old Lady, and a quick ceremony before getting down to business on the next Niku visit is in order :D
Been there. Done that. Tradition holds that whenever you go ashore on one of these islands, the first thing you do is put some island sand on your cheeks. That breeze you feel is the island's guardian spirit sniffing you. "Ahhh, this is a person of my island. I will not molest him."
We always do it, but it doesn't always work.
Maybe its your cologne Ric :P
-
Maybe its your cologne Ric :P
What cologne? Oooh...maybe that's the problem.
-
On a serious note, have you considered that the 'island spirits' may be objecting to the plan to remove the plane if found as it is now a part of the island?
Yes we live in a modern world but sometimes the old world prevails. May be worth considering before the next expedition.
-
On a serious note, have you considered that the 'island spirits' may be objecting to the plan to remove the plane if found as it is now a part of the island?
Yes we live in a modern world but sometimes the old world prevails. May be worth considering before the next expedition.
When we have our tongue in our cheek we try to remember not to bite down.
-
I had no tongue in cheek (honest) I'm a belt, braces, drawing pin and superglue kinda person.
-
It really is astounding, all the near misses, if onlys, lost items, found items with no name or serial number that have dogged the loss of AE and FN and the search for them. I am So not surprised that the DVD of the area near the Conroy Object filled up and was not replaced!
Here's hoping for a major donor to kick in so Niku VIII can be sooner, for Who Knows what's going to happen to the Richie Anomaly!
-
Richie...Help me out on this......But, have you guys seen this image up close. Take note of the wheel like characters within the red circle...Thanks!!!
-
In relationship to the possible fuselage, those shapes may be too large to be wheel related. They also do not show up as white specks with a sonar shadow. Possible shifts in coral sediment?
-
Hi Randy
What I think your seeing is a faint ring like circle caused by the impact from the object hitting the ground, what is interesting is the object seem's to be wide, notice that there is 3 or more gouges were it landed that go into one we're the object as slid on to it's side.
Richie
-
Hi Randy
What I think your seeing is a faint ring like circle caused by the impact from the object hitting the ground, what is interesting is the object seem's to be wide, notice that there is 3 or more gouges were it landed that go into one we're the object as slid on to it's side.
Richie
I see the same thing as well as other possible impact craters. This area could be below a channel that spills out from the shallow area above. Andrew described searching channels (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,1195.0.html) at the shallow area in his previous dives. These channels could be directing talus, boulders and other debris (plane parts) onto the natural piles or talus cones below. It seems natural that a falling plane part could cause boulders to fall and vice versa
-
This area could be below a channel that spills out from the shallow area above. Andrew described searching channels (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,1195.0.html) at the shallow area in his previous dives. These channels could be directing talus, boulders and other debris (plane parts) onto the natural piles or talus cones below. It seems natural that a falling plane part could cause boulders to fall and vice versa
Interesting thought. And falling boulders and talus could cover pieces of wreckage that had a low profile so that all we see in the sonar image are the sticky-uppy bits (technical term).
-
Ric, I think I might see the fuselage as you were describing it. I would guess its upside down with the bulkhead where a wing was once affixed sticking up creating the main "shadow".
The smaller section "broken off" behind it almost looks like the rudder and elevator sticking out of the sea floor. Just my two cents for what its worth. Richie congrats on your anomaly it's one hell of a find, even if it turns out to be coral.
Sorry about the "pre-school" rendition of my picture hopefully it gets what I "see" across.
-
One thing the sonar anomaly has going for it is that, if it was a natural feature like a rock slide or landslide you might expect to see one or two more along the side of the seamount, but you don't. Which adds to the chances of it being something man made. Of course something man made may include a boat as Ric mentioned but, it does appear strange that there isn't anything else on the sonar sweeps that looks even similar to this.
-
Richie...Is it by chance that what we believe to be an impact crater in what I pointed out the other day, is in fact one of the motors off of the Electra? Just a thought!!!
-
Hi Randy
Not sure to be honest, Check this out though in the attached image, There's a white arrow pointing to a shadow below left of anomaly i can almost make it out but before i say what i see.
Would like to know what other's may see, Bare in mind the shadow could be covered in sediment
Thanks Richie
-
Bare in mind the shadow could be covered in sediment
How do you cover a shadow with sediment? Just curious.
-
you don't, But there is something there which is burly visible ;D
-
Hi Randy
Not sure to be honest, Check this out though in the attached image, There's a white arrow pointing to a shadow below left of anomaly i can almost make it out but before i say what i see.
Would like to know what other's may see, Bare in mind the shadow could be covered in sediment
Thanks Richie
It's about the same length and diameter as an Electra engine, seems to me.
-
Hi Randy
Not sure to be honest, Check this out though in the attached image, There's a white arrow pointing to a shadow below left of anomaly i can almost make it out but before i say what i see.
Would like to know what other's may see, Bare in mind the shadow could be covered in sediment
Thanks Richie
It's about the same length and diameter as an Electra engine, seems to me.
Here is a side by side comparison, all to scale. In both images, the engine was not re-sized in comparison to the fuselage, or vice versa. The images were just trimmed to remove backgrounds, nothing more.
Electra image is from Air and Space Museum here (http://airandspace.si.edu/images/collections/media/full/A19600213000Cp03.jpg)
Looks like a close match to me...
Of course, the object on the left could be a big rock that just happens to be similar to a Lockheed Electra engine.
The Anomaly on the right could just be a coral ridge.
-
Wow, Charlie, that's very illuminating, nicely done.
-
Nicely done Charlie!!! I saw the white image you were talking about Richie...and this is baffling!!! What I would like to know Ric...and if Jeff Glickman is reading this to clarify something...Most of us know that on a sonar image like this that black usually indicates a shadow or a dark area. But, is that the case for white images. What I'm trying to ponder on here...is there anything else non-man made that would trigger the white colored on the anomaly image? Thanks!!!
-
Charlie!!!! Very interesting!! Good work!
-
Most of us know that on a sonar image like this that black usually indicates a shadow or a dark area. But, is that the case for white images. What I'm trying to ponder on here...is there anything else non-man made that would trigger the white colored on the anomaly image? Thanks!!!
All the white indicates is a strong sonar return. The color is not an indication that an object is man-made.
Also, before everybody gets too excited about Charlies "engine" - what he shows in his illustration is the entire engine, cowling and nacelle. The engine and cowling could, and probably would, separate from the rest of the airframe, but the nacelle from the firewall back is an integral part of the wing/center section.
Let me caution everyone about amateur interpretation of these images. Richie spotted the anomaly because it was dead-obvious - so dead-obvious that everyone else missed it because we were looking for things much more subtle. I don't see anything else in the imagery that is that obvious. We now have experts from several different companies looking at the raw sonar data to see if there's anything else there. Let's let them do their work. We've all seen what can happen when amateur imaginations run wild.
-
Let me caution everyone about amateur interpretation of these images. Richie spotted the anomaly because it was dead-obvious - so dead-obvious that everyone else missed it because we were looking for things much more subtle. I don't see anything else in the imagery that is that obvious. We now have experts from several different companies looking at the raw sonar data to see if there's anything else there. Let's let them do their work. We've all seen what can happen when amateur imaginations run wild.
I second that. I threw the images together in 20 minutes on an older image processing program - hardly a professional assessment.
And as Ric points out, the viability of the smaller object actually being an engine, depends somewhat on how much, if any, of the wing/center section, the engine took with it when it separated from the aircraft.
Sometimes when it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it's just a rock.
That said, it does appear to be in the general ballpark of the size for a detached Electra engine.
The only way to find out, is to fund an expedition to go look at it.
-
And as Ric points out, the viability of the smaller object actually being an engine, depends somewhat on how much, if any, of the wing/center section, the engine took with it when it separated from the aircraft.
The engine will almost certainly fail at the mounts. They're stressed to take longitudinal loads (the prop pulls the engine, the engine pulls the mounts, the mounts pull the rest of the plane). They're not stress for side-loads.
The only way to find out, is to fund an expedition to go look at it.
Amen
-
Let's not forget that this airframe (if that is what it is)has been under salt water for a long time and corrosion is a factor.
If the engine mounts are attached to a rotted out aluminum wing/center section it could come apart anywhere...depending on where the stresses are as it rolls,drops,slides or whatever on it's way to where it is now...(if it's there, whatever it is)
And we don't know what happened when it went below the surface.
I'm of the school that says lets go look.
I don't care if there are lots of reasons why it might not be there; I have seen enough reasons to think it is...I guess it boils down to whether there are enough people who believe it is or might be, to pay the cost of looking...it's not up to a vote, it's a matter of what it takes to go do it.
I just want more time spent on the things around the "7 Site" (I think it is/was an A) and at the "G" (I think it is/was an E) while everyone is there, as well as underwater...since it's a big deal just to get there.
Let's get it done before the next big earthquake and tsunami slides everything that we think is there down on top of what we think is down there !?!
Bill
-
Richie spotted the anomaly because it was dead-obvious - so dead-obvious that everyone else missed it because we were looking for things much more subtle.
With all due respect I don't think this was the case at all. I submit that the anomaly was missed, at least by us forum participants, because a reasonable assumption was made that the sonar data had already been thoroughly analyzed by those higher up in the food chain doing the front line analysis and that the anomaly had been subsequently ruled out or otherwise dealt with. Richie was merely asking about what appeared to be an interesting, if odd, feature. Who knew it was a feature that actually been overlooked. The point is, I think, that most of us assume that any image posted either in the form or on the TIGHAR web site has been already thoroughly gone over, at least with regard to features as imposing at the "Conroy anomaly". But this is all a moot point. The time for chagrin is over. On with the analysis and the search.
-
I submit that the anomaly was missed, at least by us forum participants, because a reasonable assumption was made that the sonar data had already been thoroughly analyzed by those higher up in the food chain doing the front line analysis and that the anomaly had been subsequently ruled out or otherwise dealt with.
That's exactly right. We at TIGHAR made that same assumption - that the contractor with the expertise who was paid a great deal of money to identify and alert us to worthwhile targets, had done their job.
-
I submit that the anomaly was missed, at least by us forum participants, because a reasonable assumption was made that the sonar data had already been thoroughly analyzed by those higher up in the food chain doing the front line analysis and that the anomaly had been subsequently ruled out or otherwise dealt with.
That's exactly right. We at TIGHAR made that same assumption - that the contractor with the expertise who was paid a great deal of money to identify and alert us to worthwhile targets, had done their job.
Did you save the receipt?
-
Did you save the receipt?
Oh yeah. I'm not at liberty to comment further.
-
Did you save the receipt?
Oh yeah. I'm not at liberty to comment further.
Why do I feel strangely compelled to say "go get em TIGHAR!"?
-
For me, at present, everything has a bit of supposition connected to it. Like everyone else I would love to know what it is. Having to wait and wait, for a good many years, I wanted an answer, I wanted the proof. Unfortunately these things take time and, as we all know, a great deal of money. But at least I have hope. Mr. Gillespie is my hope for a solution. I’m just praying that at my age (nearly75) the solution is near.
Bruce
-
I’m just praying that at my age (nearly75) the solution is near.
Heck Bruce, I'm 65 myself. Been working on this since I was 40 (get a life Gillespie!).
Then again, Winston Churchill was my age when he became Prime Minister in 1940. We're just getting started!
-
Let's not forget that this airframe (if that is what it is)has been under salt water for a long time and corrosion is a factor.
If the engine mounts are attached to a rotted out aluminum wing/center section it could come apart anywhere...depending on where the stresses are as it rolls,drops,slides or whatever on it's way to where it is now...(if it's there, whatever it is)
I agree - I believe in most crashes the engine(s) would detach on impact because you have such enormous forces on the mounts. But that is not the case here. There was no crash - the Electra just floated over the edge and likely hung there at the edge of the reef for years, getting more corroded all the time. It's conceivable the engine did take some of the wing/center section with it when it finally detached from the plane.
The wings themselves likely detached relatively early, and if they still had any type of aerodynamic shape, they may have "flown" underwater on their way to the bottom, and may be quite some distance from the wreck. They may never be found. The fuselage and especially the heavy center section, as well as the engines, would likely head almost straight down the slope.
It's interesting that that is exactly what we seem to be seeing now - the heavier bits going almost straight down the slope from where we think the Electra landed.
-
Well I may just be getting started but my fear is that the finish line may be in sight! I must add that my late friend, Ray Catran (?) can’t remember the spelling, was the one who led me to your site. I’m going to save a few dollars and send them along. Don’t be too optimistic, I live on a pension!
Bruce
-
Latest update from Ric on the sonar data...
http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/Bulletins/67_NikuVIINews/67_NikuVIIUpdate.html (http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/Bulletins/67_NikuVIINews/67_NikuVIIUpdate.html)
-
Thanks for link Jeff :)
-
Richie
looking at the raw data for the sonar anomaly, now that it shows it to be even straighter than it first appeared, it looks even more out of place compared to its surroundings. Example: most of the features on the sonar run from top to bottom, reef to sea floor, the grooves, gullies etc... except the shelves of course. Then you get see this strange anomaly doing the opposite, going east to west as it were, in a straight line. I have tried to find something similar in the sonar data but nothing sticks out like a sore thumb as much as this anomaly.
-
Jeff and Richie...Very late here in Chicago, but just saw the updated anomaly pic and I too found it rather interesting. The two white anomalies at the bottom of the picture...Is that something new? Let me know...They look triangular in shape!!!! Thanks!!!!
-
Jeff and Richie...Very late here in Chicago, but just saw the updated anomaly pic and I too found it rather interesting. The two white anomalies at the bottom of the picture...Is that something new? Let me know...They look triangular in shape!!!! Thanks!!!!
it's 6:37am here, An i have to go to work in 52 minutes :'(
-
Jeff and Richie...Very late here in Chicago, but just saw the updated anomaly pic and I too found it rather interesting. The two white anomalies at the bottom of the picture...Is that something new? Let me know...They look triangular in shape!!!! Thanks!!!!
it's 6:37am here, An i have to go to work in 52 minutes :'(
It's 07:00am here and I finish work in 30 mins Richie ;D
-
Lucky u am just starting shud be home for dinner though I hope
-
Re: Sonar Target
Quote from Randy Conrad« Reply #131 on: June 05, 2013, 04:31:32 AM »
"...you will notice that it looks like there are sections. If you take the biggest part of this image and overlay it from right to left...it appears that they are identical in length. Anyway, I notated this in red hash marks (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1140.0;attach=6248) to let you know what I'm talking about!"
Randy,
Looks like the missing sonar pings found by OIC may explain the segments noted by your RED hash marks.
-
Re: Sonar Target
Quote from Randy Conrad« Reply #131 on: June 05, 2013, 04:31:32 AM »
"...you will notice that it looks like there are sections. If you take the biggest part of this image and overlay it from right to left...it appears that they are identical in length. Anyway, I notated this in red hash marks (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1140.0;attach=6248) to let you know what I'm talking about!"
Randy,
Looks like the missing sonar pings found by OIC may explain the segments noted by your RED hash marks.
The length of the entire string of hash marks is about 30 meters. How can this be explained in terms of the length of an Electra?
-
Very interesting...The image appears to very linear which is good. And, even though the data is incomplete, we can still say the anomoly is possibly the correct length/height. Understanding this is a sonar image should we expect to see hints of wing stubs protruding from the image we suspect is a fuselage?
-
...should we expect to see hints of wing stubs protruding from the image we suspect is a fuselage?
Not necessarily. If we're seeing the aircraft in profile (probably minus the engines and outer wing panels) we would see only the fuselage.
-
Got it, thnx. And a hat tip to the folks in Hawaii for offering to help w/ this. Were they willing to offer an opinion on the chances of this being what we think it may be? Have any other people w/ relevant credentials offered to revue and interpret the new data? Dang it seemed like an eternity for this new sonar material. Sorry, not grousing just being impatient and summer 2014 can't get here fast enough. BTW, great work and I'll donate ltr in the store/membership. My second post today after lurking in the shadows for years and reading evrything posted.
-
The enhanced sonar images just released certainly add a bit more information to the puzzle! Odd that there would be a linear target when all else seems to be running in a different direction. The length, as I understand it, at present can’t be precisely measured due to the missing “pings”. A big thanks to OIC for helping out with this data by the way!
Do we really know if the aircraft didn’t crash on landing?
Bruce
-
The following sonar image is of Air France flight AF447, lost over the Atlantic ocean on route from Rio to Paris in 2009. That's an Airbus A330-203 we are looking at. Hard to believe isn't it? Depth:3,800 to 4,000 metres (2,100 to 2,200 fathoms; 12,000 to 13,000 ft) It took years to locate the wreckage.
(Image: copyright BEA)
-
Hi Jeff
You would think with the technology of today there would be software available that could convert a sonar image into an actual image, so u know what your looking at :)
-
Hi Jeff
You would think with the technology of today there would be software available that could convert a sonar image into an actual image, so u know what your looking at :)
I once heard a Royal navy engineering technician compare sonar to a tracker dog. 'Both can find the target but, barking and sonar returns are damned hard to interpret'.
Typical navy humour ::)
-
Hi Jeff
You would think with the technology of today there would be software available that could convert a sonar image into an actual image, so u know what your looking at :)
You would think with the technology of today there would be software available that would have found the "sonar target" immediately after Niku VII was finished. ;)
-
Looked at the image closely this afternoon...what's your take on this Richie or Ric? Look within the black lines..and see two different things. The one on the left appears to be in three dimensional...and the other one has lines going straight across. Let me know what you guys think...thanks!~~~~
-
Looked at the image closely this afternoon...what's your take on this Richie or Ric? Look within the black lines..and see two different things. The one on the left appears to be in three dimensional...and the other one has lines going straight across. Let me know what you guys think...thanks!~~~~
What image is your slice taken from? I can't see anything that matches your image.
-
I think that's one reason that this is still regarded as an Art, as opposed to a Science. Humans still gotta' process it with their less-than-perfect internal data management mechanisms.
LTM, who prefers natural as opposed to processed,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 CER
-
Hi Bruce
If you are asking if I personally believe the discoveries and conclusions by TIGHAR so far, as well as reported radio transmissions...
My answer is "yes".
Bill
-
Charlie and others...I do apologize for this small image...when I went to download it from another computer it came up with this. Anyway, its taken off the new image that was updated and is on the second shelf...Check it out...I believe there is something there....
-
Charlie and others...I do apologize for this small image...when I went to download it from another computer it came up with this. Anyway, its taken off the new image that was updated and is on the second shelf...Check it out...I believe there is something there....
Here's what I see...
It's directly below the anomaly.
-
Here's what I see...
It's directly below the anomaly.
You're looking at the uncorrected imagery. That mosaic is distorted and unreliable.
-
You're looking at the uncorrected imagery. That mosaic is distorted and unreliable.
I just used the image he started with. In the new image I can't even really see it, it just looks like many other rockfalls in the area. When I get a minute I'll put the new image up and circle the same area.
Rocks is rocks...
-
Ric...this updated anomaly pic came directly from the new update. Charlie is in the right vicinity with the second box shown. Outside of the second box to the left is what appears something 3-dimensional. Inside that second box is something very odd. Anyway, just saw it and wanted to point it out...
-
Ric...this updated anomaly pic came directly from the new update. Charlie is in the right vicinity with the second box shown. Outside of the second box to the left is what appears something 3-dimensional. Inside that second box is something very odd. Anyway, just saw it and wanted to point it out...
Randy the image you and I used is the "before" pic. It's not reliable.
When you look at the new image, there's not much there.
-
NBC onto new sonar image
http://science.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/06/17/19005102-earharts-plane-new-sonar-imagery-analysis-raises-hopes?lite
-
http://www.ub88.org/researchprojects/f4ucorsair/f4u-corsair.html
interesting video music is a bit moody though :)
-
http://www.ub88.org/researchprojects/f4ucorsair/f4u-corsair.html
interesting video music is a bit moody though :)
Interesting that the sonar image in the above link looks a bit like the highlighted image on page 14 Charlie Chisholm's post.
-
Pareidolia - a word that should be in our vocabulary. Check it out.
-
Ssssshhhhhh! "I see dead people!"
-
Ssssshhhhhh! "I see dead people!"
He said pareidolia not paranoia!
-
Talking of faces check this little fella out with sun glasses pn i found in 2 min clip of 2012 video :)
-
That's almost as good as the winking pig 8)
-
Chris
Did u notice dinosaur head lower left
-
Yep, T=Rex skull. If your into Dr Who I can also see a black Ood in the top left :P
-
:)
-
Chris/richie,
You guys wouldn't be moonlighting as Tim's photographic experts now, would you? :)
-
I may have to consult my legal team ;)
-
Pareidolia, great word! I wonder what it's called when pareidolia leads to lawsuitia? ???
LTM,
dp
-
Let's make sure wit doesn't slip into ad hominem.
-
Let's make sure wit doesn't slip into ad hominem.
Precisely, Ric.
Truth should be the objective here, not "gotcha"...
-
Tim
May i ask what research you done, On Ric and Tighar before u contributed 1 million dollars ?
-
Do we know what happened to the NC lifeboats after the photo was taken on the beach? Is it possible that the sonar target could be one of the lifeboats washed back off the shore and subsequently sunk (storm action)? I believe they were supposed to be 26 ft in length and 1800 lbs according to records, but if the records were wrong and the boat was say 30 ft long.........? Maybe a worthwhile question?
-
Do we know what happened to the NC lifeboats after the photo was taken on the beach?
Not for sure. We did some metal detecting in that area in 1999 and found some hardware that might have been associated with the lifeboat. Absent evidence to the contrary I would assume that the boat just rotted away in place.
Is it possible that the sonar target could be one of the lifeboats washed back off the shore and subsequently sunk (storm action)?
I can't say it's impossible but it doesn't seem terribly likely.
-
All,
I've been following this research for a long time and have been very skeptical of the investigation (some call it pathological science, but I wouldn't go that far or use adjectives like that). After looking at the post-loss radio transmission information, particularly the correlations it provides between direction finding and patterns in time, space and content of reports uniquely attributable to a genuine witness, it is abundantly clear AE was on or about Gardner island. What still remains an unexplained mystery, as far as I'm concerned, is why and how she was there. It doesn't make any sense ... not to me.
But the radio evidence is exceptional. Combined with the correlational patterns we are now seeing in the subsurface analysis it is clear that the plane has been found. At least three correlated regions of artificial material consistent with an aircraft in a remote location also correlated with a photograph of that same area above water, tends to confirm the radio evidence. I do not believe that any one region such as this, nor any of the so-called shore "evidence", was sufficient by itself to establish any cause to change what you're doing. Congratulations to all of you at TIGHAR and I hope that the positive vision of discovery prevails over avarice.
Lloyd
-
Thanks Lloyd. I must disagree with you in one respect.
it is clear that the plane has been found.
I'm not yet convinced that any of our underwater imagery is aircraft debris. I dearly hope it is but until we have a clear photo of an airplane part that could only have come from NR16020 I'm not ready to say the plane has been found.
-
Ric,
I will admit to that being a "gut opinion", but as the evidence mounts I'm placing my bets by calling a duck a duck. I, too, would like to see some serial numbers and I will hold out for that. But they were definitely there. It would be easier to believe they just ran out of gas and ditched and the two souls would have suffered less. But it was not to be, imo.
Lloyd
-
I will admit to that being a "gut opinion", but as the evidence mounts I'm placing my bets by calling a duck a duck.
To be clear, I think the preponderance of evidence that they were there is overwhelming, but I'm not yet sure that we have the plane. I've learned (the hard way) that it is not up to me, or anyone at TIGHAR, to say that the mystery has been solved. Every individual must look at the available evidence and make that judgement for themselves. Some of us have been there for a long time. Others, like you, are newly arrived (welcome). Some, no doubt, will never accept that the story ended on Gardner Island no matter what we find.
-
Ric,
From your perspective I think you're absolutely spot-on. I have the luxury of not having to make the decisions you do, so I can be a little more daring. ;-) I hope we can get back there and do some serious archaeology on that site. We owe it to this British and American hero to resolve their status for posterity.
Lloyd
-
Hi Randy
Not sure to be honest, Check this out though in the attached image, There's a white arrow pointing to a shadow below left of anomaly i can almost make it out but before i say what i see.
Would like to know what other's may see, Bare in mind the shadow could be covered in sediment
Thanks Richie
Hi Richie,
Could this be interpreted as a wing and engine? I don't know if the dimensions are right for it, but in other copies of this photo with different contrast you can see what looks like a bent propeller at the bottom right corner of the anomaly. Its lying flat and pretty plain, but with bent edges as if it encountered something in its spin. In fact, the "propeller" seems to be the clearest of all the objects there. Then the bulge at the end of the anomaly looks like an engine or perhaps midsection of the plane twisted at right angles to the wing.
There is another version of this photo with a different contrast that shows it a lot better. I'll try to dig it up.
Thanks
Lloyd
Here's the image
-
Ric, do you happen to know what the sound frequency was of the sonar pings the AUV was using? In the course of looking up other side-scan sonar images for comparison, I have seen some unbelievably clear images of shipwrecks showing windows, masts, and even rope. It is my understanding that the higher the frequency the clearer the image, but the lower the range.
-
Ric, do you happen to know what the sound frequency was of the sonar pings the AUV was using?
No, I don't. I was surprised to learn from Oceanic Imaging Consultants that the contractor used two different side-scan frequencies. We're now finding out that there was a lot that the contractor never told us.
-
Ric, do you happen to know what the sound frequency was of the sonar pings the AUV was using? In the course of looking up other side-scan sonar images for comparison, I have seen some unbelievably clear images of shipwrecks showing windows, masts, and even rope. It is my understanding that the higher the frequency the clearer the image, but the lower the range.
At the Earhart 75 gig in April of 2012, the rep from Bluefin (the AUV vendor) said that they were using an EdgeTech 2200 sidescan.
http://www.edgetech.com/docs/2200-s_brochure.pdf (http://www.edgetech.com/docs/2200-s_brochure.pdf)
If you look at the datasheet you'll see that there are a number of frequency options for this sonar. I don't recall if the rep said which one he would be using. If I had to guess, it would be the 300/600 kHz one, but that's a guess on my part.
-W
-
Ric, do you happen to know what the sound frequency was of the sonar pings the AUV was using?
No, I don't. I was surprised to learn from Oceanic Imaging Consultants that the contractor used two different side-scan frequencies. We're now finding out that there was a lot that the contractor never told us.
Any chance of suing the contractor ? It seems to be the thing to do.
-
Any chance of suing the contractor ? It seems to be the thing to do.
We prefer to resolve disagreements without resorting to legal action. Let's just say that we are seeking to resolve the issue.
-
Any chance of suing the contractor ? It seems to be the thing to do.
We prefer to resolve disagreements without resorting to legal action. Let's just say that we are seeking to resolve the issue.
How refreshing in this litigious world ;D
-
Hi All
Ric
When the Rov went to check the wing anomaly did you's venture into the area i have labeled B and C
C being the object and B being the shadow
I believe the edges are to smooth to be natural and judging by shadow i speculate it could be a wheel and strut or something of that shape and size.
Thanks Richie
-
More NC wreckage?
-
Hi Chris
Not sure but looking closely and going off shadow above it, I cant think of anything on the ship that would be similar in appearance
Richie
-
Its in the wreckage zone though so the odds would be high it being NC stuff. Damn I need to win the Euro Millions then we could do one more expedition and I'd still have enough left if it proved a failure (inconclusive) to retire a rich and contented man :)
BTW I'd have to do the Euro Millions Lotto in the first place, IMO its just another stealth tax aimed at the poor and hopeful.
-
The AUV made multiple passes over the "wing" target. Here's another view of the same scene but viewed from the opposite side (note the shadows). The feature you've labeled "B" has considerable elevation and appears to be box-ish in shape. It could be a coral boulder or a piece of ship wreckage but I see nothing to suggest that it's an aircraft component.
-
Hi Ric
Thanks for posting the sonar image looks nothing like what I thought now, Has oceanic corrected all the sonar data or just the images were anomaly is.
Thanks
-
Has oceanic corrected all the sonar data or just the images were anomaly is.
Just that one area. It would cost several thousand dollars to have them correct all of it.