Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 17   Go Down

Author Topic: Sonar Target  (Read 216830 times)

Matt Revington

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 396
  • member #4155
Re: Sonar Target
« Reply #75 on: May 28, 2013, 11:42:58 AM »

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.
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 6098
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: Sonar Target
« Reply #76 on: May 28, 2013, 12:16:05 PM »

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.
Logged

Skip Daly

  • T1
  • *
  • Posts: 17
Re: Sonar Target
« Reply #77 on: May 28, 2013, 12:36:53 PM »

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
Logged

Gloria Walker Burger

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 94
Re: Sonar Target
« Reply #78 on: May 28, 2013, 04:56:43 PM »

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:
Quote
FWIW, I don't think it's moving.

Ric, why don't you think it is moving?
Gloria
TIGHAR #3760
 
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 6098
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: Sonar Target
« Reply #79 on: May 29, 2013, 05:15:01 AM »

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. 
Logged

Monty Fowler

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1078
  • "The real answer is always the right answer."
Re: Sonar Target
« Reply #80 on: May 29, 2013, 09:30:13 AM »

"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
Ex-TIGHAR member No. 2189 E C R SP, 1998-2016
 
Logged

Steve Lyle Gunderson

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 63
Re: Sonar Target
« Reply #81 on: May 29, 2013, 12:42:01 PM »

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
« 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:
 
  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.
Steve G
#3911R
 
« Last Edit: May 29, 2013, 01:17:14 PM by Bruce Thomas »
Logged

Tim Mellon

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 805
  • Blast off!
Re: Sonar Target
« Reply #82 on: May 29, 2013, 02:27:15 PM »

Yes, Steve, quite near: I estimate the sonar object to be about 50 meters further South and 200 meters uphill.

Tim
Chairman,  CEO
PanAm Systems

TIGHAR #3372R
 
Logged

Brad Beeching

  • T3
  • ***
  • Posts: 158
Question for Ric - Sonar Target
« Reply #83 on: May 29, 2013, 04:48:05 PM »

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...
Brad

#4327R
 
Logged

Jon Romig

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 102
Re: Sonar Target
« Reply #84 on: May 29, 2013, 05:32:04 PM »

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

Jon Romig 3562R
 
« Last Edit: May 29, 2013, 05:47:06 PM by Jon Romig »
Logged

Tim Mellon

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 805
  • Blast off!
Re: Sonar Target
« Reply #85 on: May 29, 2013, 05:51:08 PM »

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.

Tim
Chairman,  CEO
PanAm Systems

TIGHAR #3372R
 
Logged

Jon Romig

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 102
Re: Sonar Target
« Reply #86 on: May 29, 2013, 06:00:11 PM »

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.


Jon Romig 3562R
 
Logged

Tim Mellon

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 805
  • Blast off!
Re: Sonar Target
« Reply #87 on: May 29, 2013, 06:23:21 PM »

Above my pay scale, Jon.
Tim
Chairman,  CEO
PanAm Systems

TIGHAR #3372R
 
Logged

Jon Romig

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 102
Re: Sonar Target
« Reply #88 on: May 29, 2013, 08:12:12 PM »

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
Jon Romig 3562R
 
« Last Edit: May 29, 2013, 08:23:35 PM by Jon Romig »
Logged

Jon Romig

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 102
Re: Sonar Target
« Reply #89 on: May 29, 2013, 08:44:16 PM »


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
Jon Romig 3562R
 
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 17   Go Up
 

Copyright 2024 by TIGHAR, a non-profit foundation. No portion of the TIGHAR Website may be reproduced by xerographic, photographic, digital or any other means for any purpose. No portion of the TIGHAR Website may be stored in a retrieval system, copied, transmitted or transferred in any form or by any means, whether electronic, mechanical, digital, photographic, magnetic or otherwise, for any purpose without the express, written permission of TIGHAR. All rights reserved.

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

Powered by MySQL SMF 2.0.18 | SMF © 2021, Simple Machines Powered by PHP