Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 99 100 [101] 102 103 ... 106   Go Down

Author Topic: Still from ROV video  (Read 1088129 times)

Tim Mellon

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 805
  • Blast off!
Re: Still from ROV video
« Reply #1500 on: October 20, 2012, 01:38:35 PM »

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

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

Thank you, Ric.

Tim
Chairman,  CEO
PanAm Systems

TIGHAR #3372R
 
Logged

Tim Mellon

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 805
  • Blast off!
Re: Still from ROV video
« Reply #1501 on: October 26, 2012, 03:57:57 AM »

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

TIGHAR #3372R
 
Logged

John Balderston

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 138
Re: Still from ROV video
« Reply #1502 on: October 30, 2012, 12:13:01 AM »

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

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

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

Tim Mellon

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 805
  • Blast off!
Re: Still from ROV video
« Reply #1503 on: October 30, 2012, 06:14:27 AM »

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

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

Tim Mellon

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 805
  • Blast off!
Re: Still from ROV video
« Reply #1504 on: October 30, 2012, 11:35:47 AM »

 The Titanic.
Tim
Chairman,  CEO
PanAm Systems

TIGHAR #3372R
 
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5934
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: Still from ROV video
« Reply #1505 on: October 30, 2012, 12:24:01 PM »

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

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

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5934
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: Still from ROV video
« Reply #1506 on: October 30, 2012, 12:29:04 PM »

This just in from Jeff Glickman:

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

Tim Mellon

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 805
  • Blast off!
Re: Still from ROV video
« Reply #1507 on: October 30, 2012, 04:03:57 PM »

 
This just in from Jeff Glickman:

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

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

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

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

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5934
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: Still from ROV video
« Reply #1508 on: October 30, 2012, 06:30:55 PM »

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

John Balderston

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 138
Re: Still from ROV video
« Reply #1509 on: October 30, 2012, 06:35:37 PM »

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

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

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

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

tom howard

  • T2
  • **
  • Posts: 87
Re: Still from ROV video
« Reply #1510 on: October 30, 2012, 07:40:27 PM »

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

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


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

tom howard

  • T2
  • **
  • Posts: 87
Re: Still from ROV video
« Reply #1511 on: October 30, 2012, 10:22:26 PM »

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

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


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

Don't ask me - ask Ric...  ;)

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

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

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

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

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

Priorities, priorities...

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

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

Bill Roe

  • T3
  • ***
  • Posts: 161
Re: Still from ROV video
« Reply #1512 on: October 31, 2012, 07:28:50 AM »

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

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


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

You know - That may not be a bad idea.  There's a bunch of us that look at the videos trying, trying to identify something/anything related to an airplane.  Others see stuff that I have a real problem grasping. 
{And I have some (45 year old) USAF/Air America, I'll call it - "very minor photo interpretation" experience/fun.  We used highly trained experts to analyze aerial photos back then for intelligence briefings and those guys would show me, somewhat, how to do it.}

If a "symposium/seminar" would be arranged for Mr. Mellon, why not structure a formal seminar for all interested parties to attend?  I know I'd have an interest.
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5934
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: Still from ROV video
« Reply #1513 on: October 31, 2012, 08:09:49 AM »

Very confused of the direction the group is headed and why? ???

TIGHAR is headed in the direction of finding a conclusive solution to the Earhart mystery.  We're doing it because there is sufficient public interest to make it possible to raise the money it takes to conduct a professional, science-based investigation.
- The shape and scope of the next expedition is still under discussion - as it should be this soon after the input of so much new data.
- The debris field Jeff Glickman sees in the 2012 video needs more analysis before we can say that it merits a major commitment of resources (resources that we don't have)
- The 2010 video has been reviewed many times.  Tim Mellon sees aircraft wreckage. I don't. Neither does Jeff Glickman -  but we're always open to the possibility that we are wrong.   
- Jeff has forensic expertise. Tim has real world experience having spent many hours watching real-time ROV video during the Niku VII expedition. It makes sense for Tim and Jeff to review the video together.
Logged

Tom Swearengen

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 818
  • earhart monument, Hawaii
Re: Still from ROV video
« Reply #1514 on: October 31, 2012, 01:07:24 PM »

Hum---. If I can weigh in here for a second.
Personally, I saw more in the original video and stills than the VII video. Sorry---maybe because I got older in the process. Several of us, looked at those pictures and 'saw' some very interesting things, some of which may have been aircraft parts. (What's the black squiggley thing?) Some of us even talked to Jeff Glickman about them in DC, and frankly got a very non-committal answer. Jeff is like that! Our friends Richie and Jeff Victor spent hundreds of hours 'analyzing ' those frames. Many new members since them, John, Tom, Tim, etc. have done the same with the VII video. I wasnt on KOK, Tim was. Apparently he was watching the LIVE feed from the ROV/AUV as they were doing their thing. The rest of us are watching a video of the results of those searches.

First---congrats to Tim for being able to go on the expedition. 2nd-for being able to see first hand the operation in real time. That brings up and interesting question: in viewing it real time, did you see anything THEN that got your attention? I'm assuming NOT, because if there was, then a more detailed search would have been called for at that location. That was why TIGHAR went out to Niku, to gather real data.

As we have seen from the pictures and video, the underwater topography is something to behold. Amazing is probably not the proper adjective to use to describe it. Scary environment is close. We all have had our own opinions about what to expect. We all wanted to find this large piece of a wing with part of a N number on it. Obviously it isnt sticking up from the reef, OR the bottom (wherever that is) with a marker beacon flashing, "here I am". Its there, somewhere. That somewhere is the big haystack in the Pacific, that we think is the waters around Niku. Maybe, maybe not. With what I've seen in the video, the ROV could have missed it by 2 feet or 2 miles. The result is the same---it wasnt found. So, to echo Jeff Nevill---its hard to see another expedition go to Niku without dedicating sufficient time and resources to do a really thorough surface, and subsurface search. Dr. King and his group could search the North west part of the island, as well as areas leading back to the 7 site. Gee---maybe also the southern part of the island. Another team could be working on subsurface searches. The problem isnt time, unless you factor in the every day the artifacts that we search for are either deteriorating, or becoming hidden from view. No---the problem is the amount of money it would take to send a full scale search effort to Niku for 2-3 months to do the job. More than several million I'm sure.

Perhaps there are some deep pocketed benefactors out there, as well as others that have the means to see this through to a "breaking news announcement".
Tom Swearengen TIGHAR # 3297
 
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 99 100 [101] 102 103 ... 106   Go Up
 

Copyright 2021 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