Debris Field Found?

[Greg Daspit]

New member here from Tokyo. Hi to all. Photography and image manipulation is my game. Found that a manipulated B&W filtered image is much easier to see. The object spotted by Randy is interesting.

why would these different components of different shapes and specific gravities end up so close to each other this far away from the point where the breakup occurred?
gl

I think some of the pieces may be connected to a big chunk of the plane that is partially covered by a slide. Cables and wires holding them close to this piece as they came down. The light colored strip area top center has what looks like rivets in circular patterns in two spots. It may be the skin of a big peice but mostly covered up.
The object Randy spotted, slightly left of center, does look like a control box of some kind with a cable attached to the top that extends towards the upper left debris. Cables could have held the pieces close even though they may have broken apart on the reef.
It looks like the main landing gear in the upper right, on its side seen from the rear. It looks like it has the extended axle piece like on the Electra gear and the brace holding the fender to the gear near the hub has come loose from the fender which is partially covered by the slide

[richie conroy]

Ric

The only place i have found an item similar in old video to new video is here.

Similar size black rope with loop's on the end.

[richie conroy]

top right corner beneath the white line there is a metal tube, U can also see a metal strap just before end of tube 

[Tom Swearengen]

Oh ---Ok

[Gary LaPook]

"Paging Doctor Rorschach...........paging Doctor Rorschach!"

gl

[Malcolm McKay]

"Paging Doctor Rorschach...........paging Doctor Rorschach!"

gl

I'm feeling much the same way.

[Gary LaPook]

"Paging Doctor Rorschach...........paging Doctor Rorschach!"

gl

Why don't you guys try your luck with these images?

gl

[Dave McDaniel]

Gary, I love ya! your sense of humor is as bent as mine!...Dave

[dave burrell]

I would guess we are all disappointed. :'(
Wasn't much of a debris field on the Discovery show, just "one color glossy 8x10 picture with circles and arrows and a paragraph under each one describing how it was to be used as evidence.."

[Monte Chalmers]

I would guess we are all disappointed. :'(

somewhat.  The show was crafted well enough, but I was hoping for more in the debris field. There was something seen later that was going to be analyzed - what was that about?

[Alan Harris]

I would guess we are all disappointed. :'(
Wasn't much of a debris field on the Discovery show, just "one color glossy 8x10 picture with circles and arrows and a paragraph under each one describing how it was to be used as evidence.."

Wait . . . is that from "Alice's Restaurant" or am I way out in left field here??

I would say the production values exceeded my expectations and the content was a bit below expectation.  I had hoped there could be more last-minute rearrangement to show a little more of the ongoing HD video review.  But given the realities of producing a prime-time show I suppose my hope was somewhat unrealistic.  The strongest emotion I felt was empathy/sympathy for someone standing on a boat watching thousands of dollars per minute being urinated away on stuck AUVs and the like.

[Malcolm McKay]

Why don't you guys try your luck with these images?

gl

The second one is definitely Amelia and Fred around the campfire dining on barbecued crab.

[Monte Chalmers]

These guys would look at two photos taken seconds apart by an airplane camera, using a little viewing object, oh yeah - a "stereoscope".  They would line the aerial pictures up just right for viewing through these stereo-optic lenses.  Things on the ground would appear in 3D.  AAA Sites!  SAM Sites!  Military targets of opportunity! They'd stand right out in 3D.

Bill, wasn't it that both pictures were taken at the same time but the camera positions were varied enough to develop the 3D situation? I was just looking back through a couple of threads trying to find the thing about the expert that was to analyze an item in the debris field - haven't found it but I came across your 3D comment. 

[Malcolm McKay]

Is that picture all there is, or is there more, and how far away from the debris field of the Norwich City was it taken? Certainly I see nothing in it that could be construed as anything more than coral debris. That slightly Y shaped object in the top left might be of man-made origin but that is a still a long way from evidence of aircraft wreckage - I do hope for TIGHAR's sake that there is more to come that offers something more identifiable without recourse to other means that will simply generate controversy.

[Alan Harris]

These guys would look at two photos taken seconds apart by an airplane camera, using a little viewing object, oh yeah - a "stereoscope".  They would line the aerial pictures up just right for viewing through these stereo-optic lenses.  Things on the ground would appear in 3D.  AAA Sites!  SAM Sites!  Military targets of opportunity! They'd stand right out in 3D.

Bill, wasn't it that both pictures were taken at the same time but the camera positions were varied enough to develop the 3D situation? I was just looking back through a couple of threads trying to find the thing about the expert that was to analyze an item in the debris field - haven't found it but I came across your 3D comment.

I saw a PBS show about this not long ago.  The British derived a huge benefit in WW2 using stereo images to identify bombing targets and figure out the "what and where" of new things like V-1's and V-2's.  They had special Spitfires or Hurricanes, I forget which, fitted out with a big aerial camera that took multiple overlapping images as the plane flew along (Bill was right about that).  It drove the pilots nuts because they had to fly in harm's way low, slow, and at constant heading and speed or the images didn't work.  I believe something like the same effect is possible with the underwater images because they overlap and you can see changing perspective on the target object.  But I don't really have any knowledge/experience here.