Author Topic: Flight Path And Related Issues  (Read 383760 times)

Offline Shutter

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9281
  • Thanked: 1016 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #4440 on: November 03, 2021, 08:22:57 PM »
Interesting video from Antarctica, a woman opens a door with 60+  mph winds.

.
 

Offline 377

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1583
  • Thanked: 432 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #4441 on: November 04, 2021, 01:13:06 AM »
I jumped off the rear ramp of a C 130 that was flying WOT. I estimate the airspeed was around 350 mph. It was a test jump for a company that makes automatic openers for reserves, called AADs. I was outfitted with pressure sensors all over my exterior and a data recorder. They wanted to see how pressure fluctuated on a tumbling skydiver. Their AADs trigger on sensed pressure which is inversely proportional to altitude. High pressure indicates low altitude.

The exit was REALLY VIOLENT. I was wildly tumbling completely unable to stabilize. The angular rate of my tumbling was very high. Everything was a blur. I worried about my canopy accidentally deploying and the rapid deceleration dissecting a coronary artery. That has happened to some early head down freefallers whose rigs vibrated/fluttered  open. My rig was designed for high speed freefall but I still worried. As I decelerated to freefall velocity I was able to stabilize and deploy my main canopy normally.

The company that paid for my test jump was very pleased with the data that was recorded from my wild ride. Turns out that there were large differences recorded simultaneously between pressure sensors mounted on different parts of my tumbling body.

Really high exit speed causes freefall chaos. At least it did with me. It’s odd to think about slowing down in freefall.

377

 
The following users thanked this post: andrade1812, dudeman17

Offline dudeman17

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 297
  • Thanked: 91 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #4442 on: November 04, 2021, 05:26:33 PM »
Geez, how did you get suckered into that, haha?
 

Offline 377

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1583
  • Thanked: 432 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #4443 on: November 05, 2021, 04:15:13 AM »
You called it right Dudeman. I found out later that they had asked many other jumpers all of whom declined. The “pay” was a free C 130 jump and a tshirt. I initially felt like a heroic test pilot specially selected for his courage and skills. That morphed into sucker pretty quickly.

377
« Last Edit: November 05, 2021, 05:57:10 AM by 377 »
 
The following users thanked this post: andrade1812

Offline 377

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1583
  • Thanked: 432 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #4444 on: November 12, 2021, 10:35:02 PM »
Can airliner flight paths be reconstructed after the fact? It appears that some can. This wouldn’t help with 305 because the system used to map ionospheric reflections using the Internet and HF ham radio signals wasn’t available in 1971.

This is truly fascinating. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

I want to hear from Snowmman, Georger, Tom Kaye and other scientifically inclined Vortex dwellers. What do you think of this technique?

377
 

Offline georger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3182
  • Thanked: 467 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #4445 on: November 12, 2021, 11:34:26 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Can airliner flight paths be reconstructed after the fact? It appears that some can. This wouldn’t help with 305 because the system used to map ionospheric reflections using the Internet and HF ham radio signals wasn’t available in 1971.

This is truly fascinating. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

I want to hear from Snowmman, Georger, Tom Kaye and other scientifically inclined Vortex dwellers. What do you think of this technique?

377

Very interesting and definitely has merit. If  you know K6MYC (Mike Stahl at M2 Res./Antennas) you should run this by Mike  ;)). Mike would be interested in this - its right down his alley. Mike ran a few studies related to this for NASA and JPL when he was working with Stanford back in the 70s? Glad you brought this to our attention. Could this technique be used to check the fp of 305 ... my thought is its too old, but its worth a discussion. What are the inherent limitations of this process?

Im glad they are still looking for MH370.   

Good post! 

BTW you can still find Mike on 40m ~7150 working the South Pacific almost every night around 0600 UTC when there is propagation ...   Mike is now 84 and still going strong. He is nothing short of amazing! The same old Mike we always knew!!    :chr2:
« Last Edit: November 13, 2021, 12:04:05 AM by georger »
 

Offline Robert99

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1603
  • Thanked: 188 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #4446 on: November 13, 2021, 12:55:29 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Can airliner flight paths be reconstructed after the fact? It appears that some can. This wouldn’t help with 305 because the system used to map ionospheric reflections using the Internet and HF ham radio signals wasn’t available in 1971.

This is truly fascinating. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

I want to hear from Snowmman, Georger, Tom Kaye and other scientifically inclined Vortex dwellers. What do you think of this technique?

377

This is nonsense.  The probability of little green men from Mars hijacking the MH370 airliner is greater than the probability that this fellow can reconstruct its flight path several years after the fact. ::) 
 

Offline georger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3182
  • Thanked: 467 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #4447 on: November 13, 2021, 03:20:11 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Can airliner flight paths be reconstructed after the fact? It appears that some can. This wouldn’t help with 305 because the system used to map ionospheric reflections using the Internet and HF ham radio signals wasn’t available in 1971.

This is truly fascinating. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

I want to hear from Snowmman, Georger, Tom Kaye and other scientifically inclined Vortex dwellers. What do you think of this technique?

377

This is nonsense.  The probability of little green men from Mars hijacking the MH370 airliner is greater than the probability that this fellow can reconstruct its flight path several years after the fact. ::)

Well of course, ... what else ! Have you reviewed the theory? You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Never mind. Go back to sleep. All is well.   

I dont see YOU doing anything! So what's your beef with people who are trying to help ....
« Last Edit: November 13, 2021, 04:15:25 AM by georger »
 

Offline georger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3182
  • Thanked: 467 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #4448 on: November 13, 2021, 03:56:38 AM »
The WSPR Protocol:   You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login)

Applications
Raspberry Pi as WSPR transmitter

The protocol was designed to test propagation paths on the LF, MF and HF bands. Also used experimentally at VHF and higher frequencies. Other applications include antenna testing, frequency stability and frequency accuracy checking. Usually a WSPR station contains a computer and a transceiver, but it is also possible to build very simple beacon transmitters with little effort. For example a simple WSPR beacon can be built using the Si 570,[5] or Si 5351.[6] The Raspberry Pi can also be used as WSPR beacon. Density distribution of WSPR spots, January 2014 vs July 2014, using only most distant reception per spot.

Note - an accurate clock is essential both for transmission, and decoding of received signals (native Windows timing is usually inadequate).

MH370
In May 2021, aerospace engineer Richard Godfrey suggested an examination of historical WSPR data to further define the flight path of Malaysian Airlines flight MH370 on 8 March 2014, suggesting that there were "518 unique transmission paths that cross the area of interest around Malaysia, the Malacca Strait and the Indian Ocean. With the WSPR data provided every two minutes and the ability to check against the satellite data every hour it is possible to detect and track MH370 from two independent sources."[7]

However, the method used in this article is highly questionable; The reflected signal energy from aircraft in such distances is very small (inverse square law), much smaller than variance on the regular skywave signal due to multipath propagation, which can vary by tens of dB within seconds. Such difficulties make it necessary to use more advanced methods for radar applications at such distances in this frequency range (Over-the-horizon radar). But, the theory is sound. Better data may provide new insights especially if it agrees with prior techniques utilized which have already defined a general search area. 
 

Offline snowmman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1826
  • Thanked: 173 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #4449 on: November 13, 2021, 04:55:31 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Can airliner flight paths be reconstructed after the fact? It appears that some can. This wouldn’t help with 305 because the system used to map ionospheric reflections using the Internet and HF ham radio signals wasn’t available in 1971.

This is truly fascinating. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

I want to hear from Snowmman, Georger, Tom Kaye and other scientifically inclined Vortex dwellers. What do you think of this technique?

377

interesting. from that link. Proplab pro You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

here's a review of various radio prop programs. Proplab Pro is available since 2007. 4 stars You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login



“I use Proplab Pro V3.1 for tracing radio waves around the globe. Proplab Pro was one of the first ionospheric physics-based HF radio signal ray-tracing engines in the world for the PC and has been maintained and developed for over 30 years. It continues to be used by research organisations, scientists, engineers, students, the military and amateur radio operators around the world. It is one of the only software packages to reliably predict ionospherically refracted HF radio signal behaviour. It uses both three-dimensional models of the ionosphere as well as three-dimensional topographical data of the Earth to provide unprecedented detail in modelling HF radio signal propagation worldwide.

GDTAAA is a software application that I have developed that uses a Vincenty WGS84 navigation engine to track aircraft, a spherical navigation engine to track WSPRnet data links and anomalies. In addition, I use the Proplab Pro V3.1 engine with its embedded IRI 2007 ionospheric model to perform global ionospheric mapping and ray tracing.”
 
The following users thanked this post: 377, georger

Offline Chaucer

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 939
  • Thanked: 211 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #4450 on: November 30, 2021, 11:13:10 PM »
One of the controversial claims made by Dr. Edwards in his book is that the timing of the plot points on the FBI flight path map are wrong.

To prove this claim, he references the notes of George Harrison. Dr. Edwards concludes that there are six different authors of the notes. He labels them A through F. He states that Author F made the notation “23 DME PDX” which indicates that Flight 305 was 23 nautical miles south of what is now the Battleground VORTEC. Author F marks this as occurring at 8:18. Two other authors marked the same event, but put this time as 8:22.

Edwards examines the remaining notes and times and concludes that Author F was listening to the radio transmissions in real time and that their time of 8:18 was accurate while the other two authors were reading the teletype printout which had a 2 to 4 minute delay.

Calculating the flight speed and distance in reverse, now puts the 8:11 - 8:13 jump time and drop zone farther south over the Columbia River.

I also tried to do this same thing, but I was unable to square that circle and make it work. Dr. Edwards puts forward compelling evidence, but this is a significant aspect of the case and is only given two pages of explanation. For such an important detail about the case, I would have liked to have seen more elaboration on it.

Lastly, in order to forestall any attacks directed MY way, I am non-committal about Dr. Edwards conclusions regarding this. I’m intrigued by it, but I don’t have an opinion one way or another basically because I don’t know enough about it to hold an opinion. Any of you who are more knowledgeable want to chime in?
 

Offline snowmman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1826
  • Thanked: 173 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #4451 on: November 30, 2021, 11:30:33 PM »
377 wears 3 altimeters.
He never knows what altitude he's at...just picks the answer he likes best :)
That's the nice thing when there are multiple sources for the same data, you can just cherry pick the one you like best!
 
The following users thanked this post: georger

Offline 377

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1583
  • Thanked: 432 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #4452 on: December 01, 2021, 04:04:41 AM »
Snow has me figured out. Twice in 53 years of jumping, I’ve been down to my last parachute. I didn’t like that feeling at all. Plan B is fine until you are using plan B and realize there is no plan C. At that moment I wanted a reserve for my reserve. Three altimeters makes me feel better than I feel with just one. I think I may need a third canopy. Statistically it’s extraordinarily unlikely that I’ll ever use the tertiary reserve. So I won’t be wishing for a fourth canopy. Three should suffice.

When I mentioned a tertiary reserve to a rigger friend he laughed. He said a few were worn by CRW dogs, jumpers who fly linked canopy formations which occasionally devolve into horrific wraps (entangled canopies). He couldn’t recall any tertiary saves. He suggested humorously that instead of a third canopy I just carry a gun. “If you really need a third canopy and don’t have one at the time, just shoot yourself because it’s clearly your time to die.”

Now where can I put my second spare tire?

377

« Last Edit: December 01, 2021, 04:05:59 AM by 377 »
 
The following users thanked this post: andrade1812

Offline Bruce A. Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4320
  • Thanked: 442 times
    • The Mountain News
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #4453 on: December 01, 2021, 04:23:34 AM »
377, you put a big smile on my face. Thank you.
« Last Edit: December 01, 2021, 04:23:51 AM by Bruce A. Smith »
 

Offline Robert99

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1603
  • Thanked: 188 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #4454 on: December 01, 2021, 11:02:39 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
One of the controversial claims made by Dr. Edwards in his book is that the timing of the plot points on the FBI flight path map are wrong.

To prove this claim, he references the notes of George Harrison. Dr. Edwards concludes that there are six different authors of the notes. He labels them A through F. He states that Author F made the notation “23 DME PDX” which indicates that Flight 305 was 23 nautical miles south of what is now the Battleground VORTEC. Author F marks this as occurring at 8:18. Two other authors marked the same event, but put this time as 8:22.

Edwards examines the remaining notes and times and concludes that Author F was listening to the radio transmissions in real time and that their time of 8:18 was accurate while the other two authors were reading the teletype printout which had a 2 to 4 minute delay.

Calculating the flight speed and distance in reverse, now puts the 8:11 - 8:13 jump time and drop zone farther south over the Columbia River.

I also tried to do this same thing, but I was unable to square that circle and make it work. Dr. Edwards puts forward compelling evidence, but this is a significant aspect of the case and is only given two pages of explanation. For such an important detail about the case, I would have liked to have seen more elaboration on it.

Lastly, in order to forestall any attacks directed MY way, I am non-committal about Dr. Edwards conclusions regarding this. I’m intrigued by it, but I don’t have an opinion one way or another basically because I don’t know enough about it to hold an opinion. Any of you who are more knowledgeable want to chime in?

Chaucer, this has been discussed at length here for the last 10 years or so.  It is as simple as anything can be.  The airliner was at the 23 DME point at 8:18 PM and so reported that over the ARINC telephone patch that had been set up.  Not everyone at the NWA facility at SEATAC, where the Harrison papers originated, was on the telephone patch.

The ARINC telephone patch went through the same ARINC facility that routinely communicated with aircraft through a dedicated VHF radio frequency.  Routinely, the ARINC facility would then type up the communication and send it by teletype to subscribing stations.  In this instance, the phone patch permitted the people in SEATAC and elsewhere to also listen in on the communications between the ARINC station and the airliner. 

Nevertheless, the ARINC facility continued to prepare and transmit over the teletype system the essence of the communications it was receiving.  This required a few minutes to do and the 8:22 PM time at the bottom of the message was the time the ARINC teletype operator pushed the "send" button on his machine.

The people who were on the phone patch got the time as 8:18 PM when the information was actually transmitted and the people who were not on the phone patch got the time as 8:22 PM from the time at the bottom of the teletype printout.

There is no problem with these times.  There has never been a problem with these times.