Missing Airliner

madcow rocketry
eggtimer rocketry
shop deals on amazon
SilicdyneTRF
The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Marc_G said:
Folks, I very much doubt that if the plane was in some fantasy land stolen and squirreled away somewhere for use as a terrorist weapon, that the target would be the mainland U.S.. There's lots of crazies out there, and lots of targets of opportunity. Even if they did use it against the mainland US, it would be almost out of fuel by then... still powerful but not the same as the flying gascans that took down the Towers.
Click to expand...

Flying gas cans not withstanding, can you imagine the load of crap you could put inside a 777 with the seats removed? This modern day Emilia Earhart cold turn out to be something far far worse than a missing plan with a few folks on board.
 
Just crazy... Chinese release debris photos and send the search 140 miles east of last contact. Then come back and say those satellite photos were incorrect, or at least, were released in error. Now US government is saying engine transmissions point to an additional 4 hours of flight whereas Rolls-Royce previously said no transmission after 1:07am. And now Rolls-Royce is shutting up and not providing any statements. This is getting more strange with each passing day.
 
Last edited:
Marc_G said:
Folks, I very much doubt that if the plane was in some fantasy land stolen and squirreled away somewhere for use as a terrorist weapon, that the target would be the mainland U.S.. There's lots of crazies out there, and lots of targets of opportunity. Even if they did use it against the mainland US, it would be almost out of fuel by then... still powerful but not the same as the flying gascans that took down the Towers.
Click to expand...

As someone that flies fairly regularly on commercial airlines for my job, I can tell you without a doubt that the airport security in this country (I'm sure everywhere) is a JOKE. It's all for show, to give the illusion of security. Anyone that wants to get weapons on board a plane can do it without a problem. Hartsfield airport in Atlanta, the busiest airport in the world at times, has a group of TSA employees that graduated from clown college working there. And that comment might be a little insulting to real clowns. I wouldn't be surprised if someone walked through with a chainsaw in their hands and nobody said a word.

And even if the security at the large airports was perfect, the smallest airports in the country have non-existent security and if you fly out of one of those to a larger airport, you arrive on the "secure" side with whatever weapons you have in your pockets. Fly from there to a major airport, and you've just bypassed anything that major airport has set up to screen folks passing through their security checkpoint.

My point is, if terrorists want to use a plane again for a terrorist plot they don't need to go through all the trouble of stealing a plane off the coast of Vietnam. They could just pick one up right here whenever they're ready.
 
Yup. It's called "security theater" for a reason.

Also, are people forgetting that this plane needs a massive runway to land?

I give the odds of it being down safely somewhere in the vicinity of "none" :(
 
Steal it, park it, hide it, then wait...finish hacking the remaining RF "smells" to resemble the in flight "beehive" of a normal approaching airliner...then do some REAL damage. Might be China that gets hit this time, who knows what's on this agenda.

Considering historical precedent and all the tin foil hats negated, this crashed fight will get found and explained VERY soon by all the important acronyms.

What's this I hears about the Crapien takeover in Anchoviage anyway? Leave those fishermen alone, they're just Hungarians trying eat because the Eurasian Prime Minister won't let the little kids work for a living, ...very unfair.

Yup.jpgYup.jpg
 
dixontj93060 said:
Yep, he thought you'd say it was photoshoped or something, but swears it is not: https://wtvr.com/2014/03/13/hunter-kills-500-lb-wild-hog/. Maybe he's just a fine hunter.
Click to expand...

No need for Photoshop. Perspective is everything.

This is an old trick. Just take the picture with a wide angle lens and have the hunter step back a couple feet. The photographer moves up towards the hog until it fills the FOV and takes the picture. Because of the short focal length everything is in focus, but the hunter looks tiny compared to the hog.....

Bob
 
bobkrech said:
No need for Photoshop. Perspective is everything.

This is an old trick. Just take the picture with a wide angle lens and have the hunter step back a couple feet. The photographer moves up towards the hog until it fills the FOV and takes the picture. Because of the short focal length everything is in focus, but the hunter looks tiny compared to the hog.....

Bob
Click to expand...

Did you even look at the link? The hog is over 8ft long. Looking at the guy's head and imagining him lying down next to hog I could see him taking up 3/4rs of the length (6 feet). I'm no expert, but we have tons of hunters around here and none them do the crap you and TopRamen are describing. If they did they'd get skewered (or shot) by their neighbor.
 
bobkrech said:
No need for Photoshop. Perspective is everything.

This is an old trick. Just take the picture with a wide angle lens and have the hunter step back a couple feet. The photographer moves up towards the hog until it fills the FOV and takes the picture. Because of the short focal length everything is in focus, but the hunter looks tiny compared to the hog.....

Bob
Click to expand...

This is also a good way to make Hobbits and Wizards.
 
dixontj93060 said:
Did you even look at the link? The hog is over 8ft long. Looking at the guy's head and imagining him lying down next to hog I could see him taking up 3/4rs of the length (6 feet). I'm no expert, but we have tons of hunters around here and none them do the crap you and TopRamen are describing. If they did they'd get skewered (or shot) by their neighbor.
Click to expand...
I've done technical photography for a long time so I take offense by you calling my comments crap. I'm not saying anything was done intentionally, but when you take a photo with a short focal length lens without a known reference length (as in the field) the fact is you will obtain photographs that appears to be Photoshopped.

Here's some technical background on why that is.

https://api.ning.com/files/FyLL0CPW...UduSxme2Aqx/IMG_0220.JPG?width=737&height=550 is a link to a photograph of a 400 pound boar in the back of a Polaris 4 wheeler. Here's another picture of the vehicle. https://allabouturanch.com/photo/pict0025-2/next?context=latest

The hog is positioned at the hinge of the tailgate that is 54" wide, and the hunter is leaning against the back of the box which is 36.5" deep. The height of the bed is 11.5" https://www.polaris.com/en-us/ranger-utv/ranger-crew-900-eps-titanium-matte-metallic-le/specs

Here's a drawing on how you measure a boar. https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct...MSNV9Ip0DfGtdZjNv_Hb6YlA&ust=1394824312484036

Here's a journal article on how to measure a boar and how to relate the measurement to weight. https://www.aspajournal.it/index.php/ijas/article/view/ijas.2010.e9/1250

Another article on weighing pigs by body measurements here. https://sugarmtnfarm.com/how-to-weigh-a-pig-with-a-string/

It's pretty clear that weight is proportional to the length x girth squared or is proportional to the cube root of the length.

If I scale the photo of the 400 pound boar on the back of the Polaris to a 500 pound boar, the length scale factor equal to the cube root of (500/400) = 1.08. For comparison a 500 pound boar posed in the same position on the back of the Polaris would have its eyes over the right hand side of the bed.

Without a reference distance which provided by the Polaris bed in the photo I referenced, you could have vastly different perceptions on the size of the boar which is exactly what you get when you take a picture of a boar in the woods with a hunter in the background.

In the days of film photography, if you used a 50 mm focal length lens to take the photo, you would have your normal perspective. If you took the picture with a 28 mm lens, the foreground object seems larger than the background object just due to perspective. If the photographer used a 100-200 mm lens and stood back, the perspective is flat and the foreground object and the background object would appear to be closer and similar in perspective. A good comparison is taking a model launch photo with a house in the background. This happens at CMASS launches frequently where a house 2000' away looks like its almost next to the pads!

It all the illusion of perspective, and it doesn't have to be intentional.

Bob
 
bobkrech said:
I've done technical photography for a long time so I take offense by you calling my comments crap. I'm not saying anything was done intentionally, but when you take a photo with a short focal length lens without a known reference length (as in the field) the fact is you will obtain photographs that appears to be Photoshopped.

Here's some technical background on why that is.

https://api.ning.com/files/FyLL0CPW...UduSxme2Aqx/IMG_0220.JPG?width=737&height=550 is a link to a photograph of a 400 pound boar in the back of a Polaris 4 wheeler. Here's another picture of the vehicle. https://allabouturanch.com/photo/pict0025-2/next?context=latest

The hog is positioned at the hinge of the tailgate that is 54" wide, and the hunter is leaning against the back of the box which is 36.5" deep. The height of the bed is 11.5" https://www.polaris.com/en-us/ranger-utv/ranger-crew-900-eps-titanium-matte-metallic-le/specs

Here's a drawing on how you measure a boar. https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct...MSNV9Ip0DfGtdZjNv_Hb6YlA&ust=1394824312484036

Here's a journal article on how to measure a boar and how to relate the measurement to weight. https://www.aspajournal.it/index.php/ijas/article/view/ijas.2010.e9/1250

Another article on weighing pigs by body measurements here. https://sugarmtnfarm.com/how-to-weigh-a-pig-with-a-string/

It's pretty clear that weight is proportional to the length x girth squared or is proportional to the cube root of the length.

If I scale the photo of the 400 pound boar on the back of the Polaris to a 500 pound boar, the length scale factor equal to the cube root of (500/400) = 1.08. For comparison a 500 pound boar posed in the same position on the back of the Polaris would have its eyes over the right hand side of the bed.

Without a reference distance which provided by the Polaris bed in the photo I referenced, you could have vastly different perceptions on the size of the boar which is exactly what you get when you take a picture of a boar in the woods with a hunter in the background.

In the days of film photography, if you used a 50 mm focal length lens to take the photo, you would have your normal perspective. If you took the picture with a 28 mm lens, the foreground object seems larger than the background object just due to perspective. If the photographer used a 100-200 mm lens and stood back, the perspective is flat and the foreground object and the background object would appear to be closer and similar in perspective. A good comparison is taking a model launch photo with a house in the background. This happens at CMASS launches frequently where a house 2000' away looks like its almost next to the pads!

It all the illusion of perspective, and it doesn't have to be intentional.

Bob
Click to expand...

Bob, first most of you links are broken/incorrect. One that was good was how to measure a pig from base of tail to crown of head. This is all fine. The report of the boar may be false, but in multiple articles and reports they state that the boar is 8 ft in length. I'm assuming they are measuring it correctly, maybe not. And for sure I don't know, maybe they did use the wrong lens/focal length.

My issue with "crap" it is not your photographic skill, it is that TopRamen first said the hunter was sitting 10 feet behind the animal and then you said "this is an old trick." I am not a hunter, but do live on what could be considered a hunting preserve. During the six years I have owned the property I have taken 20+ "trophy shots" of hunters. Not one stood 10 feet behind the animal or even considered trying to "trick" someone with the shot--they don't need to they are proud enough. They all stand or kneel right behind the animal either holding the rack/head or as shown in the wild boar picture, the gun (or bow) used for the kill. If they heard you imply that they were using trickery they would say "CRAP I AM!" (or worse) and it would quickly come to fisticuffs (or worse). People that blurt out around here without thinking are quickly run out of town.
 
Last edited:
Airobert said:
Airliners are designed to handle about 0.5 atm (4-8PSI) of pressure on the INSIDE. The valves do not allow for more pressure on the outside of the plane than on the inside. They also have a safety valve that vents the pressure when on the ground so you can't blow the doors open. (Some doors also have a vent system built in)
I suppose it might survive 2 atm of pressure, but it would soon fill up with water.
Click to expand...

What a commercial airframe is designed to withstand, where it normally operates and what it must demonstrate to gain an airworthiness certificate are not necessarily and quite often different. Sometimes not even close. So while they may pressurize to .5 atm, regs dictate it must be able to withstand far more than that. Our Engines are subjected to all manner of ridiculousness.

When the deHaviland Comet was experiencing mid air catastrophic airframe failures, (mid aid disintegrations), an airframe was eventually filled with water and pressurized to levels exceeding insanity. Still it remained intact. However, when it was cycled through normal loads, it finally ruptured.

I’m not sure I understand your point regarding the outflow valves? Or are you simply adding to the description? Keep in mind, the Negative Pressure Relief Valve may or may not be part of an Outflow Valve. On the last system I worked on, granted that was 1990, the Outflow and Negative Pressure Relief Valves were on separate, redundant systems.

Perhaps I was not clear in my previous description, but the scenario relies on the cabin filling with water. I have very little doubt that 2 atm is well within reason. Especially when you consider the flooding cabin would be compressing the trapped air. This scenario also relies on the premise that the trapped air will not cause the hull to explode but rather allow the air to escape slowly. Once filled, there is no depth that would cause the hull to rupture.
 
In a previous post, I indicated that the engines sent back two reports.

“It turns out we received two reports from the engines before it vanished. We received the broadcasts as it was taking off and during the ascent.”

Now it appears that we received reports for four hours after the aircraft ended communication and left radar surveillance.
 
dixontj93060 said:
Bob, first most of you links are broken/incorrect. One that was good was how to measure a pig from base of tail to crown of head. This is all fine. The report of the boar may be false, but in multiple articles and reports they state that the boar is 8 ft in length. I'm assuming they are measuring it correctly, maybe not. And for sure I don't know, maybe they did use the wrong lens/focal length.

My issue with "crap" it is not your photographic skill, it is that TopRamen first said the hunter was sitting 10 feet behind the animal and then you said "this is an old trick." I am not a hunter, but do live on what could be considered a hunting preserve. During the six years I have owned the property I have taken 20+ "trophy shots" of hunters. Not one stood 10 feet behind the animal or even considered trying to "trick" someone with the shot--they don't need to they are proud enough. They all stand or kneel right behind the animal either holding the rack/head or as shown in the wild boar picture, the gun (or bow) used for the kill. If they heard you imply that they were using trickery they would say "CRAP I AM!" (or worse) and it would quickly come to fisticuffs (or worse). People that blurt out around here without thinking are quickly run out of town.
Click to expand...
Funny, all the links work on my computer. :confused:

I never questioned the reported measurement. One measures a boar along the contour of the body from the tail joint on the butt to the tip of the snout which approximates the arc of a circle. The actual standing length approximates the cord of a circle which is less than tape measured length as shown in the drawing below. An 8' tape measurement would result in an ~6.5' standing length. The 400 pound boar in my reference photograph had an ~6' standing length.

boarmeasurements.jpg

There's not right or wrong focal length. You take a photo with whatever camera you have. I never said the hunter tried to trick anyone. What I did say that it's all perspective and you can use perspective in trick photography to make foreground objects look big, and background objects look small.

Bob
 
blackbrandt said:
If organizations like NORAD have been tracking the plane, and know exactly where it is, and then release that information immediately, other countries now know the power of the US tracking. If they wait, then other countries have to guess more on the US tracking powers.



Another thing I thought of, I am also not going to be surprised if this plane turns up in a month or so, laden with bombs, and crashes into a building. If this is true, it is probably hiding away on some deserted island.
Click to expand...

Again, really well thought out.
 
VonMises said:
If it hit the water wouldn't SOSUS pick it up?
Click to expand...
That's actually a pretty good question. I don't know what there is in terms of passive sonar infrastructure in that part of the world, and if a sub picked something up then whoever government is driving would be a bit cagey about how they release the info.
 
dixontj93060 said:
Did you even look at the link? The hog is over 8ft long. Looking at the guy's head and imagining him lying down next to hog I could see him taking up 3/4rs of the length (6 feet). I'm no expert, but we have tons of hunters around here and none them do the crap you and TopRamen are describing. If they did they'd get skewered (or shot) by their neighbor.
Click to expand...


Sorry, but you are wrong. There's even tutorials on how to take this same type of Picture. It is Common Practice among Hog Hunters in Particular.
Been a Popular Trendy thing to do for a few Years now.
There is a reason the Guy is behind the Hog, and not laying infront of it.

And as far as someone getting Skewered or shot for taking a Pic' in this Style, this Style Pic' has become the accepted standard for Hog Pics'.
It's basically the only way Hog Pics' are taken nowadays.
 
Last edited:
dixontj93060 said:
Bob, first most of you links are broken/incorrect. One that was good was how to measure a pig from base of tail to crown of head. This is all fine. The report of the boar may be false, but in multiple articles and reports they state that the boar is 8 ft in length. I'm assuming they are measuring it correctly, maybe not. And for sure I don't know, maybe they did use the wrong lens/focal length.

My issue with "crap" it is not your photographic skill, it is that TopRamen first said the hunter was sitting 10 feet behind the animal and then you said "this is an old trick." I am not a hunter, but do live on what could be considered a hunting preserve. During the six years I have owned the property I have taken 20+ "trophy shots" of hunters. Not one stood 10 feet behind the animal or even considered trying to "trick" someone with the shot--they don't need to they are proud enough. They all stand or kneel right behind the animal either holding the rack/head or as shown in the wild boar picture, the gun (or bow) used for the kill. If they heard you imply that they were using trickery they would say "CRAP I AM!" (or worse) and it would quickly come to fisticuffs (or worse). People that blurt out around here without thinking are quickly run out of town.
Click to expand...

DNR records these at weigh stations I'm a hunter and I know in most states wild game is publicly recorded it could be found... I believe its 500lbs because I don't know the guy and can only take his word for it..

Sent from my SPH-L300 using Rocketry Forum mobile app
 
There is a difference in landing in a river and landing in an ocean...

Sent from my SPH-L300 using Rocketry Forum mobile app
 
This has got to be some kind of a record for off topic
A thread about an airliner crash (maybe) becomes a heated argument about estimating dead hog weights.

M
 

Similar threads

J
Missile comes within 100' of Airliner
Replies
8
Views
2K
tbrogan
tbrogan

Latest posts

Back
Top