Help search for Steve Fossett

I wonder if this massive search will also discover long lost gliders?
Does anyone know if there were any missing gliders over the years in
Nevada?

Ramy

On Sep 10, 9:54 am, Marc Ramsey wrote:
Dan G wrote:
What is true, without doubt, is that a full conventional SAR operation
is launched for *anyone* who goes missing in an aircraft or boat,
whether rich or poor, or famous or not, and that's still a person's
best hope for timely rescue.

Perhaps, but I still found this headline and article rather sad:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...7/09/10/MNF0S2...

The search for Fossett is something more than a "conventional" SAR
operation...

Marc

Dan G wrote:
TBH I don't know how effective this method of "searching" will prove.
As is linked to above, the prototype of this method was the search for
a Microsoft employee who sailed out of San Francisco and was never
seen again (I worked on that one too). Although a number of yachts of
the right size were sighted in the images, they proved not to be the
Tenacious and Gray was never found. (Gray and the Tenacious are still
out there, somewhere, probably on the seabed by now). You can read the
blog that was used to co-ordinate the satellite search:

I'm skeptical as well, but I think it's an interesting technique which may
have some potential, so it's good that it's getting another test.

What is true, without doubt, is that a full conventional SAR operation
is launched for *anyone* who goes missing in an aircraft or boat,
whether rich or poor, or famous or not, and that's still a person's
best hope for timely rescue.

Indeed. There has been some complaining about the seemingly special
attention that Fossett is getting, but this satellite stuff appears to
be contributed by entirely private organizations, and if they want to do
that then that's their business. And if it leads to better techniques for
everyone then we're all better off in the end.

--
Michael Ash
Rogue Amoeba Software

"Dan G" wrote in message
ups.com...
http://www.mturk.com/mturk/preview?g...21T60&kw=Flash

These are 0.4 m resolution pictures taken by satellite (GeoEye) since
Fossett went missing. You're shown a picture and either you say "no,
nothing of interest" or "yes, this should be checked out". There's
over 100,000 images to sift through, so if you can help, please do!


Probably my ineptness, but the flash application doesn't work. I get a
Google Earth view of the Lat, Long starting point on Google Earth but no
opportunity to designate an image as interesting. I also don't get a
predictable way to shift to the next image.

I've tried with both IE and Firefox.

Bill Daniels

On Sep 10, 4:32 pm, "Bill Daniels" bildan@comcast-dot-net wrote:
Probably my ineptness, but the flash application doesn't work. I get a
Google Earth view of the Lat, Long starting point on Google Earth but no
opportunity to designate an image as interesting. I also don't get a
predictable way to shift to the next image.

Just realised that I've been using a non-Flash version (I use Opera so
can turn Flash on and off at will - usually it's off). To get it, just
take the =Flash off the end of the URL:

http://www.mturk.com/mturk/preview?g...XEZJZG21T60&kw


Dan

I was game, gave it a try, and after entering enough contact information to
get spammed for years to come, I got the "Try again later" message. Web
sites shouldn't be playing these kinds of games with people's lives - unless
they're robust enough to follow through. Sorry Steve, no help coming from
this end.


"Dan G" wrote in message
ups.com...
http://www.mturk.com/mturk/preview?g...21T60&kw=Flash

These are 0.4 m resolution pictures taken by satellite (GeoEye) since
Fossett went missing. You're shown a picture and either you say "no,
nothing of interest" or "yes, this should be checked out". There's
over 100,000 images to sift through, so if you can help, please do!

"user" wrote in message
...
I was game, gave it a try, and after entering enough contact information to get
spammed for years to come, I got the "Try again later" message. Web sites
shouldn't be playing these kinds of games with people's lives - unless they're
robust enough to follow through. Sorry Steve, no help coming from this end.

I was also initially game to give it a try, but made the mistake of reading
the user agreement. Sorry, no go this time.

Perhaps in the future they will have time to smooth out some of the kinks.

Vaughn

On Sep 10, 11:53 pm, "Vaughn Simon"
wrote:
"user" wrote in message

...

I was game, gave it a try, and after entering enough contact information to get
spammed for years to come, I got the "Try again later" message. Web sites
shouldn't be playing these kinds of games with people's lives - unless they're
robust enough to follow through. Sorry Steve, no help coming from this end.

I was also initially game to give it a try, but made the mistake of reading
the user agreement. Sorry, no go this time.

Perhaps in the future they will have time to smooth out some of the kinks.

It's amazon.com. Just use your normal Amazon login. If you've never
used Amazon before, well, they've not become one of the biggest, if
not *the* biggest, online retailers in the world by spamming customers
or screwing them through the license. Join. Help.

BTW I'd caution against using Google Earth even with the GeoEye KML -
it's a vast area, so it needs to be divided up evenly between users -
which is what MT does. It also allows you to report anything
interesting you find straight to the team.


Dan

In looking at the area covered by the new sat pictures on Google
Earth, I am surprised by how small it is. from lat=38.9520869405,
lon=-119.456244753 to lat=37.9965916667, lon=-118.937121878 is only
about 1800 sq miles. Sounds like a lot on paper, but gliders were
covering 3-4x that amount the same day. Was that all the coverage they
could get, or was there something to indicate that was an area of
focus? His range must have been 50x this area. I would think that
the advantage of an online sat search is that a million eyes could
cover a very large area several times over. Impossible by air.

Matt

On Sep 11, 11:42 am, "Matt Herron Jr." wrote:
In looking at the area covered by the new sat pictures on Google
Earth, I am surprised by how small it is. from lat=38.9520869405,
lon=-119.456244753 to lat=37.9965916667, lon=-118.937121878 is only
about 1800 sq miles. Sounds like a lot on paper, but gliders were
covering 3-4x that amount the same day. Was that all the coverage they
could get, or was there something to indicate that was an area of
focus? His range must have been 50x this area. I would think that
the advantage of an online sat search is that a million eyes could
cover a very large area several times over. Impossible by air.

Matt

It would also be a huge advantage if the Amazon page would provide
side by side sat pictures before and after his flight. Much easier to
spot a difference. I bet a computer software could do that as well.
Maybe they are already doing it...

Ramy

On Sep 10, 3:35 pm, "user" wrote:
I was game, gave it a try, and after entering enough contact information to
get spammed for years to come, I got the "Try again later" message. Web
sites shouldn't be playing these kinds of games with people's lives - unless
they're robust enough to follow through. Sorry Steve, no help coming from
this end.


Come on - give them a break ! They only had few days to put all this
system together. Try again and it will go through.


Limus