Steve Fossett

Makes no sense

Or he landed on a whitish lake bed, flipped over and you are trying to
find a whitish underbelly on top of white dirt. I keep watching news
hoping that he will have been found alive but those hopes are fading.

Ron Lee

On Sep 9, 9:36 am, NoneYa wrote:
We can take pictures of objects on the Earth from space that
are 2 inch's wide. We can take pictures of objects on Mars
Why can't we find a wrecked
airplane in Nevada??

they are doing so.

still a ton of data for the computers to churn through.

why not take some computer programming courses to see why such things
are difficult.

a starter course on photography can also give you some clues.

on the other hand, he could have drilled in so hard that there may
only be a patch of dirt slightly darker than the surrounding dirt.

"NoneYa" wrote in message
...
We can take pictures of objects on the Earth from space that are 2 inch's
wide. We can take pictures of objects on Mars that are 12 inches wide. Why
can't we find a wrecked airplane in Nevada?? A place that is mostly dirt
and sand with very little vegetation?

WE?

What part are you taking in the search?

On Sep 9, 10:36 am, NoneYa wrote:
We can take pictures of objects on the Earth from space that
are 2 inch's wide. We can take pictures of objects on Mars
that are 12 inches wide. Why can't we find a wrecked
airplane in Nevada?? A place that is mostly dirt and sand
with very little vegetation?

Makes no sense

to a bigot, reality makes little/no sense.



http://www.spacecomputer.com/systems/archer.html

On Sun, 09 Sep 2007 10:36:35 -0400, NoneYa
wrote:

We can take pictures of objects on the Earth from space that
are 2 inch's wide. We can take pictures of objects on Mars
that are 12 inches wide. Why can't we find a wrecked
airplane in Nevada?? A place that is mostly dirt and sand
with very little vegetation?

Makes no sense

Makes a lot of sense to me. Tain't all that easy even with image
comparison. Too many variables, irregular shaped objects, and
changing landscape along with no recent data/images for a base line.

We can easily find lots of things when we are looking at either a
small area for something specific of any area where we look for
"anything", but not something specific in a very large area. That is
extremely difficult. When it comes to pattern recognition, computers
are very good at looking for some specific shape, but not good at
finding that shape when it's been altered. The algorithms for complex
pattern recognition are very sophisticated and typically take lots of
computing horsepower.

On top of that if there is any brush around, airplanes can be
extremely difficult to spot even from 500 or a 1000 feet.

A Bo went down between here and MOP a few years back. That area runs
probably between 50 and 100 people per square mile. They put it
between two trees and walked out. The FAA inspectors couldn't readily
find the plane so to save time the two guys took them back in and as I
understand it still took them a few hours to find it.

For Steve's sake, I hope he's still hiding in the back of the hangar
with Paris.

On Sep 9, 7:36 am, NoneYa wrote:
We can take pictures of objects on the Earth from space that
are 2 inch's wide. We can take pictures of objects on Mars
that are 12 inches wide. Why can't we find a wrecked
airplane in Nevada?? A place that is mostly dirt and sand
with very little vegetation?

Makes no sense

The high quality Google Earth pictures are all done with aircraft.
Googe has had aircraft up to update the search area so you can help
search right now on Google Earth.