Posted on 09/13/2007 12:55:13 PM PDT by ZGuy
Steve Fossett is still missing since his plane plane disappeared on September 3 while searching for areas to attempt a new land speed record. Searching approximately 7,500 square miles, local authorities and the Air Force have yet to find the missing adventurer, but some high-tech images and assistance from the Internet community may have aided in spotting Fossett’s missing plane.
Web users have come to the aid of rescuers by examining numerous satellite images using a service by Amazon.com called Mechanical Turk. According to AVweb, an aviation news resource, it is possible that one of the Web spotters found Fossett’s missing Bellanca Citabria Super Decathlon on a mountain side.
“Sure, it’s a long shot, but AVweb readers taking part in the Mechanical Turk effort to locate Steve Fossett through Google Earth imagery has found something that doesn’t look like it belongs on a mountainside. Have a close look at the accompanying image. It looks to us like it could be the fuselage and wings of a small plane. We’ll likely know soon enough if this is Fossett’s Super Decathlon (or a combination of rock and shadow that looks like it) but in the meantime, the important thing is to keep looking, ” says the posting on AVweb. “Humans are still much better at picking objects out of photos that don’t appear to belong there than computers are.”
Read more at Wired.
Thanks to iturk for the heads-up.
Doug’s Opinion
This is not the first time the Internet community has been asked to help out with searching for something. For years, the SETI@home project has been letting volunteers offer computational power on their computer to analyze radio telescope signals for sentient life among the stars. This is one case, however, where people can feel directly involved in a project versus letting a computer do the work for them.
If this Internet search for Fossett is successful, this could mark a new trend in Web volunteers being used to help find missing people quickly over vast amounts of search area. It only makes sense: the greater number of people scouring satellite imagery will dramatically increase the odds of discovering something while using less resources. Sure, searching for Fossett’s small plane in 7,500 of rugged terrain is like looking for a needle in a haystack, but the more people you have looking for it, the greater the chance that someone is going to find something.
Wow!
If web searchers can do this, then how come the USAF can’t find Iranian insurgents in Iraq using the same technique?
From what I understood, searchers (from various agencies) had found 7 or 8 other wreck sites from crashes over the years, which I found pretty remarkable.
Moral: file a flight plan.
re: the attached pix: incredibly sharp eyes there.
Democrats probably put a stop to the technique claiming it is an illegal search and currently the issue is under review by the 9th circut.
Wouldn't surprise me for a minute if my poor humor is actually true.
Is that a large cross near the plane? A signal?
Yeah, and why can’t we find Bin Laden?
“If web searchers can do this, then how come the USAF can’t find Iranian insurgents in Iraq using the same technique?”
You mean like this? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PIAgNv59w6Q
Because he's DEAD.
(On the other hand, I never could make sense of ultrasound images either. I was sure my firstborn son would look like Lake Michigan during a snowstorm.)
It has to do with time and location. A crashed airplane isn't going to move. By the time you are able to locate a terrorist hideout, through imagery, they will have moved a few miles away. Easier said then actually done.
I always hoped the satellites could produce images of vince foster driving to ft marcy, getting out of his car, etc, but I hear they were turned off that day (or maybe just malfunctioning)
Not to pour cold water on this issue, but most of the immages on Google Earth are months if not years old. We use it all the time for doing preliminary site work and conversions to approximate cad details for proposed projects. We then obtain the actual survey information to do the specific detail work. It is a good tool but again, most images were taken long before he became missing.
Once in Google Earth, in the layers section of the side toolbar, clicking the DigitalGlobe Coverage checkboxes for the appropriate year will then show on the screen when the image were taken.
“Is that a large cross near the plane? A signal?”
Aren’t K’s usually used as signals?
They need to have a satellite parked above the border, and computers analyzing the photos 24 hours a day.
That the plane is still in its original shape is a good sign - as opposed to crashing into a mountainside in a fireball. On the surface, that looks like a survivable crash.
I wouldn’t have thought it would have been that intact if it went into a mountain.
They can, and they do.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.