Page 2 of 3

Posted: 16 May 2007, 16:58
by DispatchDragon
It looks like an ATR Dan

Heres one I found - eye level is 1500 feet AMSL - altitude here is 1000 AGL
and the nearest airport is 20 miles away = found it checking out my favorite sopt on Lake Allatoona just north of Atlanta - the area is still very isolated
so my question is - the Cessna flying or down????


Leif

Image

Posted: 16 May 2007, 17:41
by Chris Trott
The aircraft flying aren't rendered in 3D. That aircraft could be at 100 feet (AGL) or 10000 feet (AGL) and it'll look the same in that satellite photo since it's not stereoscopic, and thus there is no true way to determine actual height.

Posted: 16 May 2007, 17:54
by DispatchDragon
That makes sense Chris - thank you

Leif

BTW if anyone really wants to find something - try looking for the life size mock up of Baghdad Intl up on he Range north of Nellis ;)

Leif

Posted: 16 May 2007, 21:54
by steveS4SSL
All I can find is Area 51.... :think:

Posted: 16 May 2007, 22:30
by blanston12
Keith Jones wrote:If you think that's low, have a look here:-

41°51'7.47"N
121°28'42.92"W
Looks like a C-5A being refueled by a KC-135 (707), given the size difference you would not think it would be worth the effort.
Keith Jones wrote: There's also something of interest here:-

52°20'10.62"N
0°11'44.23"W
Very cool, time to fire up the wayback machine.

Posted: 16 May 2007, 22:49
by DispatchDragon
Steve

Ill get the lat/Lon for it - Its north of the 51 restricted area - and east of
the Silverbow (Tonapah) facility it lies on the south end of a dry lake bed complete with AAA and SAM sites marked out.


Leif

Posted: 17 May 2007, 08:51
by fmansam
i dont understand this google earth.....

a few months ago i looked at Basra, and shaibah, both little haunts i frequented whilst in the delightful little place call iraq,
when i looked at them they were farly recent shots.... tents etc errected by coalition forces, now, nothing no zip, diddly squat, the pictures are now pre-war no 2,
any ideas how they work this, as i thought they would have put up recent shots as oppose to old!!

Posted: 17 May 2007, 09:28
by Garry Russell
That might be a security issue :think:

Governments have been complaining about how easy it is to see sites on the system.

Perhaps a compromise is to put old out of date pics in :dunno:

Just a guess

Garry

Posted: 17 May 2007, 11:44
by Nigel H-J
I've just noticed some thing, you can get lower down say at New York without too much blurredness than you can for Lincoln UK........Why is this? :think:

Posted: 17 May 2007, 12:10
by DaveB
It's all to do with the resolution of the shots Nigel. One could say that NY is a little more interesting that Lincolnshire.. not that I would of course :wink: Some areas are shot at a much higher magnification allowing that much more detail :smile:

ATB

DaveB :tab: