Is it a missile or a plane in this photo?

[CptColumbo]

I came across this: http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17975999~days=9999

Someone linked one of my youtube videos to it. It shows other people doing some good research, and proves we are not alone.

Actually this is also a shameless plug for my youtube page:http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=CptColumbo

[PhantomWolf]

It's a plane, the wings are there, but are dark gray in colour. You can see them both though.

[babazaroni]

Wow, very cool. Wonder what kind of a plane it is?

It's a very distinctive pattern with engines mounted on the fuselage. Someone will recognize it.

[Kryptos]

A shadow is visible to the northeast of the object, where the wings of the aircraft are more evident.

[apathoid]

I found it in Google Earth, its about 85 feet long, that ain't no cruise missile!!

ETA: I think its an ERJ (http://www.airliners.net/info/stats.main?id=198)

[babazaroni]

I found it in Google Earth, its about 85 feet long, that ain't no cruise missile!!

ETA: I think its an ERJ (http://www.airliners.net/info/stats.main?id=198)

Are you sure? Looks like the engines are over the wings. But the ERJ has them behind the wings.

Could be a shadow illusion though.

[apathoid]

Are you sure? Looks like the engines are over the wings. But the ERJ has them behind the wings.

Could be a shadow illusion though.

Its just a guess, but the size is about right for the ERJ. I only know of one aircraft with the engines slung above the wing and you dont see those in the US.

[Gravy]

Yes, it is a plane, the wings and horizonal stabilizers are darker, and it says "2006 Google" below the tail end of the plane. It helps to enlarge the image.

[firecoins]

Its a jet. The wings are there.

[R.Mackey]

I second the ERJ hypothesis. I think you're being fooled by white lanes drawn on the wings, perhaps to outline overwing exit escape routes.

I'm not aware of any modern aircraft with two engines, body-mounted, above the wings. Undesirable in a passenger aircraft. I suspect they're mounted near the tail and just not distinct in the photo.

But it's just a guess.

[babazaroni]

Yes, it is a definite possibility that those white areas on the wings are not engines.

[CptColumbo]

Could the darkness of the wings be due to it's paint job, or is it shading?

[PhantomWolf]

I'd go with paint job, it's too symetrical for shading

[Gravy]

I second the ERJ hypothesis. I think you're being fooled by white lanes drawn on the wings, perhaps to outline overwing exit escape routes.

I'm not aware of any modern aircraft with two engines, body-mounted, above the wings. Undesirable in a passenger aircraft. I suspect they're mounted near the tail and just not distinct in the photo.

But it's just a guess.Agreed. I think the eye naturally goes from the contrails to the white patches on the wings, but engines above the wings? Sure, let's add 30% to our engine maintenance costs, just for the hell of it!

[apathoid]

Agreed. I think the eye naturally goes from the contrails to the white patches on the wings, but engines above the wings? Sure, let's add 30% to our engine maintenance costs, just for the hell of it!

I think we've found our culprit:

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/0854754/L/

Green wings, engines and horizental stab.

[gumboot]

Are you sure? Looks like the engines are over the wings. But the ERJ has them behind the wings.

Could be a shadow illusion though.

Yeah I think the white marks over the wings are park of its markings also, not engines.

However what ever this is, it isn't an airliner. It's only 100ft long, but the scale is for SURFACE measurements and this is obviously above the surface, so it's closer to camera, therefore it's a much larger scale.

Also to consider...

Contrails only appear at altitudes over about 8km (26,000ft). The shadow on the ground (if that is indeed what it is) indicates the aircraft is (relatively) close to the ground. Therefore, unless parts of Utah are at altitudes comparable with the Himalayahs, the trail behind it isn't contrails, but smoke. If it's smoke exhaust, that also suggests it's not a civilian airliner.

Personally I'd go for some sort of very small private or government jet.

-Gumboot

[CurtC]

I found it in Google Earth, its about 85 feet long, that ain't no cruise missile!!You can't use Google Earth to measure something in flight. Many of the closer-in images are taken by aerial photos instead of satellite - I measured a MD80 airliner at about 250 feet long, when it's really about half that.

[PhantomWolf]

I think we've found our culprit:

Looks like it's certainly in contention for a winner to me.

[gumboot]

I think we've found our culprit:

Looks like it's certainly in contention for a winner to me.


Too long.

Unless Google's scale is completely wrong (which is always a possibility).

-Gumboot

[apathoid]

If you open Google Earth and zoom in on Phoenix Int'l, Concourse B(check Google Earth community at left), you'll find alot of these CRJs that match the mystery planes dimensions and color scheme quite well...

[apathoid]

If you open Google Earth and zoom in on Phoenix Int'l, Concourse B(check Google Earth community at left), you'll find alot of these CRJs that match the mystery planes dimensions and color scheme quite well...

Here is a piccie.
http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/990245fa1412bd604.jpg

[Oliver]

I don't know what it is but you can see wings on it...

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/1110745fa14528113f.jpg

ETA: LOL, Apathoid already solved the mystery...

[Gravy]

Here is a piccie.

Show-off.

[babazaroni]

If you open Google Earth and zoom in on Phoenix Int'l, Concourse B(check Google Earth community at left), you'll find alot of these CRJs that match the mystery planes dimensions and color scheme quite well...

Nice find. Makes sense since the plane is over Utah. The objects sticking out at the end may be the engines, and the unseen tail is behind.

ETA: not sure about the engines.

[gumboot]

Nice find. Makes sense since the plane is over Utah. The objects sticking out at the end may be the engines, and the unseen tail is behind.

ETA: not sure about the engines.



That means Google's scale is way off. How embarassing.

-Gumboot

[beachnut]

If you open Google Earth and zoom in on Phoenix Int'l, Concourse B(check Google Earth community at left), you'll find alot of these CRJs that match the mystery planes dimensions and color scheme quite well...
Good job.

Good job on the 61.2 degrees true track, too.

[Anti-sophist]

Here is a piccie.


Very nice. That's some pretty impessive ninja skills. That's kind of sleuth work I expect from my CIA/NSA/FBI/NWO disinfo agents.

[Schmitt.]

Here is a piccie.
Ha, that's insanely good work. The white markings even have exactly the same effect as the one in the picture, looking like distinct white objects above the wings. Every day I'm appalled at how well you chaps do your thing :P

[MRC_Hans]

That means Google's scale is way off. How embarassing.

-GumbootAs already mentioned, we don't know the altitude of neither the plane nor the camara. If this was taken from a high-altitude plane, the plane in the picture will be considerably nearer to the camara than the ground, but if it is a telescopic sattelite image, it will be close to the ground, from the POV of the camara. Seing that the ground-shadow is about the same size, I suspect the latter.

The configuration of this plane is so common that it is impossible to even try to identify it from a low-res photo. And the size of swept-wing, high stabilizer, twin rear-mounted engines jets range from 12 seaters to small jumbos. I'm not a specialist in liveries, but I suspect dozens of airlines have a light fuselage, dark wing pattern.

Hans

[rwguinn]

As already mentioned, we don't know the altitude of neither the plane nor the camara. If this was taken from a high-altitude plane, the plane in the picture will be considerably nearer to the camara than the ground, but if it is a telescopic sattelite image, it will be close to the ground, from the POV of the camara. Seing that the ground-shadow is about the same size, I suspect the latter.

The configuration of this plane is so common that it is impossible to even try to identify it from a low-res photo. And the size of swept-wing, high stabilizer, twin rear-mounted engines jets range from 12 seaters to small jumbos. I'm not a specialist in liveries, but I suspect dozens of airlines have a light fuselage, dark wing pattern.

Hans

Er, um...
Ground shadow is cast by the sun, not the camera local--
at at 93,000,000 miles, the light from the sun can be considered as parallel rays. any object at any altitude within the earth's atmosphere will cast a shadow whos size in essentially the same size as the object...

[CurtC]

Seing that the ground-shadow is about the same size, I suspect the latter.That's not a ground shadow, it's a photo negative artifact that appears on a lot of Google Earth views. The shadow of an airplane in flight would be completely diffuse because the Sun isn't a point source of light.


That means Google's scale is way off. How embarassing.As I said before, you can't judge the size of an object in flight using Google Earth. Many of the high-res photos are aerial photos, so objects in flight, which are closer to the camera, appear much larger than they would on the ground. Here's an MD-82 in flight in Texas which measures at 258 feet long:

W 97.2787283724151,N 32.50036303680706

(put that string into Google Earth's search box, or into Google Maps' search box to see it).

The MD-82 is actually only 147 feet long.

[apathoid]

That's not a ground shadow, it's a photo negative artifact that appears on a lot of Google Earth views. The shadow of an airplane in flight would be completely diffuse because the Sun isn't a point source of light.


As I said before, you can't judge the size of an object in flight using Google Earth. Many of the high-res photos are aerial photos, so objects in flight, which are closer to the camera, appear much larger than they would on the ground. Here's an MD-82 in flight in Texas which measures at 258 feet long:

W 97.2787283724151,N 32.50036303680706

(put that string into Google Earth's search box, or into Google Maps' search box to see it).

The MD-82 is actually only 147 feet long.

Thats a big MD80!

Seriously, that camera must've been quite low, huh? Since the MD80 lacked contrails and was only 30 miles from AAs home base, we can be fairly sure that's where she was headed. That would put her in the 8000~10000 ft range, so that camera couldn't have been much more than 20,000 tops.

I was under the impression that most GE imagery was satellite or high altitude NASA overflights.

[CurtC]

By the way, click this link:

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&ct=res&cd=2&url=http%3A%2F%2Fbbs.keyhole.com%2Fubb%2Fdownload. php%3FNumber%3D360116&ei=ZbL6ReeADZPqgwPf2cHIAg&usg=__QozcxduVuRZTAYvpCHWT2Hsqttw=&sig2=wlQMt9iydgvE2SCdwJGEpw

to get a collection of aircraft in flight for Google Earth. I think clicking this link should download the file and automatically start Google Earth, loading that file. There are thousands of them.

Also, the "shadow" of the plane is what's known as a "motion ghost" - the photo is actually a combination of two photos, one color and one B&W. If the object moved between the time the two photos were taken you'll see this ghost.

[babazaroni]

If those wings are really ground shadows, then it is one amazing coincidence that they line up exactly where the real wings would be.

[Kryptos]

That's not a ground shadow, it's a photo negative artifact that appears on a lot of Google Earth views.

The imagery is taken from the QuickBird satellite (by DigitalGlobe), which is the highest resolution commercial system. The satellite is a polar orbiting at 450 km, which means every 93 minutes it circles the Earth from pole to pole, taking a new swath each time. The other type of satellite is geostationary, such as weather satellites (e.g. GOES (http://www.goes.noaa.gov/)) which remain focused on the same portions of the earth at all times.

QuickBird actually takes a pair of images each time. One is black & white (panchromatic) at ultra-high resolution (1 cell or "pixel" = 60 cm on the ground). The other is multispectral (color), but somewhat lower resolution (2.4 meters). What you see on Google Maps and Google Earth are the two images overlaid together. Because the airplane travels so fast, it moved position slightly between the time the two images were taken. Thus the "shadow" which really isn't a true shadow but an image artifact, known as "image ghosting".

[Kryptos]

By the way, click this link:

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&ct=res&cd=2&url=http%3A%2F%2Fbbs.keyhole.com%2Fubb%2Fdownload. php%3FNumber%3D360116&ei=ZbL6ReeADZPqgwPf2cHIAg&usg=__QozcxduVuRZTAYvpCHWT2Hsqttw=&sig2=wlQMt9iydgvE2SCdwJGEpw

to get a collection of aircraft in flight for Google Earth. I think clicking this link should download the file and automatically start Google Earth, loading that file. There are thousands of them.

Also, the "shadow" of the plane is what's known as a "motion ghost" - the photo is actually a combination of two photos, one color and one B&W. If the object moved between the time the two photos were taken you'll see this ghost.

Okay, now I see you explained the same thing about "image ghosting".

The KML file is very cool, but labels this plane as "cruise missile over Utah"

[Fuzake]

Yeah, that's definitely a plane.

[FramerDave]

This was well and thoroughly covered on Fark a couple weeks ago. The plane is an America West Express CRJ-900. The dark teal-green wings almost disappear against the ground due to low contrast, as does the tail. What looks like the two engines at mid-body are the white stripes on the wings.

If you compare the planes at the jetways of PDX side by side you'll see that they are a match.

It was amazing seeing how people still argued that it was a cruise missile even after heaps of evidence to the contrary had been piled on.

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1150660/M/

[gumboot]

I think the people who think I'm wrong about the scale thing totally missed my point...

Google Earth images come from two sources. The further away images are satellite images. Satellites don't take photographs (except for spy satellites). The brightly-coloured images you get are enhanced and modified from the original satellite images.

When you zoom in further you get aerial photographs. Aerial photographs are taken from relatively low altitudes using aircraft, and meshed together using computers. The level of detail in the coverage (or even if there is any aerial photography images) depends entirely on what is available for that region of the world.

Scale can be calculated, in a limited form, for flying aircraft. That is, you can calculate what size something ISN'T. An object closer to the lens is larger. Always. Therefore, if something flying in the air measures a length X based on the surface scale of the map, we know for a fact that the object in question has a length LESS than X.

We have measured this aircraft, and I believe the length based on the Google Earth scale is something like 85ft. This means we know FOR A FACT that either the object is SHORTER than 85ft, or Google Earth's scale is wrong.

We have since identified the type of aircraft, and I think it's pretty much 100% that's what the aircraft is. That aircraft type is longer than 85ft. Therefore Google Earth's scale MUST be wrong.

-Gumboot

[jhunter1163]

This was well and thoroughly covered on Fark a couple weeks ago. The plane is an America West Express CRJ-900. The dark teal-green wings almost disappear against the ground due to low contrast, as does the tail. What looks like the two engines at mid-body are the white stripes on the wings.

If you compare the planes at the jetways of PDX side by side you'll see that they are a match.

It was amazing seeing how people still argued that it was a cruise missile even after heaps of evidence to the contrary had been piled on.

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1150660/M/

I wouldn't be surprised to see this make its way into the next Balsamo Vignette.

[babazaroni]

The CRJ-900 is about 119 feet long from tip of nose to a line connecting the tips of the swept back horizontal tail section.

Using the GoogleEarth ruler, the length of the airport jet is a good match for 119 feet.

Now use the ruler to measure the distance from the tip of the nose to the end of the wide white section supporting the engines. This comes to about 98 feet.

Now do the same for the mystery jet. Still a good match and I can see a faint outline of the tail section behind.