GOOGLE EARTH

aircraft tech trng

Lapin

Christ, where's that?
Knock ?

CaptainSkidmark

are those fed ex planes?

Steyr

Lapin wrote: »

Christ, where's that?
Knock ?

Are you serious???:P

Lapin

Steyr wrote: »

Are you serious???:P

Of course !!!;)

I'd still love to know where it is though

Lapin

Ghost plane :eek:

Steyr

Lapin wrote: »

Ghost plane :eek:

Or Aircraft at higher Altitude?

Steyr

Lapin wrote: »

Of course !!!;)

I'd still love to know where it is though

The OP can share that with us i hope, America i believe.

Simon Gruber Says

Lapin wrote: »

Ghost plane :eek:

I'd recon it's just a camera glitch or a shadow because it seems to be a mirror image. Both are MD-11's in my opinion from the shape and the triple contrail.

Hogzy

OP that could very well be one of those areas in airports where firemen train.
It could have been disassembled so thats why it looks strange.

A small version of what im explaining.




Surely if they were removing a real plane it would be the wings to go first.

Edit: Just looked at the photo again and thinking maybe it was a fire. I doubt they would put a fire training facility so close to a working building

Steyr

Hogzy wrote: »

Edit: Just looked at the photo again and thinking maybe it was a fire. I doubt they would put a fire training facility so close to a working building

Now you got it, its certainely not a Fire Dump, they are always away from Aircraft/Fuel/Terminals/Humans ANYTHING to do with Flight Ops or anything i mentioned. Even EICM's Fire Dump is at the opposite side of the Airport.

Andrew33

There's a lot of sh1te on googleearth, don't believe everything you see on it, in fact, I'd go so far as to say, believe nothing on the internet until proved otherwise. Loads of photoshopped "weird" aircraft pics on the 'net purporting to come from googleearth.

Hogzy

Andrew33 wrote: »

There's a lot of sh1te on googleearth, don't believe everything you see on it, in fact, I'd go so far as to say, believe nothing on the internet until proved otherwise. Loads of photoshopped "weird" aircraft pics on the 'net purporting to come from googleearth.

There is nothing photoshopped on google earth. I guarantee you that.

Andrew33

Hogzy wrote: »

There is nothing photoshopped on google earth. I guarantee you that.

Grab yourself a dictionary (or just google it) and look up the word "purport" and then read my post again:rolleyes:

tricky D

Hogzy wrote: »

There is nothing photoshopped on google earth. I guarantee you that.

There's plenty of nuclear facilities, airbases, submarine bases and the like, which have been put through the pixelate, blur and other filters:

Ventiseri-Solenzara Air Base
Deelen
Geilenkirschen, Germany, NATO
Tours Airport, France
Den Helder
Marcoule Nuclear Facility
Ile Longue, Brest

edit: More at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite_map_images_with_missing_or_unclear_data

Lapin

Nothing photoshopped about the image I posted above. The co ordinates are there. Check it yourself and see. Or use the ruler in the tools menu if you want a more challenging method, its about 18km NE of St. Patricks Bridge in Cork City on a heading of 59 degrees!
I only called it a ghost plane because of the way it appears in the image. Its obviously a photographical quirk. I'm just curious as to what causes it. Perhaps this is the wrong forum to find that out but I still happen to think its a cool photo for an aviation thread.

tricky D

Your one is fine. There's lots more examples of that effect. E.g. 53°24'39.04"N 6° 5'20.06"W

There's other strange things GE does. Take a look at the sewing errors at Singapore Airport's not so straight runway: 1°22'15.03"N 103°59'12.28"E

Another one is repeated objects like at Frankfurt Airport:
50° 3'6.61"N 8°37'2.53"E

Hogzy

tricky D wrote: »

There's plenty of nuclear facilities, airbases, submarine bases and the like, which have been put through the pixelate, blur and other filters:

Ventiseri-Solenzara Air Base
Deelen
Geilenkirschen, Germany, NATO
Tours Airport, France
Den Helder
Marcoule Nuclear Facility
Ile Longue, Brest

edit: More at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite_map_images_with_missing_or_unclear_data

Well that is different. That is blurring out for security reasons and what not. What i meant to say was nothing is photo shopped to give the impression of an area being different to what it actually is in real life.

ie what the camera sees is what is uploaded. Google is obviously going to blur out areas that it does not have permission to photograph.

Andrew33

Hogzy wrote: »

Well that is different. That is blurring out for security reasons and what not. What i meant to say was nothing is photo shopped to give the impression of an area being different to what it actually is in real life.

ie what the camera sees is what is uploaded. Google is obviously going to blur out areas that it does not have permission to photograph.

With all due respect, you're posting your opinion as facts. blurring out/deleting/pixelating an area to make it look different is not "photoshopped"???? maybe GE didn't use the Photoshop program but thats like saying you hoovered instead of vacuumed.
And to pull you up on your second point, Google didn't knock on my door and ask me if they could show my house on streetview or ask me if I'd prefer it blurred out.

And thirdly, if GoogeEarth is so damned faithful to whats actually there, why don't we see hundreds of aircraft crisscrossing the skys over London/Paris/Amsterdam??
Just log onto www.radarvirtuel.com to see how many aircraft are in the skies over the aforementioned cities at any one time.

tricky D

Andrew33 wrote: »

And thirdly, if GoogeEarth is so damned faithful to whats actually there, why don't we see hundreds of aircraft crisscrossing the skys over London/Paris/Amsterdam??
Just log onto www.radarvirtuel.com to see how many aircraft are in the skies over the aforementioned cities at any one time.

This has a load of aircraft of all sorts caught in the air: http://bbs.keyhole.com/ubb/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=364129

However, like you say there's nowhere near as many as on RV and very few captured over sea/ocean.

Hogzy

Andrew33 wrote: »

With all due respect, you're posting your opinion as facts. blurring out/deleting/pixelating an area to make it look different is not "photoshopped"????

Google are not going to photoshop (using this as a verb for general editing of images) a random bunny rabit into the sahara desert for sh!ts and giggles are they. That is the context of photoshopping i am talking about.

Google didn't knock on my door and ask me if they could show my house on streetview or ask me if I'd prefer it blurred out.

That is because showing your house on street view isnt against the interests of public policy and security is it? If it were then they would be legally obliged to blur it out.

And thirdly, if GoogeEarth is so damned faithful to whats actually there, why don't we see hundreds of aircraft crisscrossing the skys over London/Paris/Amsterdam??

Its all nice looking at the planes zoomed out over the entire scale of europe but zoom in to the cities and you will see how sparsely spread out the planes are.

Planes at cruising altitude are invisible because these planes would very much so be out of focus so would become so blurred that they blend in to the natural noise of the photograph. Planes that are maybe at an altitude 10,000ft are perfectly visible as has been shown in the hundreds of photos posted online. Just check the approach pattern of any busy airport. Remember though each plane will be 6-7 miles apart and wont exactly be in a perfectly straight line with the runway so there alot harder to see than you can imagine.

skelliser

Wasnt there a crash landing a few years ago stateside where the plane came off the runway and hit some buildings and burst into flames?
could this be it

tricky D

Hogzy wrote: »

Google are not going to photoshop (using this as a verb for general editing of images) a random bunny rabit into the sahara desert for sh!ts and giggles are they. That is the context of photoshopping i am talking about.

You're still backtracking on your initial guarantee.

Hogzy wrote: »

Its all nice looking at the planes zoomed out over the entire scale of europe but zoom in to the cities and you will see how sparsely spread out the planes are.

Planes at cruising altitude are invisible because these planes would very much so be out of focus so would become so blurred that they blend in to the natural noise of the photograph. Planes that are maybe at an altitude 10,000ft are perfectly visible as has been shown in the hundreds of photos posted online. Just check the approach pattern of any busy airport. Remember though each plane will be 6-7 miles apart and wont exactly be in a perfectly straight line with the runway so there alot harder to see than you can imagine.

Yes, do yourself check approach paths for busy airports and you'll notice the lack of captures.

Also, if planes at cruising height are out of focus, why do so many have contrails like the transatlantic one off Slyne Head?

I think you're confusing speculation with fact.

Steyr

skelliser wrote: »

Wasnt there a crash landing a few years ago stateside where the plane came off the runway and hit some buildings and burst into flames?
could this be it

Doubt it S, looks like an Airport Apron/Ramp and its surrounded by Aircraft which is even weirder.