Helicopter Activity at Papoose Lake

[astr0144]

Sorry ArMaP, I may have misunderstood some thing or was not fully clear or a bit stressed over something making some of my replies, as I found I think I made a few errors.

Was you image showing the hand version or how the software overlaps or pieces the various photo images together.

when I said this phrase, I was thinking your image may had been representing the old hand method, but I now
think you were showing how the software worked.

I am suspecting what you shown, was the older methods that they used to use.

Not the older method (that would be doing thing by hand) I was talking about the software used to make image mosaics, panoramas being one example of those.

Interesting Maths analysis.

I am NOT sure how you determone and specific area size, or know that the covered area was 20 KM as I think on the original image you were able to alter the scale, such as zoom in or out of the map, unless you used the original setting and was abe to see some sort of scale or was just aware of it, or managed to check it online some how
or make an estimate of the scale as online maps do show some sort of scale, even if its say a per KM or say 10 KM line...that you can then make an estimation of the rest of the maps size.

I will have to think further about how you came up with your numbers / eg.

The trouble with me is I dont like using meters or KMs, I am old school and prefer to use feet and miles.
but I think I have an idea of what you are describing. but may need to recheck a few things to clarify it in my
mind.

2 ft per pixel is correct, but the photos are many pixels wide and usually even more pixels long (see the note at the bottom of this post).
In the case I was talking about, the photos cover an area of 20 km, which, at 0.6 metres per pixel means more than 30,000 pixels wide, so no, certainly not 35 photos to capture a 70 ft object.
35 pixels to capture a 70 ft object, yes.
On a 20 km wide photo a 20 metres object would represent 1/1000 of the total photo width.

I was thinking as if or  that say we were say showing an eg, as if it was or had been using the a Satelitte that may had been using a high resolution camera of 2 FT per pixel.

But also what I may had been suggesting was that to be able to see the Helicopter like we can, is that it could still
have been shown using much lower resolution cameras where each pixel could be much larger area. so for eg.
each pixel may show an area of say 10FT or even upto say 70 foot per pixel. or somewhere between 10 to 70 ft.
Could that be possible and still allow us to see the helicopter as we do on the map image. ?

I was talking about the satellite I found with the highest resolution, I don't know the resolution of the camera that took the photos used to create that image.

The shadow size also may vary depending if the helicopter is on the ground or in flight and would depend on what height above the ground. also the position of the Sun....as longer shadows get cast as the sun goes down lower to the horizon.

If we see the object we see it's shadow, as they are the same size (in fact, the shadow is always a little bigger, but wouldn't make a difference at this distance).

Interesting to note your further consideration.

Looking closer I agree, the possible shadow does look slightly lighter, and we can also see the vegetation, so it could really be a the shadow.

NO...Not in my opinion...In the Image you posted of the helicopter, the top of that photo.. is pointing EAST...
which some may have thought could have been North...(which may often be the case when  how we may consider a photo.... where we think of it being laid out like a compass..if we go clock wise.. N.E.S.W   )

The Shadow, is shown slightly below the helicopters image. which is more to the west of the helicopter.
ie opposite the way that the image may appear to had been pointing.

BUT it is also slightly south of it, so the helicopters shadow is South WEST in my opinion.

That also in my opinion should had suggested that the sun would have had to have been coming from the opposite of South west, which would had put it in a NORTH EAST Location.... AND THAT AS FAR AS I AM AWARE IS NOT POSSIBLE.  as the Sun in the Northern hemisphere never positions from the North.

SO that does still make me question that photo ... UNLESS SOMEHOW its showing an inversed image somehow.
like if we look through certain telescopes you can see the images upside down...


JUST TO RECTIFY SOMETHING THAT I SAID, that was Incorrect...I should have said..NOT ! see in bold.
when I had referred to :

THE OTHER THING TO CONSIDER

"Yet the shadow seems to be towards the South West.
Would that suggest maybe that the Sun would have had to have been positioned towards the North East ?
Which would "NOT" be possible in the Northern hemsphere"

Yet the shadow seems to be towards the South West. Would that suggest maybe that the Sun would have had to have been positioned towards the North East ?  Which would be possible in the Northern hemsphere.

]

Isn't the shadow southeast regarding the helicopter? That would put the Sun at northwest (more west-northwest, in fact)

I am not sure exactly where the sun tends to rise in winter in the north hemisphere , but we are usually led to believe that the sun tends to rise in the EAST... but it probably goes more towards inbetween the EAST and South in MID  Winter say around December / January...  BUT come end of Febuary we are getting towards spring.

In Winter the Sun rises and sets more to the south and in the Summer more to the north.

I will have to try to look at this later if need be... BUT it may there fore ref to what I suggest...
That the hadow we see is South West of the Helicoper and NOT south East of it.

Using this site we can see that on 2022-02-24 the Sun set close to a west-southwest position, so it was not possible for it to cast an east-southeast shadow.

IF they were trying to do a clever Hoax they may try to create a fake shadow on the image.

Why would anyone create a fake shadow?

So at the moment I still am a bit unsure on the image of the Helicopter image being shown on the map photo that we see. as the Shadow to me does not make full sense that I would agree with..

Interesting to note what you descibe.

I think I recall see a TV progam where an NASA astronaut Gordon Cooper was using using a special camera up in space where he was trying to photograph certain areas of say the Carribean Sea / Bahama's and Islands where he believed that there was many ship wrecks that contained a LOT sunken treasures worth a fortune... in which he created some special maps and did intend to later attempt to search for the wrecks as he was also a diver.

In the end he had become friends with a treasure hunter and his son and ended up after he died having the maps
past on the treasure hunter  who later had too old to act on it and later passed it onto his son... who later on did attempt to find the wrecks...

He did a TV program series on it called "Coppers treasure" which was very interesting.

They did find some wrecks one they believed could had been one of Christopher Columbus's sunken ships.

but unfortunatly the TV series ended just after they had found some treasure and it never told the viewers what the outcome was, as at the time, the son who was searching was running out of funds to be able to continue to
search and it had cost a lot of money for them to try to search for it.

Cooper's Treasure

In a 1963 mission, Gordon Cooper was sent on a 122 hour flight around the world, detecting nuclear sites. He photographed numerous locations, and discovered more than 100 anomalies around the South Caribbean area, which appeared as dark patches, and were said to be sunken ships. Throughout his lifetime, he secretly worked with the Miklos family on many of these ships, uncovering treasure that is rumored to be worth billions of dollars. Before he passed away, he then gave his research and documents to Darrell Miklos.

Darrell Miklos was born into a family of shipwreck explorers and treasure hunters, who have been active in expeditions since the 1970s. His father Roger Miklos was a police officer, who relocated to Florida after he met another treasure hunter named Kip Wagner, and was offered a job with Wagner searching shipwrecks and treasure locations. They salvaged numerous shipwrecks, and along the way met Gordon Cooper, an engineer, test pilot and Air Force pilot, actually one of the youngest of the seven original astronauts in Project Mercury, the first US manned space program. He piloted the longest and final Mercury flight, a 34-hour mission so becoming the first American to sleep in space. He was also the last American to be launched alone in an entirely solo orbital mission, and was later the command pilot of Gemini 5. His contributions to NASA are significant and he is considered one of the pioneers of space technology. Cooper and Miklos worked together on numerous treasure-hunting projects, continuing to do so for several decades. Cooper was a firm believer in aliens and unidentified flying objects, having experiences with unusual aircraft when he was younger. He debated that the US government was withholding information about UFOs.

Path to Treasure Hunting

His father's friendship with Cooper lead them to be hired by NASA during the Apollo Program. Darrell and his father would comb the sea, recovering booster rockets used for flights. Over the next two decades, he became involved in work with NASA, while also excavating shipwrecks near the coast of Florida. He also became friends with Cooper, and the two would work together for many years. He became a certified diver, and was later invited to join the American Academy of Underwater Scientists. He eventually opened his own company in 2014, called Gemini Marine Exploration. Darrell now uses his experience to offer shipwreck recovery services with his company. Before Cooper passed away, he gave information to Miklos which would become a catalyst for his next treasure adventures. He then had an idea of creating a television show which became "Cooper's Treasure"

https://affairpost.com/darrell-miklos-from-coopers-treasure-wiki-father-roger-miklos-treasure-age-family-net-worth-wife/

I found this article also , but I was not aware of this suggestion that they claimed to find a possible ET spacecraft.
that new info to me, whether they have or may show it on TV or not, I await to see.

ET MYSTERY Treasure hunter claims he's found an ALIEN spaceship while exploring ancient shipwrecks under the Bermuda Triangle
Intrepid shipwreck explorer Darrell Miklos stumbled across the huge structure in the Bahamas using maps designed by an ex-NASA astronaut

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6975073/treasure-hunder-darrell-miklos-ufo-bermuda-triangle/

Note: many satellites, instead of using a rectangular sensor for their cameras, use only a one line sensor, and they work as a scanner, capturing one line at a time while moving across the area they are photographing, so their photos usually have much more pixels in length than in width. The fact that most satellites have orbits that are further away from Earth over the poles than over the equator also changes the resolution, so the higher resolution photos are only possible closer to the equator, the closer to the poles they get the lower the resolution.

[ArMaP]

Was you image showing the hand version or how the software overlaps or pieces the various photo images together.

Both, the software works the same way as the manual way: it finds similar features in both images, does that for several locations and then aligns the two photos by those common features, with some resizing/skewing/rotating/whatever if necessary. Then it applies the same method for the next image.

I am sure how you determone and specific area size, or know that the covered area was 20 KM as I think on the original image you were able to alter the scale, such as zoom in or out of the map, unless you used the original setting and was abe to see some sort of scale or was just aware of it, or managed to check it online some how
or make an estimate of the scale as online maps do show some sort of scale, even if its say a per KM or say 10 KM line...that you can then make an estimation of the rest of the maps size.

I was talking about that specific satellite I found on my search, the one that has the highest resolution I could find, 60 cm (2 ft). I don't have the slightest idea of which satellite (or even if it really was a satellite, some photos we assume we taken by a satellite are in fact taken by high altitude aeroplanes) took the photos used on that site.

But also what I may had been suggesting was that to be able to see the Helicopter like we can, is that it could still
have been shown using much lower resolution cameras where each pixel could be much larger area. so for eg.
each pixel may show an area of say 10FT or even upto say 70 foot per pixel. or somewhere between 10 to 70 ft.
Could that be possible and still allow us to see the helicopter as we do on the map image. ?

A, for example, 2 ft per pixel resolution means any object that is 2 ft or more appears on the image. Anything smaller than that will only change the colour of one pixel (if the object is not of a colour similar to that of the ground).
So, if the helicopter's tail is 2 ft wide, it will appear on a 2 ft per pixel image as one pixel wide. On a 1 ft per pixel it will appear as 2 pixels wide. On a 5 ft per pixel image it would not be visible, as it would represent only 40% of a pixel's width.

The shadow size also may vary depending if the helicopter is on the ground or in flight and would depend on what height above the ground. also the position of the Sun....as longer shadows get cast as the sun goes down lower to the horizon.

True, but the "shadow" doesn't appear to be distorted by perspective, so if it's a shadow it was projected from a direction close to that from the camera to the helicopter.

NO...Not in my opinion...In the Image you posted of the helicopter, the top of that photo.. is pointing EAST...
which some may have thought could have been North...(which may often be the case when  how we may consider a photo.... where we think of it being laid out like a compass..if we go clock wise.. N.E.S.W   )

Why do you say that? The image is pointing in the same direction on Google Maps or Bing Maps, with North at the top, West to the left, South at the bottom and East to the right.

[astr0144]

Apologies ArMaP, my mistake ! ,

My earlier description was down to my wrong thinking or imagination..

and I am unable to see the original webpage on my computer which I mentioned before.. and I only see it on a
mobile phone.

I have now looked again on just a normal bing map to find that same area where the helicopter seems to have been shown.

When I look again and I look at what seems like a trail ... that is just below the image of the helicopter.

Above that trail or above the helicopter is showing more towards the North as you say.

(Although it is pointing slightly North East depending what part of the trial as it slightly varies depending what part and how one looks at it.)  The trail seems as if its coming from a higher left side to a lower right side of when we see it on the map.

and although the Helicopter is on the Right hand side or East side of Papoose lake..  I can see that the trail and where the helicopter had been located... would have been showing facing more towards North than East.

So the Shadow is to the Lower right or the Helicopter and that I think does suggest its south east of it as you suggested.

which would maybe mean if the sun was say setting more towards the North west, then what we see appears to be correct. that the shadow could show up as being South East.

For some reason I had though that that trial and Helicopter had been facing more towards the East.
probably because it was on the East side of Papoose Lake.

so it was my mistake.

Why do you say that? The image is pointing in the same direction on Google Maps or Bing Maps, with North at the top, West to the left, South at the bottom and East to the right.