Following on from the Kermit Weeks thread, I had done some Googling into DV202 and found the results of quite an interesting aerial survey. Seemingly more of the Lancaster is located around the Peenemunde area than is commonly reported, which would make for some interesting archaeological work in the future.
By: Arabella-Cox - 31st July 2015 at 16:01
There might also be some doubt that this is DV202.
By: Meddle - 31st July 2015 at 15:58
Thanks for that breakdown, Ross. Your comment prompted me to dig up the software I used; Erdas Imagine.
We know that the lake in Peenemunde is filled with silt from the adjacent power station, as the divers stir it up in the videos from the site. If Merlin engines can become buried in the silt then this calls into question Merlindown’s grander claims?
By: Beermat - 31st July 2015 at 15:39
Thanks Ross. The knowledge on this site is amazing.
By: Ross_McNeill - 31st July 2015 at 15:30
Yup – that’s one of the problems with what merlindown are saying they can find
The thematic bands 1 to 5 and 7 are normally 30m but with good software you can get this down to about 15 m as you say.
Band 6 is 120 for IR resampled to 30 m to match bands 1 to 5.
For the sub-surface analysis to work to need an object several mtr in length lying on a 50 x 50 mtr bottom of constant depth/composition.
As you are using the pixel change to denote depth it comes down to not the width resolution but the absorbtion of sunlight to produce a pixel change and for the 10mtr depth of sea water this equates to about 2 mtr penetration.
Ross
By: Beermat - 31st July 2015 at 15:18
I’ve touched on remote sensing too.. as far as I know Landsat operates at far too low a resolution (15m at absolute best). I am guessing the ‘Lancaster’ image came from some other source?
By: Ross_McNeill - 31st July 2015 at 15:02
Possibly using the Landsat resource but the colouration of the peat in the water cause major headaches that would need to be over come
The basic premise is that as light penetrates water it is absorbed, the greater the depth the more colours (frequency) is absorbed.
If you look at any satellite photo of a shallow body of water the deeper the water the more the apparent colour of the bottom moves towards dark blue.
Anything standing proud of the bottom that reflects light in a similar way to the surroundings will show a lighter tint than the rest.
Works well for depths up to 10 m and for artefacts that are covered by similar material/marine growth to the surroundings but is screwed up by alge etc.
If you can get a visible light picture with very good resolution in colour then by comparing several images of the same site a false 3d image can be deduced. Infra Red and other wavelength images of the same visible light image can reduce errors due to plankton/alge, pollution, salinity bands etc.
The Landsat images from the various bands are available on free download from the US Geo Survey – you need to sign up for delivery – but it needs bespoke software to do the comparison and produce the deviation image. It’s a software package that merlindown have produced and trying to promote with the claims to have found the lost but usually it is just to have located what was already found.
Ross
By: Meddle - 31st July 2015 at 14:48
The wording of the original article is a little suspect;
“Note its shape (the straight white band on the back is where the doors are situated to provide access to the inside of the bomber). At the opposite side of the cupola (bottom of cupola image as seen here) is where the guns were mounted. The guns are still in situ, and are more in evidence on other images (not reproduced here).”
I think that this section is worded as an appeal to the reader’s wish to not appear ignorant. To be honest the visuals from his surveying work look a lot like ’80s arcade games, and nothing in any of them say Lancaster to me.
Having said all that, I’ve studied remote sensing before today. I used software to analyse various bands within a hyper spectral image, which revealed different mineral deposits on an otherwise barren desert floor. It is entirely possible to penetrate vegetation and soil, but I’m not sure you can conclusively identify Lancaster components as a result. “More in evidence on other images (not reproduced here)” seems like a total cop-out.
Perhaps a good tidy up of the Peenemunde site is in order. It seems odd that DV202 still languishes in a heavily polluted lake.
By: Beermat - 31st July 2015 at 14:42
Hi Ross
Is there then a method available to find a couple of shallow buried aircraft in a Dartmoor bog? Now a serious question.
By: Ross_McNeill - 31st July 2015 at 14:36
The resource and software is legit. It’s the application and results that are suspect.
The satellite imaging is available for all to examine and is of much more current images that Google Earth etc.
It has been used to show locations of both buried and shallow submerged artefacts but for submerged objects it needs some fairly comprehensive comparison between the bands to produce an anomaly image from the changes.
Limited to depths where sunlight can penetrate and to objects that stand proud of the seabed by more than the resolution of the image band eg 2 to 4 mtr.
Every so often he pops up to claim a new coastal find.
Shades of Dive the World
http://www.merlindownscience.co.uk/b17-bomber/
Ross
By: Beermat - 31st July 2015 at 14:17
I think there are some doubts as to the credibility of the chap behind the software. https://www.metabunk.org/debunked-tim-ackers-mh370-debris-claims.t3595/
Shame, because that ‘magic underground aeroplane finder’ would have been useful.. elsewhere.
Sign In
July 31, 2015 at 12:59 pm