canwhitewolf
Searcher
Reged: 01/09/08
Posts: 487
|
|
actually im not dismissing it because of that fact it was being flown at 60-80 ft (although i do question SF would be doing that) or that rawley may have not analyized it correctly, actually im not dismissing it at all just looking at what could be other than what it is at present...thinking outside the box as ive done from the beginning on this case, ive always had reservations about the intel on this
im more questioning the reasons for fossett being there, just doesnt make sense because of who he was, what he likes to do, his mission orientation, the conversations the night before, what he dreamed about, what he dreams about, whats the next challenge, what he thought when he woke up and so on, this is an opportunity in nevada to do what.?.....combining that with the possibility of the sightings being a different plane is to me a real possibility, i dont mean any disrespect but we dont know how good rawleys eyesight is, whether he has colour vision problems or anything like that, Just because someone is in law enforcement doesnt mean they ask the right questions or that they get it right or fully understand flying and so on , and again no disrespect meant at all, thats just the way it is.
I realize because of the intel they have and believe and decided upon that the search area makes sense to them and to a degree i understand but dont completely agree
Bob hoover is amazing! an uncanny pilot
ww
--------------------
"Argue for your limitations and sure enough they're yours"
Illusions- Richard Bach
the greater the resistance, the greater the truth waiting to be revealed
|
vanaj
Searcher
Reged: 09/12/07
Posts: 1786
Loc: Reno, NV
|
|
Quote:
actually im not dismissing it because of that fact it was being flown at 60-80 ft (although i do question SF would be doing that) or that rawley may have not analyized it correctly, actually im not dismissing it at all just looking at what could be other than what it is at present...thinking outside the box as ive done from the beginning on this case, ive always had reservations about the intel on this
im more questioning the reasons for fossett being there, just doesnt make sense because of who he was, what he likes to do, his mission orientation, the conversations the night before, what he dreamed about, what he dreams about, whats the next challenge, what he thought when he woke up and so on, this is an opportunity in nevada to do what.?.....combining that with the possibility of the sightings being a different plane is to me a real possibility, i dont mean any disrespect but we dont know how good rawleys eyesight is, whether he has colour vision problems or anything like that, Just because someone is in law enforcement doesnt mean they ask the right questions or that they get it right or fully understand flying and so on , and again no disrespect meant at all, thats just the way it is.
I realize because of the intel they have and believe and decided upon that the search area makes sense to them and to a degree i understand but dont completely agree
Bob hoover is amazing! an uncanny pilot
ww
Maybe you should come down here and do your own investigating since you don't believe the intel is incorrect and that their might just have been another plane like Hilton's flying around the Hilton Ranch, the odds on that are just astronomical...or Rawley is color blind...or maybe the person asking Rawley questions wrote down 60-80ft and meant 60-80 meters since maybe they just moved here from Canada...
Like I have said before...we could play what if's all day or until the cows come home...asking questions here won't get you where you want to be or the answers you seem to want, so do you own foot work in the field and see if you get any different answers.
again no disrespect meant at all, thats just the way it is, facts are facts...crystal balls are just that...
--------------------
"For those who understand, no explanation is necessary. For those who don’t, no explanation will suffice."
Future SAR Techniques and Fossett Search/Info and Discussions continued in the forum below...
http://www.hostingphpbb.com/forum/index.php?mforum=futuresar
|
Suzyquad
Searcher
Reged: 01/06/08
Posts: 201
|
|
If SF says to his wife ....."I will be home by noon".(and he is true to his word)..it is already 11:00am...he has just passed NMR and heading to Mud Spring direction.(RB ..words)..how long would it take him to get back to the Flying M? (seems he may have been flying a circuitous route)
Where did the unconfirmed radar track come from?..(Which seems to start from the Lucky Boy Pass)
Would SF be using ...VFR...compass...GPS?
Edited by Suzyquad (06/13/08 06:27 AM)
|
vanaj
Searcher
Reged: 09/12/07
Posts: 1786
Loc: Reno, NV
|
|
Quote:
If SF says to his wife ....."I will be home by noon".(and he is true to his word)..it is already 11:00am...he has just passed NMR and heading to Mud Spring direction.(RB ..words)..how long would it take him to get back to the Flying M? (seems he may have been flying a circuitous route)
Where did the unconfirmed radar track come from?..(Which seems to start from the Lucky Boy Pass)
Would SF be using ...VFR...compass...GPS?
To get from NMR to Flying M Ranch by way of Mud Spring and LBP then direct to FMR would only take about 15 mins depending on speed...could be faster...
Yes it would be VFR...SF knew this area as he flew over it quite a bit in gliders and his Jet...
--------------------
"For those who understand, no explanation is necessary. For those who don’t, no explanation will suffice."
Future SAR Techniques and Fossett Search/Info and Discussions continued in the forum below...
http://www.hostingphpbb.com/forum/index.php?mforum=futuresar
|
no_stranger
Master Guide
Reged: 10/26/05
Posts: 4492
Loc: Western Australia GMT+8
|
|
Most of you have probably come across this image,
but for those that haven't.
This is most probably one of the search planes flying at low altitude.
Coords, 38.496248 -118.920734
Overlay, GeoEye_Delivery 4
--------------------
Link to some support answers from the past.
Jump to Google Earth Support Groups.
 Just Hopping Around !
|
pineshi
Searcher
Reged: 01/18/08
Posts: 188
Loc: Nanaimo BC Canada
|
|
i wondered about all that flying around NMR myself.
one of the news articles i read mentioned LIPITOR...that Fossett was on that drug.
i took a wild swing and came up with one possible outlook to this case.
a drug induced confusion and potential accident waiting to happen.read this
http://books.google.ca/books?hl=en&i...;ct=result#PPA7,M1
that could have been one outcome.
who knows?
--------------------
Where is Nanaimo, BC Canada?
|
vanaj
Searcher
Reged: 09/12/07
Posts: 1786
Loc: Reno, NV
|
|
Quote:
i wondered about all that flying around NMR myself.
one of the news articles i read mentioned LIPITOR...that Fossett was on that drug.
i took a wild swing and came up with one possible outlook to this case.
a drug induced confusion and potential accident waiting to happen.read this
http://books.google.ca/books?hl=en&i...;ct=result#PPA7,M1
that could have been one outcome.
who knows?
Any link to this article ??
FAA Flight Surgeons are pretty strict on what med you can take and still fly with those meds...
--------------------
"For those who understand, no explanation is necessary. For those who don’t, no explanation will suffice."
Future SAR Techniques and Fossett Search/Info and Discussions continued in the forum below...
http://www.hostingphpbb.com/forum/index.php?mforum=futuresar
|
vanaj
Searcher
Reged: 09/12/07
Posts: 1786
Loc: Reno, NV
|
|
Quote:
Most of you have probably come across this image,
but for those that haven't.
This is most probably one of the search planes flying at low altitude.
Coords, 38.496248 -118.920734
Overlay, GeoEye_Delivery 4
KP,
The clue it the painted wing tips and tail..this is how the CAP paints their planes...usually red/orange...
--------------------
"For those who understand, no explanation is necessary. For those who don’t, no explanation will suffice."
Future SAR Techniques and Fossett Search/Info and Discussions continued in the forum below...
http://www.hostingphpbb.com/forum/index.php?mforum=futuresar
|
canwhitewolf
Searcher
Reged: 01/09/08
Posts: 487
|
|
I guess ill try and answer your strong response to my questioning a little later
but in the meantime let me just say that i dont find it astronomical odds at all that something like this could happen, nor obviously do the LEO's as they were looking towards this as well, at least one higher up was anyway
had the timing of the first sighting at NMR ( and we dont know exactly what time that is, only an approximation of around 9am i think is what i read) but had this first sighting been say 8:55 am that rawley saw the plane go over and steve fossett took off at 9am .........then
would the possibility then exist of two planes in the air around the same time around that area of nine mile ranch and the flying M be more valid? and the odds not so astronomical?
the odds dont seem that astronomical to me, im not sure how it would take place but feel it could take place
I think there is a reasonable possibility that it could have been SF but am not entirely convinced that both sightings were
Its important for the safety of searchers and airmen that the ambiguities be resolved as best one can by asking and questioning and questioning again if necessary i would think
ww
--------------------
"Argue for your limitations and sure enough they're yours"
Illusions- Richard Bach
the greater the resistance, the greater the truth waiting to be revealed
|
canwhitewolf
Searcher
Reged: 01/09/08
Posts: 487
|
|
friend of mine went on lipitor and totally lost it, ended up on sofa near out of his head, ended up in hospital and drs still telling him it wasnt the lipitor, cripes
i had warned him weeks earlier to get off of it,
he has now died, not sure if the drug contributed to it or not
I dont think this was SF's problem though, he was obviously functioning socializing and so on
--------------------
"Argue for your limitations and sure enough they're yours"
Illusions- Richard Bach
the greater the resistance, the greater the truth waiting to be revealed
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
[Re: 
Edit
Reply
Quote
