The Yellowstone SuperCaldera Project, page 1

To get us started, here is some assorted background on the geological setting of the Yellowstone SuperCaldera. As will become very evident, this is a very volcanically active region, although because there has not been any significant volcanism during recorded times, it is often not recognized as such by those not directly related to geological studies.


Yellowstone National Park covers 2,221,766 acres, which is roughly the size of the state of Connecticut. Most of the park is located in the northwestern corner of Wyoming, but a small portion overlaps that state's boundaries with Montana and Idaho. The park is comprised primarily of high, forested, volcanic plateaus that have been eroded over — the millennia by glaciation and stream flow and that are flanked on the north, east, and south by mountains. The Continental Divide traverses the park from its southeastern corner to its «-western boundary. The elevation of the park averages 8,000 feet, ranging from 5,282 feet in the north, where the Gardner River drains from the park, to 11,358 feet in the east, at the summit of Eagle Peak in the Absaroka Range.

www.yellowstonenationalpark.com...

The Washburn Range in Yellowstone forms the skyline between canyon village and tower fall. From a parking area on Dunraven Pass, an altitude of 8,850' above sea level, an old road leads to the summit of Mt. Washburn at 10,243'. The 1,400' climb has much to recommend it, including geology.

Seen along the road is a dark breccia consisting of anglular volcanic stones, embedded in a fine angular matrix. This breccia formed some 50 million years ago when watery mixtures of ash and rocks flowed down mountain slopes onto then tropical lowlands. There are countless volcanic mudflows that make up the Washburn Range and mountains to the east. All were deposited over a period of 10 million years.

Bedding planes separating breccia layers are instructive. In Mount Washburn and surrounding peaks, all slope northward. Shouldn't some slope southward? Didn't debris also flow down the south slopes of ancient volcanoes? Well, where is the evidence?

We search to the south for these flows in vain. Far below us is Washburn Hot Springs, the Grand Canyon of the Yellowstone, Hayden Valley, and Yellowstone Lake. The nearest recognizable peak is Mount Sheridan, in the Red Mountains, 37 miles south of Mount Washburn. The summits of Washburn and Sheridan are within 65 feet of each other in elevation.

Volcanic breccias sloping only north combined with
gently rolling plateaus extending south to the Red Mountains suggest that the Washburn Range is only a remnant; the northern remnant of a much larger and higher range that extended far to the south. This range is a part of the Absaroka volcanic field, which also forms the mountainous terrain east of Yellowstone Lake. But how to account for the missing southern part of the Washburn Range? The answer lies down on the plateaus forming the heart of Yellowstone. Road cuts between Dunraven Pass and Canyon Village glitter in the sun. The rock is rhyolite, the lava form of granite. It differs fundamentally in its composition, origin, and age from the volcanic rocks composing Mount Washburn. Shiny black volcanic glass (obsidian) causes the glitter.

Tens of rhyolite lava flows were erupted one after another in central Yellowstone. Canyon Village is built on one. Elephant Back Mountain, west of Lake Hotel, is another. Several flows make up the plateau between Canyon Village and Norris, and several more bound the western margins of Yellowstone Lake. Flows enclose Lewis and Shoshone lakes; they form the wooded boundaries of the geyser basins. Many streams follow seams between flows of different ages.

Lava flows can be readily dated. They contain various radioactive elements which decay to form daughter products. By measuring the relative amounts of parent material and daughter products and knowing the rate of change from parent to daughter, a geochronologist has a radioactive clock for dating the ages of flows. Analysis, though, is not simple and geologic dates are usually followed by a fudge factor such as +/- 6,000 years. Between the Washburn Range and the Red Mountains, lava flows range in age from about 500,000 years to 100,000 years. They are much younger than the 50 million-year-old Absaroka volcanics.

GIacial times never seem far away in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. If you were to walk the streets of Chicago on a hot August day, you would have a rough time believing that 150 centuries ago the land beneath the sidewalk was covered by ice thousands of feet thick. In Grand Teton National Park, on the same August day, you can view a glacier. From the valley floor, the Teton Glacier is only 4.5 miles to the west and 7,000 feet up the mountain. More glaciers grace the flanks of nearby Mt. Moran.

www.yellowstonenationalpark.com...

These tuffs demonstrated conclusively that the volcanic events forming Yellowstone were not the products of many million years of geologic change ending many millions of years ago. Rather, their time scale was compressed into only the last two million years. A long geologic history would have allowed a more leisurely progression of events—a lava flow here, then a million years later another flow there. A longer geologic history would also have called for intermittent periods of magma (molten rock) formation separated by periods of volcanic quiescence. Instead, this short time scale compressed the sequence of explosions and flows and required a heat source much larger and younger than ever before imagined.

Caldera's are large basin-shaped volcanic depressions more or less circular in form. Caldera eruptions on the Yellowstone scale have a world wide frequency of perhaps once every hundred thousand years. Somewhat smaller eruptions, on the scale of Crater Lake-Mount Mazama in Oregon, are more frequent, perhaps every 1,000 years or less. Such explosive eruptions were not isolated events. Rather, they were climactic stages of magmatic processes that extended over hundreds of thousands of years.

No one has ever seen a volcanic explosion on the scale of the Yellowstone eruptions, but smaller explosions have been observed and their activity described. Consider Mount Tambora, on the island of Sumbawa, Indonesia to grasp some idea of what's involved when a caldera forms during or just after an ash flow eruption. For about three years the volcano rumbled and fumed before a moderate eruption on April 5, 1815 produced thundering explosions heard 870 miles away. Next morning volcanic ash began to fall and continued to fall though the explosions became progressively weaker

www.yellowstonenationalpark.com...

DR has tasked me with gathering remote imaging of Yellowstone, hopefully over a fairly good time period in order to graphically detect and illustrate the changes occuring there. I am currently working on that.

But I have found a paper that I believe I need to go ahead and post. And its with the USGS

quake.wr.usgs.gov...

In particular look at this set of interferograms from 1993 thru 1997 and read the following associated with the images:

quake.wr.usgs.gov...

Six interferograms constructed using the two-pass method (for example, 12, 25). The range of colors from violet to red, shown in the color bar on the top of (B), corresponds to one cycle of phase from 0 to 2p (one fringe) representing ~28 mm of displacement between a point on the ground and the satellite. The time interval spanned by each interferogram is referenced to the horizontal time axis where the beginning of each year is marked and labeled. The red, green and blue bars attached to each interferogram indicate the corresponding time interval. The first three interferograms are sequential whereas the last three are cumulative over longer time spans (with some overlap). Where coherence is adequate, the interferograms show that deformation extends only slightly beyond the northeast caldera boundary to the northwest-southeast trending faults mapped by Christiansen (Fig. 1, (2)). (A) August 1992 to June 1993. This image shows over 30 mm of inferred subsidence centered in the northeast half of the caldera and closely associated with the SC dome. (B) June 1993 to August 1995. In this image the center of deformation has shifted to the southwest half of the caldera with with over 40 mm of subsidence associated with the ML dome. (C) August 1995 to September 1996. The main deformation mode is now uplift (~20 mm) associated with the SC dome [note the reversed color sequence toward the center of SC dome, relative to (A) and (B)]. The ML dome still appears to be subsiding slightly during this time interval. (D) August 1992 to June 1995: This image shows ~60 mm of subsidence. (E) July 1992 to August 1995 also showing ~60 mm of subsidence. (F) July 1995 to June 1997: This image shows over 30 mm of uplift.

Also, look at this figure which shows vertical displacement analysis:

quake.wr.usgs.gov...

Vertical displacement inferred from interferometry data at benchmarks on the leveling line shown in Fig. 1. Distance on the horizontal axis is measured along the leveling line in the direction from LB to MW (Fig. 1). Displacement inferred from interferometry (19, 20) is marked with open triangles connected with solid lines, labeled "InSAR." Displacement measured in leveling surveys is marked with the solid triangles connected with a dashed line, labeled "Leveling". The vertical error bars on the right side of (A) and (B) show the maximum estimated error in the leveling measurement (~14 mm). The error decreases to ~0 mm at the beginning of the profile. (A) Comparison of vertical displacement inferred from the interferogram in Fig. 2A (August 1992 to June 1993) (19) to that measured from September 1992 to September 1993 at benchmarks (9). (B) Comparison of vertical displacement inferred from the interferogram in Fig. 2B (June 1993 to August 1995) to that measured from September 1993 to September 1995 at benchmarks (9, 10). (C) Vertical displacement inferred at benchmarks using interferogram in Fig. 2F (July 1995 to June 1997) (19). Leveling data after September 1995 are not yet available.



I am saving any and all images I can find in case we run into sites being taken down, or changed.

The purpose of this first post is to familiarize anyone who isn't up to speed on GPS technology with a little insight as well as to attempt to expalin how its used to monitor land mass movement, plot velocity vectors, and give an overall picture of how fast and in what direction a given mass is moving..if it is at all.

Whe most of us think of GPS, we think of hiking or navigating in our car or we think of smart bombs slamming with pin-point accuracy into Saddam's birthday party. GPS, however, is a broadbased technology with many facets and one of those is surveying.

The use of GPS in a surveying application requires much more deligent protocols than the average mapping or navigation project. Usually, GPS surveys must be suplimented with traditional equipment such as the theodelite, electronic distance measure (EDM) and old fashion rod and level. Why, because GPS has one Achille's heel and that is, it must have an un-obstructed open sky. When we do land mass monitoring of a large area such as this(yellowstone), unless we have a specific need to have a control point in a certain place, this can usually be mitigated by careful placement of the control points to allow good access. Many other factors must be considered before placement including, ownership of land(not a problem in yellowstone), likely stability of surrounding area (oh boy), protection from malicious vandalism (you bastards). Most are 4 to 6 feet copper rods or brass plates set on concrete.

The following are quotes from this link..

volcanoes.usgs.gov...

..and deal with the hows and whys of GPS..

GPS offers several advantages compared to volcano surveys that use electronic distance meters. GPS does not require lines-of-sight between benchmarks so they can be located almost anywhere as long as the site has a clear view of the sky. This is a big advantage on most volcanoes, where steep slopes at stratovolcanoes like Mount Rainier or broad, gently-sloping ones at shield volcanoes like Mauna Loa often get in the way of line-of-sight between benchmarks. Another advantage of GPS is that measurements can be made in almost any weather condition. Both horizontal and vertical changes in position can be measured to an accuracy of a few millimeters (horizontal) to several millimeters (vertical). Finally, GPS receivers are portable, require only one person to set up the equipment, and can transmit data in near real time and operate unattended for several months on batteries and solar panels.

The Global Positioning system consists of a constellation of 24 satellites. Each satellite orbits Earth twice a day at an altitude of about 20,000 km and continuously transmits information on specific radio frequencies to ground-based receivers. GPS was developed by U.S. Department of Defense as a worldwide navigation system and has been adopted by civilians for many other uses, including surveying, mapping and scientific applications. Relatively inexpensive GPS receivers like those used by pilots, boaters and outdoor enthusiasts can determine its position on the Earth's surface to within a few tens of meters. With more sophisticated receivers and data-analysis techniques, we can determine receiver positions to less than a centimeter.

The GPS satellites continuously transmit an estimate of their position, digital codes, and a precise time signal. A GPS receiver uses an internal clock and the codes to determine the distances to at least 4 satellites. Distance is calculated by multiplying the time it takes the radio signals to reach the receiver times the speed at which the signals travel - approximately 186,000 miles/second, which is the speed of light. Knowing where the satellites are located when they transmit their signals, the receiver can calculate its position on Earth or in the air. The key to is that receivers must simultaneously receive the signals from at least 4 satellites, in part because the clocks in the receivers aren't as accurate as the atomic clocks in the satellites. If the clocks in a receiver and satellite were out of sync by 1/1000th of a second, the distance measurement could be off by 186 miles! The fourth measurement essentially enables the receiver to correct its internal clock.

One thing I will add to this is that with survey GPS, a fifth sat needs to be present and a base reference station is set up with a base receiver and VHF radio which broadcast the correction factor in real-time.


With that rather lenghty but brief background on the technology used to obtain these data, I'll give an overview into the network set-up to monitor the Yellowstone area, The operating parameters, the data recorded to date, its significance, and discuss its usefulness and relevance.

In this post, we will look at the network used to monitor the area..






Also, here is some sample data plotted from the Lake Wyoming monitoring station(s). Movements era in mm and the three graphs represent movement North to South (Northings), East to West (Eastings), and verticle movement.







..Mammoth, Wyoming..




Everybody's fav. Old Faithful..





Hayden Valley..




And finally White Lake..




Also, being that this station is one the East side of the Teton fault, and has just recenltly come into operation, it caught my eye so I'll post it's graph now as well.

Teton Science School, Wyoming




In coming posts, I'll present more data of this type as well as attempt to assemble an overall motion vector for the entire area to be used in the final analysis of the group as requested by each member. I don't want to overload or flood everyone with too many specifics all at once and I hope I didn't do that this time. I felt is was important to understand the principle behind the technology as well as get a quick overview of the research and data itself.

Let's start with some data, shall we?

Earthquakes are a good indication of a pending eruption. How has the Yellowstone area fared over the years?

www.quake.utah.edu...
January 1, 1995 - December 31, 1995 (1497 earthquakes)
January 1, 1996 - December 31, 1996 (1339 earthquakes)
January 1, 1997 - December 31, 1997 (1396 earthquakes)
January 1, 1998 - December 31, 1998 (1492 earthquakes)
January 1, 1999 - December 31, 1999 (3172 earthquakes)
January 1, 2000 - December 31, 2000 (1939 earthquakes)
January 1, 2001 - December 31, 2001 (2060 earthquakes)
January 1, 2002 - December 31, 2002 (2375 earthquakes)

Prior to that:
www.quake.utah.edu...
1994 - 812 earthquakes
1993 - 178 eathquakes
1992 - 153 earthquakes
1991 - 339 earthquakes
1990 - 711 earthquakes
1989 - 482 earthquakes
1988 - 228 earthquakes
1987 - 289 earthquakes

Here we see a dramatic increase in the number of quakes since 1987.

I thought this might help to show just how dynamic a caldera can be...





The extent of the Yellowstone SuperCaldera in area has been well established from studies of past eruption events. The aerial extent of the magma chamber has been established through remote sensing and field studies.

However, current evidence is suggesting that the magma plume is starting to move around within the magma chamber, as evidenced in the above picture. The movement of such a large volume of magma would also explain the current reports of lake water temperature rising suddenly by 10+ degrees, the sudden extinction and conversion of mudpits into steam vents, as well as historic geysers becoming steam vents.

This is very worrying from the standpoint of a geologist, as the mass movement of a magma plume often is associated with a change within the magma chamber, be it a change in the plume volume, or ambient pressure.

And, such movement is often recorded immediately before an eruption event...

Okay thrid try. For some reason the image I wanted to post won't show and deletes everything else when I preview or post it so you'll have to follow a link.. Sorry.

Anyway, I'm listing some velocity vectors dirived from the station data which will show direction of movement around the Caldera.

psvelo -O -R -Jt -Sr.2/.865/8 -A0.02/0.2/0.06 -G255/0/0 -V << eof >> plt
-123.4875 48.3898 5.87 4.98 0.02 0.01 114.91 ALBH
-119.6250 49.3226 1.62 1.87 0.02 0.01 105.35 DRAO
-120.9444 39.9746 -7.35 8.32 0.02 0.02 95.10 QUIN
-112.8605 40.6807 -2.05 -0.01 0.05 0.04 93.37 CEDA
-112.1210 40.6526 -1.40 0.27 0.05 0.04 92.30 COON
-116.8892 35.4252 -4.91 7.18 0.02 0.01 88.36 GOLD
-108.1189 34.3015 0.29 -0.50 0.02 0.01 96.56 PIE1
-104.0150 30.6805 0.18 0.94 0.02 0.02 108.42 MDO1
-91.5749 41.7716 -0.06 0.67 0.02 0.02 35.96 NLIB
-110.4002 44.5651 -0.85 1.80 0.07 0.06 88.03 LKWY
-111.8088 40.7811 -0.34 1.09 0.05 0.04 96.93 RBUT
-112.8449 39.4256 -1.66 0.25 0.05 0.04 91.97 SMEL
-110.6773 39.1910 0.51 0.90 0.06 0.05 93.32 CAST
-111.3727 40.5141 0.05 0.53 0.05 0.04 91.28 HEBE
-112.2296 41.0157 -1.09 -0.05 0.06 0.04 95.96 NAIU
-111.9283 40.2614 -1.49 0.47 0.07 0.05 91.70 LMUT
-111.9289 41.2532 0.62 0.22 0.07 0.06 80.25 EOUT
-110.6893 44.9734 0.88 1.14 0.09 0.06 89.06 MAWY
-113.2412 43.2441 -1.93 -0.28 0.11 0.09 93.52 GTRG
-110.8319 44.4518 -2.37 -2.96 0.13 0.10 87.97 OFWY
-109.5578 42.7671 0.32 0.71 0.13 0.11 89.42 BLWY
-114.4140 43.5626 -1.69 -0.43 0.18 0.14 97.00 HLID
-111.6298 45.5969 -0.42 -1.41 0.26 0.19 91.41 NOMT
-107.9965 45.9712 -0.43 -1.18 0.28 0.24 87.71 BIL1
-110.2867 44.6395 -3.23 2.15 0.39 0.29 85.46 WLWY
-110.5360 44.6136 5.10 -4.28 0.42 0.31 88.34 HVWY
-111.0637 42.7731 0.89 0.51 0.27 0.21 86.36 AHID
-110.5975 43.6741 -1.50 -0.23 0.56 0.43 87.96 TSWY
eof

Note:
1,2 -> longitude, latitude, of station.
3,4 -> eastward, northward velocity.
5,6 -> semi-major, semi-minor axes.
7 -> counter-clockwise angle, in degrees, from horizontal axis
to major axis of ellipse.
8 -> station name.

Data derived from continuous GPS stations operated by the University of Utah, collaborative BARGEN stations in Utah, and the NGS NDGPS site at Billings, Montana.

Error ellipses show two standard-deviations (95% confident intervals).

Stations with green circles do not have enough data (< one year) to obtain accurate velocity vectors

As far as I know, this is public data posted by University of Utah.

The last comment refers to this raster image..(You don't need the language pack if it offers.)

www.mines.utah.edu...



Here is some info about ADDNEQ, the program UofU used to derive the velocity from their raw data..


www.unavco.ucar.edu...


Velocity estimation with ADDNEQ requires as input at least two normal equation files (.NEQ) for two distinct epochs. Obviously two input NEQ files does not provide a statistically large sample space. The estimate of velocities is also bounded by the repeatability of the station coordinates. In an ideal situation, the velocity estimates would utilize high quality daily solutions spanning multiple years. Not all data sets are so robust. In particular, it may be necessary to try and derive velocity fields from two or three campaigns spanning a time period of less than two years. In general, the velocity estimates should always be considered with some degree of scientific skepticism. Estimating a 1 mm/year velocity field with data from two camapaigns spanning one year of motion is probably not feasible. Especially if your campaign coordinate repeatability is 5 mm. Please refer to Elmar Brockmann's thesis for a more complete discussion on velocity estimation strategies [ "Combination of Solutions for Geodetic and Geodynamic Applications of the Global Positioning System (GPS)", Elmar Brockmann, Univeristy of Bern, 1996].



[Edited on 19-9-2003 by astrocreep]

I have created a webpage to which I am saving all remote imaging I find.

mysticfish.net...

I will post updates to this thread when I have made substantial additions to this site.

As a professional geologist, one of the things that has perplexed me the most about the situation in Yellowstone, is that there are numerous eruption indicators being recorded and yet none in a position of authority has yet raised any concern to the public.

The main authority as pertains to early warning of potential seismic events and volcanic eruptions is the United States Geological Survey, or USGS. The USGS has long been monitoring Yellowstone park due to its very unique geological setting and recognized early on the potential geological hazard that the SuperCaldera posed. Today, the USGS coordinates with the US Parks and Wildlife service to keep tabs on the Yellowstone caldera through a very extensive and expensive network of remote sensing equipment, GPS ground movement recorders, EDM, seismographs, and numerous other items.

If there is an organization that is in a position to completely assess the hazard posed by the Yellowstone caldera, and the potential eruption possibilities, it is the USGS.

However, not only has the USGS NOT issued any statements regarding the potential eruption hazards of Yellowstone, much less any kind of eruption warning, they are actively downplaying the potential hazards, and appear to be debunking any possibility of eruption.

YELLOWSTONE NATIONAL PARK, Wyo. (AP) - Geothermal activity is increasing in a Yellowstone National Park geyser basin and the bottom of Yellowstone Lake is bulging, but scientists say there is no impending major eruption.

www.journalnet.com...

Now, why would the USGS want to not only misinform the public about the likely dangers posed by such a massive potential eruption, and thereby endanger the public through lack of information, but to actively debunk those that do wish to inform the public of these dangers?

Around 1980, the USGS issued an eruption warning for the Mammoth Lake caldera in California:

During May 1980 a swarm of earthquakes hit the area, 4 of these had a magnitude 6, and that marked the onset of a period of unrest that continues up to now.
As illustrated in the ... some 20 small to moderate eruptions have occured along the Inyo-Mono Craters in the last 5.000 years. Does the new activity means that we can expect another eruption now? According to USGS the possibility is compareable with odds for a great (magnitude 8) earthquake occuring on the coast of California, and odds are smaller than for a major (magnitde 7 or greater) earthquake in L.A. or S.F. area.

www.vulkaner.no...

However, when this eruption warning was issued, and it became public knowledge that the eruption referenced had a window of error in excess of 50 years, well... the USGS had some problems coming.

The basis of these problems revolved around the massive drop in property values in the affected area of the eruption warning. Several property developers who lost significant finances sued the USGS.

A new conservative leadership installed at USGS decided that silence was the best option.

Now, what are the possibilities of an upcoming eruption at Yellowstone?

If the park were ready to blow its top, there would be several signs that magma was moving toward the surface, and earthquakes would be more frequent and stronger. The ground, while often rising and falling in Yellowstone, would most likely gradually rise and the chemistry of many geysers would change.

www.journalnet.com...

Lets review some facts, shall we?

Large geothermally driven bulge under Yellowstone Lake.
Apparent fishkills in yellowstone lake.
Mass animal migrations out of Yellowstone (keep in mind that wildlife is a very important indicator to seismic activity)
Average ground surface bulging up to 70 cm in a year.
Bare ground temperatures in excess of 200 degrees f.
Water temperature in yellowstone lake (normally constant temp due to year round springs) rising up to 30-40 degrees above normal.
Recent spate of Magnitude 3-4 earthquakes centered in or near Yellowstone Park.
Current water and air monitoring of sulfur and mercury, both are volcanic contaminants, and precursors to volcanic activity.

I would point out that many reports indicate that a large number of geysers (which function by infiltrating groundwater deeper, closer to the magma where it is superheated and then expelled in a high temp water/steam jet) have essentially dried up and turned to strictly steam vents. A number of geysers were reported in places that were never before active with geysers, which then similarly dried up and turned into steam vents.

My interpretations of these facts, as previously mentioned on this thread, is that a large body of magma, likely the parent magma plume in the main magma chamber, is moving around, and likely expanding, getting closer to the surface. The sudden lack of liquid water in these geysers I find very disturbing, as it means that the subsurface rocks are becoming superheated, and superheating the water to strictly vapor. In addition, it appears that the superheating is taking place at a faster rate than groundwater infiltration, therefore, there is a net drop in the groundwater levels locally in the active areas.

Another very disturbing thing that I expect but have no current information on is the lake acidity. (Currently, Kukla is making an on-site inspection, and I hope to get some information from him to confirm this)

As there is obvious evidence of a large bulge under Yellowstone lake, and reports of a massive fishkill there, I suspect that the bottom of the lake may be fractured, and allowing infiltration of sulfur compounds (gaseous) into the lake. When sulfur gases are dissolved in water, it will produce sulfuric acid. However, owing to the size and volume of Yellowstone lake, minor leaks that have always been known to occur would be inconsequential, and likely be readily diluted.

However, based on the reports of fishkills, strong sulfur odor associated with the lake, I suspect a very large release of sulfur gas into the lake. I have asked Kukla to perform a field test, if he gains access to the lake, to test for the current water PH. If it returns as highly acidic, that would indicate not only a sulfur release into the lake, but one of massive proportions. This could be construed as a precursor to eruption.

If it is acceptable, I would like to link to my thread on thixotropy and gel strength as referenced to magma columns.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

[Edited on 21-9-2003 by Valhall]

I find this to be Very informative, and relative to our project.

enjoy...

quake.wr.usgs.gov...

I just wanted to give a few more maps of the Caldera with reference to GPS stations. Please not that aside form the GPS monitoring points placed in the 2000 campaign by the University of Utah, there are also USGS continuous monitoring stations which house GPS receivers fulltime which constantly record positions and store them.









I'll try to get those velocity vectors to show up again..






Plus a pic or two of the actual station..

Here are Kukla's videos of the new thermal area he encountered.

Very good work Kukla!

New HotSpot - Part 1

New HotSpot - Part 2

New HotSpot - Part 3

New HotSpot - Part 4

New HotSpot - Part 5

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: