It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Quake Watch 2011

page: 155
203
<< 152  153  154    156  157  158 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 5 2011 @ 04:34 AM
link   
reply to post by muzzy
 


Muzzy, I am showing a ~6.5 in New Zealand - sourced by GeoNet.


3540736g gntnz newz 1 2011-07-05T03:36:25.152Z -38.67452 175.74966 6.4960 ML 1 152.3430 Waihaha 0 0 524632




But I can't see anything on LISS that looks like a 6.5. In fact at the time stated there plots are completely clear. Any ideas. Are you still all well there. Did anyone feel anything?

Edit to add. I note however that the Number of reporting stations is 1.


edit on 5/7/2011 by PuterMan because: (no reason given)


Further ETA

Looks like this one is it:


Deepish, but I still would have thought at 5.3 that would have shown fairly strongly on SNZO. Must be the depth that is damping it?



edit on 5/7/2011 by PuterMan because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 5 2011 @ 05:29 AM
link   
whats going on in melbourne???

another little shaker...

MAG 3.7

2011/07/05 09:16:29

-38.336 145.821 (map)

21.0 kms (depth)

NEAR THE SOUTHEAST COAST OF AUSTRALIA

see: earthquake.usgs.gov...

2nd one today...

seeya
edit on 5/7/2011 by shaneR because: add link



posted on Jul, 5 2011 @ 05:59 AM
link   
MAG 5.5 JAPAN...

MAG 5.5

2011/07/05 utc time = 10:18:45

34.020 135.196 (map)

15.0 kms (depth)


NEAR S. COAST OF WESTERN HONSHU, JAPAN


hang on, is this a new spot???
ie sth/west coast...

seeya
edit on 5/7/2011 by shaneR because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 5 2011 @ 11:56 AM
link   
reply to post by shaneR
 




4.7 2011/07/05 10:34:55 33.956 135.203 8.4 NEAR S. COAST OF WESTERN HONSHU, JAPAN
5.5 2011/07/05 10:18:44 34.020 135.196 15.0 NEAR S. COAST OF WESTERN HONSHU, JAPAN


Yes, this is a new area...might keep an eye out here!

earthquake.usgs.gov...
edit on 5-7-2011 by berkeleygal because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 5 2011 @ 12:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by shaneR
MAG 5.5 JAPAN...

MAG 5.5

2011/07/05 utc time = 10:18:45

34.020 135.196 (map)

15.0 kms (depth)


NEAR S. COAST OF WESTERN HONSHU, JAPAN


hang on, is this a new spot???
ie sth/west coast...

seeya
edit on 5/7/2011 by shaneR because: (no reason given)


Shane, just a heads up. It does not matter who or what you are quoting, but you MUST link your sources. Rules and TOS of ATS require it, as well as copyright laws. Just don't want you to get smacked by the mods, as violation of copyright rules are taken extremely seriously.



posted on Jul, 5 2011 @ 12:05 PM
link   
We had another shaker here in Utah this morning. This one is closer to southern Utah. About 200 miles south of me.


Earthquake Details

This event has been reviewed by a seismologist.
Magnitude 3.2
Date-Time Tuesday, July 05, 2011 at 14:59:04 UTC
Tuesday, July 05, 2011 at 08:59:04 AM at epicenter
Time of Earthquake in other Time Zones

Location 37.561°N, 112.591°W
Depth 2.9 km (1.8 miles)
Region UTAH
Distances 17 km (10 miles) NW (324°) from Alton, UT
17 km (11 miles) SW (234°) from Hatch, UT
25 km (16 miles) N (2°) from Glendale, UT
45 km (28 miles) ESE (108°) from Cedar City, UT
157 km (97 miles) ENE (57°) from Mesquite, NV
279 km (173 miles) NE (56°) from Las Vegas, NV

Location Uncertainty horizontal +/- 0.6 km (0.4 miles); depth +/- 1.3 km (0.8 miles)
Parameters NST= 26, Nph= 26, Dmin=24 km, Rmss=0.39 sec, Gp= 47°,
M-type=local magnitude (ML), Version=2
Source University of Utah Seismograph Stations

Event ID uu00007445


Source - USGS



posted on Jul, 5 2011 @ 01:52 PM
link   
reply to post by PuterMan
 

yeah the depth must be limiting the size of the reading on LISS SNZO but looks decent on BUD
and also shows quite well on Urewera URZ.NZ.10.HH1
compare with SNZO graph with the 5.0 (USGS 4.9) the day before

I think USGS are being a bit stingey with a 5.3mb magnitude, I counted 7 x 6's on the phase data.


Only the one aftershock (at the same depth), doubt there will be any more, my understanding of the subduction theory is that at that depth the leading edge of the Pacific Plate just fell off into the mantle (at 150km).

edit on 5-7-2011 by muzzy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 5 2011 @ 04:37 PM
link   
Another Map

Fore and After Shocks offshore Akito, Manawatu around the 5.039ML






edit on 5-7-2011 by muzzy because: hey its raining, I got time on my hands




posted on Jul, 5 2011 @ 05:38 PM
link   
reply to post by PuterMan
 

To further add to the confusion check this out.
I think its the 5.3 USGS are showing NE of Fiji.
They haven't got SNZO in the phase data but based on the arrival time at SBA (Scott Base, Antarctica) it fits in nicely.
But why the difference in size

Taupo is way closer to SNZO than Fiji is.

Depth 150km Taupo versus 10km Fiji, but you would think ...................

If it wasn't for the 3644 Felt Reports on Geonet I'd tend to think Geonet got it wrong.




posted on Jul, 5 2011 @ 06:17 PM
link   
reply to post by muzzy
 


Even their ML @ 5.7 is well under GeoNet. They seem to have a definite downer on quake magnitudes from New Zealand.

Looking at the 4.x you mentioned on 4th and the one yesterday I would have said it was way bigger than 5.3. After all if the depth was damping it a bit as far as the S waves are concerned then you would expect it to show smaller on the S part for a quake at depth would you not?



posted on Jul, 5 2011 @ 06:36 PM
link   
reply to post by muzzy
 


Too tired to think about where Wallis and thingybob if that is Fiji then yes I would agree.

The depth is definitely something to do with it. If you look at the BH1 plot you linked to however the Fiji one does not show at all!

This is probably a difference between broadband and long period. I think SNZO broadband is 40Hz and LHZ is 1 Hz.

ETA: SNZO.IU.00.LHZ.2011.186 the LHZ version does not show that other quake either, yet it is showing much stronger than the earlier one. That cannot be right!!

In fact it does not matter what I look at the second quake cannot be seen

HIZ.NZ.10.HHZ.2011.186
KHZ.NZ.10.HHZ.2011.186
URZ.NZ.10.HHZ.2011.186

But the 5.3 in NZ is very faint on this one but there is a trace of the Fiji quake. OUZ.NZ.10.HHZ.2011.186

Is it possible that that trace is not Fiji at all but a very much smaller local quake that does not show on the other NZ instruments?
edit on 5/7/2011 by PuterMan because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 5 2011 @ 08:11 PM
link   
reply to post by UtahRosebud
 


thankjs UtahRosebud,
+ agreed,

it must have been late when i did that one,
+ accidently left off the USGS link i (almost) always add..

cheers,

+seeya



posted on Jul, 5 2011 @ 09:51 PM
link   
reply to post by PuterMan
 


No, I just don't get it, its (the Fijian one) showing strongest in on LISS at NZ, Raoul Is. and Samoa as you would expect, and most of the other Pacific Rim stations too, just seems a really big signal for such a moderate quake.
Can't be local usually even local 5's show on LISS SNZO as no more than a slight "heave" on the main line, not even having spikes like these two have.

GEOFON have it at 5.5Mw manually revised and the Russians 5.4mb .(5.9mb at Obninsk, Russia)

I see the Russians have the Taupo quake at 5.4mb too, however all their readings are from the NW of NZ, whereas the energy went SE (according to the Geonet Felt Reports)
edit on 5-7-2011 by muzzy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 6 2011 @ 04:01 AM
link   
MAG 5.2

2011/07/06

08:00:04

-1.693 138.621 (map)

29.0 (depth)

NEAR THE NORTH COAST OF PAPUA, INDONESIA

see:

earthquake.usgs.gov...

seeya



posted on Jul, 6 2011 @ 12:41 PM
link   
5.7M, depth: 10km 7/7 00:14 Off the coast of Japan

www.newscientist.com...

From an amateur view, looks like the quakes here are getting shallower.....
edit on 6-7-2011 by RoyalBlue because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 6 2011 @ 02:22 PM
link   
6.7 in Kermadec Islands north of New Zealand according to EMSC below, (uninhabited apparently) , however , USGS has it as a 7.8


www.emsc-csem.org...

earthquake.usgs.gov...

and now a Tsunami warning for Tonga and New Zealand - according to Sky News - be safe Kiwis

edit on 6-7-2011 by slidingdoor because: add info



posted on Jul, 6 2011 @ 02:23 PM
link   
7.8!!!

Wednesday July 6 2011, 19:03:16 UTC 15 minutes ago Kermadec Islands region 7.8 48.0 Detail

quakes.globalincidentmap.com...

Norther CA just got 3.8 as I was adding the link:



posted on Jul, 6 2011 @ 02:23 PM
link   
A big quake somewhere in the New Zealand region. I reckon off the east coast North Island (Porangahau?) I was checking the McQueens Drum when I saw it...no shaking here, so must be elsewhere!

Or it could be the Kermadecs!
edit on 6-7-2011 by aorAki because: (no reason given)



Uh, yeah, after the settling effects of a coffee, it indeed seems to be from the Kermadecs.

Here is the national drum set:www.geonet.org.nz...
edit on 6-7-2011 by aorAki because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 6 2011 @ 02:36 PM
link   

Magnitude
7.8
Date-Time
Wednesday, July 06, 2011 at 19:03:16 UTC
Thursday, July 07, 2011 at 07:03:16 AM at epicenter
Location
29.312°S, 176.204°W
Depth
1 km (~0.6 mile) (poorly constrained)
Region
KERMADEC ISLANDS REGION
Distances
161 km (100 miles) E (93°) from Raoul Island, Kermadec Islands
913 km (567 miles) S (186°) from NUKU'ALOFA, Tonga
3007 km (1868 miles) WSW (239°) from PAPEETE, Tahiti, French Polynesia
Location Uncertainty
horizontal +/- 14.1 km (8.8 miles); depth +/- 4.4 km (2.7 miles)
Parameters
NST=620, Nph=625, Dmin=168.1 km, Rmss=1.02 sec, Gp= 18°,
M-type=teleseismic moment magnitude (Mw), Version=B
Source
U.S. Geological Survey, National Earthquake Information Center:
World Data Center for Seismology, Denver
Event ID
usc0004pbm


earthquake.usgs.gov...



posted on Jul, 6 2011 @ 02:48 PM
link   
Help me out here guys.......but this area is the same as japan and the PNW as far as the potential for a mega quake, correct? This is an EXTREMELY shallow quake for its size (unless they change the depth). I am fearful of another scenario like Japan, in that this could be a pre-cursor......???


Let's hope not.



new topics

top topics



 
203
<< 152  153  154    156  157  158 >>

log in

join