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.
Originally posted by PuterMan
reply to post by Nyiah
A question to everyone.
Let's say the AVO had a Facebook page, or something like that and ran a campaign to "Adopt An Alaskan Volcano" in the interests of promoting science for the public good. Do you think there would be any mileage in that sort of scheme?
If say one sponsored a volcano for $5 what sort of information or contact would you expect to get by virtue of your sponsorship?edit on 15/5/2013 by PuterMan because: (no reason given)
A second Alaska volcano began heating up Monday. Pavlof Volcano, 625 miles from Anchorage, does have seismic instruments, which picked up tremors signaling a possible eruption. Satellite imagery also showed a lot of heat in the mountain.
For example, gone is a plan to install seismic monitors at Cleveland Volcano, a remote mountain on an uninhabited island in the Aleutians. The volcano experienced a low-level eruption earlier this month that continues to discharge steam, gas and heat, although no ash clouds have been detected in the past week.
Originally posted by Hopechest
We can tell fairly easy when an eruption is happening and can direct resources as needed to monitor it. This is nothing more than people want every inch of ground tracked which is a waste in my opinion. Tell the pilots to look out the window...if they notice an ash cloud they may want to think about going around it.
Originally posted by TrueAmerican
Originally posted by Hopechest
We can tell fairly easy when an eruption is happening and can direct resources as needed to monitor it. This is nothing more than people want every inch of ground tracked which is a waste in my opinion. Tell the pilots to look out the window...if they notice an ash cloud they may want to think about going around it.
At an unmonitored volcano, that is not true. We cannot tell fairly easily. We can't tell fairly easily if a MONITORED volcano is about to erupt. Little Sitkin, Iliamna, and so many others prove that day in day out. And by the time they can tell, it may too late. But we can advidse for elevated activity, and when it reaches a threshold, then advise the airlines of the threat. At an unmonitored one you cannot do any of that.
I'll be sure and direct the families of the dead crash victims to your post.
And Oli, you nailed it. No surprise. You rule.
Originally posted by Hopechest
Well correct me if I'm wrong but quakes do not indicate an ash cloud which is the point of concern here right?
Is there not plenty of seismic activity without ash clouds going on up there?
If that is the case don't then need to independently verify there is an ash cloud outside of the seismic monitoring?
If so then they don't really need seismic monitoring, they need a radar or more observation towers.