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: FosterVS
originally posted by: Macenroe82
a reply to: FosterVS
What kind of drones do you have?
Not what you have. Wow, jealous.
originally posted by: gariac
originally posted by: FosterVS
originally posted by: Macenroe82
a reply to: FosterVS
What kind of drones do you have?
Not what you have. Wow, jealous.
www.youtube.com...
A bit OT, but the DJI video is impressive.
A few applications come to mind for drone use around the range. It would be fun to fly a grid over the F-4 crash site near Rachel and document all the debris. I would fly it over Texas Lake just to get a different perspective of the dry lake. You might be able to detect where aircraft have landed on it. You could photograph the craters near highway 6.
originally posted by: FosterVS
originally posted by: gariac
originally posted by: FosterVS
originally posted by: Macenroe82
a reply to: FosterVS
What kind of drones do you have?
Not what you have. Wow, jealous.
www.youtube.com...
A bit OT, but the DJI video is impressive.
A few applications come to mind for drone use around the range. It would be fun to fly a grid over the F-4 crash site near Rachel and document all the debris. I would fly it over Texas Lake just to get a different perspective of the dry lake. You might be able to detect where aircraft have landed on it. You could photograph the craters near highway 6.
I like your thinking. I might just try that at the F-4 crash site, and maybe the Weed crash site? Even a certain titanium craft, if I find the spot.
originally posted by: FosterVS
originally posted by: gariac
a reply to: FosterVS
I'm calling that new Range 61 gate. ;-)
I thought THIS one was "new Range 61 Gate"?
37°17'19.68"N, 115°37'47.63"W
The one with the camera, located just over the border, to the right of the gate.
And this is "Wilson Gate"?
37°17'19.37"N, 115°26'34.59"W
I know for sure this one is the one with the camera up the hill to the left of the gate:
37°17'19.49"N, 115°35'27.89"W
I've got Bald Mountain gates 1-6 marked on my Google Earth, been to them all.
I think you and I should come up with official nomenclature for these border crossings.
originally posted by: gariac
Wilson Gate is fine.
How about Range 61 Camera gate for:
37°17'19.49"N, 115°35'27.89"W
Ditto on the camera. You can see it on Google Earth.
37°17'19.68"N, 115°37'47.63"W
I don't believe I have been to this gate. Looking at Google Earth, there seem to be two gates nearby. Maybe three depending on what you call a road.
I don't have a quad, so if the road looks dicey, I don't take it. Or I part and walk. You never know where a rancher might put a valve.
originally posted by: FosterVS
originally posted by: gariac
Wilson Gate is fine.
How about Range 61 Camera gate for:
37°17'19.49"N, 115°35'27.89"W
Ditto on the camera. You can see it on Google Earth.
37°17'19.68"N, 115°37'47.63"W
I don't believe I have been to this gate. Looking at Google Earth, there seem to be two gates nearby. Maybe three depending on what you call a road.
I don't have a quad, so if the road looks dicey, I don't take it. Or I part and walk. You never know where a rancher might put a valve.
"37°17'19.68"N, 115°37'47.63"W
I don't believe I have been to this gate. Looking at Google Earth, there seem to be two gates nearby. Maybe three depending on what you call a road."
I believe I was at that gate in 2014. There is a camera just on the other side of the fence, just out of reach, maybe 40 feet to the right?
originally posted by: [post=20404324]gariacI know I haven't seen that camera setup. But I recall you said you found a camera near Roadblock Canyon. Is it possible you have the sites mixed ip?
In any event, this photograph shows, perhaps verifies my hypothesis that the yagi antenna is for use by a person on the ground and the dish is for reaching Bald Mountain. (I used to call this a theory, but nitpickers gave me grief.)
The hypothesis:
1) Those solar cells are way too small for continuous video monitoring.
2) One possible surveillance scheme is the motion sensor way down the road goes off. It triggers the camera or the base sends a signal to the camera to turn on.
3) Assuming a base worker has approached the gate, they fire up a UHF commercial band radio. The yagi picks up the land mobile radio and relays the signal to the base over the microwave dish.
4) The dude at the base looks at the video and based on the communications deems the visitor to be kosher or sends the camo dudes.
5) An alternate version is the camera turns on when the land mobile radio is fired up.
The key here is the yagi pointing downward at the road.
6) I suppose a third alternative is the base vehicles have a sensor on them similar to the one that might be under the white bus. That would explain the use of a high gain yagi when a simple omni antenna would do for comms with a land mobile radio.
originally posted by: SpeedFanatic
The YouTube movies in question just returned to his YouTube channel.
originally posted by: gariac
a reply to: gariac
That was harder than I thought, mostly because they used a road I don't use. I think they started here.
37°14'13.20"N 115°12'27.21"W
www inplanesight.org
Go to Nellis information. The "standard" route to Tikaboo is listed there. The road they used might be improved, but in the past it was so rough you might as well take the long route.
The drone takes off, then pans a bit to the left, showing the regular road to Tikaboo. Then it pans to the right, looking into the sun. That direction is opposite that of the base.
originally posted by: FosterVS
originally posted by: gariac
a reply to: gariac
That was harder than I thought, mostly because they used a road I don't use. I think they started here.
37°14'13.20"N 115°12'27.21"W
www inplanesight.org
Go to Nellis information. The "standard" route to Tikaboo is listed there. The road they used might be improved, but in the past it was so rough you might as well take the long route.
The drone takes off, then pans a bit to the left, showing the regular road to Tikaboo. Then it pans to the right, looking into the sun. That direction is opposite that of the base.
If that's where they flew from, I have no idea what the hell they were trying to accomplish. From my calculations, they would have had to fly to over 9000 ft. to see over the ranges in between that spot and Groom Lake. And it's 33 miles away. Me thinks they never did any homework, and thought Groom was just on the other side of the Pahranagat Mountain Range. And didn't realize there was another range in between. Jumbled Hills/Desert Range.
originally posted by: gariac
Well Tikaboo is 26 miles away, so your calculation is in the ballpark. I'm not sure they have to do 9000ft. They are starting at probably 6500ft. Tikaboo is a bit less than 8000ft. You can see the base from lower than 8000ft since we watch the base mostly from the camp site rather than the peak. For photography, you might as well climb the remaining few hundred feet from the camp to the peak, but otherwise the camp site is fine and you don't have a camera on your arse.
But your point is well taken. Why haul a drone out to Tikaboo if you can just launch it closer to the base.
I haven't mentioned this lately, but if you are going to photograph or shoot video through miles of atmosphere, you should color correct at the lens. I use a 400nm long pass filter in combination with a kr1.5. The 400nm long pass is way more useful for film than CCD, but I have it from the film days. The kr1.5 reduces a lot of the blue due to the haze, which in turn allows the CCD to set the exposure on the base rather than the atmosphere. This is the thing you can't fix in post because the "information" never made it to the sensor, or more correctly was lost in the noise.
I've never really found a good book on long distance photography. There are books on aerial photography, but generally nobody considers shooting from more than 3 miles away. Even satellites are effectively at the three miles limit if you consider that is the limit of breathable atmosphere. (Obvioisly the satellite itself is much higher, but most of the loss is in the first three miles.)
One idea is just to put on an amber or orange filter and convert to grayscale.