Chad pictures

[nekitamo]

Could you give the exact orientation of the drone...on this picture and also on the others?

May be we could do a correlation with ground particularities like: meridian, fault, water, trees, roads, hightways... and what we could imagine!

Not sure about exact orientations, but here's what I figured out so far (with image numbers per elevenaugust's notation):


EDIT: This is just a quick sketch - for better precision, check sp33's 3D study below!

[Kaelos]

Thanks Nekitamo!

This shows roughly a 15° inclination over equator, if we assume the tail/ring is in line with drone trajectory
(that seems to be the case with Chad's drone but not with Raj's one!)

A simple suggestion...
(I'm too busy now for more)

We have dates and locations for Yosemite, Tahoe, Chad, Raj, Brent etc. and a system to determine orientation trajectory (or the field orientation used, like for sail), with ring/tail oriented drone system, perhaps Roy's Dutton theory is applicable there?...

In 1997, Roy Dutton, a NASA orbit calculation specialist, has 'shown' that UFO sightings which seemed not to be correlated, were in fact correlated by a mother ship orbit.

To 'deliver' and 'retrieve' a probe, the mother ship must use a 'super orbit' to come near earth, these orbits make a special angle with equator (101 'markers' identified on equator) and thus sightings are 'spots' on 'lines' defined by orbit/date/location.
(Roy Dutton seemed to be able to make some previsions...)

[spf33]

still really rough camera matching using chad's scannedimage,
scannedimage2, scannedimage5.

using sensor width of 5mm cameras match photos at what is
working out right now to lens&fov of 5.5\48, 6\45, 6.9\39.





edit to add - the drone is 13.5' wide.  the terrain geometry still isn't finalized at all, not sure yet how much this could alter the results.  the drone arms need to be re-positioned more closely match to the photos (right now it appears the arms may be changing position between photos by slightly horizontally rotating around the center torus). 

also, notice scannedimage2 camera and the dramatic foreshortening that doesn't quite match the photo. 

[spf33]

curious as to how long it takes @ an average walking speed of 2.7mph.
with the assumption that scannedimage.jpg thru scannedimage5.jpg were shot successively the drone
would also be moving at around 2.5 -3.5 mph.  the entire walk takes about 2m16s;

[Nemo492]

Moving from Starting point - Spot 1 - to Spot 2
the photographer had to enter a private property.
Numbers and/or Tonio could better explain that point.

[10538]

Just to clear something up.  None of the Chad photos were taken on the lower gravel road. It's more like this:


Plus there is not much of a chance to walk the path indicated by Spf because there is a locked security gate before you get to the lower gravel road.  That and the guard dog (Torco) might get you.

[10538]

I should clarify location 3.  It's not certain.  There were not enough landmarks to be certain.  It is also a possibility that 3 and 4 were taken from the same spot, likely looking more toward the east judging by the sun hitting the side of the drone.

[spf33]

None of the Chad photos were taken on the lower gravel road.

assuming consecutive shots, what would be the ideal\available path from 2 to 4 or vice versa?
i don't even know that this matters, might be too much speculation...

[10538]

assuming consecutive shots, what would be the ideal\available path from 2 to 4 or vice versa?

This is the only way I see that's feasible.

[spf33]

This is the only way I see that's feasible.

thanks for that. 

so it just reoccurred to me that chad said the cell phone photo was from his wife and that the next time he went out and snapped the other photos he was with a friend. 

i guess two men are going to move a bit faster than my pregnant lady estimation of less than 3mph walking speed.

now wondering at what point they may have gotten directly under the drone for scannedimage3 because chad in his testimony seems to imply all the scanned image photos were from the same outing.

[10538]

now wondering at what point they may have gotten directly under the drone for scannedimage3 because chad in his testimony seems to imply all the scanned image photos were from the same outing.

Maybe like this:


Still, they would be taking their chances going down there.  But considering the circumstances they may not have been concerned with that.

[spf33]

Still, they would be taking their chances going down there. 

so that road over to the water reservoir is accessible even if private, no fence or gate?

and is the lower path area, below #2, fenced in with torco the killer canine inside?

why the heck is there even helicopter landing pad out here?

[Nemo492]

While Numbers is away.. i heard the helicopter landing pad story
it was donated by someone
who lost family lives in a car accident...
and it's located by the highway.
There, to the right :

[10538]

so that road over to the water reservoir is accessible even if private, no fence or gate?

I'm sorry.  I'm trying to go by memory (which is terrible).  I don't recall there being a gate on the path to the water tank.  Actually we saw the tank but never walked over to it.

and is the lower path area, below #2, fenced in with torco the killer canine inside?

There again my memory is fuzzy.  Maybe 11A can remember better.  On second thought, I'm not totally sure there is a gate before getting to the lower gravel road area.  I think you can walk down there, but we have no evidence that any pics were taken from down there.  I think not.  The dog is not fenced in.  You go down there and you risk a confrontation.  It happened to 11A and I when we went to the mouse house area.  None of them dogs are fenced or on a leash.

[elevenaugust]

At the beginning of the path:


And at the end:


The private aeras, except the one point in my drawing, are not closed with any gates or fences, there's only a sign, like the one in the photo above.