Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 03:45 AM - Re: Weird 747 shadow (Steve @ Col-East)
2. 05:47 AM - Re: Oil Leak [bcc][faked-from] (Brock Lorber)
3. 06:14 AM - Re: Weird 747 shadow (bertberry1@aol.com)
4. 06:46 AM - Attending your first Fly-In? (Barry Collman)
5. 07:32 AM - Re: Weird 747 shadow (David Owens)
6. 07:33 AM - Re: Oil Leak (Moe - Ross Racing Pistons)
7. 10:40 AM - Re: Oil Leak (Bruce Campbell)
8. 01:23 PM - Re: Oil Leak [bcc][faked-from] (nico css)
9. 02:12 PM - Re: Oil Leak [bcc][faked-from] (David Owens)
10. 02:14 PM - Re: Oil Leak [bcc][faked-from] (David Owens)
11. 05:16 PM - Re: Attending your first Fly-In? (Myron Ashley)
Message 1
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
From: | "Steve @ Col-East" <steve2@sover.net> |
Subject: | Re: Weird 747 shadow |
Hi Andrew,
It gets a little complicated......
The 3D effect is used by many companies to create the terrain model used
by so many applications. It could be flight simulators, or GPS units
with ground proximity in them.... What Google is doing is using that
model to 'drape' their imagery over it to give you that 3D effect.
I'll take a look at those examples when I am back at a fast modem, but I
have another 'possible' explanation for what you are seeing.
In order for an orthophoto to be scaled properly the original photo has
to stretched and shrunk to fit the terrain. Think of the left side of a
photo as having a mountain, and the right side with a valley. The two
sides of one photo will have different scales...... This effect is
further complicated by the fact that only in the center of the image is
the camera looking directly down, vertically. For most of the image, the
subject is at more and more of an angle off center.
This 'looking off center' is not an insolvable problem as long as the
object is draped onto the terrain model. But any object that stands
proud from the terrain model is going to be put in the wrong place. The
higher something is, and the further off perpendicular from under the
camera, the more horizontal error will be introduced when the object is
forced down to the terrain model.
So tall buildings will appear misplaced. Aircraft could appear a great
distance from where they should have been on the earth directly beneath
them.....
The simple answer is; every image pixel needs a proper elevation in
order to be placed accurately in horizontal.
As for multiple images causing ortho-weirdness, it does all the time.
Things like a baseball field with way too many players and a bunch of
other errors, some of them quite funny......
David Owens, on this list, I'm sure takes quite a lot of imagery
destined for ortho photos also, with their Colemill 500A.....
Steve
----- Original Message -----
From: andrew.bridget@telus.net
To: commander-list@matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2007 8:58 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: Weird 747 shadow
Hi, yes, Nico,I think Steve is likely right; I only read his post
after I responded. Talk about opening my yap before I have all the info
:-)
Found some other aircraft with ghosted shadows. No I didn't scan
Google Earth ... well I did look at O'Hare to see if there were any on
approach/climbout, and at Vancouver, Toronto, Calgary, and ... but then
I gave up and cheated by looking at
http://www.gearthhacks.com/dlcat24/Aircraft-in-flight.htm
Steve, given this, is it not possible that two photos are taken and
then overlaid to give the 3D effect when one tilts the earth to a more
horizontal plane? (pun unintended) This would explain the aircraft
"moving on". In each of the ghosted shadows the ghost aircraft appears
to be on (or slightly higher) than the clear aircraft. However, on a
slower aircraft (like the helicopter, or aircraft on finals) there isn't
any ghosting.This would add to the theory that the aircraft has moved on
- only fast aircraft appear to be ghosted.
Blessings
Andrew
----- Original Message -----
From: nico css
To: commander-list@matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2007 5:23 PM
Subject: RE: Commander-List: Weird 747 shadow
Hi Andrew.
I don't think so, because the 747 would have to have drifted south
without any forward movement. The shadows of the surrounding structures
indicate that it's early morning, so in that respect the blue shadow is
in the right place. What is a bit off, I would say, is that the shadow
indicates that the sun is slightly south of the 747, which is impossible
seeing that Johannesburg is 26 deg south and the sun never gets further
south than 23.5 deg. However, if the shadow was moved due to
manipulation of the satellite photographs, then it might not show where
it actually was.
Steve gave an excellent explanation: satellite photos are not
regular photos but orthophotos, which are programmatically manipulated
to make the individual satellite images fit seamlessly in one image, and
perhaps some shift could have changed the color of the shadow. Steve I
apologize if my paraphrasing what you said has lost the message.
Who knows, but it is very interesting.
Nico
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
andrew.bridget@telus.net
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2007 5:05 PM
To: commander-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: Commander-List: Weird 747 shadow
> Look at google earth at this location: 26 02 03 S, 28 14 04 E
Yes, very interesting - note that the ghosted image is above the
'clear' 747 - I wonder if it has something to do with a second photo
taken immediately after the first; the 747 having moved on since the
first? I'm sure there's a better explanation...
God bless,
Andrew
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List">http://www.mat
ronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
Message 2
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Oil Leak [bcc][faked-from] |
The very best solution to oil leaking valve covers is not over-torquing
the screws that hold them on. When the screws are over-torqued, they
pucker the thin metal and ruin the seal with any gaskets.
Keep the cork gaskets and get new valve covers. Torque the screws (with
star washers) exactly as published in the overhaul manual (~ 20 inch
pounds, barely more than snug).
Brock
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of
brent-mueller@comcast.net
Sent: Tue 8/28/2007 9:21 PM
Subject: Commander-List: Oil Leak [bcc][faked-from]
<aerocommander-560e@comcast.net>
-Greetings-
Our valve covers leak some.
what is the very best solution to oil leaking valve covers.
I was told silicon ones are the ones to use, we have cork now.
If cork expands with the warm oil then flattens when not run for a bit,
whats th advantage over silcone?
Take Care,
Brent
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=131505#131505
3D========================
3D=========
3D========================
3D=========
3D========================
3D=========
Message 3
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Weird 747 shadow |
For what its worth, I think it has to do with shutter speed. Slower shutter speed
which allows better detail. In addition, a lot of these are not sat photos
but are aerial photos that are piece milled in.
Bert
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T
-----Original Message-----
From: <andrew.bridget@telus.net>
To:<commander-list@matronics.com>
Subject: Re: Commander-List: Weird 747 shadow
Hi, yes, Nico,I think Steve is likely right; I only read his post after I responded.
Talk about opening my yap before I have all the info :-)
Found some other aircraft with ghosted shadows. No I didn't scan Google Earth... well I did look at O'Hare to see if there were any on approach/climbout, and at Vancouver, Toronto, Calgary, and ... but then I gave up andcheatedbylooking at http://www.gearthhacks.com/dlcat24/Aircraft-in-flight.htm <http://www.gearthhacks.com/dlcat24/Aircraft-in-flight.htm>
Steve, given this, is it not possible that two photos are taken and then overlaid
to give the 3D effect when one tilts the earth to a more horizontal plane?
(pun unintended) This would explain the aircraft "moving on". In each of the ghosted
shadows the ghostaircraft appears to beon (or slightly higher)than the
clear aircraft. However, on a slower aircraft (like the helicopter, or aircraft
on finals) there isn't any ghosting.This would add to the theory that the aircraft
has moved on - only fast aircraft appear to beghosted.
Blessings
Andrew
----- Original Message -----
From: nico
css <mailto:nico@cybersuperstore.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2007 5:23 PM
Subject: RE: Commander-List: Weird 747 shadow
Hi Andrew.
I dont think so, because the 747 would have to have drifted south without any forward
movement. The shadows of the surrounding structures indicate that its early
morning, so in that respect the blue shadow is in the right place. What is
a bit off, I would say, is that the shadow indicates that the sun is slightly
south of the 747, which is impossible seeing that Johannesburg is 26 deg south
and the sun never gets further south than 23.5 deg. However, if the shadow
was moved due to manipulation of the satellite photographs, then it might not
show where it actually was.
Steve gave an excellent explanation: satellite photos are not regular photos but
orthophotos, which are programmatically manipulated to make the individual satellite
images fit seamlessly in one image, and perhaps some shift could have
changed the color of the shadow. Steve I apologize if my paraphrasing what you
said has lost the message.
Who knows, but it is very interesting.
Nico
----------------
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of andrew.bridget@telus.net
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2007 5:05 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: Weird 747 shadow
> Look at google earth at this location: 26 02 03 S, 28 14 04 E
Yes, very interesting - note that the ghosted image is above the 'clear' 747 -
I wonder if it has something to do with a second photo taken immediately after
the first; the 747 having moved on since the first? I'm sure there's a better
explanation...
God bless,
Message 4
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Attending your first Fly-In? |
Hi All,
If any Commander owner is attending their very first Fly-In, please let
me know and bring along a personalised history of their Commander(s).
Very Best Regards,
Barry
Message 5
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Weird 747 shadow |
Actually, when you use some of the GEO software such as Leica Suite, and
Imagine, some of the features you can choose to "merge" the images
seamlessly allow you to "feather" the images, which makes the image
progressively trsnsparent to the extent of the image... to appear more
seamless between frames, as well as auto dodging, which will change the
actual gamut of each image to match more or less creating another aspect
of "seamless" as the eye can see... color and density assuming the
images were captured at or near the same sun angle, weather etc. As for
the "ghost" shadow, I think it was feathered below the image that was
overlayed after, like you guys said... BAWK!
David Owens
Aerial Viewpoint
N14AV
AC-500A-Colemill
Message 6
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Brent,
The silicon, in my experience, are better than cork, however, first be sure
that someone hasn't tightened the screws up so much that the valve covers
are bent around the screw holes. This check can be done with a flat surface
and a feeler gage. If you go to silicon, and do engine oil analysis, be
sure to tell the analyzers. If you don't tell them, likely they will tell
you that the engine is in trouble. Do not over tighten the screws no matter
what type of gaskets you use.
Moe
N680RR
680F(p)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
brent-mueller@comcast.net
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2007 9:21 PM
Subject: Commander-List: Oil Leak
<aerocommander-560e@comcast.net>
-Greetings-
Our valve covers leak some.
what is the very best solution to oil leaking valve covers.
I was told silicon ones are the ones to use, we have cork now.
If cork expands with the warm oil then flattens when not run for a bit,
whats th advantage over silcone?
Take Care,
Brent
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=131505#131505
Message 7
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
When I went to silicon valve covers the oil leak problem was greatly
reduced on the GO435s. There were still other leaks around some of the
accessories that had to be dealt with, but it was then possible to
isolate them. Eventually got it down to essentially no leaks.
Bruce
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
brent-mueller@comcast.net
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2007 9:21 PM
Subject: Commander-List: Oil Leak
<aerocommander-560e@comcast.net>
-Greetings-
Our valve covers leak some.
what is the very best solution to oil leaking valve covers.
I was told silicon ones are the ones to use, we have cork now.
If cork expands with the warm oil then flattens when not run for a bit,
whats th advantage over silcone?
Take Care,
Brent
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=131505#131505
Message 8
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Oil Leak [bcc][faked-from] |
Would it hurt to apply a thin layer of grease on the cork before
installation? That way the seal is not 'dry' and should prevent sweating. Or
is it a no-no on aviation engines?
Nico
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brock Lorber
Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2007 5:47 AM
Subject: RE: Commander-List: Oil Leak [bcc][faked-from]
The very best solution to oil leaking valve covers is not over-torquing the
screws that hold them on. When the screws are over-torqued, they pucker the
thin metal and ruin the seal with any gaskets.
Keep the cork gaskets and get new valve covers. Torque the screws (with
star washers) exactly as published in the overhaul manual (~ 20 inch pounds,
barely more than snug).
Brock
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of
brent-mueller@comcast.net
Sent: Tue 8/28/2007 9:21 PM
Subject: Commander-List: Oil Leak [bcc][faked-from]
<aerocommander-560e@comcast.net>
-Greetings-
Our valve covers leak some.
what is the very best solution to oil leaking valve covers.
I was told silicon ones are the ones to use, we have cork now.
If cork expands with the warm oil then flattens when not run for a bit,
whats th advantage over silcone?
Take Care,
Brent
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=131505#131505
3D========================
3D=========
3D========================
3D=========
3D========================
3D=========
Message 9
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Oil Leak [bcc][faked-from] |
We use Hylomar on ours...
David Owens
Aerial Viewpoint
N14AV
AC-500A-Colemill
Message 10
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Oil Leak [bcc][faked-from] |
go to http://www.hylomar-usa.com/ for aviation specifics...
David Owens
Aerial Viewpoint
N14AV
AC-500A-Colemill
Message 11
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Attending your first Fly-In? |
Hello Barry,
This will be my first fly-in. I am looking forward to meeting everyone.
Thanks,
Myron Ashley
N620DR
----- Original Message -----
From: Barry Collman
To: commander-list@matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2007 8:46 AM
Subject: Commander-List: Attending your first Fly-In?
Hi All,
If any Commander owner is attending their very first Fly-In, please
let me know and bring along a personalised history of their
Commander(s).
Very Best Regards,
Barry
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|