![]() Is there dispositive evidence for the SWATT theory? Working from the hypothesis that the radar video is actually capturing a SWATT training exercise (for context, my last two posts here and here), I'm now trying to disprove myself. While waiting for the excellent work of on the AIS data to conclude, I think I have one last big post left in me for the day. There are too many stacking tolerances here to be exact and the position of Swan Ace on the scope is almost exactly the same.Ĭlip 4 can't really be analyzed because the Swan Ace does not appear on the scope. There are four clips, but only three show the location of the Swan Ace.Ĭlip 1 was recorded at about 04:40:58 UTCĬlip 2 was recorded at about 04:43:22 UTCĬlip 3 is so close that there's no meaningful difference between it and clip 2 but it may have been taken at 04:42:16 UTC. You can reasonably match them up with circles drawn at those ranges on Google Earth, then infer the time the video was taken by the timestamp of the matching AIS record that's closest to where the Swan Ace was shown on the radar console. The rings on the radar console are actually at 5 NM and 10 NM (not 6 and 12). We have all the data for the path of the Swan Ace, so if you match up her track with her approximate location on screen you can determine the approximate time and date when the video was taken. ![]() From that you can make a reasonable guess at the location of the ship. Just in case this is useful: by examining the video at various time indexes when there is a reasonably clear picture of the screen, you can determine the position, bearing and range of the cursor. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |