Unknown orange/red glow over Pacific Ocean
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unknown orange/red glow over Pacific Ocean
A Dutch pilot flying for an unnamed airline saw an unknown orange/red glow over Pacific Ocean while enroute from Hong Kong to Alaska.
No idea what it is. Looks like a vulcano eruption.
Here the pilot's story and more photos
Unknown orange/red glow over Pacific Ocean - August 24, 2014 Photo Gallery by Flying Dutchman at pbase.com
No idea what it is. Looks like a vulcano eruption.
Here the pilot's story and more photos
Unknown orange/red glow over Pacific Ocean - August 24, 2014 Photo Gallery by Flying Dutchman at pbase.com
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Africa
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Could have been this...
A top-secret weapon being developed by the US military was destroyed four seconds after its launch from a test range in Alaska early on Monday after controllers detected a problem with the system, the Pentagon said. The Advanced Hypersonic Weapon is part of a program to create a missile that will destroy targets anywhere on Earth within an hour - traveling at speeds in excess of 3,500 miles-an-hour or Mach 5. The mission was aborted to ensure public safety, and no one was injured in the incident, which occurred shortly after 4 am EDT at the Kodiak Launch Complex in Alaska, said Maureen Schumann, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Defense Department.
Despite the pilot's doubts about the green glow: "the strange green glow that was all over the Northern Hemisphere. I think it was sort of a Northern Lights but it was much more dispersed, never seen anything like this before.." I reckon from the photographs that it is indeed Aurora ( you can get "all sky" aurora if you're in the right place at the right time, sometimes it's diffuse.., sometimes it isn't and is very impressive).
That said I really have no idea about the red glow.
That said I really have no idea about the red glow.
TWT
Rocket was destroyed shortly after launch - 4 secs but who's to know how far it flew given the speeds the poster says there trying to achieve. The aurora I would say is the mostly lightly suspect on some of the photos. I have seen it quite often Salmon fishing in northern latitude's as well as flying up there, but the multi coloured dots have me beat less it is said rocket , or possible gas burning as I have heard of gas being released before earthquakes. Will be interested to see what others think.
Rocket was destroyed shortly after launch - 4 secs but who's to know how far it flew given the speeds the poster says there trying to achieve. The aurora I would say is the mostly lightly suspect on some of the photos. I have seen it quite often Salmon fishing in northern latitude's as well as flying up there, but the multi coloured dots have me beat less it is said rocket , or possible gas burning as I have heard of gas being released before earthquakes. Will be interested to see what others think.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,816
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Glowing lights underneath the clouds photo - Flying Dutchman photos at pbase.com
That isn't aurora, its under them.
And the exposure is 8s at F2.8 at 12800 ISO with a 10.5mm fish eye. Which will screw with things somewhat.
That isn't aurora, its under them.
And the exposure is 8s at F2.8 at 12800 ISO with a 10.5mm fish eye. Which will screw with things somewhat.
That isn't aurora, its under them.
And the exposure is 8s at F2.8 at 12800 ISO with a 10.5mm fish eye. Which will screw with things somewhat.
(are you smelling "Photoshop"??....closest thing I've seen to lights on the ground like that is the Dutch greenhouses you see coming towards Lambourne from the east at O dark thirty AM in the winter....Cynic? Me???)
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Northern Territory Australia
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would have thought an 8 second exposure would have caused some light trails. an earlier picture has a 30 second exposure and the image is very clear. To hold a D800 camera rock steady for 30secs without a tripod and a remote shutter releases is quite a feat especially in an aircraft that is flying into the night at +/- 500MPH. My canon 5d mk2 is about the same weight and i can't achieve that type of steadiness for 30 secs with a fisheye.... but the exif is there so I wonder how it was achieved. Interesting series of pictures though.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: EICK
Age: 46
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would have thought an 8 second exposure would have caused some light trails.
. To hold a D800 camera rock steady for 30secs without a tripod and a remote shutter releases is quite a feat especially in an aircraft
) up against the number 2 or 3 flight deck window. The piccies wouldn't be exhibition quality -the star images would be slightly trailed due to aircraft motion (usually in roll) but the aurora images good enough for basic logging/research purposes. I would post one as an example but they're still on slides and in a box..somewhere safe..
All in all I reckon the aurora images look like the real thing, still no idea about the red lights/glow other than a guess that it's down to fishing of some sort???
Last edited by wiggy; 26th Aug 2014 at 18:17.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,899
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
All in all I reckon the aurora images look like the real thing, still no idea about the red lights/glow other than a guess that it's down to fishing of some sort???
Like others, I'm more than a little skeptical that you can do a 30 second exposure from a plane on a NOPAC route and still get sharp star images, even with a 10.5 mm lens. And, if the exposure was actually 1/30th of a second instead through an EXIF data typo, I don't think you would see the Andromeda Galaxy even with the great sensor on the D800 (M31 is high in the center of the first picture in the gallery linked in the first post on this thread).
The Dutchman's other picture galleries are very nice and the site seems to be legit. I've seen some odd things over the years on that route including staging rockets, noctilucent clouds and satellite glints. And, we've all seen those surprisingly bright fishing fleet lights glowing under a cloud layer.
Still, not sure what the red glow would be.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,816
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the shorter the focal length the longer the exposure can be without trails. 11mm I have taken 90 second exposures and no trails visible.
http://www.grelf.net/star_trails.html
http://www.grelf.net/star_trails.html
Don't think those streaks are auroral
http://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aurora
https://www.google.fr/search?q=coron...w=1013&bih=632
Like others, I'm more than a little skeptical that you can do a 30 second exposure from a plane on a NOPAC route and still get sharp star images, even with a 10.5 mm lens. And, if the exposure was actually 1/30th of a second instead through an EXIF data typo, I don't think you would see the Andromeda Galaxy even with the great sensor on the D800 (M31 is high in the center of the first picture in the gallery linked in the first post on this thread).
Well from the NAT tracks I believe
it is perfectly possible to capture images that the professional aurora researchers can use...perhaps using a standard lens, ISO 400 film, 30 second exposure....You do however need to adopt a bit of a scatter gun approach (lots of frames, hope 1 or 2 are OK). I would however agree that M31 might well be a stretch, must have a look at some of my old "work" when I can find it to do a comparison
but it's very much old tech....
the shorter the focal length the longer the exposure can be without trails. 11mm I have taken 90 second exposures and no trails visible.
Like wise.Now, about the red low level glows............
Last edited by wiggy; 26th Aug 2014 at 20:06.
