So, we're hunting subs again....

[RiverAux]

According to this article, a CAP Archer-equipped plane helped find the remains of the USS Grunion, a submarine lost during World War II.... http://www.lahontanvalleynews.com/article/20070928/Opinion/109280053

I would be interested in learning more about this particular mission.  Did they pretty much have the location picked out and then used the Archer to pinpoint it?  Was there a large-scale search using the Archer?  Or, did they just use the Archer to provide additional confirmation of something that they had pinpointed using other means?  The article implies that the Archer was pretty critical. 

I wonder who was paying for this mission?  AFAM?  Corporate? 

[Hoser]

Read where they found Grunion, in over 1000 feet of water. ARCHER Doesn't see through water. Second, Kiska is closer to Japan than it is to Anchorage. The idea that some CAP guys flew a Ga8 out to the Aletuians and went looking for a sunken sub with ARCHER is an absurd idea. Ive been out there and it isn't the friendliest flying or boating environment. The Aleutian Chain is over 1000 miles long from the tip of the Alaska peninsula to Attu and the westernmost end. Quoting the famed Alaskan Pilot Bob Reeve, there are 2 seasons there, the rainy season from May till Sept and the foggy season from from Oct to April. Oh yeah the wind blows constantly in 6 directions at once, called williwaws. I know they found Grunion, but with ARCHER? That doeesn't even qualify as a stretch. I'm an operator and even I am sure that mission would be a waste of time effort equipment and possibly personnel.  Using Naval records and Sonar to find it, sure but ARCHER====> ROFLMAO


Hoser

[Flying Pig]

Whats even better is the article says they were in a 182 employing the ARCHER

[RiverAux]

I'm embarrassed that I didn't catch the 182/Archer mistake myself. 

However, while the media tend to get details like that wrong, I have a hard time believing they got it so wrong that CAP and Archer weren't involved in the first place. What are you saying Hoser, that they're just lying about it? 

[Flying Pig]

Well, maybe someone should get a hold of LTC Robert Miller and get it straight from the horse before we end up with another locked thread.   

[RiverAux]

NHQ has put a link to the story up on CAP News Online.  I'm not sure that would exactly count as official verification, but I would hope they would do some fact checking before featuring media stories on our own site. 

[floridacyclist]

I've been trying to catch Col Miller on AOL to ask him about that...kind of funny that he would be helping from here in FL....maybe there's enough of a grain of truth to something in this story that things got mixed up from there, but i am curious as to how we fit in.

[♠SARKID♠]

BWAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA!!!

[wingnut]

 the secret is out

[RiverAux]

wth are you guys talking about?

[calguy]

I have checked the story and it is true.  Now they are going to fly the GA8 Airvan...really a 182 re-made,  to the Pacific to find Amelia Earhart.

[♠SARKID♠]

Interesting.  ARCHER sees in many more bands of light than the human eye does.  One of those bands must be a contrast that can be seen through water, or something to that effect.  It's hard for us to imagine because we dont see the same way ARCHER does.

[Hoser]

I am not saying they lied about it. The inference to be drawn is someome doesn't know what they are talking about. Like I said ARCHER doesnt see through water, 2. the Aleutian Islands are not the most hospitable place on earth and Kiska is closer to Japan than to Anchorage. The whole idea is plainly absurd. That is what I am saying. Having been up and down the Aleutian Chain several times both by air and by ship I really want to know this could be done. Flying out to Attu to the LORAN Station is an adventure and they know exactly where they are going. Unless one has been there it is nearly impossible to describe the reality of the Aleutians/Bering Sea.

Hoser

[SarDragon]

OK, why doesn't ARCHER see through water? Give us a little physics lesson.

All things are "seen" by means of reflected electromagnetic energy. People see things in a specific range of this energy called "visible light". Radar used a different band, and IR still a different band.

If ARCHER can "see" in a band wider than the hunam eye, and can even be "programmed" to concentrate on one specific "color", then it would seem logical that it can "see" underwater to at least the same extent that my eyes can. If I understand the system correctly, is is entirely passive, having no transmitter.

I will acknowledge that the 1000 foot depth may a bit of a stretch, but I don't know enough about ARCHER to make that determination.

Your turn.

[♠SARKID♠]

Okay, I did a short bit of research and came up with this site.  Pretty straightforward info.
http://waterencyclopedia.com/La-Mi/Light-Transmission-in-the-Ocean.html and the all-powerful-with-a-grain-of-salt Wikipedia

It says that the disphotic extends to about 3,300ft and is dimly lit.  At 3,300 ft begins the aphotic zone where no light penetrates at all.  Theoretically, with ARCHER's uber eyes, there could be enough reflected light at 1000ft for the wreck to be seen.

[♠SARKID♠]

I'VE GOT IT!  I'VE GOT THE ANSWER!       sort of....

Okay, I was doing some research last night on the USS Grunion (the ship in question) and I came across a website built and maintained by the search crews that found the wreck.  They had an email address for one people in charge of the search (actually one of the sons of the Grunions commander).  So I sent an email asking about CAP's involvement in the search.

MY EMAIL

To: Bruce Abele
From: Cadet/MSgt Dan Turkal, Civil Air Patrol

Mr. Abele,

I recently read an article stating that the Civil Air Patrol played a part in the search for the USS Grunion ( http://www.lahontanvalleynews.com/article/20070928/Opinion/109280053).  The article stated that CAP used its ARCHER imaging technology to help locate the vessel .  Me and some other members of CAP find this intriguing and somewhat unlikely based on how ARCHER works.  Also there is no mention of CAP on your website.  For these reasons, we wanted to know if you did use CAP's help, or if it was just some bizarre media fluke in the article we read.  You can read our discussion on the topic so far at this address ( http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=3164.0).  Is it true that you enlisted CAP's help?  Was ARCHER (if you used it) successful in the search?

(If you have no idea as to what I'm talking about, let me know, and we'll chalk it up to that media fluke *wink*)

Respectfully,

Cadet/MSgt Dan Turkal
Timmerman Composite Squadron, Wisconsin Wing
Civil Air Patrol

REPLY

Dan,

I saw the comment that you are referring to in Wickipedia. However, it was corrected shortly afterwards.

CAP was not used in our search.

Bruce

There we go folks, closure one half of that puppy.  But the question still remains...if ARCHER had been used, would it have been able to see the ship?  See my post above this, because I think there may be a possibility.

[Hoser]

OK ARCHER does not look for objcts as our eyes do. It "looks" mathematically at all incoming data and depending on how certain thresholds are set, hits on pixels that are statistically anomalous. That is why we get hits on target aircraft, Jim Billy Bob's junk pile and leaves that have changed in the fall etc etc. It also compares specific spectral signatures with the incoming data stream and hits on a "match." I use that term loosely as on a Search I loaded signatures from known target aircraft wreckage into the system and turned anomaly detect threshold way up so all it would really hit was signature match. Guess what, it also hit on JBB's junk piles as well as aircraft wreckage that had previously was unfound. On another mission, oil spill signatures were created and loaded and positive hits were made to determine extent of contamination. A spectral signature is specific to a substance and is indicative of what wavelengths are absorbed or reflected and the intensity of said reflectance or absorbtion. So in that sense it isn't programmed to look for specific colors. It appears that way because the proverbial blue tarps or Red pickup trucks get "chipped," not because of their color but because of their being statistically anomalous to the  surrounding area, and again this is in terms of pixels not objects.
Just because light can penetrate water does not mean that it will reflect back what was transmitted into the water. If say 950 nanometer (NIR) is transmitted in the water does not mean that it will be reradiated. ( I don't know the absorbance/reflective properties of sea water in terms of wavelengths that are absorbed or reradiated so that number is for illustration purposes)It may be scattered or absorbed. When we tell ARCHER to do it's thing, we set detect thresholds in terms of pixels and if an object is outside what we tell ARCHER to look for, either too large or too small it won't hit. Ambient conditions, lighting, particulates, sun angle, cloud cover, background terrain all influence not only what wavelengths or absorbed and reflected but how well they can be detected.

Hoser

[RiverAux]

I just don't see how any reporter could get so mixed up about the use of CAP in this search.  They had a lot of supposed facts about CAP's involvement that simply couldn't have gotten there without someone providing that information.  Someone had to have told them CAP was involved and given them that stuff.  Did someone in CAP claim credit for something we weren't involved in?

[♠SARKID♠]

Standby, I'm writing the editor to ask.