Posted by: sellbestshoeseasyforbuy at October 8, 2008 05:24 AM
Players will 12sky money experience the 9-Tier Pagoda three times a week at a specified time. During that time each faction will join the zone separately and team up to fight most difficult monsters Twelve Sky has seen.
Posted by: 12sky money at August 9, 2008 03:15 AM
Normal mode is where most players will begin to buy Shaiya gold. You need more experience to gain levels than in Easy, but the level cap is removed. You are able to use all items usable in Easy mode, plus you are able to use Dread items.
Posted by: buy Shaiya gold at August 9, 2008 03:07 AM
In order to play the Requiem, I bought much Requiem Lant, it spend me much money.
Posted by: Requiem Lant at August 5, 2008 08:30 PM
We can also maplestory.io this site to buy, cheap and safe. It was so non-stop the escalation, in order to satisfy their desire to want things, the upgrading of non-stop!
Posted by: maplestory.io at August 5, 2008 08:29 PM
rolex replica watches - $98 swiss , we don't sale replica watches.The Art of E-commerce
Posted by: replica watches at August 3, 2008 08:42 PM
But, slowly, we are all the reasons more and more distant from the RO, RO to leave the distance we have much more. I am a lot busier than before, not like before, often on the line. Although sometimes he also give me a little cheap zeny, but I l know that there are misunderstandings between us, and increasingly deep.
Posted by: cheap zeny at August 2, 2008 02:06 AM
nice to meet you
Posted by: wowpowerleveling at April 14, 2008 08:34 PM
Ah, you may not that the scene won't even go to the lowest resolution for Google, which would be about a meter using civilian imagery. Therefor, any cruise missile would surely be lost in the pixels as most are not much more than 3 meters long anyways, and less than a meter wide. An MD-88 makes a lot more sense especially considering the twin exhaust plumes that trail the plane. I doubt any satellite photo could pick up the exhaust of a cruise missile! Nice try guys, just a big plane with the wings painted a dark color.
Posted by: wpnexp at October 13, 2007 12:15 PM
Hey, CAG, I'm the one asking the questions here. What we've proved so far is DT readers are a lot smarter than I am. Good stuff, folks.
Posted by: Ward at March 6, 2007 12:52 PM
Its a 737
Posted by: James at March 5, 2007 10:40 PM
Well Ward...you posted this. Is it an MD-80?
Anytime baby.
Posted by: CAG-15 at March 5, 2007 09:55 PM
@GS
Actually it has alot to do with light/dark colors. Lighter colors reflect light, darker colors absorb light. A darker, absorbent color against a lighter, more reflective color background will stick out like Brittany Spears at a Mensa convention.
Posted by: DS at March 5, 2007 06:06 PM
It's not about light or dark colors per se, it's about reflectivity or lack thereof.
Anyone familiar with satellite photography analysis is aware of the issue, what you see from satellite images is not necessarily what you get from a Canon on the tarmac.
Posted by: GS at March 5, 2007 03:16 PM
Even though this has been pretty much established as a jetliner of some sort, here's something else to think about. For anyone looking at the dark colored wings as evidence of some sort of optical deception...it's not a very effective measure. The majority of that part of the country is desert, or light colored rock. Any conflict from here on out (except for DPRK) will be in a sandy region. I don't think dark colored wings would hide anything against that sort of backdrop.
Posted by: DS at March 5, 2007 10:36 AM
How easily we are led by our desire to see something that is not there. Once you read the debunking comments or just the comments containing the link to the debunking, and then go look at the image again. POW! There the wings are painted darkly with a light colored wing root surface. At that point it is obviously a commercial airliner.
This has been debunked as an America West MD-90 out of Phoenix on several sites such as Fark.com and Digg.com. Analysis of the dark wings and tail match up with the America West pain scheme, and the size/shape of the overall plane is consistent with an MD-90.
Fark forum link
Digg link
Posted by: Tartan69 at March 5, 2007 02:52 AM
Idunno, it originally looked like a SLAM-ER or maybe a Harpoon, but upon closer inspection, it looks like a Tomahawk. Could it POSSIBLY be an RJ or Fokker 100?
Heck - how close is this to that new 'area 51' they're supposedly putting up in Utah?
Posted by: R Wharton at March 4, 2007 10:05 PM
i did some diging and the angle of the black lines originating at the nose and at the sub wings (whose angles appear idientical)is consistent with the mach cone of an object traveling around mach 1.1. thats a little slow for for a rattler, but it is of note.
Posted by: sam at March 4, 2007 01:47 PM
Im not an expert, but is it possible that the black wing type things are the product of distortion caused by a sonic boom.
Maybe some type of prototype for the rattler hypersonic cruise missile...
Posted by: sam at March 4, 2007 01:12 PM
On planes seen in aerial vs satellite photography:
Posted by: Allen Thomson at March 4, 2007 11:01 AM
From http://www.air-and-space.com/20060228_LAX_page_1.htm:
"Sky West Delta Connection Canadair CL-600-2B19 Regional et 200ER, N448SW flight SKW3775 to SLC." (image there).
This aircraft, and the CRJ-700 that SkyWest also flies, are problematic because the fuselage-mounted engine nacelles are noticeably forward of the empennage, perhaps midway between it and the wing. On the GE image, no such side-mounted nacelles are visible. There's what looks like the front tips of them just ahead of the dark shapes of the empennage, though. The CRJ-900 has its nacelles mounted much further back, relatively speaking, but also on the fuselage; this would account for two closely-placed contrails, as well as nacelles hidden underneath the horizontal stabilizers, which on the CRJ series are mounted at the top of the tail. All it would take is a slight viewing angle from the rear and we'd lose the nacelles on a CRJ-900.
SkyWest *does* claim to have CRJ-900s in service as DLC flights, making a SLC destination quite possible. The CRJ-900 is longer than the '700 series as well, which is more in line with the slender profile of this aircraft.
I was unable to find any imagery of the SkyWest color scheme showing the tops of the wings or horiz. stabilizers to verify their light/dark patterns. Note, however, that in the case of United Express (which also flies CRJs) the top of the fuselage is white while the engine nacelles are dark save for the rear bypass:
http://www.vectorsite.net/avcrj.html
..this site also contains a top-down silhouette of the CRJ family.
The dark nacelles could account for their not showing up, or showing up only as the two abbreviated cylinders alongside the fuselage in the GE picture.
I like the CRJ hypothesis, esp. given its proximity to SLC.
-PA
Posted by: PhantomAnalyst at March 4, 2007 05:13 AM
As for the Canadair hypothesis, I feel that it suffers from the same issues as the MD-80, the rear fuselage of the Canadair aircraft is too short to match up with the shape of the craft in the Google Maps image.
In looking at the paint schemes of Canadair I did find that the paint sections of thier aircraft in dark colors, however it seemed that the wings were generally of a light color, and the wingroots were dark. This represents the opposite of what is seen in the photo where the wingroots are clearly lightly colored and the wings are very dark.
Posted by: Endyr at March 4, 2007 03:35 AM
Well through careful Photoshop testing, I believe that I have ruled out it being an MD-80 or variant. By comparing the shape with a schematic of the aircraft I found that the aft of the "craft" was too long and that the "engines" or stubs at the rear were too far back in comparison with the MD-80.
I actually thought that the most likely culprit was the MD-80 as I thought I could see the horizontal tail of the craft behind the stubs at the rear of the craft. However, I have not ruled out it being a smaller aircraft such as a private jet or a Fokker 100 series regional airliner.
So...basically the results so far have been inconclusive.
Posted by: Endyr at March 4, 2007 03:28 AM
The paint scheme and dimensions are a perfect match for a SkyWest Canadair CL-65-700. Skywest Airlines is based in SLC. Operating as a Delta Connection, their aircraft have white fuselages and grey wings.
Posted by: MikePB42 at March 3, 2007 11:53 PM
I don't accept the airplane theory. 1) The paint scheme is odd. Why leave the body a normal color, yet nearly blacken the wings? And 2) The shape of the wings resembles those of an ALCM. The cord does not appear to lengthen near the body. 3) I did zoom out. The object is about 50 miles south southwest of Salt Lake city, and it is headed towards the White Sands area. Also, the apparent presence of a slight shadow on the port wing suggests a mid to late morning photo.
If this is a cruise missle, then the presence of dual exhaust is unique.
Posted by: Jeff at March 3, 2007 10:29 PM
Its a plane, look close enough you can see the black wings.
Posted by: Galls at March 3, 2007 07:00 PM
This is definitely an interesting photo, but not because of the jet (I do believe it is a jet). Someone else here mentinoed the blurry object to the upper right of the jet, which is giving a faint contrail of it's own. Very interesting. Most likely it is a photographic anomaly, but it might be something else more interesting. No way to know really, unless you're an 'insider'.
:)
Posted by: DS at March 3, 2007 06:08 PM
As for the blurry image to the upper right, my guess is that's some artifact of how Google combines neighboring images.
Posted by: David Barrett at March 3, 2007 06:04 PM
This http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Alitalia.md82.i-dawl.arp.jpg doesn't seem to match a better contrast and magnification of the rear of object or the box-like sections where the wings attach. One would expect a v-shape wing behind twin engines. The distance between nose and wings seems to match the MDs as well as a more powerful magnification of the nose section. If the craft was tilted nose towards the ground the slight thickening of the rear and the expected rear wings/engine overlapping from an angle might look like the image. The only problem with that seems to be strange new distance between a MD's nose and wing edge and distance between wing to engine this MD would have as opposed to the picture linked above.
Posted by: Maxtrue at March 3, 2007 06:02 PM
SECURITY ANALYSIS REPORT 3:51PM 3-3-57
BY MAX ANDERSON max1mos111@yahoo.com
THREAT ANALYSIS beta test>missle recovery scenario
I noticed the data was blocked in to not allow copying or zooming in , only out. It looked more like a trident missle dragged & dropped in. There is no shadow on it, so I assume it is not in mid-flight as the rest of the participants guess.
1> I posted a scenario for recovery &/or disposal. I had the evac route going down, but since there is a city in the path , you may want to go up near the lake to convoy it out with less spectators as possible. This took me 28 minutes to create and upload as a plan of action as a test beta scenrio WITH SITELINK FOR ACTIVE RECOVERY AND TAGS UNDER max1mos111 in yahoo or aol/google search engines ready for review by directors in a reeal time scenario.
2> The problem is that microsoft excel is blocked and the copy and paste feature managing blocking editing is blocked, so I copied a paper note of the map and the gps coordiantes. After zooming out it gave me location and hybrid gave me roads cities and vegetation tables.
3> After uploading the data I referred data to public forums to give intelligence data in assisting in test beta recovery scenarios for analysis review by other participants in this forum. Test protocol for file-sharing to command personnel and fellow analysts as threat analysis
http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blogO1ahRPI8er4gvVWAGF6W_kZB
Max Anderson - - - All beta intelectual digital data information is copywrighted nov. 2005- mar. 2007 & patent pending material on Yahoo 360. Material on yahoo 360 patent pending is related to engineering Research & development. - - -
This is a training excersice scenario only , not real time scenario! SO DO NOT PANNICK!
Posted by: Max Anderson at March 3, 2007 05:09 PM
Cruise missile, tracking an azimuth of approximately 310 degrees over southwestern Utah.
Olde Soldier sends...
Posted by: J. Gocht at March 3, 2007 04:15 PM
A 757 heading to Boise or Spokane?
Posted by: TB at March 3, 2007 03:43 PM
Allen what do you base your 3% scale argument on?
Geometry (or, if you like, trigonometry) plus the altitude of the satellite and the altitudes at which such airplanes generally fly.
> The Quickbird's camera is calibrated for max ground-level resolution,
True.
> a zoom effect that causes an exponential increase in the scale of high-altitude planes/etc.
Huh? That seems to be technobabble. Could you provide a reference that explains what you mean, please?
> Take this cessna for example:
http://googlesightseeing.com/maps?p=299&c=2695&ll=37.587705,-120.900453&spn=0.008529,0.012081&t=k&hl=en
> Think it's really 425 feet long??
No, I think it's one of the parts of GE that was provided by an aerial photography company rather than a satellite imagery company. You really can't fool geometry. Or at least not without serious Photoshopping, which I don't think is the case in that image.
Posted by: Allen Thomson at March 3, 2007 03:43 PM
Allen what do you base your 3% scale argument on? The Quickbird's camera is calibrated for max ground-level resolution, a zoom effect that causes an exponential increase in the scale of high-altitude planes/etc. Take this cessna for example:
http://googlesightseeing.com/maps?p=299&c=2695&ll=37.587705,-120.900453&spn=0.008529,0.012081&t=k&hl=en
Think it's really 425 feet long??
Posted by: Moose at March 3, 2007 02:10 PM
OK, looking into this a bit more, the picture seems to have been taken mid-morning of April 7, 2006. A sufficiently interested analyst (not me) could go get the satellite orbital elements for the appropriate epoch from http://www.space-track.org/perl/login.pl and pin down the time to within a minute or two.
After that, I suppose, you could try to find out what was flying in the vicinity at that time. Just looking at the direction of flight, the plane would pass a bit to the west of Salt Lake City and was coming from the direction of Phoenix.
Perhaps some aircraft-savvy person would recognize the paint scheme of dark wings and light fuselage.
Posted by: Allen Thomson at March 3, 2007 01:29 PM
Alright, but what's the blurry grayish thing that's leaving its own (fainter) contrail, just northeast of the missile in this picture?
Posted by: Kepler at March 3, 2007 12:48 PM
On scale: The picture was taken by a DigitalGlobe QuickBird satellite at an altitude of 450 km. The vehicle in question was at an altitude of at most 15 km (more likely ~10), so the difference in ground level scale (for which the Google Earth measuring tool is presumably calibrated) and scale at vehicle altitude is going to be 3% at most.
As for the intrinsic accuracy of the GE measuring tool, I've measured a few things of known size on the ground and found that it comes very close -- certainly to within the accuracy with which I can position the ends of the ruler.
Posted by: Allen Thomson at March 3, 2007 12:44 PM
Guys, it was taken by A Satellite and it has a contrail, which means it was at least 8 kilometers up. Using the GM measuring tool's not gonna give you an accurate size.
It's a SLAM-ER, picture here:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/images/slamer01.jpg
Apparently it's headed toward the White Sands range in Utah. Hard to tell where it was fired from, since it can be given waypoint guidance, but judging by SLAM-ER's range it was somewhere over southern Utah.
Posted by: Moose at March 3, 2007 12:24 PM
Optical camo test bed?
Posted by: Ed at March 3, 2007 12:24 PM
I did some photoshoping to bring up the colours in the picture. (Level 47, 1.00, 129) and you can make out black wings. However, you can also see a dark area up front which looks like a cockpit. Also with play with the levels, the part where the 'wings' and body meet, it looks like there are engines. Google maps say that the object is 100 Ft long.
Now given it's above the ground so that scale is useless, I'm guessing the picture was taken at 5,500 ft (in referencing a familiar tall building), but this would mean that the object is LESS THAN 100 ft, it would have to be on the ground (no shadow to indicate this) to be 100 ft long.
The MD-80 is 134 FT in length. So this shoots that down. Unless it's a private charter, it's not a normal jet.
It also has 2 streams of exhaust/vapour trail. So it's probably not a cruise missile, as I understand they don't want trail's and they are single jet engine.
SO my guess is a private jet liner
Posted by: Foreign.Boy at March 3, 2007 11:42 AM
Naturally my first thought was "cruise missile", followed by "AGM-84" since there were no winglets- then I noticed the dark-colored wings that CW is talking about. Definitely an airliner.
Posted by: TrustButVerify at March 3, 2007 11:02 AM
It can neither be a Tomahawk nor a Harpoon--far too big and it in no way accounts for the wings; it looks like a variant on the MD-80 design being floated around. Though the scaling of any possible dimensions is impossible; Google Earth does not keep everything within proportion--which means that the object is not nearly as big as the measurements applicable to the surface it is covering. Yes, it's clearly a plane, but without any escort vehicles to scale the size of the image, difficult to assess. More baffling: who authorized this shot as declassified for such hypothetical analysis? Appalling lapse, or an extremely lucky shot.
Posted by: Jon at March 3, 2007 10:57 AM
It shows up in Google Earth too, where the measuring tool gives 27.5 meters nose to tail, 21 meters wing span. (It's a little hard to be sure about the wings because they're dark against a dark background.)
Posted by: Allen Thomson at March 3, 2007 10:38 AM
It looks 90% like a AGM-84 Harpoon
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/agm-84-pics.htm
(The mid fuselage fins don't seem to be angled on the satellite image.)
The size is the problem.
A Harpoon is only about 1/6th as large as the object on the photo.
My second guess was that it is a kind of atmosphere research rocket that is not flying horizontally but near vertically. That would easily explain the size - it could be much closer to the camera than any ground object.
Something like this:
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/rocketscience-03ze.html
But the MD-80 story seems sound, too.
Posted by: Sven Ortmann at March 3, 2007 10:02 AM
Harpoon.
Posted by: Agricola at March 3, 2007 09:14 AM
Saw this on digg...take a closer look are you see the wings(they are black). Almost looks like a MD-80...
Posted by: CW at March 3, 2007 08:43 AM
Well, being the military buff I am, and the certain things that I do...on zero sleep. I would instinctly look at this and say it's a cruise missle or something similiar. Maybe Tomahawk, I am not really bothering to match it right this second. If you zoom out you find it is flying high above the sky in Utah. Just so happens this terrain is very similiar to certain areas we are and most certainly will be fighting in. I believe it is a missle test that is about it. If I get the time I might scan up all the bases I know around there, but if I don't I hope one of you does it. Thank you.
Posted by: James Verzwyvelt at March 3, 2007 07:42 AM
replica rolex watches
http://www.watchinstyle.com/chanel-j12-white-chronograph-fully-high-grade-ceramic-p-910.html?zenid=9m7rdns1qli5ntbq2uevks5ve0
http://easyforbuy.com/nike-air-zoom-lebron-c-49.html?zenid=c0enle2a7n4rgumpq0g5t9bqb6
http://lowestmall.com/nike-air-max-c-44.html?zenid=e62d2m88ej0b70vn97n4e9pkd6
Posted by: instylewatch at October 8, 2008 05:19 PM