Cotter

The Falcon Project - Launching Spring '2015

410 posts in this topic

Glad to see, after all the buildup, or ?'s about what was going on with it. I'm personally doubtful that anything but "boots on the ground" will turn up good photo or thermal evidence (which still won't be good enough), but we'll see what aerial recon can do...CO2 recognition equipment? I guess the project is launched with BF DNA evidence a foregone conclusion (according to what Meldrum implies in the article)...

I also find it hard to believe that the sole purpose of the project is to look for BF...what else do they plan to look for/at while up there, and how can it make money? Why is flying up to 7500 feet such an important detail? Just asking honest questions that occur to me (I hate to say it, but my first reaction to most anything is to look for the underlying reasons why people do things - most of which are usually motivated by less than altruistic or purely scientific reasons, IMO)...

Interesting stuff. I don't see the DNA evidence as a foregone conclusion at all, which is why I question things. Seems getting the cart before the horse (unless this a real sign that the horse is on the move, as it were...) Should we take it that way?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why is flying up to 7500 feet such an important detail?

Higher altitudes (mountainous terrain) and a larger field of view would be my guess.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Glad to see a new concept for finding BF.

In many mountains wind will be a factor. How much noise does the engine put out?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow some of the comments after the article are harsh. I wish the Falcon project luck in their search.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kudos to all for trying a new concept, which is so desperately needed in this field.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 things jumped out at me upon reading that article:

1) Only 3-4 hours flight time?! How in the world does that garner any confidence? I would want it to spend more time than that just hovering over a good spot with some Sas potential... they are expecting to travel out, hopefully find an animal or a family unit, track them and take photographs, then travel back in all within 3-4 hours? I would have expected it to be an all-day slow hover day after day if they expected to actually find anything.

2) "The prospect of compelling DNA evidence for a relict North American primate looms on the horizon and may indicate that a corner is about to be turned" -Dr. Meldrum... that makes me happy to read :) I am getting the feeling that knowledge of looming "compelling" evidence is becoming more widespread, and Bigfoot is starting to become not the taboo subject it once was. Perhaps the paper-to-be-discussed-in-another-thread is making more waves of anticipation in the scientific community than we are privy to? Just wishful thinking I know, but Dr. Meldrum is usually careful about the way he words things and keeping it strictly scientific, and I was happy to see him say that.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Glad to see, after all the buildup, or ?'s about what was going on with it. I'm personally doubtful that anything but "boots on the ground" will turn up good photo or thermal evidence (which still won't be good enough), but we'll see what aerial recon can do...CO2 recognition equipment? I guess the project is launched with BF DNA evidence a foregone conclusion (according to what Meldrum implies in the article)...

I also find it hard to believe that the sole purpose of the project is to look for BF...what else do they plan to look for/at while up there, and how can it make money? Why is flying up to 7500 feet such an important detail? Just asking honest questions that occur to me (I hate to say it, but my first reaction to most anything is to look for the underlying reasons why people do things - most of which are usually motivated by less than altruistic or purely scientific reasons, IMO)...

Interesting stuff. I don't see the DNA evidence as a foregone conclusion at all, which is why I question things. Seems getting the cart before the horse (unless this a real sign that the horse is on the move, as it were...) Should we take it that way?

I wish them the best.

I would only point out that one of the characteristics of a failed investigative infrastructure is the invocation of the 'techno-super tool'. This has certainly been the history within criminal investigations. Typically, the 'super-tool' is touted in the public eye to inspire confidence in the project or perhaps to draw additional funding. It is promoted with fanfare as the answer to a pressing investigational problem. Adoption rarely produces the results advertised. The tool absorbs all the project's funds and personnel to the exclusion of maintaining basic investigational channels. The technical difficulties in keeping the tool operational often induce a starvation to the remainder of the project. There is a long history here but I won't go into it. The same has occurred on several occasions within the history of sasquatch research.

In this instance if there are no other investigative actions taking place, the project can hardly starve out other processes. Certainly better than having no line in the water at all.

Edited by HOLDMYBEER
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@NGJ -

The article says top speed of 45 mph. Let's just say that the working speed is 30 MPH.

In 3 hours, that's 90 miles it can cover. A magnitude on the order about 10 times that someone on foot could cover.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the challenge will be to maintain signal for remote control. Get out of range,or obstructed and it's over. I'm sure there are military systems that would suffice, but very pricey.

Then there is the need for the pilot to see where he's going (aside from scanning the ground), recognize altitude requirements, and find his way back to base. It would need a homing beacon, or a GPS display.

It would be interesting to hear more about the onboard systems.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@SY.

How do those nanocopter pilots fly them? I can imagine they must get out of visual sight often....

maybe I'm wrong on that.

Additionally, don't drone pilots fly drones remotely?

I'm just thinking they probably have those issues addressed.

Thoughts?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would expect drone pilots to have a virtual cockpit they operate from. I'm sure the manufacturer of this new craft has thought of the issues. The thing is there is often a gap between concept and real world effectiveness. Hopefully they've done the right testing and R&D work on it. It would be a shame to have it crash.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites