My take on the MH370 drone camera pose.

Generate New Template

public (1567) , uap (1561) , disclosure (1383) , ufo (1296) , transparency (1220) , government (1066) , information (1011) , disinformation (943) , ufos (919) , campaign (862) , congress (769) , people (678) , phenomena (648) , national (632) , urge (586) , issue (565) , regarding (565) , unidentified (561) , security (538) , truth (506) , american (506) , support (503) , potential (498) , know (477) , trust (469) , uaps (467) , writing (462) , accountability (461) , time (424) , scientific (410) , intelligence (381) , understanding (370) , act (363) , rep (357) , members (354) , defense (331) , action (314) , efforts (311) , research (310) , committee (309) , objects (302) , related (301) , legislation (297) , house (290) , secrecy (288) , oversight (286) , template (283) , ndaa (282) , concern (280) , being (274) ,

Resolution and Sensor Size

The FLIR camera provides footage at a resolution of 960x720p. While there’s a possibility that this footage has been upscaled, this resolution is typical for thermal imagers.

Thermal image sensors often have pixel pitches of 12µm or 17µm.

Given a resolution of 960×720, potential sensor sizes are:

11.52mm x 8.64mm (at 12µm pixel pitch)

16.32mm x 12.24mm (at 17µm pixel pitch)

Two distinct physical objects are noticeable in the video frame:

Object 1: Believed to be either a wing or the top section of the camera pod.

Object 2: Presumed to be the drone’s front. The heated section on this object might be a pitot tube.

The video uses false colors, which are atypical for military drones. This coloring might have been added post-production, either to emphasize certain aspects of the footage or for dramatic effect. Notably, all verified FLIR footage that has been leaked is in black and white.

A unique square reticle is present in the video. The only known instance of such a UI overlay is in the Starsafir 380 FLIR Teledyne camera pod. However, there are slight differences, such as the FLIR overlay’s retractable corners during zoom.

Theories on Camera Placement

Theory 1A: Wing Placement with Visible Wing

The camera, situated on the wing, captures parts of the wing and the drone’s front. However, this seems implausible since the camera is positioned significantly lower in the pod beneath the wing. The wing would not be visible unless the camera was extremely close to it.

Theory 1B: Wing Placement with Visible Pod

It’s possible that Object 1 is not the wing but the camera pod’s upper section. While this seems plausible, Object 2’s curvature isn’t evident in the original frame.

A higher sensor size reduces the distortion of the line. Here is a 36mm sensor size.

It’s improbable for a 960×720 resolution thermal image sensor to measure as large as 36mm, especially when the prevalent pixel pitches are 12µm and 17µm, translating to sizes of 11.52mm and 16.32mm respectively.

Theory 2: Rearward Camera Angle

The camera might be facing backward, capturing the wing and the rear of the wing-mounted camera housing. This theory is unlikely since the wing’s angle doesn’t match the footage.

Concluding Thoughts

Theory 1A seems unlikely due to the camera’s positioning constraints. While Theory 1B is possible, it’s not the most probable. Theory 2 doesn’t align with the wing’s observed angle. The most plausible explanation for Object 2 is that it’s a fabrication, and the footage creator positioned the camera too near to the wing.

submitted by /u/UFO_enjoyer
[link] [comments]  

Read More