Do you ever think about the geology below you, as you fly?

[Waldo Pepper 1,953]

2 hours ago, dmwalker said:

You might be interested to read this open ended documentation of the recovery efforts from one month after the tsunami up to November, 2022, including  "The enormous task of elevating the ground of coastal districts by several meters and re-enforcing the waterfront is finally approaching completion in many municipalities along the Sanriku Coast, clearing the stage for the actual rebuilding of the former town centers":

https://www.japan-guide.com/blog/recovery/#:~:text=Two and a half years after the tsunami 

I'm glad I wasn't one of the guys who went around bagging up all the hot topsoil.    The Japanese exhibited an extraordinary will to persevere.      It's predominantly mountainous,  they have a lot of people,  and their isn't a lot of flat land to spare.   I

[birdguy 3,943]

Geography and Geology are always going through my mind when I fly the sim or when I flew in real life.

I got so engrossed in the canyonlands of southern Utah while flying over it in a Cherokee one day I got lost.  Tuning in the Hanksville and Grand Junction VORs to locate myself I found I was only a few miles from the Canyonlands airport near Moab.

The groundscape you fly over is always interesting.

Noel

[Antipodeslonghaul 79]

I definitely love watching the scenery/geology when I fly, much to the dismay of my fellow passengers, "Would you mind shutting that blind? I'm trying to sleep!" Recently I've found I can't watch a whole movie, I'm too critical and get bored too easily. But even when it's dark, I don't mind staring out the window.

The one sight I'll never forget was seeing K2 on a Dubai to Osaka flight early in the morning on an Emirates A340-500, quite some time ago. And then when I got up and peered through a window on the other side of the plane looking towards Afghanistan, the scenery was just as incredible, if not even more so. The air was crystal clear and it felt perhaps like being on a smaller plane, maybe a DC-3 flying at a low altitude, so detailed was the image of the rocks and the ice fields in the mountains down below.

[Waldo Pepper 1,953]

 

[n4gix 4,947]

Good heavens, that's a LOT of aftershocks!

[Paul K 1,336]

I found this interesting, geologically speaking - Iran's Gulf coast, during my RTW trip.

 

 

[Waldo Pepper 1,953]

3 hours ago, Paul K said:

I found this interesting, geologically speaking - Iran's Gulf coast, during my RTW trip.

 

Wild.   I can picture a 3,000 to 4,000 foot mountain ridge once being there.   Maybe 5000.

[birdguy 3,943]

Yes, there is mountain range along the gulf coast of Iran.  Peaks of less than 3,000 meters about 150KM from the shoreline.  But that sheer cliff seems out of place.  Interesting.

Noel

[Dominique_K 10,150]

3 hours ago, Paul K said:

I found this interesting, geologically speaking - Iran's Gulf coast, during my RTW trip.

 The Zagros mountains. An example of the collision of tectonic plates. And an interesting history at the dawn of civilization too. 

Edited May 7, 2023 by Dominique_K

[goates 576]

There are some interesting features in those Iranian mountains.

 

[Dominique_K 10,150]

By the way, the  MSFS terrain imagery is excellent in the Zagros (at least where I flew). A great little flight between "folds" is for instance from OISL to OIBH. My Pilatus Porter loves it ! 

[Dominique_K 10,150]

Tectonic folds in the Zagros

... and West of Kashgar in Xinjiang

 

[Waldo Pepper 1,953]

 

[birdguy 3,943]

On Good Friday,1964, I was on shift in Wyoming when the 9.1 Richter Scale earthquake shook Anchorage.  Our seismometers went nuts.  It was a week before things settled to a point where we could start read the seismograms again.

The Pacific rim is not called the Ring of Fire for nothing.

Noel

[Waldo Pepper 1,953]

According to Nick Zentner,  the quakes along the San Andreas fault are 7.0 on the Richter scale,   give or take a few decimals.    A 9.0 would be 900x more energy than a 7.0.