Cavechat.org

Scott McCrea wrote:

hank moon wrote:Any chance of you posting some hot rack images?

Good one Scott.

Oh, no

A cycling friend of mine told me I had a nice rack. Then he clarified -- ROOF rack (for my bikes).

hank moon wrote:Any chance of you posting some hot rack images?

Scott McCrea wrote:

Giggity.

KeyserSoze wrote:Very clever idea. I would think that it would be used best in the winter time for more contrast, correct?

Presumably the winter/summer distinction may depend on what is being looked for?

If I was looking for a lower entrance to a deep system, would I not be best looking for cold spots in the summer?

In the winter, would a lower entrance have much contrast with the surroundings if it was sucking air in?

Here's another one for $199. Seek Thermal. http://www.thermal.com/index.html

Looks like the flir one is on sale for black friday. Only if you own $250 if you own an iphone that works with it!

http://www.flir.com/instruments/display ... oCHk3w_wcB

I am not smart enough for a smart phone, so I use a FLIR E4 that is "modified". But it is a lot more expensive than the thermal imaging attachment. I find cave detection easier in the cold weather for high entrances, simply because of the bright orange signature. Low entrance warm weather detection is fine, but near as defined as cold weather detection.

I recieved my SEEK thermal attachment ($170 -discounted due to SNAFU) and took it out to an area that has known limestone caves. I used it to check out what might have been a promising easy dig but did not have the moss and blowing air signature I like to see in my digs. As you can see, although their is no discernable temperature difference that I was able to detect with my senses, there appears to be a considerable temperature difference in the furthermost reaches of the chocked feature. I will be going back to this area soon to see if digging will reveal more.