EM 1110-2-2907
1 October 2003
posts. Features 2 and 3 were pits filled with artifacts and debris. Feature 2 fill included nails,
a shell casing, and flat glass. The function of this pit was undetermined. Feature 3 contained
wood, glass, nails, and roofing fragments. It was assumed that this was a posthole pit exca-
vated in 1924 during the remodel and repair of the hanger. The posthole was subsequently
back filled with reconstruction debris. These three features were not evenly spaced nor in a
parallel or perpendicular orientation relative to the predicted location of the hanger. The
authors did assert that possibly two of these features represented intact hangar posts.
d. Sensor Data Acquisition. The airborne remote sensing study conducted by NASA in-
corporated a calibrated airborne multispectral sensor (CAMS), which collects data in the
visible, infrared, and thermal bands. A hand held inframetrics thermal scanner was also
used.
e. Study Results.
(1) The geophysical survey results indicated that a rectangular area defined by the
conductivity, magnetic, and GPR anomalies most likely encompassed the hangar location,
which was initially indicated by the 1924 air photo. The airborne hand held inframetrics
confirmed the shape and location of the hanger. An explanation for the distinct thermal re-
sponse remains unclear. The authors suggested that soil compaction and heat retention re-
lated to spilled petroleum products may account for the unique thermal signature at the han-
gar site. The field research led to the collection of over 6000 individual samples; the
majority of which were buried industrial artifacts. The authors stated that with "no historical
records, it might have been very difficult to infer the primary function of the hangar build-
ing" from the collected fragments.
(2) All artifacts were georeferenced and a GIS map was generated to indicate the dis-
tribution of materials relative to the hangar and other building units. The majority of artifact
categories are concentrated on the northern portion of the hanger as a result of demolition
processes. The inframetrics was useful in locating the hanger footprint and delineated gul-
lies adjacent to the road. The CAMS detected the actual roadbed.
f. Conclusions. This study demonstrates how remote sensing technologies can further
traditional research efforts in the area of archeology and history. The amalgamation of GIS
with airborne and ground remote sensing methods proved highly successful in providing
additional information on the already well-documented site. The distribution mapping of
artifacts indicated that the building had been demolished by a bulldozer, differing from the
theory that the building had simply collapsed on its own accord. Even though the hangar
may have been demolished using a bulldozer, its archaeological evidence maintained some
integrity and was easily detected by the thermal sensor. Thermal sensors are thus likely to
join the growing array of near surface geophysical and aerial remote sensing techniques that
can enhance researchers ability to detect and study archaeological sites.
Point of Contact: Michael Hargrave, Phone: (217) 352-6511, x7325
6-21
Previous Page
