What do you think?

[Yeager]

If you look at the waves you can easily visualize the radius as being more localized rather than from the other side of the globe.  I mean...the western coast that is Chile is a long long ways from Malaysia. 

[oakranger]

I don't believe it is a tsunami. Tsunami's have a very long wavelength in the hundreds of km.
They get closer together as they get approach a coastline, but not that close as seen in the pic.
Looks like a more local phenomena.

NOAA is the one who track tsunami's not the USGS.

Great pic though.

But how can you tell the distance of the wave in the pic.  You do not have a strong reference of scale to tell.

[Ruler2]

But how can you tell the distance of the wave in the pic.  You do not have a strong reference of scale to tell.

Well he's a good ways above the clouds, and cumulus clouds are usually around 3K if I'm not mistaken, I'd guess the wave is 5-7 miles away, if not more.

[lyric1]

If you look at the waves you can easily visualize the radius as being more localized rather than from the other side of the globe.  I mean...the western coast that is Chile is a long long ways from Malaysia. 

The part of the world he was flying I think has a lot of islands they would change the pattern of the waves I would think along with any other land mass?

[FTJR]

I was at 36K (and I swear I still saw a pony above me  ). Plenty of islands. I dont know what I saw, but I know it is unusual. I had a reply from the USGS.

Tsunami waves would not be visible from the air.  The waves in the picture look like they might be a refraction pattern caused perhaps by islands upwind.  Much like what you can see here: http://folk.uio.no/karstent/waves/neg1.gif .   I'm not an oceanographer, however, so you might check with NOAA

If I get a reply from the NOAA, I'll post it.

[narsus]

But how can you tell the distance of the wave in the pic.  You do not have a strong reference of scale to tell.

In open water the amplitude of a tsunami is maybe 3-4 feet.
So FTJR was at 36,000ft, the wavelengths are way too close together. The wavelengths are probably in the hundreds of feet up to maybe a thousand feet, not the hundreds of miles.

[phatzo]

We've had some pretty legendary swell hitting the east coast of Australia at the moment, but that seems way to big for even the most epic of conditions. (takes of surf bum hat and puts cartoon pilot hat back on.)

[PFactorDave]

I was at 36K (and I swear I still saw a ROOK pony above me   ).

Fixed that for you!  

As for the radius of the wave...  It could have passed between some islands (or even underwater mountains) which would have caused it to narrow and start expanding out again.  It reminds me of an experiment from High School Physics class (ya ya 20 some years ago), where the teacher demonstrated how waves act as they pass through small openings.

Like this...

[Lepape2]

If you know the exact time when you took that photo, maybe you could do some cross reference with the estimated tsunami wave location and compare it to your airplane's flight path. That's the only evidence you can find to prove its a legitimate tsunami sighting.

Still looks very cool and large enough to induce doubt over a naturally occurring open sea phenomenon... or not 

[Chalenge]

The tsunami was almost completely zero before it got to the Phils and Malaysia is even further.

What you are seeing in the picture you took is a standing wave (a Seiche) probably caused by a quake centered 76 km southeast of General Santos City in Mindanao (both preceding and following the event in Chile 5.3 mag and 4.5 mag). There may also have been other quakes in the region that caused it. Seiche type effects because of their wavelength are not always visible on the surface of the water itself and sometimes make no surface changes at all. It doesnt even have to be a strong quake to cause Seiche events. From the air as you just discovered is another matter because you can see a much greater area.

There was also one in Japan about the same time and more powerful (6.9 Mag).

Yes most Seiche events are on the surface. What you are seeing is the standing wave travelling along the resonating thermocline about 300 feet below the surface.

[FTJR]

Like I said, I really dont know what I saw. The time of the picture is 8 utc

[ABDCWOT]

What were you flying?  _AB

[Rolex]

I believe it was about 21+ hours until the Chile earthquake tsunami reached the northern latitudes of the western Pacific. Interesting photo, though. It's a planet full of wonder.

[phatzo]

What were you flying?  _AB

I'm sure JR's regular ride is a 320

[Masherbrum]

I don't believe it is a tsunami. Tsunami's have a very long wavelength in the hundreds of km.
They get closer together as they get approach a coastline, but not that close as seen in the pic.
Looks like a more local phenomena.

NOAA is the one who track tsunami's not the USGS.

Great pic though.

You DO realize FTJR is an airline pilot and given the "altitude", puts the "waves" in perspective.    Even if this isn't a "tsunami" I can assure you a minimum of 30k of alt.