Pun intended. I can see how normal gait analysis helps people with ailments, and thus justifies the expense of development. Mitigating health risks makes sense to me so I expect more gait analysis in medical research.

However, an example of satellite gait analysis posted on Bruce’s blog sounds like a westernized solution still looking for a problem. Perhaps someone wants to be able to find and recognize people from far, far away?

It seems to me that anyone who does not want to be recognized still can easily avoid a radar and camera gait analysis system from hundreds of feet away, let alone hundreds of miles away from space.

Shadows of a long dress, a tunic (e.g. a shalwar kameez) or a long coat, for example, would render a shadow analysis system useless, no? What about from shoes with wheels in the heels? Terrain also matters. The systems probably assume a hard surface like pavement. Also, it has been mentioned many times here and elsewhere that a simple change in shoes can alter gait.

I wonder if Auburn University scientists realized their research into orthopedic problems from flip-flops was also documenting a major flaw in gait analysis systems.

Shroyer’s team, under the direction of Dr. Wendi Weimar, associate professor of biomechanics and director of the department’s Biomechanics Laboratory, found that flip-flop wearers took shorter steps and that their heels hit the ground with less vertical force than when the same walkers wore athletic shoes. When wearing flip-flops, the study participants did not bring their toes up as much during the leg’s swing phase, resulting in a larger ankle angle and shorter stride length, possibly because they tended to grip the flip-flops with their toes.

Did I mention walking under trees…perhaps the satellite system assumes there soon will be no vegetation. I would say it is more useful in arid regions, but walking on sand goes right back to the issue of terrain.