Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46  
User currently offlineSA7700 From South Africa, joined Dec 2003, 3431 posts, RR: 26
Posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 66328 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD MODERATOR

Some members may not be aware of the fact that all members have an edit window of 60 minutes, from the time you first make a post in which to add or remove any additional comments or information into/from the post. Please make use of this feature made available to you, for your own convenience, instead of posting one post after another (doubles, triples or more).

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

Due to length part 45 was locked for further contributions. Please feel free to continue your discussion in part 46:

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 1 (by Longhornmaniac Mar 7 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 2 (by LipeGIG Mar 7 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 3 (by SA7700 Mar 8 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 4 (by SA7700 Mar 8 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 5 (by SA7700 Mar 8 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 6 (by SA7700 Mar 9 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 7 (by SA7700 Mar 9 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 8 (by jetblueguy22 Mar 9 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 9 (by SA7700 Mar 10 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 10 (by SA7700 Mar 10 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 11 (by jetblueguy22 Mar 10 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 12 (by SA7700 Mar 10 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 13 (by SA7700 Mar 11 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 14 (by SA7700 Mar 11 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 15 (by jetblueguy22 Mar 11 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 16 (by SA7700 Mar 12 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 17 (by 777ER Mar 12 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 18 (by jetblueguy22 Mar 12 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 19 (by SA7700 Mar 13 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 20 (by SA7700 Mar 13 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 21 (by SA7700 Mar 13 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 22 (by SA7700 Mar 13 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 23 (by SA7700 Mar 14 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 24 (by SA7700 Mar 14 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 25 (by SA7700 Mar 14 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 26 (by SA7700 Mar 15 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 27 (by SA7700 Mar 15 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 28 (by jetblueguy22 Mar 15 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 29 (by SA7700 Mar 16 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 30 (by SA7700 Mar 16 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 31 (by jetblueguy22 Mar 16 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 32 (by ManuCH Mar 17 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 33 (by jetblueguy22 Mar 17 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 34 (by SA7700 Mar 18 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 35 (by SA7700 Mar 18 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 36 (by jetblueguy22 Mar 18 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 37 (by SA7700 Mar 19 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 38 (by jetblueguy22 Mar 19 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 39 (by SA7700 Mar 20 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 40 (by SA7700 Mar 20 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 41 (by SA7700 Mar 20 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 42 (by jetblueguy22 Mar 21 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 44 (by SA7700 Mar 23 2014 in Civil Aviation)

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 45 (by SA7700 Mar 25 2014 in Civil Aviation)



**********************************************************************************************

**** ADDITIONAL NEWS REPORTS ****

MH370: search for missing Malaysia Airlines plane extended to southern Indian Ocean

Najib's full press statement on MH370

Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370: What we know so far

MISSING MH370: Timeline

Flight MH370: Police focus on pilots as search for airliner goes on - live updates

Flight MH370: New timeline casts doubt on pilot deception theory

MISSING MH370: ACARS cannot be disabled

MISSING MH370: Search for missing aircraft above politics: Hishamuddin


***********************************************************************************************


SOME IMPORTANT REMINDERS FOR ALL OUR MEMBERS TO CONSIDER BEFORE POSTING IN THIS THREAD:

**** Out of respect to the crew, passengers and also family members; close to those onboard MH370; please keep science fiction theories and content related to past / current movies or possible future movie rights out of these threads. ****

**** PLEASE DO NOT REPEAT QUESTIONS AND SCENARIOS THAT HAS BEEN COVERED AND DISCUSSED IN PREVIOUS THREADS AND WHICH DO NOT CONTRIBUTE OR APPLY, IN A CONSTRUCTIVE MANNER, TOWARDS THIS CONVERSATION ANY LONGER. ****

**** Please make an effort to read through some of the threads, if possible the latest in the series, before adding your own comments and theories to the current, active thread on this issue. ****

**** PLEASE BE RESPECTFUL TOWARDS OTHER USERS AND KEEP THE FORUM RULES AND REGULATIONS IN MIND WHEN POSTING IN THE FORUMS. SHOULD THERE BE ANY RULE VIOLATIONS, PLEASE BRING THIS TO THE ATTENTION OF THE MODERATORS BY MAKING USE OF THE “SUGGEST DELETION FUNCTION”. ****

**** WHEN STATING FACTS, STATISTICS OR NEWSWORTHY BULLETINS, PLEASE BE SURE TO INCLUDE AN HTML LINK OR REFERENCE TO A PUBLICATION. IF YOU ARE MERELY PROVIDING AN OPINION, PLEASE MENTION THIS IN YOUR POST. ALL MEMBERS ARE RESPONSIBLE TO AVOID ARGUMENTS BASED ON RUMORS OR MISINFORMATION


**** Some members may not be aware of the fact that all members have an edit window of 60 minutes, from the time you first make a post in which to add or remove any additional comments or information into/from the post. Please make use of this feature made available to you, for your own convenience, instead of posting one post after another (doubles, triples or more).

**** [b]Also keep in mind that this is a discussion forum and not a chat room. If you would like to chat about this incident, kindly make use of the "Live Chat" option, which is available in the "forum drop-down menu".
Messages of agreement such as "ME TOO", "I AGREE WITH X", ”YES” OR ”NO” have been found to waste time and space and are therefore to be avoided. A message consisting of only one or two lines of text is probably not worth posting. Do not make posts that contain only a smiley face, check mark, etc. Make sure the content of your post is relevant to the topic.

Enjoy the forums!

Regards and thanks for your co-operation,

SA7700


When you are doing stuff that nobody has done before, there is no manual – Kevin McCloud (Grand Designs)
295 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinemalaysia From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 3333 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 66473 times:

Now when is there a news update on actually reading the serial number or even verifying off the possible fire protection bottles that washed up in the Maldives? It cant take that long to confirm what exactly the object was by now.


There Are Those Who Believe That There May Yet Be Other Airlines Who Even Now Fight To Survive Beyond The Heavens
User currently offlinephantomx18 From United States of America, joined Mar 2014, 16 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 66406 times:

Posting again from previous thread lock:

Object washed ashore in the Maldives - Baarah Beach(not sure about this news source, never heard of them before):

http://www.haveeru.com.mv/news/54153

. .thought to be bomb or mine, but sure looks like this:

http://quick.aero/sterling/blog/how-...658848.pagespeed.ic.Fm-5teWM9D.jpg

A a fire suppression bottle. . . similar to what would be found on the missing MH370.

What are the odds of one of these floating in the ocean, washing up ashore thousands of miles away from search area, when no other plane has been reported missing in the area?

Could ocean currents account for this, or are they looking in the wrong place? Or could this be an elaborate hoax?

[Edited 2014-03-25 22:55:43]

[Edited 2014-03-25 22:56:24]

[Edited 2014-03-25 23:13:51]

User currently offline65mustang From United States of America, joined Mar 2014, 84 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 65890 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I posed a question in part 40 reply 35 about how large of a piece of the plane has to be to show up on primary radar. I think that if a piece of the plane fell off, that it would match the data of the plane descending at 40000 fps and also match the ghost plane/depressurization hypothesis. It would also be a reason for debris being found in places other than the south indian ocean like maybe the fire bottle in the maldives. I googled for news reports that might be related to this idea. I found a google translation of an article that appeared in the china times dated March 8:

In addition, the U.S. Embassy said the 2:43 U.S. military bases stationed in Thailand U-Tapao SOS signal was listening to some of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370 emergency call, said the aircraft cabin facing disintegration driver call, they want a forced landing . U.S. troops are currently stationed in Thailand, Malaysia has been providing this signal.

I saw this was mentioned way back in part 3, but i did not see where it was resolved. I can't find a conclusive info debunking this(anybody got more info?). The only references i found to this incident on the internet referred to this translated article. Nothing in english news. Utapao is roughly an hour from where mh370 was at the time of the transmission(if this happened). Utapao is on china time so this time should be 3:43 malaysia/indochina time which does not fit the timeline. If the 2:43 was malaysia/indochina time it is close to the 3 satcom pings that occurred at approximately at 2:25, 2:27, and 2:28. What prompted the mh 370 to communicate through satcom at this time and is the utapao mayday true? Maybe there is a piece of the plane at the bottom of the gulf of Thailand where this whole thing started and a ship should do a sonar search.


I am very interested in this potential fire bottle. I Think i see soot on the bottle. Might just be a reflection. I hope there was not a bomb squad that blew it up.

[Edited 2014-03-25 23:27:20]

User currently offlinenm2582 From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 124 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 65782 times:

I am not in any way certified or educated as a wreckage inspector, but ***IF*** this object is a fire bottle, and ***IF*** it's from MH370, then I find it surprising how intact and undamaged it looks. I would have thought it would be dented or damaged, or still be partially attached to some of it's supporting structure, or otherwise show some evidence that it's been in a significant incident. It just seems odd to me...

User currently offlineBruceSmith From South Africa, joined May 2011, 46 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 65708 times:

Quoting phantomx18 (Reply 2):

Object washed ashore in the Maldives - Baarah Beach(not sure about this news source, never heard of them before):

http://www.haveeru.com.mv/news/54153

. .thought to be bomb or mine, but sure looks like this:

http://quick.aero/sterling/blog/how-...658848.pagespeed.ic.Fm-5teWM9D.jpg

A a fire suppression bottle. . . similar to what would be found on the missing MH370.

How big is an engine fire suppression bottle? In relation to the plant leaves and the logs, that object looks between 8 and 12 inches across.


User currently offlinephantomx18 From United States of America, joined Mar 2014, 16 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 65575 times:

I have no idea how big they are on a 777 but from researching online, they can be around that size (on the smaller end). We need someone with experience about the bottles on the 777 to chime in on how big they are (I am assuming there are different bottles of different sizes positioned through out the plane).

Also. . .the spherical shape of the bottle would absorb a lot of impact, and if we assume it was actually used to fight a fire, wouldn't it then be empty (filled with air), and therefore buoyant?


User currently offlineAlexA340B777 From Indonesia, joined Oct 2008, 135 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 65479 times:

Regarding the supposed fire supression bottle found on Maldives:
Is anyone communicating that to the investigation team of MH370?

In the linked newspaper article containing the picture there is no word
Mentioning that anyone is considering a connection to the missing MH370 flight...


Alex



So far travelled to 64 countries on 5 continents on 398 flights
User currently offline65mustang From United States of America, joined Mar 2014, 84 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 65381 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Boeing article about replacing halon systems.

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/aeromagazine/articles/2011_q4/3/


User currently onlineFinn350 From Finland, joined Jul 2013, 668 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 65135 times:

If we trust in the southern track predicted by Inmarsat, the fire extinguisher bottle in the Maldives can't possibly be from MH 370.

User currently offlinedavs5032 From United States of America, joined Sep 2010, 388 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 65075 times:

Just a suggestion to the mods, it would be helpful if RCAIR1's most recent Sanity Check - post 284 in the previous thread - were copied onto this one.


And THANKS, Rcair1, for your continued hard work on that!


User currently offlineTapir From Malaysia, joined Mar 2014, 136 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 65021 times:

Re: Sanity Check.

Am I correct to say that there's no cargo manifest available except for a select few? Furthermore, three items mentioned in list raise further questions.

1) Mangosteen - This was the first item listed by MAS CEO. it should have been the batteries and radios.

2) Battery

3) Radio.

There are hardly any mangosteens during this time of the year due to one of the worse draught that hit this country recently. Anyone from Msia can confirm this? Secondly, why would China want to import batteries and radios from Msia?


User currently offlineart From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2005, 3381 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 64907 times:

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 9):
If we trust in the southern track predicted by Inmarsat, the fire extinguisher bottle in the Maldives can't possibly be from MH 370.

Indeed.

As for the fire suppression sphere found om the beach (if that is what it is), are these used on watercraft as well as aircraft?


User currently offlinePellegrine From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2367 posts, RR: 8
Reply 13, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 64889 times:

Re. Starlionblue reply #6, replies #2-15 et al., thread #45:

http://money.cnn.com/2014/03/25/news/malaysia-airlines-compensation/

Thank you in advance. Money is never "free". To me, a $5,000 initial payment IS "hush" money. It is, "calm them down" money. Just as some members have stated to me, "calm down." It is the utmost, savage insult. Lose a loved one in a tragic circumstance, and see how you feel. Let's talk 8 digits, or let's talk me savaging you in the press and elsewhere for the rest of my natural life. To anyone who has never lost a loved one in a tragic, weird circumstance, I would say how dare you judge the person grieving. I FEEL for the MAS370 surviving relatives.

Maybe a few posters are more inclined towards the sensitivities of airline companies, or airframe manufacturers. The sentiment has been expressed previously in other crashes during the existence of this internet forum.

There is no onus on me to prove anything; the onus is to express one's opinion, which I have done. Nothing more. Moving on.

No one knows anything regarding this publicly, so there isn't much to talk about. I just hope for the families, having been involved in civil matters before, that they find adequate (brilliant, methodical, caring) representation, and not some ignorant and/or shyster bastards....of which there are many in the civil legal field. Settlement should be in excess of $10M, even in the case of a single, young retail clerk.



oh boy!!!
User currently offlinephantomx18 From United States of America, joined Mar 2014, 16 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 64797 times:

Quoting art (Reply 12):

As far as I can tell, the ones found on ships are cylindrical in shape, not spherical. Also, from google images, they appear larger.

[Edited 2014-03-26 00:07:34]

User currently offlinejcxroberts From United States of America, joined Mar 2014, 87 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 64818 times:

The bottle will have a serial number and should be relatively easy to check. We will soon see how competent and honest the Leads are in this case.

User currently offlinephantomx18 From United States of America, joined Mar 2014, 16 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 64665 times:

Member WolfSJ sent me these links showing the bottles are made out of titanium:

http://www.kiddegraviner.com/Files/K...77_Titanium_Cargo_Extinguisher.pdf
http://www.kiddegraviner.com/Files/K..._cargo_extinguisher_capability.pdf

Can someone chime in on the strength of titanium to survive an ocean impact, even maybe a low speed one?


User currently offlineBackSeater From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 382 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 64555 times:

Could Doppler data imply a great circle rather than constant heading route ?

Looking again at Inmarsat's Doppler graph, the systematic error showing measured always less that predicted may be a very important clue. As much as I am still wondering about the margin of error on RTD measurements because that was not a requirement for Inmarsat to measure and record RTD very accurately, I trust Doppler measurements.

For the Doppler to be always lower means that the projection of the aircraft ground speed vector on the satellite to aircraft vector is smaller. You could say let's reduce the speed but then you will not reach the next circle in time when the next ping arrives.

The other explanation is that the angle between the aircraft speed vector and the satellite to aircraft vector is larger that expected. In that case the ground speed must also be increased to match the next RTD circle rendez-cous.

Clearly I do not have RTD data to test that hypothesis but investigators do.

If that hypothesis holds, I think it would mean that the aircraft was not flying a constant heading but possibly a great circle route to somewhere west of the current search area, even farther away from any land base.


User currently offlineflyingturtle From Switzerland, joined Oct 2011, 2331 posts, RR: 13
Reply 18, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 64516 times:

Quoting nm2582 (Reply 4):
I am not in any way certified or educated as a wreckage inspector, but ***IF*** this object is a fire bottle, and ***IF*** it's from MH370, then I find it surprising how intact and undamaged it looks.
Quoting phantomx18 (Reply 16):

I can well imagine that the fan blades and the rather sturdy engine "backbone" take the brunt of the impact, leaving such a fire bottle pretty much intact. The fire bottle also looks like a pressure vessel, which is built to be stable.

I wonder if you find traces of cables, screws and other metal parts impacting on the fire bottle. (Well, if this is a fire bottle at all...)

Quoting BackSeater (Reply 17):
Could Doppler data imply a great circle rather than constant heading route ?

You may need to re-phrase your question in order to remove ambiguities - because, when you hold your heading constant, every route is a great circle route!

For example http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?P=kul+-+per - the plane starts with a 159.7 deg heading. You fly and fly and fly without any turns - you end up in Perth. Your constant heading course is a great circle route. Your compass (either true or magnetic) will change, though.

A route where your compass (true, not magnetic) does not change is a rhumb line: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhumb_line (which is not a great circle in practically all cases).



David

[Edited 2014-03-26 00:22:08]

[Edited 2014-03-26 00:31:21]

[Edited 2014-03-26 00:38:53]

[Edited 2014-03-26 00:40:37]


Keeping calm is terrorism against those who want to live in fear.
User currently offlineart From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2005, 3381 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 64346 times:

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 13):
To me, a $5,000 initial payment IS "hush" money.
Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 13):
There is no onus on me to prove anything; the onus is to express one's opinion, which I have done.

Of course you can express your opinion but if you argue that you do not need to provide anything to support its validity - and disregard anything that counters your view - what is the point of expressing your opinion?

To follow your approach: it is my opinion that 1+1=3. There is an onus on me to express my opinion. There is no onus on me to prove it.


User currently offlineSpeedbird128 From Pitcairn Islands, joined Oct 2003, 1648 posts, RR: 2
Reply 20, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 64161 times:

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 13):
To me, a $5,000 initial payment IS "hush" money

To hush what exactly? The entire *planet* knows what has been unfolding with MH370. Just turn on your TV...

What discreditable information do you think the relatives have that poses a threat?



A306, A313, A319, A320, A321, A332, A343, A345, A346 A388, AC90, B06, B722, B732, B733, B735, B738, B744, B762, B772, B7
User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17002 posts, RR: 67
Reply 21, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 63623 times:

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 13):

Re. Starlionblue reply #6, replies #2-15 et al., thread #45:

http://money.cnn.com/2014/03/25/news/malaysia-airlines-compensation/

Thank you in advance. Money is never "free". To me, a $5,000 initial payment IS "hush" money. It is, "calm them down" money. Just as some members have stated to me, "calm down." It is the utmost, savage insult. Lose a loved one in a tragic circumstance, and see how you feel. Let's talk 8 digits, or let's talk me savaging you in the press and elsewhere for the rest of my natural life. To anyone who has never lost a loved one in a tragic, weird circumstance, I would say how dare you judge the person grieving. I FEEL for the MAS370 surviving relatives.

Maybe a few posters are more inclined towards the sensitivities of airline companies, or airframe manufacturers. The sentiment has been expressed previously in other crashes during the existence of this internet forum.

There is no onus on me to prove anything; the onus is to express one's opinion, which I have done. Nothing more. Moving on.

No one knows anything regarding this publicly, so there isn't much to talk about. I just hope for the families, having been involved in civil matters before, that they find adequate (brilliant, methodical, caring) representation, and not some ignorant and/or shyster bastards....of which there are many in the civil legal field. Settlement should be in excess of $10M, even in the case of a single, young retail clerk.

Here we go again. Let me count the ways.

First off, the article supports "our" view and discredits yours. You keep making an argument without any basis, even quoting sources that do the opposite of support your view.

The payments of $5,000 per passenger should help families cope with the immediate financial strain caused by a long search for the plane. But the airline is eventually likely to pay next of kin compensation that ranges into the millions of dollars per passenger.
Under an international treaty known as the Montreal Convention, the airline must pay relatives of each deceased passenger an initial sum of around $150,000 to $175,000.
Relatives of victims can also sue for further damages -- unless the airline can prove that it took all necessary measures to prevent a crash or any other incident that prevented passengers from arriving safely.


Second, the onus is on you when you say things like "show me the contract", which you did. You did not just express an opinion. You asked members to prove to you that you were wrong.

Third, it seems very clear that final settlements are a long way away. Same as in any accident. No surprise there.

Fourth, you unleash this vitriol on lawyers and companies in a matter where not much of import has even happened except MH paying for relatives to stay in hotels, paying for their meals, paying for their travel, paying for their phone calls, and giving them spending money for incidentals. No one is under the illusion that MH will "get away" with cheating the passengers.

Fifth, no one here has said the relatives do not have a right to compensation, and yet you're acting as if some of us want the relatives to be tricked into taking low sums by the company. I am certain everyone here would like the passengers to be alive, but since that doesn't seem to be in the cards, we would be happy if the relatives receive compensation.



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlinesejtam From Singapore, joined Sep 2011, 48 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 63601 times:

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 13):
To me, a $5,000 initial payment IS "hush" money

Right. Everything must have an ulterior, malicious motive.

An initial payment can eg be very welcome to defray initial costs for those families, eg taking care of immediate expenditures that come up due to
- the travel/staying in MY
- continuing their other obligations (eg while their own life-insurance, if they even have such) is processing etc
- heck, even legal representation etc

If you had one/more members of your immediate family torn away like that, possibly the breadwinners, you'd also need ways to defray such immediate costs.

I am sure this won't be the final payment, but it would be premature to expect a payment of the final amounts now, while there is no hope of any result of an investigation. Hence this 'hardship money', and not a any form of restitution..


User currently offlineaw70 From Austria, joined Mar 2014, 32 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 63391 times:

I would like to place a train of thought on the table, just to see what you guys think. In the absence of debris from the aircraft, there is actually still some leeway with respect to what could have happened.

What can we safely conclude so far:

- That the aircraft was lost either due to some truly bizarre sequence of technical faults, or due to malicious actions by someone on board.

If the cause of the disappearance is indeed a technical fault, it certainly will be one of the weirdest aircraft loss scenarios, ever. As no one seems to be able to come up with a technical scenario that matches the observed facts.

However, if malicious intent is the cause, we actually have two fundamentally distinct scenarios to consider:

1. that someone on board acted alone (for whatever motive), or

2. that whatever happened was the result of a planned action by an organisation of some sort (again, for whatever ultimate motive)

It is worth noting that given the scarcity of hard information we have right now, it is currently actually impossible to rule out either option: the first one is of course quite a bit more plausible, as it does not require the existence of a covert organisation intent on destroying or capturing a commercial aircraft. HOWEVER, from a logical viewpoint, this does NOT mean that option 2 can be completely discarded.

Why am I stressing this point? Because if option 2 is what actually happened, the whole thing might not be over at all yet.

If (and this is of course a huge IF) this is the result of a covert organisation of some sort executing a long-planned action plan to seize an airliner, the satcom pings we are working with right now might actually be fake. A deliberately planted false lead, in other words. This would be hard to do from a technical viewpoint, but definitely not impossible. Remember that MH370 used a fairly old version of Inmarsat satcom, one that is very probably still spoof-able with high but doable effort. It would require a lot of specialist knowledge, sure, but it *is* doable if you plan ahead well enough. And you can very probably also fake moving Doppler returns from a stationary emitter, if you have a comms pro working on a sophisticated piece of kit.

Why I am saying this? Well, whoever did this apparently thought the whole thing through reasonably well before he (or they) acted. Chances are that someone like that would also be aware of the satcom issues, if an organisation who wanted a captured aircraft in a particular spot was indeed behind this. And putting out fake satcom pings from an a/c that otherwise went totally dark would have been the perfect tool for making double and triple sure that all available satellite imaging resources would be diverted *away* from remote airfields capable of taking a 777, much closer to where the aircraft disappeared. Which means that *if* option 2 is what actually happened, spoofing the satcom pings would actually be a very sensible thing to do for a perpetrating organisation - this would not be a fluke add-on to a bizarre scenario, but actually a fairly important ingredient in a well-thought out plan.

I am aware that what I am writing here does not help the investigation in any way. Nor am I able to give any sort of sane (or even remotely comprehensible) motive why anyone would want to capture an airliner. And go to all these lengths to cover their tracks. But still. Everyone here seems to take the satcom pings as some sort of gospel. They very, very probably are, and the aircraft is practically certainly indeed at the bottom of the Southern Indian Ocean. But as long as no actual wreckage is found there, option 2 remains an improbable but technically possible scenario. We should keep that in mind.

[Edited 2014-03-26 01:23:11]

User currently offlineliquidair From United Kingdom, joined May 2011, 181 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 62938 times:

Quoting phantomx18 (Reply 2):

I'd say the two images match really, really closely.

are the bottles from the cargo bay? If not, where are they on the airplane?

This will stir the hornets' nest a little more.


User currently offlineAirbus747 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2014, 12 posts, RR: 0
Reply 25, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 64279 times:

Quoting aw70 (Reply 23):

Very well said aw70.

I think that confidently stating that we "know" that the aircraft went down is a very, very stretched theory and far from the full picture.

We may have many pieces of the puzzle but without the final one we should not come to any conclusion - at least, not a final conclusion!

Also, no matter whether the plane is lost right now, we cannot call the case closed until full resources are dedicated to investigating the actual cause of what happened. Unfortunately I foresee that the less facts are known about the true cause, the more space there will be for crazy theories to appear as legitimate.

Question: are any of the investigators involved fully independent from the airline and government?


User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17002 posts, RR: 67
Reply 26, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 63686 times:

Quoting liquidair (Reply 24):
are the bottles from the cargo bay? If not, where are they on the airplane?

On a 737, they are in the wheel well. On a 777, I don't know.



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineliss From United States of America, joined Mar 2014, 1 posts, RR: 0
Reply 27, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 65481 times:

Hi, first post. My grandfather had a passion for airplanes, so I grew up with great respect for flight and pilots. My own area of study is health science. I’ve been following this thread since the day after MH370 disappeared. I thank you all—especially rcair1—for sharing your time and insights.

One of the smartest scientists I know likes to remind me: coincidences occur more often than people imagine. I admit I’ve tended to view the plane’s disappearance as the likely result of a crime due to the large number of suspicious factors involved, but three things have caused me to question this assumption:

  1. The plane was carrying a shipment of lithium-ion batteries. The fact that MH denied the presence of this fire hazard before acknowledging it suggests to me that MH is worried about the implications of the batteries’ presence on the plane. And if it worries MH, it worries me.
  2. The plane turned back toward Malaysia and very quickly dipped down to 12k feet. Perhaps this was an attempt to dive below radar, but it also matches the altitude at which crew could—hypothetically, with effort— open a plane’s cargo door if the plane were flying slowly enough. The 777’s rear cargo door is situated well behind the wing and opens outward.
  3. Mike McKay, the oil-rig worker from New Zealand, was so certain he observed MH370 go down burning toward the Gulf of Thailand that he wrote the equivalent of a sworn declaration about what he saw and insisted his employers get the statement to authorities. His observation occurred at the right time in the right-ish place. He described a single piece of something burning going down toward the gulf. The flames went out before it reached water. The fall lasted 10 to 15 seconds.

What would a catastrophic li-ion battery fire mean on a 777 passenger flight? If a big pallet of these batteries ignited, wouldn’t they need to be ejected out the rear cargo door in order for the plane to have any chance of surviving?

An object that falls from 12k feet would take roughly 27 seconds to reach ground/water, but the fall would be shorter if the object already possessed downward velocity, as would be the case if the plane were continuing to descend beyond 12k feet. And yes, I know people have insisted cargo doors on passenger planes can’t be opened mid-flight, but I think reducing altitude and slowing the plane might allow it. During a catastrophic fire, there’s no reason not to try.

Clearly, a fire could have damaged portions of the FBW and communications systems. And sadly, smoke from burning li-ion packs might have left anyone without an oxygen canister sickly or even dead. If a group did succeed in pushing burning batteries off the plane, it’s possible they returned to a cabin with only a handful of other people left alive.

The plane’s apparent low altitude flight across Malaysia may seem like an attempt to evade detection, but it could also be the failed attempt of a flight attendant to save a plane with compromised gear and controls. I read a report of a potential witness on the ground stating that the plane flew very low overhead with its landing lights on (5000 to 7000 lumens), but not its navigation lights (roughly 3000 lumens). If the person flying the plane were trying to hide it, why would those absurdly bright landing lights be on? And if those glaring things were on, why bother turning off the navigation lights? The witness’s description of the lights makes me suspect the plane’s systems were no longer fully controllable.

As for the very strange route the plane eventually followed, if the FMS were damaged and an inexperienced person were trying to control the plane, it’s possible MH370 could end up doing exactly what it did. And that’s pretty horrifying.

Of course, I can also imagine deliberate, illegal actions creating the same route and outcome.

If I had any say in the investigation, I’d be looking for a big burnt mass of li-ion battery packs on the gulf floor near the coordinates Mike McKay shared. I don’t think we’re going to find the plane itself for quite a long time. If, however, we found charred li-ion batteries in a relevant location in the gulf, it might help us understand a bit more about what happened on that plane.

Either way, my heart hurts for the families of the people lost on MH370.
~L


User currently offlinetheaviator380 From UK - England, joined Feb 2013, 396 posts, RR: 0
Reply 28, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 65182 times:

Quoting liss (Reply 27):

Good to see your first post.

I have never heard and never imagined commercial aircraft like B777 in which pilot or crew can perform maneuver what you have stated. Ejecting those Li batteries from cargo hold is not as easy as some one would think.

Biggest issue still remain unanswered every time I listen to these theories, Why on the earth pilot didn't declare emergency or didn't contact ATC if they knew there is fire onboard? Unfortunately No one has answer for that.


User currently offlinetheaviator380 From UK - England, joined Feb 2013, 396 posts, RR: 0
Reply 29, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 64909 times:

I have 2 ideas, need to know whether it's possible to make those in reality on commercial aircraft.

1. Having CVR and FDR which can float on water surface and emits GPS signal out.

2. Having some kind communication system for senior FA in cabin by means of which they send distress signal out to ground staff or ATC? (I am not sure whether this is available on modern jets like A388 and B787) I have seen little cabin for senior FA on A388 where there is computer system, having flown on A388 few times.

Thoughts please?


User currently offlineciaran From Ireland, joined Aug 2005, 34 posts, RR: 0
Reply 30, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 64721 times:

Looking for debris amongst other dedris (the state of our oceans)


http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/26/wo...-by-a-sea-of-detritus.html?hp&_r=0


User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17002 posts, RR: 67
Reply 31, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 64317 times:

Quoting theaviator380 (Reply 29):
1. Having CVR and FDR which can float on water surface and emits GPS signal out.

The problem with a floating CVR and FDR is not the floating per se, although it is not a trivial problem. It is the fact that they are by necessity bolted to the structure so if the structure sinks, so do the boxes.

To be clear, you cannot "emit a GPS signal". You'd emit a position signal via radio.

Quoting theaviator380 (Reply 29):
2. Having some kind communication system for senior FA in cabin by means of which they send distress signal out to ground staff or ATC? (I am not sure whether this is available on modern jets like A388 and B787) I have seen little cabin for senior FA on A388 where there is computer system, having flown on A388 few times.

Such a system can easily be disabled from the cockpit for safety reasons.



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21530 posts, RR: 55
Reply 32, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 64250 times:

Quoting phantomx18 (Reply 6):
Also. . .the spherical shape of the bottle would absorb a lot of impact, and if we assume it was actually used to fight a fire, wouldn't it then be empty (filled with air), and therefore buoyant?

The mounts that connect the bottles to the lines that go to the engines (or cargo bay, depending on which bottle it is) are pretty heavy. I don't know whether the bottle itself would float, and I don't know if whether it had been used or not would make a difference.

If it is from the plane, and we can tell that it was used or not used, then that gives us some valuable insight into what might have happened.

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 9):
If we trust in the southern track predicted by Inmarsat, the fire extinguisher bottle in the Maldives can't possibly be from MH 370.

I'd trust identifying marks on the bottle far more than Inmarsat tracking for determining whether it came from the plane or not.

Quoting flyingturtle (Reply 18):
can well imagine that the fan blades and the rather sturdy engine "backbone" take the brunt of the impact, leaving such a fire bottle pretty much intact. The fire bottle also looks like a pressure vessel, which is built to be stable.

The bottles aren't in the engines themselves. They're somewhere else in the plane, and hoses take the extinguishing agent from the bottle to the engine (or wherever else it needs to go - the normal items with fire protection are the engines, APU and the cargo bays). So you could have the engines rip off the airframe and the fire bottles would still be there.

Quoting theaviator380 (Reply 29):
1. Having CVR and FDR which can float on water surface and emits GPS signal out.

A problem with this is that having the CVR and FDR floating would mean that they could drift away from the wreckage, and finding the wreckage is also very important to the investigation. Better to have the important stuff all in the same place.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineliquidair From United Kingdom, joined May 2011, 181 posts, RR: 0
Reply 33, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 63860 times:

Can somebody please bullet point todays conference?

User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 10894 posts, RR: 32
Reply 34, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 64148 times:

Airbus D&S gave Malaysia possible MH370 space images of debris, with 122 possible objects.

http://twitter.com/R_Wall/status/448756294133243904



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlinejollo From Italy, joined Aug 2011, 212 posts, RR: 0
Reply 35, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 63843 times:

Quoting liss (Reply 27):
Hi, first post.

Welcome!

Quoting liss (Reply 27):
One of the smartest scientists I know likes to remind me: coincidences occur more often than people imagine.

Concur. I have witnessed myself a few weird (and awfully harmful) combination of events that would have been very hard to produce (or even imagine) by a malicious will. In other words, "sh*t happens". By the way, as far flung hypothetic scenarios go, the one you described has some merit: at the very least, it is apparent that you gave it some serious thought.



Quoting theaviator380 (Reply 28):
I have never heard and never imagined commercial aircraft like B777 in which pilot or crew can perform maneuver what you have stated. Ejecting those Li batteries from cargo hold is not as easy as some one would think.

The fact that no one ever attempted or even imagined this kind of mad stunt isn't surprising; the point is, is it at all possibile? The read cargo door of a 777 *can* theoretically be opened in flight, or is it physically impossible? We need an operator for the answer.

Quoting theaviator380 (Reply 28):
Biggest issue still remain unanswered every time I listen to these theories, Why on the earth pilot didn't declare emergency or didn't contact ATC if they knew there is fire onboard? Unfortunately No one has answer for that.

Well, since we're in the realm of highly improbable scenarios, a fire totally disabling comms but leaving the a/c (barely) flyable can't be totally ruled out, especially if active fire fighting was going on. Likely? Not. But I don't think it can be proved as impossible.

On the other hand, a fire event (and associated fire-fighting) disabling ACARS and leaving the satcom apparatus functional enough to process sat pings could be more easy to rule out. Are the electronic components handling these two functions discrete? Are they physically separated and far enough form each other that fire could disable one and not the other? Yet another question for a knowledgeable operator.


User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 10894 posts, RR: 32
Reply 36, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 64018 times:

Airbus Defence & Space satellite spotted a field of 122 objects potentially related to MH370.

http://pbs.twimg.com/media/BjpNkJGCIAAwzOP.jpg:large

http://twitter.com/mykamarul/status/448756396280926209/photo/1/large



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlinetheaviator380 From UK - England, joined Feb 2013, 396 posts, RR: 0
Reply 37, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 63160 times:

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 31):
Quoting Mir (Reply 32):
Quoting jollo (Reply 35):

Thank you, appreciated.


User currently offlinep51tang From New Zealand, joined Mar 2014, 64 posts, RR: 0
Reply 38, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 63508 times:

Quoting liss (Reply 27):
The plane’s apparent low altitude flight across Malaysia may seem like an attempt to evade detection, but it could also be the failed attempt of a flight attendant to save a plane with compromised gear and controls. I read a report of a potential witness on the ground stating that the plane flew very low overhead with its landing lights on (5000 to 7000 lumens), but not its navigation lights (roughly 3000 lumens). If the person flying the plane were trying to hide it, why would those absurdly bright landing lights be on? And if those glaring things were on, why bother turning off the navigation lights?

- I've also thought about this.Why were the Landing Lights on, and not the Navigation Lights?.(assuming the public sighting is valid) and I suspect that it does have some merit.

It could mean that whoever (he,she,they) was in the Flight Deck did not want to be spotted by other passing Aircraft.I mean,you can see Tail Beacons from passing Aircraft flying at 20,000ft+ from Terra Firma looking up into the night sky.But could passing Aircraft Flying at 35,000ft see another Aircraft Flying at 1,000ft with no Navigation Lights on, just Landing lights?.

I believe this person is conscious about 9/11 and does not want Military Fighters Scrambled from either surrounding Asian Countries, Caveat: (In their own mind).

There are also non-confirmed reports of a Commercial Aircraft flying very low (1,000ft - 1,500ft) through Strait of Malacca.If I am to follow this theory ,then I'd say it might just be a ploy to evade land based radar.But more importantly,if I was trying to 'Hi tail it out of town' un-noticed and fly very low at night above open water,then I would not rely on instruments alone.I'd switch on the landing lights to get a reflection (feedback) from the water.Again, probably goes back to Flight Training perhaps?.Rule 1: Never rely on instruments alone.And thus,probably a trade off between being noticed and evading land based radar?.

# Throw stones if you want to.But their are no Aliens nor Elvis making a guest appearance, in my feedback.  

[Edited 2014-03-26 02:59:03]

User currently offlineApprentice From United States of America, joined Jan 2013, 99 posts, RR: 0
Reply 39, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 63467 times:

Quoting liquidair (Reply 24):

1. I don't think this bottle was INSTALLED on MH flight, the bottle still have the protections in places: 2 freon outputs port (red caps), the plugs are capped (black caps), and location for pressure indicating transmitter and low pressure warning switch also caped without switchs installed (blue caps). In that way bottle are delivery to install or back to a shop, placed in a protected wood container. On the other way, it looks that percursion cartridges are installed, and that is not comom.

2. Several bottles like this are installed on a B777' out of memory, 2 for engine fire, in the wings, 3 for cargo holds fire supression (one of them is a cylinder) located in fwd cargo cmpt, and one for APU fire supression located in the tail

3. No sure about MH policies, but usually you transport that only in a Cargo flight: Hazardous Cargo

Rgds



A "NO" is a positive answer. My Tutor
User currently offlineKDTWflyer From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 828 posts, RR: 1
Reply 40, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 63418 times:

CNN is reporting that a satelitte has observed 122 pieces of debris floating in close proximity to each other in the Indian Ocean... http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/26/world/...irlines-plane/index.html?hpt=hp_t1


Excerpt from article...

"Malaysian Remote Sensing Agency (MRSA) received new satellite images from France that were taken on March 23. The images showed 122 potential objects in one area of the ocean. Some of the objects were as much as 23 meters in length. Some appeared bright, possibly indicating solid material. They were located about 2,500 kilometers from Perth. "This is another new lead that will help direct the search operation," said Acting Minister of Transportation Hishammuddin Bin Hussein on Wednesday."

[Edited 2014-03-26 03:04:46]


NW B744 B742 B753 B752 A333 A332 A320 A319 DC10 DC9 ARJ CRJ S340
User currently offlineart From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2005, 3381 posts, RR: 0
Reply 41, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 63127 times:

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 36):
Airbus Defence & Space satellite spotted a field of 122 objects potentially related to MH370.

The image shows SAR area is a long distance away from the position of the 3 sightings of objects by satellite. Which area is now being searched by the aircraft used?


User currently offlineboacvc10 From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 610 posts, RR: 0
Reply 42, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 62763 times:

I am sure many of a.net community have harbored suspicion that the Prime Minister of Malaysia and Australia wouldn't have made so definitive statements and committed assets if they had not already confirmed the location of the aircraft, and that they had information not yet released to the public, but was of a cant-be-ignored-anymore smoking-gun nature. One of these pieces of information is what was recently reported : 122 images from the same area.

Quote:

Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia (CNN) -- [Breaking news update at 5:44 a.m.]

Malaysian Remote Sensing Agency (MRSA) received new satellite images from France that were taken on March 23. The images showed 122 potential objects in one area of the ocean. Some of the objects were as much as 23 meters in length. Some appeared bright, possibly indicating solid material. They were located about 2,500 kilometers from Perth. "This is another new lead that will help direct the search operation," said Acting Minister of Transportation Hishammuddin Bin Hussein on Wednesday.
Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 36):
Airbus Defence & Space satellite spotted a field of 122 objects potentially related to MH370.

As this batch of satellite imagery is in very close proximity to the other two sensor readings (Australian, Chinese), regardless of what the actual objects might be, and where they are now, due to the Sea State 7 bad weather - I have a theory that the investigating authorities have additional information by now where the aircraft is possibly resting.

with the Airbus Defense and Space (formerly Airbus Military, Astrium and Cassidian) sensors on orbital platforms able to image conventional land objects, with gigapixel resolution allowing 1.5m SPOT imagery, and the fact that Australia and region is already covered, it's a very capable platform -- and if the interactive sample pictures on their website look that good, they have in most probably already captured the floating debris cluster. warning, if you try to download full resolution 1:50000 SPOT 1.5m imagery, it's a cool 700 MB file.

I may be wrong, but usually the press is a few days behind the curve for this investigation .. well anyway, for the a.net community here is their portal and I do wonder if they will formally announce an imaging task for their satellite, as they have now approximately 10-12 hours of daylight available. .and it is a LEO bird The SPOT orbit is polar, circular, sun-synchronous, and phased

Depending upon how many satellites have open tasks slots available, they could be imaging the site several times in the day to account for ocean drift of those debris field. An competent remote sensing engineer would be able to write a simple data anomaly search algorithm to locate non-sea surface phenomenon ... I suppose (sadly) they have already had the time to do it and test it out, so perhaps we are nearing the end of the search phase.

BOACVC10

[Edited 2014-03-26 03:16:48]


Up, up and Away!
User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 10894 posts, RR: 32
Reply 43, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 63502 times:

The Malaysian government just released another picture:

http://twitter.com/R_Wall/status/448763617928683520/photo/1/large



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlineliquidair From United Kingdom, joined May 2011, 181 posts, RR: 0
Reply 44, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 62803 times:

Sorry, but the way The Australian Newscorps journalist just got humiliated was funny- it's kinda bad directing a question at the MAS CEO when he's not there. Oh dear.

Quoting Apprentice (Reply 39):
Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 26):

thank you both.

@apprentice, I'm not sure i understood your post - are you saying mh370 did not have these bottles installed, but may have been carrying them?

where are you seeing the colour coded caps? I can just see black and silver in the photo...

[Edited 2014-03-26 03:19:08]

User currently offlineboacvc10 From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 610 posts, RR: 0
Reply 45, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 62772 times:

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 43):
he Malaysian government just released another picture:

Wow, look at the scale of that picture .... 76000 meters across. Any object that shows up in that frame, at that scale from a Low Earth Orbiting sensor, is significant. .... If it is not an aircraft debris field, could there really be any other explanation?



Up, up and Away!
User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17002 posts, RR: 67
Reply 46, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 61960 times:

Quoting jollo (Reply 35):
Quoting theaviator380 (Reply 28):
I have never heard and never imagined commercial aircraft like B777 in which pilot or crew can perform maneuver what you have stated. Ejecting those Li batteries from cargo hold is not as easy as some one would think.

The fact that no one ever attempted or even imagined this kind of mad stunt isn't surprising; the point is, is it at all possibile? The read cargo door of a 777 *can* theoretically be opened in flight, or is it physically impossible? We need an operator for the answer.

I'm not sure if the weight-on-wheels logic would allow you to open a cargo door in flight. Even if you could there's no access to the hold. And even if you had access to the hold it is unlikely purely by the nature of randomness that the correct pallet/container would be by the door. If it wasn't by the door, you'd have to move other pallets/containers first and dump them out.

I'll call this one remotely possible but implausible in the extreme.



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlinenupogodi From Canada, joined Mar 2014, 909 posts, RR: 4
Reply 47, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 62105 times:

Quoting boacvc10 (Reply 45):
Wow, look at the scale of that picture .... 76000 meters across. Any object that shows up in that frame, at that scale from a Low Earth Orbiting sensor, is significant. .... If it is not an aircraft debris field, could there really be any other explanation?

Floating crap in the ocean, just like every other time they've spotted potential debris...   



A man must know how to look before he can hope to see.
User currently offlinetimpdx From United States of America, joined Jul 2009, 533 posts, RR: 0
Reply 48, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 61750 times:

I will have to closely look at the extinguisher bottle I have in hand for a TV show I am working on currently later today. Its from an aircraft scrapyard, its quite heavy, moved it around yesterday. But it may be bouyant, though. No idea what particular model my bottle comes from, but that object in the Maldives is almost identical to what is sitting in our construction shop waiting to be installed on our set. (we are making a interior commercial cargo hold for a TV show)

User currently offlineboacvc10 From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 610 posts, RR: 0
Reply 49, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 61680 times:

Quoting nupogodi (Reply 47):
Floating crap in the ocean,

23 meters in length and bright colors ... not your garden variety "floating crap"



Up, up and Away!
User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 10894 posts, RR: 32
Reply 50, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 61588 times:

According to the press conference, some of the objects appear to be bright, possibly indicating solid materials.


Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlineAlexA340B777 From Indonesia, joined Oct 2008, 135 posts, RR: 0
Reply 51, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 60599 times:

Was there any word in the news conference about the object found in Maldives? Any reporter asking about it?

Alex



So far travelled to 64 countries on 5 continents on 398 flights
User currently offlineEVAAIRBR076 From Netherlands, joined May 2009, 122 posts, RR: 0
Reply 52, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 60399 times:

Quoting boacvc10 (Reply 49):

Could be floating trash why not? There is floating trash like plastic bottles etc in the ocean that has the size of half of Europe. I wouldn't be surprised again if it is not related to MH370, like all those times before when they said they might spotted debris.


User currently offlinetheaviator380 From UK - England, joined Feb 2013, 396 posts, RR: 0
Reply 53, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 60319 times:

Quoting AlexA340B777 (Reply 51):

Erm..What object? didn't see any news of that.


User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 10894 posts, RR: 32
Reply 54, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 60244 times:

Quoting EVAAIRBR076 (Reply 52):
Could be floating trash why not?

Yes it could be trash. Those ships have to locate and investigate the debris first.



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlineAlexA340B777 From Indonesia, joined Oct 2008, 135 posts, RR: 0
Reply 55, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 60289 times:

Quoting theaviator380 (Reply 53):

see post number 2 of this thread... or here:

http://www.haveeru.com.mv/news/54153



some here saying it is looking very similar to an aircraft engine fire supression system.

I am just wondering if that finding is somehow being unnoticed in the ongoing investigation.


Alex


edit: typo

[Edited 2014-03-26 04:03:11]


So far travelled to 64 countries on 5 continents on 398 flights
User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17002 posts, RR: 67
Reply 56, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 60234 times:

Quoting theaviator380 (Reply 53):
Quoting AlexA340B777 (Reply 51):

Erm..What object? didn't see any news of that.

See MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46 (by SA7700 Mar 25 2014 in Civil Aviation)



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineliquidair From United Kingdom, joined May 2011, 181 posts, RR: 0
Reply 57, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 60063 times:

Quoting theaviator380 (Reply 53):

ah, come on dude..... There's only been 50 replies in this thread, it's not THAT much to read, lol!

head to the first ten posts.

Quoting AlexA340B777 (Reply 51):

i didn't hear anything, no. Not even in the Q&A.

interestingly enough though, the acting minister chose the words "hope against hope" if the debris is MH370.

i wonder - and he was asked - are they still thinking there could be survivors? His answer was vague- saying he too was a father, brother and understands what the families are going through.

this is a day and a half later after the PM said there was no chance of survivors.

This duality in expression troubles me.


User currently offlineLTC8K6 From United States of America, joined Jun 2009, 1203 posts, RR: 0
Reply 58, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 60022 times:

Quoting Apprentice (Reply 39):
1. I don't think this bottle was INSTALLED on MH flight, the bottle still have the protections in places: 2 freon outputs port (red caps), the plugs are capped (black caps), and location for pressure indicating transmitter and low pressure warning switch also caped without switchs installed (blue caps). In that way bottle are delivery to install or back to a shop, placed in a protected wood container. On the other way, it looks that percursion cartridges are installed, and that is not comom.

I can't tell if there are any caps on it in the picture of it on the beach...

I can see them in the example pic certainly, but not on the actual pic.


User currently offlineDTW2HYD From United States of America, joined Jan 2013, 1767 posts, RR: 2
Reply 59, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 59988 times:

Earlier reports suggest this is a garbage collection area, so until they find first piece from MH370 we have to keep our fingers crossed.

User currently offlineEVAAIRBR076 From Netherlands, joined May 2009, 122 posts, RR: 0
Reply 60, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 59848 times:

And dont forget there is still a lot of trash from fukushima japan, like ships, parts of houses and a lot of other stuff. 23 meters in lenght and then not be able to identify it with satellites? And they can see me having a sunbath in my back garden. And 23 meters in length? As far as i can remember i dont know crashes, except the ethiopian one that was hijacked and landed in the ocean, that gave such large pieces of debris.

[Edited 2014-03-26 04:09:37]

User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 10894 posts, RR: 32
Reply 61, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 59875 times:

Both HMAS Success and Xue Long are now in the search area, they will try to locate the debris spotted on satellite.


Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlineflood From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 1381 posts, RR: 1
Reply 62, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 60110 times:

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 43):
The Malaysian government just released another picture:

It looks a lot more 'promising' than previous debris sightings... another image:


via http://twitter.com/bevanshields85/status/448773191146561536/photo/1


User currently offlinePihero From France, joined Jan 2005, 4392 posts, RR: 76
Reply 63, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 60057 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I'd like to remind all of us on this forum that the only serious clue we have as to the whereabouts of Flight 370 is the
NTSB / INMARSAT sutdy, both on the *pings*'exploitation and refinements using Doppler shifts.
That clue has been deemed accurate / dependable / reasonable ... enough to cause the search to have started in the southern part of the Indian Ocean.
I gave in an earlier post a simplistic, kitchen-table explanation on how the reasoning was, of course using computers and algorythm that would solve the difficulties of wind effect and - I forgot to mention it, my apologies - the effect of a rapid magnetic variation the further south we project or re-constructed route.
This is my pencil-divider-paper strip solution :



I mentioned in that post that a study of the winds will amount to solving a vector field.
As it happens, I came across Tim Vasquez' weather maps of the area :

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j261/Pihero/00HR250MBHGTWINDgfsfaxanl0020140308.gif

Tim is a meteorologist and his work on AF 447 helped debunk quite a lot of theories.
Meteorology is about, by pure coincidence, also about studying / forecasting wind fields.
This result is but one possible trajectory, based on a constant magnetic heading, canstant CAS and a constant altitude.
The resulting trajectory is an illustration of what the NTSB people could have arrived at :

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j261/Pihero/io-route-sum.gif

He said :" we assume the aircraft flew westward and toward the Strait of Malacca as some of the Malaysian investigative reports indicate, and bypassed the 10°N waypoint shown in the image above, and that after some sort of altercation or change in plans on board a heading of 210° was selected, which would be 210°M, with heading reference in MAG ( my edit) as would be expected. This would then be engaged by putting the autopilot in heading mode in an attempt to fly out into the remote Indian Ocean. The first point in this set that would be crossed was at 5°00'N 95°22'E. Here we assume FL390 with airspeed of M.82 (TAS=468 kt).

Comment : FL 390 is a 200 hPa reference for weather charts. the difference with FL 350 / M.82, as we are above the tropopause would be minimal( constant OAT).

The above seem to match quite a few aspects of the theory : constant magnetic heading and constant speed at a constant altitude.
The theory of a great circle route is well disproved... and may I remind us that a GC route will only happen with an origin point and an arrival point, both inserted in an FMS working in LNAV mode ?
Tim's site is Here

You could also take a serious look at this page dealing with a possible contrail, and Tim's study of it... Funny enough, this also comes close to the NTSB derived-at area.

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j261/Pihero/io-sar.jpg

This is the text of that study :

Possible contrail study by Tim Vasquez

[Edited 2014-03-26 04:21:49]

[Edited 2014-03-26 04:24:44]

[Edited 2014-03-26 04:26:36]


Contrail designer
User currently offlineflyingturtle From Switzerland, joined Oct 2011, 2331 posts, RR: 13
Reply 64, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 59452 times:

Quoting flood (Reply 62):
It looks a lot more 'promising' than previous debris sightings... another image:

I'll pray and light a candle. Lots of people need answers.


David



Keeping calm is terrorism against those who want to live in fear.
User currently offlineDavid L From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 9523 posts, RR: 42
Reply 65, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 59685 times:

Quoting liquidair (Reply 57):
This duality in expression troubles me.

It seems quite understandable to me. The head says the evidence has the aircraft coming down out reach of safety while the heart clings on to the thin hope of survivors. It's not an easy position to be in.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 63):

Thanks for that. It's not that I don't want to discuss your work on this, it's that it's outside the bounds of my knowledge. Please carry on with it.  Smile

[Edited 2014-03-26 04:27:57]

User currently offlineboacvc10 From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 610 posts, RR: 0
Reply 66, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 59481 times:

Quoting EVAAIRBR076 (Reply 60):
And they can see me having a sunbath in my back garden

The Google maps and other vendor pics of you in your back garden doing .... are taken from overflying aircraft, not from space, on an orbiting platform.



Up, up and Away!
User currently offlineEVAAIRBR076 From Netherlands, joined May 2009, 122 posts, RR: 0
Reply 67, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 59192 times:

Quoting boacvc10 (Reply 66):

ok i didnt knew that, thanks for clearing that up  


User currently offlinec680 From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 588 posts, RR: 0
Reply 68, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 59072 times:

Given the following assumptions:

1) The relatively large search area
2) Lack of specific starting point for the search - no known center point to start a search
3) Strong currents in the area - debris will quickly drift away from the incident site
4) Typically rough seas in the search area - will make any ship towed undersea search more difficult
5) The amount of time that has past - with each passing day, location beacon batteries are further depleted

I know this is a horrible thought, but...

What are the ODDS that MH370 is NEVER found?



My happy place is FL470 - what's yours?
User currently offlinedavs5032 From United States of America, joined Sep 2010, 388 posts, RR: 0
Reply 69, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 59013 times:

Quoting David L (Reply 65):
It seems quite understandable to me. The head says the evidence has the aircraft coming down out reach of safety while the heart clings on to the thin hope of survivors. It's not an easy position to be in.

Agreed. It's not easy trying to meet the realistic outcome theories of the media and public at this point while still respecting the sensitivities of still grieving family members. Really no way to please everyone.


User currently offlineflyingturtle From Switzerland, joined Oct 2011, 2331 posts, RR: 13
Reply 70, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 58848 times:

Quoting c680 (Reply 68):
What are the ODDS that MH370 is NEVER found?

If you ask me for my completely uneducated guess, the chance is 95% that MH370 will be found. You can still use side-scan sonar, even years after the crash.


And Pihero - I admire your drawing! 


David



Keeping calm is terrorism against those who want to live in fear.
User currently offlinePihero From France, joined Jan 2005, 4392 posts, RR: 76
Reply 71, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 58411 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting flyingturtle (Reply 70):

And Pihero - I admire your drawing!

You flatterer you !   
Actually, That's way beyond my computer skills.



Contrail designer
User currently offlinec680 From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 588 posts, RR: 0
Reply 72, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 58334 times:

Quoting flyingturtle (Reply 70):
If you ask me for my completely uneducated guess, the chance is 95% that MH370 will be found. You can still use side-scan sonar, even years after the crash.

And who pays for years of searching? Australia? Boeing? Malaysia? China?

Something tells me the trial lawyers will not be contributing to that fund!   



My happy place is FL470 - what's yours?
User currently offlineliquidair From United Kingdom, joined May 2011, 181 posts, RR: 0
Reply 73, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 57942 times:

Quoting David L (Reply 65):
Quoting davs5032 (Reply 69):
2010

meh. Maybe not start making a definitive statement before would have been the better option.

i find the acting minister's choice of words far more sensitive and wise as opposed to the absolute terminology used by the PM.

this is irregardless of pings, algorithm and politics, its simple humanity.


User currently offlineDavid L From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 9523 posts, RR: 42
Reply 74, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 57665 times:

Quoting liquidair (Reply 73):
meh. Maybe not start making a definitive statement before would have been the better option.

And that would be construed by many here and in the press as "hiding information". As someone else said, damned if you do, damned if you don't.


User currently offlinethunderboltdrgn From Sweden, joined Jan 2012, 563 posts, RR: 0
Reply 75, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 57440 times:

Quoting c680 (Reply 72):

And who pays for years of searching? Australia? Boeing? Malaysia? China?

Even if the official search is called off, it doesn't prevent privateers from trying to find it.
Even if they lack the resources of the current search operations who knows what technology that
will be available in 10-20 years and onwards from now. Perhaps "tomorrow's" technology will
be advanced enough to search large areas underwater in a good way.

Maybe some sort of advanced underwater equivalent of a UAV



Like a thunderbolt of lightning the Dragon roars across the sky
User currently offlineart From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2005, 3381 posts, RR: 0
Reply 76, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 57622 times:

Quoting c680 (Reply 72):
And who pays for years of searching? Australia? Boeing? Malaysia? China?

I read (on a.net, I think) that the cost of the AF447 operation was US$140 million, shared between airline, aircraft manufacturer and one other party (accident investigation authority?)


User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 10894 posts, RR: 32
Reply 77, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 57982 times:

Australian authorities said on Wednesday that three more objects had been spotted by aircraft searching for a Malaysian jet missing in the southern Indian Ocean.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/...es-australia-idUSBREA2P0P420140326



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlineTrin From United States of America, joined May 2011, 145 posts, RR: 2
Reply 78, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 57796 times:

Quoting boacvc10 (Reply 45):
Wow, look at the scale of that picture .... 76000 meters across. Any object that shows up in that frame, at that scale from a Low Earth Orbiting sensor, is significant. .... If it is not an aircraft debris field, could there really be any other explanation?

I don't think there could be, no. To see THAT sort of debris configuration THAT far out at sea? That's MH370.  



"I'd always thought you were a guy." .... "Most guys do." ~The Matrix.
User currently offlineDTW2HYD From United States of America, joined Jan 2013, 1767 posts, RR: 2
Reply 79, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 57317 times:

Quoting c680 (Reply 72):
And who pays for years of searching? Australia? Boeing? Malaysia? China?

I thought MH insurance companies pay for most of it and rest by Malaysian Government. Once debris field is located a contract will be awarded to defense contractors/oil companies for recovery. Boeing's insurance company pays only if there is a claim against company.


User currently offlineYoungMans From Australia, joined Mar 2014, 156 posts, RR: 0
Reply 80, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 57115 times:

"...Trust me, I work for the Government..!"

That seems to be the implied message from the talking heads on the TV news, especially from the politicians.

Has anyone seen any clear pictures of any of the floating debris, other than grainy satellite pictures?

We are told about wooden pallets, big objects more than 20 m long and whatever else; but as yet there is not a single high-quality photo that has been released to the public. Why?

With aircraft having taken footage of at least some of the debris, why don't we get to see at least a few photos from that?


User currently offlineJimJupiter From Germany, joined Sep 2011, 222 posts, RR: 0
Reply 81, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 56834 times:

Quoting YoungMans (Reply 80):
why don't we get to see at least a few photos from that?

We do get to see photos. If we don't get to see more or better ones, it's maybe because keeping us here up to date is not their first concern? Just an idea.



One is born, one runs up bills, one dies.
User currently offlineTrin From United States of America, joined May 2011, 145 posts, RR: 2
Reply 82, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 56739 times:

Quoting YoungMans (Reply 80):
With aircraft having taken footage of at least some of the debris, why don't we get to see at least a few photos from that?

Because, quite simply, we don't matter and we are not entitled to it.

Those concerned with SAR efforts and the investigative bodies DO 'get to see' them. As nothing more than members of the concerned online community - we don't.



"I'd always thought you were a guy." .... "Most guys do." ~The Matrix.
User currently offlineliquidair From United Kingdom, joined May 2011, 181 posts, RR: 0
Reply 83, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 56748 times:

Quoting David L (Reply 74):

on this occasion i disagree. I think it would have been better for the PM to confirm only that Inmarsat had narrowed the path down to the southern corridor and give an approximate position, calculated fuel load at last ping, and flight time to nearest land.

how on earth could that be construed as hiding something?


User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 10894 posts, RR: 32
Reply 84, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 57024 times:

Quoting c680 (Reply 68):
What are the ODDS that MH370 is NEVER found?

Not finding an 777 sized airplane is unacceptable and they will have to do whatever it takes to find it.

Quoting c680 (Reply 72):
And who pays for years of searching? Australia? Boeing? Malaysia? China?

Airbus payed a lot of money for the AF447 search. As long as there are enough parties out there who want to find it, they will share those costs.



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlineKaiarahi From Canada, joined Jul 2009, 2950 posts, RR: 28
Reply 85, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 56556 times:

Quoting David L (Reply 65):
It seems quite understandable to me. The head says the evidence has the aircraft coming down out reach of safety while the heart clings on to the thin hope of survivors.

There's a good neuroscience article here on investigations / desire for closure / tunnel vision: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe...-breeds-certainty/article17666325/



Note à moi-même - il faut respecter les cons.
User currently offlineLH526 From Germany, joined Aug 2000, 2353 posts, RR: 14
Reply 86, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 56335 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

Did the officials cross check the satellite photos with the currents (Indian ocean gyre) and the garbage patches within and so made sure it's not just ocean garbage floating around?


Trittst im Morgenrot daher, seh ich dich im Strahlenmeer ...
User currently offlinechrisrad From Australia, joined Dec 2000, 1068 posts, RR: 8
Reply 87, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 56348 times:

Sorry if this has been discussed already, but I can't see anything about it in the current thread

http://www.news.com.au/travel/travel...quawk/story-fnizu68q-1226865138407

OFFICIALS have revealed missing Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 gave off an unexplained signal minutes after the plane beamed its last scheduled “ping” to satellites.
The Boeing 777 broadcast a series of hourly “hello signals” to satellites for seven hours after it vanished from the radar. The pings were used by British satellite company Inmarsat to triangulate the current search area.
But last night Malaysian officials said the plane also beamed an unusual “partial” ping just eight minutes after what was thought to be its final transmission.
“There is evidence of a partial ‘handshake’ (ping) between the aircraft and ground station at 00:19 GMT,” said acting transport minister Hishammuddin Hussein.
“This transmission is not understood and is subject to further ongoing work”
Thomas Withington, a defence electronics analyst, told the UK’s Telegraph newspaper: “It sounds like the aircraft began to squawk a message and for some reason this was curtailed.”
“It could be because the aircraft was at a catastrophic phase of flight — that something was causing it to crash — or there could be some atmospheric disturbance.”



Welcome aboard Malaysia Airlines! Winner of Best Cabin Staff 2001,2002,2003,2004,2007,2009,2012
User currently offlineart From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2005, 3381 posts, RR: 0
Reply 88, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 56317 times:

Quoting Trin (Reply 78):
Quoting boacvc10 (Reply 45): .... If it is not an aircraft debris field, could there really be any other explanation?I don't think there could be, no. To see THAT sort of debris configuration THAT far out at sea? That's MH370.

Your reasoning is persuasive. I'm inclined to agree. And if the debris field is large, searching ships should be able to find it (whereas so far aircraft have mostly not been able to spot individual anomalies shown on satellite images).

By the way, just read on a French site that the family of an American on board are starting legal action against the carrier and the manufacturer.

In French (see last paragraph):

http://www.air-journal.fr/2014-03-26...un-satellite-francais-5102631.html

[Edited 2014-03-26 05:43:12]

User currently offlinerc135x From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 89, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 55931 times:

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 26):
On a 737, they are in the wheel well. On a 777, I don't know.

According to an FAA technical manual the two engine fire extinguisher bottles are located together some 80 feet from the engines. I would presume that places them somewhere in the fuselage.


User currently offlineAirKorea From South Korea, joined Dec 2006, 43 posts, RR: 0
Reply 90, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 56085 times:

Interesting articale. It is consistent with my speculation about the cause of MH 370 crash.

Flight MH370: Pilot in wrong state of mind to fly - friend
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/air-accide...cle.cfm?c_id=665&objectid=11226334


User currently offlineKaiarahi From Canada, joined Jul 2009, 2950 posts, RR: 28
Reply 91, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 55053 times:

Quoting AirKorea (Reply 90):
Interesting articale.

There's something there that doesn't make sense. The FO had 103 hours on type, but the article (and others) keep saying that this was his first flight without a check pilot. As far as I know, a pilot transitioning to a new type would not have 103 hours flight time with a check pilot - if he was that bad, it would be sim time. I assume what they're misreporting is that it was his first time in a 2 person flight crew, and that his previous time was as relief in a 3 person crew.



Note à moi-même - il faut respecter les cons.
User currently offlineshortstack81 From United States of America, joined Mar 2014, 35 posts, RR: 0
Reply 92, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 54282 times:

Quoting Trin (Reply 78):
I don't think there could be, no. To see THAT sort of debris configuration THAT far out at sea? That's MH370.

Yes, it could be it, but there are locations in the oceans where flotsum just collects. I'm not sure if all of them are as well known as the ones in the Pacific and Atlantic. Crossing my fingers and hoping we soon get some answers, but I think it's dark there now.


User currently offlinetheaviator380 From UK - England, joined Feb 2013, 396 posts, RR: 0
Reply 93, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 54233 times:

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 77):

I think Aus authorities should find debri first, pull it up from ocean and then declare they have found debris from MH370.


User currently offlinelnglive1011yyz From Canada, joined Oct 2003, 1608 posts, RR: 15
Reply 94, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 54348 times:

Quoting phantomx18 (Reply 2):
Posting again from previous thread lock:

Object washed ashore in the Maldives - Baarah Beach(not sure about this news source, never heard of them before):

http://www.haveeru.com.mv/news/54153

. .thought to be bomb or mine, but sure looks like this:

http://quick.aero/sterling/blog/how-...658848.pagespeed.ic.Fm-5teWM9D.jpg

A a fire suppression bottle. . . similar to what would be found on the missing MH370

This post needs to be 'upvoted' (to take from another website I visit), for visibility...

Can ANYONE with aircraft maintenance background confirm whether or not this item looks similar to an aircraft fire suppression bottle? The searches I've done online are eerily similar to this object.

If this was found in Maldives, should that nor warrant at least a look from the investigators!?

1011yyz



Pack your bags, we're going on a sympathy trip!
User currently offlineBackSeater From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 382 posts, RR: 1
Reply 95, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 53770 times:

Quoting Pihero (Reply 63):
This result is but one possible trajectory, based on a constant magnetic heading, canstant CAS and a constant altitude.

Please allow me to ask why was the aircraft using a "constant magnetic heading" ?
Arre you saying that the best track that matches the RTD data to within x nm is based on that assumption?

I would have thought that an FMS uses true heading internally, computed from the great circle that passes through the starting and ending coordinates. If someone wanted to use a magnetic heading, I assume the FMS would convert back and forth using an up-to-date table of magnetic declinations. But doesn't that method of flying over long distances mean that you cannot know where you will end up?

Do pilots use that? Just curious.


User currently offlinetheaviator380 From UK - England, joined Feb 2013, 396 posts, RR: 0
Reply 96, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 53807 times:

Quoting lnglive1011yyz (Reply 94):

That thing which has been washed to the beach looks little smaller than fire suppression ball/bottle. Also it's almost certain what approximate area aircraft ditched in the ocean and this place near Maldives is atleast 3000 miles away for SAR area? is it possible for debris to spread that far in span of 16 days? or it just some junk from some ship or even someone done it for publicity?


User currently offlineBruceSmith From South Africa, joined May 2011, 46 posts, RR: 0
Reply 97, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 53586 times:

Quoting lnglive1011yyz (Reply 94):
Quoting phantomx18 (Reply 2):
Posting again from previous thread lock:

Object washed ashore in the Maldives - Baarah Beach(not sure about this news source, never heard of them before):

http://www.haveeru.com.mv/news/54153

. .thought to be bomb or mine, but sure looks like this:

http://quick.aero/sterling/blog/how-...658848.pagespeed.ic.Fm-5teWM9D.jpg

A a fire suppression bottle. . . similar to what would be found on the missing MH370

This post needs to be 'upvoted' (to take from another website I visit), for visibility...

Can ANYONE with aircraft maintenance background confirm whether or not this item looks similar to an aircraft fire suppression bottle? The searches I've done online are eerily similar to this object.

If this was found in Maldives, should that nor warrant at least a look from the investigators!?

1011yyz

It does look similar to a fire suppression bottle, but it also looks similar to a rocket/satellite spherical fuel tank which is normally made of titanium and survives reentry quite often. There have been at least 6 satellites or rocket bodies reentering since December 2013 that had tracks that ended in the Indian ocean.

The article above has a followup link in it now which states the Maldives defence force determined it wasn't a bomb and removed it to a military base for identification.


User currently offlinenupogodi From Canada, joined Mar 2014, 909 posts, RR: 4
Reply 98, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 53527 times:

Quoting lnglive1011yyz (Reply 94):
This post needs to be 'upvoted' (to take from another website I visit), for visibility...

Can ANYONE with aircraft maintenance background confirm whether or not this item looks similar to an aircraft fire suppression bottle? The searches I've done online are eerily similar to this object.

I hope you don't visit threads relating to MH370 on reddit. It is incredibly frustrating to see mountains of misinformation getting upvoted.

Anyhow, someone PPRuNe claims to be mx said that the bottle look too small to be for a 777, and someone else said that the APU bottles are the same size as the engine bottles. It's possible someone faked that picture just to cause a fuss.

[Edited 2014-03-26 06:23:54]


A man must know how to look before he can hope to see.
User currently offlinercair1 From United States of America, joined Oct 2009, 1308 posts, RR: 52
Reply 99, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 54159 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CUSTOMER SERVICE & SUPPORT


Sanity Check - 3/26/2014 - 03:40Z
Re-posting in the new thread since I ended up at the end of the last one.
There is (will be) a link to this post in my profile under "homepage".

Formating notes.
New/changed lines will have this background color. All changes are relative to the previous Sanity Check.
Previous Sanity Check here. NOTE: this link will place the entry at the top of the screen, you will have to expand it.Previous Sanity Check. (by rcair1 Mar 21 2014 in Civil Aviation)
Minor wording/grammar/spelling changes are NOT highlighted.

Introductory comments:
This is the first updated Sanity Check for some days. This simply because there has been no news till the recent announcements from Malaysia and Inmarsat. I was loathe to spend too much time just addressing conspiracy theories for which we have no data.
To be clear - while I believe we know the plane has gone down in the South India Ocean, we have no better idea of why it flew there than we did on March 8.
Therefore the speculation, conspiracy theories, idle chatter, continues and will.
As before, this sanity check will focus on what we know more than what we think.

Changes in this edition.
Discussion and refinement of Inmarsat data.
Various sections simplified and clarified.
Doppler tutorial added.
I've shortened several sections- I have not highlighted those changes. The heading will say something like "Shortened". I did not hightlight them because I'm limited in formating.

First, I'm going to start with a restatement of what we know - right up front.
The aircraft departed KUL normally then secondary radar, voice and ACARS Contact was lost.
The aircraft turned west, then north west and primary radar contact was lost.
The aircraft continued to fly, or operate, for approximately 7 hrs.
We have not found the aircraft or wreckage and have not received any ELT transmissions.
The aircraft is lost (in the sense of crashed) with all souls on board. May they Rest in Peace.
The aircraft flew south into a remote part of the Indian Ocean.
Probable location of aircraft at last 'ping' place it 4-5 hours from major land with 30-45 minutes of fuel.
A final "partial ping" was received 8 minutes after the last one. Unknown reason - investigation underway (potential indication of power failure/flame-out).

Yes - I know:
There are those in this forum who will disagree that we "know" those last 3 items as we have not found debris or wreckage.
When (if) we find that wreckage, some of those will continue to deny the plane few there - they will postulate China or Malaysia or the US or "somebody" place the wreckage there.
I believe the data to be credible and factual if not 'proven'. It is beyond reasonable doubt.
I would be happy to be proven wrong - that the plane landed somewhere safely - and will gladly admit it.

First a synopsis
The ship took off normally and headed on course to Beijing
The last ACARS transmission was 01:07 local.
Reports that ACARS indicated new way-points were programed into the FMS before have been denied or have credible non-threatening explanations (see Way-points)
The last comms were "All right, good night" transmitted to Malaysia at hand-off to Vietnam control. Vietnam was not contacted. It has been reported it was the First Officer's voice.
NOTE: This sign-off is not atypical or unusual. If anything it tends to argue for normalcy (though deception cannot be excluded).
The transponder stopped transmitting at 1:21 - loss of secondary radar.
The discussion of climbs and descents seems to have changed. This matter is still unclear.
Inmarsat data is consistent with 30K cruise - no indication of fluctuating altitudes during majority of flight.
There are subsequent primary radar returns west over Malacca Strait and then north west. Since it is primarily radar - a reflection - it does NOT identify the a/c, however it has been correlated with SATCOM pings so confidence is high that the returns are from MH370
SATCOM system pings continued for 7+ (last ping at 08:11 local) hrs after LOS (loss of signal)
Using newly developed analysis, the SATCOM data has been used to exclude the so called 'north' corridor. (See Advanced analysis of SATCOM Pings).
This new analysis has allowed us to dramatically reduce the search area. It has also, unfortunately, placed the aircraft in a location where safe landing at fuel exhaustion is not possible.
A last "partial ping" was received 8 minutes after the 8:11 ping. The meaning of this is unknown, but speculation is it may have been an indication of fuel starvation and shutdown.
Searching continues for debris in the South Indian Ocean, but the location, weather and conditions are poor

Time-line
1:07 am - Last ACARS transmission.
1:19 am - Last verbal communication "All right, good night" from the plane; believed to be the co-pilot
1:21 am - Transponder stopped transmitting (turned off or failed)
1:30 am - Civilian (primary) radar lost contact
1:37 am - Expected ACARS transmission; not received
2:15 am - Last military primary radar contact
8:11 am - Last (hourly) satellite handshake
8:19 am (approx) A 'partial ping' was received - potentially and indication of power fluctuations at fuel starvation.

ACARS
ACARS is an automated aircraft communication system that transmits a/c information, including navigation, operations, maintenance, etc to ATC and maintenance facilities.
ACARS is NOT a flight system - it is not needed for safe flight.
ACARS is a subscription service and costs money. All indications are the MH370 was subscribed only to engine health monitoring and data from that is sent to Rolls Royce.
This last fact (only EHM) is somewhat questions because of 3/18 reports of new way-points being programmed. This would require ADS-C
ACARS communicates via VHF, HF or SATCOM. The communications channel depends on availability and is independent of the ACARS.
ACARS can be instructed not to use SATCOM, HF or VHF from the Cockpit. This would effectively stop ACARS from sending data. Access to the EE bay is not required.
The last ACARS transmission was at 1:07. The next was expected at 1:37 and was not received: This means ACARS communication was disabled between those times. This could be action by the flight-deck crew or system failure.

ACARS data from MH370
The ACARS system sent 2 engine health reports to Rolls Royce, both prior to the LOS event.
The Rolls Royce page indicates that a 'snapshot' of engine data would be sent at: takeoff, climb, cruise and landing. We know 2 ACARS Engine Health reports were received, consistent with the 1st two.
The last engine health report was received at 1:07am. The next was expected at 1:37 am and was not received. This indicates that the transmission of ACARS data was disabled between 1:07 and 1:37, but not when during that period.
The Engine Health report received prior to LOS had 'interesting' altitude data/fluctuations including 40K drop in a minute. That data is suspect.
There seems to be some indication that ADS-C data with changed way-point information was included in the last ACARS report. This has not been confirmed and has, in fact, been denied.
A recent report stated that is was "normal" for MH pilots to turn off ACARS for flights into China. This has not been verified and seems inconsistent with SATCOM coverage.

ADS-C Tutorial.
ADS-C stands for Aircraft Dependent Surveillance - Contract.
The "Dependent" is because it "depends" on the aircraft taking action - as opposed to "independent" like radar..
Contract means there must be a "contract" or "agreement" set up by the controllers an/or crew to send information.
ADS-C is not required to be used.
ADS-C can be programed to report periodically, on demand, on event. It can be initiated by the crew in an emergency.
There have been reports - now denied - that the ship turned before LOS, or that that new way-points were programmed before LOS.
The only way this (later) item would be know is if the ACARS Predicted Route Group was sent. That includes ETA, altitude, lat/long at next way-point and next+1 way-point.
ADS-C is transmitted via ACARS which can use SATCOM, VHF or HF.
ADS-C does not transmit via transponder (thanks for that correction)
A good tutorial on ADS-C is available at http://prezi.com/pcuvxhcklsda/ads-c-overview/

Way-point Entry Data.
I have deleted this section which dealt with reports of turns before LOS and insertion of new way-points before LOS as these reports continue to be postulated and denied.
I will add that information if it becomes factual.

Way-point Tracks.
A series of way-points reported that match the primary radar tracks in/near Malacca Strait.
These way-points line up with the direction indicated by the primary radar returns and Inmarsat data to the north.
While many believe the aircraft was under control - we cannot conclude if these way-point were used, or just coincidentally along the path.
A 777 can be programed to follow a series of way-point automatically - this is normal operating procedure and a 777 pilot would need no extra practice/training to do it. (Relevant to pilot flight simulator ownership)

SATCOM
SATCOM is a communications channel - Satellite Communications. It is a radio system that uses satellites to communicate various information.
SATCOM is not ACARS - it is one of the channels ACARS can use.
The Inmarsat Senior VP likened the Inmarsat box on MH370 to a 'handset' and the Satellites to the network. ACARS, Texting, etc are all "applications" that run on the 'handset'
The system pings the aircraft roughly hourly.
The SATCOM system on MH370 is a "Classic Aero" set and connects to Inmarsat 3 satellites. In the area covered, the only satellite with coverage is IOR. (Source Inmarsat)
The SATCOM system sends (or responds to) periodic 'pings' to/from the satellites (hourly). These 'pings' are a network communication that says "I am here."
SATCOM pings are not communicating a/c status, they are part of the communications channel. They are akin to registration pings on a cell system.
SATCOM pings provide no aircraft location, heading, speed or altitude information.
NOTE: There are versions of Inmarsat solutions that provide more location information than we have for MH370 (Inmarsat-4).
However, this a/c did not use this technology and the pings are handled over the low bandwidth, non-directional global antenna.
Claiming that it did (have newer versions or use directional antennas) is yet another unsubstantiated theory that would require massive conspiracy at Inmarsat. Why? I don't buy it
I have deleted the rest of this section in light of new Inmarsat analysis (see below)

Advanced analysis of SATCOM Pings
Over the past 24-48 hours we have learned that Inmarsat has developed new analysis techniques to improve their estimation of MH370's likely path. Inmarsat should be applauded for this work.
As I understand from information presented by Inmarsat, the analysis included:
- A component of Time of Flight analysis - how long does it take the signal travel from the satellite to the a/c and back.
- A component of frequency shift analysis (based on the well known Doppler effect - see below).
- Inclusion of variation in position, with time, of the IOR satellite (wobble).
- Specific correlation with other a/c (777 I believe) using the same type of equipment in the same relative routing.
- Specific information about this a/c from previous flights and ground communications to understand the signature of this specific installation.
- Assumptions for various airspeed and altitude (somewhat driven by a/c performance models.)
As a result of this analysis, Inmarsat has been able to eliminate the "north" corridor previously identified.
This graph shows how the correlation between north corridor and the MH370 data is poor, south corridor data and MH370 data is good.
Combining that information with other data - we can conclude with high confidence that MH370 flew south into the Indian Ocean where it crashed due to fuel starvation.
NOTE: I've simplified this dramatically
Other figures of interest.

Doppler Effect - a simple tutorial.
The Doppler effect (named after Austrian physicist Christian Doppler) is something we have probably all experienced.
The most common case we may be familiar with is how a train whistle will decrease in pitch as the train goes by.
It works like this (sound wave based).
-The train whistle we hear is the result of pressure waves in the air causing motion of our ear drums.
-Let's assume that the horn frequency is 200 Hz, the speed of sound is 340m/s and the train is coming at us at 100km/hr (27.7m/s).
-This effectively adds to the speed of sound and decreases the 'effective wavelength' because the source is moving towards us.
-The sound we will hear is about 220Hz - it is higher than the train tone.
-When the train passes it is now moving at 27.7 m/s away from us and the tone drops to about 180Hz.
-This is a big change and we can clearly hear it.
In the case of the Inmarsat satellites, the "ping" is carried on a radio wave operating at, I believe, about 1.6 GHz so the wavelength (use the speed of light, not speed of sound) is about 18.737028625cm
There is a reason I included so many digits
Ignoring satellite motion, if the aircraft was moving directly at the satellite at 450 knots (231.5m/s) - the sensed wavelength is 18.73701415625cm
Ignoring satellite motion, if the aircraft was moving directly way from the satellite at 450 knots (-231.5m/s) - the sensed wavelength is 18.73704309375cm
Now - if I've done my maths correctly (and I would encourage checking here), the percentage change is 0.00015% - on the order of 1 part per million.
And of course, this is the best case - the a/c moving directly toward (including climbing) the satellite and directly away (descending).
In the case of MH370 - the Doppler effect was much smaller because the aircraft is not climbing/descending and is moving at an angle to the satellite.
In addition, this is being measured by a device that is designed not to measure it.
Satellite motion will add/subtract from this as well and was key to the analysis
It should be clear from this that based on this you cannot take a simple single measurement from a single ping and calculate meaningful data.
What Inmarsat did was compare (correlate) data from MH370 with similar data from a/c traveling on similar routes. That correlation matches will with a southern route, not well with a northern route.
Authors note: I hesitated to provide this analysis because 1) it is pretty deep and 2) it will open the door for those who say "No way they can calculate that."
However, I believe it is better to discuss it openly than to 'hide it from the uneducated masses."
Face it - conspiracy theorists will dismiss anything. Those interested in learning and perhaps questioning logically (thus providing better insights/options) will do so. That may lead to better understanding."

Fire Theory (Was Cargo and Lithium Batteries).
I'm leaving this here because it continues to be discussed. However, until (and if) we get further data - this is just one of many speculations.
I would point out that most authorities are pointing at human action versus mechanical failure (of any sort).
One hypothesis that has been presented is that a fire broke out incapacitated the crew/passengers or caused hypoxia that did so.
The hypothesis is:
A fire broke out causing the crew to disable multiple systems (or disabled them itself)
The crew was successful in containing/extinguishing the fire - but then was disable due to smoke and/or hypoxia.
The a/c, either on autopilot or uncontrolled by stable due to advance FBW systems, remained in stable flight till fuel exhaustion.
The turns exhibited could have been a combination of programmed and random course changes.

Hypoxia and Pressurization
There has been lots of speculation about loss of pressurization in the aircraft and what that would do to passengers and crew.
IMPORTANT NOTE: all of this applies to cabin pressure - not the pressure outside.Just climbing to 45K would not exposed the passengers to that altitude - the aircraft would have to be depressurized.
In the case of loss of cabin pressure - O2 mask would deploy automatically.
Cockpit alarms would sound - comparison to Helios is not valid (777 and 737 are very different).
The 777 can be modified for operation at very high altitude airports w/o alarm - however, that just raises the alert altitude, it does not disable it. Further - there is no evidence this 777 has been so modified.
The pilots cannot disable this above 13,500 feet - they can release the masks.
Passengers masks would last 12-20 minutes. Portable crew (FA) bottles ~30minutes. Cockpit crew longer.
Time of useful consciousness (not to loss of consciousness) will range from 1-3 minutes at 30K to 9-15 seconds at 43K. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_of_useful_consciousness)
above 40,000 ft cabin altitude - positive pressure oxygen is required - passenger masks do not do this and would not be effective.
Because of this the a/c must be certified able to descend and pilots demonstrate an emergency descent to ~10,000 ft in 2 minutes.
The actual regulation is that passengers cannot be exposed to a cabin altitude of more than 25K for more than 2 minutes, or more than 40K for any time. (A380 got an exception to this rule.)

Cabin depressurizing by Pilots (shortened)
Pilots can depressurize the a/c by turning pressurization to manual, turning off bleed air and opening outflow valves. (I have no information on how quickly this would lower cabin pressure.
This would not disable either alarms or auto-deploy of passenger oxygen masks.
Let's investigate the sequence required.
1) Pilots (or whomever is in control) switches to manual pressurization, turns off bleed, opens outflow valves.
2) Cabin altitude climbs above 13,500 and passenger masks deploy - there is no way to prevent that. At that point passengers and cabin crew know.
3) Presuming the pilots do not descend - passengers O2 will last 12-20 minutes. After that, depending on the cabin altitude they will loose effective consciousness (not loose consciousness, but effective consciousness).
4) Cabin crew O2 will run out.
5) During this time, the flight crew O2 will operate (and last longer)
6) At some point - depending on cabin altitude - those not on O2 will become disabled or die.
NOTE: Above 40K cabin altitude passenger masks are ineffective - positive pressure O2 is required.
NOTE: The a/c itself is not impacted by depressurizing.

CRV/FDR Data
The CVR (cockpit voice recorder) and FDR (flight data recorder) do not transmit data in flight.
They do emit sonic pings if immersed. These will last a minimum of 30 days. We can expect sonar is being used to listen for them.
The pinger operates at 37.5KHz 106.5dp re 1μPa. (thanks k83713)
Maximum depth of beacon detection in Normal Conditions: 1-2km
Maximum depth of beacon detection in Good Conditions: 4-5km
Localising a pinger from the surface in shallow water is relatively easy, as described above. In deep water, the detection equipment should be installed on a self-propelled underwater vehicle, presupposing that the position is already known to within the maximum 2-3km detection range.
The CVR reportedly is a 120 minute CVR so it would contain only the last 120 minutes of flight (presuming it did not fail or was turned off prior to that).
I don't have data form the recording time of the FDR, but it is typically much longer.

ELT
The ELT, or emergency locater transmitter is mounted in the rear of the aircraft - difficult to access in flight.
The ELT is battery powered - independent built in power source. It is this source that is suspect in causing the 787 fire at Heathrow.
The ELT will be trigged by G forces in a crash. It will not operate under water.
The ELT can be triggered from the cockpit - it is a hardwired switch not dependent on computer systems.
The ELT transmits on the guard frequency (VHF) and on 406MHz to satellites. If it had been triggered (above water), satellites would have heard it and been able to locate the a/c.
Clarification: there are additional manual ELT's in the cabin that can be activated by crew members, and on slide rafts, but they do not include g-force sensing.

Primary versus Secondary Radar (brief tutorial)
Primary radar is based on the original military usage. It sends out a strong (KW to MW) signal and looks for a reflection from something.
Primary radar provides distance and location. Comparing returns speed can be determined. Strength of return can indicate size.
Stealth a/c and ships are designed to absorb or miss-direct the reflection so primary radar cannot see them.
Primary radar does not depend on the transponder, so turning off a transponder will not make an a/c disappear from primary.
Primary radar is less prevalent than secondary - and more typically military tho ATC's do use it.
Secondary Radar is really not Radar in the defined sense. It is directional communication.
In secondary radar a directional signal is sent out (much less powerful than primary). Any a/c with a transponder that receives it will respond (the transponder responds) with information about the aircraft.
Combined with the direction of the outgoing beam, the time of flight information and returned information, the a/c location and identity (and other info depending on the mode) is returned.
Secondary radar is the primary method used by ATC.
If the transponder fails or is turned off - secondary radar will not see the a/c.
In the case of MH370
The transponder was turned off - so the a/c disappeared from secondary (ATC) radar.
A target was tracked west, then northwest using primary radar. That target was correlated with SATCOM pings help determine it was MH370.

Airworthiness Directive
The airworthiness directive about corrosion near the SATCOM antenna does not apply to this ship.
The ship DOES have SATCOM - but uses a different antenna

Aircraft Type and Fuel State
The aircraft was a Boeing 777-200ER. MTOW 656,000 lbs, 301 3 class passengers (standard Boeing Config - does not reflect MH specific config.)
The aircraft could land in 6000 ft, or much less at high risk. As little as 3000ft has been stated, but it could not take off from there.
The aircraft would need a hard surface to land - this is heavier that has been done on steel matts.
It is reported the aircraft 45 to 60 minutes extra fuel. This would amount to about 7-7.5 hrs of fuel. This is a normal amount for this route.
The aircraft should have been able to fly about 30 minutes after the last SATCOM ping at 8:11.
The figure at this link show max range for the 777-200ER. NOTE: MH370 was not fueled for this range. http://www.boeing.com/assets/pdf/com.../777_range_singapore.pdf

Can a 777 fly 'by itself' for 7+ hours.
There has been much debate on if the 777 could continue to fly without human intervention for 7+ hours.
Fundamentallywe know the aircraft did fly on - so any theory must support a potential for the aircraft to continue in flight.
Satcom data has eliminated the "stationary on the ground" theory
Without information on the conditions on the aircraft - we cannot make a determination of what the a/c could or could not do.
We can make some educated statements:
If under human control - obviously it could fly this long.
On full autopilot it could fly on - however, that would assume a course was programmed in. If a 777 is programed to a way-point and it reaches that point - it will continue on the last heading.
If in heading and speed hold mode - it could fly to fuel fuel exhaustion.
In a 777, unlike and Airbus a/c, upon flame out the 777 will pitch down to maintain speed. An airbus will pitch up to attempt to maintain altitude till alpha prots cause it to decent at just above stall, nose up. No argument about which is better please. It is irrelevant - both will descend.
In summary - there are multiple scenarios where the a/c would have continued in flight till fuel exhaustion. We have no data or basis to include or exclude any of them.

Search Areas
Searching is now exclusively in the South Indian Ocean west of Australia.
AMSA Maps http://www.amsa.gov.au/media/incidents/mh370-search.asp

Mobile phones
We continue to have lots of discussion on "mobile phones" - can the connect in flight, etc.
We don't have any reports or evidence of that any passenger or crew mobile phone has registered with any network.
Until we have that data or reports - I believe the mobile phone discussions are not getting us anywhere.
UPDATE: This subject continues to be discussed. But, we have had no reports of cell phones registering with towers - we are in a loop here.

Most Common Theories. Note - all have problems!
Successful hijacking either with crew complicity or not, followed by controlled flight somewhere. Argument against: most believe we would have found/tracked the aircraft or heard something from the hijackers. Also, actions by passengers.
Unsuccessful hijacking either with crew complicity or not, followed by automatic flight to fuel exhaustion. Argument against: Likely the passengers would know and some action would be taken.
Pilot homicide/suicide followed by controlled or automatic flight till fuel exhaustion. Arguments against: No evidence of motive. Why fly to remote area rather than immediate crash. May require hypoxia to disable cabin crew/passengers.
Mechanical failure that disabled all comms, disabled crew/passengers but left a/c flying in an automatic mode: Theory not in favor with investigators.

Less Common Theories and Conspiracy Theories (simplified)
Other theories that seem less likely or fully improbable - however most are versions of the above.
A fire broke out that incapacitated passengers and crew - but allowed to aircraft to fly on it's own till starvation. This is a form of the Mechanical failure theory based on fire.
The aircraft "shadowed" either a KLM or SIA aircraft to hide from radar then turned off the track and landed.
Freescale engineers have been hijacked for sensitive US data.
There was something in the Cargo worth stealing - which is why it was not screened.
The plane was full of undeclared gold.Gold is very heavy - what would you declare the cargo as?
The US hijacked the 777 using on board FBW technology to fly it like a drone to Diego Garcia (this one wins the insanity case).
There has been a claim by counter terrorist expert that this could be a "cyber hijack" - a malicious attack of a FBW a/c by somebody in the back with a smart phone.

Crew Related Theories
The crew and passengers are a focus of investigation. Particularly the crew, because of the difficulty of managing an external cockpit intrusion.
The pilot has received a lot of attention because: 1) He supports opposition politics, 2) He has a mongo flight simulator, 3) There are rumors of family problems (debunked???).

Dismissed or Confirmed not True
Chinese Satellite Debris - nothing found in area.
Oil worker report - nothing found in area.
Greek shipping debris - nothing found/not related.
Raft with "Boarding" found - not related
Original 'debris' reports (March 8/9) not related/nothing found.
Maldives low flying a/c - not related.
Cell phones ringing - artifact of the cellular system.
Aliens.

IN summary what we know is.
The aircraft departed KUL normally then secondary radar, voice and ACARS Contact was lost.
The aircraft turned west, then north west and primary radar contact was lost.
The aircraft continued to fly, or operate, for approximately 7 hrs.
We have not found the aircraft or wreckage and have not received any ELT transmissions.
The aircraft is lost (in the sense of crashed) with all souls on board. May they Rest in Peace.
The aircraft flew south into a remote part of the Indian Ocean.
Probable location of aircraft at last 'ping' place it 4-5 hours from major land with 30-45 minutes of fuel.

That is all.
Respectfully Submitted - rcair1



rcair1
User currently online76er From Netherlands, joined Mar 2007, 512 posts, RR: 1
Reply 100, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 53388 times:

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 91):
There's something there that doesn't make sense. The FO had 103 hours on type, but the article (and others) keep saying that this was his first flight without a check pilot. As far as I know, a pilot transitioning to a new type would not have 103 hours flight time with a check pilot - if he was that bad, it would be sim time

On the contrary, it makes complete sense. After completing sim training it is standard procedure to initially operate regular flights with an instructor. It's called linetraining under supervision or IOE in the USA. Policies vary by airline, but I would not be surprised if the required total time under supervision in this case was 100 hours.


User currently offlineTheRedBAron From Mexico, joined Mar 2005, 2194 posts, RR: 8
Reply 101, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 53301 times:

Quoting AirKorea (Reply 90):
Interesting articale. It is consistent with my speculation about the cause of MH 370 crash.

Flight MH370: Pilot in wrong state of mind to fly - friend
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/air-accide...cle.cfm?c_id=665&objectid=11226334

Even if the possibility of pilot involvement in this tragedy, exist, I DONT THINK HE DID IT. In the article they don't mention at all he was not even to fly that day, and other small info.

Yes he may be suicidal, but seldom a suicidal person kills 200+ to take out his anger, also it required him to have a plan to make such a complex flight and LOOONG journey to death (even if he was dead 2 hours into the flight and the T7 flew alone for another 5 or 6 hours). All of us have problems, but even if we face them and may be depressed to handle them and move over, very few of us take the anger towards innocent people, your employer and most of all your work (that he in this case seemed to love).

My thesis is about depression and my speciality was about external factors that triggered them, believe me when I say he doesn't fit the profile at all, but then again as somebody here said S+it happens !

I hope they can tell us if the object in the maldives is indeed a fore bottle....

TRB



The best seat in a Plane is the Jumpseat.
User currently offlinebikerthai From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 2072 posts, RR: 4
Reply 102, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 53847 times:

Quoting jollo (Reply 35):
The read cargo door of a 777 *can* theoretically be opened in flight, or is it physically impossible?

It would be un-wise. As the 777 cargo door opens up and outward, opening it during flight may rip the door from the fuselage, causing catastrophic structure failure.

Also, "although I am not sure about this", I believe the cargo door are structural load bearing. There are a ton of pins and fittings that secure the door against the fuselage.

bt



Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
User currently offlinelnglive1011yyz From Canada, joined Oct 2003, 1608 posts, RR: 15
Reply 103, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 53538 times:

Quoting nupogodi (Reply 98):

I hope you don't visit threads relating to MH370 on reddit. It is incredibly frustrating to see mountains of misinformation getting upvoted.

Anyhow, someone PPRuNe claims to be mx said that the bottle look too small to be for a 777, and someone else said that the APU bottles are the same size as the engine bottles. It's possible someone faked that picture just to cause a fuss.

Oh, I don't believe 99% of the stuff I read on reddit lol

I don't see the harm in them looking into the item though - it would take just a few minutes of looking at it for serial #'s, etc, to determine if it came from an aircraft and/or the particular plane in question.

The website indicates they have taken the item to a military base for investigation, so hopefully they will be able to identify what it came from.

1011yyz



Pack your bags, we're going on a sympathy trip!
User currently offlineLTC8K6 From United States of America, joined Jun 2009, 1203 posts, RR: 0
Reply 104, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 53607 times:

http://vnews-assets.s3-website-us-ea...azonaws.com/posts/medium_29224.jpg

http://vnews-assets.s3-website-us-ea...azonaws.com/posts/medium_29222.jpg

Better pics of the washed up sphere.


User currently offlinercair1 From United States of America, joined Oct 2009, 1308 posts, RR: 52
Reply 105, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 53486 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CUSTOMER SERVICE & SUPPORT

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 102):
Also, "although I am not sure about this", I believe the cargo door are structural load bearing. There are a ton of pins and fittings that secure the door against the fuselage.

I also don't think there is any access to the cargo bay from the cabin.

Let's see here - the challenges.
- In flight opening of door (rip off)
- Interlocks?
- Required decompression.
- No entry method.
- If there was - you are going to a compartment fire - you'd better have SCBA and PPE
- If there was - how to you move about - it is full.
- No visibility - fires are not like "Back Draft" they are black and you cannot see. We train to search by feel.
- Where is this pallet in relation to the door - do you have to dump half the cargo?

I think we can exclude dumping cargol. This is not the "High and the Mighty"



rcair1
User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 10894 posts, RR: 32
Reply 106, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 53351 times:

Quoting rcair1 (Reply 105):
I think we can exclude dumping cargo

Unless there was a John McClane aboard, I agree.



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlinebikerthai From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 2072 posts, RR: 4
Reply 107, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 52965 times:

Quoting rcair1 (Reply 105):

I also don't think there is any access to the cargo bay from the cabin.

Even if you can hack your way down to the cargo bay. You would not be able to get around the containers to get to the door switch. There is no room between the container and the sidewall.

Thanks rcair1 for the last re-cap. The information about the last partial ping to me is very useful as it would probably help reduce the search area when the time comes to recover the fuselage.

bt



Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
User currently offlineBruceSmith From South Africa, joined May 2011, 46 posts, RR: 0
Reply 108, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 52985 times:

Quoting LTC8K6 (Reply 104):
http://vnews-assets.s3-website-us-ea...azonaws.com/posts/medium_29224.jpg

http://vnews-assets.s3-website-us-ea...azonaws.com/posts/medium_29222.jpg

Better pics of the washed up sphere.

From those pictures, that looks like a custom chemical reaction vessel for chemical process development or a calorific test apparatus. No mounting brackets and a single exit port unlike the example photographs of the extinguisher vessel.

http://www.chilworth.co.uk/instrumen...sphere-flammability-apparatus.aspx


User currently offlineDTW2HYD From United States of America, joined Jan 2013, 1767 posts, RR: 2
Reply 109, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 52658 times:

Quoting phantomx18 (Reply 2):
What are the odds of one of these floating in the ocean, washing up ashore thousands of miles away from search area, when no other plane has been reported missing in the area?

Could ocean currents account for this, or are they looking in the wrong place? Or could this be an elaborate hoax?

Based on what I heard from oceanography experts on news, the area they are searching is like a washing machine. It would be hard for anything to reach from 1500NM south west of Perth to Maldivian shore. May be in few years but not in ~20 days

One expert told there is 3 Million Tons of plastic floating in oceans and 1000 containers are lost at sea every year.


User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21530 posts, RR: 55
Reply 110, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 52623 times:

Quoting rcair1 (Reply 105):
I also don't think there is any access to the cargo bay from the cabin.

It's possible on the 747, so it wouldn't surprise me if it were possible on the 777 as well.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlinenupogodi From Canada, joined Mar 2014, 909 posts, RR: 4
Reply 111, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 52870 times:

Quoting rcair1 (Reply 105):
I also don't think there is any access to the cargo bay from the cabin.

I flew on a Thomas Cook A332 that had a "downstairs" washroom. I'd never seen such a thing on a single-deck aircraft, I asked the FA about it, she said yeah we have a few like that and it takes up part of the cargo space. That would make sense. Maybe with an axe you could get through the wall?

Of course I'm just being silly. The cargo thing is silly.



A man must know how to look before he can hope to see.
User currently offlineLTC8K6 From United States of America, joined Jun 2009, 1203 posts, RR: 0
Reply 112, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 52617 times:

Quoting BruceSmith (Reply 108):
From those pictures, that looks like a custom chemical reaction vessel for chemical process development or a calorific test apparatus. No mounting brackets and a single exit port unlike the example photographs of the extinguisher vessel.

It does have what looks like a mounting strap mark, though.

http://aae-ltd.com/wp-content/uploads/Extinguisher-Bottle-Assembly.jpg

I really doubt it's from MH370, but it still needs to be checked out.


User currently offlinetheaviator380 From UK - England, joined Feb 2013, 396 posts, RR: 0
Reply 113, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 52360 times:

Quoting nupogodi (Reply 111):

It's on some of LH A340-300 as well. Don't understand the logic as Thomas cook FA said it takes up cargo space, don't see how it's viable for LH. I doubt Thomas cook carries any major commercial cargo being holiday charter.


User currently offlineBruceSmith From South Africa, joined May 2011, 46 posts, RR: 0
Reply 114, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 52008 times:

Quoting LTC8K6 (Reply 112):
It does have what looks like a mounting strap mark, though.

http://aae-ltd.com/wp-content/uploads/Extinguisher-Bottle-Assembly.jpg

I really doubt it's from MH370, but it still needs to be checked out.

I was thinking raised welded seam, if you follow the line to the edges of the tank, you can see how it curves up from the main radius and even casts a raised edge in the flash shadow at the top right of the photo.

http://vnews-assets.s3-website-us-ea...azonaws.com/posts/medium_29224.jpg

But we do need to be sure and hopefully someone is talking to the Maldives defence chaps.


User currently offlinerfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7607 posts, RR: 32
Reply 115, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 52138 times:

Quoting 65mustang (Reply 3):
In addition, the U.S. Embassy said the 2:43 U.S. military bases stationed in Thailand U-Tapao SOS signal was listening to some of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370 emergency call, said the aircraft cabin facing disintegration driver call, they want a forced landing . U.S. troops are currently stationed in Thailand, Malaysia has been providing this signal.

No - the US Embassy never made such an announcement, and the US Department of Defense has denied that any US forces in Thailand picked up any signal from MH370.

The original article appears to have come from a known conspiracy web site, and might be based on a fourth hand report from a relative of a relative of a relative of a US Navy sailor who was on a P-3 crew sent to Thailand to help with the search. There may have been a few US military at U-Tapao at the time MH-370 disappeared, but based on DOD releases it appears unlikely. There were several support staff members sent to U-Tapao after the search for MH-370 began.

Quoting c680 (Reply 72):
And who pays for years of searching? Australia? Boeing? Malaysia? China?

Paying for years of searching can go into multiple catagories.

Since there is heavy pressure within China to find the aircraft - the Chinese military could easily decide to conduct training maneuvers in the search reason for years as a part of their normal training budget.

Australia will likely use the search area as a training location for several weeks, but if nothing is found - their active searches will likely end by mid-April. The same with most nations, though the US might leave some assets in the area for longer.

If (When) verifiable debris are found, MAS and Boeing will fund through their insurance companies, or self-insurance, a detailed under-sea search. The Malaysian government will likely contribute to this effort due to the financial condition of Malaysia Airlines.

With potential lawsuit damages exceeding $ 1 billion USD - Boeing needs the aircraft wreckage to be found.

Finding the AF447 FDR/CVR certainly helped Airbus in the eventual final settlements from that crash.

Boeing will be on the defensive because they will not be able to disprove all sorts of mechanical possible causes for the accident. The airline will argue that the aircraft failed and caused the loss in court, Boeing will argue that the crew failed and caused the crash. Without actual wreckage, and hopefully FDR/CVR data, neither will be able to avoid massive damage awards in court.


Note - given the length of the aircraft flight after the initial change of direction and LOS - it is extremely unlikely that the CVR will have anything about why the aircraft changed course or the communications was lost.


User currently offlinefodar From Lebanon, joined Jan 2008, 22 posts, RR: 0
Reply 116, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 51716 times:

Quoting rcair1 (Reply 99):
• In the case of the Inmarsat satellites, the "ping" is carried on a radio wave operating at, I believe, about 1.6 GHz so the wavelength (use the speed of light, not speed of sound) is about 18.737028625cm
• There is a reason I included so many digits
• Ignoring satellite motion, if the aircraft was moving directly at the satellite at 450 knots (231.5m/s) - the sensed wavelength is 18.73701415625cm
• Ignoring satellite motion, if the aircraft was moving directly way from the satellite at 450 knots (-231.5m/s) - the sensed wavelength is 18.73704309375cm
• Now - if I've done my maths correctly (and I would encourage checking here), the percentage change is 0.00015% - on the order of 1 part per million.
• And of course, this is the best case - the a/c moving directly toward (including climbing) the satellite and directly away (descending).
• In the case of MH370 - the Doppler effect was much smaller because the aircraft is not climbing/descending and is moving at an angle to the satellite.
• In addition, this is being measured by a device that is designed not to measure it.
• Satellite motion will add/subtract from this as well and was key to the analysis
• It should be clear from this that based on this you cannot take a simple single measurement from a single ping and calculate meaningful data.

The summaries that I read in the more detailed news reports implied that it was the doppler shift in the burst repetition frequency that was estimated, not the relatively much, much smaller doppler in the carrier signal that you describe above. Not to belittle the achievement, especially that this is not a radar system with a mode designed to estimate range and doppler.


User currently offlinercair1 From United States of America, joined Oct 2009, 1308 posts, RR: 52
Reply 117, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 51499 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CUSTOMER SERVICE & SUPPORT

Quoting fodar (Reply 116):

Thanks - do you have that frequency - so I could update the calculations.



rcair1
User currently offlineTrin From United States of America, joined May 2011, 145 posts, RR: 2
Reply 118, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 51424 times:

Quoting theaviator380 (Reply 93):

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 77):

I think Aus authorities should find debri first, pull it up from ocean and then declare they have found debris from MH370.

They may have already. Given the previous days' good searching conditions, the 'new' (2+ days old) satellite images from Malaysia, and the delays in each and every piece of information so far to come out of this investigation (from the Malaysians) - we should expect a significant delay between when official MH370 debris is recovered, and when it is announced to the world.



"I'd always thought you were a guy." .... "Most guys do." ~The Matrix.
User currently offlineDavid L From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 9523 posts, RR: 42
Reply 119, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 50643 times:

Quoting Trin (Reply 118):
the 'new' (2 days old) satellite images from Malaysia, and the delays in each and every piece of information so far to come out of this investigation (from the Malaysians)

Are you sure you aren't confusing the dates the images were taken with the dates on which potential wreckage was identified? In your reference to previous images that's certainly what you've done. The "delay" between image dates and announcements of potential debris are not caused by the Malaysians "sitting" on the information.


User currently offlinePihero From France, joined Jan 2005, 4392 posts, RR: 76
Reply 120, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 50505 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting rcair1 (Reply 99):

Can a 777 fly 'by itself' for 7+ hours.
• There has been much debate on if the 777 could continue to fly without human intervention for 7+ hours.
• Fundamentallywe know the aircraft did fly on - so any theory must support a potential for the aircraft to continue in flight.
• Satcom data has eliminated the "stationary on the ground" theory.......
• On full autopilot it could fly on - however, that would assume a course was programmed in. If a 777 is programed to a way-point and it reaches that point - it will continue on the last heading.
• If in heading and speed hold mode - it could fly to fuel fuel exhaustion.

It's the " ...that would assume a course was programmed"... that I'd like to discuss a bit :
The basic modes of an autopilot are HDG - meaning *hold heading* and VS - meaning *vertical speed*. The next level of pitch mode would be ALT HOLD... My question is, for a Boeing airplane, about the difference between VS = 0 and "hold this altitude", especially with turbulence-caused deviations on vertical speed.
A programmed course could only have been made in an LNAV mode... and that course will be a great circle arc.
We know that the NTSB / INMARSAT work excludes an orthodromy... hence the "programmed" theory goes down the drain.
On the other hand, HDG /VS, being the basic modes, could happen with loss of FMS guidance inputs.

Quoting BackSeater (Reply 95):

Please allow me to ask why was the aircraft using a "constant magnetic heading" ?
Arre you saying that the best track that matches the RTD data to within x nm is based on that assumption?

Yes. read my posts explaining the reasoning and see for yourself the results, both for the NTSB / INMARSAT solution and Tim Vasquez's.

Quoting BackSeater (Reply 95):
I would have thought that an FMS uses true heading internally, computed from the great circle that passes through the starting and ending coordinates. If someone wanted to use a magnetic heading, I assume the FMS would convert back and forth using an up-to-date table of magnetic declinations. But doesn't that method of flying over long distances mean that you cannot know where you will end up?

First, the flight instruments are not driven by the FMS : They are provided Altitude, IAS, Attitude, Heading by the ADIRUs.
As we are still working - like our fathers and grandfathers - in *magnetic heading*, our navigation / piloting data on our flight instruments come from the ADIRUs, not the FMS. So you have it backwards...That's up to a very high latitude when the system changes automatically to a *true heading, because variations change very rapidly.

Second, the FMS receives exactly the same infos provided to the flight instruments and elaborates its navigation on its own. As I said in one earlier post, an orthodromy is systematically computed by the FMS between two points : an origin - which could be one's actual present position, and a *destination* which could be a waypoint or a Lat/Long position.

And I repeat : the orthodromy, i.e an FMS-generated, i.e on LNAV, does not gel with the *ping / Doppler* solution everything is now based upon, including all the efforts for SAR from Australia;



Contrail designer
User currently offlinestealthz From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5678 posts, RR: 45
Reply 121, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 50017 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 115):
Australia will likely use the search area as a training location for several weeks, but if nothing is found - their active searches will likely end by mid-April

I would expect Australia to stay involved to a significant extent while the situation is ongoing... just part of having the ill-fated plane fall into our SAR zone... goes with the territory.. we will do what we can.



If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
User currently offlinenupogodi From Canada, joined Mar 2014, 909 posts, RR: 4
Reply 122, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 49543 times:

Quoting rcair1 (Reply 117):
Thanks - do you have that frequency - so I could update the calculations.

The graph shows, it was, what, 100-300Hz difference in what we know is a 1600MHz carrier. Basically as low as 6 millionths of a percent difference. Absolutely incredible.



A man must know how to look before he can hope to see.
User currently offlineToni_ From Cape Verde, joined Apr 2002, 95 posts, RR: 0
Reply 123, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 49216 times:

Quoting LTC8K6 (Reply 112):
It does have what looks like a mounting strap mark, though.

http://aae-ltd.com/wp-content/uploads/Extinguisher-Bottle-Assembly.jpg

I really doubt it's from MH370, but it still needs to be checked out.

If I remember correctly, with my outdated maintenance experience on the 747, the fire bottles for the engines and APU do have mounting brackets. You won't find any item that is installed by simple straps inside a high vibration area such as a wing, pylon or engine. There are fire bottles installed in the lavatories, but those have 2 nozzles sticking out and are significantly smaller.

Best image example I can find on the net is that of a 737NG:
http://www.b737.org.uk/images/firebottles.jpg

As others have mentioned here, it's highly unlikely that this object has anything to do with MH370.

Firstly, It was found on the Haa Alif atoll, which is one of the northern most atolls of the Maledives. That does not add up to today's logic.

And secondly, if you look at the currents ( http://marinebio.org/i/currents/Ocean_currents_1943.jpg ), any piece of debris is most likely to head east towards Australia. It would either make landfall somewhere along the west coast, or continue with the current and drift up north to then possibly drift to the west again. I remember reading that the current at the supposed crash location were 1-2 nm per hour. I'm not sure about the wind factor, but still it seems impossible for it to make it to the Maledives in just 16 days.


User currently offlinePihero From France, joined Jan 2005, 4392 posts, RR: 76
Reply 124, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 48691 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Reasonability check :

Assuming a crash in the Maldives archipelago, wouldn't lighter objets show first ashore ? long before a metallic, semi-buoyant Halon spherical bottle ?



Contrail designer
User currently offlinesassiciai From UK - Scotland, joined Jan 2013, 334 posts, RR: 0
Reply 125, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 48219 times:

Quoting c680 (Reply 72):
Something tells me the trial lawyers will not be contributing to that fund!   

What a uniquely American thought! Who's on trial already? All involved parties are guilty until proven innocent?


User currently offline65mustang From United States of America, joined Mar 2014, 84 posts, RR: 0
Reply 126, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 48343 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The close up picture of the object found in Maldives looks like there is a wire hook at the top that may have been used to hang the object. There also appears to be soot at the bottom that may indicate it was used to "cook" something. Drugs maybe? I also noticed in the first pictures that the sand around the object was not smooth and washed as it would be if the object "washed ashore". Somebody placed it there or it fell out of the sky and landed there.

User currently offlinegarpd From UK - Scotland, joined Aug 2005, 2630 posts, RR: 4
Reply 127, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 48463 times:

Quoting Pihero (Reply 124):

Assuming a crash in the Maldives archipelago, wouldn't lighter objets show first ashore ? long before a metallic, semi-buoyant Halon spherical bottle ?

I would accept that as logical.

Besides, it's already been shown that this spherical object lacks the requisite mounting brackets and a second exit port for a halon bottle. This bottle is highly unlikely to be from a 777.

Probably a fuel cell from some satellite that splashed down in the Indian Ocean. Titanium bottles have been known to survive re-entry and breakup of their mother craft.

[Edited 2014-03-26 08:20:38]


arpdesign.wordpress.com
User currently offlineBackSeater From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 382 posts, RR: 1
Reply 128, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day ago) and read 45734 times:

Quoting Pihero (Reply 120):
Yes. read my posts explaining the reasoning and see for yourself the results, both for the NTSB / INMARSAT solution and Tim Vasquez's.

Thank you for your explanation. Be sure that I always read your posts although I may not always grab all of their implications at once.

Therefore the ADIRU processes Inertial Nav data, possibly GPS data, and computes true heading but displays at moderate latitudes magnetic heading based on declination tables.

Allow me to still be a bit surprised by that navigational choice. Selecting 230 MAG seems to me to be a "hazardous" way to fly into oblivion because of the rapidly varying declination along the way, from -2deg near Malaysia to about -42deg around their probable crash area. Determining where you might be 2,600nm further does not look trivial without the help of a computer.

Could a 230 TRUE heading have been selected instead? Had they done that, the aircraft would have flown straight to Mauritius. They might even have landed there.


User currently offlineLTC8K6 From United States of America, joined Jun 2009, 1203 posts, RR: 0
Reply 129, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day ago) and read 45691 times:

Quoting Toni_ (Reply 123):
Firstly, It was found on the Haa Alif atoll, which is one of the northern most atolls of the Maledives. That does not add up to today's logic.

Well, the idea would be that 9M-MRO actually crashed near the Maldives and the witnesses in the area were right...

I don't think so, and as I already said, it's unlikely to be from 9M-MRO.

This is, I think, an attempt to prop up those Maldives witness reports.


User currently offlinedavs5032 From United States of America, joined Sep 2010, 388 posts, RR: 0
Reply 130, posted (4 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 44823 times:

Quoting sassiciai (Reply 125):

Quoting c680 (Reply 72):
Something tells me the trial lawyers will not be contributing to that fund!   

What a uniquely American thought! Who's on trial already? All involved parties are guilty until proven innocent?

Don't lump us in as subscribing to that garbage in any way. I was going to point out the ridiculousness of that post but others beat me to it...looks like I need to speak out more often so such irrational minority views aren't allowed to wrongfully represent us.


User currently offlineBruceSmith From South Africa, joined May 2011, 46 posts, RR: 0
Reply 131, posted (4 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 44613 times:

Now a couple of local Maldivian aircraft engineers apparently think the item is likely a fire suppression bottle, but haven't seen the object in person only the photos. Unlikely for reasons I gave before, but let's wait and see.

http://www.haveeru.com.mv/news/54178


User currently offlineyellowtail From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 6054 posts, RR: 2
Reply 132, posted (4 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 44184 times:

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 31):
The problem with a floating CVR and FDR is not the floating per se, although it is not a trivial problem. It is the fact that they are by necessity bolted to the structure so if the structure sinks, so do the boxes.

Assuming it could be made to float, the bolts would be the easy part. There are materials that will disintegrate in sea water after a few weeks that could be used for the bolts.



When in doubt, hold on to your altitude. No-one has ever collided with the sky.
User currently offlineLTC8K6 From United States of America, joined Jun 2009, 1203 posts, RR: 0
Reply 133, posted (4 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 43731 times:

Quoting BruceSmith (Reply 131):

That's good, it will be checked out. That will help stop speculation and rumor.


User currently offlinePihero From France, joined Jan 2005, 4392 posts, RR: 76
Reply 134, posted (4 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 43732 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting BackSeater (Reply 128):
Therefore the ADIRU processes Inertial Nav data, possibly GPS data, and computes true heading but displays at moderate latitudes magnetic heading based on declination tables.
Allow me to still be a bit surprised by that navigational choice.

The system, basically, has two branches : ADIRU --> Pilots' instruments panels and ADIRU --> FMGS.
There is no GPS input into the ADIRUs ( that I know of ).
ADIRUS provide the FMS with inertial and pitot / static data... so do the GPS boxes.
Then, and only then will the FMGS elaborate a position based on INS refined-by-GPS ( On the 'BUs it's called GPIRS ).
That's for long range navigation. If one is in range of a set of DMEs, VOR-DMEs... the program changes, giving a priority to the most accurate position available.
Basically, in HDG mode, one is flying like on a DC-4... The FMS is left aside, unused.

Quoting BackSeater (Reply 128):
Selecting 230 MAG seems to me to be a "hazardous" way to fly into oblivion because of the rapidly varying declination along the way, from -2deg near Malaysia to about -42deg around their probable crash area. Determining where you might be 2,600nm further does not look trivial without the help of a computer.

We do not navigate that way any more. The HDG mode is used for very short term trajectories, like a final localizer interception or an ATC instruction... and we don't generally expect it to last for much more than five minutes.
Your comment is a very reasonable one and I don't, even for one second, believe that a pilot would use the HDG mode for seven hours.. much more *reasonable* would be to type S80 E095 and select LNAV...
But it's just me.

[Edited 2014-03-26 09:52:17]

[Edited 2014-03-26 09:54:38]


Contrail designer
User currently offlineKaiarahi From Canada, joined Jul 2009, 2950 posts, RR: 28
Reply 135, posted (4 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 43288 times:

Quoting 76er (Reply 100):
On the contrary, it makes complete sense. After completing sim training it is standard procedure to initially operate regular flights with an instructor. It's called linetraining under supervision or IOE in the USA.

I know that.

Quoting 76er (Reply 100):
I would not be surprised if the required total time under supervision in this case was 100 hours.

I would be surprised that 100+ hours post sim with a 3rd check pilot in the cockpit would be required for transitioning. Again, perhaps the articles were badly written and this was simply the first flight without a PIC who was not also certified as a check pilot. Does anyone know the MH regime?



Note à moi-même - il faut respecter les cons.
User currently onlineHeinkel From Germany, joined Sep 2013, 17 posts, RR: 0
Reply 136, posted (4 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 43225 times:

Quoting davs5032 (Reply 130):
Quoting sassiciai (Reply 125):

Quoting c680 (Reply 72):
Something tells me the trial lawyers will not be contributing to that fund!

What a uniquely American thought! Who's on trial already? All involved parties are guilty until proven innocent?

Don't lump us in as subscribing to that garbage in any way. I was going to point out the ridiculousness of that post but others beat me to it...looks like I need to speak out more often so such irrational minority views aren't allowed to wrongfully represent us.

I just read in a German news website (T-Online), that American lawyers "Ribbeck Law" have filed a "million $" law suit against Boeing and MH.

Quote (soory, only in German):

Inzwischen hat eine US-Anwaltskanzlei Millionenklage gegen die Fluggesellschaft und den Flugzeugbauer eingereicht. Die Kanzlei Ribbeck Law teilte mit, sie habe Malaysia Airlines und Boeing zugleich eine Frist von 30 Tagen gesetzt, um die Vorgänge beim Verschwinden von Flug MH370 aufzuklären. "Alle Verantwortlichen" würden zur Rechenschaft gezogen.

Die Anwaltskanzlei verfolgt die Annahme, es habe eventuell einen Baufehler an der Maschine oder ein technisches Versagen gegeben - oder die Fluggesellschaft treffe ein Verschulden beim Verschwinden der Boeing 777 mit 239 Menschen an Bord. Monica Kelly von Ribbeck Law kündigte an, für "jeden Fluggast" Entschädigungszahlungen in Millionenhöhe geltend zu machen, nannte aber keinen Gesamtbetrag.

Best regards from Germany
Andreas


User currently offlinetiong From Malaysia, joined Mar 2014, 10 posts, RR: 0
Reply 137, posted (4 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 43131 times:

Quoting phantomx18 (Reply 2):

Object washed ashore in the Maldives - Baarah Beach(not sure about this news source, never heard of them before):

This finding not far from Maldives is very interesting.

For the past few days I was contemplating there must be some clue mysteriously from the number 370.

The plane type is Boeing 777 = triple 7 = 3s 7 , add 0, u get 370 = MH 370.

Use google earth and enter 3,70, for latitude =3 and longitude =70, you will get the location about 100nM from Maldives island to the west of Male. Weird or just coincidence.


User currently offlineDTW2HYD From United States of America, joined Jan 2013, 1767 posts, RR: 2
Reply 138, posted (4 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 42730 times:

Quoting tiong (Reply 137):
The plane type is Boeing 777 = triple 7 = 3s 7 , add 0, u get 370 = MH 370.

Use google earth and enter 3,70, for latitude =3 and longitude =70, you will get the location about 100nM from Maldives island to the west of Male. Weird or just coincidence.

Excellent. If this went down because of mechanical issues, 9M-"MRO" also be a weird coincidence.


User currently offlineart From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2005, 3381 posts, RR: 0
Reply 139, posted (4 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 42277 times:

Quoting tiong (Reply 137):
This finding not far from Maldives is very interesting.

I don't think it is interesting - I see no evidence of attachment brackets.


User currently offlinejollo From Italy, joined Aug 2011, 212 posts, RR: 0
Reply 140, posted (4 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 42246 times:

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 102):
It would be un-wise. As the 777 cargo door opens up and outward, opening it during flight may rip the door from the fuselage, causing catastrophic structure failure.

An understatement if I ever heard one. But we've all read of desperate men doing crazy things as last-ditch attempts at saving their life. So, let's not exclude the hypothesis just because it's un-wise. Let's assume that the door rips off, somehow avoids impact with control surfaces and falls harmlessly into the ocean: are you saying that just not having the cargo door in place in it's frame during flight would cause a structural failure of the airframe? T7s are tough, remember...

Quoting Mir (Reply 110):
It's possible on the 747, so it wouldn't surprise me if it were possible on the 777 as well.

Yes, I would also be wary of saying that in-flight access to the cargo compartment is impossible.

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 102):
Also, "although I am not sure about this", I believe the cargo door are structural load bearing. There are a ton of pins and fittings that secure the door against the fuselage.

That would be a much more conclusive argument against the hypothesis: I can't imagine a desperate man hacking mechanical interlocks in flight while fighting a fire. On the other hand, if opening the cargo door is "just" a matter of pulling and turning some emergency release mechanism, I wouldn't rule out the possibility.

Quoting nupogodi (Reply 111):
The cargo thing is silly.

Probably. But I haven't read any arguments yet that "prove" it's impossible (just very unlikely).

[Edited 2014-03-26 10:30:16]

User currently offlineuta999 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2010, 72 posts, RR: 0
Reply 141, posted (4 months 1 week 22 hours ago) and read 41914 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

There is a chance someone ditched the plane on purpose, in one piece over the deepest part of the ocean.

It would then sink to the bottom, leaving no trace.


User currently offlineMarkAK From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 142, posted (4 months 1 week 22 hours ago) and read 41752 times:

The Doppler Shift on a 1.6 GHz carrier due to 70 m/s velocity (about 155 MPH) of the satellite (due to its inclined orbit) is
about 370 Hz or 0.23 ppm (parts per million). This is not difficult to measure with modern electronics. Modern OCXO (Ovenized Crystal Oscillator) such as probably used in the A/C SATCOM modem are rated in PPB (parts per billion) .

By the way, when expressed as percentage or PPM, the Doppler shift is the same regardless of the carrier frequency.

The math seems correct anyway.

But the assumption would be that all the other causes of frequency error have been accounted for correctly and the shift being measured is actually due to the relative motion of the satellite to the A/C.

Mark




.


User currently offlinespacecadet From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3611 posts, RR: 12
Reply 143, posted (4 months 1 week 22 hours ago) and read 41538 times:

Quoting LTC8K6 (Reply 129):
This is, I think, an attempt to prop up those Maldives witness reports.

Just out of curiosity, how hard is it to get one of these fire suppression bottles if someone wanted one? How hard would it be to make something that could look enough like one to fool people in a photograph?

I'm not saying this is what it is, but there are certainly plenty of hoaxes like this that the media falls for every year.

If this thing in the Maldives is part of MH370, then a lot of countries are spending a lot of money concentrating their search in the wrong place. Oh, and all the satellite data (or the interpretations of it) are wrong too. And I really doubt any of that's the case.



I'm tired of being a wanna-be league bowler. I wanna be a league bowler!
User currently offlinehivue From United States of America, joined Feb 2013, 1059 posts, RR: 0
Reply 144, posted (4 months 1 week 22 hours ago) and read 41122 times:

Quoting tiong (Reply 137):
enter 3,70, for latitude =3 and longitude =70

Sure that's not supposed to be lat = 70 and long = 3? Oops, that's right, it wouldn't match up then. 
Quoting MarkAK (Reply 142):
The Doppler Shift on a 1.6 GHz carrier due

As pointed out earlier they seem to have used used burst mode info, not the carrier, for the Doppler shift calculations. See this:
http://blog.tmfassociates.com/
(I know this link has been posted before.)


User currently offlinePihero From France, joined Jan 2005, 4392 posts, RR: 76
Reply 145, posted (4 months 1 week 22 hours ago) and read 41049 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Reasonability check :

Quoting jollo (Reply 140):
Quoting nupogodi (Reply 111):
The cargo thing is silly.

Probably. But I haven't read any arguments yet that "prove" it's impossible (just very unlikely).

How do you open a cargo door from inside ?
Fair question as I've never thought of it.



Contrail designer
User currently offlinerc135x From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 146, posted (4 months 1 week 22 hours ago) and read 40751 times:

Quoting jollo (Reply 140):
Let's assume that the door rips off, somehow avoids impact with control surfaces and falls harmlessly into the ocean: are you saying that just not having the cargo door in place in it's frame during flight would cause a structural failure of the airframe? T7s are tough, remember...

Simply for the sake of argument IF the crew could access the aft cargo compartment and open the door and jettison burning cargo pallets, then the decrease in weight (which could range from substantive to dramatic) would significantly shift the CG forward with the attendant decreases in cruise range.

Perhaps someone with more dispatch or loadmaster expertise could determine if the airplane was even controllable given this CG change.


User currently offlinebikerthai From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 2072 posts, RR: 4
Reply 147, posted (4 months 1 week 21 hours ago) and read 38851 times:

Quoting jollo (Reply 140):
are you saying that just not having the cargo door in place in it's frame during flight would cause a structural failure of the airframe? T7s are tough, remember...

Not a cargo door expert, but have seen some structures of the door and the door area.

If you have a fuselage with a large hole in it, the airplane loads will have to shear around the hole. If your door is not load bearing, then your supporting structure door frame would have to be very stout. And even though what you say is true about the 777 being tough, it would not be a good weight trade-off for the designer to design the cargo door to be non-load bearing.

All the pins that I saw that locks the door into the frame are probably the load bearing members that transfer the shear load into the door. Lose the door during flight, then the stringers around the door would probably buckle and in case of the aft door, the tail section will probably twist off. Someone in fuselage design would have to verify what I'm saying is correct.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 145):

How do you open a cargo door from inside ?

We definitely need a cargo handling person here to help us out. I would guess that there would be a switch inside the door just in case someone accidentally close the door while a handling crew was still inside.

bt



Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
User currently onlinegatorman96 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 870 posts, RR: 0
Reply 148, posted (4 months 1 week 21 hours ago) and read 38398 times:

Quoting tiong (Reply 137):
The plane type is Boeing 777 = triple 7 = 3s 7 , add 0, u get 370 = MH 370.

Spooky...How about this one?

7+7+7=21, plus 2, you get 23, then, if you add a 9, you get 239, which is the number of passengers/crew on this ill-fated flight.

The number 239 is the country code for Sao Tome Island, which is directly west of the Huvadhoo Atoll, the largest Atoll of the Maldives, located 239 miles south of Male.  



Cha brro
User currently offlineJAAlbert From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 1556 posts, RR: 1
Reply 149, posted (4 months 1 week 21 hours ago) and read 38085 times:

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 147):
All the pins that I saw that locks the door into the frame are probably the load bearing members that transfer the shear load into the door. Lose the door during flight, then the stringers around the door would probably buckle and in case of the aft door, the tail section will probably twist off. Someone in fuselage design would have to verify what I'm saying is correct

I recall reading that after the Turkish Airline DC-10 crash - which resulted when a cargo door fell off causing an explosive decompression inside the cabin - that the airlines were directed to redesign the cargo door such that, if it blew off, it would not cause structural damage to the interior - or a decompression. If this is true, I can't imagine opening the door would cause structural damage to the surrounding stringers.


User currently offlineJimJupiter From Germany, joined Sep 2011, 222 posts, RR: 0
Reply 150, posted (4 months 1 week 21 hours ago) and read 37980 times:

Quoting tiong (Reply 137):

For the past few days I was contemplating there must be some clue mysteriously from the number 370.

The plane type is Boeing 777 = triple 7 = 3s 7 , add 0, u get 370 = MH 370.

Use google earth and enter 3,70, for latitude =3 and longitude =70, you will get the location about 100nM from Maldives island to the west of Male. Weird or just coincidence.

I'd sincerely suggest you read "Foucault's Pendulum" by Umberto Eco. You might like it as much as I do.  



One is born, one runs up bills, one dies.
User currently offlineDavid L From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 9523 posts, RR: 42
Reply 151, posted (4 months 1 week 21 hours ago) and read 37704 times:

Quoting JAAlbert (Reply 149):
the airlines were directed to redesign the cargo door such that, if it blew off, it would not cause structural damage to the interior - or a decompression.

The proposed redesign was to prevent a sudden pressure differential between the cabin and the cargo hold from distorting the structure. I can't see a way to prevent decompression if a door blows off!


User currently offlinebikerthai From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 2072 posts, RR: 4
Reply 152, posted (4 months 1 week 21 hours ago) and read 38083 times:

Quoting JAAlbert (Reply 149):

I recall reading that after the Turkish Airline DC-10 crash - which resulted when a cargo door fell off causing an explosive decompression inside the cabin - that the airlines were directed to redesign the cargo door such that, if it blew off, it would not cause structural damage to the interior - or a decompression. If this is true, I can't imagine opening the door would cause structural damage to the surrounding stringers.

If this is true, then perhaps the doors are not flight load bearing. Maybe the pins are just for the pressure loads.

bt



Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
User currently offlineLXLucien From Switzerland, joined Mar 2005, 261 posts, RR: 4
Reply 153, posted (4 months 1 week 21 hours ago) and read 38283 times:

Quoting Heinkel (Reply 136):
I just read in a German news website (T-Online), that American lawyers "Ribbeck Law" have filed a "million $" law suit against Boeing and MH.

I saw this coming... pathetic! to make profit on the back of the victims and their relatives (and don't tell me they want justice to be served! they don't)



Quote "Syriana": "Beirut, it's like Paris in the Mid-East"
User currently offlinedc9northwest From Switzerland, joined Feb 2007, 2269 posts, RR: 7
Reply 154, posted (4 months 1 week 21 hours ago) and read 37919 times:

I got one too:

777-239-370=168, which may or may not be a completely random number.


User currently offlineart From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2005, 3381 posts, RR: 0
Reply 155, posted (4 months 1 week 21 hours ago) and read 37808 times:

Quoting LXLucien (Reply 153):
I saw this coming... pathetic! to make profit on the back of the victims and their relatives (and don't tell me they want justice to be served! they don't)

It's a bit early, isn't it? Couldn't they at least have waited until the possible evidence of the aircraft coming down in the sea had been checked?

[Edited 2014-03-26 12:13:50]

User currently offlineWarrenPlatts From United States of America, joined Mar 2014, 386 posts, RR: 2
Reply 156, posted (4 months 1 week 21 hours ago) and read 37855 times: