SA7700
Topic Author
Posts: 2936
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2003 9:38 pm

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 5:35 am

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)
 
User avatar
malaysia
Posts: 2616
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 1999 3:26 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 5:47 am

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
 
phantomx18
Posts: 19
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 10:06 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 5:53 am

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]
 
65mustang
Posts: 84
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2014 1:28 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 6:16 am

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]
 
nm2582
Posts: 159
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 2:15 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 6:23 am

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...
 
BruceSmith
Posts: 67
Joined: Mon May 30, 2011 10:35 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 6:25 am

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.
 
phantomx18
Posts: 19
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 10:06 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 6:32 am

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?
 
AlexA340B777
Posts: 64
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 4:37 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 6:35 am

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 74 countries on 6 continents on 537 flights
 
65mustang
Posts: 84
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2014 1:28 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 6:39 am

Boeing article about replacing halon systems.

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/aeromagazine/articles/2011_q4/3/
 
User avatar
Finn350
Posts: 1058
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:57 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 6:49 am

If we trust in the southern track predicted by Inmarsat, the fire extinguisher bottle in the Maldives can't possibly be from MH 370.
 
davs5032
Posts: 200
Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 2:12 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 6:52 am

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!
 
tapir
Posts: 136
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 12:07 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 6:52 am

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?
 
art
Posts: 2680
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:46 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 6:58 am

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 avatar
Pellegrine
Posts: 1828
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 10:19 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 6:58 am

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, here we go!!!
 
phantomx18
Posts: 19
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 10:06 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 7:02 am

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]
 
jcxroberts
Posts: 97
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 3:41 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 7:03 am

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.
 
phantomx18
Posts: 19
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 10:06 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 7:10 am

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?
 
Backseater
Posts: 420
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 3:20 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 7:15 am

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.
 
flyingturtle
Posts: 4619
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2011 1:39 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 7:16 am

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.
 
art
Posts: 2680
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:46 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 7:22 am

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.
 
speedbird128
Posts: 1562
Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2003 2:30 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 7:30 am

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 avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 17114
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 7:54 am

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." - John Ringo
 
sejtam
Posts: 82
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 1:46 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 7:55 am

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..
 
aw70
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 11:20 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 8:05 am

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]
 
liquidair
Posts: 265
Joined: Fri May 27, 2011 2:01 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 8:22 am

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.
trying to stop my gaseous viscosity go liquid
 
Airbus747
Posts: 89
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2014 12:18 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 8:30 am

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 avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 17114
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 8:42 am

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." - John Ringo
 
liss
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2014 8:16 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 8:57 am

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
 
theaviator380
Posts: 579
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 8:44 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 9:05 am

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.
 
theaviator380
Posts: 579
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 8:44 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 9:09 am

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?
 
ciaran
Posts: 9
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2005 8:49 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 9:14 am

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 avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 17114
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 9:25 am

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." - John Ringo
 
Mir
Posts: 19107
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 9:26 am

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
 
liquidair
Posts: 265
Joined: Fri May 27, 2011 2:01 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 9:35 am

Can somebody please bullet point todays conference?
trying to stop my gaseous viscosity go liquid
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Crew
Posts: 20153
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 9:41 am

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

http://twitter.com/R_Wall/status/448756294133243904
Close, but no cigar http://vine.co/v/OjqeYWWpVWK
 
jollo
Posts: 266
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2011 7:24 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 9:41 am

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 avatar
KarelXWB
Crew
Posts: 20153
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 9:45 am

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
Close, but no cigar http://vine.co/v/OjqeYWWpVWK
 
theaviator380
Posts: 579
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 8:44 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 9:52 am

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

Thank you, appreciated.
 
p51tang
Posts: 63
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2014 10:51 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 9:53 am

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]
 
Apprentice
Posts: 211
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 12:51 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 9:53 am

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., "DON'T KNOW" is not. My Tutor
 
KDTWflyer
Posts: 786
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2004 12:51 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 9:59 am

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
 
art
Posts: 2680
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:46 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 10:00 am

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?
 
boacvc10
Posts: 469
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 2:31 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 10:10 am

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 avatar
KarelXWB
Crew
Posts: 20153
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 10:11 am

The Malaysian government just released another picture:

http://twitter.com/R_Wall/status/448763617928683520/photo/1/large
Close, but no cigar http://vine.co/v/OjqeYWWpVWK
 
liquidair
Posts: 265
Joined: Fri May 27, 2011 2:01 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 10:13 am

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]
trying to stop my gaseous viscosity go liquid
 
boacvc10
Posts: 469
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 2:31 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 10:19 am

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 avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 17114
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 10:24 am

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." - John Ringo
 
nupogodi
Posts: 933
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 10:58 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 10:27 am

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.
 
timpdx
Posts: 578
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2009 1:54 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 10:30 am

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)
 
boacvc10
Posts: 469
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 2:31 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 46

Wed Mar 26, 2014 10:34 am

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!