MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 2

LipeGIG · Sat Mar 08, 2014 3:29 am

Continuation of the discussion regarding MH370 flight, operated by a Boeing 777-200ER, declared missing enroute KUL-PEK.

Link to the First Thread
MH370 Malaysian Airlines B777-200ER missing enroute KUL-PEK (by Longhornmaniac Mar 7 2014 in Civil Aviation)

Part 1 will be closed now that reaches around 250 posts.

Miami · Sat Mar 08, 2014 3:34 am

Already on Wiki..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaysia_Airlines_Flight_370

turjo101 · Sat Mar 08, 2014 3:35 am

How likely is mid air collision?!? I mean the ac was supposed to be close to Vietnam. Anyone know anything about Vietnam ATC?

wxmeddler · Sat Mar 08, 2014 3:37 am

CIMSS is a satellight aggregate out of Wisconsin, they just put out these two images / gifs of weather conditions in the area:

Infrared:
http://cimss.ssec.wisc.edu/goes/blog.../03/140307_coms1_ir_mh370_anim.gif

Water Vapor:
http://cimss.ssec.wisc.edu/goes/blog.../03/140307_coms1_wv_mh370_anim.gif

TruemanQLD · Sat Mar 08, 2014 3:37 am

Quoting turjo101 (Reply 2):

How likely is mid air collision?!? I mean the ac was supposed to be close to Vietnam. Anyone know anything about Vietnam ATC?

I would say very unlikely. Would have been reported by now

OOer · Sat Mar 08, 2014 3:39 am

The best possible outcome at this point is that the airplane ditched and that at least some survivors are floating around on rafts.

prosa · Sat Mar 08, 2014 3:39 am

Regarding the terrorism aspect ... it seems unlikely that Uyghurs would have targeted a MH aircraft, as Malaysia is an Islamic state. One of the Chinese airlines would have been a more likely target.

hivue · Sat Mar 08, 2014 3:40 am

Quoting turjo101 (Reply 2):
How likely is mid air collision?!?

Current information indicates that the incident occurred while the airplane was at FL350. There have been no reports of other airliners or of military aircraft in the area having problems.

kl838 · Sat Mar 08, 2014 3:40 am

I posted this in the other thread, but its locked now, I was asking whether or not MH would receive ACARS messages like AF did when the A330 hit the water?

Finn350 · Sat Mar 08, 2014 3:41 am

Apparently, the ELTs are not transmitting or it would have been reported already. It looks very bad.

Mir · Sat Mar 08, 2014 3:42 am

Quoting turjo101 (Reply 2):
How likely is mid air collision?!?

Not very. If it were with another plane, we'd know about it because either that plane would have survived to tell the tale, or we'd be talking about two missing planes in the same area. If it were with a bird (which is incredibly unlikely that that altitude, but there are birds that have been known to fly that high), it wouldn't have been enough to take down the airplane.

-Mir

DCAYOW · Sat Mar 08, 2014 3:42 am

CCTV is reporting that Vietnam has detected the missing planes "signal".

LipeGIG · Sat Mar 08, 2014 3:43 am

Breakdown of Citizenship

1. China - 152 + 1 Child
2. Malaysia - 38
3. Indonesia - 12
4. Australia - 7
5. France - 3
6. USA - 3 + 1 child
7. New Zealand - 2
8. Ukraine - 2
9. Canada - 2
10. Russia - 1
11. Italy - 1
12. Taiwan - 1
13. Holland - 1
14. Austria - 1

antskip · Sat Mar 08, 2014 3:44 am

MH370 code-shared with China Southern CZ448, who provided most of the passengers. Beijing Airport is a very sad place at the moment. Must be hell for those waiting there.

[Edited 2014-03-07 19:46:22]

zeke · Sat Mar 08, 2014 3:44 am

Normally heading out of KL on that route you are kept low as the outbound track crosses the busy Singapore inbound routes and the Bangkok Singapore route. You go from KL control to a Singapore radar on VHF, them as you get further out transfer to Singapore on datalink. Then transfer to Vietnam on datalink, often after transfer from Singapore to Vietnam you are initially out of VHF range.

They should have a good idea of the location.

Miami · Sat Mar 08, 2014 3:45 am

MH releases nationalities of passengers on board MH flight 370

BoeingVista · Sat Mar 08, 2014 3:46 am

Quoting Mir (Reply 12):
Not very. If it were with another plane, we'd know about it because either that plane would have survived to tell the tale, or we'd be talking about two missing planes in the same area. If it were with a bird (which is incredibly unlikely that that altitude, but there are birds that have been known to fly that high), it wouldn't have been enough to take down the airplane.

-Mir

Unless it was a military plane, still unlikely but the South China sea has a lot of activity and competing claims at the moment.

ltbewr · Sat Mar 08, 2014 3:48 am

As to a mid-air collision, especially at 35,000 ft would also mean a second aircraft that is lost or has come up at some airport (ie: the bizjet that clipped a GOL airliner, the bizjet landed at a military airport, the Gol broke up and all lost on the Gol one). As far as we know now, that hasn't happened. Of course one can make all kinds of extreme speculation like as to a wayward Missile hit is (one theory on TWA 800's loss).

Mir · Sat Mar 08, 2014 3:48 am

Quoting kl838 (Reply 9):
I was asking whether or not MH would receive ACARS messages like AF did when the A330 hit the water?

If they had the equipment to. That sort of thing isn't standard - it's a service that the airline has the option to set up and pay for.

However, it should be pointed out that ACARS is only useful if you can't find the FDR, as the FDR provides far more data to investigators. Once the FDR is recovered (which shouldn't be nearly as hard as AF447's was, as it's either on land or in water that isn't that deep), it'll give investigators plenty of information to work with.

-Mir

JAGflyer · Sat Mar 08, 2014 3:51 am

By "signal" they most likely mean ELT. The ELT does not activate unless a crash is detected or the pilot's manually enable it. That's not very good news but at least they have something to go on when it comes to locating the plane.

manny · Sat Mar 08, 2014 3:55 am

Vietnamese authorities have detected the plane's transmitter around 120 nautical miles (138 miles) southwest of Cape Ca Mau (Vietnam's southernmost point), in the middle of the ocean.

http://translate.google.com/translat...mui-ca-mau-120-hai-ly-2960870.html

LipeGIG · Sat Mar 08, 2014 3:58 am

Just asking all to avoid discussion in regards to the quality of news. Please focus on the subject (i.e. the missing plane)

Moderators Team

calpilot · Sat Mar 08, 2014 3:59 am

I'm sure this will be lost in the post after post of people. Heck, maybe someone already shared.

http://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/wiki.php?id=147571

The aircraft had major damage history. Might be a good place to start a investigation.

airplanedaj · Sat Mar 08, 2014 3:59 am

Quoting JAGflyer (Reply 21):
By "signal" they most likely mean ELT. The ELT does not activate unless a crash is detected or the pilot's manually enable it. That's not very good news but at least they have something to go on when it comes to locating the plane.

In the US, I don't think commercial airliners don't need ELT's. I am a student at an aviation university in the US and that was covered in my Aviation Regulations class. This may not be true elsewhere in the world though. They may be mentioning the pingers on the black boxes though, if it crashed in water.

kl838 · Sat Mar 08, 2014 3:59 am

Quoting Mir (Reply 20):
If they had the equipment to. That sort of thing isn't standard - it's a service that the airline has the option to set up and pay for.

However, it should be pointed out that ACARS is only useful if you can't find the FDR, as the FDR provides far more data to investigators. Once the FDR is recovered (which shouldn't be nearly as hard as AF447's was, as it's either on land or in water that isn't that deep), it'll give investigators plenty of information to work with.

Thanks Mir, it makes sense and hopefully there is some news very soon. It could be anything with such few details and information.

Quoting JAGflyer (Reply 21):

By "signal" they most likely mean ELT. The ELT does not activate unless a crash is detected or the pilot's manually enable it. That's not very good news but at least they have something to go on when it comes to locating the plane.

Thats not good news then, was hoping the aircraft landed in some forgotten airfield or something, but one could only hope and pray.

JOYA380B747 · Sat Mar 08, 2014 3:59 am

From the link below, there are claims as to an incident with this particular aircraft in August '12

http://www.smh.com.au/world/seven-au...e-goes-missing-20140308-hvgnx.html

Quote:
The missing plane is believed to have been involved in a crash in August, 2012, when it damaged the tail of a China Eastern Airlines plane at Shanghai Pudong Airport, according to unconfirmed reports.
In the incident, the tip of the wing of the Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777 broke off.

kiwiinoz · Sat Mar 08, 2014 4:00 am

They are not that far off land. I would have thought the Vietnamese could send out a couple of choppers to take a look rather than just the rescue boats

Viscount724 · Sat Mar 08, 2014 4:02 am

Quoting manny (Reply 20):
Vietnamese authorities have detected the plane's transmitter around 120 nautical miles (138 miles) southwest of Cape Ca Mau (Vietnam's southernmost point), in the middle of the ocean.

That report has been denied.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/...sing-vietnam-idUSL3N0M505Z20140308

flymia · Sat Mar 08, 2014 4:03 am

Odd that they got no messages at all. Hoping for the best but at this point any positive outcome is such a small chance right now. Hope they can find the presume wreckage ASAP. US News outlets have not said much recently. Currently have CCTV on which I would imagine will spend most of the time on the MH 370. They are also reporting Vietnam officials have detected an ELT signal 120nm off the coast. Soon it will be time to figure out what happened, especially considering it is a 777. Which that is now being refuted. Interesting enough someone on CCTV in the Beijing airport just said they still have reports that the plane may have landed at another airport which I highly doubt is possible after this amount of time has passed.

CCTV just said the pilot was very senior with over 18,000hrs. MH does have a good safety record also.

[Edited 2014-03-07 20:07:32]

celestar · Sat Mar 08, 2014 4:03 am

I have a strong suspicion that this is an act of terrorist.
Remember what just happened at Kunming
Malaysia had few enemies but remember there are 153 tourists on board and it looks like a good target for making a statement to China.
I totally detest terrorism against innocent people.
B777 or modern airplanes have sophisticated safety equipment. Considering what was known, two hours after took off, my horrible suspicion could be a very plausible.

Finn350 · Sat Mar 08, 2014 4:05 am

Quoting JOYA380B747 (Reply 25):
From the link below, there are claims as to an incident with this particular aircraft in August '12

Even if a wing tip would be torn off mid-flight, it should not cause a catastrophic failure.

spacecadet · Sat Mar 08, 2014 4:07 am

Quoting celestar (Reply 29):
I have a strong suspicion that this is an act of terrorist.

People said the same about AF447...

And now other people are saying this incident reminds them of AF447... both theories are statistically likely to be wrong.

hivue · Sat Mar 08, 2014 4:07 am

Quoting kiwiinoz (Reply 26):
They are not that far off land. I would have thought the Vietnamese could send out a couple of choppers to take a look rather than just the rescue boats

They may have sent helicopters. There may not be much to see and what there is may be hard to spot.

Ab345 · Sat Mar 08, 2014 4:08 am

On this link you can see the damage the plane suffered from the previous incident with the A346

http://pic.feeyo.com/posts/569/5691311.html#5691316

JHwk · Sat Mar 08, 2014 4:09 am

Sounds like it is near the Perhentians (Malaysia), closer than Vietnam

flymia · Sat Mar 08, 2014 4:10 am

Quoting celestar (Reply 29):
I have a strong suspicion that this is an act of terrorist.
Remember what just happened at Kunming
Malaysia had few enemies but remember there are 153 tourists on board and it looks like a good target for making a statement to China.
I totally detest terrorism against innocent people.
B777 or modern airplanes have sophisticated safety equipment. Considering what was known, two hours after took off, my horrible suspicion could be a very plausible.

Certainly possible. Unless an organization takes responsibility may takes months or even over a year to find out.

Mir · Sat Mar 08, 2014 4:10 am

Quoting CALPilot (Reply 22):
The aircraft had major damage history. Might be a good place to start a investigation.

I'm sure that will get a lot of press, but I don't believe it to be significant. Airplanes get damaged all the time, and they're able to be repaired to an airworthy state. The fact that this one was involved in a ground collision just means it was involved in a ground collision and was repaired. Nothing more can be drawn from that at this point.

Quoting celestar (Reply 29):
I have a strong suspicion that this is an act of terrorist.
Remember what just happened at Kunming

Why would Islamic terrorists go after an airline from an Islamic country?

-Mir

casinterest · Sat Mar 08, 2014 4:11 am

Quoting manny (Reply 20):
Vietnamese authorities have detected the plane's transmitter around 120 nautical miles (138 miles) southwest of Cape Ca Mau (Vietnam's southernmost point), in the middle of the ocean.

Guess we will wait to see what the details are. If the plane's transmitter has been detected, do we know if it was on the surface or whether they already reached the site?

1:00-3:00 A.M again. Whatever happened, the Darkness and hour would not have helped the pilots much .

Newark727 · Sat Mar 08, 2014 4:12 am

So we're sure now that this is 9M-MRO? Haven't been keeping up completely, but all we had on the registration earlier seemed a bit "best guess" from our amateurs here.

silentbob · Sat Mar 08, 2014 4:12 am

Quoting celestar (Reply 29):
I have a strong suspicion that this is an act of terrorist.

They usually don't wait very long to claim responsibility

SWALUV · Sat Mar 08, 2014 4:13 am

Quoting Mir (Reply 36):
Airplanes get damaged all the time, and they're able to be repaired to an airworthy state. The fact that this one was involved in a ground collision just means it was involved in a ground collision and was repaired. Nothing more can be drawn from that at this point.

Would the damage the aircraft received in the ground collision cause significant stress on the remainder of the wing and begin to cause cracking?

N867DA · Sat Mar 08, 2014 4:14 am

It took seven years after botched repair to the aft bulkhead to bring down JAL 123 in 1985.We don't know what the condition of the MH777 is right now, but if it is indeed a hull loss I'm sure the A/C maintenance records will be scrutinized carefully.

Miami · Sat Mar 08, 2014 4:14 am

Signal has been detected of 9M-MRO

A Vietnamese official of search and rescue said Saturday that the signal of the missing Malaysia Airlines 777 has been detected.

Signal of the 777 with 227 passengers and 12 crew members on board has been detected at some 120 nautical miles southwest of Vietnam's southernmost Ca Mau province.

Starlionblue · Sat Mar 08, 2014 4:17 am

Quoting SWALUV (Reply 40):

Quoting Mir (Reply 36):
Airplanes get damaged all the time, and they're able to be repaired to an airworthy state. The fact that this one was involved in a ground collision just means it was involved in a ground collision and was repaired. Nothing more can be drawn from that at this point.

Would the damage the aircraft received in the ground collision cause significant stress on the remainder of the wing and begin to cause cracking?

This would have been checked pre- and post-repair. Besides, aircraft components are designed and built not to fail due to failure of another part. Chain reactions are frowned upon.

Quoting Miami (Reply 42):

Signal has been detected of 9M-MRO

A Vietnamese official of search and rescue said Saturday that the signal of the missing Malaysia Airlines 777 has been detected.

Signal of the 777 with 227 passengers and 12 crew members on board has been detected at some 120 nautical miles southwest of Vietnam's southernmost Ca Mau province.

Read the thread please (Reply 27). This report has been denied by Vietnamese authorities. http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/...sing-vietnam-idUSL3N0M505Z20140308

LTC8K6 · Sat Mar 08, 2014 4:17 am

Again, the report of a signal has been denied. It also doesn't seem to make sense given where flightradar data ends,

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/...sing-vietnam-idUSL3N0M505Z20140308

apfpilot · Sat Mar 08, 2014 4:19 am

Quoting CALPilot (Reply 22):

I'm sure this will be lost in the post after post of people. Heck, maybe someone already shared.

http://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/wiki.php?id=147571

The aircraft had major damage history. Might be a good place to start a investigation.

Pic of the damage, doesn't look toooo bad. http://cdn.feeyo.com/pic/20120810/201208100951017177.jpg

LTC8K6 · Sat Mar 08, 2014 4:23 am

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/MAS370

This was linked earlier. If that is the flight, then data was lost over land and early.

Kaphias · Sat Mar 08, 2014 4:25 am

Quoting LTC8K6 (Reply 46):
This was linked earlier. If that is the flight, then data was lost over land and early.

This kind of data loss occurs often with international flights on FlightAware and therefore it cannot be considered to be a reliable source in this case.

hivue · Sat Mar 08, 2014 4:27 am

Quoting LTC8K6 (Reply 46):
If that is the flight, then data was lost over land and early.

That doesn't look like 2 hours worth of flying. An earlier link to an avherald note said that communication was lost over the Gulf of Thailand.

AirCalSNA · Sat Mar 08, 2014 4:28 am

FWIW the NY Times most emailed news report concerns the apparently politically motivated criminal conviction of the Malaysian government most threatening opponent. Apparently there are some serious political forces at play in Malaysia.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/08/wo...nced-in-sodomy-case.html?src=rechp

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net