MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 17

rcair1 · Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:12 am

Quoting stuyyz (Reply 138):
doesn't this imply that the plane went down pretty soon after the transponder stopped?

Quoting stuyyz (Reply 138):
Can somebody explain the Rolls Royce Engine communications?

The "RR" signals are signals sent as part of ACARS (Aircraft Communications Addressing and Reporting System) which is a system that send maintenance information, in this case to Rolls Royce. It is unrelated to the transponder which identifies the a/c to secondary radar systems. In this case, Rolls Royce reports they received 2 standard messages, then none. ACARS is satellite based, I believe, and completely unrelated to the transponder

Quoting stuyyz (Reply 138):
you can't manually turn off the RR signals (again my understanding)

You can turn off ACARS - you can (and must be able to) turn off any electrical system in the aircraft.
However, it is an interesting point that, perhaps a 777 pilot can let us know. ACARS is not something the pilots would regularly interact with. It is intended to be a 'behind the scenes' system that is used by maintenance. Yes - if there is a problem that ACARs reports - it may be presented to the pilots - but not as ACARs, but as an aircraft problem.

So - regarding the 'hijacking' issues - it seems like it would takes somebody much more familiar with a/c systems than the garden variety hijacker. Turning off a transponder - easy - there is a knob on the front. Turning off ACARS? You probably have to pull some rather obscure breaker. The 'average' hijacker (if there is such a thing) may not even know ACARS exists or is installed on a particular a/c. Case in point - lots of confusion even now if the a/c had ACARS operating.

rcair1 · Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:15 am

Comparison of "Oil Rig Worker" data and China SANSTID data

Posted this in 16, but there have been some comments here so I though a repost may be useful.
----
Just for the heck of it, I did a bit of work in Google Earth to compare two reports.

First - the oil rig worker at 8 22 30.23 N by 108 42 22.26 E reported the fire on a bearing of 265-276 and 50-70 km

Second the China Sat photos at N6.7 E 105.63

Where are they relative to each other?

Well - if you start at the oil rig and look 270 degrees, you are looking substantially north of the China Sat debris sighting (which is about 240 degrees.)

But - if you take the surface current/rate reported by the worker (225/230 at 2.0-2.5 knots)- and assume the debris drifted that way, it is kind of interesting.

What you see is that if debris landed 70KM from the worker at 270 degrees and then drifted 235 degrees, it would intersect the China Sat sighting,

BUT - the distance is wrong. The distance from the oil worker's proposed location (which he admits is poor) to the China Sat location is 170 NM, which at a 2 knot drift speed would take 85 hours. The time between the two sightings is only about 34 hours (1722 Z the 7th to 300Z the 9th). But if you extend the oil workers sighting line to shorten the distance, the bearing is wrong for his reported surface current.

And - none of this explains how the plane got from the last know location to the Oil worker's sighting location.

Here is a picture.
Frankly - don't know if this means anything - but that they don't match up.

MH sighting lines

nupogodi · Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:19 am

Quoting rcair1 (Reply 150):
ACARS is satellite based, I believe

Usually VHF actually

Some on this forum call HF ACARS uplinks "sat-cars". But in most cases it's ground-based stations listening for VHF

Still, if I understand correctly, the accident aircraft was capable of both.

edit: Also, to disable ACARS, as I have read on PPRuNe from 777 drivers, you just have to go into the computer and selectively disable both uplinks (if you have SATCOM, otherwise just the one). Or, yeah, just pull the breaker.

[Edited 2014-03-12 21:20:51]

edit2: excuse me, I believe in aviation you guys call those *downlinks*. Well, I have a computer science background and when I'm sending something I consider it an uplink, but you guys call it what you want, eh?

[Edited 2014-03-12 21:30:09]

747megatop · Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:25 am

Quoting zeke (Reply 77):
The P3 is also one of the few aircraft that can pickup the underwater pinger by dropping buoys.

How many buoys can it drop before it runs out of them? Surely, they would drop a buoy only after sighting some debris or suspect the aircraft is in some specific area, right?

Starlionblue · Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:28 am

Quoting rcair1 (Reply 150):
So - regarding the 'hijacking' issues - it seems like it would takes somebody much more familiar with a/c systems than the garden variety hijacker. Turning off a transponder - easy - there is a knob on the front. Turning off ACARS? You probably have to pull some rather obscure breaker. The 'average' hijacker (if there is such a thing) may not even know ACARS exists or is installed on a particular a/c. Case in point - lots of confusion even now if the a/c had ACARS operating.

While I agree that the "average" hijacker might not prepare well, nothing says our very hypothetical hijacker is average. Once you make the assumption that this person planned properly, the information is not so hard to glean.

A couple of minutes of searching found me several images of the real panel and diagrams. There are full FCOMs and FCTMs to download and so forth.

http://www.piac.com.pk/trainingsecti...dffiles/777/b777-fctm_22072010.pdf

http://www.737ng.co.uk/B777%20FCOM%2...ht%20Crew%20Operating%20Manual.pdf

Quoting nupogodi (Reply 152):
edit2: excuse me, I believe in aviation you guys call those *downlinks*. Well, I have a computer science background and when I'm sending something I consider it an uplink, but you guys call it what you want, eh?

I hear you. I've worked with computers for years so imagine my confusion when we went through this terminology in ATPL class. "Downlink?!?"

"I reject your reality and substitute my own!"

[Edited 2014-03-12 21:31:36]

rcair1 · Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:30 am

Quoting nupogodi (Reply 152):
Usually VHF actually

Thanks!

NAV20 · Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:30 am

That New Zealander, Mike McKay, provided a very detailed report of what he saw. Good for him..........

As far as I can work out the position he states (I only have one of the kids' old atlases to work with

) he places the 'incident' quite close to the coast of Vietnam, pretty well due south of Ho Chi Minh city - but as I say I have limited resources where geography is concerned, anyone please correct me if I'm wrong?

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/world/201...-missing-plane-come-down-in-flames

spacecadet · Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:31 am

US officials are discounting the Chinese images: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/13/wo...laysia-airlines-flight-370.html?hp

An American military official discounted the Chinese images, saying that United States satellites would have seen the object and did not. It was unlikely, the official added, that a large piece of the aircraft would be floating, and in any case, its location was in a high-traffic area near the many ships and aircraft searching for the missing jetliner.

“I cannot possibly believe that image is a valid image,”’ the official said.

The Times is also quoting the Malaysian military again as saying they detected *something* flying west. It sounds like that's where the confusion is coming from - they're not sure if this was MH370 or not, but the radar did pick up an unidentified plane flying at 29,500 feet over Malaysia.

LTC8K6 · Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:33 am

Don't anyone take this the wrong way, but, could we stop with the Rorschach tests?

Starlionblue · Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:35 am

Quoting Nav20 (Reply 157):
As far as I can work out the position he states (I only have one of the kids' old atlases to work with &nbsp

Your old atlases and this little thing we call "The Internet".

You can plonk in coordinates in Google Maps.

Entering "8°22'30.2"N 108°42'22.3"E" gives:

https://www.google.com/maps/place/8%C2%B022'30.2%22N+108%C2%B042'22.3%22E/@8.6276892,112.4058292,6z/data=!4m2!3m1!1s0x0:0x0

[Edited 2014-03-12 21:36:23]

[Edited 2014-03-12 21:38:08]

Starlionblue · Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:36 am

Quoting jetblueguy22 (Reply 160):

It's behind a paywall, but the WSJ is saying that the 777 may have flown 5 hours longer than it's last contact point. This is getting sketchier by the minute....

I saw an estimate of 7+ hours. In any case a looooong way.

nupogodi · Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:37 am

Quoting spacecadet (Reply 156):

US officials are discounting the Chinese images

This is very disconcerting. The US has massive space-based assets, and would easily be able to confirm or deny this.

I fear this will be another empty day. I sympathize with all the friends and families who are not being given the opportunity to begin their grieving process.

747megatop · Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:42 am

Quoting airplane (Reply 43):
I know the search for this aircraft has been very poor and puts Malaysian authorities in an under qualified situation. But since this is a Boeing, is NTSB on this too ?

Why has it been poor or why are they in an underqualified situation? Lack of debris in the Ocean makes it hard to pinpoint where the aircraft came down and would baffle any country. Imagine AF 447 without any floating debris around the last known point of contact. They would have never found it then. Even after finding the floating debris it took 2 years for them to find the actual wreck and retrieve the black boxes. US and China are also involved in the search so far and have found NOTHING.

flood · Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:42 am

Someone had posted this here a couple of minutes ago but for some reason it's been removed?

Ostrower tweets:
"BREAKING WSJ EXCLUSIVE: Engine monitoring data shows missing 777 was airborne for five hours -sources"
http://twitter.com/jonostrower/status/443967767835062272

ADent · Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:42 am

Does ADS-B rely on secondary radar interrogations to transmit, or does ADS-B transmit on a schedule also? (Say broadcast location every 30 sec?)

nupogodi · Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:43 am

Quoting ADent (Reply 164):
Does ADS-B rely on secondary radar interrogations to transmit, or does ADS-B transmit on a schedule also? (Say broadcast location every 30 sec?)

The latter. The B in ADS-B stands for Broadcast.

Stretch · Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:44 am

Good afternoon. The Wall Street Journal is reporting new information on missing flight MH370, which U.S. investigators now suspect flew on long after it disappeared from civilian radar screens.

U.S. investigators suspect that Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 stayed in the air for about four hours past the time it reached its last confirmed location, according to two people familiar with the details, raising the possibility that the plane could have flown on for hundreds of additional miles under conditions that remain murky.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...ive#block-532114d3e4b0edca9ee78e24

Starlionblue · Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:44 am

Quoting nupogodi (Reply 165):
Quoting ADent (Reply 164):
Does ADS-B rely on secondary radar interrogations to transmit, or does ADS-B transmit on a schedule also? (Say broadcast location every 30 sec?)

The latter. The B in ADS-B stands for Broadcast.

And AFAIK it is every second.

[Edited 2014-03-12 21:44:53]

flood · Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:45 am

Quoting Stretch (Reply 166):
The Wall Street Journal is reporting new information on missing flight MH370, which U.S. investigators now suspect flew on long after it disappeared from civilian radar screens.

Link to WSJ article
http://tinyurl.com/m7jnd8x

nupogodi · Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:45 am

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 154):
I hear you. I've worked with computers for years so imagine my confusion when we went through this terminology in ATPL class. "Downlink?!?"

Hahah, I suppose when the terminology was created, it could only really go down! Now the down can go up and who knows what where... Jargon!

jetblueguy22 · Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:47 am

Quoting flood (Reply 163):
Someone had posted this here a couple of minutes ago but for some reason it's been removed?

I did but for whatever reason the link got all messed up.

Quoting flood (Reply 163):
BREAKING WSJ EXCLUSIVE: Engine monitoring data shows missing 777 was airborne for five hours -sources"

This is beyond sketchy IMO. How does something like this happen which isn't some kind of hijacking? The most shocking thing is the fact that we are just finding out about this now. I would hope the Malaysian government knew about it a long time ago.
Pat

LTC8K6 · Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:47 am

So they seem to be saying that engine data was still be reported by 9M-MRO for hours?

Coal · Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:50 am

Quoting The Guardian:
State media in Malaysia has also criticised Australian news coverage of co-pilot Fariq Abdul Hamid, labelling an interview conducted by Channel Nine with two women who alleged untoward behaviour by the pilot when he let them in the cockpit as “gutter journalism”.

Wholeheartedly agree. Just to reiterate what I said in Thrd 15, this was just two dumb blondes wanting a bit of fame plus typical sensationalist Australian media looking down at their Southeast Asian neighbors.

Cheers
Coal

rcair1 · Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:50 am

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 154):
While I agree that the "average" hijacker might not prepare well, nothing says our very hypothetical hijacker is average. Once you make the assumption that this person planned properly, the information is not so hard to glean.

Indeed - but it does argue for our VERY hypothetical hijacker having pretty deep knowledge of a 777. Compare to the hijackers on 9/11. They did not even know how to select cabin versus radio on the mic.

Back to the facts - we know the a/c disappeared from secondary radar and stopped communicating. We know that, by now, it is down somewhere - fuel ran out long ago. We don't know much else.

-------------------------------------
This is the hard part for those not involved in SAR - waiting.... and waiting....

I can tell you from personal experience - it can be as frustrating on the other side.

As a "public figure" on the other side - the person standing in front of 3000+ evacuated people at a daily briefing and trying to answer their questions, sooth there needs, and sometimes deliver the worst kind of news (yes, your house, your home, it is gone) - I can tell you without hesitation that NOTHING I've ever done is as frustrating not being able to answer those questions, sooth those needs, help those grieving people. Despite everything that very competent people can do - sometimes the answer is 'we just don't know'.

While I have seen it done well, and badly, I would ask those blasting the various 'authorities' to remember - it is tough on both sides. Also - the public speakers may or may not be the 'best' for the case - but frankly, they are often not the ones doing the work. The best are often the line. I've been blessed to work with some great teams - and also had to work for some not so good. But in general - the desire and effort is genuine.

- bg

747megatop · Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:51 am

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 6):
Answer: According to this link http://www.hydro-international.com/i...Deepwater_Black_Box_Retrieval.html they ping on acoustic 38.5 kHz (an audio signal) and a range of 2-3km

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-26514556

"They [flight recorders] typically have a radio beacon and so for example our P-3 - if they are flying within a certain range of that - will pick up that radio beacon."

So, folks, I think the best bet now is to swarm as much of the surrounding Oceans as possible (at least within a 2 hour radius of last known contact to begin with) with P-3s from as many countries as possible so that the pinger from the black boxes are picked up before their batteries die out! Sounds like a ridiculous idea and a brute force approach that is going to cost a lot of money but what else to do in the current situation where the wreckage is nowhere to be found?

dtfg · Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:51 am

WSJ: Engine data suggests the plane flew on for hours after disappearing from radar

KIAS · Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:52 am

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 154):

Quoting rcair1 (Reply 150):
So - regarding the 'hijacking' issues - it seems like it would takes somebody much more familiar with a/c systems than the garden variety hijacker. Turning off a transponder - easy - there is a knob on the front. Turning off ACARS? You probably have to pull some rather obscure breaker. The 'average' hijacker (if there is such a thing) may not even know ACARS exists or is installed on a particular a/c. Case in point - lots of confusion even now if the a/c had ACARS operating.

While I agree that the "average" hijacker might not prepare well, nothing says our very hypothetical hijacker is average. Once you make the assumption that this person planned properly, the information is not so hard to glean.

Most of the 772 circuit breakers are located in the E/E bay, ACARS is in the AIMS cabinet in the rear. Doubtful a hijacker made it there. More likely would be a catastrophic event affecting the cabinet.

nupogodi · Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:52 am

So NTSB says Rolls-Royce was getting engine status updates 5 hours after the last known secondary contact?

I talk to my CPL buddy about this every day, and every day there's a new story, and each time I tell him "This can't get any weirder".

And now I look like a liar. Because it just got a lot weirder.

vnangia · Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:53 am

Quoting Stretch (Reply 166):

I think I speak for a lot of people when I say:

Also, wtf does "The investigators believe the plane flew for a total of five hours based on data automatically downloaded and sent to the ground from the Boeing Co. 777's engines as part of a routine maintenance and monitoring program." mean? They continued receiving ACARS messages?

LTC8K6 · Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:53 am

So we would be looking at a hijacking, or an incapacitated crew, with this "engine data for four hours" story?

nm2582 · Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:54 am

EDIT: apparently this had a mention in the news yesterday and was never confirmed, so it's probably old news.

This came across google news a few minutes ago. I have not yet seen any other source carry it, so I remain sceptical:

http://www.wantchinatimes.com/news-s...nt.aspx?id=20140312000154&cid=1103

"The Beijing News has reported that a source claiming to be a local volunteer assisting in the search for missing Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 has found a dead body wearing a lifejacket in an area of the Strait of Malacca."

[Edited 2014-03-12 22:00:18]

huxrules · Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:54 am

By the time I get up there better be some 'splainin from "US investigators" if this is true.

nupogodi · Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:54 am

Quoting 747megatop (Reply 174):
So, folks, I think the best bet now is to swarm as much of the surrounding Oceans as possible (at least within a 2 hour radius of last known contact to begin with) with P-3s from as many countries as possible so that the pinger from the black boxes are picked up before their batteries die out! Sounds like a ridiculous idea and a brute force approach that is going to cost a lot of money but what else to do in the current situation where the wreckage is nowhere to be found?

I'm not sure they would be heard outside of the water, but I could be wrong.

NAV20 · Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:54 am

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 159):
Your old atlases and this little thing we call "The Internet". You can plonk in coordinates in Google Maps.

Fair enough, Starlionblue. But it looks as if I got it pretty well right, south of Ho Chi Minh City?

So if Mike Mckay is right, and really did see the aeroplane crashing, the authorities are just plain looking in the wrong places?

Starlionblue · Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:54 am

Quoting KIAS (Reply 176):
Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 154):

Quoting rcair1 (Reply 150):
So - regarding the 'hijacking' issues - it seems like it would takes somebody much more familiar with a/c systems than the garden variety hijacker. Turning off a transponder - easy - there is a knob on the front. Turning off ACARS? You probably have to pull some rather obscure breaker. The 'average' hijacker (if there is such a thing) may not even know ACARS exists or is installed on a particular a/c. Case in point - lots of confusion even now if the a/c had ACARS operating.

While I agree that the "average" hijacker might not prepare well, nothing says our very hypothetical hijacker is average. Once you make the assumption that this person planned properly, the information is not so hard to glean.

Most of the 772 circuit breakers are located in the E/E bay, ACARS is in the AIMS cabinet in the rear. Doubtful a hijacker made it there. More likely would be a catastrophic event affecting the cabinet.

Thx for info. I suspected it wasn't in the overhead panel at least.

Quoting LTC8K6 (Reply 180):
So we would be looking at a hijacking, or an incapacitated crew, with this "engine data for four hours" story?

Both are possibilities.

[Edited 2014-03-12 21:55:51]

[Edited 2014-03-12 21:56:30]

[Edited 2014-03-12 21:57:12]

LTC8K6 · Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:55 am

The engine data comm system is separate?

Wouldn't have guessed that.

jcxroberts · Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:55 am

Quoting flood (Reply 163):
"BREAKING WSJ EXCLUSIVE: Engine monitoring data shows missing 777 was airborne for five hours -sources"
http://twitter.com/jonostrower/statu...62272

Makes sense and what many people thought. Given how heavily monitored the South China Sea is, this means it went out the Indian Ocean most likely. I also remember an eye witness who saw it at low elevation coming back over Malaysia. I guess they got this data from Rolls Royce ?

wjcandee · Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:55 am

If the WSJ is right, that's why a red-eye flight was the one that disappeared. That may be why cell phones and chat apps showed communication active until the phones died. But what of the passengers? Executed? Holed up as captives somewhere? WOW. If true, it's unheard of. Another high-concept, low-tech terrorist plot? The EICAS data may include clues as to where the thing is, and presumably satellites and such are searching there right now. I'm imagining Seal Team Six and the equivalent Chinese folks locking and loading. Interesting that the Americans are so at odds with the rest of the world's investigators.

nupogodi · Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:56 am

Quoting vnangia (Reply 179):
Also, wtf does "The investigators believe the plane flew for a total of five hours based on data automatically downloaded and sent to the ground from the Boeing Co. 777's engines as part of a routine maintenance and monitoring program." mean? They continued receiving ACARS messages?

Assuming no misdirection that is exactly what it means. They said previously that Rolls-Royce got 2 status updates during the accident flight, one on take off and one reaching cruise, neither exceptional.

Now apparently they reveal they got more. A lot more, it seems.

I hope this is false somehow.

flood · Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:57 am

Quoting nm2582 (Reply 181):
"The Beijing News has reported that a source claiming to be a local volunteer assisting in the search for missing Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 has found a dead body wearing a lifejacket in an area of the Strait of Malacca."

It was initially reported yesterday with no mention since and appears to have been unrelated.

Quoting jetblueguy22 (Reply 170):
I did but for whatever reason the link got all messed up.

Ah, thanks... was surprised it disappeared so quick but I guess you being a mod explains that

Starlionblue · Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:57 am

Quoting LTC8K6 (Reply 186):
The engine data comm system is separate?

Wouldn't have guessed that.

ACARS is a separate comms system from the others. It's not only for engine stuff though. You can even use for text communications with base.

nm2582 · Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:59 am

Quoting wjcandee (Reply 188):
Interesting that the Americans are so at odds with the rest of the world's investigators.

Considering it's a Boeing aircraft, and the NTSB's connections with Boeing and around the world, it's entirely possible that they have formed up a discrete investigation unit of their own; and with the experience and connections they have...they could come up with some stunning news. When you get a bunch of well-connected, experienced folks to set aside their differences and drive towards one goal....

Just one possibility!

chrisrad · Thu Mar 13, 2014 5:00 am

Stranger and stranger every day.

Quoting flood (Reply 168):
Quoting Stretch (Reply 166):
The Wall Street Journal is reporting new information on missing flight MH370, which U.S. investigators now suspect flew on long after it disappeared from civilian radar screens.

Link to WSJ article
http://tinyurl.com/m7jnd8x

Quoting wjcandee (Reply 188):
If the WSJ is right, that's why a red-eye flight was the one that disappeared. That may be why cell phones and chat apps showed communication active until the phones died. But what of the passengers? Executed? Holed up as captives somewhere? WOW. If true, it's unheard of. Another high-concept, low-tech terrorist plot? The EICAS data may include clues as to where the thing is, and presumably satellites and such are searching there right now. I'm imagining Seal Team Six and the equivalent Chinese folks locking and loading. Interesting that the Americans are so at odds with the rest of the world's investigators.

nm2582 · Thu Mar 13, 2014 5:00 am

Quoting flood (Reply 190):
It was initially reported yesterday with no mention since and appears to have been unrelated.

Thanks. updated my post so that nobody takes it and runs with it.

capt747ret · Thu Mar 13, 2014 5:01 am

The data feeds can be traced to the ground receiving stations which would give a good plot of its flight path.

panampaul · Thu Mar 13, 2014 5:02 am

To me, this sounds like the Malaysian's are backpeddling a bit but it's not really clear.

Malaysia: Radar Tracked Object Over Strait of Malacca Saturday Morning

Quote:
Life Raft Reported Found, Fishermen Say They Saw Low-Flying Plane

New information arose Wednedsday about the possible direction that the missing Malaysia Airlines jetliner took Saturday after taking off from Kuala Lumpur.

A Royal Malaysian Air Force base tracked what it termed an unidentified object over the Strait of Malacca early Saturday morning after the last known civilian contact with Flight 370.....

.

flyenthu · Thu Mar 13, 2014 5:02 am

Quoting nm2582 (Reply 181):

Wow...this if true is much less than the 4-5 hours WSJ is reporting. Obviously source and info. needs to be confirmed.

Stretch · Thu Mar 13, 2014 5:03 am

The more info that gets released WITHOUT visual verification of an aircraft, the more bizzare this gets.

LTC8K6 · Thu Mar 13, 2014 5:03 am

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 191):

ACARS is a separate comms system from the others. It's not only for engine stuff though. You can even use for text communications with base.

I was assuming ACARS was not working.

777Jet · Thu Mar 13, 2014 5:05 am

Quoting Nav20 (Reply 184):
So if Mike Mckay is right, and really did see the aeroplane crashing, the authorities are just plain looking in the wrong places?

Quoting jcxroberts (Reply 187):
Quoting flood (Reply 163):
"BREAKING WSJ EXCLUSIVE: Engine monitoring data shows missing 777 was airborne for five hours -sources"
http://twitter.com/jonostrower/statu...62272

Makes sense and what many people thought. Given how heavily monitored the South China Sea is, this means it went out the Indian Ocean most likely. I also remember an eye witness who saw it at low elevation coming back over Malaysia. I guess they got this data from Rolls Royce ?

If Mike Mckay is correct then the engine monitoring data is wrong. If the engine monitoring data is correct then Mike Mckay is wrong. Awesome!

If the plane was hijacked, could the cockpit have been entered (let's say while a pilot used the toilet) without being seen by other passengers? I sat in row 1 on a TG 777-200 and I could not see the flight deck entry. Is the cockpit door visible from seats in the pax cabin? If the cockpit was entered by just one or two people and nobody (including cabin crew) saw and the plane kept flying for hours then how were the passengers to know that the plane was taken? They would have had no reason to try to make phone calls. Also, if a FA suspected something and called the cockpit, the pilots might not have been able to say much other than what the hijackers told them to say... Just another theory...

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net