Due to length part 17 was locked for further contributions. Please feel free to continue your discussion in part 18.

MH370 Malaysian Airlines B777-200ER missing enroute KUL-PEK (by Longhornmaniac Mar 7 2014 in Civil Aviation)
MH370 Malaysian Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 2 (by LipeGIG Mar 7 2014 in Civil Aviation)
MH370 Malaysian Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 3 (by SA7700 Mar 8 2014 in Civil Aviation)
MH370 Malaysian Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 4 (by SA7700 Mar 8 2014 in Civil Aviation)
MH370 Malaysian Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 5 (by SA7700 Mar 8 2014 in Civil Aviation)
MH370 Malaysian 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 772 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 B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 17 (by 777ER Mar 12 2014 in Civil Aviation)

A select few members have been making remarks towards others in the “Missing Malaysia Airlines 777 threads” for speculating about the fate of 9M-MRO, her crew and passengers. Given the fact that there is so much uncertainty going on at this stage, speculation is going to be a factor on this site and also at the biggest and greatest news corporations of the globe. At least until we all have a clearer picture. Is it a perfect situation – certainly not? That being said, we need to stay dynamic in a possible fast-changing situation.

It is not unique to this incident and if we go back in history and trace remarkable aviation events we will see that speculation has been an aspect, essential to some healthy debate. It is not the intention of the moderators to stifle the opinions of members that fall within the rules-and regulations of airliners.net. All that we kindly request from all our members is to stay within the site’s parameters. Please be respectful towards one another and let us all hope for the best possible outcome.


PLEASE KEEP IN MIND:


**** Out of respect to the crew, passengers and also family members; close to those onboard MH370; could we please keep science fiction theories and content related to possible future movie rights out of these threads? ****

**** Please do not repeat questions and scenarios that were covered and discussed in previous threads and which do not contribute in a constructive manner towards the real topic 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. ****

**** Once again 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”. ****


Enjoy the forums!

Regards and thanks for your co-operation,

Pat

This captures three types of reports:

The first are snapshots, where the sensor data listed above is captured and collected into a small report. This is carried out during take-off, during climb and once the aircraft is in cruise.

The second type is triggered by unusual engine conditions. Examples might be if an engine exceeded its TGT (Turbine Gas Temperature) limits during a take-off. These reports contain a short time-history of key parameters to enable rapid and effective trouble-shooting of the problem.

The final type is a summary, which is produced at the end of the flight. This captures information such as maximum conditions experienced during the flight, and power reductions selected during take-off and climb.

http://www.rolls-royce.com/about/tec...ystems_tech/monitoring_systems.jsp

There's no indication that the RR EHM system would have produced anything but the three snapshots and the summary.

Presumably, they received a summary? And thus know when the flight ended?

"Quoting dcsben (Reply 209):
If it is indeed true that the a/c kept on flying for 4-5 more hours, then it is again quite possible that the transponder was turned off and the plane flown somewhere intentionally."

I read that. But it makes no sense. Which terrorist group in that part of the world, giving the ass kicking they´ve been receiving for the past decade and a half, has the infrastructure to carry out such an operation? I can buy they managed to hijack the plane and fly it somewhere, land it (it´s happened before) but then prepare a 777 for a future operation? With no government in that part of the world knowing about it? It sounds like a bad Bond movie plot.

The only place it could have gone if flying West is to countries that are not going to be able to hide something like this for such a long time, or not knowing about it.

"Quoting 777Jet (Reply 223):
Also, how come it has taken five days to find out that the engine monitoring data suggests that the plane flew for 5 more hours?"

I would guess that it´s data that has taken a while to analyze and then re analyze.

As reported in the previous thread, Wall Street Journal claims 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.

Link to the story
http://tinyurl.com/m7jnd8x

Apparently, the plane sent ACARS information regarding engine performance but without location information through a satellite connection.

So we're down to two broad possibilities right:

1) Hijacking (including by the crew)
2) Hypoxia plus other weirdness explaining the transponder and turn

Any other possibilities?

Also, the WSJ report makes FL 295 sound exceedingly intentional. Again, not something that is necessarily incompatible with hypoxia and other non-nefarious weirdness, but it's tough to square.

Quoting aftgaffe (Reply 5): Any other possibilities?

Loss of control is still a possibility.

I have a feeling....

Last radar signal from MH370 (en route from Kuala Lumpur to Bejing) was above Vietnam Sea/South Chinese Sea. New Zealand oil ridge worker (on oil ridge south of Vietnam) sees burning plane falling from sky into South Chinese Sea. Chinese satellite might found debris in South Chinese Sea.

Fishermen found dead body with life jacket in Malakka Street. Life raft was found in Malakka Street. Malaysian Air Force picked up radar signal from an unidentified flying object (maybe a disguised or not responding plane) above Malakka Street.

My feeling: maybe a stealth aircraft collided in mid-air with the Malaysian Airlines Boeing 777. The airliner crashed in South Chinese Sea and the stealth aircraft tried to get back to Diego Garcia or other base but did not make it and crashed into Malakka Street.

Quoting LTC8K6 (Reply 1): The final type is a summary, which is produced at the end of the flight. This captures information such as maximum conditions experienced during the flight, and power reductions selected during take-off and climb.

Goodness. This seems to be the only type that fits a scenario which would communicate a duration of flight.

What conditions have to be met for "end of flight" to be triggered and this summary set? If we're talking about a controlled proper engine shutdown, then things are about to get super, super interesting...

EDIT: upon second thought, the report could also have been the "unusual engine condition" report.

If they received an "unusual engine condition" report but no "summary" report, that could indicate that the flight did not end with a controlled landing (the unusual engine condition could have been flame out due to fuel starvation, or an excessive throttle setting for excessive duration?? just guessing here).

On the other hand, if they received a summary report, then the plane could be wheels down somewhere.

The content of the data they have will be very telling.

[Edited 2014-03-12 23:13:58]

Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 8): Loss of control is still a possibility.

Can you say more? 4 hours loss aloft without control and comms - that's difficult to envision (although I realize we are in exceedingly difficult to envision territory), particularly since (1) WSJ did not report anything unusual in engine ACARS (although sources could be holding back) and (2) we have an indication of a significant post-transponder failure heading change but no indication after supposedly flying back over Malaysia that the a/c maneuvered in direction of land. So it would be four hours of uncontrollable but relatively stable, straight flight.

What am I missing?

The story of the dead body found in a life jacket is a day old now, has there been any news in terms of the authenticity of this discovery?

Quoting washingtonflyer (Reply 10): Holy fuc... What does the range circle look like four hours after it was lost from Malaysian radar?

It's on this Twitter, a few posts down:

https://twitter.com/flyingwithfish

His range circle does seem conservative. I don't have image-creation capabilities at the moment but my Google Earth fooling around yields a circle stretching from central Pakistan to central Australia.

And, of course, extending VERY far into the Indian Ocean.

[Edited 2014-03-12 23:11:41]

Some of you guys are great at making maps. Can someone make a map with a radius from the last know point showing how far this plane could have flown if it did fly 5 hours more. That would help a lot of us visualize up to where this plane could have gone.

From the earlier thread:

"NTSB investigators are not amateurs and neither is the Wall Street Journal. "

I seriously doubt the NTSB is leading this investigation from the US side. They are probably involved as they would have the technical knowledge to know what to do with stuff like ACARS data. But the WSJ left very little doubt that this is a counter-terrorism investigation that's going on in the US. And why wouldn't it be at this point? The Malaysians are leading the SAR (for now), there's no actual crash to investigate (I mean, not one that's been found)... all there really is to do from the US side is make sure no one's going to get hit over the head with an airplane.

I doubt it was the NTSB that gave this info to the WSJ. The NTSB doesn't typically leak stuff to the press. Other US government agencies are known to do that, however, both intentionally and not. (But I'm guessing this was the former.)

[Edited 2014-03-12 23:13:17]

The only thing I can think of to explain the WSJ report is that ACARS sent an engine summary report, indicting that the plane had landed.

I'm not really familiar with how all of that works though, so I'm just guessing.

https://twitter.com/petchmo/status/443972954401935361

Quoting CO777DAL (Reply 13): Some of you guys are great at making maps. Can someone make a map with a radius from the last know point showing how far this plane could have flown if it did fly 5 hours more. That would help a lot of us visualize up to where this plane could have gone.

If heading West, it could be India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Sri Lanka or the Maldives. If on its current heading at point of contact loss, somewhere in China.

Quoting LTC8K6 (Reply 15): The only thing I can think of to explain the WSJ report is that ACARS sent an engine summary report, indicting that the plane had landed.

And maybe also a successful or nearly succeful ditching. Even if the engines are separated that might cause the ACARS to send a report.

Quoting Owleye (Reply 9): Fishermen found dead body with life jacket in Malakka Street.

Are you saying that a body was found on a street on land? That would mean something happened over land and not water, which would change the nature of the search.

Quoting aftgaffe (Reply 5): 1) Hijacking (including by the crew)

I know we do not know for sure and that we are all just guessing at this point in time, but I highly doubt the captain would hijack the plane or allow it to be hijacked. He was experienced and had been with the airline since the 1980s.

Quoting nm2582 (Reply 11): What conditions have to be met for "end of flight" to be triggered and this summary set? If we're talking about a controlled proper engine shutdown, then things are about to get super, super interesting...

Very true. Could it also have been that it sent the summary when the engines turned off because of a crash, so more of a mechanical or forced shutdown rather than a proper shutdown?

Also, have the authorities been able to verify the report of the New Zealand oil ridge worker or are people blowing that off at this point? Do we know when there will be verification or further investigation into what the Chinese satellite saw?

Quoting laxboeingman (Reply 20): Are you saying that a body was found on a street on land? That would mean something happened over land and not water, which would change the nature of the search.

Malakka Street is a sea street, west of the Malaysia penninsula (not on land)

Quoting KIAS (Reply 16): https://twitter.com/petchmo/status/443972954401935361

That map is way too conservative. It shows the range as not even making it to its intended destination - PEK.

If WSJ reporting is accurate, and data interpretation is conclusive and bears out that the plane was aloft for another 4 hours, the only possibility is that the plane was commandeered by either crew or "terrorists". What is MOST PROBABLE, and what I've heard is now driving the main vein of the investigation, is the Captain acting alone. There has been some speculation, in "reputable" circles, that the pilot of MH370 was afflicted by a type of delusional personalty disorder. Particularly a propensity towards grandiosity and ego-inflation, which may have been catalysts to an event such as is now unfolding. Again, this is very preliminary, perfunctory speculation but IS THE line of logic currently driving the investigation. As for the status of a/c and passengers, officials are being very cautious about releasing any pertinent information as the situation is "very fluid" and "dynamic" and of a "sensitive" nature. I will post more when I have more info.

Quoting washingtonflyer (Reply 17): I assume that it had enough to get to Beijing and then fuel for one additional hour....

I believe two additional hours was mentioned in a previous thread.

Quoting laxboeingman (Reply 20): Are you saying that a body was found on a street on land? That would mean something happened over land and not water, which would change the nature of the search.

I'm pretty sure hes confusing the word "street" for "strait", and he means the latter.

Quoting Owleye (Reply 20): Malakka Street

Malacca Strait in English. Sorry to nitpick, but in this case it might make a difference.

Quoting washingtonflyer (Reply 21): That map is way too conservative. It shows the range as not even making it to its intended destination - PEK.

That's not a fuel range map, it's a time-of-flight map based on the "4-5 hours" of engine ACARS data.

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 18): And maybe also a successful or nearly succeful ditching. Even if the engines are separated that might cause the ACARS to send a report.

Do we know how the system determines "landed"? I assumed weight on wheels.

Quoting spacecadet (Reply 14): I seriously doubt the NTSB is leading this investigation from the US side.

They may not be formally, but I wouldn't doubt they are leading their own independent investigation. If they find something worthy of notifying the Malaysian authorities I'm sure they would.

Quoting spacecadet (Reply 14): But the WSJ left very little doubt that this is a counter-terrorism investigation that's going on in the US. And why wouldn't it be at this point? The Malaysians are leading the SAR (for now), there's no actual crash to investigate (I mean, not one that's been found)... all there really is to do from the US side is make sure no one's going to get hit over the head with an airplane.

I'm sure it is busy in Langley right now. I have to imagine this is making the counterterrorism task forces sweating bullets.

How is radar coverage in Myanmar? I only say this because looking at the green circle that is the only spot that sticks out to me as not having a large level of commercial service. I have to imagine India or Thailand would have spotted it. Then again, you really can't rule anything out with this...
Pat

Quoting Owleye (Reply 20): Malakka Street is a sea street, west of the Malaysia penninsula (not on land)

OK, thank you. Sorry for my error. Has it been confirmed that the person was on MH370? Have authorities moved into that area to search for debris?

Quoting sipadan (Reply 22): What is MOST PROBABLE, and what I've heard is now driving the main vein of the investigation, is the Captain acting alone.

As a journalist, I have to ask: How do you know that/where are your sources from and how do your sources know that?


In terms of the WSJ report, how do we know what they reported is accurate and where did they get their information from?

Quoting vnangia (Reply 29): "But it transmitted engine data post flight … so that worked"

It's not really possible that kind of information is showing up on some aviation consultant's Twitter, is it? Surely something that astounding would be leaked not to him but to a reputable newspaper.

Quoting LTC8K6 (Reply 28): Do we know how the system determines "landed"? I assumed weight on wheels.

If your assumption is correct, then a crash would have been able to send the report. That is still creepy.

Quoting hamiltondaniel (Reply 25): If this is true this is just insane.

I would have to say that I find it unbelievable that the plane made a normal landing. I would have to think people would have seen a 777 at low altitudes.

From the previous thread:

Quote: User currently onlineSamH123 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2014, 2 posts, RR: 0 Reply 237, posted Wed Mar 12 2014 14:47:31 your local time (28 minutes 4 secs ago) and read 3690 times: I did not see it mentioned in this thread that at the press conference yesterday it was said that: "We are looking into four areas: one; hijacking, two; sabotage, three; psychological problems of the passengers and crew and four; personal problems among the passengers and crew." The fact a mechanical problem is not even one of the 4 areas shocked me - they seem to be ruling out the plane crashing anywhere near where it went off radar

The guy was speaking for the security agencies involved, i.e. the criminological aspect of the investigation. He did explicitly not speak for the aviation authorities, who would be responsible for checking technical or operational causes.

Quoting CO777DAL (Reply 13):

crap at maps, but according to MH own website the 772 cruises @ 0.84 Mach/897kmh, so lets base a few cities on 5 hours @ 850kmh = 4250km

First up

Colombo is 2458
Kabul is 4833 so that's out
Pyongyang 4657 so that's out
Mogadishu, Somalia is 6265 so that's out
Yemen is 6030 so that's out
Tehran, Iran is 6291 so that's out
Sochi is 7537 so that's out
Kiev, Ukraine is 8411 so that's out

unless it flew for longer than 5 hours, it's potential max Range is around 12,779 km...in which case all of the above are within range

It seems like Flying With Fish is speculating and guessing based on information available, sort of like we are. I would like to find out, though, where he is getting some of his information from.

How do we even know for sure that an engine report was transmitted?

Quoting laxboeingman (Reply 31): If your assumption is correct, then a crash would have been able to send the report. That is still creepy.

I would think that is unlikely.

My understanding is that ACARS prioritizes messages and sends them in a certain order. It doesn't immediately send data.

Quoting laxboeingman (Reply 31): I would have to say that I find it unbelievable that the plane made a normal landing. I would have to think people would have seen a 777 at low altitudes.

If we are going full conspiracy theory, then it could have been landed at a remote military facility where it is extremely unlikely to have been observed.

Quoting vnangia (Reply 33):

Is he reading my posts?  

Quoting nm2582 (Reply 36): If we are going full conspiracy theory, then it could have been landed at a remote military facility where it is extremely unlikely to have been observed.

True, but why would a government be in on this and how would other governments not find out?

Quoting jetblueguy22 (Reply 28): I'm sure it is busy in Langley right now. I have to imagine this is making the counterterrorism task forces sweating bullets.

officials were told investigators are actively pursuing the notion that the plane was diverted "with the intention of using it later for another purpose."

Source: "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety!" B.Franklin

Wouldn't an ACARS report contain a touchdown rate, speed, etc...?

Here we are at day 5. When did Boeing (I assume) become aware of this information? I would have thought that as soon as they become aware of the missing aircraft, they would have checked to see if any data was being transmitted.

If they did, and no data received on the weekend, maybe the flight was hijacked, landed, and took off again, but this time the pilot made sure that that mode of communication was operational once more. Just a thought.

Quoting LTC8K6 (Reply 35): My understanding is that ACARS prioritizes messages and sends them in a certain order. It doesn't immediately send data.

OK, thank you. Does that mean it would not send the data if it crashed?

Quoting fiscal (Reply 42): Here we are at day 5. When did Boeing (I assume) become aware of this information? I would have thought that as soon as they become aware of the missing aircraft, they would have checked to see if any data was being transmitted.

If Boeing got the information, wouldn't the airline then get it as well? Why would Boeing and not the airline get it?

Quoting laxboeingman (Reply 29): In terms of the WSJ report, how do we know what they reported is accurate and where did they get their information from?

We don't know that it's accurate. But it is highly detailed, gives specifics on actual briefings going on, and quotes anonymous sources within the US government. And it's the WSJ, not some podunk local paper in Iowa. The WSJ has a large array of government sources, and the government often uses the WSJ to leak info they want out in public without officially announcing it. If this info is inaccurate, you can expect a denial from the government tomorrow, because this is a big deal in a big paper. My bet is that there will be no denial. At most, you'll get a "we have nothing we can report at this time"... followed by more leaks to the press.

Can we give it 100% confidence? No, definitely not. We need some corroboration, either officially or at least independently from other sources. But it's a major publication with a history of government PR giving very detailed specifics on the investigation from the US side. So I tend to believe at least the gist of it.

Quoting laxboeingman (Reply 43): OK, thank you. Does that mean it would not send the data if it crashed?

I would think it's a long shot, but not entirely impossible.

Quoting imagoagnitio (Reply 34): Kabul is 4833 so that's out Pyongyang 4657 so that's out

Accounting for rounding errors, reported numbers being rounded, favorable winds, etc. etc.; either of these two locations could potentially be possible. Considering the surveillance Kim Jon-un must be under, I can't imagine how they would have been able to hide this, though.

[Edited 2014-03-12 23:39:01]

Quoting CaliAtenza (Reply 6): I did come across this twitter account: https://twitter.com/flyingwithfish Either this guy is a Loon, or he knows something much more than we are all being told.

Or both.

Quoting laxboeingman (Reply 31): Quoting hamiltondaniel (Reply 25): If this is true this is just insane. I would have to say that I find it unbelievable that the plane made a normal landing. I would have to think people would have seen a 777 at low altitudes.

At night it would be very hard to identify the plane. The vast majority can't even identify the type during the daytime..

Quoting stackhouse007 (Reply 40): Wouldn't an ACARS report contain a touchdown rate, speed, etc...?

That apparently depends on what the operator subscribes to.

Does the WSJ story indicate the radar or transmitter was turned off during flight? How would someone not have leaked it by now if it did land?

[Edited 2014-03-12 23:45:53]