Due to length part 35 was locked for further contributions. Please feel free to continue your discussion in part 36:

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)

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

**** 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


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


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



Enjoy the forums!

Regards and thanks for your co-operation,

Pat

I think the media is probably wrong on this one. How would they know a new flight plan was entered into the FMC before the last comm? People have speculated about ADS-C but that doesn't seem likely.

Quoting planesmart from previous thread: Did either of the pilots spend time on a 777 simulator post the water landing in the Hudson? Did either try such a landing on the commercial simulator? Perhaps the plane is in a remote river or lagoon.

Answer: There's no way to accurately model such an event in Microsoft Flight Simulator, or in a commercial simulator for that matter.

Quoting gatorman96 (Reply 244): Quoting 65Mustang (Reply 225): Failed or successful Hijack - Somali pirates are pretty brazen. With all due respect to Somali pirates, I'm willing to bet that not one of them have ever set foot on an aircraft, let alone own a passport. Why branch out to Malaysia to steal an aircraft when there are hundreds of massive, lumbering ships right off the coast of Somalia ripe for pirating? Makes no sense...

You're quite right. Somali pirates are, by and large, barely competent. To paraphrase one author's take, "the problem with Somali pirates is that they're neither competent nor ambitious enough. If there was one guy who knew what he was doing there, he would take over the whole operation in a few months and make it way more efficient, quickly setting himself up as dictator of the area. And then he could work on 'most favored dictator' status with the US. He would be much richer, as would his country."

Not to say other insurgent groups don't have the skillset.

But I digress...

Quoting ChrisNH (Reply 269): Quoting hivue (Reply 262): Not correct. A turn was entered in the FMS 12 min before final voice contact but not executed then. "Entered into the FMS" or "executed"...what difference does it make? The plane should have gone straight and instead went left...and a calm, unconcerned copilot says 'Good night?' Before they even take off, both crew members go over this stuff to cross-check for anomalies. A mis-commanded turn like this would happen hundreds of time daily all over the globe if pilots didn't cross-reference their waypoints. Yet you don't see that happening.

Planes make wrong turns all the time actually, but pilots tend to notice. And as you say, the cross-check waypoints before executing.

Quoting seatran (Reply 278): Most pilots follow the purple line and if the purple line says to go left, they go left and don't really question it.

It's magenta. 

[Edited 2014-03-18 20:21:27]

[Edited 2014-03-18 20:21:52]

[Edited 2014-03-18 20:24:06]

---From the prior (now locked) thread---

From prior threads...

[unknown]If a certain terrorist group will "steal" a plane they will use it right away (9/11).

IADCA: I'm not convinced that whoever took it wants the plane. I think disappearing without a trace might be the point. It's a pretty powerful statement to say (by implication, of course): "We took a loaded 777 from a major airline and we made it vanish into thin air. You have no idea how we did it, and you don't even know who we are, so you have no idea if or when we might do it again.

THIS has been my pet theory for a while now. If true, the real shock would come with the disappearance of the next plane...

gatorman96: Aside from a battle over the flight controls, this could be an explanation for the sudden climb to 43-45K feet.

I haven't seen this mentioned elsewhere, but let's say the hijacker decompresses the cabin. The passengers are in real trouble after a few minutes but the f/a's have their oxygen bottles. So there is an attempt on their part to break into the cockpit. To quell the commotion and to thwart this, the hijacker enters a steep climb - attempting to physically force the f/a's to the rear of the plane. (thoughts??)

virgin744: Why not steal a cargo plane? Why do it with passengers on board?

It's easy to board a passenger plane. Just buy a ticket. Besides who is going to really notice that a cargo plane is missing? It may be a news item, but that would be about it. And if your goal is terror, making over 200 people disappear is much more in line with such an evil plan.

laddb: Naturally, whoever landed at some remote airport is probably filling a boat with seat cushions and suitcases to be scattered in the middle of the Indian Ocean as a diversion.

Oh wow. Unfortunately that makes sense...

Great article on the immarsat pings and possible plane locations plotted as arcs.

http://tmfassociates.com/blog/2014/0.../15/understanding-satellite-pings/

My understanding is that the possible locations are all based on the last ping. My question is how these arcs looked like for the previous pings. Has anyone seen possible arcs for each ping prior to the last one?

Posted this just as the previous thread was being locked.

Quoting stuyyz (Reply 15): The pilot had Diego Garcia as one of his top 5 landing strips in his simulator, so for whatever reason he was aiming for this airport.

Do you have a source for this from the media?

I know when the rumor first appeared on these threads, and it has been repeated several times.

I find this hard to believe because:

1) Diego Garcia is not a challenging or difficult airport to land at - at night or daytime in FS, and even easier in the real world. It is very boring actually. Pretty much if a real world pilot can land on a 10,000 ft + runway, he can land at Diego Garcia.

2) MSFS does not model military UHF communications or military TACAN navigation aids/ systems. MSFS would not prepare a real pilot for a 'stealth' landing at a military airfield.

3) MSFS flight logging is notoriously buggy and inaccurate. Most people turn it off because it can cause OOM errors and cause the sim to crash. Even when it doesn't cause crashes, it doesn't always record landings correctly. The logging in MSFS can give misleading impressions about which airports are most frequently used.

Quoting stuyyz (Reply 15): Coverup: It may all come down to the base commander or even the missile operator who is covering it up, and not telling his senior officer. Who knows...its a longshot theory in the first place.

There are too many people and too much internet connection activity with Diego Garcia for some think like a civilian airliner arrival or destruction to stay secret. It can't happen. Even if they shutdown the internet and telephone access - we would have heard about that on military family forums. DG is simply not that isolated in today's electronic age. And military people are not blind robots. They know right from wrong and a cover-up of something like shooting down an airliner would not be possible.

Quoting FirstClass (Reply 4): Has anyone seen possible arcs for each ping prior to the last one?

That has not been released.

Ok this from tomnod Facebook. It does look like a person to me.

Jennifer Cardillo Tesman maybe it's not a person from #370, but def looks like a person. Maybe from a boat..... I know it's out there but really looks like a person!!!! http://www.tomnod.com/.../cha.../mh370_indian_ocean/map/2234

Added. Check this link. http://www.tomnod.com/nod/challenge/mh370_indian_ocean/map/2234

[Edited 2014-03-18 20:36:55]

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 5): Even when [MSFS] doesn't cause crashes

This is amusing out of context.

Quoting Tapir (Reply 7): Jennifer Cardillo Tesman maybe it's not a person from #370, but def looks like a person. Maybe from a boat..... I know it's out there but really looks like a person!!!! http://www.tomnod.com/.../cha.../mh3.../2234

Your link does not seem to be working.

Quoting Dalavia (Reply 9):

Try again. About 2 cm up from the center. Zoom the page as big as possible.Looks like someone sitting on something.

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 2): Planes make wrong turns all the time actually, but pilots tend to notice. And as you say, the cross-check waypoints before executing.

This is true pilots do make wrong turns pretty frequently. Pilots may or may not notice a wrong turn. If we entered the route on the ground and cross-checked it against the ATC clearance, then it's an exceedingly rare pilot who will continue to cross-check the route. It would be easy to miss a wrong turn that was supposed to go 30 deg left instead of 30 deg right.

On an oceanic route or non-radar route with position reporting then that's a different story since you confirm the next waypoint on your position report. I'm not sure what kind of route MH 370 was on. It has been years since I've flown down in that part of the world.

What would catch most pilot's attention is a sharp turn in the purple line that is not going in the general direction where it's supposed to go or a discontinuity in the route.

Quoting Tapir (Reply 10): Try again. About 2 cm up from the center. Zoom the page as big as possible.Looks like someone sitting on something.

Okay, thanks.

Working now.

[Edited 2014-03-18 20:41:18]

Help me out here. I was flipping through the channels and saw on FOX that one of their "experts" said that someone in the cockpit can turn something off so the plane will not create a distress signal if it crashed. And that is why we have not found it. The example the "expert" gave is that if the plane had a tail strike the person can turn off the device so it will not go off.

I wasn't really paying attention so I did not hear what the device was. He said there was one in the front of the plane and one in the tail. He was not talking about the black box was he? Cause I am pretty sure you can not turn off the signal the black box makes.

Seven Somali Pirates Jailed in Malaysia -September 2, 2013 - 11:32:16 UTC
http://www.oceanuslive.org/main/viewnews.aspx?uid=00000772

Need to check the background of the convicted Somalis.

Maybe someone can help me remember this; not that its plausibe. I remember reading an acticle in which a computer hacker was able to access the ships onboard computer systems and alter the flight parameters. I'm sure this is not the case as the pilots surely would have noticed, and communicated the variance. Then again I surely do not know enough about what can and cannot be accessed. Any info is welcomed.

Quoting nupogodi (Reply 6): That has not been released.

Well, considering that we've heard reports the last 2 arcs were close to each other that gives a small clue...

The plane must have flown close to the tangential of the hemisphere below the satellite to remain close to the 40 deg arc for an hour. This would basically mean it was flying either NW or SE.

Either that or it was already circling or had landed in the mean time (I see no point in why it would remain powered up though if the latter was the case).

D.

Quoting Dalavia (Reply 9): Your link does not seem to be working.

I think this is what he was linking: http://www.tomnod.com/nod/challenge/mh370_indian_ocean/map/2234

Quoting dragon-wings (Reply 13): I wasn't really paying attention so I did not hear what the device was. He said there was one in the front of the plane and one in the tail. He was not talking about the black box was he? Cause I am pretty sure you can not turn off the signal the black box makes.

You can't turn off the beacon on the ELT either, so I don't know what that "expert" was on about. You shouldn't watch Fox News anyway.

It now appears that a variety of sources including TV news are saying that the change in course of MH370 was entered into the FMS before the now-famous "All right, good night" sign-off.

I don't believe this answers any questions as to whether this was a routine emergency flight plan as a backup - or something far more sinister but the information continues to trickle in at a pace resembling moalsses.

Apparently the bad PR is getting to Malaysia and it is changing its management strategy for the search as well. Go figure.

Missing Malaysia Jet’s Change in Direction Programmed Before Sign-off

Quote: Management of Search to be Divvied Up by Country New evidence in the case of the missing Malaysia Airlines jetliner indicates that the plane’s change of direction may very well have been input into a cockpit computer before the last voice communication was received by controllers on the ground....

.

[Edited 2014-03-18 21:02:26]

Quoting dragon-wings (Reply 13): Help me out here. I was flipping through the channels and saw on FOX that one of their "experts" said that someone in the cockpit can turn something off so the plane will not create a distress signal if it crashed. And that is why we have not found it. The example the "expert" gave is that if the plane had a tail strike the person can turn off the device so it will not go off. I wasn't really paying attention so I did not hear what the device was. He said there was one in the front of the plane and one in the tail. He was not talking about the black box was he? Cause I am pretty sure you can not turn off the signal the black box makes.

I think they are referring to the ELT (Emergency locator transmitter) I think there is one installed in the back but there is no off switch from the best I understand just a manual ON or test switch. It has an independent battery and antenna so turning it off would be a little difficult. I'm not sure about the one in the front it could be a portable distress beacon or another installed one.

Quoting tomlee (Reply 20): I'm not sure about the one in the front it could be a portable distress beacon or another installed one.

I don't think there is an ELT installed in the front. I mean, I've never heard of such a thing, my word isn't gospel but neither are the words of Fox's talking heads. There will be portable ones in the cabin as you said but they require manual activation, unlikely in a night ditching of a 777.

Quoting nupogodi (Reply 18): You can't turn off the beacon on the ELT either, so I don't know what that "expert" was on about. You shouldn't watch Fox News anyway.

That's what I thought just wasn't total sure. And I usually watch CNN.  

Quoting PanAmPaul (Reply 19): It now appears that a variety of sources including TV news are saying that the change in course of MH370 took place before the now-famous "All right, good night" sign-off.

The change in course did not take place then. It was just set up in the FMS then.

Quoting Tapir (Reply 10): Looks like someone sitting on something.

Trust me mate. The more time you spend with Tomnod the more illusions you'll get.

Quoting dragon-wings (Reply 22): That's what I thought just wasn't total sure. And I usually watch CNN.

You should watch their international channel if you have access to it, American CNN seems to focus more on Justin Bieber like things rather than real news.

Reposted because I got it in at the end of the last post.l

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 258): CNN and FOX said that the plane turned about 12 minutes before the final message.

Yes - I've been watching the eating dinner and SCREAMING AT THE TV for the last hour.
I've seen multiple experts who obviously (to even a moderately informed person like me) were NOT experts - they could not be because they were making statements that were verify-ably false.
The ONLY ones I saw that were good - and they were saying the things you read here from experts were:
- Patrick Smith of askthepilot.com
- A Mike (Howard? I think) that was a pilot and ex covert ops person.

We even had an ex NTSB expert say that having a co-pilot enter FMS data and not verify with the pilot was an "inconceivable breech of CRM". We all know, and the NTSB should really know - that while CRM is key - it is not "inconceivable" that is it violated - for goodness sake - the NTSB has accident reports that have violation of CRM as a cause or contributing factor.

That same NTSB expert said "the 777 has fire extinguishing capability to handle ANY fire". Both Patrick Smith and the other pilot were saying "No - not true." The anchor-person even said "Patrick - you disagree with that". And Patrick said "there were a lot of things wrong what 'he' said - at which point they said "we only have time for one."

Then they showed pictures of the 777 that had the ground cockpit fire - and completely glossed over the fact that if that fire had occurred in flight - it would not have survived 7+ hours. Then they talked about Swiss Air 111 and glossed over that the comms did not fail immediately and the aircraft did not survive even long enough divert (and would not have in any case).

Patrick Smith looked completely disgusted.

Here is what is being report.
1) The ACARS engine report at 1:07 included way-point changes
--> this would be consistent with an ADS-C way-point event report reported by ACARS
--> But would an ADS-C way-point event be included in an ACARS transmission to Rolls Royce for EHM?
2) They are saying (incorrectly I think) that this means the aircraft HAD ALREADY turned at that ACARS report - 12 minutes before the hand-off report "All Right - Good Night".
--> BTW - a couple of the experts including Patrick Smith questioned that and said - wait - it just means it was programmed, not that it turned.
--> This also ignores the fact that at this point the Transponder was on so the course change would be reported on Secondary Radar to ATC 12 minutes before hand-off.

BTW - this is all based on the NYT report that we've already discussed.
Even the NYT reporter they had on was 'not sure' it had already turned.

What I think may be the truth.
-> The ACARS report at 1:07 may have included ADS-C Data that says that new way-points (yet to be identified in the press) had been entered (not executed, just loaded).
-> The aircraft had NOT turned - as that would have been revealed on Secondary Radar.(ATC).

This is significant in that it seems to indicate new way-points had been entered at 1:07.
If these way-points are consistent with the reported course - that means the crew was under duress or complicate at that time.
It is not for sure - because pilots do enter alternate way-points for various reasons - and they may not be executed.

I'm sure I'll have new foder for the Sanity check in the morning.

--------
On other subjects.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 258): Are transponders to control centers also time delayed?

NO - absolutely not. The purpose of the transponder/radar is control of traffic in real time. There is no way it could be delayed. How could you control traffic flow for traffic you see with a delay.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 265): Now I am also receiving conflicting reports from both CNN, FOX, and every other news source saying that they cannot confirm that the turn was computer-input. Was this info sent via satallite to Boeing or RR?

It would have to come via ADS-C and ACARS (see Sanity Check - post 44)

Quoting LTC8K6 (Reply 279): IIRC, the actual turn would be reported by ACARS, not the data entry. So if ACARS reported the turn, then the turn occurred before ACARS was disabled. I think.

I don't believe so. ADS-C reports next waypoint and next+1. It depends on what the reported waypoints were.

BIG problem with "already turned". Transponder was on - for over 12 more minutes. ATC would see the turn.

Quoting nupogodi (Reply 21): I don't think there is an ELT installed in the front. I mean, I've never heard of such a thing, my word isn't gospel but neither are the words of Fox's talking heads. There will be portable ones in the cabin as you said but they require manual activation, unlikely in a night ditching of a 777.

Yeah I've never heard of two automatic beacons, I highly doubt they would go through the effort/cost of installing multiple automatic ELTs and the requirements are only for one installed one last time I checked (They don't really work in most jet airline crashes in any case).

Quoting ivanoruvan (Reply 24):

Maybe, seeing two squarish shaped object too.

Trivia: This thread has now exceeded 10,000 replies. It reached that number around Reply 250 in Part 35.

Quoting rcair1 (Reply 26):

If the turn were many minutes earlier, FR24 would also show it.

So I think it's safe to say the turn did not occur earlier than previously thought.

Quoting dragon-wings (Reply 13): I wasn't really paying attention so I did not hear what the device was.

He was talking about the ELT. He was also wrong. He also said there were 4 on the 777. I don't think so.

You cannot turn the ELT. It is in the tail, not the nose. You can "activate", "reset", "selftest".

Quoting nupogodi (Reply 18): You shouldn't watch Fox News anyway.

Quoting dragon-wings (Reply 22): That's what I thought just wasn't total sure. And I usually watch CNN

Fox news had Patrick Smith on - he is very good and was fighting back hard on the crap.

I've watched both during this - neither has a monopoly on being right or wrong and often they are feeding from the same source.

Better answer - don't watch any of them - they have been about 10% right and about often quite far behind this forum.

-rcair1

Getting weird. Another strange shape here. Same location.

http://www.tomnod.com/nod/challenge/mh370_indian_ocean/map/4953

wreckage?

ACARS - Can anyone clarify with certainty whether the ACARS reports upcoming, programmed turns or only turns that have been initiated and/or completed?

Quoting hivue (Reply 23): The change in course did not take place then. It was just set up in the FMS then.

Which is what I meant to say - thanks for pointing out the gap in thinking on my part - I've fixed it in my original post.

Quoting bajamatic (Reply 33): ACARS - Can anyone clarify with certainty whether the ACARS reports upcoming, programmed turns or only turns that have been initiated and/or completed?

ACARS - if reporting ADS-C reports the lat, long, altitude and ETA for the next 2 waypoints (next waypoint and next+1 waypoint).

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 29): Trivia: This thread has now exceeded 10,000 replies. It reached that number around Reply 250 in Part 35.

Moral: if you want your deathless prose widely read, don't write a book. Post on anet. 

Quoting Tapir (Reply 32): Getting weird. Another strange shape here. Same location. http://www.tomnod.com/nod/challenge/mh370_indian_ocean/map/4953 wreckage?

Lots of debris or something all over that area!

Quoting LTC8K6 (Reply 30): If the turn were many minutes earlier, FR24 would also show it. So I think it's safe to say the turn did not occur earlier than previously thought.

Does programming a change in heading necessarily mean immediate change in direction? It may not be, right? It could be that the change was programmed before the copilot's last communication for a later point in time.

Sanity Check - NOTE.
- it is 22:00 here and I've had 2 beers - so no updated Sanity Check tonight.

Thanks to those who have posted suggestions on it.
- The prevalent suggestion is 'Leave the detail but somehow highlight the changes"

At this point - I'm going to let information through night (here) and day (Malaysia) try to clear up the following two issues:
- Sighting in Maldive
- Change in course programming as reported by ACARS/ADS-C.

In the morning I will see where we are at...

-rcair1

Quoting rcair1 (Reply 31): He was talking about the ELT. He was also wrong. He also said there were 4 on the 777. I don't think so.

Well, there are way more than 4 I think. There's one in each slide and at least one in the cabin, but they are not g-activated.

Quoting flyenthu (Reply 38): Does programming a change in heading necessarily mean immediate change in direction? It may not be, right? It could be that the change was programmed before the copilot's last communication for a later point in time.

Absolutely does not mean anything immediate. You have to execute the plan, and if your next waypoint is your current next waypoint nothing will change for a while. e.g. if I'm driving to Montreal through Toronto, but I decide to go to Thunder Bay through Toronto instead, I still have to go to Toronto. Sorry for the Canadian references...

Well with CNN talking about the plane being used as a future weapon, or it ending up in Iran now;....i guess Flying With Fish wasn't so wrong after all....

Quoting Tapir (Reply 32): Getting weird. Another strange shape here. Same location. http://www.tomnod.com/nod/challenge/mh370_indian_ocean/map/4953 wreckage?

Beats me. But looks like something which is partially burnt too. Nose, tail of an aircraft?? Man, now I'm delusional.   

So here we are almost 2 weeks after MH370 vanished and we basically know nothing more then we did on day 1, other than the plane made a turn towards the West shortly after take-off.

Wow!

I think a sea monster snatched it from the sky and ate it.

Quoting rcair1 (Reply 35): ACARS - if reporting ADS-C reports the lat, long, altitude and ETA for the next 2 waypoints (next waypoint and next+1 waypoint).

Can we confirm Malaysia Airlines subscribed to all these ACARS services? At first the reports were they didn't subscribe to any of it, then just the engine health reports, now this? I'm so confused...

Quoting rcair1 (Reply 31): Better answer - don't watch any of them - they have been about 10% right and about often quite far behind this forum.

You are 100% correct.

I know a helluva lot more about trains than I do about planes. And I can tell you this. Anytime there is a railroad incident, report, accident, etc. - in general the news reports are almost always WRONG.

I learned a long time ago not to trust the news.

Quoting OOer (Reply 44): I think a sea monster snatched it from the sky and ate it.

Or a space monster that way the plane would technically reach low earth orbit for a moment.

Quoting chaseus1 (Reply 37): http://www.tomnod.com/nod/challenge/mh370_indian_ocean/map/4953

Quoting chaseus1 (Reply 37): Lots of debris or something all over that area!

This looks like a large chunk of something . 20 x 60 meters.

[Edited 2014-03-18 21:29:52]

Quoting edmountain (Reply 45): Can we confirm Malaysia Airlines subscribed to all these ACARS services? At first the reports were they didn't subscribe to any of it, then just the engine health reports, now this? I'm so confused...

ADS-C is speculation as to how they know the flight plan was changed in the FMC. Google it to read about what it is. It's not likely they had ADS-C activated.

I'm not sure they only subscribed to EHM, the early reports were that they subscribed to a "basic" level of AHM from Boeing too but not over SATCOM? It's quite complicated since all of these things have costs attached to them, and the costs change depending on which downlink you use, and you can program airline policy into the system - i.e. "use any link for this, use only VHF for that" etc. Then any of the links can be disabled by the crew by digging into menus in the MFD, but only for ACARS... Basically, without getting a VERY SPECIFIC and technical description of EXACTLY what the aircraft was configured to do, all we can do is speculate.

But I am skeptical of the ADS-C angle, to be honest.