Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
undertheradar
Posts: 407
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2014 1:02 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 1:17 am

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 36):

as day breaks over the southern indian ocean..we can only hope 'something' comes to fruition and can be POSITIVELY identified as 'something' from MH370.

on that note...I have been 'googling' all over the place and filing through my own memory as I try my best to answer my own questions before putting a post on here..if my memory serves me correctly...WOODEN pallets are used in commercial aircraft holds sometimes...so IF they do find this pallet and CAN trace it back to someone who used it as part of their freight consignment...or even better, locate a more significant piece of debris (more easily/quickly identifiable) ..then at least we can narrow the search down to ONE HEMISPHERE..

i'm focused on FINDING MH370

'hope' is all we have at the moment

[Edited 2014-03-22 18:37:30]
 
GZed
Posts: 43
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2014 12:21 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 1:37 am

Quoting SouthernBelle (Reply 43):
Interesting, huh?

Check this out. I have added a few extra points beyond what we know :
http://skyvector.com/?ll=-9.39703903...R:F.WM.NILAM:F.WI.VIROT:F.VC.NIXUL

This map shows that whoever was in control could have flown known way points to where the north and south routes intersect (based on the Inmarsat ping calculations):



Compare the above with this:



MH370 appears to be flying know waypoints, heading for Diego Garcia (possibly). But then turns away at NIXUL - why?
 
rj777
Posts: 1807
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2000 1:47 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 1:41 am

That cargo pallet could be from the MH370 cargo hold.
 
mouldypete
Posts: 28
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2014 3:59 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 1:59 am

Quoting GZed (Reply 58):
Check this out. I have added a few extra points beyond what we know :
http://skyvector.com/?ll=-9.39703903...R:F.WM.NILAM:F.WI.VIROT:F.VC.NIXUL

This map shows that whoever was in control could have flown known way points to where the north and south routes intersect (based on the Inmarsat ping calculations):

I think you may have missed a major point. The tracks plotted by the NTSB START from the last supposedly known radar positions. The whole premise of the final prediction for both the southern and the northwestern track is promulgated from the "last known position" from radar.

I think we are in danger of entering a circular argument here.

[Edited 2014-03-22 19:00:34]

[Edited 2014-03-22 19:01:27]
 
WingedMigrator
Posts: 1771
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 9:45 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 2:01 am

Quoting GZed (Reply 58):
This map shows that whoever was in control could have flown known way points to where the north and south routes intersect (based on the Inmarsat ping calculations)

Beg to differ, this map doesn't show squat. Except that the sky is full of waypoints, enough to ascribe a drifting flight path to some sort of devious flight plan.
 
GZed
Posts: 43
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2014 12:21 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 2:04 am

Quoting Mouldypete (Reply 60):
The whole premise of the final prediction for the both the southern and the northwestern track is promulgated from the "last known position" from radar

I don't agree. The predicted north and south route starting point is based on the 3:11 and 4:11 Inmarsat pings, both showing the same distance from the satellite. Look at the image in my previous post.

Continue the purple north and south tracks back to a starting point and you have NIXUL (approx.)

[Edited 2014-03-22 19:06:51]

[Edited 2014-03-22 19:07:52]
 
SouthernBelle
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2014 3:27 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 2:15 am

Quoting GZed (Reply 58):
MH370 appears to be flying know waypoints, heading for Diego Garcia (possibly). But then turns away at NIXUL - why?

Fun stuff! Your second map, as far as I've read, is entirely derived data- Inmarsat has actually only released the very last ping, for whatever reason. And according to the Slate article http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_te...issing_airliner_s_flight_path.html the folks at Inmarsat said aside from possibly a short time, 370 was always flying away from the satellite.

"Today, Inmarsat revealed some crucial information. “The ping timings got longer,” Inmarsat spokesman Chris McLaughlin stated via email. That is to say, at each stage of its journey, the aircraft got progressively farther away from the geostationary satellite’s position, located over a spot on the equator south of Pakistan, and never changed its heading in a direction that took it closer—at least for very long."



But to answer your question- maybe he was trying to fly in between islands, it looks like, and then turned south once he'd gone around the edge of Indonesia? This looks most likely, and I'm pretty sure they went south.

Now, I'll be honest, my pet theory has always looked more like this and landing at one of the many airports around there or many roads for that matter but the new radar data doesn't really seem to support it.

[Edited 2014-03-22 19:17:11]

[Edited 2014-03-22 19:18:49]

[Edited 2014-03-22 19:19:16]
 
ltbewr
Posts: 15354
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 2:23 am

Another terrible and strange twist for the Malaysian Government and the families of victims - the Malaysian Formula 1 Grand Prix race is to be held next weekend and victims family have to leave the hotel in KL they were sent to as reserved for use by the Ferrari F1 team.
http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nascar...html;_ylt=AwrBJR.FRC5T0igAR9HQtDMD
Can this situation get any crazier ?
 
mouldypete
Posts: 28
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2014 3:59 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 2:24 am

Quoting GZed (Reply 62):

I don't agree. The predicted north and south route starting point is based on the 3:11 and 4:11 Inmarsat pings, both showing the same distance from the satellite. Look at the image in my previous post.

Sorry but I am puzzled, I do not see a 3:11 'ping' location on the BBC map. As far as I am aware we have not been given any data on 'pings' and their relationships to the IOR Inmarsat satellite other than the last 'ping' at 8:11am. Also the pings give no location. Only the series of loci can give a track based on a straight flight path and normal cruising speed.

This is very clearly explained by icair in his sanity check.

The map in your last posting is quite clear in stating that the track and 'pings' are "Assumed and extrapolated NTSB solutions",

In fact the map shows only the "Last military radar contact" and again assumes this is the starting point for the two track solutions, one of which is preferred by the NTSB for other reasons.

Without a starting point for the tracks of the loci, the two 'solutions' can be rotated at will throughout the circle as long as none of the 'pings' falls within the range of any other Inmarsat satellites.

[Edited 2014-03-22 19:25:20]
 
GZed
Posts: 43
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2014 12:21 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 2:29 am

Quoting Mouldypete (Reply 60):
The whole premise of the final prediction for both the southern and the northwestern track is promulgated from the "last known position" from radar.

OK, in part yes. But, Inmarsat obviously believe that by 3:11 the aircraft was at or near the 4:11 ping line (within the margin for error). If the a/c continued on its last know heading, based on primary radar, it would not have intersected the 3:11/4:11 ping line at the correct time.

Therefore, the Inmarsat data forced them to concluded that the a/c made an undocumented left turn to make the intersection with the 3:11/4:11 ping possible. The 3:11 location is thought to be approximately NIXUL.
 
747-600X
Posts: 2554
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2000 3:11 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 2:29 am

How is this still a matter of confusion? That map only shows ONE ping - the one indicated by the massive, red circle. There's only one ping shown. That's it; it's that simple. Really.
 
GZed
Posts: 43
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2014 12:21 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 2:34 am

Quoting Mouldypete (Reply 67):
The map in your last posting is quite clear in stating that the track and 'pings' are "Assumed and extrapolated NTSB solutions",

I understand this, but as others have stated, they MUST have used all 7 ping calculations to come up with the most likely tracks.

When you put the publish north and south tracks on a map, this is what the hourly ping calculations must have shown them, otherwise they would not have concluded that these are the most likely tracks.
 
GZed
Posts: 43
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2014 12:21 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 3:08 am

Quoting Mouldypete (Reply 67):
Without a starting point for the tracks of the loci, the two 'solutions' can be rotated at will throughout the circle as long as none of the 'pings' falls within the range of any other Inmarsat satellites.

Sure, but they DID go ahead and choose a starting point based on the data, and that starting point is not on the line of the a/c's last known heading.
 
NAV30
Posts: 1080
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 9:16 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 3:23 am

Quoting SouthernBelle (Reply 51):
Doesn't look made up to me. Your take?

Agreed not made up, SouthernBelle- but as it happened I spent a bit of time in coastal artillery many years back. In those days all you got was fuzzy blips - though radar will probably have come on a bit since those days.  

However, I suspect that the guys who drew up the map/diagram you posted may have assumed that the pilots were using waypoints and drawn up the track accordingly. After all, the track is almost straight anyway, the aeroplane would in fact have passed pretty close to 'VAMPI' in any case.

So it remains possible, seems to me, that the aeroplane just flew a straight path, with both pilots incapacitated - while still passing close enough to the waypoints for the 'mappers' to assume that they were using them?
 
GZed
Posts: 43
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2014 12:21 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 3:41 am

Please keep in mind that the purple track lines are "Published NTSB highest probability solutions*". Therefore, they MUST be based on the 7 pings, regardless of whether or not the pings have been published.

So I feel it is safe to assume that the ping rings, or loci, are representative of the actual Inmarsat ping results. It also follows that the 3:11 ping is the assumed starting point, and by 4:11 the a/c was still on the same loci.

Whoever came up with this image has not labelled 3:11 as the starting point, but that is what the tracks tell us.
 
nupogodi
Posts: 933
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 10:58 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 3:46 am

Quoting GZed (Reply 76):
It also follows that the 3:11 ping is the assumed starting point, and by 4:11 the a/c was still on the same loci.

Where in the world are you getting the data for 0311L and 0411L pings? That hasn't been published. What are you even talking about? How does "it follow"?
A man must know how to look before he can hope to see.
 
dragon6172
Posts: 1128
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:56 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 3:49 am

Quoting SouthernBelle (Reply 43):
And therefore, as you can easily see, here's exactly the waypoints he was still using.

Agree with your assessment of the radar track. However, what you plotted on the Skyvector map appears incorrect. Seems to me that the radar track shown in the pictures you posted show the track going over Penang VOR, then making the right turn towards VAMPI.

I believe it should be this route:

http://skyvector.com/?ll=6.580213512...KC:A.WM.WMKP:F.WM.VAMPI:F.WM.MEKAR

Or perhaps I missed something, I took a break from the threads to attend a hockey game tonight!


Edited for link

[Edited 2014-03-22 20:55:34]
Phrogs Phorever
 
monjonman
Posts: 32
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2014 6:40 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 4:27 am

Have there been any more details released of the alleged phone call made before take off from the mystery woman who phoned captain Zaharie Ahmad Shah using a fake ID to purchase the sim card and why has she not come forward to speak with authorities?
You would have to ask why would someone use fake ID to purchase a sim card .I can not think of any reason other then to conceal your identity.The plot thickens!
 
GZed
Posts: 43
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2014 12:21 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 5:00 am

At this point I'm going to remain faithful that the 2 purple "Published NTSB highest probability solutions*" are based on accurate data. So from that it follows that MH370 was at the intersection point of the 2 tracks at 3:11. To dispute this is to say that one of two tracks is mathematically impossible.

Once I realised this it dawned on me that the 3:11 ping point (the intersection point) is the most accurate point drawn. All other estimated location points become less and less likely.

Quite simply the NTSB believe that MH370 was at the intersection of the two tracks at 3:11. They have not said so, but that is the reality.
 
747megatop
Posts: 1785
Joined: Wed May 23, 2007 8:22 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 5:23 am

Quoting fooflyboy (Reply 12):
Exactly. So no one chould be concerned about "privacy".

I would think so too. The video should be used only in the case of an incident; purely to improve safety. But, this would involve a big effort on the part of various govts to pass legistlations perhaps to safeguard the right of pilots and ensure that the video footage is used only for the purposes of investigating accidents and improvement of safety.
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6987
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 5:54 am

Quoting monjonman (Reply 67):
Have there been any more details released of the alleged phone call made before take off from the mystery woman who phoned captain Zaharie Ahmad Shah using a fake ID to purchase the sim card and why has she not come forward to speak with authorities?
You would have to ask why would someone use fake ID to purchase a sim card .I can not think of any reason other then to conceal your identity.The plot thickens!

But just because one might want to conceal their identity does not necessarily mean that they are planning a crime or are a criminal. Interesting nonetheless...

One a side note, I just came back from some spotting at SYD and the MH crew on the A333 9M-MTM gave one of the best waves I have seen whilst taxing out to 34L...
DC10-10/30,MD82/88/90, 717,727,732/3/4/5/7/8/9ER,742/4,752/3,763/ER,772/E/L/3/W,788/9, 306,320,321,332/3,346,359,388
 
mandala499
Posts: 6593
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 5:54 am

Quoting abba (Reply 10):
Save for the early rumors of the captain's family problems - that has later been proven false - there has been silence on this front ever since the disappearance.

If you want to look at the captain, why not look into the FO. I think the media prefers to go after the captain just because he has a simulator. The FO is a different story altogether. Apart from the cockpit visitors a while back, not many is known publicly. Talk with some in MH and a potentially dark story comes out. But, given his family's background, it's likely that it's being kept quiet at the moment. We'll see how it goes.

Quoting spacecadet (Reply 16):
It might be important - but it could be important for exactly the opposite reason you think it is. .... and it's down to your own personal biases how you see it.

That is a very good point!

Quoting fooflyboy (Reply 17):
But I would hope that airlines would be more professionally managed and that abuse of monitoring systems would not occur.

That's the whole point. If every airlines can be more professional in using its present monitoring systems, then abuse of the system would not occur.
I wonder how having a camera would help in KI574, AF447, RA97004, MZ8968, and JT904 ? Bear in mind also RA97004 didn't have to take years, from accident day to final report release was under 6 months.
It also appears to me that the strongest advocators of cockpit camera for accident investigation purposes, are not, from the accident investigator background. So is this a "want to know for investigation" issue, or a "I don't trust/understand what the investigators are saying" issue?

Quoting Pihero (Reply 27):
Your post is puzzling, as so far no one has provided any evidence of all these trajectories or manoeuvres.
The only known facts are :
- A straightforward navigation to IGARI... and then nothing.
As a matter of fact the last known position - from FlightRadar (!!!) was a turn to the left, consistent to a direct track to IGARI ( confirmed by the Mickey Mouse Chinese COM translation), and starting a turn to fintercept the course to BITOD and subsequent route points.
Quoting Pihero (Reply 27):
AFAIK, the rest of the so-called radar contacts heve never been proven to be Flight 370. Not one.

I'll correct both you AND ME!   
The facts known as yesterday was different from what I wrote earlier, which was based on a non-official fact.
The know facts now:
1. Aircraft took off towards northwest at KUL. (Source: Press releases, and FR24)
2. Aircraft turned right direct to IGARI (a track heading of 025º) and climbed to FL350. (Press releases, and FR24)
3. "At IGARI" aircraft turned to the right to a track heading of 040º and headed towards BITOD. (FR24)
4. After a certain time prior to BITOD, aircraft transponders went off. (FR24 track)
5. Aircraft turned back towards mainland (Official)
6. So-called radar track has been "determined with great confidence to be that of MH370". (MH370 press conference 15 Mar by Prime Minister).
7. Aircraft seen on radar tracking out of Penang at a track consistent with VPG (Penang VOR) to VAMPI, in a reasonably straight but low meandering track. General direct track is about 285º to 290º (should be 288º). (Chinese Press conference, 21Mar).
8. After VAMPI, aircraft is seen tracking airway N571 away from Malaysia (track 287º), towards MEKAR and disappeared before MEKAR. Track is again, slow minor meandering. (Chinese Press conference 21Mar). Aircraft reported to be at FL295 prior to disappearance (By Air Force Chief, on MH370 press conference 15Mar).
Note: Chinese info on "military radar plot" writes 295R/200NM from PEN, but does not match the radar plot shown (290º at 230NM - 240NM is more like it).

Quoting Pihero (Reply 27):
For many people, the term *FIRE* has a very emotional connotation, and as such, the idea of an electrical fire is awfully difficult to accept... We have to say here that electricity doesn't burn... but it can communicate enough heat to flammable materials for them to catch fire...materials which are almost non-existent in our electronics bays.(See on this subject the AAIB report on the N786UA incident at LHR ).
But electrical components in the presence of arcing could emit quantities of potentially highly toxic fumes, i.e smoke.

Up until 14th March, I too avocated fire, of some sort.
I did put the Fire scenarios as:
1. Oxygen accelerated fire:
- Explains lack of comms.
- Ruled out by press release 14th March. This scenario simply does not allow for the aircraft to turn over PEN and head north west and continue flying for hours. It shouldn't even last until PEN.
2. "Simplified accelerated fire".
- Explains turn back.
- Explains the lack of comms at the initial stages only
- Fails at the transponder turns off combined with the turn towards northwest later on and flying for hours. It simply should not have lasted that long.
3. Electrical fire (added thanks to Pihero & Kiarahi)
- Explains turn back
- Explains lack of comms throughout.
- Does not explain turn at PEN to northwest.
- If it somehow can turn at PEN, the meandering flight path per military radar is explained (degraded navigation performance)

Now the "takeover scenario"
1. Simplified Hijacking
- Explains ALL the known flight paths.
- Can but does not automatically explain comms blackout transponder switch off with no other hints.
- Does not explain the ACARS disabling in combination with the above.
- Does not explain the slightly meandering path outbound PEN.
2. "Both crew" plane heist.
- Explains all the known flight paths.
- Explains all the comms blackouts including ACARS disabling.
- Explains all allegations of erratic aircraft behaviour except after it is outbound of PEN, because it wastes a lot of fuel.
- Motive extremely difficult to understand, if not "not-plausible". (We're talking about the Captain and the FO on opposites of the political spectrum in terms of family background).

3. "One crew" plane heist.
- Explains all the known flight path.
- Explans all the comms blackouts including ACARS disabling
- Explains all allegations of erratic aircraft behaviour including after the aircraft is outbound of PEN.
- Motive extremely difficult to understand, especially if wreckage does end up in the southern arc.

4. 3rd party plane heist.
- Explains all the above, except...
-- Timing of the comms and the turnback.
-- Meandering flight path out of PEN (wastes too much fuel).

Quoting SouthernBelle (Reply 43):
Have you not seen the newest radar data? I think it's very interesting.

It shows MH370 flying from waypoint VAMPI to MEKAR:

Many thanks for this!
---
Sleuthing Post (using Pihero's term!    )... A bit late with 2 weeks into the disappearance, but then I haven't had time to sit down and digest it so far...

I had a look at FR24 again,
Aircraft reached IGARI at 1720UTC at FL350 with a ground speed of 474kts, turned towards BITOD and was tracking 040° at 1721, but has no altitude information. It then disappeared off the ADS-B altogether.
I'll have to check the manuals again to see how this can happen. The ADS-B transmits at 2x a second to 1x per 8 seconds depending on the aircraft (need to look at it again). I want to look at this because if it's 2x a second there's a chance that a change of selection towards STBY on the transponder may have been caught.

I do wish the FR24 feedster at Kota Bharu would provide the raw ADS-B data... it could tell us a lot more of what happened just prior to disappearance.

We know that it would take 49-59mins (depending on how it's flown, 49mins is for normal flying at 475kts gndspd) to get between IGARI and VAMPI. That would make the aircraft reach VAMPI sometime between if it disappeared at 1721, add about 2 - 5 minutes for changes in speed, etc, we'd get there at 1811 to 1821UTC.
THY67 (A330-300, FL340, 374kts GS) reached VAMPI at about 1755, so I think we can throw that one out of any possibility.
While SIA68 had a possibility of a close encounter with MH370, we can now say for certain MH370 did not piggyback SIA68. It did not match the primary radar for any possibility of piggybacking further down the timeline.
1 aircraft did however reached VAMPI at 1817, which is Emirates343 (777-300), at FL340 at about 390kts gndspd at VAMPI. Based on FR24, this is the only suitable candidate for piggybacking... but would it make sense to piggyback this one as it was going to Dubai? Its a predictable path (N571 airway) does make it a perfect opportunity, but the question is, where would it go? It would be too far south to go anywhere the conspiracy theorists want to go to (about 100NM south of any part of Pakistan, if it wanted to go to say, those places conspiracy theorists say it would).
Until we've seen wreckage of the aircraft, we're not done yet with the northern arc... but...

Without ruling out the northern arc, the question then becomes "how did it go to the south without being detected?"
I did some calculations, from MEKAR... if it followed N571 until IGOGU on the border between Indian and Malaysia FIR (and should be out of primary radar), then head to TOPIN on the Indonesian FIR-SriLankan FIR border, and continued south along the border, you'd hit the endurance ring not too far from the reported sightings of the debris are. The time it takes from VAMPI to reach TOPIN via IGOGU, is about 50 mins, makes the arrival at IGOGU at around 3:11... now this matches those so-called intermediate pings and their position lines. It also explains the two probable lines is reflected off each other along the line roughly from 00N64E on 080º/260º line... which covers... TOPIN.

The NTSB extrapolated lines show the furthest probably extent along the final ping arcs north and south. Anything east of it, is more likely to be west of it.

---

Quoting ltbewr (Reply 20):
Would the auto-pilot adjust for one engine running out of fuel before the other or disengage ?
Quoting ltbewr (Reply 20):
If the loss of an engine due to fuel starvation (as happened in the Helios flight) and the auto is still on, and no one flying, would the a/c continue on it's original path but with difficulty ?
Quoting ltbewr (Reply 20):
Would the a/c glide straight ahead on the last autopilot setting, doing a 'belly' landing, or stall and go into a flat spin (like I believe AF 447 did) or go into a steep dive ?
Quoting ltbewr (Reply 20):
Would the a/c pitch nose down or tail down or go to left or right (depending on which engine cut out first) and crash 'pinwheel' style ?

Going to have to dig in to the books for the answer to that, but I need my rest first.

Quoting canoecarrier (Reply 26):
I have a hard time imagining many scenarios where the flight crew or passengers are conscious as the plane continued flying the track it did for 7 or so hours without anyone noticing or attempting to do something. That sort of scenario also assumes the flight attendants were unaware or unable to affect what was going on as well. I can't think of any flight I've ever flown on as an airline employee or passenger where the cabin crew didn't speak to the pilots several times during a flight.

Sentiments shared.

Quoting GZed (Reply 68):
Once I realised this it dawned on me that the 3:11 ping point (the intersection point) is the most accurate point drawn. All other estimated location points become less and less likely.

The 3:11 ping is still an arc, but it's one that's not too wide... it's no more than the same sector angle as the missing final ping line. I'd say the 3:11 ping arc is no more than 400nm across (guess? Maybe am far off... haven't started calculating yet). But it's about 1700NM radius from N00E64.
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 22796
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 6:12 am

So, if (and I am just speculating) IF the debris floating in the south Indian Ocean really is MH370, could any of that debris wash ashore in Australia? I don't know anything about the currents there is why I ask.
You bet I'm pumped!!! I just had a green tea!!!
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6987
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 6:27 am

Quoting seb146 (Reply 72):
So, if (and I am just speculating) IF the debris floating in the south Indian Ocean really is MH370, could any of that debris wash ashore in Australia? I don't know anything about the currents there is why I ask.

The Indian Ocean current chart I saw moves anti-clockwise, so debris in the Southern Indian Ocean would first move from West to East before moving North in an anti-clockwise pattern. So, if the possible Chinese debris image was 120kms or so South South West (which is what I saw reported) of the possible debris the Australians saw, then they should be moving towards the area where the possible Australian debris were spotted and following those debris in the current towards the North East, up towards Perth. I'm sure that some debris would one day was ashore somewhere if MH370 did indeed go down in the sea. I just hope they are still following other leads and searching in other areas as it has been some days since these images were released and nothing has been confirmed yet and it may not even be MH370 related as well...

[Edited 2014-03-22 23:30:25]
DC10-10/30,MD82/88/90, 717,727,732/3/4/5/7/8/9ER,742/4,752/3,763/ER,772/E/L/3/W,788/9, 306,320,321,332/3,346,359,388
 
GZed
Posts: 43
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2014 12:21 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 7:03 am

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 71):
The 3:11 ping is still an arc, but it's one that's not too wide... it's no more than the same sector angle as the missing final ping line. I'd say the 3:11 ping arc is no more than 400nm across (guess? Maybe am far off... haven't started calculating yet). But it's about 1700NM radius from N00E64.

I shouldn't have used the word "point" for the 3:11 ping. Of course it is a small arc, resulting from the Inmarsat ping margin of error. It's even more correct to call it a small area rather than a small arc, because the margin of error has an effect in all directions with regards to calculating this location.
 
B777fan
Posts: 135
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:44 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 7:04 am

Quoting nupogodi (Reply 65):
How does "it follow"?

You're correct that the data hasn't been published yet but I think this might help explain what he is getting at.

We know there were hourly pings. The NTSB has made some inferences from the data and published possible tracks.

All he is saying is, if those tracks are correct - a big if - then we can infer the existence of the other ping arcs and their location without them being published.

So even though this well known chart is making up intermediate ping locations, those locations are reasonable for the NTSB's tracks. In fact if the aircraft took one of those tracks they must be correct within some reasonable margin of error.
 
NAV30
Posts: 1080
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 9:16 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 7:09 am

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 71):
Does not explain turn at PEN to northwest.

First of all, thanks for the meticulous and informative post.  

About Penang, I said a couple of threads ago that I thought that, in the event of having to turn and 'land back,' the pilots would have headed north of any direct course to Penang, because there were mountains in the way. And that I'd have expected them to stay north of those, and instead head for an airport closer to ground level (that is, an airport to the north of the mountains).

If you cut Penang out of the path they are believed to have flown, the VOR-to-VOR course shown in the maps is just about 'spot on.'

So maybe they didn't fly over Penang at all - and someone just made a mistake drawing up the published map? If that is so, the 'pilots incapacitated, aircraft follows last commanded course until fuel gives out' theory appears to be right back in contention again?
 
Razza74
Posts: 123
Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2005 12:17 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 7:09 am

Here in Perth there is a North-South current called the Leeuwin Current, this brings warm water from the tropics South along the Western Australian coast and this may prevent debris from washing up on the West Australian coast
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leeuwin_Current
Ahh the joy of living under a flightpath
 
monjonman
Posts: 32
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2014 6:40 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 7:32 am

Quoting Razza74 (Reply 77):

Yeah if anything was to wash up it would more likely be along the southern coast towards South Australia or west coast of Tasmania unless it is able to float across the top of the water in which case the winds could push it towards Perth.
With us heading into the winter months I would expect that the debri would push further north with the storm fronts.But lets not get too far ahead of ourselves just yet.
 
rj777
Posts: 1807
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2000 1:47 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 7:48 am

Let's just hope it doesn't float south towards Antarctica!
 
User avatar
p51tang
Posts: 69
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2014 10:51 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 8:23 am

Quote: The purpose of the hourly "handshakes" is to allow the satellite to know the approximate location of the aircraft so that it can efficiently relay any messages. For this, the satellite needs to know the angle of the aircraft from the satellite.

An aircraft directly under the satellite would be at a 90 degree angle to the satellite; an aircraft at the poles would be at 0 degrees.

In the case of Malaysia Airlines 370, authorities have said, the last message sent was at 40 degrees.

Accident investigators, with the help of satellite experts, have used that information to determine the possible location of the plane.

http://edition.cnn.com/2014/03/17/wo...370/index.html?iid=article_sidebar

I agree with Mandella499 (Quote)

3. "One crew" plane heist.
- Explains all the known flight path.
- Explans all the comms blackouts including ACARS disabling
- Explains all allegations of erratic aircraft behaviour including after the aircraft is outbound of PEN.
- Motive extremely difficult to understand, especially if wreckage does end up in the southern arc.

4. 3rd party plane heist.
- Explains all the above, except...
-- Timing of the comms and the turnback.
-- Meandering flight path out of PEN (wastes too much fuel).

In addition to this: Was the reason it flew to 45,000ft by either (One crew/Third party) to Asphyxiate the passengers so that there was no repeat of Flight 93?.I'd also like to know the evidence supplied so far, that confirms that MH370 reached 45,000 ft.

1/ Do terrorists route the Plane around Indonesia and then gun it for the South??,or go for maximum collateral damage and just re-route the 777 shortly into the intended flight plan, and fly it into the Petronas Twin Towers in Malaysia?.

2/ Does a Captain usher the co-pilot out of the flight-deck and Asphyxiate everyone in the cabin at 45,000ft?,and then route the plane strategically around Indonesia so as to avoid land based radar?.That way, he gives himself and the plane the best possible head start for the subsequent ditching in the Southern Indian Ocean.Because he knows that the Black-Boxes can only transmit their location at depths of up to 6,100m.And where he's going to bring it down using precise co-ordinates, is well in excess of that.

Aside from this,I cannot accept the fact that Boeing or any Aircraft Manufacturer for that matter, offers
the ability to turn off ACARS manually.Why??.Who the heck installs GPS tracking into their car for
security purposes, and then switches it off manually before leaving it in the car-park at the Airport?.
Anyone?.No?.O.k........

ACARS and or GPS Equivalent needs to be secured behind the console,where it cannot be
tampered with.

Not a simple matter of undoing a few console screws and dis-mounting the system.

No good Sir!.....

[Edited 2014-03-23 01:46:25]

[Edited 2014-03-23 02:04:39]

[Edited 2014-03-23 02:17:48]
 
Sandgroper
Posts: 66
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2008 8:40 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 8:25 am

The Chinese Ilyushins mistakenly landed at Perth International Airport yesterday instead of Pearce:

http://aegwaspotters.blogspot.com.au...lyushin-il-76mdtd-20541-21045.html

And after a quick 10 minute flight they joined the rest of the search force at the correct airport Pearce 35km north, here reported on WA Today, language barriers reported could be an issue with this muli national search:

http://www.watoday.com.au/world/chin...s-flight-mh370-20140323-35ar5.html
Sandgroper
 
mandala499
Posts: 6593
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 8:37 am

Quoting GZed (Reply 74):
I shouldn't have used the word "point" for the 3:11 ping. Of course it is a small arc, resulting from the Inmarsat ping margin of error.

Don't worry about it too much... I know what you meant... just wanted to make sure the others know what you mean.  
Quoting NAV30 (Reply 76):
About Penang, I said a couple of threads ago that I thought that, in the event of having to turn and 'land back,' the pilots would have headed north of any direct course to Penang, because there were mountains in the way. And that I'd have expected them to stay north of those, and instead head for an airport closer to ground level (that is, an airport to the north of the mountains).

The highest grid MORA from IGARI to PEN is 7000ft. No biggie.
But, the Malaysian east coast has Kota Bharu and Kuantan airports, which are wayyyy nearer than PEN (or as others have thought... LGK).

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 76):
So maybe they didn't fly over Penang at all - and someone just made a mistake drawing up the published map? If that is so, the 'pilots incapacitated, aircraft follows last commanded course until fuel gives out' theory appears to be right back in contention again?

Unfortunately, no. The radar track showed that the aircraft ended up outbound on a 285-290 deg track from PEN but the plot does not show it flying over PEN, but... have a look yourself...
http://i60.tinypic.com/30kf61x.jpg
IGARI is to the east north east (bearing 060 roughly) out of PEN...
So, for the aircraft to have gone into where it is shown on the plot above, the basic incapacitation theory goes out of the window. Complex ones can still occur though, but one needs to be careful about the potential timelines.
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
monjonman
Posts: 32
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2014 6:40 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 8:38 am

Quoting Sandgroper (Reply 81):

Well I guess at least they got the right city and not Perth Tasmania!
 
Backseater
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 3:20 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 8:44 am

Quoting p51tang (Reply 80):
Accident investigators, with the help of satellite experts, have used that information to determine the possible location of the plane.

http://edition.cnn.com/2014/03/17/wo...370/index.html?iid=article_sidebar

and a quote from the article above dated 17 March:
"We're trying to get up to speed on what that means and how to interpret it," one U.S. official told reporters. "It's sort of a new technology for us."
"We have never had to use satellite handshaking as the best possible source of information," the official said.

IMO one more reason to release RTD and margin of error data for all recorded pings.
 
mandala499
Posts: 6593
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 8:51 am

Quoting p51tang (Reply 80):
An aircraft directly under the satellite would be at a 90 degree angle to the satellite; an aircraft at the poles would be at 0 degrees.

At the poles it would be out of coverage, hence would be at less than 0º... but 0º doesn't apply to the poles only (just to make that clear for those merely reading this)... as evident with:
Quoting p51tang (Reply 80):
Aside from this,I cannot accept the fact that Boeing or any Aircraft Manufacturer for that matter, offers the ability to turn off ACARS manually.Why??.Who the heck installs GPS tracking into their car for
security purposes, and then switches it off manually before leaving it in the car-park at the Airport?.
Anyone?.No?.O.k........

I can... Those things are optional, and each message costs money.
If this is GPS tracking in a car, imagine if you've had it installed and it costs $1000 a month for the messages the device is sending. If you can't uninstall it, you'd want to switch it off. Besides, what do you do when it sends erroneous messages continuously?
Now if the messages aren't expensive, people will be more willing to not be able to switch it off.

So, ACARS is also configurable, you can have it sending messages for positions every 5 seconds if you want (if you want to blow your money away), or send every 6 hours (if you want to be stingy)... so what makes a "disable VHF/SatCom/Both" so different?

The car I used in the example, may cost about $1000 in messages using ACARS... depending on the intervals, and the type of messages (eg: aircraft health monitoring), that can easily go up to $10,000... and when things go wrong (and they do, you can easily add another 50% on top of that. That adds about 20 cents to every single hour you fly to your ticket price.

Quoting p51tang (Reply 80):
Not a simple matter of undoing a few console screws and dis-mounting the system.

On a VHF only ACARS... all you need is to switch the VHF channel used for data, to voice... and bye bye ACARS.
In the case of this aircraft, no, no need to even undoing a few screws... I can put the transponders on standby (ie: off), turn off and VHF ACARS in less than 5 seconds, and another 10 seconds and the whole ACARS can be disabled (through the menu from the MFD, "uncheck" VHF Acars, "uncheck Satcom Acars"...)...

[Edited 2014-03-23 01:55:58]
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
tim73
Posts: 93
Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2013 9:03 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 9:18 am

So the pinging in black boxes works for 30 days, right? So they got 15 days to go.

“It certainly depends on the location,” Sarah McComb, chief of the recorders division at the National Transportation Safety Board, said Tuesday. “I don’t think the range is quite five to 10 miles, but there are a lot of different factors involved. It also can be compromised if it’s buried in silt or sand.”

So with five mile radius it has about 50 square mile/130 square km coverage area. With 600 000 square kilometer search area it is less than 0.02 percent or 1:4615 per sonar buoy dropped. Wtihout ping...just forget finding it. And there is no guarantee it is inside that area.

[Edited 2014-03-23 02:44:23]
 
User avatar
p51tang
Posts: 69
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2014 10:51 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 9:40 am



Quoting mandala499 (Reply 71):
I had a look at FR24 again,
Aircraft reached IGARI at 1720UTC at FL350 with a ground speed of 474kts, turned towards BITOD and was tracking 040° at 1721, but has no altitude information. It then disappeared off the ADS-B altogether.

Seems to me that 475kts is the trade off between (urgency and flight range).Am I right in suggesting that the normal cruising speed for the 777 is approx 490kts?.To a maximum of 512kts.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_777

[Edited 2014-03-23 03:01:48]
 
Shmendr
Posts: 23
Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2007 4:43 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 9:50 am

CNN just quoted (5:50am EST) Malaysian Defense/Transportation minister stating that he has received new satellite images from the French authorities showing debris in the south Indian Ocean.
 
GZed
Posts: 43
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2014 12:21 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 9:50 am

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 71):
I did some calculations, from MEKAR... if it followed N571 until IGOGU on the border between Indian and Malaysia FIR (and should be out of primary radar), then head to TOPIN on the Indonesian FIR-SriLankan FIR border, and continued south along the border, you'd hit the endurance ring not too far from the reported sightings of the debris are. The time it takes from VAMPI to reach TOPIN via IGOGU, is about 50 mins, makes the arrival at IGOGU at around 3:11.

For those of you wanting a visual representation of what mandala499 just said, click here:

http://skyvector.com/?ll=4.175498331...7:F.WM.NILAM:F.VO.IGOGU:F.VC.TOPIN
 
art
Posts: 3596
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:46 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 10:24 am

Quoting Shmendr (Reply 89):
CNN just quoted (5:50am EST) Malaysian Defense/Transportation minister stating that he has received new satellite images from the French authorities showing debris in the south Indian Ocean.

Any indication of the position of this (possible) debris?
 
monjonman
Posts: 32
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2014 6:40 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 10:43 am

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-fXhAIqFO4&list=UU4onRb7Ythq0ud2VyzxthLg
I have not seen this video posted yet from AMSA which went up a couple of hours ago on youtube ,so here it is .
 
cand
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2014 9:05 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 11:20 am

Quoting p51tang (Reply 80):
3. "One crew" plane heist.- Explains all the known flight path.- Explans all the comms blackouts including ACARS disabling- Explains all allegations of erratic aircraft behaviour including after the aircraft is outbound of PEN.- Motive extremely difficult to understand, especially if wreckage does end up in the southern arc.

Possible motive: political blackmail (release captain's uncle from jail), maybe planned to blackmail during flight (like the heist to Geneva a few weeks ago). Then something went wrong and plane ends up flying by itself.
 
art
Posts: 3596
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:46 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 11:22 am

If only the UK still had Nimrods - I believe that max endurance was 22 hours which would have enabled each aircraft to spend many hours in the search area before needing to head back to base. With that sort of endurance each aircraft might have been able to search for the entire duration of adequate daylight in contrast to the 1-2 hours some of the assets spend on station.
 
Airvan00
Posts: 236
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2008 1:06 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 11:33 am

Quoting Sandgroper (Reply 81):
The Chinese Ilyushins mistakenly landed at Perth International Airport yesterday instead of Pearce:

I expect they knew exactly what they were doing.
The international requirements for entering Australia, specify what ports are acceptable, usually those with full time Customs facilities.
The journalist just assumed that they got it wrong.
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 20219
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 11:41 am

Quoting art (Reply 93):

If only the UK still had Nimrods - I believe that max endurance was 22 hours which would have enabled each aircraft to spend many hours in the search area before needing to head back to base. With that sort of endurance each aircraft might have been able to search for the entire duration of adequate daylight in contrast to the 1-2 hours some of the assets spend on station.

This was already covered a couple of threads ago. Endurance of 16-20 hours is only possible if almost the entire flight time is spent at endurance speeds. Given the 3-4 hours to travel each way to and from the search area, the loiter endurance is more like 2-3 hours.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
Chaostheory
Posts: 1159
Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2013 2:09 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 11:52 am

Quoting art (Reply 93):
If only the UK still had Nimrods - I believe that max endurance was 22 hours which would have enabled each aircraft to spend many hours in the search area before needing to head back to base. With that sort of endurance each aircraft might have been able to search for the entire duration of adequate daylight in contrast to the 1-2 hours some of the assets spend on station.

According to parliamentary publications, the MRA4 would have had a 2400nm range with 3 hours on station in a SAR capacity. In this instance, I would imagine a loiter time of 5-6 hours max for the Nimord:

http://www.publications.parliament.u.../cmselect/cmdfence/761/761vw15.htm
 
uta999
Posts: 938
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:10 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 11:54 am

Quoting David Meany

From BBC News website

In today's world why do we still have to rely on finding two metal boxes at the bottom of the ocean to find out what happened - surely the technology must exist for aircraft to automatically transmit flight data direct to the cloud?


I agree, it's now time that real-time location (speed, Alt plus lat-long becomes a legal requirement. Refreshed every 60 seconds, it could act as ATC radar over remote areas and the oceans, as well as reducing the 60nm separation.

It could also open up longer routes over water, knowing that any incident would be quickly located and a rescue organised.

If a flight deviates from flight plan, it would turn RED on ATC and military radar. Prompting a response.

Other data could also be sent via satellite to indicate a major failure/incident with an aircraft system, or unusual crew action onboard.

Much of the data sent now is benign. Showing the aircraft is working normally. In future only abnormal data should be sent.
Your computer just got better
 
tim73
Posts: 93
Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2013 9:03 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 12:23 pm

One thing is clear, we treat oceans as our personal junkyard  
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 20219
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 43

Sun Mar 23, 2014 12:25 pm

Quoting uta999 (Reply 97):

Quoting David Meany

From BBC News website

In today's world why do we still have to rely on finding two metal boxes at the bottom of the ocean to find out what happened - surely the technology must exist for aircraft to automatically transmit flight data direct to the cloud?


I agree, it's now time that real-time location (speed, Alt plus lat-long becomes a legal requirement. Refreshed every 60 seconds, it could act as ATC radar over remote areas and the oceans, as well as reducing the 60nm separation.

It could also open up longer routes over water, knowing that any incident would be quickly located and a rescue organised.

If a flight deviates from flight plan, it would turn RED on ATC and military radar. Prompting a response.

Other data could also be sent via satellite to indicate a major failure/incident with an aircraft system, or unusual crew action onboard.

Much of the data sent now is benign. Showing the aircraft is working normally. In future only abnormal data should be sent.

We may be progressing towards the real-time data age. However consider this. Real time data is well within the achievable, but it is not without cost. Is it worth adding US$0.50 to every single ticket in order to solve the one crash in over thirty years that so far has no physical evidence a month or two faster? The one flight in a billion? The extreme outlier? If we're going to spend money on aviation safety, there must be a dozen better investments that will have a more significant impact on survivability than real-time streaming telemetry. Howe about we spend money on those instead? Faster FANS implementation worldwide would be start. Or how about zero viz taxiing systems?

If it were a matter of saving lives, I would be all for real time black box streaming, at least if the price were reasonable. But I seriously doubt that real-time data streaming black box technology would save any lives.

Black boxes are not about search and rescue. They are about investigation and figuring out how to avoid this accident happening again. Black boxes are about figuring things out once everyone is dead. They don't save the lives of the people on the flight. They save the lives of the people on all the flights in the future.

- Longer routes over water are not now or have ever been limited by black boxes. They are limited by engine out diversion times.
- Deviations from the flight plan happen all time. If such things created alerts, there would be so many alerts they would create clutter which drowned out actual emergencies.

[Edited 2014-03-23 05:29:42]
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos