Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 8
 
LTC8K6
Posts: 1590
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 8:36 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 2:47 am

Quoting AR385 (Reply 98):
Anybody have an idea what the "new credible lead" is?

The plane was cruising at a higher speed than originally thought, thus it ran out of fuel earlier?

Somehow that doesn't make sense at first reading...
 
lazybones
Posts: 159
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 7:32 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 2:51 am

Quoting TheRedBAron (Reply 15):
As me he think the Captain did not do it, way too complicated, way to uncertain and to top it off as he told me : We all have troubles, if a nasty divorce would make somebody do this, we would have a crash each week...

As a divorcee... that's just too funny .. gold 
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6987
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 2:56 am

Quoting nupogodi (Reply 89):
What more could you want? They sent a P8, a 130, two destroyers, helicopters and other assets... This may be outdated since apparently they withdrew the Kidd, but that's pretty serious equipment.

"a P8" as in one?
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
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8928
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 3:03 am

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 102):
"a P8" as in one?

There is one and I believe they are sending another. Not too shabby since there are only 6 that deployed to Japan, I believe. That's 1/3 of them right there
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 20554
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 3:04 am

Quoting rolfen (Reply 71):
Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 58):
mandala499 did talk about making it very hard to turn off. But it needs to have a breaker of something. Making it impossible to turn off adds not inconsiderable risk to every flight.

Not if it is an external unit, mounted to the outside of the fuselage, in a way that a fire would not damage or penetrate the fuselage in any way. It could be self-powered, using an enclosed battery, which would power the units for hours after it stops receiving power.

I think it's possible.

Possible, certainly, but you're talking a huge expense for every single aircraft. More weight, a change in aerodynamics. If you add a tail boom, say, you have to reconfigure the APU exchaust, the taill lights, the tailstrike logic, and probably some other stuff.

Add to this that a unit attached to the outside could potentially drift very far from the actual wreckage.

1. There are simpler ways of implementing better tracking.
2. There is no way to make an aircraft pilot-proof. A sufficiently motivated pilot can and will find a way to crash any aircraft. This is a risk we take every time we get on a plane. And I'm fine with it. After all, pilots who try to kill me are so rare the risk is well within what most people find acceptable.

Spending significant money on every single flight in order to more easily find the one that disappears every two or three decades should be done in a way that makes more sense.

Quoting fotoflyer71 (Reply 91):

I'm not a huge fan of this whole UAV drone movement but wouldn't these be awesome for SAR in this case (well at least the search part)? Great endurance, surveillance etc... Adverse weather make this a no no?

Global Hawk and similar platforms have this capability, but there aren't exactly dozens of them lying about that can be tasked for this. A Global Hawk costs more than a 777. With R&D it is actually much more. Cheaper, more common drones like Predator don't have the range for this kind of operation.

[Edited 2014-03-27 20:07:37]
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6987
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 3:13 am

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 103):
Not too shabby since there are only 6 that deployed to Japan, I believe. That's 1/3 of them right there

I read an article about that a while ago: http://blogs.wsj.com/chinarealtime/2...nger-range-plane-to-search-effort/

"the U.S. has deployed six of the new aircraft to Okinawa in southern Japan since December as part of its “rebalancing” strategy to shift more military assets to Asia."

I would have though that finding MH370 would be more important at the moment compared to whatever else these planes are doing if they are doing anything at all other that beefing up US military assets in Asia.

Is it wrong to expect a bit more given the nature of the search and size of the search area? I'm sure if those who think that enough is being done had a relative on that flight they would be singing a different tune...  
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
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8928
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 3:18 am

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 105):
I would have though that finding MH370 would be more important at the moment compared to whatever else these planes are doing if they are doing anything at all other that beefing up US military assets in Asia.

Is it wrong to expect a bit more given the nature of the search and size of the search area? I'm sure if those who think that enough is being done had a relative on that flight they would be singing a different tune...  

What, should we all drop everything we are doing and search for MH370? Agree or disagree with the US in Asia, but they have a job to do over there and sending 1/3 of their P-8s down there shows commitment IMO.

How many P-3s Australia NOT send? What 'good' are they doing not looking for MH370?
 
WarrenPlatts
Posts: 517
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2014 6:03 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 3:18 am

Quoting nupogodi (Reply 75):
You are making a lot of assumptions, and haven't refuted anything that Pihero said.Your biggest mistake is assuming that the published INMARSAT possible tracks are actual tracks. Remember, this is a predictive model created based on analysis of similar T7 flights on similar routes. You are pretending like the map is showing two exact possibilities for their routing when that could not be further from the truth. They know approximately where they went based on the Doppler shift analysis (but definitely south), and making some assumptions could calculate possible tracks. Not all of the Doppler and RTT analysis in the world will turn a 1996 communications satellite into a precise geolocator. You have failed to define what you mean by an "inertial track". And yet you make very definitive, finite statements. It's disingenuous analysis.

No, no, no....

Dude, I totally recognize that the published Inmarsat tracks are mere models. Given a series of circular LOPs and a given speed, assuming a relatively straightforward trajectory--i.e., no curlicues allowed--there is only one (southern) track that is consistent with the LOPs. They could do more tracks with different speeds. Thus, by fooling around with the assumed speed, you can form practically any track you could imagine. Well, perhaps I shouldn't say that. But it would be nice to see for ourselves all LOPs, then we could fool around with different speeds, and see what kinds of tracks result.

And BTW, an "inertial track" is a Newtonian track, where when something starts rolling in one direction, it does not stop or deviate its course unless something else affects it.
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 20554
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 3:19 am

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 105):
Is it wrong to expect a bit more given the nature of the search and size of the search area? I'm sure if those who think that enough is being done had a relative on that flight they would be singing a different tune.

I hope that if I had a relative on the plane, I could be rational about such things. I probably couldn't, and that's the problem. The last people to decide on these things should be those directly affected, simply because their ability to make rational decisions at this time is severely compromised.

If I were rational, I would know that everyone was dead. In the end, a few more weeks or months does not change that. But of course you can't ask every relative to will themselves to feel that way.

I have a hard time believing that US and Aussie SAR organizations are incompetent. They are probably doing what they can. If there were lives to be saved, then by all means send in every asset. But at this point we're talking salvage and investigation. A few more days won't make much difference.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
User avatar
fotoflyer71
Posts: 41
Joined: Sun May 08, 2011 6:22 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 3:23 am

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 105):
Global Hawk and similar platforms have this capability, but there aren't exactly dozens of them lying about that can be tasked for this. A Global Hawk costs more than a 777. With R&D it is actually much more. Cheaper, more common drones like Predator don't have the range for this kind of operation.

Had no idea they were that pricey! Thanks.
Try to learn from the mistakes of others. You won't live long enough to make all of them yourself.
 
wjcandee
Posts: 10206
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2000 12:50 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 3:32 am

One of the more annoying things about this is the glacial pace at which our military rolls things out...which means that our P8s "don't have" aerial refueling capability "yet".

The P8 is great for this kind of mission because of its ability to get on station faster, and the fact that it has a slightly-higher loiter time once there. Still, as you start to get farther and farther from Perth, the loiter time drops dramatically. It is apparent that there are going to be potential locations that you can't search with the P8.

Which is probably why the military equipped the P8 with aerial refueling capability. It has it right now. It's just that they haven't developed procedures and trained the crews to use it. Which, to the military, means that it doesn't have that capability right now, and isn't scheduled to get it until 2015. Really?

If you had the refueling ability, you could depart before first light, get on station a daybreak, and stay there until sunset. Yes, it would require the a/c to carry two crews, but you would really maximize the use of the asset, giving it 11 or 12 hours on station each day instead of 3-4. And you could go as deep into the Indian Ocean as you care to.

What a shame that they haven't gotten that capability up and running faster, and don't plan to.
 
flyenthu
Posts: 590
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2012 2:37 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 3:32 am

Maybe this has been discussed, but why are so many satellite leads just turning up empty? Have ships reached the areas? What are those objects in the satellite pics anyway?
 
B777fan
Posts: 135
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:44 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 3:37 am

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 92):
All right. So there you have it. Coriolis effects happen, and they are of concern to long distance airliners. If you have more questions, feel free...

Ok, I am starting to see your argument and you are just flat wrong.

Here is a thought experiment. Assume no wind conditions over the earth for a single day. During that day you fly a jet due south from the equator with the inertial nav system keeping you pointing 'straight and level inertially' as you say. As you move south, your course will not drift left or right over the surface of the earth from the Coriolis effect. You will fly a constant 180 heading right along your starting line of longitude.

This is because the Coriolis effect has almost nothing to do with flight, particularly sub sonic flight. The ocean of air above us is moving along with the surface of the earth just as the oceans of water do. For airliner navigation, local wind - which is the non zero speed of the air over the ground at any location - overwhelms the Coriolis effect. Essentially the same as a ship on the surface of the ocean.

The Coriolis effect is part of what drives prevailing winds all over the globe, but for aircraft navigation you first plot a zero wind course using any method - constant heading, great circle, etc - and then correct for local winds at your altitude. Or better yet plot a course to use favorable winds or avoid unfavorable ones. No Coriolis effect input is required because zero wind conditions imply the air is moving with the surface.

Your math was great, just not applicable in non vacuum conditions at these speeds.

Edited to change thought experiment from helicopter one that misstated your assumptions to a better one using your conditions.


[Edited 2014-03-27 20:41:11]

[Edited 2014-03-27 21:14:37]

[Edited 2014-03-27 21:16:24]
 
rwessel
Posts: 2448
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 3:47 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 3:51 am

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 92):
The mass of the airplane would have nothing to do with it for starters.

I'd upload my spreadsheet if this site allowed it, but the math is simple.

The 400 knot flight path crosses the equator at a heading of pretty much 180°--due south in other words. However, its absolute velocity is not 400 knots: at the equator, it also has an eastward velocity component of 900 knots. This eastward velocity component does not go away when you proceed south. However, the radius of the Earth as measured by the distance from the surface parallel to the equatorial plane to the geometric axis decreases. Therefore, for example, the circumference of the 30th parallel (34,700 km) is a lot less than the equator (~40,000 km).

Do you follow me so far?

SA Czech Airlines">OK, due to Newton's law of conservation of everything, when an airplane proceeds due south to the 30th parallel, it still retains the eastward velocity component of 900 knots. Unfortunately, the Earth's radius is much less at this point: only 34700 km are moved per 24 hours. The resultant ground velocity is only 780 knots. That means the aircraft at this point--relative to the ground--is moving to the east at a rate of 120 knots.

Still follow?

SA Czech Airlines">OK, so at 30°--relative to the ground--it has a southward component of 400 knots, and a RELATIVE eastward component of 120 knots. So now we invoke geometry. If you'll recall tan(θ) = SO/SA, where SO is the side opposite of θ, and SA is the side adjacent to θ (the other side of the triangle being the hypotenuse, course). We are interested in the angle θ, because this will tell us the effect of the Coriolis effect. Thus, tan(θ) = (120 / 400) = 0.3; atan(0.3) = ~17°.

Thus, the expected heading of an aircraft proceeding south on an inertial path (given a starting heading of 180° at the equator) is 163° (180° - 17°).

Excellent! You've made it this far!

All of that is drowned out by the fact that the airplane moves in the air mass, not around the center of earth, and the air mass, is largely glued to the surface. So the air mass drags the airplane along with it. Consider a hot air balloon floating over the equator, in a gentle 10 knot wind to the south, now lets say it drifts south to the 30th parallel - (where, in our thought experiment, the wind is still 10kts due south). At the equator the balloon had a 900kt eastward component relative to the center of the earth. But it would be absurd to expect that at 30S it's going to have a sideways velocity through the air of 120kts!

The animations in the link you provided are simply wrong. Now those would more or less apply to a ballistic path *outside* the atmosphere, and for things like ballistic missiles that absolutely must me taken into account.
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 20554
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 3:56 am

Quoting fotoflyer71 (Reply 109):
Quoting 777Jet (Reply 105):
Global Hawk and similar platforms have this capability, but there aren't exactly dozens of them lying about that can be tasked for this. A Global Hawk costs more than a 777. With R&D it is actually much more. Cheaper, more common drones like Predator don't have the range for this kind of operation.

Had no idea they were that pricey! Thanks.

Hey, I said that!  
Quoting wjcandee (Reply 110):
One of the more annoying things about this is the glacial pace at which our military rolls things out...which means that our P8s "don't have" aerial refueling capability "yet".

The P8 is great for this kind of mission because of its ability to get on station faster, and the fact that it has a slightly-higher loiter time once there. Still, as you start to get farther and farther from Perth, the loiter time drops dramatically. It is apparent that there are going to be potential locations that you can't search with the P8.

Which is probably why the military equipped the P8 with aerial refueling capability. It has it right now. It's just that they haven't developed procedures and trained the crews to use it. Which, to the military, means that it doesn't have that capability right now, and isn't scheduled to get it until 2015. Really?

If you had the refueling ability, you could depart before first light, get on station a daybreak, and stay there until sunset. Yes, it would require the a/c to carry two crews, but you would really maximize the use of the asset, giving it 11 or 12 hours on station each day instead of 3-4. And you could go as deep into the Indian Ocean as you care to.

What a shame that they haven't gotten that capability up and running faster, and don't plan to.

Aerial refueling is risky, complex and very very expensive. Training takes time, and it's one thing to refuel a plane that's close to the airport where you've based your tanker. It's another to fly out to sea and do it three hours from shore.

I get the impression that even if they had the capability, they might not use it because it raises the cost astronomically.

Quoting flyenthu (Reply 111):
Maybe this has been discussed, but why are so many satellite leads just turning up empty? Have ships reached the areas? What are those objects in the satellite pics anyway?

Satellite leads are just that, leads. Most don't pan out because they might just be things like waves or clouds or whatever. Also, debris that floated when the pic was taken might have sunk a few hours later.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
rfields5421
Posts: 6374
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:45 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 3:56 am

Some of you need to read a factual list of assets committed to the search efforts.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaysi...ht_370#International_participation

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 72):
I wonder why Nine 'censored' his comments so that they seemed only to refer to 'pilot error' (or worse)?

That is known as editorial discretion. A reporter or his editor is focused the story on the point they wish to mention. Other data / information is edited out which does not support that point. Every news organization in the world does it, just sometimes not as blatantly, sometimes even more so.

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 78):
Which appears to indicate that all the recently-found 'debris' is irrelevant to the case?

All the recently found 'debris' is in a broad area, and none of it has been linked to MH370. Frankly, I think a lot of the 'debris' has been the optical effects of atmosphere and a rough ocean. Even though the search area is some of the least traveled ocean waters in the world - there is still a lot of junk floating around.

Quoting aftgaffe (Reply 83):
Anyone have a sense of why the U.S. hasn't sent an aircraft carrier?

The US doesn't have any available. The budget games last year forced the US Navy to basically take two ships out of service for months. Even now, there are really only three deployable aircraft carriers, and two in a workup cycle. Frankly, the US Navy has more important tasks for their carriers than using them as a poor search platform with very bad aircraft for SAR work.

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 102):
a P8" as in one?

The US only has about two dozen of them - and is committing a second. That will be a substantial portion of their active aircraft fleet.
Not all who wander are lost.
 
flyenthu
Posts: 590
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2012 2:37 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 4:05 am

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 114):

I get that, but somehow finding it hard to buy that debris numbering in the 100s would all play hide and seek.
 
panampaul
Posts: 229
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2013 4:01 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 4:05 am

Once again, there's a new 'credible lead' and the entire search is moving 700 miles north.

Malaysia Flight 370: Latest Radar Data Sends Searchers 700 Miles North - ‘Most Credible Lead Yet’ Based on Faster Airspeed

Quote:
The Australian government announced that the search for the missing Malaysia Airlines jet shifted hundreds of miles north Friday morning

In a statement released midday Friday, the Australian Maritime Safety Authority said that the Boeing 777 is likely not to have traveled as far south into the Indian Ocean as had previously been estimated.

The agency said that the new information was gleaned from an ongoing analysis of radar data...

.
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 20554
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 4:07 am

Quoting flyenthu (Reply 116):
Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 114):

I get that, but somehow finding it hard to buy that debris numbering in the 100s would all play hide and seek.

Fair point, but conditions have a lot to do with it. We're talking big waves and low cloud so a ship could pass by a piece of wreckage 500 meters away without anyone on board spotting it.

There's also a lot of crap in the ocean. A lot.

[Edited 2014-03-27 21:38:36]
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
User avatar
fotoflyer71
Posts: 41
Joined: Sun May 08, 2011 6:22 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 4:16 am

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 114):
Hey, I said that!

So you did!!! Apologies - don't know how I screwed that up...!
Try to learn from the mistakes of others. You won't live long enough to make all of them yourself.
 
flyenthu
Posts: 590
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2012 2:37 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 4:25 am

Quoting PanAmPaul (Reply 117):

Something tells me that things are not quite "adding up" with their math if they are now focusing in an area hundreds of miles away. This is truly a puzzle of epic proportions unlike any other.
 
Backseater
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 3:20 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 4:29 am

Search area should probably be adjusted because it was determined before Doppler data became available

There has been a lot of discussion about 400kts vs. 450kts tracks but I think it is hopeless without the proper data to decide what is a plausible track.

Now that we know that Inmarsat recorded the Doppler (probably from their burst demod), it is clear that they have a very powerful Litmus test to examine various possible tracks. Doppler measurements can be very precise and provide clues as to the relation between aircraft speed and heading at each ping.

Actually we could all do the same evaluation if we had access to a few pieces of additional data:
- estimates of wind aloft to bound the range of possible ground speeds (but we already have them thanks to Pihero/Tim Gonzales)
- the RTD values at each ping (or distance to satellite) with an estimate of their margins of error
- the 3 coordinates and 3 components of the speed vector of 3F1 at the time of each ping (in some frame of reference on earth).

Such data is needed to remove the satellite Doppler contribution from the published Doppler graph so that we would then obtain the measured airplane Doppler to determine if it is compatible with any potential track.

With that we should be able to compute the Doppler at ping time when we place the aircraft at a certain location and choose a speed and true heading for the aircraft. Of course the same Doppler at a given ping can be obtained by different triplets location+speed+heading but many should be quickly eliminated if we cannot rendez-vous in time with the next RTD circle. The assumption we have to make is that the aircraft remains steady from one ping to the next. If someone flew erratically the whole time then we are back to relying only on RTDs. Note that the smaller the margin of error on RTDs, the fewer solutions will have to be explored.

The algorithm outlined here would do a tree search of candidate trajectories starting with the first ping (location, speed, heading) and continuing in the same manner until the last ping.

By tallying where the aircraft ends up with each feasible scenario through the 7 pings, we could build a statistical map of the areas worth exploring,

I am guessing that some investigators are probably doing something along those lines right now. So, with a little bit more patience we should soon learn what the result is.
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8928
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 4:34 am

I don't see what is so surprising... they are finding more and more evidence out and are refining the search. It's not like it's the Indian Ocean one day, the Straits the next day, China the next day, and the Indian Ocean again. People seem to be getting really impatient because it's frustrating but seriously, we can't always expect instantaneous answers
 
undertheradar
Posts: 409
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2014 1:02 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 4:40 am

please feel free to have my post deleted....but I just need to 'vent'.... I fully realize that this event is ever changing..not an exact science...as an Australian living in Australia...PLEASE TONY ABBOTT STOP GRANDSTANDING AND MAKING STATEMENTS ABOUT MH370...if I see him hold a press conference and hear him use the word 'credible' one more time!!!!!!! argggghhhh.... leave it up to the professionals to make statements and hold press conferences
 
nupogodi
Posts: 933
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 10:58 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 4:42 am

Quoting BackSeater (Reply 121):
Such data is needed to remove the satellite Doppler contribution from the published Doppler graph

Not exactly. You can do that, but you need to know the speed of the aircraft away/towards the sat... Well, we know it's away. But we don't really know how fast, unless you assume a straight track DIRECTLY away from the sat - which is unlikely. Without that, you can know the sat movement as precisely as you care to, but you wouldn't know what part of the shift is caused by a/c movement and what part is caused by sat movement.

That is why they published the data that they did: they built a predictive model based on other aircraft movements, and then compared the measured data to the model. Since the satellite is mostly moving north-south, they would get differences between the two tracks. But gosh you can't get heading from that, there's just not enough data. That's why the predicted tracks are based on assumptions like their speed. We know they went south, and within their range there's nowhere they could be other than the ocean, so you have to sort-of work from that knowledge to find tracks that fit the model and agree with what you know.

[Edited 2014-03-27 21:45:43]
A man must know how to look before he can hope to see.
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6987
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 4:43 am

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 106):
What, should we all drop everything we are doing and search for MH370? Agree or disagree with the US in Asia, but they have a job to do over there and sending 1/3 of their P-8s down there shows commitment IMO.

How many P-3s Australia NOT send? What 'good' are they doing not looking for MH370?

I actually agree with the US in Asia (to bite at your semantic game). And what job are the ones not searching for MH370 actually doing? That is all I'm curious to know. If they are doing other things then they are doing other things. But if they are just sitting in a hanger collecting dust then I am saying that it would be more appropriate to send them to help the other planes (all of which are probably less capable than the P8) look for MH370. I don't know how many P3s Australia did not send but I know that the P8 is more capable and since Australia does not have any it would be up to those with them to send them.

"Amid improving weather conditions, 10 aircraft and six ships were being sent to the new search area.

They include two Royal Australian Air Force P3 Orions, a Japanese Coast Guard jet, a Japanese P3 Orion, a Republic of Korea P3 Orion, a Republic of Korea C130 Hercules, a Royal New Zealand Air Force P3 Orion, a Chinese military Ilyushin IL-76, a United States Navy P8 Poseidon aircraft, and one civil jet acting as a communications relay.

A further RAAF P3 Orion has been placed on standby at Pearce to investigate any reported sightings."

http://www.smh.com.au/national/missi...-20140328-35nco.html#ixzz2xEExjKQW

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 115):
The US only has about two dozen of them - and is committing a second. That will be a substantial portion of their active aircraft fleet.

Substantial? 2 out of about 24?


@ DeltaMD90 - " It's not like it's the Indian Ocean one day, the Straits the next day, China the next day, and the Indian Ocean again." - Maybe not anymore, but that is exactly how it was during week one...

[Edited 2014-03-27 21:53:48]
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
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 20554
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 4:53 am

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 125):
I actually agree with the US in Asia (to bite at your semantic game). And what job are the ones not searching for MH370 actually doing? That is all I'm curious to know. If they are doing other things then they are doing other things. But if they are just sitting in a hanger collecting dust then I am saying that it would be more appropriate to send them to help the other planes (all of which are probably less capable than the P8) look for MH370. I don't know how many P3s Australia did not send but I know Australia sent 2 planes for every 1 US plane if you want to talk small numbers..

They might be training for their primary mission or undergoing maintenance.

Also, Australia is right there. Sorta. Japan is a long way from Australia.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
User avatar
Finn350
Posts: 1601
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:57 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 4:53 am

Quoting BackSeater (Reply 121):
Such data is needed to remove the satellite Doppler contribution from the published Doppler graph so that we would then obtain the measured airplane Doppler to determine if it is compatible with any potential track.

As explained in the previous thread, they know the satellite's track accurately and can remove the Doppler shift induced by the satellite's movement. After that they basically get the plane's radial velocity component (towards or away from the satellite) and once they assume a ground speed they can calculate the tangential velocity component by simple trigonometry. After that it is integrating the track from the last known radar position to the last ping assuming a constand speed and taking winds into account. The only question is what is the assumed speed. Previously they have used 450 knots, but they have now apparently upgraded the speed based on the last radar data.

[Edited 2014-03-27 21:56:47]
 
aftgaffe
Posts: 176
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 7:18 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 4:55 am

http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/vi...ey-thomas-on-plane-debris.cnn.html

According to an expert on CNN, the debris has "absolutely" been found. And as Piers Morgan points out, the expert is an Aussie, so he has special knowledge of the Indian ocean.

Sigh....

[Edited 2014-03-27 21:56:40]
 
aftgaffe
Posts: 176
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 7:18 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 5:02 am

Quoting aftgaffe (Reply 128):
According to an expert on CNN, the debris has "absolutely" been found. And as Piers Morgan points out, the expert is an Aussie, so he has special knowledge of the Indian ocean.

Before anyone gets on me about how laughable that is, I was being sarcastic. Though someone on CNN really did just say the debris has absolutely been spotted.
 
undertheradar
Posts: 409
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2014 1:02 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 5:03 am

Quoting aftgaffe (Reply 128):

piers morgan...trying to 'salvage' his career...lol.
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6987
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 5:03 am

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 127):

They might be training for their primary mission or undergoing maintenance.

Also, Australia is right there. Sorta. Japan is a long way from Australia.

Only about 10.5 hours from Perth  
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
 
nupogodi
Posts: 933
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 10:58 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 5:05 am

Quoting undertheradar (Reply 130):
piers morgan...trying to 'salvage' his career...lol.

He doesn't quite get as much hate here in North America as he does from the Brits, but I totally see where they're coming from. The man is a waste of oxygen in the best of times.

I don't know how you people watch CNN, I honestly don't. Everything that has been reported on that network that hasn't come directly from press releases has been incorrect. Why even bother?
A man must know how to look before he can hope to see.
 
Backseater
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 3:20 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 5:07 am

Quoting nupogodi (Reply 124):
But we don't really know how fast, unless you assume a straight track DIRECTLY away from the sat - which is unlikely. Without that, you can know the sat movement as precisely as you care to, but you wouldn't know what part of the shift is caused by a/c movement and what part is caused by sat movement.

Please allow me to disagree. I assume that Inmarsat models the motion of its satellite very well, as all operators do, the only uncertainty possible being right after a correction.

So when I have a measured composite Doppler at ping time:
- I pick a candidate location for the aircraft.
- that gives me the vector: satellite - candidate location
- I project (vector product) the sat speed vector onto the sat-location vector. That is the radial speed of the satellite in that direction. I remove it from the measured Doppler.
- the left-over Doppler is only valid for that candidate aircraft location but it gives me the projection of the unknown aircraft speed vector onto the sat-location vector
- at that point I still have many choices (aircraft ground speed within permitted range after adding the estimated wind component, aircraft true heading) that have the same projection onto the sat-location vector. That's the purpose of doing a tree search keeping at each ping only the choices that rendez-vous correctly on the next RTD ring.

Actually I built the core of that algorithm while flying over Greenland today. Except that I don't have any data to plug-in.
 
aftgaffe
Posts: 176
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 7:18 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 5:10 am

Quoting nupogodi (Reply 132):
I don't know how you people watch CNN, I honestly don't. Everything that has been reported on that network that hasn't come directly from press releases has been incorrect. Why even bother?

You can't honestly say that when they started talking about black holes and supernatural intervention that it wasn't among the more entertaining things on TV.  

[Edited 2014-03-27 22:11:53]
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6987
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 5:13 am

Quoting nupogodi (Reply 132):
Quoting undertheradar (Reply 130):
piers morgan...trying to 'salvage' his career...lol.

He doesn't quite get as much hate here in North America as he does from the Brits, but I totally see where they're coming from. The man is a waste of oxygen in the best of times.

He has earned a tiny little bit more respect in Australia after facing Brett Lee in the nets during the Ashes Cricket. However, he received damage that most likely has clouded his judgement even more...  
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
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 20554
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 5:16 am

Quoting aftgaffe (Reply 134):
Quoting nupogodi (Reply 132):
I don't know how you people watch CNN, I honestly don't. Everything that has been reported on that network that hasn't come directly from press releases has been incorrect. Why even bother?

You can't honestly say that when they started talking about black holes and supernatural intervention that it wasn't among the more entertaining things on TV

This is worth reposting. Again and again. It is The Daily Show's "critique" of CNN and Fox coverage. Warning: The following short videos contain vicious satire of news organizations which richly deserve it.

- Making fun of CNN's coverage: http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/6l...tfn/the-curious-case-of-flight-370
- Making fun of FOX's coverage: http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/olkrde/american-idle-speculation
- But wait, don't forget MSNBC, who explicitly stated that they would not make news out of non-news. And yet...: http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/vd...ation---high-tech-jungle-hijacking
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
nupogodi
Posts: 933
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 10:58 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 5:16 am

Quoting BackSeater (Reply 133):
Please allow me to disagree. I assume that Inmarsat models the motion of its satellite very well, as all operators do, the only uncertainty possible being right after a correction.

I get what you're saying, and I'll disagree with you too. Assume for a moment that the aircraft is circling the satellite perfectly. I know, I know, not our situation. But I mean just think for a second that it is moving identically with the satellite, following its orbit. You can know the sat movement to insane precision, but then what will you subtract to remove the influence of its movement? 0, right? But you only know that it's 0 because you know that fact, that the aircraft is perfectly mirroring the satellites movement.

Now, move away from our contrived example. How in the world would you know, without knowing the aircraft's speed and heading, what component of the doppler shift is contributed by the sat or the a/c? You simply can't.

That's why they modelled it the way they did and looked to see what was a good fit. It doesn't give you any kind of precise heading, it can't help you calculate aircraft speed, and it can't determine the contribution of the shift from a/c movement and sat movement (although you can make reasonable assumptions to an extent).

That's why their analysis allowed them to say one thing definitively: it went south. The potential tracks are based on that data, combined with radar data, combined with assumed speed/altitude and by extension range.

It is novel what they have done, but no amount of analysis is going to turn this satellite into a geolocator.
A man must know how to look before he can hope to see.
 
Backseater
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 3:20 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 5:19 am

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 126):
As explained in the previous thread, they know the satellite's track accurately and can remove the Doppler shift induced by the satellite's movement. After that they basically get the plane's radial velocity component (towards or away from the satellite) and once they assume a ground speed they can calculate the tangential velocity component by simple trigonometry. After that it is integrating the track from the last known radar position to the last ping assuming a constand speed and taking winds into account. The only question is what is the assumed speed. Previously they have used 450 knots, but they have now apparently upgraded the speed based on the last radar data.

Exactly.

In addition, the algorithm I propose does not force a speed for the whole flight a priori. Between any pair of pings you have to explore possibly several ground speeds within the permitted range provided they natch the RTD and Doppler constraints.
 
65mustang
Posts: 84
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2014 1:28 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 5:24 am

Mandala gave these numbers in part 46.

There's another problem to the speed... the part from Penang to the last point of radar contact, the aircraft only went 110NM in 20 mins... giving it 330kts only.

Why is the new info saying that known radar data indicates a much higher speed?
 
Backseater
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 3:20 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 5:25 am

Quoting nupogodi (Reply 138):
It is novel what they have done, but no amount of analysis is going to turn this satellite into a geolocator.

Of course.
Their graph was instrumental in eliminating from speculation the northern arc once and for all. Great!
What I described is a straightforward search through the space of trajectories keeping only those that match the known constraints, assuming only that the aircraft is on a steady course form one ping to the next.
 
nupogodi
Posts: 933
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 10:58 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 5:32 am

Quoting undertheradar (Reply 136):
AAAAARRRRGGGGHHHH....I'M AUSTRALIAN BORN (DUTCH HERITAGE)...LIVE IN AUSTRALIA....PLEASE DONT ASSOCIATE ME WITH THE 'BRITS'... LOL

Calm down buddy, I said "the Brits" not "you Brits".
A man must know how to look before he can hope to see.
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 3728
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 5:35 am

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 115):

"Anyone have a sense of why the U.S. hasn't sent an aircraft carrier?

The US doesn't have any available. The budget games last year forced the US Navy to basically take two ships out of service for months. Even now, there are really only three deployable aircraft carriers, and two in a workup cycle. Frankly, the US Navy has more important tasks for their carriers than using them as a poor search platform with very bad aircraft for SAR work."

Add to that, we do have the Ukranian Crissis. Having the carriers ready just in case would seem to be a more prudent move.

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
User avatar
Finn350
Posts: 1601
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:57 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 5:56 am

Quoting 65mustang (Reply 140):
There's another problem to the speed... the part from Penang to the last point of radar contact, the aircraft only went 110NM in 20 mins... giving it 330kts only.

That is actually a good question... upgrading the speed increases the westward component of the velocity and downgrading the speed increases the eastward component in the analysis. Moving the search area to northeast is consistent with downgrading the speed, unless they have made some other changes in the initial conditions assumptions.
 
undertheradar
Posts: 409
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2014 1:02 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 5:59 am

Quoting nupogodi (Reply 142):
[/
[quote=nupogodi,reply=142]

LOL...im calm...I forget that typing capitals nowadays means SHOUTING lol..... im oldschool...where capitals meant highlighting/emphasizing words..lol
 
spacecadet
Posts: 3582
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2001 3:36 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 6:06 am

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 144):
That is actually a good question... upgrading the speed increases the westward component of the velocity and downgrading the speed increases the eastward component in the analysis. Moving the search area to northeast is consistent with downgrading the speed, unless they have made some other changes in the initial conditions assumptions.

Some people seem to be having a hard time grasping this. Someone should make a new graph that explains it.

If the plane was traveling faster than previously thought before radar contact was lost, then it would fly a shorter distance once radar contact was lost before running out of fuel. Yet it still would end up on the last satellite arc. For it to travel a shorter distance but still end up on that same arc, it *has* to be to the northeast of where they were searching before.

It's actually very simple and totally consistent. The speed once it turned south is pretty much immaterial; what matters at that point is where those pings came from. But if the speed while it was still on radar traveling west is higher than thought, then the total distance it traveled would have to indicate it would be on a more north-easterly point on that last satellite ping arc.

Essentially they're saying the final heading of the airplane once it disappeared from radar was different than they first thought, because the heading they had calculated was based on traveling a certain distance to that last arc.

Quoting flyenthu (Reply 120):
Something tells me that things are not quite "adding up" with their math if they are now focusing in an area hundreds of miles away.

It adds up fine. The numbers being added up have changed, based on new analysis of the radar data while it was overflying Malaysia and such.

Quoting flyenthu (Reply 116):
I get that, but somehow finding it hard to buy that debris numbering in the 100s would all play hide and seek.

Because it probably wasn't even debris. I'm not an "imaging expert" per se, but I've seen plenty of satellite shots of the ocean over the years and been on it in rough weather, and pretty much *all* of what I've seen in the last couple of days looked like plain old whitecaps to me. If you're not seeing it in motion, a whitecap can easily look like a solid object. And water "shines" in the light, so I never understood the fact that these objects were shining somehow made them more likely to be airplane debris.

[Edited 2014-03-27 23:14:39]
I'm tired of being a wanna-be league bowler. I wanna be a league bowler!
 
User avatar
Finn350
Posts: 1601
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:57 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 6:13 am

Quoting spacecadet (Reply 146):
If the plane was traveling faster than previously thought before radar contact was lost, then it would fly a shorter distance once radar contact was lost before running out of fuel. Yet it still would end up on the last satellite arc. For it to travel a shorter distance but still end up on that same arc, it *has* to be to the northeast of where they were searching before.

Yes, based on the last ping arc only, if the plane was travelling faster or slower than the optimum cruise speed of 450 knots it would have ended northeast because it would have run out fuel earlier. If we take into account the speed induced from the Doppler shift, we have an additional constraint. Assuming the Doppler shift data is correct only a lower speed would indicate moving the search area north east, if not any other changes to the initial conditions.
 
imagoagnitio
Posts: 34
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2014 12:22 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 6:19 am

Just picked up a Royal Australian Air Force KC-30A landing at Perth Int'l, just wondering if they are able to refuel any of the foreign SAR aircraft, are the refueling apparatus the same for all?

That's if it is over there to join in with the search operation.
 
bluesky9
Posts: 105
Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2014 1:26 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 6:26 am

I have read most of the threads but just like to throw in a couple of ideas into the mix which hopefully have not been mentioned before. Some of the ideas are more speculative than others.

Assumptions about the aircraft speed have now been modified based on radar data. Seems likely that these assumptions are correct, but might also worth considering max endurance speed for various altitudes?
Seems that the two dominant theories, do not include sabotage. e.g. ricin gas bombs in cockpit placed to take out coms, pilots and everyone on board. Could explain path away from land, i.e. setting waypoints for autopilot, i.e. to avoid crashing into populated area.
Not scanning the cargo is odd, if there was something strange about the cargo then that would color the interpretation of the facts.
Seems unlikely that captain was involved, the fact that he was put on the flight at the last minute points away from him and maybe even towards others. i.e. what if it was known there was some risk associated with this flight and that is why he was assigned to this particular flight. Similarly, it is unlikely the copilot was involved.
I find it hard to believe that the aircraft tracked back over Penang would not have raised an alarm on the ground and not been investigated in realtime.

I have noticed in many airports there is no rigorous check to ensure the person boarding with the boarding pass is the same one that had their passport and boarding passed checked at passport control. I think we need biometric and image matching at both these points to ensure it is the same person.

The copilots final sign off was normal, so could it have been recorded from a previous flight, might be worth checking that it does not exactly match a previous call on another flight.

If any passengers were alive for the flight, an emergency Inmarsat sat phone in the crew compartment would have been able to track the aircraft and know what is going on. They also have options for boats where there is a big red emergency button that transmits GPS information with an emergency identification. These can all operate independently of the aircraft electrical system. (Though I know there were also EPIRBs in the passenger compartment, that were not used.)

The new debris sighting, looks more promising. Be interesting to see satellite images of this area from before the dates on the latest images.

Time is running out to find the pinger. I don't see any submarines in the assets looking in the search area. If a submarine that could detect the pinger over say a 20nm band cruising at 30kts could cover 14,400 square nautical miles a day in any weather. Ten subs could cover 144,000 sq nm per day. However, there is likely a security issue with using the subs in joint operation with lots of different anti submarine aircraft in the area. In any case pinger finders sitting on the ground will not find anything, but could at least eliminate locations if actually being used while also having a chance however small of picking up something.

Whatever the case it seems obvious the black box and its pinger needs to be easier to find. Many boats have EPIRBs that automatically deploy and float on the water transmitting GPS data. They are small light and relatively inexpensive, so might need something like this on aircraft so the impact point can be found more quickly.

It would be very suspicious and worrying if the debris and black box is not found for this aircraft.

[Edited 2014-03-28 00:25:08]
 
spacecadet
Posts: 3582
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2001 3:36 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 47

Fri Mar 28, 2014 6:26 am

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 147):
Assuming the Doppler shift data is correct only a lower speed would indicate moving the search area north east, if not any other changes to the initial conditions.

I feel like from your earlier posts that you're interpreting this new info as saying the speed *after* radar contact was lost was higher. I watched the news conference and they never talked about the post-radar speed once. All they said was the speed on radar was higher than thought previously, meaning they had less fuel when contact was lost, meaning they traveled a shorter distance once contact was lost. That can only mean the plane is northeast of where they thought it was, because we know it's on that arc.

[Edited 2014-03-27 23:27:10]
I'm tired of being a wanna-be league bowler. I wanna be a league bowler!
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 8

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