• 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 7
 
User avatar
Finn350
Posts: 1594
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:57 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Tue Apr 01, 2014 6:32 pm

Quoting BackSeater (Reply 98):
But more recently MarkAK supported by Mandal499 indicated that the satcom on MH370 removed the aircraft induced Doppler by pre-compensation. That is crucial because if confirmed, then the method I described in post #24 above may give us the approximate aircraft location on the RTD ring at each ping without assuming any speed or heading a priori!
Quoting BackSeater (Reply 24):
What the earth station will measure is the satellite Doppler vector projected onto the satellite to aircraft vector. The measured Doppler scalar value compared to the Doppler expected from the instantaneous speed of the satellite yields the angle between satellite speed vector and satellite to aircraft vector. That angle is the half angle of a cone whose axis is the satellite speed vector. That cone should mostly intersect the southern portion of the ring in one point unless the speed vector of the satellite happens to almost point to the aircraft. In that case we shall unfortunately have two intersections. But by looking at successive calculated locations, we should be able to eliminate one of the two intersections if any ever occurred during the construction process.

I don't fully understand your method explained in reply #24, especially as there is only "Doppler scalar" value (for example 300 Hz), not "Doppler vector". However as Inmarsat has stated that they can get no furher information regarding the aircraft position (besides selecting the southern arc) from the ping and Doppler, I assume that the calculation you suggest is not possible.
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2979
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Tue Apr 01, 2014 6:36 pm

Quoting affirmative (Reply 96):
Most people know that the US military have satellites that could be well used for this search but there's very little, to not say none, word from the US

Because any spare satellites are busy keeping an eye on Ukraine and North Korea right now. (Not a joke).

And since we are talking conspiracies . . . perhaps the Chinese do not want the US to have more assets in the area from a national pride stand point (shrug).

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
sipadan
Posts: 322
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2014 7:06 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Tue Apr 01, 2014 6:55 pm

Quoting affirmative (Reply 96):
2 What happened to the rest of the world, and more precisely the US? Most people know that the US military have satellites that could be well used for this search but there's very little, to not say none, word from the US. And why not deploy some of the KC-135s from Diego Garcia to help in the search? And on the subject of Diego Garcia, I browsed around using google maps and there are some pretty massive communication and radar installations on that island. There are also quite a few buildings that have been seemingly blurred out from google maps (check south of the airport). And finally, how would Diego Garcia fair in terms of the plotted inmarsat track?

I concur that the relative absence of a US 'voice' is somewhat puzzling. Certainly national defense usurps all else, but I really have a difficult time believing we are seemingly just as 'clueless' as Malaysia and the rest of the world are in regards to where this a/c is. So, we can in the earliest of hours rule out an in-flight catastrophic explosion because of a sophisticated 'flash/bang' technology that is sensitive enough to detect said event throughout the entire atmosphere of the earth, but now we have no idea as to where the plane is...right.
 
User avatar
PITingres
Posts: 1253
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 1:59 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Tue Apr 01, 2014 7:14 pm

Quoting decoder (Reply 97):
So the final transmission suddenly changed from somewhat informal and technically incorrect (however prevalent it may be) to by-the-book aviation radio phraseology. I have some trouble believing that.

I find myself bemused by all the people who want to make a big deal of this. I can think of a very simple way that this might have happened: it was initially transcribed by someone who is very familiar with aviation radio traffic. I can easily imagine that for such a person, the call sign is more like overhead than signal (sort of like saying "over" at the end of a transmission). An exact transcription was probably made later, and by that time the original one was in circulation.

I see no way in which this event indicts Malaysia's handling of the situation. Do the extra 4 words add the slightest bit to our understanding? No.

The only way this wording update is relevant is if you're looking for an excuse to blame Malaysia for something in the first place, and I'm sure that there are better targets.
Fly, you fools! Fly!
 
shortstack81
Posts: 40
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2014 11:25 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Tue Apr 01, 2014 7:15 pm

When the camp in the US government that thinks the plane is in Pakistan (those leaking to Flying with Fish) were more or less proven wrong, "unnamed American officials" rather shut up. That probably explains the "quiet" on our (American) part.

It seems that NO ONE knows anything. This is the mystery of the ages, and it's really sad too.

in the days of steamships, ocean liners would sail out of Bristol and Liverpool and Capetown and vanish, never to be seen again, their families never to get any closure. I hope that is not what happens this time.
 
Backseater
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 3:20 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Tue Apr 01, 2014 7:23 pm

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 101):
I don't fully understand your method explained in reply #24, especially as there is only "Doppler scalar" value (for example 300 Hz), not "Doppler vector". However as Inmarsat has stated that they can get no furher information regarding the aircraft position (besides selecting the southern arc) from the ping and Doppler, I assume that the calculation you suggest is not possible.

If the calculated pre-compensation is factual, then the Doppler that Inmarsat measured is only caused by the speed of the satellite along the aircraft-satellite vector.

If Inmarsat knows the position and speed vector of 3F1 at ping time in an earth based frame of reference, the max Doppler would occur when the speed vector of the satellite is aligned with the sat to aircraft vector. For example, if the satellite moved at 70m/s directly towards the aircraft, the Doppler would be max at about +370Hz. If the measured Doppler is only +320Hz, that means the speed of the satellite towards the aircraft was not 70m/s but only 60.5m/s.

Therefore the angle between the speed vector of the satellite and the sat to aircraft vector is ACOS(60.5/70) or ACOS(320/370) if you prefer. In our example we find 30.13degrees.

That is the half angle of the cone I described in post #24. But if do not want to think in terms of the intersection of the cone with the RTD ring for that ping, it should be clear that there are going to be 1 possibly two points that are on the proper RTD ring and satisfy the angle constraint between sat speed vector and sat to aircraft vector.

If there is no intersection at all i.e. no point that meets the criteria, I would suspect the assumptions re. sat modem pre-compensation are wrong or maybe the inertial nav system has been tampered with...
 
CaptainKramer
Posts: 281
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2012 8:12 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Tue Apr 01, 2014 7:24 pm

Regarding MH370 mentioning twice that they were cruising at FL350.

Maybe the Co-pilot, having some doubt creep in, wanted to clarify the altitiude they were at (6 minutes after ATC signed off with Malaysian 370), given that MH370, includes the numbers "370" which could be interpreted as a Flight Level instead of a Flight Number.

Or maybe the Malaysian Co-pilot heard ATC speaking to another flight, instructing FL370 (given the transcript only included the exchanges between ATC and MH370) , and the Malaysian Co-pilot only caught the 370 part, which prompted the clarification to ATC just in case.

Regarding the United States perceived passive role; in the public domain at least, regarding MH370.

IMHO I would imagine you would have to factor in that this is the second B777 accident in the last couple of months, and I imagine the last thing the U.S. wants to do, is to be seen as influencing matters, which could be later misconstrued as "unduly" influencing matters, given Boeing is an American Company and Lawyers are always on the look out for an opportunity to connect the dots, when building there case, should mechanical failure be a factor in both accidents.

[Edited 2014-04-01 12:47:45]
 
User avatar
Finn350
Posts: 1594
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:57 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Tue Apr 01, 2014 7:31 pm

Quoting BackSeater (Reply 106):
If Inmarsat knows the position and speed vector of 3F1 at ping time in an earth based frame of reference, the max Doppler would occur when the speed vector of the satellite is aligned with the sat to aircraft vector. For example, if the satellite moved at 70m/s directly towards the aircraft, the Doppler would be max at about +370Hz. If the measured Doppler is only +320Hz, that means the speed of the satellite towards the aircraft was not 70m/s but only 60.5m/s.

OK, I now see what you are suggesting. I suppose there is some limitation to this calculation. It might be that the Doppler shift cancellation by the aircraft is not exact but approximate to such extent that the cone you describe is 'smeared' too much to give any meaningful result (besides selecting the northern or southern arc).
 
User avatar
Moose135
Posts: 3073
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 11:27 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Tue Apr 01, 2014 7:32 pm

Quoting CaptainKramer (Reply 107):

Exactly - or perhaps they thought "Did we check in?" and repeated it to be sure Center heard them. I don't see where it's that big of a deal that he repeated it.
KC-135 - Passing gas and taking names!
 
Backseater
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 3:20 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Tue Apr 01, 2014 7:51 pm

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 108):
OK, I now see what you are suggesting. I suppose there is some limitation to this calculation. It might be that the Doppler shift cancellation by the aircraft is not exact but approximate to such extent that the cone you describe is 'smeared' too much to give any meaningful result (besides selecting the northern or southern arc).

I agree. Theoretically what I propose works but in practice geometric factors and experimental errors could seriously decrease the final accuracy.

The Inmarsat Doppler diagram at 450kts showed errors between predicted and measured on the southern arc. Their data can therefore be processed again to get agreement between predicted and measured using the method I described.

No matter how coarse the result is, it would be worth seeing. By bounding the RTD and Doppler angle estimate we could have a set of boxes, one for each ping, through which any candidate trajectory must pass.

Again, Inmarsat has probably already performed that work. But then, why didn't they say so?
 
cand
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2014 9:05 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Tue Apr 01, 2014 7:52 pm

Quoting affirmative (Reply 96):
how would Diego Garcia fair in terms of the plotted inmarsat track?

Why do we keep believing in this track which yields ever moving targets and no hard evidence? It looks more like a "wag the dog" farce.
 
vnangia
Posts: 75
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 3:57 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Tue Apr 01, 2014 7:59 pm

Quoting David L (Reply 81):
We're "used to" accidents where the location is generally known, often not far from airports or within radar contact, so the recorders can be recovered very quickly. Although AF447 was lost in the middle of the Atlantic, it came down fairly close to its last known position so the search in "the right area" could begin almost immediately and a considerable amount of information was known from the ACARS messages.

There is still a considerable difference in the way this investigation has been handled relative to elsewhere. A location is not required to say, "this is the complete and full data I can share with you today," instead of repeated "we're doing our best" and then correcting themselves without missing a beat ... "we have always been at war with Eurasia" comes to mind. For example, today, day 25(/26), we've learned that the aircraft performed a 290 from 40 to 330, instead of what they've been suggesting from day 3/4 - that the aircraft made a sharp left turn to cross over the peninsula. I cannot understand why they've waited this long to say so - they've almost certainly been sitting on that tidbit for a while, and if they've not had it, then they could at least say, "we've redone the analysis of radar and based on this new data we believe the aircraft made a right turn instead of a left". Instead, they toss this out without context or explanation.

That is just one of the many things we're "used to" hearing from a more open agency. A location is useful to start recovery of aircraft and human remains, which are important to the wider aviation community understand what happened and helping the families and friends come to closure, respectively. However, even without the location, they've put out various inane statements ("the pilot is a supporter of the opposition leader") and conflicting information. The Malaysian authorities have walked back virtually everything they've said, and made no attempt to put out a written statement that summarizes what they know. rcair1 has done a better job than have the Malaysians, and he is working off publicly available information - and rcair1 has a day job that doesn't involve MH370 SAR as far as I can tell.

Quoting David L (Reply 81):
And let's not forget that many here perceived a lack of information from that investigation, claiming it to be a deliberate attempt to conceal damning evidence against Airbus.

I'm not sure what you're saying here. You are aware it was a Boeing 777, not an Airbus, that was performing MH370?

In short, while we in the wider aviation community may be interested and concerned, we are secondary consumers of this information. At least for the sake of the families the Malaysians should be more forthcoming, more transparent and most of all, honest about what they do know and don't know - regardless of knowing the location (clearly in the second bin) or sensitivity about wrongdoing.
 
Pihero
Posts: 4318
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 5:11 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Tue Apr 01, 2014 8:14 pm

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 92):
Re: the Doppler shift data, it occurred to me you could actually derive some info about the true heading:

I must say i've seen a lot of rubbish in my life but this beats them all.
To the point that I am going to ask you a simple question : What are you, really ?
That's because you're utterring enough bull to make a private pilot sick, and wondering...You don't even know the basic "speed triangle" in very basic navigation, i.e the one that is about Heading / TAS - Wind Speed /Direction - and Course / Ground speed.
This is more like it :
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j261/Pihero/TriangledesventsetDoppler.jpg
This corrects two things in your posts ( all of them on the subject ) :
1/- What you call true *heading* is in fact a course that is dependent on TAS, Heading and the wind.
2/- Your schematic is patently erroneous as your Doppler component is opposite the radial velocity of the aircraft ( it goes toward the inside of the LOP
Conclusion : You can not derive a True Heading without knowing the wind and assuming a given ( set of) speed.
Corollary : all your theories are worth nothing.
Contrail designer
 
WarrenPlatts
Posts: 517
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2014 6:03 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Tue Apr 01, 2014 8:17 pm

Quoting BackSeater (Reply 24):
What the earth station will measure is the satellite Doppler vector projected onto the satellite to aircraft vector. The measured Doppler scalar value compared to the Doppler expected from the instantaneous speed of the satellite yields the angle between satellite speed vector and satellite to aircraft vector. That angle is the half angle of a cone whose axis is the satellite speed vector. That cone should mostly intersect the southern portion of the ring in one point unless the speed vector of the satellite happens to almost point to the aircraft. In that case we shall unfortunately have two intersections. But by looking at successive calculated locations, we should be able to eliminate one of the two intersections if any ever occurred during the construction process.

What you're proposing is a separate line of position (LOP), centered on the satellite's motion vector (which is pretty much either due north or due south, tangential to the Earth's surface. I don't see exactly how you can calculate a unique angle between the satellites direction of motion and the direction to MH370. A little math would help, and perhaps a diagram or two.

Quoting hivue (Reply 95):
Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 92):for a given assumed ground speed and observed radial velocity component, the two vectors when added would form a right triangle
Why have you assumed that the vectors for assumed ground speed are all specific vectors? For all we know currently the course the plane was flying could have been to almost anywhere in a south/south-easterly direction.

Not exactly sure what you mean. Any given motion is going to have a specific vector. Really, the main usefulness would be as a "sanity check" of the Inmarsat tracks. As pointed out early, given a time series of concentric LOPs, and a single assumed speed and general direction, there is only one, unique track that can be generated. That is, given the assumed speed, the position and course on the LOP where the a/c crosses is known.

Thus, if you also know the radial velocity from the satellite, you can check the course predicted by the Doppler with the course implied by the assumed velocity. If they do not match up, then you know you picked the wrong assumed velocity, in this manner, one ought to be able to narrow down to what the actual velocity must have been. It will be the only assumed velocity whose implied course match the course deduced from the Doppler radial velocities and the implied position on the LOP.

In this manner, as in BackSeater's technique, it should be possible to deduce a single track that matches all data.

[Edited 2014-04-01 13:41:33]
 
spacecadet
Posts: 3478
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2001 3:36 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Tue Apr 01, 2014 8:19 pm

Quoting PITingres (Reply 104):
I see no way in which this event indicts Malaysia's handling of the situation. Do the extra 4 words add the slightest bit to our understanding? No.

Not the point. The point is this is a very basic, factual point that was made very early on, and the authorities have had ample time to correct it. It's understandable for the "fog of war" to create some confusion in the very early hours of an investigation, and for incorrect information to be leaked or even released officially on occasion. But this was a basic fact that would be easily verified and apparently never was, despite focus on it by the media and others who thought the phraseology was odd and could indicate something. I was never one of those people, but they existed - and the entire reason they existed was because Malaysia released incorrect information and never corrected it. And they did that officially.

What this does at the very least is make the Malaysians appear incompetent. At worst, it fosters conspiracy theorists. And it's a pretty basic technique of any investigation that while you give as much information as you can, you have to make sure that it's as correct as you can know it to be. Sometimes information can change, new information can override old information, etc. but this doesn't fall into those categories - this is a guy's voice on a recording and all you need to do is listen to what he says. That hasn't changed in 3 weeks. What he said has been the same as it always was; what's changed is that Malaysia finally corrected a basic mistake they made 3 weeks ago. What other basic mistakes have they made that haven't yet been corrected?
I'm tired of being a wanna-be league bowler. I wanna be a league bowler!
 
vnangia
Posts: 75
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 3:57 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Tue Apr 01, 2014 8:21 pm

Regarding Diego Garcia: just so people are aware: Diego Garcia is about 4,500km away from the search area - or roughly put, Boston to Dublin, or Chicago to Fairbanks, or Las Vegas to Honolulu. And that's not blurring, affirmative - those are clouds over Diego Garcia in Google Maps; it's clearer on alternative providers.

As to this feeling that the US is being passive: the NTSB released a short statement several days ago to the effect that said the Malaysians are in charge and we'll support them - we won't make any statements of our own since they're the lead agency right now. I was actually surprised to hear anything separately from the Australians about the search, really. And US military assets are mighty, but not omnipotent - nor is it clear that they had any hardware that was looking in that particular direction. Looking through clouds is extremely difficult, and likely wouldn't result in much at this late stage. Had the search area been identified in the first couple of days, perhaps (PERHAPS) something would have shown up on a radar scan of ocean's surface from orbit, but at this point of time, I very seriously doubt it. This is going to be a long search, probably eventually involving comprehensive sea-bottom mapping. And if the plane landed more or less intact and is at the bottom of the Diamantina Deep, it's going to be years before the equipment is in place to try for a retrieval.
 
Toni_
Posts: 272
Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2002 8:56 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Tue Apr 01, 2014 8:46 pm

Question for the flyers and/or experts out there, regarding the double mentioning of MH370's altitude.

Judging the FIR map of the Malaysia region, I notice that there is a boundary between the Kuala Lumpur FIR and an area called the "Northern Boundary of the South China Sea". This area falls under responsibility of Kuala Lumpur as well. Is it SOP to contact the same frequency that you're already on while crossing a boundary? It could explain that second call.
 
karungguni
Posts: 36
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2014 9:14 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Tue Apr 01, 2014 9:37 pm

Longtime lurker and first time poster. The usual forgive if this has already been posted.

I am most puzzled by there not being closer scrutiny of if and why it did not fly through Indonesian airspace. The Indonesians deny it and I have yet to see a definite flight path by satellite pings. If it did not fly over Indonesian airspace it seems beyond coincidence that it would head north to the Nicobar Islands and then head south over the open Indian Ocean. So the plane managed to avoid everybody's airspace except the Malaysians and the Indians? Could it be common knowledge that neither would be likely to provoke a reaction? Is it because the navigation waypoint takes it north of Indonesia? If it was an inflight catastrophic event why enter a waypoint to the west and not head towards the nearest east coast airport (The Langkawi theory)?

The plane disappears before entering Vietnamese airspace giving an initial confusion window and then skirts both Thai and Indonesian airspace. This is just too strange on top of the idea of the inflight incident that would knock out communication systems and yet keep the plane aloft until the fuel runs out.

http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2...d-not-fly-indonesian-airspace.html
 
hivue
Posts: 1954
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:26 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Tue Apr 01, 2014 9:42 pm

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 114):
Not exactly sure what you mean.

Yes, that was worded very poorly on my part. Your "assumed velocity" (the hypotenuses of your triangles) is a vector. It has a magnitude and a direction. The direction of your "radial velocity" vector obviously needs to be away from the satellite. For any given location on the LOP how did you come up with a single direction for the "assumed velocity" (assumed ground speed component)? At any given point on the LOP the velocity vector of the aircraft could have been in one of many different directions.
"You're sitting. In a chair. In the SKY!!" ~ Louis C.K.
 
WarrenPlatts
Posts: 517
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2014 6:03 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Tue Apr 01, 2014 9:58 pm

Quoting hivue (Reply 121):
Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 114):Not exactly sure what you mean.
Yes, that was worded very poorly on my part. Your "assumed velocity" (the hypotenuses of your triangles) is a vector. It has a magnitude and a direction. The direction of your "radial velocity" vector obviously needs to be away from the satellite. For any given location on the LOP how did you come up with a single direction for the "assumed velocity" (assumed ground speed component)? At any given point on the LOP the velocity vector of the aircraft could have been in one of many different directions.

That's what I thought at first. And of course, the pilot can change direction at any point, so you are technically correct. However, If we assume the pilot was on a more or less straight path, given an assumed ground speed, say 450 knots, that 450 knots is going to be the vectorial sum of the radial velocity and the tangential velocity to the satellite LOP.

The tangential velocity can be calculated using the Pythagorean Theorem, namely: tangential velocity = sqrt([ground speed]^2 - [radial velocity]^2). At any given point on the LOP, the radial velocity vector is pointing directly away from the satellite, whereas the tangential velocity is perpendicular to the radial velocity. Thus the vector of the ground speed velocity is uniquely determined by the radial and tangential vectors.

Later on, I will try to do a concrete example using the last LOP and the published Inmarsat flight paths.
 
WingedMigrator
Posts: 1771
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 9:45 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Tue Apr 01, 2014 10:13 pm

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 122):
radial velocity

How does the radial velocity of the satellite allow you to conclude anything about any component of aircraft velocity, provided that the aircraft satcom terminal pre-compensates for its own doppler shift?
 
User avatar
PITingres
Posts: 1253
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 1:59 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Tue Apr 01, 2014 10:37 pm

Quoting spacecadet (Reply 115):
The point is this is a very basic, factual point that was made very early on, and the authorities have had ample time to correct it.

I guess we disagree on how "basic" the omission is. The message content was there from the start. Whether or not the speaker included the callsign signoff is very nearly irrelevant, and the resources needed to double-check and get the word out were better used elsewhere.

Quoting spacecadet (Reply 115):
At worst, it fosters conspiracy theorists.

Hardly necessary, though. A really devoted conspiracy theorist would have jumped on the lack of callsign immediately as being an anomaly.

Yes, ideally it should have been right from the start, but I think this is really making a mountain out of a zit.
Fly, you fools! Fly!
 
sipadan
Posts: 322
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2014 7:06 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Tue Apr 01, 2014 10:38 pm

Quoting moose135 (Reply 109):
Exactly - or perhaps they thought "Did we check in?" and repeated it to be sure Center heard them. I don't see where it's that big of a deal that he repeated it.

[/quote]

Quoting Toni_ (Reply 118):
Judging the FIR map of the Malaysia region, I notice that there is a boundary between the Kuala Lumpur FIR and an area called the "Northern Boundary of the South China Sea". This area falls under responsibility of Kuala Lumpur as well. Is it SOP to contact the same frequency that you're already on while crossing a boundary? It could explain that second call.

Let me repeat...along with the question of WHO made the final transmission from MH370 "good night Malaysian 370 (it is now widely believed to have been the voice of the pilot, captain Shah), there is also information coming forth that the 2nd FL350 transmission was also made by the pilot, and not the co-pilot as was initially assumed. These last two transmissions would have then been given by Captain Shah, whereas all previous transmissions were given by the co-pilot. And then the plane disappears two minutes later...hmmm. Maybe Captain Shah, knowing that these transcripts would be scrutinized, wanted to give the appearance of normalcy (since almost everyone here seems to think this redundancy is normal), or perhaps he intended to deviate prior to the hand-off, or this or that...I'm sure he had a reason...after all, he must have, if it was in fact his voice and IF this was in fact a purposeful act.
 
Backseater
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 3:20 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Tue Apr 01, 2014 10:40 pm

Quoting BackSeater (Reply 98):
Does anybody know for sure which model of Satcom was on MH370?

Honeywell satcom modem likely to calculate and eliminate aircraft induced Doppler.

Well, I can start answering the first part of one of my own questions.
Just got my paper copy of AWST. Excerpt form "New math: By Amy Svitak:

Built by Honeywell Aerospace, MH370's L-band satcom terminal uses position, speed, direction, pitch, roll and yaw data from the aircraft to steer its antenna and maintain a lock in Inmarsat 3-F1. But while the terminal is continually pinging the spacecraft, this data is only used to orient the antenna and offset transmitted frequency due to Doppler shift. It is not transmitted off the aircraft.

Honeywell? What model? Anybody can look up the installation manual?

AWST's article implies a calculated frequency pre-compensation. Those of you that still want to estimate the a/c speed vector (I also did many threads ago), you are out of luck. There is probably no Doppler at all due to aircraft motion in the Inmarsat Doppler measurement. But what is in the Inmarsat measurement is much better because it indirectly contains a/c directional information.

One more reason to use the method I described in posts #24, #67, #106 and that yields the estimated a/c position at ping time on each RTD ring.
 
David L
Posts: 8551
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:26 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Tue Apr 01, 2014 10:42 pm

Quoting vnangia (Reply 112):
Quoting David L (Reply 81):And let's not forget that many here perceived a lack of information from that investigation, claiming it to be a deliberate attempt to conceal damning evidence against Airbus.
I'm not sure what you're saying here. You are aware it was a Boeing 777, not an Airbus, that was performing MH370?

If you look more closely at what I said you'll see that it was a reference to the search for AF447, which was an Airbus 330 - the point being that some armchair experts will "see" incompetence and conspiracy if that's what they want. The pattern is the same.

Quoting PITingres (Reply 104):

   Actually listening to the recording probably tells the investigators a lot more than the slightly altered wording.
 
sipadan
Posts: 322
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2014 7:06 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Tue Apr 01, 2014 11:10 pm

Britain sending one of it's nuclear subs to 'crash site'...Malaysian airlines JUST announced implementation of new policy prohibiting pilots to be alone in the cockpit.

Malaysian officials saying investigation has now evolved to only one premise...a criminal act. This is their stated position as of 2nd of April...now all CNN 'talking heads doing 180's and conceding that this 'now' looks like foul play.

[Edited 2014-04-01 16:40:41]
 
EC135
Posts: 55
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2000 2:58 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Tue Apr 01, 2014 11:25 pm

The very well planned action to let the aircraft disappear (including transponder off, ACARS switched off, programming new way-points, no Mayday call, happening at night under protection of darkness, and so on....) is in my opinion totally out of the "sudden accident" theory, it must have been planned over days, more likely weeks or month if not even years in before. If you are planning such an event - and to let a 777 completely disappear for almost a month, is a really really big Task - you would ask yourself some questions in before, no matter for the reason you are all doing this: Is there any possibility to be tracked by radar or satellite or any other device? If you are planning this event you are of course aware of the satellite pings, so I wonder if there is ANY POSSIBILITY to create false signals, e.g. by hacking the Immersat database? Would there be any other scenario where the plane might have been flown to besides what we know or what we are expected to know? And once again, what is the ID of the large airplane reportedly flying low level over a remote Maldivian Island some hours after disappearance?
 
KIAS
Posts: 72
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2014 4:25 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Tue Apr 01, 2014 11:47 pm

Quoting AR385 (Reply 130):
What would be the reason for a submarine?

Subs are equipped with side-scan sonar. A good synopsis here: http://www.nauticalcharts.noaa.gov/hsd/SSS.html

Nuclear subs can submerge for a long duration, 2-3 months at a time (limited typically by the amount of food on board).
"We fly, but we have not 'conquered' the air. When we presume mastery, we are often startled by our ignorance." - DHW
 
sipadan
Posts: 322
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2014 7:06 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Tue Apr 01, 2014 11:48 pm

Quoting AR385 (Reply 130):
And that policy. Who are they having in mind to put in the cockpit? Does this have any chance of extending and become a worldwide regulation? What a way to go back to three crew cockpits...

don't know the answers to these questions but will try to find out...and the implementation of extending such a policy worldwide would be a real mess and I can't imagine it would come to that, but who knows...as for the submarine, it apparently is equipped with 'specialized' equipment and is felt to be of value in that there is a growing consensus among investigators that the plane may still be largely intact...I'll try to find out more.
 
WarrenPlatts
Posts: 517
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2014 6:03 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Tue Apr 01, 2014 11:49 pm

Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 123):
Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 122):radial velocity
How does the radial velocity of the satellite allow you to conclude anything about any component of aircraft velocity, provided that the aircraft satcom terminal pre-compensates for its own doppler shift?

The satellite's movements are perfectly known. And it's not the radial velocity of the satellite that is of interest: it's the radial velocity from the satellite that we are interested in. This is by definition the relative velocity component of the aircraft directly away from (or towards) the satellite.
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6977
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Wed Apr 02, 2014 12:00 am

Some of the SAR footage on the news I have seen shows some very calm sea at times (and horrible, rough seas at other times). Assuming there was enough daylight to see when the plane would have run out of fuel and that somebody was still at the controls, I'm starting to give more credibility to the idea that it tried to make a controlled landing on to the sea and even if those massive engines broke off and the plane broke up into a few pieces, I think it is more likely that the plane has ended up in pieces large enough to sink and will not be found. The little pieces of debris that have gotten loose would be so far and few between that they might have floated to anywhere by now or have been hammered by waves for long enough now that they too have probably sunk. If the seas were calm in the area it went down then this is very possible. I would think that if somebody with flying skills had the intention of not wanting to be found this is what they would do...
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: 19426
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Wed Apr 02, 2014 12:03 am

Quoting AR385 (Reply 130):
Quoting sipadan (Reply 128):
Britain sending one of it's nuclear subs to 'crash site'...Malaysian airlines JUST announced implementation of new policy prohibiting pilots to be alone in the cockpit.

What would be the reason for a submarine?

And that policy. Who are they having in mind to put in the cockpit? Does this have any chance of extending and become a worldwide regulation? What a way to go back to three crew cockpits...

Doesn't have to be three crew. An F/A can sit in the cockpit while a pilot needs to take a nature break.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
sipadan
Posts: 322
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2014 7:06 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Wed Apr 02, 2014 12:05 am

Quoting EC135 (Reply 129):
The very well planned action to let the aircraft disappear (including transponder off, ACARS switched off, programming new way-points, no Mayday call, happening at night under protection of darkness, and so on....) is in my opinion totally out of the "sudden accident" theory, it must have been planned over days, more likely weeks or month if not even years in before. If you are planning such an event - and to let a 777 completely disappear for almost a month, is a really really big Task - you would ask yourself some questions in before, no matter for the reason you are all doing this: Is there any possibility to be tracked by radar or satellite or any other device? If you are planning this event you are of course aware of the satellite pings, so I wonder if there is ANY POSSIBILITY to create false signals, e.g. by hacking the Immersat database? Would there be any other scenario where the plane might have been flown to besides what we know or what we are expected to know? And once again, what is the ID of the large airplane reportedly flying low level over a remote Maldivian Island some hours after disappearance?

IMHO this is precisely what took place...it would be nice (helpful) if perhaps people far brighter than I and well versed in flight and aviation would engage this scenario, but there is a great reluctance to do so. I understand that this would create a frenzy of speculation and disparate strategy (what would YOU do to effectively disappear ) but the reality that this is THE most plausible explanation shouldn't be ignored, or tabled until even more time expires...time is of the essence.
 
sipadan
Posts: 322
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2014 7:06 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Wed Apr 02, 2014 12:09 am

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 135):
Doesn't have to be three crew. An F/A can sit in the cockpit while a pilot needs to take a nature break.

yes, I am now hearing that this is exactly the new requirement that they are implementing immediately.
 
AR385
Posts: 6927
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 8:25 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Wed Apr 02, 2014 12:10 am

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 135):
Doesn't have to be three crew. An F/A can sit in the cockpit while a pilot needs to take a nature break.

1. I do not want to get into a debate about female-male equality. It is not my intention, and this is not about that, but I want to mention it.

If it is an F/A, what would a smallish, female, Asian F/A be able to do in a cockpit when a technical crew member goes rogue? (Assuming this is the reason why the Malaysian authorities are coming up with this rule)

Also, would an F/A actually understand when irregular procedures are being undertaken, like shutting down the transponder, the ACARS, pulling out the CVR circuit or other systems?

I was thinking a third person would have to be by necessity a pilot or an air marshall.
 
Backseater
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 3:20 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Wed Apr 02, 2014 12:17 am

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 133):
The satellite's movements are perfectly known. And it's not the radial velocity of the satellite that is of interest: it's the radial velocity from the satellite that we are interested in. This is by definition the relative velocity component of the aircraft directly away from (or towards) the satellite.

I am afraid you got it wrong.
If pre-compensation is confirmed for the Honeywell satcom on MH370, Doppler will tell you nothing about the aircraft speed or direction because the very purpose of frequency correction is to eliminate Doppler due to a/c motion in the direction of the satellite.

It is in fact the motion of the satellite around its nominal position that will produce the Doppler because the a/c did not compensate for it. The a/c modem software assumed a geo sat fixed at its nominal orbital position. Not good from FDMA standpoint but great for what we are trying to do.

Doppler will therefore not give us the speed of the a/c but the a/c direction from the satellite. Add the RTD ring constraint and you have an approximate location!

The whole process is a little bit like positioning by observing Doppler shift. If you remember, that's what the venerable Transit satellite did in the old days.
 
CaliAtenza
Posts: 1681
Joined: Mon Dec 25, 2006 1:43 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Wed Apr 02, 2014 12:20 am

Quoting shortstack81 (Reply 105):
When the camp in the US government that thinks the plane is in Pakistan (those leaking to Flying with Fish) were more or less proven wrong, "unnamed American officials" rather shut up. That probably explains the "quiet" on our (American) part.

Flying with Fish still thinks the plane will never be found and that it was stolen, but i've stopped going on his twitter feed for many days now. I got tired of the endless speculation and leaks and what not  .
 
EricR
Posts: 1226
Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2010 4:15 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Wed Apr 02, 2014 12:21 am

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 30):

Flying With Fish is an internet troll using information in public domain to make his claims.

Say what you want about Flying with Fish, but he has been unquestionably accurate on almost everything since this event began. Even when people were questioning his theory after officials said the plane headed south, he still maintained his original position that the plane did not go south. Two weeks later and still no evidence of the plane in the Indian Ocean. I do not rule out his theory.
 
sipadan
Posts: 322
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2014 7:06 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Wed Apr 02, 2014 12:23 am

humor injection...since something male/female was brought up, I must take the opportunity to announce that my life has spiraled out of control...I am in the midst of being enthralled by the Maryland vs. Louisville women's college basketball game...this can't be a healthy fixation.
 
vnangia
Posts: 75
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 3:57 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Wed Apr 02, 2014 12:26 am

Quoting David L (Reply 127):
If you look more closely at what I said you'll see that it was a reference to the search for AF447, which was an Airbus 330 - the point being that some armchair experts will "see" incompetence and conspiracy if that's what they want. The pattern is the same.

I see; sorry. That was unclear to me. I was lurking here at that time (I've been lurking since AF4590), and I do remember the conspiracy theorists come out in force for AF447, particularly those ranting about the "superiority" of the control mechanisms of their respective aircraft.

However, I would still argue that we know less today, day 25/26 of MH370 than we did on day 2/3 of AF447 and I don't just mean the location. We had a complete listing of the passengers, knew a little bit about the tech crew, knew about the ACARS messages, someone here had already dug up the AD on the pitot tubes, most people had formed theories based on reality, and most everyone felt that though the SAR was too slow, BEA was trying it's hardest to be honest, open and forthcoming. In short, the opposite of how the Malaysians have handled MH370. So, yeah, I hear you that while every crash brings out the worst in people, MH370 is unique in that a very unusual, possibly criminal*, situation has taken place with a seriously challenged agency trying to helm it. And that is rightly deserving of our criticism.

*: I know most people have concluded that at least one member of the tech crew was involved, but until we can say definitively it was deliberate, I'll wait. I can put together at least one scenario involving hypoxia in which the tech crew was trying to get the plane home and ended up flying the plane into the ocean.
 
vnangia
Posts: 75
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 3:57 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Wed Apr 02, 2014 12:28 am

Quoting AR385 (Reply 138):
air marshall

Doubt even a marshal would understand. Marshals are usually trained in counterterrorism, not flight. It would have to be a flight crew.
 
jelliesR
Posts: 94
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 1:46 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Wed Apr 02, 2014 12:32 am

Quoting EC135 (Reply 129):
f you are planning this event you are of course aware of the satellite pings,

Why do you leap to this conclusion.
It seems to me that planning to ditch an aircraft at an unknown location in the ocean, for a competent pilot aware of the limits of radar coverage, hardly requires any planning at all.

All he needs to do is disable just two systems, one of which thanks to 9/11 even passengers are aware of, the other would certainly be known by a 777 check captain with nerdish tendencies. Make a turn out of sight (over the horizon) of the last and largest land-based radar install and .. presto .. you're done. The ocean and uncertainties takes care of the rest.

He would have followed the AF447 recovery with interest and filed away the information that even when a last fix was very close to a crash site, it turned out to be a 3 year operation to locate the debris on the ocean floor.

Just because something is difficult to find doesn't make it hard to hide. If you blindfold someone and toss a thimble into a garden the recovery operation will be immense. The world was wearing a blindfold and the aircraft executed one turn at an unknown point in time. That is all it took.
 
AR385
Posts: 6927
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 8:25 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Wed Apr 02, 2014 12:33 am

Quoting vnangia (Reply 144):
Doubt even a marshal would understand. Marshals are usually trained in counterterrorism, not flight. It would have to be a flight crew.

It would have to be a flight crew, yes, that´s what I was getting at. The question is: Would it be an armed flight crew? Like that program that they have in the US.

The implications of this Malay rule, if true, are enormous. It means they believe in the theory of a rogue cockpit crew member. Are they being cautious, or do the parties involved have more information than released publicly?
 
fooflyboy
Posts: 51
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 4:15 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Wed Apr 02, 2014 12:35 am

Quoting AR385 (Reply 138):
I was thinking a third person would have to be by necessity a pilot or an air marshall.

Someone wisely stated in a prior thread that it will be virtually impossible to make planes "pilot-proof".
 
rcair1
Posts: 1147
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2009 8:39 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Wed Apr 02, 2014 12:38 am

Quoting vnangia (Reply 143):
However, I would still argue that we know less today, day 25/26 of MH370 than we did on day 2/3 of AF447 and I don't just mean the location. We had a complete listing of the passengers, knew a little bit about the tech crew, knew about the ACARS messages, someone here had already dug up the AD on the pitot tubes, most people had formed theories based on reality, and most everyone felt that though the SAR was too slow, BEA was trying it's hardest to be honest, open and forthcoming. In short, the opposite of how the Malaysians have handled MH370. So, yeah, I hear you that while every crash brings out the worst in people, MH370 is unique in that a very unusual, possibly criminal*, situation has taken place with a seriously challenged agency trying to helm it. And that is rightly deserving of our criticism.

I agree that we 'know less' but:
- Passenger list: I think this may be considered and on-going criminal investigation - with AF447 we had evidence of an a/c in trouble.
- Tech crew: We do know "a bit" about them.
- There was one ACARS and we know about it.
- There are no relevant AD's that we know about - the AF447 ACARS data indicated speed issues.
- I do not think most theories were based on reality - they were wild speculation and I don't remember any theory that was in line with what happened.
- SAR is always always always 'thought' to be too slow.
- There were differing views of BEA.
- You forgot how long it took them to realize AF447 was missing - much longer than MH370.

In many ways - I think we are not being productive comparing AF447 and MH370. They seem very different to me.
- We had data that 447 was suffering mechanical failure - but operating
- We know the plane flew into weather.
- We pretty much knew where 447 was.
- We pretty much knew it went down - and about when.

For MH370
- We have data about a/c failure -
- We have indications that disparate and unrelated parts of the a/c stopped communicating.
- We have data that tells us the a/c flew for 7+ hours after that cease of communication.
- We have very sketchy data on where the aircraft was headed for those 7 hours.
rcair1
 
11Bravo
Posts: 1683
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 8:54 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Wed Apr 02, 2014 12:40 am

Quoting EricR (Reply 141):
Say what you want about Flying with Fish, but he has been unquestionably accurate on almost everything since this event began.

Really? To each his own I suppose. It seems to me his comments and predictions have been utterly without supporting fact or evidence.
WhaleJets Rule!
 
EricR
Posts: 1226
Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2010 4:15 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Wed Apr 02, 2014 12:48 am

Quoting 11Bravo (Reply 149):


Quoting EricR (Reply 141):
Say what you want about Flying with Fish, but he has been unquestionably accurate on almost everything since this event began.

Really? To each his own I suppose. It seems to me his comments and predictions have been utterly without supporting fact or evidence.

You are correct that he has not had supporting evidence, but neither has anyone else. It is hard to have supporting evidence when a plane disappears. All anyone knows for certain is that the plane made an ubrupt turn back to the west and was last seen heading toward the Andaman Islands. Everything else is based on speculation and untested uses of technology whose accuracy is unknown until the plane is located.
 
sipadan
Posts: 322
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2014 7:06 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Wed Apr 02, 2014 12:57 am

Quoting jelliesR (Reply 145):
Why do you leap to this conclusion.
It seems to me that planning to ditch an aircraft at an unknown location in the ocean, for a competent pilot aware of the limits of radar coverage, hardly requires any planning at all.

I think this conclusion is leapt to only because it would stand to reason that if your true intent is for the a/c to never be found (recovered), why wouldn't you do everything in your power to ensure that this ends up being the case? If there was even the most remote possibility of being detected by satellite, INMARSAT or otherwise, it would make sense that somebody with this intention would try to mitigate this in whatever manner possible...no? maybe not, just intuiting.
 
vnangia
Posts: 75
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 3:57 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Wed Apr 02, 2014 12:57 am

Quoting rcair1 (Reply 148):
In many ways - I think we are not being productive comparing AF447 and MH370. They seem very different to me.

Fair enough. I have pretty vivid recollections of AF447 going down (I was working on a project in Brazil that year) and BEA didn't need to keep saying they were doing their best; it was evident in their actions.

Quoting rcair1 (Reply 148):
- We have data about a/c failure -
- We have indications that disparate and unrelated parts of the a/c stopped communicating.
- We have data that tells us the a/c flew for 7+ hours after that cease of communication.
- We have very sketchy data on where the aircraft was headed for those 7 hours.

My point precisely - we know exactly as much today as we knew certainly ten days ago, and more like three weeks ago. Remember when the news broke they were searching the Malacca Straits? That was March 11/12 that the Malaysian AF chief denied the plane crossed the peninsula, and then they announced the plane had followed airways used to travel to the Middle East and Europe, which as far as I've seen, has still not been retracted officially, though the Inmarsat data does rule that out.

All I'm saying is this: I completely understand why the families are furious and don't believe a word that Malaysian investigators are saying. I think we as a broader aviation community also have pretty much lost faith in anything they're saying, and I think they rightly deserve criticism for botching this as badly as they have. Hell, unless it's on your sanity check list, I don't believe them.

Every agency - including the NTSB, which is sort of the model agency here - comes in for critiques of their performance post-disaster, but at least in my 15-20 years of memories of following this sort of news, this has to rate the worst handled one of all. And that's both exacerbated by and yet quite separate from the unique circumstances of this missing jet.
 
ltbewr
Posts: 14370
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 49

Wed Apr 02, 2014 1:11 am

What routes did Capt. Shah typically run in the previous months or years ? Was MH 370 one he commonly was a PIC on or only one of several ? If we take the theory of the 'Pilot did it', knowing this route and certain other ones may have let him set up the timing for turning off the transponder and other critical systems, how to maneuver the a/c after the systems were shut down to avoid radars, or populated areas and other issues for the flight path this a/c apparently took.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 7

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