Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 7
 
Pihero
Posts: 4318
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 5:11 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 55

Tue Apr 15, 2014 6:06 pm

Quoting aftgaffe (Reply 48):
Agreed. All I'm saying--or meant to be saying--is that the application (i.e. ACARS) I believe uses much the same data (e.g. positional data) that the FMS and a/p ultimately use. Maybe they are sourced differently (would be good to know),

Mandala499 has answered your specific question. Fully.
Contrail designer
 
abba
Posts: 1385
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 12:08 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 55

Tue Apr 15, 2014 6:11 pm

Quoting Pihero (Reply 23):
On ALL these events, the contributors have managed to narrow down the most likely chain of events which led to the crash... even with diagrams, spreadsheets, drawings that are quite amazingly close to the final reports. IMHO, that's something no other aviation site could claim.

I do remember a few of these - and enjoyed tremendously being educated by highly competent peoples' well informed views on matters I have only a very limited knowledge about. I can only now dream of seeing this repeated....
 
747megatop
Posts: 1785
Joined: Wed May 23, 2007 8:22 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 55

Tue Apr 15, 2014 6:33 pm

Quoting pilotalex14 (Reply 40):
That makes no logical sense to me.

pilotalex14,

Nothing about this case has been logical so far. This incident is unprecedented without parallels. Usually in any incident SAR is initiated around the last known point of contact and within a few hours/days some trace of the wreckage is found following which further recovery of the main wreckage & FDR,CVR is attempted. But, MH 370 is going to rewrite the books on how things are designed & done similar to how 9/11 changed a lot of things. At this point all theories floating around are possible and cannot be ruled out (unless of course wild theories like aircraft thrown to outer space as someone suggested a few threads back can safely be ruled out). From the facts we have so far the possibility of this being a deliberate act seems very strong. A inflight fire that knocked out all comms but kept the aircraft flying for 7 hours without spreading to crash the aircraft much earlier is very hard to believe and to me is a 1 in a million(or probably billion?) occurrence..but who knows!!...aircraft accidents are full of surprises and every accident is different in some way..so it may indeed turn out to be a fire with a combination of something else!!!. I guess our only way of know the truth is the wreckage itself along with the FDR & CVR.
 
aftgaffe
Posts: 176
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 7:18 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 55

Tue Apr 15, 2014 6:34 pm

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 47):
An Inmarsat 3 & 4 satellite terminal will continue to respond to session pings from satellite and/or ground earth station even if no data is being sent through. The satellite and/or ground earth station also sends session pings to terminals known to be switched on even if there is no data to send through (and customer does not get billed for this). That is an Inmarsat thing and not an ACARS thing. Inmarsat simply sees ACARS data exchange/transmissions from or to the aircraft as data payload through its pipeline... nothing more, nothing less... except for the data gateway channelling at the ground earth stations.

If the pings are still continuing, then the satcom session was still on and that the antenna and modem was still functioning ... thats all it means... nothing more, nothing less... apart from the ARINC429 data feed from the aircraft system to the satcom was still functioning. The feed includes position heading, pitch and roll. So AHRS and Position function of the IRS function of the ADIRU, was still functioning, otherwise the beam cannot be aimed at the satellite correctly and we won't hear about these pings at all.

Thank you Mandala. That is really informative.

If you can indulge a quick follow up question. If a fire destroyed the B777 pedestal but did not affect the data feed or the electronics bays, would ACARS messages (be likely to) continue to transmit or would the loss of the interface cause ACARS to stop running?
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8928
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 55

Tue Apr 15, 2014 6:48 pm

Quoting CO953 (Reply 46):
4) The takeover of the aircraft by a party of one or more who started programming in waypoints, didn't fully know what they were doing, and thought they were headed in the right direction....until they ran out of gas.

Idk... if you actually have any idea how to program an FMS you probably know how to go onto skyvector or whatever and pick the right points... the FMS isn't always intuitive

At least on the 737, there is an insufficient fuel warning that would hint to them that they put in poorly thought out points. And you have the navigation displays and all... idk, really can't buy into this
 
SoJo
Posts: 282
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2012 9:29 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 55

Tue Apr 15, 2014 7:11 pm

Quoting Pihero (Reply 23):
Maybe they are in retaliation trolling some psychiatric / conspiracist sites...

Hopefully Pihero, hopefully. Too many 'experts' have joined since the onset of MH370. Blathering on incessantly.

Thank you , also mandala, zeke and others for bringing rationale to this thread.

Gentlemen, I salute you.
RAF Abingdon 1967. I met Beverley from Blackburn. Fantastic!
 
Backseater
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 3:20 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 55

Tue Apr 15, 2014 7:14 pm

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 47):
otherwise the beam cannot be aimed at the satellite correctly and we won't hear about these pings at all.

I assume MH 370 had an MCS 4200/7200
But do you know for sure what make and model of antenna was installed?

[Edited 2014-04-15 12:15:37]
 
hivue
Posts: 2133
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:26 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 55

Tue Apr 15, 2014 8:40 pm

Quoting aftgaffe (Reply 38):
I'm asking whether (1) it is possible for a fire or some other event / malfunction to knock out ACARS (and sever the link between positional data and the satcom antennae, which I think is different than merely knocking out the ACARS interface) and still not cause a/p to automatically disconnect. And, then, (2) if disconnection occurs, what other a/p mode could be used.

I wouldn't be surprised if Boeing has been working the fault tree on this sort of thing. Not that we would see any of the results before the final report (if then).

Quoting aftgaffe (Reply 39):
And yet that same data (positional data, engine data) was presumably being provided to the FMS as without it, most if not all a/p modes would not be operable, right?

As a another non-aviation professional posting on this site let me advise you not to "presume" any details of aircraft operation. You will almost always be wrong. Just sit back and listen to the professionals.

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 47):
unfortunately his sms ringer was a GPWS call, caused the captain who was the PF, to initiate a go-around hearing that GPWS sound....

  
Seriously, this sort of story should be plenty to convince anyone that really weird stuff can and does happen. If we ever find out what really happened to MH370 it probably will be considerably stranger than anything that's been posted in this thread so far.
"You're sitting. In a chair. In the SKY!!" ~ Louis C.K.
 
747megatop
Posts: 1785
Joined: Wed May 23, 2007 8:22 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 55

Tue Apr 15, 2014 8:53 pm

Bluefin-21 didn't find any debris on it's first dive

"The probe found no debris during its shortened scanning session."
http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/15/world/...irlines-plane/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

Hopefully it won't be long before it finds some.
 
User avatar
ssteve
Posts: 1493
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 8:32 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 55

Tue Apr 15, 2014 9:03 pm

Quoting 11Bravo (Reply 44):

Also USNS Cesar Chavez is now in route from the search area to Perth after a rendezvous at sea with the two main search groups over the last week.

Thanks for mentioning... some neat photos of underway replenishment out there:
http://media.themalaymailonline.com/uploads/gallery/tues2.jpeg
http://media.themalaymailonline.com/uploads/gallery/mh370tu2.jpeg
From here: http://www.themalaymailonline.com/ma...ight-take-two-months-searchers-say
 
747megatop
Posts: 1785
Joined: Wed May 23, 2007 8:22 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 55

Tue Apr 15, 2014 9:08 pm

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 47):
I know a case of one FO that lost his job after he left his cellphone on during a flight and it received am SMS on final approach... unfortunately his sms ringer was a GPWS call, caused the captain who was the PF, to initiate a go-around hearing that GPWS sound....

I don't know which incident you are referring to but if you are referring to the incident which i think you are referring to then it was not the FO's phone. It was the captain's phone and in fact he was preoccupied with his cell phone on final approach

http://www.atsb.gov.au/media/3599204/ao2010035.pdf

"Somewhere between 2,500 ft and 2,000 ft in the
descent, the crew heard noises associated with
incoming text messages on the captain’s mobile
phone. The FO requested that a missed approach
altitude of 5,000 ft be set into the Flight Control
Unit (FCU)7 and, after not getting a response from
the captain, repeated the request"

"The FO recalled that, after still not getting a
response from the captain, he looked over and, on
seeing the captain preoccupied with his mobile
phone, set the missed approach altitude himself.
The captain stated that he was in the process of
unlocking and turning off his mobile phone at that
time and did not hear the call for the missed
approach altitude to be set in the FCU."

Quite a shocking incident. Not sure how this relates to MH 370 (in fact it does not relate at all) but quoted the details on this incident since you mentioned it and I wanted to clarify that it was the Captain himself who screwed up and not the FO.

[Edited 2014-04-15 14:12:06]

[Edited 2014-04-15 15:07:21]
 
markak
Posts: 43
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2014 1:14 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 55

Tue Apr 15, 2014 9:15 pm

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 47):
If the pings are still continuing, then the satcom session was still on and that the antenna and modem was still functioning ... thats all it means... nothing more, nothing less... apart from the ARINC429 data feed from the aircraft system to the satcom was still functioning. The feed includes position heading, pitch and roll. So AHRS and Position function of the IRS function of the ADIRU, was still functioning, otherwise the beam cannot be aimed at the satellite correctly and we won't hear about these pings at all.

I thought I read someplace (perhaps not correct) that MH370 was equipped with only a low gain SATCOM antenna.
If this is the case, then no beam steering information is needed to send a SATCOM ping.

Mark
 
aftgaffe
Posts: 176
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 7:18 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 55

Tue Apr 15, 2014 9:16 pm

Quoting Pihero (Reply 23):
Maybe they are in retaliation trolling some psychiatric / conspiracist sites... and good for them if that's the case !

I fear I am among those drawing your ire, but that nonetheless made me laugh.

Quoting hivue (Reply 57):
As a another non-aviation professional posting on this site let me advise you not to "presume" any details of aircraft operation. You will almost always be wrong. Just sit back and listen to the professionals.

To the extent you're saying that non-aviation professionals like myself should not pretend to be things or know things they aren't or don't, I agree with you.

On a similar note, I very much enjoy it when it the experts are sharing. Indeed, that is why I've lurked on and off for years here.

But to the extent you are saying a non-professional should not "presume" anything about aircraft operation, I respectfully disagree (I would agree if I were writing an incident report, but I am not).

There are few ways to advance a discussion--by professionals or non-professionals alike--about something for which there is very limited, very imperfect information other than by making and testing theories and their assumptions. Indeed, I thought that was one of the principal points of this thread.

In the particular case you cited, I not only did not *hide* my assumption--meaning it's easily corrected--but I haven't heard anything suggesting it was incorrect.

Moreover, others may disagree with whether this was productive, but my whole point in this line of comments was to provoke further discussion about the *assumptions* set forth (by the professionals, mind you) concerning the non-nefarious theories under which a fire or similar event knocked comms, the transponder, and ACARS offline (or whatever the proper term is, I don't think it matters for this discussion) and led to the pilots' incapacitation.

Inherent in those theories is the *assumption* that a fire that destroys comms instruments, etc. causes ACARS to stop running. Does it? I don't know. I merely asked.

Also inherent is the *assumption* that it is possible for a fire (or similar event) to destroy the instruments in question but to leave a/p operable (if one believes that the plane flew at least the southbound leg on a/p, as many of the professionals so believe). Is that true? Or perhaps more accurately, under what circumstances can that be true and under what circumstances will that not be true?

I would love to hear more from the professionals on both of these questions. I genuinely do not think they have been answered and I think they represent a legitimate if not constructive line of inquiry.
 
hivue
Posts: 2133
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:26 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 55

Tue Apr 15, 2014 9:28 pm

Quoting aftgaffe (Reply 62):
but I haven't heard anything suggesting it was incorrect.

See this:

Quoting Pihero (Reply 41):
Quoting aftgaffe (Reply 39): Satcom continued to work (hence, the pings). But satcom did not have any ACARS data to provide. The systems that provided the data were, for lack of a better way to put it, not providing the data. And yet that same data (positional data, engine data) was presumably being provided to the FMS as without it, most if not all a/p modes would not be operable, right?
Why do you think the autopilot needs the FMS at all times ?
Doesn't it have other independent modes ? ( as a matter of fact modes that don't specifically need pilot input )
"You're sitting. In a chair. In the SKY!!" ~ Louis C.K.
 
aftgaffe
Posts: 176
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 7:18 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 11

Tue Apr 15, 2014 9:42 pm

Quoting hivue (Reply 63):

Is this a gotcha thing?

Show me something that establishes a likelihood that when ACARS stopped working (or anytime before or soon thereafter, as we don't know the precise time) that the FMS stopped getting positional and engine data and I will *withdraw* my assumption as invalid.

What you quoted at most shows that it is better to leave what I said as an *assumption* and not a fact because it is not necessarily true - ergo, it is an assumption.

Also, from someone we all regard as an expert, this:

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 47):
f the pings are still continuing, then the satcom session was still on and that the antenna and modem was still functioning ... thats all it means... nothing more, nothing less... apart from the ARINC429 data feed from the aircraft system to the satcom was still functioning. The feed includes position heading, pitch and roll. So AHRS and Position function of the IRS function of the ADIRU, was still functioning, otherwise the beam cannot be aimed at the satellite correctly and we won't hear about these pings at all.



Edit *Should have been when ACARS stopped "working" not stopped "transmitting."

[Edited 2014-04-15 14:54:49]
 
Kaiarahi
Posts: 1810
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 6:55 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 55

Tue Apr 15, 2014 10:11 pm

Quoting aftgaffe (Reply 62):
Also inherent is the *assumption* that it is possible for a fire (or similar event) to destroy the instruments in question but to leave a/p operable (if one believes that the plane flew at least the southbound leg on a/p, as many of the professionals so believe). Is that true? Or perhaps more accurately, under what circumstances can that be true and under what circumstances will that not be true?

Here's the A/P mode control panel on a 777 (thx to Pihero). You can click on any panel component to see what it does. You can probably figure out which modes require FMC input and which derive their data elsewhere.
http://meriweather.com/flightdeck/777/glare/mode.html#

[Edited 2014-04-15 15:13:43]
Empty vessels make the most noise.
 
Kaiarahi
Posts: 1810
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 6:55 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 55

Tue Apr 15, 2014 10:28 pm

For those who haven't seen what a cockpit fire can do, this was the MS B772 fire (happily on the ground) in Cairo in 2011. In this case, it was a wiring issue in the cockpit emergency oxygen system.
http://wfol.tv/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Egyptair.jpg
http://avherald.com/img/egypt_b772_su-gdb_cairo_110729_2.jpg
Empty vessels make the most noise.
 
WarrenPlatts
Posts: 517
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2014 6:03 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 55

Tue Apr 15, 2014 10:37 pm

Quoting BackSeater (Reply 16):
To be constructive, a foundation based on evidence should be provided for each scenario, followed by a technical argument showing how such a scenario fits the known observations. Critiques by others should also be based on evidence used as counter argument, avoiding non argumented posts that just say "it is stupid" or "I don't believe it". Outright dismissal of evidence just because it does not fit one's scenario should be avoided.

I would like to take another look at the waypoints in the vicinity of the current search area (-20, 104). I have added more waypoints. As I said before, the search area makes the a/c look like it was following a route from EMVAS through IKASA. If you continue to extend the line, it runs through waypoint NINOB. In fact, if you carefully draw the line IKASA NINOB, the search area is less than 1.5 nm from that track, seemingly suggesting that the a/c was flying a route programmed by a pilot.

Sure it could have been a coincidence. Both pilots could have been incapacitated, the a/c flying a random magnetic heading being pushed by crosswinds and Coriolis could have popped out anywhere along the last Inmarsat LOP--it was just dumb luck that it happened to pop out near IKASA right next to the IKASA NINOB route.

But how much of a coincidence? There are only 4 waypoints adjacent to the 24:11 LOP: IKASA, VERIS, SADUD, ATMAL. Well, actually there is also RERAB, but that is halfway to the Kergulens, and beyond the plausible range of the B777. For each of the former four, one can draw to or three plausible tracks leading to other, relatively nearby waypoints (see chart--possible routes shown in thin red lines). I count nine plausible routes. Each line defines a band with a width of 3.0 nm. Thus, for an aircraft to crash within 1.5 miles of the track, it would crash within this 3 nm band. Since there are nine plausible routes for a pilot following waypoints to take, this adds up to 27 waypoints.

Now, if the a/c was pilotless, wherever it crashed is random WRT the 24:11 LOP. That is, there is no principled reason for it to pop out in any special area--all we know is that it must have crashed somewhere along that LOP within its maximum expected range. According to Pihero, the a/c had enough range to crash as far to the southwest as longitude 82. We can the highest northeastern point to be the 10th parallel (presumably any further north and it would be in range of Indonesian military radar.

The length of the arc between those two points is ~2330 nm. Thus, we can calculate the probability that a pilotless aircraft would happen to crash close to the nine plausible waypoint route: 27/1000 = ~1%. IOW, we should expect a 99% probability that it would not crash near a plausible waypoint route. That is, we can say with a 99% confidence level that the a/c was intentionally piloted.

Sure, the number of waypoint routes can be multiplied. E.g., POLUM NINOB; VERIS AKDIP; VERIS TANEM; VERIS DECEM; VERIS IDOKU; IKASA UXORA; etc. But very soon it starts getting ridiculous because you have to include waypoints that are over 500 nm away from the 24:11 LOP. To put it another way, to get below the 95% confidence level that the a/c was in fact following a waypoint route, one would need 37-38 plausible routes that cross the LOP. There's just not that many reasonably plausible routes because the waypoints are rather sparse.

 
Kaiarahi
Posts: 1810
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 6:55 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 55

Tue Apr 15, 2014 10:46 pm

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 67):
I would like to take another look at the waypoints in the vicinity of the current search area (-20, 104). I have added more waypoints. As I said before, the search area makes the a/c look like it was following a route from EMVAS through IKASA. If you continue to extend the line, it runs through waypoint NINOB. In fact, if you carefully draw the line IKASA NINOB, the search area is less than 1.5 nm from that track, seemingly suggesting that the a/c was flying a route programmed by a pilot.

There are many A/P modes that do not rely on FMC programmed waypoints.
Empty vessels make the most noise.
 
Pihero
Posts: 4318
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 5:11 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 55

Tue Apr 15, 2014 10:48 pm

Quoting aftgaffe (Reply 62):
I fear I am among those drawing your ire,

No, I was talking in very broad terms.
There is here a fundamental misunderstanding on what we are at :
I know what we're not at : Solve the investigation on flight 370.
We should not be armchair aviators, armchair engineers, armchair psychologists, psychiatrists, political and strategical analysts : we are just a bunch of opinionated, sometimes passionate aviation fans.

What we should be is a group of sleuths, you know, the private eye who smokes a lot, drinks whisky by the gallons and picks up beautiful femmes fatales in some sleazy bars...but has a nice capacity for deduction : that's right, that's what we should be.( No ! I'm not talking about Columbo ! )

Like in every case of air accidents, there is a very limited number of areas to consider :
- The human side ( personalities, dynamics of relationships, CRM, procedure discipline, airline environment )
- The aircraft side ( systems and vulnerabilities to faults, limitations, performance, airframe integrity... )
- The environment aspect ( weather, ATC, airspace )
It doesn't seem much and very simplistic, but in fact there will be interactions between these fields, leading to a tree of events which could become very complex.

That has always been my point : We cannot exclude an initial theory just because it doesn't suit our personal preferences, even if at first sight it could look crackpotty or downright offensive.
A theory should stand on its own and fit the facts are they are progressively made available. If they don't any more, we have to look somewhere else, again and again...and again.

Now the facts :
- Where to find them is up to one's tastes and intellectuality. ( Me, I don't read newspapers because there is always the risk that sensationalism prevents from the time we all need to digest a piece of news in a clear and reasonable way : I only read weekly magazines )
- Facts should also stand on their own and withstand the test of time
- And finally, facts should be crosschecked with other unimpeachable sources.

Six weeks have now passed since the flight disappearance.
Isn't it time to review what we have - as facts - and start all over again ?

[Edited 2014-04-15 15:53:01]
Contrail designer
 
WarrenPlatts
Posts: 517
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2014 6:03 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 55

Tue Apr 15, 2014 10:53 pm

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 66):
For those who haven't seen what a cockpit fire can do, this was the MS B772 fire (happily on the ground) in Cairo in 2011. In this case, it was a wiring issue in the cockpit emergency oxygen system.http://wfol.tv/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Egyptair.jpghttp://avherald.com/img/egypt_b772_su-gdb_cairo_110729_2.jpg

Wow. That's pretty bad. It's hard to believe that an aircraft could continue flying on autopilot after that.

Recall that 7BOEING7--an actual B777 pilot--said that under Pihero's theory (fire that both stopped the ACARS, and incapacitated the pilots) the B777 would most likely crash into the ocean, and not travel for another 7 hours.
 
aftgaffe
Posts: 176
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 7:18 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 55

Tue Apr 15, 2014 10:54 pm

Quoting Pihero (Reply 69):

Very much   

Quoting Pihero (Reply 69):
What we should be is a group of sleuths, you know, the private eye who smokes a lot, drinks whisky by the gallons and picks up beautiful femmes fatales in some sleazy bars... that's right, that's what we should be.

 
 
Pihero
Posts: 4318
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 5:11 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 55

Tue Apr 15, 2014 10:55 pm

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 65):
You can probably figure out which modes require FMC input and which derive their data elsewhere.

Man ! You are way way way badder than me !   
Contrail designer
 
User avatar
Dalavia
Posts: 458
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 3:08 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 55

Tue Apr 15, 2014 11:07 pm

Quoting Pihero (Reply 69):
Isn't it time to review what we have - as facts - and start all over again ?

Given the number of retractions, changes and conflicts within official statements over the past weeks (even omitting the media from consideration), the clear answer to your (perhaps rhetorical) question must be a resounding YES!

I don't know about others, but I confess I have lost track of what is real and what is not in some of the so-called evidence that has been released.
 
WarrenPlatts
Posts: 517
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2014 6:03 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 55

Tue Apr 15, 2014 11:13 pm

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 68):
Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 67):I would like to take another look at the waypoints in the vicinity of the current search area (-20, 104). I have added more waypoints. As I said before, the search area makes the a/c look like it was following a route from EMVAS through IKASA. If you continue to extend the line, it runs through waypoint NINOB. In fact, if you carefully draw the line IKASA NINOB, the search area is less than 1.5 nm from that track, seemingly suggesting that the a/c was flying a route programmed by a pilot.

There are many A/P modes that do not rely on FMC programmed waypoints.

There are about four other modes as I understand it: it can be in TRK or HDG mode: the former maintains a constant course adjusting the heading to compensate for crosswinds, Coriolis etc. The latter maintains a constant compass heading, but will get blown off course by strong crosswinds. Then there is the "HDG SEL" switch below the navigation display: if it is set to NORM, the a/c will follow magnetic headings/courses; if the switch is set to TRUE, it will follow true headings/courses.

However, as Zeke pointed out in the last thread, pilots generally as a matter of course follow "routes": these usually consist of a series of several preprogrammed waypoints--although as Zeke pointed out, individual lat/long positions can be manually entered. However, manually entering lat/longs is a rather tedious process, and there are many waypoints that can be selected from with just a few keystrokes.

All that said, the location of the search area practically on top of the EMVAS IKASA NINOB route--one of several routes that apparently lead out of Perth--is suggestive of, that is, it is consistent with, an a/c following a preprogrammed route. Just sayin'....

Certainly, the implications of the above are not pleasant to contemplate to say the least--as if there is anything pleasant to contemplate in this incident... All I gotta say is if there were no pilots, that's would be quite a coincidence that it just happened to crash within a mile and a half of a well defined waypoint route. 21S 104E is not exactly in the middle of the Malacca Strait. In actuality, it is in the middle of nowhere, yet it lies on one of only a relatively few plausible waypoint routes.

[Edited 2014-04-15 16:18:49]
 
Kaiarahi
Posts: 1810
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 6:55 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 55

Tue Apr 15, 2014 11:18 pm

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 70):
It's hard to believe that an aircraft could continue flying on autopilot after that.

It didn't - it happened on the ground. But look at the A/P mode control panel on the glareshield - pretty much intact.

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 70):
Recall that 7BOEING7--an actual B777 pilot--said that under Pihero's theory (fire that both stopped the ACARS, and incapacitated the pilots) the B777 would most likely crash into the ocean

Which it apparently did. When would depend on when the pilots were incapacitated (think progressive events) and what they may have managed to do between an initial event and incapacitation.
Empty vessels make the most noise.
 
Kaiarahi
Posts: 1810
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 6:55 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 55

Tue Apr 15, 2014 11:23 pm

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 74):
However, as Zeke pointed out in the last thread, pilots generally as a matter of course follow "routes":

When everything is proceeding normally. The last thing I'd do if I had a fire or other emergency on the flight deck is start fiddling with entering waypoints (this was not a normal pre-programmed route) into the FMC.
Empty vessels make the most noise.
 
11Bravo
Posts: 1683
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 8:54 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 55

Tue Apr 15, 2014 11:46 pm

Quoting SSTeve (Reply 59):
Thanks for mentioning... some neat photos of underway replenishment out there:

Nice photos, Thanks
WhaleJets Rule!
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6987
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 55

Tue Apr 15, 2014 11:49 pm

After I watched an interview with David Mearns I immediately felt confident that they are in the right area based on what he said. This guy knows his stuff and helped find AF447 as well as the HMAS Sydney deep in the Indian Ocean. I have not felt as positive as I do now about the SAR until this interview. Here is a link to the interview and some quotes:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-04-1...-site-located-david-mearns/5392440



"One of the world's foremost wreck hunters believes searchers have found the crash site of the missing Malaysia Airlines jet, and recovering the plane's black boxes is inevitable.

"I think essentially they have found the wreckage site," the director of the UK-based Bluewater Recoveries, David Mearns, told 7.30.

"While the Government hasn't announced that yet, if somebody asked me: 'Technically, do they have enough information to say that?' my answer is unequivocally 'Yes'."

Mr Mearns solved one of the nation's greatest maritime mysteries when he found the wreck of HMAS Sydney deep in the Indian Ocean.

He was awarded an honorary Order of Australia for his work.

His advice was also crucial in helping to find the wreckage of Air France flight 447.

His confidence is based on the strength of the sonar "pings" emitted from the plane's black box recorders.

Those signals appear to have now stopped as the device ran out of battery strength.

"You just don't hear these signals randomly in the ocean. These are not fleeting sounds - they have got four very, very good detections, with the right spectrum of noise coming from them. It can't be from anything else," Mr Mearns said."

and...

""Somewhere out of some place, fantastic pieces of intelligence were put together to really narrow it down to a small, small area," he said.

"And that's how these guys have been able to find it so quickly.

"The Ocean Shield was out there a couple of days and they got a hit. That has been a tremendous success and miraculous. People were searching for a miracle. This was 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 55

Tue Apr 15, 2014 11:50 pm

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 76):
The last thing I'd do if I had a fire or other emergency on the flight deck is start fiddling with entering waypoints (this was not a normal pre-programmed route) into the FMC.

Why not? Time permitting I could see them typing in a familiar waypoint, putting it as the active waypoint, and hitting execute. That isn't that hard. Though, if they did that, you'd think they would have made a call (assuming their radios worked.) I don't see them dragging out charts or anything but hitting a simple waypoint in the FMS isn't that bad.

Then again, I never did any ocean flying, I do believe you're supposed to turn 90deg right rather than just turning off randomly
 
aftgaffe
Posts: 176
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 7:18 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 11

Tue Apr 15, 2014 11:50 pm

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 75):
Which it apparently did. When would depend on when the pilots were incapacitated (think progressive events) and what they may have managed to do between an initial event and incapacitation.

I think he meant crash into the ocean pretty quickly after the fire broke out, which is what one of the MS 667 pilots has been quoted as saying would have happened when asked if MS 667 could explain MH 370:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...-yield-clues-to-missing-plane.html

However Shaheer Magdy Abdel Sayyed, the pilot on the Egyptair flight where the fire took place, saw significant differences between the two incidents.

The problem happened with my aircraft at the ground. If the same problem happened while the plane flying it will not last for too long before it fall.''

"It was very fortunate for me and for the passengers and the crew that it was in the ground but if it happened while the plane flying there will not be any flying, the plane will not fly all that distance and will fall immediately in its location"



Again, not discounting the possibility of a fire. But it would *seem* like the fire would have to be of a substantially different sort than MS 667, which took something like 20 minutes for firefighters to put out (so who knows what happened w/o firefighters).

Here's the av herald write up with pics: http://www.avherald.com/h?article=44078aa7&opt=0. I don't think the earlier link worked.

[Edited 2014-04-15 16:52:07]
 
WarrenPlatts
Posts: 517
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2014 6:03 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 55

Tue Apr 15, 2014 11:52 pm

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 76):
Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 74):However, as Zeke pointed out in the last thread, pilots generally as a matter of course follow "routes":

When everything is proceeding normally.

The last thing I'd do if I had a fire or other emergency on the flight deck is start fiddling with entering waypoints (this was not a normal pre-programmed route) into the FMC.

My point exactly....

So....

If he was fiddling with waypoints, that would seemingly entail that ________________________?
 
LandSweetLand
Posts: 185
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:47 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 55

Tue Apr 15, 2014 11:54 pm

Quoting pilotalex14 (Reply 40):
Actually reminds me of that movies cant remember the name of it about the cruise ship that was hijacked and then programed into the dock...

Speed 2 I believe.
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 8981
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 55

Wed Apr 16, 2014 12:20 am

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 78):
Mr Mearns solved one of the nation's greatest maritime mysteries when he found the wreck of HMAS Sydney deep in the Indian Ocean.

He was awarded an honorary Order of Australia for his work.

His advice was also crucial in helping to find the wreckage of Air France flight 447.

Here is the problem. The guy who led Titanic expedition and AF447 search Paul Henry Nargeolet thinks there is nothing at current search site. According to him there is no way it could land in one piece and sink. Best example he gave, even a sea plane cannot land in that location. According to him only possibility it broke into million pieces and at least few pieces should float. No wreckage, no plane.

http://waittinstitute.org/people/paul-henry-nargeolet/

He completely debunks my theory but he is the guy with more experience than deep-sea recovery and played with ULBs while recovering Titanic artifacts.
All posts are just opinions.
 
aftgaffe
Posts: 176
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 7:18 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 55

Wed Apr 16, 2014 12:50 am

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 76):
The last thing I'd do if I had a fire or other emergency on the flight deck is start fiddling with entering waypoints (this was not a normal pre-programmed route) into the FMC.

So what to do? Disconnect a/p and make the turn west by hand? If so, what scenarios gets us back to a/p and a turn south to nowhere? The time lapse between the two turns is difficult to make sense of (neutral language).
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6987
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 55

Wed Apr 16, 2014 12:51 am

Quoting DTW2HYD (Reply 83):
Here is the problem. The guy who led Titanic expedition and AF447 search Paul Henry Nargeolet thinks there is nothing at current search site. According to him there is no way it could land in one piece and sink. Best example he gave, even a sea plane cannot land in that location. According to him only possibility it broke into million pieces and at least few pieces should float. No wreckage, no plane.

I too think that the lack of finding one single floating debris is an issue. There is probably zero chance that the plane ditched in once piece and sank - but that doesn't mean that it had to break into millions of tiny pieces that float. Yes, some small pieces should have broken loose that float, but after being pounded by waves for weeks (before that search area was looked at) means there is a possibility that even the most buoyant objects could have eventually sunk. Maybe the plane broke into several larger pieces that sank. There is a lot of possibilities between sinking in one piece and breaking up into a million pieces... What does Paul Henry Nargeolet think is making the pings that were heard?
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 55

Wed Apr 16, 2014 12:57 am

Obviously I can't just reject the opinion of an expert, but given that the ocean is messy and it took a long time for them to start searching there, why is his idea that floating debris doesn't exist instead of simply hasn't been found? Big pieces may have sunk, small pieces may have not been found/retrieved/identified yet. But I don't know. We seem to have two experts contradicting each other - one saying that the acoustic signal could be nothing but an ULB, one saying that there's no way the plane went down there since there's no floating debris.
A man must know how to look before he can hope to see.
 
jetterrosie
Posts: 47
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2008 5:08 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 55

Wed Apr 16, 2014 1:00 am

Quoting sojo (Reply 55):


   Couldn't agree more.
 
747megatop
Posts: 1785
Joined: Wed May 23, 2007 8:22 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 55

Wed Apr 16, 2014 1:05 am

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 75):
It didn't - it happened on the ground. But look at the A/P mode control panel on the glareshield - pretty much intact.

If this happened in the air, the aircraft would certainly be doomed sooner than later because of the high termperature fire that was spreading. Remember that it took 10 fire brigade and rescue units of different types to bring the inferno under control. Also, the damage was not limited to the aircraft. Damage was found on the air bridge as well.

[Edited 2014-04-15 18:23:24]
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 8981
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 55

Wed Apr 16, 2014 1:07 am

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 85):
Maybe the plane broke into several larger pieces that sank.

Even that doesn't explain the absence of debris. Even if you assume just broke in half (or just one breach) there are lot of loose light weight objects in the cabin which can escape from the breach point.

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 85):
What does Paul Henry Nargeolet think is making the pings that were heard?

I posted this few days back. According to him these ULBs don't work even in best conditions. He actually tried to use ULBs as tags while recovering Titanic artifacts by putting ULBs in the recovery buckets. In most cases they didn't get a ping even from 1000 ft. Every SAR ship has few of these for testing their equipment, he thinks someone accidentally dropped in search area.
All posts are just opinions.
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6987
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 55

Wed Apr 16, 2014 3:00 am

Quoting DTW2HYD (Reply 89):
Even that doesn't explain the absence of debris. Even if you assume just broke in half (or just one breach) there are lot of loose light weight objects in the cabin which can escape from the breach point.
Quoting nupogodi (Reply 86):
why is his idea that floating debris doesn't exist instead of simply hasn't been found?

I'm sure, with the currents, that the debris would have been long gone by the time the area they are looking in now started getting searched. It is possible that the currents moved the debris field a long way a way. So far that, even using current charts, they have not yet been found because of the scale of the task (I mean the ocean it just so massive and unpredictable that they might never find a tiny debris field that has probably spread out into smaller and eventually individual pieces).

[Edited 2014-04-15 20:01:28]
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
 
WingedMigrator
Posts: 1771
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 9:45 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 55

Wed Apr 16, 2014 3:10 am

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 70):
Recall that 7BOEING7--an actual B777 pilot--said that under Pihero's theory (fire that both stopped the ACARS, and incapacitated the pilots) the B777 would most likely crash into the ocean, and not travel for another 7 hours.

We don't know that. Fires can be fought and brought under control, or can burn themselves out. Not all fires turn into uncontrollable infernos that destroy the airframe.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 69):
Isn't it time to review what we have - as facts - and start all over again ?

   thank you for getting us back on track!

True or false? The aircraft was either piloted by a human, or on autopilot. When left to its own devices, it was explained earlier that the aircraft will slowly bank to one side until the fly-by-wire bank angle protection kicks in. So, even with fly-by-wire, it couldn't fly on for thousands of miles without something or someone keeping the wings level.

True or false? None of the satcom hardware is located anywhere near the cockpit. From what I gather, the satcom electronics boxes (not just the antenna!) are located in an overhead rack in the main cabin on the left side near door 3. Therefore, the satcom hardware might not be affected by a fire in the cockpit or electronics bay at the front of the aircraft.

True or false? In order to point the high-gain antenna at the satellite and successfully respond to pings, the satcom unit needed to know aircraft position and attitude.

True or false? Aircraft position and attitude data provided to the satcom unit originates from the AIMS (Airplane Information Management System), a heavily redundant system located in the electronics bay at the front of the aircraft.
 
User avatar
7BOEING7
Posts: 3039
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 5:28 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 55

Wed Apr 16, 2014 3:41 am

Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 91):
We don't know that. Fires can be fought and brought under control, or can burn themselves out. Not all fires turn into uncontrollable infernos that destroy the airframe.

That's true but with the pilots incapacitated the odds of staying in the air have decreased exponentially.

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 85):
There is probably zero chance that the plane ditched in once piece and sank

If the plane was being flown at the time by an experienced pilot the chances are excellent. The engines may come off but they'll go to the bottom anyway. Two P-3 Orions have ditched in far from ideal conditions. Both had multiple engine failures and one was in 30ft seas in the North Pacific (much worse than MH370 would have experienced), yet the airframes remained relatively intact and only one crewman on each lost their lives during the landing.
 
vnangia
Posts: 75
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 3:57 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 55

Wed Apr 16, 2014 3:46 am

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 75):
It didn't - it happened on the ground. But look at the A/P mode control panel on the glareshield - pretty much intact.

Are we looking at the same pictures mate? That AP panel up on the glareshield looks burnt to a crisp - just a bit less crisp than everything else in the cockpit, of course, but I'd rate that AP panel as damaged beyond use or functionality.

When I first heard about SU-GBP, I thought it was a minor thing based on the video. When I saw the pictures later, particularly on the left side of the cockpit/EE bay, it was shocking how quickly it burnt through the skin of the aircraft. Sitting in my comfortable armchair, I'd likely agree a fire like that on MH370 would've quickly resulted in a crash of the aircraft. I suppose the only question is, how would it be affected by a low-pressure, high-speed environment? The former is likely to make fire more difficult; the latter is likely to exacerbate it.
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6987
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 55

Wed Apr 16, 2014 4:02 am

Quoting 7BOEING7 (Reply 92):
Quoting 777Jet (Reply 85):
There is probably zero chance that the plane ditched in once piece and sank

If the plane was being flown at the time by an experienced pilot the chances are excellent.

Even with the swell / sea conditions at that time? Originally I thought that was possible (as there should have been enough daylight) but with the swells in the area at that time, unless it sat down perfectly on the back of a wave (or whatever of the few techniques you think would be most successful) then I think a few large parts would have broken off at the minimum. Still good to hear that others think it could have landed in ONE piece though   I might re-entertain that scenario. Let's see what the first images reveal if we get to that stage...

[Edited 2014-04-15 21:08:00]
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
 
WingedMigrator
Posts: 1771
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 9:45 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 55

Wed Apr 16, 2014 4:22 am

Quoting 7BOEING7 (Reply 92):
That's true but with the pilots incapacitated the odds of staying in the air have decreased exponentially.

If the pilots were incapacitated after 1900Z (approximate time of the final turn south) the odds of staying in the air would have been excellent.
 
canoecarrier
Posts: 2573
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2004 1:20 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 55

Wed Apr 16, 2014 4:26 am

Quoting SSTeve (Reply 59):
hanks for mentioning... some neat photos of underway replenishment out there:

I can't make out the nationalities of the two ships the Chavez is refueling/replenishing but I can't help but wonder what the sailors on those two ships think of the food we're passing along. Let's hope it doesn't create an international incident.

It would appear that it's not a military helicopter sling loading the cargo transfer.
The beatings will continue until morale improves
 
11Bravo
Posts: 1683
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 8:54 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 55

Wed Apr 16, 2014 4:40 am

Quoting canoecarrier (Reply 96):
I can't make out the nationalities of the two ships the Chavez is refueling/replenishing but I can't help but wonder what the sailors on those two ships think of the food we're passing along. Let's hope it doesn't create an international incident.

Those ships are HMAS Success (Replenishment Oiler) and HMAS Perth (Frigate) It looks like the helo you're talking about is a RAN SH-3 Sea King.
WhaleJets Rule!
 
65mustang
Posts: 84
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2014 1:28 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 55

Wed Apr 16, 2014 4:46 am

Quoting DTW2HYD (Reply 89):
Even that doesn't explain the absence of debris. Even if you assume just broke in half (or just one breach) there are lot of loose light weight objects in the cabin which can escape from the breach point..

It is hard to believe that if OS and Echo have been going back and forth over the expected wreckage for a week, why there has beed no debris that has become dislodged during that time and surfaced and found. I think of the cups, magazines, paper, insulation, luggage, seats, etc. I can think of 4 options as to why no debris has risen to the surface during the past week.

1). The plane is not there.
2). The plane is mostly intact and contains all debris
3). Every single loose buoyant piece of debris was lost on impact or rose and drifted away in the weeks before ocean shield was on site.
4). Debris is surfacing, but searchers are missing it.


And i thought of a fifth

5). Debris has been found but has not been reported to the media.

[Edited 2014-04-15 22:06:50]

[Edited 2014-04-15 22:08:15]
 
LTC8K6
Posts: 1590
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 8:36 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 55

Wed Apr 16, 2014 5:00 am

I think people are forgetting how long it took to get significant resources into the suspected area of the crash when they talk about a lack of debris. It was 3 weeks before significant resources were in the current areas searching for debris.

Debris and oil slicks had 2 to 3 weeks to disappear/sink/move.
  • 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