Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 7
 
wilco737
Topic Author
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2004 12:21 am

MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sat Apr 19, 2014 9:35 am

Some members may not be aware of the fact that all members have an edit window of 60 minutes, from the time you first make a post in which to add or remove any additional comments or information into/from the post. Please make use of this feature made available to you, for your own convenience, instead of posting one post after another (doubles, triples or more).

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

Due to length part 55 was locked for further contributions. Please feel free to continue your discussion in part 56.



SOME IMPORTANT REMINDERS FOR ALL OUR MEMBERS TO CONSIDER BEFORE POSTING IN THIS THREAD:

**** Out of respect to the crew, passengers and also family members; close to those onboard MH370; please keep science fiction theories and content related to past / current movies or possible future movie rights out of these threads. ****

**** PLEASE DO NOT REPEAT QUESTIONS AND SCENARIOS THAT HAS BEEN COVERED AND DISCUSSED IN PREVIOUS THREADS AND WHICH DO NOT CONTRIBUTE OR APPLY, IN A CONSTRUCTIVE MANNER, TOWARDS THIS CONVERSATION ANY LONGER. ****

**** Please make an effort to read through some of the threads, if possible the latest in the series, before adding your own comments and theories to the current, active thread on this issue. ****

**** PLEASE BE RESPECTFUL TOWARDS OTHER USERS AND KEEP THE FORUM RULES AND REGULATIONS IN MIND WHEN POSTING IN THE FORUMS. SHOULD THERE BE ANY RULE VIOLATIONS, PLEASE BRING THIS TO THE ATTENTION OF THE MODERATORS BY MAKING USE OF THE “SUGGEST DELETION FUNCTION”.
****

**** WHEN STATING FACTS, STATISTICS OR NEWSWORTHY BULLETINS, PLEASE BE SURE TO INCLUDE AN HTML LINK OR REFERENCE TO A PUBLICATION. IF YOU ARE MERELY PROVIDING AN OPINION, PLEASE MENTION THIS IN YOUR POST. ALL MEMBERS ARE RESPONSIBLE TO AVOID ARGUMENTS BASED ON RUMORS OR MISINFORMATION

**** Some members may not be aware of the fact that all members have an edit window of 60 minutes, from the time you first make a post in which to add or remove any additional comments or information into/from the post. Please make use of this feature made available to you, for your own convenience, instead of posting one post after another (doubles, triples or more).

**** Also keep in mind that this is a discussion forum and not a chat room. If you would like to chat about this incident, kindly make use of the "Live Chat" option, which is available in the "forum drop-down menu". Messages of agreement such as "ME TOO", "I AGREE WITH X", ”YES” OR ”NO” have been found to waste time and space and are therefore to be avoided. A message consisting of only one or two lines of text is probably not worth posting. Do not make posts that contain only a smiley face, check mark, etc. Make sure the content of your post is relevant to the topic.

Enjoy the forums!

Regards and thanks for your co-operation
 
abba
Posts: 1385
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 12:08 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sat Apr 19, 2014 11:14 am

Quoting sipadan:
Off the top of my head, to use a European example, I believe that the guy who killed some 90 odd people or so on/off the island (Utoya? sp?) off of Denmark was in his 30's. There are so many other homicide/suicides of people of a like age and socio-economic status that it's absurd. Just not of this scale.

And you claim to be a doctor and a psychiatrist? Save for the fact that this demonstrates that you do not know geography either, if it is Anders Behring Breivik (a Norwegian) you are talking about. Here we are dealing with a person with extreme right wing views who DID NOT commit suicide. Said person's profile falls well in line with your own American homegrown terrorists. He was alone with few if any friends - single - no job - no position in society - a complete failure - far from a person with social status such as a senior pilot. You are certainly not doing your profession any honor by coming up with this parallel - if you indeed are a professional after all. This certainly makes me doubt it!

So the challenge is still on: Give me just one example of a non-aviation suicide committed by a middle aged successful male involving the killing of some 250 other people of whom several are personally known to the culprit! Give me just one!

And yes I know Malaysian politics well after having lived in Asia for 13 years - and no one should be very surprised to hear that Anwar Ibrahim went back to prison. And Adwar Ibrahim is not the kind of politician who produces suicidal terrorists. He is indeed very much a person who have been a part of the ruling establishment and his problems is not so much a result of his political views as they are a result of internal power struggles in the upper part of the political establishment in Malaysia - in particular as he got into trouble with Mahathir.

But perhaps it is my own paranoia: But Malaysians are properly not considered by some as real human beings and can apparently be trusted to do things that will otherwise never be expected from any white male. Certainly - it takes a little bit more than some simple dirt to commit suicide and in the process kill some 250 other human beings including people known personally to the pilot. Again it is strange that most - if not all - examples of pilots' suicide is committed by people coming from a different cultural background than the one the people making the conclusion came from.
 
Pihero
Posts: 4318
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 5:11 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sat Apr 19, 2014 11:22 am

Quoting abba (Reply 1):
. Again it is strange that most - if not all - examples of pilots' suicide is committed by people coming from a different cultural background than the one the people making the conclusion came from.

Sooo true !
Contrail designer
 
Starglider
Posts: 659
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2006 12:19 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sat Apr 19, 2014 11:26 am

For the FIXED ELT, In case of an emergency, a switch on the overhead panel can be set from ARMED to ON.

The location on the overhead panel for this ELT switch is above the emergency light switch.

However, when checking some pictures of MAS B777s, this switch was not installed at the time these pictures were taken:

No ELT control panel on MAS B777:
http://www.flugzeugbilder.de/netshow.php?id=20558

https://www.airliners.net/photo/Malay...d=21b6c221e15438a2d6b9a52e80e34908

With ELT control panel installed, undefined B777:
http://i.planepictures.net/12/77/1061145116.jpg

Question: If the ELT control panel was installed at a later date than the pictures taken of the MAS B777 overhead panels, why in the 6 or 7 hours of flight wasn't the fixed ELT switched from ARMED to ON if the crew was not incapacitated?

If the ELT control panel was not installed then the flight crew could not have activated the ELT from the flight deck before impact with the ocean.

[Edited 2014-04-19 04:27:18]
 
WarrenPlatts
Posts: 517
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2014 6:03 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sat Apr 19, 2014 11:41 am

More evidence of a waypoint path in the early phase:

1. When the a/c took off from KUA at 16:41 UTC and headed for IGARI, presumably it followed route R208 (KUA PIBOS GUNBO VKR IKUKO IGARI). At least that is the only named route that leads from KUA to IGARI. Since all conditions were normal at this stage, I think we can agree that it most likely followed this path.

2. The turn at IGARI. We know from the radar (and now the FO's cell phone handshake) that the a/c passed over the southern vicinity of Penang Island. In order to get there from IGARI, there is a convenient named route: 2 routes actually: M765 (IGARI VENLI VKB) leads from IGARI to the coast. From there, route B219 leads directly to the south of Penang (VPG). Now, it is possible to take a winding path from IGARI to VPG that wouldn't follow that route: however, as I shall show below, time constraints mandate that the a/c must have flown a direct route.

http://i.imgur.com/wcqMcHa.png

3. The turn at Penang/VPG. After the turn at Penang, the aircraft evidently was pointed at waypoint VAMPI. There is no named route per se on this leg, but it would be a logical choice for someone wanting to get out of the Strait of Malacca in a hurry. We know from the radar that it passed Pulau Perak at 18:02 UTC, and that the last radar contact occurred at 18:22--at a distance of ~162 nm to the WNW, a little past waypoint MEKAR, for an average ground speed of 486 knots.

4. Waypoint VAMPI: is 86 nm to the WNW from Pulau Perak. At 486 knots, the a/c would have crossed VAMPI at about 18:13. At this point, the aircraft apparently followed the named route N571 (VAMPI MEKAR NILAM IGOGU). The a/c would have crossed MEKAR at 18:21, with the last radar contact to follow a minute later at 18:22.

5. The Doppler event. There were 3 bursts of communication by the SATCOM from about 18:25 until, with the FBO at 18:25 having a markedly higher FBO than the other two (cf. the MH370: Burst Frequency Offset Analysis chart released by Inmarsat). Surprisingly, at precisely 18:25 the a/c would have been right at NILAM. This is consistent with a turn at NILAM on to the named route P627 (NILAM SANOB IGEBO POVUS BEDAX NIXUL) that leads out the center of the "Great Channel" between the Nicobars and Sumatra. Finally, at precisely 18:29, the a/c would have crossed the 18:29 "ping ring" LOP identified by Duncan Steel and cohorts.

6. Total Flying Time. As you can see, the SkyVector estimated flying time from KUA to where route P627 crosses the 18:29 ping ring is 1:39, whereas the total flight time from 16:41 to 18:29 is 1:48, thus there is a grand total of 9 extra minutes, most of which would have been presumably used up during the takeoff and acceleration. Because of the tight timeline, the a/c could not have deviated much from the waypoint path described above.

7. The Final Turn South. If we take the Indonesians at face value and accept their claim that MH370 did not cross over Sumatra, then we know for a fact that the main turn south could not have happened during the 18:25 to 18:29 Doppler event. Presumably the a/c would have continued on route P627, and turned south later, perhaps at one of several possible waypoints.

8. Conclusion: the apparent flight path of the a/c from 16:41 until 18:29 is wholly consistent with an a/c following a waypoint path, namely: KUA PIBOS VKR IGARI VENLI VKB VPG VAMPI MEKAR NILAM SANOB. Most of the track follows the named routes R208 M765 B219 N571 and P627. Note that the only leg of this track that does not follow a named route published on aviation charts is the section from VPG to VAMPI. For a velocity of 486 knots there is not l a lot of time for any major deviations from this shortest path. Note also that this flight path practically overflies two airports suitable for landing a Boeing 777 (Kota Bharu and Penang).

http://i.imgur.com/ZMg3csN.png
 
Unflug
Posts: 729
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 5:25 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sat Apr 19, 2014 12:10 pm

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 4):
If we take the Indonesians at face value and accept their claim that MH370 did not cross over Sumatra, then we know for a fact

I don't want to go into any details of your post(s), appears to be useless. Just taking this sentence, don't you see how flawed that logic is: if we assume this and that, then we know for a fact???
 
NAV30
Posts: 1080
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 9:16 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sat Apr 19, 2014 12:19 pm

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 4):
Since all conditions were normal at this stage, I think we can agree that it most likely followed this path.

'Losing my grip' here?

Surely conditions were anything but 'normal'?

As far as I know the aeroplane was flight-planned and cleared to fly to CHINA, not Malaysia? Or the South Pacific?

[Edited 2014-04-19 05:30:41]
 
User avatar
Finn350
Posts: 1601
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:57 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sat Apr 19, 2014 12:24 pm

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 4):
8. Conclusion: the apparent flight path of the a/c from 16:41 until 18:29 is wholly consistent with an a/c following a waypoint path, namely: KUA PIBOS VKR IGARI VENLI VKB VPG VAMPI MEKAR NILAM SANOB. Most of the track follows the named routes R208 M765 B219 N571 and P627. Note that the only leg of this track that does not follow a named route published on aviation charts is the section from VPG to VAMPI. For a velocity of 486 knots there is not l a lot of time for any major deviations from this shortest path. Note also that this flight path practically overflies two airports suitable for landing a Boeing 777 (Kota Bharu and Penang).

Thanks for a very through post that was well argumented. There is one piece of the Inmarsat analysis that points to a sharp turn south further north, namely the example southern tracks:

http://s2.postimg.org/nr6x8o2nt/mh370.jpg

As I understand it, the investigators believe the MH370 took the red example southern track at the end of which the current underwater search area is roughly located (when taking into account the 7th partial ping at 0019 Z that was later identified). The red track was chosen over the yellow track as the plane flew faster (consumed more fuel) in the first part of the flight than originally thought. Also the altitude changes (to FL390 over the Malay Peninsula and then to around FL50 near Penang) consumed probably fuel. The plane wouldn't have had range further than the red track.

It seems that not all of the following conditions can be met at the same time:
- aircraft near MEKAR at 1822 Z as per the Malaysian military radar plot
- sharp turn south around 1825 Z - 18:30 Z as per the Inmarsat Burst Frequency Offset chart
- sharp turn south north of Sumatra as per the Inmarsat example southern tracks map

Apparently, at least one of the preceding conditions is not accurate. The analysis they have done might have been refined later and not released to the public.

Regarding Duncan's estimated loci, it is evident from the Inmarsat example southern tracks that the loci for example at 1830 Z cannot be estimated at any great precision; both the red and yellow track are consistent with the satellite handshake data and they have clearly a different distance to the satellite.
 
WarrenPlatts
Posts: 517
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2014 6:03 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sat Apr 19, 2014 12:40 pm



Quoting Finn350:
As I understand it, the investigators believe the MH370 took the red example southern track at the end of which the current underwater search area is roughly located (when taking into account the 7th partial ping at 0019 Z that was later identified). The red track was chosen over the yellow track as the plane flew faster (consumed more fuel) in the first part of the flight than originally thought. Also the altitude changes (to FL390 over the Malay Peninsula and then to around FL50 near Penang) consumed probably fuel. The plane wouldn't have had range further than the red track.

Actually, the current search area (-21, 104) is quite a ways away from the end of the red (400 knot) track; also the purported crash site is right by waypoint IKASA. Since it's pretty clear that the MH370 was flying a waypoint path prior to the turn south, it's likely IMHO that it kept flying established routes and waypoints. Using SkyVector, it's easy to construct various paths. The shape of the red track always struck me as odd (hence my early speculation that it might represent an "inertial" track).

http://i.imgur.com/LsR9sau.png



Quote:
It seems that not all of the following conditions can be met at the same time:
- aircraft near MEKAR at 1822 Z as per the Malaysian military radar plot
- sharp turn south around 1825 Z - 18:30 Z as per the Inmarsat Burst Frequency Offset chart
- sharp turn south north of Sumatra as per the Inmarsat example southern tracks map

Apparently, at least one of the preceding conditions is not accurate. The analysis they have done might have been refined later and not released to the public.

Yes, these three are mutually incompatible. a/c at MEKAR at 18:21Z seems firm. At 18:25, it would have been at NILAM--the intersection of the main route leading out of the Great Channel, and so would be a logical place to turn. If it proceeded further north on the same track (Route N571) perhaps up to IGOGU then a left turn to MEMAK, cutting over the south end of the Nicobar Island, there could have been no turn at 18:25.



Quote:
Regarding Duncan's estimated loci, it is evident from the Inmarsat example southern tracks that the loci for example at 1830 Z cannot be estimated at any great precision; both the red and yellow track are consistent with the satellite handshake data and they have clearly a different distance to the satellite.

If the 450 knot path turned south at MEKAR, it would have crossed the the 18:29 LOP while overflying Indonesia. From the way I've got it drawn, they both would have been the same distance from the satellite. I agree that the "ping ring" LOPs shouldn't be taken as the gospel truth. Nevertheless it is striking that given the velocity of 486 knots implied by the radar data, and a turn at NILAM at 18:25, that the a/c crosses the 18:29 LOP right at 18:29.  Smile

[Edited 2014-04-19 06:20:01]
 
NAV30
Posts: 1080
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 9:16 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sat Apr 19, 2014 1:18 pm

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 8):
Way to take my comments out of context... There is no flawed logic: if it is a fact that MH370 did not overfly Indonesia,

Apologies, WarrenPlatts, I'm 'inhibited' by the fact that I only ever flew gliders and Cessnas, and that the more exotic modern navigational aids hadn't even been invented when I had to pack in flying and concentrate on bringing up the family..........

All I'm basically saying is that the aeroplane started off 'on course,' flying NE towards Peking. It then appears to have turned SW, then due south. We don't know why those course changes occurred - on the face of it they don't make sense.

As far as I know, none of us know anything more than that for certain?
 
WarrenPlatts
Posts: 517
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2014 6:03 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sat Apr 19, 2014 1:31 pm

Well, it went NE toward Peking, then SW toward Penang, then NW out the Strait of Malacca, and then evidently a turn to the SW, and then finally a turn to the south. I have my ideas about how the course changes could make sense, but no need to start a flame war.
 
User avatar
Finn350
Posts: 1601
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:57 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sat Apr 19, 2014 1:40 pm

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 8):
Actually, the current search area (-21, 104) is quite a ways away from the end of the red (400 knot) track; also the purported crash site is right by waypoint IKASA. Since it's pretty clear that the MH370 was flying a waypoint path prior to the turn south, it's likely IMHO that it kept flying established routes and waypoints. Using SkyVector, it's easy to construct various paths. The shape of the red track always struck me as odd (hence my early speculation that it might represent an "inertial" track).

OK, then there must be some further analysis that has not been made public and the example southern tracks are not valid anymore.
 
nupogodi
Posts: 933
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 10:58 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sat Apr 19, 2014 1:43 pm

Quoting Starglider (Reply 3):
However, when checking some pictures of MAS B777s, this switch was not installed at the time these pictures were taken:

You know, I had always assumed that the ELT ON/ARMED/RESET panel in the cockpit would be a required item. What if they had a rough landing and triggered the ELT, how would they reset it? So maybe if you don't see it in the cockpit photo, it's been installed somewhere else...? Pretty sure I see it in the second picture you provided, but I can't make out the lettering to be sure.

Someone manually enabling the ELT would require someone conscious who can't control the airplane in the cockpit. That seems pretty outlandish to me.
A man must know how to look before he can hope to see.
 
Backseater
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 3:20 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sat Apr 19, 2014 2:07 pm

Some more thoughts regarding the underwater search strategy with Bluefin-21 and the towed pinger locator

I am still puzzled as to how lucky Ocean Shield was to steam to a location of unknown accuracy (the so-called "sweet spot") derived from RTD+Doppler+fuel estimates and hear the last gasps of the pinger right away, particularly when they had a real (not estimated, mind you) observation by a Chinese SAR ship 600nm further south. He who wins the jackpot after buying his first ticket is indeed very lucky!

But based on that lucky shot, Bluefin 21 does not seem to hit pay dirt. So, it might be worth taking a step back and doing some experimental calibration for a few days to understand sound propagation in that area ans as those depths:
- take a break in the Bluefin-21 schedule
- bring HMS Echo to lower a test pinger with a weak battery to the bottom right where Ocean Shield believes is the most likely location of MH370's pinger
- have Ocean Shield drag the towed pinger locator along the tracks where the original pings were heard
- compare actual recorded pings with the new ones, adjust strategy and schedule next experiment
- move HMS Echo to other locations as dictated by the cumulative results (I would be curious to find out what they get if they ever decide to move in the direction of the Chinese observations)
 
Starglider
Posts: 659
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2006 12:19 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sat Apr 19, 2014 2:53 pm

Quoting nupogodi (Reply 12):
You know, I had always assumed that the ELT ON/ARMED/RESET panel in the cockpit would be a required item.

The ELT remote control panel on the flight deck is optional and depends on the type of ELT installed as FIXED ELT and its accessibility by the crew.

Quoting nupogodi (Reply 12):
What if they had a rough landing and triggered the ELT,

Generally it takes more than a "rough landing" to activate the g-switch (if installed which, again, depends on the type of ELT).

Quoting nupogodi (Reply 12):
Someone manually enabling the ELT would require someone conscious who can't control the airplane in the cockpit. That seems pretty outlandish to me.

That is something for the investigation to unravel.
 
aftgaffe
Posts: 176
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 7:18 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sat Apr 19, 2014 3:37 pm

Quoting Unflug (Reply 5):
I don't want to go into any details of your post(s), appears to be useless. Just taking this sentence, don't you see how flawed that logic is: if we assume this and that, then we know for a fact???

Grrrrr!!!!  
Someone's logic might be flawed--and identifying those flaws constructively is how we make progress--but to say it is flawed logic to attempt to make progress by using identified and supported (even if ultimately flawed) assumptions is to say we should shut down this thread and wait for authorities to tell us what all the facts are.

Of course, there does seem to be a contingent in favor of doing just that... but I would point out that the *authorities* are basically doing the same thing we are, *conceptually-speaking.* They are not blindly fact-finding without making and remaking assumption-based theories to guide the fact-finding process. To the contrary....

At any rate, whether or not WarrenPlatts is right, he is showing his work and supporting his theses. So too is Pihero. That makes the dialogue between them, imho, educational, productive, and fun (in no small part because Pihero is a sarcastic wit par excellence).
 
cat3appr50
Posts: 185
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 10:44 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sat Apr 19, 2014 3:39 pm

Responding to BackSeater Repy 13

I agree with your logical, objective approach. But I would add, why are they continuing with the Bluefin 21 with it's reported multitude of issues and incapability of attaining the depths (for better sonar, etc. capability) of where it is being reported that the pinger origins are likely originating from, and instead bring in the right equipment for the challenge. If Bluefin 21 doesn't have the pressure vessel capability for the depths they need to go to for both enhanced sonar and video capability for the search at the reported depths why are they not bringing in the reported other deep diving assets available which would have this enhanced capability?

So, I'll answer my own question....IMO it's likely about "costs". And with, if I recall correctly twenty some nations participating in this search, and given many are certainly not third world nations and have the economic capability to jointly support a more costly search with more technically enhanced equipment and depth capability, it seems costs may now be a major driver. Otherwise, I simply can't comprehend why they are not bringing in the more capable deep diving assets now to more intensely explore the area where it seems most believe MH370 may be at the discovered received pinger signal area.

And if its search "costs" they are now seemingly concerned with (otherwise IMO they would be bringing in more capable underwater assets beyond the Bluefin 21 now) then one could fairly question that after the Air France incident and the lessons learned (but not applied), why is it not required by the ICAO for aircraft to have constant (at appropriate intervals) ACARS transmissions of at least altitude, speed, and lat/long. for aircraft transiting over-water areas of significant size and flight time. This would have eliminated the current month plus search time currently going on with MH370 and prevented the $ multi-millions of exhaustive search efforts with nearly unbearable results (for the families of the victims continuing to held in limbo over all of this). Once again, lessons learned but not applied.
 
Backseater
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 3:20 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sat Apr 19, 2014 4:00 pm

Quoting cat3appr50 (Reply 16):
But I would add, why are they continuing with the Bluefin 21 with it's reported multitude of issues and incapability of attaining the depths (for better sonar, etc. capability) of where it is being reported that the pinger origins are likely originating from, and instead bring in the right equipment for the challenge

What I gathered is that after extending the max depth limit built into the Bluefin-21 software from 4,500m to 5,000m(?), Bluefin is working fine as it has to glide 35m(?) over the bottom as a compromise between swath width and resolution.

Today the Malaysian Ministry of Transport said on CNN that the investigators were considering using several instruments. I don't remember him talking about who will foot the bill.

Quoting cat3appr50 (Reply 16):
why is it not required by the ICAO for aircraft to have constant (at appropriate intervals) ACARS transmissions of at least altitude, speed, and lat/long. for aircraft transiting over-water areas of significant size and flight time

Of course. As a matter of fact I think Inmarsat announced this week that they would offer some free a/c tracking services. My concern is that now that the satcom equipment has moved front stage, and considering that its power consumption is probably in the 600W range, how long before every pilot insists on having a convenient CB to power it down, just in case?
Or does that convenient CB already exist?
 
Kaiarahi
Posts: 1810
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 6:55 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sat Apr 19, 2014 4:13 pm

Quoting cat3appr50 (Reply 16):
why are they not bringing in the reported other deep diving assets available

Likely because they're NOT available. There are only a few capable of operating at this depth, and they're booked months and even years in advance. If I recall correctly, there was a wait of 11 months to get the equipment that found AF447.
Empty vessels make the most noise.
 
User avatar
Finn350
Posts: 1601
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:57 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sat Apr 19, 2014 4:29 pm

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 18):
Likely because they're NOT available. There are only a few capable of operating at this depth, and they're booked months and even years in advance. If I recall correctly, there was a wait of 11 months to get the equipment that found AF447

I get a different impression from this news story.

Quote:
Woods Hole Researchers Ready To Help Find Missing Malaysian Jet
http://boston.cbslocal.com/2014/03/2...ork-to-find-missing-malaysian-jet/
 
65mustang
Posts: 84
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2014 1:28 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sat Apr 19, 2014 5:14 pm

Quoting cat3appr50 (Reply 16):
ACARS transmissions of at least altitude, speed, and lat/long. for aircraft transiting over-water areas of significant size and flight time. This would have eliminated the current month plus search time currently going on with MH370 and prevented the $ multi-millions of exhaustive search efforts with nearly unbearable results

Or a simple call from Malaysia Airlines or ATC to 9m-mro via satcom would have revealed their location. Even if the call was not answered, the attempt would have caused an exchange of data showing their location. I don't understand why someone didn.t call the plane when it went missing.

The following info would be helpful to fill in a lot of the blanks.

1. The audio recording between ATC and MH370. I do not have faith in the transcript. It might have been sanitzed to save face.

2. Audio recording and chatter between ATCs after mh370 deviated from its course.

3. The policies and procedures of Malaysia air regarding having tcas, transponder, acars, etc on or off in dark zones/china. There was an article from quoting a pilot who said "It is Mas procedure to switch ACARS, VHF, and High Frequency selection off but this is only for flights to China as the service provider for Mas does not cover China."

4. What the pilot has done in the past in previous flights with regards to when he opens the cockpit door, orders drinks, if he turns off transponder, acars, when he is acting as a training pilot what he allows the trainee to do.

5. Cell tower registrations/deregistrations of all devices onboard from the time mh370 was at the gate until the last ping.

6. Inmarsat data on the pings.
 
Pihero
Posts: 4318
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 5:11 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sat Apr 19, 2014 5:30 pm

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 4):
1. When the a/c took off from KUA at 16:41 UTC and headed for IGARI, presumably it followed route R208 (KUA PIBOS GUNBO VKR IKUKO IGARI). At least that is the only named route that leads from KUA to IGARI. Since all conditions were normal at this stage, I think we can agree that it most likely followed this path.

Another example of oriented thinking :
The flight was cleared by Lumpur Approach, one minute after takeoff " Direct IGARI, flight level 180" from the official Com transcript.

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 4):

2. The turn at IGARI. We know from the radar (and now the FO's cell phone handshake) that the a/c passed over the southern vicinity of Penang Island.

So, first you believe the radar...

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 4):
3. The turn at Penang/VPG. After the turn at Penang, the aircraft evidently was pointed at waypoint VAMPI.

"Evidently" why ? It could have gone anywhere...but, of course...

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 4):
. There is no named route per se on this leg, but it would be a logical choice for someone wanting to get out of the Strait of Malacca in a hurry.

THe quickest way was to fly right across Sumatra...

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 4):
We know from the radar that it passed Pulau Perak at 18:02 UTC, and that the last radar contact occurred at 18:22--at a distance of ~162 nm to the WNW, a little past waypoint MEKAR, for an average ground speed of 486 knots.

... now, we believe the radar at 18:02 but no longer at 18:22 . THe tag says specifically : 295 R 200Nm from Butterworth AB... but nof course that doesn't suit your demo.
...which is, as a matter of fact not even yours, but of someone called "ThreeMiles" on PPrune ( posts # 7216 / p 361 and # 7237 )...on March 22nd.

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 4):
6. Total Flying Time. As you can see, the SkyVector estimated flying time from KUA to where route P627 crosses the 18:29 ping ring is 1:39, whereas the total flight time from 16:41 to 18:29 is 1:48, thus there is a grand total of 9 extra minutes, most of which would have been presumably used up during the takeoff and acceleration.

Another distorted logic : Why not take IGARI as the origin of your demo ? After all, we have quite a few elements ( the last ADS-B report, for instance, to base our navigation on.
and ... what 18:29 ping ring ? It has never been published, AFAIK.

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 4):

8. Conclusion: the apparent flight path of the a/c from 16:41 until 18:29 is wholly consistent with an a/c following a waypoint path, namely: KUA PIBOS VKR IGARI VENLI VKB VPG VAMPI MEKAR NILAM SANOB. Most of the track follows the named routes R208 M765 B219 N571 and P627.

Bull. A direc t track from IGARI to any point North of Sumatra fits it better.
And fits the infos given to us ( I mean the un-doctored ones, not your assumption of a continuous radar track... etc...) a lot better.
You still have to account for a ground speed of 486 kt ( your accuracy always astonishes me ) in the Straits passage and one of... 400 kt for the southern routes.
So... You should have done a bit more research before using others' analyses.

The problem is that your credibility takes a beating.

[Edited 2014-04-19 10:37:14]
Contrail designer
 
flyenthu
Posts: 590
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2012 2:37 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sat Apr 19, 2014 5:36 pm

Hi,

In the AF 447 case, did the ELTs transmit signal upon impact? I don't remember hearing much about that? Anyone can shed some light? If this has been discussed, apologies.

Thank you.
 
User avatar
Moose135
Posts: 3204
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 11:27 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sat Apr 19, 2014 5:46 pm

Quoting 65mustang (Reply 20):
The following info would be helpful to fill in a lot of the blanks.

Not directed to you personally, but I keep seeing similar statements like this throughout these threads, some implying Malaysia is hiding something by not making all of this data public. I'm sure the investigators are getting this information, and unless you are a party to the investigation, you have no "right" to see any of it. I know that interferes with the armchair crash investigators on the web, but no one outside of the investigation is owed any of these details today.
KC-135 - Passing gas and taking names!
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 8598
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sat Apr 19, 2014 5:52 pm

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 19):
I get a different impression from this news story.

They are ready to help doesn't mean ready to ship out. These are mostly booked in advance by oil exploration companies. It is unlikely oil companies change their schedule(ie., postpone staring a new drill) to accommodate MH370.

Also these are purpose built and a whole sleuth of support equipment and highly trained technicians go with each unit. Assembling and training a team takes much longer.
All posts are just opinions.
 
panampaul
Posts: 229
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2013 4:01 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sat Apr 19, 2014 6:09 pm

It sounds as if either the searchers aren't being entirely candid or they are simply going to give up on the ocean floor where they are looking if nothing is seen (common sense approach?).

Could it be possible that all of the calculations are just so off that the plane is nowhere near the search area?

Malaysian Officials: Hunt for Flight 370 at ‘Critical Stage’ - Current Underwater Search Could End Within a Week

Quote:
The hunt for the missing Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777 is at a ‘critical’ stage, according to Malaysian officials, as Australian officials announced a plan to end underwater searches for the jet’s flight data recorders within a week.

The narrowing of the search is at a very critical juncture,” said, Hishammuddin Hussein, Malaysia’s defense and acting transport minister, at a news conference Saturday....

..
 
decoder
Posts: 15
Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2005 8:45 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sat Apr 19, 2014 6:13 pm

Quoting DTW2HYD (Reply 24):
It is unlikely oil companies change their schedule(ie., postpone staring a new drill) to accommodate MH370.

Maybe I'm naive, but it doesn't seem like anything the oil companies would be doing with the AUV's would be more imperative than finding a missing airliner with 250 souls on board.

It would be great PR to turn over a couple for the sake of the common good.
 
mouldypete
Posts: 28
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2014 3:59 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sat Apr 19, 2014 6:15 pm

Quoting BackSeater (Reply 13):
I am still puzzled as to how lucky Ocean Shield was to steam to a location of unknown accuracy (the so-called "sweet spot") derived from RTD+Doppler+fuel estimates and hear the last gasps of the pinger right away, particularly when they had a real (not estimated, mind you) observation by a Chinese SAR ship 600nm further south. He who wins the jackpot after buying his first ticket is indeed very lucky!

Hmmmmmmm. Makes one wonder doesn't it? Makes one ask one's self if perhaps there is some military hardware deployed underwater which is too secret to reveal and it was this that first found the sonar 'ping'. This IMO is more believable than the jackpot win argument.

Quoting aftgaffe (Reply 15):
Grrrrr!!!!  
Someone's logic might be flawed--and identifying those flaws constructively is how we make progress--but to say it is flawed logic to attempt to make progress by using identified and supported (even if ultimately flawed) assumptions is to say we should shut down this thread and wait for authorities to tell us what all the facts are.

Grrrr again.
Warren Platts is a petroleum geologist. That is how they work. Constructing a complete jigsaw image when they have only a tiny fraction of the pieces and produce a plausible argument based on surmises and hypotheses where the only facts will be from the expensive drilling that they are specifically arguing for; or in this case, the FDR and possibly the CVR data (similarly expensive to acquire I suspect).

[Edited 2014-04-19 11:29:01]
 
Unflug
Posts: 729
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 5:25 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sat Apr 19, 2014 6:28 pm

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 10):
I have my ideas about how the course changes could make sense, but no need to start a flame war.
Quoting aftgaffe (Reply 15):
At any rate, whether or not WarrenPlatts is right, he is showing his work and supporting his theses.

Yes, he is showing his "work", aka his "own ideas". I'd prefer if he kept that so called "work" just for himself, that is my opinion. I'm following these threads with some interest, but can't see anything useful in that kind of work, sorry.

Quoting aftgaffe (Reply 15):
So too is Pihero. That makes the dialogue between them, imho, educational, productive, and fun (in no small part because Pihero is a sarcastic wit par excellence).

Ehm, no.
 
User avatar
cougar15
Posts: 1447
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 6:10 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sat Apr 19, 2014 6:42 pm

Quoting mouldypete (Reply 27):
Warren Platts is a petroleum geologist. That is how they work. Constructing a complete jigsaw image when they have only a tiny fraction of the pieces and produce a plausible argument based on surmises and hypotheses where the only facts will be from the expensive drilling that they are specifically arguing for; or in this case, the FDR and possibly the CVR data (similarly expensive to acquire I suspect).

allow me to ask the question again (and I am a West Australian - Mariner by trade )- , so I had a ´bucket of hope´....
Do we know anymore today than on day 1? I sadly fear not! Leewin Currents, Fremantle Doctors etc etc... but are we any wiser?
Sadly, I expect we might find this bird.....50 years on by pure accident! Sorry, I don´t wanna be the jerk here, but.... pings, pongs,.. and 44 days on and we are no further......!!!
some you lose, others you can´t win!
 
65mustang
Posts: 84
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2014 1:28 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sat Apr 19, 2014 6:59 pm

Quoting moose135 (Reply 23):
I'm sure the investigators are getting this information, and unless you are a party to the investigation, you have no "right" to see any of it.

I understand that there are security reasons for not releasing certain information and that I have no right to see sensitive information. I am just an armchair sleuth and there is no reason for anybody to give any weight to what i have to say. I think the families do have a right. I do believe the Malaysians are not equipped to handle the investigation. They have repeatedly released incorrect information and have had to changed their stance several times. That indicates a cover up or incompetence. I do believe they are making mistakes in their investigation and i believe they are not doing an exhaustive search of the information that is within their reach. As a post by an mandala in part 55:

"I spent the last 2 days meeting our regulators regarding aviation health, safety and security... one interesting revelation from the airport authority (not the airport operator) is that now almost 75% of all the 'bad stuff' we catch on international arrivals involvw flights coming in from KUL.... Once you hear the all sorts of weird stuff caught.... you can't help but wonder how much of the 'black holes' were exploited (if any) by the perpetrators to make MH370 the biggest aviation mystery to date. "

I believe the above statement transfers to the investigation. If the Malaysins released the audio and it matched their transcript, it would be a move that would enhance their credibility.

It would be financially beneficial for malaysia if the plane/cause is never discovered. Don't you see a conflict of interest? If the homicide theory is true, a MO of the pilot could have been to bankrupt Malaysia. The fact remains that there has not been one piece of debris found, or at least public acknowledgement of of it. I have been reading these pages for a while and know there are a wide range of experts and professionals on here, and a lot of them. I wonder what they could do if they were privy to the information that investgators are keeping close. Once the sonar mapping by bluefin is complete, nothing is found, and they sit down to reevaluate, maybe the exact thing they need to do is release the information for expert crowdsourcing.
 
bluesky9
Posts: 105
Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2014 1:26 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sat Apr 19, 2014 7:00 pm

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 4):
More evidence of a waypoint path in the early phase:

Nice analysis, just wondering what would the path look like if we assumed they actually did fly over Indonesia?

Quoting 65mustang (Reply 20):
The following info would be helpful to fill in a lot of the blanks.

Agree completely, with the tenor of your post and the points themselves.

I too have low confidence in the reported ATC - MH370 transcripts. Particularly, since they changed a day or two after I drew attention to their potential significance somewhere around thread 24. I wrote about the importance of those words due the improbability of their timing. I also noted that because the words were standard they could have been pre-recorded to give us all a false impression of the circumstances on the plane. Then to my surprise, a day or two later the final words are changed. (Might have been a coincidence)

Maybe also add 7. We need exact details on the ELT(s) that MH370 had and that could have been manually operated either from the cabin or from the flightdeck for this particular aircraft.

Quoting Starglider (Reply 3):
Question: If the ELT control panel was installed at a later date than the pictures taken of the MAS B777 overhead panels, why in the 6 or 7 hours of flight wasn't the fixed ELT switched from ARMED to ON if the crew was not incapacitated?.

Yes except there are also ELTs in the cabin. So you have to conclude that all cabin and flight crew must have been incapacitated since none of the cabin ELTs were used either. Having everyone incapacitated is one possibility another is that the crew though the emergency was under control.

Quoting Starglider (Reply 3):
If the ELT control panel was not installed then the flight crew could not have activated the ELT from the flight deck before impact with the ocean.

Yes so the question is was an ELT installed in the cockpit on MH370?

Quoting BackSeater (Reply 13):
I am still puzzled as to how lucky Ocean Shield was to steam to a location of unknown accuracy (the so-called "sweet spot") derived from RTD Doppler fuel estimates and hear the last gasps of the pinger right away, particularly when they had a real (not estimated, mind you) observation by a Chinese SAR ship 600nm further south. He who wins the jackpot after buying his first ticket is indeed very lucky!

Could be that the folks doing the SAR already had other information about the impact point from submarine(s) and devices that were already in the IO at the time of impact. The subs could compare timings of pressure waves originating from the point of impact to draw further circles that would have crossed the Inmarsat circles giving more accuracy then we are seeing.

The Fire Scenario
We have from the pilot of the Egyptian A/C that experience an O2 then electrical fire on the ground, that the plane would be have gone down quickly had it been flying. But what if the same fire happened on MH370 and due to sheer chance the plane remained sort of flyable. I imagine at least one of the pilots would be burnt so badly as to be ineffective while the remaining pilot has pulled every non essential CB he can find, and turned off all non essential serviced, then he puts some way-points that take the A/C back to the area most wants to go. Once set, he switches on the AP he can get out of seat away from the flames and fight the fire with an extinguisher and help the other guy out of the seat. But something happens....

Really need to ramp up that search and resolve whether there is an issue with the aircraft.
 
Backseater
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 3:20 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sat Apr 19, 2014 7:12 pm

Quoting moose135 (Reply 23):
I keep seeing similar statements like this throughout these threads, some implying Malaysia is hiding something by not making all of this data public. I'm sure the investigators are getting this information, and unless you are a party to the investigation, you have no "right" to see any of it

In theory, you are right. Both raw data and interpretations/explanations by official investigators may be kept under wraps until the official report is released a couple of years later, possibly accompanied by additional observer reports.

But in the MH370 case, the process does not to fit that perfect paradigm. A number of pieces of raw data reached the public, at times corroborated, not corroborated, denied, un-denied, doctored, ...plus some hints of preliminary interpretations.

Actually I do not believe that is inept on the part of the Malaysians in charge as some have suggested earlier. On the contrary, it is rather clever on their part. The media and the world at large have now been trained to accept that everything in this case, including "raw" data, can be transmogrified in the future. In practice it seems to me that the Malaysians have simply managed to keep as many degrees of freedom as possible, just in case. That might become handy some day when it is time to write the final report, should its findings not be to the liking of some of the powerful, wherever they may be.
 
User avatar
TheRedBaron
Posts: 3276
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 6:17 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sat Apr 19, 2014 8:07 pm

Quoting cougar15 (Reply 29):
allow me to ask the question again (and I am a West Australian - Mariner by trade )- , so I had a ´bucket of hope´....
Do we know anymore today than on day 1? I sadly fear not! Leewin Currents, Fremantle Doctors etc etc... but are we any wiser?
Sadly, I expect we might find this bird.....50 years on by pure accident! Sorry, I don´t wanna be the jerk here, but.... pings, pongs,.. and 44 days on and we are no further......!!!

Agree 100%, My gut tells me this Aircraft will not be found....

Quoting 65mustang (Reply 30):
I do believe the Malaysians are not equipped to handle the investigation. They have repeatedly released incorrect information and have had to changed their stance several times. That indicates a cover up or incompetence. I do believe they are making mistakes in their investigation and i believe they are not doing an exhaustive search of the information that is within their reach.

My feelings, that the authorities have withheld critical info, and then contradicted themselves so credibility goes down and chances of finding the AC are nill.

Quoting 65mustang (Reply 30):
(post by Mandala BTW) Once you hear the all sorts of weird stuff caught.... you can't help but wonder how much of the 'black holes' were exploited (if any) by the perpetrators to make MH370 the biggest aviation mystery to date. "

No cargo manifest, sketchy radar info, weird contradictions = lack of credibility.

Back to lurking

TRB
The best seat in a Plane is the Jumpseat.
 
Kaiarahi
Posts: 1810
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 6:55 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sat Apr 19, 2014 8:18 pm

Quoting 65mustang (Reply 30):
It would be financially beneficial for malaysia if the plane/cause is never discovered. Don't you see a conflict of interest? If the homicide theory is true, a MO of the pilot could have been to bankrupt Malaysia. The fact remains that there has not been one piece of debris found, or at least public acknowledgement of of it. I have been reading these pages for a while and know there are a wide range of experts and professionals on here, and a lot of them. I wonder what they could do if they were privy to the information that investgators are keeping close. Once the sonar mapping by bluefin is complete, nothing is found, and they sit down to reevaluate, maybe the exact thing they need to do is release the information for expert crowdsourcing.

You must have been reading the AF447 threads again   . There are hundreds of posts on there similar to this, alleging that Airbus, Thales and AF didn't want to find the plane out of self-interest, and that BEA was corrupt and under the influence of the French government, Airbus and AF.

Guess what happened?
Empty vessels make the most noise.
 
twincessna340a
Posts: 126
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2012 4:26 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sat Apr 19, 2014 8:28 pm

Quoting bluesky9 (Reply 31):
The Fire Scenario

The fire scenario doesn't have to be catastrophic. A small electrical fire in an inaccessible area can produce a lot of smoke.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Canada_Flight_797
 
Pihero
Posts: 4318
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 5:11 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sat Apr 19, 2014 10:33 pm

Conversation on the Inmarsat pings :

Just came from a dinner with a nice group of friends, among them an avionics engineer and he got us really thinking :

He said that in his experience, the Satcom never ( stress never ) stops exchanging data with the satellite. the so-called "call every hour at fixed times" is a load of bull and these "handshakes" happen several times every minute.

To him, it is disingenuous to say that we only have ten loci... It could be one hundred and probably more...
(I went back to downloaqd the BFO diagram made public) and he said :"You see ? In the space of two minutes, they acknowledge at least thee *pings* and as far as I know, no message was exchanged then !

When asked how accurate the *loci* could be, he said : their width could be determined to a precision of ten meters, but the problem is assuming an altitude, that would introduce an error of up to 500 meters, maybe a bit more, but I'd be surprised if the lines are determined with a margin of more than a kilometer.

In his opinion, Inmarsat is just pulling our legs : they have far more data than they've advertised, they have models of the BFOs, from Flight370, when it was on the ground (apparently there is somewhere an article on that *bias* from the plane) and from countless of 777s flying in the region who don't even know they've been spied upon and their data used to refine the initial AAIB model.

Finally asked if the plane would ever be found, he said that it will depend on how big the pieces are and what the currents are... but he was no marine scientist.

[Edited 2014-04-19 15:40:29]
Contrail designer
 
User avatar
TheRedBaron
Posts: 3276
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 6:17 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sat Apr 19, 2014 11:24 pm

Quoting Pihero (Reply 36):

Thanks! a fresh glass of water on this big desert of info and weird assumptions.

If my car gps refreshes every 2 seconds, why an aircraft would "ping" every hour or so...I never asked because frankly I don't know nothing about Inmarsat and satcom handshakes...now the problem is WHY they have withheld the data, and more important who this benefits...

TRB
The best seat in a Plane is the Jumpseat.
 
FLY744
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 12:36 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sat Apr 19, 2014 11:28 pm

Quoting Pihero (Reply 36):
Conversation on the Inmarsat pings

A few days ago I had a similar conversation with an old friend who is also an avionic engineer. The other thing he pointed out was that the Inmarsat 3 birds use spot beams for the high gain system. The spot beam the airplane AES was logged on to gives more geographic information because of the coverage of the spot beam. Now I understand much better how they were able to resolve the north/south loci so easily.

The specific spot beam information has not been released either.
Aviation in itself is not inherently dangerous.
 
nupogodi
Posts: 933
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 10:58 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sat Apr 19, 2014 11:38 pm

IIRC we were told that they had a low-gain antenna without beam steering, and we don't *really* know for sure how frequently the terminal would keep-alive when all of its clients - ACARS, satphones etc were offline.

Keep-alive once an hour seems a bit unusual (just based on my knowledge of typical ground TCP/IP netwoks), but without detailed information from Honeywell engineers, I don't think we could know for sure.

[Edited 2014-04-19 16:38:58]
A man must know how to look before he can hope to see.
 
Ttailsteve
Posts: 78
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 4:40 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sat Apr 19, 2014 11:48 pm

Quoting Pihero (Reply 2):

People's Temple 1978 / 918 deaths including 303 children

Heide Fittkau-Garthe, a German psychologist, 1998 / 32 deaths including 5 children

I could go on and on as far back as 2BC the Teutons....fast fwd to the Ottomans....... And cite many more from present day.

Plenty of pilots have done this as well with all different kinds and sizes of airplanes. I am not aware of any Caucasian or Anglo pilots having committed such acts, however.

Certain cultures and religions tend to encourage or even reward mass murder / suicides while other cultures and religions tend to encourage preservation of life.
 
Ttailsteve
Posts: 78
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 4:40 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sat Apr 19, 2014 11:52 pm

To Phiero.....auto quote somehow attributed the quote to you incorrectly......sorry chap.....

It should have been to Abba

"So the challenge is still on: Give me just one example of a non-aviation suicide committed by a middle aged successful male involving the killing of some 250 other people of whom several are personally known to the culprit! Give me just one!"

Not sure why or how it happened. My apologies.
 
aftgaffe
Posts: 176
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 7:18 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sun Apr 20, 2014 12:00 am

Quoting Pihero (Reply 36):


Well that is certainly consistent with how all of a sudden Inmarsat is willing to / able to offer airplane tracking for *free.*
From the WSJ:

LONDON—Satellite communications company Inmarsat ISAT.LN +0.07% PLC plans to offer basic tracking services free of charge to airlines, its chairman said, in the strongest sign yet of the aerospace industry's intentions to enhance monitoring abilities for commercial jets after the disappearance of Malaysia Airlines 3786.KU -4.35% Flight 370.

Airlines have long resisted making satellite tracking routine, in part because of the costs. But since Flight 370's disappearance on March 8, airlines and international safety organizations have shown new interest in such efforts.

For Inmarsat's offer to become a reality, any ultimate industry standards for satellite tracking would have to encompass its communications satellites. Andrew Sukawaty, Inmarsat's executive chairman, said in an interview that he has told regulatory authorities that if the company is part of a global tracking service, it would offer its tracking free to ease the cost of acceptance.

Inmarsat estimates that offering the service free would mean forgoing $10 million to $15 million in revenue annually, but "This is such small potatoes against what we're providing" commercially, Mr. Sukawaty said. Inmarsat collected $1.25 billion in revenue in 2013.

If its system is used, Inmarsat would cover any required costs to upgrade its network to support the service, Mr. Sukawaty said. But airlines would still have to cover the cost of additional hardware—and its installation—to periodically transmit their aircrafts' position, speed and altitude, he said. Inmarsat doesn't sell that equipment.

Inmarsat has been central to the hunt for Flight 370 after the company developed and refined a method for analyzing digital transmissions from the plane that has allowed international searchers to focus their hunt in an area of the southern Indian Ocean. No physical trace of the missing Boeing BA +1.49% 777-200ER has yet been found.

Commercial jets currently are tracked mainly using ground-based radar. Calls to use additional systems intensified after the crash of Air France AF.FR +1.34% 447 in the Atlantic Ocean in 2009, in which searchers quickly recovered some aircraft debris but needed nearly two years to locate the jet's so-called black boxes. Despite recommendations from aviation authorities, however, no changes were made to how jetliners are monitored.

It is unclear how exactly a global system of satellite tracking of jetliners would be developed and implemented. The International Air Transport Association has convened a task force to produce conclusions by the end of 2014 for implementing a tracking system.

Mr. Sukawaty said mandatory tracking for maritime operations offers a guide. Today, dedicated transmitters onboard ships, sold by third-party companies, operate safety services at no charge on Inmarsat's satellite network as part of the Global Maritime Distress and Signal System.

One thorny issue for airlines is potential disagreement between carriers that already pay to track their fleets and those potentially unwilling to adopt a global mandate. Airlines such as Air France and Deutsche Lufthansa AG LHA.XE +1.71% already pay to embed position data in other data transmissions that report the status of the airplane for maintenance and operational purposes.

And Mr. Sukawaty said some state-owned airlines are considered extensions of air forces and may be reluctant to incorporate global tracking for national-security reasons.


Another worthwhile read posing questions (not unlike those posed here) about what data Inmarsat has:
http://www.slate.com/articles/techno...arch_for_the_missing_airliner.html
 
EricR
Posts: 1226
Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2010 4:15 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sun Apr 20, 2014 12:07 am

Quoting Pihero (Reply 36):

In his opinion, Inmarsat is just pulling our legs : they have far more data than they've advertised, they have models of the BFOs, from Flight370, when it was on the ground (apparently there is somewhere an article on that *bias* from the plane) and from countless of 777s flying in the region who don't even know they've been spied upon and their data used to refine the initial AAIB model.

It is worth mentioning that the use of this data to locate an aircraft is experimental at best. It is not out of the question that data could have been misinterpreted and the aircraft is actually somewhere else.

Quoting Theredbaron (Reply 37):

Thanks! a fresh glass of water on this big desert of info and weird assumptions.

If my car gps refreshes every 2 seconds, why an aircraft would "ping" every hour or so...I never asked because frankly I don't know nothing about Inmarsat and satcom handshakes...now the problem is WHY they have withheld the data, and more important who this benefits...

In thread 53 you said you were going to remain silent until something was found. Did you have a change of heart, or did they find something that I am not aware of?
 
Ttailsteve
Posts: 78
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 4:40 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sun Apr 20, 2014 12:12 am

Quoting nupogodi (Reply 43):

Meets the criteria Adda outlined. Successful. Middle aged. Male. Non-Aviation. Killed more than 250......committed suicide and on his last day many ordered murder of hundreds if not 1,000s while he killed himself.
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 9524
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sun Apr 20, 2014 12:15 am

Quoting Theredbaron (Reply 37):
now the problem is WHY they have withheld the data, and more important who this benefits...

Well, to be fair, you are basing this on Pihero's quote of one person's point-of-view/knowledge. We've been advised repeatedly - and wisely - in these threads to not just jump on the latest information and start making assumptions. In this case, you'd appear to be assuming that what his friend said is 100% factual, but we really don't know that as outsiders.

-Dave
-Dave


MAX’d out on MAX threads. If you are starting a thread, and it’s about the MAX - stop. There’s already a thread that covers it.
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 8598
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sun Apr 20, 2014 12:29 am

Quoting FLY744 (Reply 38):
The spot beam the airplane AES was logged on to gives more geographic information because of the coverage of the spot beam. Now I understand much better how they were able to resolve the north/south loci so easily.

3F1 has 7 spot beams. Even if they knew which spot beam responded to MH370, still a large area. Also if it was handed off from one spot beam to another, relatively easier to track its path. Also we should see 7 smaller arcs than one arc. So global beam is more likely. Someone suggested handshakes are via global beam and data payloads via spot beam.

IMO someone else was also monitoring same frequencies and their satellites also have pings from MH370. One reason Ocean Shield went straight to that spot.
All posts are just opinions.
 
User avatar
TheRedBaron
Posts: 3276
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 6:17 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sun Apr 20, 2014 2:28 am

Quoting EricR (Reply 45):
In thread 53 you said you were going to remain silent until something was found. Did you have a change of heart, or did they find something that I am not aware of?
Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 47):
Well, to be fair, you are basing this on Pihero's quote of one person's point-of-view/knowledge. We've been advised repeatedly - and wisely - in these threads to not just jump on the latest information and start making assumptions. In this case, you'd appear to be assuming that what his friend said is 100% factual, but we really don't know that as outsiders.

I can answer both by providing some background info: as a Mexican I am accustomed of authorities lying and giving wrong info, only to be found much later (years) of the real reasons for some "events", so If you knew me well, you would know I am the "suspicious" kind of person, not a conspiracy theory nut, but in my 50 years I have for example traveled to Dallas to Dealey plaza to check on JFK story and such and make my own conclusions.

In this case since I think thread 5 I stated that I could not believe that radar coverahge was so bad/spoty/non existent in that area...then almost 2 weeks later there was "new" data on the route taken, then the changes in some info by the authorities involved, then the inmarsat pings ...it has been a very long process with info flowing drop by drop....
In the line of work I have there are a lot of secret info, non disclosure agreements and weird policies all regarding data that cant be made public, so Its very logical for me that such a delicate event that resulted in this tragedy will be handled accordingly. Who benefits, or if the real truth is know who will it damage?

In case of Pihero and after countless posts of him seeing that in my view hi has been very cautious in jumping into conclusions, I think is valid that he posts this info as believable, also based on the very few info released...so I am willing to believe that "they" are not telling the truth or withholding information critical to this tragedy, if I soun like a crazu nut in CT theories so be it...

Also I think that after over a month and no factual or Physical evidence of the 777 the chances of finding it are very slim...so maybe we wont ever have evidence... but I felt compelled to post because I think a ping every hour or so doesn't seem logical in this day and time....

TRB
The best seat in a Plane is the Jumpseat.
 
User avatar
p51tang
Posts: 69
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2014 10:51 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sun Apr 20, 2014 3:34 am

Originally posted by WarrenPlatts
Thread 55 Reply 139




Greetings and Salutations Good Sir!.I always look forward to your posts.  

As per your map (shown above) from the previous thread detailing a possible way-point route.I would be
pleased to review your interpretation of a possible way-point route from BEDAX to the current
search location.

I would also be interested to see how close your calculation lines up with N640,as this
dissects between Cocos & Christmas Islands.



That aside: For any other interested A.net participants.Would it be possible to land a Boeing 777
at either Island with half fuel load,full Pax and full cargo capacity?.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cocos_%28Keeling%29_Islands_Airport

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christmas_Island_Airport

http://www.boeing.com/assets/pdf/com...ercial/airports/acaps/777rsec3.pdf


I'm thinking about a legitimate emergency landing for a Boeing 777 flying a path over both Islands
towards Australia.If a landing were possible under Boeing Specifications,how would you then fly it
off either Island with Nil Pax,Nil Cargo and enough fuel to the nearest land based refueling?.

Perhaps someone with a Computer Flight Simulator can offer some insight?.



Quoting aftgaffe (Reply 15):
At any rate, whether or not WarrenPlatts is right, he is showing his work and supporting his theses. So too is Pihero. That makes the dialogue between them, imho, educational, productive, and fun (in no small part because Pihero is a sarcastic wit par excellence).

Ditto: My cognitive sentiments endorsed.  

[Edited 2014-04-19 20:40:52]

[Edited 2014-04-19 21:19:45]

[Edited 2014-04-19 21:20:29]
 
User avatar
Finn350
Posts: 1601
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:57 am

RE: MH370 Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 56

Sun Apr 20, 2014 4:03 am

Quoting Pihero (Reply 36):
He said that in his experience, the Satcom never ( stress never ) stops exchanging data with the satellite. the so-called "call every hour at fixed times" is a load of bull and these "handshakes" happen several times every minute.

That would be contrary to everything that has been published about the Inmarsat pings, for example the last ping at 0011 Z and the last partial ping at 0019 Z. If there were hundreds of pings I am sure some expert would have noticed the discrepancy and would have commented on the discrepancy publicly.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 36):
To him, it is disingenuous to say that we only have ten loci... It could be one hundred and probably more...
(I went back to downloaqd the BFO diagram made public) and he said :"You see ? In the space of two minutes, they acknowledge at least thee *pings* and as far as I know, no message was exchanged then !

The three pings at 1825 Z - 1830 Z are because the aircraft is believed to have made a sharp turn south then and the satellite antenna re-orienting itself due to the new heading. This should not be coming as a new information to you as we have been discussing the last two parts of this thread about it.
  • 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