• 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 7
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 9526
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

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

Sun Apr 20, 2014 4:11 am

Quoting Theredbaron (Reply 49):
if I soun like a crazu nut in CT theories so be it...

I'm not really trying to make any statement or judgment about you at all. I'm just curious how we get to thread 56 and the first time this statement about the ping frequency is made it's accepted as virtual fact?

Pihero shared what someone told him. He may have been sharing it because he believes it. He may have been sharing it to make a point. He may have been sharing it to see what others would say. I certainly don't assume that him quoting someone means that it's absolutely accurate. And that's not a judgment or statement about him either.

-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.
 
nupogodi
Posts: 933
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 10:58 am

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

Sun Apr 20, 2014 4:34 am

Quoting p51tang (Reply 50):
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?.

At either airports with calm winds, based on what we've been told by 777 operators waaaay upthread, a landing would be possible. The graphs in your link confirm that, well at least with flaps, I didn't look at the others. Apparently if you're willing to brake like crazy and screw the safety margin, the 777 can wedge itself in pretty tight. But you might not expect to take off again.

Why is this relevant? They didn't land there.
A man must know how to look before he can hope to see.
 
CBRboy
Posts: 178
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2007 2:03 pm

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

Sun Apr 20, 2014 4:56 am

Quoting Theredbaron (Reply 49):
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.

Speaking of non-disclosure, Malaysia has apparently asked Australia to sign a MoU about the handling of recovered wreckage, bodies and black boxes.

Quote:
Malaysia is drafting the agreement "to safeguard both nations from any legal pitfalls that may surface during that (recovery) phase," the New Straits Times reported on Friday.?....
Details of the MoU will not be made public, the report said.
 
sipadan
Posts: 322
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2014 7:06 am

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

Sun Apr 20, 2014 5:44 am

Quoting abba (Reply 1):
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.
Quoting abba (Reply 1):
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!

as you can see, I say 'off the top of my head'. And, was this incident on an island off of Denmark, or not? You must not know how to properly read?? Or, where is it that my geography was wrong? Please respond, as you make this accusation.

Quoting abba (Reply 1):
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.

What is 'strange' about people from different cultural backgrounds making a determination that suicide was the cause of an air accident? You seem to be obsessed with something known as 'cultural bias', but, furthermore you also seem to imply that these determinations are incorrect? Feel free to clarify your premise, as it borders on the absurd? Oh, yeah...and while you're at it, please let us know precisely what you intend to convey when you use the word 'dirt'. It is in many of your posts and could benefit from some specificity.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 2):
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.
Quoting Pihero (Reply 2):
Sooo true !

ah, yes...must not have been suicides...or, what is sooo true?
 
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 5:58 am

Quoting nupogodi (Reply 53):
At either airports with calm winds, based on what we've been told by 777 operators waaaay upthread, a landing would be possible. The graphs in your link confirm that, well at least with flaps, I didn't look at the others. Apparently if you're willing to brake like crazy and screw the safety margin, the 777 can wedge itself in pretty tight. But you might not expect to take off again.

Why is this relevant? They didn't land there.



It's an out-take.Which means that if (you or myself) were on a similar flight,then
what are the logistics of an emergency landing.Not just now,but for future passenger safety on
that route.

I'm also contemplating the concept of a 'permanent ornament' stranded on such an Island in
the name of safety.Who pays the bill for future loss of income?.

[Edited 2014-04-19 23:19:10]

[Edited 2014-04-19 23:20:29]
 
NAV30
Posts: 1080
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 9:16 am

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

Sun Apr 20, 2014 6:03 am

Several press reports have more or less indicated that the current search will 'end' within the next few days. This story appears to confirm this, but (thankfully) it refers to the 'first search,' and indicates that further searches are being planned, hopefully with 'beefed-up' equipment:-

"When this phase of the search began the guidance was that if the best estimated area for the first search found nothing the intention was to move outwards from the zone with side scan sonar mapping, using searchlights and cameras to confirm any positive leads that the sonar might provide.

"There are however indications in government briefings in Kuala Lumpur in recent days that the search may be augmented with additional commercial equipment suitable for very deep sea mapping and identification purposes.

"At the current rate of progress the likelihood of the first seabed search phase being completed by mid week has firmed."


http://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalk...-floor-search-passes-halfway-mark/
 
YoungMans
Posts: 432
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 10:31 am

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

Sun Apr 20, 2014 7:15 am

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 51):


'...I am sure some expert would have noticed the discrepancy and would have commented on the discrepancy publicly.'

No longer in today's world with its "...need to know" and, by extension, "...a need to tell."
 
bluesky9
Posts: 105
Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2014 1:26 pm

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

Sun Apr 20, 2014 7:46 am

Quoting cbrboy (Reply 54):
Speaking of non-disclosure, Malaysia has apparently asked Australia to sign a MoU about the handling of recovered wreckage, bodies and black boxes.

Apparently the MOU
http://www.smh.com.au/world/mh370-se...-and-black-box-20140418-zqwkr.html
the gist of it is:
"Azharuddin added that Malaysia would lead most of the investigation, with Australia and others helping."

Seriously, what more are they hiding?
Maybe they are worried about the CVR and ATC transcripts.
Is there something embarrassing in the cargo they want to hide?
Given Malaysia's handling of the things so far and their general contempt for the rule of law, how can they be trusted?

The investigation should be done in Australia with US, Malaysian, Chinese, and Boeing, NSTSB and other interested parties acting as observers.

I don't think anyone could take seriously any findings of a Malaysian investigation.
 
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 8:05 am

Quoting bluesky9 (Reply 60):
I don't think anyone could take seriously any findings of a Malaysian investigation.

Agreed.  



Quote:
Azharuddin added that Malaysia would lead most of the investigation, with Australia and others helping.

Details of the MoU will not be made public, the report said.

Sounds very much like a WWF transcript.

'If you smell what the Rock is cooking'   
 
Pihero
Posts: 4318
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 5:11 am

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

Sun Apr 20, 2014 8:07 am

More on the *pings* :
I received an e-mail from someone who seems to have followed this discussion but who doesn't want to be involved in the brawl ( I can understand that...)
I certainly do not understand much in this subject, but only on broad terms - I understand RTDs and Doppler shifts and the general methods used - but that's all. The intricacies of satellite technology is not really in my field..
So there are some excerpts of his letter :
"I am a Satellite Comms engineer who is now a global manager for a very large Satcom provider…
If the Inmarsat Aero Services use an IDirect style platform ( which most are ), then these “pings” are every six seconds or so on the platform…
Now, if Inmarsat only check on their monitoring software every hour, then fine, but the data is there…

So, there is, according to my correspondent - nothing sinister about Inmarsat : they started with the data they had on their hourly checks and I can believe that they went deeper into their *ping journal*.
( Which, btw, explains the refined *loci*, before the introduction of the Doppler shifts analysis).

The rest has to do with proprietary info and non-disclosure agreements ( heck ! I deal with those everyday when flying a plane that has been built by the thousands !). Which means IMHO that the full data are available to the investigation team (s ?) but not the public.

Quoting aftgaffe (Reply 44):
Well that is certainly consistent with how all of a sudden Inmarsat is willing to / able to offer airplane tracking for *free.*

It seems so.

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 47):
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 heartily agree on your statement. But these infos bring really nothing new to our subject : they only seem to point at the fact that the *loci* data are very probably a lot more accurately known than we all surmised ; they also explain the "credibility" most researchers give them, and prove to us by the purposeful search they are leading in some very precise locations.

As for trhe successful outcome of the underwater search, as my friend says, I'm no marine scientist, but if one remembers AF447, the wreckage was in a zone that had been heavily explored. It was only after the analysis had pinpointed the likeliest area that they went there with remote-controlled subs, without any more towed sonar... equipment.

By the way, I know nothing about IDirect.
What is that ?

[Edited 2014-04-20 01:10:03]
Contrail designer
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6977
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

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

Sun Apr 20, 2014 8:52 am

Quoting p51tang (Reply 61):
Quoting bluesky9 (Reply 60):
I don't think anyone could take seriously any findings of a Malaysian investigation.

Agreed.

I'll second that.

Quoting bluesky9 (Reply 60):
Seriously, what more are they hiding?
Maybe they are worried about the CVR and ATC transcripts.
Is there something embarrassing in the cargo they want to hide?
Given Malaysia's handling of the things so far and their general contempt for the rule of law, how can they be trusted?

The investigation should be done in Australia with US, Malaysian, Chinese, and Boeing, NSTSB and other interested parties acting as observers.

Malaysian authorities can't be trusted. Moreover, they should not be given the boxes to handle if they are ever found - no way. Malaysia and MAS have the most to lose here. Was it the cargo? Was it a crew member? Did the military shoot it when it crossed Malaysian airspace unidentified? While I'd prefer it if the boxes went to the US, it was a Boeing jet that went down and there is the possibility it is mechanical so there is US interest. The engines were RR so there is also UK interest. They might as well handle the boxes in Australia if ever found, like you said, with observers from interested countries watching on and with the help of authorities (like the NTSB) from other nations. If Australia hand the boxes over to Malaysia we will probably never know the truth...

[Edited 2014-04-20 01:54:26]
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
 
art
Posts: 2993
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:46 am

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

Sun Apr 20, 2014 9:17 am

Just a thought about the black boxes, if found: if MAS owned the aircraft (rather than a lease company) surely the boxes belong to MAS. The owner of a good usually has control over the good eg I own my car so I control what is done with it.

If MAS owns the black boxes, does MAS choose which entity scrutinises the black box data or is there some convention obliging MAS to supply the boxes to a qualified authority for expert scrutiny?
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6977
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

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

Sun Apr 20, 2014 9:26 am

Quoting art (Reply 64):
Just a thought about the black boxes, if found: if MAS owned the aircraft (rather than a lease company) surely the boxes belong to MAS. The owner of a good usually has control over the good eg I own my car so I control what is done with it.

If MAS owns the black boxes, does MAS choose which entity scrutinises the black box data or is there some convention obliging MAS to supply the boxes to a qualified authority for expert scrutiny?

Good question...

If they try to use that attitude then I would hope that they are paying for most of if not all of this massive SAR effort as it is their plane that is missing.

Does MAS still own the boxes if the finder has spent millions and millions of dollars recovering them from one of the most remote places on Earth? Maybe this will get very political and nasty. If they are not found sooner and eventually were found by a Chinese funded mission I'm sure China wouldn't hand them back to Malaysia; they'd say 'finders keepers'...
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
 
Heinkel
Posts: 232
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2013 6:15 pm

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

Sun Apr 20, 2014 9:37 am

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 63):
Malaysian authorities can't be trusted. Moreover, they should not be given the boxes to handle if they are ever found - no way. Malaysia and MAS have the most to lose here.


There are international rules, who is in charge / responsible for a serach and the investigation of an aircraft accident. If the rules say it is the Malaysian government, so be it.

Who decides, that they "can't be trusted"? Who is in a posititon to break the rules and tell us that he is more trustworthy than others?

For me it is surprising, that we hear next to nothing from the Americans. We know that they have a tight spy satellite coverage worldwide with state of the art equipemtent and their numerous agencies are wiretapping phones wordlwide and they want to make us believe that they don't know anything about the fate of the missing a/c?

Do you trust them more than the Malaysian governement?

Best regards
Andreas
 
toneale
Posts: 46
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2006 7:46 pm

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

Sun Apr 20, 2014 9:44 am

I've been lurking since this whole thing started. As a casual observer, but really puzzles me is that there has been not 1 piece of debris found belonging to the aircraft. That seems just so implausible to me. I understand not finding the aircraft itself for months (maybe years) given the depth and vast search area, but you would think that at something floating around out there could be positively tied to the flight.
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6977
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

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

Sun Apr 20, 2014 9:54 am

Quoting Heinkel (Reply 66):
For me it is surprising, that we hear next to nothing from the Americans. We know that they have a tight spy satellite coverage worldwide with state of the art equipemtent and their numerous agencies are wiretapping phones wordlwide and they want to make us believe that they don't know anything about the fate of the missing a/c?

Do you trust them more than the Malaysian governement?

I do more so when it comes to MH370, absolutely!
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
 
Heinkel
Posts: 232
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2013 6:15 pm

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

Sun Apr 20, 2014 9:59 am

Quoting art (Reply 64):
Just a thought about the black boxes, if found: if MAS owned the aircraft (rather than a lease company) surely the boxes belong to MAS. The owner of a good usually has control over the good eg I own my car so I control what is done with it.

Not when it comes to an accident investigation.

The black boxes, the plane, the debris is still owned by the owner, but during the investigation they are pieces of evidence. So they were seized or confiscated by the responsible authorities until the inverstigation (and often the law suits) are fnished.

Then the law court decides, if the pieces of evidence can be given back to their owners or not.

I do road crash investigations and as long as I need the wrecked vehicles or their parts, they are under my disposal and control and were given back to the owner when I'm ready and judge or a prosecutor decides that they were no longer needed.

Best regards
Andreas
 
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 10:00 am

Quoting art (Reply 64):
If MAS owns the black boxes, does MAS choose which entity scrutinises the black box data or is there some convention obliging MAS to supply the boxes to a qualified authority for expert scrutiny?

If my own mother was on-board, I would want the NTSB to have a vested interest in a plane that was
manufactured in the United States.

http://www.faqs.org/espionage/Nt-Pa/...l-Transportation-Safety-Board.html [Note] Cap backwards 

I would also trust that there was a memorandum of understanding from G20 http://www.g20.org/about_g20/g20_members

that imparts evidence to an Investigative Agency that is not associated with the owner of said property.

[Edited 2014-04-20 03:02:49]

[Edited 2014-04-20 03:14:02]

[Edited 2014-04-20 03:16:54]
 
awthompson
Posts: 511
Joined: Sat May 28, 2005 9:59 pm

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

Sun Apr 20, 2014 10:37 am

Quoting bluesky9 (Reply 31):
The Fire Scenario
We have from the pilot of the Egyptian A/C that experienced 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 services, 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....

Plausible, but doesn't account for the alleged climb and other altitude changes if indeed those occurred.
 
UALWN
Posts: 2185
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 3:27 pm

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

Sun Apr 20, 2014 10:46 am

Quoting sipadan (Reply 56):
And, was this incident on an island off of Denmark, or not?

It was not. It was on an island within a lake in Norway.
AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/787/AB6/310/32X/330/340/350/380
 
Kaiarahi
Posts: 1807
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 6:55 pm

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

Sun Apr 20, 2014 11:02 am

Quoting bluesky9 (Reply 60):
"Azharuddin added that Malaysia would lead most of the investigation, with Australia and others helping."

Seriously, what more are they hiding?
Quoting bluesky9 (Reply 60):
The investigation should be done in Australia with US, Malaysian, Chinese, and Boeing, NSTSB and other interested parties acting as observers.

It will be conducted in accordance with the provisions of international law, and not what you or anyone else thinks should happen. Annex 13 of the International Convention on Civil Aviation provides that where an accident occurs in international airspace, the investigation is led by the country of registry.

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 63):
Malaysian authorities can't be trusted. Moreover, they should not be given the boxes to handle if they are ever found - no way. Malaysia and MAS have the most to lose here. Was it the cargo? Was it a crew member? Did the military shoot it when it crossed Malaysian airspace unidentified?

AF447 redux: "BEA can't be trusted, because they'll do what Airbus / AF / the French government tell them to do. BEA has falsified evidence in the past. BEA can't be trusted because they're French".   

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 65):
Does MAS still own the boxes if the finder has spent millions and millions of dollars recovering them from one of the most remote places on Earth? Maybe this will get very political and nasty. If they are not found sooner and eventually were found by a Chinese funded mission I'm sure China wouldn't hand them back to Malaysia; they'd say 'finders keepers'...

You could inform yourself by reading Annex 13 of the International Convention on Civil Aviation, or continue posting nonsense.

"Article 5.6
The investigator-in-charge shall have unhampered access to the wreckage and all relevant material, including flight recorders and ATS records, and shall have unrestricted control over it to ensure that a detailed examination can be made without delay by authorized personnel participating in the investigation."
Empty vessels make the most noise.
 
Heinkel
Posts: 232
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2013 6:15 pm

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

Sun Apr 20, 2014 11:12 am

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 73):
Quoting bluesky9 (Reply 60):
The investigation should be done in Australia with US, Malaysian, Chinese, and Boeing, NSTSB and other interested parties acting as observers.


It will be conducted in accordance with the provisions of international law, and not what you or anyone else thinks should happen. Annex 13 of the International Convention on Civil Aviation provides that where an accident occurs in international airspace, the investigation is led by the country of registry.

"Article 5.6
The investigator-in-charge shall have unhampered access to the wreckage and all relevant material, including flight recorders and ATS records, and shall have unrestricted control over it to ensure that a detailed examination can be made without delay by authorized personnel participating in the investigation."

   Agreed 100%
 
art
Posts: 2993
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:46 am

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

Sun Apr 20, 2014 11:14 am

"Article 5.6
The investigator-in-charge shall have unhampered access to the wreckage and all relevant material, including flight recorders and ATS records, and shall have unrestricted control over it to ensure that a detailed examination can be made without delay by authorized personnel participating in the investigation."

Thanks for the extract. Who authorises the personnel? Is it the investigator-in-charge (being, I guess some Australian entity if the black boxes are found in a search area allocated to Australia)?

JUST SAW THE PRECEDING POST - so it's Malaysia that decides what to do with the black boxes, if recovered.

[Edited 2014-04-20 04:17:51]
 
Starglider
Posts: 659
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2006 12:19 am

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

Sun Apr 20, 2014 11:15 am

Quoting flyenthu (Reply 22):
In the AF 447 case, did the ELTs transmit signal upon impact? I don't remember hearing much about that?

The were no ELT transmitted signals received in the AF 447 case.

As a result, with reference to the BEA final report, Section 4. Safety Recommendation 4.2.4 on pages 206/207 states:

"that EASA and ICAO study the possibility of making mandatory, for
aeroplanes making public transport flights with passengers over maritime
or remote areas, the activation of the emergency locator transmitter
(ELT), as soon as an emergency situation is detected on board."

Source:
http://www.bea.aero/docspa/2009/f-cp090601.en/pdf/f-cp090601.en.pdf

Quoting bluesky9 (Reply 31):
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?

If, for both the cabin and on the flight deck, only portable ELTs were available then they would be less effective during flight when activated inside the fuselage. That is the reason why there is also a FIXED ELT installed which is attached to the airframe structure and connected to an external blade antenna enabling it to transmit effectively outside the aircraft.

If this FIXED ELT (usually installed above the ceiling panels in the crown of the aft fuselage) is not easily accessible by the crew then a control panel is installed on the flight deck. In the case of the B777 on the overhead panel.

Reviewing some pictures here on A.net of the 9M-MRG and the 9M-MRO, both aircraft did not have a blade antenna installed in the early years of operation but were fitted with an ELT antenna somewhere in 2005 or 2006.:

9M-MRG without ELT antenna in Sept. 2005:
https://www.airliners.net/photo/Malay...d=01f8b816077e13c54b364406ec1b0f47

9M-MRG with ELT antenna (the added most aft antenna on the top of the fuselage) in Sept. 2006:
https://www.airliners.net/photo/Malay...d=01f8b816077e13c54b364406ec1b0f47

Yet, I see no ELT control panel on the flight deck of 9M-MRG in the picture taken in May 2007:
https://www.airliners.net/photo/Malay...d=01f8b816077e13c54b364406ec1b0f47

9M-MRO without ELT antenna in March 2005:
https://www.airliners.net/photo/Malay...d=e193b8e8fc0c3ebc2c9f7131e279e655

9M-MRO with ELT antenna (the added most aft antenna on the top of the fuselage) in Dec. 2005:
https://www.airliners.net/photo/Malay...d=e193b8e8fc0c3ebc2c9f7131e279e655

The additional antenna implies that a FIXED ELT was installed at that time but if there is indeed no control panel on the flight deck it must somehow be easily accessible to the crew.
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6977
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

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

Sun Apr 20, 2014 11:17 am

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 73):
You could inform yourself by reading Annex 13 of the International Convention on Civil Aviation, or continue posting nonsense.

"Article 5.6
The investigator-in-charge shall have unhampered access to the wreckage and all relevant material, including flight recorders and ATS records, and shall have unrestricted control over it to ensure that a detailed examination can be made without delay by authorized personnel participating in the investigation."

Thank you for informing me, and the poster who actually asked the question, of that. I had no idea that 'Annex 13 of the International Convention on Civil Aviation' was such common knowledge... Also, thanks for pointing out the sarcastic nonsense that I posted - I was just trying to post like you               

[Edited 2014-04-20 04:21:54]
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
 
MD11Engineer
Posts: 13916
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2003 5:25 am

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

Sun Apr 20, 2014 11:31 am

Could somebody in the know please post a reality check of all known facts so far?
No speculation, please, just what is known up to now, especially about the early part of the flight up to the turn south.

Jan
Je Suis Charlie et je suis Ahmet aussi
 
abba
Posts: 1385
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 12:08 pm

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

Sun Apr 20, 2014 11:55 am

Quoting sipadan (Reply 56):
And, was this incident on an island off of Denmark, or not?

No - it was NOT out on an island off of Denmark. I leave it to you to do the research to find out which country we are dealing with here.

Quoting sipadan (Reply 56):
What is 'strange' about people from different cultural backgrounds making a determination that suicide was the cause of an air accident?

The strange thing is still that they rarely - if NEVER - makes that accusation about people from their own cultural background flying for an airline of their own nationality. We all know that a trustworthy white American will >EVER NEVER do such a thing. People from Malaysia or from Singapore on the other hand... There strong indications that there is a lot of cultural prejudice here.

Quoting sipadan (Reply 56):
Oh, yeah...and while you're at it, please let us know precisely what you intend to convey when you use the word 'dirt'.

'
Things that you want to keep secret. Then it is up to you to determine what that might be.

Still - the challenge is on: Give one - 1 - single example of a suicide outside aviation that can be said to be a true parallel to what you claim is likely that this pilot did.¨

Buses are rarely falling out over the cliffs, trains are seldom crashing into stations, taxis not that often going out over the edges of bridges.... Com on!
 
ltbewr
Posts: 14422
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

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

Sun Apr 20, 2014 12:32 pm

It is well settled by international agreements that Malaysia by ownership of the a/c and the flight having taken off from their country and Australia as it is in their SAR per international agreements, have control of the investigation and any evidence. I presume this comes from the rules as to sea ships.
The Memo of Understanding is a likely a sound and proper procedure that any country would and should do.
Many don't trust the Malaysian government for a variety of well discussed reasons. Many would like to see more transparency of the Malaysian government, but the public view is unlikely to change due to their culture and governmental set up. Perhaps the best answer for Malaysia would be to turn the recorder boxes if recovered to the UK or France air crash investigative authorities review, that would help with their creditability and prevent allegations of issues by the USA NTSB from being involved.
 
Kaiarahi
Posts: 1807
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 6:55 pm

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

Sun Apr 20, 2014 12:34 pm

Quoting ltbewr (Reply 80):
I presume this comes from the rules as to sea ships.

International Convention on Civil Aviation. See post 73.
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 56

Sun Apr 20, 2014 1:24 pm

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 78):
Could somebody in the know please post a reality check of all known facts so far?
No speculation, please, just what is known up to now, especially about the early part of the flight up to the turn south.

Would yuou believe, someone has posted on Wiki the known facts :

"TIMELINE OF DISAPPEARANCE

Elapsed Time / MYT / UTC / Event


00:00 8 March 7 March

00:41 16:41 Take-off from KUL (Kuala Lumpur

00:20 01:01 17:01 Crew confirms altitude of 35,000 feet (11,000 m)

00:26 01:07 17:07 Last ACARS data transmission received;

crew confirms altitude of 35,000 feet, a second time

00:38 01:19 17:19 Last Malaysian ATC voice contact

00:40 01:21 17:21 Last secondary radar (transponder) contact at 6°55′15″N 103°34′43″E

00:41 0 1:22 17:22 Transponder and ADS-B no longer operating.

00:49 01:30 17:30 Voice contact attempt by another aircraft, at request of Vietnam ATC;

00:56 01:37 17:37 Missed expected half-hourly ACARS data transmission

01:34 02:15 18:15 Last primary radar contact by Malaysian military, 200 miles (320 km) NW of Penang

01:41 02:22 18:22 1st of 6 roughly hourly Classic Aero pings (handshakes) since last ACARS transmission, via the Inmarsat-3 F1 satellite

05:49 06:30 22:30 Missed scheduled arrival at PEK (Beijing)

06:43 07:24 23:24 Malaysia Airlines pronounces flight missing in statement released to media[38]

07:30 08:11 8 March 6th and last successful automated hourly handshake with Inmarsat-3 F1

07:38 08:19 00:19 Unscheduled, unexplained partial handshake transmitted by aircraft

08:34 09:15 01:15 Scheduled hourly ping attempt by Inmarsat goes unanswered by aircraft


The rest is conjectures, assumptions, contradictory informations.

One has to sift through all of it.
Contrail designer
 
NAV30
Posts: 1080
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 9:16 am

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

Sun Apr 20, 2014 1:45 pm

Quoting Pihero (Reply 82):
Would yuou believe, someone has posted on Wiki the known facts :

To 'follow up,' the aeroplane was flight-planned for China. So it started off heading north-east, then turned north-west, then south-west, then pretty well due south.

It then appears to have flown on until it ran out of fuel and crashed. While making no further radio contact of any kind.

I don't think we can expect any early 'diagnosis' of what happened. Seems to me, on the face of it, that the most likely thing is an 'explosive decompression,' leading to the death of everyone on board. After which the aeroplane (on autopilot) flew on until the fuel ran out?
 
bluesky9
Posts: 105
Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2014 1:26 pm

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

Sun Apr 20, 2014 1:50 pm

Several days ago Malaysia's own experts were saying they did not have the expertise to do the investigation and were happy to have it done in Australia. So the decision by Malaysia to carry out the investigation themselves can only be seen as a politically motivated, with the aim of controlling the outcome to suit their own ends.

If Malaysia forces the issue perhaps other countries should review whether Malaysia Airlines should operate on international routes until the cause of this incident is resolved to their satisfaction. After all, every A/C flying an international route is a guided missile, that could carry anything at all in its cargo hold. The entire system is built on trust. If the country of origin does not scan the cargo, then it could contain anything (.e.g. hydrogen bomb, biological weapons, drugs). When the country of origin repeatedly changes their story and does not apply the rule of law, how can the international community trust their findings. Maybe it is time to set up an international body of experts that handles the search and analysis of these types of events.

This development indicates that there may be some serious facts about the flight that have not yet become public knowledge (otherwise why would they bother). If the A/C was carrying an illegal cargo or a weapon of some kind, then a crime may have been committed in Vietnam when MH370 entered Vietnamese airspace.

[Edited 2014-04-20 07:03:14]
 
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 2:00 pm

Quoting abba (Reply 79):

The strange thing is still that they rarely - if NEVER - makes that accusation about people from their own cultural background flying for an airline of their own nationality. We all know that a trustworthy white American will >EVER NEVER do such a thing. People from Malaysia or from Singapore on the other hand... There strong indications that there is a lot of cultural prejudice here.

What a bizarre comment. We are not going to ignore facts. The number of commercial airplane crashes that resulted from suicide are few, but it has occurred. The few that have occurred were by pilots of other nationalities. Big deal. It doesn't mean it cannot happen by an American, but it has yet to occur.

Based on your comment above, it sounds like you may be the one with the cultural bias.
 
Kaiarahi
Posts: 1807
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 6:55 pm

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

Sun Apr 20, 2014 2:17 pm

Quoting bluesky9 (Reply 84):
Several days ago Malaysia's own experts were saying they did not have the expertise to do the investigation and were happy to have it done in Australia.

I don't recall that. Do you have a source?

Quoting bluesky9 (Reply 84):
So the decision by Malaysia to carry out the investigation themselves can only be seen as a politically motivated, with the aim of controlling the outcome to suit their own ends.

Since you have an LL.B.(Hons), you should read Annex 13 of the International Convention on Civil Aviation. It sets out the parties who are entitled to participate fully in an investigation, examine all of the evidence and, if necessary, have a dissenting conclusion published as part of the final report. In this case, they include the U.S. and Australia.

In addition, China, Indonesia, France, New Zealand, Canada, Ukraine, Italy, Netherlands, Austria and Russia have the right to appoint expert observers.

Not much room for a cover-up.
Empty vessels make the most noise.
 
panampaul
Posts: 229
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2013 4:01 pm

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

Sun Apr 20, 2014 2:28 pm

Bluefin 21 completed its 7th mission and is now on its 8th. Nothing has been found and this is apparently the haflway point.

Bluefin Mission 7 Marks Halfway Point in Flight 370 Sea Floor Search - Hunt Continues without ‘Contacts of Interest’


[quote]Australian officials announced Sunday that the underwater search has covered “approximately 50%” of the highly targeted search area, adding that nothing from Flight 370 has been found.

Bluefin 21, the autonomous underwater vehicle tasked with the search of the sea floor for the missing Malaysia Airlines jetliner, completed its seventh mission Sunday having covered approximately half of the “focused underwater search area” according to Australian authorities. To date, it has not yet found any signs of the lost aircraft....[quote]

.
 
bluesky9
Posts: 105
Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2014 1:26 pm

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

Sun Apr 20, 2014 2:30 pm

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 86):
I don't recall that. Do you have a source?

I believe it was CNN, but I am not sure.

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 86):
Since you have an LL.B.(Hons), you should read Annex 13 of the International Convention on Civil Aviation. It sets out the parties who are entitled to participate fully in an investigation, examine all of the evidence and, if necessary, have a dissenting conclusion published as part of the final report. In this case, they include the U.S. and Australia.In addition, China, Indonesia, France, New Zealand, Canada, Ukraine, Italy, Netherlands, Austria and Russia have the right to appoint expert observers. Not much room for a cover-up.


Ha, OK fair enough, I will read it.

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 86):
Not much room for a cover-up.

Hope you are right.
 
User avatar
fotoflyer71
Posts: 41
Joined: Sun May 08, 2011 6:22 pm

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

Sun Apr 20, 2014 2:38 pm

Quoting Pihero (Reply 62):
By the way, I know nothing about IDirect.
What is that ?

iDirect is a technology company that provides satellite communications platforms of the same name. I thought they were mainly an enterprise VSAT player but on checking their website they do a number of applications, one of which being aeronautical connectivity. I don't know if MH370 used the iDirect platform or not.

Website here: http://www.idirect.net/Applications/Aeronautical-Connectivity.aspx

[Edited 2014-04-20 07:50:52]
Try to learn from the mistakes of others. You won't live long enough to make all of them yourself.
 
ltbewr
Posts: 14422
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

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

Sun Apr 20, 2014 2:56 pm

Quoting bluesky9 (Reply 84):
If Malaysia forces the issue perhaps other countries should review whether Malaysia Airlines should operate on international routes until the cause of this incident is resolved to their satisfaction.

Problem with a ban on MH flights into protesting countries is that Malaysia would like ban the airlines of protesting countries from flying into Malaysia. That would likely financially cripple MH and some other airlines, with lost jobs, business and trade disruptions and damaged tourism.
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 9526
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

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

Sun Apr 20, 2014 3:10 pm

Quoting abba (Reply 79):
The strange thing is still that they rarely - if NEVER - makes that accusation about people from their own cultural background flying for an airline of their own nationality.

Conversely - if that's allowed here - it could be that the people from the SAME culture are ruling it out for their own cultural/religious/nationalistic reasons? I'm not saying that's what's happening, but you appear to have ruled that out or not considered that as an option. Perhaps for your own cultural/religious/nationalistic reasons........

Quoting abba (Reply 79):
We all know that a trustworthy white American will >EVER NEVER do such a thing.

What an unnecessary, inflammatory thing to say. Do you actually think this type of statement makes you sound impressive?

Quoting abba (Reply 79):
There strong indications that there is a lot of cultural prejudice here.

There's a LOT here, and it's not just cultural prejudice. I'm sure it's there, but to just call out one portion of the total group and claim THEY are the problem is silly.

Quoting EricR (Reply 85):
The few that have occurred were by pilots of other nationalities. Big deal. It doesn't mean it cannot happen by an American, but it has yet to occur.

Perhaps not by pilots, but by airline employees in the US it has. I'm not sure if a white American such as myself is allowed to mention that here, or perhaps it doesn't fit the argument of those quoted earlier?

-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.
 
bluesky9
Posts: 105
Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2014 1:26 pm

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

Sun Apr 20, 2014 3:37 pm

Quoting Starglider (Reply 76):
The additional antenna implies that a FIXED ELT was installed at that time but if there is indeed no control panel on the flight deck it must somehow be easily accessible to the crew.

That is good research Starglider, amazing you could figure that out.

Quoting Starglider (Reply 76):
If, for both the cabin and on the flight deck, only portable ELTs were available then they would be less effective during flight when activated inside the fuselage.

Yes one would except that, but the signal from these portable beacons is pretty strong, and each has a serial number so I think it likely it would be picked up at least once by a satellite if triggered inside the A/C. Not sure if this has ever been tested though. I know they have accidentally been triggered inside boats and the satellite picked up the signal.
 
Pihero
Posts: 4318
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 5:11 am

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

Sun Apr 20, 2014 4:20 pm

Quoting fotoflyer71 (Reply 89):
iDirect is a technology company that provides satellite communications platforms of the same name. I thought they were mainly an enterprise VSAT player but on checking their website they do a number of applications, one of which being aeronautical connectivity.

Many thanks !

I read your link and something just jumped into my face :

"...Aeronautical communications implies high-speed communications capability, up to 1000 km/hr. This requires the advanced Doppler cancellation that is a licensable software feature available across our hub range..."
(Stress is mine )

Sooo ...the Doppler shift can even be provided by the platform's transmission itself an could be checked against the RTDs !

No wonder they're seeing new areas of use !
Contrail designer
 
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 4:40 pm

Quoting Heinkel (Reply 66):
For me it is surprising, that we hear next to nothing from the Americans. We know that they have a tight spy satellite coverage worldwide with state of the art equipemtent and their numerous agencies are wiretapping phones wordlwide and they want to make us believe that they don't know anything about the fate of the missing a/c?

Uh, we told you a month ago through strategic leaks that it landed in Iran / Pakistan / Krygystan (crappy direct but not non-stop service).

‏@flyingwithfish 03/19/2014
My primary DHS source sent me a one word answer for #MH370 flying south. The word is ... wait for it ... “Bull$#!+”

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 73):
It will be conducted in accordance with the provisions of international law, and not what you or anyone else thinks should happen. Annex 13 of the International Convention on Civil Aviation provides that where an accident occurs in international airspace, the investigation is led by the country of registry.

Perhaps only of theoretical interest but wearing your law professor hat, if it could be shown that the initial turn off the flight path, the reported climb, and the loss of the transponder occurred in Vietnamese airspace, then might Vietnam have a jurisdictional claim, the argument being that either--but at least one of--an *accident* or an *incident* occurred in its airspace?

Of course, Vietnam likely has zero interest in conducting this investigation. So this sort of jurisdictional fight would only arise if another country wanted to wrest control away from Malaysia and was able to convince Vietnam to assert jurisdiction and then delegate authority to that country (so a true long shot)... but it doesn't seem the most legally outlandish thing in the world?

Accident defined:

Accident. An occurrence associated with the operation of an aircraft which takes place between the time any person boards the aircraft with the intention of flight until such time as all such persons have disembarked, in which:

a) a person is fatally or seriously injured as a result of:
— being in the aircraft, or
— direct contact with any part of the aircraft, including parts which have become detached from the aircraft, or — direct exposure to jet blast,
except when the injuries are from natural causes, self-inflicted or inflicted by other persons, or when the injuries are to stowaways hiding outside the areas normally available to the passengers and crew; or

b) the aircraft sustains damage or structural failure which:
— adversely affects the structural strength, performance or flight characteristics of the aircraft, and — would normally require major repair or replacement of the affected component,
except for engine failure or damage, when the damage is limited to the engine, its cowlings or accessories; or for damage limited to propellers, wing tips, antennas, tires, brakes, fairings, small dents or puncture holes in the aircraft skin; or

c) the aircraft is missing or is completely inaccessible.

Note 1.— For statistical uniformity only, an injury resulting in death within thirty days of the date of the accident is classified as a fatal injury by ICAO.

Note 2.— An aircraft is considered to be missing when the official search has been terminated and the wreckage has not been located.

Incident defined:

Incident. An occurrence, other than an accident, associated with the operation of an aircraft which affects or could affect the
safety of operation.

Note.— The types of incidents which are of main interest to the International Civil Aviation Organization for accident prevention studies are listed in the Accident/Incident Reporting Manual (Doc 9156).

[Edited 2014-04-20 09:46:17]
 
cat3appr50
Posts: 166
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 10:44 pm

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

Sun Apr 20, 2014 4:40 pm

Several news agencies have reported the following, quoting, "It turned left, then climbed to 39,000 feet -- below its peak safe limit of 43,100 feet -- and maintained that altitude for about 20 minutes over the Malay Peninsula before beginning to descend."

Sorry if I have missed the objective source for same in this ever changing and seeming constant contradictory investigation, so who/what is the source for the above? In addition, it says they "descended", therefore to what altitude, and what technology was used to objectively verify this descent? Don't they have a waypoint or lat/long position where this supposed descent from FL390 (the current ascended to altitude now being reported above the original flight cruise altitude after several others were originally reported) started and where (approximate waypoint or lat/long position) this descent to some lower altitude ended and the final altitude, and therefore estimated vertical speed for the descent?

I don't know how anybody who has a good grasp on aviation could keep up with this ever changing data coming in from this investigation.
 
Lizzie
Posts: 130
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2014 11:18 am

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

Sun Apr 20, 2014 5:03 pm

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 !

Thanks, this has been bugging me. If the pings are initiated by the satellite, rather than by some untoward activity by the plane, it makes no sense to have three close together pings just happening to happen when the plane is doing something peculiar.

I've been convinced for a while that the data the search is working from must be far far richer than what has been reported, and which makes the exercise going on on Duncan Steel's blog probably moot.

But I wish we knew how good the info was, because that would make a big difference to how to read a null finding from the underwater search.
 
Kaiarahi
Posts: 1807
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 6:55 pm

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

Sun Apr 20, 2014 5:15 pm

Quoting aftgaffe (Reply 94):
Perhaps only of theoretical interest but wearing your law professor hat, if it could be shown that the initial turn off the flight path, the reported climb, and the loss of the transponder occurred in Vietnamese airspace, then might Vietnam have a jurisdictional claim, the argument being that either--but at least one of--an *accident* or an *incident* occurred in its airspace?

Annex 13 only applies to *accidents* and *serious incidents*. *Serious incident* is defined as "an incident involving circumstances indicating that an accident nearly occurred". In this case, since an accident DID occur, as far as we know in international airspace, Malaysia has jurisdiction as both the state of registration and the state of the operator. In any event, Vietnam is still a relatively poor country and I can't imaging they'd want to take on the expense of an investigation.

We also need to distinguish between Vietnamese airspace and international airspace over which Vietnam exercises ATC functions. It seems unlikely that the plane ever entered Vietnamese airspace. In fact, at the time the xponder and comms were lost, it was probably in the SIN SSR area.
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 56

Sun Apr 20, 2014 5:17 pm

Quoting cat3appr50 (Reply 95):
I don't know how anybody who has a good grasp on aviation could keep up with this ever changing data coming in from this investigation.

A very simple and effective method : Wait three or four days before considering the new piece of news. During that time, if there hasn't been a denial / rebuttal / contradiction, then you might consider it as *not so suspect* or even as *evidence*.

Unfortunately, most have been revealed as false / faulty / inconsistent....

...but you keep your sanity;

[Edited 2014-04-20 10:23:34]

[Edited 2014-04-20 10:25:14]
Contrail designer
 
747megatop
Posts: 1731
Joined: Wed May 23, 2007 8:22 am

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

Sun Apr 20, 2014 5:44 pm

I think the media is trigger happy right now, reporting anything to do with Malaysia airlines. MH 192 KUL-BLR seems to have turned back due to unknown reasons - http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/20/world/...sia-airlines-flight-192/index.html .It could be a minor technical issue or a medical emergency issue for all we know.
 
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 5:52 pm

Quoting Lizzie (Reply 96):
Thanks, this has been bugging me. If the pings are initiated by the satellite, rather than by some untoward activity by the plane, it makes no sense to have three close together pings just happening to happen when the plane is doing something peculiar.

Good point, that makes no sense at all. If this business about the multiple pings / minute bears out, it will be interesting to hear (if we ever do) why Inmarsat released what it did and held back what it did. The decision does not seem fully explainable by NDAs and protection of proprietary info. It seems like some other factors may be at play (I'm not suggesting anything nefarious here).

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 97):
We also need to distinguish between Vietnamese airspace and international airspace over which Vietnam exercises ATC functions. It seems unlikely that the plane ever entered Vietnamese airspace. In fact, at the time the xponder and comms were lost, it was probably in the SIN SSR area.

Ah yes, thanks. CNN reported yesterday that the turn and climb was in Vietnamese airspace... but now that you mention it that seems highly unlikely to have been possible.
 
65mustang
Posts: 84
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2014 1:28 am

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

Sun Apr 20, 2014 6:08 pm

The a/c most likely crashed in the ocean and not on land. Would maritime salvage law trump annex 13?
 
abba
Posts: 1385
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 12:08 pm

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

Sun Apr 20, 2014 6:12 pm

Quoting EricR (Reply 85):
Based on your comment above, it sounds like you may be the one with the cultural bias.

No - wrong.

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 91):
There's a LOT here, and it's not just cultural prejudice

Certainly. Having the pilot doing suicide is the cheapest solution for many of the parties involved. You save the costs of a huge and painstaking analysis taking years and millions and millions of $$$ in order to find out what really happened. Do you have any idea of the cost involved to do the TWA or the AF disasters? Do you think a third world country - like Egypt - or a small city state - like Singapore - could ever dream of being able to afford to pay that amount of $$$???

Or?????

And what did the TWA cost Boeing in court damages? Do you really think Boeing really would like to find out what really brought the MH370 down? What the h¤¤¤¤ - it is not common that this happens anyway. The T72s usually stay in the air fine. Why let a Malaysian flight spoil the party? The 772 is more or less out of production by now anyway. I am sure that Boeing and the Malayian government would be happy to use the pilot as a scapegoat. It by far the cheapest solution to most parties involved. The pilot committed suicide. Save the money. Save the day.

By the way - have you noticed that we have got quite a few new members? Strangely enough: all have joined A-net onthe very date or only shortly after the MH370 disappearance. Many of them has the very same style of writing. Some of them no doubt are lying about the professional background. All supporting the very same view.

Wonder what you get paid as a member of the Boeing damage control team which no doubt will be active on a forum like this and even being so with the consent of the Malaysian government. Phiro's paranoia is more than justified in my humble opinion.
  • 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