• 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 8
 
wilco737
Topic Author
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2004 12:21 am

MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 60

Mon May 05, 2014 5:48 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 59 was locked for further contributions. Please feel free to continue your discussion in part 60.

MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 59 (by LipeGIG May 1 2014 in Civil Aviation)

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
 
Backseater
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 3:20 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 60

Mon May 05, 2014 6:05 am

http://www.airtrafficmanagement.net/...analysis-mh370-preliminary-report/

FYI, a clear assessment of the preliminary report by Steve Winter, an independent ATM consultant and an Engineering Fellow with Raytheon Company. He was formerly Chief Technologist for NATS.
 
mandala499
Posts: 6592
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 60

Mon May 05, 2014 6:13 am

Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 241):
If mandala had heard within a single-digit number of hours after the aircraft dropped off secondary radar screens, then it stands to reason the "authorities" already knew much more than they let on.

I expected them to announce by midday actually...

Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 241):
Mandala, are you sure it was Saturday morning, and what was the degree of certainty conveyed with this information?

Certain but very confused. By midday, hijack was "told" to be one of the possibility, and Malaysia Airlines did not like being told to "continue assuming" that. I was initially told that the aircraft had, according to military radar, varying ground speeds from 280kts to 550kts, and altitudes from 5000 to 45000. However, I cautioned that the altitudes could be notoriously unreliable at primary radar if you let it go "untreated". By midday, I was then told that it might have gone to the west and may have gone over Sumatra, at which I said it was going to be a nightmare.

I quickly narrowed down to 3 possibilities at that time:
1. The plane had an immediate catastrophic failure in the cockpit such as the Egyptair style crash and that it went on and crashed further than the last known position on secondary radar and that the primary radar was something else; or
2. The primary radar returns was the aircraft, and that the altitude estimation was erroneous, and that the aircraft continued as the radar said it went.. This could have been a hijack/takeover, or some sort of onboard smoke on a slow fire.
3. The aircraft was being hijacked and was flown to the deck to avoid detection.

This became a debate over the first 2 days.
I personally at the time believed 1 and 2. MH seemed to believe 1 and 2, the minister of transport seemed to believe 1 and 2, but I was told the Prime Minister's office wanted to see 2 and 3 from the very first day.

After a few days the leaks stopped because of potential detection, and that "someone" wanted to focus on number 3.

I do caution those who read the above that it does not mean there is bad intention by the Malaysian government, but I but it as gross incompetence. They handled the accident media releases with text book precision for 7 days, but after that, it crumbled as soon as the Prime Minister made his announcement.

At the moment, 2 is the most likely, but which of the sub-possibilities in 2, is the question. 3 is becoming more unlikely with more calculations being done.

There is a 4th alternative but it is a combo of 2 and 3. That is the aircraft did go up and down, but that the aircraft was not in full control, which make the path west of Penang very hard (but not impossible) to believe... hence the speed variaions.

Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 241):
Somebody (probably multiple somebodies!) isn't sharing their radar data, or lack thereof, for strategic military reasons. I'm sure there's tons of data available, but it's just a little too sensitive to share in anything close to raw form.

There is a lot of things missing. We do know that the military authorities are talking behind the scenes, and we do know the "lack of data" does not always mean there is none... but I am extremely disturbed by the silence of the Air Accident Inspectorate since day 1. Our NTSC team have called, emailed, called their cell phones, and no answer. This is highly unusual in that they normally would reply, "it's OK, we can handle this, thanks for your offer"... All our SAR ops were also made by request from the Malaysian Minister of Defence to our minister of defence, and our NTSC nor our minister of transportation were put in the loop.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 243):
The most idiotic part : Flight 370 did not have the transponder on .( remember ? it had been switched off by the dastardly mass murdering pilot !!! )... and with his transponder off-line, he doesn't have TCAS information either !

There is only one way for the rendez-vous shadowing method to work given the no TCAS... Someone must have provided GCI or position updates of the "target" to the crew, otherwise it's an impossible task... maybe someone had an Iridium portable satcom set...    or maybe he got info from someone on an airband VHF...    If not any of the two... definite bye bye to the rendez-vous theory.

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 249):
I really wish the Malaysian officials had released a bit more information they have regarding the military radar traces.

Don't we all!

Quoting Pihero (Reply 237):
You should ask Mandala499 these questions. He could have some interesting answers for you.

U want me to divulge regional defence details here?   
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
NAV30
Posts: 1080
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 9:16 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 60

Mon May 05, 2014 6:34 am

I've been trying to do a bit of 'lateral thinkng, ' aided by this (apparently factual) article:-

"The report also shows the plane was missing for four hours before Malaysia’s Rescue Coordination Centre was activated.

"As well as the report, officials released the audiotapes of the last transmissions from the missing plane’s cockpit, the cargo manifest and the seating plan.

"The report noted that at 1.38am on March 8, 17 minutes after the Boeing 777-200 disappeared from radar, Vietnamese air traffic control questioned the whereabouts of the plane, which was to have entered their airspace.

"They told their counterparts in Kuala Lumpur that verbal contact had not been made with MH370.

"Other air traffic controls in the region also reported no contact.

"The report states that “A playback of a recording from military primary radar revealed that an aircraft with a possibility of MH 370 had made an air-turn back onto a Westerly heading crossing Peninsular Malaysia.”


Full article: http://www.malaysia-chronicle.com/in...70-was-lost&Itemid=2#ixzz30olTejY7
Follow us: @MsiaChronicle on Twitter

We will all recall that the last known communication with MH370 was one or other of the pilots saying goodnight to the Malaysians. This story makes it pretty clear that they never checked in with the Vietnamese - who duly notified Malaysia of the fact, within 17 minutes (as did other ATC in the area.).

But the Malaysians apparently did 'just plain nothing' for three hours, even though the Vietnamese and others had told them that their aeroplane had 'gone missing,' there is every possibility that a full-blown cover-up is going on?

[Edited 2014-05-04 23:35:51]
 
yakima
Posts: 78
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2005 3:58 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 60

Mon May 05, 2014 8:05 am

My apologies if the question has been asked before. I did not read through all the threads from the start but is up to date with the last few.

In an ideal world, what should have happened in terms of Kuala Lumpur ATC and Ho Chi Minh ATC? In general, how frequently will planes be late checking in? If 17 minutes is too much, after how much time should an alarm have been raised?

In normal ATC operations, is 'missing planes' something an air traffic controller think about often? We hear of glitches in ATC and ATC systems going down frequently. Isn't it human to first think that there is just a temporary problem before ssuming the worst?

What should have been the sequence of events here if everything was followed to the letter?

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

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 60

Mon May 05, 2014 8:24 am

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 2):
U want me to divulge regional defence details here?

Yeah !
... and while you are in jail waiting for your high treason trial and your eventual execution, wde'll be sending you oranges and chocolate !   
Contrail designer
 
lancelot07
Posts: 1084
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2014 8:22 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 60

Mon May 05, 2014 8:32 am

Quoting yakima (Reply 4):
If 17 minutes is too much, after how much time should an alarm have been raised?

I don't think these 17 minutes are a problem, but it seems nothing was done for 4 hours.
 
Backseater
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 3:20 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 60

Mon May 05, 2014 8:40 am

Quote:
PIheor post #237 in part 59
You don't seem to read my analysis : I did just that, i.e eliminating the 18:02 Pulau Perak report and playing a direct route PNG to that 18:22 point the result is ...

There is no solution to the IGARI - PNG - NILAM flight path other than a flight at MMO at high altitude. No jinking and no sea skimming.

But your proof that a radar evasion profile is now based on the 18:22 radar point. That is your "hard" fact? Right?
But that "hard" fact is now approx 262nm from Butterworth AB according to the preliminary report attachment.
Remember, last month that same piece of data was on the Pulau Perak radar plot presented in Beijing by Malaysian envoys. At that time it was only 200nm from Butterworth AB! Strange, don't you think?

As the The Chief Inspector of Air Accidents of the Ministry of Transport of Malaysia states in the note of the Preliminary Report:

Quote:
The information contained in this preliminary report is correct at the time of issue...

So, stay tuned! I bet we have not seen the last magic trick of the peripatetic "hard" facts!
 
Pihero
Posts: 4318
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 5:11 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 60

Mon May 05, 2014 8:51 am

Quoting BackSeater (Reply 1):
FYI, a clear assessment of the preliminary report by Steve Winter, an independent ATM consultant and an Engineering Fellow with Raytheon Company. He was formerly Chief Technologist for NATS.

For this forum, the question I seriously - very seriously - ask you is : " What do you think of it ? "

After all, he has the credentials and the technical knowledge - and experience - on ATC / ATM, doesn't he ?

However, he hasn't mentioned in his :
"...There is little mention of the Royal Malaysian Air Force’s (RMAF) capabilities: only that a radar playback indicated a possible aircraft turning back over the Malaysian Peninsula...."

the full sentence from the report :
"...A play back of a recording from a military primary radar revealed that an aircraft with a possibility of MH 370 had made an air-turn back onto a Westerly heading crossing Peninsular Malaysia..."

I stressed " Westerly heading"... no mention of Khota Bharu, and no mention of Penang or Butterworth.
That's as well, as such westerly trajectory ( anything more than 240° from the turn at IGARI) would cross Southern Thailand too, and as everybody knows, military sensitivities are to be respected these days.
Contrail designer
 
Backseater
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 3:20 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 60

Mon May 05, 2014 9:07 am

Just like most of us, he feels the report is unremarkable and borders on the bare minimum not to anger ICAO. He is hungry for more of the data that he thinks should exist.

Quote:
There is little mention of the Royal Malaysian Air Force’s (RMAF) capabilities: only that a radar playback indicated a possible aircraft turning back over the Malaysian Peninsula. Since it is not mentioned in the report, it has to be concluded that no attempt was made to coordinate with the RMAF at the time of the aircraft’s disappearance, which may well turn out to be a critical factor in the loss of the aircraft. There is no mention of the reports of aircraft altitude from the air defence radars.
 
User avatar
p51tang
Posts: 69
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2014 10:51 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 60

Mon May 05, 2014 9:35 am

Quote:
Pihero Reply 268 Thread 58 - Second, for the defence authorities, there are obvously some serious concerns on capabilities of detection / interception / procedures / chain of command / decision / control.... that all the high-ranking officers are deep in a *Cover your six o'clock * exercise...

And some.....

Quote:
Pihero Reply 34 Thread 59 - If it hadn't seemed so earlier, this is now a farce of political in-fighting and a*** covering in Malaysia.

+1

Quote:
Pihero Reply 156 Thread 59 - Exactly what I was afraid of, several posts ago : The ministry of transport ( which is also the ministry of Defence ) has managed to confuse the public with the simultaneous publication of the international investigation team preliminary report and some in-house documents, mixing facts ( the cargo manifest and the edited com liaisons between ATCs and the airline OPS ) with an in-house very dodgy study on possible flight tracks.

A*** covering operation through disinformation successful !

Possible theory: Derrière Armour is starting to melt under the blow-torch.

Quote:
Pihero Reply 195 Thread 59 - Call it Hussein's or whatever.

It is a map that was released by the Defence Ministry for very suspiscious reasons simultaneously to the investigation team's revised prelim report.

A-huh....

Quote:
NAV30 Reply 253 Thread 59 - We will all recall that the last known communication with MH370 was one or other of the pilots saying goodnight to the Malaysians. This story makes it pretty clear that they never checked in with the Vietnamese - who duly notified Malaysia of the fact, within 17 minutes (as did other ATC in the area.).

But the Malaysians apparently did 'just plain nothing' for three hours, even though the Vietnamese and others had told them that their aeroplane had 'gone missing,' there is every possibility that a full-blown cover-up is going on?

Fo Sho! Bruddah!....
 
bluesky9
Posts: 105
Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2014 1:26 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 60

Mon May 05, 2014 9:42 am

Speculation
Speculation is a useful part of the scientific method. Basically, the process involves proposing multiple theories to explain an event. The best theories make the least number of unprovable assumptions and are consistent with the "facts" that we know. A good theory is also falsifiable, by finding new facts. The least good theories (though not necessarily wrong) are those that make more assumptions and those that no matter what new data is released are not falsifiable.

The process is then to consider as many orthogonal or independent scenarios consistent with the "facts" as possible. In other words scenarios that are as different from one another as possible. (There is still room for new theories here.) Based on our own experiences we each assign different probabilities to the scenarios. As more information becomes available those probabilities should change, until hopefully they converge.

Radar Avoidance Scenario
However you look it, It is NOT likely that radar avoidance was the aim of the westerly route.
Because:
1. Radar could have been avoided by turning east instead of south west.
2. A pilot flying back towards Penang at any altitude would expect to be seen by primary radar (as I mentioned before).
3. Avoiding primary radar on this route would be very unlikely no matter what route or altitude was flown, this A/C has a huge RCS.
4. Timings (appear) to make it impossible that the A/C descended to very low level and climbed again.
5. ...etc add your reasons

So the radar avoidance aspect of scenarios as implying some sort of intention of someone in control can be put to rest. In other words there was no real attempt to avoid radar. If anything the opposite case is stronger, i.e. maybe they wanted to be seen.

More likely (as I mentioned before) is that no one in the Military Radar was "watching" the screen. Think about the human factor of the job of watching a military radar in early morning hours. The operator might pay attention for the first few days, but after a few months (or years) of seeing absolutely nothing of interest it might be hard for a human to monitor the radar properly. So although the military can tick the box saying "we have someone monitoring 24/7" in reality it might not be effective. This might account for the tension between the military and civilian authorities in Malaysia at present.

High Altitude Flight as Way to Take out Pax and Crew
Flying at 35K or 39K for a 20 minutes will not take out all crew and pax. The cabin crew have walk around O2 that will last longer. Even then if the aircraft descends some people will wake up. For example the teenager who survived an unpressurized flight to Hawaii in the wheel well. So although this scenario is still possible it is not an effective tactic and is not consistent with any low altitude flight at or below 10K feet. Therefore we cannot say a temporary increase in altitude implies intent, though maintaining altitude while depressurized might if someone was in control. We don't have enough data now, but when the A/C is found we will.

Cargo Fire Scenario
A simple fire in the cargo hold does not explain the lack of comms and loss of transponder. (So this can probably be trimmed from the tree of possibilities or at least assigned a very low probability.)

The only interesting cargo scenarios are:
1. Extremely toxic cargo, that either via fire or otherwise was toxic to the flight crew. (unknown or low probability)
2. Valuable cargo -> heist (unknown or low probability)
3. Valuable Hi Tech military cargo, e.g. anti radar tech -> heist, hijack for diversion, &/or shoot down and elaborate ICAR spoofing or fabrication of ICAR information (unknown or low probability). (Have to consider this because unfortunately it is not unprecedented to be told big fibs by governments: WMDs in Iraq, Gulf of Tonkin, etc. Also not finding the aircraft has caused some friction between Malaysia and China, at just the time Obama was firming up alliances against China in Asia. In addition some western companies could profit from this disaster should realtime flight monitoring be adopted, [followed eventually by ground controlled pilot override]. It also might have given western countries the chance to assess China's military capabilities during the search. However, it does not really feel like this is what is happening and there are other factors that would count against this scenario, nevertheless it should be on the table to be reconsidered if the A/C is not found.)

Pax Boarding
One potential problem is that at some airports only the boarding pass is inspected at the gate, but not the passport. This seems a point of vulnerability since someone other than the person whose name is on the boarding pass could get on the plane. So if one person could replace another, so could a group. (True there is the question of what happened to the pax that were originally booked. Also true there are checks and balances at other airports on pax arrivals, but not all international airports are created equal. In other words relying on a perfect airport system throughout the rest of the world is not sufficient to ensure that the pax you think on board are actually on board. I can think of a few ways to get around these issues but I don't want to spell those out here.) Also sometimes carry on bags are not inspected at the gate, this adds another point of vulnerability, e.g. among other things, someone might take on a portable VHF to listen in to ATC.

Other Scenarios
The fire scenario (like Egypt Air) followed by pilot incapacitation and/or aircraft handling problems seem plausible.
The rouge pilot or hijack are possible, but does not explain the flight path and so is therefore less plausible.

What we really need are some old style investigative journalists who track down NEW hard facts on the ground. The reporting so far seems fairly superficial, almost everything coming from the authorities and being analyzed from afar.

Report
In some ways the report showing things not running smoothly on the ground after MH370 vanished is reassuring, since that is the way these type of "one off" things often pan out. If Malaysia now simply try to find out the truth, they might come out of this OK, but if they try to spin this, they will likely eventually become unstuck.

[Edited 2014-05-05 02:46:32]

[Edited 2014-05-05 03:12:45]
 
Pihero
Posts: 4318
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 5:11 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 60

Mon May 05, 2014 9:49 am

Quoting BackSeater (Reply 7):
But your proof that a radar evasion profile is now based on the 18:22 radar point. That is your "hard" fact? Right?

Not at all ! It's from your assessment of the trajectory (which you share with others, including WP ).
I just tried to show that your hypothetical trajectory is an impossibility.
I plotted that point (your point at Nilam for the basis of the most accurate distance computation.

In all the posts I did about your hypothesis[I] of a jinking / High / Low / High profile, I haven't given a single fact of my own, except the actual aircraft maximum performance and the maximum possible combination of altitudes. I even went as far as using the best altitude for an MMO /VMO combination - FL 300 -.
... and yet, y[i]your hypothesis is still an impossibility.

Quoting BackSeater (Reply 7):
according to the preliminary report attachment

It _is_not_a_preliminary_report_attachment, vetted by the investigation team. To say otherwise is IMO now disingenuous.

Quoting BackSeater (Reply 7):
last month that same piece of data was on the Pulau Perak radar plot presented in Beijing by Malaysian envoys. At that time it was only 200nm from Butterworth AB! Strange, don't you think?

Yep !.. but it's no longer the case on the attached pretty picture from Hishammudin's ... which begs the question : what do your base your theory on ?
When question answered, stick to that *fact*.
Otherwise you'd be cheating.
If you believe H's services, the path is impossible
If you believe the radar plot ( 285° / 200 nm from Butterworth ), yes it could accept some low level flying... but you'll have to account for an extra 80 nm to the turning point at their 18:27:04 ( I love the precision ), which also makes it impossible, because ,
following Finn350 post #160 / Thread 59 : 18:22 to 18:27 = 857 - 811 = 47 nm, which already requires a whopping 565 kt ground speed.
If you add 80 nm to that distance, you'd have to fly 127 nm in five minutes --> GS = 1522 kt ...
That's Mach 1.2 and I really didn't know a T7 could be supersonic...
But I could be wrong and all my friends on the type have hidden that fact to me and my manuals !   

[Edited 2014-05-05 03:29:55]
Contrail designer
 
Backseater
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 3:20 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 60

Mon May 05, 2014 11:11 am

Quoting Pihero (Reply 12):
but you'll have to account for an extra 80 nm to the turning point at their 18:27:04 ( I love the precision ), which also makes it impossible

As a matter of fact, I don't really know where that "turning point" location comes from? How does it work? The satcom transmits when the a/c begins a turn? And what error margin do you assume on the location coordinates?
 
na
Posts: 9729
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 1999 3:52 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 60

Mon May 05, 2014 11:40 am

I would like to raise my unanswered question again: are there any ongoing investigations about crew and passengers? Or are the authorities only concentrating on the shrinking hope to find the black boxes?
 
Pihero
Posts: 4318
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 5:11 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 60

Mon May 05, 2014 11:52 am

I don't assume anything.
I take the distances from the pretty pictures, solved by Finn350.
Once again, it's up to you to accept those data or not and compute accordingly... and honestly.

That's what I did, on your behalf, considering that you did not want to do it and kept on claiming a radar avoidance flight path.

The only factual informations we have are :
- Takeoff time 16:41 Z
- IGARI 17:21 Z
- A *possible turn* to a westerly course after IGARI ( from where ?)
- A *possible turn* at 19:29 Z, detected by the Doppler BFOs analysis
- An end of the SatCom handshakes at 00:19 Z
All these times + or - 1 minute.

Additional implications :
At 19:29 Z, the airplane was North- Northwest of the Sumatra tip.
The Indian Ocean part of the flight had been flown at a much lower speed than the initial cruising speed we observed at IGARI.
Contrail designer
 
lancelot07
Posts: 1084
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2014 8:22 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 60

Mon May 05, 2014 11:56 am

Quoting na (Reply 14):
are there any ongoing investigations about crew and passengers?

Passengers and cockpit crew were cleared weeks ago, al least it was reported that nothing suspicious was found. But iirc the cabin crew was not mentioned then. And if passengers can board with stolen passports and tickets paid in cash, everything has to be taken with a grain of salt.
 
User avatar
Finn350
Posts: 1601
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:57 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 60

Mon May 05, 2014 12:05 pm

Quoting Pihero (Reply 12):
following Finn350 post #160 / Thread 59 : 18:22 to 18:27 = 857 - 811 = 47 nm, which already requires a whopping 565 kt ground speed.

I made a new table of the times, distances and average ground speeds adding the exact time for the IGARI fly-over as presented in the interim report and using 275 nm as the distance from Kuala Lumpur to IGARI.



If we use the distances and times as in the 'investigation team' map and the interim report, the plane was flying at a considerable speed between IGARI at 172104 Z and the last military radar detection at 182200 Z.

The ground speed was even greater between the last military radar detection 182200 Z and a ping (and a sharp turn south) at 182704 Z. Please note that this last average ground speed is highly dependent on the exact timing of the last military radar detection. Even a 15 second earlier timestamp for the last military radar detection would decrease this speed by 26 knots.

As noted by Pihero, these high ground speeds will rule out any low altitude flight.
 
lancelot07
Posts: 1084
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2014 8:22 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 60

Mon May 05, 2014 12:13 pm

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 17):
Even a 15 second earlier timestamp for the last military radar detection would decrease this speed by 26 knots.

This last leg to the first ping is quite strange. Where does that turn at 18:22 come from ?
 
User avatar
neutrino
Posts: 1536
Joined: Thu May 10, 2012 5:33 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 60

Mon May 05, 2014 12:21 pm

Quoting Pihero (Reply 5):
Yeah !
... and while you are in jail waiting for your high treason trial and your eventual execution, wde'll be sending you oranges and chocolate !

Only some mundane foodstuff?
You should do better than that; like cobbling together an Anet Delta Force for a SAR (Storm And Rescue) mission.  
Potestatem obscuri lateris nescitis
 
User avatar
Finn350
Posts: 1601
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:57 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 60

Mon May 05, 2014 12:27 pm

Quoting lancelot07 (Reply 18):
This last leg to the first ping is quite strange. Where does that turn at 18:22 come from ?


Yes, there is a slight turn at 182200 Z at the 'Updated Last Air Defence Radar' detection at 811 nm as per the 'investigation team map'.

It is true it would be more logical that the plane continued on a straight course with somewhat lesser speed to reach the 182704 Z ping ring at correct time, because the pilot (whoever it was) couldn't have known where the military radar coverage ends.

I suppose they know what speed the plane had as it left the military radar coverage, and they have used that speed to calculate a heading to reach the ping ring at 182704 Z at correct time.

http://oi61.tinypic.com/imqqz6.jpg
 
Backseater
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 3:20 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 60

Mon May 05, 2014 12:42 pm

Quoting Pihero (Reply 15):
considering that you ... kept on claiming a radar avoidance flight path.

I only claimed that a radar avoidance flight path is one scenario among several very distinct scenarios, and all scenarios have outstanding problems before they can become plausible.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 15):
The only factual informations we have are :
- Takeoff time 16:41 Z
- IGARI 17:21 Z
- A *possible turn* to a westerly course after IGARI ( from where ?)
- A *possible turn* at 19:29 Z, detected by the Doppler BFOs analysis
- An end of the SatCom handshakes at 00:19 Z
All these times + or - 1 minute.

Note with that short list, there are not too many scenarios you can rule out as being impossible.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 15):
The Indian Ocean part of the flight had been flown at a much lower speed than the initial cruising speed we observed at IGAR

than we observed at IGARI but also IMO at 19:22. According to the report's 2 Air defence points, 519kts average speed over 20min but the chart attached to the prelim says speed=325kts at 18:22. What happened? The person(s) flying the a/c slammed on the brakes because they were afraid of approaching the edge of radar coverage???

BTW, if you move the 18:22 point back to 200nm from Butterworth AB and leave 18:02 at Pulau Perak, you get an average speed of 333kts. Interesting isn't it? That is IMO still wrong but that gives a new light on the probable "correctness" of data in the report's attachments. I really thing the "damage control team" tasked with obfuscating the raw data (of course to preserve Malaysian national security) should take a break and breathe deeply. Looks like they are getting a bit sloppy.   
 
lancelot07
Posts: 1084
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2014 8:22 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 60

Mon May 05, 2014 12:54 pm

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 20):
I suppose they know what speed the plane had as it left the military radar coverage, and they have used that speed to calculate a heading to reach the ping ring at 182704 Z at correct time.

well yes, but wasn't that way above max speed for a 777 ? (even accounting for tail wind)

another strange feature is the turn near Penang. Why not connect the last civilian radar contact with the first military (18:02) ? Sure, that would give a path over Thailand, and the Thais said that din't happen. Hmmmm.

another silly question: Why would somebody controlling the plane try to avoid radar ? Nobody would shoot down a civilian airliner, and the 777 would beat any fighter jet on endurance.

[Edited 2014-05-05 06:02:09]
 
NAV30
Posts: 1080
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 9:16 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 60

Mon May 05, 2014 1:15 pm

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 17):
Please note that this last average ground speed is highly dependent on the exact timing of the last military radar detection

Trying to keep things simple, as far as I can tell, the last definite direct radio contact with MH370 was the 'Goodnight' message? At which time the aeroplane was flying its allotted track, more or less north-east?

After that MH370 appears to have been 'off the air.' The subsequent turns to the south-west, and then to the south, were not reported by the crew to Malaysian ATC. Indeed,, there appear to have been no further communications of any kind from MH370. The possible (dare I say 'alleged')' 'turns back' - first to the south-west, then to the south - seem to be based not on any communications from the aeroplane or ATC but on reports from a military radar station whose primary job would not have been tracking civilian flights.

On present evidence, it appears that, from the moment of losing contact, all possibilities remain open. MH370 could indeed have turned south-west (for whatever reason). Or it could have continued flying a bit east of north, on its planned track.

And/or it could have had a fatal 'malfunction,' right then and there?

[Edited 2014-05-05 06:51:59]
 
LTC8K6
Posts: 1538
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 8:36 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 60

Mon May 05, 2014 1:20 pm

Let's face it, we only know a few things.

We know when 9M-MRO took off.

We know when ADS-B data stopped.

We know the last heading was ~40 degrees.

We know when the crew was last heard from.

We know that things went wonky near waypoint IGARI

We know the sat modem was still awake and answering handshakes for many hours.

We know the sat modem tried a last unscheduled partial handshake at 08:19M / 00:19U the next day.

We know the next scheduled handshake went unanswered.

We know it didn't arrive in PEK on schedule.

We know not a sign of it has been found.
 
NAV30
Posts: 1080
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 9:16 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 60

Mon May 05, 2014 2:15 pm

Just about agree 100%, LTC8K6. Except for:-


Quoting LTC8K6 (Reply 24):
We know the last heading was ~40 degrees.

That conclusion doesn't, as far as I know, follow from the available information. All that is currently known is that 'an aeroplane' flew west across the relevant area at the relevant time. But that evidence comes from military radar, not civil ATC. There is no guarantee that the relevant aeroplane was in fact MH370?

I doubt that MH370 was the only aeroplane flying that night?

[Edited 2014-05-05 07:19:07]
 
User avatar
Finn350
Posts: 1601
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:57 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 60

Mon May 05, 2014 2:19 pm

Quoting BackSeater (Reply 21):
but the chart attached to the prelim says speed=325kts at 18:22

Those ground speeds refer to the last segment of the flight, 1827 Z - 0019 Z.

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 23):
The possible (dare I say 'alleged')' 'turns back' - first to the south-west, then to the south - seem to be based not on any communications from the aeroplane or ATC but on reports from a military radar station whose primary job would not have been tracking civilian flights.

If we discount the satellite handshakes, then yes. If we accept the satellite handshakes as evidence, there was (among others) a handshake at 182704 Z that places the aircraft somewhere on an arc crossing the northern tip of Sumatra and extending north and south.

Quoting lancelot07 (Reply 22):
another strange feature is the turn near Penang. Why not connect the last civilian radar contact with the first military (18:02) ?

They have never characterized the 1802 Z detection as the 'first' (although it might be). Based on the photograph of the 'Military radar plot from Pulau Perak to last plot at 02:22 H' that was discussed about 20 parts ago, it looks like there are several radar 'blips' both before and after the 1802 Z detection. The interpretation of this plot has remained elusive, and the 'last air defence radar point' at 02:22 H / 1822 Z has been 'updated' in the latest 'investigation team' map.

http://tmfassociates.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Beijing-event.jpg

[Edited 2014-05-05 07:26:27]
 
LTC8K6
Posts: 1538
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 8:36 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 60

Mon May 05, 2014 2:50 pm

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 25):

That is the last ADS-B heading from FR24.

9M-MRO turned from 25 to 28 to 40 degrees and then data ends.
 
lancelot07
Posts: 1084
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2014 8:22 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 60

Mon May 05, 2014 2:56 pm

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 26):
it looks like there are several radar 'blips' both before and after the 1802 Z detection. The interpretation of this plot has remained elusive, and the 'last air defence radar point' at 02:22 H / 1822 Z has been 'updated' in the latest 'investigation team' map.

Thanks for posting the slide again! The dots should fit with the map. I wonder, why they did not put the mark on the first dot.

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 23):
On present evidence, it appears that, from the moment of losing contact, all possibilities remain open.

Yes, if we dismiss
- absence of radar contact in the northeast
- absence of a wreck in the northeast (most of the area is land, mostly densely populated)
- reported radar contact in the southwest
- and, above all, the handshakes.
And there just might be more from US or Australian military sources that will not be revealed.

A few parts ago there was a link to an article from March that says China will search the north. If they had found anything it sure would have been reported.

Edit: I am not sure what the lines in the background of the slide mean, but after looking at the full-sized version i think it might be airways. If true, we can forget all "waypoint" and "airway"-theories, none of the dots is on a line !

[Edited 2014-05-05 08:14:12]
 
User avatar
Finn350
Posts: 1601
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:57 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 60

Mon May 05, 2014 3:29 pm

Quoting lancelot07 (Reply 28):
Edit: I am not sure what the lines in the background of the slide mean, but after looking at the full-sized version i think it might be airways. If true, we can forget all "waypoint" and "airway"-theories, none of the dots is on a line !

Actually, the left half of the 'blips' correspond to an airway, according to this image from another forum where the radar 'blips' have been overlaid on an aeronautical chart (and the right part is consistent with a VPG - VAMPI flight):

http://i.imgur.com/XhbOy0g.jpg

[Edited 2014-05-05 08:31:12]
 
mandala499
Posts: 6592
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 60

Mon May 05, 2014 3:37 pm

Quoting lancelot07 (Reply 28):
Thanks for posting the slide again! The dots should fit with the map. I wonder, why they did not put the mark on the first dot.

This is the sad thing about having multiple sources blurting themselves out as "official"..
My guess is that they didn't put the timestamp on the first dot because they just wanted to match the then previous announcement that they began to be suspicious of the aircraft detected at 02:02...

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 29):
Actually, the left half of the 'blips' correspond to an airway, according to this image from another forum where the radar 'blips' have been overlaid on an aeronautical chart:

Thanks for finding that overlay!
I think this explains why they thought the aircraft was going at variable speeds... because at first glance, once would think that...
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
Backseater
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 3:20 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 60

Mon May 05, 2014 3:45 pm

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 30):
this explains why they thought the aircraft was going at variable speeds

as if climbing west of Penang.
I found some time ago a speed ratio approx. equal to 5/7 between the beginning and end of the radar track (using the two short sequences that seem to correspond to one point per antenna revolution)
5/7 as in 350kts / 490kts
Seems about right for a climb profile.
 
LTC8K6
Posts: 1538
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 8:36 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 60

Mon May 05, 2014 4:07 pm

Except there is nothing to show that those dots are related to 9M-MRO...
 
Backseater
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 3:20 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 60

Mon May 05, 2014 4:22 pm

Quoting LTC8K6 (Reply 32):
Except there is nothing to show that those dots are related to 9M-MRO...

Around 2a.m. there is not much commercial traffic on those airways. Check FR24 right now. Nobody on radials 275-295 from Butterworth AB.
Removing the dots corresponding to a few commercial airplanes with well known positions must not be too hard by software, maybe even by hand.

In the US, AFAIK ATC en-route radars also show primary returns as tiny dots that are not very visible unless you really look for them. In Malaysia,I am not sure. Because if they did, secondary radar logs might be another data source.
 
kurtjeter
Posts: 142
Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2011 1:32 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 60

Mon May 05, 2014 4:49 pm

Quoting lancelot07 (Reply 22):
another silly question: Why would somebody controlling the plane try to avoid radar ? Nobody would shoot down a civilian airliner, and the 777 would beat any fighter jet on endurance.

Maybe you meant this tongue-in-cheek? There's the case of KAL 007 in 1983!
 
User avatar
pvjin
Posts: 3614
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 4:52 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 60

Mon May 05, 2014 4:59 pm

Quoting kurtjeter (Reply 34):
Maybe you meant this tongue-in-cheek? There's the case of KAL 007 in 1983!

That was back then. I highly doubt any country (with possible exception of North Korea) would shoot down an unidentified airliner that is peacefully cruising at + 30 000ft. Doing that would be an inexcusable mass murder.
"Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that." - Martin Luther King Jr
 
coolian2
Posts: 2483
Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2006 3:34 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 60

Mon May 05, 2014 5:01 pm

Quoting kurtjeter (Reply 34):
Maybe you meant this tongue-in-cheek? There's the case of KAL 007 in 1983!

Ummmmmm historical context not-withstanding?
Q300/ATR72-600/737-200/-300/-400/-700/-800/A320/767-200/-300/757-200/777-300ER/
747-200/-300/-400/ER/A340-300/A380-800/MD-83/-88/CRJ-700/-900
 
LTC8K6
Posts: 1538
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 8:36 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 60

Mon May 05, 2014 5:07 pm

Quoting BackSeater (Reply 33):

It is an assumption, nothing more, as far as I know.

There is nothing specific that identifies those returns as being 9M-MRO.

It is even possible that the left group is 9M-MRO, and the right group is not.
 
 
User avatar
pvjin
Posts: 3614
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 4:52 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 60

Mon May 05, 2014 5:10 pm

Quoting LTC8K6 (Reply 38):
e's

That happened in a war zone. MH370 wasn't flying near any war zone.
"Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that." - Martin Luther King Jr
 
LTC8K6
Posts: 1538
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 8:36 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 60

Mon May 05, 2014 5:17 pm

Quoting pvjin (Reply 39):

It was 5 years after KAL007, and an airliner was still mistaken for an F-14...and cover ups were attempted and lies were told.

I'm sure no one shot down 9M-MRO, but it's foolish to say no one would...
 
lancelot07
Posts: 1084
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2014 8:22 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 60

Mon May 05, 2014 5:22 pm

Quoting kurtjeter (Reply 34):
Maybe you meant this tongue-in-cheek? There's the case of KAL 007 in 1983!

no, not tongue in cheek!
Actually, there were more cases in the past, KAL twice, Iran Air, and others. But I don't think any government in the region is as paranoid as the USSR was (especially around sensitive military installations), and there is no shooting war going on like in the Iran Air case. I really don't think anybody around Malaysia would shoot down a civilian plane. And wouldn't be a high flying plane considered to be less of a threat than a low flying ?
If I were a terrorist on the run, I'd rather go high than low and take the risk of flying into a mountain or get caught anyway. But I have to concede, I'm not an experienced terrorist.  

Btw, if one simply wanted to avoid radar, why go over the peninsula at all? Why not go east - southeast ?
 
hivue
Posts: 2052
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:26 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 60

Mon May 05, 2014 5:52 pm

Quoting lancelot07 (Reply 41):
Btw, if one simply wanted to avoid radar, why go over the peninsula at all? Why not go east - southeast ?

If you want to fly 7 hours unnoticed, E/SE from the point where the xponder ceased doesn't look to me like the way to go.
"You're sitting. In a chair. In the SKY!!" ~ Louis C.K.
 
na
Posts: 9729
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 1999 3:52 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 60

Mon May 05, 2014 6:41 pm

Quoting lancelot07 (Reply 16):
Passengers and cockpit crew were cleared weeks ago, al least it was reported that nothing suspicious was found.

That was about 4 weeks ago and it didnt sound like the investigation was thorough. I find it strange that there was not a single word since.
 
lancelot07
Posts: 1084
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2014 8:22 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 60

Mon May 05, 2014 6:58 pm

Quoting na (Reply 43):
That was about 4 weeks ago and it didnt sound like the investigation was thorough. I find it strange that there was not a single word since.

It sounded thorough regarding the captain. Regarding the FO there were some hints here that he is well connected to the government, so what do you expect ? I remember that the cabin crew was not mentioned and found that a little strange.
The pax ? 2 with stolen passports.
 
solarflyer22
Posts: 1519
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 7:07 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 60

Mon May 05, 2014 9:06 pm

Quoting lancelot07 (Reply 44):
The pax ? 2 with stolen passports.

One of the two Iran passengers was a Christian with a colorful Facebook page. I don't know why FoxNews covers the 2 stolen passport wielding 'terrorists' without mentioning that minor detail. I'm Iranian, well acquainted with the Armenian/ Christian Iranians, and he clearly was not a hijacker. We know who the trouble makers are in our nation very well and its easy to spot them. The suggestion is laughable to us, literally. On satellite TV based in LA, we joke about it.

I'd be more concerned about the Chinese passengers than the Iranian ones. They were there in large numbers and I am not really sure I'd trust Beijing to be forthcoming if they found something. Asian nations usually try to save face then air the dirty laundry. Trying to hijack a plane with two people is hard enough, with one its nearly impossible.

Quoting lancelot07 (Reply 41):

Btw, if one simply wanted to avoid radar, why go over the peninsula at all?

Yeah, this does not make sense to me either. Unless you are flying nap of the earth, which would be totally ridiculous in a 777, there's no point. Plus it puts you at risk of being spotted on the ground by civilians.
 
lancelot07
Posts: 1084
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2014 8:22 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 60

Mon May 05, 2014 9:54 pm

Quoting solarflyer22 (Reply 45):
and he clearly was not a hijacker.

Those two were certainly thoroughly investigated, they are not the point. They were found out eventually.
But if 2 passengers can board with stolen passports after paying their tickets in cash, what else can happen? How many can board with forged passports ? How effective are the passport controls in KUL? And the security controls?
Big question mark.
 
User avatar
pvjin
Posts: 3614
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 4:52 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 60

Mon May 05, 2014 10:30 pm

Quoting lancelot07 (Reply 46):
But if 2 passengers can board with stolen passports after paying their tickets in cash, what else can happen? How many can board with forged passports ? How effective are the passport controls in KUL? And the security controls?
Big question mark.

I doubt KUL is any worse than most other airports in the region. I wouldn't have much faith on airport security anyway, I'm pretty sure well trained terrorists with unwanted items could board a flight pretty much anywhere in the world.
"Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that." - Martin Luther King Jr
 
YoungMans
Posts: 432
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 10:31 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 60

Mon May 05, 2014 10:45 pm

In any criminal investigation, one of the first questions the police will ask is about motive; who benefits, what would the suspects be prepared to do, to get what they want.

This is one of the questions that hasn't been covered here in any great detail; who would benefit from the disappearance of flight MH370? And how then would the disappearance fit around that?

Well, maybe there is more to it than what meets the eye ....
Thanks to the internet, whenever something happens, as on the scale of this disappearance, blogs and websites run riot.

Fortunately we can apply a simple filter in that case; is what we are told:
1 . Absolutely true; 100% on the scale, or ....
2. Is it absolutely false; 0% on the scale, or ...
3. Does the truth lie somewhere in between.

With this in mind we can confidently search the net and we'll find lots of information.
(Some of it, of course, outright BULL..)

In the first instance then it has to pass Occam's Razor; which sorts out most of the stuff; and indeed, most of it will then fall by the wayside. But not all of it; that then has to pass a further test, 'Is-It-Plausible'.
Once information has passed these two stages, we can start to seriously look at it.

Keeping that in mind, have a look at this..:
And I quote:
"It adds: “Here is your motive for the missing Beijing plane.
As all four Chinese members of the Patent were passengers on the missing plane.”

Patent holders can alter the proceeds legally by passing wealth to their heirs. “However, they cannot do so until the Patent is approved. So when the plane went missing, the patent had not been approved.” "
End of quote ...

And guess what ...
If the general information on it is correct, the patent(s) were passed four days after the disappearance of MH370.
Coincidence or not? If it is true ....

You find this on the following website and it is the last four paragraphs that sum it up.

http://beforeitsnews.com/politics/20...-who-stood-in-his-way-2607888.html

Is this plausible?
(Now, please don't shoot me, the messenger.)

[Edited 2014-05-05 16:37:19]
 
User avatar
p51tang
Posts: 69
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2014 10:51 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 60

Mon May 05, 2014 11:28 pm

Quoting BackSeater (Reply 33):
Around 2a.m. there is not much commercial traffic on those airways. Check FR24 right now. Nobody on radials 275-295 from Butterworth AB.



Agreed.   

I took a snapshot from FR24 at 7.00am Malaysian Time,and even during daylight, there was no noticeable traffic between VPG - VAMPI.

I was tracking MAS195 (9M-MRP) from BOM - KUL.....A T7 flying 39,000ft hauling A** at 485kts.   


  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 8

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos