mandala499
Posts: 6589
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 63

Sun May 25, 2014 5:08 pm

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 249):
Nobody's shoving anything down anyone's throats.

I see present tense, not past tense...   

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 249):
I am not married to the idea that D200J was THE waypoing programmed into the FMC.

So when did the divorce happen?

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 249):
another obscure waypoing, KENDI, that is nearby.

KENDI isn't as obscure as D155J. It is a clearance limit point for many of the standard arrivals into Penang.

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 249):
Alternatively, the pilot could have entered manually a lat/long, or the pilot could have been using southern coast of Penang as a mental waypoint while he/she/it was flying manually.

Why enter manual lat lon if you could simply just put in... VPG, for example?
The way I see it is that there is a possibility that this was manually flown or with HDGSEL in the A/P but flying with either or both of following the LNAV magenta line on the ND (eyeball 101), or flying with raw data (with doing other things which could result in the deviation).

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 249):
Now, as I understand it, when making a turn at a waypoint, unless the turn is very sharp, the aircraft will automatically cut the corner somewhat, and fly to the north of it (in this case). The question is whether 3.5 nm is too much?

If you're navigating by waypoints, let's say in LNAV on A/P... your inbound track and your outbound track, should intersect at the waypoint. As this isn't the case, we can largely dismiss flying by LNAV on A/P in this portion.
If you're navigating by waypoints and not in LNAV on A/P, 3.5NM is and isn't too much at the same time. If he's navigating by waypoints and notin LNAV, then he can always short cut, or overshoot the waypoint, or miss it completely whilst remaining within a "general area of the waypoint".

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 249):
ISBIX MUTMI RUNUT.

Looks like the authorities may have elected to go with ISBIX PIPOV BEBIM POLUM by the looks of those white lines... if it were done by waypoint navigation...

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 249):
I favor a continuation of the 189T track--you guys, however, seem to think that it is psychologically impossible for a pilot to fly a true course. So who knows?

Continuation of the 189T can happen, but not by the pilot selecting the heading reference to true north... it if happens by other means, it's probably going to be more feasible than the heading reference change from mag to true.
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
EricR
Posts: 1226
Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2010 4:15 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 63

Sun May 25, 2014 5:10 pm

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 249):

I dunno, you tell me: if you carefully project the radar track backwards, it appears to cut to about 3 to 3.5 nm to the north of KENDI and D200J

The problem is this.....you are spending an awful amount of time trying to identify possible locations of the plane based on a fraction of the known data that governments in the search have available to them. In addition, you are assuming the immersat data is accurate, but I am not 100% convinced this data is accurate.

This is the first time immersat data was used to help locate an aircraft. Therefore, the methodology used to identify possible locations of the plane is highly prone to inaccuracies. Even proven technologies, such as the pinger locaters used in the Indian Ocean, provided false results. I cannot imagine the possible false results of the immersat data.
 
EricR
Posts: 1226
Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2010 4:15 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 63

Sun May 25, 2014 5:13 pm

Quoting lancelot07 (Reply 251):

Yes, but then it did not fly so far to the west. In fact, the search area seem to be EAST of KUL.

But the plane did not need to fly that far west. It just needed to fly long enough under the cover of darkness to reach a point of no return (ie. far enough away from a viable landing strip with the remaining fuel it had on board).
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 9526
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 63

Sun May 25, 2014 6:35 pm

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 219):
Sounds exactly like many in here!

True. But then again, we are also blessed with REAL pilots/engineers/ATC/mechanics/etc.  

-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.
 
Kaiarahi
Posts: 1807
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 6:55 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 63

Sun May 25, 2014 6:40 pm

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 249):
I am not married to the idea that D200J was THE waypoing programmed into the FMC.

You were for about 10 threads, despite Mandala499 and others pointing out that it an obscure approach fix, not an enroute way point. I hope you break the news of your divorce gently to your bridesmaids on this thread.

[Edited 2014-05-25 11:41:00]
Empty vessels make the most noise.
 
David L
Posts: 8551
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:26 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 63

Sun May 25, 2014 6:47 pm

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 246):

Thank you! I just don't have the patience to keep restarting at the beginning.
 
WarrenPlatts
Posts: 517
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2014 6:03 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 63

Sun May 25, 2014 7:59 pm

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 256):
You were for about 10 threads, despite Mandala499 and others pointing out that it an obscure approach fix, not an enroute way point. .

This is false.... I never said D200J was THE waypoint used. Yes, it is an obscure waypoint, but I'm guessing it very well could have been familiar to someone with 20,000 hours of flying over Malaysia. And just because it is ordinarily used as an approach waypoint does not entail that it could have been used as a high-level waypoint. No one has said the FMC would reject it. Maybe it was used, maybe it wasn't. Probably, if it was used somehow, the LNAV system was not engaged; conversely if the LNAV subsystem was being used, then D200J evidently was not the waypoint entered. The big fact is that VPG was mostly likely not the waypoint, as the track cuts some 7 nm to the south of VPG. However, as I have consistently maintained, such minor technical details are of little import. All that counts is that the aircraft cut around the south end of Penang Island for some reason. Whether it was VPG or D200J or KENDI or a GPS coordinate or something else does not matter, although nitpicking is seen by some here as useful for scoring debate points when forming ad hominem arguments.

[Edited 2014-05-25 14:13:01]
 
lancelot07
Posts: 1084
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2014 8:22 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 63

Sun May 25, 2014 8:11 pm

Quoting EricR (Reply 254):
But the plane did not need to fly that far west. It just needed to fly long enough under the cover of darkness to reach a point of no return (ie. far enough away from a viable landing strip with the remaining fuel it had on board).

I understand, but i don't think it is such a good idea. A passenger or crew member looking out of the window will notice if the plane is over the ocean or desert, or over populated land, where you can expect a few lights on the ground. Then they will see the sun rise on the wrong side of the plane. And the point of no return must have been very late - Cocos Island, Christmas Island, even Java is not very far away from the now assumed path of the plane.

But then why avoid radar at all ? Nobody there will shoot down an airliner nowadays (ok, maybe North Korea), and the 777 will beat any fighter easily due to its much longer range.
 
WarrenPlatts
Posts: 517
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2014 6:03 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 63

Sun May 25, 2014 8:14 pm

Quote:
The problem is this.....you are spending an awful amount of time trying to identify possible locations of the plane based on a fraction of the known data that governments in the search have available to them. In addition, you are assuming the immersat data is accurate, but I am not 100% convinced this data is accurate.

This is the first time immersat data was used to help locate an aircraft. Therefore, the methodology used to identify possible locations of the plane is highly prone to inaccuracies. Even proven technologies, such as the pinger locaters used in the Indian Ocean, provided false results. I cannot imagine the possible false results of the immersat data.

3 points:

1. I don't think the governments in the search have a lot of aces left up their sleeve that they haven't shown. I believe they are on a wild goose chase based on an erroneous interpretation of the initial phase: my understanding is that the reason they are focusing on these slow-speed tracks is because it was once believed that the aircraft engaged in a lot of aerial acrobatics and thus used up a lot of fuel after the turn at IGARI. Therefore, in order to have enough fuel to get to the final ping rings, the aircraft would have had to fly at a slow speed. This begs the question of why the a/c would slow down and apparently head toward Australia IMO. However, as we have shown here--and even Pihero agrees with me--there simply wasn't enough time for any low-altitude attempts to avoid radar. Therefore, there should have been more than enough fuel left over for the high-speed tracks to the west.

2. In defense of the Inmarsat data, they have done controls on aircraft with known positions and trajectories and supposedly got consistent results. Also, that 18:27 ping ring LOP is consistent with the "Butterworth" radar track.

3. I wouldn't say that the "pinger locators" provided false results: they heard what they heard. It's just that they heard another ship's echolocator or a fish finder rather than the MH370 black boxes IMO.
 
WarrenPlatts
Posts: 517
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2014 6:03 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 63

Sun May 25, 2014 9:46 pm

Quote:
Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 249):
ISBIX MUTMI RUNUT.

Quoting Mandala: Looks like the authorities may have elected to go with ISBIX PIPOV BEBIM POLUM by the looks of those white lines... if it were done by waypoint navigation...

It looks to me like they are flying manually entered lat/long waypoints that just so happen to be located on the ping rings. Quite a coincidence, don't you think?  You gotta admit the tracks are just screwy looking....

Quote:
Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 249):
I favor a continuation of the 189T track--you guys, however, seem to think that it is psychologically impossible for a pilot to fly a true course. So who knows?

Quoting Mandala: Continuation of the 189T can happen, but not by the pilot selecting the heading reference to true north... it if happens by other means, it's probably going to be more feasible than the heading reference change from mag to true.

Is there an easy way to tell it to just keep flying the same GC path it was last on?
 
EricR
Posts: 1226
Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2010 4:15 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 63

Sun May 25, 2014 10:05 pm

Quoting lancelot07 (Reply 259):

A passenger or crew member looking out of the window will notice if the plane is over the ocean or desert, or over populated land, where you can expect a few lights on the ground. Then they will see the sun rise on the wrong side of the plane.

I do not disagree, hence the reason why I said he had to make sure he flew far enough way before anyone noticed.

Quoting lancelot07 (Reply 259):

And the point of no return must have been very late - Cocos Island, Christmas Island, even Java is not very far away from the now assumed path of the plane.

Neither Java nor Xmas Island are close. Xmas Island may have been the closest destination (next to Cocos Islands), but in absolute terms, it was not close. Xmas Island would have been several hours away by the time the sun started to rise. Cocos Island would have been the only conceivable destination.

However, one important thing to keep in mind is that if the passengers successfully gained access to the cockpit, it would have been virtually impossible for them to determine where they were and where the closest diversion airport was located. The only thing a passenger would have seen would have been water all around them. In addition, they probably were out of radio range.

Quoting lancelot07 (Reply 259):

But then why avoid radar at all ? Nobody there will shoot down an airliner nowadays (ok, maybe North Korea), and the 777 will beat any fighter easily due to its much longer range.

In this case, the less attention you draw to yourself, the better the chance your plan will succeed. Also, who knows what actions would have been taken had ATC known that MH370 was deliberately taken off course and flown in the opposite direction of its intended destination.

ATC and Malaysian Airlines were initially under the assumption that the plane was somewhere in Cambodia, and then believed the plane crashed in the Gulf of Thailand. Turning off the transponder provided the distraction necessary for the plane to sneak toward the west.

[Edited 2014-05-25 15:25:14]
 
YoungMans
Posts: 432
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 10:31 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 63

Sun May 25, 2014 10:24 pm

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 258):
although nitpicking is seen by some here as useful for scoring debate points when forming ad hominem arguments.

I fully agree with you on this.

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 255):
True. But then again, we are also blessed with REAL pilots/engineers/ATC/mechanics/etc.  

-Dave

Any of that counts for nothing if the (or a) patented Uninteruptable Auto Pilot was activated.
 
lancelot07
Posts: 1084
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2014 8:22 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 63

Sun May 25, 2014 10:51 pm

Quoting EricR (Reply 262):
I do not disagree, hence the reason why I said he had to make sure he flew far enough way before anyone noticed.

I do not disagree either, they had a better chance in darkness. But they could not be sure to accomplish that task.

Quoting EricR (Reply 262):
However, one important thing to keep in mind is that if the passengers successfully gained access to the cockpit, it would have been virtually impossible for them to determine where they were and where the closest diversion airport was located. The only thing a passenger would have seen would have been water all around them. In addition, they probably were out of radio range.

They certainly were not out of HF-range (1000s of miles), still there would have been obstacles in operating the radio, finding frequencies, and first of all, entering the cockpit. I am not sure about navigation, but we have already discussed the possibility of using smartphones inside the plane.

Quoting EricR (Reply 262):
Your plan has a better chance of success without drawing attention to yourself. Who knows what actions would have been taken had ATC know that MH370 was deliberately taken off course and flown in the opposite direction of its intended destination.

Well, yes. But then, MH370 was indeed deliberately taken off course, for whatever reason. And absolutely nothing happened for 4 hours. Still, I have to admit, getting out of radar range (avoid it or not) was probably possible faster to the west than to the east with all the islands and a long way to the open ocean.
 
Kaiarahi
Posts: 1807
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 6:55 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 63

Mon May 26, 2014 12:02 am

Quoting YoungMans (Reply 263):
Any of that counts for nothing if the (or a) patented Uninteruptable Auto Pilot was activated.

There's no such thing.

Quoting YoungMans (Reply 263):
Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 258):
although nitpicking is seen by some here as useful for scoring debate points when forming ad hominem arguments.

I fully agree with you on this.

So let's just ignore the capabilities / constraints of the aircraft systems, fuel burn, performance envelopes, electrical architecture, SOPs regarding navigation and waypoints, knowledge of aviation professionals in the region .... Disney time - Bambi did it   

[Edited 2014-05-25 17:02:49]
Empty vessels make the most noise.
 
YoungMans
Posts: 432
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 10:31 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 63

Mon May 26, 2014 1:09 am

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 265):
There's no such thing.

Copied that..!
 
mandala499
Posts: 6589
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 63

Mon May 26, 2014 1:27 am

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 258):
I never said D200J was THE waypoint used.

Oh yeah, you said D155J wa THE waypoint... right? or you have discussion amok selective amnesia?   

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 258):
The big fact is that VPG was mostly likely not the waypoint, as the track cuts some 7 nm to the south of VPG.

In the pilot mindset, it is most likely to be the waypoint, but he was handflying or using HDGSEL.
As unlikely as it is, KENDI comes as a close 2nd choice.

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 261):
It looks to me like they are flying manually entered lat/long waypoints that just so happen to be located on the ping rings.

That is counter intuitive to the mission in hand if we are to follow your theory. If we have a lat/lon entry for the Penang area, why would it then go to to ISBIX RUNUT etc... why not just lat/lon coordinates away from waypoints?
This contradicts your previous assertion (which you'd probably deny, or reply with "I am not married to them") that the aircraft must have been flown following waypoints.

Entering VPG, then flying it by hand or HDGSEL and missing it by 7NM makes more sense to your theory than just continuing to change your assertion from D155J to D200J to KENDI to whatever...

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 258):
No one has said the FMC would reject it

If it's not in the database, entering D200J would not yield anything, and you have to enter the VOR, Radial, Distance.
If could also be in the database as a non-pilot selectable individual waypoint.
Regardless of the likelihood of using these, we don't know the actual waypoint database used by MH. Some airlines can elect for waypoints such as D200J to be non-selectable as individual waypoints, some allow, etc.

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 258):
However, as I have consistently maintained, such minor technical details are of little import.

Little importance that you keep insisting upon...
Are you out of waypoints yet Warren?

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 261):
It looks to me like they are flying manually

Hey, you're the one who insisted they had to fly with waypoints... I was just supplying you with waypoints that may fit the white lines. :p

Quoting YoungMans (Reply 263):
Any of that counts for nothing if the (or a) patented Uninteruptable Auto Pilot was activated.

Mate, as said, it doesn't exist... don't you mean uninterruptable power supply?  Smile

To those who still thinks this UAP is a good idea...
Uninterruptable Auto Pilot? Oh God... why?
Everyone was screaming "more handflying" with Asiana in SFO, and now we have this?
Uninterruptable Auto Pilot? OK, so shove it in LNAV/VNAV and you can't change interrupt it with updates such as waypoint shortcuts, change in altitudes, change in Time Over Target for traffic flow management, or change of runways/STARs at destination? Hey, airport's closed, we need to divert... Oh we can't, we have a UAP... *facepalm*
Or, How about basic weather deviation to avoid massive CB clouds which happens often in the tropics? On you can't because you now have UAP... So, have you ever flown into or even close to a CB? Some of the local towering cumulus (which are much smaller) here can be enough to throw flight attendants to the ceiling and turn trolleys into in-cabin ballistic missiles! (Yes, I've seen the safety report, and the medical bill the airline had to pay).

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 265):
Disney time - Bambi did it

Nah, must be someone possessed by Tigger after a night out with bambi to a bar...  Smile
*funnily enough, those are actual callsigns and was used in such a series of phrases in a radio call once!  biggrin  *

[Edited 2014-05-25 18:30:15]
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
jcxroberts
Posts: 97
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 3:41 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 63

Mon May 26, 2014 1:30 am

Quoting sipadan (Reply 216):
Yes, I believe Zaharie had/went amok (not beramok). That this was a vendetta, with the side benefit of reform. If you want me to say he went berserk, he went berserk. Postal, he went postal. So what was all this about again??


He went amuk by carefully calculating a way to crash a plane without detection ? And what reform is coming of it ? Nothing.
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6977
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 63

Mon May 26, 2014 2:21 am

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 229):
You can go to that "Professional Pilots Slagfest Forum" and just see how bad it is... But, for the purposes of an accident, we, as professionals, do not see pointing blame as appropriate... unless we want to bring A.net forums down to the "professional pilots slagfest forum"...

Yes, this forum is of a much higher quality, which is one reason I don't use that forum and decided to join this one. BTW I am not trying to blame anyone or anything (a mechanical fault can also be blamed, just like a person) - I just say what I believed happened and why, just like everyone else does.

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 255):
True. But then again, we are also blessed with REAL pilots/engineers/ATC/mechanics/etc.

And that is what makes the conversation more interesting...

[Edited 2014-05-25 19:22:51]
DC10-10/30,MD82/88/90, 717,727,732/3/4/5/7/8/9ER,742/4,752/3,763/ER,772/E/L/3/W,788/9, 306,320,321,332/3,346,359,388
 
nupogodi
Posts: 933
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 10:58 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 63

Mon May 26, 2014 2:36 am

Mandala, re: "uninterruptible autopilot"

I think the last time this was mentioned, there was some sort of website of dubious quality someone linked which talked about Boeing developing (and patenting?) a system to remotely take-over an aircraft you know has been hijacked (like on 9/11) and have the AP fly somewhere and do an autoland somewhere with Cat III ILS, while people on the ground clear the skies and the runway for it.

Nothing about that sounds technically impossible, just don't think it's actually been implemented. And there are security concerns with such a thing existing, after all who issues the commands? Now you just moved the hijacker from the cockpit, to somewhere he doesn't have to risk his life...

It's not quite what you're thinking, at least I don't think it is, but the whole idea sure is a flight of fancy. Heh, flight.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/new-a...nother-911-impossible-7239651.html

[Edited 2014-05-25 19:42:04]
A man must know how to look before he can hope to see.
 
jetblueguy22
Posts: 3238
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 12:26 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 63

Mon May 26, 2014 5:02 am

Hi All,

As this thread has gotten long Part 64 has been created to continue the conversation. It can be found here MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64 (by jetblueguy22 May 25 2014 in Civil Aviation) .

All posts made after the lock will be removed for housekeeping purposes only.

Regards,
Pat
Look at sweatpants guy. This is a 90 million dollar aircraft, not a Tallahassee strip club

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