• 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 7
 
jetblueguy22
Topic Author
Posts: 3300
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 12:26 am

MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 4:59 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 63 was locked for further contributions. Please feel free to continue your discussion in part 64.

MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 63 (by wilco737 May 19 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,
Pat
Look at sweatpants guy. This is a 90 million dollar aircraft, not a Tallahassee strip club
 
rwessel
Posts: 2448
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 3:47 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 5:09 am

(reposted, as I just got caught in the thread change)

Quoting YoungMans (Reply 165):
Thank you for that, very much appreciated. I'm still grappling with it though ...
If I remember this correctly, first off it was (only) the angle, satellite to aircraft, that determined the north and south arcs.

From what I understand now, those angles don't matter at all anymore; it is now only the timing, i.e. the travel-time of the signals on which the search area calculations are based, including and relying on the Doppler shift data, those proverbial BFO's.
Do I see this correctly now?

It was never an angle from the satellite. The "ping", basically the round trip time of a signal from the satellite to the satcom transceiver, and its response back, establishes the distance between the satellite and the satcom transceiver. This is because the speed of light is fixed, and Inmarsat (apparently) has a good handle on the latency the transciver has on the return signal, and how accurate the satellite is in measuring those things.

Let's say that the round-trip time was 250ms, and the latency in the transceiver was 11ms - that would imply that the one-way trip was about 120ms, or about 22,300 miles (and that's only a number in the general ballpark for illustration, please don't try to match it to the released "ping ring"). That's all that the basic "ping" tells us - that the aircraft is 22,300 miles from that satellite at the time of the ping. IOW, the aircraft is somewhere on the surface of the sphere 22,300 miles in diameter, centered on the satellite. As far as the satellite is concerned, the 777 could well be 22,300 miles *above* the satellite.

But we know that there are certain limits to 777 performance. For example, they don't fly below the surface of the earth, or much above 45kft. So only the areas where the surface of the 22,300 mile sphere intersects places where a 777 could actually fly (above the surface, below ~45kft) are actually interesting. That's the intersection of the 22,300 mile sphere and a roughly nine mile thick spherical surface of the atmosphere here the 777 might be. *That's* the "ping ring". Note that the surface of the 22,300 mile sphere intersects the "atmosphere" sphere surface at a fairly oblique angle, thus the ring has a fair bit of inherent width (IOW, if the aircraft were at 100ft, it would be on a ~20 mile smaller ring than if the aircraft were at 45,000ft, IOW, the ring is actually ~20 miles wide).

Other factors then ruled out much of the ring - the northern and southern limits are defined by aircraft performance (IOW, the aircraft could simply not have made to those locations), and the center segment was eliminated because that area has overlapping coverage from a satellite further east (over the Pacific), which did *not* see the aircraft. That left two segments (the so-called northern and southern segments/arcs).
 
sipadan
Posts: 322
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2014 7:06 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 5:22 am

Quoting jcxroberts (Reply 268):
He went amuk by carefully calculating a way to crash a plane without detection ? And what reform is coming of it ? Nothing.

I don't know. People go postal by carefully planning out their attack. They think to themselves: This is what I am going to do, this is who I will be targeting, and this is how I will do it. It is not the mindless 'frenzy' that you seem to suggest. Or, at least, going postal isn't. You still have possession of rational thought. You are in NO WAY in a dissociative state. You are perhaps in a mild altered state of consciousness, but are perfectly capable of coherent action and thought. It's not steeped in the randomness that you seem to imply.

Okay...Just say for a minute, let's say that HE DID DO IT. After all, this is certainly a possibility. Now, what is it you would like to know? That Anwar was sentenced 7 hours before Zaharie flew is indisputable. That Zaharie would have, at the least, been very upset and angry about this is also indisputable. Does this alone make him guilty of murder...of course not. But whether he would have been 'angry' that morning is beyond question. If this is established (and I believe it has been), and a plane is missing (I think this we can agree on), and his voice is the last utterance to have come from this a/c, he is a bonafide 'suspect', whether one like it or not. I believe there is copious corroborating evidence to be suggestive of his complicity, but I'll refrain. Oh, and that it 'appears' pretty damn likely that someone who knew what they were doing was controlling the a/c. Yes, that insignificant observation (of course, Pihero could well be correct) small observation as well.

Look, if this WAS intentional, then SOMEONE had to do it. That this has been established (intentionality) as 'fact' is to my satisfaction (many here will call me naive to the myriad possibilities of cascading failures, I disagree). I personally don't subscribe to the REAL conspiracy theories for a million and one reasons, not least of which is the timing of events as we know them. I also don't believe that Fariq was capable of said act (I don't believe him to have been in the requisite mental state. He had the technical knowledge.) So I am only left with one. I could be wrong, but i would just about bet my life on it.

[Edited 2014-05-25 22:28:01]
 
NAV30
Posts: 1080
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 9:16 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 5:53 am

Thanks for the extra info, rwessel, interesting.

I think it's important for us to realise that, apart from the first 40 minutes or so, the only 'primary' information we have about MH7-370's track is from the satellite linkup. The aeroplane passed out of 'primary' (official) radar coverage quite early on, and was subsequently tracked only by military radar (and it was that that tracked the supposed turns to the west, and then the south)

The timeline of the cockpit events is quite interesting (edited to local time only for clarity):-

Take-off from KUL (Kuala Lumpur)
00:41 Takeoff
01.01 Crew confirms altitude of 35,000 feet (11,000 m)[32]
01:07 Last ACARS data transmission received;[33] crew confirms altitude of 35,000 feet, a second time[32]
01:19 Last Malaysian ATC voice contact[34]
01:21 Last secondary radar (transponder) contact at 6°55′15″N 103°34′43″E[35][36]
01:22 Transponder and ADS-B no longer operating.
01.30 Voice contact attempt by another aircraft, at request of Vietnam ATC; mumbling and radio static heard in reply[29]
01:37 Missed expected half-hourly ACARS data transmission[33]
02.15 Last primary radar contact by Malaysian military, 200 miles (320 km) NW of Penang,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaysi...ight_370#Timeline_of_disappearance

So the flight crew appears to have lost radio contact after about 40 minutes, at 01.21 local time; and, at virtually the same time, the radar, the transponder, and the locator beacon stopped working?

After that time the aeroplane stopped responding - and any possible 'turns west and south' appear to have been detected/reported by military radar only?

[Edited 2014-05-25 23:12:23]
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6977
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 6:19 am

Thank you for that very interesting info rwessel.

Quoting rwessel (Reply 1):
The "ping", basically the round trip time of a signal from the satellite to the satcom transceiver, and its response back, establishes the distance between the satellite and the satcom transceiver.

That is basically what I thought was meant the whole time.
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
 
lancelot07
Posts: 1084
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2014 8:22 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 6:38 am

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 3):
After that time the aeroplane stopped responding - and any possible 'turns west and south' appear to have been detected/reported by military radar only?

yes, by Thai and Malaysian, and by the satellite pings. Not necessary to mention that the plane did not land in Peking and was not found in the very shallow waters off Vietnam. Continuation on its planned route to Peking is not an option.
 
NAV30
Posts: 1080
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 9:16 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 6:51 am

Oddly enough, there appears to have been an eye-witness, lancelot07?

http://globalnews.ca/news/1202910/oi...lines-flight-mh370-go-down-report/
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6977
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 7:26 am

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 6):
Oddly enough, there appears to have been an eye-witness

One can wonder, given that nothing was found in that area and the search area is now 1000s of kms away from that area, what that oil rig work actually saw... Or, if his information was part of something bigger... Or, if he was under the influence of something... I remember he gave his passport details which were plastered over the internet so I think he expected to be taken seriously...
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
 
David L
Posts: 8551
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:26 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 7:44 am

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 3):
and any possible 'turns west and south' appear to have been detected/reported by military radar only?

No. That has been explained to you several times within the last few days. The "basic" Inmarsat data shows the aircraft getting closer to the satellite after it reached the vicinity of IGARI, i.e. It turned to the west. The turn to the south was determined by further analysis of the satellite communication signals.

Do you still think the Bay of Bengal is northeast of KL?

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 6):

Discussed extensively weeks ago. If you can't be bothered reviewing what's already been discussed then please at least look at the summaries posted by rcair1 in many of the earlier threads.
 
YoungMans
Posts: 432
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 10:31 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 7:46 am

Quoting rwessel (Reply 1):
(reposted, as I just got caught in the thread change)

Thank you very much for your efforts with this.
I understand this now; I was under the impression that, in the early stages, it was the angle of the satellite antenna that was important.
You learn a lot on A.net; thanks once again.

YoungMans
 
mandala499
Posts: 6592
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 7:49 am

Quoting nupogodi (Reply 268):
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.

Not only that... such a thing is not going to be certified unless it can be switched off in one way or another... from there, it'll only be a matter of time before it is compromised.
All the hijacker needs to do when this happens is slap a satphone by a window patch antenna, or go through the equipment on board (unless disabled), call a TV station, then talk while shooting people one by one...
If that ever happens, I wonder how people will view this "turn the plane into a drone" system...

Quoting sipadan (Reply 2):
I also don't believe that Fariq was capable of said act

The question is, would something like this need a lot of planning? If not, it's probably the captain, if yes, it's probably the FO... but... the FO was capable of such act... but his mother might refuse to believe that! *hint hint*

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 3):
After that time the aeroplane stopped responding - and any possible 'turns west and south' appear to have been detected/reported by military radar only?

West, yes.
South, no... it was still heading northwest when it left known military radar coverage.

Quoting CabSauv (Reply 8):
NAV30 mate ... where have you been the last 2+ months ?

This is candidate for "Post of Q2-14"   
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6977
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 7:56 am

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 11):
The question is, would something like this need a lot of planning? If not, it's probably the captain, if yes, it's probably the FO... but... the FO was capable of such act... but his mother might refuse to believe that! *hint hint*

That is one way I look at it. I believe *if* MH370 was planned and *if* a pilot was involved in the planning it would more likely be the FO.
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
 
David L
Posts: 8551
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:26 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 8:19 am

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 11):
Quoting NAV30 (Reply 3):After that time the aeroplane stopped responding - and any possible 'turns west and south' appear to have been detected/reported by military radar only?
West, yes.

To be clear, I'm saying military radar isn't the only evidence of a turn to the west, as NAV30 suggested.  
 
lancelot07
Posts: 1084
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2014 8:22 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 8:23 am

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 7):
One can wonder, given that nothing was found in that area and the search area is now 1000s of kms away from that area, what that oil rig work actually saw...

One can wonder, why only one oil rig worker saw something.  
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6977
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 8:30 am

Quoting lancelot07 (Reply 14):
Quoting 777Jet (Reply 7):
One can wonder, given that nothing was found in that area and the search area is now 1000s of kms away from that area, what that oil rig work actually saw...

One can wonder, why only one oil rig worker saw something.

Exactly. You would think that an oil rig worker would have some idea of what they were seeing. Which leads me to believe, if there was a cover up the oil rig worker may be part of it in that he was intending to divert attention away from where it should be because the area he said originally made sense as it was near where the plane went missing. Or, something might have been smoked that night or maybe 15 seconds of fame looked possible...      
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
 
sipadan
Posts: 322
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2014 7:06 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 10:16 am

Quoting David L (Reply 13):
To be clear, I'm saying military radar isn't the only evidence of a turn to the west, as NAV30 suggested.  

yes...that this is corroborated by multiple pieces of data (multiple radars, satellite, as has been pointed out before) makes the turn to the west irrefutable, literally. Why are we talking about this?

Quoting lancelot07 (Reply 5):
yes, by Thai and Malaysian, and by the satellite pings. Not necessary to mention that the plane did not land in Peking and was not found in the very shallow waters off Vietnam. Continuation on its planned route to Peking is not an option.

No shit...Look, Nav 30...I appreciate your tenacity and thoughtfulness and allegiance to the FACTS. But you are ignoring the FACT that this plane TURNED WEST at or near IGARI. This is in dispute by no one else on this thread accept you. If you accepted this as FACT, well, you can start anew and be in the same ball park as the rest of us. Just a suggestion.
You have some really interesting thoughts, just ditch the debunked premise that you hold.

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 15):
Or, something might have been smoked that night or maybe 15 seconds of fame looked
possible...      
I discount this sighting completely. Most likely someone wanting to feel relevant (don't we all) with little at stake. However, with this 'government' behaving like it is, all bets are off. This has truly been disgraceful on Malaysia's part. I mean, to put yourself into the shoes of a family member and have to endure Mr. Half-face Hussein (sp?) obfuscate on 4 corners is more than one could bear. THAT was despicable. He would have done well to have kept the family members in mind before setting out on a charade such that he presented (yes, I know i am setting myself up for criticism here, thank you).
 
lancelot07
Posts: 1084
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2014 8:22 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 10:25 am

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 14):
or maybe 15 seconds of fame looked possible...      

If it had turned out, that the plane had crashed there, it would be much more than just 15 seconds !
Same is true for other sellers of snake oil.
 
User avatar
Finn350
Posts: 1595
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:57 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 10:30 am



Quote:
Raw satellite data on MH370 to be released Tuesday, Malaysia says

Source: http://edition.cnn.com/2014/05/26/wo.../malaysia-missing-plane/index.html

At the very least, we should get all the ping ring and BFO data tomorrow. Hopefully they will also release data related to the first part of the flight, as that is essential in determining the most probable search area due to fuel burn constraints.

[Edited 2014-05-26 03:30:59]
 
WarrenPlatts
Posts: 517
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2014 6:03 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 10:37 am

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 14):
Or, something might have been smoked that night or maybe 15 seconds of fame looked possible...

Doubtful that something was smoked: roughnecks are routinely tested for drugs--especially off-shore workers. He saw a meteor. Was not looking for 15 seconds of fame. He was just trying to help.
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6977
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 10:40 am

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 17):
Hopefully they will also release data related to the first part of the flight

Hopefully it is the real data. It has been what, 2 1/2 months now? Anything released after a few weeks deserves being questioned, especially the way Malaysia has handled this thus far...
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
 
NAV30
Posts: 1080
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 9:16 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 10:54 am

Quoting David L (Reply 12):
To be clear, I'm saying military radar isn't the only evidence of a turn to the west, as NAV30 suggested.

No visual sightings, as far as I know? And it has been mentioned that the speed and height of the aeroplane, as tracked on radar, possibly didn't match normal 777 performance exactly? And no 'tracking' at all once the aeroplane purportedly turned south?

Quoting lancelot07 (Reply 13):
One can wonder, why only one oil rig worker saw something.

We have to remember that the whole thing took place in the small hours, most people would have been asleep and it was dark?

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 14):
if there was a cover up the oil rig worker may be part of it in that he was intending to divert attention away from where it should be because the area he said originally made sense as it was near where the plane went missing. Or, something might have been smoked that night or maybe 15 seconds of fame looked possible

Have to 'draw the line' there, 777Jet. Did you read his very polite and competent report?

Anyway, guys, the 'authorities' have been searching for months and have found nothing. It honestly would not surprise me in the least if THEY themselves don't soon begin to consider, and maybe even be pressured into, searching alternative locations soon?

[Edited 2014-05-26 04:02:12]
 
WarrenPlatts
Posts: 517
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2014 6:03 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 10:58 am

Quote:
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.

Quoting Mandala: That is counter intuitive to the mission in hand if we are to follow your theory. ... I was just supplying you with waypoints that may fit the white lines. :p

It's quite clear at this point that the tracks they're basing the current search effort on do not follow waypoints at all. It is pure geometry. And is thus doomed to fail.
 
Backseater
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 3:20 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 11:06 am

What are the 777-200ER Vdf and Mdf values specified by Boeing?
 
WarrenPlatts
Posts: 517
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2014 6:03 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 11:09 am

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 20):
And it has been mentioned that the speed and height of the aeroplane, as tracked on radar, possibly didn't match normal 777 performance exactly?

Huh? The evident ground speed was about 500 to 510 kts; there probably was a tailwind component of 10 to 20 kts. This is consistent with a normal cruising speed of 0.84 Mach (490 knots) at 35,000 feet--the last reported altitude AFAIK.
 
NAV30
Posts: 1080
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 9:16 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 12:11 pm

Quoting David L (Reply 24):
For goodness' sake! Please read the discussion before responding to it.

500 knots is quite a lot, David L. And definitely no proper track once it supposedly turned south, only a 'fan' of white lines?
 
moderators
Moderator
Posts: 362
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2004 6:33 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 12:28 pm

Ladies and Gentlemen,

we know this is a very tragic accident which happened here and discussion can get heated at times.

But we ask you to respect everybodys opinion in here. Try to stay calm and don't start any name calling in here.

Thanks for your cooperation.

Kind Regards.
Please use [email protected] to contact us.
 
mandala499
Posts: 6592
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 12:29 pm

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 21):
It's quite clear at this point that the tracks they're basing the current search effort on do not follow waypoints at all. It is pure geometry. And is thus doomed to fail.

Well, if you haven't sent your theory to the authorities, what's keeping you? :p

So, did he enter lat/lon waypoints or named waypoints?   
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
David L
Posts: 8551
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:26 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 12:31 pm

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 25):

How many times do you need it to be explained that the "basic" Inmarsat analysis of the communication with the aircraft showed a turn to the west and that further analysis indicated a later turn to the south?

The military radar tracking is not the only evidence of the turns.

While we're at it, do you still think the Bay of Bengal is northeast of KL?
 
WarrenPlatts
Posts: 517
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2014 6:03 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 12:45 pm

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 26):
Well, if you haven't sent your theory to the authorities, what's keeping you? :p

I'm waiting on the release of the raw data...   
 
Backseater
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 3:20 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 12:46 pm

Soon I expect to better disprove the 4 step scenario I proposed weeks ago. In the mean time, here as some more details about the military plot around Pulau Perak.

http://i.imgur.com/N0MWBCK.jpg
 
NAV30
Posts: 1080
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 9:16 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 1:21 pm

May as well get hanged for a sheep rather than a lamb............  

Apparently MH370 DID initially fly in that direction - and a Chinese satellite detected possible wreckage in the region at more or less the same time:-

http://www.news.com.au/world/oil-rig...lames/story-fndir2ev-1226853302184
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6977
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 1:31 pm

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 20):
Have to 'draw the line' there, 777Jet. Did you read his very polite and competent report?

Yes I did. And, what does that prove? Nothing... Do you expect an insider not to be polite or professional? I'm not saying he is in on it, I'm not saying he isn't in on it, I'm just saying his report was very 'polite and competent' to use your words and all that politeness and professionalism turned out to be a dead lead - there could be several reasons why...
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
 
NAV30
Posts: 1080
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 9:16 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 1:41 pm

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 31):
Do you expect an insider not to be polite or professional?

What on Earth leads you to think he was an 'insider'?

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 31):
all that politeness and professionalism turned out to be a dead lead - there could be several reasons why...

I suspect that the press story gives us a possible answer to that, 777jet. The Chinese and the Vietnamese weren't getting on, the rest of the team were concentrating on the far southern region, and they just gave up searching.........

“The position he’s given is in the area that the Chinese have now found, which is nowhere near where the Malaysians have been looking and it’s where the Vietnamese, because of all the confusion with the Malaysians, have stopped looking.”

[Edited 2014-05-26 06:46:25]
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6977
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 1:55 pm

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 32):
Quoting 777Jet (Reply 31):
Do you expect an insider not to be polite or professional?

What on Earth leads you to think he was an 'insider'?

I already wrote why in a previous post. Nonetheless, I will briefly write again in case that post has been del....

If MH370 was human intervention, moreover, part of a big plan like a government being involved, it wouldn't hurt to have someone say 'I think I saw the plane here' so everyone goes running over to look for it while all along it is somewhere else. You provide your passport details and tell the media and make it look like you are legit - which he could be anyway. That would be one of the least complicated things to do. Taking the plane and making in vanish would be the hard part. But, if that is indeed what has happened, then it has been a job well done!

So, I am only suggesting that he could be an insider whose mission was to divert attention only if MH370 was something on the scale of a massive cover up job - you know, like a government being involved. If it was a mechanical problem / fire / pilot suicide / typical hijacking then he is obviously not an insider... But that is something we don't know yet and can't rule out until the plane is found and if it was a big plan then we might never find the plane as that may have been part of the intention...
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
 
David L
Posts: 8551
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:26 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 2:19 pm

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 30):
Apparently MH370 DID initially fly in that direction - and a Chinese satellite detected possible wreckage in the region at more or less the same time:-

http://www.news.com.au/world/oil-rig...02184

  

That story is from March 13th, i.e. before the Inmarsat data came to light and before a possible radar track back over the Peninsula was revealed.

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 32):
I suspect that the press story gives us a possible answer to that, 777jet. The Chinese and the Vietnamese weren't getting on, the rest of the team were concentrating on the far southern region, and they just gave up searching.........

“The position he’s given is in the area that the Chinese have now found, which is nowhere near where the Malaysians have been looking and it’s where the Vietnamese, because of all the confusion with the Malaysians, have stopped looking.”
"Nowhere near where the Malaysians have been looking" refers to a different part of the Gulf of Thailand, not to "the far southern region".

Please stop dragging the discussion back to square one.
 
NAV30
Posts: 1080
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 9:16 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 2:27 pm

Quoting David L (Reply 34):
That story is from March 13th, i.e. before the Inmarsat data came to light and before a possible radar track back over the Peninsula was revealed.

Trouble is, David L, that doesn't mean it's wrong?

It's not as if the southern search has found anything either?

There's a radar track of MH370 flying out to about that point, and then disappearing?

[Edited 2014-05-26 07:30:44]
 
WarrenPlatts
Posts: 517
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2014 6:03 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 2:37 pm

Quoting BackSeater (Reply 29):
Soon I expect to better disprove the 4 step scenario I proposed weeks ago. In the mean time, here as some more details about the military plot around Pulau Perak.

Hey where did you get that pretty picture? Also, the lines marked "other a/cs" are from SkyVector: one is simply the route N571, and the other is the boundary of an area marked as WMD-413A. Also, I get 499 kt for the 2-minute interval.
 
David L
Posts: 8551
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:26 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 3:10 pm

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 35):
that doesn't mean it's wrong?

This was discussed extensively two months ago. Subsequent evidence indicates that whatever he saw, it can't have been MH370. I'm not going to go back and dig out all the details to spoon-feed it to you. We've tried that with the satellite data and it doesn't seem to work.

The aircraft turned towards the west after IGARI and continued to communicate with the satellite for over 7 hours.
 
Backseater
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 3:20 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 3:12 pm

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 36):
Hey where did you get that pretty picture?

From the original Chinese photogtapher.

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 36):
Also, the lines marked "other a/cs" are from SkyVector: one is simply the route N571, and the other is the boundary of an area marked as WMD-413A.

I agree but I think there are dots on those lines that are other a/c's. What is interesting is that those dots (if they indeed are dots) are very well aligned. If those dots are primary radar returns, then it would seem that 9M-MRO was being flown manually!
 
Backseater
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 3:20 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 3:52 pm

Here is the higher resolution image for the military radar plot:

http://i.imgur.com/NkACC20.jpg

Warren, I also concur with your earlier suggestion that two radars may have been involved. At this stage, it looks to me as if both radars were initially switched off. That would explain why they did not see the turn at Igari. Then they got wind of a problem and turned on the radar located at Butterworth AB (elevation near 0) but they lost the contact about 130nm out. So they turned on the radar on top of Pinau Pinang (elev 2700ft) and got the latter part of the track west of the white circle. Radial values are coherent with the twin radar scheme.
 
lancelot07
Posts: 1084
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2014 8:22 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 5:02 pm

Quoting BackSeater (Reply 39):
So they turned on the radar on top of Pinau Pinang (elev 2700ft) and got the latter part of the track west of the white circle

So the description "200nm from Butterworth" at 02:22 is a red herring ? Iirc, it was corrected later (very suspiciously), so you two may well be right.
 
User avatar
Finn350
Posts: 1595
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:57 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 5:18 pm

Quoting BackSeater (Reply 39):
Then they got wind of a problem and turned on the radar located at Butterworth AB (elevation near 0) but they lost the contact about 130nm out. So they turned on the radar on top of Pinau Pinang (elev 2700ft) and got the latter part of the track west of the white circle. Radial values are coherent with the twin radar scheme.

I don't think that even the civilians were aware of that the plane was really missing at that point of time based on the "ACTIONS TAKEN BETWEEN 01:38 AND 06:14 ON SATURDAY 8 MARCH". At that point of time (2:00 - 2:30 MYT) different civilian ATCs were communicating about the possible location of MH 370.

Most likely, the military radars were not actively observed at that point of time and they only later found out that MH370 might be in the military radar recordings.

Source: online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/actions.pdf
 
User avatar
Finn350
Posts: 1595
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:57 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 5:42 pm

It seems we are now finally starting to get real hard facts regarding the flight path.

As far as I can tell, this confirms the earlier unofficial military radar plot image and the flight path:

http://oi59.tinypic.com/2z3yw3l.jpg



Edit: It also appears that the ping rings are quite precise. From the publication:

Quote:
An analysis of SATCOM system parameters showed that the accuracy of the rings was ± 10 km.

Source: http://www.atsb.gov.au/media/5205507...ions%20on%20defining_FactSheet.pdf

MH370 : Considerations on defining the search area
26 May 2014
Australian Transport Safety Bureau

This should be official enough to vertically archive any theory suggesting a direct flight path from around IGARI to north of Sumatra.

[Edited 2014-05-26 10:51:07]

[Edited 2014-05-26 10:53:53]

[Edited 2014-05-26 11:35:12]
 
giopan1975
Posts: 57
Joined: Wed Jun 03, 2009 7:55 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 5:44 pm

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 41):
Most likely, the military radars were not actively observed at that point of time and they only later found out that MH370 might be in the military radar recordings.

They only later found out means some days later??

This does not add up correctly:

A nation with the proportions of a developing country and not those of Somalia or Zambia, is going through a major tragedy with their national/inter-national air carriage on the spot, their military had the missing plane on their screens moments after the transponder died and Malaysia insisted in searching on the opposite direction for days putting Mallaca Strait as active search area only on charts but not actually looking there at all?

I cannot imagine Malay Government was not aware of the military radar observations since Day 1. Was the indication too weak to start searching in the Straits ONLY after they had rulled out the Gulf of Thailand?

Were they buying time for some reason?
 
SoJo
Posts: 282
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2012 9:29 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 5:56 pm

I think the aircraft landed at Butterworth, was broken up and hidden within the old 33 Squadron Bloodhound missile site.

Perfect answer. Sounds good to me! It is not where they are presently searching. Why? Because they haven't found it there.

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

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 5:58 pm

Quoting lancelot07 (Reply 40):
2:22 is a red herring ?

02:22:12 is the last time stamp visible along the left edge of the radar plot. It is about 246nm from the Pulau Pinang radar site.

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 41):
I don't think that even the civilians were aware of that the plane was really missing at that point of time

Indeed, many scenarios are possible to explain that radar data was available at times, unavailable at other times. Captured but maybe sealed, or not captured at all? Maybe provided by Thai radars after the fact? Doctored?
But no good scenario yet that could fit everything together. I thought I had one weeks ago with the climb west of Penang and only one radar but speeds don't seem to work out (so far!).
 
WarrenPlatts
Posts: 517
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2014 6:03 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 6:43 pm

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 42):
It seems we are now finally starting to get real hard facts regarding the flight path.As far as I can tell, this confirms the earlier unofficial military radar plot image and the flight path:

Nothing really new here. The ping rings are in the same position as the ones I derived from the Hussein charts.

kmz files here:

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/qlpoawrnbobxq3n/AADLfu6rbLba-vklbLe0b2b_a

I found this interesting:

Quote:
Use of waypoints
Comparison of possible flight paths with tracks using waypoints is also under consideration.

About time....

Quote:
Air Routes
There is only one published north-south air route in the south-eastern Indian Ocean. Air route M641
connects Cocos Island to Perth and has four waypoints. The air route crosses the area where the four
acoustic signals were detected.

This is odd though: SkyVector shows a bunch of different air routes...

ETA: I think I see where they got their 332 knot velocity: If you take that route M641 and measure the distance between the 22:40 and 24:11 ping rings, you get about 501.5 nm, which works out to velocity of 332 kt. Unfortunately, the distance between the 21:40 and 22:40 ping rings is only 281 nm, and the distance between the 20:40 and 21:40 ping rings is only 185 nm on M641. I'll wager that M641 is not the true way.

[Edited 2014-05-26 11:55:11]
 
Kaiarahi
Posts: 1807
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 6:55 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 6:46 pm

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 46):
This is odd though: SkyVector shows a bunch of different air routes...

Probably why SkyVector has a prominent "Not to be used for navigation" warning   
Empty vessels make the most noise.
 
WarrenPlatts
Posts: 517
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2014 6:03 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 6:50 pm

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 47):
Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 46):This is odd though: SkyVector shows a bunch of different air routes...
Probably why SkyVector has a prominent "Not to be used for navigation" warning 

Nah, the warning is there simply to prevent confused people from suing them...
 
mandala499
Posts: 6592
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 64

Mon May 26, 2014 7:43 pm

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 28):
I'm waiting on the release of the raw data...

I guess you're not that confident as you were a few topics ago then...

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 41):
I don't think that even the civilians were aware of that the plane was really missing at that point of time based on the "ACTIONS TAKEN BETWEEN 01:38 AND 06:14 ON SATURDAY 8 MARCH". At that point of time (2:00 - 2:30 MYT) different civilian ATCs were communicating about the possible location of MH 370.

I can tell you that the accident go-team at MH was notified as early as 430am that MH370 was missing. Information (not yet cross checked with other sources) received indicated that the primary radar information on "the mysterious aircraft" that flew across Malaysia, was also available to them at that time, or by about 10am, which included the possibility of the aircraft going up and down and what have you...
So I can tell you that civilian non-ATC persons who are not in MH Ops Control Center, knew about it as early as 430am local time.

Quoting giopan1975 (Reply 43):
I cannot imagine Malay Government was not aware of the military radar observations since Day 1. Was the indication too weak to start searching in the Straits ONLY after they had rulled out the Gulf of Thailand?

Were they buying time for some reason?

Malaysia requested Indonesia's participation in the MH370 search effort to cover the Malacca Straits from day 1. We had at least 3 turboprop search aircraft (possibly 2 GAF Nomads and 2 CN235s from our Navy), and 1 737-200 Surveiller was combing through the straits as early as the the saturday afternoon or sunday noon.

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 42):
As far as I can tell, this confirms the earlier unofficial military radar plot image and the flight path:
http://oi59.tinypic.com/2z3yw3l.jpg

Now that's a very interesting path... Looks like it missed WarrenPlatt's D200J/D155J idea (to which he claims he never insisted on, and is not married to that idea).
To me, it looks like that the aircraft was programmed to go back to PEN by someone... the line goes from VKB VOR to a waypoint which would be on the arrivals, ENDOR, with a possibility that it was preceeded by PUKAR (although it looks like PUKAR was not 'used'). Pulling this on the FMC one would just go and select the STAR applicable to their direction, a BIDMO1A arrival.
But that's about as far as the waypoints go in this case... it didn't go to MEKAT waypoint (the next one in the arrival for BIDMO1A). Nor does it appear to go via KENDI (the next one after MEKAT)... although it might have, but OPOVI (the last waypoint on ISMAS1A or LUNTU1A arrival before KENDI)

Now his leads to the following possibilities:
1. The morphed/merged WP & Pihero theory...
Divert to Penang, program the STAR into the FMC, but, they did not carry out the arrivals for some reason or another (maybe controllability issue, task saturation, or, whatever else), and it may have been hand flown, hence the turn behaviour, consistent with task saturated crew trying to handfly waypoints (we've seen a few of those over here in the sim checkrides    ), but this require the north west leg as a result of a cascade of problems which lead to the actions. KENDI is still a possibility, when one cannot follow their waypoints, the avaiabilit of KENDI as an initial approach fix and also a holding waypoint, may have led them to go direct after ENDOR and do a parallel entry for a reversal into KENDI for the hold and descent (assuming they wanted to go to PEN), the kink can be explained by it. However, it needs a significant problem for them to not continue that and end up continuing NW, and then the turn to the south.... But, Pihero may have something on this.
2. The Waypoint to getaway theory...
There are 2 possibilities, 1. is to have programmed VPG, but the leg was flown on HDGSEL with eyeball 101 on the ND (we call it the lazy smartass method when newbies do this in their sim checkrides), hence the deviations and the overshoot prior to the turn to northwest. 2. MH's STAR chart into PEN has the 04 and 22 arrivals on 2 different charts on 1 page, and the arc arrival to 04 don't reveal much in terms of waypoint names (Only KENDI is used, the rest are radials and distances). A quick look at the 04 and 22 STAR charts on that single sheet of paper, one can guess that the path was chosen in order to "fool" observers on what its intentions are (assuming someone was looking at it assuming it was suffering from Lost Comms with a divert, which is, follow established arrivals procedures for wherever it is you are diverting to)... To the eye of a a radar operator concerned about the flight being a lost comms diversion, the move straight to ENDOR or PUKAR to ENDOR, would raise no suspicion that something else was going to happen... that is the aircraft suddenly continuing to the NW... This could also explain why even early on there was talk about the aircraft descending and going at a very high speed (which was, maybe because the aircraft never descended! :p ).

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 48):
Nah, the warning is there simply to prevent confused people from suing them...

The explanation is there in the site: "SkyVector is not an official source of flight information and should not be used for navigation."
You do not use non-approved sources for flight navigation.
In SkyVector, there are no guarantees that the information you're getting is correct ("not an official source", hence doesn't have the necessary approvals to be used as flight information for real life flying). It is not just to prevent people from suing them... it is an admission of lack of approvals for real life navigational/flying use, false claims thereof can result in the government pulling the plug and ordering skyvector to close down.
But, skyvector or not, there are several airways down there.

---
Just thinking, what if it's not the captain or the FO... what if this was just a simple hijack made by some avgeek who knew airways, etc, transponders, etc, but has only been testing these on the home FlightSim, using full fuel all time... I bet he thought he would have made to Australia that way...   
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
  • 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