• 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 7
 
WarrenPlatts
Posts: 517
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2014 6:03 pm

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

Tue May 27, 2014 1:31 pm

Well, back to the reverse engineering....

There definitely is a correlation between the BTO times and the 1-way predicted ping times back engineered from the Hussein charts.

http://i.imgur.com/b1JeOaH.png

Not sure what it means. Could be a means of testing the validity of the "7 Data Point (sic)" ping rings I guess.
 
NAV30
Posts: 1080
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 9:16 am

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

Tue May 27, 2014 1:46 pm

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 103):
Not sure what it means.

Admit to being even LESS sure, WarrenPlatts.

Can't help feeling that the 'most likely' scenario is MH370 crashing about 40 minutes after take-off? And the radar guys picking up all sort of echoes from other aircraft to support the 'long flight north-west, south-west, due-south' notion?

If the pilots had survived, all they could (and would) have done is flown their 'official' trip to Peking? Or, if they'd had any trouble,said so and 'landed short'?
 
User avatar
fotoflyer71
Posts: 41
Joined: Sun May 08, 2011 6:22 pm

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

Tue May 27, 2014 1:59 pm

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 104):
Can't help feeling that the 'most likely' scenario is MH370 crashing about 40 minutes after take-off?

Sigh. Head. Brick. Wall.
Try to learn from the mistakes of others. You won't live long enough to make all of them yourself.
 
WarrenPlatts
Posts: 517
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2014 6:03 pm

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

Tue May 27, 2014 2:03 pm

Quote:
Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 103):
Not sure what it means.

Quoting NAV30: Admit to being even LESS sure, WarrenPlatts.

Can't help feeling that the 'most likely' scenario is MH370 crashing about 40 minutes after take-off?

Then how do you explain this extensive log of communications that took place for up to 7.5 hours after the takeoff?

As for correlating the BTOs with the predicted ping times, I added the 7 Data Point series and got some interesting results:

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

The "7 Data Point" series also shows an excellent correlation. What this tells me is that the central problem is defining the linear function that deduces the 1-way ping time--and hence the distance to the satellite. What we also see is two different attempts to produce such a function. What we don't see is the methodology used to produce the two functions. Hence we can't tell which one is correct.

I will say that the "7 Data Point" is inconsistent with a ISBIX MUTMI RUNUT flight path, whereas the Hussein Chart data series lines up perfectly. Thus, if it is the case that a southerly waypoint path was taken, then that would seem to imply that the Hussein Chart data series should be preferred.

Klm files for the 7 Data Point ping rings can be found here:

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/ezs6imv367w8xqb/AADqEhUIaO__UkCXLEIGDVwQa

Courtesy of Duncan Steel.
 
NAV30
Posts: 1080
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 9:16 am

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

Tue May 27, 2014 2:13 pm

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 106):
Then how do you explain this extensive log of communications that took place for up to 7.5 hours after the takeoff?

Fair enough, WarrenPlatts. Kindly put it on a map, with some more information, and I'll gladly (and fairly) consider it. But at the moment, it means precisely nothing?

[Edited 2014-05-27 07:16:28]
 
aftgaffe
Posts: 176
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 7:18 am

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

Tue May 27, 2014 2:23 pm

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 107):
Fair enough, WarrenPlatts. Kindly put it on a map, with some more information, and I'll gladly consider it. But at the moment, it means precisely nothing?

No, it does not mean precisely nothing.

If the plane crashed 40 minutes after take off it could not have been communicating with a satellite 7.5 hours after take off. But the plane was communicating with a satellite 7.5 hours after take off. So it did not crash 40 minutes after take off.
 
WarrenPlatts
Posts: 517
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2014 6:03 pm

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

Tue May 27, 2014 2:52 pm

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 107):
Fair enough, WarrenPlatts. Kindly put it on a map, with some more information, and I'll gladly (and fairly) consider it. But at the moment, it means precisely nothing?

Here is a chart that shows the ping rings derived from the Inmarsat "handshakes" or "pings". E.g., the 2nd to last one (at 24:11) is derived from page 41, 4th line down with the 8/03/2014 00:10:59.928 time stamp. It has a Burst Time Offset of 18040 microseconds. This apparently corresponds to a distance between the satellite and the aircraft of some 37,783.3 kilometers. From this distance and the height of the GEO orbit and the airplanes altitude, one can calculate a "ping ring" line of position (LOP) with a radius of ~4838 km from the subsatellite point at 24:11 for that day. Thus, any aircraft would have to be either right at the line at 00:10:59.928 UTC or within a very few miles of that line at that time. Also, arguing against a quick crash is the lack of any surface debris despite early searches and fair weather in the South China Sea.

http://i.imgur.com/pgBw6pV.png
 
nomadd22
Posts: 1570
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:42 pm

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

Tue May 27, 2014 4:03 pm

BTO is just processing delay, or how long it takes the ping to make it all the way through the equipment at both ends minus the actual propagation delay.
Anon
 
WarrenPlatts
Posts: 517
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2014 6:03 pm

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

Tue May 27, 2014 4:20 pm

Quoting nomadd22 (Reply 110):
BTO is just processing delay, or how long it takes the ping to make it all the way through the equipment at both ends minus the actual propagation delay.

I take it your the same nomadd over at nsf.com? I think there's more to it than that. Maybe you could work through an example for us. As far as I can tell, there is no way to derive the 1-way travel time, and hence the distance between the sat and the a/c, without importing something else that's not in the released report. There is the nearly 2 second delay between the log-on interrogation and the logoff acknowledgement, but it doesn't correlate with distance to the satellite: e.g., at 24:11, the delay is 1.928 seconds, but at the 19:41 (the closest handshake) the delay is 1.996. Seems like it should be shorter.

Also, I put this over there, but you can do a linear regression to derive an equation that relates the BTO with the 1-way travel time:

Hussein Charts:
1-way ping time = 0.116165579 + 0.546858242 * BTO

7 Data Point Graph:
1-way ping time = 0.116932924 + 0.501092384 * BTO

But these are back-engineered from published charts and graphs. I wish we could get away from such reverse engineering, but it appears the Inmarsat folks are still holding their cards close to their vest....

[Edited 2014-05-27 09:24:42]
 
LTC8K6
Posts: 1538
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 8:36 pm

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

Tue May 27, 2014 4:25 pm

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 104):

Can't help feeling that the 'most likely' scenario is MH370 crashing about 40 minutes after take-off?

You would then need to explain why 9M-MRO's satmodem hardware was still working for the next seven hours or so.
 
Backseater
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 3:20 pm

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

Tue May 27, 2014 4:33 pm

Quoting nomadd22 (Reply 110):
BTO is just processing delay, or how long it takes the ping to make it all the way through the equipment at both ends minus the actual propagation delay.

That is not how I understand BTO.
The BTO is measured for R channel responses to specific messages (e.g. logon/logoff acks) that consist of bursts within Aloha slots.
Each Aloha slot is separated from neighbor slots by large guard bands because the start time of the burst depends on the distance from the a/c to the satellite.
The reason is that the R-channel slot is synchronized with a constant delay on the receipt of the requesting burst on the P channel.
The farther the a/c from 3F1, the later the P channel request is detected. After a constant delay, the response burst is transmitted but received even later by the satellite because of the greater distance to 3F1..
The BTO therefore contains the distance sat to a/c on the P channel and a/c to sat on the R channel.
Compared to a reference fixed terminal, the BTO should measure twice the distance difference between (a/c - sat) and (ref - sat).
 
PlaneInsomniac
Posts: 418
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2007 7:34 am

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

Tue May 27, 2014 4:44 pm

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 101):
radar guys

"Radar guys"? What are you talking about? Nobody here is talking about radar or anything even remotely similar.

 

If you equate sat modem pings with "radar guys picking up echos", you might as well say that MH370 was a locomotive instead of a plane and could never have taken off in the first place. If facts are irrelevant, why stop at ignoring the physical satellite data?

And, "kindly", could you please stop requesting the other forum participants to provide you with maps which already have been posted in these forums hundreds (or thousands) of times in the last couple months so that you can "fairly consider" them. Frankly, this is all getting a little bizarre.

[Edited 2014-05-27 09:49:38]
Am I cured? Slept 5 hours on last long-haul flight...
 
lancelot07
Posts: 1084
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2014 8:22 pm

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

Tue May 27, 2014 5:01 pm

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 94):
As you'll see above, BackSeater, on the principle of 'Keep It Stupidly Sensible', I rather favour the view that the aeroplane had a problem east of Vietnam, and crashed there and then, only about an hour out. But thanks for responding 'on topic.'

        
NOBODY doubts that the plane was flying for 7,5 hours, a few minutes more or less. Nobody except NAV30.  Wow!
In 7,5 hours normal flight the plane would be in Peking easily. The northern arc is completely over land.
The plane is NOT in the South China Sea east of Vietnam - that much is certain.
 
markak
Posts: 43
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2014 1:14 am

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

Tue May 27, 2014 5:13 pm

Quoting BackSeater (Reply 110):
That is not how I understand BTO.
The BTO is measured for R channel responses to specific messages (e.g. logon/logoff acks) that consist of bursts within Aloha slots.
Each Aloha slot is separated from neighbor slots by large guard bands because the start time of the burst depends on the distance from the a/c to the satellite.
The reason is that the R-channel slot is synchronized with a constant delay on the receipt of the requesting burst on the P channel.
The farther the a/c from 3F1, the later the P channel request is detected. After a constant delay, the response burst is transmitted but received even later by the satellite because of the greater distance to 3F1..
The BTO therefore contains the distance sat to a/c on the P channel and a/c to sat on the R channel.
Compared to a reference fixed terminal, the BTO should measure twice the distance difference between (a/c - sat) and (ref - sat).

We need to determine the ref location. The sub satellite point would be logical, do the numbers work out?

Can one of the navigation experts here determine what is the distance from KUL to 3F1 sub satellite point. (That is the point on the Earth nominally on the equator directly under 3F1, which is at 64.5 deg longitude nominally.

The difficult part is we need the straight line distance, (through the Earth) not the distance along the surface.
 
Backseater
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 3:20 pm

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

Tue May 27, 2014 5:48 pm

Quoting MarkAK (Reply 113):
The difficult part is we need the straight line distance, (through the Earth) not the distance along the surface.

I don't think so.
IMO BTO is just twice the difference between 2 distances to the satellite:
- a/c to satellite
- ref terminal to satellite (virtual) i.e. just some bias value in the GES(?)
 
mandala499
Posts: 6592
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

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

Tue May 27, 2014 5:48 pm

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 61):
The longer we go without having a single piece of wreckage or debris washing up on a beach somewhere the more I think it is somewhere else very far away or either intentionally landed or came down in a remote area of land.

The amount of false reports of "having a piece of the wreckage washing up ashore" am sure have reached ridiculous proportions at some stages, they just don't make it to the media.
I've come across claims or requests to check "possible wreckage" washing up all the way from the northern tip of sumatra, all the way to East Timor's southern coast. Several of these claims (including the one at East Timor) resulted in people familiar with aviation being dispatched to check (as the real investigators were already being sent allover the place)... so far, all have been deemed unrelated to MH370.
I just wish we'd find a piece of it.. it's way overdue.

Quoting bluesky9 (Reply 64):
But a variation on this that does not require access to the EE bay and involves simpler equipment that already exists is the brief case size GPS spoofer.

GPS spoofer in the case of multiple navigation systems is going to be difficult to achieve unless you knock the crew out. The most I've heard is to induce a lateral displacement of the calculated position. The general direction can't be changed much... it gets too complex that way.
In the 777, GPS is usually the primary source of automatic position keeping for navigation purposes. But direction/track heading is not calculated using GPS at all, but from the IRS portion of the ADIRU.

About 7 years ago or so, I suspect that another MH 777 was victim of a GPS spoof attempt over China (coincidence? MH, 777 and China... and it was PEK to KUL), where ATC noticed the aircraft was following the airway but just over 2.5NM to one side. ATC notified the crew, and the crew isolated the GPS and navigated without (IRS with Radio Navigation update for FMC position), and continued to KUL. The GPS position was found to be 40NM to the front and left on 1 receiver, and 20NM to the rear and left in the second receiver). The GPS positions didn't merge with the calculated FMC position from non-GPS sources until they approached the Malaysian peninsula. This case, I am told was never solved and that Boeing responded with "cannot be replicated, we can't find the cause/answer". If I can find the photo of the ND during the time showing the erroneous GPS position, I'd post it, but it has been several years since I located it.

Quoting bluesky9 (Reply 64):
A device like this could be used to navigate the A/C to wherever the hijacker(s) wanted without changing the initial programmed route. That is the A/P could remain engaged while the calculated current GPS positions of the A/C and waypoints could be manipulated (by the GPS spoofing device) to take the A/C way off course. (This requires that the pilots are incapacitated.)

As far as I know GPS spoofing isn't as simple as injecting a signal to override, but requires overpowering the GPS signals reaching the aircraft with your false ones, pretending to be the real GPS signal, and the receiver would calculate based on that the doppler of various GPS satellites, including your false signal, to generate a false position without realizing it.

It is easier to make the plane go down than it is to make it turn around and fly in the opposite direction for over 7 hours.

Quoting fotoflyer71 (Reply 66):
Mandala - do any of these STARs appear to have any curveballs that would cause a FMC flight plan discontinuity? My memory is rusty on the kinds of situations that would cause this - I think one simple example would be a " From over PUKAR INT fly heading xxx degrees for vectors to final approach course". In my understanding, if such a discontinuity exists, and something prevents the pilots (system malfunction/ incapacitation) from manually dropping the next waypoint onto the discontinuity then the

If you go and try and do the STAR at over 400 knots where it's supposed to turn from 'downwind' to final, you'd miss it completely... but at what stage would the FMC generate the disconnect, hasn't been looked at by the looks of it. But the turn and disconnection prompting a HDG Hold at 285 - 290 (like the outbound from Penang portion of MH370), is probably quite likely (without checking the books... so reader beware).

Quoting bluesky9 (Reply 67):
It may have stopped some important cargo reaching China.

If it's that US thingy from Afghanistan, it's baloney. It's easier to send it through Pakistan and let the Chinese pick it up from Pakistan.

Quoting bluesky9 (Reply 67):
f the A/C sits in a hanger somewhere it could be useful to someone in a future false flag operation.

Well, someone must have killed all those onboard otherwise it's quite a logistical feat keeping those people fed, quiet, isolated, and not escaping.

Maybe it landed at remote grass field (with hard ground underneath the surface) in the south western coast of Java..    But no hangars... so, that throws it out.

It wouldn't be in a hangar in the Maldives... someone would have talked by now.

Etc... etc... etc...

Quoting jetsetter1969 (Reply 82):
Mandala i was not implying a sytem without circuit protection but one that cant be isolated by the crew. At the end of the day the authorities and the industry have to do what they can to prevent a reoccurance and yes we would not want a knee jerk reaction.

If it is to control the aircraft, the crew needs to be able to switch it off. No certification authority is going to let the risk of something being able to take control without the ability to switch it off in case of an erroneous activation.
Even the Fly By Wire computers in the 777 and Airbuses can be switched off and reset.

Quoting jetsetter1969 (Reply 82):
Twenty-two companies, including Globalstar and Rockwell Collins, responded to the call.
"The responses received so far to the ICAO questionnaire showed that there are existing commercial off-the-shelf solutions providing global coverage for hardware costs under USD $100,000," said the ICAO

I find it ridiculous that I can easily track where my aircraft are whenever they are flying, and airplanes carring 50x more people onboard and valued at 40x my airplanes, can't? Seriously, it doesn't even cost $100,000... you can have it on a pressurized jet aircraft for less than $20k... or even carry the portable ones for less than $1000.

People like SITA and ARINC need to wake up that they can't "hold the industry hostage emotionally" by saying it all has to go through ACARS as per ICAO ATN requirements... Of course, they prefer airlines buying the $300,000 antennas and satcom modem even if it's just for sending the same amount of data that can be handled reliably with a $5000 antenna... why do they want to waste these money? "coz it's good for business" ????   

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 86):
A 1-way signal to the satellite is on the order of 1/8 of a second. Therefore, total roundtrip time should be on order of 1/2 second.

The actual ping times when you ping an aircraft on Inmarsat, based on my experience is more than 800ms, even on a good day, and be near the equator and not too far from the longitude of the orbital slot.

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 86):
3. Then we're given a BTO value in microseconds that seemingly has no relation to the actual speed of light travel times: e.g., for the 24:11 ping ring we are given 18,040 microseconds = 0.01804 seconds, far shorter than the actual travel times.

and:

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 88):
That raises the question of offset from what?

It's about 2900NM? Well, my guess is that it's the offset from the expected ping time if you're right underneath the satellite on the earth surface. But then, I haven't checked that possibility through any calculations.

And now... the NAV30 section...

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 92):
We have a 'case' where an aeroplane flying north-east past Vietnam went off-air.

Past Vietnam? Heck it didn't even pass Saigon/Ho Chi Minh City! It didn't even make it to the Vietnamese landmass!

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 92):
Opinions from there are divided. I reckon that it probably crashed - others think that it went on flying, turned north-west, and then south-west, and finally south.

Fact: The airplane flew on for about another 7 hours after it disappeared from civilian radar. So it didn't crash near where it disappeared, unless it just flew in circles over there for another 7 hours.

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 92):
Flew a bit myself, and the aids were just that - 'aids'......... Often enough one used them, but you never depended on them. And, above all, you had to make sure that you DIDN'T depend on them.

Are you IFR certified and familiar with longhaul IFR navigation under Transport category airplanes? Are you familiar with RNP? Remote area IFR navigation? etc etc etc?
In Instrument Flight Rules, you are dependent on your navigational aids and your instruments.

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 92):
I don't think Inmarsat caused the accident - indeed I don't think it even contributed to it. But can we PLEASE (at least a few of us) get back to discussing what caused the accident, and how any future events of the same kind can be prevented?

NAV20/30 ruins another topic... yet again!
To find what caused the accident, we need to know where it is first. Then we can theorize how it got there, and then identify which is more likely, and then find a way to prevent a repeat.
No, sorry, it did not crash in the South China Sea based on all the available data. The area was extensively searched.

By the way you see it, the only way to prevent this from happening again in the future is simple... don't fly at night and don't fly too far from radar coverage, and make sure you crash into making floating debris if you do disappear from radar...

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 94):
As you'll see above, BackSeater, on the principle of 'Keep It Stupidly Sensible', I rather favour the view that the aeroplane had a problem east of Vietnam, and crashed there and then, only about an hour out. But thanks for responding 'on topic.'

I'd rather favour you keep it sensible stupid...

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 96):
Much more likely, in my view (having done the job in my Army days) that the radar guys got it wrong, and tracked a different aeroplane (or aeroplanes)?

So an airplane disappeared, and another one appeared from the same spot, and flying somewhere else, while everything else they saw, accounted for other flights (and none missing)... they got it wrong? sure...

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 101):
Can't help feeling that the 'most likely' scenario is MH370 crashing about 40 minutes after take-off? And the radar guys picking up all sort of echoes from other aircraft to support the 'long flight north-west, south-west, due-south' notion?

You think they're a bunch of total idiots and not check if what they saw was not other aircraft?
If it crashed about 40 minutes after take off, please, we'd like to know how you can explain the aircraft's satellite communications being in contact with the satellite for another 7 hours... (and if you say anything stupid like "it's not the satcom from MH370, I guess you just don't and can't and don't want to understand it and want us to join your folly).

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 104):
Fair enough, WarrenPlatts. Kindly put it on a map, with some more information, and I'll gladly (and fairly) consider it. But at the moment, it means precisely nothing?

It means that regardless where it went (since you said it probably crashed about 40 mins after take off), the satellite communications system onboard the aircraft was powered and running and was in contact with the satellite. If it crashed, it wouldn't be.

---
Hey Warren... I think it's time you ask someone the question "what are you smoking"...   
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
giopan1975
Posts: 57
Joined: Wed Jun 03, 2009 7:55 pm

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

Tue May 27, 2014 6:04 pm

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 101):
Can't help feeling that the 'most likely' scenario is MH370 crashing about 40 minutes after take-off? And the radar guys picking up all sort of echoes from other aircraft to support the 'long flight north-west, south-west, due-south' notion?

Up till now you are failing to convince me that you are retarded...but you have been trying hard I can admit.

Could someone please explain in plain English why those 7 "handshakes" do not reveal the altitude of the aircraft during those "handshakes"?

[Edited 2014-05-27 11:05:06]
 
aftgaffe
Posts: 176
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 7:18 am

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

Tue May 27, 2014 6:18 pm

Quoting giopan1975 (Reply 116):
Could someone please explain in plain English why those 7 "handshakes" do not reveal the altitude of the aircraft during those "handshakes"?

As I understand it, the only positional data that we know of that can be extracted from the handshakes is the (approximate) distance between the plane and the satellite at each handshake (based on the travel time of the transmissions) and the (approximate) direction of the plane relative to the satellite (based on the doppler shifts).

Altitude cannot, as far as I know, be isolated from these limited data points.
 
Backseater
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 3:20 pm

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

Tue May 27, 2014 6:23 pm

Just some additional commenst re. your GPS comments:

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 115):
GPS spoofer in the case of multiple navigation systems is going to be difficult to achieve unless you knock the crew out. The most I've heard is to induce a lateral displacement of the calculated position. The general direction can't be changed much... it gets too complex that way.

If the a/c uses a simple civilian (C/A code) single frequency GPS receiver, at least one company builds constellation simulators for less than $25k. With that you can make a nearby receiver fly on any track you want and from wherever you want.

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 115):
About 7 years ago or so, I suspect that another MH 777 was victim of a GPS spoof attempt over China (coincidence? MH, 777 and China... and it was PEK to KUL), where ATC noticed the aircraft was following the airway but just over 2.5NM to one side. ATC notified the crew, and the crew isolated the GPS and navigated without (IRS with Radio Navigation update for FMC position), and continued to KUL. The GPS position was found to be 40NM to the front and left on 1 receiver, and 20NM to the rear and left in the second receiver). The GPS positions didn't merge with the calculated FMC position from non-GPS sources until they approached the Malaysian peninsula.

GPS signals are very, very low power, spread spectrum signals. If you generate a new set of signals on the ground built for the current location of the target to be spoofed and beam the composite in the direction of an airborne civilian receiver, the receiver is likely to sync and use the spoofed signals and think it is flying somewhere where it is not. To avoid such problems, military receivers use a secure way to sync (encrypted P code) and often directional antennas to eliminate jammers and verify that the signal of each GPS satellite comes along the correct vector for that satellite.
 
WingedMigrator
Posts: 1771
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 9:45 am

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

Tue May 27, 2014 6:35 pm

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 107):
But at the moment, it means precisely nothing?

Is there a reason for phrasing everything in the form of a question? Could it be a way to avoid affirming your point too strongly, should you later have to distance yourself from it? The data from Inmarsat proves beyond the shadow of a doubt that the satcom unit on board the aircraft functioned for 7.5 hours? It seems rather silly to dismiss this important clue, because a crash prior to that timeframe would surely have rendered the satcom unit inoperative? How else could one explain the detailed comms data logs just published by Inmarsat?

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 109):
one can calculate a "ping ring" line of position (LOP) with a radius of ~4838 km from the subsatellite point

I think that with the accuracy of the data now available form Inmarsat, we are going to have to start producing loci that take into account not only the position of the satellite but also the oblateness of the Earth. The intersection of a cone with an oblate spheroid is not exactly circular.
 
giopan1975
Posts: 57
Joined: Wed Jun 03, 2009 7:55 pm

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

Tue May 27, 2014 6:39 pm

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 106):
This apparently corresponds to a distance between the satellite and the aircraft of some 37,783.3 kilometers
Quoting aftgaffe (Reply 117):
As I understand it, the only positional data that we know of that can be extracted from the handshakes is the (approximate) distance between the plane and the satellite at each handshake (based on the travel time of the transmissions) and the (approximate) direction of the plane relative to the satellite (based on the doppler shifts).

Altitude cannot, as far as I know, be isolated from these limited data points.

If we know the distance between the satellite and the plane and between the satellite and sea level why isnt plane alltitude concluded at the handshakes?
 
User avatar
dennypayne
Posts: 272
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 3:38 am

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

Tue May 27, 2014 6:47 pm

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 107):
Kindly put it on a map, with some more information

WP has produced plenty of maps over the course of these threads that utilize this information. He does not owe it to you to keep rehashing the same discussions just because you can't be bothered to understand the concepts that have been detailed over the past few months. While there are a fair amount of people here that do not subscribe to WP's exact scenario, I think all who have been involved in the threads from the beginning at least understand where his conclusions are coming from.

NAV30 - you are so far behind the discussion that your posts are just adding a lot of noise to the thread. Please stop bringing up news articles and scenarios from 2 months ago, that have long been discussed and debunked. You are missing completely obvious things like aftgaffe points out - and shouldn't have to point out had you been following and understanding the discussion.
A300/310/319/320/321/332/333/343/380 AN24/28/38/148 AT7 B190
B717/722/732/3/4/5/7/8/9 742/744/752/753/762/763/764/772/773/788/789
CR2/7/9 D8S D93/4/5 DHC2/3/7/8 D28/38 EMB/EM2/ER3/D/4/E70/75/90
F50/100 J31 L10 L410 M11/80/90 RJ85 SF3 SU9 T134/154 Y42
 
aftgaffe
Posts: 176
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 7:18 am

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

Tue May 27, 2014 6:51 pm

Quoting giopan1975 (Reply 120):
If we know the distance between the satellite and the plane and between the satellite and sea level why isnt plane alltitude concluded at the handshakes?

We would need to know the distance between the satellite and the point in the ocean the plane was directly above at the time of each handshake. We don't have that info.
 
lancelot07
Posts: 1084
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2014 8:22 pm

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

Tue May 27, 2014 6:56 pm

Quoting giopan1975 (Reply 120):
If we know the distance between the satellite and the plane and between the satellite and sea level why isnt plane alltitude concluded at the handshakes?

I guess the margin of error is too big. 10km horizontally is not much, vertically it is the difference between cruise and water, more or less.
 
User avatar
Finn350
Posts: 1601
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:57 am

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

Tue May 27, 2014 7:01 pm

Quoting giopan1975 (Reply 120):
If we know the distance between the satellite and the plane and between the satellite and sea level why isnt plane alltitude concluded at the handshakes?

Let's say you are the satellite and another person is the plane.

Imagine that you are standing on top of a tall building and you know the height of the building.

The only thing you know is the distance from you to the another person.

You want to know at what altitude the other person is.

Based on this information alone, you cannot say whether the other person is standing on the ground or on top of another building slightly farther away, as the distance to the another person would be the same.

For the same reason, you cannot deduce the altitude of the aircraft from the distance alone.
 
giopan1975
Posts: 57
Joined: Wed Jun 03, 2009 7:55 pm

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

Tue May 27, 2014 7:30 pm

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 124):
Let's say you are the satellite and another person is the plane.

Imagine that you are standing on top of a tall building and you know the height of the building.


For the same reason, you cannot deduce the altitude of the aircraft from the distance alone.
Quoting aftgaffe (Reply 122):
We would need to know the distance between the satellite and the point in the ocean the plane was directly above at the time of each handshake. We don't have that info.

Thanks for the xplaining I get it know - however I bet there should be some way to calculate at least the aprox altitude of the airplane at the points of the handshakes - given the speed of the Earth moving and possible airplane speeds. My physics is basic and I am using very simple logic, maybe unknown parametrs are too many...
 
WarrenPlatts
Posts: 517
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2014 6:03 pm

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

Tue May 27, 2014 8:06 pm

Quoting giopan1975 (Reply 125):
however I bet there should be some way to calculate at least the aprox altitude of the airplane at the points of the handshakes

Well, if you think it's going 500 knots, the altitude has to be pretty high. As I said, the difference between FL400 and FL000, can mean up to 6.5 nm difference in the ping ring radius.

Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 119):
I think that with the accuracy of the data now available form Inmarsat, we are going to have to start producing loci that take into account not only the position of the satellite but also the oblateness of the Earth. The intersection of a cone with an oblate spheroid is not exactly circular.

This is true. I thought maybe GPSVIsualizer might take that into account, but I guess it doesn't. One work around would be to use the radius of the Earth at the latitude you're looking at to figure the ping ring radius. E.g., if you think the a/c is crossing the 24:11 ping ring at about 40S, then use the radius of the Earth for 40S, and it will be accurate for where you are interested in.

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 115):
---Hey Warren... I think it's time you ask someone the question "what are you smoking"...  

Oh give the old man a break! He was at the Battle of Britain and fears he may not live long enough to see this thing through. Heck, at the rate things are going, none of us may live long enough! I figure NAV30's earned the right to own any opinion he wants to at this point....

Speaking of old men, I'm starting to get a little worried about Pihero--I hope he hasn't put himself in the hospital due to getting too stressed out over this thing! 
 
nupogodi
Posts: 933
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 10:58 am

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

Tue May 27, 2014 9:15 pm

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 126):
FL000

Eh?
A man must know how to look before he can hope to see.
 
Backseater
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 3:20 pm

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

Tue May 27, 2014 9:20 pm

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 126):
As I said, the difference between FL400 and FL000, can mean up to 6.5 nm difference in the ping ring radius.
Quoting nupogodi (Reply 127):
Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 126):
FL000

Eh?

Warren is a geologist. He probably also operates at FL-40!   
 
WarrenPlatts
Posts: 517
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2014 6:03 pm

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

Tue May 27, 2014 10:21 pm

Does anyone have a link to or are in possession of a second by second accounting of the pre-17:21 UTC portion of the flight, including what gate it was parked at and exactly where it went immediately after takeoff? If I had that, I think I can calibrate the raw BTO times and come up with an objective formula for all ping rings.
 
markak
Posts: 43
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2014 1:14 am

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

Tue May 27, 2014 10:29 pm

To those that recently joined the discussion and are asking basic questions, you may want to do some reading and get up to speed first. Duncan Steel has published a lot of good info on the net. You can find it via Google.
 
jetsetter1969
Posts: 71
Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2013 12:06 am

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

Tue May 27, 2014 11:23 pm

Quoting Manadala 499 (reply 115)
If it is to control the aircraft, the crew needs to be able to switch it off. No certification authority is going to let the risk of something being able to take control without the ability to switch it off in case of an erroneous activation.
Even the Fly By Wire computers in the 777 and Airbuses can be switched off and reset.

I am talking purely about a tracking device that cannot be isolated but still has circuit protection. The point of an investigation is to find root cause and how to prevent a reoccurrance so IF this aircraft had its transponder and ACARS turned off or disabled by crew or persons unknown then how do you prevent a repeat of this event if you have a system that can be isolated by someone in flight? Obviously the inmarsat system was not isolated in flight but as im not in aviation i dont know if it was due to the crew not being aware of it having regular handshakes with a satellite or it was not capable of being isolated.

Cheers
Dave
 
jcxroberts
Posts: 97
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 3:41 pm

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

Tue May 27, 2014 11:35 pm

They spent a lot of time searching the Southern Arc and got nothing, The Indian Ocean is big but the Southern Arc is much less so. And nothing has washed up, nothing has been seen floating.
 
nupogodi
Posts: 933
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 10:58 am

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

Wed May 28, 2014 12:14 am

Quoting flightsimboy (Reply 133):
So at it's 64th thread, I am sure the clue of the MH crash has been solved, yes?

Nope. If powers of 2 are significant to you, come back at thread 128.
A man must know how to look before he can hope to see.
 
spacecadet
Posts: 3536
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2001 3:36 am

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

Wed May 28, 2014 12:15 am

Quoting jcxroberts (Reply 132):
The Indian Ocean is big but the Southern Arc is much less so. And nothing has washed up, nothing has been seen floating.

You are massively underestimating how big even a tiny percentage of any ocean is.

Let's try this. Go find a yellow 1969 Boss Mustang somewhere in a corridor between Rhode Island and Louisiana. And you have to find it by sight. Oh, and it's in a garage.

What? You haven't found it yet?! Clearly you're searching thousands of miles off track.
I'm tired of being a wanna-be league bowler. I wanna be a league bowler!
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6977
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

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

Wed May 28, 2014 1:25 am

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 101):

Can't help feeling that the 'most likely' scenario is MH370 crashing about 40 minutes after take-off?

Huh? Seriously? And approaching three months later not a single debris from MH370 has washed up anywhere around there? The water there is not that deep and the point it went missing is much closer, much, much closer to land than where they are looking now. I am very confident that the plane did not go down where contact was initially lost. And, whether or not the location deduced from the pings is correct, given that MH370 pinged for another 7.5hrs means it would have most likely been flying somewhere far away during that time...

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 115):
I just wish we'd find a piece of it.. it's way overdue.

Likewise.

[Edited 2014-05-27 18:26:54]
DC10-10/30,MD82/88/90, 717,727,732/3/4/5/7/8/9ER,742/4,752/3,763/ER,772/E/L/3/W,788/9, 306,320,321,332/3,346,359,388
 
User avatar
BaconButty
Posts: 820
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 3:42 pm

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

Wed May 28, 2014 1:36 am

Quoting jcxroberts (Reply 132):
They spent a lot of time searching the Southern Arc and got nothing, The Indian Ocean is big but the Southern Arc is much less so. And nothing has washed up, nothing has been seen floating.
Quote:
Space is big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind- bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist's, but that's just peanuts to space.

The late great Douglas Adams
Down with that sort of thing!
 
hivue
Posts: 2057
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:26 am

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

Wed May 28, 2014 1:48 am

Quoting nupogodi (Reply 127):
Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 126):FL000Eh?

MSL in an ISA.  
"You're sitting. In a chair. In the SKY!!" ~ Louis C.K.
 
bloviator
Posts: 6
Joined: Tue May 27, 2014 10:32 pm

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

Wed May 28, 2014 2:40 am

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 139):
We're working on it. It's a work in progress. Progress is being made. This latest release is tantalizing. It doesn't give how they analyzed their own data. So "transparency" has a way to go. However, I think we can figure this out with just what we got, if we look at it dispassionately.

So what's the plan? Recalculate the reverse engineered ping rings, plug in the various flight path scenarios (WPs from WP, Pihero's slow and steady descent, etc.), and see where we're at?


Question for the group - did we know about the 18:39 Z ground call to the a/c? That seems an interesting fact. Particularly in light of the fact another (satcom) call was not attempted until 23:13 Z. Unless the 18:39 call was unrelated to the a/c having gone missing (and was not itself that important a call), why would anyone wait 4.5 hours to try again?

Can anyone in airline operations speak to this?
 
WarrenPlatts
Posts: 517
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2014 6:03 pm

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

Wed May 28, 2014 2:55 am

Quoting bloviator (Reply 144):
So what's the plan? Recalculate the reverse engineered ping rings, plug in the various flight path scenarios (WPs from WP, Pihero's slow and steady descent, etc.), and see where we're at?


Yes that's exactly what we want: Recalculate the ping rings--only this time they will not be wholly reverse engineered: we can calibrate from the known path now that they've given us the raw--and boy do I mean raw--data....
 
WingedMigrator
Posts: 1771
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 9:45 am

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

Wed May 28, 2014 3:10 am

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 148):
now that they've given us the raw--and boy do I mean raw--data....

Nothing wrong with how raw it is. In fact if it were more processed, people would complain that it wasn't raw.

Speaking of raw data, is there data available for the wind fields (magnitude and direction) as a function of latitude, longitude and altitude in the overall area during the flight? I don't mean graphical maps but computer-readable data in whatever format.

Such data is at least as important as the Inmarsat data for modeling where the aircraft might have gone.

So is a fuel burn model. According to the ATSB, the top-of-climb ACARS report supposedly included the fuel load remaining at that time, which has not been made public. That would be an important initial condition.
 
mandala499
Posts: 6592
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

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

Wed May 28, 2014 3:44 am

Quoting jetsetter1969 (Reply 131):
I am talking purely about a tracking device that cannot be isolated but still has circuit protection.

I have that in my aircraft where I work already. It costs about $20,000 installed in the aircraft. Install that in commercial airliners and it should be about no more than double.

Quoting jetsetter1969 (Reply 131):
The point of an investigation is to find root cause and how to prevent a reoccurrance so IF this aircraft had its transponder and ACARS turned off or disabled by crew or persons unknown then how do you prevent a repeat of this event if you have a system that can be isolated by someone in flight?

The satcom can be disabled in flight... but you have to go into the E&E bay. That's how it is, and that's how it's going to be. In smaller aircraft, the CB going to be in a part that cannot be accessed by the crew in flight.

One has to tread carefully on the underlying reasons on why you want it set up a certain way. Because you can not make the chance of this happening again down to zero...

One problem on MH370 is that this is unprecedented that even professionals are at risk of quickly pointing at foul play (usually due to the unwillingness to explain the alternative)... and yes, the alternative is quite complex and difficult to explain.

Install these trackers "that can't be switched off" and the aircraft can still go missing... that's the reality that the world has to live with...
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
YVRLTN
Posts: 2339
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2006 1:49 pm

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

Wed May 28, 2014 4:21 am

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 126):
Oh give the old man a break!
Quoting NAV30 (Reply 92):
Flew a bit myself, and the aids were just that - 'aids'.
Quoting NAV30 (Reply 92):
Virtually all the discussion seems to be centred on how the latest gimmick (Inmarsat) was performing?
Quoting NAV30 (Reply 92):
Placing all their faith in what, on the face of it, is a 'new-fangled' (and very possibly 'short-lived') flight-management aid?

I believe the confusion is Nav thinks that "Inmarsat" is all part of the onboard navigation systems on the aircraft.

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 115):
It means that regardless where it went (since you said it probably crashed about 40 mins after take off), the satellite communications system onboard the aircraft was powered and running and was in contact with the satellite. If it crashed, it wouldn't be.

It is possible the aircraft could have landed and continue to ping the satellite for 7+ hours if there is power, but we know that is not the case as the ping rings mean there is movement.

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 115):
If I can find the photo of the ND during the time showing the erroneous GPS position, I'd post it, but it has been several years since I located it.

That is interesting, it may be really helpful if you could find it.

Quoting Bruce (Reply 62):

But if it was turned into a drone, why hasn't it done anything yet? Like crash into something?

Not that I believe this is the case at all, but it could be a random trial run for something at a later date.

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 72):
The issue with the cargo scanners not working leads me to believe the cargo might have played a role?

Again, has this ever been proved as the truth?

Quoting ComeAndGo (Reply 140):
It's a bomb in the front wheel well that blew a hole into the E bay & cockpit.

I know you are being facetious, but I have been trying to get my head around Pihero's fire theory and the cause of thick smoke / fumes rather than a full out fire and have been thinking of the Nationair DC8 crash. Could a burst nose wheel tire or some malfunction (dont believe there are brakes on the nose?) resulting in a lot of heat begin to smolder slowly when retracted up into the wheel well? What would that wheel be underneath in the cockpit? Smoldering rubber would certainly produce horrid smoke and fumes.

[Edited 2014-05-27 22:12:08]
Follow me on twitter for YVR movements @vernonYVR
 
LTC8K6
Posts: 1538
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 8:36 pm

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

Wed May 28, 2014 4:43 am

Quoting flightsimboy (Reply 145):
It amazes me this thread has gone to 64........One can always count on the armchair airline crash investigators on here to get a kick from the deaths of others

I was, of course, merely making fun of your post.

I have participated quite a bit in the 64 pages. Hopefully my contributions helped a little, and I learned a little. I'm sure I never made light of the tragedy.

Perhaps you can make an effort to contribute?
 
WingedMigrator
Posts: 1771
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 9:45 am

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

Wed May 28, 2014 4:53 am

Quoting YVRLTN (Reply 151):
Smoldering rubber would certainly produce horrid smoke and fumes.

Have you considered that gear bays are outside the pressure hull?
 
YVRLTN
Posts: 2339
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2006 1:49 pm

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

Wed May 28, 2014 5:17 am

Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 153):
Have you considered that gear bays are outside the pressure hull?

Yes (I mistyped Arrow Air for Nationair - I edited my post).

http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19910711-0
QUOTE
Witnesses noticed flames in the area of the left main landing gear. The flames disappeared when the undercarriage was retracted. During the next three minutes several indications of system anomalies occurred, which included a pressurization system failure, a gear unsafe light and a loss of hydraulics.
The captain requested a level-off at 2000 feet because of the pressurization problem

Im not suggesting anything as serious as this accident but just pondering the possibilities once inside the well and doors closed.
Follow me on twitter for YVR movements @vernonYVR
 
User avatar
Finn350
Posts: 1601
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:57 am

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

Wed May 28, 2014 5:53 am

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 126):
I'm starting to get a little worried about Pihero--

Don't worry. He is probably recovering from the realization what the most likely scenario for the disappeareance of MH370 is (and to lesser extent that his pet theory 'IGARI direct to north of Sumatra' is ready for vertical archiving based on the ATSB publication).
 
YoungMans
Posts: 432
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 10:31 am

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

Wed May 28, 2014 6:01 am

Now that the 'Raw Data' has been made available, there still doesn't seem to be much more progress.
As Mandala499 alludes to it, it's about time that something washed up on some beach somewhere.
But it just doesn't or we simply don't know about it..!

So, could it be then that the data from the satellite is still wrong after all?
I reckon it could be but.., knowing nothing about satellites and what they can and can't do, others will have to put these ideas through the wringer.

As I see it, there could be three ways or methods for the data from the satellite to be wrong:

One ....
The data from this particular satellite has 'always' contained a small error.
It has never been noticed because this specific error has never before affected the designed function. The satellite has always worked as it should, as a sophisticated relay station.
The error would or could be (and here I am guessing) how the satellite time-stamps each and every message. This might be an error that has always been in "the machine", from the very first day it was put into orbit, or it may have crept in over time.
This error has never prevented normal satellite function and hence it was never noticed - until now.
One resulting consequence could be that it distorts all specific (time to) distance measurements.
I would think this might be likely.

From here on in it gets a bit more hairy, I'm sorry ....

Two ....
The data from the satellite has been deliberately falsified.
An error could have been introduced into the data set somewhere and that misleads all the calculations and assumptions but still appears plausible and likely to outsiders, like people on A.net and others.
One must not forget, the military-corporate- government complex would be the satellite company's biggest customer; and they will always know 'which side their bread is buttered on'.
Those involved with the current search efforts in Australia and elsewhere wouldn't even know about this; they don't have a need to know.
In this scenario, 9M-RMO would have pretty much flown the path as it has been worked out here; the only difference being that it has ended up somewhere else in the Indian Ocean, anywhere except near the search areas covered so far.
This could also be likely.

Now it gets hairier still.

Three ....
The data may not have been just falsified but was completely fabricated, concocted; this could have been to an extent that not even the satellite company would have noticed anything wrong, at least not initially.
Knowing the electronic call-sign for this particular aircraft (or flight) a sophisticated electronics lab could probably copy that. It could use that then to communicate with the ground station, via the satellite.
The timing of the 'handshakes' (including the BFO's, BTO's and whatever else) could have been changed electronically and the satellite and the ground station would have accepted that as 'stock-standard communications'.
Such an electronics lab could be on land; anywhere really as long as it is within the necessary distance from the satellite. Much easier still would have been for such a lab to be on a ship; and again, that could have been just about anywhere on the Indian Ocean.
This scenario would have been quite ruthless and would require a sophistication as we have seen it only with 9/11.
In this scenario too, there would have been no need for the aircraft to fly anywhere near the Indian Ocean.
Is this likely? Probably, but Heavens forbid.
 
FLY744
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 12:36 am

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

Wed May 28, 2014 6:03 am

Quoting YVRLTN (Reply 151):
Smoldering rubber would certainly produce horrid smoke and fumes.

My experience with burst tires (had several on 747s) is that they do not smoulder. Bursts typically occur at fairly high speed and the tire carcass is shed fairly quickly.

Secondly, had MH370 had a tire burst on departure KL it is most likely they would have gone back rather than continue to PEK. There would also have been a fair bit of to and fro with KL maintenance (which did not occur).
Aviation in itself is not inherently dangerous.
 
NAV30
Posts: 1080
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 9:16 am

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

Wed May 28, 2014 6:17 am

Quoting YVRLTN (Reply 151):
I believe the confusion is Nav thinks that "Inmarsat" is all part of the onboard navigation systems on the aircraft.

Rather the reverse, YVRLTN. As I pointed out back in Post 3, ALL the other navigation/tracking systems appear to have shut down about 40 minutes after take-off. There appears to have been no other contact after that time.

00:41 Take-off
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]


So, only about 40 minutes after take-off, all the OTHER methods of tracking the aeroplane went off-air. Leaving only Inmarsat to track the aeroplane (as far as I know, only in the shape of hourly 'pings')?

I think there is a distinct possibility that MH370 ended up in the sea at that point. How Inmarsat apparently went on 'pinging' a possible western and/or southern course, I don't know. But all OTHER contact with the aeroplane - and the crew - ended at that time? And the flight crew never checked in with Vietnam?

[Edited 2014-05-27 23:43:30]
  • 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