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

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 65

Mon Jun 02, 2014 12:17 pm

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 199):
Are you saying that both pilots were equally competent on the 777?

I didn't say that. Please re-read my post.

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 199):
Do you think that both pilots would have confidently been able to make MH370 disappear with the same amount of 'ease' as the other if that is what happened?

I don't know. Nor do you.

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 199):
Do you think that both pilots had the same motive to take MH370 if that is what happened?

I don't know. Nor do you.

However, Mandala499 who is thoroughly familiar with the culture of the region, the training and competencies of pilots in the region, and has talked to MH pilots/staff, believes it is just as likely the FO could have done something as the PIC.
Empty vessels make the most noise.
 
boacvc10
Posts: 501
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 2:31 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 65

Mon Jun 02, 2014 2:16 pm

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 11):
However, back to aviate, navigate, communicate, if you take the communications out, as in this case, then you're left with aviate then navigate.

Sorry Mandala, I am responding to a post of several days ago - if, and this is a conjecture, senior, experienced pilot, have been incapacitated, after the set of maneuvers you described, while the aircraft was in the straits off of Malaysia, and then a further degradation of the systems "happened", is there any chance that the remaining pilot could (I repeat this is a conjecture) succesfully "navigate" to a known destination? What was the sky/wind/lighting conditions like at that time? Could he have become desparate enough to try to use his phone as an alternative map tool - because his instruments weren't working/available? Could he have ... in earnest, tried but failed to plot a route without reference to charts etc, and then became desparate to turn on his phone for a GPS fix and potentially a lost comms call? Apparently he was a relative new pilot to the 777, fully trained, but not career experienced, if I have understood correctly? Could a relatively inexperienced trainee hand fly and hand navigate back to base in the midnight hours?

My apologies if this turns out to be a very incorrect assessment of the pilot's experience level.
Up, up and Away!
 
lancelot07
Posts: 1084
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2014 8:22 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 65

Mon Jun 02, 2014 2:31 pm

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 199):
Do you think that both pilots would have confidently been able to make MH370 disappear with the same amount of 'ease' as the other if that is what happened?

I understand mandala499 that both were sufficiently able, if make the plane disappear is what they wanted .
Who is "more" able, or able with more "ease" is an irrelevant question - the plane can't disappear "more".
And mandala had an interesting possible motive for the FO to do it.

Did i forget that the captain is to blame at all cost ? 
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 7500
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 65

Mon Jun 02, 2014 2:46 pm

Quoting lazybones (Reply 198):
Well I pointed this out quite a few threads ago, and some didn't agree with me. So I'm glad Tim Clark shares my view. It does read a bit like he personally read my original post .... just kidding

This was answered in earlier threads.

Best estimates suggest RMAF has total of 26 all weather, night capable fighters.

18 x Su-30MKM Flankers with 11 Squadron @Gong Kedak AFB
8 x Boeing F/A-18D Hornets with 18 Squadron @Butterworth AFB

Plus
4xKC130Ts with 20 Squadron @Subang AFB (assuming RMAF's SU30MKMs and F/A 18s are capable)

That hardware gives 8xSU30s @Gong Kedak AFB and 4xF/A18s @Butterworth AFB operational ready.

With this posture, it is very unlikely RMAF can do anything at night to chase a commercial airliner over open oceans. It will be a one way trip for its fighter jets. It has to coordinate tankers from Subang and Fighters from Gong Kedak/Butterworth. I would say near zero possibility.

So RMAF simply waited for day light.
 
LTC8K6
Posts: 1534
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 8:36 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 65

Mon Jun 02, 2014 2:55 pm

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 196):
Turning the IFE Switch will result in the IFE and the satphones handsets in the cabin to stop working.
The satcom itself, will continue to function as long as Left Main AC Bus is powered.

I would say, since that seems to match what happened, it's a little push further towards "foul play" for me.

I was already leaning that way though, as I have said before.
 
lancelot07
Posts: 1084
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2014 8:22 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 65

Mon Jun 02, 2014 3:33 pm

Silly question: How do they know the IFE was off ? Satcom off and back on later sure, if our conclusions are right. But IFE ?
Iirc, 9M-MRO was not equipped with satphone for the pax. No need to turn it off.
 
User avatar
AirlineCritic
Posts: 1703
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 1:07 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 65

Mon Jun 02, 2014 3:49 pm

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 187):
I am afraid the full "pilot did it" scenario consistent with all the data is as follows:
- lock the other pilot out of the cockpit
- turn the transponder switch first to ALT RPTG OFF and a few seconds later to STBY to disable transponder at 1721 Z
- disable ACARS communication paths (SATCOM and radio) from the FMC menu
- switch off the left main generator and switch on the left backup generator to disable IFE and cabin satellite phones (SATCOM modem will be disabled, too)
- depressurize the cabin to incapacitate all the others
- after incapacitating all the others, to restore a fully functioning plane, turn on the left main generator at 1825 Z (SATCOM modem will be enabled and will request a log-on, but the perpetrator obviously didn't know that)
- fly to southern Indian Ocean, either piloted or through waypoints

I hope there is also a technical malfunction scenario consistent with all the data.

Cold blooded. Seeing this written up in such a small number of words gives me the creeps.

But yes, this does seem to match data... not ruling out other things, but it is a chilling and plausible scenario. Thanks.
 
mandala499
Posts: 6592
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 65

Mon Jun 02, 2014 4:24 pm

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 199):
Are you saying that both pilots were equally competent on the 777?

In addition to:

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 197):
Maybe it seems complicated to someone who knows nothing about an air transport aircraft, but none of those things requires knowledge or skills beyond those of anyone on a 777 flightdeck, including an FO.

Remember, since the FO is a "newbie" on the type it does not mean he's less capable of doing these amazing things especially regarding the aircraft systems:
1. The FO has experience on the 737s. He's not a total newbie.
2. This flight was his first flight on duty without a safety co-pilot. This means he's new on the type.
3. #2 means the FO had recently undergone a type rating course and examination to qualify for the 777.
4. #2 means the FO had even more recently undergone a sim-check for the 777
5. #2 means the FO has been subjected to on-the-fly questions by instructors during his 777 line training.
6. #1 and #2 means the questions on #5 are more on aircraft systems knowledge, and long-haul flying instead of basic flight management and planning (which he would have been grilled on when he was qualifying on the 737).
7. #3 - #6 means he is very fresh with knowledge available in the manuals and type rating syllabus.
This would lead to:
8. The stuff we talk about such as the back up generators powering the AC Transfer bus in the event of a Left Main AC Bus failure (and not a Generator failure) means the aircraft can be operating "normally" while the SatCom won't be powered under such schematic set up, would be relatively fresh in his mind (and especially since the manuals state that clearly!).
9. The stuff we talk about such as switching off the IFE PASS switch leads to the IFE systems deactivated which includes the handsets integrated to the IFE seat controllers that is connected to the Satcom system therefore disabling passenger satcom phonecalls but leaving the satcom system still active, would be relatively fresh in his mind.
10. The stuff on the various ways of deactivating the ACARS by deselecting the ACARS freq from the 3 VHF control panels, and the deselection of the VHF and SATCOM for ACARS through the lower EICAS screen would be relatively fresh in his mind.
11. Had any of these kinds of stuff come up in the simchecks, type rating examination, or the line training, and he would fail to answer satisfactorily, he would risk being put through additional training or retraining, or worst, sent back to his previous type (the 737).

Given that the Captain was a training captain and also given the situation on #8-10, BOTH pilots would be significantly more knowledgeable on the aircraft systems than the average MH Boeing 777 line captains and co-pilots.

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 199):
Do you think that both pilots would have confidently been able to make MH370 disappear with the same amount of 'ease' as the other if that is what happened?

Yes. While the captain may have the benefit of more experience and more experience on type, the FO has the benefit of being more familiar with the current situation that would help "ease" the attempt, thanks to having just been in short haul operations a few months ago.

The navigation part is also easy, just pull out the charts available onboard and any pilot qualified on the aircraft type (or even types with similar FMC set up or flow, which includes the 737 as long as flight legs are concerned) with such intentions and wanting to achieve the hideous goal through waypoint navigation, would have no trouble programming those waypoints on the FMC and relatively quickly.

IF, just IF, the use of arrivals waypoints to "confuse" plane boffins such as us, both crew would have no trouble in doing so. Again, the Captain thanks to his experience, the FO thanks to his recency in short-haul flying (which means he'd have flown in and out of KBR and PEN more often than the Captain over the past 2 years).

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 199):
Do you think that both pilots had the same motive to take MH370 if that is what happened?

If both had the same motive then I'd simply say, "well, then they BOTH did it." Information I've received indicate that the FOs may have a different motive with equal intensity of rage/anger that would result in mass-murder suicide.

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 199):
Do you think it was more likely that an experienced Captain was tricked and locked out of the cockpit by the junior FO or do you think it is more likely -((as one of the points Finn350 mentioned was "- lock the other pilot out of the cockpit" - that I quoted when replying but you just so happened to leave out when quoting just part of my reply - which is no surprise))- that the senior Captain could have easily tricked the FO into leaving the cockpit?

If I am one of those pilots and I need to incapacitate the other guy, well, he'd know the door combination... no use. If I want him out of contention to interfere with me, I'd pull the cockpit crash axe and hack him to death.
If I trick him to go out of the cockpit, he may already be suspicious and that risks hindering my plan. If he leaves the cockpit and I depressurize the cabin, he may have an oxygen mask within reach and eventually obtain a portable oxygen bottle and start trying to get the airplane back with whatever he can come up with (and yes, people do underestimate how many weapons there are onboard with a few simple steps, in a way, it's good... it keeps our cabins safer than if everyone knows).

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 199):
All I was suggesting is that, given what we know about the Captain and his experience, it would be easier for the Captain to pull of MH370 IMO. IMO the Captain could have pulled it off without any planning (if he made a snap decision, let's say, after a failed negotiation or whatever) whereas I'm sure it would have required more planning by the FO. Of course all type rated pilots in the cockpit, know where everything is and what does what - that is their job. That is what they are supposed to know and do. That does not mean that their ability to pull certain things off or perform certain tasks is equal...

I am not type rated, but if I can take over the cockpit, I can pull off a similar thing, even if I didn't plan it! I'm not even a captain! Heck, am not even a pilot. Put me in the cockpit with a working FMC and LNAV serviceable, with a chart, and yes, it won't be hard to pull such a stunt... And am sure I won't be the only one saying it's not that hard.

Quoting boacvc10 (Reply 201):
Sorry Mandala, I am responding to a post of several days ago - if, and this is a conjecture, senior, experienced pilot, have been incapacitated, after the set of maneuvers you described, while the aircraft was in the straits off of Malaysia, and then a further degradation of the systems "happened", is there any chance that the remaining pilot could (I repeat this is a conjecture) succesfully "navigate" to a known destination? What was the sky/wind/lighting conditions like at that time? Could he have become desparate enough to try to use his phone as an alternative map tool - because his instruments weren't working/available? Could he have ... in earnest, tried but failed to plot a route without reference to charts etc, and then became desparate to turn on his phone for a GPS fix and potentially a lost comms call? Apparently he was a relative new pilot to the 777, fully trained, but not career experienced, if I have understood correctly? Could a relatively inexperienced trainee hand fly and hand navigate back to base in the midnight hours?

Lighting conditions? Dark night, moon had set by then, so you won't be able to use that.
With regards to the phone, yes, it's possible (but no, the celltowers won't pick him up), but how useful that would be would depend on what map software you use.
He can pull his iPad or another tablet, and vaguely navigate by a flight companion software (pilots in this region love having these in their toys)... BUT, that is only if it's within reach of his hands... and even then, once you have messy things like multiple problems, or... simply... smoke... It just goes much harder to think that way and achieve it.

Quoting dtw2hyd (Reply 203):
With this posture, it is very unlikely RMAF can do anything at night to chase a commercial airliner over open oceans. It will be a one way trip for its fighter jets. It has to coordinate tankers from Subang and Fighters from Gong Kedak/Butterworth. I would say near zero possibility.

So RMAF simply waited for day light.

As inexcusable as what the RMAF did or did not do... I also understand their reluctance to act.
Let's forget chasing the aircraft over open ocean... let's just say what happens as the airplane crossed Malaysia.
1. Crossing Malaysia doesn't take too long.
2. Fighters would have to be scrambled and be airborne relatively quickly to make a reasonable intercept.
3. Dark night... if it's a rogue flight, with lights off... risk of collision is present... and a collision with MH370 would probably be a LOT more embarrassing that just letting it go...
4. If they did not believe it was MH370, once the airplane leaves 12NM from the coast, it's in international territory (but still in Malaysian managed airspace, whi... you won't be able to enforce much...

Quoting lancelot07 (Reply 205):
Silly question: How do they know the IFE was off ? Satcom off and back on later sure, if our conclusions are right. But IFE ?
Iirc, 9M-MRO was not equipped with satphone for the pax. No need to turn it off.

The IFE controller that is on the seat can be seen here:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Chris Finney Contrabandit Photos


That's 9M-MRO... the IFE controller doubles as a satphone handset... on the other side, you'd have the dialler and card swiper (which charges you a hideous price for the calls)... to explain:

Up close:

Turn it around and...


That was on 9M-MRD (found this trip report in another site)...
That goes to the IFE server, and then a billing module in the IFE server, it talks to the Satcom SDU to make the calls.

Switch the IFE off... bye bye satphone calls by the passengers... but satcom would still be on.
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
boacvc10
Posts: 501
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 2:31 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 65

Mon Jun 02, 2014 4:33 pm

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 207):
With regards to the phone, yes, it's possible (but no, the celltowers won't pick him up),

I am obviously out of sync with the threads: was the earlier report of the airborne cell phone being picked up by ground towers ever confirmed, or discussed after that initial reporting period? I wonder why people bother to report and then not followup with "it's false" or something.
Up, up and Away!
 
User avatar
BaconButty
Posts: 815
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 3:42 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 65

Mon Jun 02, 2014 4:36 pm

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 187):
I am afraid the full "pilot did it" scenario consistent with all the data is as follows:
- lock the other pilot out of the cockpit
- turn the transponder switch first to ALT RPTG OFF and a few seconds later to STBY to disable transponder at 1721 Z
- disable ACARS communication paths (SATCOM and radio) from the FMC menu
- switch off the left main generator and switch on the left backup generator to disable IFE and cabin satellite phones (SATCOM modem will be disabled, too)
- depressurize the cabin to incapacitate all the others
- after incapacitating all the others, to restore a fully functioning plane, turn on the left main generator at 1825 Z (SATCOM modem will be enabled and will request a log-on, but the perpetrator obviously didn't know that)
- fly to southern Indian Ocean, either piloted or through waypoints

I hope there is also a technical malfunction scenario consistent with all the data.

Questions I have about this:
Is an hour long enough to be certain of incapacitating everybody? Crew oxygen supplies in the cabin? Didn't the FA turn up in the Helios crash a couple of hours after the pilots Hypoxia?
Why power down the left bus when there's seemingly easier ways to disable the IFE and hence seatback phones?
Two in the cockpit rule? (though the crew don't seem to have been especially big on rule following)
A part of the circumstantial evidence for malicious intent comes from the radar transponder going off just at the moment of handover - how do you convince your colleague to go and splash his boots at just the right time?
I may be dreaming this, but don't FA's have a method of getting through the cockpit doors in this situation?
Down with that sort of thing!
 
bloviator
Posts: 6
Joined: Tue May 27, 2014 10:32 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 65

Mon Jun 02, 2014 4:55 pm

Quoting LTC8K6 (Reply 204):
Quoting mandala499 (Reply 196):
Turning the IFE Switch will result in the IFE and the satphones handsets in the cabin to stop working.
The satcom itself, will continue to function as long as Left Main AC Bus is powered.

I would say, since that seems to match what happened, it's a little push further towards "foul play" for me.

Yeah but why kill the left AC bus or pull the satcom CBs if your goal is simply to turn off IFE and you have a cockpit switch to do so? If satcom were intentionally killed in a hijack scenario, presumably the motivation was something other than killing IFE. Any ideas?

For thought:

According to released Inmarsat data, the satcom link was lost at 17:07:46.

According to the released ATC transcripts, MH 370 made the call to ATC to confirm FL at 17:07:55. The call is of course meaningless and innocuous in itself. But the timing is bizarre.

Anyone know what sort of indication you get in the B777 cockpit that satcom has been lost--but not the left AC bus--and what sort of loss will trigger the message?

[Edited 2014-06-02 09:57:57]
 
boacvc10
Posts: 501
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 2:31 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 65

Mon Jun 02, 2014 5:05 pm

Quoting bloviator (Reply 210):
According to the released ATC transcripts, MH 370 made the call to ATC to confirm FL at 17:07:55. The call is of course meaningless and innocuous in itself. But the timing is bizarre.

In a recent trip I noticed differences in airport wide clocks (digital clocks need synchronization!) and in the span of 24-36 hours travel time I noticed quite a bit of difference between SFO>HKG>SIN and then later in the month SIN>ICN>SFO -- with my cellphone as a crude common clock measurement tool. Is it possible the times mentioned in the investigative reports are not (or were not ever) in precise synchronization? You have Inmarsat ground stations, you have Malaysian ATC, Malaysian Military, and a host of other surrounding communication networks -- is there a timing standards check between facilities? I ask as I've seen this in the past +/- 1-2 mins between US, EU destinations. But I admit I have only observed these as a passenger.

But what is really interesting is that the GSM networks often have differing clocks as well. I realize the aircraft would have GPS synchronized time, but what about the air traffic ground stations in the Malayan peninsula?
Up, up and Away!
 
User avatar
Finn350
Posts: 1595
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:57 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 65

Mon Jun 02, 2014 5:27 pm

Quoting BaconButty (Reply 209):
Questions I have about this:
Is an hour long enough to be certain of incapacitating everybody? Crew oxygen supplies in the cabin? Didn't the FA turn up in the Helios crash a couple of hours after the pilots Hypoxia?

Good questions. An hour is probably not enough to incapacitate all the other crew members unless the perpetrator climbs to a very high altitude where a positive pressure mask is required. However, as the perpetrator is going to die anyway, he may choose to die by hypoxia, and there is no need to repressurize the plane.

Quoting BaconButty (Reply 209):
Why power down the left bus when there's seemingly easier ways to disable the IFE and hence seatback phones?
Quoting bloviator (Reply 210):
Yeah but why kill the left AC bus or pull the satcom CBs if your goal is simply to turn off IFE and you have a cockpit switch to do so? If satcom were intentionally killed in a hijack scenario, presumably the motivation was something other than killing IFE. Any ideas?

There has to be some other reason why the left AC bus was switched off if this is the correct scenario. Are there any other satellite phones in the cabin besides the IFE ones (for cabin crew use)? Or maybe the perpetrator wanted to disable the SATCOM modem, but it is then strange that it was enabled at 1825 Z.

Quoting BaconButty (Reply 209):
Two in the cockpit rule? (though the crew don't seem to have been especially big on rule following)

I think MH enforced two-in-the-cockpit rule only after this incident.

Quoting BaconButty (Reply 209):
A part of the circumstantial evidence for malicious intent comes from the radar transponder going off just at the moment of handover - how do you convince your colleague to go and splash his boots at just the right time?

If this is the correct scenario, the other pilot must have been locked out of the cockpit already before the last ATC calls at 1719 Z.

Quoting BaconButty (Reply 209):
I may be dreaming this, but don't FA's have a method of getting through the cockpit doors in this situation?

As I understand it (reading from A.net...) the pilot can change the door code and also reject entry access to cockpit by cabin crew.

Quoting bloviator (Reply 210):
According to released Inmarsat data, the satcom link was lost at 17:07:46.

Actually, last ACARS message was at 1707 Z, but the SATCOM link was confirmed lost only at 1803 Z when the SATCOM modem didn't respond to a query. SATCOM modem can have been disabled any time between 1707 Z and 1803 Z. In addition, there apparently is a missing ACARS transmission from the plane which should have occurred at 1737 Z at the latest, but that is not directly related to the SATCOM modem (as ACARS can be disabled separately).
 
mandala499
Posts: 6592
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 65

Mon Jun 02, 2014 6:11 pm

Quoting bloviator (Reply 210):
Anyone know what sort of indication you get in the B777 cockpit that satcom has been lost--but not the left AC bus--and what sort of loss will trigger the message?

There would be an advisory message on the EICAS... stating... (not imaginatively) "SATCOM" to indicate basically a failed satcom system.
This is satcom, not pax satphone...

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 212):
However, as the perpetrator is going to die anyway, he may choose to die by hypoxia, and there is no need to repressurize the plane.

Then... who did something later on to restore power to the left main ac bus?

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 212):
the correct scenario. Are there any other satellite phones in the cabin besides the IFE ones (for cabin crew use)?

The correct term would be "satcom/satphone passenger handsets".. not satphones.. technically, the satphone is the satellite data unit.
Cockpit.. through the Audio Management Unit which can go straight to their headsets.
For cabin crew use? None.

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 212):
There has to be some other reason why the left AC bus was switched off if this is the correct scenario. Are there any other satellite phones in the cabin besides the IFE ones (for cabin crew use)? Or maybe the perpetrator wanted to disable the SATCOM modem, but it is then strange that it was enabled at 1825 Z.

Left Main AC Bus isn't switched off... you can't... What you can do is isolate it from power supply.
It could be a GEN fail, GEN error, or just a simple failure of the BUS.... or yes, you simply isolate it from generators and the rest of the electrical systems

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 212):
I think MH enforced two-in-the-cockpit rule only after this incident.

If I remember correctly, this was introduced a while back... way before this accident.

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 212):
As I understand it (reading from A.net...) the pilot can change the door code and also reject entry access to cockpit by cabin crew.

There are other ways.. but yes, it depends on what door system they installed.
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
bloviator
Posts: 6
Joined: Tue May 27, 2014 10:32 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 65

Mon Jun 02, 2014 6:15 pm

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 212):
Actually, last ACARS message was at 1707 Z, but the SATCOM link was confirmed lost only at 1803 Z when the SATCOM modem didn't respond to a query. SATCOM modem can have been disabled any time between 1707 Z and 1803 Z. In addition, there apparently is a missing ACARS transmission from the plane which should have occurred at 1737 Z at the latest, but that is not directly related to the SATCOM modem (as ACARS can be disabled separately).

Ah, thanks. I misread the message at 17:07:48 on the R channel as that of the satellite trying to reestablish contact but apparently it's just the satellite confirming receipt of the ACARS message.
 
User avatar
Finn350
Posts: 1595
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:57 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 65

Mon Jun 02, 2014 6:19 pm

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 213):
Then... who did something later on to restore power to the left main ac bus?

I meant the perpetrator must have been conscious at 1825 Z to restore power and a few minutes later make the final turn south, but after that he might have just programmed the rest of the route and take the mask away.

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 213):
Left Main AC Bus isn't switched off... you can't... What you can do is isolate it from power supply.

Thanks for the correct terminology.

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 213):
If I remember correctly, this was introduced a while back... way before this accident.

According to this article, the policy was introduced only after the incident, but the article could be incorrect

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/w...-Malaysia/articleshow/33026776.cms

[Edited 2014-06-02 11:50:25]
 
User avatar
9MMPQ
Posts: 445
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2011 3:00 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 65

Mon Jun 02, 2014 7:24 pm

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 207):

A good post from you again. It's posts like this that see me check back on these threads despite some of the other contributions over the past 64 parts.

Quoting BaconButty (Reply 209):
Is an hour long enough to be certain of incapacitating everybody? Crew oxygen supplies in the cabin? Didn't the FA turn up in the Helios crash a couple of hours after the pilots Hypoxia?

Not quite certain, no. Portable oxygen bottles can last from a minimum 30 minutes to 60 minutes depending on the rate and amount of use. There were 10 cabin crewmembers and the number of oxygen bottles in the cabin is in the 12-14 range which (i think?) may still be excluding a bottle used for medical assistance purposes. It's entirely possible some may have eventually switched to another bottle. Of course if we were to presume a decompression was experienced i doubt anyone would be in an immediate mindstate to try & make the most of what supply they had so there are quite some variables that can come into play.

For the Helios case i think they found that all bottles were emptied. That could/would suggest the FA switched bottles once one was depleted.

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 212):
I think MH enforced two-in-the-cockpit rule only after this incident.

Yes, this was also brought up internally shortly afterwards.

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 212):
As I understand it (reading from A.net...) the pilot can change the door code and also reject entry access to cockpit by cabin crew.

It can also be locked from the inside. You'd only be left with brute force which will not get you anywhere fast.

[Edited 2014-06-02 12:25:14]
I believe in coincidences. Coincidences happen every day. But I don't trust coincidences.
 
nupogodi
Posts: 933
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 10:58 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 65

Mon Jun 02, 2014 7:53 pm

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 207):
yes, people do underestimate how many weapons there are onboard with a few simple steps

My brain tells me the crash axe is the most formidable, but my knees will claim that it's actually the drink cart.
A man must know how to look before he can hope to see.
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 7500
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 65

Mon Jun 02, 2014 8:02 pm

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 207):

About the Captain and/or FO theory, why would any Bhumiputra commit such act when they have everything going for them. Granted they may have difference of opinion with current administration but there are lot more permanently disenfranchised groups in Malaysia. If this theory has legs I would say Malaysia has bigger issues on hand than MH370.
 
abba
Posts: 1385
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 12:08 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 65

Mon Jun 02, 2014 8:37 pm

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 207):
If both had the same motive then I'd simply say, "well, then they BOTH did it." Information I've received indicate that the FOs may have a different motive with equal intensity of rage/anger that would result in mass-murder suicide.

Now if this was a crime committed out of anger I simply don't understand why it was done this way. To let the plane simply disappear seems more like a very premeditate plan carried out with a cold mind rather that an expression of (sudden) anger. If it was sudden anger - or anger at all - it should have been far more "graphical".
 
dfambro
Posts: 334
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2009 10:32 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 65

Mon Jun 02, 2014 8:47 pm

Quoting dtw2hyd (Reply 218):
About the Captain and/or FO theory, why would any Bhumiputra commit such act when they have everything going for them.

It's one of the great mysteries of this incident. The flight path "looks" intentional, but there are no good suspects. The pilot and FO are upstanding citizens, and other than a couple of false-passport smugglers, I haven't seen anything suspicious about any passenger.

These facts alone make a fire/electrical/mechanical issue seem more likely. But in that case how does it fly for hours and navigate around Indonesia and out into the ocean?

I don't see any scenario that makes much sense.
 
Backseater
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 3:20 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 65

Mon Jun 02, 2014 9:20 pm

Is there a way to fly a T7 at cruise (say FL350, Mach .82) and reverse course in less time that it would take to fly a standard 180 degree turn? No constraints on fuel economy, altitude gain/loss and track offset, but the speed at the end of the maneuver must be approximately the same (or as fast as permitted by Mmo/Vmo at the end of maneuver altitude) after course reversal.

[Edited 2014-06-02 14:23:23]
 
LTC8K6
Posts: 1534
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 8:36 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 65

Mon Jun 02, 2014 11:56 pm

Couldn't the plane have simply lost contact for a while without anyone turning the satmodem off?

Are there any situations where the system would have to re-connect without a power disruption?
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6977
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 65

Tue Jun 03, 2014 12:55 am

Quoting lancelot07 (Reply 202):
Did i forget that the captain is to blame at all cost ?

I don't know, did you?  
Quoting lancelot07 (Reply 205):
How do they know the IFE was off ?

In the four corners documentary somebody stated that "Somebody" tampered with the IFE - I wonder how they knew that it was a person and not something like a tech issue or fire unless they used the wrong words.

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 207):
Yes. While the captain may have the benefit of more experience and more experience on type, the FO has the benefit of being more familiar with the current situation that would help "ease" the attempt, thanks to having just been in short haul operations a few months ago.

Help 'ease' the attempt...

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 207):
Quoting 777Jet (Reply 199):
Do you think that both pilots had the same motive to take MH370 if that is what happened?

If both had the same motive then I'd simply say, "well, then they BOTH did it." Information I've received indicate that the FOs may have a different motive with equal intensity of rage/anger that would result in mass-murder suicide.

Hear say?

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 207):
If I am one of those pilots and I need to incapacitate the other guy, well, he'd know the door combination...

Can that code not be changed?

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 207):
I am not type rated, but if I can take over the cockpit, I can pull off a similar thing, even if I didn't plan it!

I guess anybody who can follow instructions and operate the radio would be able to get a 777 back to land safely...
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
 
LTC8K6
Posts: 1534
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 8:36 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 65

Tue Jun 03, 2014 1:09 am

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 207):

If I am one of those pilots and I need to incapacitate the other guy, well, he'd know the door combination... no use.

It's been stated a few times in these various parts that the person in the cockpit can deny entry, and also, that there is a physical manual bolt that can't be accessed from outside.

That is, you can be locked out of the cockpit, one way or the other, even if you know the access code.
 
747megatop
Posts: 1750
Joined: Wed May 23, 2007 8:22 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 65

Tue Jun 03, 2014 1:16 am

Quoting nupogodi (Reply 217):
My brain tells me the crash axe is the most formidable, but my knees will claim that it's actually the drink cart.

And if i was flying VS by butt,knees and back will unanimously claim that it is the seat that is the formidable weapon and my head would whole heartedly second them  . I land up being a corpse hardly able to walk after a 10 hour LAX-LHR flight or a 11 hour one in the return direction.
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6977
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 65

Tue Jun 03, 2014 2:00 am

Quoting LTC8K6 (Reply 224):
Quoting mandala499 (Reply 207):

If I am one of those pilots and I need to incapacitate the other guy, well, he'd know the door combination... no use.

It's been stated a few times in these various parts that the person in the cockpit can deny entry, and also, that there is a physical manual bolt that can't be accessed from outside.

That is, you can be locked out of the cockpit, one way or the other, even if you know the access code.

That is what I thought too...

Quoting 747megatop (Reply 225):
Quoting nupogodi (Reply 217):
My brain tells me the crash axe is the most formidable, but my knees will claim that it's actually the drink cart.

And if i was flying VS by butt,knees and back will unanimously claim that it is the seat that is the formidable weapon and my head would whole heartedly second them . I land up being a corpse hardly able to walk after a 10 hour LAX-LHR flight or a 11 hour one in the return direction.

That is gold! The Y seat in the DL 77L almost killed me... The massages after the flight also almost killed my bank account!

BTW - are there crash axes located through out the cabin for the FAs to access as well? If so, I'd hope they were hard to access for a nut case that flips out, unless, of course, the FA uses it on the nut case  

[Edited 2014-06-02 19:01:06]
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
 
65mustang
Posts: 84
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2014 1:28 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 65

Tue Jun 03, 2014 2:32 am

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 22):
ARINC 429 data feed failure, causing the satellite to not able to fix onto the satellite for a long enough period of time

I was trying to find more information on the outflow valves and the bleed air systems of a 777. I came across this document listing 777-300 simulator malfunctions (does it apply to 9m-mro?)

http://www.airfrance-flightacad.com/...7FFS2Simulatedmalfunctionslist.pdf

It list the following:


ASCPCFAIL /L&R
Cause
ASCPC channel failure (ARINC 429 circuit card fail).
Effects
Air Supply Cabin Pressure Controller (ASCPC) channel fails.
Message
CABIN ALT AUTO L,R (S) S21025 S21026;

Does this mean that a failure of the ARINC 429 card could cause Satcom issues AND stop the cabin pressurization from bleed air?

I was trying to find an answer to what happens to the outflow valves if there is a power failure. I read that the valves remain in the position they were in at the time of the failure. There were reports of mh370 descending to fl50 and then climbing back to fl290. If there was an ASCPC failure, would a 777-200 depressurize if it decreased in to fl50 through the pressure relief valve and then not pressurize again when it climbed back to fl290?
 
FLY744
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 12:36 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 65

Tue Jun 03, 2014 2:53 am

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 226):
BTW - are there crash axes located through out the cabin for the FAs to access as well?

With the greatest of respect, as a passenger you have no need to know where any crash axes may be located. The very fact that you don't know the answer to the question means that they are suitably concealed. Let's leave it at that.

This response is not intended personally but some security related information is best not revealed on a public forum.

Think security. Thanks for understanding.
Aviation in itself is not inherently dangerous.
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6977
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 65

Tue Jun 03, 2014 3:16 am

Quoting FLY744 (Reply 228):
Quoting 777Jet (Reply 226):
BTW - are there crash axes located through out the cabin for the FAs to access as well?

With the greatest of respect, as a passenger you have no need to know where any crash axes may be located. The very fact that you don't know the answer to the question means that they are suitably concealed. Let's leave it at that.

This response is not intended personally but some security related information is best not revealed on a public forum.

Think security. Thanks for understanding.

Thanks for your response - and for answering my question  

Sounds like a yes to me!
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
 
LTC8K6
Posts: 1534
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 8:36 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 65

Tue Jun 03, 2014 4:19 am

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 229):

The locations are widely available on the internet, so I'm not sure what all the secrecy is about. That horse has long left the barn.
 
FLY744
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 12:36 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 65

Tue Jun 03, 2014 4:39 am

Quoting LTC8K6 (Reply 230):
The locations are widely available on the internet, so I'm not sure what all the secrecy is about. That horse has long left the barn.

Not necessarily. The location of emergency equipment is a matter of individual operator preference (with the agreement of their regulator). Not all airlines are the same.

While most emergency equipment has locator icons on the outside of the stowage that does not apply to all items.

Any attempt at secrecy, as you put it, is about keeping you, the passenger, safe! I'm sure you would prefer it that way.
Aviation in itself is not inherently dangerous.
 
LTC8K6
Posts: 1534
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 8:36 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 65

Tue Jun 03, 2014 4:52 am

Quoting FLY744 (Reply 231):
I'm sure you would prefer it that way.

Not if I need an axe to escape, or to help someone, and no crew survived to find one for me...
 
User avatar
hOMSaR
Posts: 2252
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2010 4:47 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 65

Tue Jun 03, 2014 5:20 am

Quoting LTC8K6 (Reply 232):

Not if I need an axe to escape, or to help someone, and no crew survived to find one for me...

I guess it really comes down to a question of how many fatalities have occurred due to the inability of a passenger to locate a crash axe, vs. how many could occur if any passenger had access to one.
The plural of Airbus is Airbuses. Airbii is not a word.
There is no 787-800, nor 787-900 or 747-800. It's 787-8, 787-9, and 747-8.
A321neoLR is also unnecessary. It's simply A321LR.
Airplanes don't have isles, they have aisles.
 
WingedMigrator
Posts: 1771
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 9:45 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 65

Tue Jun 03, 2014 5:25 am

Quoting LTC8K6 (Reply 222):

Couldn't the plane have simply lost contact for a while without anyone turning the satmodem off?

Are there any situations where the system would have to re-connect without a power disruption?

Sure, why not? These boxes are rated for certain environments (temperature for example) and are not required to operate within specification (frequency tuning for example) while those environments are not present.
 
NAV30
Posts: 1080
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 9:16 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 65

Tue Jun 03, 2014 6:57 am

Interesting article here more or less 'debunking' the Inmarsat data - a 'choice extract' being this one:-

"STK calculations show the satellite’s relative motion was just 2 miles per hour toward the airport at this time. Factoring in the satellite’s angle above the horizon, the plane would need to have been moving at least 50 miles per hour on the ground to produce this frequency shift—implausibly high eleven minutes prior to takeoff, when flight transcripts show the plane had just pushed back from the gate and not yet begun to taxi."

http://www.theatlantic.com/technolog...370s-demise-doesnt-hold-up/361826/

Worth reading all the way through. I'd only add one point of my own. Everyone else seems to have accepted the 'two turns west' at face value - but (having had to mess around with radar in my youth) I have some doubts. After all, it's recorded that MH370 lost all contact - including radar contact - in the two minutes or so following the 'sign-off.' But the highly-respected pilots did not report any such change of course (or, indeed, 'check in' at all)?

The radar guys then appear to have asked the military for help in finding the aircraft, and they came up with the 'two turns west.' But apparently they also recorded some very high speeds, and the 'target' aeroplane descending to 6,000 feet or lower. I think it's highly likely that the aeroplane they were tracking was military (explaining the speed) and 'heading for home' (explaining the low altitude)?

[Edited 2014-06-03 00:12:02]
 
CabSauv
Posts: 35
Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2009 8:54 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 65

Tue Jun 03, 2014 8:58 am

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 235):
After all, it's recorded that MH370 lost all contact - including radar contact - in the two minutes or so following the 'sign-off.'

we do not know whether PSR contact was actually lost or even if it ever did "see" MH370 at that time (Malaysia / Viet / Thai). We know SSR was (transponder off) "lost"

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 235):
But the highly-respected pilots did not report any such change of course (or, indeed, 'check in' at all)?

Yep. This we know.

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 235):
The radar guys then appear to have asked the military for help in finding the aircraft, and they came up with the 'two turns west.' But apparently they also recorded some very high speeds, and the 'target' aeroplane descending to 6,000 feet or lower. I think it's highly likely that the aeroplane they were tracking was military (explaining the speed) and 'heading for home' (explaining the low altitude)?

and no. The "radar guys" did not ask the military for help.

exactly what the military knew, or did not know, or saw, or did not see, we do not know.

"they" recorded high speeds -> we do not know that. that all comes from within the first few days at pressers with relatives / media etc.

OK you have solved it.

Shot down ? By who ?
The military plane then escaped over Malaysia? into the straight? and then turned South? and all the time tracked by Inmarsat with MH370's unique Satcom modem identifier somehow attached to it? Or was Inmarsat "in on this all along"?
 
mandala499
Posts: 6592
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 65

Tue Jun 03, 2014 9:44 am

Quoting 9MMPQ (Reply 216):
Yes, this was also brought up internally shortly afterwards.

I thought they had this policy not long after 9/11... was it removed and reintroduced after MH370?

Quoting dtw2hyd (Reply 218):
If this theory has legs I would say Malaysia has bigger issues on hand than MH370.

I can have a big list, but that's not for this topic.

Quoting abba (Reply 219):
Now if this was a crime committed out of anger I simply don't understand why it was done this way. To let the plane simply disappear seems more like a very premeditate plan carried out with a cold mind rather that an expression of (sudden) anger. If it was sudden anger - or anger at all - it should have been far more "graphical".

This is the argument used by those who disagree that the captain did it out of the reaction to the result of the Anwar trial. Even if he did it, the timing could simply have been a coincidence. My view is that to say he did it as a reaction to the trial is... stretching it too far.

Quoting dfambro (Reply 220):
These facts alone make a fire/electrical/mechanical issue seem more likely. But in that case how does it fly for hours and navigate around Indonesia and out into the ocean?

I don't see any scenario that makes much sense.

It depends on the nature of the fire or technical issue. Not all fires onboard spread quickly and destroy the plane quickly... That is why this needs to be worked on to see that it's possible, or not... and how so.

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 223):
Hear say?

It's no more hearsay than the early reports of the captain being there at the trial, etc, etc, etc.
I cannot divulge much other than, "it has been looked into, and it's a possibility."

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 223):
Can that code not be changed?

It can. But then, if I want the the other guy out of the context, pull the crash axe, hack him to death, call the FAs and say, "We don't want to be disturbed for the rest of the flight. Thanks."
Throwing him out of the cockpit in one way or another, will incite a fightback. The code can be changed, but some have an override code which some may know while others don't, etc, etc. Besides, brute force can still result in a successful re-entry to the cockpit.

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 223):
I guess anybody who can follow instructions and operate the radio would be able to get a 777 back to land safely.

Yes, and no... but the simple answer is.. yes, able to get it back with a chance of survival... ie, even with autoland, such scenarios are still likely to result in a crash, but a survivable one at the airport with the rescuers waiting.

Quoting LTC8K6 (Reply 224):
That is, you can be locked out of the cockpit, one way or the other, even if you know the access code.

If this is a case of 1 rogue pilot locking the other pilot out and then no one can get into the cockpit, we've now killed more passengers in a single airplane by putting in the dead bolt on the cockpit door than the hijackers of 9/11 with 4 aircraft(of course, they killed a heck of a lot more people on the ground!). From the passengers statistics point of view, it doesn't look like a good deal at all having these bolts.

Again, other countries may have different rules on cockpit door security these days... and some of these "dead bolts" can be overcome by some other method (which is not open for discussion in an open forum).

Quoting FLY744 (Reply 231):
Not necessarily. The location of emergency equipment is a matter of individual operator preference (with the agreement of their regulator). Not all airlines are the same.

While most emergency equipment has locator icons on the outside of the stowage that does not apply to all items.

Any attempt at secrecy, as you put it, is about keeping you, the passenger, safe! I'm sure you would prefer it that way.

Some airlines have crash axes in cabin and some still have the storage place, clearly marked. Some don't have them in the cockpit. Some operators (fearful of pilot suicides) don't have crash axes in the cockpit and have it in the cabin instead. Some don't even have it in the cabin... and some have it under disguised markings. Some airlines, have the locations marked in a sealed document in the aircraft and is unique per aircraft, and it's only to be retrieved if in a planned emergency it is deemed necessary.

But then, to kill people onboard, I won't need the crash axe... there are still other items I can use... *expects the FBI to turn up and arrest me now!*   

But yes, these things aren't to be discussed in an open forum where anyone can read it.
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 65

Tue Jun 03, 2014 9:46 am

Quoting FLY744 (Reply 231):
Quoting LTC8K6 (Reply 230):
The locations are widely available on the internet, so I'm not sure what all the secrecy is about. That horse has long left the barn.

Not necessarily. The location of emergency equipment is a matter of individual operator preference (with the agreement of their regulator). Not all airlines are the same.

While most emergency equipment has locator icons on the outside of the stowage that does not apply to all items.

Any attempt at secrecy, as you put it, is about keeping you, the passenger, safe! I'm sure you would prefer it that way.

LOL

I only asked if there were also axes kept in the cabin for FAs to access (I know what is in the cockpit) in case of an emergency. It was a 'yes' / 'no' question... I did NOT ask for the locations of the axes...

Mr original question: "are there crash axes located through out the cabin for the FAs to access as well?"

Answer requires a 'yes' (which I got) or a 'no'. I was not looking for 'hidden' behind the jump-seat in-front of door 3L... I don't know how knowing that the FAs has access to axes is a safety breach but I can understand why it might not be wise to disclose their locations but that is not what I was asking anyway...
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
777Jet
Posts: 6977
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 65

Tue Jun 03, 2014 9:56 am

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 237):
Quoting 777Jet (Reply 223):
Can that code not be changed?

It can. But then, if I want the the other guy out of the context, pull the crash axe, hack him to death,

Until it is confirmed that the alleged attempted phone call a cell phone tower picked up from Fariq's phone is not true then in the case of MH370 I will still believe that one of the pilots might have been locked out of the cockpit by the other -(no hacking to death in the cockpit - unless that did happen and the Captain turned on the FO's phone to make it look like the FO was doing something)- and attempted to make a call. Why was that the only call attempted if true? Because... the plane was depressurized while still over the Gulf of Thailand and all the pax were out before in range of cell phone towers and out of any FAs and the FO who were still alive on bottled oxygen Fariq was the one who tried to turn his phone on or make a call... Just a wild guess...

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 237):
Quoting 777Jet (Reply 223):
I guess anybody who can follow instructions and operate the radio would be able to get a 777 back to land safely.

Yes, and no... but the simple answer is.. yes, able to get it back with a chance of survival... ie, even with autoland, such scenarios are still likely to result in a crash, but a survivable one at the airport with the rescuers waiting.

I'm sure I could stop a 772 within 10,000 feet, and keep the front spinners within 3 meters of the center line  
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
 
LTC8K6
Posts: 1534
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 8:36 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 65

Tue Jun 03, 2014 11:26 am

Quoting hOmSaR (Reply 233):

I guess it really comes down to a question of how many fatalities have occurred due to the inability of a passenger to locate a crash axe, vs. how many could occur if any passenger had access to one.

Well, it's called a crash axe, so that's what I think of first. A crash.

Okay, there's been a crash, I have survived, now what? Maybe I need one of those axes?  
Quoting 777Jet (Reply 238):
It was a 'yes' / 'no' question...

It depends on the plane. Often the answer would be "no", iirc.

There is sometimes only one axe, and it's with the pilots.
 
nupogodi
Posts: 933
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 10:58 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 65

Tue Jun 03, 2014 12:35 pm

Heh, regarding the crash axe thing - I'll disagree with people saying it's a security concern. In computer security we call that "security by obscurity" and we call it that because it's truthfully no security at all. A determined attacker will learn your secret hiding spots, it's as easy as befriending a flight attendant and getting them a little drunk. In computers, we lock things up with encryption, mathematically guaranteed to be strong. In the real world we lock things up with keys, behind steel doors, physically guaranteed to be strong. Simply hiding something isn't very useful, unless you keep your life savings or a firearm unlocked in your mattress and think that's a bright idea.

Still, I understand the desire not to be "the guy" who spills the beans.   But if you think hiding info that everyone who works on any of your airline's aircraft knows is secure, I've got a bridge to sell you.

[Edited 2014-06-03 05:37:13]
A man must know how to look before he can hope to see.
 
maninch
Posts: 5
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2014 11:09 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 65

Tue Jun 03, 2014 12:43 pm

Just found this in the Independent : http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...oke-over-indian-ocean-9477827.html

It's not exactly scientific and I have nothing of note to add. Just a question though: how far is this 'sighting' from the other 'sighting' reported shortly after the aircraft went missing? I believe that was a New Zealand sailor?

Sorry if it's just another red herring ...
 
mandala499
Posts: 6592
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 65

Tue Jun 03, 2014 12:59 pm

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 239):
Until it is confirmed that the alleged attempted phone call a cell phone tower picked up from Fariq's phone is not true then in the case of MH370 I will still believe that one of the pilots might have been locked out of the cockpit by the other -(no hacking to death in the cockpit - unless that did happen and the Captain turned on the FO's phone to make it look like the FO was doing something)- and attempted to make a call.

I'd take it as until there's confirmation there's an attempted phone call, then I believe the pilot locked out theory is bogus.
The cell network could easily supply the data on which towers tracked the phone and when and where the call was made. That data is not made available, which if true, would have been declared as fact by now.

The thing is, seriously, ever tried trying to connect to a ground BTS while flying at FL350, or even 10,000 above ground? Then ever tried to make a call in those situations?

I flew at 1000ft at 140kts and I couldn't even get a cellphone signal... and I was flying over the middle of city!
The last time I had a cell connection inside an aircraft at over 10,000ft was 14 years ago at FL270 on descent... back in the days of low density of cell towers and low frequency GSM (800MHz)... those days are mostly long gone in Indonesia and Malaysia. Now the higher frequency signals, are harder to latch on to let alone make a call on, from inside airplanes at altitudes... and the BTS antennas have better control on vertical beam coverage... to not waste energy transmitting to high elevation angles where there is "no one"...
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
NAV30
Posts: 1080
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 9:16 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 65

Tue Jun 03, 2014 1:01 pm

Quoting maninch (Reply 242):
Just a question though: how far is this 'sighting' from the other 'sighting' reported shortly after the aircraft went missing?

Usual thing, maninch, there is actually no position stated. So it is impossible to evaluate this 'sighting' just from the press report.

The 'authorities' have a pretty good 'fix' on MH370 going off radio, radar, and all other forms of communication - flying say nor-nor-east, at 35,000 feet, about 50 minutes after taking off. But that seems to be all anyone has, up to the present time.

[Edited 2014-06-03 06:16:41]
 
User avatar
9MMPQ
Posts: 445
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2011 3:00 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 65

Tue Jun 03, 2014 1:24 pm

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 237):
I thought they had this policy not long after 9/11... was it removed and reintroduced after MH370?

I joined MH a bit later then that so can't comment on what, if anything, was done around that time. I can only say that from communications i have seen it seems an instatement of new policy. I will say that what could be viewed as the 9/11 mindset regarding security might not be applied as firm or maybe even worldwide as we would like to automatically asume. I'm saying that because over the years i have seen a few examples on different airlines where i knew there were only 2 pilots up front with one of them stepping out without another crewmember taking their place. Did we not also have the E190 suicide crash last year where the F/O (whose place was not taken by another crewmember) was locked out after heading to the bathroom.

Quoting abba (Reply 219):
Now if this was a crime committed out of anger I simply don't understand why it was done this way. To let the plane simply disappear seems more like a very premeditate plan carried out with a cold mind rather that an expression of (sudden) anger. If it was sudden anger - or anger at all - it should have been far more "graphical".
Quoting mandala499 (Reply 237):
This is the argument used by those who disagree that the captain did it out of the reaction to the result of the Anwar trial. Even if he did it, the timing could simply have been a coincidence. My view is that to say he did it as a reaction to the trial is... stretching it too far.

I doubt we will ever know the real reasons but some times there are case were people lash out in ways nobody would ever have expected from them. I am thus not ruling out anyone or anything on that front.

I will say this though, the whole aftermath in Malaysia has left a distinct impression of incompetence at best and things being what they are in Malaysia there will always be those looking for a cover up or other hidden agenda by the government.

If MH370 is not found that will continue to linger. If MH370 is found (and i like to believe some day we will find it) we still may not get any real answers. Since MH370 has been flown until fuel starvation the CVR may no longer have a record of what happened around the time contact was lost. Then we are left with the FDR and if we were to presume MH370 was intentionally flown out into the Indian Ocean we are likely only to see a record of someone piloting MH370 to it's final resting place. Without a clear answer to the who & why it will remain a grateful subject for people to use against the government. So this would leave a bit of a legacy to those in power today. It's just one of the tidbits we have that when all put together leaves me feeling very uneasy about what may have happened onboard.
I believe in coincidences. Coincidences happen every day. But I don't trust coincidences.
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6977
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 65

Tue Jun 03, 2014 1:33 pm

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 243):

All I know is that back in 2011 I made a phone call on 9M-MRG from my own cell phone whilst at FLT350 over the South China Sea using AeroMobile technology that was just installed to that aircraft. I have been told that was the only MH777 to be installed with AeroMobile as it was being tried and ended up not being worth installing on the rest of the fleet. I don't know what to believe about the later, but having made a phone call from inside one MH 777 from my own cell phone over the ocean at FLT350 makes it easier for me to believe that a phone call could be made... I took a pic of the 'instruction' card that was in the seat back pocket - it is in my profile...

Quoting maninch (Reply 242):
WP first posted a link to the forum, a few days ago, in which that person wrote about the sighting and asked if they should follow up with authorities - obviously they did!

[Edited 2014-06-03 06:42:20]
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 65

Tue Jun 03, 2014 1:33 pm

Quoting 9MMPQ (Reply 245):
Since MH370 has been flown until fuel starvation the CVR may no longer have a record of what happened around the time contact was lost.

Must admit, 9MMPO, I've seen no evidence to support any idea that MH370 flew 'until fuel starvation'? On the (scanty) available evidence, it likely 'went in' within the first hour?
 
User avatar
Finn350
Posts: 1595
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:57 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 65

Tue Jun 03, 2014 1:35 pm

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 243):
The cell network could easily supply the data on which towers tracked the phone and when and where the call was made. That data is not made available, which if true, would have been declared as fact by now.

I think the cell phone call attempt has been denied by the Malaysian officials. However, CNN reported based on their sources that there was a cell phone registration to a cell tower from the FO's cell phone when the plane flew over Malaysia. This has not been denied and if true, it would indicate the FO had switched his phone on (or out of airplane mode).

Quoting 9MMPQ (Reply 245):
If MH370 is not found that will continue to linger.

If the culprit was one of the pilots, I also think that we will never know the real motive. If there was a clear motive it would have surfaced already. I also wonder to what degree mental health issues might be involved, as the act is very heinous.
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6977
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 65

Tue Jun 03, 2014 1:41 pm

Quoting 9MMPQ (Reply 245):
Since MH370 has been flown until fuel starvation the CVR may no longer have a record of what happened around the time contact was lost. Then we are left with the FDR and if we were to presume MH370 was intentionally flown out into the Indian Ocean we are likely only to see a record of someone piloting MH370 to it's final resting place. Without a clear answer to the who & why it will remain a grateful subject for people to use against the government.

Exactly. I have been saying that for a long time. I'd absolutely love to hear what went on at the critical time when the transponder stopped - what was being said in the cockpit. Nonetheless, I don't expect to hear anything juicy on the CVR if MH370 is where they are looking. But, I'm still hoping that apart from finding an intact FDR, that they find the cockpit door. I'd like to know ( after visual / forensic examination) if it was being rammed by a galley cart or if somebody tried to bust it open with an axe...

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 247):
it likely 'went in' within the first hour?

We all know your theory now... Seriously... In fact, I hope your right, because then the cockpit conversation would still be on the CVR!

[Edited 2014-06-03 06:45:21]
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

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