• 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 7
 
wilco737
Topic Author
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2004 12:21 am

MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 66

Wed Jun 04, 2014 5:41 am

Due to length part 65 was locked for further contributions. Please feel free to continue your discussion in part 66.

MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 65 (by jetblueguy22 May 29 2014 in Civil Aviation)

SOME IMPORTANT REMINDERS FOR ALL OUR MEMBERS TO CONSIDER BEFORE POSTING IN THIS THREAD:

**** Out of respect to the crew, passengers and also family members; close to those onboard MH370; please keep science fiction theories and content related to past / current movies or possible future movie rights out of these threads. ****

**** PLEASE DO NOT REPEAT QUESTIONS AND SCENARIOS THAT HAS BEEN COVERED AND DISCUSSED IN PREVIOUS THREADS AND WHICH DO NOT CONTRIBUTE OR APPLY, IN A CONSTRUCTIVE MANNER, TOWARDS THIS CONVERSATION ANY LONGER. ****

**** Please make an effort to read through some of the threads, if possible the latest in the series, before adding your own comments and theories to the current, active thread on this issue. ****

**** PLEASE BE RESPECTFUL TOWARDS OTHER USERS AND KEEP THE FORUM RULES AND REGULATIONS IN MIND WHEN POSTING IN THE FORUMS. SHOULD THERE BE ANY RULE VIOLATIONS, PLEASE BRING THIS TO THE ATTENTION OF THE MODERATORS BY MAKING USE OF THE SUGGEST DELETION FUNCTION.
****

**** WHEN STATING FACTS, STATISTICS OR NEWSWORTHY BULLETINS, PLEASE BE SURE TO INCLUDE AN HTML LINK OR REFERENCE TO A PUBLICATION. IF YOU ARE MERELY PROVIDING AN OPINION, PLEASE MENTION THIS IN YOUR POST. ALL MEMBERS ARE RESPONSIBLE TO AVOID ARGUMENTS BASED ON RUMORS OR MISINFORMATION

**** Some members may not be aware of the fact that all members have an edit window of 60 minutes, from the time you first make a post in which to add or remove any additional comments or information into/from the post. Please make use of this feature made available to you, for your own convenience, instead of posting one post after another (doubles, triples or more).

**** Also keep in mind that this is a discussion forum and not a chat room. If you would like to chat about this incident, kindly make use of the "Live Chat" option, which is available in the "forum drop-down menu". Messages of agreement such as "ME TOO", "I AGREE WITH X", YES OR NO have been found to waste time and space and are therefore to be avoided. A message consisting of only one or two lines of text is probably not worth posting. Do not make posts that contain only a smiley face, check mark, etc. Make sure the content of your post is relevant to the topic.

Enjoy the forums!
 
abba
Posts: 1385
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 12:08 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 66

Wed Jun 04, 2014 6:09 am

From the last part 777Jet: So if you do not receive an official claim of responsibility you conclude that no declared motive proves that there was no deliberate act! By extension, In the future unclaimed terrorist acts will be declared not to have taken place?

---

I haven't talked about an official claim of responsibility. But if it is indeed a deliberate act of terrorism someone would have been celebrating and bragging about it. Terrorists have a reason to do the things they do. Plain evilness - where it is only the laugh of it that is the point - is something that only exits in cartoons. Even if there were no official claim after 9-11 it only took few days before it was known not only which organization was behind but also who the individual terrorists on each of planes were! A large part of the investigation about this side of the event can be carried out no matter whether the plane is found or not.

---

From the last part 777Jet: There is almost a timeline and chain of events prepared that fits the Captain did it theory and also explains the cover up behavior. However, if it was posted in here, it would get quoted, and eventually deleted after a 'reference quote' got deleted... You know how it works...

So, abba, where is your theory / chain of events?

---

See the point is that it only takes an absolute minimum of technical knowledge to come up with a chain of events claiming that the pilot did it. You only need to know a little bit about the performance and fuel burn of the aircraft (some of the chains of events put forth seems not even to be able to do that). I am in no way impressed. In particular as the argument - the pilot did it that way in order to have it look like an accident - can be used. Now to come up with a technical chain of events take an intimate knowledge of the design and the systems of the 777 - and I haven't that. And I guess that you do neither.

[Edited 2014-06-03 23:19:17]
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6977
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 66

Wed Jun 04, 2014 9:05 am

Quoting abba (Reply 1):
So if you do not receive an official claim of responsibility you conclude that no declared motive proves that there was no deliberate act! By extension, In the future unclaimed terrorist acts will be declared not to have taken place?

I don't know what you are going on about...

I never said that it was or was not terrorist related so that is irrelevant as I have not been an advocate for any theory relating to terrorist groups (or fire or mechanical problems for that matter).

Quoting abba (Reply 1):
Now to come up with a technical chain of events take an intimate knowledge of the design and the systems of the 777 - and I haven't that. And I guess that you do neither.

I sure don't . But one thing I have more of than many others is common sense. Do you know what that is? Common sense says that a T7 does not have a fire occur quick enough -(between the last ATC communication when no indication of a problem was mentioned and the time the transponder stopped which is obviously when something was happening)- to take out the transponder / comms so quickly and yet not do enough damage to the plane to allow it to change course a few times and fly on for another 7.5 hours...
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
 
Kaiarahi
Posts: 1807
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 6:55 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 66

Wed Jun 04, 2014 9:41 am

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 2):
But one thing I have more of than many others is common sense. Do you know what that is?

"I have often wished I had time to cultivate modesty... but I am too busy thinking about myself." - Edith Sitwell
Empty vessels make the most noise.
 
abba
Posts: 1385
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 12:08 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 66

Wed Jun 04, 2014 9:41 am

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 2):
Do you know what that is?

I certainly do!

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 2):
Common sense says that a T7 does not have a fire occur quick enough -(between the last ATC communication when no indication of a problem was mentioned and the time the transponder stopped which is obviously when something was happening)- to take out the transponder / comms so quickly and yet not do enough damage to the plane to allow it to change course a few times and fly on for another 7.5 hours...

And therefore I know that this is not what common sense says but what fee speculation believes.

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 2):
I don't know what you are going on about...

As I indicated: quoting you from part 65
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6977
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 66

Wed Jun 04, 2014 10:07 am

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 3):
"I have often wished I had time to cultivate modesty... but I am too busy thinking about myself." - Edith Sitwell

I doubt anybody thinks about themselves as much as you think about yourself  
Quoting abba (Reply 4):
As I indicated: quoting you from part 65

What I wrote in my last post in part #65 was not what you quoted in here... Not even close...
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
 
abba
Posts: 1385
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 12:08 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 66

Wed Jun 04, 2014 10:27 am

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 5):
Not even close...

Sorry - it was BackSeater.... I got you mixed up!
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6977
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 66

Wed Jun 04, 2014 10:37 am

Quoting abba (Reply 6):
Quoting 777Jet (Reply 5):
Not even close...

Sorry - it was BackSeater.... I got you mixed up!

Okay! No worries!
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
 
mandala499
Posts: 6592
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 66

Wed Jun 04, 2014 10:45 am

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 239):
I'm sure I could stop a 772 within 10,000 feet, and keep the front spinners within 3 meters of the center line

In ideal conditions for the autoland to function, yes... but then, is it always ideal?  
Quoting 777Jet (Reply 246):
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...

I am well aware of MH's "toying around" on onboard connectivity with Aeromobile in the past.
9M-MRO did not have this onboard, and the scheme was on 9M-MRG on a trial basis only.
It requires a SwiftBroadband system, which is the HGA antenna but a newer SDU, and then a leaky feeder and/or picocell (to act as a BTS/celltower onboard). 9M-MRO did NOT have this installed on the aircraft.

I have had nice connections on aircraft fitted with Aeromobile and/or OnAir for cellular and/or wifi. But for aircraft without these systems, no... the cell call isn't going to happen from that altitude.

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 248):
This has not been denied and if true, it would indicate the FO had switched his phone on

Even if that is true, it only means, "he forgot to switch off his mobile phone off", which happens a LOT even to crew. It does not make it more likely that it happened because he was locked out of the cockpit.

Quoting sipadan (Reply 250):
It seems that at some point within this 11 minute span, a decision was made to swap duties, Fariq would move to piloting, Zaharie to comms. I wonder if this wasn't a 'unilateral' decision? And about that incomplete read back,

Try: EICAS warning/alert. OK, PIC has airplane and comms, SIC is to do the troubleshooting.
The out of routine situation can also explain the "incomplete" readback. This can also explain a delay in calling Ho CHi Minh immediately... aviate, navigate, communicate.
Remember this is the FO's first 777 duty flight without the safety co-pilot... so the Captain may elect to delay the call to assist, only to have the problems escalate.

Quoting sipadan (Reply 250):
Since my knowledge of the flight deck is so 'rudimentary', I have been told over and over again that this flopping of roles means 'nothing' . However, since the a/c is MISSING, and lives have been lost, I think even the slightest and seemingly most insignificant of anomalies is deserving of rigorous scrutiny.

It is usually "nothing". Yes, it deserves scrutiny in this case, BUT, we have to also be careful about it.

Quoting sipadan (Reply 250):
So you think that ONLY if the phone call is proven and realized could the locked out theory stand?

To use the phone call to support the locked out theory, it has to be proven that the call was made. If the call didn't happen, the theory needs other means of explanation/support. To purport the locked out theory by use of "the possibility of a phone call being made" is the wrong way of doing it if looking at this from the accident investigation viewpoint... if one wants to go about it from the criminal investigation point of view, then I can understand such stance.

Quoting BackSeater (Reply 256):
Of course, we all understand why Mr. Hussein cannot confirm it. As you remember, he stated that he will not confirm what has not been corroborated! And his team is still searching for an eyewitness corroborating that he saw the F/O's phone being turned on!

Well, after seeing him on the 4 Corners, U know, the plane can be in Mars... Seriously. I have to treat what he says in extreme caution and skepticism.

Quoting abba (Reply 260):
(Pihero - please present your theory in a full version!)

I'd like to remind everyone more complex systems in airplanes are there to make aviation safer, at the cost of making it increasingly difficult to "understand the chain of events and consequences". This is what we have to live with.
On another front, we also need to realize that as aviation becomes safer, each accident/incident becomes more stupidly simple or of bizarre complexity... the middle ground of "an average in complexity" accidents are what has been eliminated with the improvements in safety.

Therefore, for the full theory of the non-hostile takeover (the Mishap Theory), is extremely difficult and complex to construct in a systematic manner. One must also remember that even the hostile takeover theory, is not as easy as it seems either to construct in a systematic manner.

Quoting BackSeater (Reply 266):
I believe that work remains to be done to discriminate between different classes of scenarios:
- a deliberate act, possibly but not necessarily involving the crew under duress or not;
- an accidental event, compounded or not by subsequent crew actions, that caused the a/c to fly autonomously;
- a combination of the two whereby a deliberate act caused an accidental event at some later time.

SPOT ON!

 
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
chrisrad
Posts: 967
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2000 7:26 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 66

Wed Jun 04, 2014 10:56 am

http://www.theage.com.au/wa-news/cur...trace-of-mh370-20140604-zrxaw.html

Researchers at Perth's Curtin University are examining a low-frequency underwater sound signal that could have resulted from Malaysian Airlines Flight MH370 crashing into the Indian Ocean.
Dr Alec Duncan, from Curtin University's Centre for Marine Science and Technology team, believes there is slim chance - perhaps as low as 10 per cent - the low frequency signal could have been MH370 either hitting the water or a part of the aircraft imploding as it sank to the bottom of the ocean.
However he conceded the signal, picked up by underwater sound recorders off Rottnest Island just after 1.30am (UTC) on March 8 - consistent with the disappearance of MH370 - more likely originated from a natural event, such as a small earth tremor.

Welcome aboard Malaysia Airlines! Winner of Best Cabin Staff 2001,2002,2003,2004,2007,2009,2012
 
User avatar
Finn350
Posts: 1595
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:57 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 66

Wed Jun 04, 2014 10:59 am



Quoting mandala499 (Reply 8):
Even if that is true, it only means, "he forgot to switch off his mobile phone off", which happens a LOT even to crew. It does not make it more likely that it happened because he was locked out of the cockpit.

Here is the CNN news story:

http://edition.cnn.com/2014/04/14/world/asia/malaysia-airlines-plane/

Quote:
The phone of the first officer of Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 was on and made contact with a cell tower in Malaysia about the time the plane disappeared from radar, a U.S. official told CNN on Monday.

However, the U.S. official -- who cited information shared by Malaysian investigators -- said there was no evidence the first officer, Fariq Abdul Hamid, had tried to make a call.

The official told CNN's Pamela Brown on Monday that a cell-phone tower in Penang, Malaysia -- about 250 miles from where the flight's transponder last sent a signal -- detected the first officer's phone searching for service roughly 30 minutes after authorities believe the plane made a sharp turn westward.

And another source:

http://indianexpress.com/article/wor...de-mid-air-phone-call-says-report/

Quote:
Citing sources close to the investigations, the paper said that checks on Fariq’s phone showed that connection to the phone had been “detached” before the plane took off.

“This is usually the result of the phone being switched off. At one point, however, when the airplane was airborne, between waypoint Igari and the spot near Penang (just before it went missing from radar), the line was ‘reattached’.

“A ‘reattachment’ does not necessarily mean that a call was made. It can also be the result of the phone being switched on again,” the sources said.

If these quotes are true, it would indicate that the phone was likely switched off before take-off and switched on later during the flight.

[Edited 2014-06-04 04:03:51]
 
LTC8K6
Posts: 1534
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 8:36 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 66

Wed Jun 04, 2014 11:10 am

Yeah those stories are saying that the phone was off during the first part of the flight, and turned on later during the flight.
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 9072
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 66

Wed Jun 04, 2014 11:13 am

But we do not know for what reason. Maybe he wanted to use the GPS or whatever...
 
mandala499
Posts: 6592
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 66

Wed Jun 04, 2014 11:15 am

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 10):
If these quotes are true, it would indicate that the phone was likely switched off before take-off and switched on later during the flight.

The CNN one makes it sound like it might have just been left on...

The Indian article does not specifically say it was turned off and turned on, only that de-attachment "usually" (not always) means the phone was switched off before flight and then switched on again. The wording does not say that it was switched off and then switched on again.

Therefore, I see the two articles as merely saying, "yeah the cellphones seems to have caught something, but it could just well be the phone being left on."

For me, the term "detached" means it went offline, and not deliberately switched off, which would be "signed off"...

Now the question returns to: "How many of us have had a cellular connection (just a signal with a strength) to the ground (not to the onboard BTS, so discounting those with onboard cellular service) at FL350 on a 777?"
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
User avatar
Finn350
Posts: 1595
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:57 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 66

Wed Jun 04, 2014 11:26 am

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 13):
For me, the term "detached" means it went offline, and not deliberately switched off, which would be "signed off"...

What do you mean by a phone going "offline" other than switching it off (or to airplane mode)? Surely there is ample cell phone coverage at Kuala Lumpur airport?
 
mandala499
Posts: 6592
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 66

Wed Jun 04, 2014 11:37 am

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 14):
What do you mean by a phone going "offline" other than switching it off (or to airplane mode)? Surely there is ample cell phone coverage at Kuala Lumpur airport?

What do I mean?
It's switched on... while you're on the ground... and then you take off... at some point, you lose cellular coverage... therefore at that time, your phone has gone "detached from the network" / "gone offline".
Switching it off, it tells the cellular service, "I'm going off, cya" then "zzzz..."
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
User avatar
Finn350
Posts: 1595
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:57 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 66

Wed Jun 04, 2014 11:40 am

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 15):
What do I mean?
It's switched on... while you're on the ground... and then you take off... at some point, you lose cellular coverage... therefore at that time, your phone has gone "detached from the network" / "gone offline".
Switching it off, it tells the cellular service, "I'm going off, cya" then "zzzz..."

The important bit regarding this from my previous quote:

Quote:
Citing sources close to the investigations, the paper said that checks on Fariq’s phone showed that connection to the phone had been “detached” before the plane took off.

That is "before the plane took off".
 
User avatar
Finn350
Posts: 1595
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:57 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 66

Wed Jun 04, 2014 12:14 pm

Emirates Tim Clark on MH370:

Quote:
He believes that “this aircraft was disabled in three primary systems. To be able to disable those requires a knowledge of the system which even our pilots in Emirates don’t know how to do. Somebody got on board and knew exactly what they were up to.”
Quote:
To Clark, tracking is not the main issue: “the first thing you need to do is do not allow anybody on board to disable ACARS – job done.”

Source: http://aviationweek.com/commercial-a...s-mh370-investigation-deficiencies
 
mandala499
Posts: 6592
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 66

Wed Jun 04, 2014 12:34 pm

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 17):
Emirates Tim Clark on MH370:

Tim Clark would need to have a discussion with his technical team then... His 777s still have the ability to deselect VHF (and HF on his 777LRs) and Satcom from the ACARS menu. That's clearly stated in the 777 Flight Crew Operating Manual (yes, Emirates')... In my view, him saying that "which even our pilots in Emirates don’t know how to do", I take it as an insult to his pilots at Emirates...

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 16):
That is "before the plane took off".

But the article only says that it is likely that it was switched off. It doesn't specifically say that it was turned off. They have no idea whether it was switched off or went to airplane mode, or whether it simply lost connectivity even "before the plane took off" (which is can happen despite ample coverage).

Regardless, I do agree that such information should have been confirmed or denied in the preliminary report... although it goes mainly towards the criminal investigation side rather than the accident investigation side. I still don't take it as a confirmation that it was switched off and then switched on...
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
Backseater
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 3:20 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 66

Wed Jun 04, 2014 12:48 pm

Quoting chrisrad (Reply 9):
Researchers at Perth's Curtin University are examining a low-frequency underwater sound signal that could have resulted from Malaysian Airlines Flight MH370 crashing into the Indian Ocean.

Dr. Duncan is obviously cautious but this is very interesting, even if there is only a 10% chance that it could be related to MH370. I had raised the issue on May 10th but at the time, it looked that the data was waiting for scientists to analyze it further.

I am not sure how to interpret the map. Maybe the intersection of two hyperboles if all they have are two time of arrival differences from two pairs of hydrophones(?).

Yesterday some report mentioned approx. 3,000nm from Perth.
That would put the estimate near the Maldives. Remember the (discarded) sightings?
 
Guillermo
Posts: 32
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2001 11:54 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 66

Wed Jun 04, 2014 1:06 pm

Sorry if this was discussed before...

Considering the great "linear momentum" of the aircraft in flight, *if* it crashed, and *if* the crash was particularly violent, chances are that any nearby seismographic stations could have recorded some seismographic event related to that crash. *If* yes, this could probably lead us to the actual location of the crash site.

This already happened at least one time in my knowledge, with the Swissair SR111 crash near Peggy's Cove, Nova Scotia, Canada, 1998:

(quote of the official investigation report, page 3)

At approximately 0130, observers in the area of St. Margaret’s Bay, Nova Scotia, saw a large
aircraft fly overhead at low altitude and heard the sound of its engines. At about 0131, several
observers heard a sound described as a loud clap. Seismographic recorders in Halifax,
Nova Scotia, and in Moncton, New Brunswick, recorded a seismic event at 0131:18, which
coincides with the time the aircraft struck the water.


(Source: Aviation Investigation Report - In-Flight Fire Leading to Collision with Water - Swissair Transport Limited - McDonnell Douglas MD-11 HB-IWF - Peggy’s Cove, Nova Scotia 5 nm SW - 2 September 1998 - Report Number A98H0003 - http://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-re...viation/1998/a98h0003/a98h0003.pdf )

I found that there are some seismographic stations in the area where presumably the flight could had crashed, however I do not know anything about what kind of data they are hearing to, nor if they keep records -if any- only of events greater or equal to an "x" magnitude level, how much time do they keep these records, etc. Sources:

Station search:
http://www.isc.ac.uk/registries/search/

EXAMPLE:

Station details:
================

Code: BTM

Latitude: 3.20000

Longitude: 113.08333

Elevation: 156.0

Depth:

Name: Bintulu

Region: Sarawak,Malaysia

Status:

Station comments:
=================

opened 1998

Data at the ISC for 9 years between 2001 and 2012.

Station maps:
http://www.iris.edu/hq/programs/gsn/maps

Hope this helps.

Regards,
Guillermo.
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 7524
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 66

Wed Jun 04, 2014 1:49 pm

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 17):
Emirates Tim Clark on MH370:

Like any other airline exec, he don't want to spend one additional dollar. So he has to tone down any such suggestion by deflecting attention some where else.
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6977
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 66

Wed Jun 04, 2014 1:57 pm

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 8):
Quoting 777Jet (Reply 239):
I'm sure I could stop a 772 within 10,000 feet, and keep the front spinners within 3 meters of the center line

In ideal conditions for the autoland to function, yes... but then, is it always ideal?

I mean hand flying in conditions that would usually warrant a CAT III ILS approach - after a few bourbons of course  
Quoting mandala499 (Reply 8):
Quoting Finn350 (Reply 248):
This has not been denied and if true, it would indicate the FO had switched his phone on

Even if that is true, it only means, "he forgot to switch off his mobile phone off", which happens a LOT even to crew. It does not make it more likely that it happened because he was locked out of the cockpit.

I just would have though it would have been picked up by more towers if it was left on the whole time - or not picked up at all. If it was only picked up by the one tower (and based on the location of the tower and the route the plane took, possibly being in closer range to other towers before the one that picked up the signal as it flew from East to West across Malaysia) IMO it is more likely that the specific tower picked it up as the phone was just turned on and that was the closest tower at the time.

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 10):
If these quotes are true, it would indicate that the phone was likely switched off before take-off and switched on later during the flight.

I'm going with switched on later during the flight - possibly trying to make an emergency call...
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
 
Backseater
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 3:20 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 66

Wed Jun 04, 2014 8:28 pm

FMC question.
I understand that the a/c speed during the various flight segments is usually chosen by the FMC based on the Cost Index (CI) chosen by the pilot. For the T7 I read the following:

Quote:
The descent may be planned at econ Mach/CAS (based on the CI) or a manually entered Mach/CAS. VNAV limits the maximum target speed as follows:
777: 314 kts (Vmo/Mmo minus 16 kts) or a pilot-entered speed greater than 319 kts (Vmo/Mmo minus 11 kts).
FMCs also limit target speeds appropriately for initial buffet and limit thrust.

In practice, what is the maximum target speed that can be entered into the FMC for the descent segment? Vmo i.e.330kts?
What max speed will actually be used as a function of altitude?
 
adriaticus
Posts: 993
Joined: Thu May 06, 2004 3:29 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 66

Wed Jun 04, 2014 8:33 pm

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 13):
Now the question returns to: "How many of us have had a cellular connection (just a signal with a strength) to the ground (not to the onboard BTS, so discounting those with onboard cellular service) at FL350 on a 777?"

For what is worth, a few years ago I was awakened by an incoming call on my cell phone, while flying at cruising altitude (presumably at FL300 or above) over Mexico City, en route LAX-SJO, on board a TA A320. Not exactly the same conditions described in your question, but heck, pretty close I'd say!

I notice the phone displyed the smallest bar on the signal strenght. I tried answering the call, but being the signal too low to transmit/receive, it hissed, cracked and dropped right away. The "No Signal" sign came in within seconds thereafter.

___Ad.
A300/18/19/20/21/30/32/88 An24 ATR42/72 B721/2 B732/3/G/8/MAX B741/2/4 B752 B762/3/4 B772/3 B788/9 Concorde DC8/9/10 E45/70/75/90/95 IL62/86 MD10-30/11 SA340/2000 TU134/154
 
Backseater
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 3:20 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 66

Wed Jun 04, 2014 8:44 pm

Quoting adriaticus (Reply 24):
while flying at cruising altitude (presumably at FL300 or above) over Mexico City,

Interesting but Mexico DF is at about 7,500ft alt. I guess there may be BTS on some of the mountains around (?) maybe at over 10,000ft. FL unknown, geometric altitude may be different by +/- 2,000 or 3,000ft.
Still high but maybe down to 17,000ft(?) above terrain.

And if you were closer to Puebla, maybe they have installed some BTS on the slopes of the Popocateplt (17,000ft plus) for intrepid volcano watchers!

[Edited 2014-06-04 13:53:05]
 
LH707330
Posts: 2262
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 11:27 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 66

Wed Jun 04, 2014 8:54 pm

Quoting BackSeater (Reply 19):
I am not sure how to interpret the map. Maybe the intersection of two hyperboles if all they have are two time of arrival differences from two pairs of hydrophones(?).

I think you meant "hyperbolas" or "hyperbolae," by contrast the intersection of two hyperboles is what's going on on this forum 

Based on the fact that those lines are relatively close together, I'm guessing the hydrophones were close to the path and the widening in the middle is due to possible error margins. Eyeballing it, it looks like that line crosses the last ping ring about 700 miles SW of the previous search area.
 
Backseater
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 3:20 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 66

Wed Jun 04, 2014 9:03 pm

Quoting LH707330 (Reply 26):
I think you meant "hyperbolas" or "hyperbolae,"

I stand corrected.   
 
prebennorholm
Posts: 7020
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2000 6:25 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 66

Wed Jun 04, 2014 10:30 pm

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 18):
Tim Clark would need to have a discussion with his technical team then... His 777s still have the ability to deselect VHF (and HF on his 777LRs) and Satcom from the ACARS menu. That's clearly stated in the 777 Flight Crew Operating Manual (yes, Emirates')... In my view, him saying that "which even our pilots in Emirates don’t know how to do", I take it as an insult to his pilots at Emirates...

Aeh, give the man a break. We know that Tim Clark is a talking machine and a businessman.

He has a small peripheral interest in this accident because he has a large 777 fleet. He tries to divert attention away from the theory of a catastrophic malfunction, which he does by talking only about the other theory, foul play. And then he indicates that he knows how to avoid or minimize foul play.

He is talking to people who don't have a 777 operating manual on their office shelf, and his real mesage could have been much shorter, like this: " Don't worry about flying on my 777s".

Maybe Clark thinks the same way as I do - that there is a 99+% chance that MH370 will end up as the "Amelia Earhart of 21st century" - that we will never know more than we already do. That will produce endless conspiratory theories over the next several decades. As few as possible of those theories should include a "small devil" designed into the magnificent 777. Sure he hopes so, and so do I.
Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs
 
User avatar
gennadius
Posts: 447
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 5:38 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 66

Wed Jun 04, 2014 10:50 pm

Quoting LH707330 (Reply 26):
by contrast the intersection of two hyperboles is what's going on on this forum

Hahahahahahahaha....

This is, by far, the most hilarious description of a large amount of this thread.

I'm surprised my drink didn't come out of my nose as I laughed out loud upon reading it. Thank you for that.

[Edited 2014-06-04 15:52:03]

[Edited 2014-06-04 15:52:24]
Per ardua, ad astra
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6977
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 66

Thu Jun 05, 2014 1:30 am

Quoting prebennorholm (Reply 28):
Quoting mandala499 (Reply 18):
Tim Clark would need to have a discussion with his technical team then... His 777s still have the ability to deselect VHF (and HF on his 777LRs) and Satcom from the ACARS menu. That's clearly stated in the 777 Flight Crew Operating Manual (yes, Emirates')... In my view, him saying that "which even our pilots in Emirates don’t know how to do", I take it as an insult to his pilots at Emirates...

Aeh, give the man a break. We know that Tim Clark is a talking machine and a businessman.

He has a small peripheral interest in this accident because he has a large 777 fleet. He tries to divert attention away from the theory of a catastrophic malfunction, which he does by talking only about the other theory, foul play. And then he indicates that he knows how to avoid or minimize foul play.

He is talking to people who don't have a 777 operating manual on their office shelf, and his real mesage could have been much shorter, like this: " Don't worry about flying on my 777s".

We all know that Tim Clark is a mouth. IMO it would be better for him to keep it shut in regards to MH370 if all he has to say is things that imply that "The 777 is safe because I buy them in bulk so please keep flying on my T7s..." - How many other airlines or CEOs have made similar comments? I don't know that answer - perhaps others have or have not after MH370. I think if he wants to re-assure the public that the T7 is safe in regards to MH370 then it is better if he doesn't mention MH370 at all (unless he sees a trend in bookings on his T7 operated flights which I really doubt)... He must have been really bored, had an itchy tongue, and had nothing else to say that day  
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
 
WingedMigrator
Posts: 1771
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 9:45 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 66

Thu Jun 05, 2014 3:18 am

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 2):
Common sense says that a T7 does not have a fire occur quick enough

Common sense also says a 777 should not disappear without a trace for three months, regardless of how it may have happened. You will find that common sense has very limited applicability when considering events that are highly unlikely. So please check your common sense at the door!

Incidentally, I have been following the eyewitness report from the sailor off Banda Aceh and it doesn't seem so half-baked after all. This person is quite sincere and doesn't appear to be a publicity troll. She has chosen to publish all of her first-hand observations / recollections here. Definitely worth a read.
 
adriaticus
Posts: 993
Joined: Thu May 06, 2004 3:29 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 66

Thu Jun 05, 2014 3:43 am

Quoting BackSeater (Reply 25):

Quoting adriaticus (Reply 24):
while flying at cruising altitude (presumably at FL300 or above) over Mexico City,

Interesting but Mexico DF is at about 7,500ft alt. I guess there may be BTS on some of the mountains around (?) maybe at over 10,000ft. FL unknown, geometric altitude may be different by /- 2,000 or 3,000ft.
Still high but maybe down to 17,000ft(?) above terrain.

Indeed, there is cellular coverage in the mountains surrounding the Valley of Anahuac. The roads to Cuernavaca and Toluca reach elevations of 10,000 ft, and in the case of the Ajusco-Ocoyoacac road, up to 11,000 ft, towers everywhere.

So maybe, just maybe, the phone I had inadvertently left on upon departure of LAX, momentarily engaged a signal in a clear night (probably around 2AM) from a tower 20K feet below us or so. I always thought it was a call to report I had messages on my voicemail (such service was common back then).

___Ad.
A300/18/19/20/21/30/32/88 An24 ATR42/72 B721/2 B732/3/G/8/MAX B741/2/4 B752 B762/3/4 B772/3 B788/9 Concorde DC8/9/10 E45/70/75/90/95 IL62/86 MD10-30/11 SA340/2000 TU134/154
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6977
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 66

Thu Jun 05, 2014 3:47 am

Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 31):

I'm never surprised when I see somebody on a.net quote only part of another person's comment to make it look out of context...  

Regarding the sailor... If the plane was on fire over the location she was at, then based on past aviation fire accidents (ValuJet 592, South African Airways Flight 295, etc.) I can't see how it would have made it from over the Gulf of Thailand where it first went missing (if a fire started then to take out the transponder / comms) and remain on fire whilst flying above the sail boat and moreover, keep flying for another few hours until it ended up where the Inmarsat data placed it... If the sailor is correct, then I would guess that something minor happened over the Gulf of Thailand where it first went missing that eventually turned into a fire much later on but no way did it make it from the sailor's position to where Inmarsat places it if it remained on fire - either the fire went out and it kept flying or Inmarsat is wrong and it crashed elsewhere, somewhere closer to the sail boat's location. What a fluke if the sailor saw it at the time it was on fire though... It would have been nice if that info came out sooner because there might have been survivors depending on such a sighting...

BTW I still think that MH370 was foul play 
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
 
YVRLTN
Posts: 2339
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2006 1:49 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 66

Thu Jun 05, 2014 4:18 am

How about this scenario?

> Explosive decompression
> Pilots grabbed oxygen and programmed a bunch of waypoints to get back to Penang so they did not have to navigate
> They however succumbed and therefore could not descend to Penang
> After passing the last waypoint, the plane carries on flying on the course it was on - fits in with Pihero's theory. Would that even happen?

Two things that dont add up for me...

1) What in an explosive decompression event would also knock out the transponder & comms, but otherwise allow the plane to fly 'normally'?
2) Why would they remain at cruise, surely the first thing to do before entering any waypoints is to dive down to a lower altitude - if they had fuel, power & control (as it seems they did to fly for 7.5hrs), then maintaining altitude doesnt seem necessary.
Follow me on twitter for YVR movements @vernonYVR
 
WingedMigrator
Posts: 1771
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 9:45 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 66

Thu Jun 05, 2014 4:24 am

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 33):
I'm never surprised when I see somebody on a.net quote only part of another person's comment to make it look out of context...

Such was certainly not my intent, sorry. If I may paraphrase, you thought the fire theory was implausible because it defied common sense. Please correct me if I had this wrong.

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 33):
based on past aviation fire accidents

There aren't many in-flight fires that occurred on a highly automated fly-by-wire aircraft during cruise. I'm pretty sure the total is zero. Past experience may not be a good indicator in this respect. There is no basis for any "common sense"

To be clear, I'm not 100% sold on the fire theory, but we should keep an open mind.
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6977
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 66

Thu Jun 05, 2014 4:46 am

Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 35):
If I may paraphrase, you thought the fire theory was implausible because it defied common sense. Please correct me if I had this wrong.

Not that the fire theory was implausible, but for the plane to fly for another 7.5 hrs (if Inmarsat is correct) after there being a fire at the time the transponder stopped.

All I am suggesting is this:

Last ATC communication (assuming everything normal. no hint to ATC of problem).
Transponder stops less than 2 mins later (something happened in these 2 mins - right at the ATC changeover zone of all times and places).
Plane turns around, makes a few turns, flys for another 7.5 hrs, and is never seen again - now almost 3 months.

I just find it very hard to even consider that there was initially a fire that took out the transponder (without any sign less than 2 mins earlier when MH370 signed off without raising alarm), and the plane flew on until it was seen by the lady on the sail boat whilst being on fire, and then the plane kept flying for hours more until it got were Inmarsat places it...
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 66

Thu Jun 05, 2014 5:05 am

Supposedly the plane flew low over and near Malaysia as it passed back across land.

Was no one's phone on? Even if they had succumbed to decompression, surely a few cellphones were still on.

And if they hadn't succumbed to decompression, but there was a cabin fire, or some other emergency, didn't anyone try to call or send a text?
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 9072
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 66

Thu Jun 05, 2014 5:07 am

Especially if it looked like a Meteor with fire and lots of smoke.
 
LTC8K6
Posts: 1534
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 8:36 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 66

Thu Jun 05, 2014 5:12 am

http://www.atsb.gov.au/mh370/search-area-map.aspx

The 7th Arc

The latest information and analysis confirms that MH370 will be found in close proximity to the arc set out in the map and labelled as the 7th arc. At the time MH370 reached this arc, the aircraft is considered to have exhausted its fuel and to have been descending. As a result, the aircraft is unlikely to be more than 20 NM (38 km) to the west or 30 NM (55 km) to the east of the arc.

Based on all the independent analysis of satellite communications and aircraft performance, the total extent of the 7th arc reaches from latitude 20 degrees S to 39 degrees S.

Refinement of the analysis in the coming weeks will reduce the underwater Search Area along this arc to a prioritised 17,500 sq. NM (60,000 sq. km). The prioritised length of the Search Area along the arc is expected to be 350 NM (650 km).

More information about the Search Area will be made available as soon as it is verified.
 
User avatar
9MMPQ
Posts: 445
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2011 3:00 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 66

Thu Jun 05, 2014 6:33 am

Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 31):
Common sense also says a 777 should not disappear without a trace for three months, regardless of how it may have happened.

Common sense also tells me it's a large & deep ocean out there, for the most part without any radar coverage. In the absence of any other form of real time tracking that presents a lot of space to get lost in. After we got news about a radar track heading out further west from Penang that was my first thought anyway

Quoting YVRLTN (Reply 34):
How about this scenario?

> Explosive decompression
> Pilots grabbed oxygen and programmed a bunch of waypoints to get back to Penang so they did not have to navigate
> They however succumbed and therefore could not descend to Penang

One problem right off the bat would be what the crew would be succumbing to. If they are on oxygen they would have had plenty of time to make Penang, even if they did not immediately descend. So you would have to throw another elemanent into the mix. The fire or other failures theory with the speed required to take out comms immediately while leaving the crew enough time to try and make it near to Penang would have to involve a set of drastic circumstances. Trying to imagine a scenario where all this happens while yet leaving the aircraft perfectly fine to fly on for another few hours and turning towards Australia is making that even more difficult. Talking to others in the company I have a very hard time in coming up with or believing such a scenario. It feels like a stretch & it would then have to be a combination none of us have ever seen or imagined before.
I believe in coincidences. Coincidences happen every day. But I don't trust coincidences.
 
abba
Posts: 1385
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 12:08 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 66

Thu Jun 05, 2014 6:47 am

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 36):
Not that the fire theory was implausible, but for the plane to fly for another 7.5 hrs (if Inmarsat is correct) after there being a fire at the time the transponder stopped.

My guess is that the likelihood of this is very much a question of where the fire took place.

It could have started slowly (perhaps even before the last communication - some initial warnings might have occurred by then - not yet serious enough to be discussed with the ATC?), then slowly accelerated to a level that has incapacitated the pilots and destroyed the cockpit - perhaps killed the rest of the crew and pax - only to be starved off due to there being no more burnable material available to feed the fire. Now, if the first phase is from shortly before the last communication until the last turn, the second phase from perhaps in the middle of the last turn and some time following and the final phase the last few hours of the flight then it should be possible that the observation of a burning plane - at the time and place reported - could indeed be true. This is of cause nothing but plain speculation that is only saying that a major fire could end in another way than bringing down the plane immediately.
 
mandala499
Posts: 6592
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 66

Thu Jun 05, 2014 7:02 am

Quoting BackSeater (Reply 23):
In practice, what is the maximum target speed that can be entered into the FMC for the descent segment? Vmo i.e.330kts?
What max speed will actually be used as a function of altitude?

It can be as slow as green dot speed, and as fast as Vmo...
You can enter a target speed (mach and IAS) to override the CI generated speeds... And it will switch from mach to IAS when the speeds intersect in the descent.

Quoting adriaticus (Reply 24):
For what is worth, a few years ago I was awakened by an incoming call on my cell phone, while flying at cruising altitude (presumably at FL300 or above) over Mexico City, en route LAX-SJO, on board a TA A320. Not exactly the same conditions described in your question, but heck, pretty close I'd say!

If it was from 17000ft, that would be from about 23000ft... I had an incoming call at FL270 once, but yes, that was 14 yrs ago (and it was an A313 overflying terrain of less than 200ft in general.

Quoting prebennorholm (Reply 28):
Aeh, give the man a break. We know that Tim Clark is a talking machine and a businessman.

.....

He is talking to people who don't have a 777 operating manual on their office shelf, and his real mesage could have been much shorter, like this: " Don't worry about flying on my 777s".

Ideally, he should have used a different sentence to convey the message.

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 36):
I just find it very hard to even consider that there was initially a fire that took out the transponder (without any sign less than 2 mins earlier when MH370 signed off without raising alarm), and the plane flew on until it was seen by the lady on the sail boat whilst being on fire, and then the plane kept flying for hours more until it got were Inmarsat places it...

The fire may not have started the moment they disappeared, but can be later.... it may have been caused by a short-circuit first, followed by a minor electrical fire later, which then propagated.... Not all fires propagate quickly onboard an aircraft... and some fires, can extinguish itself...
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
abba
Posts: 1385
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 12:08 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 66

Thu Jun 05, 2014 7:55 am

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 42):
and some fires, can extinguish itself...

In particular when they run out of material to feed them... And my queses is that airplanes are designed to have as little burnable material in them as possible. To my unprofessional common sense (as long as it do makes sense for better informed people) a fire starving out is not unthinkable.
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 9072
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 66

Thu Jun 05, 2014 8:11 am

A fire you see from the ground is pretty major. A fire that will kill the crew is pretty major.

So we need a fire that kills or disables the crew and the comms, but not navigation, autopilot or other flight controls. Possible but not easy to imagine. Especially considering the fact that the flight routes shows no indication of any tpyical reaction to a fire / smoke event. (like descending, trying to land, etc.)
 
mandala499
Posts: 6592
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 66

Thu Jun 05, 2014 8:34 am

Quoting seahawk (Reply 44):
So we need a fire that kills or disables the crew and the comms, but not navigation, autopilot or other flight controls. Possible but not easy to imagine. Especially considering the fact that the flight routes shows no indication of any tpyical reaction to a fire / smoke event. (like descending, trying to land, etc.)

There is no need for a major fire to have enough smoke to kill the crew (because it doesn't have to kill them imediately).
The chain of event to start it off can be a basic EICAS message prior to that last call, and when they switched frequencies, the comms failed and the transponder failed (some if not all these might raise further EICAS messages), so they decided to return, and the nature of the problem was not urgent enough to warrant a "Land ASAP". If they know they had no comms and no transponder, they might elect to go to Penang which was nearer but also has no traffic at the time (while KUL might still be busy with it's sets of redeyes, and security things if they decided to turn up unnanounced). This may explain why they didn't descend immediately. No Comms with other possible problems while near your home turf, it's better to go back.
This may explain why the aircraft seems to have followed the standard arrivals route from the NE to PEN. The situation through the turn could be as mundane as "let's go back, I have the aircraft and the comms when it gets back, and you troubleshoot"... but near their point of descent to PEN, the situation would have one where they felt it was more necessary to fly the aircraft first, such as excess smoke, and possible other problems. An electrical fire may be under way at this stage.
CRM demands on the PIC when flying with a crew still under training (on the type) coupled with the need to troubleshoot, may eventually result in him not flying the aircraft and do the troubleshooting aswell... This may aswell explain why the aircraft did not end up completing the turn onto PEN, as they are too high and too fast, and the LNAV would disengage (inadvertent discontinuity) and proceed on a northwesterly direction.
Troubleshooting in trying to sort some things out may well continue until incapacitation. But under this theory, whether or not the crew was at the point of incapacity or not during the final turn south, is not known.

We do not know yet which of the possible problems may yield the above chain of events... such as an AC BUS L EICAS message, or GEN L Eicas, or something else, or multitudes. Some on its own, and in combination with other candidates, may yield that, while a slight difference may not.

Going through what could cause such chain of events can also benefit those who believe in the hijack/takeover scenario, because the SatCom being switched off require the Left main AC Bus to be unpowered, but with the satcom active again after 1825, it must have had power to the Left Main AC Bus after 1825... now nothing in my books would make "unpower the bus, then switch it on again" to make sense under a hijack/takeover scenario... But this could also be a hijack/takeover scenario gone wrong... that, opens the possibility of the Left Main AC Bus to be switched off and on under a hijack/takeover scenario. A hijack/takeover scenario gone wrong, might still end up with a slow fire anyway...

For the fire to be seen from the ground, a simple glow from within the aircraft can be mistranslated as that. I am disturbed on if the smoke was seen, then it would either be contrails or smoke... but for that to be seen in the middle of a moonless night (moon had set by that time), means it has to be something extremely bad (ruling out the ability to last until 8am) or it was an effect of "creative memory" prevalent in eyewitnesses.

If we want to use the sailor's explanation, to me at the moment it can only be used as "it was seen", no more, no less.
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 9072
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 66

Thu Jun 05, 2014 8:41 am

And how did a fire turn off ACARS?
 
mandala499
Posts: 6592
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 66

Thu Jun 05, 2014 8:48 am

Quoting seahawk (Reply 46):
And how did a fire turn off ACARS?

Electrical failure (leading to fire) can.
From the Inmarsat logs, it seems that ACARS was selected to SATCOM and not VHF.
If the an electrical failure / problem (that later led to the fire) killed the satcom, ACARS would be off.
But, the extent of the problem would also have to affect VHF and Transponders (as the aircraft disappeared from secondary radar).
Comms shorting out isn't exactly major drama requiring "land ASAP"... but Comms shorting out could lead to fire unless dealt with.
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 66

Thu Jun 05, 2014 9:24 am

Quoting LTC8K6 (Reply 39):

Happy 5th a.net Birthday!  

Regarding the fire...

Okay, say a short or whatever took out the transponder and comms (maybe the frequency switch over caused something electrical to happen - I don't know). The plane was then flown to get back to land somewhere. But, then a full fire broke out. But the plane kept flying, making turns. Then, fire became a decent size, much later, at the time and over the location of the sail boat (that leaves a lot of time between the electrical short or whatever and the time it was over the sail boat - what happened during this time?). But, shortly after passing the sail boat, the fire extinguished itself and the plane continued on for hours more as if nothing happened. It is possible. But, if it was a fire that was seen by the sail boat it must have been a good sized fire - a fire of the type that destroys aircraft. So, what was happening between the transponder going off and the moment over the sail boat when the fire was a full potential and then must have gone out very soon after passing the sail boat otherwise it would have crashed and not flown for hours more... What a fluke for the sail boat to be there - and bad luck for any potential survivors or families waiting for news that it was not reported until 2.5 months later... Maybe the FO was smoking in the cockpit and the cockpit was in party mode like the 737 flight the FO was on with a different captain and two women in the cock-pit   Even in a fire scenario we can still blame the pilot if he lit up j/k...
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
Finn350
Posts: 1595
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:57 am

RE: MH Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing Enroute KUL-PEK Part 66

Thu Jun 05, 2014 11:00 am

Quoting LTC8K6 (Reply 39):
The 7th Arc

The latest information and analysis confirms that MH370 will be found in close proximity to the arc set out in the map and labelled as the 7th arc. At the time MH370 reached this arc, the aircraft is considered to have exhausted its fuel and to have been descending

Thanks for the news. It is good to read that they are certain that the 7th arc is correct. They are apparently also relatively certain that the fuel was exhausted and the plane was already descending. To me, it looks likely that neither of the pilots was conscious at that point of time (regardless of it being foul play or technical malfunction scenario).
  • 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