User avatar
AirlineCritic
Posts: 1707
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 1:07 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Sat Mar 21, 2015 4:43 am

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 99):
Quoting ATCtower (Reply 98):
What troubles me is there was no reply.

A very simple, but apparently too simple for some, explaination could be that there was no further replies from MH370 because whoever was flying / taking the plane chose to go silent for obvious reasons. That MH370 went silent when and where it did is a strength of the 'Captain did it' & 'hi-jack / failed hi-jack' scenarios IMHO.

I thought ATCtower was also asking about why the local ATC did not work harder to ask from MH370 why they were not responding.
 
User avatar
Finn350
Posts: 1601
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:57 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Sat Mar 21, 2015 5:38 am

Quoting AirlineCritic (Reply 100):
I thought ATCtower was also asking about why the local ATC did not work harder to ask from MH370 why they were not responding.

From the Factual Information, p. 2

Quote:
At 1719:26 UTC [0119:26 MYT], MH370 was instructed to contact HCM ATCC on the radio frequency of 120.9 MHz.

At 1719:30 UTC [0119:30 MYT], MH370 acknowledged with “Good night Malaysia Three Seven Zero”. This was the last recorded radio transmission from MH370.

The Mode S symbol of MH370 dropped off from radar display at 1720:36 UTC [0120:36 MYT], and the last secondary radar position symbol of MH370 was recorded at 1721:13 UTC [0121:13 MYT].

The Mode S symbol dropped around one minute after the plane was handed off by the ATC. If the plane had not been handed over, the ATC probably would have noticed Mode S symbol and subsequently the plane symbol dropping off the radar.
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 4704
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Sat Mar 21, 2015 6:56 am

To me, the lack of a readback regarding the frequency change, and ATC not subsequently asking for one, seems more to be a sign of complacency. Basically, ATC thinking it's just another boring flight to Beijing, and the possibility of something going wrong never entered their minds.

As well, Malaysian ATC may have just assumed that 370 immediately changed frequency to 120.9 so they wouldn't be expecting to hear anything more from MH370. Again, ATC may just have had a boring night and perhaps weren't paying attention 100%.

To me, the transponder seems deliberate. like someone attempted to put it in standby but mistakenly put it in mode A for a short time before switching it to standby.

I don't have any doubts about the flight path seemingly dodging radar and ending up in the south Indian ocean. Too many official and reputable multi lettered organizations agree on it...and I have no reason to doubt it so I will believe it until such time as it is proven wrong.

I do have a question for Mandala, (or another airline pilot); is it possible to program the supposed route into the flight management computer, (or whatever it's called?). If so, how difficult would this task be for a non or private pilot?

I am really having trouble buying into the theory that one of the pilots did this. By now, the background checks would have turned up something substantially significant, (huge debt, bad attitude, somebody ran over his favorite cat), something substantial.

On the other hand, the most likely theory I can think of is that some person did this...just not the pilots. I doubt hijackers or terrorists because they would want to take credit for this, or make demands. That didn't happen. Fire or catastrophe seems unlikely, (I suspect a fire would have taken the plane down long before the 7 hours was up), except for anoxia caused by lack of pressurization...but that doesn't explain the change in route.

Most likely to me is person x was in the cockpit before the last transmission, had learned enough to know about emergency squawk codes, (as well how to lock the cockpit door), how to work the radios, forced the pilots to reprogram the flight computer for the known route, killed or otherwise disabled the pilots, turned off the pressurization and everybody went to sleep.

Now, I'm just spitballing here, and I'm not married to the theory...but it just came to mind and I have no idea how difficult it is to learn how to work the pressurization, etc. Basically, I was thinking about the movie Airport, (great movie, by the way), about a passenger trying to take down a plane so his wife could collect insurance. He/she would definitely want the plane to go down in a remote area.

Maybe this has already been debunked, which is fine...I don't mind being wrong, but for now, it seems plausible to me...but not necessarily likely.

I really don't care which theory is right; I just want the aircraft found, then speculation just won't matter. There's no prize for picking the correct scenario.

Have at it.
What the...?
 
mandala499
Posts: 6592
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Sat Mar 21, 2015 7:22 am

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 102):
To me, the transponder seems deliberate. like someone attempted to put it in standby but mistakenly put it in mode A for a short time before switching it to standby.

As discussed above and/or the previous part, the transponder installed does not have the ability to not operate without sending the Mode S by a select switch. Putting it in Mode A only, would still mean Mode A and S, as per the 777 FCOM and the transponder's installtion manual.

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 102):
I do have a question for Mandala, (or another airline pilot); is it possible to program the supposed route into the flight management computer, (or whatever it's called?). If so, how difficult would this task be for a non or private pilot?

It's relatively easy... all you need is some home computer flight simulator time with a good addon that simulates the FMC functions pretty well. There are some good 777 addons that simulate a lot of the systems but I'm not familiar with them. Put a serious flight simmer with experience on FMC aircraft into a full flight simulator and tell them to go somewhere or just give them notes on the waypoints and the approaches/runway... they could end up bringing the plane into an autoland (albeit might end up with some scratches), provided you have ideal conditions.

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 102):
(I suspect a fire would have taken the plane down long before the 7 hours was up), except for anoxia caused by lack of pressurization...but that doesn't explain the change in route.

This is the difficulty of MH370... based on the factual information, the start looks like some form of technical problem, but ended up as if someone deliberately flew it to oblivion.
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
tailskid
Posts: 844
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 7:27 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Sat Mar 21, 2015 8:30 am

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 103):
Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 102):is it possible to program the supposed route into the flight management computer, (or whatever it's called?). If so, how difficult would this task be for a non or private pilot?

It's relatively easy...

Actually it's impossible. All versions of the flight route include multiple variations of altitude. You can program a descent or an ascent, but not both.
 
mandala499
Posts: 6592
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Sat Mar 21, 2015 8:48 am

Quoting tailskid (Reply 104):
Actually it's impossible

He asked for the ROUTE, not altitude.
Entering the waypoints you want to go to, is easy. Look for, let's say IGARI or BITOD, then put in VKB on the line below it. It will create a disconnect before and after, ignore the disconnect below, enter VPG below BITOD, then VAMPI, then MEKAR, then so on and then maybe NILAM and so on and so on... Clear out the disconnects, then press the execute. Just do it all on the LEGS page instead of RTE.

Quoting tailskid (Reply 104):
All versions of the flight route include multiple variations of altitude.

Which can be done with the LNAV on, and not use the VNAV, but ALT SEL and V/S to play around. Just make sure SPD SEL isn't being messed around with... or you might want to if you want...
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 4704
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Sat Mar 21, 2015 9:09 am

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 103):
As discussed above and/or the previous part, the transponder installed does not have the ability to not operate without sending the Mode S by a select switch. Putting it in Mode A only, would still mean Mode A and S, as per the 777 FCOM and the transponder's installtion manual.

I missed that bit....thanks. There is so much in these threads, and I rarely participate, so it's easy to miss a thing or two.
What the...?
 
User avatar
TheFlyingDisk
Posts: 1958
Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2008 12:43 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Sat Mar 21, 2015 9:41 am

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 102):
To me, the lack of a readback regarding the frequency change, and ATC not subsequently asking for one, seems more to be a sign of complacency. Basically, ATC thinking it's just another boring flight to Beijing, and the possibility of something going wrong never entered their minds.

This is a typical Malaysian trait of being too laid back, known as the "tidak apa" (which translates as never mind) attitude. It's not limited to government workers but is fairly common among Malaysians.
I FLY KLM+ALASKA+QATAR+MALAYSIA+AIRASIA+MALINDO
 
User avatar
7BOEING7
Posts: 3039
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 5:28 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Sat Mar 21, 2015 2:51 pm

Quoting tailskid (Reply 104):
Actually it's impossible. All versions of the flight route include multiple variations of altitude. You can program a descent or an ascent, but not both.

True, if we assume there were multiple variations in altitude. If we assume the only altitude changes were the initial perturbations about the cruise altitude, there are no other known changes in altitude until the final descent and working the route is fairly easy as Mandala pointed out. If the perpetrator was on oxygen and didn't go to sleep with everybody else he could easily have the autopilot climb/descend if he'd practiced that.
 
Kaiarahi
Posts: 1807
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 6:55 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Sat Mar 21, 2015 3:29 pm

Quoting 7BOEING7 (Reply 110):
True, if we assume there were multiple variations in altitude. If we assume the only altitude changes were the initial perturbations about the cruise altitude, there are no other known changes in altitude until the final descent and working the route is fairly easy as Mandala pointed out.

It was established by Pihero and others back when the Inmarsat data was first published that the plane could not have reached the final ping ring if there were multiple variations in altitude. The radar data in the report also shows a relatively constant ground speed, which is inconsistent with multiple climbs and descents.
Empty vessels make the most noise.
 
User avatar
Finn350
Posts: 1601
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:57 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Sat Mar 21, 2015 4:07 pm

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 111):
It was established by Pihero and others back when the Inmarsat data was first published that the plane could not have reached the final ping ring if there were multiple variations in altitude. The radar data in the report also shows a relatively constant ground speed, which is inconsistent with multiple climbs and descents.

Just to clarify, based on the Factual Information (p. 3), there were multiple changes in the altitude after the plane dropped off secondary radars and was tracked by primary radars:

Quote:
At 1730:35 UTC [0130:35 MYT] to 1735UTC [0135 MYT] the radar return was on heading 231 magnetic (M), ground speed of 496 knots (kt.) and registered height of 35,700 ft.

At 1736 UTC [0136 MYT to 1736:40 UTC [0136:40 MYT] heading was 237M, ground speed fluctuation between 494 and 525 kt. and height fluctuation between 31,100 and 33,000 ft.

At 1739:59 UTC [0139:59 MYT] heading was 244M, ground speed 529 kt. and height at 32,800 ft.



On another note, I just realized that Vietnamese radar recorded dropping off the symbol at about the same time as Lumpur radar and Thai radar recorded dropping off the symbol at about the same time as KL ATCC radar.

Quote:


The Mode S symbol of MH370 dropped off from radar display at 1720:36 UTC [0120:36 MYT], and the last secondary radar position symbol of MH370 was recorded at 1721:13 UTC [0121:13 MYT].

The disappearance of the radar position symbol of MH370 was captured by the KL ATCC radar at time 1721:13 UTC [0121:13 MYT]. Military radar and radar sources from two other countries, namely Vietnam and Thailand, also captured the disappearance of the radar position symbol of MH370 at about the same time.

c) Ho Chi Minh Radar and Automatic Dependent Surveillance - Broadcast (ADS-B)
At 1720:33 UTC [0120:33 MYT] MH370 SSR and ADS-B radar position symbols disappeared from the radar display.

e) Thailand Radar
On playback of the radar recording it was noted that the radar position symbol of A2157 disappeared at 1721:13UTC [0121:13 MYT].


It looks like that these are just differences in radar systems showing the target.
 
Kaiarahi
Posts: 1807
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 6:55 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Sat Mar 21, 2015 4:24 pm

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 112):
Just to clarify, based on the Factual Information (p. 3), there were multiple changes in the altitude after the plane dropped off secondary radars and was tracked by primary radars

I know that. What I'm referring to were suggestions on here that there were radar evading climbs and descents crossing the Malay peninsula.
Empty vessels make the most noise.
 
gzm
Posts: 364
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2014 1:52 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Sat Mar 21, 2015 4:59 pm

Why would a pilot -any pilot- go to such great lengths to prove his skills and baffle everybody, only to finally guide the airplane literally to the middle of nowhere? To baffle us some more?
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 4704
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Sat Mar 21, 2015 7:24 pm

Quoting gzm (Reply 114):

It just seems like such a convoluted way for a pilot to purposely crash a plane. Why not go with the old standby; pull the breakers on the recorders and plunge it into the sea?

To me, the known route had a human hand behind it...I just can't think of any logical reason that it would be the pilots...but crazy often defies logic. While there is no real evidence the pilots didn't do it, I just can't come up with a reason they did...other than one of them being completely bat$hit nuts and did a hell of a fine job hiding that much wacko from everybody...for a very long time.

So, in this scenario...if it wasn't the pilots, who could it have been? And how could it have been accomplished?
What the...?
 
tailskid
Posts: 844
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 7:27 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Sat Mar 21, 2015 9:50 pm

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 115):
It just seems like such a convoluted way for a pilot to purposely crash a plane. Why not go with the old standby; pull the breakers on the recorders and plunge it into the sea?

You have to understand (accept?) that what has transpired was not the intent of the pilot.

We can see with great certainty that the intent was to make the plane and its passengers disappear into thin air. That would have made an even more intriguing story than the one we have.

There is (I believe) something else afoot in this event,. The fact that the turnback and flight back over the Malaysian peninsula was leaked early on, then denied after the 11th, indicates that something was being hidden. We can assume that Malaysia would have continued to deny the flight over the peninsula forever if the Inmarsat data hadn't come to light. The stonewalling on the flight path began on the 11th and unfortunatly for Hishammuddin and his crew, the very next day Inmarsat released its information to Malaysia, and this information probably wasn't understood or digested in Malaysia until the 13th, and its full implications weren't understood until the fourteenth when Andy Pasztors' WSJ article informed the world that 9MMRO had continued flying for hours past 01:19:36. Fortunately for Hishammuddin and crew everybody at that time focused on the plane and ignored the discrepancy between what Malaysia had been telling the world and what reality actually was.

Now, a year later, I continue to suspect that the pilot knew things that we still don't know; it certainly appears that he guessed that the Malaysian Government would pretend to have never seen 9MMRO after the transponder went off. My guess is that the pilot assumed that Hishammuddin would be caught in this lie and the resulting scandal would uncover other things and bring the government down.

Maybe someday we will know what those "things" were.

[Edited 2015-03-21 14:51:41]
 
User avatar
pvjin
Posts: 3614
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 4:52 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Sat Mar 21, 2015 10:02 pm

Quoting tailskid (Reply 116):
The fact that the turnback and flight back over the Malaysian peninsula was leaked early on, then denied after the 11th, indicates that something was being hidden.

I think they were just incompetent.
"Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that." - Martin Luther King Jr
 
tailskid
Posts: 844
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 7:27 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Sat Mar 21, 2015 10:14 pm

Quoting pvjin (Reply 117):
I think they were just incompetent.

When? Before the 11th when the leakers were telling the truth? Or after the 11th when after the regime had time for group discussion and decision making, they decided to give a false account of both what they knew and what they had said earlier?

Remember: "I wish to state that I did not make any such statements as above."?

I suppose you could say that the early leaks were an indication of incompetence.
Make what you want of the later tightening up on information releases, after all, so far they are still getting away with it.

[Edited 2015-03-21 15:39:46]
 
UALWN
Posts: 2186
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 3:27 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Sun Mar 22, 2015 2:04 am

Quoting pvjin (Reply 117):
I think they were just incompetent.

Hanlon's razor at work.
AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/787/AB6/310/32X/330/340/350/380
 
mandala499
Posts: 6592
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Sun Mar 22, 2015 3:29 am

Quoting tailskid (Reply 116):
The fact that the turnback and flight back over the Malaysian peninsula was leaked early on, then denied after the 11th, indicates that something was being hidden. We can assume that Malaysia would have continued to deny the flight over the peninsula forever if the Inmarsat data hadn't come to light. The stonewalling on the flight path began on the 11th and unfortunatly for Hishammuddin and his crew, the very next day Inmarsat released its information to Malaysia, and this information probably wasn't understood or digested in Malaysia until the 13th, and its full implications weren't understood until the fourteenth when Andy Pasztors' WSJ article informed the world that 9MMRO had continued flying for hours past 01:19:36. Fortunately for Hishammuddin and crew everybody at that time focused on the plane and ignored the discrepancy between what Malaysia had been telling the world and what reality actually was.

If you're saying they were hiding something between 11th and 14th, you're damn right... but that doesn't mean they did not search outside the South China sea before they announced it wasn't in the South China sea.

Quoting tailskid (Reply 116):
it certainly appears that he guessed that the Malaysian Government would pretend to have never seen 9MMRO after the transponder went off.

That is a strong accusation, which, the truth would be slightly inconvenience this point of view of yours. The Malaysian government has asked Indonesia for assistance to search on the Malacca straits before PM Najib's announcements.

From: http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/03...ght-mh370-would-vanish-in-minutes/

https://nationalpostcom.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/malaysia_-indo_prayer.jpg
Taken March 12, Indonesian Air Force 737-200MPA before SAR mission on 12 March 2014, from Medan airbase (formerly Polonia Airport).

https://nationalpostcom.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/malaysia_-_indo_plane.jpg
Taken onboard an Indonesian Air Force 737-200MPA on 11 March 2014, reportedly over strait of Malacca.

https://nationalpostcom.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/malaysia_-_indo_wallmap.jpg
Indonesian Air Force search area on Indonesia's part of the Malacca straits, taken 12 March 2014.


Another search pattern overlaid on an AIS map... taken on or before 14 March 2014.

Quoting tailskid (Reply 118):
Or after the 11th when after the regime had time for group discussion and decision making, they decided to give a false account of both what they knew and what they had said earlier?

For:

Quoting tailskid (Reply 118):
I suppose you could say that the early leaks were an indication of incompetence.
Make what you want of the later tightening up on information releases, after all, so far they are still getting away with it.

and:

Quoting tailskid (Reply 118):
Or after the 11th when after the regime had time for group discussion and decision making, they decided to give a false account of both what they knew and what they had said earlier?

It is blatantly obvious that despite what they said, they wanted to cover all bases... otherwise, why ask Indonesia to search on the Malacca straits?

I seem to recall also that Vietnam was quite strong in its assertion that MH370 was lost in their sector. This may have played a part in Malaysia's "incompetence", in that if they asked for it to be searched elsewhere than South China Seas, and then the Vietnamese found something, they would have been embarrassed big big time. Vietnam was finding oil slicks, etc... but nothing else. In the end, they had to say, "screw what Vietnam is saying... time to shift the focus elsewhere."

In that article it is stated that Malaysia had asked India to assist at or prior to 12th March. Now where would they search? Andaman sea... not South China sea.

Now... from: http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/03...sia-airlines-flight-mh370-missing/

In this image:
https://nationalpostcom.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/malaysia_map.jpg
On March 10, Malaysia had designated a search area on the entrance of the Malacca straits already.

This puts it beyond doubt that before the announcement by PM Najib, regardless of what Hishammudin said, Malaysia already knew and took into account the turnback and the north west segment (from radar), and already asked for searches to be conducted there.

The notion of cover up and not trying to look in the Malacca Straits and Andaman sea prior to PM Najib's announcement is, by looking at the facts above, unfounded, and untrue.

(All images from National Post, originally from AP).
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 9526
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Sun Mar 22, 2015 3:47 am

Quoting tailskid (Reply 116):
Now, a year later, I continue to suspect that the pilot knew things that we still don't know; it certainly appears that he guessed that the Malaysian Government would pretend to have never seen 9MMRO after the transponder went off. My guess is that the pilot assumed that Hishammuddin would be caught in this lie and the resulting scandal would uncover other things and bring the government down.

So he hijacked this flight to bring down the government? That's your assertion? It's an honest question.

-Dave
-Dave


MAX’d out on MAX threads. If you are starting a thread, and it’s about the MAX - stop. There’s already a thread that covers it.
 
ATCtower
Posts: 495
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 1:46 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Sun Mar 22, 2015 4:59 am

Quoting AirlineCritic (Reply 100):
I thought ATCtower was also asking about why the local ATC did not work harder to ask from MH370 why they were not responding.

My apologies, yes this is what I was asking about.

I know we all have differing ways of getting the job done across the globe but it seems from viewing the transcripts that no attempt was made concerning 370 from the ATC standpoint. We all have a certain amount of time after an expected check-in until we use alternate means to contact the plane and one can only assume they do as well. Not dredging up any conspiracy theories regarding ATC but it seems very odd to me that no one on either side even attempted an air-to-air relay to raise 370...

What bothers me most from an ATC standpoint, is that it is my understanding the aircraft was in 'handoff' between two different countries sectors, flying a relatively busy route at a relatively busy time so both controllers should have noticed the loss of either mode C or the entire xponder damn near immediately, and should have further tracked its primary return until they could no longer. I have heard nothing of the sort from any reports. I am obviously unsure how long this would have been in that region of the world, but we have no reason to believe 370 changed altitude and at least here in the US, we could track even a primary target at that altitude for a very long distance. Nothing related to any of this has yet to be made public that I am aware of and raises some very interesting questions.
By reading the above post you waive all rights to be offended. If you do not like what you read, forget it.
 
mandala499
Posts: 6592
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Sun Mar 22, 2015 5:23 am

The route wasnt busy at the time it happened. If I remember correctly MH370 was the only aircraft within at least 50NM from itself at the time.
The tracking of the aircraft using primary is included in the factual information... Albeit the wordings leave a lot to be desired.
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
User avatar
TheFlyingDisk
Posts: 1958
Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2008 12:43 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Sun Mar 22, 2015 5:23 am

Quoting ATCtower (Reply 122):
I know we all have differing ways of getting the job done across the globe but it seems from viewing the transcripts that no attempt was made concerning 370 from the ATC standpoint. We all have a certain amount of time after an expected check-in until we use alternate means to contact the plane and one can only assume they do as well. Not dredging up any conspiracy theories regarding ATC but it seems very odd to me that no one on either side even attempted an air-to-air relay to raise 370...

Actually there were attempts at air-to-air relay through other aircraft in the vicinity ordered by HCM ATCC hence it was not reflected in the transcript. But MH386, the PVG flight which was trailing MH370 had reported back to KUL ATCC that they've not gotten in touch.

Quote:

1853:48 UTC
[0253:48 MYT]
MAS 386 Malayisan Three Seven Zero this is Malaysian Three
Eight Six.

1854:02 UTC
[0254:02 MYT]
MAS 386 Malayisan Three Seven Zero this is Malaysian Three
Eight Six.

1854:14 UTC
[0254:14 MYT]
Lumpur Radar Malaysian Three Eight Six eer… this is Lumpur Radar
confirm you are trying to call Malaysian Three Seven
Zero.

1854:21 UTC
[0254:21 MYT]
MAS 386 That is affirm sir eer because Ho Chi Minh asked us to
contact them they have lost contact eer… with them.

1854:28 UTC
[0254:28 MYT]
Lumpur Radar Yeah okay affirm already transfer to Ho Chi Minh and
Ho Chi Minh negative contact with the aircraft eer please
try to raise the aircraft on maybe on emergency
frequency.

1854:39 UTC
[0254:39 MYT]
MAS 386 Roger we try one two one five eer… now we try on one
two three four five, thank you.

1854:52 UTC
[0254:52 MYT]
Lumpur Radar Malaysian Three Eight Six Lumpur.


Quoting tailskid (Reply 118):
Remember: "I wish to state that I did not make any such statements as above."?

Which was fact:

Quoting TheFlyingDisk (Reply 81):
Here's the press conference link on 10 March where the General of the Royal Malaysia Air Force stated that there is a POSSIBILITY of the RTB which had not been confirmed.

Whereas the report by Reuters stated the following

Quote:

Earlier on Tuesday, Malaysia's Berita Harian newspaper quoted air force chief Rodzali Daud as saying the Malaysia Airlines plane was last detected by military radar at 2:40 a.m. on Saturday, near the island of Pulau Perak at the northern end of the Strait of Malacca. It was flying at a height of about 9,000 meters (29,500 ft), he was quoted as saying.

"The last time the flight was detected close to Pulau Perak, in the Melaka Straits, at 2.40 a.m. by the control tower before the signal was lost," the paper quoted Rodzali as saying.

So technically he is right to deny that he said that. Having followed the press conference daily in the early days of the disappearance (as did all Malaysians - this is by far one of, if not the biggest disasters to have befallen Malaysia right up to that point), I have not seen the General making any other statements after his PC statement on the 10th.


[Edited 2015-03-21 22:24:30]

[Edited 2015-03-21 22:25:07]
I FLY KLM+ALASKA+QATAR+MALAYSIA+AIRASIA+MALINDO
 
tailskid
Posts: 844
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 7:27 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Sun Mar 22, 2015 5:36 am

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 121):
So he hijacked this flight to bring down the government? That's your assertion? It's an honest question.

I believe so, yes.
 
NAV30
Posts: 1080
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 9:16 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Sun Mar 22, 2015 5:38 am

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 120):
The notion of cover up and not trying to look in the Malacca Straits and Andaman sea prior to PM Najib's announcement is, by looking at the facts above, unfounded, and untrue.

Interesting and useful, mandala.

One thing puzzles me, though. I've actually seen those 'pings' on one occasion, and (since they are definitely recorded by a satellite as tracking in both directions, in this case north-east as well as south-west) the authorities were dead right to track them 'both ways.'

As I understand it, civilian radar lost contact with MH370 at the very beginning of the accident, while it was still heading north-east. From then on, the only available evidence on where MH370 possibly went was recorded by military radar. Which would have had no identification capability?. That picked up an apparent turn to the south-west, but with no positive identification that they were tracking MH370? It really could have been an entirely different aeroplane?

Raises the question of why the investigators almost immediately concluded that MH370 had turned to the south-west - and, within a couple of days, dropped any efforts to search to the north-east?

Why do you think the investigators decided, within a couple of days, that MH370 had reversed its course; and have since concentrated entirely on the south-west track?

[Edited 2015-03-21 22:40:30]
 
mandala499
Posts: 6592
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Sun Mar 22, 2015 5:46 am

NAV30, I take it you haven't read the report where it mentioned the aircraft was tracked by civilian primary radar as well as military primary radar? I guess you haven't seen the part in the report that would answer your question? If you're too lazy to read it then don't blame us if we're too lazy to discuss with you.
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
NAV30
Posts: 1080
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 9:16 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Sun Mar 22, 2015 5:59 am

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 127):
I guess you haven't seen the part in the report that would answer your question?

All I have seen is a civilian radar track (in red) ending to the north-east - and then an apparently-military track (in yellow) showing it turning back?

PS scroll down on this - you'll see the red track replaced by a yellow one, heading south-west. And then all SORTS of further possible courses?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaysia_Airlines_Flight_370

[Edited 2015-03-21 23:25:58]
 
mandala499
Posts: 6592
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Sun Mar 22, 2015 6:45 am

Ok... That means you haven't read then.
Go to:
http://news.aviation-safety.net/2015...aysia-issues-mh370-factual-report/
Then scroll to see a link to the full document of the factual information published on the 1 year anniversary of the disappearance.
Read the report and your question should he answered..
(Although I guess you'll still throw questions asking the same thing again... And again... And again...)
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
YoungMans
Posts: 432
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 10:31 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Sun Mar 22, 2015 9:50 am

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 118):

Your reply triggered a thought ....
Is there a possibility, assuming we are dealing with foul play of the worst kind, that all those searches in the first few days were not really meant to find anything but were instead to make sure that nobody actually would.

If no wreckage would be found, it would be pretty safe to release the satellite data, at the time when it was.
And as you know what I'm getting at, that in turn would have provided a cover for the foul play.

Had anybody found anything, any wreckage that is clearly off 9M-MRO, they could not have released the satellite data.

Mind you, the people in the SAR aircraft and surface vessels would never have known what the real game is; they were genuinely trying to find a missing aircraft or anything off it.

However, some of the garbled versions of government information would make sense; trying to hide the truth.

Edit: Spelling and a few extra words

[Edited 2015-03-22 02:56:08]
 
User avatar
777Jet
Topic Author
Posts: 6977
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Sun Mar 22, 2015 10:44 am

Quoting gzm (Reply 112):
Why would a pilot -any pilot- go to such great lengths to prove his skills and baffle everybody, only to finally guide the airplane literally to the middle of nowhere? To baffle us some more?

Try thinking along the lines of 'why would an individual do this' instead of 'why would a pilot do this'...

Despite the fact that all pilots are pilots, all pilots are also very unique individuals...


Quoting ATCtower (Reply 120):
I know we all have differing ways of getting the job done across the globe but it seems from viewing the transcripts that no attempt was made concerning 370 from the ATC standpoint.

  

More than twenty minutes past between the last verbal ATC communication with MH370 and the first attempt by ATC to contact it after it went silent...


1719:30 UTC
[0119:30 MYT]
MAS 370 Good night Malaysian Three Seven Zero.

1741:23 UTC
0141:23 MYT]
Lumpur Radar Malaysian Three Seven Zero Lumpur Radar how do
you read, do you read.

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 121):
If I remember correctly MH370 was the only aircraft within at least 50NM from itself at the time.
Quoting TheFlyingDisk (Reply 122):
But MH386, the PVG flight which was trailing MH370 had reported back to KUL ATCC that they've not gotten in touch.

Do we know how far MH386 was trailing MH370 by? Or, what was the closest aircraft *trailing* MH370 and thus looking in the direction of MH370 before the turn back?

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 126):
PS scroll down on this - you'll see the red track replaced by a yellow one, heading south-west. And then all SORTS of further possible courses?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaysia_Airlines_Flight_370

Mate, a factual interim report has been recently released and you are still using wiki as a source for MH370 information???

Quoting YoungMans (Reply 128):
Is there a possibility, assuming we are dealing with foul play of the worst kind, that all those searches in the first few days were not really meant to find anything but were instead to make sure that nobody actually would.

You know the answer to that is 'yes, it is possible'. Moreover, you even know what the odds are:

Quoting YoungMans (Reply 8):
50:50

It either happened or it didn't, right? "there can be no ‘in-between’."  

        

Sorry, I couldn't resist... 
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: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Sun Mar 22, 2015 11:25 am

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 127):
Read the report and your question should he answered..

Won't happen. He never did read the AF447 report, despite being given the link dozens of times.
Empty vessels make the most noise.
 
ltbewr
Posts: 14565
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Sun Mar 22, 2015 11:49 am

Sadly, a terrible mix of politics, religion, culture, the lack of physical evidence, limited tracking information and communications, using past air crashes investigations results and their histories as well as many wanting to be one that turns out to have had the answer has caused an unprecedented discussion here and elsewhere about this loss.

Politics on several levels has seriously compromised this investigation, not just in Malaysia but its adjacent countries. An earlier post in this part noted the Challenger Space Shuttle disaster due to a failure of O-rings between the booster stages. The real problem was that the flight was launched in near-freezing temperatures against the opinion of some of the rocket's engineers but were overridden for political reasons. That shuttle flight had a civilian grade school teacher on board, President Reagan wanted the publicity of her to be big news for his own political gains, NASA looking to keep its funding and thus appease the President let politics override how low temps affect a safe launch, so the real factor in that disaster. In this case, many of us believe the failures of the military in Malaysia, their politicalized status in that country, pressure to hide the truth, all seriously compromised the investigation from the beginning. There is also that this flight was going to China with a number of China nationals on board with its political complications. Some will also say many other governments, including the USA, Russia, China all 'know what really happened' but are hiding it to protect the secrecy of their spy systems and locations of military deployments further compromising the investigation.

Religion is also seen as a factor, in particular as Malaysia is a dominate Islamic country. Due to a long and well documented history of hijackings and attacks as to airliners by 'Islamic' connected persons and groups, when aircraft are lost, 'they' are quickly blamed.

Culture as seen by the 'west', the fear of shaming ones self or their family, past air crashes in the Asian region due to deliberate actions of pilots to crash planes in command of due to 'shame' leads many to 'the pilot did it'. Throw in rumors of the political beliefs of the PIC pre-crash, his obsession with flying, it leads even more to the 'pilot did it' belief.

Using the info from past aircraft losses such as Silk Air (belief the 'pilot did it'), Helios (decompression loss, flight to run out of fuel), a number of hijacking scenario,s all seem to be factors that push various theory of this loss and distract from an honest investigation as well as trigger 1000's of posts here.

The lack of physical evidence, limited tracing info and communications, possible compromises of info, that some were not doing their job on the ground and not seeing this unidentified aircraft flying over them all hurts getting to the truth.

Of course, many put out various scenarios with the limited info we have are twisting it into vast conspiracies for their own political or ego reasons. Many still question the loss of TWA 800 and put out that it was shot down by a secret US military missile, due to their own political or personal reasons. This loss is been a gold mine for the conspiracy buffs.

Sadly, until the remains of this plane are found, and it may never happen, we are going to see the endless rounds of discussion here and elsewhere continue.
 
tailskid
Posts: 844
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 7:27 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Sun Mar 22, 2015 1:07 pm

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 118):
The notion of cover up and not trying to look in the Malacca Straits and Andaman sea prior to PM Najib's announcement is, by looking at the facts above, unfounded, and untrue.

Your entire post #118 is just a long strawman argument. I never said they neglected to search in the Malacca Strait.

What I said was that they allowed others to search in the South China Sea for 8 days when they knew on the morning of Saturday the 8th that it could not be in the SCS because Malaysian radar at Pulu Pinang had watched it as it left the SCS, flown over the Malaysian peninsula and up the Strait for over 300 nm before passing out of range of their radar.

They had played the Malacca Strait search as being a peripheral, cover all bases no matter how unlikely search. They never notified any of the nations searching in the SCS about their radar data. They never called off the search there, the other nations had to figure it out on their own.

There is simply no reason for, or excuse for, hiding information about the last known position of the plane other people were trying to help find.
 
YoungMans
Posts: 432
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 10:31 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Sun Mar 22, 2015 1:42 pm

Quoting LTBEWR (Reply 131):
Sadly, until the remains of this plane are found, and it may never happen, we are going to see the endless rounds of discussion here and elsewhere continue.

Much of what you say is true, no doubt, and there is also a fair bit where I wouldn't know.
Are you pointing out that the whole MH370 saga is indeed a sad one (which it truly is) and all we can do is have the discussions that we do?
Or are you implying that we should no longer be discussing these issues?
Personally I feel that lately, with hindsight, there are still details coming out that were not considered properly in the early threads and stages. It is good and proper, I reckon, to further examine those details.
 
NAV30
Posts: 1080
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 9:16 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Sun Mar 22, 2015 2:12 pm

The BBC is usually pretty reliable.

They've now published a map showing the satellite 'handshakes' recorded as having been received from MH370. People don't need me to point out that they bear virtually no relation to the (up to now, 'likely') southern or northern course of MH370.

I've been much criticised on here for being sceptical about the 'official' information. I won't comment further, everyone will have to make up their own minds about whether the investigators are on the right track........

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-26503141
 
Kaiarahi
Posts: 1807
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 6:55 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Sun Mar 22, 2015 2:47 pm

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 134):

They've now published a map showing the satellite 'handshakes' recorded as having been received from MH370.

Not "now". That story was published 2 months ago.

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 134):
People don't need me to point out that they bear virtually no relation to the (up to now, 'likely') southern or northern course of MH370.

It's the same southern arc data published by Inmarsat and in the investigation team report   
Empty vessels make the most noise.
 
NAV30
Posts: 1080
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 9:16 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Sun Mar 22, 2015 2:50 pm

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 135):
It's the same southern arc data published by Inmarsat and in the investigation team report

So why are they searching in totally different places?
 
Kaiarahi
Posts: 1807
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 6:55 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Sun Mar 22, 2015 2:55 pm

The first (more northerly) search was conducted BEFORE the Inmarsat data was available.
Empty vessels make the most noise.
 
David L
Posts: 8551
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:26 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Sun Mar 22, 2015 3:37 pm

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 134):
People don't need me to point out that they bear virtually no relation to the (up to now, 'likely') southern or northern course of MH370.

They're not supposed to. If you look at the legend, the red arcs are clearly labelled as denoting "the final satellite communication - plane was somewhere along the arcs". If you take another look, you'll see that the arcs are centred on the position of the satellite, shown as a cyan coloured dot. The course from the last radar contact to the suspected final location is not shown on the map.

As has been explained so many times, the arcs depict possible locations at a given time. They do not depict the actual course of the aircraft.

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 136):
So why are they searching in totally different places?

I guess you didn't follow the ATSB updates, either. If you had, you'd have known that Inmarsat refined their estimation further after the search in the SIO had started. There was also a search around the area where it was claimed that signals from the ULBs had been detected (red dots on the BBC map), which turned out to be a false alarm.
 
mandala499
Posts: 6592
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Sun Mar 22, 2015 8:27 pm

Quoting tailskid (Reply 132):
Your entire post #118 is just a long strawman argument.

Hey, I learnt that from you remember?

And I just realized this...

Quoting tailskid (Reply 66):
It is worthy of mention here that the British SAR effort with their P3 Orions searched the Strait from day one, and when the US sent a destroyer for the search in the early days it too went to the Strait.

Something is very wrong with that... Britain having P-3 Orions would be news to me... Got evidence of Britain operating P-3 Orions in March 2013? Where did these "British Orions" came from onto the search areas?
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
tailskid
Posts: 844
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 7:27 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Sun Mar 22, 2015 10:31 pm

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 139):

In the very early days after MH370 was missing there was a discussion between several posters either here or on another forum that started out with one poster saying that USN Orions were searching in the Strait. Another poster corrected him to say that those were British planes, my memory left me the impression that they were British Orions but now it seems that couldn't be.

I could find the original conversation if I thought it was worth the effort, but it's just a minor peripheral detail that I really have no interest in.
 
Kaiarahi
Posts: 1807
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 6:55 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Sun Mar 22, 2015 10:38 pm

Quoting tailskid (Reply 140):
it's just a minor peripheral detail that I really have no interest in.

But you seem to have extraordinarily compulsive attention to minor peripheral details posted by anyone else.

I'm still waiting for your response to this "minor peripheral detail":

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 63):
Quoting tailskid (Reply 59):
You do understand that the official paperwork that you'll be reading from will be written by the same people who left a dozen nations searching the South China Sea for a week when they knew from the first night that it had crossed the Malaysian peninsula and flown at least 300 miles north in the Malacca Strait?

As has been pointed out to you many times, the report was written by an investigation team composed of 8 agencies, including NTSB, AAIB, ATSB and BEA. Are you still suggesting that they're all complicit in a cover up?
Empty vessels make the most noise.
 
tailskid
Posts: 844
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 7:27 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Sun Mar 22, 2015 11:34 pm

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 141):
I'm still waiting for your response to .............. As has been pointed out to you many times, the report was written by an investigation team composed of 8 agencies, including NTSB, AAIB, ATSB and BEA. Are you still suggesting that they're all complicit in a cover up?:

Malaysia writes the report, no matter what lies you tell, Malaysia still writes the report.

The partner agencies have the ability to write dissenting reports. What would you expect is used to resolve disputes? Fistfights in front of the word processor? In any event, Malaysia controls most of the information that goes into the report and all the radar data from Malaysia.

Remember this?

Quote:
Under Annex 13 of the Convention on International Civil Aviation the NTSB is a required participant in the investigation (state of manufacture) and has the right under article 6.3 to have a dissenting report included in the final report.

You should get used to that sentence because it's not going to go away.
 
User avatar
777Jet
Topic Author
Posts: 6977
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Mon Mar 23, 2015 12:13 am

Quoting YoungMans (Reply 133):
Quoting LTBEWR (Reply 131):
Sadly, until the remains of this plane are found, and it may never happen, we are going to see the endless rounds of discussion here and elsewhere continue.

Much of what you say is true, no doubt, and there is also a fair bit where I wouldn't know.
Are you pointing out that the whole MH370 saga is indeed a sad one (which it truly is) and all we can do is have the discussions that we do?
Or are you implying that we should no longer be discussing these issues?

My opinion is that the greatest aviation mystery of all time is far too important not to be discussed regardless of new information flow and that anybody who does not want to read / participate in the "endless rounds of discussion here and elsewhere" can simply just ignore it by not clicking on the link... Simple, no?

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 134):
I've been much criticised on here for being sceptical about the 'official' information.

Or for using wiki as a source for your 'official' information not long after a factual interim report was released by the authorities, as well as for linking articles that are months old and claiming that their content is 'new'...

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 135):
Quoting NAV30 (Reply 134):

They've now published a map showing the satellite 'handshakes' recorded as having been received from MH370.

Not "now". That story was published 2 months ago.

  

Maybe NAV30's internet connection is very, very slow and his posts take about 2 months to appear in here after he hits the 'post' button  
Quoting tailskid (Reply 140):
I could find the original conversation if I thought it was worth the effort, but it's just a minor peripheral detail that I really have no interest in.

Yet you are quick to ask others to provide sources for their claims - credible sources at that.

Interesting.

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 141):
Quoting tailskid (Reply 140):
it's just a minor peripheral detail that I really have no interest in.

But you seem to have extraordinarily compulsive attention to minor peripheral details posted by anyone else.

  
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
Topic Author
Posts: 6977
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Mon Mar 23, 2015 12:47 am

Quoting tailskid (Reply 144):
That subject matters a lot to you?

I'm not surprised.

I'm not surprised with that reply from you.

Why don't you put into practice what you preach to others and provide a source for your claims in the following post:

Quoting tailskid (Reply 140):
In the very early days after MH370 was missing there was a discussion between several posters either here or on another forum that started out with one poster saying that USN Orions were searching in the Strait. Another poster corrected him to say that those were British planes, my memory left me the impression that they were British Orions but now it seems that couldn't be.

I could find the original conversation if I thought it was worth the effort, but it's just a minor peripheral detail that I really have no interest in.
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
 
tailskid
Posts: 844
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 7:27 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Mon Mar 23, 2015 12:57 am

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 145):
Why don't you put into practice what you preach to others and provide a source for your claims in the following post:

Why don't you research it yourself if it's important to you.
 
morsecoder
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2015 2:42 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Mon Mar 23, 2015 3:04 am

Hello, I'm a long time lurker – since shortly after MH 370 disappeared – and finally thought I'd risk making a fool of myself. FWIW, I'm not a pilot or otherwise involved in aviation except as an occasional passenger. I'm not an engineer either. My background is in telecoms – including satellites – on the business side of the house. And I appreciate all the good info and hard work that's gone into this forum.

I've been thinking about mandala's hypothesis that the cause was a combination of a technical malfunction and deliberate human action. Suppose the technical malfunction was the result of an intentional action?

The base scenario would be:
1. The hijacker makes preparations and boards the flight.
2. At or before 1719 UTC, he (or she or they) takes control of the plane by means which include technical measures – a hack via hardware, software and/or direct access to equipment. At a minimum, these measures take the radar transponder and satellite link off line.
3. He causes the plane to be flown on a course that minimises the chance of detection.
4. Around 1825 UTC, once the plane is beyond radar coverage, a. someone activates some systems which were previously off line, b. the plane turns south and c. a malfunction or mistake occurs which prevents further course changes. Not necessarily in that order.

There are many ways to build on this base. For example, the hijacker uses a hack (software and/or hardware) to take down some or all of the comms systems (i.e., a deliberately caused malfunction), and then takes control of the plane by physical means. He forces the pilots off the flight deck, locks himself in, then depressurises the plane and violently pitches it up and down to prevent a counter-attack. Once he believes he's in a dark zone, he turns the plane south and then reboots the comms systems, with the intent of re-entering controlled airspace from a direction that lets him try to assume a new identity for the plane. He then attempts to re-pressurise the plane but fails without realising it. He takes off his oxygen mask – maybe reset some electronics? use the head? – and falls unconscious. Or he doesn't re-pressurise the plane and figures, incorrectly, he can hold his breath long enough to get to a portable oxygen cylinder or do what he needs to do.

Alternatively, the original hack had unforeseen consequences – most do on first use – and the plane's control systems became inoperable or malfunctioned after the turn south. The reboot of systems around 1825 could have been the trigger or a consequence – i.e. part of an attempt to fix it. The fault either prevented any further course changes, or required action beyond the ability of the hijacker.

I realise that the idea of someone gaining unauthorised access to aircraft systems is controversial, to say the least. I'm defining "hack" broadly (and arguably incorrectly – "crack" would be the preferred term). It might have been as simple as a rapid takeover combined with a particular system shut-down sequence. But it could also be more complicated, including something initiated by someone with access to the plane prior to the flight.

There's not much that can be said about the motive, except that the hijacker intended to fly it to Location X for Purpose Y. It could have been a political motive – was there ever any basis revealed for the early speculation about the plane going north? I'm not saying it did, but that could have been the original intent, resulting in suspicious chatter being picked up by intelligence agencies.

Personally, I favor the notion that some bright boy thought he figured how to get away with making money off a hijacking. I don't like Evil Genius explanations that assume everything went exactly as planned. It's more likely that whoever did it was smart enough to come up with a new idea but not smart enough to foresee all the potential problems. I think DB Cooper would agree with me.  

[Edited 2015-03-22 20:05:41]
 
Kaiarahi
Posts: 1807
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 6:55 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Mon Mar 23, 2015 4:25 am

Quoting tailskid (Reply 142):
Malaysia writes the report, no matter what lies you tell, Malaysia still writes the report.

What "lies" would those be? Direct quotes from Annex 13 of the Convention on International Civil Aviation maybe? Please explain to us again how the NTSB, AAIB, ATSB and BEA are all complicit in a cover up.

Quoting tailskid (Reply 142):
The partner agencies have the ability to write dissenting reports. What would you expect is used to resolve disputes? Fistfights in front of the word processor?

You obviously have no idea how international comity works. I understand that your reality is fistfights, but NTSB, AAIB, ATSB and BEA actually don't work that way. It's called professionalism - very different from slander and mudslinging.
Empty vessels make the most noise.
 
tailskid
Posts: 844
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 7:27 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Mon Mar 23, 2015 4:33 am

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 148):
You obviously have no idea how international comity works.

Here, I'll give it to you one more time.

Quote:
Under Annex 13 of the Convention on International Civil Aviation the NTSB is a required participant in the investigation (state of manufacture) and has the right under article 6.3 to have a dissenting report included in the final report.

Now I'll explain it to you: If any of the orgs disagree with the report Malaysia writes, they can write a dissenting report.

I can help you no further, I'll ignore all of your rude insults in the future.
 
User avatar
Finn350
Posts: 1601
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:57 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Mon Mar 23, 2015 4:42 am

Quoting tailskid (Reply 149):
Now I'll explain it to you: If any of the orgs disagree with the report Malaysia writes, they can write a dissenting report.

There were no dissenting reports published in conjunction with the Interim report or the Factual information, se we can safely conclude that all the organizations agree on the contests of the said reports.

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