tailskid
Posts: 844
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 7:27 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 8:27 am

Quoting UALWN (Reply 49):
The fact is that you haven't swayed anybody to your side.

THE FACTS ARE: today the towel was thrown in by some of the most entrenched naysayers and the flight path I described in post 7 is now the accepted truth by all but a few outliers, of which I gather you are one. It has also been agreed upon that a pilot was flying the plane at least up to the turn south.

From where I started here this is not half the battle won, but 90% of the battle won.


Have a nice day UALWN.

[Edited 2015-03-17 01:55:52]
 
Kaiarahi
Posts: 1807
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 6:55 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 9:55 am

Quoting oxymorph (Reply 37):
So Zaharie was definitively on comms for all transmissions post take-off, if I am understanding the report correctly.

Which would indicate that the FO was PF, which is what one would expect on a final training flight.

Quoting tailskid (Reply 26):
Quoting AIRWALK (Reply 10):
Fariq was undergoing line training and as PNF he would be handling the comms.

Is there any source for this, or is it just an assumption? I didn't see anything in the report indicating who was PF/PM, or anything about MH's training procedures. If it's an assumption, I would assume the opposite. The whole point of a final training flight is to assess the FO's flying competency, not to have him watching.
Empty vessels make the most noise.
 
liquidair
Posts: 266
Joined: Fri May 27, 2011 2:01 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 10:54 am

Quoting tailskid (Reply 22):

There's a lot of stuff in public domain. Even your posts are.

I'll stick to the official paperwork if you don't mind... Much less crud.

Quoting ATCtower (Reply 23):

Thanks for your reply... To explain myself further, isn't it odd, not the repeat only but the "7"370? Our would that just be a different way of saying it?

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 29):

Thank you!
trying to stop my gaseous viscosity go liquid
 
bond007
Posts: 4428
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2005 2:07 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 10:54 am

Quoting tailskid (Reply 26):

Quoting bond007 (Reply 24):
We have absolutely no indication who was in the cockpit!

We surely do, it was Zaharie who handled the last transmission and said: “good night Malaysian Three Seven Zero” .

Quoting bond007 (Reply 24):
Are you serious that we should assume it wasn't hijacked because .. "he didn't notify ATC surreptitiously" ..
Yes I am.

We know he was in the cockpit at that time only .... we have no clue where he was after that time, or who was flying the aircraft.

These are the kind of things you are basing your 100% certainty on ...oh well!


Jimbo
I'd rather be on the ground wishing I was in the air, than in the air wishing I was on the ground!
 
YoungMans
Posts: 432
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 10:31 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 1:17 pm

For some reason people here on A.net get into quite a spot of bother that I dare question the veracity of the satellite data. And I am perplexed why that should be. I am puzzled that the vast majority here on A.net is comfortable with the idea to blindly and in good faith accept the satellite data as true and correct, as it stands.

Let me try again, then, and explain as accurately and clearly as I can how it came about that I do have that question.

I didn't just follow the discussion about MH370 here on A.net; I also listen to the news etc and, quite importantly, I also listen to other people. One of the remarks that I heard fairly often is that people simply didn't believe it that 9M-MRO has ended up in the SIO, just like that; even here on A.net some people are or at least were of that opinion. But not many people offered an explanation where the aircraft might be instead; or, more importantly, they never asked themselves how do we know.., how can we know whether it is here or there.

So I thought about this, how can we, anyone, tell that the aircraft took the track that it is assumed to have taken? It doesn't take Einstein to work out that it is only the satellite data that tells us where the aircraft ought to be; there is no other information.

It does not in any way tell us whether the data is correct or not (as in falsified).
If the US, China, the Russians or anyone else have information on MH370, as may people believe they would and should, they've decided not to tell us, the public. We can only believe in blind faith!

Thinking about it some more, then, who could possibly falsify that kind of data, particularly when there is so much security involved? The only explanation I could come up with is that it would have to be an organisation (agency) with a lot of clout and highly trained personnel to go with it. The organisation and the personnel would have the technical and logistical skills to carry out an operation of that scale.

Why would they do it?
For a very specific purpose; to make it look like the aircraft went one way when in fact it went somewhere else.

Do we have precedents for that? I'm pretty sure we do, maybe not in aviation and certainly not recently. Generally speaking though, there have been heaps of false-flag operations, world wide and over the years, by all kinds of people, especially governments. So who exactly would be behind something like the disappearance of MH370?
Your guess is as good as mine.
Your guess is also as good as mine when it comes to the question of 'what-for-all-that'.

So, as I think I have mentioned it already, the question is not really whether the satellite data was manipulated, that either was or it was not (I won't call it 50:50 anymore); the real and important question is whether a professional hijacking is behind the disappearance of MH370. The latter is the crux of the matter ....

As for the probability of such a professional hijack? I have already given that a 20%, in reply 122 of the previous thread.
(Thank you for your help there, 777Jet.) That percentage can easily change, of course, higher or lower, as new facts and evidence come to hand.

So I hope that I have now explained clearly enough how I've come to question the veracity of the satellite data.
But.., in return now, it comes with a challenge.

If you strongly disagree with any of what I have written, don't just use cheap labels or name calling.
If you feel I should not be questioning the satellite data, then tell us why not.
On what grounds can we be sure that the satellite data is correct?
My belief is that we never had nor will we ever get a guarantee to that effect.
 
UALWN
Posts: 2186
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 3:27 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 1:33 pm

Quoting tailskid (Reply 50):
From where I started here this is not half the battle won, but 90% of the battle won.

I think it's more like 0% of the battle won. Your battle is and has always been to convince everybody here that the captain is, in your words, a "mass murderer." Yet I'm afraid you have still to convince anybody here about that. Along the way, you have verbally assaulted anybody here who dared question your conviction.

Quoting tailskid (Reply 50):
Have a nice day UALWN.

Oh, you too, tailskid.
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
 
JCS
Posts: 180
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 11:16 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 2:45 pm

I would like to know the probability that it flew a straight line from where we think it did. Especially given the previous flightpath. Would a possibly extra turn also explain why no debris has been found (yet)?
 
jerrylee
Posts: 12
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 7:09 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 2:50 pm

Well, after a lot of reading here and on other sites on the web I must admit that I' m up till now not sure at all about the so called known facts concerning the flight path. As I have learned are all those primary and secondary radar datas coming from the Malaysian government. The timeline of the different publications, the differences of military and civil radars, sometimes mixed up and put together by the government so that they must fit into the given path, published on March 8th, 2015, are at least questionable. All data and the timelines can be read on av herald. In my opinion the Malaysian government knew from the turn at IGARI that there was sth wrong with MH370 and it seems to me they let it go for a long time. SAR was started about 4 or 5 hours after disappearing and they let them search in the South China Sea for a long time. So the known facts are not definetely the true facts, at least to me. Anyway thanks to all here who are really trying hard to find out more about this mystery.
 
tailskid
Posts: 844
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 7:27 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 4:20 pm

Quoting YoungMans (Reply 54):
For some reason people here on A.net get into quite a spot of bother that I dare question the veracity of the satellite data. And I am perplexed why that should be. I am puzzled that the vast majority here on A.net is comfortable with the idea to blindly and in good faith accept the satellite data as true and correct, as it stands.

It is you who is operating on "blind faith" not us, from your posts here it is obvious that you haven't taken the time to understand the technical aspect of the Inmarsat data. So while others are operating from knowledge, you are winging it. You are telling us what you "think" without giving it the necessary thought.

If you had studied the Inmarsat technology, you would be telling us why you question it, not over and over that you do question it. Your logic and methodology is identical to the guy who insisted that the plane was somewhere right under where it went missing.
 
tailskid
Posts: 844
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 7:27 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 4:24 pm

Quoting liquidair (Reply 52):
I'll stick to the official paperwork if you don't mind.

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?

You should give that some more thought IMO.
 
tailskid
Posts: 844
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 7:27 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 4:27 pm

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 51):
I didn't see anything in the report indicating who was PF/PM, or anything about MH's training procedures.

In the end, whoever was on comms was whoever Zaharie wanted to be on comms.
 
tailskid
Posts: 844
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 7:27 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 4:43 pm

Replying to jerrylee (Reply 57):

Vietnam, Thailand, Singapore, China and Indonesia all issued their statements about what they saw on radar to the press directly, not through Malaysia. At least some of these states are not real cozy with Malaysia, so it is very unlikely that they would lie on Malaysia's account. Also, all of these nations made their public statements long after the 8th.

In regard to the Malaysian radar, one of the opposition parties has very recently issued a statement of their own re: Malaysian radar sightings. Their report is critical of the military.

It was a full 31 minutes that MH370, was within our radars both civil and military,” pointed out DAP MPs Julian Tan and Steven Sim in a joint press conference held today in Parliament. They questioned why Malaysian authorities made no emergency response after having detected a plane on the radar and being notified by Vietnamese air traffic control regarding the oddity. 18 minutes after MH370 had re-entered Malaysian airspace, Ho Chi Minh Air Traffic Control Centre (HCM ATCC) contacted KL ATCC to inform that no communication had been established with M370. This was 20 minutes after HCM ATCC was supposed to communicate with the plane, and about the time that MH370 was estimated to have just re-entered Peninsula Malaysia flying through Kota Bharu. The report noted that MH370 had shown up on both Malaysian civil and military radars from 1.21am to 1.52am that day, making it a full 31 minutes.
http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/cat...e-mh370s-31-min-rogue-flight-path/
 
jerrylee
Posts: 12
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 7:09 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 5:27 pm

Quoting tailskid (Reply 59):

Would you be so kind to tell why you think these radar datas are true as they come from, as far as I know , the same people you obviously accuse of being involved in some kind of a criminal act by not telling the truth about the turns of MH370. In case I missed something on the origin of the data, please let me know.
 
Kaiarahi
Posts: 1807
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 6:55 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 6:12 pm

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.
 
jerrylee
Posts: 12
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 7:09 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 6:17 pm

Quoting tailskid (Reply 61):

Sorry, but I didn't find any offical radar data from China, Singapore, Thailand or Indonesia although I googled it a lot. Vietnam may be special because there are some findings on google where you can derive an own radar data check by Vietnam. So I must insist, what are your sources for your claimes. Australia for example also denies any activity of their Jindalee Radar. It was not working,lol.
 
Kaiarahi
Posts: 1807
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 6:55 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 6:27 pm

Quoting jerrylee (Reply 64):
It was not working,lol.

Or it was pointed at the wrong place. The Jindalee array is mostly used to cover the Timor Sea for refugee activity.
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

Tue Mar 17, 2015 6:54 pm

Quoting jerrylee (Reply 62):
Would you be so kind to tell why you think these radar datas are true as they come from, as far as I know , the same people you obviously accuse of being involved in some kind of a criminal act by not telling the truth about the turns of MH370. In case I missed something on the origin of the data, please let me know.

I assume you're talking about the Malaysian radar data, as each other country is a separate case.

The first to publicly say they saw MH370 after the transponder was turned off was Vietnam who stated that they saw it turn back, they released this information immediately. The next to say they had radar data was Malaysia, but this was sketchy information, they said that they had seen it over Pulau Perak Island in the Malacca strait at 2:40. This was an inadvertent release. they tried to backpedal from this but the cat was already out of the bag on Malacca.

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. They apparently knew something the MSM didn't at that time. Then early on but I am not sure of the time of first announcement, Thailand said that they had seen "a target" approaching Kota Bharu at 1:28 or nine minutes after the last transmission. It should be noted here that on the 11th Hishammuddin took direct control of media releases and all leaks ended and on the 11th Malaysia’s air force chief, Rodzali Daud, said "I wish to state that I did not make any such statements as above...." referring to a March 9th statement by him to Reuters saying that "radar indicated that the plane may have turned back." So their PR blunders were and are quite revealing. They obviously wished that nothing had been said about the sighting in the Strait but it was too late by then.

On the 12th a Pentagon official said that the warship USS Kidd was moving to the Indian Ocean and Thai Air Vice Marshal Montol Suchookorn said an unidentified aircraft was detected at 1.28am, eight minutes after MH370'S transponder stopped communicating. Vietnam suspended most of its search effort in the SCS after Malaysia refused to answer their questions.

On the 13th the Wall Street Journal released its bombshell story that the plane had flown on for hours. In Kuala Lumpur Hishammuddin denied the Wall Street Journal report about 9MMRO flying on for several hours after disappearing.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB100014...4052702304914904579434653903086282

On the 14th Hishammuddin again told journalists the report was "inaccurate". "I would like to refer to news reports suggesting that the aircraft may have continued flying for some time after the last contact, as Malaysia Airlines will confirm shortly, those reports are inaccurate."
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/SEA-02-140314.html

On the 15th Malaysia's Prime Minister stated in a press conference: "based on new satellite communication......... the aircraft could have flown on for 7 hours, the last trace of the aircraft was identified at 08:11"L (00:11Z Mar 8th).

On the 16th India ended its search effort in the SCS.

The Inmarsat data had forced Malaysia's hand. They now had to admit that their early reports were correct. The plane had flown on for hours. They had a meeting with the "families" a few weeks later when they showed a phoney radar plot showing the plane's track out past VAMPI. It took many months after that before journalists pried out of them the fact that the radar site at Pulau Pinang was manned that night. The last plot they gave was MEKAR plus 10 nm. which appears to be correct as it lines up with the Inmarsat 18:39 ping ring. The only fixed radar that Malaysia has that can "see" out to MEKAR +10 is at Pulau Pinang.

So in the end, when they were forced to, they fessed up and told the truth.
 
tailskid
Posts: 844
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 7:27 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 7:06 pm

Quoting jerrylee (Reply 64):
what are your sources for your claims.

"We informed Malaysia on the day we lost contact with the flight that we noticed the flight turned back west but Malaysia did not respond," Vietnam deputy minister of transport Pham Quy Tieu was quoted as saying http://www.straitstimes.com/breaking...d-back-201403#sthash.gA9bngqU.dpuf


Aviation sources in China report that radar data suggest a steep and sudden descent of the aircraft, during which the track of the aircraft changed from 024 degrees to 333 degrees. http://avherald.com/h?article=4710c69b


A Singaporean air traffic surveillance and control unit also picked up the signal that MH370 "made a turn back before it was reported to have climbed 1,000 metres from its original altitude at 10,000 metres"
http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/m...t-tracked-mh370-to-malacca-straits

Air Vice Marshal Montol Suchookorn of the Royal Thai Air Force said an unidentified aircraft was detected at 1.28am,
http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/m...-mh370-india-says-indian-ocean-has

[Edited 2015-03-17 12:09:32]

Edit: I gave the wrong link for China


[Edited 2015-03-17 12:12:34]
 
SoJo
Posts: 282
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2012 9:29 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 10:17 pm

Methinks tis time to rename this thread to, "Tailskid is right and no one else has a brain" , maybe. Why? He just reiterates the same old blarney over and over again. Why respond to this person? Several posts suggested a while back, just ignore him, but still people reply. I'm dismayed why this topic continues.
RAF Abingdon 1967. I met Beverley from Blackburn. Fantastic!
 
exfss
Posts: 74
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2015 6:54 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 10:36 pm

Quoting SoJo (Reply 68):
I'm dismayed why this topic continues.

hehe.
Well, I assume the reason why it does go on is because no plane have been found yet.
Someone might just have point the smoking gun, but became dragged into truth and facebook argument about poetic devillness...
So from then on, it became kind of entertaining I guess.

Fortunately, most of all I read here is question rather than certainty or ''the truth''
That is was I was looking for.
For the title, i disagree, he could use it as a fact somewhere else...
A throll is something we get used to.
No question is stupid.Only answers can be.
 
Kaiarahi
Posts: 1807
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 6:55 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 11:51 pm

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?

So no response? Another inconvenient truth?
Empty vessels make the most noise.
 
User avatar
BaconButty
Posts: 820
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 3:42 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Wed Mar 18, 2015 12:42 am

Quoting tailskid (Reply 50):
THE FACTS ARE: today the towel was thrown in by some of the most entrenched naysayers and the flight path I described in post 7 is now the accepted truth by all but a few outliers,

For my sins I've been following this since thread one, and what you're saying there bears no relation to what I've seen at all. The turnaround and route back to the Malacca straights has been the mainstream opinion on here for a long time. There have been one or two theoretical discussions about the feasibility of spoofing, but very few people have proposed it as a serious option, and, as he's stated once or twice, Nav30 thinks it went down pretty quickly. There were discussions early on about exact routes and altitudes and waypoints, hopefully now cleared up by the factual document. But the "Entrenched Naysayers" are just a figment of your paranoid imagination.

Quickly going back to your assertion re. various nations having "issued their statements" re. having seen MH370 turn back after IGARI on primary radar. One by one (referencing the sources you provided):

Thailand:
- By their own admission it was "unidentified" (your characterisation).
- They said it never flew over Thai airspace. According to the factual report map on p7 it did (The area of responsibility are later in the document - p102 iirc and show the sectors edges going along the Thai/Malaysian border)

China:
The source you provide only references "Aviation Sources". They refer to a "steep and sudden descent" which is at odds with the factual report. The same report points out that this report contradicts a previous report that the aircraft landed in Nanning, and also quotes Vietnamese SAR officials saying they have found the ELT, which for some reason you don't give the same level of credence to. As I said in a previous post, it's clearly a heap of steaming bollocks.

Singapore:
"It was also reported that a Singaporean air traffic surveillance ..." enough said, surely - hardly Singapore having "Issued a Statement"

Vietnam:
"we noticed the flight turned back west" - by far the most convincing, but, given the lack of any mention in the factual report coupled with no one in Viet Nam shouting up to the effect, I would suggest they noticed it's lack of arrival rather than the actual turn. But hey - you never know.

But the bottom line is there is no good reason to view the Factual report as anything but comprehensive, and given the level of oversight I would hope any reasonable person would too.

Quoting tailskid (Reply 66):
British SAR effort with their P3 Orions

We scrapped our Nimrods 'cos we're brassic unfortunately.
Down with that sort of thing!
 
tailskid
Posts: 844
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 7:27 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Wed Mar 18, 2015 12:55 am

Quoting baconbutty (Reply 71):

You claim everybody was always on board with the flight path and then you turn right around and bicker with the evidence that supports the flight path described in post #7.

So what's your point? Do you just like to argue?
 
User avatar
BaconButty
Posts: 820
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 3:42 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Wed Mar 18, 2015 1:08 am

Quoting tailskid (Reply 72):
So what's your point? Do you just like to argue?

Oh I love to argue, ask my wife*. But that isn't my purpose - I believe you have an agenda to discredit the factual report, since it's conclusions regarding the Pilots state of mind and private life are inconvenient in as much as they give the lie to a lot of the tabloid BS about the man. I think it also suits your purpose to paint a picture of Malaysian cover up and conspiracy.

Of course I could be wrong. I'm currently working my way through a selection of Belgian beers, hence my mellow mood. There's half a dozen Lambics amongst them - they always shock me. I expect beer and get something more akin to cider (the one I'm currently quaffing is Vanderghinste Oud Bruin fwiw - never had it before). Maybe I'm wrong about you too, but I don't think so.

* She always wins
Down with that sort of thing!
 
tailskid
Posts: 844
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 7:27 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Wed Mar 18, 2015 1:13 am

Quoting baconbutty (Reply 73):

I have a very firm belief in what I'm saying. If you want to call that an agenda, so be it.
 
User avatar
TheFlyingDisk
Posts: 1999
Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2008 12:43 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Wed Mar 18, 2015 3:09 am

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?

According to the Wall Street Journal article dated 9 March 2014, the Malaysian government HAD deployed search teams through the Malacca Straits and made it public knowledge the same day:

Quote:
Malaysian authorities are widening their search for missing Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 to some unexpected places, including the narrow Strait of Malacca on the opposite side of the country from where the plane was last spotted.

http://blogs.wsj.com/indonesiarealti...acca/

Another article by BBC dated 10 March also said the same thing:

Quote:
Malaysia said it was widening the hunt, after days of searching found no trace of the plane or the 239 people on board - most of whom were Chinese.

Rescue teams from nine countries will now scour areas stretching from the Malacca Strait to the South China Sea.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-2...13506

So I really wouldn't have much of a doubt over the data presented in the report.
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

Wed Mar 18, 2015 4:00 am

Quoting TheFlyingDisk (Reply 75):
Malaysian authorities are widening their search for missing Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 to some unexpected places, including the narrow Strait of Malacca on the opposite side of the country from where the plane was last spotted.

Right, Malaysia and Britain and the US were in the Malacca Strait, but everyone else were in the SCS. And up until the 15th when the Prime Minister provided the belated Malaysian announcement of the Inmarsat data, Malaysia was denying that the plane had "flown for hours." On the 14th, Hishammuddin specifically denied the WSJ article; the nations searching the South China Sea were not told about the fact that the plane had been tracked into the Malacca Strait until the 15th, although some of them had figured out on their own that they were on a wild goose chase by the 12th. India kept searching until the 16th because they were never told to stop. Malaysia knew on the morning of the 8th that 9MMRO had flown past VAMPI in the Strait.

There was no WSJ article about MH370 on March 9th that i know of, do you have a link?
 
oxymorph
Posts: 177
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2014 10:57 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Wed Mar 18, 2015 4:35 am

Quoting TheFlyingDisk (Reply 75):
Another article by BBC dated 10 March also said the same thing:

Quote:
Malaysia said it was widening the hunt, after days of searching found no trace of the plane or the 239 people on board - most of whom were Chinese.

Strange that this article was apparently (the link doesn't work) dated March 10th, yet the quote you furnish says "after DAYS of searching"...doesn't quite add up.

Also, the journal 'article' you furnish a link for doesn't seem interested in complying, either.

Where in Malaysia you from?

[Edited 2015-03-17 21:37:36]
 
ATCtower
Posts: 510
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 1:46 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Wed Mar 18, 2015 4:37 am

Quoting liquidair (Reply 52):
Thanks for your reply... To explain myself further, isn't it odd, not the repeat only but the "7"370? Our would that just be a different way of saying it?

Nothing that would alarm ATC here. Even American pilots whose primary language is English will often screw up their callsign, or altitude or whatever on check-in. This is what we call a hearback/readback. ATC is expected to verify the data displayed with the info reported by the pilots.

Not that I have any factual info but after years of ATC this very much sounded to me like a pilot speaking a language that is not his primary (HUGE difference between primary language and level 5 speaking it) and simply transposing numbers and going back to correct himself without actually using the word 'correction'.

While there certainly could be something to this, it will be a while before we know for sure and honestly I have a hard time reading into anything abnormal with regards to their final transmissions with ATC.
By reading the above post you waive all rights to be offended. If you do not like what you read, forget it.
 
oxymorph
Posts: 177
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2014 10:57 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Wed Mar 18, 2015 4:41 am

Quoting ATCtower (Reply 78):
While there certainly could be something to this, it will be a while before we know for sure and honestly I have a hard time reading into anything abnormal with regards to their final transmissions with ATC.

Uhm, you don't find Zaharie not reading the frequency back to ATC 'abnormal', when he had done so immediately all previous occurrences?
 
User avatar
777Jet
Topic Author
Posts: 6982
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Wed Mar 18, 2015 4:50 am

Quoting exfss (Reply 69):
Quoting SoJo (Reply 68):
I'm dismayed why this topic continues.

hehe.
Well, I assume the reason why it does go on is because no plane have been found yet.

And maybe, just maybe, because MH370 is the greatest aviation mystery of all time...
DC10-10/30,MD82/88/90, 717,727,732/3/4/5/7/8/9ER,742/4,752/3,763/ER,772/E/L/3/W,788/9, 306,320,321,332/3,346,359,388
 
User avatar
TheFlyingDisk
Posts: 1999
Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2008 12:43 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Wed Mar 18, 2015 6:25 am

Quoting tailskid (Reply 76):
There was no WSJ article about MH370 on March 9th that i know of, do you have a link?
Quoting oxymorph (Reply 77):
Strange that this article was apparently (the link doesn't work) dated March 10th, yet the quote you furnish says "after DAYS of searching"...doesn't quite add up.

Also, the journal 'article' you furnish a link for doesn't seem interested in complying, either.

I screwed up the links in my earlier post as they included the HTML formatting. Here's the correct link

WSJ article

BBC article

Quoting tailskid (Reply 66):
It should be noted here that on the 11th Hishammuddin took direct control of media releases and all leaks ended and on the 11th Malaysia’s air force chief, Rodzali Daud, said "I wish to state that I did not make any such statements as above...." referring to a March 9th statement by him to Reuters saying that "radar indicated that the plane may have turned back."

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.

Also just to correct you - Hishammuddin was part of the Press Conference on the 10th so technically he had control of the information that was released including the General's statement.

Quoting oxymorph (Reply 77):
Where in Malaysia you from?

40 km from KUL & 25 km from Hishammuddin's office at the Ministry of Defence.

[Edited 2015-03-17 23:26:16]
I FLY KLM+ALASKA+QATAR+MALAYSIA+AIRASIA+MALINDO
 
FlyDeltaJetsATL
Posts: 136
Joined: Sun Mar 08, 2015 9:39 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Wed Mar 18, 2015 9:14 am

Quoting tailskid (Reply 66):
The first to publicly say they saw MH370 after the transponder was turned off was Vietnam who stated that they saw it turn back, they released this information immediately.

They saw the same radar blip turn back? Because if they saw the same radar blip that was previously identified as MH370 turn back something must have seemed odd given that they would have been expecting the blip to continue on into Vietnamese airspace, no? That should have set alarm bells off, but it obviously didn't as MH370 was left alone by all ATCs for quite some time after the final ATC call & turn back. I believe they just saw a blip, which could have been any plane, but I will admit that it was probably MH370. There is still no way they could confirm it was MH370 at the time - they saw 'a plane'...

If they saw the same blip that was previously MH370 turn back they should have attempted to contact the plane sooner, much sooner. But they did nothing. I believe they just saw a blip in the approximate area that MH370 should have been in but heading in the almost opposite direction and just assumed that it was MH370 when they released the information.

Quoting tailskid (Reply 66):
The next to say they had radar data was Malaysia, but this was sketchy information, they said that they had seen it over Pulau Perak Island in the Malacca strait at 2:40. This was an inadvertent release. they tried to backpedal from this but the cat was already out of the bag on Malacca.

Again, without the transponder on, all they could see was a blip on the radar. How were they to know that it was MH370? The most they could assume was that the 'plane' they saw on radar was most likely MH370. This is because it was not until the Inmarsat data, including the ping times and probable location of the plane on the ping arcs, that they could connect all of the dots and then work out that the radar blip was indeed MH370 given that the radar track / times fit perfectly between the turn around at IGARI and the first handshake that was picked up after the route through the Malacca Strait in relation to Boeing 777-200ER performance.

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 80):
Quoting exfss (Reply 69):
Quoting SoJo (Reply 68):
I'm dismayed why this topic continues.

hehe.
Well, I assume the reason why it does go on is because no plane have been found yet.

And maybe, just maybe, because MH370 is the greatest aviation mystery of all time...

That reason alone makes this discussion worth continuing. I also believe that by continuing this discussion people will know that MH370 is at least in the thoughts of some given that MH370 updates are very rare in mainstream media now.

Quoting TheFlyingDisk (Reply 81):
Quoting oxymorph (Reply 77):
Where in Malaysia you from?

40 km from KUL & 25 km from Hishammuddin's office at the Ministry of Defence.

Do you still think that will be Hishammuddin's office after the next election?


Edited for spelling.



[Edited 2015-03-18 02:40:39]
FLY DELTA JETS
 
FlyDeltaJetsATL
Posts: 136
Joined: Sun Mar 08, 2015 9:39 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Wed Mar 18, 2015 9:34 am

Quoting oxymorph (Reply 79):
Quoting ATCtower (Reply 78):
While there certainly could be something to this, it will be a while before we know for sure and honestly I have a hard time reading into anything abnormal with regards to their final transmissions with ATC.

Uhm, you don't find Zaharie not reading the frequency back to ATC 'abnormal', when he had done so immediately all previous occurrences?

My apologies for not addressing this point in my last reply and for posting a reply again so soon - I don't know how to add a new quote into a post when 'editing' it.

I agree that whoever was speaking to ATC was reading back instructions to ATC in the transmissions up to the last transmission in which there was no readback. However, I'm not entirley sure what to make of it. The inconsistencies such as the extra / redundant FL350 transmission, the 'Ehhh... 7370' call sign error, the change in order of words used, and the fail to typically readback an instruction in the last heard tnrasmission suggests to me either the person talking to ATC was not entirely focused / had something else on their mind or, in contrast to the information below, different people spoke the final few transmissions.

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 33):
Quote:
Five sets of audio recordings were analysed starting from Airway Clearance Delivery at 1625:52 UTC [0025:52 MYT] till the last utterance from Lumpur Radar at 1719:30 UTC [0119:30 MYT]. There were a total of 23 utterances as follows:

a. Airway Clearance Delivery (ACD) - frequency 126.0 MHz -- 4 utterances
b. Lumpur Ground (LG) - frequency 122.27 MHz -- 6 utterances
c. Lumpur Tower (LT) - frequency 118.8 MHz -- 4 utterances
- 1636:30 UTC Tower Malaysian Three Seven Zero morning.
- 1636:37 UTC Alfa One Zero Malaysian Three Seven Zero.
- 1638:45 UTC Line up Three Two Alfa One Zero Malaysian Three Three Seven Zero.
- 1640:40 UTC Three Two Right clear for take-off Malaysian Three Seven Zero thank you bye.
d. Approach Radar (AR) - frequency 121.25 MHz -- 3 utterances
- 1642:50 UTC Departure Malaysian aaa… Three Seven Zero.
- 1643:01 UTC Okay… level one eight zero direct IGARI Malaysian One… aaa Three Seven Zero.
- 1646:42 UTC Night one three two six Malaysian err… Three Seven Zero.
e. Lumpur Radar (LR) - frequency 132.6 MHz -- 6 utterances
- 1646.55 UTC Lumpur Control Malaysian aa Three Seven Zero.
- 1647.03 UTC Level two five zero Malaysian aaThree Seven Zero.
- 1650:11 UTC Flight level three five zero Malaysian aa Three Seven Zero.
- 1701:17 UTC Malaysian aaThree Seven Zero maintaining flight level three five zero.
- 1707:56 UTC Ehhh… Seven Three Seven Zero maintaining level three five zero.
- 1719:30 UTC Good night Malaysian Three Seven Zero.

From the information available, the first 3 sets of audio recordings (ACD, LG, LT), the speech segments are those of the Flight Officer before take-off, and the 4th & 5th (AR & LR) sets of the audio recordings originated from the Captain after take-off.


Source: page 21 of Factual Information and recordings in the Appendices 1.18A-G
Quoting oxymorph (Reply 37):
Quoting Finn350 (Reply 33):
It depends on whether we consider "Factual Information" as facts or not.

Thanks. So Zaharie was definitively on comms for all transmissions post take-off, if I am understanding the report correctly.

Pretty interesting.



Edited for spelling.

[Edited 2015-03-18 02:35:43]
FLY DELTA JETS
 
David L
Posts: 8551
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:26 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Wed Mar 18, 2015 10:21 am

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 11):
Theory: "The Captain did it"
Strenghts (In addition to the above):
- Captain is a known sympathizer of the opposition whose leader was re-sentenced a few hours earlier.

Weaknesses (In addition to the above):
- Investigation checked the character of the captain and his life and has not raised any alarms in the factual report.

I'd include the slightly (but not very) erratic altitude to the Weaknesses of that theory. It doesn't tie in with an experienced 777 pilot and an undamaged aircraft.

Quoting TheFlyingDisk (Reply 81):
I screwed up the links in my earlier post as they included the HTML formatting. Here's the correct link ...

Thanks for those. That time-line ties in with the statements at the press conference at around that time, i.e. that a radar track showed a target flying east to west, which may or may not have been MH370, and that they had called in outside help to analyse it.

[Edited 2015-03-18 03:22:43]
 
User avatar
AirlineCritic
Posts: 1714
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 1:07 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Wed Mar 18, 2015 11:36 am

Quoting David L (Reply 84):
I'd include the slightly (but not very) erratic altitude to the Weaknesses of that theory. It doesn't tie in with an experienced 777 pilot and an undamaged aircraft.

But could be related to struggle, or commotion in the cabin perhaps, people piling up on the cockpit door, for instance... and maybe the captain had to exit his seat to deal with them or something else.
 
oxymorph
Posts: 177
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2014 10:57 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Wed Mar 18, 2015 12:33 pm

Quoting FlyDeltaJetsATL (Reply 82):
cause if they saw the same radar blip that was previously identified as MH370 turn back something must have seemed odd given that they would have been expecting the blip to continue on into Vietnamese airspace, no? That should have set alarm bells off, but it obviously didn't as MH370 was left alone by all ATCs for quite some time after the final ATC call & turn back. I believe they just saw a blip, which could have been any plane, but I will admit that it was probably MH370. There is still no way they could confirm it was MH370 at the time - they saw 'a plane'...

If they saw the same blip that was previously MH370 turn back they should have attempted to contact the plane sooner, much sooner. But they did nothing. I believe they just saw a blip in the approximate area that MH370 should have been in but heading in the almost opposite direction and just assumed that it was MH370 when they released the information.

Funny then that Hishammuddin in his 4corners interview said they KNEW it was 'FROM (it originated) OUR AIRSPACE'. This was said by him to give backing and support to the idea that they KNEW 'IT WAS FRIENDLY'.

I'll spell it out for you (not being condescending): They KNEW it was MH370. And they knew it was Zaharie. Almost immediately. Ooops Mr. H.

Quoting David L (Reply 84):
Thanks for those. That time-line ties in with the statements at the press conference at around that time, i.e. that a radar track showed a target flying east to west, which may or may not have been MH370, and that they had called in outside help to analyse it.

See above. Hishammudin attempts to not so cagily use the amorphous 'an aircraft' in describing what was seen at the time.

BUT he slips up when he allows that they KNEW it was FROM (it originated) our airspace.

Quoting David L (Reply 84):
I'd include the slightly (but not very) erratic altitude to the Weaknesses of that theory. It doesn't tie in with an experienced 777 pilot and an undamaged aircraft.

LOL. Damaged aircraft? That's hilarious.
 
David L
Posts: 8551
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:26 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Wed Mar 18, 2015 1:38 pm

Quoting AirlineCritic (Reply 85):

Yes, it suggests there may have been another factor, whatever that might be.
 
tailskid
Posts: 844
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 7:27 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Wed Mar 18, 2015 6:00 pm

Quoting TheFlyingDisk (Reply 75):
According to the Wall Street Journal article dated 9 March 2014, the Malaysian government HAD deployed search teams through the Malacca Straits and made it public knowledge the same day:

Thanks for the links, a lot of the early stuff is lost to me. I'm glad to have these links, it adds to the early picture.

In the WSJ piece they said that they were searching west of Malaysia as "part of the standard operating procedure.” in an effort to " leave no stone unturned." So while they acknowledged searching the Malacca Strait, they portrayed it as an extraordinary measure; meanwhile, they failed to mention their radar data, thus keeping the nations searching in the SCS uninformed.

Quoting TheFlyingDisk (Reply 75):
Another article by BBC dated 10 March also said the same thing:

Similar stuff, the BBC article said: " they were widening the search area because of indications the plane, a Boeing 777-200ER, may have turned back from its scheduled route shortly before vanishing from radar screens. " Notice they said "may have." They had to publicly acknowledge something about a "possible" turnaround because Vietnam had told them it had turned back.
 
tailskid
Posts: 844
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 7:27 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Wed Mar 18, 2015 7:13 pm

Quoting FlyDeltaJetsATL (Reply 82):
They saw the same radar blip turn back? Because if they saw the same radar blip that was previously identified as MH370 turn back something must have seemed odd given that they would have been expecting the blip to continue on into Vietnamese airspace, no? That should have set alarm bells off, but it obviously didn't as MH370 was left alone by all ATCs for quite some time after the final ATC call & turn back. I believe they just saw a blip, which could have been any plane, but I will admit that it was probably MH370. There is still no way they could confirm it was MH370 at the time - they saw 'a plane'...

From reading the ATC transcript it is clear that the Vietnamese ATC controller was unaware of it turning back, and that is understandable as he was looking at a secondary (ATC) radar. It had to have been their military primary radar which caught the turnback. Here's some relevant ATC messages:

03:50:16 HCM ATCC said "We just see him on the radar screen one time and after a few minutes later disappear"

0350:31 HCM ATCC Yeah until now we ask many aircraft company or the aircraft on frequency but no response no one ah… know about Malaysian Three Seven Zero until now.

0428:08 HCM ATCC Yeah, no at IGARI we don't have the contact I just seen on the radar three five zero

Nowhere in the Interim report's communication log does it say anything about Vietnam seeing it turn back.
But on the 12th, Vietnam’s deputy minister of transport, Pham Quy Tieu said: "We informed Malaysia on the day we lost contact with the flight that we noticed the flight turned back west but Malaysia did not respond," http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...n-confusion-over-planes-final-path


BTW it's not so confusing as you might think for a radar operator to keep straight which target is which (plane), especially late at night over anywhere other than NYC. I described watching a search radar screen earlier as being like watching turtles crawl across a basketball court. They knew who the plane turning back was, just as the Malaysian military operators at Pulu Pinang knew what they were tracking as 9MMRO flew from IGARI to MEKAR +10.
 
mandala499
Posts: 6592
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Wed Mar 18, 2015 7:52 pm

Quoting tailskid (Reply 17):
So now we are in agreement on the flight path: that's huge.

Huge? You must be desperate.
The flight path has now been published as fact, I have been agreeing to such a flight path for a while... it has nothing to do with what you said, but the flight path I accepted was one of the radar tracks shown in one of the press conferences / conference with next of kin... That flight path as fact, ends at the last point shown on radar. Anything beyond that, are just theories. The southern Indian ocean path is just the most probable and generally accepted theory, based on the BFO analysis, to which I agree to.

Quoting tailskid (Reply 17):
Your latest gambit had been the "spoofing" of Inmarsat data.

Did I say the aircraft's Inmarsat data was spoofed? Just because it was possible does not mean it was. Please do not make false accusations.

Quoting tailskid (Reply 17):
Much like a discussion with strawmen.

I think I'm replying to some...

Quoting tailskid (Reply 20):
If he were in the cockpit, it would have been his job to handle radio communications, so we have a strong indication that he wasn't on the flight deck.

We don't have the facts who was the PF and who was the PM. But usually, one flies, the other handles communications... standard stuff. If Zaharie was handling communications after airborne, then the PF would be Fariq. Fariq isn't qualified to taxi the 777 so therefore Fariq handled the communications while on the ground. Again, standard stuff. Nothing out of the ordinary and certainly nothing to indicate that Fariq was definitely out of the flight deck.

Quoting oxymorph (Reply 37):
So Zaharie was definitively on comms for all transmissions post take-off, if I am understanding the report correctly.

Pretty interesting.

Nothing interesting in that one... just standard stuff...

Quoting tailskid (Reply 50):
From where I started here this is not half the battle won, but 90% of the battle won.

90%? LOL!

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 70):
So no response? Another inconvenient truth?

Again, nothing new is there.

Quoting oxymorph (Reply 79):
you don't find Zaharie not reading the frequency back to ATC 'abnormal', when he had done so immediately all previous occurrences?

Ever seen a person handling the aircraft radio when his mind's somewhere else or just simply not focused?
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
User avatar
Finn350
Posts: 1601
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:57 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Wed Mar 18, 2015 8:19 pm

Quoting ATCtower (Reply 78):
Not that I have any factual info but after years of ATC this very much sounded to me like a pilot speaking a language that is not his primary (HUGE difference between primary language and level 5 speaking it) and simply transposing numbers and going back to correct himself without actually using the word 'correction'

ATCtower, you having years of ATC experience, are you able to say what could cause Mode S symbol drop off the ATC radar screen 37 seconds before the symbol of the plane drops off the radar screen altogether? Are there ATC radarscope configurations where the Mode S symbol drops off immediately when the transponder is switched to standby and the symbol for the plane only after 37 seconds after the loss of signal? Or could the Mode S symbol drop off because the plane would not be transmitting altitude information any longer (i.e. Mode S transponder switched to ALT OFF position)?
 
ATCtower
Posts: 510
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 1:46 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Wed Mar 18, 2015 9:09 pm

Quoting oxymorph (Reply 79):
Uhm, you don't find Zaharie not reading the frequency back to ATC 'abnormal', when he had done so immediately all previous occurrences?

Not at all. I have issued immediate back to back transmissions to an aircraft if I forget to combine the clearances and within the span of less than two seconds have heard both pilots reply to different clearances. Without knowing the SOP for MH I cant say (and unless you know the actions to be inconsistent with the MH SOP, neither can you) why a particular pilot answers a particular transmission.

Having flown a number of times in the cockpit with nearly every airline in the US, for airlines based here, I have never heard of any SOP that would dictate who is replying to a clearance. It is specifically outlined who is responsible for checking particular clearances (typically a redundant check of both pilots), but it could be something as innocuous as the frequency was busy and when they were issued a clearance the captain had a mouth full of coffee and didnt want to delay reply to ATC. We simply dont know but I can assure you from this country, nothing I saw from the transcripts is in its own regard alarming.

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 91):
ATCtower, you having years of ATC experience, are you able to say what could cause Mode S symbol drop off the ATC radar screen 37 seconds before the symbol of the plane drops off the radar screen altogether? Are there ATC radarscope configurations where the Mode S symbol drops off immediately when the transponder is switched to standby and the symbol for the plane only after 37 seconds after the loss of signal? Or could the Mode S symbol drop off because the plane would not be transmitting altitude information any longer (i.e. Mode S transponder switched to ALT OFF position)?

This is another really difficult question to answer because we surely use a different system than Asian ATC. Best I can figure, we dont have an S symbol but do use a 'C' when A/C is at assigned altitude (not climbing or descending). If this C were to disappear it would probably be a glitch with our own computers. What I have on occasion seen is losing the mode C where we still see the correlated target but no altitude information. This (in my experience) has always been something on the aircraft; either the pilot bumped the xponder, the main or standby xponder (or just mode C reporter) crapped out. Generally if the xponder craps out or is turned/bumped off, we will see a track of the assumed routing until we reestablish radar contact with the aircraft. I have on very rare occasion seen where neither transponder will work and we are required to track the target as a primary only target (no mode C, no mode S, nada except the return of the radar pinging (bad term for this thread I know) the actual aircraft and sending us this data. Generally at high altitudes, 35k for example we will have a very strong radar return and be able to track the aircraft without question. If the aircraft goes into areas of decreased radar coverage (altitudes below radar coverage, etc.) we will get sporadic hits of the primary target and can usually track it as long as some hits are caught. There has not been a time (other than radar outage) where I have been unable to track either a correlated or a primary target.

Again, only time will tell but I see nothing directly screwy with the radio transmissions. The xponder, definitely!
By reading the above post you waive all rights to be offended. If you do not like what you read, forget it.
 
User avatar
Finn350
Posts: 1601
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:57 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Wed Mar 18, 2015 9:21 pm

Quoting ATCtower (Reply 92):
What I have on occasion seen is losing the mode C where we still see the correlated target but no altitude information. This (in my experience) has always been something on the aircraft; either the pilot bumped the xponder, the main or standby xponder (or just mode C reporter) crapped out.

OK, thanks for the answer. Mode S symbol dropping off the ATC radar screen was the first abnormality regarding MH370, and if we could figure out why that happened we would be able to say what started the whole chain of events. I think that the Investigation Team knows what happened, as they are able to say that the transponder was "operating satisfactorily" until MH370 dropped off completely the radar screen, but they are not revealing their thinking in the Factual Information report.
 
Kaiarahi
Posts: 1807
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 6:55 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Wed Mar 18, 2015 10:29 pm

Quoting ATCtower (Reply 92):

Thank you. So much garbage has been posted here about the implications of who was responding to ATC.
Empty vessels make the most noise.
 
User avatar
777Jet
Topic Author
Posts: 6982
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Thu Mar 19, 2015 4:12 am

Quoting AirlineCritic (Reply 85):
Quoting David L (Reply 84):
I'd include the slightly (but not very) erratic altitude to the Weaknesses of that theory. It doesn't tie in with an experienced 777 pilot and an undamaged aircraft.

But could be related to struggle, or commotion in the cabin perhaps, people piling up on the cockpit door, for instance... and maybe the captain had to exit his seat to deal with them or something else.

The person flying / taking the plane would not have to leave their seat to deal with anybody banging on the cockpit door. Just pulling back or pushing forward on the yoke would do the job. Add a few side to side movements and anybody trying to enter the cockpit would be thrown around violently. That is what the FedEx 705 Captain did whilst his crew were under attack by Auburn Calloway. He used the plane to throw the attacker around unexpectedly.
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
 
liquidair
Posts: 266
Joined: Fri May 27, 2011 2:01 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Thu Mar 19, 2015 8:49 am

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 95):

With the difference that on MH370, there were 230+ people in the back... I wonder what the SOP would be for that type event?

I'm guessing there is one.
trying to stop my gaseous viscosity go liquid
 
User avatar
777Jet
Topic Author
Posts: 6982
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Thu Mar 19, 2015 9:08 am

Quoting liquidair (Reply 96):
Quoting 777Jet (Reply 95):

With the difference that on MH370, there were 230+ people in the back...

I should have mentioned that I was speaking in the context of 'the Captain did it' scenario in which the FO might have been locked out of the cockpit and he and possibly others might have been attempting to gain access to the cockpit whilst they were still alive / conscious. In that context the Captain would not give a [email protected]#n about the wellbeing of the 238 people on the other side of the cockpit door. The same could be said if the plane was hi-jacked and people were trying to regain access to the cockpit - the hi-jackers could fly the plane erratically to make it very difficult for anybody attempting to regain access to the cockpit.

[Edited 2015-03-19 02:10:37]
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
 
ATCtower
Posts: 510
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 1:46 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Fri Mar 20, 2015 6:06 am

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 93):
OK, thanks for the answer. Mode S symbol dropping off the ATC radar screen was the first abnormality regarding MH370, and if we could figure out why that happened we would be able to say what started the whole chain of events. I think that the Investigation Team knows what happened, as they are able to say that the transponder was "operating satisfactorily" until MH370 dropped off completely the radar screen, but they are not revealing their thinking in the Factual Information report.

And this is whats so peculiar about this instance is that science/technology cant immediately answer our questions based on known facts. I will say (as I am a pilot with time in everything from a C152 to an Airbus A320, I know neither are the aircraft in question), no matter the human involvement aboard the A/C, short of it being shot down or blown up mid-air, ATC should have been able to track it (especially with A/P or turns, etc.) for some time after it dropped off secondary radar. This doesnt mean they 'would' but here in the US, the second we see an A/C drop from 'pinged' radar we utilize primary returns to track it.

From that response you will get an unusual 'personal' response where I will say, if I had seen something like this, my IMMEDIATE response would be "MH370, lost your mode-C, report altitude". If I received no reply, my voice would be VERY stern (believe me, EVERY good controller has a D*CK voice), adamant, and demanding. If I received no response, I would expect said aircraft was unable to reply and I would under power of my authority declare an emergency for the aircraft, treat it as an aircraft in distress, and follow the next steps. (Praying to see a 7600), nevertheless, this would be a troubled aircraft. What troubles me is there was no reply.

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 94):
Thank you. So much garbage has been posted here about the implications of who was responding to ATC.

It is my pleasure and I will help any way I can as an amateur pilot and professional atc. The HARD part, is we are not allowed/granted permission by our government or any other to observe ATC outside the US so I have ZERO idea how it is done anywhere but here..... Would be a good fight for controllers to take but after a decade plus of not being allowed on flight decks we finally are again after weeks of paperwork, asking to see how their ATC is done might be as easy as getting a Playmate to sleep with you...
By reading the above post you waive all rights to be offended. If you do not like what you read, forget it.
 
User avatar
777Jet
Topic Author
Posts: 6982
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Sat Mar 21, 2015 1:59 am

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.
DC10-10/30,MD82/88/90, 717,727,732/3/4/5/7/8/9ER,742/4,752/3,763/ER,772/E/L/3/W,788/9, 306,320,321,332/3,346,359,388

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos