For those interested, here is the link to one of the latest documentaries on MH370.

I believe it was published this August.

Sorry if it has been posted before, but I found this documentary to be one of the most informative about MH370.

The focus on the Inmarsat handshakes is excellent and one can learn quite a bit about the steps Inmarsat took.

The documentary gets really interesting around the 30 min mark.


BBC Documentary - Where is Flight MH370 - Discovery Channel BBC Horizon

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ebtTehZhn44

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 50):

Thanks for posting this.
I found it great that they focused on the technical aspects rather than placing undue and unsubstantiated blame.

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 50):

Thanks a lot!

TRB

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 50): For those interested, here is the link to one of the latest documentaries on MH370.

Thanks for the link 777Jet!


YoungMans will be interested in the comment at 26:04 about the possible 'hoax' regarding the data that Inmarsat first thought might have happened:

"One of the concerns we had was in fact this could just be one big hoax that someone had played on Inmarsat. That the aircraft went down and someone at the same time pretended to be that aircraft".

However, Inmarsat ruled that out pretty quickly. The thorough explanation by Inmarsat about the whole process removes any doubt about the accuracy of the data IMO, not that I ever had any doubt.


There are also some interesting comments throughout about what Inmarsat told Malaysia, the 'top secret radar data' that tracked the turn back over the South China Sea, and Malaysia allowing the search in the South China Sea to continue after initially being told by Inmarsat about where it likely ended up.


Jesse

Quoting Kevil (Reply 54): he flaperon found on Reunion island could drifted there from the South China Sea trough Malacca strait.

Which by your link, shows it wouldn't have ended up on Reunion islands.

Quoting Kevil (Reply 54): "Just look how much red color is around Reunion if you pick Christmas Island as a starting point compared to current search area."

And Christmas Island is what? 850 nautical miles south of Kuala Lumpur and therefore further away than that from the South China Sea?

Quoting Kevil (Reply 54): The Inmarsat calculations of the MH370 flight in the southern Indian Ocean seems not to be credible. It is not possible to calculate the MH370 flight coordinates (longitude and latitude) based on Burst Frequency Offset (airplane speed) and Burst Timing Offset (airplane distance) with just one reference point – Inmarsat satellite. Pings reception does not exclude the MH370 crashed in the South China Sea in the area of seventh ring (the same area mentioned by Mike McKay) where the plane or part of the wreckage with SATCOM transmitter could remain floating for some time.

Then you need to explain how the satcom of the aircraft was still pinging at 8am... and how the aircraft could have flown for that long and still end up only in the South China Sea.

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 55): Which by your link, shows it wouldn't have ended up on Reunion islands

It doesn't have nothing to do with the distance from Kuala Lumpur. Christmas Island is close to Malacca Strait. The flaperon could easily drifted there from the South China Sea. See this link

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 55): And Christmas Island is what? 850 nautical miles south of Kuala Lumpur and therefore further away than that from the South China Sea?

It's easy the MH370 landed on the water near IGARI waypoint in the South China Sea and remain floating there for a few hours.

Quoting Kevil (Reply 54): I am absolutely convinced the MH370 crashed in the South China Sea. The flaperon found on Reunion island could drifted there from the South China Sea trough Malacca strait. This correspond with the latest sea current simulations here ("Just look how much red color is around Reunion if you pick Christmas Island as a starting point compared to current search area.").

Nope, if the aircraft had crashed in South China Sea most of the parts would have ended up in nearby islands. Even if some of the parts somehow managed to float to the Indian Ocean they shouldn't have ended up anywhere near as south as Reunion. The part being found from La Reunion fits the theory of aircraft ending up somewhere west of Australia perfectly.

Quoting Kevil (Reply 54): There is just one reliable eyewitness of burning object (plane ?) in the area where the signal of the MH370 transponder has been lost Mike McKay, oil rig worker, who sent an email to Vietnamese authorities about his sighting. Although Mike McKay is living in New Zealand he was neither contacted by ATSB to hear his evidence nor mentioned in the ATSB report.

Always when an aircraft crashes or disappears there's an eye witness who saw an explosion or fire somewhere, even if the investigation later concludes no such thing happened.

Quoting Kevil (Reply 54): "Malaysia’s air force chief said radar tracking showed IT MAY HAVE TURNED BACK from its scheduled route before it disappeared."

It did turn back from its scheduled route, there's radar data which confirms it, plus the INMARSAT stuff.

Quoting Kevil (Reply 54): In case of similar aircraft accidents (TWA 800, Swissair Flight 111, Air France Flight 447) the wreckage has been found not far from the last known position of the aircraft.

Yes, and in this case the area near its last known position, which also happens to have a lot of marine traffic, was searched and nothing at all was found. This is not a similar aircraft accident to those.

Quoting Kevil (Reply 56): It's easy the MH370 landed on the water near IGARI waypoint in the South China Sea and remain floating there for a few hours.

A 777 will not remain floating for a few hours after ditching on a sea, especially if the ditching kills everybody which would be the case, or have you seen any lifeboats full of pax anywhere?

Quoting Kevil (Reply 56): It doesn't have nothing to do with the distance from Kuala Lumpur. Christmas Island is close to Malacca Strait. The flaperon could easily drifted there from the South China Sea. See this link

The area where MH370 disappeared from civilian radar is nowhere near Malacca Strait.

[Edited 2015-08-28 03:17:56]

Quoting Kevil (Reply 56): It's easy the MH370 landed on the water near IGARI waypoint in the South China Sea and remain floating there for a few hours.

If it floated, wouldn't people try to get out?
If it floated and had the satcom pings, while floating... the satcom would have had power from what? It requires the Main Left AC Bus to be powered. Engines would be dead... APU? If powered by the APU, it doesn't explain why the satcom went dead for over an hour then decided to logon itself (usually after a reboot)... then transmitting till 8am... If it floated for that long, it should have floated for a lot longer, and APU consumes much less fuel than the engines, and therefore should have transmitted well past 8-9am...

If it remained floating for all those hours, sorry, the flaperon wouldn be extremely likely to have detached. If we have, say, the outboard aileron, then your theory can talk a bit.

Quoting Kevil (Reply 56): It doesn't have nothing to do with the distance from Kuala Lumpur. Christmas Island is close to Malacca Strait. The flaperon could easily drifted there from the South China Sea. See this link

But it does. The current near IGARI at around that time, would have made debris not end up in the Indian ocean but remain somewhere in Indonesia's internal waters.

Christmas Island, is NOT NEAR Malacca Strait. Sorry. It would have to go up towards Aceh, then go down the western coast of Sumatra towards Christmas Island ? Go and look up the currents of Malacca Straits. Now, if it did go up the strait, then it would have gone west past Sumatra... and likely to remain on the north of the equator. And surely there would have been debris washed up along Indonesian and Malaysian coastlines by now, add Sri Lanka, and the Indian eastern seaboard too. In fact, we should have seen debris washed up on Peninsular Malaysia's eastern coastline by now.

Quoting pvjin (Reply 57): Always when an aircraft crashes or disappears there's an eye witness who saw an explosion or fire somewhere, even if the investigation later concludes no such thing happened.

Kevil, let me add to Pvjin's comments:
With QZ8501 we had witnesses claiming it flew over land! Some testified they saw the airplane with burning engines trying to go to land then ditching next to the coast and drifted away carried by the current before anyone could get out.
With KI571, we even had witnesses claiming they saw the airplane overflying land and over the mountains into the sea beyond. Explosions, seen and heard those claims, etc, etc, etc.
In each of the above cases, they've been proven to be false.
We've even had people who are supposed to be credible, giving out false testimony for the sake of getting 15 seconds of fame!

Quoting pvjin (Reply 57): A 777 will not remain floating for a few hours after ditching on a sea, especially if the ditching kills everybody which would be the case, or have you seen any lifeboats full of pax anywhere?

If it killed everyone, it wouldn't be in 1 piece. If it was in 1 piece, we'd be seeing liferafts, pax (dead or alive) with lifevests, etc.

Quoting pvjin (Reply 57): The area where MH370 disappeared from civilian radar is nowhere near Malacca Strait.

Kevil, again, let me add. It's on the other side of Peninsular Malaysia... And Christmas island is probably over 1000NM from IGARI on a straight line... Sorry.

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 58): If it floated, wouldn't people try to get out? If it floated and had the satcom pings, while floating... the satcom would have had power from what?

The MH370 could suffer major decompression caused by the airframe rupture as a result of an on board fire (toxic fumes) which could kill all passengers. The airplane could broke into a few pieces during relatively slow landing on the water. The SATCOM Honeywell MCS-6000 has two 12 Volts 7 Ah backup batteries which is enough power for pings send each hour by Low Gain non directional antenna.

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 58): The current near IGARI at around that time, would have made debris not end up in the Indian ocean but remain somewhere in Indonesia's internal waters.

See the South China Sea currents in Winter here .

[Edited 2015-08-28 06:35:11]

[Edited 2015-08-28 06:47:53]

Quoting Kevil (Reply 56): It's easy the MH370 landed on the water near IGARI waypoint in the South China Sea and remain floating there for a few hours.

That area was searched extensively in the days after MH370 was reported missing. There's no way MH370 went down in the Gulf of Thailand and floated for hours. On top of that, the Strait of Malacca is an extremely busy and congested shopping lane.

Quoting Kevil (Reply 59): The SATCOM Honeywell MCS-6000 has two 12 Volts 7 Ah backup batteries which is enough power for pings send each hour by Low Gain non directional antenna.

So that, while the airplane broke up? Nice try. Sorry.
Again, you lose satcom if the Left Main AC Bus is unpowered, the LGA antenna is DC powered but the controlling SDU needs AC power and other inputs too, which it would not get if the airplane broke up as you said.

And no, as far as I remember, the BFO would not match a relatively stationary vehicle without Doppler Pre-Correction (LGA has no Doppler pre-correction).

Broke into a few pieces would also mean we'd have more than a few floating debris.

Quoting Kevil (Reply 59): See the South China Sea currents in Winter here .

I've seen the SCS current model enough times thank you. To go to the Strait of Malacca, it would have through Batam & Singapore's extremely busy waterway. I suggest you look at the Bay of Bengal currents too before you try to assert this SCS theory of yours.

Quoting David L (Reply 60): That area was searched extensively in the days after MH370 was reported missing.

"Kevil",

I wrote what I thought might help the search but within two days of my email being leaked the search in the South China Sea was called-off. On the basis of the (belated) primary military radar readings coming to light, the search was then moved to the Andaman Sea. I think the South China Sea search was called-off prematurely and as such I would agree with your assessment. Acting on my sighting, the Vietnamese sent out one flight only (six days after MH370 disappeared) and then were told to stop looking.

I have been hoping for some evidence to prove that is was not MH370 I saw, but unfortunately there has been no proof yet.

Mike McKay.

Quoting Kevil (Reply 62):

What's your point? That all the other evidence should be rejected on the strength of one alleged eye witness?

Quoting David L (Reply 60): shopping lane

Bugger. That's "shipping lane", of course.   

Quoting David L (Reply 63): What's your point? That all the other evidence should be rejected on the strength of one alleged eye witness?

I don't think so but the area mentioned by Mike McKay should be thoroughly searched.

Quoting Kevil (Reply 64): I don't think so but the area mentioned by Mike McKay should be thoroughly searched.

Why ?
A burning plane was allegedly seen by a lady on a sailing boat northwest of Sumatra, and a low flying plane was allegedly seen by a few islanders in the Maledives.

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 58): the satcom would have had power from what?

Not just powered but fed with navigation data to steer the phased array high-gain antenna beam. Or is the HGA not needed for the pings and attempted satellite calls?

Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 66): Or is the HGA not needed for the pings and attempted satellite calls?

9M-MRO was equiped with a low gain satellite antenna (source of this being photographs of Malaysia Airlines B777 fleet) so no beam steering/focussing as is possible in the phased array high gain antenna.

Quoting lancelot07 (Reply 65): A burning plane was allegedly seen by a lady on a sailing boat northwest of Sumatra, and a low flying plane was allegedly seen by a few islanders in the Maledives.

The difference is that Mike McKay is reliable professional and opposite to other witnesses he sent an email about his sighting to Vietnamese authorities a few days after the disappearance of the MH370.

Quoting Kevil (Reply 68): The difference is that Mike McKay is reliable professional and opposite to other witnesses he sent an email about his sighting to Vietnamese authorities a few days after the disappearance of the MH370.

Him being an oil rig worker doesn't make him a professional when it comes to investigating aircraft accidents. The fact a part of MH370 was found from La Reunion is much better proof of the aircraft ending up in the Indian Ocean than a random sighting by one person is a proof of it not ending there.

I believe it's possible that MH370 may be somewhere bit off from the current search area, however it's definitely somewhere in the Indian Ocean.

Claim that MH370 sought in wrong place

In my previous posts I thought Sunda strait not Malacca strait, sorry.

[Edited 2015-08-28 14:23:25]

Quoting Kevil (Reply 67): 9M-MRO was equiped with a low gain satellite antenna (source of this being photographs of Malaysia Airlines B777 fleet) so no beam steering/focussing as is possible in the phased array high gain antenna

If we're going to go by photographs, the satcom high-gain phased array antennas are located above door 3 on both sides of the aircraft.


View Large View Medium

Photo © Sunandan Subramaniam

Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 71): If we're going to go by photographs, the satcom high-gain phased array antennas are located above door 3 on both sides of the aircraft.

You are right. MH370 has the High Gain Antenna (LGA). See What We Know Now About MH370. From the text: "Don’s signal analysis of the three attempted phone calls suggests that the high-gain antenna might not have been working properly, perhaps because the antenna was not steered correctly."

Follow the link here (pdf) in the text "high-gain antennae mounted near the rear of the aircraft. (Specs, courtesty of Don Thompson, here." for the detail description and antennas pictures.

This continual "theory" about a break up in the South China sea is one of the most ridiculous things I have ever seen in my entire life.

Oh yeah, depite all evidence to the contrary- radar, sat pings, everything, it actually crashed in the South China sea... one of the shallowest parts of the ocean, in some of the busiest shipping lanes with a high amount of general boat traffic and in very close proximity to many shore lines...

But it took over a year for ANYTHING to turn up anywhere, and involved the flaperon very improbably meandering its way through the straight of Malacca all the way to Reunion.

Because that makes any amount of sense on any possible level.


Get over it. You're wrong. You sound absurd, and you're embarrassing yourself.

[Edited 2015-08-29 02:17:58]

Quoting Kevil (Reply 70): In my previous posts I thought Sunda strait not Malacca strait, sorry.

Get your geography right if you want to make such outlandish claims and save yourself and other people time and energy.
If you cannot get such key geographical features right, it does form a cloud of doubt on your theory. Sorry.

Quoting Kevil (Reply 67): 9M-MRO was equiped with a low gain satellite antenna (source of this being photographs of Malaysia Airlines B777 fleet) so no beam steering/focussing as is possible in the phased array high gain antenna.

It has both the LGA and HGA. Now, back to your idea of "airplane floating" "several pieces" and "still pinging".. the satcom set up is that if you have the left main AC bus unpowered, none of the satcom would work. Sure the LGA can be DC powered... however, the LGA still need the SDU, RFU, LGA-HPA and LGA-LNA/DIP to be powered... and those boxes are powered by the left main AC bus.
So "floating in several pieces until 8am" is discounted. End of story.

Quoting Kevil (Reply 72): You are right. MH370 has the High Gain Antenna (LGA). See What We Know Now About MH370. From the text: "Don’s signal analysis of the three attempted phone calls suggests that the high-gain antenna might not have been working properly, perhaps because the antenna was not steered correctly."

Since when is the "high gain antena" an LGA? Is this another of your "mistakes" ?
Funny you mentioned Jeff Wise's post. In the discussions I have with Jeff and several other members who are or were in IG, our conclusion is that the BFO numbers come the high gain antenna (HGA), and that the receiving BFO on the satellite would be much greater than that had it been from the LGA.

Quoting Kevil (Reply 68): The difference is that Mike McKay is reliable professional and opposite to other witnesses he sent an email about his sighting to Vietnamese authorities a few days after the disappearance of the MH370.

Yes so? I've seen other "reliable and professional" witnesses turn out to be totally wrong in other accidents.
The airplane didn't crash near the time it disappeared. Throw Mike McKay's story out of the window. If it did crash where it he said it was, it crashed after 820am KL time. End of story.

Quoting jpetekyxmd80 (Reply 73): Get over it. You're wrong. You sound absurd, and you're embarrassing yourself.

I don't understand why area of the last known position of the MH370 hasn't been thoroughly searched to disprove sightings of Mike McKay. No single radar track, no credible Inmarsat calculations, no MH370 resting place found...

Quoting Kevil (Reply 75): I don't understand why area of the last known position of the MH370 hasn't been thoroughly searched to disprove sightings of Mike McKay. No single radar track, no credible Inmarsat calculations, no MH370 resting place found...

Last known position of the flight has been thoroughly searched, I remember how they even released satellite imagery for the public to look at and see if they can spot any debris. Nothing was found.

Quoting Kevil (Reply 68): The difference is that Mike McKay is reliable professional

says who ? And professional in what ?

Quote: and opposite to other witnesses he sent an email about his sighting to Vietnamese authorities a few days after the disappearance of the MH370.

Sending an email means nothing. Others gave interviews. Not meaning much either.

If you don't remember, the South China Sea was searched for about 2 weeks. This theory is complete and utter nonsense.

It might be off beam, but the wreck is nowhere near South China Sea.

Quoting Kevil (Reply 78): German oceanographers claim that the MH370 search is way off-beam

What happened to the flap found on Reunion island? Did the French make another announcement proving or disproving that it came from MH 370? If the flap came from MH 370 then the search is definitely in approximately the region of the crash (Southern Indian ocean).

Quoting 747megatop (Reply 80 What happened to the flap found on Reunion island? Did the French make another announcement proving or disproving that it came from MH 370? If the flap came from MH 370 then the search is definitely in approximately the region of the crash (Southern Indian ocean).

The French did not make any final announcement yet. Report on progress "in due course".

Note the text (article and sea current simulations here 
Mick I know that but it's about probabilities, noone can point exact location of origin but it's safe to make some estimations and say area SW of Australia has 5% chance, NW of Australia 35% chance etc.

Just look how much red color is around Reunion if you pick Christmas Island as a starting point compared to current search area.

You can try your own sea current simulation at http://adrift.org.au/

Quoting Kevil (Reply 81): You can try your own sea current simulation at http://adrift.org.au/

Nothing, when you click in the South China sea. No data for that area.
But lots of islands and land around it.

Quoting Kevil (Reply 81): You can try your own sea current simulation at http://adrift.org.au/

Did you try the one that makes your south china sea theory completely implausible if not impossible?

Quoting Kevil (Reply 81): The French did not make any final announcement yet. Report on progress "in due course".

"We still need to identify a number that is inside the flaperon. It is a Spanish subcontracting company that owns that part. This company would be able to identify this number, but the staff is on vacation. We'll have to wait for next week to get their guidance.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/29/europe/mh370-part/index.html

Quoting 747megatop (Reply 84): "We still need to identify a number that is inside the flaperon. It is a Spanish subcontracting company that owns that part. This company would be able to identify this number, but the staff is on vacation. We'll have to wait for next week to get their guidance.

This Spanish company, they only have ONE staff that's able to identify the part?

Why can't the French confirm it with, I don't know, the people who OWNED & FIXED the plane?

The Boeing identification plate on the exterior has fallen off, which is not surprising, so they are forced to pick the flaperon apart and go back to the individual part manufacturer. Seems a little unusual for the delay, but it's August in europe, what can you say?

Ok, remind me again why the part was sent to Toulouse instead of Seattle?

Reunion island is France.

Quoting jpetekyxmd80 (Reply 83): Did you try the one that makes your south china sea theory completely implausible if not impossible?

Unfortunately http://adrift.org.au/ does not have data for the South China Sea.

Quoting Kevil (Reply 89):

Yes, and with some common sense anyone can understand that most of the debris there would end up on shores of surrounding coasts and islands.

Quoting Kevil (Reply 89): Unfortunately http://adrift.org.au/ does not have data for the South China Sea.

Yes there is, for most of it. I clicked right where IGARI is and it worked fine. Not that this would convince you. The dozens of factual and common sense reasons above have done nothing either.

Flaperon dead end?

http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/31/world/mh370-investigation/index.html

"Now comes word that a Spanish company has told French investigators that it cannot tell with certainty from consulting its records whether the flaperon found on Reunion Island came from MH370, a French source close to the investigation told CNN."

Quoting 747megatop (Reply 92): Flaperon dead end?

Not so fast !
They could not get the confirmation they wanted, but still nobody came forward with anything that suggests it might be from any other plane.

Quoting lancelot07 (Reply 93): but still nobody came forward with anything that suggests it might be from any other plane.

  the investigators need not look any farther than a.net to get people to come forward with theories on how that flaperon came near Reunion island's coast.

Quoting Kevil (Reply 78): German oceanographers claim that the MH370 search is way off-beam

Interesting analysis and I saw this on another article. I think they may be somewhat correct. I think the search location is too far south. I am amazed this thing floats though. I have a feeling the plane did not run till fuel exhaustion but instead plummeted somewhere shortly after the last Satellite ping. That ping I don't think was located to exact area either. There was a broad band where it might have come from.

Quoting pvjin (Reply 90): Quoting Kevil (Reply 89): Yes, and with some common sense anyone can understand that most of the debris there would end up on shores of surrounding coasts and islands.

The thing about common sense is that it is not very common  

Quoting 747megatop (Reply 94): Quoting lancelot07 (Reply 93): but still nobody came forward with anything that suggests it might be from any other plane. the investigators need not look any farther than a.net to get people to come forward with theories on how that flaperon came near Reunion island's coast.

  

Quoting solarflyer22 (Reply 95): I have a feeling the plane did not run till fuel exhaustion but instead plummeted somewhere shortly after the last Satellite ping.

The final ping could indicate the moment the plane ditched into the water if it ditched under control.

Quoting solarflyer22 (Reply 95): That ping I don't think was located to exact area either.

Quoting solarflyer22 (Reply 95): There was a broad band where it might have come from.

A very long arc  

At least Inmarsat believe they know what direction along that arc the plane headed.

I am a little mystified that the flaperon/flap/whatever found has not been linked to a particular aircraft. When the components used to assemble the flaperon were made, would there be no numbering on them to record from which batch they came as a minimum? I don't know aircraft construction methods but I would have thought that there was a system where each component in the system could be tracked back at least to a batch, if not tagged with a unique ID.

http://www.focus.de/wissen/technik/s...zort-von-mh370-vor_id_4916166.html

The outcome of German scientists. They put 2 million virtual parts into the computer and let them drift based on data of the Indian Ocean of the past 16 months. If the flap is indeed from MH370, afterthis simulation it crashed much further north.

Quoting 747megatop (Reply 94): the investigators need not look any farther than a.net to get people to come forward with theories on how that flaperon came near Reunion island's coast.

Anyone here missing a flaperon ?  
One of his own, proof of purchase and payment required!