TIGHAR

Chatterbox => Extraneous exchanges => Topic started by: Tim Mellon on March 15, 2014, 08:50:49 PM

Title: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Tim Mellon on March 15, 2014, 08:50:49 PM
Sorry, Ric, for posting this in the wrong thread. I was responding to Richie's query about the flight path of the Malaysian B777.

My best guess so far:

Route WMKK (Kuala Lumpur) to IGARI at FIR boundary with Vietnam, sharp left turn, over Malaya, up the channel and then direct SABDI, followed by a right turn direct to Chah Bahar airbase in Southeastern Iran (Google view attached). After overflying Malaya, minimum radar coverage for the entire balance of the route. Less than 3500 NM, well within the fuel load that was required for an IFR flight to Beijing. Length of Rwy 9L/27R at OIZC is 13,595 feet, way sufficient for a light B777. There is no hangar large enough at OIZC to contain a B777, but it is certainly possible that the aircraft could have been unloaded, refueled and re-dispatched elsewhere in no more than two hours if this scenario had been well planned. 7.5 hours of flight from KL, it would still have been night time when the aircraft departed OIZC for elsewhere.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on March 15, 2014, 11:45:51 PM
A comprehensive guide to the missing flight from the BBC news...

Malaysia Airlines: What we know about flight MH370

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-26503141 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-26503141)
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on March 16, 2014, 09:10:04 AM
Assuming for the moment that current speculation that the flight was diverted by either the crew or others is correct, what was the motivation?  What was the purpose?
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on March 16, 2014, 10:53:19 AM
Someone aboard was very proficient in switching off the various tracking and identification systems, the only one left functioning 'They report that a satellite system operated by London-based telecommunications company Inmarsat received an automated signal from flight MH370 at least five hours after the plane was reported lost.' required a more technical means of deactivation. Would hijackers have been aware of all of these systems? would that leave the crew as the most knowledgeable and likeliest?
A real mystery.




Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on March 16, 2014, 10:55:39 AM
In either case, this appears to have been a well-planned sophisticated operation.  Why?  What was the purpose?
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on March 16, 2014, 11:15:37 AM
CNN have a page on the missing plane and the search area, huge now, plus the range with the available fuel on board and the satellite tracking data...

http://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2014/03/world/malaysia-flight-map/index.html?iid=article_sidebar (http://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2014/03/world/malaysia-flight-map/index.html?iid=article_sidebar)
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Monty Fowler on March 16, 2014, 12:32:31 PM
Here's my take on it:

This was a human-caused event, most likely by either the pilot or co-pilot. Not all that hard to do with the highly-automated airliners of today. Either the pilot or co-pilot disables/kills the other in the cockpit. They are behind a locked door, so no one else can see what's going on. The passengers and flight attendants are handled by depressurizing the aircraft. The emergency oxygen systems back there are only good for about 10-15 minutes. All the pilot or co-pilot has to do is keep the plane above 10,000-12,000 feet for an hour or so and everyone in the back of the aircraft is either dead or beyond help. Then it's just a matter of setting the course to terminate in an empty area of ocean while methodically switching off all of the electronic locating systems. Remember, it was night when all this was going on, so there was little if any chance for anyone to actually see anything.

As to motivation, well ... the human mind is capable of unthinkable depravities towards other human beings. There is precedent for the pilot or co-pilot taking the aircraft and all aboard with them in a final suicidal plunge. There is also precedent for airliners flying for some time with everyone disabled from lack of oxygen.

Answers will only come when, and if, some floating wreckage can be found that will give a clue as to the terminal point of this flight.

LTM, who doesn't like to think the unthinkable,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 CER
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Dale O. Beethe on March 16, 2014, 01:28:03 PM
I wouldn't assume it crashed.  What if some rogue nation or a terrorist group has a nuclear or biological weapon that it wants to use on the U.S. (presumably, since every problem in the world is evidently our fault) but no delivery system.  A long range airliner might be quite usable as a delivery system.  I'd say we'd best be extremely vigilant.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on March 16, 2014, 01:29:29 PM
I agree that at least of the pilots was complicit but if your only objective is to kill the passengers why not just dive it into the ocean? 
There's much more going on here than a simple suicide mission.  Somebody took great pains took make the airplane disappear and then flew for several hours.  Unless we're looking at rank insanity (which is a possibility) the perpetrator(s) were on their way somewhere.  Someone was waiting for them to arrive.  Whether they arrived or not is presently unknown. 

This was a sophisticated operation sponsored by somebody who has significant assets.
•  That airplane was on it's way somewhere and somebody was waiting for it to arrive, land, taxi into a big hanger, close the doors, and the airplane is gone.
•  If the plane is going to remain hidden you have to control the local environment.  That is best accomplished if it's on a military airfield.  That means the operation is probably state-sponsored.
•  It's not about hostages.  Hostages are no good to you if nobody knows you have them and hostages are not worth this much effort. Killing the passengers was probably the first thing they did.  Put on your mask and de-pressurize the cabin.
•  The airplane is probably not what they're after.  It's not new technology and if you just want to make a flying bomb it's a lot easier to steal an old 727.
•  Seems to me there must have been something aboard that airplane that was worth stealing.  Somebody knew it would be aboard that flight long in advance.  The Malaysians have not been forthcoming about what was in the cargo hold.  Or it could be as simple as a diplomat's laptop, although there are easier ways to do that.

The template for something like this has been around since 1965. It was called Thunderball.

BTW, I see no reason to see Iran as the culprit.  Most of the passengers were Chinese.  Why would Iran want to piss off China?
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Dale O. Beethe on March 16, 2014, 01:34:27 PM
I'd agree it would probably be easier to steal an old 727, but it looks as if someone has stolen this one, so it was obviously possible.  I hadn't considered stealing it for what's on it.  It would be interesting to know exactly what was aboard.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on March 16, 2014, 01:40:07 PM
According to the fuel load figures the plane had enough fuel for a further 2,500 miles from it's last point of contact. From that information certain destinations can be ruled out. Malaysian military radar tracked the plane so it isn't beyond the realms of possibility that other countries had the ability to do so as well, but nothing, Thailand, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, India, Sri Lanka, nothing.



Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on March 16, 2014, 06:33:22 PM
Malaysian military radar tracked the plane so it isn't beyond the realms of possibility that other countries had the ability to do so as well, but nothing, Thailand, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, India, Sri Lanka, nothing.

Fly low enough and you're invisible to all radar (done that) but at those altitudes the 777 has nothing like 2,500 miles ( 6 hours) of range.  But the pings from the engines suggest that the engines continued to run for 6 hours which would suggest that the plane was flying at an efficient altitude in an area where there was no radar coverage (open ocean). If I'm the thief, that's exactly what I want you to think.

We already know that whoever did this is intimately familiar with the airplane.  If they have the expertise to disable the automated reporting systems that can be accessed in flight they certainly know about the engine system they can't do anything about.  Land the airplane somewhere within the low level range but leave the engines running at reduced power creating the illusion that the plane is still in flight and diverting searches to areas far from where you really are.

If I was running the search I'd be looking at military airfields with at least 4,000 feet of runway and a big hangar within maybe a thousand miles of the last known point.  It would be interesting to know whether the USS Kidd now in the Straight of Malacca has SEALs aboard.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Dale O. Beethe on March 16, 2014, 07:37:16 PM
I would guess there's all sorts of preparations being made to deal with whatever the situation turns out to be, most of them being fairly violent.  Not to rattle sabers, but some things need to be resolved with extreme prejudice.  Thank God we still have some young lions willing to go in harm's way.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Mark Appel on March 16, 2014, 07:54:56 PM
I note this evening of reports the pilot had obsessive national political views. He was (is) an allegedly ardent supporter of an opposition leader, convicted of sodomy no less, a mere 5 hours before 370 flight time. The expertise required for the maneuvers and calculated behaviors witnessed thus far may give the illusion of a well-thought out plan. On the other hand, it may actually be a pattern executed by an expert, but deranged intelligence...
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Tim Mellon on March 16, 2014, 08:56:55 PM
According to the fuel load figures the plane had enough fuel for a further 2,500 miles from it's last point of contact.

Jeff, what was the takeoff fuel load? Where did this data come from?

Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Tim Mellon on March 16, 2014, 09:02:01 PM
I have noticed that on most nights (as last night, see below) MAS370 climbs straight to its cruising altitude of FL390. On some nights, it climbs to FL370 and then performs a cruise climb to FL390, which is a way of maximizing performance as fuel is burned off.

On the night of the disappearance, however, the aircraft had only climbed to FL350 before leveling off. This would indicate either that the aircraft was heavier than normal, or that it was restricted by ATC to a flight level that would permit separation with crossing traffic (not really likely at that time of night on that route).

So was there something of great weight (and maybe value) in the cargo hold that would explain this anomaly? Was there an unusually large uplift of fuel to create a greater endurance? Once again, it certainly would be useful to see the F/O's signed weight and balance calculations that were handed over before the cabin door was shut from the jetway.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Tim Mellon on March 16, 2014, 09:30:23 PM
I agree that at least of the pilots was complicit but if your only objective is to kill the passengers why not just dive it into the ocean? 
There's much more going on here than a simple suicide mission.  Somebody took great pains took make the airplane disappear and then flew for several hours.  Unless we're looking at rank insanity (which is a possibility) the perpetrator(s) were on their way somewhere.  Someone was waiting for them to arrive.  Whether they arrived or not is presently unknown. 

This was a sophisticated operation sponsored by somebody who has significant assets.
•  That airplane was on it's way somewhere and somebody was waiting for it to arrive, land, taxi into a big hanger, close the doors, and the airplane is gone.
•  If the plane is going to remain hidden you have to control the local environment.  That is best accomplished if it's on a military airfield.  That means the operation is probably state-sponsored.
•  It's not about hostages.  Hostages are no good to you if nobody knows you have them and hostages are not worth this much effort. Killing the passengers was probably the first thing they did.  Put on your mask and de-pressurize the cabin.
•  The airplane is probably not what they're after.  It's not new technology and if you just want to make a flying bomb it's a lot easier to steal an old 727.
•  Seems to me there must have been something aboard that airplane that was worth stealing.  Somebody knew it would be aboard that flight long in advance.  The Malaysians have not been forthcoming about what was in the cargo hold.  Or it could be as simple as a diplomat's laptop, although there are easier ways to do that.

The template for something like this has been around since 1965. It was called Thunderball.

BTW, I see no reason to see Iran as the culprit.  Most of the passengers were Chinese.  Why would Iran want to piss off China?


Western China is populated in part by Uighurs, Islamic folk related to the Turkic culture. They have been in revolt against the central Chinese Government for some time now. Recently 30 or so Han were killed by knife-wielding Uighurs in Urumqi, capital of Xinjiang Province. There is obviously the possibility that this aircraft hijacking could be related to this insurrection. I have no doubt that Iran, or Pakistan, would have no trouble aiding these Islamic brothers.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Tim Mellon on March 16, 2014, 09:40:35 PM
I'd agree it would probably be easier to steal an old 727, but it looks as if someone has stolen this one, so it was obviously possible.  I hadn't considered stealing it for what's on it.  It would be interesting to know exactly what was aboard.

Well, Dale, being rated in the B727,  I respectfully disagree that at this point in time it is anything worth stealing. If it could fly 25% of the way of a 777 you might have a point. The Lockheed 10E could fly twice as far and still deliver a devastating nuclear payload.

The cargo carried on MH370 is certainly an interesting aspect. Suppose it was Gold enroute to China. Suppose clever Uighurs decided to stow away in the cargo compartment, then after takeoff access the main deck through the Mechanical Equipment Compartment. Aided by one of the flight crew, this could have developed into an interesting scenario....

Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: manjeet aujla on March 16, 2014, 10:15:06 PM
The airlines/security would be very derelict, if the hijackers got control, without setting off an alarm by the pilots (don't they lock cockpit doors these days?). So, the pilots being in on it seems much more likely.

They must have known that when flying over land in Malaysia, they would be seen on military radar, and could/would be intercepted.  So the plan for a hijack was not workable/foolproof for the route they took (it seems to have been negligence on the part of the malaysian radar operators that they ignored the unidentified blip). But if they were on a suicide mission, they would not care about being spotted on radar.

 If they flew the southern-arc route and crashed into the southern Indian Ocean, as a suicide gesture, experts are saying the plane may never be found because of the depths involved, currents and remoteness of the area.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on March 16, 2014, 10:45:53 PM
According to the fuel load figures the plane had enough fuel for a further 2,500 miles from it's last point of contact.

Jeff, what was the takeoff fuel load? Where did this data come from?

Not Malaysian Airlines, they will have the data but it will have to be given to the investigation team first rather than the press. That said the calculations used to get the range of 2,500 miles must be based on distance to destination plus the reserve fuel requirements. The 777 had enough fuel to fly the 2,700 miles (4,345km) to Beijing and the required reserves for the reserve fuel requirements. Of course the Captain might have uploaded more fuel than needed for the destination and reserve, if so Malaysian Airlines will be aware and the investigation team too. It would be an indication of something being very amiss though.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: George Lam on March 17, 2014, 01:36:33 AM
I find the final satellite "ping" location to be very intriguing, but mysterious.  If the red lines are an indication of the plane's approx. location during that final ping, it either must've been flying over land for many hours prior, or over the Indean Ocean the entire flight.  The northern red line is very far inland, so if it is there, eyes might have been purposely looking away from radar.

Not knowing how accurate these ping indicators are, how likely is it that the plane landed in a country like Iran, Saudi Arabia, or even Pakistan, which are no where near the red lines?

I don't know the technological capabilities of countries like Burma and Bangladesh, or if they have sufficient military radar coverage.  Could the plane have traversed those air spaces without knowledge? Just curious.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeffrey Pearce on March 17, 2014, 01:46:46 AM
Manjeet,

Concerning your words "But if they were on a suicide mission, they would not care about being spotted on radar". Thinking about this, if they don't care whether or not they are seen on radar, why go out somewhere where they know they won't be seen to commit suicide? What is the logic to this? Right now this makes me think suicide is not what they wanted.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Dale O. Beethe on March 17, 2014, 05:47:57 AM
I'd agree it would probably be easier to steal an old 727, but it looks as if someone has stolen this one, so it was obviously possible.  I hadn't considered stealing it for what's on it.  It would be interesting to know exactly what was aboard.

Well, Dale, being rated in the B727,  I respectfully disagree that at this point in time it is anything worth stealing. If it could fly 25% of the way of a 777 you might have a point. The Lockheed 10E could fly twice as far and still deliver a devastating nuclear payload.
The cargo carried on MH370 is certainly an interesting aspect. Suppose it was Gold enroute to China. Suppose clever Uighurs decided to stow away in the cargo compartment, then after takeoff access the main deck through the Mechanical Equipment Compartment. Aided by one of the flight crew, this could have developed into an interesting scenario....
Tim, I will readily defer to your knowledge of the B727 and the 777.  (My knowledge of piloting is limited to "Stick back, ground gets smaller.  Stick forward, ground gets bigger.")   My point was that regardless of now much easier it would be to steal another type, the fact that this particular 777 is missing says it was possible to steal it.  Time will tell as to what purpose it was taken for.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on March 17, 2014, 07:12:24 AM
Could the plane have traversed those air spaces without knowledge? Just curious.

Not without it showing up on military radar systems Greg. Unless it had stealth capabilities heavily armed reception committees would be sent up to investigate. Which makes the overland route look unlikely compared to the route over sea. Incidentally when it flew back over the Malaysian peninsula it was picked up by their military radar but no planes were sent to investigate unfortunately. Which beggars the question why have defence capabilities if you ignore what you see? If they had sent up a couple of planes to investigate the radar blip they probably wouldn't be searching for a missing Malaysian airliner a week later.





Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on March 17, 2014, 07:16:05 AM
Could the plane have traversed those air spaces without knowledge? Just curious.

Not without it showing up on military radar systems Greg.

Provided there were military radars systems in place.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Dale O. Beethe on March 17, 2014, 07:44:05 AM
And assuming they were operated competently and willingly.  Having served around a lot of other nation's military forces, I know it's a mistake to assume all other military forces are as competent (if at all) and as well led as ours are.  Some nations have outstanding military forces.  Many don't.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on March 17, 2014, 08:17:01 AM
China has the hardware for sure, Thailand as well.
The former Soviet Union republics of Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan inherited the formers air defence network in that area.
Whether any country will admit to allowing an unidentified aircraft fly through it's airspace without lifting a finger is seriously being questioned as you point out...

"It has also revived questions about why the Malaysian military did not immediately notice what was happening, and what gaps there might be more generally in military air defences in a region where the defence and security temperature is high at the moment.
It has now emerged that Malaysian primary military radar tracked an unidentified contact that flew right across the country's air space, now confirmed to be MH370. But no action, it seems, was taken."

Of course it is certainly a distinct possibility that the airplane was flown through a number of other countries airspace but, will those countries own up to not spotting it, or not doing anything about it if they did?





Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: manjeet aujla on March 17, 2014, 09:03:22 AM
@Jeffrey P.

What I meant was that if they were hijacking the plane, they would not plan on flying over Malaysian land, where they would know that military radar would see them. So that is a point  against it being a hijack. On a suicide mission, they would not care if they were seen by military radar.

On your good point on why they would go that way anyway, my thought is that since he/they were going on a suicide anyway, for whatever deranged reason, they wanted to inflict max damage by going south, as far as they could into the Indian Ocean (that is the southern route). That way they may never be found, inflicting further pain on those who had loved ones aboard.

The reasoning can be discussed ad infinitum, I suppose. But this is terrorism any way you put it, and these people do not show any considerations for innocents they may harm.


Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on March 17, 2014, 09:22:31 AM
Purely in terms of 'where'd it go' -

Probably moot to argue - the satillites almost certainly know.  Question is, how much will the masters of those devices say, and when will they be willing to say it?  To do so is still, even with Jane's, etc., to tip one's intelligence hand.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on March 17, 2014, 09:36:04 AM
But this is terrorism any way you put it, and these people do not show any considerations for innocents they may harm.

The purpose of terrorism is to terrorize to some political end.  This doesn't fit that definition - not yet anyway.  Mentally ill mass murders are not terrorists.  Or this could be Grand Theft Airplane for the purpose of obtaining something aboard the plane.  The passengers could be simply collateral damage.  No less despicable, but not "terrorism" per se.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: manjeet aujla on March 17, 2014, 04:45:06 PM
One of the earlier accounts had it that we were searching the Malacca Straits before anybody else, and that the USA prolly had the best idea of where this plane went, and so everybody else oughta just follow where the Americans were looking. With us involved at least there is a chance this plane will eventually be found.  Just today one of the guys (Rep King?) on a House Intelligence Subcommittee commented that it was looking more and more like a suicide crash into the southern Indian Ocean.

 
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Monty Fowler on March 17, 2014, 04:53:52 PM
[ ... Or this could be Grand Theft Airplane for the purpose of obtaining something aboard the plane.  The passengers could be simply collateral damage. 

Hmmm ... possible video game licensing opportunities?

Kidding! But I have to admit, stealing an entire airliner would probably rank right up there with the greatest thefts in recorded history. My money is still on the pilot or co-pilot turning it into a one-way flight.

LTM,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 CER
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Tim Mellon on March 17, 2014, 07:38:57 PM
Purely in terms of 'where'd it go' -

I started this thread suspecting Iran.

Now the Isrealis  (http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/03/17/missing-jet-iranian-threats-prompt-israel-to-tighten-air-security/) also suspect Iran.

I think I will trust...the Israelis in this matter.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Tim Mellon on March 17, 2014, 08:13:52 PM
I wouldn't assume it crashed.  What if some rogue nation or a terrorist group has a nuclear or biological weapon that it wants to use on the U.S. (presumably, since every problem in the world is evidently our fault) but no delivery system.  A long range airliner might be quite usable as a delivery system.  I'd say we'd best be extremely vigilant.

You mean on a mission such as is depicted below, Dale? Once over Saudi Arabia, I would doubt very much sophisticated radar coverage in most of Northern Africa. Then, across the Atlantic, a free pass.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Dale O. Beethe on March 17, 2014, 08:17:48 PM
Yes, Tim, something like that.  Scary stuff.  Hope we have people on that potentiality.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Tim Mellon on March 17, 2014, 08:23:47 PM
I worry as much about the Iranian ships 200 miles offshore, not to mention the containers shipped in by sea, the Airstream trailers from Canada, and the donkeys coming over our Southern boarder.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: George Lam on March 17, 2014, 08:28:10 PM
Summarizing what I've gathered from numerous sources...The purpose of the hourly satellite-to-plane "handshakes" is to allow the satellite to know the approximate location of the aircraft so that it can transmit any messages. For this, the satellite needs to know the angle of the aircraft from the satellite.  The satellite is around 22,000 miles in orbit, west of center of the Indean Ocean at the final "ping" moment, 8:11am.

An aircraft directly under the satellite would be at a 90 degree angle to the satellite and an aircraft at the poles would be at 0 degrees.

In the case of Malaysia Airlines 370, authorities have said, the last message sent was at 40 degrees.  Satellite and accident investigation experts have used that information to determine the possible location of the plane, somewhere in the vicinity of those red lines spanning from Northern Thailand to Southern Kazakhastan, or southern Indonesia to southern Indean Ocean.

If this information is correct and the satellite ping indication of the plane being at 40 degrees from it is correct, how can the plane be anywhere near Iran or adjacent middle east countries?  Could it have landed somewhere, refueled, and flown to the area of one of the red lines within that time frame?  I'm focused more on the northern red line, as the southern red line may point more towards intentional ditching at sea or pilot suicide as others have mentioned.

I have my reservations until more concrete evidence is found, but this is what we have to work with at this point.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Tim Mellon on March 17, 2014, 08:46:48 PM

If this information is correct and the satellite ping indication of the plane being at 40 degrees from it is correct, how can the plane be anywhere near Iran or adjacent middle east countries?

The 40o red circle does pass through Northwestern Iran (see attachment). And what is the accuracy of this satellite triangulation anyway, +/- 5o?
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: George Lam on March 17, 2014, 09:56:32 PM
All the news sources citing expert and professional analysis I've read through say the return signal from the plane only lies somewhere on those red lines, not the entire circle representing the 40 degree inclination from the satellite.  I'm sure there is an uncertainty factor, maybe 5 degrees, maybe less, but there is no mention of this tolerance.

I'm curious how they narrowed down the signal to only those two red segments of the circle.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: John Ousterhout on March 17, 2014, 11:34:14 PM
Don't confuse geosync satellite orbits (22,000 miles up) with Low Earth Orbits (200-600 miles up "spy" satellites).  Geo-sync are great for communications (your TV satellite antenna points at one), but poor for finding earth locations.  On the other hand, LEO orbits are great for getting earthly data, such as GPS signals and fuzzy camera pictures, but those satellites are only "overhead" for relatively short periods, and seemingly never in good camera range (for those few that actually carry cameras).  Despite what you see in movies, spy satellites don't get to see much as they zip overhead, and what they do get to look at is planned well in advance.  I'm sure that someone has checked to see if by chance any LEO satellite camera systems just happened to catch photos of flight 370, but it would be difficult to verify that was the aircraft they were actually seeing from as much as a few thousand miles away.
The saying I liked was "what you want is knowledge, but what you get is information."
Title: Malaysian Airlines Flight 370 on Nikumaroro?
Post by: Timothy Takemoto on March 18, 2014, 12:17:51 AM
With the tragic disappearance of Malaysian Airways Flight 370 in mind, like other's here, I could not help wondering where the aircraft could have disappeared to.

There has been some comment on the fact that the pilot (and another cabin crew member (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2582624/MH370-It-wasnt-just-captain-missing-Malaysian-airline-flight-simulator-similar-computer-software-home-belonging-member-cabin-crew.html)) both had home flight simulators. The police are analysing virtual flight path's for details.

(As anyone who is unlikely to have read my other (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,1201.msg25003.html#msg25003) two (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,1201.msg25082.html#msg25082) lame suggestions would know) I am interested in analysing images, and the obvious one to analyse now is the image shown behind the captain on his flight simulator (http://www.flickr.com/photos/nihonbunka/13233950623/), originally from a video posted by the pilot about how to repair an air conditioner (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qykj3FeG-p4&list=UUm6f3-wcpgLhxUR_ONPfoJA). 

It seems that behind him he has landed his virtual plane on a V-shaped strip of white land, which is at sea level and surrounded by ocean. My first thoughts were of beaches, sand banks and particularly isolated atolls such as Nikumaroro the rare angular atoll (https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Kuala+Lumpur,+Federal+Territory+of+Kuala+Lumpur,+Malaysia/Nikumaroro+Island,+Kiribati/@0.1177568,55.4764901,2z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m13!4m12!1m5!1m1!1s0x31cc49c701efeae7:0xf4d98e5b2f1c287d!2m2!1d101.686855!2d3.139003!1m5!1m1!1s0x706aec9cb3d9ad87:0xb09d9ed73197d6a2!2m2!1d-174.5195974!2d-4.6779191?hl=en) where Tighar hypothesises that Amelia Earhart landed her plane, and went unnoticed.

Isolated V-shaped atolls include Moruroa and Caroline island, both of which are even further away. Even to get to Nikumaroro whoever flew the plane would have needed to use ground effect.

Someone has already used the same software to simulate the landing on Nikumaroro and published a video of the simulation of the landing on Nikumaroro (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m7jh4okOXOU) here. I admit it looks very different. Good though.
Title: Re: Malaysian Airlines Flight 370 on Nikumaroro?
Post by: Bruce Thomas on March 18, 2014, 06:21:32 AM
Someone has already used the same software to simulate the landing on Nikumaroro and published a video of the simulation of the landing on Nikumaroro (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m7jh4okOXOU) here. I admit it looks very different. Good though.

No, that video does not simulate a landing on Nikumaroro. Looking at the final scene, one can discern the Coast Guard cutter sitting off-shore, and some imagined buildings and men waiting for AE to alight from her aircraft. These words, in German, appear on the screen, "Amelia Earhart hat dieses Eiland nie erreicht." Translation: "Amelia Earhart never reached this island." The simulated landing is NR16020 coming in to land on Howland Island.

Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on March 18, 2014, 06:40:14 AM
Purely in terms of 'where'd it go' -

I started this thread suspecting Iran.

Now the Isrealis  (http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/03/17/missing-jet-iranian-threats-prompt-israel-to-tighten-air-security/) also suspect Iran.

I think I will trust...the Israelis in this matter.

Good judgment, Tim - in fact, almost eery that you had that thought so early.  This thing does not seem to be over at all.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on March 18, 2014, 06:43:35 AM
But this is terrorism any way you put it, and these people do not show any considerations for innocents they may harm.

The purpose of terrorism is to terrorize to some political end.  This doesn't fit that definition - not yet anyway.  Mentally ill mass murders are not terrorists.  Or this could be Grand Theft Airplane for the purpose of obtaining something aboard the plane.  The passengers could be simply collateral damage.  No less despicable, but not "terrorism" per se.

It is looking more and more like your "not yet" statement has considerable weight; we appear to have grand larceny so far - probably throw in mass murder (assuming the thieves had no plans to feed all those passengers...), and of a 'deadly weapon' at that - with assault likely to follow.  IF they can get past now-highly alerted air defenses (not too likely).
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on March 18, 2014, 06:48:51 AM
I wouldn't assume it crashed.  What if some rogue nation or a terrorist group has a nuclear or biological weapon that it wants to use on the U.S. (presumably, since every problem in the world is evidently our fault) but no delivery system.  A long range airliner might be quite usable as a delivery system.  I'd say we'd best be extremely vigilant.

You mean on a mission such as is depicted below, Dale? Once over Saudi Arabia, I would doubt very much sophisticated radar coverage in most of Northern Africa. Then, across the Atlantic, a free pass.

The Saudi's have AWACS and no love of Tehran, and while north Africa and an Atlantic dash could be it, the low altitude needed for much of that is mileage-killing for any jet.

I suspect we should look to the east for this threat - may not be aimed at us here at all.  If Iran is involved, there are other shadowy routes to Tel Aviv.  I don't think the bird would ever make it across their border though - they could shade Doc Holliday in a bar fight.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: C.W. Herndon on March 18, 2014, 08:17:06 AM
Here is another interesting theory (http://mashable.com/2014/03/17/malaysia-airlines-escape-radar/) about what might have happened to Flight 370.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Tim Mellon on March 18, 2014, 02:01:45 PM
Here is another interesting theory (http://mashable.com/2014/03/17/malaysia-airlines-escape-radar/) about what might have happened to Flight 370.

This is, after all, the same method used by the US Coast Guard when tailing a drug-running aircraft:
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Tim Mellon on March 18, 2014, 02:15:52 PM
And that's about the shortest route to any point in Iran that they could hope for. Amazing.

It would also explain why MH370 descended to FL295 over the Strait of Malacca: SQ68 had leveled off at FL300 (see SQ68 Track Log below).
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: George Lam on March 18, 2014, 04:06:22 PM
...The amount of planning and secrecy if something like this "shadow" theory is actually what went down.  It is one of the more interesting and clever theories, I'll give it that.  Based on what info we have at the moment, I would put it up as one of the more plausible theories.  But still, it would have had to descend over its landing destination.  Wouldn't that be picked up on radar?  Unless the observing participants ignored it.

Still waiting... geez 10 days and I am really anxious to know the details.  Yet we've waited patiently 77 years for Amelia's story to unfold.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Dave McDaniel on March 18, 2014, 04:41:56 PM
Here is another interesting theory (http://mashable.com/2014/03/17/malaysia-airlines-escape-radar/) about what might have happened to Flight 370.
I would consider Mr. Ledgerwood's theory a very valid one if I were trying to conceal my position. It's a tactic that has been in use since WWI when submarines used it to infiltrate convoys and harbors. He's (Mr. Ledgerwood) is not thinking outside the box per se. But he's headed in the right direction and that's good. I would be very surprised if the powers that be weren't doing the same giving what the implications are IF it was an inflight take-over. Notice I didn't use the term "hijack".
 But before we go there, Crew incapacitation due to a pressurization problem coupled with a incomplete flight plan entered into the Flight Management System (FMS) would explain the course reversal and loss of communication. Most airlines use "canned flight plans" and the updating of the FMS database is a maintenance function not a pilot function. However, the pilots would be responsible for ensuring that the proper routing, including Lat/Lon's for each waypoint, were entered correctly off of the appropriate Nav chart. This is normally done well before the "Before Engine Start Checklist" is run. But checklist do get interrupted sometimes and items do get missed, or items get deferred until they are completed. In the latter, a prudent flight crew would either put the checklist on hold until the item was accomplished or the entire checklist would be re-read from the start. More than once I have called for a checklist (and there are many) to be re-run because I or the First Officer weren't sure or couldn't remember if an item was accomplished. Or if the checklist was even completed! These things happen when there are distractions or after a long day or late at night. Cockpit Vigilance and redundancy are what keep these errors to a minimum. But, say the crew got interrupted for some reason and the flight plan was only entered to the last known fix and the preceding flights flight plan was still loaded in the FMS. It would go to the next way-point, wherever that might be, even if the correct destination was entered. At this point in time we can't know what was actually programed into the FMS but I would look at where the aircraft had been previous to this flight. The first thing we were taught in the military when programing the Doppler or INS navigation systems was "BS in BS out." ...Occam's Razor.

 If you disregard every thing I said above, then the alternatives to that can't be good. Either we have a fleet of 777's operating world wide with a major problem that has just now presented it self (all the more important that we find it) or it was stolen for some purpose that will no doubt come to be known probably sooner than later.                     

 So let's take Mr. Ledgerwood's train of thought a little further and ask the question "How would you steal a modern airliner in todays world"? Well, it wouldn't be easy. It would take both a flight crew with intimate knowledge of the aircraft that went beyond what is taught in the typical systems curriculum at the "school house" and a ground crew. Not to mention a destination with the right real estate and support for such a mission. I say "Mission" because it would have to be conceived as one. It would take more than just a rogue flight crew to accomplish this. Pretty obvious! Whoever planed this most likely had a military background or had access to this type of training. Sometimes The Freedom of Information Act can shoot us in the foot. Sometimes documents are declassified that shouldn't be, sometimes training material is not even considered Confidential when IMO it should be classified much higher in this day and age.
 So I'm not going to divulge any information that might aid someone with bad intensions but I will point out some things that I see as being maybe not so obvious or parallels some of the training I have received.
 First, I'm sure that Woody and possibly Ric would know what I mean by the term "reverse planning sequence" and what detailed planning that entails and the protocols that are followed. If this is in fact a covert operation by the bad guys they seemed to have followed the plan to perfection. It has all the ear-marks. Perfect timing, coordination, logistics and the means both financially and personnel wise. Follow the money. Don't expect to get any (correct) information from anyone directly involved with the mission. Compartmentalization.
 Second, Electronic Countermeasures. What! on an airliner? Yes, of sorts. ACARS. The airlines are very protective of this system. They use it for a lot of things. If a crew wants a personal conversation with the Chief Pilot just try resetting the ACARS clock to match your "out" time to your scheduled departure time because the cabin crew didn't get the door closed on time, that's a perfect way to do it. Pulling the power circuit breaker will probably get the flight crew time on the beach or worse. They are that protective of it for obvious reasons. They don't teach pilots how to disable it or tamper with it in anyway. Other than how to use the control head an navigate the various menu's it's not a subject that is discussed other than it has it's own separate transceiver, usually the #3 VHF radio in the aircraft I have flown. Only someone with specific maintenance knowledge would know how totally disable it. This is the unit responsible for the "pings" sent to the satellites so prevalent in the media. So how can it be used as a electronic countermeasure? Read on.
 Third, Flight profile. Mr. Ledgerwood's theory is a good one if you are trying to evade radar interception. Other things to consider if you are trying to avoid detection is to turn off all but passive systems on the aircraft. This would include all radios, Radar and the FMS because it uses GPS for navigation. What better way to navigate over a ocean on a dark night than flying formation with another aircraft going your way? I bet even I could do that.
 Fourth, Deception. The perpetrators know where they are, where they are going and you don't. Big sky. Big ocean. Little airplane, in perspective. They have you so confused at this point you don't even know what ocean to search in. Or more correctly, which continent. Everyone is searching in a radius of what they think is the maximum range of what the fuel load would support. Logical. Not if you are trying to extend your fuel to the max limit. Shutting down one engine will extend the range by a good percentage. All one would have to do is consult the "driftdown" charts for the aircraft weight and outside air temp and descend to the best single engine cruise altitude for that segment of the flight. Good weather, no ice and they can start it up whenever they need it. They would pay a  price in speed and the engine would most likely be run at max continuous power to hold that altitude but as fuel burned off they would have the option of either maintaining that altitude and pulling the power back or climbing higher for a better fuel burn and a higher Mach number. So now all they have to do is convince the SAR folks that they ran out of fuel about the time they thought they would. Easy enough, disable the ACARS completely via the transmitter itself at the approximate time that fuel exhaustion was expected. No more "pings" and the aircraft is considered down well short of where it actually is. If they are smart enough to get this far, they had this figured out long before their mission got underway. I really hope I'm wrong about all of this. 

 In either of these scenarios, it's a tragedy. My heart goes out to the families and loved ones of those souls lost. God's speed to the SAR teams and those in the investigative communities that are trying to find a answer.

LTM,
Dave   
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Tim Mellon on March 18, 2014, 04:49:59 PM
But still, it would have had to descend over its landing destination.  Wouldn't that be picked up on radar?  Unless the observing participants ignored it.


Or were expecting the arrival, with open arms....
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Tim Mellon on March 18, 2014, 05:32:26 PM
My guess is that it wasn't really that difficult to reprogram the FMS:

Step 1 - Before IGARI, enter the next waypoint as VAMPI;

Step 2 - on the way to VAMPI, enter the rest of the route, viz. VAMPI N571 LAGOG N877 PRA A325 KE P757 PG UL124 PEKES UL125 TBZ UR660 DASIS. That will get you to the far end of Iran. Drop out anytime before that point, if you want.

This route is probably a canned route for most airlines flying from South Asia to Europe, or could have been produced by Jepesen or Universal as the most efficient route for that day. All I did was back-plan it from the actual flight path flown by SQ68 on that night. The perpetrators might have had someone in Singapore listening to Clearance Delivery and then passing on the clearance by phone.

Entering this data on my Honeywell GNS-XLS would take no more than three minutes.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeffrey Pearce on March 18, 2014, 05:44:44 PM
What is the time of day of the last heard transmission-I don't mean voice-that is identified as coming from the missing plane? What is known or can be estimated about the time of day when the plane landed. This assumes that it did land.

Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Tim Mellon on March 18, 2014, 07:30:41 PM
What is the time of day of the last heard transmission-I don't mean voice-that is identified as coming from the missing plane? What is known or can be estimated about the time of day when the plane landed. This assumes that it did land.

Aircraft took off at roughly 12:30 AM (1630Z), flew for roughly 7.5 hours Westward. That would mean landing 8 AM Kuala Lumpur time  (0000Z), or if in Iran 3:30 AM. Middle of the night.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: George Lam on March 18, 2014, 07:43:48 PM
I don't recall reading anywhere that the plane flew the entire 7.5 hours westward.  The only data suggesting a possible 8:11am location (Kuala Lumpur time) that has been released to the public lies somewhere on those red semi-circles within the 40 degree angle from which the satellite read the returning ping of the 777. 

That's where the Ledgerwood "shadow" theory and the released data conflict.  I'm still open to all possibilities. 
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Tim Mellon on March 18, 2014, 07:54:16 PM
I don't recall reading anywhere that the plane flew the entire 7.5 hours westward.  The only data suggesting a possible 8:11am location (Kuala Lumpur time) that has been released to the public lies somewhere on those red semi-circles within the 40 degree angle from which the satellite read the returning ping of the 777. 

That's where the Ledgerwood "shadow" theory and the released data conflict.  I'm still open to all possibilities.

You should note, Greg, that DASIS intersection (on the route I described) is very close to the 40o circle from the satellite. The red band ends East of there, but only due to the estimate of the fuel quantities uplifted by MH370.

Direct route between VAMPI and DASIS is 3483.2 nautical miles, approximately 7 hours at 500 knots. Add the hour getting to VAMPI, and you're at 8 hours. If MH370 broke off before DASIS you would have to adjust downwards. I would assume these folks took off with enough fuel to get to where they wanted to go.

Roughly the last two hours of that flight would have been over Iranian territory. No doubt there are quite a few secluded airfields (i.e. military) available for their landing.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on March 18, 2014, 08:20:32 PM
Why Iran? How crazy would Iran have to be to use the airplane as a weapon against Israel or the U.S.?
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Tim Mellon on March 18, 2014, 08:48:58 PM
Why Iran? How crazy would Iran have to be to use the airplane as a weapon against Israel or the U.S.?

Well, Ric, the U.S. is only the Great Satan.

Iran has repeatedly vowed to vaporize the State of Israel.

To answer your question: Extremely.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: John Ousterhout on March 18, 2014, 09:20:06 PM
Why steal a dinky 777 when Iran already has  big 747's (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air), as well as  (Tupolev's and Airbuses (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahan_Air)?  If Iran wanted to fill an airliner with explosives and fly it into Israel, they've already got some.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: manjeet aujla on March 18, 2014, 09:59:01 PM
Ric G. and AE are mentioned in this article.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/18/missing-malaysia-plane_n_4989725.html
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: manjeet aujla on March 18, 2014, 10:10:59 PM
Well, the Inmarsat sats will have had 5-6 readings before the 8:11am one, and those are prolly known (hopefully) by the Malaysians.  Those are one of the strongest known 'facts' that can be relied on. So the maldives sighting seemingly does not sound credible as it does not plot on the last Inmarsat semi-circle.

Another ex-777 pilot is quoted as saying that if the pilot took it to the south, and plunged into the ocean at 6-700 knots, the plane pieces will be the size of postage stamps.

The malaysians are being idiots by not formally asking the US for help.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Greg Daspit on March 18, 2014, 10:34:27 PM
Why steal a dinky 777 when Iran already has  big 747's (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air), as well as  (Tupolev's and Airbuses (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahan_Air)?  If Iran wanted to fill an airliner with explosives and fly it into Israel, they've already got some.
Good point
I don't think the plane could make it there to begin with, and it doesn't make sense for any state doing this to have the plane fly to their own country and implicate themselves. Especially on a course over so much land of other countries with radar and a billion people
I'm starting to think something affected the crew's mental abilities. Dry cell batteries burning (http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/002805.htm) may cause mental ability problems and possibly a later fire, crossover short circuits or electrical cascade failures
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Brad Mackey on March 18, 2014, 10:52:44 PM
After reading many articles on this disappearance I can't help but think about how the easy answer that the 777 crashed in the deep part of the ocean was the popular answer by many.  It makes you think about what the first theories were in the A.E. disappearance and the public reaction to those theories.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Tim Mellon on March 19, 2014, 12:44:33 AM
Why steal a dinky 777 when Iran already has  big 747's (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air), as well as  (Tupolev's and Airbuses (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahan_Air)?  If Iran wanted to fill an airliner with explosives and fly it into Israel, they've already got some.


PAX (http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/465557/Malaysian-plane-20-on-board-worked-for-ELECTRONIC-WARFARE-and-radar-defence-company)?
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Tim Gard on March 19, 2014, 02:23:31 AM
After reading many articles on this disappearance I can't help but think about how the easy answer that the 777 crashed in the deep part of the ocean was the popular answer by many.  It makes you think about what the first theories were in the A.E. disappearance and the public reaction to those theories.

Might they be that the radio messages continuously emerging from the Phoenix Islands group in an area near Gardner Island should be investigated as a priority as reflected by the newspaper headlines of the week of Jul 2nd 1937?



Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ken Nielsen on March 19, 2014, 04:31:02 AM
With or without Iranian involvement, the human cargo carried by the plane would probably be of greater value than the plane itself. A large number of Chinese nationals and some Americans thrown in would provide Uighur separatists and other Muslim militants with hostages for extortion and graphic online videos for a long time.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on March 19, 2014, 04:53:46 AM
And the 227 passengers, are they temporarily or permanently incapacitated? No communication from them at all via their mobile phones.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Kevin Weeks on March 19, 2014, 05:46:50 AM
And the 227 passengers, are they temporarily or permanently incapacitated? No communication from them at all via their mobile phones.

this and the plane's navigation systems got me thinking. Your phone can be tracked via gps as long as it is on. if the pilots were using their planes navigation systems would that not also have a similar GPS link?
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on March 19, 2014, 06:15:11 AM
The point I was trying to make Kevin was that someone/persons went to a lot of trouble to shut down all of the systems that could track the plane but, as you mention, the passengers mobile phones? Did the someone/persons go to the rear of the plane to collect/force passengers to switch off all mobile phones? Do that while flying the plane at the same time, on your own? Would the passengers not be a little suspicious?
A very strange disappearance indeed.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on March 19, 2014, 06:28:05 AM
Why steal a dinky 777 when Iran already has  big 747's (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air), as well as  (Tupolev's and Airbuses (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahan_Air)?  If Iran wanted to fill an airliner with explosives and fly it into Israel, they've already got some.

Deniability.

As to 'dinky', the triple seven starts at 660,000 pounds and variants go as high as 775,000 pounds - into A-340 and 747 territory.  It is also rated for up to 440 passengers (a function of emergency exit capabilities, not practicality).  Far from 'dinky', it's an impressively large beast, no question about it.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on March 19, 2014, 06:38:01 AM
With or without Iranian involvement, the human cargo carried by the plane would probably be of greater value than the plane itself. A large number of Chinese nationals and some Americans thrown in would provide Uighur separatists and other Muslim militants with hostages for extortion and graphic online videos for a long time.

20 of those passengers were high-tech types from one peculiar company, not without value.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on March 19, 2014, 06:49:05 AM
And the 227 passengers, are they temporarily or permanently incapacitated? No communication from them at all via their mobile phones.

this and the plane's navigation systems got me thinking. Your phone can be tracked via gps as long as it is on. if the pilots were using their planes navigation systems would that not also have a similar GPS link?

Remember the excursion to high altitude.  There's a problem with cabin exposure to altitudes above 40K feet for any length of time - incapacitation usually followed by death unless immediate support.  This is a huge certification barrier that typically limits ceilings because emergency decent modes have to accounted for as part of recovery.  At least one flight crew member (pilot) is supposed to pull oxygen all the time above 40K for this reason, to offset in case of such an event.

Point being, not a huge deal to depressurize tha cattle car and put a bunch of people to sleep, for good if some fiend really wanted to do it... even if they did get masks on after teh event they aren't likely to recover well unless the cabin altitude drops rapidly to something around 20K or lower.  Has to do with blood / oxygen saturation and recovery time / gas pressures above 40K and what they do to the human being.  But a pilot pulling oxygen the whole time will probably do fine.

And with any luck, all the phones were very compliantly put into 'airplane mode' or turned off before take-off...
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Steve Lee on March 19, 2014, 07:08:47 AM
All the news sources citing expert and professional analysis I've read through say the return signal from the plane only lies somewhere on those red lines, not the entire circle representing the 40 degree inclination from the satellite.  I'm sure there is an uncertainty factor, maybe 5 degrees, maybe less, but there is no mention of this tolerance.

I'm curious how they narrowed down the signal to only those two red segments of the circle.
It is my understanding the line was determined by how long the signal took to travel, and they determined the distance the signal could cover in that time and calculated the circle that the distance crossed the earth. The satellite wasn't intended to locate the plane or any angle of the plane.
They eliminated the west half of the circle because it was out of range and part of the center of the east side of the circle because it was covered by radar.

Does crossing that line at the time it did still give the plane enough fuel to reach Iran?
The line on the map posted (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,1454.msg30713.html#msg30713) stops before it gets to Iran and they said the west half of the circle is out of range. I think the "range" is by time. In other words it couldn't get there in that time but does it still have enough fuel to reach Iran if it crosses that line at that time?

If I understand it the INMARSAT pings were hourly but we've only seen the arc for the final ping at 8:11. If there is similar data for previous pings, that data would provide valuable clues about the course of the plane. So, has it been stated that there is no previous satellite ping data for the plane, or is this data being withheld for some reason?

Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on March 19, 2014, 08:06:15 AM
Good point about the trip up to 40,000 ft + and the possible attempt to render the passengers
Unconscious, permanently or temporarily Jeff. That would explain why the 35+ business class satellite phones were not used to report the strange/missing flight path displayed on the in-flight tracking mode on the passengers screens. I think it was mentioned in the show that Ric appeared in regarding the handling characteristics of the plane at such an extreme altitude at that all up weight, plus or minus 10 Knots was mentioned being the difference of being in control or in a lot of trouble.



Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Kevin Weeks on March 19, 2014, 08:13:09 AM
Good point about the trip up to 40,000 ft + and the possible attempt to render the passengers
Unconscious, permanently or temporarily Jeff. That would explain why the 35+ business class satellite phones were not used to report the strange/missing flight path displayed on the in-flight tracking mode on the passengers screens. I think it was mentioned in the show that Ric appeared in regarding the handling characteristics of the plane at such an extreme altitude at that all up weight, plus or minus 10 Knots was mentioned being the difference of being in control or in a lot of trouble.

I can imagine it would be. the U2 spy plane had a very marginal difference between it's cruise speed and stall speed when at altitude.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on March 19, 2014, 08:13:45 AM
All the news sources citing expert and professional analysis I've read through say the return signal from the plane only lies somewhere on those red lines, not the entire circle representing the 40 degree inclination from the satellite.  I'm sure there is an uncertainty factor, maybe 5 degrees, maybe less, but there is no mention of this tolerance.

I'm curious how they narrowed down the signal to only those two red segments of the circle.
It is my understanding the line was determined by how long the signal took to travel, and they determined the distance the signal could cover in that time and calculated the circle that the distance crossed the earth. The satellite wasn't intended to locate the plane or any angle of the plane.
They eliminated the west half of the circle because it was out of range and part of the center of the east side of the circle because it was covered by radar.

Does crossing that line at the time it did still give the plane enough fuel to reach Iran?
The line on the map posted (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,1454.msg30713.html#msg30713) stops before it gets to Iran and they said the west half of the circle is out of range. I think the "range" is by time. In other words it couldn't get there in that time but does it still have enough fuel to reach Iran if it crosses that line at that time?

If I understand it the INMARSAT pings were hourly but we've only seen the arc for the final ping at 8:11. If there is similar data for previous pings, that data would provide valuable clues about the course of the plane. So, has it been stated that there is no previous satellite ping data for the plane, or is this data being withheld for some reason?

Good point, Steve.

If I had to guess I'd say we've seen nothing like the full data yet, and probably never will.  But I'd also bet someone is gathering it, and at least two strong candidates exist for having that capability (and motive) - US (as in "U.S.") and likely Israel, who have a knack for gaining such information.  I would also bet India knows more than is being broadcast.

Every tidbit that can be gleaned is no doubt going onto someone's 'spreadsheet' and better than even somebody already has strong notions of where this bird went to earth.  Us mere mortals probably won't know until it's either in the hunter's sack, or launched for some bad purpose (which I doubt will succeed).

Further thoughts on this thing -

IF this plane is intended for bad use, it unfortunately does not have to consummate that plan for the perpetrators to have succeeded in large fashion already: they've proven they can steal a plane and muscle it through the aviation web, albeit in an aviation backwater of course, at least compared to western standards.   They've also managed to get major attention from authorities in every nation worth considering - publicly tying up resources and raising awareness about the limitations of governments in protecting and controlling all things important. 

All that while ripping off capitalist enterprise and digging spurs into the mindset on transportation safety, not a bad day if one is a bad guy.  "It can happen to you" is possibly the intended message in some master-mind's head, no matter how this goes next.

It seems aimed at the human propensity for clining to near-superstition, although there can be practical concerns, no doubt.  Think of it - odd similarity perhaps to the Earhart loss in a peculiar way - what was the public sentiment about long-range landplane flight over water for years after the Earhart loss?  Was she really such an abberant footnote, or did she imprint a particular notion on the public's mind about core aviation capabilities?  In her time, convention held that safety was realized in the form of lumbering seaplanes plying those routes and I will suggest that were it not for the realities of WWII, landplane sea crossings might not have become so common so quickly in the next decade. 

But did the Earhart loss have anything to do with that mindset?  Not sure that's clear - WWII overrode many things.  And it's hard for me to fear Flight 370's fate - as a Delta frequent flyer seldom going further east than Tel Aviv, I don't relate that well to whatever risk may lie in flying on the carrier of an emerging nation in a relative backwater.  I just sent my son to Germany yesterday on a Delta flight, a nice 767, and with nary a perilous thought.  But had someone suggested to me in say, August of 1937, that I board a twin-engined landplane to fly over the ocean, I don't know... and were I invited to fly from Malaysia to China aboard the former country's flag carrier right now... hmmm.  I guess that's what landed this string where it is.

And I guess I'd want to know finally who had analyzed all the data that must be 'out there' to the satisfaction of those who can best guarantee improvements to the system - and my safety.  I'd bet it is being gathered and will eventually sift-down into some good intelligence that gets laid before us in some form.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Tim Mellon on March 19, 2014, 08:41:17 AM
Good point about the trip up to 40,000 ft + and the possible attempt to render the passengers
Unconscious, permanently or temporarily Jeff. That would explain why the 35+ business class satellite phones were not used to report the strange/missing flight path displayed on the in-flight tracking mode on the passengers screens. I think it was mentioned in the show that Ric appeared in regarding the handling characteristics of the plane at such an extreme altitude at that all up weight, plus or minus 10 Knots was mentioned being the difference of being in control or in a lot of trouble.

Jeff, a few points:

1. The Service Ceiling of the B777-200ER is 43,100 feet; the aircraft is fully controllable within a range of speed up to that altitude, the range depending on its gross weight.

2. If the cockpit crew turned off the transponder, I'm sure they also had the foresight to turn off the in-flight following mode on the TVs.

3. As the aircraft was over water at the time of the diversion (near IGARI intersection), I doubt there was any cell coverage at all, being over 100 NM from land. Even passing Westward over the Isthmus near the Thai boarder, the aircraft would have been in cell range for only a very short period, because the land there is very narrow. And many cell phones couldn't communicate anyway due to the altitude.

4. An excursion up to 40,000 feet would hardly affect cabin pressure at all, as the aircraft can maintain an eight inch differential compared to ambient pressure all the way up to its Service Ceiling. Maybe the pilot jockeyed the plane so as to force passengers to remain seated and belted due to induced "turbulance".
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Tim Mellon on March 19, 2014, 08:49:40 AM
If I understand it the INMARSAT pings were hourly but we've only seen the arc for the final ping at 8:11. If there is similar data for previous pings, that data would provide valuable clues about the course of the plane. So, has it been stated that there is no previous satellite ping data for the plane, or is this data being withheld for some reason?

Steve, do you think, maybe, that if those intermediate pings showed a steeper angle because the aircraft was on the same route as the Singapore Airline Flight 68, and that it implied that the aircraft was flying over India and Pakistan, that those countries would be a tad unhappy that a rogue could be passing overhead, but there was no way to detect its position in order to remove it as a threat?
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Tim Mellon on March 19, 2014, 08:59:11 AM
And the 227 passengers, are they temporarily or permanently incapacitated? No communication from them at all via their mobile phones.

this and the plane's navigation systems got me thinking. Your phone can be tracked via gps as long as it is on. if the pilots were using their planes navigation systems would that not also have a similar GPS link?

GPS signals are one-way, inbound to a cellphone receiver. The position of the receiver is calculated by the receiver and then retransmitted on another frequency, usually to a cell tower. If there are no cell towers, then the signal disappears into the ether.

The aircraft GPS does not re-transmit the position if the ACARS is rendered inoperative. The calculated position is used only to navigate the aircraft using the auto-pilot.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Tim Mellon on March 19, 2014, 09:21:10 AM

IF this plane is intended for bad use, it unfortunately does not have to consummate that plan for the perpetrators to have succeeded in large fashion already: they've proven they can steal a plane and muscle it through the aviation web, albeit in an aviation backwater of course, at least compared to western standards.   They've also managed to get major attention from authorities in every nation worth considering - publicly tying up resources and raising awareness about the limitations of governments in protecting and controlling all things important. 

Jeff, this snapshot taken moments ago. Doesn't really look like an "aviation backwater" to me, even by Western standards.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on March 19, 2014, 10:12:50 AM
Good point about the trip up to 40,000 ft + and the possible attempt to render the passengers
Unconscious, permanently or temporarily Jeff. That would explain why the 35+ business class satellite phones were not used to report the strange/missing flight path displayed on the in-flight tracking mode on the passengers screens. I think it was mentioned in the show that Ric appeared in regarding the handling characteristics of the plane at such an extreme altitude at that all up weight, plus or minus 10 Knots was mentioned being the difference of being in control or in a lot of trouble.

Jeff, a few points:

1. The Service Ceiling of the B777-200ER is 43,100 feet; the aircraft is fully controllable within a range of speed up to that altitude, the range depending on its gross weight.

2. If the cockpit crew turned off the transponder, I'm sure they also had the foresight to turn off the in-flight following mode on the TVs.

3. As the aircraft was over water at the time of the diversion (near IGARI intersection), I doubt there was any cell coverage at all, being over 100 NM from land. Even passing Westward over the Isthmus near the Thai boarder, the aircraft would have been in cell range for only a very short period, because the land there is very narrow. And many cell phones couldn't communicate anyway due to the altitude.

4. An excursion up to 40,000 feet would hardly affect cabin pressure at all, as the aircraft can maintain an eight inch differential compared to ambient pressure all the way up to its Service Ceiling. Maybe the pilot jockeyed the plane so as to force passengers to remain seated and belted due to induced "turbulance".

Service ceiling these days is typically more dictated by the cabin limits (assumes rotor burst / catastrophic decompression) and recovery time through emergency descent; it is the airplane's ability to reach 20K (give or take) within a time limit and an assumed rate of leakage (rapid / nearly instant in this scenario) that constrains altitude, not generally handling qualities as in the old days.  This became most pronounced recently by the 787 effort - Boeing did not get the altitude they wanted by a longshot because of emergency descent time constraints.

What we are talking about (hypothetically) is an induced event - which could be made to happen slowly, not necessarily rapidly.  While the cabin 'can' maintain altitude as you point out, we're really talking about 'making' it do 'otherwise', i.e. creeping it up to a high enough figure (high cabin altitude / low pressure) such that its 'lights out' for the oblivious passengers.

As to effects 'up to' 40K, they are adequate to do this; anything above 40K just adds assurance of 'lights out'.  It is an extreme.  For some reason I thought there was an excursion to as high as 45K on that flight but maybe I misread or misheard, there's been so much floating around it is hard to say.  Had the flight done so, I was simply conjecturing this as a reason - a way for an evil-bent pilot to ensure his cattle were sleeping in the back.

Cabin entertainment stuff fails all the time so no big deal to kick that off; it typically feeds off an ARINC bus from the avionics, so if transponder ADS-B Out stuff is disabled, so likely is the moving map in the cabin (or so the crew can make it be, easily enough, by as you point out, simply disabling the cabin stuff).

Cellular 'out of range' is a good thought, hard to say for how long though.  Maybe there were accomplices who went through the cabin like train robbers, taking cell phones up...

Don't know.  Just an interesting schmorgasboard of possibilities and some very eery pointers in the bag already.  Everything I say is conjecture, of course - I don't have hard answers.  Maybe it is even wrong to go there - it is speculation and as a hard rule we don't do that where 'accidents' are concerned, but this doesn't smell like an accident, so far...
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on March 19, 2014, 10:15:18 AM
If I understand it the INMARSAT pings were hourly but we've only seen the arc for the final ping at 8:11. If there is similar data for previous pings, that data would provide valuable clues about the course of the plane. So, has it been stated that there is no previous satellite ping data for the plane, or is this data being withheld for some reason?

Steve, do you think, maybe, that if those intermediate pings showed a steeper angle because the aircraft was on the same route as the Singapore Airline Flight 68, and that it implied that the aircraft was flying over India and Pakistan, that those countries would be a tad unhappy that a rogue could be passing overhead, but there was no way to detect its position in order to remove it as a threat?

Not to answer for Steve, but I doubt they'd of noticed this real-time.  By the time alerted to possibility and perhaps found it, hours or days too late to act.

Then 'what to do' about sharing 'what they know' - all tend toward paranoia about tipping hand on capabilities (or lack of).
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on March 19, 2014, 10:21:40 AM

IF this plane is intended for bad use, it unfortunately does not have to consummate that plan for the perpetrators to have succeeded in large fashion already: they've proven they can steal a plane and muscle it through the aviation web, albeit in an aviation backwater of course, at least compared to western standards.   They've also managed to get major attention from authorities in every nation worth considering - publicly tying up resources and raising awareness about the limitations of governments in protecting and controlling all things important. 

Jeff, this snapshot taken moments ago. Doesn't really look like an "aviation backwater" to me, even by Western standards.

In terms of 'traffic', I agree.  In terms of sophistication and alliance between parties to understand deviant behavior, I disagree.  That part of the world is relatively asleep at night compared to the north Atlantic corridor, Pacific rim, north America and the EU. 

So when I speak of 'aviation backwater' I mean in full context, not just 'how much traffic / how much aviation', but 'how sophisticated and able the entire aviation complex is'.  If you doubt me, just listen to the news emerging daily as a stage of clowns awkwardly releases odd tidbits of information and revises and revisits - it is taking a long time for them to get even the basic story straight.  I suggest that is because it was relatively easy to catch that part of the world with its aviation britches down, compared to some other places.

Try this stunt over the north Atlantic... you couldn't make a 172 disappear so easily.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: manjeet aujla on March 19, 2014, 01:00:19 PM
Jeff, it has been about 25 years since I was briefly doing comm, nav and surveillance (cns)systems for oceanic flights over the north atlantic at the start of my engineering career... but back then, on planes flying to Europe, there was limited or practically no CNS once you were a bit away from the boston area, until one got into range to ireland. So planes had to be spread out, as ATC was not sure exactly where they were over the north atlantic.

Now there is widespread GPS (for nav and surv), ACARS (both of which can be shut off) and Inmarsat are still there.  I am not upto what other comm they have now - definately sat I think. But I think all these can be shutoff by a hijacker, like on this ML flight (except Inmarsat). That leaves primary surv via sats only if plane is hijacked.  And I am not upto how widespread their use is by ATC ( the FAA was  v. very conservative to change). Even with that, a rogue pilot is the biggest nightmare, and practically unstoppable.
 That makes this thing so scary.

We are prolly the only ones who may have sat surveillance over the south indian ocean area ... and the malaysians still have not asked formally for our assistance. And these are the same guys who knew the same day that it had shown up on their mil radar, and let the search continue in the wrong place for the next 5-6 days. Unbelievable. That would never happen here.

The Inmarsat data is the most important and reliable, imo. With the several pings they have, including the final one at 8:11,they should be able to plot the likely course(s), with flight speed, concentric ping radii circles, fuel etc. calculations and search within likely areas. 
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on March 19, 2014, 01:09:42 PM
Out of curiosity, what would happen if the plane landed but the engines were left running so that "pings" continued?  Would that create the illusion that the plane was still in flight, leading searchers off on a wild goos chase?
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Tim Mellon on March 19, 2014, 01:27:43 PM
Out of curiosity, what would happen if the plane landed but the engines were left running so that "pings" continued?  Would that create the illusion that the plane was still in flight, leading searchers off on a wild goos chase?

I think the APU would be sufficient to power the necessary busses, almost indefinitely. But at what point, considering the initial fuel load, does this ruse become absurd? Especially if the angle measured by Inmarsat remains constant over time.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Tim Mellon on March 19, 2014, 01:39:00 PM
I am not upto what other comm they have now - definately sat I think.

CPDLC (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CCcQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FController%25E2%2580%2593pilot_data_link_communications&ei=DfEpU6GSBJLiyAGn5ICwCA&usg=AFQjCNEtbP87F7F0JH9F9XLeZeemEcPrHg&bvm=bv.62922401,d.aWc) is now widely in use over the North Atlantic and parts of Northern Europe. No doubt it will be obligatory in the not-to-distant future for all aircraft flying in RVSM airspace.

Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Tim Mellon on March 19, 2014, 01:41:45 PM

The Inmarsat data is the most important and reliable, imo. With the several pings they have, including the final one at 8:11,they should be able to plot the likely course(s), with flight speed, concentric ping radii circles, fuel etc. calculations and search within likely areas.

You'd think. But who's going to tell India that they muffed it?
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on March 19, 2014, 01:47:27 PM
But at what point, considering the initial fuel load, does this ruse become absurd? Especially if the angle measured by Inmarsat remains constant over time.

You cut it off at the time of fuel exhaustion if the plane had remained in flight. If I understand it correctly, a constant angle measured by Inmarsat would not necessarily indicate that the plane was in a stationary position.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: manjeet aujla on March 19, 2014, 01:48:59 PM
If they landed and let the pings continue, the arc of possible locations would be constant. In other words, there would be only one arc.

Then, one could conclude that a) they had landed somewhere on the arc, and if the pings were all constant from the first one, one could figure out where they were by how long they had flown. So not a good option for the hijackers. But b) if they had planned this to the nth degree, the hijackers could calculate the 'arc' to where they were headed, and fly along it to their destination. That way they would give the searchers the illusion that they had landed, while they had actually gone far away, along the arc. And with a simple onboard GPS, this flying along an arc would be easy to do, all else being taken care of for eg. evading radar.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on March 19, 2014, 02:03:28 PM
Jeff, it has been about 25 years since I was briefly doing comm, nav and surveillance (cns)systems for oceanic flights over the north atlantic at the start of my engineering career... but back then, on planes flying to Europe, there was limited or practically no CNS once you were a bit away from the boston area, until one got into range to ireland. So planes had to be spread out, as ATC was not sure exactly where they were over the north atlantic.

Now there is widespread GPS (for nav and surv), ACARS (both of which can be shut off) and Inmarsat are still there.  I am not upto what other comm they have now - definately sat I think. But I think all these can be shutoff by a hijacker, like on this ML flight (except Inmarsat). That leaves primary surv via sats only if plane is hijacked.  And I am not upto how widespread their use is by ATC ( the FAA was  v. very conservative to change). Even with that, a rogue pilot is the biggest nightmare, and practically unstoppable.
 That makes this thing so scary.

We are prolly the only ones who may have sat surveillance over the south indian ocean area ... and the malaysians still have not asked formally for our assistance. And these are the same guys who knew the same day that it had shown up on their mil radar, and let the search continue in the wrong place for the next 5-6 days. Unbelievable. That would never happen here.

The Inmarsat data is the most important and reliable, imo. With the several pings they have, including the final one at 8:11,they should be able to plot the likely course(s), with flight speed, concentric ping radii circles, fuel etc. calculations and search within likely areas.

You sort of underscore my thoughts, Manjeet - and no offense was intended toward any sector - please consider:

A large part of the difference as I see it is exactly what you cite with Malaysia's hesitation.

I gather by "we" you mean India - for whom I have the greatest respect as to technical capability.  That was not part of my thinking on 'backwater' - it has more to do with how the region behaves nation-to-nation and the relative disparities there among nations as to specific capabilities.  In terms of a swift, competent response, he U.S. calling on the U.K. or France for help in a situation like this would be one thing, I believe; India, for instance, doing the same of Malaysia or Thailand would be altogether another - would that be a fair belief?  Not that India wouldn't help Malaysia quite competently with whatever she has - but as you've pointed out...

That's a large part of the net that I see missing in that part of the world compared to northern hemisphere / western-allied nations - it is not just about technical resources.

Well agree a rogue pilot is a nightmare anywhere.  Didn't we have a 767 pile into the Atlantic in the hands of a transport pilot some years ago for that reason?  All the detection in the world cannot stop that.  But as to stealing a transport and getting away with it (if that is what happened) - a very different matter.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: manjeet aujla on March 19, 2014, 02:11:09 PM
I looked up CPDLC quickly and the whole thing brought back memories of multiple meetings of FAA, ICAO, FANS groups etc. This datalink system was the hot topic back then, and ALL the airlines, FAA people insisted that voice should always be available no matter what/how data links were used. Good they have some sort of implementation. And it seems to be primarily Inmarsat data links- not surprised. They had been doing this with ships for a while, and had the most experience, and more important to the industry - most credibility.

Inmarsat wanted to implement a different modulation scheme (for satellite transmission) for the airline system, and as a contractor, I was charged with technically evaluating it. When talking to me about it, the FAA/ICAO guys (who were nontechnical people and primarily managers and administrators) would refer to it as the 'squiggles in the air'.... lol.

Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: manjeet aujla on March 19, 2014, 02:14:49 PM
@Jeff.

By 'we', I mean the USA. I have been a citizen for nearly 30 years.  :)
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: manjeet aujla on March 19, 2014, 02:26:44 PM
@Jeff.

I don't what the politics is back there anymore, but Yes, it is fair to say they would have different considerations in helping each other, than say from the British and us. This degree of cooperation changes with changing politics.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on March 19, 2014, 02:41:32 PM
@Jeff.

By 'we', I mean the USA. I have been a citizen for nearly 30 years.  :)

Thanks - wasn't sure, but trying to get context - I stand corrected.  Agreed, and apologies if I've offended unintentionally.

That said, I still have the respect for India that I've stated - so far as I know they are well advanced there in comparison to many others in region and have a sophisticated system generally.  My thoughts about short-comings there have more to do with relationships among the various countries and how the net as a whole functions (or does not).

Yes, agree, U.S. is well blessed and has not been tapped to speak of, except now - FBI into reconstructing files that were 'deleted' from the pilot's flight simulator in February. 

Speaking of which, I don't find the Flight Sim to be a particularly ominous thing - but I guess those files will reveal if any premeditative stuff was going on or not in that venue.  I doubt that an 18 thousand hour 777 pilot would sweat too much about what was done other than thinking the whole scheme through very carefully.  Ultimately, if he were to land the bird somewhere, he just needs enough runway - and given that, it's a no brainer once he's there.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Andrew M McKenna on March 19, 2014, 05:26:05 PM
For the less conspiracy minded, there is an alternate theory put forth here:

http://www.wired.com/autopia/2014/03/mh370-electrical-fire/ (http://www.wired.com/autopia/2014/03/mh370-electrical-fire/)

Electrical fire on board developing before the last "good night" shuts down the ACRS system.  Upon discovering the fire, they turn immediately to the left and program the flight computer on a heading towards the nearest long runway not obstructed by mountains = Palau Langkawi. 

Concurrently the crew is shutting down all electrical systems, including the transponder and the radio as part of dealing with the electrical fire, subsequently to be overcome by toxic fumes.

Aircraft carries on down the LOP (just kidding) towards the Maldives for another 6+ hours, which makes sense of this story:

http://metro.co.uk/2014/03/18/flight-mh370-residents-on-remote-island-in-maldives-saw-jet-matching-missing-malaysia-airlines-planes-description-4640688/ (http://metro.co.uk/2014/03/18/flight-mh370-residents-on-remote-island-in-maldives-saw-jet-matching-missing-malaysia-airlines-planes-description-4640688/)

And eventually ends up in the ocean.  The Maldive islander's stories are largely being considered unreliable as the timing is somewhat off.

Not sure how all this matches up with the angle to the ACRS satellite, but it is certainly a simpler solution worth looking into.

Note the parallel with the Nikumaroro Hypothesis of discounting the recollections of Island residents as being unreliable.

amck
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: John Ousterhout on March 19, 2014, 07:47:29 PM
I'm curious how the angle was determined from the ACRS satellite, and therefore the possible track/position on the ground.  The systems I'm familiar with don't use position sensors that allow precise calculations of angles relative to the Earth.  It's much like the DF data from our favorite Lockheed pilot - the angles measured are +/- some large number (but centered on Gardner).  If the angle from the satellite to the ping is calculated by signal transient time, then the error is likely to be even greater.  Therefore, I recommend anyone contemplating the arcs shown on the maps add a wide error band centered on those bands but at least a few hundred miles wide.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Steve Lee on March 19, 2014, 07:51:23 PM
This article (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2584816/Search-area-missing-jet-dramatically-narrowed-US-officials-hone-satellite-signals-engine.html) seems to indicate (though the wording is somewhat ambiguous) that investigators do have data from a series hourly pings, not just the last one at 811 AM:

"...Hourly satellite pings from the aircraft, refined by U.S. and British aviation officials, provided far more information than expected as to where a wreck may be found, allowing the search to be drastically narrowed to two possible flight paths. 

Both of the routes head toward the South Pole and end in the Indian Ocean, some 1429 miles from Perth..."



Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Richard Lyon Metzger on March 19, 2014, 08:22:41 PM
But why???
Maybe a ransom for the 20 employees of a high tech electronics company that were on board.
Would you contact the authorities if you knew the kidnappers would kill/threaten them???
What is the minimum distance needed to land a 777, but not necessarily takeoff????
There are many abandoned airfields within its range.



LTM
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Steve Lee on March 19, 2014, 09:10:38 PM
Perhaps the Australians glimpsed a portion of the path of the airliner on JORN? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jindalee_Operational_Radar_Network)
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: George Lam on March 20, 2014, 12:18:33 AM
This article (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2584816/Search-area-missing-jet-dramatically-narrowed-US-officials-hone-satellite-signals-engine.html) seems to indicate (though the wording is somewhat ambiguous) that investigators do have data from a series hourly pings, not just the last one at 811 AM:

"...Hourly satellite pings from the aircraft, refined by U.S. and British aviation officials, provided far more information than expected as to where a wreck may be found, allowing the search to be drastically narrowed to two possible flight paths. 

Both of the routes head toward the South Pole and end in the Indian Ocean, some 1429 miles from Perth..."

If this article is accurate, well this just may be it then, if the hourly pings give an indication of the flight path.  Why did we only hear about the final ping for so long before they put them all together?  Waiting to see if the debris spotted west of Australia is of the plane.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on March 20, 2014, 03:25:17 AM
Australia sees possible plane debris
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-26659951 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-26659951)

Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: C.W. Herndon on March 20, 2014, 05:02:00 AM
For the less conspiracy minded, there is an alternate theory put forth here:

Aircraft carries on down the LOP (just kidding) towards the Maldives for another 6+ hours, which makes sense of this story:

http://metro.co.uk/2014/03/18/flight-mh370-residents-on-remote-island-in-maldives-saw-jet-matching-missing-malaysia-airlines-planes-description-4640688/ (http://metro.co.uk/2014/03/18/flight-mh370-residents-on-remote-island-in-maldives-saw-jet-matching-missing-malaysia-airlines-planes-description-4640688/)

And eventually ends up in the ocean.  The Maldive islander's stories are largely being considered unreliable as the timing is somewhat off.

I don't think that the Maldives are anywhere close to where the Australians now think that Flight 370 may have gone down.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on March 20, 2014, 06:45:31 AM
For the less conspiracy minded, there is an alternate theory put forth here:

http://www.wired.com/autopia/2014/03/mh370-electrical-fire/ (http://www.wired.com/autopia/2014/03/mh370-electrical-fire/)

Electrical fire on board developing before the last "good night" shuts down the ACRS system.  Upon discovering the fire, they turn immediately to the left and program the flight computer on a heading towards the nearest long runway not obstructed by mountains = Palau Langkawi. 

Concurrently the crew is shutting down all electrical systems, including the transponder and the radio as part of dealing with the electrical fire, subsequently to be overcome by toxic fumes.

Aircraft carries on down the LOP (just kidding) towards the Maldives for another 6+ hours, which makes sense of this story:

http://metro.co.uk/2014/03/18/flight-mh370-residents-on-remote-island-in-maldives-saw-jet-matching-missing-malaysia-airlines-planes-description-4640688/ (http://metro.co.uk/2014/03/18/flight-mh370-residents-on-remote-island-in-maldives-saw-jet-matching-missing-malaysia-airlines-planes-description-4640688/)

And eventually ends up in the ocean.  The Maldive islander's stories are largely being considered unreliable as the timing is somewhat off.

Not sure how all this matches up with the angle to the ACRS satellite, but it is certainly a simpler solution worth looking into.

Note the parallel with the Nikumaroro Hypothesis of discounting the recollections of Island residents as being unreliable.

amck

Anxious to see what comes out of this as the debris field can be located and investigated - 'lawn dart' theory (well, sea dart) is the less bizarre and the incident-turned-tragic mode of incapacitating crew, etc. is plausible. 

Now comes this morning a blurb on Fox from one observer that the flight may have been transporting a shipment of Lithium Ion batteries, which can cause mischief similar to that experienced by another jumbo transporting a similar shipment in past.

But not as interesting as the more bizarre rumblings so many of us 'enjoy'.. and in saying that, I can't overlook that we are always talking about the fate of 239 human beings.  This thing is terribly sad any way it comes out.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on March 20, 2014, 07:35:34 AM
Sadly Jeff the signs are pointing towards it being the missing flight.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-26662641 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-26662641)
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Greg Daspit on March 20, 2014, 09:27:16 AM
Based on where they are looking so hard, even before they saw debris, it appears they think the plane flew on, uncontrolled, until it ran out of fuel. See sketch
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: manjeet aujla on March 20, 2014, 09:33:01 AM
The fire theory was popular for a couple of days, esp on google+, but when the inmarsat arcs came along, it could not explain those, except by saying that the autopilot took over and the plane flew on till fuel ran out. So this theory still has life.

With this, the plane b-box will be found, and the what and how may be answered. But the answer of 'Why'  is likely to be murky though.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Greg Daspit on March 20, 2014, 10:29:34 AM
The co-pilot said "all right good night" after new coordinates entered.
So the question is why didn’t he say something and why didn’t Air traffic control ask him why he changed course?
Did he enter coordinates and not execute them yet?
I can see where they may have smelled something odd and entered in the coordinates back to nearest airport just in case but did not hit execute until they knew more.
Maybe he says "good night" because all they had was a suspicion at that time. Then later the fire starts shutting down circuits and they also may shut them off.
The fire could also cause toxic fumes and not a lot of structural damage.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Tim Mellon on March 20, 2014, 11:41:11 AM
Based on where they are looking so hard, even before they saw debris, it appears they think the plane flew on, uncontrolled, until it ran out of fuel. See sketch

Greg, how do we know how much fuel was onboard? I have seen no definitive evidence of the takeoff fuel load. Or is that extra distance just how much longer the aircraft could have been aloft without sending another hourly ping?

Maybe their destination was Kerguelen, although I think there is no airport there at all.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Greg Daspit on March 20, 2014, 11:58:34 AM
Based on where they are looking so hard, even before they saw debris, it appears they think the plane flew on, uncontrolled, until it ran out of fuel. See sketch

Greg, how do we know how much fuel was onboard? I have seen no definitive evidence of the takeoff fuel load. Or is that extra distance just how much longer the aircraft could have been aloft without sending another hourly ping?

Maybe their destination was Kerguelen, although I think there is no airport there at all.
I don't know. I did see on CNN that they did not take on extra fuel and some expert said they likely had enough for the trip plus 20% or so. The sketch is my own. I'm just showing the logic in looking there. Even if you don't know the exact fuel, speed or height, the method of intersecting the arc and an estimated flight distance would narrow the search to a smaller area. What I'm thinking is they also allowed for heading drift, currents over the past days, and variance in fuel estimates and other factors to give some priority to the search area. I drew an x but Im sure there are other factors in where they are searching and the area is bigger to allow for them. I'm just showing a simplified sketch.

Some lessons from history is countries don't like to give away their secrets. The British used to send search planes for German subs even though they knew where they would be based on Ultra. They just wanted the Germans to think they were spotted by a search plane so as not to reveal they broke their code. So they made sure the sub saw the search plane before attacking.

I think there may also be some tech involved that we may not be aware of.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeffrey Pearce on March 20, 2014, 05:01:16 PM
What is the time of day of the last heard transmission-I don't mean voice-that is identified as coming from the missing plane? What is known or can be estimated about the time of day when the plane landed. This assumes that it did land.

If the time of day is known or can be reliably estimated it would be interesting to look at a satellite visual photograph to see the areas where there was enough light from the sun to afford whoever is flying the plane a safe landing. In other words the areas that were just coming out of darkness into the light. If light was necessary to land the pilot could have been waiting for this condition to exist before landing.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Monty Fowler on March 21, 2014, 08:49:47 AM
One thing that concerns me - now that it looks like they might be narrowing down the search area - how many days can the locater pinger on the black box last? I seem to remember it's only 7-10 days, but can't find a specific reference.

LTM,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 CER
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: manjeet aujla on March 21, 2014, 09:44:27 AM
The battery on the blackbox lasts about 30 days. They have dropped sonar buoys to listen for it.

Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Dan Swift on March 21, 2014, 10:23:39 AM
They are already about half way through the life span of the batteries in the boxes. 
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Laura Gridley on March 21, 2014, 01:41:30 PM
Ric's on CNN right now being interviewed about this flight. Good job Ric!
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: C.W. Herndon on March 21, 2014, 09:08:13 PM
How is this for an interesting screen shot? I wonder what it could mean.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: George Lam on March 22, 2014, 10:11:47 PM
How is this for an interesting screen shot? I wonder what it could mean.

A placeholder, perhaps?  They're toying with us... just look at that balsa wood full scale model aircraft carrier they're building.

Actually this might be a symbol for "landing strip here" or "airport" as a visual means.  The wingspan doesn't match the 777.

Nice find though
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Monty Fowler on March 23, 2014, 01:49:33 PM
... just look at that balsa wood full scale model aircraft carrier they're building.

Now, now, let's give credit where credit is due. It's not balsa wood ... but has anyone besides me noticed the sudden worldwide shortage of grey Lego blocks???

LTM, who knows that Lego blocks float quite well,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 CER

Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on March 23, 2014, 05:12:37 PM
How is this for an interesting screen shot? I wonder what it could mean.

...wonder what's under the large shelter to the right of the 'sand plane' in your screen shot, Woody? ;)

Why would Tehran hide a stolen 777 in Iran and risk a major fuss laid on them?  All they need is a proxy, someone rented for a bit to help out in a tribal region where renegades have been known to disappear for years, right under the population's nose... it's probably in Pakistan...

As to the Indian Ocean, just think - TIGHAR's found far more random junk washed up on Niku than possible Earhart artifacts - a fact of modern life in the international village: dishwashers and microwaves floating inside lost shipping containers can clog the seaways.

Egad, and I just took down "how'd they lose such a big, shiny thing" as my little banner...
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on March 23, 2014, 05:39:38 PM
Another parallel with the Earhart mystery.  Blame the usual suspects - whoever we don't like at the moment.  No evidence. No problem.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Greg Daspit on March 23, 2014, 05:50:53 PM
Change in radio frequency may have caused communication problems?
Where have we heard that before?
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on March 23, 2014, 06:19:29 PM
Change in radio frequency may have caused

"All right, good night." sounds like a hand-off to the next controller. If you get no response on the new frequency you return to the old frequency and say that you are "unable" on the new frequency.  The controller then gives you a different frequency to try.  All very standard.

I've been appalled at the bad reasoning demonstrated by "the authorities" and my fellow talking heads on television. It's 1937 all over again.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Steve Lee on March 23, 2014, 06:41:08 PM
A New York Time article by Philip Pan and Kirk Semple published yesterday (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/23/world/asia/a-routine-flight-till-both-routine-and-flight-vanish.html?hp&_r=0 ) makes it clear that investigators have 'circles of position' for several hourly Inmarsat pings.

"Inmarsat technicians identified what appeared to be a series of fleeting “pings” between Flight 370, a satellite over the Indian Ocean and a ground station in Perth, Australia.

The signals — seven of them transmitted at one-hour intervals — were an important clue, because they could have come only from an antenna receiving power from the plane itself. But while they carried a unique code identifying the aircraft as Flight 370, the signals contained no positioning or other data that could indicate where the plane was when it sent them.

By Sunday afternoon, a team of Inmarsat engineers set to work using the principles of trigonometry to determine the distance between the satellite and the plane at the time of each ping, and then to calculate two rough flight paths. The plane, they concluded, had turned again. But it may have then traveled in more or less a straight line, heading north over countries likely to have picked it up on radar, or south toward the Indian Ocean and Antarctica.
"

The Inmarsat data is consistent with the plane flying straight south to a latitude below 30 South, thus the 'circles of position' must have been increasing in radius during the last several hours, because the Inmarsat 'circles of position' are centered on the equator (the satellite is in geosynchronous orbit ) and thus the plane was flying away from the spot the satellite was centered over.

This seems to rule out the idea that the plane landed somewhere and continued to be pinged for several hours from a fixed position on the ground.

I imagine it also rules out the hypothesis that the Malaysian plane 'shadowed' a commercial flight.

To me, the idea that the plane ended up in Iran or Pakistan seems only a tad more plausible than the idea that there are underwater banjos off of Nikumaroro. ::)




Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: manjeet aujla on March 23, 2014, 08:00:23 PM
The several inmarsat pings have been plotted, and 2 possible paths identified, as shown in this link..

http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/535538-malaysian-airlines-mh370-contact-lost-370.html

The north one goes clear over central india. It is prolly improbable that the indians did not see this on their primary, and announce it, if the plane went that way. Also with the air coverage we have over there, we would have seen it when it flew over pakistan and afghanistan. So that leaves the south route as only alternative (with the info currently available.)

This is inmarsat data, so it has high degree of credibility. 

I hope we have some US or russian subs listening for the pings down there. 
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Steve Lee on March 23, 2014, 08:34:38 PM
Thanks for posting that Manjeet.  Nice to see science-based analysis rather than pure speculation.  That's what we all come here for, I hope! :-X
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Monty Fowler on March 24, 2014, 04:56:25 AM
I hope we have some US or russian subs listening for the pings down there.

I hope we have more technology that is listening, too ... but that brings up the gooey question of national security (a.k.a. hide the subs/bombers/tanks/etc.)

Even if the US does have the hardware to narrow the search, will it publicly bandy that information about? Not that very much of what our military does these days is truly secret, but the Cold War mentality lingers on with many who work in our armed forces. Where Rule No. 1 is "Tell'm nothing." I hope I am wrong about that, but I've ceased to be amazed by what our government hides in the name of "national security."

LTM,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 CER
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on March 24, 2014, 07:21:45 AM
I truly hope that the bird is found and agree that the 'sensible' thing is 'lost at sea'...

But we common folk still lack hard evidence, folks, EITHER way... all this stuff about 'lost at sea' being talked about here is just as much up in the air as any prospect in terms of 'hard facts', sorry.

What I've offered about landfall is not of my own mind.  It's been offered and is still being considered as a serious concern among those with far more assets than I have access to.  It is not a popular or fun prospect.  Nor, now being suspected by the right folks, is it really much of a threat as I understand it - you can't use something like that to ill ends if it will be intercepted effectively, and it likely would be.

Anyway, who knows... a ship is approaching the latest suspect area in the Indian Ocean.  Perhaps they will find sad evidence that will end all the speculation.  Above all else I hope for closure among the families and friends of those who lost so much.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on March 24, 2014, 07:36:08 AM
Nice to see science-based analysis rather than pure speculation.

Not quite.  Manjeet says the plane probably would have been detected on radar if it went north, then says "that leaves the south route as the only alternative." He's treating a "maybe" as an established fact and drawing a firm conclusion.  The same mistake was made in 1937. The radio signals could only be sent from an airplane on land. No airplane was seen on land, therefore the signals must have been bogus.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on March 24, 2014, 07:48:50 AM
Nice to see science-based analysis rather than pure speculation.

Not quite.  Manjeet says the plane probably would have been detected on radar if it went north, then says "that leaves the south route as the only alternative." He's treating a "maybe" as an established fact and drawing a firm conclusion.  The same mistake was made in 1937. The radio signals could only be sent from an airplane on land. No airplane was seen on land, therefore the signals must have been bogus.

I respect Manjeet's thoughts a great deal and he knows far more about tracking than I ever will, I'm sure.  I'm equally as sure of what Ric has said - that there remain significant 'maybes' here, including that 'maybe' the bird would have been seen flying northwest.  And 'maybe not', too - for many reasons that I'm sure Manjeet would likely agree with as possible.  I respect that we can speak in terms of 'probables', and that 'maybes' are not absolute.

It is not incredible that a crew could deliberately seek a shadow, for instance, to avoid detection in a relatively lightly scanned area of the world during those hours.  And primary radar is a funny thing - unless one is really looking for / expecting a target, it well may be missed - that much I understand.

But how can something as big and shiny as a 777 be lost?  How can something like an Electra be lost, especially with an able navigator aboard...

And yes, there are startling parallels now to 1937 when able people were trying to make the best of radio signals - and finally found compelling reasons (rightly or wrongly, likely the latter IMO) to abadon that information.  Here now we struggle with the possible whisperings of an ill-fated jet to know what happened, and yet they still tell us so little.

One day such craft will carry an ELT package that the crew cannot molest - and that can be activated remotely from the ground if such an event is suspected, and that upon impact will not only 'go off', but be detached and float... seems so obvious now I wonder why it hasn't been done for decades.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on March 24, 2014, 10:08:46 AM
Sadly the news is as feared...


Flight MH370 'crashed in south Indian Ocean' - Malaysia PM



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-26716572 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-26716572)
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on March 24, 2014, 11:18:12 AM
Sadly the news is as feared...


Flight MH370 'crashed in south Indian Ocean' - Malaysia PM

"The Malaysian prime minister said Inmarsat had been able to shed further light on the plane's flight path by performing further calculations on the MH370 data "using a type of analysis never before used in an investigation of this sort".

And what if this never-before-used type of analysis is wrong? I'll accept that the plane crashed in the ocean when debris is recovered and conclusively identified.  I'm holding their feet to the same fire mine have been held to.

If we can reach firm conclusions about MH370's fate based on the analysis of data we can do the same for NR16020.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Tim Gard on March 24, 2014, 11:40:49 AM
Sadly the news is as feared...


Flight MH370 'crashed in south Indian Ocean' - Malaysia PM

And what if this never-before-used type of analysis is wrong? I'll accept that the plane crashed in the ocean when debris is recovered and conclusively identified.  I'm holding their feet to the same fire mine have been held to.

If we can reach firm conclusions about MH370's fate based on the analysis of data we can do the same for NR16020.

I agree with Ric.

Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Dan Swift on March 24, 2014, 12:56:07 PM
Exactly Ric! 
Time for some body else's 'toes to burn'.
It might be a interesting wager to bet on who finds which plane first? 
Dan   
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Bruce Thomas on March 24, 2014, 01:53:54 PM
The old saying goes, "The proof is in the pudding."

What I'd like to see is a slew of instances of data from flights, with the same analysis done on several hourly pings and predicting where the flights ended up. Can the pings of a Malaysia Airlines flight from Kuala Lumpur to New Delhi absolutely confirm that the flight ended up reasonably close to New Delhi and nowhere else? It would seem to me that there will be nearly always two possibile flight paths, both ending equidistant from Kuala Lumpur, and hour after hour crossing the same concentric rings based on the satellite location. My own crude look at such rings leads me to suggest an alternate landing area somewhere in the South Indian Ocean somewhere between Australia and Madagascar.

Excluding that other point along the northern arc of the concentric ring for MH370 seems based largely on the hounds (military air defense watchdogs) not barking at an intruding flight, assuming that the hounds were awake and had their radars on and effectively operated.

But wouldn't the world go berserk at some point in the future (77 years?) when in the high Himalayas a Boeing 777-200ER with Malaysia Airlines livery were to be found crumpled under the snowpack?!
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: manjeet aujla on March 24, 2014, 01:56:29 PM
I am by no means an expert on surveillance - I just respect Inmarsat's capabilities, and what they say. Their data-set and analysis, I think, is most credible. They also ran this 'new type of analysis' , by a peer review group, and have also  published some of their 'new' methodology, which will be undoubtedly critiqued  by more experts.

The malaysian PM bases his statement seemingly on inmarsat data and analysis,  and so is going out on a limb a bit. There may be other data given to him in confidence, which they don't want to release, and that makes them sure of the south route. The 'idiot artifact' in this case is going to be the actual debris field.

The parallel with AE is, at least, the lessons that the current searchers could follow from the AE search. In hindsight, things always become clearer. When they were searching for AE, like here, time was not on their side, and resources were far more limited. They did have to make certain assumptions in the heat of the moment, just because, like here, with limited resources, they had to concentrate on the most likely places to search. Similarly, in this search, they have to necessarily make assumptions/speculate, maybe on incomplete info, so that the planes and ships etc.,they do have are used most effectively.

So, when I was using words like 'improbable', I was trying to follow why the searchers were concentrating on the south route, which seemed logical. The northern route clearly went over central india, and if the indians had missed it, it went over northern afg-pak borders areas, where we would prolly have caught it, as we own the airspace over afghanistan.

In hindsight, if we could turn the clock back, and know what we know today of the Niku hypothesis, esp the radio signals which have been strongly shown to be credible, we would say "forget everything else - send all the planes and ships to niku". From what I can remember on the AE search,  if Lambrecht, by design or happy coincidence, had overflown Niku 2-3 days earlier, and/or the tide had been low, the plane would have been out in the open. But in the pressure cooker environment they were in, like here, they had to speculate and reason a bit, from the data they did have. Time was running out -like here it is still running out to find the blackbox.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on March 24, 2014, 02:05:30 PM
"According to Inmarsat, this involved a totally new way of modelling, which was why it took time.

The company told the BBC the new calculation involved crunching far more data and that engineers spent all weekend looking back at previous Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777 flights.

They compared the satellite data from those flights with flight MH370 and were able to work out that it went south."

"In the past day, both Australian and Chinese air force crews have reported spotting debris."

Nothing from the Northern route yet
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on March 24, 2014, 02:16:41 PM
MH370 Malaysia plane: How maths helped find an earlier crash

Statisticians helped locate an Air France plane in 2011 which was missing for two years.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-26680633 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-26680633)


Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: manjeet aujla on March 24, 2014, 02:18:08 PM
Well Ric, with Niku, you are proposing a solution to possibly the most enduring, fascinating mystery of the aircraft era - something which a lot people still find compelling. So your feet ARE going to be held to the fire a bit!

Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on March 24, 2014, 02:25:39 PM
I am by no means an expert on surveillance - I just respect Inmarsat's capabilities, and what they say. Their data-set and analysis, I think, is most credible. They also ran this 'new type of analysis' , by a peer review group, and have also  published some of their 'new' methodology, which will be undoubtedly critiqued  by more experts.

The malaysian PM bases his statement seemingly on inmarsat data and analysis,  and so is going out on a limb a bit. There may be other data given to him in confidence, which they don't want to release, and that makes them sure of the south route. The 'idiot artifact' in this case is going to be the actual debris field.

The parallel with AE is, at least, the lessons that the current searchers could follow from the AE search. In hindsight, things always become clearer. When they were searching for AE, like here, time was not on their side, and resources were far more limited. They did have to make certain assumptions in the heat of the moment, just because, like here, with limited resources, they had to concentrate on the most likely places to search. Similarly, in this search, they have to necessarily make assumptions/speculate, maybe on incomplete info, so that the planes and ships etc.,they do have are used most effectively.

So, when I was using words like 'improbable', I was trying to follow why the searchers were concentrating on the south route, which seemed logical. The northern route clearly went over central india, and if the indians had missed it, it went over northern afg-pak borders areas, where we would prolly have caught it, as we own the airspace over afghanistan.

In hindsight, if we could turn the clock back, and know what we know today of the Niku hypothesis, esp the radio signals which have been strongly shown to be credible, we would say "forget everything else - send all the planes and ships to niku". From what I can remember on the AE search,  if Lambrecht, by design or happy coincidence, had overflown Niku 2-3 days earlier, and/or the tide had been low, the plane would have been out in the open. But in the pressure cooker environment they were in, like here, they had to speculate and reason a bit, from the data they did have. Time was running out -like here it is still running out to find the blackbox.

Excellent comments and summary here Manjeet, thanks, I enjoy your sharing of excellent thought.  You nailed the real pressures that come to bear on these things and the PM of Malaysia has an agonizing responsibility to help families find closure, and short of having debris in-hand it is always a numbers game.  What is nearly certain beyond measure is that the passengers did not survive, no matter the circumstance - and this is the strongest position Malaysia has been able to assemble to-date.

Like Ric, however, 'the numbers' are fraught with peril in many eyes, especially those of us who don't understand the technology involved here so well.  So I take Inmarsat's pencil-sharpening with a small grain of salt for now and will feel better once something definitive has been found.  Call that ignorance if one will - I certainly confess ignorance where this tracking technology is concerned.

My thoughts go out to those who lost family and friends aboard that flight - at least they have something as closure that is based on the best that can be produced so far - compassion calls for that, I think.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on March 24, 2014, 02:40:38 PM
"Some 26 countries have have been involved since the plane disappeared, including Malaysia, Indonesia, Australia, New Zealand, China, the US, South Korea, Japan, the UAE and the UK.
Australia's HMAS Surprise is currently the only ship in the southern search area, although ten Chinese ships and six Malaysian vessels, with three ship-borne helicopters, are en route and expected to arrive from 25 March.
In addition to the Australian and Chinese aircraft operating from Perth a further 3 planes - 2 from Japan and one from the United Arab Emirates - have been sent to assist.
The US and UK are also contributing resources."

The International response and International cooperation has been an inspiration in the progress of the search so far.


Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Steve Lee on March 24, 2014, 05:43:49 PM
"According to Inmarsat, this involved a totally new way of modelling, which was why it took time.

The company told the BBC the new calculation involved crunching far more data and that engineers spent all weekend looking back at previous Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777 flights.

They compared the satellite data from those flights with flight MH370 and were able to work out that it went south."

"In the past day, both Australian and Chinese air force crews have reported spotting debris."

Nothing from the Northern route yet

It sounds like Inmarsat had the good sense to do as Bruce Thomas suggested (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,1454.msg30986.html#msg30986) and ground truth their model.  So, I think this probably takes care of Ric's concern ("what if this never-before-used type of analysis is wrong?").

I am still wondering if part of the airliner's flight was spotted on JORN (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jindalee_Operational_Radar_Network). If it was, probably we'll never know...
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on March 24, 2014, 06:22:12 PM
The graphic suggests that the NTSB calculated possible paths based on data that is not public and that the NTSB were able to assign probabilities to those paths. As far as I know, neither Inmarsat, the NTSB nor the Australian government (or it's agencies) have made public the data or method of calculating these tracks.

The graphic below suggests several Inmarsat pings were used (the example shows 01:11, 02:11, 04:11, 05:11, 06:11, 07:11 and 08:11 but these are probably speculation).

So far as is publicly known, there was no ping at 09:11 or later which suggests the flight ended between 08:11 and 09:11. This is broadly consistent with maximum fuel range of the aircraft. The labelled NTSB solutions suggest that NTSB calculated that no other constant speed (and heading?) tracks fit the data.




Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Bruce Thomas on March 24, 2014, 06:37:15 PM
I am still wondering if part of the airliner's flight was spotted on JORN (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jindalee_Operational_Radar_Network). If it was, probably we'll never know...

That's a very interesting find, Steve. The western-most coverage shown in the Wikipedia article looks like it overlaps the track shown in the NTSB map shown in Jeff Victor's post (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,1454.msg30998.html#msg30998). Who knows, perhaps those JORN "hounds" were awake and listening ... let's hope if they were, someday we'll hear their baying.  I'll bet if they did bay, that Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbot has heard them!  ;)

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3b/Cover_%28Hound_of_Baskervilles%2C_1902%29.jpg/76px-Cover_%28Hound_of_Baskervilles%2C_1902%29.jpg)
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on March 24, 2014, 08:04:02 PM
I am still wondering if part of the airliner's flight was spotted on JORN (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jindalee_Operational_Radar_Network). If it was, probably we'll never know...

That's a very interesting find, Steve. The western-most coverage shown in the Wikipedia article looks like it overlaps the track shown in the NTSB map shown in Jeff Victor's post (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,1454.msg30998.html#msg30998). Who knows, perhaps those JORN "hounds" were awake and listening ... let's hope if they were, someday we'll hear their baying.  I'll bet if they did bay, that Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbot has heard them!  ;)

Seems a distinct possibility Bruce

"The JORN network is operated by No. 1 Radar Surveillance Unit RAAF (1RSU). Data from the JORN sites is fed to the JORN Coordination Centre at RAAF Base Edinburgh where it is passed on to other agencies and military units. Officially the system allows the Australian Defence Force to observe all air and sea activity north of Australia to distances of 3000 km. This encompasses all of Java, Irian Jaya, Papua New Guinea and the Solomon Islands, and halfway across the Indian Ocean. Other sources put the range at 4000 km from the Australian coastline,[23] as far away as Singapore.[24]

The JORN is so sensitive it is able to track planes as small as a Cessna 172 taking off and landing in East Timor 2600 km away. Current research is anticipated to increase its sensitivity by a factor of ten beyond this level. It is also reportedly able to detect stealth aircraft, as typically these are designed only to avoid detection by microwave radar.[6] Project DUNDEE[25] was a cooperative research project, with American missile defence research, into using JORN to detect missiles.[26] The JORN is anticipated to play a role in future Missile Defense Agency initiatives, detecting and tracking missile launches in Asia.[27]"


Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on March 25, 2014, 01:22:40 PM
JORN - good find, Steve - cool stuff.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Kevin Weeks on March 25, 2014, 02:31:21 PM
was just reading about the "number crunching" done to track the plane... interesting stuff. appears they used the doppler effect to tell if the data sent from the plane was compressed a bit (heading towards the satellite) or decompressed a bit (heading away from the satellite) I'm sure thats a very dumbed down version of it but it is easy to comprehend.

this wasn't from the CNN article, this is my own little addition:

The data sent from the plane (or from any device, your computer for instance) is not sent in one big single batch, it in a series of "packets". By determining the time between packets they were able to determine the doppler effect.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Tim Gard on March 25, 2014, 03:47:13 PM
MH370 Malaysia plane: How maths helped find an earlier crash

Statisticians helped locate an Air France plane in 2011 which was missing for two years.


They also found wreckage - the vertical stabiliser ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_447  (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_447)

Off the western coast of Australia they have only found freight palates.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Tim Gard on March 25, 2014, 04:54:30 PM
This loss is still pretty creepy.

Agreed.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on March 25, 2014, 06:54:23 PM
MH370 Malaysia plane: How maths helped find an earlier crash

Statisticians helped locate an Air France plane in 2011 which was missing for two years.


They also found wreckage - the vertical stabiliser ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_447  (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_447)

Off the western coast of Australia they have only found freight palates.

Tim, they did indeed find debris from Air France flight 447 floating on the surface, most noticeably the big vertical stabiliser (composite material construction) and, un-inflated life jackets and various other objects that were buoyant. However, that was little help in actually locating the aircraft wreckage, which took another two years and mega bucks before they located it. I have a feeling Malaysian Airlines flight MH370 is going to take even longer due to the time it has taken to find floating debris and, the distance to the nearest land. Currents and wind have had a long time to move the debris away from any impact area.
The Boeing 777 has quite a lot of composite material construction so it is quite possible that some of it is buoyant enough to stay visible. Virtually all airliners carry cargo be it passengers baggage or freight on/in cargo pallets, it's how they justify losing your baggage.

"There have been several sightings of debris, but none has yet been confirmed as being linked to the plane.
Malaysia's acting Transport Minister Hishammuddin Hussein has said that, as a result of the latest analysis, the area of search has narrowed from 2.24m sq nautical miles to 469,407 sq nautical miles.
Operations in a northern corridor - one of two vast areas where the plane might have ended its journey - have been called off, he added."
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on March 26, 2014, 10:43:21 AM
This loss is still pretty creepy.

Agreed.

An interesting article  (http://worldtruth.tv/rothschild-inherits-a-semiconductor-patent-for-freescale-semiconductors/) from an old friend who is very tuned in to such information.

Read it for what it is worth, just passing it on.  I am always struck - truth truly is stranger than fiction often enough.

Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Tim Gard on March 26, 2014, 11:20:29 AM
Tim, they did indeed find debris from Air France flight 447 floating on the surface, most noticeably the big vertical stabiliser (composite material construction) and, un-inflated life jackets and various other objects that were buoyant. However, that was little help in actually locating the aircraft wreckage, which took another two years and mega bucks before they located it. I have a feeling Malaysian Airlines flight

Finding the vertical stabilizer was evidence that the plane had indeed gone down rather than having been hijacked and landed elsewhere. Finding the black boxes is a common next step once the crash has become a reality and the general area established.

knowing the line of flight for 447 reduced the search area considerably as does Amelia's Line Of Position aid in locating the Electra. The depth of water in which 447 sank was a considerable hurdle.

A floating palate in a recognised shipping lane is not proof of an air disaster. Maybe if it was accompanied by suitcases and other items expected to be found in a cargo area, but that then raises the question of how it exited the fuselage intact.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: manjeet aujla on March 26, 2014, 02:00:56 PM
A point is made in this article, towards the end, that even if the blackbox is found, it would be very hard to prove pilot suicide ....

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/air-accidents/news/article.cfm?c_id=665&objectid=11226334

because the cvr would have been written  over after 2 hours, and the data recorder would likely record that the plane flew on normally till it ran out of fuel.

This is setting up to be discussed in conspiracy theories for decades.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Tim Gard on March 26, 2014, 02:48:36 PM
I didn't realize that flight 447 was feared to have been a theft.

Doesn't that mean you're making the same mistake? You're not sure whether, at any stage, 447 was presumed to be hijacked but you are sure about what has happened to 370.

Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Tim Gard on March 26, 2014, 02:52:41 PM
A point is made in this article, towards the end, that even if the blackbox is found, it would be very hard to prove pilot suicide ....

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/air-accidents/news/article.cfm?c_id=665&objectid=11226334

because the cvr would have been written  over after 2 hours, and the data recorder would likely record that the plane flew on normally till it ran out of fuel.

This is setting up to be discussed in conspiracy theories for decades.

I can think of instances where pilot suicide was initially assumed and subsequently disproven ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ig9LE0Vp1YM

I can also think of instances where pilot suicide was initially dismissed and later proven ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4QYJZBaQCds
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on March 26, 2014, 06:54:37 PM
The latest images appear to show some 122 "potential objects" in an area of around 400 sq km (160 sq miles), about 2,557km from Perth, Australia.

One is up to 23m in length while others appear to be "bright", possibly indicating solid material, Malaysia's acting Transport Minister Hishammuddin Hussein has said.
Aircraft and ships have not yet identified the possible debris.
The minister added that it was too early to tell whether any of the objects were from flight MH370, but that they were "the most credible lead that we have."



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-26514556 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-26514556)
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on March 31, 2014, 03:36:46 PM
I didn't realize that flight 447 was feared to have been a theft.

Doesn't that mean you're making the same mistake? You're not sure whether, at any stage, 447 was presumed to be hijacked but you are sure about what has happened to 370.

No, not sure at all, Tim.  'Feared' and 'known' aren't the same; nor were the earmarks of the two flights as I've understood them.

Like we agreed above, 'creepy' situation, still.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Tim Gard on April 01, 2014, 01:20:48 PM
No, not sure at all, Tim.  'Feared' and 'known' aren't the same; nor were the earmarks of the two flights as I've understood them.


I take you to have said that because the same ping technique was used the outcome of the two flights was equally accurate, but now you're not sure?
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on April 01, 2014, 01:33:01 PM
No, not sure at all, Tim.  'Feared' and 'known' aren't the same; nor were the earmarks of the two flights as I've understood them.


I take you to have said that because the same ping technique was used the outcome of the two flights was equally accurate, but now you're not sure?

I wasn't aware of Sat ping being used on the earlier loss.  I'm merely noting that I was not aware that the Airbus / Atlantic loss was ever considered a possible 'taking', that's all.  For some reason it seemed like a mechanical / system issue had always been strongly suspected, but maybe I overlooked something.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on April 06, 2014, 07:21:01 AM
CNN is still doing almost non-stop coverage of the non-news about MH370.  I'm now apparently in their stable of "experts" and I have to ration the time I can give them.  I was on (off and on) from 8:30 to 10:00 last night, then they called me back and wanted me back on at 11:00.  I turned them down but agreed to do 8:00 to 9:00 tonight (Sunday).  It's all pretty silly and the constant attempt to find something to talk about results is some pretty silly things being said.  One "expert" last night night said that he was encouraged by what he felt was growing "momentum" in the search, indicating that we're getting closer to finding the plane.  Say what?  Despite the deployment of greater and greater assets, nothing, nada, zip has been found.  Contrast that to our work on the Earhart disappearance we have turned up an abundance of solid clues in multiple avenues of investigation, all pointing to the same conclusion. THAT is momentum.

What baffles me in the MH370 case is the resistance to accept and pursue clues that are staring the investigators in the face.  We have an airplane that is acknowledged to have been abducted by someone with intimate knowledge of of its systems.  They took deliberate steps to make the airplane "disappear" from in-flight monitoring then they changed course and continued to fly for several hours.  Why?  Now we learn that the pilot had been practicing "emergency landings" on his home flight simulator.  Everyone is quick to dismiss that as something that is perfectly reasonable for a dedicated pilot to do, and under normal circumstances I would agree.  But these are not normal circumstances.  I'd like to know what kind of "emergency landings" he was practicing.  Landing with thrust -reversers inop?  Landing with an engine out?  Perfectly normal.  But what if he was practicing short field landings with no mechanical or systems malfunctions?  That wouldn't be automatically damning, but it would be interesting to know - especially since he tried to erase his computer.

Maybe these clues are being followed and they're just not talking about it.  I hope so.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on April 06, 2014, 07:55:12 AM
CNN is still doing almost non-stop coverage of the non-news about MH370.  I'm now apparently in their stable of "experts" and I have to ration the time I can give them.  I was on (off and on) from 8:30 to 10:00 last night, then they called me back and wanted me back on at 11:00.  I turned them down but agreed to do 8:00 to 9:00 tonight (Sunday).  It's all pretty silly and the constant attempt to find something to talk about results is some pretty silly things being said.  One "expert" last night night said that he was encouraged by what he felt was growing "momentum" in the search, indicating that we're getting closer to finding the plane.  Say what?  Despite the deployment of greater and greater assets, nothing, nada, zip has been found.  Contrast that to our work on the Earhart disappearance we have turned up an abundance of solid clues in multiple avenues of investigation, all pointing to the same conclusion. THAT is momentum.

What baffles me in the MH370 case is the resistance to accept and pursue clues that are staring the investigators in the face.  We have an airplane that is acknowledged to have been abducted by someone with intimate knowledge of of its systems.  They took deliberate steps to make the airplane "disappear" from in-flight monitoring then they changed course and continued to fly for several hours.  Why?  Now we learn that the pilot had been practicing "emergency landings" on his home flight simulator.  Everyone is quick to dismiss that as something that is perfectly reasonable for a dedicated pilot to do, and under normal circumstances I would agree.  But these are not normal circumstances.  I'd like to know what kind of "emergency landings" he was practicing.  Landing with thrust -reversers inop?  Landing with an engine out?  Perfectly normal.  But what if he was practicing short field landings with no mechanical or systems malfunctions?  That wouldn't be automatically damning, but it would be interesting to know - especially since he tried to erase his computer.

Maybe these clues are being followed and they're just not talking about it.  I hope so.

I suspect your closing statement may be far more true than we'll ever know.  I still have a very strong suspicion about where that airplane - ain't... and what you've pointed out is utterly the case.

The satellite 'pings' / handshakes and the re-analysis is all interesting - and I seriously doubt the reliability of it.  I cannot do so on technical grounds, I'm not technically able; but given the aggregate of observations it does not pass the smell test any more than last month's tuna salad in my fridge.

But enough of my own notions - what's important is the whole, big picture - what is the evidence?  You are correct - there's far more to suggest Earhart and Noonan on Niku than Flight 370 in the southern Indian Ocean at the moment.

Process counts - and what a shot you have at highlighting TIGHAR's way of approaching investigations.  Hope to see you 'on' later.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ian MacKay on April 06, 2014, 05:29:08 PM
CNN is still doing almost non-stop coverage of the non-news about MH370. 

Others cleverer than I have recently claimed that CNN stands for "Crash News Network"
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: C.W. Herndon on April 06, 2014, 09:30:40 PM
I'd like to know what kind of "emergency landings" he was practicing.

How about maybe on a narrow runway?
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on April 06, 2014, 11:02:58 PM
Latest news on the search...

"An Australian vessel searching for the missing Malaysia Airlines plane has detected signals consistent with those from aircraft black boxes.

Australian defence vessel Ocean Shield acquired the signal twice, once for more than two hours, Australia said.

Air Chief Marshal Angus Houston, who is leading the search, called it the "most promising lead" so far.

But he said more information was needed: "We haven't found the aircraft yet and we need further confirmation."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-26917934 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-26917934)
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on April 07, 2014, 05:36:07 AM
Latest news on the search...

"An Australian vessel searching for the missing Malaysia Airlines plane has detected signals consistent with those from aircraft black boxes.

Australian defence vessel Ocean Shield acquired the signal twice, once for more than two hours, Australia said.

Air Chief Marshal Angus Houston, who is leading the search, called it the "most promising lead" so far.

But he said more information was needed: "We haven't found the aircraft yet and we need further confirmation."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-26917934 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-26917934)

Here's hoping - it's getting very late for pingers to still be alive.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on April 07, 2014, 06:52:15 AM
Second that Jeff. I do hope they have better luck in beating the time limit than Air France 447. It took 2 years of searching after initially failing to locate the flight recorder boxes before they gave up 'pinging'.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on April 07, 2014, 07:36:35 AM
The Atlantic is challenging enough, but that part of the Indian Ocean is extremely difficult (as we all know by now).

I do hope this is a true signal - 2 hours of steady stuff is fairly persuasive.  It would be good to have a real answer - and this is the strongest evidence so far (and far from conclusive still, but something must be banging away out there to produce what was heard by the Aussies).
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Kevin Weeks on April 07, 2014, 08:15:54 AM
The Atlantic is challenging enough, but that part of the Indian Ocean is extremely difficult (as we all know by now).

I do hope this is a true signal - 2 hours of steady stuff is fairly persuasive.  It would be good to have a real answer - and this is the strongest evidence so far (and far from conclusive still, but something must be banging away out there to produce what was heard by the Aussies).

*puts on tinfoil hat*

it's the russian/iranian/chinese/somalian/insertgroupofchoicehere submarines pinging away to find the billions of dollars in gold/uranium/missile guidance chips/nuclear weapons plans/insertterroristthreatofchoicehere that were smuggled aboard the plane Man!!

I know a couple of guys who are completely convinced these things MUST be true in order to explain the loss of this plane.... I can only imagine living inside these peoples heads!
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on April 07, 2014, 12:32:06 PM
The Atlantic is challenging enough, but that part of the Indian Ocean is extremely difficult (as we all know by now).

I do hope this is a true signal - 2 hours of steady stuff is fairly persuasive.  It would be good to have a real answer - and this is the strongest evidence so far (and far from conclusive still, but something must be banging away out there to produce what was heard by the Aussies).

*puts on tinfoil hat*

it's the russian/iranian/chinese/somalian/insertgroupofchoicehere submarines pinging away to find the billions of dollars in gold/uranium/missile guidance chips/nuclear weapons plans/insertterroristthreatofchoicehere that were smuggled aboard the plane Man!!

I know a couple of guys who are completely convinced these things MUST be true in order to explain the loss of this plane.... I can only imagine living inside these peoples heads!

LOL!!!

Maybe it is there. 

I'd bet a box of donuts that it was a failed theft / terror hyjacking gone wrong (sad but good) if it is.

...now where'd my shiny hat go...
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370, yet another theory.
Post by: Dave Ross Wilkinson on April 07, 2014, 04:16:47 PM
Suppose an electrical failure of some kind was responsible, a progressive failure that first knocked power to the ACARS, then to the transponder, and then to the RADIO.  What would the pilot do?  He is flying around in the middle of the night in a 777 full of passengers, and fuel.  The pilot's first thought might be to turn back, but how to signal ATC? He couldn't just pick the nearest airport that is suitable for a 777 and try to land, unannounced. 

The air lanes are busy at that time of night -- red eyes out of southeast Asia into China, Japan and Europe are popular with business passengers (I am told).  He certainly doesn't want to have a collision, flying around invisible to ATC.

Perhaps (or not) the electrical problem had put out his lights, too.  He might not want to risk a landing with a full load of fuel.  And he can't talk to ATC.  It's  reminiscent of EA. 

So, he might do some calculations and realize that he could land in Australia, perhaps on the edge of one of the deserts, or another smooth spot with little fuel in his tank. 

But a miscalculation of the fuel put him in the Indian Ocean.   

Just a thought.  Nothing nefarious, just a widespread electrical failure.

Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on April 07, 2014, 04:52:53 PM
I'm not typed in anything bigger than a DC-3 and I've never flown a turbine-powered aircraft of any description except on a simulator, but I can't image an electrical failure that would defeat the multiple redundant of systems on a modern jetliner and still leave the aircraft flyable - and this aircraft was imminently flyable.  After taking steps that give every appearance of being an intentional effort to disappear, it made course changes that are consistent with a concerted attempt to remain undetected by avoiding Indonesian airspace.  I'm probably more skeptical of conspiracy theories, having seen too many silly ones in the Wonderful World of Amelia, but MH370 stinks.  Somebody was up to no good.  If the wreck is found in southern Indian Ocean, draw a straight line from that point back to when the flight is known to have made its last turn and that's the point where something happened to incapacitate the crew, leaving the plane to continue on auto-pilot until fuel exhaustion.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on April 07, 2014, 06:17:41 PM
There is an interesting discussion thread here on The Aviation Herald which draws a rather speculative but, given a previous incident "Accident: Egyptair B772 at Cairo on Jul 29th 2011, cockpit fire" has some plausible points to consider.
http://www.avherald.com/h?article=44078aa7&opt=0 (http://www.avherald.com/h?article=44078aa7&opt=0)

Egypt Airs Boeing 777 was production number 71
Malaysian Airlines Boeing 777 was production number 404
Malaysian Airlines 777 was apparently NOT part of the batch of 282 Boeing 777s with the fault as identified as the cause of the Egypt Air cockpit fire.

The erratic flight path over Malaysian and Indonesian airspace and the POSSIBLE discovery of MH370 in the Indian Ocean?

To get there it would have had to turned left from its last known verifiable position, 02:15 last contact with military radar, which would also put it on a heading to the nearest airport in Northern Indonesia (was that the intention?) then, "If the wreck is found in southern Indian Ocean, draw a straight line from that point back to when the flight is known to have made its last turn and that's the point where something happened to incapacitate the crew, leaving the plane to continue on auto-pilot until fuel exhaustion."

Finally, if you subtract the distance spent meandering around in Malaysian and Indonesian airspace from the possible straight line fuel consumption range from Kuala Lumpur then the areas of POSSIBLE debris and pings are in the right range for fuel exhaustion. As commented in the thread earlier, if the on-board computer receives no further instructions after being instructed to head to the nearest alternative then it continues to fly that course until told to do otherwise or, fuel the runs out.
"To change course to an emergency airport all a 777 pilot has to do is go to the ALTN page of the FMC and select and execute DIVERT NOW. The aircraft will then turn and fly to the emergency airport, although it won't start a descent until a lower altitude is selected in the MCP."


Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Greg Daspit on April 07, 2014, 06:27:06 PM
They flew over Malaysia and didn't avoid its radar.
If the crew smelled an electrical fire could they have turned off everything electrical except what they absolutely thought they needed to fly the plane?
I read they could turn ACARS and the transponder off in the cockpit and pull breakers in the cockpit (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/21/what-happened-to-flight-mh370-missing-plane).
Maybe at some point after flying over Malaysia they avoided land, not radar. Then while cirlcing land, but staying close in case  they had to ditch, the smoke eventually got them and the plane flew until it ran out of fuel.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on April 07, 2014, 06:56:26 PM
Maybe at some point after flying over Malaysia they avoided land, not radar.

Why would you do that? 
Wouldn't a water landing in a land plane be worse than any kind of landing on land except in the middle of a city (ala the Hudson ditching)..
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Greg Daspit on April 07, 2014, 07:10:53 PM
Maybe at some point after flying over Malaysia they avoided land, not radar.

Why would you do that? 
Wouldn't a water landing in a land plane be worse than any kind of landing on land except in the middle of a city (ala the Hudson ditching)..
Smoke limiting a clear view. And it was dark outside. Less likely to plow into something vertical that you can't see if ditching in the water
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on April 07, 2014, 07:16:25 PM
They flew over Malaysia and didn't avoid its radar.
If the crew smelled an electrical fire could they have turned off everything electrical except what they absolutely thought they needed to fly the plane?
I read they could turn ACARS and the transponder off in the cockpit and pull breakers in the cockpit (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/21/what-happened-to-flight-mh370-missing-plane).
Maybe at some point after flying over Malaysia they avoided land, not radar. Then while cirlcing land, but staying close in case  they had to ditch, the smoke eventually got them and the plane flew until it ran out of fuel.

Some good points Greg.

locating an electrical fire isn't easy when most of the wiring and kit is concealed behind panelling.

In what circumstances would you communicate with the ground to say there was an emergency? In an emergency all pilots are trained in a golden rule: ANC, which is to aviate, navigate, communicate, in that order.

Why fly over water? Is your plane a danger to those on the ground as well? If it's a fire then water is your friend, jungles and trees your enemy. Can you fly the coastline and keep land in touching distance? yes, look at the known flight path. How many alternative airports are in your flight path direction while doing this, three.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Greg Daspit on April 07, 2014, 07:39:04 PM
Example of a pilot who chose to ditch close to land (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ob8nE4f2ZWc)
Might have turned out better but his engine caught a rock below the water.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Greg Daspit on April 07, 2014, 08:16:33 PM


In what circumstances would you communicate with the ground to say there was an emergency? In an emergency all pilots are trained in a golden rule: ANC, which is to aviate, navigate, communicate, in that order.

Why fly over water? Is your plane a danger to those on the ground as well? If it's a fire then water is your friend, jungles and trees your enemy. Can you fly the coastline and keep land in touching distance? yes, look at the known flight path. How many alternative airports
Maybe they did try to communicate. The trouble seemed to happen at a radio transfer point. Maybe in the process of changing frequencies an emergency happened and they did not realize an issue because they were pre occupied with a possible fire. Maybe it was the radio system they chose that was the cause of the electrical problem itself.  Or they assumed the radio was the problem and shut it off first.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on April 07, 2014, 08:42:29 PM
Example of a pilot who chose to ditch close to land (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ob8nE4f2ZWc)
Might have turned out better but his engine caught a rock below the water.

The pilot in this case had no choice Greg, no fuel left. He did mention to the hijackers that there was insufficient fuel aboard to reach their chosen destination.

"Instead of flying towards Australia, the captain followed the African coastline. The hijackers noticed that land was still visible and forced the pilot to steer east. Leul secretly headed for the Comoro Islands, which lie midway between Madagascar and the African mainland. The plane was nearly out of fuel as it approached the island group, but the hijackers continued to ignore the captain's warnings. Out of options, Leul began to circle the area, hoping to land the plane at the Comoros' main airport. This forced Leul to land at more than 175 knots (324 km/h; 201 mph). Leul tried to make an emergency landing at Prince Said Ibrahim International Airport on Grande Comore, but a fight with the hijackers at the last minute caused him to lose his visual point of reference, leaving him unable to locate the airport. While still fighting with the hijackers, he tried to ditch the aircraft in shallow waters 500 yards (457 m) off Le Galawa Beach Hotel, near Mitsamiouli at the northern end of Grande Comore island. Leul attempted to land parallel with the waves instead of against the waves in an effort to smooth the landing. Seconds prior to contacting the water the aircraft was banked left some ten degrees; the left engine and wingtip struck the water first. The engine acted as a scoop and struck a coral reef, slowing that side of the aircraft quickly, causing the Boeing 767 to violently spin left and break apart. Except for the rear part of the airframe, the broken portions of the fuselage sank rapidly. Island residents and tourists, including a group of scuba divers and some French doctors on vacation, came to the aid of crash survivors. Many passengers died because they inflated their life jackets in the cabin, causing them to be trapped inside by the rising water. This led to future notices about not inflating the vests before exiting the plane.


Reminiscent of the Hudson river ditching in that case but without the 100% result, still,  Capt. Chesley B. "Sully" Sullenberger didn't have hijackers to deal with as well at the same time.

It will be interesting to see what the flight and voice recorders have to say, if they can recover them.
Question? can they be disabled by the crew or when a circuit breaker is pulled?
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Monty Fowler on April 07, 2014, 08:53:29 PM
It will be interesting to see what the flight and voice recorders have to say, if they can recover them.
Question? can they be disabled by the crew or when a circuit breaker is pulled?

Not a systems expert by any means, but, to me, anyone who can disable almost every other electronic tracking and locating device on the 777 can probably figure out a way to try and disable the flight data and voice recorders. Although I'm pretty sure they have multiple redundant systems to keep the working, plus their battery backups.

But ... a voice recorder might not reveal much. I believe the tape or disc has about two hours of recording time and then just records over itself. All the person in control of the aircraft has to do is keep their mouth shut for that length of time. All the investigators would have to go on is cockpit sounds, and it's kind of hard to differentiate what sound is what switch being thrown.

Regardless, this was a deliberate, human-casued event. That is the simplest explanation. As to Why?, well, the human mind can be an awfully scary place.

LTM,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 CER
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Greg Daspit on April 07, 2014, 09:04:09 PM
Example of a pilot who chose to ditch close to land (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ob8nE4f2ZWc)
Might have turned out better but his engine caught a rock below the water.

The pilot in this case had no choice Greg, no fuel left. He did mention to the hijackers that there was insufficient fuel aboard to reach their chosen destination.

It will be interesting to see what the flight and voice recorders have to say, if they can recover them.
Question? can they be disabled by the crew or when a circuit breaker is pulled?
Even knowing he had no fuel he had time to make choices at 20k feet. Crash land on the island,must have rejected it, crash land farther out to sea, must have rejected it, or crash land close to shore. He made his best choice or his "only choice" as he saw it.  Yes, really need the data recorder. In that link (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/21/what-happened-to-flight-mh370-missing-plane) I posted the pilot said "One question I keep being asked by friends and family is: "Can the pilots turn off the black box?" The answer is no".
I read the voice recorder may have over recored the early stuff. But even recorded silence is a clue
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on April 07, 2014, 09:46:43 PM
"But even recorded silence is a clue"

That's for sure, people may be silent but the airplane makes noises, engines, bleeps, warnings, rattles, alarms etc...
A number of air crash investigations have been solved by a combination of flight data recorder information matched to sounds, not voices in the cockpit.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on April 07, 2014, 09:59:32 PM
On the subject of voice data recorders. You would have thought that in this digital age they would record the voice data for the whole flight digitally onto a memory card instead of a mere two hours using tape.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on April 08, 2014, 12:37:23 AM
Latest search area narrowed down...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-26923235 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-26923235)


Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Kevin Weeks on April 08, 2014, 06:52:55 AM
Maybe at some point after flying over Malaysia they avoided land, not radar.

Why would you do that? 
Wouldn't a water landing in a land plane be worse than any kind of landing on land except in the middle of a city (ala the Hudson ditching)..
Smoke limiting a clear view. And it was dark outside. Less likely to plow into something vertical that you can't see if ditching in the water

smoke limiting view would be a reason to get down to lower altitude. if I am not mistaken the 777 has cockpit windows that you can open for this purpose. being night time may have been a problem. if they had no navigation tools functioning would they have flown on in a straight line with the hope of finding land before fuel ran out?? does a 777 have a mechanical compass in it??
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: John Ousterhout on April 08, 2014, 09:42:47 AM
Does the 777 have a "glass cockpit"?  What instruments are left that wouldn't require electricity?  Does the emergency lighting system have an independent power source?  The mental image of an unlit cockpit without working displays is pretty scary.  What can be done with a flashlight if the digital displays are all blank?  Compass, turn and bank, what else would still be helpful?
If the aircraft flew straight and level, doesn't that imply the autopilot was functioning?  Don't the engines also require electrical power?  If so, then part of the electrical system was working.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: C.W. Herndon on April 08, 2014, 12:22:39 PM
smoke limiting view would be a reason to get down to lower altitude. if I am not mistaken the 777 has cockpit windows that you can open for this purpose. being night time may have been a problem. if they had no navigation tools functioning would they have flown on in a straight line with the hope of finding land before fuel ran out?? does a 777 have a mechanical compass in it??

Yes Kevin, the 777 has a mechanical (magnetic) compass mounted at the top center of the windshield, as in most aircraft, and shown in the picture below from official Boeing video of the 777 cockpit (http://777boeing.com/boeing-777-cockpit/) found here.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: C.W. Herndon on April 08, 2014, 12:43:54 PM
Does the 777 have a "glass cockpit"? 

If the aircraft flew straight and level, doesn't that imply the autopilot was functioning?  Don't the engines also require electrical power?  If so, then part of the electrical system was working.

Yes John, the 777 has a glass cockpit as shown in this video from Boeing. (http://777boeing.com/boeing-777-cockpit/)

The aircraft also has a fly-by-wire control system (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fly-by-wire) which makes it HIGHLY unlikely, and probably impossible, that it could be flown if all electrical power were out.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Kevin Weeks on April 08, 2014, 02:11:36 PM
Does the 777 have a "glass cockpit"? 

If the aircraft flew straight and level, doesn't that imply the autopilot was functioning?  Don't the engines also require electrical power?  If so, then part of the electrical system was working.

Yes John, the 777 has a glass cockpit as shown in this video from Boeing. (http://777boeing.com/boeing-777-cockpit/)

The aircraft also has a fly-by-wire control system (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fly-by-wire) which makes it HIGHLY unlikely, and probably impossible, that it could be flown if all electrical power were out.

found an interesting description of the 777's fly by wire system here http://bits.me.berkeley.edu/me39c/Spring97/Projects/b777/flightdeck2.html

excerpt:

In designing the fly-by-wire system Boeing built in so many safeguards and backups that it almost appeared that they were unsure of their design. For example, there are effectively nine computers that could run the fly-by-wire system alone. In addition, there is a battery backup on top of a primary backup to run the system should the power to the system be interrupted. Engineers also left some of the original cable system intact as another backup system. In other words, Boeing has attempted to counter Murphy's Law such that if anything can go wrong there is a backup!
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on April 08, 2014, 02:14:25 PM
In other words, Boeing has attempted to counter Murphy's Law such that if anything can go wrong there is a backup!

Anything, that is, except the pilot.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Kevin Weeks on April 08, 2014, 02:22:09 PM
In other words, Boeing has attempted to counter Murphy's Law such that if anything can go wrong there is a backup!

Anything, that is, except the pilot.

I don't doubt that the next thing to come will be a complete cockpit control lockout. with the fly by wire controls they could do it and land the plane remotely ... scarey but true....
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on April 08, 2014, 02:25:11 PM
The next thing to come will be to replace the copilot with a Rottweiler.  The dog's job will be to bite the pilot if he touches anything.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: don hirth on April 08, 2014, 06:46:46 PM
Ric, You could do 'standup'!! Who writes your material?
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on April 08, 2014, 07:24:18 PM
Ric, You could do 'standup'!! Who writes your material?

Like most comedians, I steal it.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on April 08, 2014, 11:45:18 PM
Missing Malaysia plane: Search 'regains recorder signal'

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-26950387 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-26950387)

Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on April 09, 2014, 06:05:10 AM
Missing Malaysia plane: Search 'regains recorder signal'

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-26950387 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-26950387)

Getting warmer, good to see.  Thanks Jeff Victor.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on April 09, 2014, 03:37:16 PM
"Unquestionably" located now per FoxNoise (http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/04/09/flight-370-effort-could-soon-shift-from-search-to-recovery/).

Excellent find.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: John Ousterhout on April 09, 2014, 07:47:58 PM
Sorry, I don't click-on Fox.  Are there any new facts?
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on April 09, 2014, 07:52:23 PM
Sorry, I don't click-on Fox.  Are there any new facts?

FOX is merely quoting the opinion of an "expert."  We won't get to "unquestionably" until we have wreckage in hand or conclusively identified in imagery.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Dale O. Beethe on April 09, 2014, 09:16:28 PM
Not to defend Fox here, but they did make it clear in the article that it's the "expert's opinion" that these pings couldn't be from anything else.  As Ric said, the only way we'll know for sure is when they find identifiable wreckage.  Sort of like AE, until you have identifiable wreckage, or something equally persuasive, we won't know for sure.  Hopefully proof will be coming soon in both cases!
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on April 10, 2014, 01:38:45 AM
As I understand it the objective is to narrow down the search area by homing in as much as they can on the 'black box' pings. That way when they put the UAV into the water they will have a better idea of the sea floor topography and a smaller area to cover.
If they do locate the wreckage so soon I will be mightily impressed, good effort all round by lots of countries and people. I was fearing another two year hunt like flight AF-447.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on April 10, 2014, 05:49:31 AM
Not to defend Fox here, but they did make it clear in the article that it's the "expert's opinion" that these pings couldn't be from anything else.  As Ric said, the only way we'll know for sure is when they find identifiable wreckage.  Sort of like AE, until you have identifiable wreckage, or something equally persuasive, we won't know for sure.  Hopefully proof will be coming soon in both cases!

What Fox said... yes.

The whole exercise goes some way to show how there's no substitute for 'hands on' evidence - there have been experts looking in opposite directions on this one for some time - although the deep sea loss has gotten the lion's share of attention.  Perhaps now that will soon be validated, but not until 'hands on'.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on April 10, 2014, 07:13:36 AM
The total lack, so far, of floating debris seems odd.  If you assume that the smaller the pieces, the harder they are to spot, you might speculate that any floating pieces are small which, in turn, suggests that the impact with the ocean was at a very high speed. If that's the case, the wreckage on the ocean bottom will also be in small pieces, making them extremely difficult to find.  If the pinging stops it may be impossible to locate wreckage.
BTW, the Bluefin 21 AUV to be used in the search appears to be the exact same unit that we used in 2012 - and you know how THAT turned out.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Monty Fowler on April 10, 2014, 07:21:43 AM
BTW, the Bluefin 21 AUV to be used in the search appears to be the exact same unit that we used in 2012 - and you know how THAT turned out.

Well ... some people are just slow learners?

LTM, who finds dry paint pretty interesting these days,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 219 CER
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Doug Giese on April 10, 2014, 11:53:23 AM
The total lack, so far, of floating debris seems odd.

What if the plane did a 'soft' landing on the water, like Capt. Sully did on the Hudson?
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on April 10, 2014, 12:04:54 PM
The total lack, so far, of floating debris seems odd.

What if the plane did a 'soft' landing on the water, like Capt. Sully did on the Hudson?

There Indian Ocean is not the Hudson.  A ditching in open ocean by an airplane the size of a 777 that left the airplane intact like Sully's little A320 is almost inconceivable.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on April 10, 2014, 12:28:02 PM
The total lack, so far, of floating debris seems odd.  If you assume that the smaller the pieces, the harder they are to spot, you might speculate that any floating pieces are small which, in turn, suggests that the impact with the ocean was at a very high speed. If that's the case, the wreckage on the ocean bottom will also be in small pieces, making them extremely difficult to find.  If the pinging stops it may be impossible to locate wreckage.
BTW, the Bluefin 21 AUV to be used in the search appears to be the exact same unit that we used in 2012 - and you know how THAT turned out.

Agree and this oceanic loss still isn't confirmed. 

I'll spare us my thoughts on how these things get handled and communicated by various guvmints as 'foil hat territory', but it's still possible that "we'll never know for sure", despite the polished apple that's been put before us about the Indian Ocean.

But of course any debris had time to drift, it's true, and eventually and largely sink - been a month now.  And of course, short of finding debris, this apple will be hard for some - me for one, to swallow.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: James G. Stoveken on April 10, 2014, 12:44:00 PM
A ditching in open ocean by an airplane the size of a 777 that left the airplane intact like Sully's little A320 is almost inconceivable.

"Almost" being key.  Before Sully, the scenario of a jet running into a flock of birds over NYC, losing both engines, landing intact in the Hudson River without any loss of life and very few minor injuries was "almost inconceivable".  But it happened.  Just sayin'...
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on April 10, 2014, 02:02:46 PM
A ditching in open ocean by an airplane the size of a 777 that left the airplane intact like Sully's little A320 is almost inconceivable.

"Almost" being key.  Before Sully, the scenario of a jet running into a flock of birds over NYC, losing both engines, landing intact in the Hudson River without any loss of life and very few minor injuries was "almost inconceivable".  But it happened.  Just sayin'...

Consider that a soft ditching (is that a contradiction in terms or what, Sully notwithstanding) isn't too likely in the likely event of the 777 being a big lawn dart by the time it ran out of fuel and piled in sans-pilot (just assumin')...

Dead bird plummeting into an area of nearly always ragged seas wouldn't (there's that dangerous word) be pretty.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on April 10, 2014, 02:12:11 PM
There is also this.  A skilled ditching requires a skilled pilot in control who wants to live.  Under what possible scenario could that be the case for MH370?
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on April 10, 2014, 03:08:54 PM
There is also this.  A skilled ditching requires a skilled pilot in control who wants to live.  Under what possible scenario could that be the case for MH370?

One where it never deviated the way it did... good point, kind of sums up that likelihood.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Dave Ross Wilkinson on April 10, 2014, 03:29:33 PM
I have to now quote from the former DOT Inspector General Mary Schaivo (yes, I watch CNN for MH370 info), or rather her paraphrase on the CNN web page:

http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/10/world/asia/malaysia-airlines-plane/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

'...She said the reported dip could have occurred in response to a loss of pressure, to reach a level where pressurization was not needed and those aboard the plane would have been able to breathe without oxygen, or to get out of the way of commercial traffic, which typically flies at higher altitudes.
That would have been necessary had the plane's transponder been turned off and it lost communications. "If you don't have any communications, you need to get out of other traffic," Schiavo said.

"We still don't have any motive and any evidence of a crime yet," she said, adding that most radar can track planes at altitudes below 4,000 feet, so the plane's descent may not have indicated any attempt by whoever was controlling it to hide.'

I agree with Ms. Schaivo.  No proof, nothing but conjecture that the pilot was up to no good.  I realize that those here have lots more experience in aviation than I. My only credentials being that I've flown (only as a passenger)  on every commercial US airliner from DC-3, DC-6 to 777.  And I am older than dirt and unusually stubborn.  Just don't hit me again, OK?  I'm with you guys.

Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Gus Rubio on April 10, 2014, 03:37:49 PM
Good to hear they found the pings again.  As others here have said, they're getting close.  And to echo Ric's wondering, I'm amazed there has been no floating evidence spotted.  Hate to say it, but bodies should float for a time, and there are plenty of other things in a plane like that that will float as well, and for longer.  I would think that the currents in the search area would be known, or easily established (weather would of course make that harder to rely on).  And there has to be some kind of computer models that they can use to test assumptions and scenarios, resulting in debris patterns they can search for.  Right?  I'm about as far from an expert at this sort of thing as you can get an still be a human, but that has to exist. 

Interesting parallels with the AE/FN search, down to the use of the same Bluefin AUV.  History repeats itself.  But just as we will find AE/FN, they will find MH370.  Lots of smart people searching for both planes.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on April 10, 2014, 04:07:50 PM
'...She said the reported dip could have occurred in response to a loss of pressure, to reach a level where pressurization was not needed and those aboard the plane would have been able to breathe without oxygen, or to get out of the way of commercial traffic, which typically flies at higher altitudes.
That would have been necessary had the plane's transponder been turned off and it lost communications. "If you don't have any communications, you need to get out of other traffic," Schiavo said.

"We still don't have any motive and any evidence of a crime yet," she said, adding that most radar can track planes at altitudes below 4,000 feet, so the plane's descent may not have indicated any attempt by whoever was controlling it to hide.'

 I don't challenge her when we're on the air (that would be rude) but there are lots of things that Mary says that don't make sense to me.  Somebody turned off the transponder then heads for the deck to avoid traffic?  What sense does that make?   Most radar can track planes at altitudes below 4,000 feet?  Radar is line of sight.  How low it can pick up a target depends on how far it is from the target and whether there is any intervening terrain. 
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on April 10, 2014, 04:19:27 PM
'...She said the reported dip could have occurred in response to a loss of pressure, to reach a level where pressurization was not needed and those aboard the plane would have been able to breathe without oxygen, or to get out of the way of commercial traffic, which typically flies at higher altitudes.
That would have been necessary had the plane's transponder been turned off and it lost communications. "If you don't have any communications, you need to get out of other traffic," Schiavo said.

"We still don't have any motive and any evidence of a crime yet," she said, adding that most radar can track planes at altitudes below 4,000 feet, so the plane's descent may not have indicated any attempt by whoever was controlling it to hide.'

 I don't challenge her when we're on the air (that would be rude) but there are lots of things that Mary says that don't make sense to me.  Somebody turned off the transponder then heads for the deck to avoid traffic?  What sense does that make?   Most radar can track planes at altitudes below 4,000 feet?  Radar is line of sight.  How low it can pick up a target depends on how far it is from the target and whether there is any intervening terrain.

You're quite a gent and of course that's the 'right thing to do', but as I recall Schiavo was really more of an IG operative and not highly technically qualified.  If I got that wrong then hats off to the lady, but she's a technical dud in my book and has now underscored that with the radar comment.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Dave Ross Wilkinson on April 10, 2014, 04:23:36 PM
I don't fair to say that we know that somebody switched off the transponder.  We know it went off, but we don't know if it was switched off. 
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on April 10, 2014, 04:39:01 PM
I don't fair to say that we know that somebody switched off the transponder.  We know it went off, but we don't know if it was switched off.

As has been said by people who are far more familiar with the airplane than I, an electrical failure so massive as to defeat the multiple backup systems to the multiple back up systems would make the airplane unflyable.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: John Ousterhout on April 10, 2014, 08:31:31 PM
Do the backup systems include resetting the transponder to the original settings?  The Cessna 152 I rent, with it's fancy new instrument panel, loses its memory if the main buss is pulled.  I'm curious what the default settings and headings might be for the 777 system?  I'm considering the situation after a massive electrical fault, at night, with traffic in the vicinity.   2 hours of data might not tell what happened.
Sorting out evidence of an airliner from the "normal" floating junk is a very difficult process.  Not many folks realize just how much junk is floating around out there.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on April 10, 2014, 08:38:20 PM
Do the backup systems include resetting the transponder to the original settings?  The Cessna 152 I rent, with it's fancy new instrument panel, loses its memory if the main buss is pulled.

I don't know, but I suspect 777's systems are a wee bit more sophisticated than the 152's.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on April 10, 2014, 09:06:58 PM
Occams Razor

:  a scientific and philosophic rule that entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily which is interpreted as requiring that the simplest of competing theories be preferred to the more complex or that explanations of unknown phenomena be sought first in terms of known quantities.

The black boxes will be the judges, if they can be found and recovered.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on April 11, 2014, 08:03:22 AM
I don't fair to say that we know that somebody switched off the transponder.  We know it went off, but we don't know if it was switched off.

As has been said by people who are far more familiar with the airplane than I, an electrical failure so massive as to defeat the multiple backup systems to the multiple back up systems would make the airplane unflyable.

This one didn't smell like a massive, indiscriminant loss of power to me for that reason.  It had balanced flight for some time apparently (whichever direction...) which would require not only FBW still up but guidance from some source - whether human or silicon (even if random vector), until either the fires went out and went sea dart, or landed somewhere...

Latest pings said not from black boxes.  Running out of time on the 'good' pings that were heard.  Narrowed search, but still lots of deep, deep water.  Interesting time we live in.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on April 11, 2014, 08:17:52 AM
Occams Razor

:  a scientific and philosophic rule that entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily which is interpreted as requiring that the simplest of competing theories be preferred to the more complex or that explanations of unknown phenomena be sought first in terms of known quantities.

The black boxes will be the judges, if they can be found and recovered.

I hope they will be found but remain a bit pessimistic.

To me the razor suggests a deliberate, selective disabling of key systems (those that would betray airplane movement) followed by maneuvers that suggest a) a turn toward safety, maybe, or b) a turn toward hours of evasion and eventual disappearance. 

If the former, then a ghost plane could have developed one supposes, followed by loss in the sea, one also supposes.  A crew of healthy mind and body and intent is not likely to drift to a remote ocean area unless there were overwhelming mechanical reasons.  If that is the case then it would be awfully good to gain the remains - we need to learn how that happened.

If the latter, it's now moot - ain't going to work unless they just want to pile the missile into a backwater tower somewhere.  Rah.

What follows the latter condition is also counter to living memory of terrorist events where there is typically an eagerness for credit; why?  Premature?  If the purpose was to use the plane for bad reasons - secrecy still needed.  And it has failed, if so - Occam suggests to me if that was the case then it's too late - foiled, they'll never be able to do that now.  Nothing to brag about.

And nothing the powers that be care to have the public worried about either.  We should be more chilled by the prospect of a dead airplane wandering into the Indian Ocean to disappear than a stolen one that can be more easily understood.  I have severe personal about a fine Boeing so well proven suddenly having a devastating self-inflicted wound.  If a bomb, then how such massive crew and apparently passenger incapacitation yet airplane survival?  A failed hijacking?  Maybe something like that, but here the razor dulls for me.

I really do hope they find it out there, we need to know how it got to that place if that's the case.  Not just for closure but for the learning - tombstone lessons are the most costly and shouldn't be wasted. 

One last razor shot - the airworthiness regulators aren't very noisy on this one so far, so there must be a lot of confidence in the Boeing (as I also have)... so what do 'they' think really failed on that flight?
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Bruce Thomas on April 11, 2014, 08:31:16 AM
... Latest pings said not from black boxes.  Running out of time on the 'good' pings that were heard.  Narrowed search, but still lots of deep, deep water.  Interesting time we live in.

Talk of "pings not from black boxes" reminds me of "The Hunt for Red October (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jr0JaXfKj68)".
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on April 11, 2014, 09:24:25 AM
... Latest pings said not from black boxes.  Running out of time on the 'good' pings that were heard.  Narrowed search, but still lots of deep, deep water.  Interesting time we live in.

Talk of "pings not from black boxes" reminds me of "The Hunt for Red October (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jr0JaXfKj68)".

Connery's finest hour as Ramius, indeed.

Guvmints do play high stakes games, one man's ping is another's epiphany.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on April 11, 2014, 09:44:40 AM
Occams Razor

:  a scientific and philosophic rule that entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily which is interpreted as requiring that the simplest of competing theories be preferred to the more complex or that explanations of unknown phenomena be sought first in terms of known quantities.

The black boxes will be the judges, if they can be found and recovered.

Ahh yes, William of Occam (or Ockham), c.1287 -1347, English Franciscan friar and charter member of TIGHAR.
His famous "razor" is often misunderstood to mean that the simplest answer is most likely to be the correct answer.  What Friar Will supposedly said was, "Entia non sunt multiplicanda praetor necessitatem" (Entities must not be multiplied without necessity).  In other words, the simplest answer that accounts for all the necessary entities is most likely to be correct.   In the case of MH370 we have an array of "entities" (facts) that can be most simply explained as the actions of a rogue pilot.  In the case of the Earhart disappearance we have an array of "entities" (radio bearings, distress calls, sightings, photographs, the castaway, artifacts, and on and on) that are most simply explained by the presence of Earhart on Gardner Island.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on April 11, 2014, 12:10:31 PM
Wouldn't be the first time, by far.

Malaysia Airlines mystery: was it another 'ghost flight'?

http://www.smh.com.au/world/malaysia-airlines-mystery-was-it-another-ghost-flight-20140325-hvmn3.html (http://www.smh.com.au/world/malaysia-airlines-mystery-was-it-another-ghost-flight-20140325-hvmn3.html)

And, Swiss Air flight 111 gives us some insight into how something as simple as detecting a smell of smoke in the cockpit can rapidly develop within 13 minutes into total systems failure.

"About 13 minutes after the abnormal odour was first detected, the aircraft's flight data recorder began to record a rapid succession of aircraft systems-related failures. The flight crew declared an emergency and indicated a need to land immediately. About one minute later, radio communications and secondary radar contact with the aircraft were lost, and the flight recorders stopped functioning. About five and one-half minutes later, at 10:31 p.m. Atlantic daylight saving time (ADT), the aircraft crashed into the ocean about five nautical miles southwest of Peggy's Cove, Nova Scotia, Canada. The aircraft was destroyed and there were no survivors."
The final report into the accident quite rightly cleared the crew however, it did question Swiss Air and consequently the crews procedures, safety methods and priorities in the case of smoke/fire in the aircraft.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Monty Fowler on April 11, 2014, 12:14:46 PM
It doesn't matter how "technologically advanced" a civilization or anything it builds is - fire is, has been and always will be one of the things that can turn all of it into nothing more than ashes anytime it wants to.

LTM,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 CER
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on April 11, 2014, 07:50:42 PM
Until the flight recorders are recovered (if) then all possibilities are still on the table.

Hijack? yes but no one has claimed anything and they would appear to have been going nowhere.

Suicide? Again yes but it will have been the longest suicide flight in history, so far.

Accident? Again, another possibility but, if so then we have to learn from this so it doesn't occur again.

I would suggest that these will be the most eagerly awaited black box recoveries ever.



Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Monty Fowler on April 12, 2014, 08:50:20 AM
My optimism is starting to wane ... the meter is running on the pinger batteries and if those die before the searchers can recover the black boxes, well ...

It's roughly comparable to trying to find a single penny. In a football field. At night. Without lights. While suspended 50 feet above the field. And did I mention it was raining?

LTM, who still has his fingers crossed for this one,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 CER
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on April 12, 2014, 08:17:01 PM
My optimism is starting to wane ... the meter is running on the pinger batteries and if those die before the searchers can recover the black boxes, well ...
It's roughly comparable to trying to find a single penny. In a football field. At night. Without lights. While suspended 50 feet above the field. And did I mention it was raining?

LTM, who still has his fingers crossed for this one,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 CER

They have not been able to regain the signals. The timespan fits in with the batteries giving out. :(
Anyone recall the Helios Airways flight 522? A flight attendant with a couple of hundred hours in Cessnas tried to rescue the situation, couldn't work out the radio but had a go at flying the plane, sadly the engines flamed out on him and that was that. Top man, full marks for guts and determination.

Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Mark Appel on April 13, 2014, 07:54:37 PM
Hmmm. CNN reports on citizen investigators of Flight 370... So, are we "Avgeeks?"

http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/13/travel/aviation-geek-culture/index.html?hpt=hp_t3

Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Tim Gard on April 13, 2014, 11:57:09 PM

They have not been able to regain the signals. The timespan fits in with the batteries giving out. :(
Anyone recall the Helios Airways flight 522? A flight attendant with a couple of hundred hours in Cessnas tried to rescue the situation, couldn't work out the radio but had a go at flying the plane, sadly the engines flamed out on him and that was that. Top man, full marks for guts and determination.

Flight 522 ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GywVDgKlg6g

Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Monty Fowler on April 15, 2014, 06:55:17 AM
TIGHAR has been down this road already: http://news.yahoo.com/malaysia-jet-search-area-too-deep-submarine-004242501.html (http://news.yahoo.com/malaysia-jet-search-area-too-deep-submarine-004242501.html)

I think the "search" had morphed into the "just plain dumb stumbled upon it luck" stage.

LTM,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 CER
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Bruce Thomas on April 15, 2014, 08:21:42 AM
A key difference with this search (brought to mind by the Bluefin AUV prematurely returning to the surface on its own on its first dive) that comes to my mind: if that AUV gets lost down in the depths of the Indian Ocean, there won't be the talented Wolfgang Burnside and his marvelous ROV to go rescue it!
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on April 15, 2014, 08:54:46 AM
The Bluefin 21 operated by Phoenix International is giving them trouble?  I'm shocked, SHOCKED!
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on April 15, 2014, 08:59:02 AM
Smoke on the water...
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Mark Appel on April 15, 2014, 10:32:00 AM
My non-TIGHAR (but I'm working on them) work colleagues were amused at my loud, groaning reaction to the announcement that they were going to deploy the Bluefin 21... "Oh, they'll never find it now..."
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Monty Fowler on April 16, 2014, 09:04:04 AM
http://news.yahoo.com/mini-sub-second-mission-first-mh370-search-aborted-234405534.html (http://news.yahoo.com/mini-sub-second-mission-first-mh370-search-aborted-234405534.html) - "The hunt for a missing Malaysian plane suffered another setback Wednesday when a second seabed search by a mini-submarine was cut short due to "technical" troubles after the first also aborted in very deep water."

Been There, Done That, Got the T-Shirt.

LTM,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 219 CER
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on April 16, 2014, 09:25:58 AM
My non-TIGHAR (but I'm working on them) work colleagues were amused at my loud, groaning reaction to the announcement that they were going to deploy the Bluefin 21... "Oh, they'll never find it now..."

CNN has asked me to discuss our experience with this particular fish today at 2pm and again at 2:45.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: John Ousterhout on April 16, 2014, 09:38:06 AM
How well does the Bluefin's sonar work when it must stay a couple thousand feet above the bottom?  Would the resolution be good enough to make out a wing section?  Would the resolution be too poor to even see "recent signs of habitation?"

Also, what is the preferred search pattern - "mowing the lawn" back and forth, or an expanding rectangle centered on the best-guess location?
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on April 16, 2014, 09:44:58 AM
How well does the Bluefin's sonar work when it must stay a couple thousand feet above the bottom?

As you would expect, the further away from the target, the lower the resolution.

Would the resolution be good enough to make out a wing section?  Would the resolution be too poor to even see "recent signs of habitation?"

Hard to say, but resolution is not the only problem.  The sonar's ability to detect an object depends a great deal on at what angle the sounds waves hit the target.  At Niku, the AUV's sonar flew right over the huge mass of wreckage from the stern of Norwich City and never "saw" it.  We found it with the ROV and told them where it was.  YThey went back and tried again from a different angle and were able to see it.

Also, what is the preferred search pattern - "mowing the lawn" back and forth, or an expanding rectangle centered on the best-guess location?

They generally mow the lawn.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Mark Appel on April 16, 2014, 10:02:06 AM
How well does the Bluefin's sonar work when it must stay a couple thousand feet above the bottom?  Would the resolution be good enough to make out a wing section?  Would the resolution be too poor to even see "recent signs of habitation?"

Also, what is the preferred search pattern - "mowing the lawn" back and forth, or an expanding rectangle centered on the best-guess location?

"Pattern?" Here's the preferred pattern I'd like to see... Potential Client 'A' solicits underwater sidescanning sonar search capability from Vendor 'X." Vendor X represents a service level of performance to Potential Client A. Based upon that representation and an agreed-to price, Vendor deploys said capability and it works as represented... At least most of the time.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on April 16, 2014, 10:24:32 AM
There's a lot of misinformation being bandied about in the media. (No surprise there.)
The search with the AUV is being described in such a way as to make it sound like a U.S. Navy operation. It isn't.  The Bluefin 21 is often described as a "U.S. Navy drone."  Not so.  The AUV is owned by Phoenix International Holdings of Largo, MD.  Phoenix is operating the AUV under contract to the USN.  All the Navy is doing is passing your tax dollars along to Phoenix.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Monty Fowler on April 16, 2014, 12:47:35 PM
 http://www.phnx-international.com/news/Underwater_Search_for_Amelia_Earharts_Plane.pdf (http://www.phnx-international.com/news/Underwater_Search_for_Amelia_Earharts_Plane.pdf)

Everyone has their own point of view. This made for brief but interesting reading.

LTM,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 CER
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on April 16, 2014, 12:50:41 PM
...and speaking of media misinformation, Mary Schiavo was busy giving 'expertise' on the ferry boat disaster in South Korea on CNN this morning...

Howzat, an IG office weenie analyzing technical mishap.  In that discussion come the now-irresistible officious undertones of "the U.S. of course will be investigating" - nonsense on foreign soil and seas, unless invited.  Has the world gone crazy?  Or is it just the media lens...
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on April 16, 2014, 01:07:14 PM
http://www.phnx-international.com/news/Underwater_Search_for_Amelia_Earharts_Plane.pdf (http://www.phnx-international.com/news/Underwater_Search_for_Amelia_Earharts_Plane.pdf)

Everyone has their own point of view. This made for brief but interesting reading.

LTM,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 CER

Yep, and after reading that glowing piece, mine is "53 hours" in "8 days" - and the vendor ought to be ashamed of themselves for that. 

All told that was a $2.2M effort and I realize there were many other substantial costs, incluiding taxi and platform fares, but that got us 53 hours of look-see at a square mile of sub-sea terrain at around $41,509 per UAV hour because the thing didn't perform as expected.  A flat square mile would be around 27,878,400 square feet, and this was rough terrain, so much more - but that would also come to around 526,007 square feet scanned per hour, or 8767 square feet per minute.  In rought terrain, that suggests perhaps something less than optimal scanning of the area, at least compared to what TIGHAR had expected.

Maybe what the U.S.N. is funneling out of our pockets and into that effort in the Indian Ocean will further refine the thing, but 'Bluefin' still seems a little blue in the face as the race heats up.  Tough environment, I know - and I guess we take what the world has to offer in technology for reaching hard to reach areas.

If the airliner is even down there... and I really have to wonder, is this really the best resource the U.S.N. could muster?   Don't get me started... now where's that foil hat...  ::)
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Mark Appel on April 16, 2014, 04:07:15 PM
http://www.phnx-international.com/news/Underwater_Search_for_Amelia_Earharts_Plane.pdf (http://www.phnx-international.com/news/Underwater_Search_for_Amelia_Earharts_Plane.pdf)

Everyone has their own point of view. This made for brief but interesting reading.

LTM,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 CER

Yep, and after reading that glowing piece, mine is "53 hours" in "8 days" - and the vendor ought to be ashamed of themselves for that. 

All told that was a $2.2M effort and I realize there were many other substantial costs, incluiding taxi and platform fares, but that got us 53 hours of look-see at a square mile of sub-sea terrain at around $41,509 per UAV hour because the thing didn't perform as expected.  A flat square mile would be around 27,878,400 square feet, and this was rough terrain, so much more - but that would also come to around 526,007 square feet scanned per hour, or 8767 square feet per minute.  In rought terrain, that suggests perhaps something less than optimal scanning of the area, at least compared to what TIGHAR had expected.

Maybe what the U.S.N. is funneling out of our pockets and into that effort in the Indian Ocean will further refine the thing, but 'Bluefin' still seems a little blue in the face as the race heats up.  Tough environment, I know - and I guess we take what the world has to offer in technology for reaching hard to reach areas.

If the airliner is even down there... and I really have to wonder, is this really the best resource the U.S.N. could muster?   Don't get me started... now where's that foil hat...  ::)

I was thinking the same thing, Jeff. That is, where the hell is the U.S. Navy in all of this? I mean aside from hiring contractors... Now, given the international aspect of the search, maybe this is an appropriate level of involvement for them. But I was thinking more in terms of technical capability.

SEAWOLF and VIRGINIA class attack subs have on-board side scanning systems, deployable in vehicles similar to the notorious Bluefin. Not to mention of course, passive sonar sensors up the ying-yang (nautical term).
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on April 17, 2014, 05:25:29 AM
http://www.phnx-international.com/news/Underwater_Search_for_Amelia_Earharts_Plane.pdf (http://www.phnx-international.com/news/Underwater_Search_for_Amelia_Earharts_Plane.pdf)

Everyone has their own point of view. This made for brief but interesting reading.

LTM,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 CER

Yep, and after reading that glowing piece, mine is "53 hours" in "8 days" - and the vendor ought to be ashamed of themselves for that. 

All told that was a $2.2M effort and I realize there were many other substantial costs, incluiding taxi and platform fares, but that got us 53 hours of look-see at a square mile of sub-sea terrain at around $41,509 per UAV hour because the thing didn't perform as expected.  A flat square mile would be around 27,878,400 square feet, and this was rough terrain, so much more - but that would also come to around 526,007 square feet scanned per hour, or 8767 square feet per minute.  In rought terrain, that suggests perhaps something less than optimal scanning of the area, at least compared to what TIGHAR had expected.

Maybe what the U.S.N. is funneling out of our pockets and into that effort in the Indian Ocean will further refine the thing, but 'Bluefin' still seems a little blue in the face as the race heats up.  Tough environment, I know - and I guess we take what the world has to offer in technology for reaching hard to reach areas.

If the airliner is even down there... and I really have to wonder, is this really the best resource the U.S.N. could muster?   Don't get me started... now where's that foil hat...  ::)

I was thinking the same thing, Jeff. That is, where the hell is the U.S. Navy in all of this? I mean aside from hiring contractors... Now, given the international aspect of the search, maybe this is an appropriate level of involvement for them. But I was thinking more in terms of technical capability.

SEAWOLF and VIRGINIA class attack subs have on-board side scanning systems, deployable in vehicles similar to the notorious Bluefin. Not to mention of course, passive sonar sensors up the ying-yang (nautical term).

Well, most here know what I tend to think about flight 370...

The big dogs that don't bark sometimes reveal the most about where the fox has not been. 

I won't be surprised if this one just 'ran out of time' and winds up never found... it's a very large and strange world with some deep holes - in just the right places it seems.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Mark Appel on April 17, 2014, 10:38:47 AM
...it's a very large and strange world with some deep holes - in just the right places it seems...

Indeed. We tend to kid ourselves that world has shrunk to the point nothing can hide...tain't true.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on April 21, 2014, 05:57:31 AM
Malaysia MH370: No trace yet after two-thirds of sub's scan

Again, very reminiscent of Air France AF-447 which took 2 years of unsuccessful searching and scanning in four separate phases.

https://www.informs.org/ORMS-Today/Public-Articles/August-Volume-38-Number-4/In-Search-of-Air-France-Flight-447 (https://www.informs.org/ORMS-Today/Public-Articles/August-Volume-38-Number-4/In-Search-of-Air-France-Flight-447)



Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on April 21, 2014, 09:34:17 AM
Malaysia MH370: No trace yet after two-thirds of sub's scan

Again, very reminiscent of Air France AF-447 which took 2 years of unsuccessful searching and scanning in four separate phases.

https://www.informs.org/ORMS-Today/Public-Articles/August-Volume-38-Number-4/In-Search-of-Air-France-Flight-447 (https://www.informs.org/ORMS-Today/Public-Articles/August-Volume-38-Number-4/In-Search-of-Air-France-Flight-447)

That's good perspective, Jeff Victor, thanks.  It is a tough environment, and one hopes all us who don tin foil sleeping caps in our sleep are just plain wrong, of course... ;)
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ken Nielsen on April 23, 2014, 06:18:20 AM
BREAKING NEWS: Pieces of wreckage from MH370 may have washed ashore in Western Australia, including one which is 'length of a car with distinct rivets in it'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2611137/Have-MH370-parts-washed-ashore-Western-Australia-examine-unidentified-material-links-missing-Malaysian-plane.html#ixzz2zi9m4rKg
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on April 23, 2014, 09:43:40 AM
Now there would be a break.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Mark Appel on April 23, 2014, 11:08:47 AM
BREAKING NEWS: Pieces of wreckage from MH370 may have washed ashore in Western Australia, including one which is 'length of a car with distinct rivets in it'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2611137/Have-MH370-parts-washed-ashore-Western-Australia-examine-unidentified-material-links-missing-Malaysian-plane.html#ixzz2zi9m4rKg
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

How many times have heard a variation on this? How many times have we heard descriptions of large pieces of aluminum floating? My Spidey senses not buyin' it...
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on April 23, 2014, 12:51:08 PM
Rest assured, the Australian authorities are already damping expectations - it's not credibly believed to be part of the 777.

Sad, seems we still have no material clue - not one bobbing seat cushion found in all that surveillance...
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Mark Appel on April 23, 2014, 02:12:38 PM
Rest assured, the Australian authorities are already damping expectations - it's not credibly believed to be part of the 777.

Sad, seems we still have no material clue - not one bobbing seat cushion found in all that surveillance...

Nope. Nuttin'. Nada. The Empty Set. It does seem so intuitive that something buoyant would pop up. Only underscores our tendency to underestimate the vastness of the oceans... I did hear that someone in the search or pundit communities has speculated about doing a total reset on the search, from A-Z...
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ken Nielsen on April 23, 2014, 03:02:18 PM
I guess the appearance of solid objects close up had me believing for a moment, but no:

Sheet metal with rivets that washed ashore in Western Australia is NOT wreckage from missing flight MH370, officials confirm

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2611137/Have-MH370-parts-washed-ashore-Western-Australia-examine-unidentified-material-links-missing-Malaysian-plane.html#ixzz2zkGMwbQc
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Dan Swift on April 24, 2014, 07:55:16 AM
"Sheet metal with rivets"...why does that sound familiar?   But seriously, sheet metal with rivets can float?  That could be an interesting development. 
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: John Ousterhout on April 24, 2014, 08:54:25 AM
"Washed ashore" doesn't necessarily mean "floats on water".  It can also mean "easily moved by currents".  It's the difference between flotsam and jetsam.
The giant chunks of coral seen on the reef at Niku didn't float there either.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Tim Mellon on April 24, 2014, 09:45:53 AM
Since aluminum is only ~ 90% as dense as water, presumably it should float.

Damned decimal points...

Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: John Ousterhout on April 24, 2014, 09:51:53 AM
Better double check your figures.  Aluminum density is 2.7 gm/mL.  (2.7 times the density of water)
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on April 24, 2014, 09:29:38 PM
Rest assured, the Australian authorities are already damping expectations - it's not credibly believed to be part of the 777.

Sad, seems we still have no material clue - not one bobbing seat cushion found in all that surveillance...

Nope. Nuttin'. Nada. The Empty Set. It does seem so intuitive that something buoyant would pop up. Only underscores our tendency to underestimate the vastness of the oceans... I did hear that someone in the search or pundit communities has speculated about doing a total reset on the search, from A-Z...

Which is exactly what they did for Air France AF-447 Mark. That's when it got really complicated but, it got results.

"Our approach to the AF 447 search is rooted in classical Bayesian inference, which allows the organization of available data with associated uncertainties and computation of the PDF for target location given these data."

The full successful method is explained here...

https://www.informs.org/ORMS-Today/Public-Articles/August-Volume-38-Number-4/In-Search-of-Air-France-Flight-447 (https://www.informs.org/ORMS-Today/Public-Articles/August-Volume-38-Number-4/In-Search-of-Air-France-Flight-447)

And contains some nice graphics and formulae
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Mark Appel on April 24, 2014, 09:41:46 PM
Rest assured, the Australian authorities are already damping expectations - it's not credibly believed to be part of the 777.

Sad, seems we still have no material clue - not one bobbing seat cushion found in all that surveillance...

Nope. Nuttin'. Nada. The Empty Set. It does seem so intuitive that something buoyant would pop up. Only underscores our tendency to underestimate the vastness of the oceans... I did hear that someone in the search or pundit communities has speculated about doing a total reset on the search, from A-Z...

Which is exactly what they did for Air France AF-447 Mark. That's when it got really complicated but, it got results.

"Our approach to the AF 447 search is rooted in classical Bayesian inference, which allows the organization of available data with associated uncertainties and computation of the PDF for target location given these data."

The full successful method is explained here...

https://www.informs.org/ORMS-Today/Public-Articles/August-Volume-38-Number-4/In-Search-of-Air-France-Flight-447 (https://www.informs.org/ORMS-Today/Public-Articles/August-Volume-38-Number-4/In-Search-of-Air-France-Flight-447)

And contains some nice graphics and formulae

Yikes. Thanks Jeff. You got the "complicated" right :) But I have a feeling that's where this search is headed--into a time-intensive grinder through the data.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on April 25, 2014, 06:57:20 AM
Yes, it needs to be found Mark to find out the exact cause. Mischief or mechanical the industry needs to know in order to put measures into place that may prevent it happening again.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Dan Swift on April 25, 2014, 06:59:14 AM
Wow!  Didn't mean to 'start' something.  But very interesting info.  I was just hinting at a similarity to the Tighar artifact that also must have "washed up on shore" at some point. 
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Mark Appel on April 25, 2014, 09:38:51 AM
Wow!  Didn't mean to 'start' something.  But very interesting info.  I was just hinting at a similarity to the Tighar artifact that also must have "washed up on shore" at some point.

Understood. Well I think it's fair to say there is a difference between the sort of debris that results from a recent event and floats as a matter of its buoyancy and that sort of debris that's heavier than water, sinks, and over time is deposited through sheer, mechanical force of wave and storm action.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on April 28, 2014, 08:23:59 PM
The search for the missing Malaysian plane is entering a "new phase", Australia has announced, after the initial undersea search found nothing.

PM Tony Abbott said that "a much larger" area of the ocean floor would now be targeted.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-27184295 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-27184295)

The biggest drawback with having to expand the search area is that a lot of that area is out of the reach of the Bluefin-21.

Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on April 29, 2014, 08:08:16 AM
If you think Earhart got lost...
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on April 29, 2014, 08:10:57 AM
The biggest drawback with having to expand the search area is that a lot of that area is out of the reach of the Bluefin-21.

That's actually a plus.  Maybe they'll now switch to technology that works.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on April 29, 2014, 08:17:24 AM
And with no apologies to those who can't stand FoxNoise - a new location may be coming (http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/04/29/plane-wreckage-claim-credibility-being-assessed-malaysia-says/?intcmp=latestnews)...
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: John Klier on April 29, 2014, 12:19:11 PM
More on the new claim.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/malaysia-airlines-flight-370-georesonance-wreckage-of-a-commercial-airliner-found/

Interesting data shown in those graphics. If it were true it would mean the aircraft sunk pretty much intact.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on April 29, 2014, 12:56:07 PM
Fascinating development.  Of course, if the plane can be that far away from the presumed area it can also be in a hangar somewhere.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Albert Durrell on April 29, 2014, 03:40:13 PM
Wonder what this technology would cost for their "remote sensing" of Nikumaroro.

http://www.georesonance.com/
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on April 29, 2014, 04:36:32 PM
Wonder what this technology would cost for their "remote sensing" of Nikumaroro.

I can't imagine that it would have sufficient resolution to pick up wreckage that small.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Dale O. Beethe on April 29, 2014, 04:55:03 PM
How deep is the water where this anomaly is?
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on April 29, 2014, 04:58:04 PM
How deep is the water where this anomaly is?

About 600 feet.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Dale O. Beethe on April 29, 2014, 05:49:09 PM
That should make it a bit easier to investigate.  I realize that's still not exactly a farm pond, but at least it's not several miles deep, either.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on April 29, 2014, 06:06:38 PM
Very interesting data - that is a distinctive set of signatures of key elements that point to the picture they're sharing.

My, my - where might someone hide a 777 that's too hot to keep...
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Joy Diane Forster on April 30, 2014, 10:57:56 AM
Anyone heard of GeoResonance before?   The pictures look almost too good to me -- like seeing man-made things in coral formations which aren't there.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Kevin Weeks on April 30, 2014, 11:17:58 AM
Anyone heard of GeoResonance before?   The pictures look almost too good to me -- like seeing man-made things in coral formations which aren't there.

it sounds like a publicity grab for the company in my inexpert opinion of course.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on April 30, 2014, 01:46:29 PM
Anyone heard of GeoResonance before?   The pictures look almost too good to me -- like seeing man-made things in coral formations which aren't there.

Check them out - GeoResonance certainly has credibility. (http://GeoResonance.com)

As hard as it is to believe, this is rather impressive technology with the means to look far deeper and at far less detectable stuff than a 777 at the depth reported here.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Monty Fowler on April 30, 2014, 02:59:31 PM
The final resting place of Flight 370 will eventually be found, even if all but the Chinese eventually give up (they have a much bigger dog in this fight than any other nation).

As to the WHY  ... the human mind is a far darker and scarier place than many of us want to realize. Most of us are able to keep the demons and hobgoblins in check by wrapping a thin veneer of civility over it all. But it is a thin veneer. And once it is pierced ... all bets are off, and all manner of deviltry can be unleashed. Including things that in our wildest imaginings we would never believe possible.

LTM, who prefers to have a good flashlight in the dark places,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189CER
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Mark Pearce on April 30, 2014, 03:01:57 PM
Anyone heard of GeoResonance before?   The pictures look almost too good to me -- like seeing man-made things in coral formations which aren't there.

Check them out - GeoResonance certainly has credibility. (http://GeoResonance.com)

As hard as it is to believe, this is rather impressive technology with the means to look far deeper and at far less detectable stuff than a 777 at the depth reported here.


Forgive me Jeff if I remain skeptical. 

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/debunked-exploration-company-georesonance-believes-it-may-have-found-mh370.3558/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-range_locator#Media_exposure_and_controversy

"A long-range locator is a class of fraudulent devices purported to be a type of metal detector, supposedly able to detect a variety of substances, including gold, drugs and explosives; most are said to operate on a principle of resonance with the material being detected.

Theory of operation

Many treasure hunters swear by the devices; however, skeptics have examined the internals of many such devices and found those that have been examined to be incapable of operating as advertised, and have dismissed them as overpriced dowsing rods or similarly useless devices. Virtually all such devices claim to operate on a resonant frequency principle where the device is said to emit an electromagnetic signal, either through an antenna or a probe, that will respond to a specific substance such as gold, silver, or sometimes even paper money, and that the device will indicate the presence of such material by indicating a change in direction relative to the operator.

This theory of operation is not supported by scientific theory....


http://forums.whiteselectronics.com/showthread.php?68994-Anybody-know-anything-about-long-range-metal-detectors&s=19e3d93b74b1457799c856aea0127956
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on April 30, 2014, 03:58:14 PM
http://forums.whiteselectronics.com/showthread.php?68994-Anybody-know-anything-about-long-range-metal-detectors&s=19e3d93b74b1457799c856aea0127956

Whites Electronics is a long-time TIGHAR sponsor and provides us with metal detectors for our expeditions.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: don hirth on April 30, 2014, 05:44:06 PM
Monty,
An excellent 'take' on humanity and the human mind! I've been around more than 80 yrs. and
it's frightening how twisted and/or evil, humans can be. Only divine intervention can save the day.
PEACE
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on May 01, 2014, 04:49:15 AM
Anyone heard of GeoResonance before?   The pictures look almost too good to me -- like seeing man-made things in coral formations which aren't there.

Check them out - GeoResonance certainly has credibility. (http://GeoResonance.com)

As hard as it is to believe, this is rather impressive technology with the means to look far deeper and at far less detectable stuff than a 777 at the depth reported here.


Forgive me Jeff if I remain skeptical.

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/debunked-exploration-company-georesonance-believes-it-may-have-found-mh370.3558/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-range_locator#Media_exposure_and_controversy

"A long-range locator is a class of fraudulent devices purported to be a type of metal detector, supposedly able to detect a variety of substances, including gold, drugs and explosives; most are said to operate on a principle of resonance with the material being detected.

Theory of operation

Many treasure hunters swear by the devices; however, skeptics have examined the internals of many such devices and found those that have been examined to be incapable of operating as advertised, and have dismissed them as overpriced dowsing rods or similarly useless devices. Virtually all such devices claim to operate on a resonant frequency principle where the device is said to emit an electromagnetic signal, either through an antenna or a probe, that will respond to a specific substance such as gold, silver, or sometimes even paper money, and that the device will indicate the presence of such material by indicating a change in direction relative to the operator.

This theory of operation is not supported by scientific theory....


http://forums.whiteselectronics.com/showthread.php?68994-Anybody-know-anything-about-long-range-metal-detectors&s=19e3d93b74b1457799c856aea0127956

What's to forgive?  I really don't care to win or lose your opinion, Mark - believe or not as you will.  I'm not selling anything.

I'm not so sure that GeoResonance is any more far-fetched than the satillite voodoo that put the flight down in the south Indian Ocean, frankly.

Somehow this stuff rang a bell - and now I recall from where.  I met an engineer a some years ago who was involved in a court case, defending a patent.  His career involved in a number of cutting edge technologies with a talent for creating practical machinery by which to put new ideas to work. 

He related this very thing, as I recall - and it is more complex than a 'metal detector' as I understood it then, and read it now.  It seems most incredible to believe, I can understand - and the practical applications may not be well evolved yet, hence maybe the stuff has been oversold given the state of the art.  But at its core it is remarkably simple: everything physical around us exists with a definite molecular signature, a resonance if you will.  This gent related some experience with oil and gas field exploration with the technology with good results. 

Maybe startling results - what he related about gas and oil in north America didn't seem credible - but within a couple of years we started hearing about fracking for natural gas in a big way (another technology and not one of discovery, but recovery), and more about oil deposits and exploration.

None of which proves anything, including that this technology was even useful for the discovery of those things.  And maybe, in a world hungry for new energy finds, these folks are over-reaching.  But what strikes me is the coincidence of what I was told of, then the emergence of industry confidence in resource distribution that exactly fit what he described being 'seen' by this technology, and now the explanation before us.

So I am not sure all the debunking isn't a bit gratuitous - but take it as one will, of course.  And we certainly live in a world seemingly full of gratuitous debunkers, themselves often subject to debunking...

Meanwhile, still not one trace of the flight 'down under' in the Indian Ocean to-date. 

How hard would it be to validate - or invalidate, GeoResonance's suggestion?  We're talking relatively shallow waters.  And that's all the company has done - is suggest that what they've 'seen' be checked out - that itself indicates a willingness to 'be wrong'.  I don't see where it is grounds to declare them fraudulent.

It is interesting stuff - and it ought to be followed up on as can rather easily be done before tons of time and resources are spent mowing the remote Indian Ocean for something that well may not be there.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on May 01, 2014, 05:24:25 AM
Quite a good documentary on YouTube regarding MH 370...

The Disappearance Of Flight MH370: 14 Days That Gripped The World

http://youtu.be/Hqkq1F10i4U (http://youtu.be/Hqkq1F10i4U)

Cyber-hijacking????
That's a new one on me.


Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on May 01, 2014, 09:05:22 AM
I find it interesting that the Georesonance site is being dismissed by the search authorities, not because the technology is bogus, but because the site is so far from the previously proclaimed search area.
We here can choose between two technologies that none of us really understand - the voodoo of doppler analysis or the juju of resonance imaging. 
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Matt Revington on May 01, 2014, 11:07:43 AM
One of the techniques that the georesonance people claim to be using on their web page is NMR spectroscopy.  I've been a working NMR spectroscopist for 20 years (I run an NMR facility at a university) and I cannot see any possible way magnetic resonance imaging data could be collected in the way they claim under hundreds of metres of water with just the earth's background magnetic field from some sort of remotely sensed data.  The technology page on their web site is "under construction" so it is hard say much but regardless of where they claim to see something I am confident it was not by any magnetic resonance technique.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on May 01, 2014, 11:14:21 AM
The technology page on their web site is "under construction" ...

Not a big confidence builder.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on May 01, 2014, 11:45:14 AM
I find it interesting that the Georesonance site is being dismissed by the search authorities, not because the technology is bogus, but because the site is so far from the previously proclaimed search area.
We here can choose between two technologies that none of us really understand - the voodoo of doppler analysis or the juju of resonance imaging.

...where is that voodoo, that you do, so well...

Now where're my ju-ju beads...

But the point of dismissal may be the more telling - once corporate (meaning collective) direction is established, look out.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on May 01, 2014, 12:36:51 PM
But the point of dismissal may be the more telling - once corporate (meaning collective) direction is established, look out.

"Although unfortunately the fate of the missing flyers remains a mystery, it is considered that the search made was efficient and that the areas covered were the most probable ones based on the facts and information available.

leigh Noyes
Captain, U.S. Navy
Commanding, U.S.S. Lexington"
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on May 01, 2014, 12:56:23 PM
But the point of dismissal may be the more telling - once corporate (meaning collective) direction is established, look out.

"Although unfortunately the fate of the missing flyers remains a mystery, it is considered that the search made was efficient and that the areas covered were the most probable ones based on the facts and information available.

leigh Noyes
Captain, U.S. Navy
Commanding, U.S.S. Lexington"

Ain't it the truth - the corporate backside will never go uncovered.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Mark Pearce on May 02, 2014, 12:35:30 PM

Here's some terrific commentary from 2011 warning the unwary of the voodoo science behind Georesonance's claims. 
 
http://www.leafandstone.ca/files/Media/Dark_side_geophysics.pdf

...and more current updates;

MH370 - Why Search Teams Ignored Georesonance
http://www.science20.com/the_chatter_box/mh370_why_search_teams_ignored_georesonance-135363

Miles O'Brien slams GeoResonance [on CNN]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-Jss23O3pQ


Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Bruce Thomas on May 02, 2014, 05:19:09 PM
...where is that voodoo, that you do, so well...

Now where're my ju-ju beads...

Has anyone checked to see if Julia is on the board of Georesonance? Is this the work of the Eternal Hologram?
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on May 02, 2014, 10:10:22 PM
02:15: Malaysian military radar plotted Flight MH370 at a point south of Phuket island in the Strait of Malacca, west of its last known location. Thai military radar logs also confirmed that the plane turned west and then north over the Andaman sea.

In maps accompanying its 1 May report, the Malaysian government revised the time to be 02:22 and put the position further west.

Image courtesy of Hishammuddin Tun Hussein
Dato' Seri Hishammuddin Tun Hussein is a Malaysian politician currently heading the Minister of Defence & Minister of Transport (Acting) of the Malaysia Government.

Were they trying for Sultan Iskandar Muda International Airport ? Also called Banda Aceh International Airport (Indonesia:Bandara Internasional Banda Aceh) (IATA: BTJ, ICAO: WITT) is the airport located 13,5 kilometres southeast of the capital of Aceh province, Banda Aceh.

Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on May 31, 2014, 07:33:11 PM
The search area maybe 'adjusted' once the mathematicians have finished with...

"Bayesian inference is a statistical technique that mathematicians use to determine some underlying probability distribution based on an observed distribution. In particular, statisticians use this technique to update the probability of a particular hypothesis as they gather additional evidence."

Plus a plethora of other available data including...

http://www.dca.gov.my/mainpage/MH370%20Data%20Communication%20Logs.pdf (http://www.dca.gov.my/mainpage/MH370%20Data%20Communication%20Logs.pdf)

Could take years  :(
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Monty Fowler on June 03, 2014, 09:25:33 AM
Alllllllllllllllllllllllllll righty then! We all know something as large as an airliner can't simply vanish into thin air. Unless you subscribe to the alien abduction theory (perhaps they really, really covet the cool new batteries in that aircraft?)

Even if the jumble of letters and numbers in this data does provide information on where to look, it's still going to be a daunting task. Think of looking for a shiny new penny. While suspended 80 feet over a football field. Oh, and it's raining on you, and it's dark. And the grass can be really tall in spots.

LTM,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 ECSP
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on June 03, 2014, 12:13:30 PM
...and the penny gets a bit more tarnished and dull everyday.

Did they say WHICH football field for sure?
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Monty Fowler on June 03, 2014, 06:35:04 PM
Did they say WHICH football field for sure?

Well, no ... that's where those Bayesian inference guys come in. There's only about 4,742 possible combinations. And once they knock off MH370, we're letting them tackle that last sighting of Elvis at the Burger King.

LTM, who prefers his suede shoes in a nice demure brown,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 ECSP
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on June 03, 2014, 07:45:06 PM
When you compare the search for Malaysia Airlines MH370 to that of Air France Flight AF447 then Montys scenario looks like a walk in the park. The basis for the Air France eventual success was to go back over the previous unsuccessful search attempts and prior information on the crash location area so I suspect that's what they will be doing in the case of Malaysia Airlines MH370 unsuccessful search attempts and what little information they have regarding the crash location area.
We have to remember that the AF447 crash area location was determined on much more information than is available from MH370 so they were able to home in to a much smaller area but even then it still took over 2 years to actually find the wreckage.

"In the case of Air France Flight 447, the underlying distribution was the probability of finding the wreckage at a given location. That depended on a number of factors such as the last GPS location transmitted by the plane, how far the aircraft might have travelled after that and also the location of dead bodies found on the surface once their rate of drift in the water had been taken into account.
All of this is what statisticians call the “prior.” It gives a certain probability distribution for the location of the wreckage.
However, a number of searches that relied on this information had failed to find the wreckage. So the question that Stone and co had to answer was how this evidence should be used to modify the probability distribution.
This is what statisticians call the posterior distribution. To calculate it, Stone and co had to take into account the failure of four different searches after the plane went down. The first was the failure to find debris or bodies for six days after the plane went missing in June 2009; then there was the failure of acoustic searches in July 2009 to detect the pings from underwater locator beacons on the flight data recorder and cockpit voice recorder; next, another search in August 2009 failed to find anything using side-scanning sonar; and finally, there was another unsuccessful search using side-scanning sonar in April and May 2010."

It may take a considerably longer time to find MH370 to say the least but, if they do eventually succeed then the flight recorder data will certainly be eagerly anticipated for sure.

Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on June 04, 2014, 07:51:40 AM
Notice the dirth of similarities between the AF447 and MH370 loss aftermaths - no floating bodies or debris that could be tied to a wreck in the case of the latter.  It is of course realized that the presumed area of loss was poorly identifiable, at best, in the case of the latter event.

As to MH370, what if it simply isn't there?  Not to kick the 'conspiracy' ant bed open, just sayin'...  ???
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on June 04, 2014, 09:23:00 AM
if they do eventually succeed then the flight recorder data will certainly be eagerly anticipated for sure.

The Flight Data Recorder will reveal the mechanics of what happened but not the why.  The Cockpit Voice Recorder may or may not contain clues about the motivation.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Monty Fowler on June 04, 2014, 10:05:58 AM
The Cockpit Voice Recorder may or may not contain clues about the motivation.

All the person who took over the flight has to do to negate any value the CVR may have is to not talk, since it records over itself every 2 hours. Which seems like a rather arbitrary and silly limit, in a case like this.

LTM, who is pondering the mysteries of dry paint,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 ECSP
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on June 04, 2014, 07:27:54 PM
The answers are waiting in the Flight Data Recorder and the Cockpit Voice recorder if they can be retrieved.

The CVR records the last 2 hours on a continuous cycle and it is of course possible to negate any value by a person not making a sound as Monty pointed out. The same doesn't apply to the automatic warnings emanated by the various systems of the airplane which would probably have been working in overdrive as the airplane neared its final demise. Those sounds would be on the last 2 hours worth of CVR for sure and of course clues can be gained from them too. If they were they being acknowledged or cancelled then that would point to a person, being silent but given away by their actions, in the cockpit. Maybe the last 2 hours of CVR simply recorded a succession of warnings/alarms and nothing else, low fuel, ground proximity, cabin pressure etc... until the inevitable.
From the flight data recorder much more information on what the plane and its systems were doing is available plus all of the instructions the systems received during the flight and when. If/when it was put onto autopilot, what co-ordinates/altitude were entered,when/if it was taken off of autopilot. All give clues as to whether people were trying to fly the plane or, it was put into autopilot and then left to its own devises, or it was in autopilot when the people succumbed to whatever or who knows what other scenario?
The information is there, it's just finding it that is going to take time.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: James Champion on June 04, 2014, 08:16:26 PM
The CVR and FDR for AF447 spent nearly 2 years at an ocean depth far past their ratings, but data was recovered. All of the likely ocean locations for MH370 are similar in depth, but there is no way to know if again there will be recoverable data. Also, it's unlikely the recorders will be found within 2 years given the enormous search area.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on June 06, 2014, 12:12:44 AM
The CVR and FDR for AF447 spent nearly 2 years at an ocean depth far past their ratings, but data was recovered. All of the likely ocean locations for MH370 are similar in depth, but there is no way to know if again there will be recoverable data. Also, it's unlikely the recorders will be found within 2 years given the enormous search area.

I agree James, this will take considerably longer as there is much less information to go on regarding where the flight might have ended compared to AF 447.That's a huge disadvantage even with the most sophisticated equipment being deployed in the attempt to locate the plane.

Off topic but, it's 6th June today and we're off to Weymouth and Portland to join the 70th D-Day landings anniversary. Going to lay some flowers from our garden in remembrance of the men of the US Rangers and the Big Red One who embarked for Omaha beach from Portland and Weymouth all those years ago. A couple of rare video clips of their departure from the aforementioned places...
http://www.love-weymouth.co.uk/d-day-weymouth-1944/ (http://www.love-weymouth.co.uk/d-day-weymouth-1944/)





Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: C.W. Herndon on June 06, 2014, 05:03:04 AM
Off topic but, it's 6th June today and we're off to Weymouth and Portland to join the 70th D-Day landings anniversary. Going to lay some flowers from our garden in remembrance of the men of the US Rangers and the Big Red One who embarked for Omaha beach from Portland and Weymouth all those years ago.
Jeff, Thanks for remembering "our troops" on this day.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on June 14, 2014, 11:04:16 PM
Off topic but, it's 6th June today and we're off to Weymouth and Portland to join the 70th D-Day landings anniversary. Going to lay some flowers from our garden in remembrance of the men of the US Rangers and the Big Red One who embarked for Omaha beach from Portland and Weymouth all those years ago.
Jeff, Thanks for remembering "our troops" on this day.

A very solemn ceremony Woody but, lots of people came to pay their respects which is more and more important these days as time catches up with those who survived and memories fade.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Kent Beuchert on June 15, 2014, 09:38:15 AM
Off topic but, it's 6th June today and we're off to Weymouth and Portland to join the 70th D-Day landings anniversary. Going to lay some flowers from our garden in remembrance of the men of the US Rangers and the Big Red One who embarked for Omaha beach from Portland and Weymouth all those years ago.
Jeff, Thanks for remembering "our troops" on this day.

Let's not forget those who landed  on the western half of Omaha Beach alongside the 1st ID's 16th Regimental  Combat Team, the 116th Regiment Regimental Combat  Team (Virginia National Guard)  from the  29th ID (Blue and Gray).
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on June 16, 2014, 09:30:08 PM
Thanks for the info kent I have started to read up on 29th ID-116th regiment RCT, very much appreciated.

Back to flight MH370

Latest update confirms the time period they are looking at, months if not years.

Malaysian MH370: Inmarsat confident on crash 'hotspot'

The UK satellite company Inmarsat has told the BBC that the search for the missing Malaysia Airlines jet has yet to go to the area its scientists think is the plane's most likely crash site.

Inmarsat's communications with the aircraft are seen as the best clues to the whereabouts of Flight MH370.

The hunt for the lost jet is currently taking a short break while ships map the Indian Ocean floor.

When the search resumes, the Inmarsat "hotspot" will be a key focus.

But so too will a number of areas being fed into the investigation by other groups.

Australian authorities are expected to announce where these are shortly.

The BBC's Horizon TV programme has been given significant access to the telecommunications experts at Inmarsat.

It was the brief, hourly electronic connections between the jet and one of company's spacecraft that are currently driving the search.

Inmarsat's scientists could tell from the timings and frequencies of the connection signals that the plane had to have come down in the southern Indian Ocean.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-27870467 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-27870467)

Link to Horizon documentary, not yet available on iplayer

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b047czkj (http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b047czkj)





Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on June 21, 2014, 09:52:59 PM
This just in...

Flight MH370: Official police investigation 'identifies captain Zaharie Ahmad Shah as prime suspect over plane's disappearance'


Malaysian cops reportedly found the 53-year-old dad of three had made no social or work commitments for the future, unlike the rest of his crew

The official police investigation into the disappearance of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370 has reportedly identified the plane's captain as the prime suspect.

Malaysian cops discovered that married dad of three Shah, 53, appeared to have made NO social or work commitments for the future, unlike other members of his crew, the Sunday Times reports.

Their probe also found that he had programmed a flight simulator with drills practising a flight far out into the southern Indian Ocean and landing on a island with a short runway, the paper claims.

The drills were said to have been deleted but later recovered by computer experts.

Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on June 22, 2014, 06:57:10 AM
Whad I tell ya?  Find the island and you'll find the plane.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Randy Conrad on June 22, 2014, 07:19:59 AM
Would someone give Ric a cookie this morning!!! Nice...Ric!!!!
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Bill Mangus on June 22, 2014, 07:44:35 AM
Wonder if the Captain was a fan of the TV series "Lost"?
 ???
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Monty Fowler on June 22, 2014, 10:22:13 AM
The good news? There aren't all that many islands in that part of the world.

The bad news? We haven't looked at all of them yet. At least publicly. I would be willing to wager our ever-dilligent NSA already has more than a few satellite passes of all the tiny bits of land down there. With optics that can pick up a cigarette pack on the ground, if they've a mind too ... the bigger If is, Will the NSA shares what it knows?

LTM,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 ECSP
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Kent Beuchert on June 22, 2014, 12:35:04 PM
Quote
  Will the NSA shares what it knows? 
Hmmm...  since when has the NSA operated its own satellites?


Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on June 22, 2014, 02:43:16 PM
Quote
  Will the NSA shares what it knows? 
Hmmm...  since when has the NSA operated its own satellites?

If the NSA had its own satellites do you think we'd know about them?
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on June 23, 2014, 07:41:07 AM
This just in...

Flight MH370: Official police investigation 'identifies captain Zaharie Ahmad Shah as prime suspect over plane's disappearance'


Malaysian cops reportedly found the 53-year-old dad of three had made no social or work commitments for the future, unlike the rest of his crew

The official police investigation into the disappearance of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370 has reportedly identified the plane's captain as the prime suspect.

Malaysian cops discovered that married dad of three Shah, 53, appeared to have made NO social or work commitments for the future, unlike other members of his crew, the Sunday Times reports.

Their probe also found that he had programmed a flight simulator with drills practising a flight far out into the southern Indian Ocean and landing on a island with a short runway, the paper claims.

The drills were said to have been deleted but later recovered by computer experts.

Take your pick -

- Island / short runway mere fictional way of getting to ditching point and practising same, as if a short field landing (low energy, like ditching), or -

- Practising short field work - and destination was a ruse as it didn't matter, but a way to conceal truly intended destination.

Conspiracies...

That he may well have been in on this alone does cast doubt on 'conspiracy' - more like lone nut wanting to make a 777 disappear for his own stupid reasons.  My thought is that if others had been on the receiving end (real short strip somewhere, etc.) that too would have been detected by now. 

But who really knows for sure, yet - still no 'island', nor runway, no bird.

Strange and large world out there.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Dave McDaniel on June 23, 2014, 11:32:02 AM
I wouldn't give to much weight to that theory without further supporting evidence. During my airline type-rating training, usually at some point near the end of successful simulator training if you had a little extra time, it was not uncommon for the Sim. instructor to allow the students to have some "fun" and build confidence. This included, in my experience, landing on a aircraft carrier, flying low-level through the Los Angeles financial district and doing loops around the Golden Gate Bridge as well as hovering flight. So programming a situation where-in you had to land a 777 on a postage stamp island from altitude is not that far of a stretch. I have read in more than one article that the Captain was an instructor pilot. They didn't elaborate as to whether he was a Sim instructor flying the line or if he was a line check airman.
I give the Captain the benefit-of-doubt at this point.

LTM,
Dave 
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on June 23, 2014, 12:38:02 PM
I wouldn't give to much weight to that theory without further supporting evidence. During my airline type-rating training, usually at some point near the end of successful simulator training if you had a little extra time, it was not uncommon for the Sim. instructor to allow the students to have some "fun" and build confidence. This included, in my experience, landing on a aircraft carrier, flying low-level through the Los Angeles financial district and doing loops around the Golden Gate Bridge as well as hovering flight. So programming a situation where-in you had to land a 777 on a postage stamp island from altitude is not that far of a stretch. I have read in more than one article that the Captain was an instructor pilot. They didn't elaborate as to whether he was a Sim instructor flying the line or if he was a line check airman.
I give the Captain the benefit-of-doubt at this point.LTM,
Dave

There's a good bit of doubt about that Captain at this point, I'll give you that!  ;)
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on June 23, 2014, 08:45:40 PM
Fake news story doing the rounds on Facebook...

http://job4pals.biz/nimak/27.php (http://job4pals.biz/nimak/27.php)

I haven't shared it so have no idea what the report contains  >:(

Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Dan Swift on June 30, 2014, 02:44:52 PM
He would have to disable (kill) his copilot in order to do this.  I suppose that is possible....but could backfire too. 
And why practice ditching if you are going to kill yourself.   Just power up and nose down....
Is the theory then he was trying to land somewhere to disappear.  That means a boat waiting....and a bunch of pissed off people....unless he figured out a way to kill all the passengers....nah....this is too much.....
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on June 30, 2014, 05:19:39 PM
He would have to disable (kill) his copilot in order to do this.  I suppose that is possible....but could backfire too. 
And why practice ditching if you are going to kill yourself.   Just power up and nose down....
Is the theory then he was trying to land somewhere to disappear.  That means a boat waiting....and a bunch of pissed off people....unless he figured out a way to kill all the passengers....nah....this is too much.....

Thunderball Hypothesis:

There is something (Hitchcock would call it "the Maguffin") that is of immense value to The Bad Guys (TBG).
TBG want to obtain the Maguffin without anyone knowing that they have it.
TBG learn that the Maguffin will be transported aboard MH370.
TBG recruit the cooperation of the pilot and possibly also the co-pilot either through bribery, blackmail or, more likely, willing cooperation due to sympathetic religious or political beliefs.
The plan is to make the airplane disappear by turning off the transponder and ACARS systems, then change course and fly to an airport with enough runway for a landing and a hangar big enough to hide the aircraft.
The passengers are inconsequential. Disposing of them is a simple matter of dumping the cabin pressure at altitude.  Their oxygen masks will deploy but the supply of oxygen will only last about 15 minutes.

Maybe they made it to the airport and TBG have the Maguffin, or maybe something went wrong and and the crew was incapacitated.  The airplane continued out into the southern Indian Ocean on autopilot until it ran out of fuel. Either way, somebody knows what happened.


 
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Monty Fowler on July 21, 2014, 11:54:41 AM

Thunderball Hypothesis:

Alternate Thunderball Hypothesis (more like a WTH moment):

Amelia Earhart is arguably one of the most famous people in the world, because she vanished without a trace.
Someone who want to have lasting fame - and not caring about fortune - conceives a copycat crime. Call them The Evil One (TEO).
TEO hits upon the idea of making him/herself disappear in a similar manner, but lacks the resources to duplicate Earhart's flight in a similar manner.
However, TEO does have the resources to commandeer a commercial airliner.
Such a comandeering, and subsequent vanishment of the aircraft and several hundred people, will assure lasting fame to TEO.
The TEO cares not a wit that he/she will have to force the vanishment to happen in order to assure lasting fame.

Fatal flaw - the TEO doesn't fail to adequately consider that if everyone vanishes, no one knows what happens ... or do they?

LTM, who kinda' enjoys the funhouse mirrors at the amusement park,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 ECSP


Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Dan Swift on July 21, 2014, 12:11:41 PM
Uhhhhh....and who is TEO?  That might be important information right there.  We don't know if it was the Captain, 1st Officer, Flight Attendant having a bad week, a Terrorist, Elvis, since he's not really dead, or...
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Monty Fowler on July 23, 2014, 08:19:52 AM
Exactly, Dan. We don't know.

In some respects, this is that oft hoped-for but seldom executed Perfect Crime.

It's just too bad that more than 200 innocent victims had to be pulled down the tubes with The Evil One to fulfill that person's twisted quest for fame.

LTM,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 ECSP
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Monty Fowler on July 24, 2014, 10:41:12 AM
Annndddd, this just in, a comment under the story about the MH17 crash. I'm sure TECTIC would be behind this theory 100 percent:

"Please do your own independent research and really think for yourself. There is so MUCH glaring evidence about MH-17 being the old MH370 that went missing. We all knew when that plane went missing it was going to be used as some sort of false flag to cover Israel rolling into Gaza and geopolitically the US stands to gain by placing blame and more sanctions on Russia. This information is being aired on Mexico mainstream news and I believe in India and other places you wouldn't expect.

They had to change the flight paths because that one was through war zone 150 miles away from its normal path with the curvature of the Planet as it spins. All the Passports were brand stinking new, the tower people were taken out and replaced with "specialist" workers and sent everyone at the kiev airport home. The workers just said they were foreign. Why has the mainstream news and TPTB kept so much of this information from us from putrified bodies doctors in Holland are that these people were tortured for a long time and have been dead a long time. The bodies falling from the plane and no blood splat on a gravel road. Really dig and put the pieces together...

There is no way with our common aviation technology, especially since 9/11, that they always knew where MH370 was. I read about all the different forms of GPS and Sonar would have picked up a pretty massive blip with a crash. You can't just lose a plane these days it's impossible to disengage all 3 gps systems. They may have only got the one in the cockpit. Either way look at some of the wreckage photos when you count windows, plugged window holes, the site of the Malaysian flag is different on both planes but was not for this one. This matched MH370. That is why there are no conversations with pilots, unless the fabricate them this late in the game.

Doctors in holland are saying they have been dead for quite some time and all, even the children have been tortured plus sustained injuries from a crash. Israel and the US was hoping the separatists didn't secure the site so they could control the story better. Trust me I am no Russia supporter because their country is just as messed up as ours. Oligarchies and Oppression."


LTM, who can't even fathom most of that,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 ECSP
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on July 24, 2014, 10:45:33 AM
The mind of a conspiracy buff is an awesome thing to behold.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on August 08, 2014, 08:52:28 AM
Airing tomorrow, Saturday, Aug. 9.  History Channel special about MH370 and other (sigh) "Ghost Planes."  Amelia and I have a bit part in the show.  I haven't seen it so I don't know how they've edited the hours of video they shot of my talking head.
http://www.pilgrimstudios.com/ghost-planes-special-to-air-saturday-aug-9-on-history/
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Monty Fowler on September 11, 2014, 01:36:19 PM
Here it is six months later and we're still just as much in the dark as the day the flight vanished.

I just hope it doesn't take 70 years to solve this one.

LTM,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 ECSP
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on September 11, 2014, 01:39:04 PM
I just hope it doesn't take 70 years to solve this one.

Don't look at me.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on September 11, 2014, 04:33:07 PM
Transport theft has been going on, however unreliably reported: Libya has apparently lost a number of passenger jets (Jane's supposedly questions the veracity of the reported scope of the thefts).

Somebody is interested in big jets as 'missles', apparently.

Flight 370 does remain dark as to answers.  I don't care to be labeled 'conspiracy theorist', but I hardly think that I am by observing the obvious: a 777 would make a fine catch for someone wanting to be in the human-driven missle business, and the earmarks are there; the absence of any clear suicide intentions of the pilot, etc. is odd - but then we didn't have that much on the Egypt Air Boeing 767 that piled into the Atlantic, either.  The subsequent thefts (judge for yourself) out of Libya underscore the desire - and perhaps was found to be the easier way (duh, why didn't they think of that before disposing of a plane load of innocents).

Maybe time will tell, either way... what do I know.  But this one remains a long way from solved...
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on September 12, 2014, 10:30:41 AM
Somebody is interested in big jets as 'missles', apparently.

Using a big passenger jet as a missile can be a successful tactic as we know all too well, but you need to reach your target.  How close do you think an unidentified big jet would get to any target in the U.S. or Europe?  If you're going to use a big jet as a missile your best shot is to hijack a commercial flight.  Pick a flight that's going to someplace near your intended target and then hijack the flight only when it's close to its destination.

I agree that MH370 was abducted/stolen and may be in a hangar someplace (conspiracies do happen) but I don't think the airplane itself was the object of the abduction.  I think there was something aboard the aircraft - possibly proprietary engineering data on a laptop - that was valuable enough to somebody to justify a sophisticated operation.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on September 12, 2014, 12:55:38 PM
Somebody is interested in big jets as 'missles', apparently.

Using a big passenger jet as a missile can be a successful tactic as we know all too well, but you need to reach your target.  How close do you think an unidentified big jet would get to any target in the U.S. or Europe?  If you're going to use a big jet as a missile your best shot is to hijack a commercial flight.  Pick a flight that's going to someplace near your intended target and then hijack the flight only when it's close to its destination.

I agree that MH370 was abducted/stolen and may be in a hangar someplace (conspiracies do happen) but I don't think the airplane itself was the object of the abduction.  I think there was something aboard the aircraft - possibly proprietary engineering data on a laptop - that was valuable enough to somebody to justify a sophisticated operation.

Unfortunately what we know of as the convential 'targets' may not be the intended targets - we have some roguish enemies of humanity at-work even now in the middle east who are busy trying to rub-out masses of people who differ with them in theology, whatever.  North America / Europe may not even be the target, nor Israel (which was my first thought).

You have a point - we certainly overlap in our view of what may have happened, too - something on that flight - airplane or otherwise, may well have been the target for reasons we can only guess at.  Seems like a lot of trouble to get hold of a laptop, and the airplane just 'feels' like the common denominator somehow to me, but it can be a strange world and your guess is at least as good as mine.

Somehow I still doubt this thing will ever turn up on the Indian ocean floor.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on October 10, 2014, 09:08:39 PM
Saw the NOVA special on Flight 370's disappearance.

Very interesting explanation of the IMMARSAT effort there - but I have to say, it looks a lot like counting straws in a haystack.  The delta in the numbers that were derived to get a sense of direction and distance were a few parts per billion.  I realize that they reduced the data until a 'trend' could be identified that gave some idea as to probabilities, but it seems kind of fringe, in practical terms.  The satellite was actually moving due to end-of-intended life low-fuel issues, for one thing.

Fascinating though, how they could measure the time the signals would need to travel from airplane to satellite, etc.  I got some idea that given the amount of time until the last 'handshake', the bird would have to be well up fully into either the northern, or down in the southern arc; if north, that, if true, would have put it up in Kazakhstan somewhere - or conversely, roughly where the search has been occurring along the southern arc.

Sounded good, but one still wonders how firm this logarithm distilling really is in terms of accuracy.  As one searcher put it, there is some mounting doubt about ever finding the plane in the southern Indian ocean.

Might it take 77 years to find this one too?  I surely hope not.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: James Champion on October 11, 2014, 08:17:54 AM
I once work as an engineer for a manufacturer of high-end telemetry receivers used for receiving signals from satellites. The exacting measurement of the doppler shift (carrier offset), AGC (signal strength), and timing delay of a data burst to be acknowledge back (ranging) are all very basic information automatically measured by these systems and recorded. Usually such information is used heavily when a satellite is first launched to precisely measure the orbit and health of the satellite. When thing go wrong it is amazing what they can determine from carefully analyzing the information. The fact that they used such information from the Inmarsat system to determine the position of MH370 is of no surprise to me. Inmarsat first did such post-analysis to help with the disappearance of Air France 447. It is the same type of data that NASA uses to determine the position, speed, and distance of the Voyager probes.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Monty Fowler on October 14, 2014, 02:13:21 PM
I don't know if this qualifies as an update, but this gentleman is thinking hijack: http://www.examiner.com/article/mh370-what-really-happened-airlines-head-theorizes-missing-plane-was-hijacked (http://www.examiner.com/article/mh370-what-really-happened-airlines-head-theorizes-missing-plane-was-hijacked)

But again, the question is, Why???

LTM,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 ECSP
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on October 14, 2014, 03:41:33 PM
I don't know if this qualifies as an update, but this gentleman is thinking hijack: http://www.examiner.com/article/mh370-what-really-happened-airlines-head-theorizes-missing-plane-was-hijacked (http://www.examiner.com/article/mh370-what-really-happened-airlines-head-theorizes-missing-plane-was-hijacked)

But again, the question is, Why???

LTM,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 ECSP

Not that I necessarily disagree with the apparent possibility this gent seems to espouse, but given that this is "The Examiner", and not insignificantly that everytime I try to open it the browser freezes... I'm not sure it 'qualifies'.  Never got to read because of the 'brain freeze' thing.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Monty Fowler on October 14, 2014, 05:59:47 PM
I think there was something aboard the aircraft - possibly proprietary engineering data on a laptop - that was valuable enough to somebody to justify a sophisticated operation.

A sophisticated operation that included mass murder, because I for one doubt that any of the passengers are still alive.

And operational security on a theft of this magnitude is almost impossible to achieve, especially forever. Unless the mastermind killed all of the accomplices that carried it out, that is ...

LTM,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 ECSP
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Mark Appel on February 26, 2015, 05:22:42 PM
Now this is whacky... but interesting. New theory on Malaysian 370:

http://www.sfgate.com/technology/businessinsider/article/One-of-CNN-s-aviation-experts-thinks-Putin-stole-6103867.php
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Craig Romig on February 26, 2015, 05:48:37 PM
Now this is whacky... but interesting. New theory on Malaysian 370:

http://www.sfgate.com/technology/businessinsider/article/One-of-CNN-s-aviation-experts-thinks-Putin-stole-6103867.php

When this first happened I considered this kind of thing. If it did get hijacked. The passengers are either dead or in captivity.  If they are being held hostage. Sooner or later. One of them will show back up.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 27, 2015, 06:41:10 AM
Not all that whacky. I have said from the beginning that this looks more like an abduction than an accident.
- A pilot who takes steps to make aircraft invisible to radar is up to no good.
- A pilot who then changes course is on his way to a new "secret" destination.
- The destination must have a runway long enough to land on and a hangar big enough to hide the plane in.
- There must be people there waiting for him.
- The airport must remote and secure. That means a government/military facility.

This has the earmarks of a highly sophisticated, well-funded, state-sponsored abduction.
But abduction of what?  Not the airplane.  There are easier ways to get a 777.  Not a person.  There was nobody on the airplane that was worth that much trouble.  My best guess is that there was intellectual property (engineering data?) of some kind, possibly on a passenger's laptop, that was worth getting without letting anyone know that you have it. The people and the airplane are expendable.
But who could pull this off?  Putin?  Maybe, but not as a "show of strength."  It doesn't make any sense to stage a show of strength if nobody knows you did it. Putin has shown himself to be bold about taking action he won't own up to (Crimea, Ukraine).
The key is whether it was possible, as this guy claims, to jigger the Inmarsat data to make it look like the plane headed south.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Tim Collins on February 27, 2015, 07:07:03 AM
Not all that whacky. I have said from the beginning that this looks more like an abduction than an accident.
- A pilot who takes steps to make aircraft invisible to radar is up to no good.
- A pilot who then changes course is on his way to a new "secret" destination.
- The destination must have a runway long enough to land on and a hangar big enough to hide the plane in.
- There must be people there waiting for him.
- The airport must remote and secure. That means a government/military facility.

This has the earmarks of a highly sophisticated, well-funded, state-sponsored abduction.
But abduction of what?  Not the airplane.  There are easier ways to get a 777.  Not a person.  There was nobody on the airplane that was worth that much trouble.  My best guess is that there was intellectual property (engineering data?) of some kind, possibly on a passenger's laptop, that was worth getting without letting anyone know that you have it. The people and the airplane are expendable.
But who could pull this off?  Putin?  Maybe, but not as a "show of strength."  It doesn't make any sense to stage a show of strength if nobody knows you did it. Putin has shown himself to be bold about taking action he won't own up to (Crimea, Ukraine).
The key is whether it was possible, as this guy claims, to jigger the Inmarsat data to make it look like the plane headed south.

The mind of a conspiracy buff is an awesome thing to behold.

Yes indeed it is.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 27, 2015, 07:51:56 AM
The mind of a conspiracy buff is an awesome thing to behold.

Yes indeed it is.

And your explanation of the known events is....???
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Tim Collins on February 27, 2015, 08:22:01 AM
The mind of a conspiracy buff is an awesome thing to behold.

Yes indeed it is.



And your explanation of the known events is....???


I don't offer one. I know better than that, especially in light of your comment.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 27, 2015, 10:40:06 AM
And your explanation of the known events is....??

I don't offer one. I know better than that, especially in light of your comment.

Bravely spoken.

I do not consider myself to be a conspiracy "buff" (seeing a conspiracy behind every event).  In fact, I have been a vocal debunker of the various Japanese Capture theories.
However, conspiracies do happen and, to me, the disappearance of MH370 has all the earmarks.  I expressed my observations and I invite anyone to point out errors in my reasoning.  Such discussions are what this forum is all about.  If you don't want to participate that's fine, but don't denigrate those of us do.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Craig Romig on March 03, 2015, 11:31:08 AM
I also had a weird thought when this happened. I thought of the TV series Lost. I know weird.

Maybe they ended up on Gilligan's island. Haha.

Seriously though. I typed MH370 into search. And one of the suggested searches that came up was MH370 found. I followed it. And came across this story.http://www.theweek.co.uk/world-news/flight-mh370/57683/mystery-flight-mh370-7-other-planes-vanished Just a slightly interesting short list of other lost planes.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Daniel Paul Cotts on March 07, 2015, 02:24:44 PM
I subscribe to the pilot suicide theory. My guess at motivation was to disgrace the Malaysian government.
A recent BBC article mentions some interesting points to strengthen that theory.

Flight MH370: Could it have been suicide?
http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-31736835

Richard Westcott the BBC Transport Correspondent  who authored the piece recently interviewed someone who sounds a lot like Ric.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on March 07, 2015, 04:50:48 PM
Richard Westcott the BBC Transport Correspondent  who authored the piece recently interviewed someone who sounds a lot like Ric.

Yeah, I talked to Westcott.

The suicide thing doesn't make any sense to me.  If the pilot wanted to commit suicide he has to somehow disable the First Officer but he doesn't have to make the airplane disappear from civilian radar and then change course.  The theory that the "hook" in the flight path was for the pilot to get a good look at his hometown seems reasonable but doesn't necessarily mean that he's about to commit suicide. 
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Dan Swift on March 09, 2015, 09:54:41 AM
He just wanted to fly over his house...like we all used to do on a Saturday afternoon. 
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on March 09, 2015, 10:09:10 AM
He just wanted to fly over his house...like we all used to do on a Saturday afternoon.

Been there.  Done that.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Chris Murphy on March 17, 2015, 01:10:48 AM
Interesting article on MH370 from Jeff Wise:

http://www.scmp.com/magazines/post-magazine/article/1734990/mh370-aviation-expert-jeff-wise-spells-out-his-theory

Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on March 17, 2015, 08:04:52 AM
Interesting article on MH370 from Jeff Wise:

http://www.scmp.com/magazines/post-magazine/article/1734990/mh370-aviation-expert-jeff-wise-spells-out-his-theory

An excellent article.  Thanks Jeff.  As you probably know, I also did multiple MH370 spots on CNN (but not as many as Jeff and I didn't get paid).  From the start, this has looked to me like a state-sponsored abduction of the aircraft.  Jeff Wise takes it a step further and lays it at Putin's feet.  Maybe we're both nuts.
I was also fascinated by his description of monitoring a forum and dealing with the emotional aspects of embracing an unconventional theory.  It all sounded so familiar.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on March 17, 2015, 08:37:28 AM
I never have believed you or Jeff Wise were nuts here - it has always looked and smelled like a theft and flight north to me.

I found his analysis of the handshakes refreshing, as I have always believed there had to be room for error in how that was being interpreted, or perhaps applied.  The 'new math' that emerged so quickly was a bit too glibly offered for my taste, and the BFO / BTO explanations help close a gap of understanding on my part as to why the explanations seemed to be missing something.  Apparently the two do not align well, suggesting some manipulation of data to make a southerly track plausible.

If there is one peculiar long-shot in Wise's theory to me, it is the premeditated handling of avionics aboard the craft to the point of manipulating what latter day examiners would see in the handshake data: that assumes a deeply qualified view of how to pull this off to the inth degree of concealment.  That said - it might not be enough for a super-power sponsored effort to simply take a plane, but more 'satisfying' to demonstrate to other intelligence watchers that they are capable of diddling with our most sophisticated stuff to gain slight of hand.  What Wise describes also amounts to a secondary 'flight deck' from where the ship could be taken over and flown effectively until the cockpit could be gained.  How many people would know how to do that?  It is a credible scenario - but needs a well-qualified villan to happen well at all.

I realize that makes me sound like a conspiracy weenie.  If so, so be it - it is an odd world where odd things happen.

Of course I'm also speaking from a lay point of view and gut-feeling - not very reliable things, but other earmarks on the whole thing still smell funny.  Wise just removed some of the gut-only basis and added some real considerations for a northward track loss.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on March 17, 2015, 08:46:53 AM
What Wise describes also amounts to a secondary 'flight deck' from where the ship could be taken over and flown effectively until the cockpit could be gained.

All that is required is to "turn" the pilot so that he opens the cockpit door.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: JNev on March 17, 2015, 09:36:35 AM
Realize that.  On the other hand, Wise raises some interesting points that are not really so far fetched after all.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Craig Romig on July 29, 2015, 10:30:41 PM
http://www.wired.com/2015/07/tell-wreckage-really-mh370/
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Dan Swift on August 04, 2015, 01:53:47 PM
This sounds so familiar.  No other European Caucasian female (bones found) is reported missing...etc...etc...must be....
Compact from the 30's...Rouge...lotion jar...wrinkle cream...etc...etc....must be....

Parts of a 777...no other 777 missing...etc...etc...etc...must be....
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Monty Fowler on August 04, 2015, 02:40:49 PM
Quote from the above story: “When looking at something like this you have to be as objective and unbiased as possible,” says Gillespie. “You want it to be what you’re looking for, but you have to put that aside and look at the facts of the case and you have to make a judgment.” He would know—he and TIGHAR have spent decades investigating scraps of metal purported to have come from Amelia Earhart‘s lost Model 10 Electra.

LTM,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 ECSP

Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: ibscas on August 05, 2015, 03:02:31 PM
In my mind, as far as conspiracy theories go - and assuming this is a conspiracy rather than an accident - I would think the only justification for hijacking the airplane for something onboard would be if it was very large.  My reasoning for this is that it would seem to be much easier to acquire, say, a laptop with classified or proprietary data on it a number of different ways than to take out an aircraft for it.  I would hypothesize that it would have to be something far more difficult to acquire through conventional schemes that was in the belly of that plane.  Maybe gold, maybe any number of things.

However, I can't rule out that there is the remotest chance of a controlled landing in water.  I know this is a low likelihood, but it's not unprecedented in the least.  Saying, for a moment, that this was the case then it is feasible that there would be little to no debris field and the plane sinks.  I really don't think this is the case because at the very least it's highly likely the plane would break up as it sinks and some kind of debris would make it out - such as luggage. 

Then again, if it were a suicide mission he could have simply nosed down into the ground (i.e., 911 Pennsylvania flight) and leave a relatively small scar that may escape notice.

While on a much, MUCH, smaller scale, consider how much debris has not been found in the search for AE's plane.  Sure it has been over 70 years and of course people living on the island likely appropriated any usable debris, but you would think that there would be something - especially and not in spite of 70 years passing - as the plane continues to disintegrate underwater.  Understandably there have been pieces found that may be debris from the Electra, but all the scouring of TIGHAR over many years has produced very little.  So, even on a scale of 100 times this, the possibility that debris has yet to surface isn't that far fetched.

This all leads me to believe that, really, anything is possible and nothing can be ruled out until some evidence, any evidence, surfaces.

In the end, we all know what is going to happen here.  70 years from now Ric's great great grandchildren will be running TIGHAR searching for the mysterious MH370 flight.  They will be on MALAY-XXV, their 25th mission aboard their hover boats looking for signs of the crash.  It will end up that there was a mysterious settlement deep in the Indian ocean on a remote island that prospered for a time during the 21st century who made interesting art from aircraft aluminum and sold it on eBay.  In the end all the passengers booked the flight specifically to escape society and it was all quite logical.  The only difference being that THEIR ROV worked....   ;D

On an unrelated note - this is my first post, do I REALLY have to do FOUR verifications to post a comment here each time?
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Martin X. Moleski, SJ on August 05, 2015, 03:24:18 PM
On an unrelated note - this is my first post, do I REALLY have to do FOUR verifications to post a comment here each time?

For the first few posts, yes.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Monty Fowler on August 07, 2015, 08:17:52 AM
Hmmm, now they're talking about bits of luggage, an "aircraft window," "Chinese" water bottle, and other little pieces washing ashore. This is starting to sound more like a Controlled Flight Into Water to me. Which means there won't be much to find on the ocean floor.

At least finding the flaperon puts the wilder conspiracy theories to rest.

LTM,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 CE
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Martin X. Moleski, SJ on August 07, 2015, 08:23:24 AM
At least finding the flaperon puts the wilder conspiracy theories to rest.

That is what they want you to think!   ::)
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: ibscas on August 07, 2015, 09:46:09 AM
I'm pretty sure the aliens know to leave a few pieces here and there as they do their ongoing probing so that nobody suspect it was them.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Bob Smith on August 07, 2015, 04:08:42 PM
There are certainly going to be conspiracy theories for any happening that can't be easily explained, because they themselves are not easily explained or proven. MH370 will probably be popping up soon in Mauritania or Africa or maybe Russia, and everybody will be relieved and feel embarrassed to have thought there was any such things as aliens, or thoughts of hijacking or whatever. But still there does seem at this point, as they search for more debris around the flaperon site, that something in the whole scenario is missing. This little relatively tiny piece of evidence (possibly) is nothing compared to the bulk of the 777 as a whole, easily manipulated and relatively light in weight.It would, however seem that it had to be torn from the wing with great force and separated from other parts normally attached to it, such as the actuator, etc., most of which should float also. Where would the fuel tanks be, and the tubing and electrical lines be that were possibly routed through it?
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on August 07, 2015, 05:46:40 PM
This is an interesting model for what might happen of TIGHAR recovered a conclusively identifiable piece of NR16020 at Nikumaroro.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Martin X. Moleski, SJ on August 07, 2015, 06:13:21 PM
This is an interesting model for what might happen of TIGHAR recovered a conclusively identifiable piece of NR16020 at Nikumaroro.

Yes, exactly.

"There is no any-idiot artifact.  Just when you think it's idiot-proof, they go and invent a new idiot!"
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ian MacKay on August 22, 2015, 10:46:24 AM
On August 21, the French publication Ladepeche posted an article saying that the French technical investigation of the flaperon was completed, and that they had been unable to determine with 100% certainty that the part was from flight MH 370.
The original article in French is here:
http://www.ladepeche.fr/article/2015/08/21/2162976-mh-370-a-balma-l-enquete-technique-est-bouclee.html

Jeff Wise has a good translation into English on his site:
http://jeffwise.net/category/aviation/

The article also has comments from an anonymous French investigator saying that the flaperon had not traveled on the surface, but rather partway down the water column. As Jeff Wise points out, it is hard to imagine that the part had such precisely neutral buoyancy that it neither sank to the bottom nor floated on top.

~ Ian
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Ric Gillespie on August 22, 2015, 11:06:41 AM
As Jeff Wise points out, it is hard to imagine that the part had such precisely neutral buoyancy that it neither sank to the bottom nor floated on top.

The part is going to have some point of buoyancy between floating like a cork and sinking like a tool box.  I don't see why that point can't be somewhere on the spectrum of neutral buoyancy.

This all sounds so familiar. 
"If the deputy prosecutor of the Republic of Paris has stated that there was a “very strong supposition” that the piece belonged to the plane of flight MH370, which disappeared 18 months ago, that is based on circumstantial evidence."

At what point does a preponderance of circumstantial evidence and the absence of a credible alternate explanation become sufficient to move the judgement from "probable" to "virtually certain."   It is the great paradox of all historical investigation that it is never possible to reach "certain."
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Bob Smith on August 22, 2015, 08:49:35 PM
It is possible to reach "certain" within a reasonable doubt, isn't it, when they find a serial # or maintenance # of some kind, or a related part that it fits into. Let's hope they can do that by searching deeper and wider as they seem to be doing (slowly).
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Dave Ross Wilkinson on October 16, 2015, 09:16:07 AM
This article appeared recently at 'The Daily Beast', concerning the possibility that fire might have caused the loss of MH370. 

The author describes, in some detail, the possibility that fire originating in the cargo hold penetrated the computer and electronics bay, causing the near-simultaneous failure of radio, transponder and acars, and subsequent (presumed) navigational failure.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/10/15/the-deadly-cargo-inside-mh370-how-exploding-batteries-explain-the-mystery.html

Everything written about MH370 seems to presented in sensational manner, as does this article.  But the writer builds his case in a  logical manner, using (seeming?) factual material.
 
-- Dave
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Bob Smith on October 16, 2015, 09:10:22 PM
I don't think Amelia had any lithium batteries in her baggage. But if you are trying to imply that sometimes things take a little time to solve, I'll certainly agree.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Dave Ross Wilkinson on October 17, 2015, 07:31:09 AM
I think there is a line of text somewhere in Betty's notebook, assumed to be AE cautioning FN: "look out for that battery". 
Perhaps it has modern implications.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Bob Smith on October 17, 2015, 06:24:34 PM
I think that was when Fred was preparing to throw the battery at the inside of the "patch" in order to get out the window. It subsequently left a concave dent and presented some talking material for a lot of scientific exploitation ( exploration, sorry?)
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Monty Fowler on October 18, 2015, 11:21:14 AM
Ummmm, there would not be any "throwing around" of that battery, unless you pump iron in your off-hours or something. That strikes me as just plain silly.

LTM,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 EC
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Bob Smith on October 18, 2015, 12:31:41 PM
Of course it's silly,I made it up. Another thing that's silly, I think, is the "patch" separating from the airplane without some sort of large force directed specifically at the patch and not some other part in some other location. Indicates to me that some thought was put into the operation and not just some secondary result of forces originating in another area of the plane.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Dave Ross Wilkinson on October 19, 2015, 02:09:32 AM
The question of how the patch separated from the plane, is definitely intriguing, as is, possibly, how patch is the only potential Elektra part found by TIGHAR on Nikumororo,  (In this sense, the patch is to the Elektra as the flaperon is to MH370.)

But i am more interested, at the moment, in MH370, and the issue of Lithium-Ion batteries being shipped as cargo on passenger airliners, as discussed in the Daily Beast article I sited.  It is (IMHO) a potentially dangerous practice, and it is surprising (to me) that there is any controversy, as there has been for years. In many parts of the world, it is common practice.   In parts of the world without air cargo service, the cargo hold of a passenger jet is seen as the best (or only) alternative.

Based on its tests, the FAA wants to ban the practice until adequate safety standards can be devised:

http://www.nbcnews.com/business/travel/faa-backs-ban-shipping-lithium-batteries-commercial-airlines-n441096   

Boeing has warned its customers of the hazard, as noted in the first paragraphs of the Daily Beast article.  Yet, the battery industry resists the recommendation (from Boeing, the FAA, and Airbus), insisting that the airline is the better judge of what it can safely carry. 

Continuing on the sillier note, Amelia's plane carried two Exide 85 Amp-Hr batteries. the kind she warned FN to 'look out for' in Betty's notebook.  See forum post : http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,252.msg2222.html#msg2222. 

Connecting the silly to the tragic: If heaving that battery at the patch might dislodge it from AE's plane, is it not possible that a flaming pallet of Li-Ion batteries could burn through the cargo liner and into the electronics of a Boeing 777?





Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Craig Romig on January 25, 2016, 10:21:43 PM
Does anyone have any thoughts about the new wreckage found in Thailand?
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Monty Fowler on January 26, 2016, 09:49:28 AM
Yes. It's not from MH 370.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: James Champion on January 26, 2016, 06:58:30 PM
News articles speculate that it is debris from the first stage of rockets that India has launched recently. In the pictures on the news links it really looks like rocket debris with the curvature and small rounded/numbered ports that may be for pressurization. It doesn't quite resemble aircraft construction.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Craig Romig on January 27, 2016, 12:52:46 AM
Yes. It's not from MH 370.
thank you
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Craig Romig on January 27, 2016, 12:53:29 AM
News articles speculate that it is debris from the first stage of rockets that India has launched recently. In the pictures on the news links it really looks like rocket debris with the curvature and small rounded/numbered ports that may be for pressurization. It doesn't quite resemble aircraft construction.
thank you
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Bob Smith on January 28, 2016, 08:40:16 PM
Since Amelia and Fred probably left their iphones at home due to the weight, it's probably not relavent to talk about NR16020 in the same breath as MH370 and the theory of batteries being a part of its demise. Yet there is some interesting similarities and comparisons to be made. It's interesting to me that if MH370 was a "crashed and sank" victim, parts like the wing were still together enough to float and wash up on a beach (anybodies beach) somewhere in that great expanse of an ocean! So far they haven't found the landing gear, or seats (don't they make seats out of kapok anymore?) or anything else that would also float. Maybe later! I'm waiting to see what they may have found off the east coast of Malaysia this week.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Dave Ross Wilkinson on February 23, 2016, 12:50:00 AM
More on lithium ion batteries carried as cargo in airliners.

The  International Civil Aviation Organization has banned the transportation of Lithium-ion batteries as cargo in airliners, effective April 1, 2016.  The action was taken at the urging of Boeing and other airliner manufacturers.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-airlines-safety-batteries-idUSKCN0VW04Y 
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Bob Smith on February 23, 2016, 03:01:40 PM
Maybe not soon enough for MH370.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Bob Smith on February 23, 2016, 03:47:48 PM
One of the latest pictures of supposed debris from MH370 that showed a large round hunk of metal leaning up against a tree had a ring around the outer edge and was riveted to the hunk in a familiar manner, like the "honeycomb" seals used in jet engines and steam turbines, etc. used for sealing of hot air and gases in the turbine area. (and sometimes in the compressor area) The honeycomb ring material, which may be attached to a stationary member and fits closely to the tips of the rotating blades, is actually allowed to be worn in slightly by the rotating part, as it expands from heat and centrifugal force, into a slight "ditch" in the honeycomb part, thereby providing a more tortuous path for the gas.
 Also it appears there is a radially rough edge that may have been a torch cut, like they wanted to cut it up into smaller piece for ease of moving or disposal.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Dave Ross Wilkinson on February 23, 2016, 10:40:48 PM
Bob, I missed this 'discovery'.

Is this, and 3 other photos with it, the item? 

http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/24/asia/thailand-debris-mh370-investigation
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Bob Smith on February 24, 2016, 01:23:08 AM
Hope this shows the object as an attachment, Dave
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Bill Mangus on February 24, 2016, 06:38:15 AM
I'm pretty certain that's a section of what's called and 'inter-stage', a coupling, if you will, between the first and second stages of a missile or space launch vehicle.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Bob Smith on February 24, 2016, 11:18:33 AM
You may be right Bill. I think if anybody investigated the object to find out what it is and how it got there it would be very interesting. Somebody somewhere has more of this piece and matching parts.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: James Champion on March 06, 2016, 08:22:07 AM
A possible second part of MH370 was reported last week on a ocean/river tidal sandbank in Mozambique last week. From the posted pictures, it appears to be a piece of external surface skin, is roughly triangular in shape, about 3-1/2 feet x 2 feet, appears to be composite in construction with composite honeycomb underneath, has printed on it "NO STEP", all edges are fractured except a few pulled rivet holes along part of one edge, and has no marine growth. Articles speculate that it is from the horizontal stabilizer. No official analysis yet. Finding debris on the Mozambique coastline with the possible crash location in the Indian ocean west of Australia fit with ocean current models.

Additionally a possible third part of MH370 is reported this week. Roughly a foot square external skin, white with some blue paint consistent with MH370 colors, appearing to have underlying composite honeycomb, with no marine growth. This piece was found on Reunion island by the same person, a member of a beach cleanup crew,  who discovered the first piece (the flaperon) in July 2015.
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Rob Seasock on March 06, 2016, 02:11:01 PM
Second possible MH370 plane part found in Reunion (this is in addition to Mozambique debris) http://news.yahoo.com/second-possible-mh370-plane-part-found-reunion-191930947.html (http://news.yahoo.com/second-possible-mh370-plane-part-found-reunion-191930947.html)
Title: Re: Malaysian Flight 370
Post by: Monty Fowler on July 08, 2016, 05:46:45 PM
It looks like Australia is about to wrap up its underwater search. It would be interesting to see how they made out with their underwater sonar vehicles.

LTM,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 EC