EPTIt is kinda ridiculous that we rely on people like this to be our eyes and ears. At the same time however, you can look at plenty of other news if you just look on the main page of cnn's website or something. You don't need to settle to being spoon fed information afterall.
Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370 Missing - Page 23
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Antisocialmunky
United States5912 Posts
It is kinda ridiculous that we rely on people like this to be our eyes and ears. At the same time however, you can look at plenty of other news if you just look on the main page of cnn's website or something. You don't need to settle to being spoon fed information afterall. | ||
|
Djzapz
Canada10681 Posts
On March 16 2014 23:10 Antisocialmunky wrote: Fair enough, though this is a pretty big deal. Its really the 24 news network's faults for exploiting and encouraging retarded speculation to boost ratings though. It is kinda ridiculous that we rely on people like this to be our eyes and ears. At the same time however, you can look at plenty of other news if you just look on the main page of cnn's website or something. You don't need to settle to being spoon fed information afterall. I read news from a dozen of sources constantly as part of what it takes to do what I do for a living, so by no means do I settle to "being spoon fed information". I don't feel like I'm the one who's at risk here, I simply feel like society at large is harmed by this type of behavior by the mainstream media. Things that matter now are being silenced by sensationalist stories. Yes this is a big deal, but frankly nobody has anything new to add now. And yet it's what we talk about, not just in the news but my mother literally said it was scary because she heard of the plane being potentially used as a missile... because some guy thought it was a valid theory. Which it might be, but why do I need to hear about it on the radio while getting to work, and then hear about it again when I get back. And the next day in the paper, and back home I read about it on some news site. This whole ordeal is just one glowing example of journalists acting like bloggers. The "some people say" era of "journalism" is quite sad. | ||
|
hp.Shell
United States2527 Posts
I forgot about that show! Nostalgia bomb! | ||
|
HelpMeGetBetter
United States764 Posts
| ||
|
BlueBird.
United States3889 Posts
On March 17 2014 07:45 HelpMeGetBetter wrote: I was thinking, where will this rank among the all-time greatest mysteries throughout history? Depends on the outcome really. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23162 Posts
On March 16 2014 22:36 Djzapz wrote: I'm aware of the implications. But here's a headline on my local news website "Flight MH370: Pilots and passengers in the crosshair of the investigation"... Then the article is packed to the brim with various random ideas. We're in the middle of elections here and the most thorough articles we get loosely tells us about something we don't know about - over and over. I happened to watch the second Ron Burgundy last night and it felt strangely familiar. And again I'm not saying that we shouldn't hear about it, we definitely DO need to hear about it. But at this point the fuckers know it's what gets them clicks so they'll write empty articles non-stop to cover this. So they should get something substantial instead of spouting nonsense because it entertains people. I couldn't help but notice the ironically pointed social commentary about modern American news from Anchorman 2. I imagine 95%+ of the people who saw the movie weren't expecting that (or missed it altogether). | ||
|
HelpMeGetBetter
United States764 Posts
https://twitter.com/DoxingRx | ||
|
Djzapz
Canada10681 Posts
On March 17 2014 07:51 GreenHorizons wrote: I couldn't help but notice the ironically pointed social commentary about modern American news from Anchorman 2. I imagine 95%+ of the people who saw the movie weren't expecting that (or missed it altogether). Yeah. Just noticed I called it Ron Burgundy... meant Anchorman 2 of course. I can't imagine that so many people missed it though, it's not too subtle. | ||
|
LaNague
Germany9118 Posts
what i dont understand, though, is that the military didnt do anything against a big UFO in their airspace. Normally you would launch fighter jets and get those AA missiles on standby. Unless its a very elaborated suicide and they planned to force the government to blow them up with missiles, but they didnt do anything and then theyjust ran out of fuel. | ||
|
Djzapz
Canada10681 Posts
| ||
itsjustatank
Hong Kong9153 Posts
Prime Minister Najib Razak acknowledged Saturday that military radar and satellite data raised the possibility that the plane could have ended up somewhere in Indonesia, the southern Indian Ocean or along a vast arc of territory from northern Laos across western China to Central Asia. Malaysian officials said they were scrambling to coordinate a 25-nation effort to find the plane. On Sunday, Malaysia’s defense minister added a critical detail about investigators’ understanding of what had transpired in the cockpit in the 40 minutes of flight time before ground controllers lost contact with the jet. The determination that the last verbal message to the control tower — “All right, good night,” someone said — came after a crucial signaling system had stopped transmitting, perhaps after being shut off, was likely to refocus scrutiny on the plane’s veteran pilot, Capt. Zaharie Ahmad Shah, 53, and his young first officer, Fariq Abdul Hamid, 27. ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/SKPQ3eR.png) http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/17/world/asia/malaysia-airlines-flight.html | ||
|
Antisocialmunky
United States5912 Posts
Since the aircraft obviously turned after the island Nav Point, you would see the radii get smaller and then larger. By comparing rate at which the radii expand at the speed (based on total time it used to exhaust its fuel supply, you'd have to assume the altitude since burn rates and speed changes with altitude) the aircraft if it headed in the direction of the satellite, you can tell which directions it could have been moving. Maybe they are still floating the idea that the plane actually landed because the last 2 pings worked out to be similar radii. Otherwise they could probably rule it out and declare the people dead so people can have some closure for now. | ||
|
itsjustatank
Hong Kong9153 Posts
| ||
|
Antisocialmunky
United States5912 Posts
Given multiple pings, while we can't triangulate, we can figure out speed the aircraft was moving away from the satellite. If you couple this with an estimated airspeed, you can figure out the airplane's bearing. | ||
|
itsjustatank
Hong Kong9153 Posts
velocity = displacement / time you have only time with one satellite all you know is that within this wide range of the satellite, the plane was there at some point. | ||
|
Taf the Ghost
United States11751 Posts
On March 17 2014 09:56 LaNague wrote: Its not suicide or terrorism, the comm parts where shut down systematically and then the plane evaded those nav points very skillfully. You dont do that when you just want to kill the people. what i dont understand, though, is that the military didnt do anything against a big UFO in their airspace. Normally you would launch fighter jets and get those AA missiles on standby. Unless its a very elaborated suicide and they planned to force the government to blow them up with missiles, but they didnt do anything and then theyjust ran out of fuel. Per other things I've read, the region, at night, is pretty much dead for Radar coverage. Unless your transponder is on, you're not pinging off a lot of them. Even most of the military radar is off (cost). So if the plane headed up through Burma, then across the Himalayas, it wasn't being "seen" for a long time. Add in some radar evasion planning, and, yes, it is possible to make a massive passenger airliner disappear. If it circled counter-clockwise and went South towards Australia, then there wasn't any land-based radar to see it. But, it didn't go South. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Over-the-horizon_radar Australia has that area covered in Over-the-Horizon radar. They'd have seen the airliner. So that puts the plane, likely, somewhere over China. | ||
|
rezoacken
Canada2719 Posts
On March 17 2014 10:06 Djzapz wrote: I threw together a little video regarding the topic I mentioned above. You might not want to watch it if you're afraid of some mild Anchorman 2 "spoilers". http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=15F34oK-aUQ Funny (or sad I dont know) good job. | ||
|
Antisocialmunky
United States5912 Posts
On March 17 2014 11:25 itsjustatank wrote: you are talking about velocity velocity = displacement / time you have only time with one satellite all you know is that within this wide range of the satellite, the plane was there at some point. No I mean speed when I say speed as in you know how fast the plane is going but you don't know the direction. Here's an admittedly crappy paint explanation of what I'm talking about: ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/WJHSOxG.png) (simplified of course because the satellite moves and the Earth's surface isn't 2d) The satellite received multiple pings every half hour during the flight and Malaysian radar knew of a last known position. If you can get a good estimate of the speed, you can calculate the direction from this information. My complaint is they only released the final ping range instead of all of them so we can't really estimate the final direction of flight. What we got looked like a much bigger area than the information should suggest. | ||
|
itsjustatank
Hong Kong9153 Posts
| ||
|
Antisocialmunky
United States5912 Posts
On March 17 2014 12:29 itsjustatank wrote: well, that's what the two plots in the OP of this thread appear to be at any rate, and all they are is best guesses Actually this is what I was trying to point out. The one in the OP looks like the range of the aircraft intersected with the ranging from the last satellite ping only (minus the searched areas). ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/J9Q4STk.jpg) I'm wondering why the investigators didn't release data based on the whole set of pings which should be more specific(you would get 2 cones showing likely path of travel and over which countries). Maybe this lack of data combined with not eliminating the landing theory points to the investigators having information that would make the plane look like it was stationary. Or more likely the Malaysian are just being confusing with their press Q/As. I do find it interesting though. | ||
| ||
