EPTGlad you liked it
Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370 Missing - Page 24
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Djzapz
Canada10681 Posts
Glad you liked it | ||
|
Taf the Ghost
United States11751 Posts
On March 17 2014 12:42 Antisocialmunky wrote: 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. Even with only 1 Sat data, we should have a general "track" available. Granted, there's two fairly specific path possibilities, but the nature of those would tell a whole lot. Which is what really stands out as an issue. If the Flight went North, it would have expanded away from the Satellite. If it went South (but all the way around Indonesia), then it should have moved closer to the Satellite before expanding out. The two issues I see, from poking around, are this: If it went South, it would have shown up on Australia Military Radar by at least Sunda Strait (between Java & Sumatra). And that's by publicly published ranges. I would take a guess it extends further, probably closer to the Straits of Malacca, given regional realities for the Military there. So, the plane would have entered the Australian Military Radar zone for a good while, at something of a strange direction. And the Aussies hadn't checked up on that information for a week? The other issue is I've come across several mentions of a Chinese SIGNIT listening post on one of the Burma-controlled island. I doubt they'd have had too advanced of radar out there (it's signal intercept location, after all; not a radar post), but they might have picked up the flight. Now, the Chinese aren't "officially" there, so they might not be willing to acknowledge any information they have out there. But there is a chance they have at least some idea of a partial amount of the track. Further, Indonesia never saw it on their radar at any point? So it steered all the around Indonesia, then goes South-East. It leads me to believe there's another set of information that hasn't been released yet. Something is really missing. Or it's the only way to not implication the Chinese (even if they actually didn't have anything to do with it). There's a lot of posturing involved in all of this. | ||
|
FFW_Rude
France10201 Posts
Transponder was off and ACRA too no ? How did they ping the plane since then because i thought it was really LOST. Did they search into radars "logs" to follow the plane after this ? Could the plane had circled around (like you would do when you are waiting in aeroport space ?) and then take a direction ? To throw off timestamps ? I would really love if someone could sum up the info we have right now because it's kind of confusing for me (english vocabulary of this thing is bad for someone like me). What i understood : - Plane take off - Transponder disconnected - Radio message to air control saying good night after this. - Plane disapear - Military pings location of the aircraft then lose it - Drawings of where the plane could have gone since fuel reserve and speed. - Apparently, high people where in the plane (high ranked in technology or something) - Companies don't want to reveal functions and employees names. - No "funny" cargo in the plane (gold or something) - One terrorist groups said it was them but it was dismissed - No ransom/terrorist claim after that. Did i miss something ? | ||
|
LaiShin
Australia978 Posts
I'm not sure about the throwing off timestamp bit, but the plane did fly above 45,000 feet to appear as a non-commercial plane and also flew low to avoid radar at times. So it was definitely someone with aviation knowledge taking control of the plane. This comment on reddit was pretty useful for a quick summary (albeit it might be outdated). http://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/20fmd0/serious_malaysia_airlines_flight_370_megathread/cg30ibj | ||
|
radiatoren
Denmark1907 Posts
00:41 The plane departs from Kuala Lumpur on the normal route towards Beijing. (Between 01:07 and 01:37) The primary ACARS system is shut down, meaning it stopped sending informations to the ground. It kept pinging the satellite. Shutting down ACARS is a longer sequence so it cannot have been done by accident by the pilot. 01:19 The co-pilot says "All right, good night" when the plane is handed off from malaysian airspace. 01:22 The last data from the transponder is received near the Igal waypoint in the South China Sea. 01:22 The Vietnamese air traffic controller is not getting contacted by the plane as scheduled. 01:30 The plane leaves civil primary radar. 01:30 A pilot from another plane claims to have contacted the plane on the emergency frequency, but he only heard mumbling before the connection was lost. (According to a malaysian airforce radar the following unspecified sequence occured) The plane is reaching FL450 which is above recommandations for the plane. It is taking a sharp turn to the west and descends to FL230, lower than normal cruising altitude where it passes Penang and flies westward towards the Igal waypoint near Phuket. It then turns northwest towards the Igrex waypoint in the northern part of the Indian Ocean. 02:15 The plane is no longer visible on military radar, contact is lost northwest of Andaman Islands with the plane flying towards the Indian Ocean and the Igrex waypoint. (Likely from the satelite data analysis) The plane flew in either a northern corridor towards the middle east or a southern corridor towards the vast nothingness of the southern Indian Ocean. 08:11 The last ping is recieved from the plane. The satelite only logs distance to the plane and not GPS-coordinates, but by calculation, a semi-circle around the satelite has been determined as the source of the final ping. Further data about flight-path should be possible to extract as more of the distances between the satellite and the pings are calculated. The fuel reserve is estimated to about 30 minutes at that time. Edit: Seems slightly off according to the newest information. I updated the information to be more exact. | ||
|
arbiter_md
Moldova1219 Posts
In this case identifying who that expert(s) could have been among the people from the plane, would be a good start probably? And if an expert was working there, we could expect that plane landed safely somewhere. Probably we should also identify all the possible locations of landing from the map? Assuming they didn't have a possibility to refuel, the plane should be there now. | ||
|
radiatoren
Denmark1907 Posts
So far we are making a "spec" out of "u" and someone named "lation". The investigators have enough data to be able to specify what has happened a lot more accurately. Eventually we will get access to these informations, but as long as hijaacking is prominently on the table and the plane could have landed, it is a criminal investigation which makes information a lot more "need to know". | ||
|
zev318
Canada4306 Posts
On March 17 2014 21:27 arbiter_md wrote: So, it seems like the plane was deliberately flying to avoid detection. Which means some expert was working there. In this case identifying who that expert(s) could have been among the people from the plane, would be a good start probably? And if an expert was working there, we could expect that plane landed safely somewhere. Probably we should also identify all the possible locations of landing from the map? Assuming they didn't have a possibility to refuel, the plane should be there now. "there" covers an area from southern china to afghanistan, maybe more (if they went north) | ||
|
Hryul
Austria2609 Posts
| ||
|
FFW_Rude
France10201 Posts
On March 17 2014 22:00 Hryul wrote: @ffw rude: what i understand it was some data gathering stuff linked to the engines that the manufacturer of them (rolls royce) had installed. You mean the pingy thing that happened after 2:00 ? @radiatoren Thanks. It's clearer. | ||
|
Antisocialmunky
United States5912 Posts
On March 17 2014 21:56 radiatoren wrote: All possibilities to land is pretty broad. They could land on the ocean, a road, in a clearing etc. I would wait for further ping-analysis and primary radar information to better determine the exact route and flight level of the plane. That would be the easiest way to narrow the search. Some people are speculating that the hijackers had falsified a cover-identity for the plane and were able to appear like a civil cargo plane to the ground control in the northern corridor, others say they flew under FL50 to avoid radar-detection in the northern corridor and others again claim the plane took the scenic route to a final destination in the southern Indian Oceans eternal waters (whether that included a water-landing and subsequent loading of a ship or a crash). So far we are making a "spec" out of "u" and someone named "lation". The investigators have enough data to be able to specify what has happened a lot more accurately. Eventually we will get access to these informations, but as long as hijaacking is prominently on the table and the plane could have landed, it is a criminal investigation which makes information a lot more "need to know". Can you even re-code the the transponder to look like a cargo plane in flight? Being able to pull that off would make this quite the Mission Impossible heist type scenario. At any rate, it seems like information that the plane was flying as low as 5000ft (seems like American source given the units) got reported. No idea if its true but there's probably a grain of truth to it given the track record of this whole investigation. It would imply they likely got some more radar data or did more analysis on the Malaysian military radar data. Edit: Ah, it seems this has to do with the eye witness accounts as the plane was flying low over Malaysia to avoid radar. | ||
|
gruff
Sweden2276 Posts
| ||
|
Hryul
Austria2609 Posts
On March 17 2014 23:21 FFW_Rude wrote: You mean the pingy thing that happened after 2:00 ? @radiatoren Thanks. It's clearer. yes. Maintenance data download The introduction of the interface in the early 1990s between the flight data acquisition and management system, the aircraft condition monitoring system and the ACARS management unit resulted in wider acceptance of datalinks on the part of airlines. The flight data acquisition and management system and the aircraft condition monitoring system systems which analyze engine aircraft and operational performance conditions now provide performance data to the airlines on the ground in real time using the ACARS network. This reduces the need for airline personnel to go to the aircraft to off-load the data from these systems. These systems are capable of identifying abnormal flight conditions and automatically sending real-time messages to an airline. Detailed engine reports can also be transmitted to the ground via ACARS. The airlines use these reports to automate engine trending activities. This capability enables airlines to monitor their engine performance more accurately and identify and plan their repair and maintenance activities more rapidly. | ||
|
FFW_Rude
France10201 Posts
Can ACARS send transmission underwater ? Could the plane have crashed and ACARS continue to send things ? But if it's engine monitoring, a crash would have sent abnormal flight conditions records no ? If i recall correctly blackboxes can transmist 30days underwater so... I kind of read every plane crash history on wikipedia.. i don't know why i'm addicted to this. It's a real bizarre thing. Dunno why i'm attracted to read those story and particularly the blackbox pilot discussions before crash. It's a weird morbid thing... But i really hope the plane have landed and that people are safe | ||
|
Hryul
Austria2609 Posts
see wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communication_with_submarines | ||
|
oBlade
United States5583 Posts
On March 17 2014 23:29 Antisocialmunky wrote: Can you even re-code the the transponder to look like a cargo plane in flight? Being able to pull that off would make this quite the Mission Impossible heist type scenario. At any rate, it seems like information that the plane was flying as low as 5000ft (seems like American source given the units) got reported. No idea if its true but there's probably a grain of truth to it given the track record of this whole investigation. It would imply they likely got some more radar data or did more analysis on the Malaysian military radar data. Edit: Ah, it seems this has to do with the eye witness accounts as the plane was flying low over Malaysia to avoid radar. I know Air Force One did that when they went to Baghdad but that's also a special plane. | ||
|
FFW_Rude
France10201 Posts
On March 18 2014 00:59 Hryul wrote: unlikely, since radio waves don't travel that far underwater. to communicate with submarines, the US and USSR build radios with antennas > 52 km (!!). with this they told the submarines to come to the surface to use their "real" communication devices. see wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communication_with_submarines Oh ok. I really thought blackboxes could transmit underwater  | ||
|
Hryul
Austria2609 Posts
On March 17 2014 23:29 Antisocialmunky wrote: Can you even re-code the the transponder to look like a cargo plane in flight? Being able to pull that off would make this quite the Mission Impossible heist type scenario. At any rate, it seems like information that the plane was flying as low as 5000ft (seems like American source given the units) got reported. No idea if its true but there's probably a grain of truth to it given the track record of this whole investigation. It would imply they likely got some more radar data or did more analysis on the Malaysian military radar data. Edit: Ah, it seems this has to do with the eye witness accounts as the plane was flying low over Malaysia to avoid radar. I guess one should replace lmgtfy with lmwtfy: transponder:Care must be taken not to squawk any emergency code during a code change. For example, when changing from 1200 to 6501 (an assigned ATC squawk), one might turn the second wheel to a 5 (thus 1500), and then rotate the first wheel backwards in the sequence 1-0-7-6 to get to 6. This would momentarily have the transponder squawking a hijack code (7500), which might lead to more attention than one desires. | ||
|
Hryul
Austria2609 Posts
On March 18 2014 01:39 FFW_Rude wrote: Oh ok. I really thought blackboxes could transmit underwater I just read that the black box sends a sonar signal with a reach up to 3km. that is "easier" to spot, but given the area, it's still not easy.E: but the Black Box is not the Transponder. | ||
|
jinorazi
Korea (South)4948 Posts
| ||
| ||
