MH370 and military primary radar. [Archive]

Lord Lucan

16th Mar 2014, 14:06

Please excuse a non military type on your forum, but I have a question to ask, and the thread is just too insane over there on Rumours&News.

If MH370 did in fact turn back and overfly the Malaysian peninsular into the Indian Ocean, transponder off, is it conceivable they were not seen by the Malaysian Air Force, or other military radar?

I realise air defence is a sensitive matter, but what is the opinion here?

Dr Jekyll

16th Mar 2014, 14:20

Appropriate user name for the circumstances I must say.

thing

16th Mar 2014, 14:34

A 777 is a big lump of tin, any civil or miltary radar would have seen it. All the transponder does is identify the blip. As usual with cases of this sort for people with an aviation background listening to the idiots on the news is painful.

Lord Lucan

16th Mar 2014, 14:44

Having a great number of years in the business I know a 777 can be detected.

I am more interested if it is possible that it wasn't.

thing

16th Mar 2014, 15:19

ian16th

16th Mar 2014, 15:45

Radar is radar at the end of the dayIt does apprear that the civilians depend much more on transponder information than the military. The military might want to make their own decisions about what type of a/c a target is, rather than depend on what the target tells you it is.

But I stopped being a Radar Fitter in 1965 and things might have changed since then :)

Fox3WheresMyBanana

16th Mar 2014, 15:57

The most useful info appears to be in this Reuters article.

Exclusive: Radar data suggests missing Malaysia plane deliberately flown way off course - sources | Reuters (http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/14/us-malaysia-airlines-radar-exclusive-idUSBREA2D0DG20140314)

This Time of India report is also relevant

Radar suggests missing Malaysian jet changed its course more than once - The Times of India (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/rest-of-world/Radar-suggests-missing-Malaysian-jet-changed-its-course-more-than-once/articleshow/32051288.cms)

The relevant Malaysian military radar sites appear to be at Kota Bharu and Butterworth.

MH 370 is reported now to have been routing between named waypoints. Your most likely options are:
1) it was detected on military radar, but not deemed a threat due to its routing, and therefore not investigated.
2) it was detected, deemed a threat but not identified.
3) it was not detected, or not detected often enough to generate a reliable track

All of the reasons for the above would make the Malaysian authorities look bad. Questions might include:
What was the system serviceability and effective coverage?
Was this an operator or command cock-up?
Do they co-ordinate with the civilians, including flight plans?
Do their systems include transponder codes?
Do they have an effective Quick Reaction Alert?

I suspect the details are coming out now because they are reviewing the radar recordings but only now realise what they need to look for.

My best guess is that they routinely ignore civilian traffic routing between named waypoints. They will absolutely not wish to admit this, especially if it is known that they do so, as whoever was flying the jet may have planned for this.

Lord Lucan

16th Mar 2014, 16:03

Radar is radar at the end of the day, doesn't matter whether it's mil or civvy, same as dynamite, both versions go bang. I'm not sure what you're driving at when you say 'is it possible that it wasn't detected?' If it was in radar range then yes it would be detected unless it had some Klingon cloaking device. But if you are in the business then you already know that surely.

Well, it's a long time since I have been in an ATC or military radar room, that's why I'm asking. I thought primary radar returns are not displayed on current civilian ATC radars, at least not in normal operations. So civilian radar may not have noticed.

Military air defence radars however.... That is what I am getting at.

Is it possible the Air-force sometimes is asleep, or have lost the tapes? Was the only radar switched off and they were all down the local brothel? I have no idea as to the extent of Malaysia's air defence capabilities. I thought someone here might know.

thing

16th Mar 2014, 16:04

It does apprear that the civilians depend much more on transponder information than the military.Possibly true, but the OP question was 'Was it possible for it not to be detected?' The simple answer is if it was in radar range then yes, it was. Let's not get into atmospheric aberration, whether there was an N in the month and all of the other good stuff.

I agree with Fox, there's some serious backpedalling going on.

Edit: Sorry LL, just caught your post. ATC do show non transponding traffic, although I can only speak for certain about the UK and Western Europe. Why would they not want to show non transponding traffic? If anything they are going to be the bigger proximity threat precisely because you don't know their height, where they are heading etc. Go flying any time in the UK and you will have ATC warning you about 'Unidentified traffic, no height information.'

Fox3WheresMyBanana

16th Mar 2014, 16:16

Just found this: David Learmount at FlightGlobal reckons it was a cock-up by the Malaysian military also:
MH370: Malaysia's military failed in their duty says expert | Plane Talking (http://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalking/2014/03/13/mh370-malaysias-military-failed-in-their-duty-says-expert/)

Worth noting that, at that time of night, there is no Swiss QRA (they start at 6am I believe - easy life:ok:)

Sun Who

16th Mar 2014, 16:31

thing

16th Mar 2014, 16:57

Many air traffic systems around the world, including some in the UK, do not show non-squawking aircraft to the controller. This is particularly true for civilian controllers monitoring the upper air, who may only be presented with symbology derived from secondary surveillance systems, not even 'raw' secondary returns. Thanks for that, I learn again from Pprune. Why would you not want to see non transponding aircraft? Would it just overload the controller?

Can't say I've ever flown in an area where only transponding traffic was shown otherwise I wouldn't get non transponding traffic as conflicts! However, I rarely venture into the oxygen starved areas of the airspace.

ORAC

16th Mar 2014, 17:19

Wrong question.

Would it have been tracked from shortly after take-off until it left radar cover - yes. It would have been identified as a friendly based on it's SSR squawk and associated flight plan and had a friendly track label associated with it which would have stayed with it based on primary radar when the SSR was turned off.

Would the fact that the SSR was turned off and the aircraft then turned back have caused an alert? Perhaps. It was already identified as friendly and the turn back could have been assumed to be related to an aircraft electrical problem; however a prolonged deviation from the flight plan route should have triggered at least a conversation with the local ATC centre as to the problem and intentions.

Once over land it probably entered a no-track area (spurious plots associated with ground clutter and local movements are a nuisance) and the track label would have been automatically dropped. From that point it would have just been another assumed friendly overland track.

MPN11

16th Mar 2014, 17:21

When I was controlling (military) in the UK Upoer Airpace (above FL245) it was a mandatory control environment. So everyone there was being controlled by someone. Ergo, anything below 245 was just screen clutter, and thus on the T-82 radar we could operate in "Beam 6" and thus filter out all the medium and lower level stuff.

Drop below 245, and we would operate in "All Beams" to ensure we saw any possible conflicts. Then, if needed, we would use the height finder to determine the height if the conflict ... 5.000 FT vertical separation being required.

Any SSR data was a bonus, allowing coordination with the relevant controlling agency (if showing).

Lima Juliet

16th Mar 2014, 17:26

Yup, I agree, civvies tend to use SSR-only to declutter their picture. :ok:

I would hope the civil commercial aviation world takes a long hard look at itself after this. I would hope they ask the following:

1. Why is there an over reliance on SSR and not primary RADAR?
2. Why isn't there a procedure for contacting the aircraft when they don't check in on frequency?
3. When there is no contact then why didn't the air traffic service start to look with primary? The average airliner does around 8 miles a minute - so no contact after 5 minutes then start looking out by 50 miles!
4. Is it ETOPS safe or should we have more crew and engines on a single aircraft?
5. Is the use of an aircraft slide really sufficient as a life-raft following ditching?

LJ

Tankertrashnav

16th Mar 2014, 17:26

I know it is fashionable on this forum to rubbish David Learmount and anything he says, but I have to say I pretty well agree with what he is saying about this. Everything points to a huge cock-up on the part of the RMAF radar, which their authorities have been covering up because of this inevitable "face" thing. If I were a Malaysian taxpayer I'd be asking what the heck is the use of operating highly expensive Su 30s, Mig 29s and F18s if unidentified aircraft can fly unchallenged across the country's airspace?

thing

16th Mar 2014, 17:31

Yup, I agree, civvies tend to use SSR-only to declutter their pictureSo if a civ airliner looses it's transponder for whatever reason then it just disappears? Even though there must be a primary return somewhere in the system even if it's being blocked out? I find that incredible.

Lord Lucan

16th Mar 2014, 17:58

ORAC, Am I correct in thinking that you believe it is possible that it was not tracked, - or rather, it is possible that it would not have raised any military interest?

And I presume the radar data is recorded and preserved, so would it not have been reviewed within hours?

And what would be the military interest when the now unidentified return appears from the overland clutter when the aircraft coasts out into the Indian Ocean?

MPN11

16th Mar 2014, 18:27

As a generality I would say that reliance on SSR data since the 70s, by ATC certainly, has diminished the ability to work with minimal data. Think Word Processor VS. Pen, email VS. Letter.

I've had numerous situations when handing over aircraft to another Mil ATCO to hear bleats such as "I don't have a flight plan for him" or "I can't see his squawk". All one actually needs is a primary return, in the right location on tne right heading, for identification from another controller. Then just "Take 5" or coordinate - it's not that difficult.

Sadly, automation now seems to require innumerable additional bells and whistles to achieve a safe, orderly and expeditious flow of air traffic.

[/rant] :p

Trim Stab

16th Mar 2014, 19:10

I read elsewhere that the Indian Navy had turned off their primary radar, which is why they had no trace. Apparently too expensive to run their radar permanently at times when there is no threat. Possibly also the RMAF had their primary radar switched off.

Fox3WheresMyBanana

16th Mar 2014, 19:19

Interesting stuff Trim Stab -and your location is apposite - 'Heart of Darkness' now seemingly including 'in a jet with the SSR turned off anywhere in SE Asia' ;)

GreenKnight121

16th Mar 2014, 23:58

I'm not aware of the current state of things in Europe or elsewhere, but for the last couple of decades I have been seeing reports and stories (many confirmed by local control sectors and even by the FAA itself) that there are few actual high-level radars (the ones that bounce a radio wave off the aircraft skin rather than querying its transponder) left in the US ATC network!

The only place where actual radars are left in numbers in civilian service is in the lower altitudes that are relatively near airports with sufficient traffic to justify the expense.

Everything else in the ATCT network relies completely on transponders to both locate and identify aircraft.

ORAC

17th Mar 2014, 07:24

ORAC, Am I correct in thinking that you believe it is possible that it was not tracked, - or rather, it is possible that it would not have raised any military interest?

I'm saying it was practically certain it was originally detected, tracked, and identified as friendly as an outbound track. The track block would have given the track ID and, only perhaps, the height. When the SSR was turned off it might not even have been noticed. (I had occasions when I was controlling myself when someone had to point out my aircraft wasn't squawking).

As a friendly it would not of been a high priority, they would have been watching other unknown tracks and trying to identify them.

The question then arises as to whether the turn back would have raised an alert. Unless it was a sophisticated system with flight plan tracks being continuously monitored for adherence (which I am almost certain was not the case,) then the system would not have generated an alert unless it squawked radio fail, hijack or radio fail. Would the operator have seen it as suspicious? Bored airman keeping tracks on blips, unlikely.

The remaining possibility would have been if ATC called to say they'd lost contact, but they'd sent him over to HCM control and thought he'd gone. HCM didn't query his non-arrival on frequency (lack of comms between ATC centres?) so that didn't happen either.

When the track went overland/primary went below cover the track would have automatically timed out and been dropped and it would not have been seen as of interest.

When a non-squawking outbound track appeared off the west coast it would either have been made friendly or unknown based on track behaviour (coming from friendly territory) and again dropped when it left radar cover.

In short, the whole turn and transit until it left cover is highly unlikely to have raised an eyebrow until questions were asked and the tapes pulled. At which point embarassed execs would have started waffling rather than admitting that's how the system works.

Lord Lucan

17th Mar 2014, 07:29

ORAC,

Thanks for such a detailed explanation.

Any thoughts on why, after reviewing the tapes, it would take more than a week to find? Is this a difficult exercise?

Tankertrashnav

17th Mar 2014, 09:43

Going back to the OP's question, the practices current in civilian ATC with regard to transponders are a red herring. What is being asked is if it is conceivable that the military radar operated by the RMAF missed the contact.

Obviously it is conceivable - they were asleep, they were u/s, they were shut down for a day's holiday - who knows? The fact remains that a military radar does not rely on IFF - an incoming aggressor is not going to conveniently squawk for you. An effective military radar should not only have picked this aircraft up as a possible threat, but should certainly have launched aircraft to intercept and identify. Otherwise what's the point of having a massively expensive air defence system?

MPN11

17th Mar 2014, 11:02

Tankertrashnav ... not disputing anything you said, but is it not conceivable that different "Alert States" might be employed?

I accept that the region 'enjoys' a degree of tension, but in the absence of any 'indicators' is it not possible that the Malaysian AD world was in a relaxed state? Or do they have to monitor incursions constantly the way we did/do in respect of Soviet/Russian VLR aircraft?

Just surmising, nothing more.

Canadian Break

17th Mar 2014, 12:36

ORAC has summed it up nicely and I think he also talked about areas in which tracks are not initiated (primarily for system/de-cluttering reasons) in an earlier post. To answer your specific question I do not believe that post 9/11, any credible ADGE system (even in its most basic form) would change the way it does business based on some type of "alert" system. Let me qualify that, they may become more "active" - depending on INT, but I believe that there is a level below which they would not go. I base this rather sweeping statement on my 34 years of ADGE experience - at all levels, from ab-initio to inter-facing with the 'political level'. However, in saying this I do not discount the "human factor" - some poor airman on a 12 or 15 hour shift missing something, and the supervisory chain also failing to pick it up etc etc.

gr4techie

17th Mar 2014, 14:41

Why has another thread on Pprune about the missing aircraft, gone missing ?!?

Theres a reasonably priced black Proton Wira just pulled up outside.

Wholigan

17th Mar 2014, 14:56

gr4techie - considering that the one in Rumours and News is taking between 3 and 6 mods pretty much all day to keep in some (not very good) semblance of order, we don't need masses of other threads about it proliferating on PPRuNe. The site policy is to have only one thread on this topic.

Three or four threads have been deleted from other forums, but I have decided to let this one run because we usually have some common sense around in here. So far so good eh?

Rest assured though, that if it degenerates into anything like the R & N thread it will also be culled.

langleybaston

17th Mar 2014, 15:40

Am I allowed to ask the experts nicely the following:

given that there appears to be a "last known" position west of malaysia, what is the logic to searching two arcs only. Are they reciprocals plotted on a great circle? Nobody in the media seems to be asking "why there?"
I apologise if I have missed something [that would be easy!]

Canadian Break

17th Mar 2014, 15:41

That's put the kybosh on it then matey!;)

thing

17th Mar 2014, 15:45

but I have decided to let this one run because we usually have some common sense around in here

Which corner are you looking in? :)

Tankertrashnav

17th Mar 2014, 16:43

MPN11 - You may well be right about relaxed states of alert and obviously I dont know what systems they have. However I'd have thought that post 9/11, a country which is home to one of the tallest buildings in the world would always be nervous about an incoming unidentified target.

Ive been out of things for a very long time now, but I am sure in recent years I have read of Typhoons being scrambled to intercept unidentified civilian traffic approaching the UK which turned out to be entirely innocent.

MPN11

17th Mar 2014, 18:00

@ TTN and CB ... No disagreement with anything you said. As I noted, just an observation. As a Mil Area ATCO, we only ever looked at the tube if we were controlling someone ;)

Navaleye

17th Mar 2014, 18:01

A civil radar looks for a squak code and won't do much if it can't find one. A military allocates track number to any target so that it can be tracked and any follow up taken. I have no experience of land based radars but on a ship I could see a complete air picture out to 250 miles. which is why I don't believe just about anything I hear on this subject.

Canadian Break

17th Mar 2014, 18:01

Exactly my point old man!

The Old Fat One

17th Mar 2014, 18:14

Wholigan, that's a top call letting it run on here...bags of military interest from all angles and the main thread is just going to be too wackadoodle for must of us mil or ex mil types.

To quote a fictional character, if one eliminates the impossible, the whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.

At the moment, there are a great many improbable scenarios (hence the whole mystery thing) there are not that many impossible scenarios. A "straightforward" aircraft accident is possible (the quotes because no accident is ever that straightforward); a terrorism event is possible; a non terrorist criminal act is possible and so is a suicidal type of thing. At the same time all these things look improbable because we are dealing with something we are not used...a modern day Bermuda Triangle. What makes it more explainable is the possibility that a number of rare event have lined up in a statistical outlier. For example, a criminal act that then turned into an accident, or a whole sequence of events, that make the mundane, look extraordinary.

Every poker player knows that sooner or later your four kings will run into four aces. As unlikely as it seems at the time (instantly arousing suspicions of cheating) that fact is that not only is it likely (if you play enough) it is a statistical certainty. In a similar way, with millions and millions of flights, sooner or later something totally freaky in every which way is going to happen.

For my part, I keep an open mind, but I won't surprised if the eventual truth is revealed as some tragic, simple human or mechanical failure (which kind reveals what two explanations I favour).

Thoughts are with the families..it must be hell on earth.

ORAC

17th Mar 2014, 18:17

I'd have thought that post 9/11, a country which is home to one of the tallest buildings in the world would always be nervous about an incoming unidentified target. but it wasn't an unidentified track. It was an identified Friendly track which turned round - and if the operator didn't know it's flight plan why would he assume it wasn't planned to?

To mangle a quote frm the FI war - they watched it all the way out and they watched all the way back in again.

Fox3WheresMyBanana

17th Mar 2014, 18:20

LangleyBastion - I understand that the only useful data from the engine satellite 'pinger' is the angle the satellite received the signal from. Since the satellite is in a fixed position in space relative to the Earth (Geostationary orbit), the last angle received gives a circle - rather a large one - on the Earth. The arc of this circle extends out over central Asia and down to the South Indian Ocean. It would be useful to have all the ping angles and timing,but this hasn't been released yet to my knowledge. With 30 min pings, the aircraft could be in a band +/- 300nm (approx, i.e. 29 mins flying range) of this arc.

MPN11

17th Mar 2014, 19:04

I like that, ORAC :ok:

Canadian Break

17th Mar 2014, 19:08

Occam's razor?

Canadian Break

17th Mar 2014, 19:18

You could perhaps see tracks out to 250nm if the aircraft was flying at 40,000'. If it descended to 10,000 then, assuming your antenna was 60' above the waterline, your horizon would be somewhere in the region of 132nm. If it descended to 5,000 the it would reduce to about 96nm - on a good day with a following wind. (Calibrated Range for Type 1022 was 225nm.

Navaleye

17th Mar 2014, 19:30

Fully agree. Sorry did not provide enough detail. I could still watch a very large area and simply don't believe this could have fallen of the plot.if it goes to 96 miles, then I'd go for a 992.

Canadian Break

17th Mar 2014, 19:39

Sorry if that came across that I was having a go at you - I wasn't. H0wever, there is just so much complete c**p being sprouted on the internet about this (especially the BBC!) that I thought we had better explain everything in simple terms - just in case the sciolists come here for "facts" for their next "scoop" on the story. sorry NE! Bugger - can't even spell your name correctly now - sorry again!

Navaleye

17th Mar 2014, 19:56

No offence taken Sir. There is so much not being told here if defies belief.

langleybaston

17th Mar 2014, 21:19

FOX3:

just the info. I needed. Many thanks.

The Old Fat One

17th Mar 2014, 22:11

Occam's razor?

sort of (had to wiki it tho :))

I guess my point is, everything so far is explainable by anybody who understands aviation. You don't have to reach for Hollywood scenarios, when there are far simpler scenarios that have yet to be discounted. The problem is of course if the aircraft has gone down without trace in an unknown part of the ocean, we will likely remain clueless until somebody stumbles across the debris and recognises it for what it is.

And please note...I say "if". Best keep an open mind.

racedo

17th Mar 2014, 22:23

What radar does Diego Garcia have ? and its coverage ?

Fox3WheresMyBanana

17th Mar 2014, 22:30

http://www.trbimg.com/img-53249248/turbine/chi-last-known-position-of-flight-mh370-20140315/728

Diego Garcia appears to be about 1 000 nm from the nearest point on the arc they are searching along for the jet.

On the map, Where the caption reads '35,000 km above', DG is approx where the 'o' in 'above' is.

Tankertrashnav

17th Mar 2014, 22:37

but it wasn't an unidentified track. It was an identified Friendly track which turned round - and if the operator didn't know it's flight plan why would he assume it wasn't planned to?

ORAC - Yes, I accept that as far as it goes, but doesn't the "friendly " assumption cease to be valid (or least shouldnt a seed of doubt be sown) at the point that the IFF is switched off and and voice transmissions cease. I'm assuming some liaison between civilian and military ATC here, maybe that's a rash assumption.

And dont forget that up to the point they were highjacked, all four aircraft involved in the events of 9/11 were "friendly".

PS Latest nonsense all over the news tonight - it has been established the the co-pilot/first officer made the final transmission. Shock horror, aircraft captain delegates routine transmissions to the RHS - that's never happened before!

Mike Gallafent

17th Mar 2014, 23:38

All major naval powers have highly developed acoustic technology using both stationary and mobile microphones. With frequency discrimination the range and sensitivity of such devices could be useful. Are there any figures for the power of the black box transmissions that supposedly last a month?

Fox3WheresMyBanana

17th Mar 2014, 23:44

Deep-water Black Box Retrieval - November 2009, Volume 13, Number 09 - Archive - Hydro International (http://www.hydro-international.com/issues/articles/id1130-Deepwater_Black_Box_Retrieval.html)

The maximum detection range is determined primarily by the frequency and the transmission power, with an initial source level of 160.5dB re 1µPa @ 1m, which reduces to 157.0dB re 1µPa @ 1m, after 30 days. The quoted maximum detection range is 2-3km, although this is influenced by environmental conditions.

racedo

18th Mar 2014, 00:24

Diego Garcia appears to be about 1 000 nm from the nearest point on the arc they are searching along for the jet.

On the map, Where the caption reads '35,000 km above', DG is approx where the 'o' in 'above' is. Fox

Thanks for that

So assumption must be that as they savvy regarding radar coverage and holes in it then area heading towards DG spreading out hundreds of miles from DG would also be off limits.

I work on assumption that anything heading towards DG gets picked up way way out.................just a hunch.

I think aircraft is still in Malaysia / Indonsia ........easier to organise and hide where as everybody suggests 5-6 hours away.

The Old Fat One

18th Mar 2014, 06:56

I think aircraft is still in Malaysia / Indonsia ........easier to organise and hide where as everybody suggests 5-6 hours away.

Thanks for so aptly making my point. TBC...I have an open mind and rule nothing out, but lets unpack your sentence...

Easy to organise and hide a full 777?? Not hole up on some deserted strip and issue ransom demands, but HIDE a 777 and CONTROL 250+ passengers/crew away from the searching world's eyes.

How many players do you think this would take...several hundred, several thousand? I doubt such an enterprise could be ventured without some degree of state input, so you appear to be suggesting/implying the collusion of the state where you think the bird is? At Entebbe the hijackers were given state support, and that wasn't even remotely covert.

I'm not saying it's impossible...I'm saying it is massive mind stretch to get there, when there are several mundane, ordinary (tragic) explanations.

West Coast

18th Mar 2014, 07:11

OFO

If we're hypothesizing, who's to say the pax are still alive? If this is nefarious, the prize could be the plane, not the pax. A lot easier to manage the scenario way as well.

That said, my bet is they're all on the bottom of the ocean.

ORAC

18th Mar 2014, 08:48

ORAC - Yes, I accept that as far as it goes, but doesn't the "friendly " assumption cease to be valid (or least shouldnt a seed of doubt be sown) at the point that the IFF is switched off and and voice transmissions cease. I'm assuming some liaison between civilian and military ATC here, maybe that's a rash assumption. Very rash.

Malaysian ATC had chopped the flight to CHM and had an acknowledgement, then the aircraft left cover, with the SSR disappearing as it, apparently left radar cover eastbound - a totally normal transfer at the FIR boundary, why would they call anyone?

As a scheduled flight the flight plan would have been a repetitive stored flight plan in the database at CHM, but cancelled/delayed flights are a day to day occurrence so, unless Malaysian ATC called they'd they wouldn't know there was a problem, and it wouldn't be triggered and loaded at the boundary gate as the appropriate flight/SSR didn't appear, so why would they take any action?

Malaysian ADGE would have identified the track as friendly after take-off and continuously tracked it, so it was never an unknown, so the system wouldn't provide an alert.

This was carefully planned. The only point where it might have raised an alert was if the ADGE radar operator thought the behaviour of the flight was suspicious in turning around and called a superior. But without the flight plan would he suspect anything? It could have been a test flight, a medical turn back with an emergency on board, a military flight leaving the airways structure at a planned point en-route to an operating area, a naves. Gut feeling is that he'd have been quite happy as long as the blip had an A or F on it and wouldn't have done a thing or had a suspicion.

Won't stop him and his bosses getting it in the neck though; bound to be a BOI and sh*t flows downwards....

racedo

18th Mar 2014, 10:13

Easy to organise and hide a full 777?? Not hole up on some deserted strip and issue ransom demands, but HIDE a 777 and CONTROL 250+ passengers/crew away from the searching world's eyes.

How many players do you think this would take...several hundred, several thousand? I doubt such an enterprise could be ventured without some degree of state input, so you appear to be suggesting/implying the collusion of the state where you think the bird is? At Entebbe the hijackers were given state support, and that wasn't even remotely covert.

I'm not saying it's impossible...I'm saying it is massive mind stretch to get there, when there are several mundane, ordinary (tragic) explanations.

You need a strip to take a 777..............on assumption its not going to take off again.

Controlling 250 people is easy, Pilot tells them we have an emergency situation and need to put the plane down at an emergency field, once landed evacuate to a control area / shed, 10 guys with guns now in control with passengers tied up.

People will trust the Pilot because they conditioned to do it as why would a pilot hijack his own plane. Pilot or CoPilot in on it then its all on.

Mobiles easily controlled as into an area with no coverage OR take down coverage for a few hours.

Best case scenario you hold passengers in one place, worst case.........they a hindrance and in the way who know too much.

Hiding a 777 is easy, camouflage netting strung up does that if not have a large shed. If already in places for weeks before hand and just moved to get aircraft in then even less noticeable.

Now aircraft is valuable in one piece but no buyers.

However broken down into parts and fed into blackmarket then it starts to become valuable to those who can use and there will always be people who can use.

Issue will then be moving the parts, airfield would need to be close to sea where not a lot of people in a place to notice so can ship out engines and broken down parts.

The total number of people needing to be involved tops out at 50 with biggest one issue getting the engineers who can strip it down.

Tankertrashnav

18th Mar 2014, 10:33

Thanks for the detailed info ORAC, I'm probably making the mistake of comparing things with the excellent service we used to get from RAF (and other NW European) military radars way back in the 70s. In those sort of circumstances, I would have expected Northern Radar, say, to contact the appropriate civilian ATC authority to ask, for example, if they knew anything about an unidentified contact approaching the coast.

Mind you I do recall the occasion when they asked us to look out for "friendly traffic" on a reciprocal heading, just as two Badgers flashed past on our starboard side. But then, nobody's perfect.

Thomas coupling

18th Mar 2014, 10:43

Now it looks like the yanks are drip feeding some "sensitive" data into the mix from some of their satellites. It must be difficult hiding where the source of information comes from and the fidelity it has to offer!
Some very sophisticated search a/c are now scouring North / NW of Australia as a consequence.
You can bet your bottom dollar that the US have a recording of the last few track miles this a/c took before falling off radar.

The Old Fat One

18th Mar 2014, 11:05

Racedo,

Your scenario is not remotely plausible and you under estimate massive difficulties at every step...but I tell you what...I'll buy it.

Now give it a probability.

I'll give it 0.01%

and I give this...

That said, my bet is they're all on the bottom of the ocean

99.99%

And I really hope and pray that I'm wrong and one of these fantastical scenarios that has the souls on board still alive is actually being played out.

Enough said, the circumstances will emerge eventually.