Malaysian Airlines MH370 contact lost
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Europe
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chinese Terrorism
"Meanwhile, claims that a 35-year-old Uighur man from China’s troubled autonomous Muslim province was on Flight MH370 may be looked at in a new light. The group claimed responsibility earlier this week but were dismissed as opportunistic and not credible, but Malaysian reports now say the passenger had taken flight-simulator training in 2005."
Uighur separatists? claim over missing flight MH370 may be re-examined | News.com.au
Uighur separatists? claim over missing flight MH370 may be re-examined | News.com.au
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Brazil
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The idea of the First Officer being the one who spoke in the final received message wasn't 'confirmed' today, as some news sites are saying. In the press conference it was stated that it appears that way. That's not confirmation. Appearances have not proven to be too helpful so far so it is certainly not confirmed.
Also stated in that news conference was that it was not known for sure if the ACARS was switched off before the last vocal message received from the cockpit. It was specified that at 01:07 the last ACARS message was received and at 01:19 the last voice contact was made. Then, there were no more ACARS messages. The official specifically stressed that this is not confirmation that the ACARS was turned off prior to the last voice message...only that is was after the last ACARS message that was received and then the one that should have been received 30 minutes later never arrived.
I'm unaware of any official update to this, which was what happened during the press conference this morning UK time (17th March), so please update me if needed.
I'm finding it irritating that the media is using the word 'confirmed' in their headlines and then using 'suggested' in the meat of the article.
Also stated in that news conference was that it was not known for sure if the ACARS was switched off before the last vocal message received from the cockpit. It was specified that at 01:07 the last ACARS message was received and at 01:19 the last voice contact was made. Then, there were no more ACARS messages. The official specifically stressed that this is not confirmation that the ACARS was turned off prior to the last voice message...only that is was after the last ACARS message that was received and then the one that should have been received 30 minutes later never arrived.
I'm unaware of any official update to this, which was what happened during the press conference this morning UK time (17th March), so please update me if needed.
I'm finding it irritating that the media is using the word 'confirmed' in their headlines and then using 'suggested' in the meat of the article.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I must say, I think you have it all figured out
The flight path over the peninsula can be just the aftermath of the chaos. If the flightpath was carfully figured out to miss the radar, that attemp was a complete failure. The radar plot is there and is part of this investigation.
PS.: Not all tragedies on this planet are related to terrorism, probably more than 99% are not !
Last edited by OleOle; 17th Mar 2014 at 23:05.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Harrogate
Age: 46
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you go down the route of someone (flight crew or hijacker) taking the plane without the need for the passengers (for ransom etc) the obvious way of dealing with them is to knock them out by whatever means during the flight rather than having to shoot them... The only way these people would still be alive is if they are to be used as hostages, surely?
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: USA
Age: 46
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RifRaf3
Mythbusters did an experiment not long ago. They found
...now, we have a body of water 150-350 Feet deep, and you have the plane and absolutely all the parts which shattered on the surface going how deep into mud again?
An aircraft that buries itself into dirt or mud does not imply that it remains intact. It commences breaking up as it hits the water, but...
In their first experiment, the experimenters shot the 9mm pistol straight down into the water. At a range of up to seven feet, the 9mm round was effective in completely penetrating the ballistics gel – meaning a person at the same range would be killed. At eight feet, the bullet entered but did not exit the gel, indicating a possible non-fatal wound. Past eight feet, the gel was undisturbed.
The shotgun, loaded with a 3” deer slug instead of buckshot, not only "killed" the ballistic gel target at six feet, it destroyed the acrylic water tank, ending that method of testing.
The team then switched to a swimming pool to continue the experiments – and to make the test more realistic, switched from shooting straight down to an angle of twenty to thirty degrees off the vertical, approximating a shooter standing on the edge of the water and shooting out into it.
The first candidate for this test was the Civil War rifle. At a range of 15 feet, the ballistics gel was completely unharmed; likewise at five feet. Only when the range was reduced to three feet did the bullet finally penetrate the gel, suggesting that diving under water was probably a pretty effective way of dodging slugs during the Civil War.
The experimenters moved on to the hunting rifle, which was loaded with a full-metal jacket .223 round that emerged at roughly 2,500 feet per second. At ten feet, the bullet disintegrated and the gel was untouched. At three feet, the bullet again broke up, with its tip coming to rest on the gel – not nearly enough power to damage flesh.
A bullet from the M1 Garand, with a muzzle speed of 2,800 ft/sec, also disintegrated at the ten-foot range. At two feet, the slug penetrated about four inches into the gel, suggesting a non-fatal wound. The armor-piercing .50 caliber round didn’t do any better – it, too, came apart at distances greater than five feet and lost most of its punch by three feet.
The Mythbusters team concluded that you’d be safe from firearms even if they were fired straight down to a depth of eight feet, and probably safe at much lesser depths, especially if the bullet was aimed at an angle.
The shotgun, loaded with a 3” deer slug instead of buckshot, not only "killed" the ballistic gel target at six feet, it destroyed the acrylic water tank, ending that method of testing.
The team then switched to a swimming pool to continue the experiments – and to make the test more realistic, switched from shooting straight down to an angle of twenty to thirty degrees off the vertical, approximating a shooter standing on the edge of the water and shooting out into it.
The first candidate for this test was the Civil War rifle. At a range of 15 feet, the ballistics gel was completely unharmed; likewise at five feet. Only when the range was reduced to three feet did the bullet finally penetrate the gel, suggesting that diving under water was probably a pretty effective way of dodging slugs during the Civil War.
The experimenters moved on to the hunting rifle, which was loaded with a full-metal jacket .223 round that emerged at roughly 2,500 feet per second. At ten feet, the bullet disintegrated and the gel was untouched. At three feet, the bullet again broke up, with its tip coming to rest on the gel – not nearly enough power to damage flesh.
A bullet from the M1 Garand, with a muzzle speed of 2,800 ft/sec, also disintegrated at the ten-foot range. At two feet, the slug penetrated about four inches into the gel, suggesting a non-fatal wound. The armor-piercing .50 caliber round didn’t do any better – it, too, came apart at distances greater than five feet and lost most of its punch by three feet.
The Mythbusters team concluded that you’d be safe from firearms even if they were fired straight down to a depth of eight feet, and probably safe at much lesser depths, especially if the bullet was aimed at an angle.
Burial
DS
Mythbusters were using bullets. In the a/c situation the preceeding pieces make a swathe for the following bits and it is nor comparable. I reiterate that I've seen real a/c buried and there are the instances of Sil Air and others. I'm not implying no possible wreckage, but perhaps sufficiently little to be noticed. Some may drift to the surface later if the mud is fluid enough.
I'm not an absolutist like so many here addicted to closure. I'm happy to keep juggled balls in the air. I consider the buried a/c scenario my lowest priority, but I can't rule it out.
Mythbusters were using bullets. In the a/c situation the preceeding pieces make a swathe for the following bits and it is nor comparable. I reiterate that I've seen real a/c buried and there are the instances of Sil Air and others. I'm not implying no possible wreckage, but perhaps sufficiently little to be noticed. Some may drift to the surface later if the mud is fluid enough.
I'm not an absolutist like so many here addicted to closure. I'm happy to keep juggled balls in the air. I consider the buried a/c scenario my lowest priority, but I can't rule it out.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fairly close to the colonial capitol
Age: 55
Posts: 1,693
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The identifying code has to be changeable. Every time there is a maintenance swap-out of equipment the code has to be reprogrammed in the new equipment.
The only question is whether it requires physical access to the relevant PCB or whether it can be done using independent maintenance systems or using pilot interfaces operating in maintenance mode.
The only question is whether it requires physical access to the relevant PCB or whether it can be done using independent maintenance systems or using pilot interfaces operating in maintenance mode.
I suppose a Macgyver type or perhaps 007's Q could find a way to program the info into the relevant card memories, but this is now getting into the realm of fiction, particularly if we consider a de-rack/reprogram process would require the shutdown of the AIMS - not something one should or could do while airborne.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 245
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is a changeable item, generally accessed through maintenance terminals (there are several PMAT ports, three of which are only accessible on the ground) or the primary MAT located in the cockpit, however access to specialized software (GBST) is required in order to create encoded data disks for upload. In addition, while some LRU's can be manually put into 'ground' mode, the central areas of the AIMS system require the air/ground logic to be in ground mode
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
- however, at an international boundary it would be quite unusual, though not a sackable offence, for the pilots to get away with such a casual hand-off from Malaysian ATC without at least their callsign
Given the informality, they should really have been asked by ATC for a "readback" of their instructions to "Contact Vietnam on frequency xxx.x" (or something like that) to be sure that MH370 was transferring to the correct ATC in the chain.
At worse, if you got the wrong freq, you'd flip the switch back on the radio panel and ask the last controller again. I fly though the VVTS FIR from time to time, seems like the southern frequency is 133.05 from memory. If I got it wrong, I could also try to look it up on these new fangled electronic charts (not trivial with the new Jepp software in my opinion), listen on guard, call on 8942 HF or whatever. But, in all probability, the frequency would be easy to find if I botched it on the handoff in the middle of a moonless night.
Also, media reports of an aircraft transmission always seem to get things garbled. Unlike, say, the NTSB which has several pilots and non-pilots carefully vet the CVR transcript, these press reports may be sound bites repeated from an early briefing to government ministers. Once these 'details' are put out to the families and later announced at a media conference, it is hard to tell whether subsequent differing versions are corrections or more misunderstanding of the original transmissions.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: London, UK
Age: 46
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tyre fire?
A link from here
Malaysia Airlines MH370 live: 26 countries now involved in search - Telegraph
led me to Chris Goodfellow's page
https://plus.google.com/106271056358...ts/GoeVjHJaGBz
Add to the theory I read earlier that if autopilot was knocked off, the plane would just make random turns depending on wind conditions (is that viable?) and the fire 'somehow' burned itself out (the sticking point for me) to leave the plane flying uncontrolled and randomly for hours?
I can't recall a tyre fire being discussed. Is it possible?
(Apologies if the above have already been covered - PM me delete and I'll delete.)
A link from here
Malaysia Airlines MH370 live: 26 countries now involved in search - Telegraph
18.09 Could the pilot have been trying to navigate to Langkawi after a fire on board knocked out the transponder and secondary radar tracking? Could this theory, put forward by a chap called Chris Goodfellow on Google Plus, be a rational explanation for Flight MH370?
The left turn is the key here. This was a very experienced senior Captain with 18,000 hours. Maybe some of the younger pilots interviewed on CNN didn't pick up on this left turn. We old pilots were always drilled to always know the closest airport of safe harbor while in cruise. Airports behind us, airports abeam us and airports ahead of us. Always in our head. Always. Because if something happens you don't want to be thinking what are you going to do - you already know what you are going to do. Instinctively when I saw that left turn with a direct heading I knew he was heading for an airport. Actually he was taking a direct route to Palau Langkawi a 13,000 foot strip with an approach over water at night with no obstacles. He did not turn back to Kuala Lampur because he knew he had 8,000 foot ridges to cross. He knew the terrain was friendlier towards Langkawi and also a shorter distance.
The left turn is the key here. This was a very experienced senior Captain with 18,000 hours. Maybe some of the younger pilots interviewed on CNN didn't pick up on this left turn. We old pilots were always drilled to always know the closest airport of safe harbor while in cruise. Airports behind us, airports abeam us and airports ahead of us. Always in our head. Always. Because if something happens you don't want to be thinking what are you going to do - you already know what you are going to do. Instinctively when I saw that left turn with a direct heading I knew he was heading for an airport. Actually he was taking a direct route to Palau Langkawi a 13,000 foot strip with an approach over water at night with no obstacles. He did not turn back to Kuala Lampur because he knew he had 8,000 foot ridges to cross. He knew the terrain was friendlier towards Langkawi and also a shorter distance.
https://plus.google.com/106271056358...ts/GoeVjHJaGBz
For me the loss of transponders and communications makes perfect sense if a fire. There was most likely a fire or electrical fire. In the case of fire the first response if to pull all the main busses and restore circuits one by one until you have isolated the bad one.
If they pulled the busses the plane indeed would go silent. It was probably a serious event and they simply were occupied with controlling the plane and trying to fight the fire. Aviate, Navigate and lastly communicate. There are two types of fires. Electrical might not be as fast and furious and there might or might not be incapacitating smoke. However there is the possibility given the timeline that perhaps there was an overheat on one of the front landing gear tires and it blew on takeoff and started slowly burning. Yes this happens with underinflated tires. Remember heavy plane, hot night, sea level, long run takeoff. There was a well known accident in Nigeria of a DC8 that had a landing gear fire on takeoff. A tire fire once going would produce horrific incapacitating smoke. Yes, pilots have access to oxygen masks but this is a no no with fire. Most have access to a smoke hood with a filter but this will only last for a few minutes depending on the smoke level. (I used to carry one of my own in a flight bag and I still carry one in my briefcase today when I fly).
What I think happened is that they were overcome by smoke and the plane just continued on the heading probably on George (autopilot) until either fuel exhaustion or fire destroyed the control surfaces and it crashed.
If they pulled the busses the plane indeed would go silent. It was probably a serious event and they simply were occupied with controlling the plane and trying to fight the fire. Aviate, Navigate and lastly communicate. There are two types of fires. Electrical might not be as fast and furious and there might or might not be incapacitating smoke. However there is the possibility given the timeline that perhaps there was an overheat on one of the front landing gear tires and it blew on takeoff and started slowly burning. Yes this happens with underinflated tires. Remember heavy plane, hot night, sea level, long run takeoff. There was a well known accident in Nigeria of a DC8 that had a landing gear fire on takeoff. A tire fire once going would produce horrific incapacitating smoke. Yes, pilots have access to oxygen masks but this is a no no with fire. Most have access to a smoke hood with a filter but this will only last for a few minutes depending on the smoke level. (I used to carry one of my own in a flight bag and I still carry one in my briefcase today when I fly).
What I think happened is that they were overcome by smoke and the plane just continued on the heading probably on George (autopilot) until either fuel exhaustion or fire destroyed the control surfaces and it crashed.
Also a look at the age and number of cycles on those nose tires might give us a good clue too.
Fire in an aircraft demands one thing - you get the machine on the ground as soon as possible. There are two well remembered experiences in my memory. The AirCanada DC9 which landed I believe in Columbus Ohio in the eighties. That pilot delayed descent and bypassed several airports. He didn't instinctively know the closest airports. He got it on the ground eventually but lost 30 odd souls. In the 1998 crash of Swissair DC-10 off Nova Scotia was another example of heroic pilots. They were 15 minutes out of Halifax but the fire simply overcame them and they had to ditch in the ocean. Just ran out of time. That fire incidentally started when the aircraft was about an hour out of Kennedy. Guess what the transponders and communications were shut off as they pulled the busses.
Get on Google Earth and type in Pulau Langkawi and then look at it in relation to the radar track heading. 2+2=4 That for me is the simple explanation why it turned and headed in that direction.
Smart pilot. Just didn't have the time.
Fire in an aircraft demands one thing - you get the machine on the ground as soon as possible. There are two well remembered experiences in my memory. The AirCanada DC9 which landed I believe in Columbus Ohio in the eighties. That pilot delayed descent and bypassed several airports. He didn't instinctively know the closest airports. He got it on the ground eventually but lost 30 odd souls. In the 1998 crash of Swissair DC-10 off Nova Scotia was another example of heroic pilots. They were 15 minutes out of Halifax but the fire simply overcame them and they had to ditch in the ocean. Just ran out of time. That fire incidentally started when the aircraft was about an hour out of Kennedy. Guess what the transponders and communications were shut off as they pulled the busses.
Get on Google Earth and type in Pulau Langkawi and then look at it in relation to the radar track heading. 2+2=4 That for me is the simple explanation why it turned and headed in that direction.
Smart pilot. Just didn't have the time.
I can't recall a tyre fire being discussed. Is it possible?
(Apologies if the above have already been covered - PM me delete and I'll delete.)
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: wales
Age: 81
Posts: 316
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh Dear God 
Now planes apparently can crash from some 35000ft and simply spear into 150ft of water and GENTLY embed themselves in 60 feet of mud.
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: in the shadows
Age: 48
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the disappearance of MH370 was caused by suicide of one of the pilots and his goal was to commit the "perfect suicide", to disappear without a trace and leave the world mystified, then we will probably never find out.
We have no clue where the plane is. The pilot might have ditched the plane in a controlled way to avoid breaking it apart and any floatable parts separating from the aircraft, and then let it sink as a whole in a remote and deep part of the ocean.
If we ever find it, we will most likely find that the CVR and the FDR had been disabled before the events started.
We have no clue where the plane is. The pilot might have ditched the plane in a controlled way to avoid breaking it apart and any floatable parts separating from the aircraft, and then let it sink as a whole in a remote and deep part of the ocean.
If we ever find it, we will most likely find that the CVR and the FDR had been disabled before the events started.
Without an autopilot wind conditions other than wind sheer/turbulence are hardly relevant as you are flying relative to the air mass. Wind is relative to the ground. Most a/c wind (sic) up in a spiral dive after a while although high stability types have been known to go on for a long time. Jet airliners are not particulaly stable as they rely on computers for some stability.
Wind will not cause two 90 degree turns.
No offence, but if your level of basic understanding of aviation is this low you should really post elsewhere.
Wind will not cause two 90 degree turns.
No offence, but if your level of basic understanding of aviation is this low you should really post elsewhere.
Indeed this would be an important bit of Information: Has the signal level changed between the last pings and how does that correlate with the INMARSAT radians?
Moreover: Were the pings prior to that flight consistent with the profiles and timings of these previous flights.
It would also be interesting to follow an assumed flight path based on the result of these considerations with a 777 and verify the results. Can assumed Radar Returns and ping signal levels and timings be reproduced?
This might be a good idea compared to Weeks and Months of fruitless searches in the wrong area based on false and unverified assumptions.
Bearcat.
All the scenarios are far fetched, that's how accidents happen in an environment of high safety and redundancy. Yes, the fires would have to occur in that 'far-fetched' manner for this to occur. So what.
I'm interested in the least far-fetched scenario.
All the scenarios are far fetched, that's how accidents happen in an environment of high safety and redundancy. Yes, the fires would have to occur in that 'far-fetched' manner for this to occur. So what.
I'm interested in the least far-fetched scenario.
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Tranquility Base
Age: 68
Posts: 53
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How accurate were those left, right, left turns and the vectors on the images a few hundred thread pages back? The right turn after crossing the peninsula appears headed back to Phuket which may have been the nearest airport. Might suggest one of the FD crew momentarily recovered from the initial/onging event or hypoxia and was trying to get the airplane on the ground. Also, if the initial event took out the ARINC 429 buss, that might explain the loss of ACARS, Transponder, and all communications.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fairly close to the colonial capitol
Age: 55
Posts: 1,693
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: New York
Age: 75
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If an oxygen bottle failed in the avionics bay and pierced the hull, would the temperature in the bay fall to -40C quickly?
How well would the electronics work at -40C?
Would the humidity in the air exiting the aircraft coat the cables and electronics with ice?
How well would the electronics work at -40C and coated with ice?
How well would the electronics work at -40C?
Would the humidity in the air exiting the aircraft coat the cables and electronics with ice?
How well would the electronics work at -40C and coated with ice?