Malaysian Airlines MH370 contact lost
Props are for boats!
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: An Asian Hub
Age: 56
Posts: 994
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
These Kota Bahru Fisherman definitely saw something.
Several ground witnesses claim they saw Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 - CNN.com
The airport there closes at midnight or remains open for late departures. Also the VOR VKB is a very busy airway intersection and a lot of traffic very high overhead. Maybe our reported Radar hits from Thailand and Malaysia saw the aircraft flying towards KOTA BAHRU, and followed some other target after VKB.
Obviously the description "lights like coconuts"means the aircraft landing lights were on. So it was below 10000 feet. Was it trying to land at WMKC. Maybe our Flightradar24 friends can show what was flying through and above VKB around 0130am?
Several ground witnesses claim they saw Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 - CNN.com
The airport there closes at midnight or remains open for late departures. Also the VOR VKB is a very busy airway intersection and a lot of traffic very high overhead. Maybe our reported Radar hits from Thailand and Malaysia saw the aircraft flying towards KOTA BAHRU, and followed some other target after VKB.
Obviously the description "lights like coconuts"means the aircraft landing lights were on. So it was below 10000 feet. Was it trying to land at WMKC. Maybe our Flightradar24 friends can show what was flying through and above VKB around 0130am?
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,091
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"satellite signal can only come from a moving plane - BBC has learned" no source given
What they probably mean is the air/ground logic has to be 'Air' for a signal to be transmitted, no guarantee the aircraft ever reverted to 'Ground'?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The final destination
suninmyeyes #6060
Very well explained indeed.
Would not all the evidence (and lack of it) so far leave the signature of a pilot (?who) on a suicide mission with the intention of no one ever finding any evidence? Also no suicide note found, so far.
Besides the aussies are quite sure of an area in the South Indian Ocean (in line of pings and probable point of fuel exhaustion (albeit responsible for this quadrant's search).
Very well explained indeed.
Would not all the evidence (and lack of it) so far leave the signature of a pilot (?who) on a suicide mission with the intention of no one ever finding any evidence? Also no suicide note found, so far.
Besides the aussies are quite sure of an area in the South Indian Ocean (in line of pings and probable point of fuel exhaustion (albeit responsible for this quadrant's search).
Pompey till I die
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Guildford
Age: 51
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What chance that the turns etc were searching for an airport that would have lights on?
Just thinking that in an emergency with no comms, flying on visuals mostly, landing on an unlit airfield is going to be something to avoid, if not impossible, and I would guess that different airfields have different policies after curfew.
(Non professional long time lurker)-
Just thinking that in an emergency with no comms, flying on visuals mostly, landing on an unlit airfield is going to be something to avoid, if not impossible, and I would guess that different airfields have different policies after curfew.
(Non professional long time lurker)-
**If** this indeed occurred, it seems to me to be pretty important in working out causation as it would show:
- there was something wrong enough to cause incoherence and, it seems likely, no further subsequent contact;
- radio working, with Fariq speaking; but
- crucially: there is no attempt by MH 370 to hide itself (e.g. by simply not answering) and indeed there is action inconsistent with an attempt at stealth
The latter would be hard to reconcile with a rogue flight deck or intruder bent on stealth, unless it is the aftermath of a scenario similar to FedEx 705 with either: a rogue left able to fly stealthily and who does so, or no-one left able to continue flying.
- there was something wrong enough to cause incoherence and, it seems likely, no further subsequent contact;
- radio working, with Fariq speaking; but
- crucially: there is no attempt by MH 370 to hide itself (e.g. by simply not answering) and indeed there is action inconsistent with an attempt at stealth
The latter would be hard to reconcile with a rogue flight deck or intruder bent on stealth, unless it is the aftermath of a scenario similar to FedEx 705 with either: a rogue left able to fly stealthily and who does so, or no-one left able to continue flying.
911 hijackers mistakenly transmitted to ATC when they meant to make an announcement to the cabin, the reported mumbling could simply be a mis-keyed mic from a rouge on the flight deck.
Mickjoebill
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: world
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Im thoroughly confused. Initialy I thought it was wrong of anyone to assert as fact that they knew when a new waypoint was inserted into the flight plan. But I came here and the posts I read seemed to me to accept the premise. I retired 10 years ago but do not recall that a flightplan change was somehow automatically reported to the ground.
But now, "what we know" is being challenged---here anyway, not on CNN. For two days CNN has been challenging its "experts" to explain why a new off course waypoint was entered into the flight plan. As in this report from WOLF today. And I quote:
" significant new developments.....and right now to that sharp turn to the west that the jet took about an hour after takeoff. A senior US official tells CNN the altered route was actually entered into the plane guidance system at least 12 minutes before the co-pilot signed off with air traffic controllers with the words 'all right, good night'".
Someone please tell me how anyone would know what was entered into the flight plan short of someone transmitting that info via acars.
this is a question.
But now, "what we know" is being challenged---here anyway, not on CNN. For two days CNN has been challenging its "experts" to explain why a new off course waypoint was entered into the flight plan. As in this report from WOLF today. And I quote:
" significant new developments.....and right now to that sharp turn to the west that the jet took about an hour after takeoff. A senior US official tells CNN the altered route was actually entered into the plane guidance system at least 12 minutes before the co-pilot signed off with air traffic controllers with the words 'all right, good night'".
Someone please tell me how anyone would know what was entered into the flight plan short of someone transmitting that info via acars.
this is a question.
#6060 suninmyeyes.
Point of interest - you mention that you never select Stby. on the transponder, even when selecting a new squawk ?
"in my day" we were told to always select stby. when re-selecting, to guard against "accidentally" - even momentarily - pausing on one of the "77XX" emergency selections whilst re-arranging the numbers, to do so would immediately set off an alarm in the ATC unit monitoring, and even if immediately changed would raise suspicions that you were in trouble, and subsequently trying to mask the situation - i.e. a hijack attempt, so action would be irrevocably started.
What's changed ?
Thanks.
Point of interest - you mention that you never select Stby. on the transponder, even when selecting a new squawk ?
"in my day" we were told to always select stby. when re-selecting, to guard against "accidentally" - even momentarily - pausing on one of the "77XX" emergency selections whilst re-arranging the numbers, to do so would immediately set off an alarm in the ATC unit monitoring, and even if immediately changed would raise suspicions that you were in trouble, and subsequently trying to mask the situation - i.e. a hijack attempt, so action would be irrevocably started.
What's changed ?
Thanks.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: MURDO
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tonight's BBC report
One big thing I took away from this is that the Australians appear to be taking a larger public role, as is the NTSB. That's good.
The other big thing is the AMSA guy saying there were multiple SATCOM "keep-alive" pings, and their records are available. They have some more processing to do on those pings.
They're also saying the aircraft may have been on a 180-degree heading, but they didn't say where that track began.
The other big thing is the AMSA guy saying there were multiple SATCOM "keep-alive" pings, and their records are available. They have some more processing to do on those pings.
They're also saying the aircraft may have been on a 180-degree heading, but they didn't say where that track began.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Kent
Age: 65
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@Sheep guts
At 17.30Z, the only flight in the air above Kota Bharu was China Eastern Flight MU5093, going south towards Singapore at 37,000ft.
Maybe our Flightradar24 friends can show what was flying through and above VKB around 0130am?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flight plan change
costalpilot #6388
tell me how anyone would know what was entered into the flight plan
Incidentally, at the KL press conf today, it was questioned and denied. They were sure that no other flight plan was on the plane.
This begs the question as to who entered a new flight plan - turnback - zig-zag -then out over the wide blue ocean towards the South Pole.
tell me how anyone would know what was entered into the flight plan
Incidentally, at the KL press conf today, it was questioned and denied. They were sure that no other flight plan was on the plane.
This begs the question as to who entered a new flight plan - turnback - zig-zag -then out over the wide blue ocean towards the South Pole.
Last edited by brika; 20th Mar 2014 at 00:13. Reason: word correction
@ ExSp33db1rd
What's changed ?
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida and wherever my laptop is
Posts: 1,350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When an aircraft is maneuvering the size of the primary response can vary considerably particularly aircraft with large vertical surfaces like the T7. All I was pointing out was that sudden increases in signal can cause quite large errors in the primary systems height finding.
I think that the last nodder I watched was at Lindholme
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One "fact" that has not been mentioned much here is the (supposed) radio contact between MH 370 and another aircraft in which an MH 370 pilot (likely the FO) was reported to be "mumbling".
As reported (and the source seems to be MISSING MH370: Pilot: I established contact with plane - General - New Straits Times on 9 March):
Based on the timing, the reported destination (NRT), the statement that the aircraft was a 777 and was "far into Vietnamese airspace when he was asked to relay" and the fact that the pilot knew enough to recognise the voices on MH 370, the relevant flight would appear to be MAS 88, KUL-NRT, a 772, scheduled dep 23:35, which was near Da Nang at that time.
So: what is the source and status of this "fact"? I haven't been able to find anything "official" (for what that's worth), but it seems unlikely that the NST would print something like that if it were complete fiction.
As reported (and the source seems to be MISSING MH370: Pilot: I established contact with plane - General - New Straits Times on 9 March):
Based on the timing, the reported destination (NRT), the statement that the aircraft was a 777 and was "far into Vietnamese airspace when he was asked to relay" and the fact that the pilot knew enough to recognise the voices on MH 370, the relevant flight would appear to be MAS 88, KUL-NRT, a 772, scheduled dep 23:35, which was near Da Nang at that time.
So: what is the source and status of this "fact"? I haven't been able to find anything "official" (for what that's worth), but it seems unlikely that the NST would print something like that if it were complete fiction.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida and wherever my laptop is
Posts: 1,350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote [Old Carthusian]:
However, even though the rarity of the hijack or pilot deviance explanation is significant this particular line of investigation still fits the known facts better.
Correct: While several theories could fit the facts of plane going 'dark' (cascading electrical, mechanical failures for whatever reason) and turning west off course (airworthiness, compromised avionics issues, cockpit fire -head for the nearest airfield you know) there is the fact of the Immarsat data indicating the plane continued to fly for 7+ hours (and the turn was per-programmed) -Unless of course the Immarsat data is not a valid incontrovertible fact which raises a whole set of questions as to why it has officially been presented as such.
However, even though the rarity of the hijack or pilot deviance explanation is significant this particular line of investigation still fits the known facts better.
Correct: While several theories could fit the facts of plane going 'dark' (cascading electrical, mechanical failures for whatever reason) and turning west off course (airworthiness, compromised avionics issues, cockpit fire -head for the nearest airfield you know) there is the fact of the Immarsat data indicating the plane continued to fly for 7+ hours (and the turn was per-programmed) -Unless of course the Immarsat data is not a valid incontrovertible fact which raises a whole set of questions as to why it has officially been presented as such.
While it is difficult to follow the repeats of assertions of denials of assertions of corrected information .... It is apparent that the INMARSAT data is believed by the Australian, New Zealand and US maritime reconnaissance who are flying out into the middle of nowhere and also by the Chinese who are searching again in potentially reachable areas. I rather doubt that these new searches would be happening due to a PR statement.
What is clear is that the public (which unfortunately includes us) is not being given the full picture - for obvious reasons.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: North of Antartica
Posts: 180
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
John Young AMSA briefing
John Young AMSA (Emergency response division) briefing was very interesting.
Acting on information from NTSB He explained that:
The wording here is crucial, it implies that all pings were received and from that, a 'join the dots' plot can be derived. This would be the first confirmation that all pings were received, not just the last one!
Unless the Australians are assuming this is what NTSB has done, this would indicate the aircraft has been plotted heading due south or of course due North as the arcs are mirrored!
Acting on information from NTSB He explained that:
"Regular messages from the aircraft, at approximately hourly intervals during its flight. Those transmission were detected by a communications satellite over the indian ocean and with the time of those communications and the distance, Then clarified "They can't plot exact distance but sequentially they can be build up into a route the aircraft took."
Unless the Australians are assuming this is what NTSB has done, this would indicate the aircraft has been plotted heading due south or of course due North as the arcs are mirrored!
Last edited by Heli-phile; 20th Mar 2014 at 00:31. Reason: added the final summary
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: SW USA
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Apologies if this was already posted:
AMSA :: Australian Maritime Safety Authority
Most recent John Young press conference (excerpted on BBC):
https://drive.google.com/folderview?...1dxMzdSTHRMeW8
Summary update for 20 Mar 2014:
http://www.amsa.gov.au/media/documen...H370search.pdf
And the link to more media at the bottom of the PDF:
https://drive.google.com/folderview?...W8&usp=sharing
He cites the NTSB several times. The NTSB seems to have stopped posting after 12 March, with only one other release prior, on 8 March.
Press Release March 12, 2014
"NTSB UPDATES STATEMENT ON MISSING B-777 INVESTIGATION MARCH 12
National Transportation Safety Board investigators who traveled to Kuala Lumpur over the weekend are assisting Malaysian authorities who are leading the search efforts for the Boeing 777 that went missing five days ago.
Investigators with expertise in air traffic control and radar are providing technical assistance to the Malaysian authorities who are working on locating the missing jetliner.
The NTSB plans no further releases of information on the investigation."
8 March release:
Press Release March 8, 2014: NTSB positioning team to offer assistance in investigation of Malaysia Airlines 777 event
"NTSB positioning team to offer assistance in investigation of Malaysia Airlines 777 event
March 8
The National Transportation Safety Board has a team of investigators en route to Asia to be ready to assist with the investigation of the March 8 Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 event. The Boeing 777 went missing on a flight from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing.
Once the location of the airplane is determined, International Civil Aviation Organization protocols will determine which country will lead the investigation. Because of the lengthy travel time from the United States, the NTSB has sent a team of investigators, accompanied by technical advisers from Boeing and the Federal Aviation Administration, to the area so they will be positioned to offer U.S. assistance. The team departed from the U.S. tonight.
The country that leads the investigation will release all information about it."
AMSA :: Australian Maritime Safety Authority
Most recent John Young press conference (excerpted on BBC):
https://drive.google.com/folderview?...1dxMzdSTHRMeW8
Summary update for 20 Mar 2014:
http://www.amsa.gov.au/media/documen...H370search.pdf
And the link to more media at the bottom of the PDF:
https://drive.google.com/folderview?...W8&usp=sharing
He cites the NTSB several times. The NTSB seems to have stopped posting after 12 March, with only one other release prior, on 8 March.
Press Release March 12, 2014
"NTSB UPDATES STATEMENT ON MISSING B-777 INVESTIGATION MARCH 12
National Transportation Safety Board investigators who traveled to Kuala Lumpur over the weekend are assisting Malaysian authorities who are leading the search efforts for the Boeing 777 that went missing five days ago.
Investigators with expertise in air traffic control and radar are providing technical assistance to the Malaysian authorities who are working on locating the missing jetliner.
The NTSB plans no further releases of information on the investigation."
8 March release:
Press Release March 8, 2014: NTSB positioning team to offer assistance in investigation of Malaysia Airlines 777 event
"NTSB positioning team to offer assistance in investigation of Malaysia Airlines 777 event
March 8
The National Transportation Safety Board has a team of investigators en route to Asia to be ready to assist with the investigation of the March 8 Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 event. The Boeing 777 went missing on a flight from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing.
Once the location of the airplane is determined, International Civil Aviation Organization protocols will determine which country will lead the investigation. Because of the lengthy travel time from the United States, the NTSB has sent a team of investigators, accompanied by technical advisers from Boeing and the Federal Aviation Administration, to the area so they will be positioned to offer U.S. assistance. The team departed from the U.S. tonight.
The country that leads the investigation will release all information about it."