PPRuNe Forums

Go Back   PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Forgotten your Username/Password?

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 9th Mar 2014, 10:03   #741 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by ruprecht View Post
"I suspect they could, considering they will be hunting for the "pinger" signal which is not daylight dependant...
I also guess they would need 2 flight crews (at least) per aircraft, 1 to transport over there & 1 to start the search. Is this how this sort of mission would work?"
Most likely daylight missions between 2000 to 4000 feet, radar flood the area for debris, all visual stations manned.
ruprecht is offline   Reply
Old 9th Mar 2014, 10:05   #742 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Hunter Valley NSW
Posts: 94
Livesinafield. Depends on who you are listening to. According to CNN the report of debris is false. And this has been going on all day. It would appear nobody has a clue at this stage.
Ida down is offline   Reply
Old 9th Mar 2014, 10:06   #743 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Edenbridge VRP, KENT, UK
Age: 53
Posts: 46
From the South China Morning Post;

Quote:
Agree - you won't see debris from 11,000m, but you may see city lights.
Don't think the plane crashed at all. Think it was hijacked by Xinjiang separatists. New flight plan to Hotan airport. Strange that K.L. -> Hotan is exactly the same distance +/- 50km as K.L. -> Beijing. Hijackers' jettisoned fuel to make it look like a crash to direct rescuers to the wrong place.
Classic case of misdirection. They could have easily turned off the transponders, and it being night time, no tracking equipment (from say satellites) would have 'eye's' on the plane.
China's 1st failed hijacking took place at Hotan airport back in 2012. Plenty of opportunity how to resolve what went wrong from hijackers point of view.
In that case the passengers successfully overpowered the hijackers. In this case that might have gone wrong.
Anonymous Pilot mentioned background distress at 1.30am when the Vietnamese ATC asked him to contact the pilots on local frequencies.
Now 4 suspects have been identified (the right number of hijackers required to take over a plane of that size).
(thoughts).
OPENDOOR is offline   Reply
Old 9th Mar 2014, 10:10   #744 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Pacific Northwest, USA
Age: 27
Posts: 7
Folks are getting out ahead of their skis with the terrorism talk.

Right now we have a missing aircraft and [edited still no debris sightings]

Being familiar with that part of the world there are a myriad of reasons you might want to fly to China on a fake passport. I have not seen it been established that 5 is a particularly odd number; after all the folks who are the authorities on this subject apparently don't do a very good job.

If I can engage in some broader speculation myself this route does not make a lot of sense to me as a prime terrorist target. If I were a Chinese Muslim extremist isn't a domestic flight easier? And then I remind myself the only indication it might be terrorism is that there are 5 fake passports and again I fail to see the damning evidence in that.

For what it's worth a U.S. customs agent recently told me smugglers tend to travel in packs.

edited: 2 passports not 5. big deal

Last edited by chrisms86; 9th Mar 2014 at 10:27.
chrisms86 is offline   Reply
Old 9th Mar 2014, 10:11   #745 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: On the chopping board.
Posts: 832
Quote:
Can we please leave this crazy hijack and landed at a remote strip alone now?
Let people believe what they want to believe. No-one knows the facts yet.

I personally don't mind reading everyone's opinion although some are a bit out there (why anyone would want to illegally emigrate to China is beyond me, must be coming from a real $hit hole).

This will take some time to piece together before we know what happened with this flight.
Ngineer is offline   Reply
Old 9th Mar 2014, 10:18   #746 (permalink)
ddd
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Paradise
Age: 51
Posts: 76
Live video stream

When are they going to install a camera in the cockpit and some in the cabin that will transmit live video to a central station so that we shall be able to know exactly what happened during a crash before recovering the voice and data recorders?
This should be easy to do these days?
ddd is offline   Reply
Old 9th Mar 2014, 10:24   #747 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: btw SAMAR and TOSPA
Posts: 487
Quote:
I don't seem to recall the pilot who called mh370 on a separate frq hearing distress I the background???
MAS52 A330 was over SGN at the time (KUL-OSA).
MAS88 B777 was about 120NM north of SGN (KUL-TYO).

The guy claims he was on MAS88.
threemiles is offline   Reply
Old 9th Mar 2014, 10:25   #748 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Warks
Posts: 15
Quote:
As much as it is current to blame terrorism on everything, I don't believe this is the explanation here for one reason: where is the claim of responsibility? Not much point in committing an act of terror (after all, you do so fro a political aim) if nobody knows you did it.
Presumably using the same reliable logic, Lockerbie could not have been a terrorist attack as no responsibility was claimed in the first 24 hours, correction, 24 years.
skyrangerpro is offline   Reply
Old 9th Mar 2014, 10:26   #749 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: South of England
Posts: 1,366
Quote:
When are they going to install a camera in the cockpit and some in the cabin that will transmit live video to a central station so that we shall be able to know exactly what happened during a crash before recovering the voice and data recorders?
This should be easy to do these days?
Difficult enough to agree the CVR with a time limited-tape. Live video isn't likely be be there for quite a while
robin is offline   Reply
Old 9th Mar 2014, 10:30   #750 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: on airport
Age: 32
Posts: 21
@parabellum - 'MAS seem an unlikely target for a hijacking' - curious comment. Surely every airline, wherever they are, is a target. Given the international nature of airlines and the even more international makeup of the passengers these days,a hijack has all the newsworthy ingredients that the press yearn for.
Simply because an airline comes from a lesser country than some makes it no less secure. I'm not having a pop I'm genuinely curious.
Chox Off is offline   Reply
Old 9th Mar 2014, 10:35   #751 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: UK/OZ
Posts: 1,126
Can a radar trace depict an aircraft breaking up?
mickjoebill is offline   Reply
Old 9th Mar 2014, 10:36   #752 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Bangkok,Thailand
Posts: 29
Quote:
That's terrorism for you. Terrorise us/the world for a few days, not knowing WTF happened, and then claim responsiblity. If they'd claimed immediately, the news would probably be back about Ukraine by now.
Exactly, we just dont know, and Asia has many issues with corrupt governments and anti government activities....that it was Malaysia airlines points to that it was not Muslim terrorists...because Malaysia is a Muslim country...and that would not make sense.
chefrp is offline   Reply
Old 9th Mar 2014, 10:37   #753 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Leeds
Posts: 67
Quote:
When are they going to install a camera in the cockpit and some in the cabin that will transmit live video to a central station so that we shall be able to know exactly what happened during a crash before recovering the voice and data recorders?
This should be easy to do these days?

It Isn't as simple as just installing it, the tech is there

privacy is an issue personally i wouldn't want a camera linked to a live feed to my ops watching my every move in the cockpit every time i was at work, also cabin cameras look at the privacy breach for 200+ passengers

and one more thing CVR's get leaked, i personally don't want to be on liveleak with 2 million people watching me die in a plane crash thank you


Quote:
Can a radar trace depict an aircraft breaking up?
Primary surveillance radar can yes
Livesinafield is offline   Reply
Old 9th Mar 2014, 10:38   #754 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Bedford, UK
Age: 61
Posts: 1,040
Successive primary returns can do. That plus trajectory reconstruction. A surveillance radar (military) could in principle have tracked on primary. Did one? Who knows.
Mr Optimistic is offline   Reply
Old 9th Mar 2014, 10:39   #755 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: over the rainbow
Posts: 48
A day or so ago, someone posted that the sea beneath the flight path was some 50 metres in depth. That reminded me of something my late father told me when he was stationed at RAF KL in 1950's.

Once a week he would fly a STOL a/c from KL to the Shell oil company site in Borneo. He said the sea was so clear he could see shoals of sharks swimming beneath him.

It is surprising that if there are large sections of the aircraft in the area being searched, none have been found.
roving is offline   Reply
Old 9th Mar 2014, 10:40   #756 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Surrey, UK
Posts: 71
Quote:
Can a radar trace depict an aircraft breaking up?
Depending on how fast the breakup and how many large pieces, pretty sure it can. Some sort of radar (IIRC) Picked up the space shuttle disintegrating some years ago, didn't it?

BBC (UK) reporting that:
Quote:
BBC has confirmed that a man falsely using an Italian passport and a man falsely using an Austrian passport purchased tickets at the same time, and were both booked on the same onward flight from Beijing to Europe on Saturday
also that the USA's wonder tracking systems have not picked up any sign of an explosion in the atmosphere in the vicinity of the flightpath, ruling out a bomb/explosion.....

...and so the speculation goes on and on.....
HamishMcBush is offline   Reply
Old 9th Mar 2014, 10:43   #757 (permalink)

 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,212
As an Airline Pilot regularly flying in and around that area it worries me that they can't seem to piece together what happened from Radar traces, ADS, CPDLC, etc or find the damn 777. It's not a Cessna 150 they are looking for.
nitpicker330 is offline   Reply
Old 9th Mar 2014, 10:44   #758 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Highlands
Posts: 59
mickjoebill

Radar detection of break-up - it depends on the radar equipment. If the equipment is a mix of Primary and Secondary radar then yes it is quite likely that a break-up can be seen ( as with Lockerbie Panam ). On the otherhand, if it is Secondary only then once power on board is lost the transponder response is also lost and until that time, the only radar return would be from the transponder irrespective of whether the airframe was intact or not...
BlackIsle is offline   Reply
Old 9th Mar 2014, 10:46   #759 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 5
Training

Can anybody shed light on MH training on recovering from unusual attitudes? Cockpit resource management?

Air France Asiana appear to point to these very issues that contribute to an accident. As we know things to get out of hand very quickly regardless of the cause.
Flaps_Five is offline   Reply
Old 9th Mar 2014, 10:47   #760 (permalink)
8d8
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Asia's World City
Age: 58
Posts: 3
Radar tracking aircraft break-up

Suggest people review China Airlines 611 accident. Taipei to Hong Kong about 10 years ago and TWA a bit earlier. Neither set of crew were able to make a mayday transmission. Both were under radar control.
8d8 is offline   Reply
Reply
 
 
 


Thread Tools


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT. The time now is 01:05.


vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1
1996-2012 The Professional Pilots Rumour Network