Malaysian Airlines MH370 contact lost
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Connecticut, USA
Age: 64
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It appears to me that the Lithium-Ion battery discussion is unrelated to the disappearance of MH370. The battery issue should be discussed in the tech forum, not here. A fire scenario has been eliminated as a possibility in this forum unless I've missed something.
The battery discussion obfuscates the discussion of the potential scenarios, it is a red herring.
The battery discussion obfuscates the discussion of the potential scenarios, it is a red herring.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That info might be on the collated maps that show everything on the AMSA web site. (amsa.gov.au).
They have good maps and updates on a daily basis.
They have good maps and updates on a daily basis.
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: California
Posts: 154
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What Flight level is you fuel burn based on. Reports are coming out now that the aircraft dropped to 12000' or lower after its turn back. Surely this would reduce the distance covered and make this current search area way too far away now. Also making the 40 degree SAT IOR range ring handshakes much closer to the equator than previously thought.
Sure, dropping to 12000' would lower the range, but we don't know the exact descent profile and we don't know how long it stayed there. It would certainly not last full 7.5 fours at 12000' all the way through. (I can't find data on fuel burn at 12000' for any large aircraft, but even going down to 25000' would cut maximum range by ~10%)
It's easy to create a new waypoint for any place on Earth or simply just type in the Lat and Lon on the scratch pad and insert it into the Legs and away you go.
S90E180
LSK 1L
Execute.
S90E180
LSK 1L
Execute.
Props are for boats!
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: An Asian Hub
Age: 56
Posts: 994
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry to wake you up Soundasleep,
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia (CNN) -- As a growing number of airplanes scoured the southern Indian Ocean in the search for Malaysia Airlines Flight 370, authorities released new details that paint a different picture of what may have happened in the plane's cockpit.
Military radar tracking shows that the aircraft changed altitude after making a sharp turn over the South China Sea as it headed toward the Strait of Malacca, a source close to the investigation into the missing flight told CNN. The plane flew as low as 12,000 feet at some point before it disappeared from radar, according to the source.
The sharp turn seemed to be intentional, the source said, because executing it would have taken the Boeing 777 two minutes -- a time period during which the pilot or co-pilot could have sent an emergency signal if there had been a fire or other emergency onboard.
Authorities say the plane didn't send any emergency signals, though some analysts say it's still unclear whether the pilots tried but weren't able to communicate because of a catastrophic failure.
The official, who is not authorized to speak to the media, told CNN that the area the plane flew in after the turn is a heavily trafficked air corridor and that flying at 12,000 feet would have kept the jet well out of the way of that traffic.
Earlier Sunday, Malaysian authorities said the last transmission from the missing aircraft's reporting system showed it heading to Beijing -- a revelation that appears to undercut the theory that someone reprogrammed the plane's flight path before the co-pilot signed off with air-traffic controllers for the last time.
Military radar tracking shows that the aircraft changed altitude after making a sharp turn over the South China Sea as it headed toward the Strait of Malacca, a source close to the investigation into the missing flight told CNN. The plane flew as low as 12,000 feet at some point before it disappeared from radar, according to the source.
The sharp turn seemed to be intentional, the source said, because executing it would have taken the Boeing 777 two minutes -- a time period during which the pilot or co-pilot could have sent an emergency signal if there had been a fire or other emergency onboard.
Authorities say the plane didn't send any emergency signals, though some analysts say it's still unclear whether the pilots tried but weren't able to communicate because of a catastrophic failure.
The official, who is not authorized to speak to the media, told CNN that the area the plane flew in after the turn is a heavily trafficked air corridor and that flying at 12,000 feet would have kept the jet well out of the way of that traffic.
Earlier Sunday, Malaysian authorities said the last transmission from the missing aircraft's reporting system showed it heading to Beijing -- a revelation that appears to undercut the theory that someone reprogrammed the plane's flight path before the co-pilot signed off with air-traffic controllers for the last time.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: On the fast lane
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
May I suggest to any journos reading this who are going to attend the next Press Conference, to ask the officials for a 'present and latest version' of the timeline of events and facts of events from the time of departure of the flight.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: froggylandia
Age: 74
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What's it doing now ???
Words of wisdom from anther forum: "A word of caution is always given to pilots when first learning the LNAV/VNAV system: it's best to study well and always keep an eye on what it's doing. It is only as good as the person punching the buttons, and the most common thing heard in today's modern cockpits is "What's it doing now???""
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: N. California
Age: 80
Posts: 184
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Where we are now
RE: Coagie, I won't address your personal attacks.
Are you sure that you understand what I meant by obfuscate?
I am in agreement with the way this forum has been moderated. I have no complaints about the redundant and off topic posts being removed. I've read most of them, there's no loss in the ones I've seen removed. This forum is for discussing the disappearance of MH370; IMO anything not germane to that discussion should be removed, including redundant posts.
I think that the stage we are now at will be seen as the "looking for a debris field" portion of the effort locate the wreckage. There are specialized vessels who are best used in their design mode, searching the bottom, but the search effort almost certainly must find a debris field first; anything from a 777 would make it possible to make a logical prediction for the likely location of the source, and from there a search with some possibility of success can be mounted for the location of the bulk of the wreck. The ping seems to me to be a long shot.
If the plane broke up on impact, as likely, there will be floating debris. It's unlikely that there will be significant radar reflections from the small pieces that are most likely to turn up.
Spotting anything real soon is unlikely, there is a lot of clutter in those waters and the weather is deteriorating. It would be hard to overestimate how difficult it must be to to spot a (probability off white or black) piece of floating debris among the whitecaps that are the norm there. Even if the short term fails to turn up anything, assuming that the aircraft broke up on impact, the debris, or remnants of it will almost certainly turn up somewhere, maybe next year on the Zealand's West Coast. But stuff will turn up someday somewhere if the aircraft broke up on impact.
Are you sure that you understand what I meant by obfuscate?
I am in agreement with the way this forum has been moderated. I have no complaints about the redundant and off topic posts being removed. I've read most of them, there's no loss in the ones I've seen removed. This forum is for discussing the disappearance of MH370; IMO anything not germane to that discussion should be removed, including redundant posts.
I think that the stage we are now at will be seen as the "looking for a debris field" portion of the effort locate the wreckage. There are specialized vessels who are best used in their design mode, searching the bottom, but the search effort almost certainly must find a debris field first; anything from a 777 would make it possible to make a logical prediction for the likely location of the source, and from there a search with some possibility of success can be mounted for the location of the bulk of the wreck. The ping seems to me to be a long shot.
If the plane broke up on impact, as likely, there will be floating debris. It's unlikely that there will be significant radar reflections from the small pieces that are most likely to turn up.
Spotting anything real soon is unlikely, there is a lot of clutter in those waters and the weather is deteriorating. It would be hard to overestimate how difficult it must be to to spot a (probability off white or black) piece of floating debris among the whitecaps that are the norm there. Even if the short term fails to turn up anything, assuming that the aircraft broke up on impact, the debris, or remnants of it will almost certainly turn up somewhere, maybe next year on the Zealand's West Coast. But stuff will turn up someday somewhere if the aircraft broke up on impact.
Last edited by Propduffer; 24th Mar 2014 at 07:42.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Hotel Gypsy
Posts: 2,821
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1a sound asleep. Military radar doesn't need a nicely compliant transponder to ascertain height. Equally, I'm sure that no one is going to spill the beans on the accuracy of their height finding radar.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
A 12,000ft altitude does not correlate with lost radar contact at 200 miles,
TWITTER UPDATE FROM AMSA
According to AMSA twitter feed the IL76 spotted the debris from 33,000' enroute back to YPPH, US Navy P8 then tasked to search the sighting area but nothing was found.
I am fully aware that FR24 relies on enthusiast Mode S receivers but am amazed that you seem to consider that this particular programmer was astute enough to be able to write a program that selected just these two particular messages to drop the altitude (while keeping the lat/long from the same squitter) when all his other messages were presented in totality.
My point is simply that the data we see in those pseudo-messages isn't necessarily what was transmitted by the aircraft verbatim. If you don't believe that, look at the penultimate altitude readout (and others) before it reached FL350 - there is no encoding schema for either Mode C, Mode S or ADS-B that's capable of transmitting an altitude of 34591 feet.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: NNW of Antipodes
Age: 81
Posts: 1,330
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Ponitius Navigator
A 12,000ft altitude does not correlate with lost radar contact at 200 miles
Last edited by mm43; 24th Mar 2014 at 08:35.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: SFO
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With the amount of energy and cost going into this search, news organizations and "unnamed sources" should be held accountable for the breaking news they broadcast to the world.
Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 dropped in altitude after sharp turn - CNN.com
This kind of information, if true, would be crucial to the search effort.
Unnamed "officials". Sources "close to the investigation". Everyone seems to be anonymous. The video that goes with the article also goes on to make other claims about fishermen interviewed by the journalist that saw the plane etc.
I find it disgusting, given what is at stake her, that this kind of journalism is splattered out by CNN. I think of the families in the hotels reading this, then bombarding the Malaysian authorities for verification. Who knows if CNN had the forethought to take it to them as well. But of course, all the sources are anonymous. So who's to know how that information came out, if someone is being paid to hand it over, what CNN did to verify it etc.
What a way to torture people. Let alone the constant timeline switching of the Malaysian Transport Authority, the effect of which also completely changes the likelihood of various scenarios that searchers have had to consider.
I can't think of a better example of poor crisis management, spurious information and wild speculation than with the disappearance of this aircraft.
Military radar tracking shows that the aircraft changed altitude...a source close to the investigation into the missing flight told CNN. The plane flew as low as 12,000 feet...according to the source....The official, who is not authorized to speak to the media, told CNN...
This kind of information, if true, would be crucial to the search effort.
Unnamed "officials". Sources "close to the investigation". Everyone seems to be anonymous. The video that goes with the article also goes on to make other claims about fishermen interviewed by the journalist that saw the plane etc.
I find it disgusting, given what is at stake her, that this kind of journalism is splattered out by CNN. I think of the families in the hotels reading this, then bombarding the Malaysian authorities for verification. Who knows if CNN had the forethought to take it to them as well. But of course, all the sources are anonymous. So who's to know how that information came out, if someone is being paid to hand it over, what CNN did to verify it etc.
What a way to torture people. Let alone the constant timeline switching of the Malaysian Transport Authority, the effect of which also completely changes the likelihood of various scenarios that searchers have had to consider.
I can't think of a better example of poor crisis management, spurious information and wild speculation than with the disappearance of this aircraft.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
At normal cruise altitude and accounting for takeoff, though without correction for below-average # of pax.
Sure, dropping to 12000' would lower the range, but we don't know the exact descent profile and we don't know how long it stayed there. It would certainly not last full 7.5 fours at 12000' all the way through. (I can't find data on fuel burn at 12000' for any large aircraft, but even going down to 25000' would cut maximum range by ~10%)
Sure, dropping to 12000' would lower the range, but we don't know the exact descent profile and we don't know how long it stayed there. It would certainly not last full 7.5 fours at 12000' all the way through. (I can't find data on fuel burn at 12000' for any large aircraft, but even going down to 25000' would cut maximum range by ~10%)
Then there was a suggestion to increase range but flying more slowly and reducing fuel burn. It does not work that way. There are 3 speed ranges:
Maximum - gets there fastest but uses lots of fuel.
Range - goes furthest for the fuel burn.
Endurance - flies for longest time but not as far.
To fly the farthest is follows it would need to fly at best speed which is Range speed and cruise climb.