Malaysian Airlines MH370 contact lost
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Perth - Western Australia
Age: 75
Posts: 1,805
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've said it before and I'll say it again - there is nothing in Capt Zahari's 33-yr work history with MAS that represents even the slightest misbehaviour of any kind.
The CEO of MAS has stated his work record and performance was utterly faultless.
To state unequivocally that the Capt suddenly turned into a mass-murdering hijacker with a terrorist streak, after 33 yrs of airline loyalty and job performance that could not be faulted, is an affront to all right-thinking people.
I trust those who suggest this scenario are well-prepared to issue an abject apology when the truth is finally discovered.
As I have also previously stated, physics rule in flight, the same as in every other field.
Man-made equipment breaks and suffers maladies that combine to cause unplanned destruction, despite the best efforts of thousands of brilliant designers and numerous redundant systems. When that happens, aircraft obey the laws of gravity.
There are any number of scenarios that could have combined to end up with the aircraft following the unplanned flight path that it did.
Until we have some evidence of exactly what happened, please refrain from impugning the memory and actions of a talented and quite possibly, totally innocent man.
The CEO of MAS has stated his work record and performance was utterly faultless.
To state unequivocally that the Capt suddenly turned into a mass-murdering hijacker with a terrorist streak, after 33 yrs of airline loyalty and job performance that could not be faulted, is an affront to all right-thinking people.
I trust those who suggest this scenario are well-prepared to issue an abject apology when the truth is finally discovered.
As I have also previously stated, physics rule in flight, the same as in every other field.
Man-made equipment breaks and suffers maladies that combine to cause unplanned destruction, despite the best efforts of thousands of brilliant designers and numerous redundant systems. When that happens, aircraft obey the laws of gravity.
There are any number of scenarios that could have combined to end up with the aircraft following the unplanned flight path that it did.
Until we have some evidence of exactly what happened, please refrain from impugning the memory and actions of a talented and quite possibly, totally innocent man.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: WA
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If it is true that a person or persons unknown has masterminded the disappearance of this plane, then (a) we don't yet know who that person is and (b) they will not have been in a sane mind by all normal standards. That's about all that can be said of that eventuality and therefore better to leave criminal and forensic investigators to do their job if and when the time comes. Trying to understand motives or reasons at this stage is somewhat pointless.
Without wreckage authorities are struggling to say more than that they believe the flight was deliberately diverted. Let's leave it at that until more evidence gathers.
Without wreckage authorities are struggling to say more than that they believe the flight was deliberately diverted. Let's leave it at that until more evidence gathers.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
US Navy P8 turning back to Perth
Similar plots occur for VH-OCV and VH-TGG for today's search.
Indeed. The moderators need to get that nasty speculation off this thread the minute it's trolled. Time enough for discussion after the fact, if such is established. In the meantime - respect and a presumption of innocence please, unless you're adding new info!
When was the last time a Boeing pilot tried to hijack his own aircraft?
About six weeks ago:
Co-pilot hijacks Ethiopian Airlines, flies to Geneva for asylum - CNN.com
A few of us are actually pilots you know.
Pilot involvement certainly seems no less probable than some of the other theories bandied about. I hope it is not the case. But it definitely appears to me to be a possibility.
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: SFO/KCH
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
He's been with the airline for 30+ years, 18k+ hours, and dedicated his life to aviation. If there's anything stable in his life it would be that - and I seriously extremely doubt he would threaten it.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Brazil
Age: 71
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pings
What I understood about pings is that the trajectory arc is based on supposed speed and possible fuel range. Since the "handshake" received by Inmarsat means "engine still running", could it be possible the airplane landed somewhere within the arc and kept the engines running for 7 hours to make people think the airplane flew until fuel starvation?
From a ping we can only find the distance (angle) from the satellite. With a "handshake" is not possible to determine if the airplane is moving, or not.
Am I wrong?
From a ping we can only find the distance (angle) from the satellite. With a "handshake" is not possible to determine if the airplane is moving, or not.
Am I wrong?
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
He's been with the airline for 30+ years, 18k+ hours, and dedicated his life to aviation. If there's anything stable in his life it would be that - and I seriously extremely doubt he would threaten it.
The captain did have a couple of significant events in the days leading up to the flight with his wife and kids moving out and his political hero being sent back to prison for sodomy.
MH 370 in the Indian Ocean is kinda like that turtle on a fencepost. You know it didn't get there by itself.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 395
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Remember, this is Rumours & News
Stirrings in SE Asia seem to suggest that the Malaysian Government's tardiness in getting information out, plus obfuscation of events/retraction of previously reported facts might have something to do with the following (conspiracy, rather than cock-up) theory:
Captain plus other crew member(s) were avid supporters of Anwar Ibrahim, yet again consigned to jail on (fake) sodomy charges by the UMNO regime which he aims to overthrow, and had hijacked MH 370 to hold as airborne hostage against his release, following which event, a safe landing would then have been made.
On turn-back from the Malaysian/Vietnamese FIR/UIR boundary, a period of subsequent VHF negotiations (on Company frequency) between the crew and Government representatives, for Anwar's release, proved fruitless. Net result, captain plus complicit crew eventually turned south (as it turned out, tracked by the INMARSAT "pings") and flew the aircraft into the ocean (somewhat short of the first calculated search area).
Do we have a strong rational and motive here? Ideas please.
PS. I'm very familiar with SE Asian politics, I've lived and worked in Asia/SE Asia for the past twenty years and I'm a long time air transport professional with plenty of time on the 777 and the regional/international routes originating from the area - so please, no ignorant shoot-downs from Flight Sim operators, I'd like some serious response.
Captain plus other crew member(s) were avid supporters of Anwar Ibrahim, yet again consigned to jail on (fake) sodomy charges by the UMNO regime which he aims to overthrow, and had hijacked MH 370 to hold as airborne hostage against his release, following which event, a safe landing would then have been made.
On turn-back from the Malaysian/Vietnamese FIR/UIR boundary, a period of subsequent VHF negotiations (on Company frequency) between the crew and Government representatives, for Anwar's release, proved fruitless. Net result, captain plus complicit crew eventually turned south (as it turned out, tracked by the INMARSAT "pings") and flew the aircraft into the ocean (somewhat short of the first calculated search area).
Do we have a strong rational and motive here? Ideas please.
PS. I'm very familiar with SE Asian politics, I've lived and worked in Asia/SE Asia for the past twenty years and I'm a long time air transport professional with plenty of time on the 777 and the regional/international routes originating from the area - so please, no ignorant shoot-downs from Flight Sim operators, I'd like some serious response.
highcirrus - I agree it is totally plausible and the opportunity was even more available with the most inexperienced FO you could have dreamed for. It certainly explains the silence during the first few days of denial about the turn back
PS I think you would have had to spend some time in Malaysia to understand the dynamics of politics there. Without this insight it may be very hard for others to see the reality. Making the hugest sacrifice for the bettering of one's countrymen
PS I think you would have had to spend some time in Malaysia to understand the dynamics of politics there. Without this insight it may be very hard for others to see the reality. Making the hugest sacrifice for the bettering of one's countrymen
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: New Hampshire
Age: 70
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
500N Re: Orion re-tasking
500N - well, it may just be me, but I read the press release exactly as it's being reported by the media that you cite.
I believe the Orion IS en-route to the probable location of the ELT activation. The "if required" clause, I think, applies to "render assistance", not "fly to the area".
If they hadn't have already dispatched the Orion to fly south, there wouldn't be any requirement to bring in another civil jet to replace the Orion.
I think it's the press release that had a bit of ambiguity in the writing, and the media folks might have clarified the actual operation before they wrote anything.
However, I sure might be wrong here, just a thought.
I believe the Orion IS en-route to the probable location of the ELT activation. The "if required" clause, I think, applies to "render assistance", not "fly to the area".
If they hadn't have already dispatched the Orion to fly south, there wouldn't be any requirement to bring in another civil jet to replace the Orion.
I think it's the press release that had a bit of ambiguity in the writing, and the media folks might have clarified the actual operation before they wrote anything.
However, I sure might be wrong here, just a thought.
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Dubai
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What IS interesting about the Chris McLaughlin, senior vice-president for external affairs at Inmarsat interview is that....
.....once the "ping data" (and the subsequent "arc") had been established and released to the Malaysian authorities, they (Inmarsat) began work to analyse their data.
When the boffins emerged, they had established that the direction of travel could be determined (by using the Doppler effect).
This data they also released to the Malaysians.
The next day (!) Inmarsat released this information to the AAIB.
It appears that only then did the Malaysians act (no doubt with a "guiding hand" from the AAIB) on this data.
The "Southern route".
I am not saying that the Malaysian authorities were "unwilling" to act, they were no doubt dealing with an unprecedented work load and data overload. But you'd think, "further data" from the private company that had given you the biggest lead you had gained thus far....would "kinda" be important.
.....once the "ping data" (and the subsequent "arc") had been established and released to the Malaysian authorities, they (Inmarsat) began work to analyse their data.
When the boffins emerged, they had established that the direction of travel could be determined (by using the Doppler effect).
This data they also released to the Malaysians.
The next day (!) Inmarsat released this information to the AAIB.
It appears that only then did the Malaysians act (no doubt with a "guiding hand" from the AAIB) on this data.
The "Southern route".
I am not saying that the Malaysian authorities were "unwilling" to act, they were no doubt dealing with an unprecedented work load and data overload. But you'd think, "further data" from the private company that had given you the biggest lead you had gained thus far....would "kinda" be important.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Isle of Man
Age: 72
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just supposing there was a reasonably controlled descent to the sea surface then sinking (as suggested by the incomplete final ping) there might be little or no debris field, no ELT activation and the FRD/CVRs, if triggered at all, might be still inside the fuselage - the aircraft could be reasonably intact on the seabed somewhere close to the last partial-ping?
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Cork, Ireland
Age: 55
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The captain did have a couple of significant events in the days leading up to the flight with his wife and kids moving out and his political hero being sent back to prison for sodomy.
But a pilot who murders his passengers and hides the plane where it can't be found? Is that likely?
I am not saying it is impossible, but the fact that his wife left him is not really evidence that he is to blame. I just don't think it is justified add A + B and get C like this, otherwise I am never getting in an aircraft again.
Assuming this was deliberate act, then it seems to me at just as plausible that there was a motivated yet competent lunatic amongst the passengers who worked out some way to get control of the flight deck. You don't need 18,000 hours experience to fly a plane into the sea for instance.
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: 12E CTY
Age: 69
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The satellite handshakes are believed to show the aircraft heading south. There are also a small number of handshakes that are not keeping with the hourly keep-alive inquiry. One of those is the partial one (the last communication with the satellite) plus several at the incident time (aka the FIR boundary over the Gulf of Thailand).
Several commenters have wondered aloud about that last partial handshake. One comment (several hundred comments back, concerning the full sim run with fuel starvation) suggested that failed electric was briefly/partially restored when the RAT deployed. This may be connected with the partial handshake at the end of flight.
That leaves us with the several unscheduled handshakes at the incident time. Could it be that those were also due to loss of power, and then a resumption of power to the SATCOM ? If something catastrophic happened to the power bus(es), over the Gulf of Thailand, the pilots may have found themselves with an extraordinary unexpected workload. Several of the failed comms systems have been described as "can only be disabled via the CBs". Too many circuit protection devices tripping simultaneously ?
One possible scenario that does not involve malice on the part of the flight deck crew, nor any of the passengers.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In reply to highcirrus
Very intriguing theory, but it does beg the question that if such a
discussion took place on a company frequency would it not be then easily
overheard and then disseminated or leaked by other company personnel
or amateur enthusiasts ? I occasionally listen in to chatter on the local
approach frequencies at home. Are company frequencies somehow deliberately
scrambled or kept anonymous for commercial or proprietary reasons ?
discussion took place on a company frequency would it not be then easily
overheard and then disseminated or leaked by other company personnel
or amateur enthusiasts ? I occasionally listen in to chatter on the local
approach frequencies at home. Are company frequencies somehow deliberately
scrambled or kept anonymous for commercial or proprietary reasons ?
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: in a plasma cocoon
Age: 53
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Burst frequency offset analysis (doppler analysis)
Hi there.
The more I am trying to understand the D2 doppler (plane->satellite doppler, not compensed and measured by the ground stations) profile presented by the AAIB, the more I get confused. Maybe some tech guys here can help.
I understand that this D2 doppler is the plane-satellite relative speed (the 3D vector Vplane-Vsat) projected (using a dot product) onto the line of sight, the 3D vector POSplane-POSsat. This is also the 1st order derivative of the range between the plane and the satellite.
The Inmarsat satellite in geostationary orbit is moving (in the earth referential) with a Vz speed, I have modelled the Inmarsat satellite trajectory using (the sat. parameter are derived using the AGI Satellite Toolkit or STK):
Duncan Steel | Space Scientist, Author & Broadcaster
As I modelled it, the max Vz speed of the Inmarsat satellite (65 m/s) is far lower than the plane speed (235 m/s), so that the plane's heading changes are primarily shaping the D2 doppler graph.
I have also modelled the plane trajectory (but with a constant altitude) in spherical coordinates with the varied heading changes.
I get a D2 doppler which can be either positive (the plane is moving away from the satellite) or negative (a closing speed meaning the plane is moving closer to the satellite). For exemple on the 1st protion of the trajectory (heading toward Beijing), my D2 doppler is positive, and just after the large heading change toward the south, my doppler is negative (plane coming closer to the satellite). Another point: the magnitude of my doppler (from -750 Hz to 750 Hz) cannot compare with the presented D2 doppler (between 100 and 275 Hz).
My resultats are there:
https://imageshack.com/i/eun1u9p
https://imageshack.com/i/jjxqdup
The more I am trying to understand the D2 doppler (plane->satellite doppler, not compensed and measured by the ground stations) profile presented by the AAIB, the more I get confused. Maybe some tech guys here can help.
I understand that this D2 doppler is the plane-satellite relative speed (the 3D vector Vplane-Vsat) projected (using a dot product) onto the line of sight, the 3D vector POSplane-POSsat. This is also the 1st order derivative of the range between the plane and the satellite.
The Inmarsat satellite in geostationary orbit is moving (in the earth referential) with a Vz speed, I have modelled the Inmarsat satellite trajectory using (the sat. parameter are derived using the AGI Satellite Toolkit or STK):
Duncan Steel | Space Scientist, Author & Broadcaster
As I modelled it, the max Vz speed of the Inmarsat satellite (65 m/s) is far lower than the plane speed (235 m/s), so that the plane's heading changes are primarily shaping the D2 doppler graph.
I have also modelled the plane trajectory (but with a constant altitude) in spherical coordinates with the varied heading changes.
I get a D2 doppler which can be either positive (the plane is moving away from the satellite) or negative (a closing speed meaning the plane is moving closer to the satellite). For exemple on the 1st protion of the trajectory (heading toward Beijing), my D2 doppler is positive, and just after the large heading change toward the south, my doppler is negative (plane coming closer to the satellite). Another point: the magnitude of my doppler (from -750 Hz to 750 Hz) cannot compare with the presented D2 doppler (between 100 and 275 Hz).
My resultats are there:
https://imageshack.com/i/eun1u9p
https://imageshack.com/i/jjxqdup
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Dubai
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pontius....
Oh I'd agree with your reply ....BUT for the issue that they had already released the previous information (the Arc) that this "mere slip of a company" had provided to them with.
There's the rub !
Why act "so slowly" on the direction information.
Oh I'd agree with your reply ....BUT for the issue that they had already released the previous information (the Arc) that this "mere slip of a company" had provided to them with.
There's the rub !
Why act "so slowly" on the direction information.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 395
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
averow
Yes, such a discussion could be easily overheard and then, in theory, disseminated or leaked by other company personnel. However, we are not looking at a "western situation" here. In this part of the world, dissemination is easily and routinely curtailed and I'm not too sure that "air band" radio receivers are widely available to and used by, the general public, especially in the small hours of the night.
No, not as far as I am aware.
--- it does beg the question that if such a discussion took place on a company frequency would it not be then easily overheard and then disseminated or leaked by other company personnel or amateur enthusiasts ?
Are company frequencies somehow deliberately scrambled or kept anonymous for commercial or proprietary reasons ?
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: in a plasma cocoon
Age: 53
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://www.mot.gov.my/en/Newsroom/Pr...%28AAIB%29.pdf
It seems that the D2 doppler is the plane to satellite doppler contribution.
But you are right, either there is a problem with this D2 definition or measurement, or I have to go back to my trigonometry course (but that the plane can be either closing to the satellite or going away from it depending on the portion of its trajectory seems obvious).
Thanks for the tech. spec. for the max Hz/s tracking (I can introduce it in my little sim).
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Vplane causes the doppler shift D1. As you state correctly D1 is in the order of ~750Hz. That would probably be too much because it would interfere with adjacent frequency channels. That is why big parts of D1 are taken out of the equation by some preemptive compensation the plane's transceiver does. How exactly this compensation works is not yet understood by the general public, but (hopefully) by the inmarsat engineers.
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Dubai
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pontius
Did they have confidence in the data ?
I can only assume they "bought into" the initial findings.
They even went public with them.
However the "direction" findings ? The Doppler effect ?
I wonder if the "bought into" that.
Do they buy into that now ?
The Acting Minister for Transport has since "given hope" to the relatives with his recent "hotel lobby statement".
And "who knows what" their thoughts are in private.
Did they have confidence in the data ?
I can only assume they "bought into" the initial findings.
They even went public with them.
However the "direction" findings ? The Doppler effect ?
I wonder if the "bought into" that.
Do they buy into that now ?
The Acting Minister for Transport has since "given hope" to the relatives with his recent "hotel lobby statement".
And "who knows what" their thoughts are in private.