Malaysian Airlines MH370 contact lost
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: West Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@lulu....
While the application is new, the basics are very old....1842 to be exact
The doppler effect analysis is all they have to go on ATM....as far as we know
While the application is new, the basics are very old....1842 to be exact
The doppler effect analysis is all they have to go on ATM....as far as we know
Last edited by DocRohan; 27th Apr 2014 at 22:15. Reason: deletion in 5,4,3,2........ :)
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 464
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Would I be correct to say that the Inmarsat satellite technology that has lead the search to the Indian Ocean has not previously been used to locate a lost aircraft?
Besides which, if the sounds heard underwater were the recorder beacons, the satellite handshake data is largely academic at this point. The actual impact location was never known very accurately because there's only circumstantial evidence that the final handshake occurred as the aircraft was crashing... it could have continued flying for up to an hour afterwards.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: UK
Age: 57
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pingology
Thanks and i get that it should work in principle, and that theres nothing else better. Its just I reckon that as a plane finding technology it would have been too good to be true. I mean the margins for error are just unknowable.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: West Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Given that the Nuclear test ban treaty people said that their hydrophones at Cape Leeuwin did not detect MH370 impacting the ocean, it may place more weight on a controlled ditching.
This can detect icebergs falling in Antarctica, so if the plane struck the ocean with high force, it should have being able to detect the acoustic waves.
This can detect icebergs falling in Antarctica, so if the plane struck the ocean with high force, it should have being able to detect the acoustic waves.
It is not a new technology, and the next time you go through a police radar trap try and convince them the margin for error is unknowable.
In the end the Satellite track path took searchers to a place where ELT beacons could be heard. That is all that could really be asked of that approach
In the end the Satellite track path took searchers to a place where ELT beacons could be heard. That is all that could really be asked of that approach
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SATCOM Equipment
Rampstriker,
The SATCOM system on this era B777-200ER consists of the following components:
The SATCOM system on this era B777-200ER consists of the following components:
- Satellite data unit
- High speed data unit
- Top mounted high gain antenna
- Beam steering unit
- Low noise amplifier/diplexer
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Paso Robles
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I mean the margins for error are just unknowable.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: US
Age: 36
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I understand that the exact number is unknowable, but how low must the probability be that the plane is NOT in the general area where Inmarsat data lead the investigation to that was then shown to house a frequency that is said to be almost impossible to come from anything but the underwater beacon? With these 2 facts, the chances that the plane is not in this area must be approaching zero...correct?
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the end the Satellite track path took searchers to a place where ELT beacons could be heard.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Ohio, USA
Age: 78
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Satcom equipment
Mr Peabody,
Can you tell us what causes the beam to be steered. Also, each time the beam is repositioned is there communication between the aircraft and the satellite?
Can you tell us what causes the beam to be steered. Also, each time the beam is repositioned is there communication between the aircraft and the satellite?
Confirmation today by Aust PM that surface search will finish today.
Underwater search to continue over a "much larger area."
Makes sense. Little prospect of finding debris floating now (although something might wash up on a beach at some future date), and drift analysis now wound be extremely speculative.
Underwater search to continue over a "much larger area."
Makes sense. Little prospect of finding debris floating now (although something might wash up on a beach at some future date), and drift analysis now wound be extremely speculative.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dumb question?
This may be a dumb question but has the US offered to or provided assistance in the sea surface search by the use of drones? If the haven't the question I would ask is why not? It would appear that they can readily pick out a terrorist target from altitude and conduct surveillance so why not utilise their range and stand off capability to conduct a detailed search of the Indian Ocean instead of putting PC3 Orions and other aircraft at risk.
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Australia
Age: 76
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Expanded Underwater Search.
According to PM Abbott and Angus Houston the entire 700km X 80km 'splash zone' will be searched using equipment and personnel from private contractors.
The search is estimated to cost ~$Au60mil, and will take at least eight months to complete.
Meanwhile the ships involved in the surface search will remain in the area for 'continuity' and Ocean Shield will continue using the Bluefin-21.
The search is estimated to cost ~$Au60mil, and will take at least eight months to complete.
Meanwhile the ships involved in the surface search will remain in the area for 'continuity' and Ocean Shield will continue using the Bluefin-21.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Relocating at present.
Age: 63
Posts: 115
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Would I be correct to say that the Inmarsat satellite technology that has lead the search to the Indian Ocean has not previously been used to locate a lost aircraft?
If one accepts the premise that someone rather than something caused this incident and that person hadn't considered that the Inmarsat method could be used then, using the logic of "when you've eliminated the impossible...", the motive must have been to make something disappear permanently.
Which begs the question; what could be so important as to go to all this trouble to attempt to permanently hide?
What was MH370 carrying?
Last edited by OPENDOOR; 28th Apr 2014 at 08:13. Reason: spelling
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Perth Western Australia
Age: 57
Posts: 808
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just watched the news conference on the new search area and outside contractors. On the positive side the university boffins should get some really good undersea bottom data.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Perth - Western Australia
Age: 75
Posts: 1,805
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's interesting to see that many whales produce sound bursts in the region of 20kHz - but some species produce sound bursts up as high as 40kHz.
Seeing as the signals picked up by the Australian Navy were reported as being around 33kHz, I wonder if this might have been sound bursts from a whale?
Whale sound bursts are reported as travelling up to several hundred kms. The Cape Leeuwin hydrophones of the CTBTO are constantly being bombarded with whale signals.
Whale signals detected by International Monitoring System (IMS) facility: CTBTO Preparatory Commission
One has to ponder whether the major sounds produced by an aircraft ditching into the open ocean would be airborne or waterborne sound, as each has to be picked up by different methods and different instruments. It's interesting to note the CTBTO hydrophones pick up waves crashing, as permanent background noise.
The CTBTO has already stated the Cocos Island infrasound station did not, and could not, pick up any airborne sound from the region where MH370 is supposed to have been lost, due to extreme distance.
Acoustical Society of America - 166th Lay Language Papers
Seeing as the signals picked up by the Australian Navy were reported as being around 33kHz, I wonder if this might have been sound bursts from a whale?
Whale sound bursts are reported as travelling up to several hundred kms. The Cape Leeuwin hydrophones of the CTBTO are constantly being bombarded with whale signals.
Whale signals detected by International Monitoring System (IMS) facility: CTBTO Preparatory Commission
One has to ponder whether the major sounds produced by an aircraft ditching into the open ocean would be airborne or waterborne sound, as each has to be picked up by different methods and different instruments. It's interesting to note the CTBTO hydrophones pick up waves crashing, as permanent background noise.
The CTBTO has already stated the Cocos Island infrasound station did not, and could not, pick up any airborne sound from the region where MH370 is supposed to have been lost, due to extreme distance.
Acoustical Society of America - 166th Lay Language Papers
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: West Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Or...maybe its like JORN and we Aussies dont turn things on at weekends 
All jokes aside...given the reported sensitivity of these things, i am a little surprised that analysis of their data was neg...
Maybe means nothing.
All jokes aside...given the reported sensitivity of these things, i am a little surprised that analysis of their data was neg...
Maybe means nothing.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Perth - Western Australia
Age: 75
Posts: 1,805
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
micis - Station treaty code IS06 is an infrasound station on Cocos Island.
Station profiles - IS06 - Cocos Islands: CTBTO Preparatory Commission
The CTBTO has already searched their infrasound records for any signal peaks that might have come from MH370 on the morning of the 8th March and found nothing. This is because of the substantial distance from IS06 to the suspected crash site, and the high level of background noise created by wind, that is a feature of infrasound stations located on oceanic islands.
http://www.ctbto.org/fileadmin/user_...ines_MH370.pdf
Station profiles - IS06 - Cocos Islands: CTBTO Preparatory Commission
The CTBTO has already searched their infrasound records for any signal peaks that might have come from MH370 on the morning of the 8th March and found nothing. This is because of the substantial distance from IS06 to the suspected crash site, and the high level of background noise created by wind, that is a feature of infrasound stations located on oceanic islands.
http://www.ctbto.org/fileadmin/user_...ines_MH370.pdf
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
One Track
You also have huge 30 - 40 foot waves crashing down at irregular intervals which must make some sort of noise. In addition, you have ships coming down off the top of these waves also making large sounds.
How would they differentiate between them ?
And wouldn't a ship make more noise than bits of aircraft falling into the water ?
You also have huge 30 - 40 foot waves crashing down at irregular intervals which must make some sort of noise. In addition, you have ships coming down off the top of these waves also making large sounds.
How would they differentiate between them ?
And wouldn't a ship make more noise than bits of aircraft falling into the water ?
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: btw SAMAR and TOSPA
Posts: 566
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's interesting to see that many whales produce sound bursts in the region of 20kHz - but some species produce sound bursts up as high as 40kHz.
Whales are transmitting in Hz not kHz.