PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (http://www.pprune.org/)
-   Rumours & News (http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news-13/)
-   -   Malaysian Airlines MH370 contact lost (http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/535538-malaysian-airlines-mh370-contact-lost.html)

FE Hoppy 17th Mar 2014 12:57

@ Volcanicash

They specifically said max/min speed with no mention of other factors which is why it goes in the "bobbins" file.

And they should have said maximum range speed not maximum speed. Maximum speed would (by my back of a fag packet calculation) be more restrictive.

skytrax 17th Mar 2014 13:01

Guys, forget about robbery scenarios and all that nonsense. Forget about the cargo, tones of gold etc that might have been on board.
Nobody in the right mind and familiar with the aviation field would try something like this because you cannnot get away with something like this. Too complicated to put in practise such thing.

I personally belive this was planned but for completly other reasons which are yet to be revealed. Hopefully we will get to know one day. Without finding the plane and black boxes information is very limited.

Kiwiairgurl 17th Mar 2014 13:01

I bet $50 Google is already in KL assisting
Re: SgtBundy

Google do public things during disasters like putting up people finder sites for people to find one another.

But they also do a lot of silent assistance and seem to be happy not to have to go public and bask in glory. So not only do they 'do no evil' they apparently 'do awesome' as well:)

I was involved in a govt role during a serious natural disaster. Google arrived within days, with the purpose of determining what logistical and expert assistance it could provide to the govt and they made available 24/7 assets by utilising Google teams located around the world.

I reckon they're already in KL and already putting their considerable capabilities where it's needed. With google earth in their asset collection they would more than have the ability to write algorithms.

The Bullwinkle 17th Mar 2014 13:01



There is a distinction between an aircraft engineer and a Flight Engineer. Please use the correct term.
And while we're on the subject, there is a difference between a Captain and a Chief Pilot.

The Australian press keep referring to the Captain as the Chief Pilot!
If he was the Chief Pilot then this story would be even scarier!

Mahatma Kote 17th Mar 2014 13:02


"virtually impossible" to change an aircraft's identifying code
The identifying code has to be changeable. Every time there is a maintenance swap-out of equipment the code has to be reprogrammed in the new equipment.

The only question is whether it requires physical access to the relevant PCB or whether it can be done using independent maintenance systems or using pilot interfaces operating in maintenance mode.

AerocatS2A 17th Mar 2014 13:02

Overthewing, all of the TCAS units I've played with have been integrated with the transponder. Turn the transponder off and you don't have a TCAS, at all, not for receiving or transmitting. Think of TCAS as a type of transponder rather than a separate system.

macilrae 17th Mar 2014 13:03

Professional Experts
On the subject of the "experts" who are continually trotted out by the likes of CNN and BBC - many of these folks are Professional Experts and they have spent a working lifetime polishing their credentials, rather than actually contributing to their field. They sit on the right committees, they acquire the right letters after their names and as 'talking heads' they sound super-authoritative - they excel in self-promotion. In fact you can find these people in every profession. The real experts, who can give the most insightful answers, are seldom seen - partly because they prefer to be doing real stuff - and maybe also because they are lousy presenters and shun the limelight.

xyze 17th Mar 2014 13:06


At the risk of pointing out the obvious, they HAVE gotten away with the cargo.

Whether that was their aim is anyone's guess!

SeenItAll 17th Mar 2014 13:06

Moderators: Since it seems impossible to completely shut down this thread and the repetitive uninformed drivel that characterizes the majority of the posts, I have an alternative suggestion: split this thread into five separate threads.
  • One thread will be for posts suggesting that terrorists having hijacked the plane to land it or to plunder its cargo and then relaunch the plane as a bomb.
  • A second thread will be for the pilot suicide or "crash the plane where it will never be found" theory.
  • A third will be for the mechanical malfunction theory.
  • A fourth thread will be for a discussion of Search and Rescue operations.
  • And a final thread will be for posters who have not adequately read the previous posts but who want to pose a question to those that have.
By doing this, it will allow those who are absolutely convinced of terrorism not to be burdened by reading analysis about suicide or malfunctions; those who can see no logic in terrorism not to be burdened by endless X-Files speculation about cargo and Flying Dutchman relaunches; those who are sure the plane malfunctioned not to waste time discussing pilot or terrorist actions; those who just want to figure out where the plane is now not to listen to the previous three groups; and those that think they are on to something but don't want to the the research themselves to query from those that have.

This would save all of us a great deal of reading time. Thanks for listening.

currawong 17th Mar 2014 13:06

On the balance of probability -

the northern arc is mainly over China...

the pax are mainly from China...

the cargo is mainly mangosteens...

therefore -

no, you work it out for yourselves.

Thoughts to the families of the pax and crew at this difficult time.

I remain optimistic.

(And all that without lighting up anyone's radar screen, across several countries. Outstanding.)

litinoveweedle 17th Mar 2014 13:07


If on the other hand the assumptions are not for example the ping came from another source say SQ68 bound for Barcelona, then that line of enquiry ends right there.
IMHO pings are probably TDMA channel sync or frequency sync bursts. This means, that inside of data, there could be probably two low level identifiers.
1. the HW identifier (something like serial number of your phone (IMEI) or MAC address of you computer)
2. artificial identifier of the connection (which could be correlated with connection information stored previously in time of connection handshake)

There would be no data inside of these burst, as these serve only to SATCOM to keep connection to satellite synced and alive,

I would say that forging data connection on TDMA is possible and it is used for example to intercept GSM connections (man in the middle attack), but this process is definitely not trivial.

I would say, that probability, that these pings were mistakenly from another plane or forged to pretend to be from HM370, is really low.

owenshaw 17th Mar 2014 13:08

Sorry if this has already been mentioned...

The 40deg contour heading north covers the Xinjiang Province/ East Turkestan. (political unrest in the area)
According to Wikipedia an East Turkestan flag was found at the Kunming Massacre.
Will any of this end up being related?

ana1936 17th Mar 2014 13:09

some of us, maybe myself included, have been a but loose with the term ping perhaps.

Just to clarify this a little.

My understanding is that the satellites in the INMARSAT network which deal with ACARS check on the presence of their registered aircraft every hour by initiating a ping operation. This involves the satellite asking to see if a particular aircraft will answer. Only the specified aircraft will answer. And it will only answer if its engines are operating and it hears the satellite request.

Token Bird 17th Mar 2014 13:09


Except (I understand) they have primary radar "confirmation" of a north-easterly course after the westbound one (ie IGARI - VAMPI - GIVAL ....)
That was what I was trying to figure out. I recall reading that days ago but was unsure as to where that info had come from, and if it was primary radar, was it later confirmed by the Inmarsat ping data. Since they have only released info about the final ping it's not possible to tell.

I'm going to trawl back through this thread and see if I can find the reference regarding the theory they flew IGARI-VAMPI-GIVAL.

FlyingOfficerKite 17th Mar 2014 13:09


I wonder if the aircraft and passengers landed somewhere else and was refueled to await "further orders"??
Assuming the aircraft is intact and on the ground, what would be the purpose of this silence by the hijackers/sky pirates?

1. Secret negotiations already in progress?
2. Stealing of valuable cargo/VIP hostage?
3. Time to disperse the pax and crew with a view to hostage negotiations individually and/or
4. Preparing the aircraft to be used as a 'flying bomb' at some future date?

All mentioned before, but if the aircraft has landed safely what other explanation could there be?

If any or all of these scenarios are acted out a new dark age of aviation will be upon us.

SgtBundy 17th Mar 2014 13:13


If something remotely viable and simple to implement could have been done, it would have been done by now. The Tomnod marketing excercise was rolled out in a couple of days.

Fact of the matter is that implementing and debugging algorithms takes some time and effort... and therefore manpower and money.

Add onto that you're expecting satellite companies to retask their satellites for a vast area of fresh imagery..... who's going to pay for that on top of the development manpower for your magic algorithm.

Your optimism and faith in existing "simple algorithms" is commendable, but that's all it is.
Tomnod was setup in the past for some Typhoon Haiyan and they were able to source/request fresh satellite passes from I believe the day it disappeared, seeing as they own the satellites. Their current effort is re-using an existing platform for a fresh task. Marketing maybe, but hardly a futile effort when at the time they were looking for a crash site, they had the satellites to do it and the technology platform to deliver it.

No doubt to yield good results it takes time to tune and improve the methods. All I am saying is that at a high level the effort to discount large sections of ocean appears trivial, and as I said I would expect this is probably something they are smart enough to have done already. If you are talking about recognizing an aircraft or specific aircraft from this imagery, yes that would be a significant effort.

Elastic infrastructure is easily available reasonably cheaply so I don't think some of what I suggested is that far fetched.

Alloyboobtube 17th Mar 2014 13:14

Lack of signal means it could also be in 20,000 ft of water.
Could it have been landed gently in the Indian Ocean with outflow valves open and a gentle sink to the bottom intact..

The Bullwinkle 17th Mar 2014 13:15


One thread will be for posts suggesting that terrorists having hijacked the plane to land it or to plunder its cargo and then relaunch the plane as a bomb.
A second thread will be for the pilot suicide or "crash the plane where it will never be found" theory.
A third will be for the mechanical malfunction theory.
A fourth thread will be for a discussion of Search and Rescue operations.
And a final thread will be for posters who have not adequately read the previous posts but who want to pose a question to those that have.
How about a sixth thread for those who wish to wait till the aircraft is found and the real answer is discovered?

Just a thought!

geneman 17th Mar 2014 13:16

Identification of ping origin.
Simple question:
Does a ping transmitted from an aircraft and received by a geostationary satellite UNEQUIVOCALLY identify the aircraft, in the absence of any other data?

(Sorry if this has already been covered...but I couldn't find an answer to this fundamental question.)

SLFplatine 17th Mar 2014 13:17

I think we can really forget the 'Uighur terrorist' angle -their ops expertise extends no further than hand held knives and crude VBIEDs that generally do not work as intended.

All times are GMT. The time now is 21:41.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1
1996-2012 The Professional Pilots Rumour Network