Seems several people are having a hard time accepting the satellite pings and the associated theory that this plane is no where near the point of last contact. How many more sources need to come out for you to consider there could be something to it? Inmarsat, the White House, the WSJ, Reuters, etc. Granted none of this has been corroborated in full yet and one those sources is owned by Rupert "Faux News" Murdoch but...
That Inmarsat systems ping makes perfect sense. Most all wireless systems ping in one way or another. And just the ping itself in the absence of any other data can still be used for geo-location purposes. Which satellite was being targeted, the round-trip signal time, signal strength and signal quality all can form a basis for figuring out a rough location. What level of precision this provides, I don't know but I'd bet it could get you within 500 square miles and probably a lot less if you look for a track between pings.
Further to that, I'd bet that within one or two hours or so of last contact, US military intelligence would have caught wind of the missing plane. At least very basic steps to make sure satellite based reconnaissance was listening would have been taken. The extent of that capability we will never know. The US could very well have picked up VHF data broadcast packets that DID have telemetry in them.
If the plane ditched in the water near the point of last contact, odds are the Inmarsat ping would not have lasted 5 hours for multiple reasons.
And if your plane was in the South China sea, it would have been found by now.
Last edited by ianwood; 14th Mar 2014 at 19:59.
Reason: Clarity