enjineerin
The rumor is that the Pilot signal is coming form an Earth station in Burum, Netherlands. (minor difference from Fucino, Italy)
That's interesting, I will run the numbers on that.
The work Victor Iannello, Mike Exner, Duncan Steel, Don Thompson and others (as referenced:
http://tmfassociates.com/MH370Jun8.pdf ) Is narrowing in on the rumor that the EAFC was incorrectly programmed as to the Lat/Lon location for the Perth ground station. A positive (Northern Lat) for Perth results in roughly 30% reduction in the sat-Perth correction.
I saw that idea but I don't think it is a starter. Inmarsat have been running this system for years - errors would have been sorted long since. The final output of the Ground station system has to correct for all the downlink Doppler before it gets to the Inmarsat control centre. Any error would cause the frequencies to float all over the place.
There was also a belief that the last radar blips established the speed and altitude of the plane at 8:22UT = low (2900ft) and slow (?)... But, my review of the radar blips indicates a much higher speed (~ 500kts ground speed) and altitude (over 35000ft to have been visible on radar at that distance). –
I am personally very dubious about any of the Malaysian radar data. The BFO analysis does not support it, that is, it does not show probable tracks that are consistent with it. The analysis is consistent with simple track solutions, not complex.
Recent statements from Inmarsat and other participants in the official search effort seem to support the idea that the new search area will be along the same arc, but further South and West, closer to the initial Inmarsat projected paths.
I await tonight’s BBC programme. However, the quotes so far seems to imply that Ocean Shield was starting its hydrophone search at the North end of the search area shown in the ICAO report, while we know the search by the Chinese Haixun 01 was at the South end of that area (in the green zone). If the Ocean shield was diverted, it was from carrying on its search South West along the ICAO report search areas, not even further South beyond those areas, I think. In the paper I speculate that the green zone is consistent with tracks that had a speed of 470kt on the first leg, that is the final reported speed for MH370, but this may be going too far.
One previously released image "Example Southern Tracks" shows a red line for a "Constant 400 Knts Track", and a yellow line for a "Constant 450 knts Track".
The early Inmarsat maps did not seem to use the detailed BFO data. The aim then was to demonstrate the aircraft flew South rather than North. I think the search areas moved North as the BFO data analysis matured and, frankly, was believed by the authorities.
The speeds in the BFO analysis in my paper are not directly constrained by the fuel usage. I have taken a maximum speed of 500kt for the first leg to the 18:29UT ping arc, if only because the original speed was 470kt, but the BFO data does not allow any faster speed that 330kt for later legs even for the fits to the four BFO values that take it much further South. Unless the BFO data has been changed a large amount by later analysis, the higher speed tracks are not consistent with the data.
The BFO data is a tough constraint on possible tracks, at least for simple track models.