MH370 - "new" news [Archive]

JustinHeywood

13th Dec 2022, 09:59

Oh come on you lot!!:*No I do not, nor ever have, claimed to have any extra knowledge!
I will give all of you the benefit of the doubt and assume (and I'm taking a long bow) that your posts are not wind-ups.
But are you all really so thick that you cannot see the obvious?:confused:

Let us just assume then that the wreckage is found, the FDR recovered and it is found beyond any doubt, or even just possibly, that the whole event was a deliberate act by the PIC.

Cannot you hear the sounds of Lawyers salivating/sharpening their knives/ordering a new Mercedes etc etc etc?

Any Legal proceedings upon this matter would be drawn out for many many years........
Not to mention the Asian 'loss of face' culture.

So, JustinHeywood and others; Your opinions please? Oh, and minus the sarcasm merely due to an unfortunate typo on my part, if you please.

You want my opinion? But I’m not the one playing secret squirrel.

How do you know MH370 “will never be found” and who are the “certain authorities” you are referring to? Why don’t you come out and tell us?
Pinky, your post certainly hinted at some personal insight into what happened.

As far as I’m aware, NOBODY knows what happened that night on MH370. As far as I’m aware there is no actual evidence of conspiracy, although I’ve read a couple of laughable books trying to promote theories, based on pretty wild assumptions.

tubby linton

13th Dec 2022, 12:21

Unless this new piece has a serial number or some other identifiable mark on it then it will be nothing more than ocean rubbish.

GBO

14th Dec 2022, 01:56

This new report is extremely flawed. It is more likely that they have started with a pre-conceived pilot hijacking scenario and tried to bash this evidence into the hole.

Maybe they should look at the evidence first and then arrive at the most likely scenario and endpoint.

Prior to departure the oxygen bottle was serviced by Malaysia.

There wasn’t any change in behaviour as the crew passed through security. They are observed smoking prior to departure.

The aircraft departed KL and climbed to FL350/Mach 0.82

During the turn at IGARI, the transponder ceased transmission.

Aircraft turns back at about 25 degrees angle of bank, descends to FL340 and accelerates to Mach 0.84, flies in heading mode or manually until south of Penang.

Observed on primary radar by multiple Malaysian and Thai radar sites. Inherent errors in primary radar displays incorrect and unrealistic altitude changes.

No ACARS received, no comms received. No SATCOM log off.

Manually deleting the Flight ID would record a SATCOM log off.

FO cell phone connects to a cell tower when aircraft south of Penang at 1752:27.

Aircraft diverts to VAMPI-MEKAR-NILAM in LNAV still at Mach 0.84/FL340.

SATCOM call made TO aircraft via Indian Ocean satellite but can’t connect via the aircraft’s left High Gain Antenna at 18:03.

At 1822:12, the aircraft is 10 NM NW of MEKAR and leaves Malaysian primary radar range.

All Indonesian primary radar recordings at Lhokseumawe, Medan, Sabang and Sibolga are not available!

At 1825:27, aircraft initiates a SATCOM logon request to Indian Ocean Satellite. No Flight ID received from aircraft.

Aircraft must be heading south by 1840 to comply with satellite BTO / BFO data.

SATCOM call made TO aircraft at 1840, it connects but is not answered.

Approximately every hour, the satellite confirms that the aircraft is still on line, this timing can determine the aircraft’s distance (the 7 arcs) from the satellite.

Seven hours after the disappearance, the aircraft initiates a SATCOM log on. Again there isn’t a flight ID, and the aircraft is descending between 5000 to 15000 feet per minute.

Around 36 pieces of debris have been found from just about every part of the plane.

Debris barnacle analysis finds optimum sea temperature range for barnacle growth between 18-24C.

Debris drift analysis finds locations south of Latitude 40S and north of Latitude 20S unlikely.

Confirmed debris analysed by the ATSB confirms flaps where not deployed at the end of flight.

Now for the most likely scenario and endpoint.

The topped up crew oxygen bottle ruptured due to poor maintenance practices by Malaysia. (Soap and water for leak detection tests!)

The adjacent P105 Left Wire Integration Panel and Left AIMS Cabinet is obliterated.

The crew are overwhelmed and bombarded with left systems failures, ie no left transponder, no left FMC, no left HGA, no left Autothrottle, DU failures, no AMU, no ACARS, etc

The crew divert to the nearest suitable airport (Penang) at the default LRC speed of M0.84 and appropriate altitude.

They start to run checklists and problem solve.

FO turns on cell phone to call for help.

Approaching Penang, they manually switch to the right FMC, the software reset deletes the Flight ID.

Without the valid landing altitude data, the cabin altitude warning message shows at 15,000 feet, not 10,000 feet. And unfortunately for the crew, they have missed the gradual decompression event and start to become hypoxic (earlier for smokers). Mentally confused they program a diversion to Banda Aceh airport via NILAM and SANOB.

They eventually succumbed to hypoxia and pass out.

A flight attendant on portable oxygen attempts to revive the pilots, but can’t. The oxygen masks for the pilots are connected to… the ruptured oxygen bottle!

All occupants peacefully pass out from hypoxia.

The aircraft continues on autopilot. At Top Of Descent to Banda Aceh, the serviceable right Autothrottle slows the aircraft to the descent speed, the inop left throttle remains at the high power setting for Mach 0.84

As the aircraft turns left at NILAM towards SANOB, the aircraft switches from the failed left high gain antenna to the serviceable right high gain antenna, mounted on the right side of the aircraft, since the satellite is now on the right side of the aircraft (direction to satellite is about 262 degrees true). The aircraft can finally initiate a renewed log on with all occupants deceased (arc 1). The aircraft overflies Banda Aceh heading south, where it reverts to heading MAGNETIC at the end of route. (Note Indonesia is not releasing primary radar data)

The aircraft passes all arcs on time, meets BFO data, meets actual wind/temperature recordings, meets fuel exhaustion precisely, communicates with the satellite via the right HGA, conforms with autopilot constraints, meets barnacle analysis, meets drift analysis, and meets debris damage observed.

Where the ATSB search went wrong was they kept pushing the pilot suicide constant speed/switch to constant true heading solution, because a constant speed/constant magnetic heading overshoots arc 6 and 7 due to the changing magnetic variation in the southern Indian Ocean.

BUT… if you consider the accident scenario (oxygen bottle rupture) with the crew trying to save the plane, then due to the massive thrust lever differential at top of descent to Banda Aceh, the left engine runs out of fuel up to an HOUR earlier than the right! Due to envelope protection features, the slower single engine speed during the last hour now causes the aircraft to crash at the seventh arc at around 34 South 93 East, when the right engine flames out and autopilot disengages.

Auto engine restart momentarily powers SATCOM causing log on (arc 7).

The aircraft hits the water at high velocity and out of control.

The ATSB only searched about 2NM inside the arc at 34S 93E, because it concentrated the search at 38 South 88 East out to 40 NM wide.

AerialPerspective

14th Dec 2022, 02:56

Seems the ATSB has been working quietly behind the scenes

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/new-technology-could-hold-key-to-mh370-disappearance/PD7XR4LBIDKO6YWMHRCNFGG7DE/

Really?

Are you sure this is not just another one of those tedious, annual exposes by Channel Nine, who would have to be the most egregious tabloid outfit in the country, where we have yet another string of experts arguing around a conference table with a presenter who doesn't know sh-t about aviation posing obvious questions for effect and then a separate segment with Danica (I really do feel sorry for the woman and her family but her credibility is starting to be strained by her popping up every year, crying on queue then lamenting how her life has been affected THEN announcing EVERY TIME, that "if this is true, then it's a game-changer").

The program ends with no result, the whole thing is faded out to dramatic music an then nothing for 12 months until Nine decides it's that time of year again to trot out poor Danica, have her cry for a minute then declare the latest fallacy is a 'game-changer' then the experts argue, fade to black, shelved again for another 12 months.

This is becoming tedious. The Earth is mostly covered by water which is miles deep in many locations. It took 70+ years to find Amelia Earhart's aircraft so anyone that thinks this is going to be found any time soon is smoking some of the good stuff.

HappyBandit

14th Dec 2022, 03:11

This new report is extremely flawed. It is more likely that they have started with a pre-conceived pilot hijacking scenario and tried to bash this evidence into the hole. Maybe they should look at the evidence first and then arrive at the most likely scenario and endpoint. Prior to departure the oxygen bottle was serviced by Malaysia. There wasn’t any change in behaviour as the crew passed through security. They are observed smoking prior to departure. The aircraft departed KL and climbed to FL350/Mach 0.82 During the turn at IGARI, the transponder ceased transmission. Aircraft turns back at about 25 degrees angle of bank, descends to FL340 and accelerates to Mach 0.84, flies in heading mode or manually until south of Penang. Observed on primary radar by multiple Malaysian and Thai radar sites. Inherent errors in primary radar displays incorrect and unrealistic altitude changes. No ACARS received, no comms received. No SATCOM log off. Manually deleting the Flight ID would record a SATCOM log off. FO cell phone connects to a cell tower when aircraft south of Penang at 1752:27. Aircraft diverts to VAMPI-MEKAR-NILAM in LNAV still at Mach 0.84/FL340. SATCOM call made TO aircraft via Indian Ocean satellite but can’t connect via the aircraft’s left High Gain Antenna at 18:03. At 1822:12, the aircraft is 10 NM NW of MEKAR and leaves Malaysian primary radar range. All Indonesian primary radar recordings at Lhokseumawe, Medan, Sabang and Sibolga are not available! At 1825:27, aircraft initiates a SATCOM logon request to Indian Ocean Satellite. No Flight ID received from aircraft. Aircraft must be heading south by 1840 to comply with satellite BTO / BFO data. SATCOM call made TO aircraft at 1840, it connects but is not answered. Approximately every hour, the satellite confirms that the aircraft is still on line, this timing can determine the aircraft’s distance (the 7 arcs) from the satellite. Seven hours after the disappearance, the aircraft initiates a SATCOM log on. Again there isn’t a flight ID, and the aircraft is descending between 5000 to 15000 feet per minute. Around 36 pieces of debris have been found from just about every part of the plane. Debris barnacle analysis finds optimum sea temperature range for barnacle growth between 18-24C. Debris drift analysis finds locations south of Latitude 40S and north of Latitude 20S unlikely. Confirmed debris analysed by the ATSB confirms flaps where not deployed at the end of flight. Now for the most likely scenario and endpoint. The topped up crew oxygen bottle ruptured due to poor maintenance practices by Malaysia. (Soap and water for leak detection tests!) The adjacent P105 Left Wire Integration Panel and Left AIMS Cabinet is obliterated. The crew are overwhelmed and bombarded with left systems failures, ie no left transponder, no left FMC, no left HGA, no left Autothrottle, DU failures, no AMU, no ACARS, etc The crew divert to the nearest suitable airport (Penang) at the default LRC speed of M0.84 and appropriate altitude. They start to run checklists and problem solve. FO turns on cell phone to call for help. Approaching Penang, they manually switch to the right FMC, the software reset deletes the Flight ID. Without the valid landing altitude data, the cabin altitude warning message shows at 15,000 feet, not 10,000 feet. And unfortunately for the crew, they have missed the gradual decompression event and start to become hypoxic (earlier for smokers). Mentally confused they program a diversion to Banda Aceh airport via NILAM and SANOB. They eventually succumbed to hypoxia and pass out. A flight attendant on portable oxygen attempts to revive the pilots, but can’t. The oxygen masks for the pilots are connected to… the ruptured oxygen bottle! All occupants peacefully pass out from hypoxia. The aircraft continues on autopilot. At Top Of Descent to Banda Aceh, the serviceable right Autothrottle slows the aircraft to the descent speed, the inop left throttle remains at the high power setting for Mach 0.84 As the aircraft turns left at NILAM towards SANOB, the aircraft switches from the failed left high gain antenna to the serviceable right high gain antenna, mounted on the right side of the aircraft, since the satellite is now on the right side of the aircraft (direction to satellite is about 262 degrees true). The aircraft can finally initiate a renewed log on with all occupants deceased (arc 1). The aircraft overflies Banda Aceh heading south, where it reverts to heading MAGNETIC at the end of route. (Note Indonesia is not releasing primary radar data) The aircraft passes all arcs on time, meets BFO data, meets actual wind/temperature recordings, meets fuel exhaustion precisely, communicates with the satellite via the right HGA, conforms with autopilot constraints, meets barnacle analysis, meets drift analysis, and meets debris damage observed. Where the ATSB search went wrong was they kept pushing the pilot suicide constant speed/switch to constant true heading solution, because a constant speed/constant magnetic heading overshoots arc 6 and 7 due to the changing magnetic variation in the southern Indian Ocean. BUT… if you consider the accident scenario (oxygen bottle rupture) with the crew trying to save the plane, then due to the massive thrust lever differential at top of descent to Banda Aceh, the left engine runs out of fuel up to an HOUR earlier than the right! Due to envelope protection features, the slower single engine speed during the last hour now causes the aircraft to crash at the seventh arc at around 34 South 93 East, when the right engine flames out and autopilot disengages. Auto engine restart momentarily powers SATCOM causing log on (arc 7). The aircraft hits the water at high velocity and out of control. The ATSB only searched about 2NM inside the arc at 34S 93E, because it concentrated the search at 38 South 88 East out to 40 NM wide. This made for a fascinating read, and has merit. My only question is what proof, if any, do you have of faulty maintenance on oxygen bottle? Or is your analysis and interpretation based on maintenance history in general by said airline?

Surely snare sheets would have been presented and reviewed?

Interviews with maintenance personnel?

Interviews with other flight crew?

It's an interesting interpretation though and has some real deep thought involved.

BuzzBox

14th Dec 2022, 07:31

This new report is extremely flawed.

I agree this latest report is flawed. Regarding the theory you proposed, what evidence do you have for the following:

Manually deleting the Flight ID would record a SATCOM log off.
Without the valid landing altitude data, the cabin altitude warning message shows at 15,000 feet, not 10,000 feet.

angry ant

14th Dec 2022, 07:32

The MAS B777, will never be found, why, cause the experts have never lived in Malaysia and do not know the Malaysian way of thinking and " Loss of Face "
AA
Ex. MAS

birdspeed

14th Dec 2022, 20:46

Excellent post GBO.

Possible extra failures to consider are….

Loss of flight instrument screens due to the power coming from TRUs in the vicinity of the bottles. TRUs located in E3 rack.

Loss of pitot/static feeds to the flight instruments causing flight controls to drop to ‘secondary mode’. Causing autopilot and autothrottle to fail. The aircraft could then just meander on with no one at the controls. Its natural stability keeping the aircraft roughly straight and level.

Icarus2001

14th Dec 2022, 21:12

So just coincidence that the aircraft flew along the the FIR boundary?

We should ignore the flight sim track details on the home PC of the Captain?

birdspeed

14th Dec 2022, 21:29

Icarus2001…it flew towards Penang, exactly where a pilot with a sick aircraft would point his aircraft.

The official Malaysian report has stated there are normal gaming activities on the simulator. Only the FBI managed to recreate a suspicious looking route by cherry picking a selected handful of data points from the hard drives.

neville_nobody

14th Dec 2022, 21:48

Icarus2001…it flew towards Penang, exactly where a pilot with a sick aircraft would point his aircraft.

It paralleled the Malaysian/Thai FIR boundary. That in itself could have been luck however the boundary had a kink in it which MH370 conviently turned and paralleled out to the open ocean.

GBO

14th Dec 2022, 21:51

BuzzBox

”Manually deleting the flight ID would record a SATCOM log off” - see Safety Information Report.

”Without the valid landing altitude data, the cabin altitude warning message shows at 15,000 feet” - see 777 Training Manual 21-30-00 p 38

Icarus2001

MH370 only momentarily followed the Malaysian/Thai border on its diversion to Penang. That was the standard route from Kota Bharu to Penang back in 2014. Note, 30 minutes later, MH6163 flew the exact same route from Kota Bharu to Penang along the border.

The Flight simulator is inconclusive and has many flaws. They just cherry picked waypoints, which didn’t have timestamps and stitched a path together. The waypoints could be from multiple sessions. The last waypoint in the southern Indian Ocean were it ran out of fuel was supposedly flown in a PSS B777, the major problem with this is, the PSS B777 is not compatible with FSX. So how can the first waypoints be in FSX?

Icarus2001

14th Dec 2022, 22:31

Momentarily huh?

Soap and water for leak detection tests! What is the correct procedure?

https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/800x657/91a39176_4649_4641_bd1c_a1160d7fe4d9_569bd0667bcccb712858278 0a019016fe9418ee0.png

Capt Fathom

15th Dec 2022, 00:37

I thought the full moon was last week! :confused:

dr dre

15th Dec 2022, 00:54

Now for the most likely scenario and endpoint.

So an oxygen bottle ruptured which took out the exact systems that tracked and communicated the aircraft’s position but left every other system necessary for flying the aircraft perfectly intact? Somehow a gradual decompression (even though any fuselage rupture would cause a more than gradual decompression) that went unnoticed by the crew, causing them become unconscious before the cabin altitude warning went off for the first time in history (or did this magical explosion specifically knock out the cabin warning too?). They were aware enough to program a track to Aceh over Penang but too incapacitated to descend, the slightly more critical thing. And then an hour after this magical decompression managed to program the FMC or change heading to turn 90 degrees south past the northern tip of Sumatra, even though in your own story you admit the pilots are dead at this stage?

I suggest you read up on Occam’s Razor.

MechEngr

15th Dec 2022, 01:24

So an oxygen bottle ruptured which took out the exact systems that tracked and communicated the aircraft’s position but left every other system necessary for flying the aircraft perfectly intact? Somehow a gradual decompression (even though any fuselage rupture would cause a more than gradual decompression) that went unnoticed by the crew, causing them become unconscious before the cabin altitude warning went off for the first time in history (or did this magical explosion specifically knock out the cabin warning too?). They were aware enough to program a track to Aceh over Penang but too incapacitated to descend, the slightly more critical thing. And then an hour after this magical decompression managed to program the FMC or change heading to turn 90 degrees south past the northern tip of Sumatra, even though in your own story you admit the pilots are dead at this stage?

I suggest you read up on Occam’s Razor.

I think there was a fire as happened on the ground - one that left the cockpit uninhabitable in seconds. The ground fire was so intense it could not be put out by the ground fire fighters for (I think) 30 minutes. The flight control computers are below the floor; mainly the controls will be at risk to a localized fire.It explains the climb as the pilots would be desperate to quench a fire behind a panel the extinguishers could not reach and there would be insufficient time to land before being forced from the controls even if by toxic smoke rather than heat. On the ground the fire burned a hole through the fuselage. That hole would disrupt the airflow a little, causing the plane, in free flight, to pull slightly to one side, a long curving course, although a slight thrust mismatch would do the same. Did the plane encounter a different wind direction or rising air that caused the turn?

The cascade of events from an oxygen fed fire are consistent. Others just don't appear to be.

Icarus2001

15th Dec 2022, 01:54

I really hope that is (badly written) satire.

What are you smoking guys?

dr dre

15th Dec 2022, 02:21

I think there was a fire as happened on the ground - one that left the cockpit uninhabitable in seconds. The ground fire was so intense it could not be put out by the ground fire fighters for (I think) 30 minutes. The flight control computers are below the floor; mainly the controls will be at risk to a localized fire.It explains the climb as the pilots would be desperate to quench a fire behind a panel the extinguishers could not reach and there would be insufficient time to land before being forced from the controls even if by toxic smoke rather than heat. On the ground the fire burned a hole through the fuselage. That hole would disrupt the airflow a little, causing the plane, in free flight, to pull slightly to one side, a long curving course, although a slight thrust mismatch would do the same. Did the plane encounter a different wind direction or rising air that caused the turn?

The cascade of events from an oxygen fed fire are consistent. Others just don't appear to be.

So you think MH370 suffered an undetected ground fire (that then was fought by firefighters for 30 minutes - your story doesn’t make sense?). The fire then re-ignited after flight, incapacitated the crew and burned through the transponder but left all the other systems intact? Then the incapacitated crew still managed to alter course 4 times in over an hour to navigate around the northern tip of Sumatra but a tiny hole burned into the fuselage caused an imbalance in airflow directing the aircraft to the middle of the ocean?

I suggest you too read up on Occam’s razor.

The problem with these fantastical “decompression caused hypoxic pilots and erratic actions” and “smoke caused incapacitated pilots and erratic actions” stories is that MH370 was out of contact and under deliberate control for one hour until disappearing off the Indonesian coast. Someone was conscious in the flight deck and making control inputs but not communicating. Smoke inhalation incapacitates someone in at most a few minutes, decompression even in the best case scenario within 10 minutes.

Separating the outlandish variables leads to deliberate actions as the cause.

In my mind trying to find the wreckage is only going to confirm the pilot action theory. The CVR would’ve been overwritten so all that’ll be left is the FDR confirming pilot inputs. It won’t tell us WHY that decision was made.

The real investigation needs to be the family, friends, associates, internet usage, reports of the pilots (esp the Captain) starting from years before the crash.

Eclan

15th Dec 2022, 02:28

Thank you, GBO, for that excellent theory. While it appears a complex series of actions anyone who knows anything about aircraft systems understands the cascading effect a single catastrophic system failure can have on other systems.

Where did you read this? I'd be interested to follow their input more deeply and in particular on the technical explanation of such a (or fitting) bottle failure.

SRM

15th Dec 2022, 05:07

What still mystifies me is why no apparent signals from the ELT, ULB and the ULB,s on either the CVR or the FDR.

PiperCameron

15th Dec 2022, 05:45

What still mystifies me is why no apparent signals from the ELT, ULB and the ULB,s on either the CVR or the FDR.

Because they're short range and (relatively) short-lived.. designed for location either on land or relatively close to it within a few days of impact - not in the middle of absolutely nowhere at the bottom of a very deep ocean.

MechEngr

15th Dec 2022, 05:57

So you think MH370 suffered an undetected ground fire (that then was fought by firefighters for 30 minutes - your story doesn’t make sense?). The fire then re-ignited after flight, incapacitated the crew and burned through the transponder but left all the other systems intact? Then the incapacitated crew still managed to alter course 4 times in over an hour to navigate around the northern tip of Sumatra but a tiny hole burned into the fuselage caused an imbalance in airflow directing the aircraft to the middle of the ocean?

I suggest you too read up on Occam’s razor.

The problem with these fantastical “decompression caused hypoxic pilots and erratic actions” and “smoke caused incapacitated pilots and erratic actions” stories is that MH370 was out of contact and under deliberate control for one hour until disappearing off the Indonesian coast. Someone was conscious in the flight deck and making control inputs but not communicating. Smoke inhalation incapacitates someone in at most a few minutes, decompression even in the best case scenario within 10 minutes.

Separating the outlandish variables leads to deliberate actions as the cause.

In my mind trying to find the wreckage is only going to confirm the pilot action theory. The CVR would’ve been overwritten so all that’ll be left is the FDR confirming pilot inputs. It won’t tell us WHY that decision was made.

The real investigation needs to be the family, friends, associates, internet usage, reports of the pilots (esp the Captain) starting from years before the crash.

Erm, no. The fire had the same origin as the ground fire on a different plane. Not sure where the confusion comes from. I believe this plane suffered that same failure in-flight.

There's no evidence it was under deliberate control for any hour's time. They didn't draw a giant penis in the sky or spell out "GOODBYE". Things on fire might have wires melt, short circuit, make unexpected connections. Also, there are air currents that rise over islands and would nudge the plane away from them. no need for someone to be at the controls for that. The lines in the diagram look to be fit to far too few data points.

The hole explains the slight curve to the apparent long path not the irregular path before then.

For a pilot to do this would require disabling, killing, or locking out the other flight crew member, and there would have had ample chance to chop through the door to regain access. It seems unlikely for this to have continued for so long. (Note to self - if the pilot purposely depressurizes the plane without explanation, open the cabin doors and kick the slides and ELRBs out as markers while the hand-held oxygen cylinder holds out. Maybe that will trigger an emergency response from Navy or Air Force.)

While they may not find data on the CVR - they may very well find the memory chips from some of the hundred cell phones that people could have recorded their last moments on. If there had been violence, many of those cell phones would have been detected even if calls could not go through from making panicked calls to loved ones.

BuzzBox

15th Dec 2022, 06:23

BuzzBox

”Without the valid landing altitude data, the cabin altitude warning message shows at 15,000 feet” - see 777 Training Manual 21-30-00 p 38

Thanks, I hadn't seen that before, despite operating the B777 for almost 10 years. It's included in the Maintenance Training Manual, but apparently it wasn't considered important enough for the FCOM.

If I'm not mistaken, under your scenario the Satcom SDU remains powered throughout and the logon request at 1825:27 is explained by the right HGA coming into view of the satellite as the aircraft turned. If that were the case, how do you explain the abnormal BFO that was recorded for the log-on transmissions from the aircraft? The MH370 Safety Investigation Report concluded that it was most likely due to the power-on drift of the SDU OCXO, which endorsed the investigators' belief that the 1825:27 log-on was preceded by a lengthy power interruption.

dr dre

15th Dec 2022, 08:14

There's no evidence it was under deliberate control for any hour's time.

4 changes of course.

One to head back towards Malaysia

One overhead Penang to track toward the Andaman sea about 30 minutes later,

Then probably a third to track south west towards the Indian Ocean and a fourth event further south. But at least 3 deliberate course changes that happened about 30 minutes after each other.

Things on fire might have wires melt, short circuit, make unexpected connections.

An inflight Fire will make an aircraft uncontrollable within 30 minutes.

Also, there are air currents that rise over islands and would nudge the plane away from them. no need for someone to be at the controls for that.

If the A/P is disconnected the plane will enter a spiral dive within seconds.

For a pilot to do this would require disabling, killing, or locking out the other flight crew member, and there would have had ample chance to chop through the door to regain access. It seems unlikely for this to have continued for so long. (Note to self - if the pilot purposely depressurizes the plane without explanation, open the cabin doors and kick the slides and ELRBs out as markers while the hand-held oxygen cylinder holds out. Maybe that will trigger an emergency response from Navy or Air Force.)

That text confirms to me you are not an airline pilot in several ways.

Theflyingsosijman

15th Dec 2022, 09:27

Erm, no. The fire had the same origin as the ground fire on a different plane. Not sure where the confusion comes from. I believe this plane suffered that same failure in-flight.

There's no evidence it was under deliberate control for any hour's time. They didn't draw a giant penis in the sky or spell out "GOODBYE". Things on fire might have wires melt, short circuit, make unexpected connections. Also, there are air currents that rise over islands and would nudge the plane away from them. no need for someone to be at the controls for that. The lines in the diagram look to be fit to far too few data points.

The hole explains the slight curve to the apparent long path not the irregular path before then.

For a pilot to do this would require disabling, killing, or locking out the other flight crew member, and there would have had ample chance to chop through the door to regain access. It seems unlikely for this to have continued for so long. (Note to self - if the pilot purposely depressurizes the plane without explanation, open the cabin doors and kick the slides and ELRBs out as markers while the hand-held oxygen cylinder holds out. Maybe that will trigger an emergency response from Navy or Air Force.)

While they may not find data on the CVR - they may very well find the memory chips from some of the hundred cell phones that people could have recorded their last moments on. If there had been violence, many of those cell phones would have been detected even if calls could not go through from making panicked calls to loved ones.

… what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever read. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this forum is now dumber for having read it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

GBO

15th Dec 2022, 10:02

BuzzBox

The BFO does display an overshoot and settling period during the 1825 log on. My research found that the log on is both due to a repowering of SATCOM and then finally exposure of the right HGA to recommence the log on. The BFO overshoot sequence doesn’t actually match the previous logons, since the first BFO is correct and doesn’t display an overshoot.
The SATCOM is powered by the left Main AC bus. With so many left systems down following an oxygen bottle rupture, conducting the Left Main AC bus checklist will repower SATCOM.

GBO

15th Dec 2022, 10:10

Icarus2001

Using soap and water for the oxygen bottle leak detection test is not the correct procedure.
Impurities from soap residual can corrode a valve.
The proper method is to use an approved leak detector fluid.

GBO

15th Dec 2022, 10:24

dr dre

Suggest you read the manual.
Take note of the location of the crew oxygen bottle and the equipment adjacent to it.

Suggest you refresh up on the effects of hypoxia and previous hypoxia related flights such as Helios 522, Payne Stewart’s Lear Jet, VH-SKC and Kalitta 66.

Suggest you review the benefits of an autopilot
If the crew has programmed a diversion to Banda Aceh via VAMPI-MEKAR-NILAM-SANOB-BAC, the autopilot will follow this route, further inputs by the crew are not required for the aircraft to turn south from SANOB to Banda Aceh.

dr dre

15th Dec 2022, 11:30

Suggest you refresh up on the effects of hypoxia and previous hypoxia related flights such as Helios 522, Payne Stewart’s Lear Jet, VH-SKC and Kalitta 66.

In those incidents pilots lost consciousness within minutes of the decompression occurring. At MH370's cruise level time of useful consciousness is no more than one minute. Your story relies on pilots being consciousness enough to program an FMC one hour after the decompression event occurred.

If the crew has programmed a diversion to Banda Aceh via VAMPI-MEKAR-NILAM-SANOB-BAC, the autopilot will follow this route, further inputs by the crew are not required for the aircraft to turn south from SANOB to Banda Aceh.

So the crew experienced a decompression, weren't able to use any oxygen as you say the crew bottle ruptured, turned back towards Penang, but almost one hour were programming the FMC to fly a route to an airport to their south west even though radar showed them heading north west?

Suggest you get a pilot's licence then years of experience of an airline pilot before posting your "theories" again.

T28B

15th Dec 2022, 14:14

MH 370 is truly the gift that keeps on giving.
I encourage you all to remain civil to one another - as usual, please disagree without being disagreeable - as this discussion continues.

birdspeed

15th Dec 2022, 20:07

I like GBO’s thinking. I too think the O2 bottle rupture caused the cascade of failures. I differ from GBO and conclude the decompression caused the pilots to be incapacitated within say, 10 minutes…..the subsequent turns can be explained by an autopilot off flight. Of course, the first turn was manually executed before the pilots became hypoxic. Not only is the aircraft flying autopilot off, but it is also in ‘secondary flying control mode’. In this case I think a B777 is stable enough, both laterally and longitudinally, to continue until fuel exhaustion.

Capt Fathom

15th Dec 2022, 20:53

and conclude the decompression caused the pilots to be incapacitated within say, 10 minutes

Could you explain why the crew didn’t commence an emergency descent at the first sign of decompression?

lucille

15th Dec 2022, 21:01

OK. Plausible enough theory, along with many others.

A couple of things are a little difficult to understand. F/O finds time to try and use his phone but makes no effort on VHF? No idea about 777 but every other modern aircraft I’ve flown has at least one box powered by an emergency bus.

No idea if this is true but anecdotally , I’ve always been told that smokers are more resilient to hypoxia, something about their systems being hardened to low O2 environments.

Cascading / multiple faults always give me pause - the chances of such occurrences are infinitesimal. Not to say impossible, but rather other simpler theories are more attractive.

Nevertheless, super interesting analysis by GBO. Thank you for sharing.

Indeed, locating the FDR and CVR of MH370 can’t come soon enough - there is much to learn. Although, one wonders if after 10 years of immersion they will yield any data.

birdspeed

15th Dec 2022, 21:18

Could you explain why the crew didn’t commence an emergency descent at the first sign of decompression?

The pilots would be suddenly subjected to multiple serious failures, including possibly all of the following, blank flight screens, unreliable instruments, disconnection of autopilot/autothrottle, Left AC Bus, No comms, and to top it all a decompression going on in the background, to which there may have been no warning due L AIMS/EICAS failure.

By the time they had made the turn back to Penang they were going hypoxic, having now donned their masks but getting no O2 they didn’t accomplish any emergency descent.

Not the usual scenario you might practice in the Sim !

birdspeed

15th Dec 2022, 22:01

OK. Plausible enough theory, along with many others.

This O2 failure does fit with all the known circumstantial evidence we have. It’s been difficult as there has been confusing and miss information since the beginning.The O2 bottle failure is perhaps the only theory that fits the evidence, and of course there can only be one correct theory.

And as for the pilot murder/suicide idea, complete rubbish. Only propagated by the media and people who don’t understand the inner workings of a B777. Agreed, it is a complicated cascade of multiple failures, but all initiated by a simple single source of failure.

tdracer

15th Dec 2022, 23:04

I don't often agree with Dre, but his point is valid - O2 failure does NOT explain the repeated course changes the aircraft made - and if a hypoxic pilot somehow managed to program all that in the computer before passing out - why would he input that course (which conveniently skirts around ground radar coverage).

My personal favorite theory is that it was some sort of planned hijack/hostage taking (or kidnapping) plan that went wrong. One pilot intentionally depressurized the aircraft to keep the passengers from making a ruckus, overdid it, and when he realized everyone was dead, he pointed the aircraft towards the most remote bit of ocean he could come up with, and then turned off his own O2.
But like all the others, it's just a theory at this point.
BTW, if the black boxes are ever found (and are still functional), I seriously doubt the CVR will have anything useful left - it was so long after whatever was the initiating event that any info would have been written over. The FDR would be the best hope.

GBO

16th Dec 2022, 00:36

Lucille

If the Left ARINC 629 / AMU is inoperative, all radio calls are inoperative. The only option available is a cell phone. The FO sitting in the right hand cockpit seat is in the ideal position (zero Doppler) for his phone to connect with the Penang cell phone tower (Grain Loaf Bakery), as the aircraft made a gentle turn to the right, south of Penang.

tdracer

MH370 didn’t skirt around ground radar, it did the opposite. From IGARI the aircraft has remained at altitude and diverted west INTO range of multiple primary radar sites: Kota Bharu, Hat Yai, Phuket, Butterworth, Penang Hill, Medan, Lhokseumawe, Sabang, Sibolga.

dr dre

Time until hypoxia is greater in a gradual decompression compared to an explosive decompression. Gradual decompression events are insidious in nature, they can easily go undetected.

Capt Fathom

16th Dec 2022, 01:19

GBO. Why is there a gradual decompression? Are you saying an exploding crew oxygen cylinder blows only a small hole in the fuselage?

PiperCameron

16th Dec 2022, 01:30

So this happened to a Learjet,.but I still think it's an applicable example of what happens during severe hypoxia: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nz5d4Q_ykFc

Possibly a feature of the MH370 incident.? Dunno.

dr dre

16th Dec 2022, 03:31

Time until hypoxia is greater in a gradual decompression compared to an explosive decompression. Gradual decompression events are insidious in nature, they can easily go undetected.

So the oxygen bottle ruptured, took out the transponder and the cabin altitude warning system but left most other systems intact. It ruptured a hole in fuselage just the precise size needed to let air leak out at such a small rate it would not be detected. Even the tiniest of holes is still going to have air leak out of the cabin at a rate of about 1000ft per minute (and I'm being very generous there, in reality it should be much more). At a cabin altitude of 8,000 to 30,000ft (where useful consciousness is about 1 minute) will only take 20 minutes. But we know that someone made a deliberate course change at least 1 hour after the initial deviation, when the aircraft was heading WNW towards the Andaman Islands on it's last radar verified track to turn it to the South, around the top of Sumatra towards the Southern Indian Ocean.

So even if this "magic oxygen bottle" exists it still doesn't match with known evidence. QF30's ruptured oxygen bottle caused an almost instantaneous loss of all cabin pressure when it breached the fuselage.

The incident with the Kalitta Learjet in the previous video lasted a grand total of a few minutes, from the pilot descending from FL320 to a more breathable FL110. A few minutes, the time of useful consciousness at FL320 is about 1-2 minutes, so even though he was slurring his words (hypoxia effect) he had just a minute or two to get the aircraft down to more breathable air before he lost the motor skill capacity to make control inputs. MH370 was at FL350, wher time of useful consciousness is about 30 seconds. Yet the decompression story requires us to believe that a pilot stayed conscious in that environment for almost an hour with no supplemental oxygen then made a control input to turn the aircraft to the south? Simply not believable.

GBO

16th Dec 2022, 03:55

Capt Fathom

Based on the adjacent equipment failures associated with a rupturing oxygen bottle and fuel analysis, I predict that the cause of the gradual decompression is a pressurisation system failure.

Given the last ACARS report at 1706:43: FL350, M0.82, Fuel on board 43800 kg
Then for the actual weather conditions and a PDA of 1.5% from the aircraft’s OFP, a diversion from IGARI to the last radar point (10 NM NW of MEKAR at 1822:12) at FL340/M0.84 would equate to fuel remaining at 1822:12 as 35109kg.
If the aircraft was to maintain this speed and total fuel burn rate of approx 6900kg/hr, it is not going to remain airborne until the 7th arc time of 0019:29UTC.

But, if the aircraft slows to the ECON desc speed as it passes the Top Of Desc point to Banda Aceh, but maintains FL340 (everyone’s deceased), the fuel flow reduces to 6200kg/hr and then down to 5600kg/hr as weight reduces, the aircraft can remain airborne until arc 7, but ONLY IF both bleed air systems have failed since IGARI, and remained failed until 0019:29!

Lookleft

16th Dec 2022, 03:59

dr dre

16th Dec 2022, 04:20

So if all the previous decompression/hypoxia incidents quoted support the theory of slow pilot incapacitation, why doesn't Silk Air, Egypt Air and German Wings support the theory that the pilot was responsible for the aircraft tracking out over the Indian Ocean until it run out of fuel?

To this day the Egyptians refuse to admit Egyptair was a deliberate act, the Indonesians refuse to admit Silkair was a deliberate act, and the Chinese will probably never admit China Eastern was probably a deliberate act. There's a lot of aversion to admitting one of your own is responsible for that kind of act in those cultures. But also more broadly in aviation, pilots seem to be better at dealing with technical things over personal things. We want there to be a technical cause as we can understand it a lot better than dealing with human psychology.

JustinHeywood

16th Dec 2022, 04:56

BuzzBox

The Flight simulator is inconclusive and has many flaws. They just cherry picked waypoints, which didn’t have timestamps and stitched a path together. The waypoints could be from multiple sessions. The last waypoint in the southern Indian Ocean were it ran out of fuel was supposedly flown in a PSS B777, the major problem with this is, the PSS B777 is not compatible with FSX. So how can the first waypoints be in FSX?

Point of order there GBO. Do you have a source for the claim that "they" just cherry picked waypoints on Zaharie's flight sim? (I presume it is the FBI you are referring to.) AFAIK this claim first came up in Florence de Changy's execrable book, but perhaps you've better evidence?

The flight sim data, if true, is pretty damning for the captain. I can't see a clear reason that the FBI would concoct evidence, but I CAN see why people would want to discredit it.

Eclan

16th Dec 2022, 05:02

GBO. Why is there a gradual decompression? Are you saying an exploding crew oxygen cylinder blows only a small hole in the fuselage.
I suspect the theory extends not necessarily to an exploding bottle but to an overall system failure, possibly leading to an explosive loss of components but not an explosive decompression. As has been seen in aviation, the randomness of such a failure can manifest itself in any number of results from small and inconsequential to Aloha "cabriolet" or worse. A rupture of the pressure hull need only be large enough to exceed the ability of the system to control with closed outflow valves to lead to a gradual decompression. If as is stated the cabin altitude warning threshold altitude value is reset to 15,000ft then this gives ample opportunity for a human (especially a smoker) to be gradually overcome by hypoxia, especially if he's overwhelmed with automation failure and other technically complex and confusing system failures on top of a diversion.

The principle of Occam's Razor has been mentioned a few times. This principle is often misunderstood and misused by the ignorant. The principle is not intended in and of itself to rule out more complex theories with extreme prejudice. The principle is simply a preference in an approach for the more easily testable theories to be examined first.

The failure of a single light bulb once led to the loss of an L-1011. You could draw a straight line between the start and end. It is easily arguable that a single and fairly straightforward mechanical failure cascading into a series of secondary and HF failures leading to a hull loss is a much more simple theory than a conspiracy (or singular plan) to commit suicide, destroy an airliner and kill hundreds crew and passengers while following a weird but pre-determined flight path.

In fact it is fascinating that the same people rubbishing as conspiracy-theorists anyone on other threads making counter-claims of any sort to do with pandemic happenings are now conspiracy-theorising themselves. So why did he or they do it? We've heard all sorts of rumours, none substantiated; a conspiracy theory postulating a deliberate action needs development which hasn't been provided. Also, the flight sim game theory just doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Where's your tin hat? While you're at it, who was behind 9/11? Who killed JFK?

GBO's theory is definitely on the right track. GBO, where'd you get this theory of yours? Please post a link.

BuzzBox

16th Dec 2022, 06:45

The SATCOM is powered by the left Main AC bus. With so many left systems down following an oxygen bottle rupture, conducting the Left Main AC bus checklist will repower SATCOM.

If the L Main AC bus lost power after a bottle rupture, then presumably it was caused by the L GCU and L BTB isolating the damaged bus, or by the L GCU and L BTB themselves being damaged. Either way, how would the ELEC AC BUS L checklist (which requires resets of the L GCU and L BTB) restore power, if the damage was still present?

But, if the aircraft slows to the ECON desc speed as it passes the Top Of Desc point to Banda Aceh, but maintains FL340 (everyone’s deceased), the fuel flow reduces to 6200kg/hr and then down to 5600kg/hr as weight reduces, the aircraft can remain airborne until arc 7, but ONLY IF both bleed air systems have failed since IGARI, and remained failed until 0019:29!

How did you calculate these figures?

GBO

16th Dec 2022, 06:55

Eclan

I examined the evidence, looked at all possibilities, and arrived at the most likely solution.
This theory and flightpath has been around since 2016.

JustinHeywood

Refer to SIR page 27 and the multiple Royal Malaysia Police (RMP) Forensic Reports.
Quick recap:
RMP seize PIC home flight simulator and fly it on 15Mar2014
CyberSecurity Malaysia examine Simulator from 16 to 18Mar2014
Simulator Logbook file shows Microsoft FSX flown on 09Dec13, 23Jan14 (B738,B77L at Kuala Lumpur), 01Feb14 (DC3 at Yellowknife), 20Feb14 and 15Mar14.
Report documented more than 2700 coordinates from separate file fragments.
Report found seven ‘manually programmed’ waypoints (without timestamps), that when connected together could create a flight path from KLIA through the Malacca Strait and then to an area south of the Indian Ocean. (note stitched together flightpath is not to IGARI)
The final waypoint was flown in a Phoenix Simulation Software (PSS) Boeing 777-200LR
(note PSS B777 is not compatible with Microsoft FSX in 2014)
The report could not determine if the waypoints came from one or more files (ie different flight sessions)
(note the waypoint in the southern Indian Ocean is over 800 nautical miles from arc 7 and beyond the range of MH370)
Report conclusion: “there was no activity captured on JP01 and MK26 that conclusively indicate any kind of premeditated act pertaining to the incident MH370” and “there was no unusual activities other than game related flight simulations.”

dr dre

16th Dec 2022, 06:56

I suspect the theory extends not necessarily to an exploding bottle but to an overall system failure, possibly leading to an explosive loss of components but not an explosive decompression.

So a system failure that takes out the transponder, radios, ACARS, cabin altitude warning, but leaves every other system intact. That’s a very specific failure to mimic human intervention almost perfectly.

If as is stated the cabin altitude warning threshold altitude value is reset to 15,000ft then this gives ample opportunity for a human (especially a smoker) to be gradually overcome by hypoxia, especially if he's overwhelmed with automation failure and other technically complex and confusing system failures on top of a diversion.

15,000 ft is the elevation of cities in Peru and Bolivia, so not exactly where hypoxia sets in without supplemental 02. It’s in the 20,000ft range.

So that theory postulates the aircraft suffered a catastrophic systems failure, turned 180 degrees towards what they believed was the nearest alternate, which was Penang, but eventually the pilots become overwhelmed by hypoxia.

But top of descent for Penang was about 10 minutes after that turn. So they would’ve been incapacitated so much they didn’t have the thought capacity to descend. But 20 minutes later they weren’t incapacitated enough to make a 45 degree right turn to the WNW overhead Penang and then start tracking towards the Andaman sea where there are no alternate airports, and then over 30 minutes later make a left turn to fly over the top of Sumatra and out over the Indian Ocean?

That just does not make sense, and is impossible to play out in reality. It means you have to believe they were overcome by hypoxia to make irrational decisions but then recovered from that hypoxia to make conscious inputs once again a long time later.

Icarus2001

16th Dec 2022, 07:06

GBO

16th Dec 2022, 07:14

BuzzBox

How did I calculate the fuel figures?

From the B777 Performance charts for the 777-200ER/TRENT892
Modified for the actual aircraft’s (9M-MRO) OFP (PDA of 1.5% with the right engine burn rate 2% greater than the left engine), altitude, speed, wind, ISA deviation, turning FF adjustment, and bleed air selection.
This resulted in third degree polynomial equations for FF/weight calculations which was used in a 15 page excel spreadsheet to follow the flightpath until fuel exhaustion at 34S 93E.

Eclan

16th Dec 2022, 07:21

So the oxygen bottle ruptured, took out the transponder and the cabin altitude warning system but left most other systems intact.
I don't think anyone said the cabin altitude alerting system failed. It defaulted, according to this theory, to a higher trigger value but did not fail.

It ruptured a hole in fuselage just the precise size needed to let air leak out at such a small rate it would not be detected.
No, that's not what anyone's saying. It would be detected by any conscious person with the presence of mind to check the cabin altitude indicator and would eventually trigger the cabin altitude alerts. In this theory, however, it was not detected and acted upon and presumably when the alerts were finally activated the pilots were no longer conscious.

Even the tiniest of holes is still going to have air leak out of the cabin at a rate of about 1000ft per minute (and I'm being very generous there, in reality it should be much more).
You seem to forget the effect of the still-functioning packs which would be working, but failing, to overcome a leak of the right magnitude. There is nothing unrealistic about this circumstance.

At a cabin altitude of 8,000 to 30,000ft (where useful consciousness is about 1 minute) will only take 20 minutes.
No, see above. It would take much longer. How long exactly is unknown.

QF30's ruptured oxygen bottle caused an almost instantaneous loss of all cabin pressure when it breached the fuselage.
If the MH bottle had failed in the same fashion it would've had a similar result. Obviously it didn't fail in exactly the same fashion. If it had, now that would be harder to believe.

The incident with the Kalitta Learjet in the previous video lasted a grand total of a few minutes, from the pilot descending from FL320 to a more breathable FL110. A few minutes, the time of useful consciousness at FL320 is about 1-2 minutes, so even though he was slurring his words (hypoxia effect) he had just a minute or two to get the aircraft down to more breathable air before he lost the motor skill capacity to make control inputs.
That's extremely misleading and plain wrong. As we know from Avmed, every 1000ft lower increases the time of useful consciousness. At FL250 it's 3-5 min. At FL200 it can be 30min. Obviously these figures vary from person to person and are worse for smokers.

Yet the decompression story requires us to believe that a pilot stayed conscious in that environment for almost an hour with no supplemental oxygen then made a control input to turn the aircraft to the south? Simply not believable.
If you can understand the above factors you can see how a gradual decompression fits the theory neatly.

15,000 ft is the elevation of cities in Peru and Bolivia, so not exactly where hypoxia sets in without supplemental 02. It’s in the 20,000ft range.

I'm not sure how in-depth your avmed training has been but I suspect these days it is pretty short for a lot of pilots. Have you been in a decompression chamber? If you have only then will you best understand how hypoxia can affect different people at different rates and in varying ways during onset. People who live in Peru are born and bred there and well and truly adjusted to it. KL (where I think these guys lived) is at sea level. You can see the point, I think.

Also, it is implied the pilots were smokers. I've had smokers report difficulties breathing at only 10,000ft in an unpressurised aircraft.

It means you have to believe they were overcome by hypoxia to make irrational decisions but then recovered from that hypoxia to make conscious inputs once again a long time later.
Once again if you haven't been in a chamber it will be difficult for you to appreciate how hypoxia will affect you. You rule it out as a factor based on your belief or knowledge or feelings about the condition; Others, based on theirs, do not.

Humans will begin to make errors and experience difficulty assimilating information at early stages of hypoxia but without losing consciousness. It is impossible, in this theoretical scenario, to predict the effect of hypoxia on the awareness and decision-making abilities of these pilots other than to say it would be impaired to slowly increasing degrees and would appear to a healthy observer (such as you) to make no sense.

Speaking of Helios, there is a very prodigious (and some say pesky) poster around here who I seem to recall has firsthand experience of a scenario almost identical to the Helios event but with a happier ending. He's notable by his absence on this thread but it would be very interesting to hear his take on it all.

Icarus2001

16th Dec 2022, 07:40

Humans will begin to make errors and experience difficulty assimilating information at early stages of hypoxia but without losing consciousness. It is impossible, in this theoretical scenario, to predict the effect of hypoxia on the awareness and decision-making abilities of these pilots ...

So they were hypoxic enough not to descend but alert enough to program a new track to Penang, randomly add waypoints beyond Penang, their assumed alternate, oh and then the FO picked up his phone to try to make a call. He must of rallied very well an hour after this "explosion".

GBO

16th Dec 2022, 07:57

BuzzBox

If we use the oxygen bottle rupture on QF30 as a guide to the immediate blast area damage, then the L GCU and L BTB are not in the direct “blast” area.

The Left Main AC Bus (ie power to SATCOM) may have been isolated automatically because of a fault caused by the oxygen bottle rupture, or the crew, who were overwhelmed by failures, have conducted the ELEC AC BUS L checklist or depowered/repowered the Left Main AC Bus in an attempt to restore lost systems.

MechEngr

16th Dec 2022, 08:07

There are sufficient videos of people in hypobaric chambers clearly demonstrating their gradual slip from fully aware to becoming incapacitated in managing even simple skills. The worst part is the general feeling that everything is OK even when their performance is getting far worse. They do seem to recognize they are having trouble but not in a way that indicates the fear they should be having at being deprived of oxygen.

https://youtu.be/Kq5hsR_XsqM?t=88

In a short time Kimberly says she feels like she needs oxygen but is unable to figure out how to put the mask back on her face even though it is already nearly in place.

Less amusing:
https://youtu.be/hSrGfElyfVE?t=175

Samuel exits the test and soon another is pleased to simply be able to hold his pencil

The main take-away for me is to not dawdle when the masks drop. No "one last thing' or "just a second."

I expect that for commercial pilots it's also, if the other guy is acting stupid, put your mask on right now and then figure out the other guy; don't stop to ask "Are you OK?"

GBO

16th Dec 2022, 08:09

GBO

16th Dec 2022, 08:28

If they turned for Penang as a result of a known failure they would have descended. No question.

if the aircraft was flying a new route they programmed as a diversion to Penang due an abnormal, then why did they have waypoints in the FMC beyond Penang?

The Captain of Helios 522 didn’t descend and he had a fault: “My cooling light is off”.
RIP Flight Attendant Andreas Prodromou

The diversion flown from IGARI to Penang was not in LNAV, as observed by primary radar.
It was flown manually or in heading mode on autopilot.
Without a L FMC, and no auto reversion to the R FMC, there is no active route, VNAV or Top Of Descent from IGARI to Penang.
Not until someone manually switches to the R FMC will a LNAV/VNAV route become possible.
This causes a software reset, which DELETES THE FLIGHT ID.
When the R FMC became available, someone programmed a diversion to Banda Aceh, hence the LNAV track observed on radar west of Penang through the Malacca Strait via VAMPI-MEKAR-NILAM.

Andy_S

16th Dec 2022, 08:30

Running out of fuel after 7 hours is not usually associated with pilot suicide flights.
Pilot suicide flights are usually over quickly. eg GermanWings

I think there was a history of mental illness with the perpetrator of the GermanWings crash.

It's been suggested that if, as has been speculated, the Captain of MH370 had taken control of the flight and deliberately navigated it to the Southern Indian Ocean, his motivations were very different. If all you want to do is kill yourself, there are easier ways to do it. But if you want to leave behind a huge mystery and maybe cause enormous embarrassment to a government you are bitterly opposed to, then it makes sense.

BuzzBox

16th Dec 2022, 09:08

The Left Main AC Bus (ie power to SATCOM) may have been isolated automatically because of a fault caused by the oxygen bottle rupture...

Perhaps so, but the damage that caused the loss of power would still have been there when the crew completed the ELEC AC BUS L checklist. So how were they able to restore the power?

...the crew, who were overwhelmed by failures, have conducted the ELEC AC BUS L checklist or depowered/repowered the Left Main AC Bus in an attempt to restore lost systems.

Highly unlikely.

Without a L FMC, and no auto reversion to the R FMC, there is no active route, VNAV or Top Of Descent from IGARI to Penang.
Not until someone manually switches to the R FMC will a LNAV/VNAV route become possible.
This causes a software reset, which DELETES THE FLIGHT ID.

What makes you think there was no "auto reversion" to the R FMC? Are you basing this on the PMDG model or some other flight sim software? If so, it's wrong.

itsnotthatbloodyhard

16th Dec 2022, 09:13

The diversion flown from IGARI to Penang was not in LNAV, as observed by primary radar.
It was flown manually or in heading mode on autopilot.

Sorry if I’ve missed something here, but how do you know it wasn’t flown in LNAV?

GBO

16th Dec 2022, 09:19

BuzzBox

Re read, not damage but a fault.

Huh! If there is an electrical fault, conducting the ELEC AC BUS L would be a reasonable solution.

Read the manual.

Capt Fathom

16th Dec 2022, 10:28

After I stopped watching Harry and Meghan, I needed something to fill the void until Batchelor started! This thread fills the bill. Thanks.

BuzzBox

16th Dec 2022, 10:38

Re read, not damage but a fault.

Stop being obtuse. How did this "fault", presumably caused by a ruptured oxygen bottle, miraculously disappear, allowing power to be restored? Divine intervention?

Huh! If there is an electrical fault, conducting the ELEC AC BUS L would be a reasonable solution. Read the manual.

Yes, if the ELEC AC BUS L EICAS caution was displayed, but "depower[ing]/repower[ing] the Left Main AC Bus in an attempt to restore lost systems" would not.

Thanks for the advice, but with considerable time on type, you can be assured that I have "read the manual" plenty of times.

Are you the guy who promoted this theory on Victor Iannello's MH370 blog and was subsequently banned for repeatedly pushing crap that was technically incorrect or had been disproven?

GBO

16th Dec 2022, 10:39

Sorry if I’ve missed something here, but how do you know it wasn’t flown in LNAV?

As previously stated, by the primary radar recording from IGARI to south of Penang.

Icarus2001

16th Dec 2022, 11:27

How does the primary radar track reveal which mode the aircraft was in laterally?

JustinHeywood

16th Dec 2022, 11:51

.,,,Report documented more than 2700 coordinates from separate file fragments.
Report found seven ‘manually programmed’ waypoints (without timestamps), that when connected together could create a flight path from KLIA through the Malacca Strait and then …the Indian Ocean…

What the report actually says:

”The RMP Forensic Report dated 19 May 2014 documented more than 2,700 coordinates retrieved from separate file fragments and most of them are default game coordinates.
It was also discovered that there were seven ‘manually programmed’ waypoint4 coordinates that when connected
together, will create a flight path from KLIA to an area south of the Indian Ocean through the Andaman Sea.

A nice, subtle bit of editing there. You said it ‘could’, they say it ‘will’.

I cannot see that this supports the claim that these waypoints were ‘cherry picked’ by nefarious actors.

Were there were numerous other manually entered waypoints that were not mentioned in the report? Again, where is the support for the claim that the waypoints were cherry picked?

dr dre

16th Dec 2022, 14:07

I don't think anyone said the cabin altitude alerting system failed. It defaulted, according to this theory, to a higher trigger value but did not fail.

There would be Cabin Altitude EICAS messages alerting them of the problem. If it gets the the stage where hypoxia becomes a possibly (FL150 or above) then the Cabin Altitude warning would wake the dead.

If you can understand the above factors you can see how a gradual decompression fits the theory neatly.

Not neatly at all. So according to this “theory” there was a gradual leak, that went unnoticed by the crew, even though EICAS should alert them if cabin altitude is rising, even gradually. It got to just below 15,000 ft, in which TUC should be well more than 30 minutes, so as to not set off the very audible Cabin Altitude Warning, significantly decreasing their mental capacity to the point within 10 minutes they couldn’t make a decision to descend. But then, for some reason, they regained some level of mental capacity 20 minutes later to turn right, exactly overhead Penang. Then kept that mental capacity for another 30 minutes to turn out over the ocean?

I know how Hypoxia works. But the facts of the case don’t match up with a hypoxic scenario.

GBO

16th Dec 2022, 21:47

Lookleft

16th Dec 2022, 22:06

Running out of fuel after 7 hours is not usually associated with pilot suicide flights.
Pilot suicide flights are usually over quickly. eg GermanWings

Thats a very big assumption that the only way to commit suicide in an aeroplane is to point it at the ground. There was a time when the only way to commit a terrorist act on an aeroplane was to hijack it, get the pilot to land it and then make political demands. What better way to take yourself and a plane load of pax out than programming the FMC to fly you out into the Indian Ocean until the fuel runs out and no one knows where you are. As this whole thread is based on assumptions let me give you mine.

The Capt sent his FO out of the flight deck approaching the FIR boundary with Vietnam and turned the transponder off. He then turned left and flew along the FIR boundary until west of Penang. While this is happening he turns the packs off and goes onto oxygen. The FO tries to get into the flight deck but his entry is denied by the Captain. (shades of Germanwings). Within 30 minutes all the pax are unconscious and the only people who are alive are any crew members who have been using portable oxygen. The FO realises that the Captain is up to no good and tries to make a call on his phone. Once the aircraft is west of Malaysia the aircraft, on its programmed flight, turns to the southwest into the vast expanse of the Indian Ocean. At some point, possibly when there is no more frantic banging on the cockpit door, the Captain takes his oxygen mask off and eventually loses consciousness, knowing that there is no radar that can track him, and that his aircraft, and all on board, will never be found.

No remarkable technical contortions are required to make that hypothesis fit the facts as they are known.

GBO

16th Dec 2022, 22:17

GBO

16th Dec 2022, 22:43

Who programmed the diversion to Banda Aceh airport via NILAM and SANOB?

Either:
1. The Captain or FO suffering from hypoxia
2. A Flight Attendant on portable oxygen, such FA Tan Size Hiang who also owned a flight simulator at home.
3. A passenger on portable oxygen, such as the aviation engineer Mohd Khairul Amri Selamat.

Lookleft

16th Dec 2022, 22:56

GBO have you ever "programmed" a diversion on an FMC? Unless you know what you are doing and are mentally coherent then there are so many errors that are going to be made it will make the whole effort pointless. You are also suggesting that if it was not a crew member then a FA or an engineer could do it from the back of the console leaning over the thrust levers. Sorry to all the flight simmers out there but programming an FMC on Flight Sim is not the same as a professional pilot setting up an FMC after having done the appropriate type rating then line flying.

birdspeed

16th Dec 2022, 22:58

Although my version of events after a rupture of the O2 bottles differs from GBO’s, for example I think the crew are incapacitated within minutes. The autopilot has failed so any turns after the IGARI turn are explainable just to a randomly meandering aircraft.

The electrical failures are complex, and however hard we might try to explain what may have happened, in the end a damaged system will not behave in an easily explainable way.

But ultimately, with the location of the O2 bottles in the left side of the avionics bay, they do have the potential to affect all the systems we know stopped working, ACARS, COMMS, SATCOM, L TRANSPONDER, and then would also likely affect ELECTRICS, FLIGHT INSTRUMENTS, PITOT/STATIC inputs, AUTOPILOT/AUTOTHROTTLE, L AIMS, as well as cause a decompression.

BuzzBox

16th Dec 2022, 23:42

If the oxygen bottle has ruptured in cruise, resulting in extensive damage to the electronics bay and a gradual decompression event ensues, then the cabin altitude warning will NOT occur straight away, it would occur some time later. The cabin altitude starts to climb gradually.

The following photos show the damage that was caused by the ruptured oxygen bottle in the QF30 case. Significant damage was caused in both directions along the axis of the bottle and the bottle itself created a large hole in the fuselage as it exited the aircraft. It is not credible that a ruptured crew bottle on a B777 would only cause significant damage in one direction, ie aft. Given the orientation of the bottles within the MEC, it's very likely the shutoff valve and other components at the head of the bottle would fly aft, and the main body of the bottle would fly forward, through the fuselage near the nose of the aircraft. How on earth could such damage result in a slow decompression? More divine intervention?

https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1325/screen_shot_2022_12_17_at_7_30_19_am_74c0f2df1b01ba601a27b7c c3c6e0d29d8f2f8b8.jpg
https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1325/screen_shot_2022_12_17_at_7_30_37_am_8b93dc35ed4dadc14867f55 b49c90e142d4244b8.jpg
https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1325/screen_shot_2022_12_17_at_7_29_29_am_855105613832be0d97d90a7 fa4b1d6c9aab16dd0.jpg

Eclan

17th Dec 2022, 00:03

dr dre

17th Dec 2022, 00:42

dr dre

If the oxygen bottle has ruptured in cruise, resulting in extensive damage to the electronics bay and a gradual decompression event ensues, then the cabin altitude warning will NOT occur straight away, it would occur some time later. The cabin altitude starts to climb gradually. However, the crew will be bombarded with immediate failures, especially anything electrical and reliant on P105 & L AIMS eg 4/6 DU failed. They would be definitely overloaded mentally. Whilst they problem solve, it would be easy for the crew to be task fixated on a problem and miss the gradual decompression event. Considering both pilots were smokers, their lung capacity would be equivalent to a much higher altitude when the Cabin Altitude message finally appeared at 15000feet.

So a bucketload of failures happened almost instantaneously, one of which is a transponder failure as the SSR information is lost. But almost instantaneously the aircraft turns back degrees to head to Penang. When real pilots have a complex system failure it isn’t realistic to think they’d turn instantaneously. But even moreso is within the next 10 minutes they make no attempt to make any form of contact, and make no attempt to start a descent towards Penang. This was apparently after only 10 minutes at lower than FL150 to not set off the Cabin Altitude Warning. So they’re now suffering from hypoxia to the point they can’t communicate or descend, even if he’s a smoker the FO is only in his 20s and should have fairly decent lung capacity. No evidence Captain was a smoker, and both pilots weren’t overweight.

When the aircraft was near Penang, if someone programs a diversion to Banda Aceh via NILAM-SANOB the autopilot will follow that route and the aircraft will end in the southern Indian Ocean, without any human intervention, at 34S 93E.
All occupants may have been deceased as early as 1800Z due to hypoxia, 40minutes after the rupture.

So the pilots have been so overwhelmed to by hypoxia they lost the thinking ability to remember to communicate or descend, but then 20 minutes they recover enough mental capacity to program the FMC to an obscure airport (Aceh) a relatively long way from Malaysia, that MH doesn’t fly to, ignoring closer and more obvious airports like Phuket, Medan or KL where MH does fly. And then they have enough mental capacity they program that diversion along an airway, that doesn’t even go to Aceh, it passes well north. So they had a catastrophic series of failures but still were kind enough to follow the airway rather than track direct?

And if you say “well they were hypoxic so their decisions wouldn’t make sense” there’s levels of hypoxia. You start to lose the ability to perform complex thinking tasks first, then simple tasks, then lose consciousness. Remembering to descend into an airport you want to divert to is a fairly simple task. Programming an FMC along a specific air route to an obscure airport far away from where you want to go is a complex task. They would’ve lost that cognitive function long before losing the ability to descend. And even then the progression of hypoxia isn’t that slow. Once hypoxia starts you’re not going to spend 30-60 minutes stumbling around like a drunken fool. The progression to unconsciousness will be fairly rapid.

That whole story comes across as someone who’s spent a long time on MS FS and 777 technical manuals trying to work out a technical way their theory could work, but hasn’t spent anytime flying an airliner operationally and knowing the operational considerations that a real airline pilot makes.

dr dre

17th Dec 2022, 00:59

Sorry to all the flight simmers out there but programming an FMC on Flight Sim is not the same as a professional pilot setting up an FMC after having done the appropriate type rating then line flying.

Hear Hear.

I think there’s more than one FS expert on here who’s decided their countless hours of bedroom time is equivalent to flying a real airliner in an operational environment.

The good thing is their aviation exploits will remain limited to simulation games played in their pyjamas, and they’ll never get a chance to fly a real aircraft for reward. Or be part of an air crash investigation team.

JustinHeywood

17th Dec 2022, 01:00

JustinHeywood

The report doesn’t mention any other manually waypoints, but one would assume there would be many considering the coordinates stored on the Volume Shadow Information (VSI) file are stored automatically whenever the computer is left idle for more than 15 minutes.

Again, the RMP report could not determine if the waypoints came from one or more files.

Maybe you could write to them and ask; what other waypoints did the RMP find, and what aircraft did they fly on the Captain’s simulator on 15Mar14, one day before the forensic analysis by CyberSecurity Malaysia.

Well no, I’m not going to write to them, I’m not the one making claims based on assumptions about the report.

I take it then that there is no support for the ‘cherry picked by the FBI’ assertion.

Another Zombie fact. Dead, but still finding life in conspiracy theories.

BuzzBox

17th Dec 2022, 01:36

So they’re now suffering from hypoxia to the point they can’t communicate or descend, even if he’s a smoker the FO is only in his 20s and should have fairly decent lung capacity. No evidence Captain was a smoker, and both pilots weren’t overweight.

In actual fact there is such evidence, contained in leaked documents from the RMP investigation.

That said, the theory has a number of gaping holes (pardon the pun).

GBO

17th Dec 2022, 03:11

dr dre

17th Dec 2022, 03:35

dr dre

It seems you are a very experienced and competent pilot. Congratulations. It’s a shame that you weren’t the Captain on MH370.
So what would you do if faced with an oxygen bottle rupture at IGARI, which causes extensive damage to the P105 Left Wire Integration Panel and Left AIMS?

Where are you flying to?
Could you list all the failures and problems for us?
And how long do you need before you’re ready to land?

You’re basically talking about an incident where a hypothetical failure has taken out an unknown number of systems.

No one can tell you exactly what they would do as it is very situation dependent but if a failure like that occurred that you seemed to think took out all left side avionics:

Fly the aircraft, maintain current course for several minutes while you assess the nature of the problem and how you will tackle it (continue on or divert to the best alternate which would be Penang). However the primary radar track showed the aircraft turned towards Penang about 30 seconds after the loss of transponder information. So basically a decision was made whilst the startle effect was still active. Which is unrealistic.

Next point you said they lost the left side avionics but should’ve still had right side VHF radios and FMC (to program a route to Aceh supposedly). But no time to make a quick radio call?

Next if they’re aiming for Penang they should’ve made a descent quite soon after the turn, within 10 minutes. Except they don’t. You say that’s because of hypoxia taking effect.

So from that point the story become ludicrous as consciousness deliberate actions are made well after that point that require more cognitive capability than a simple descent, which they wouldn’t have because of their supposed hypoxia which has already prevented them from descending.

The theory just doesn’t work in the real world.

GBO

17th Dec 2022, 04:04

Dr dre

Thanks for your reply.
Just to tidy up, the transponder failed during the turn at IGARI. ADSB showed the aircraft was correctly turning right to intercept the IGARI BITOD cleared route. The air turn back occurred 90seconds after the transponder ceased transmitting.

So how do you make a radio call with an inoperative AMU?
And how do you program a LNAV route to Penang without a valid FMC at that time?
And how did you overcome startle effect and assess that it wasn’t a bomb that went off, with an immediate urgency to find a suitable airport?
And you say that the most suitable airport is Penang, ie where MH370 flew to. So how do you propose to fly to Penang, manually towards the start of the ILS?
And what altitude and speed?
And how do you avoid flying along the Malay/Thai border?
And how do you know when to descend without VNAV?
And which checklist did you run first?
And how long do you need until you’re ready?
And what about the blank four screens in front of you, how did that effect you?
And what about the Left Autothrottle issue.
And what about the flight control, hydraulic, landing gear and electrical issue?
And the navigation, communication problems.
And how did you inform the passengers?
And how are you dealing with the overwhelming problems?
And have you lost any situational awareness?
And why do you feel euphoric?

BuzzBox

17th Dec 2022, 04:39

And how do you program a LNAV route to Penang without a valid FMC at that time?
With the other FMC that has exactly the same data, and which would have automatically "taken over" in the event the previously active FMC failed. Read the manual. :ok:

And you say that the most suitable airport is Penang, ie where MH370 flew to. So how do you propose to fly to Penang, manually towards the start of the ILS?
Tune the VPG VOR and turn towards it would be a start.:ok:

And how do you know when to descend without VNAV?
The 3-times table works pretty well. :ok:

And which checklist did you run first?
Given there'd be a gaping hole and a rapid decompression, an immediate emergency descent while completing the CABIN ALTITUDE checklist would be pretty good places to start. :ok:

And how long do you need until you’re ready?
As long as it takes, after descending to a safe altitude. :ok:

And what about the Left Autothrottle issue.
What about it? The thrust levers can be operated manually. :ok:

And what about the flight control, hydraulic, landing gear and electrical issue?
Sort them out after descending to a safe altitude. :ok:

And the navigation, communication problems.
There are no navigation issues (see above) and there are procedures for loss of communication. :ok:

And how did you inform the passengers?
After descending to a safe altitude, open the cockpit door, tell the crew what's happening and tell them to alert the passengers. :ok:

And how are you dealing with the overwhelming problems?
As above. :ok:

And have you lost any situational awareness?
Nope. :ok:

And why do you feel euphoric?
Because of the adrenaline rush caused by the foregoing. :ok:

GBO

17th Dec 2022, 05:11

GBO

17th Dec 2022, 05:22

It is interesting though, that all pilots questioned so far (BuzzBox, dr Dre) would divert to Penang airport following an oxygen bottle rupture ie the same route flown be MH370.

BuzzBox

17th Dec 2022, 06:05

BuzzBox

Not happy with the premise, just change it!
The premise is a gradual decompression, not an explosive decompression.
You missed a lot of steps. Too bad, you’re euphoric because you are hypoxic. Fail.

Not happy with YOUR premise either, so I'm not going to change mine.

As for steps missed:

So how do you make a radio call with an inoperative AMU?
You can't, so you deal with the situation as best you can. If you need to descend ASAP and divert because of a serious emergency, then do it. :ok:

And how did you overcome startle effect and assess that it wasn’t a bomb that went off, with an immediate urgency to find a suitable airport?
I'd say a ruptured oxygen bottle would have just as much "immediate urgency to find a suitable airport" as a bomb, wouldn't you? You'd deal with it the same way as any other - assess what's happened and the associated failures, and prioritise anything that needs immediate action, like an emergency descent to a safe altitude. Most other things can wait until the aircraft is stabilised and safe. :ok:

And what altitude and speed?
How about 10,000 ft and the indicated speed you were previously doing, or less? Any faster would risk making any structural damage worse. :ok:

And how do you avoid flying along the Malay/Thai border?
Who cares? :ok:

And what about the blank four screens in front of you, how did that effect you?
Some information is obviously missing, but there are two remaining screens with some degree of reversion likely available, plus the standby instruments. All is not lost. :ok:

Did I miss any this time?

It is interesting though, that all pilots questioned so far (BuzzBox, dr Dre) would divert to Penang airport following an oxygen bottle rupture ie the same route flown be MH370.

Yep, diverting to the nearest suitable airport is pretty much a given and shouldn't be a surprise to anyone. Where they would NOT go is Banda Aceh.

Dora-9

17th Dec 2022, 06:07

would divert to Penang airport

Really? We'd never know exactly what they'd be thinking in this situation (if indeed this was the situation), but I reckon there's more than a 50% chance that they'd return to KL.

dr dre

17th Dec 2022, 06:19

And how do you know when to descend without VNAV?

And that confirms to me you’re a Flight Sim expert, and not a real pilot, as one would know the answer to that question.

May I suggest you take your theories to another place as this is for Professional Pilots (hence the name).

BuzzBox

17th Dec 2022, 06:43

Really? We'd never know exactly what they'd be thinking in this situation (if indeed this was the situation), but I reckon there's more than a 50% chance that they'd return to KL.

Fair point...

GBO

17th Dec 2022, 07:49

Dora-9

So you are diverting from IGARI to Kuala Lumpur without a serviceable radio, to an airport further away, with more traffic and higher risk of collision. Seems like a dumb decision.

Penang is closer, has a lot less traffic, familiar to the crew and open.

itsnotthatbloodyhard

17th Dec 2022, 08:01

How does the primary radar track reveal which mode the aircraft was in laterally?

I would still like to know this too, please.

GBO

17th Dec 2022, 08:17

BuzzBox

So if you can’t make a radio call, turning on your cell phone would be an option.

Diverting at 10,000 feet is very fuel inefficient, the default LRC speed for the B777 is Mach 0.84

With only 2 screens available, it is going to add complexity to the situation. Running a checklist on the R INBD DU, will mean the Engine and Crew Alert Display is not visible, items can be missed.

Yes, flying along the Malay/Thai border is not a concern in a emergency diversion to Penang. The standard route is along the border from Kota Bharu to Penang. Just like MH6163 flew 30 minutes later.

A pilot suffering from hypoxia at Penang would make irrational decisions, such as divert to Banda Aceh.

GBO

17th Dec 2022, 08:25

itsnotthatbloodyhard

The turn back radius indicates a turn radius of approximately 25 degrees angle of bank.
Given the speed, this is beyond the capabilities of LNAV. The turn back is either conducted manually or with the autopilot in heading mode.

The lateral tracking towards Penang, as observed by primary radar, is not via waypoints and has multiple minor heading changes. It is not tracking in LNAV, it is still being flown manually or by the autopilot in heading mode with minor heading changes.

The flightpath from south of Penang through the Malacca Strait is via waypoints. It is most likely now tracking in LNAV.

Eclan

17th Dec 2022, 08:37

GBO have you ever "programmed" a diversion on an FMC? ................ Sorry to all the flight simmers out there but programming an FMC on Flight Sim is not the same as a professional pilot setting up an FMC after having done the appropriate type rating then line flying
Have you had any experience with these flight sims? The fidelity in some of them is very high and the manuals are in-depth. A flight simmer can easily find his way around the real version of the aircraft he simulates on a PC especially the FMC which is replicated fully. Some of them buy add-ons such as a CDU connected via USB. They figure it all out. Sorry but operating an airliner's FMC and MCP is by design a very easy process and any determined flight simmer can do it. I'm not sure that's what happened in this case but let's keep it real - you don't have to be a "type-rated" astronaut to operate the CDU. Diverting to a new waypoint is as easy as selecting LEGS followed by five alphanumeric keystrokes, followed by LSK1 and the EXEC button. Eight presses.

And that confirms to me you’re a Flight Sim expert, and not a real pilot, as one would know the answer to that question.

Have you flown overseas? Some cultures out there do not like operating outside of the VNAV determined path and would struggle (especially if his brain is short on oxygen) to work out a profile of their own. Just how it is. That might be what GBO is alluding to.

May I suggest you take your theories to another place as this is for Professional Pilots (hence the name).
You seem very determined to erase this theory and see off a poster. Why is that? You mentioned part of the name of this network but omitted the operative word: Rumour. Why not let this theory evolve?

Judging by your post history, you seem to have a deep-rooted desire to win arguments on the internet. You tell the mods to close down threads the content of which you don't like. You tell posters whose educated theories you don't like to go elsewhere. This haughty disdain and arrogant superiority is often found amongst narcissists. Interestingly, narcissism is often found in conspiracy theorists. You don't like conspiracy theories on pandemics but you're suggesting the MH370 investigation needs to proceed in the direction of a conspiracy or solitary plan, making you a conspiracy theorist. You have posted statements in this thread which are wrong. Misinformation. Do you need to be cancelled?

BuzzBox

17th Dec 2022, 08:37

Diverting at 10,000 feet is very fuel inefficient, the default LRC speed for the B777 is Mach 0.84
In the event of depressurisation, the usual procedure is to descend to 10,000 ft or the MSA, whichever is higher (read the manual :ok:). I can assure you the LRC speed at 10,000 ft is NOT M0.84. Furthermore, the distance from IGARI to WMKP is only 221 NM, a good deal of which would be taken up by the descent. Do you seriously believe that fuel efficiency is an issue in this scenario? Good grief. :ugh:

With only 2 screens available, it is going to add complexity to the situation. Running a checklist on the R INBD DU, will mean the Engine and Crew Alert Display is not visible, items can be missed.
Both pilots have a QRH right by their side. If necessary, either pilot could run a checklist from the QRH. It's not hard.

A pilot suffering from hypoxia at Penang would make irrational decisions, such as divert to Banda Aceh.
Rubbish. That's pure supposition on your part, with ZERO evidence.

dr dre

17th Dec 2022, 08:43

Do you seriously believe that fuel efficiency is an issue in this scenario? Good grief. :ugh:

Give it a rest, bud. You are wrong in so many ways.

That poster is just a flight sim geek and a troll, someone who probably has 10,000hrs of B777 time on MS Flight Sim but zero hours in any real aircraft. Everything they post just comes across someone who’s studied the manuals ad nauseum but has no idea how the aircraft is practically operated in a real world environment. They didn’t know how to calculate top of descent without VNAV for instance.

birdspeed

17th Dec 2022, 08:43

Buzzbox,

re the O2 bottle rupture and subsequent damage.
Yes, QF30 had a large hole and rapid decompression. It doesn’t necessarily have to be so, could result in a slow decompression too.
The failure mode of the bottles on MH370 would different, they are composite rather than steel as on QF30.
I can imagine a dislodged bottle bouncing around avionics bay won’t always create a large fuselage hole.
Perhaps even no hole at all, consider the pressure wave from the rupture forcing open the over pressure valves(happened on QF30) causing only a subtle background decompression.

Chronic Snoozer

17th Dec 2022, 08:54

Judging by your post history, you seem to have a deep-rooted desire to win arguments on the internet. You tell the mods to close down threads the content of which you don't like. You tell posters whose educated theories you don't like to go elsewhere. This haughty disdain and arrogant superiority is often found amongst narcissists. Interestingly, narcissism is often found in conspiracy theorists. You don't like conspiracy theories on pandemics but you're suggesting the MH370 investigation needs to proceed in the direction of a conspiracy or solitary plan, making you a conspiracy theorist. You have posted statements in this thread which are wrong. Misinformation. Do you need to be cancelled?

Classic example of playing the person not the ball. Must be a weak theory.

birdspeed

17th Dec 2022, 08:57

dr dre, Buzzbox,

Can you explain why the autopilot would be out and why the aircraft was manually turned at IGARI and hand flown towards Penang.
That fact on its own indicates the crew had a technical issue.

And going back to that atrocious report on the latest debris find. No it’s not a landing gear door, it’s looking like the top surface of an outboard flap. Any claims that it showed intentional gear down at the end need to be revised. Perhaps a media apology to the families and especially to the Captain’s is again in order for spreading false, unverified information.

GBO

17th Dec 2022, 09:59

BuzzBox

Descending to 10000 feet is an assumption that the crew knew that a depressurisation event was occurring.
If the crew don’t believe and don’t have any cabin altitude warning at IGARI, then there mindset is to divert at a suitable LRC speed ie Mach0.84 at an appropriate altitude (FL340). There is no need to descend.

Given the amount of failures and considering the time taken by other complex emergencies, such as QF32, then MH370 is not going to be ready for landing in 10minutes.

Unfortunately for some, the oxygen bottle rupture theory does match all the evidence and flightpath.
It ends with a deceased crew and the aircraft flying until fuel exhaustion and crashing in the southern Indian Ocean.
The bottle was repressurised immediately prior to flight by Malaysia.

GBO

17th Dec 2022, 10:10

Dr dre

You have misinterpreted “And how do you know when to descend without VNAV?”, this was a question directed at you to test your knowledge.
I already knew the answer from my extensive airline career. But you seem stuck on playing the man and not the ball.
So here’s your chance to play the ball, what flightpath and end location do you predict for MH370?

Capt Fathom

17th Dec 2022, 10:33

I already knew the answer from my extensive airline career.

You’re not the baggage handler from Port Hedland by any chance?

Icarus2001

17th Dec 2022, 11:09

Diverting at 10,000 feet is very fuel inefficient, the default LRC speed for the B777 is Mach 0.84 This sentence alone confirms that you have no idea what you are talking about.

BuzzBox

17th Dec 2022, 11:24

Can you explain why the autopilot would be out and why the aircraft was manually turned at IGARI and hand flown towards Penang.
That fact on its own indicates the crew had a technical issue.

Let's not confuse "fact" with "theory". The theory about a hand-flown turn back at IGARI came from a simulator study that was conducted during the official investigation. That study concluded the turn back was flown with the autopilot disengaged because, with the autopilot engaged, they could not replicate the turn that was observed on primary radar. IIRC, a subsequent study, that was not part of the official investigation, found the radar-derived position data used in the simulator study was inaccurate. The second study used ADS-B derived position data and determined the observed turn was well within the capabilities of the autopilot. So who's right?

And going back to that atrocious report on the latest debris find. No it’s not a landing gear door, it’s looking like the top surface of an outboard flap. Any claims that it showed intentional gear down at the end need to be revised. Perhaps a media apology to the families and especially to the Captain’s is again in order for spreading false, unverified information.

I agree, that report should not have been made public.

BuzzBox

17th Dec 2022, 11:41

Descending to 10000 feet is an assumption that the crew knew that a depressurisation event was occurring. If the crew don’t believe and don’t have any cabin altitude warning at IGARI, then there mindset is to divert at a suitable LRC speed ie Mach0.84 at an appropriate altitude (FL340). There is no need to descend.
That's your assumption, which I don't believe is plausible in a ruptured oxygen bottle scenario. Even if they did stay at high level, there would be no need to fly at LRC speed for a diversion of 200-odd nautical miles. They could fly at pretty much any speed they felt like, most likely the speed they were flying at the time the incident occurred.

Given the amount of failures and considering the time taken by other complex emergencies, such as QF32, then MH370 is not going to be ready for landing in 10minutes.
Did anybody say the aircraft would be ready for landing in 10 minutes?

Unfortunately for some, the oxygen bottle rupture theory does match all the evidence and flightpath.
No it doesn't. It sounds plausible at a superficial level, but there are some big holes which you refuse to acknowledge.

birdspeed

17th Dec 2022, 12:49

[QUOTE=BuzzBox;11349618]Let's not confuse "fact" with "theory". The theory about a hand-flown turn back at IGARI came from a simulator study that was conducted during the official investigation. That study concluded the turn back was flown with the autopilot disengaged, because they could not replicate a turn flown by the autopilot with the turn that was observed on primary radar. IIRC, a subsequent study, that was not part of the official investigation, found the radar-derived position data used in the simulator study was inaccurate. The second study used ADS-B derived position data and determined the observed turn was well within the capabilities of the autopilot. So who's right?[/cQUOTE]

This has always been the problem with this investigation. Where do you go for reliable information?
The official report says the autopilot must have been off for the turn. As far as I know the only other report was from the IG who say they can replicate the turn by going to bank angle 25 to make the turn. I don’t understand or have seen a report using ADS-B as that was definitely not working during the turn….But also the continuing flight towards Penang is not straight, so the autopilot is looking like it is off here too. The most accurate study of the primary radar also shows a flight at no particular altitude(phugoid?).

So I would say it looks like the autopilot is not engaged.

BuzzBox

17th Dec 2022, 14:34

The official report says the autopilot must have been off for the turn. As far as I know the only other report was from the IG who say they can replicate the turn by going to bank angle 25 to make the turn. I don’t understand or have seen a report using ADS-B as that was definitely not working during the turn….But also the continuing flight towards Penang is not straight, so the autopilot is looking like it is off here too. The most accurate study of the primary radar also shows a flight at no particular altitude(phugoid?).

So I would say it looks like the autopilot is not engaged.

With respect to the turn back, the Safety Investigation Report (SIR) states:
The reconstruction flight conducted on the B777 flight simulator had established that the turn back was likely made while the aircraft was under manual control and not the autopilot.

The IG found discrepancies between the radar position data and the ADS-B position data immediately before the transponder stopped transmitting. Those discrepancies called into question the accuracy of the turn entry point that was used in the simulator study. It was suggested that an earlier turn could be completed by the autopilot using a bank angle of 25°.

Regarding the military radar data, the SIR states:
It became very apparent, however, that the recorded altitude and speed change “blip” to “blip” were well beyond the capability of the aircraft. It was highlighted to the Team that the altitude and speed extracted from the data are subjected to inherent error. The only useful information obtained from the Military radar was the latitude and longitude position of the aircraft as this data is reasonably accurate.

The SIR also states:
The Team also noted that the aircraft’s flight path from after the turn was consistent with the navigation being set to LNAV and/or heading mode…
Which suggests the autopilot could well have been engaged during that part of the flight.

GBO

17th Dec 2022, 16:31

So we are all in agreement that the turn back towards Penang and to south of Penang is NOT in LNAV. Therefore the aircraft is being flown manually or by the autopilot in heading mode.

Now why would anyone NOT use LNAV? Because it’s not available at that time.

GBO

17th Dec 2022, 16:35

You’re not the baggage handler from Port Hedland by any chance?

Another one playing the man. For the record, no I’m not a baggage handler, I’m a pilot.
Did you want to play the ball? Can you supply your flightpath and endpoint for MH370?

itsnotthatbloodyhard

17th Dec 2022, 19:53

Now why would anyone NOT use LNAV? Because it’s not available at that time.

Or because it is available, but isn’t the most suitable mode to make the aircraft do what you want at that time. As happens regularly.

GBO

17th Dec 2022, 20:29

Or because it is available, but isn’t the most suitable mode to make the aircraft do what you want at that time. As happens regularly.

Diverting to an airport 30 minutes away and purposely choosing to use heading mode over LNAV for the entire leg does not happen regularly.
It would be a poor decision and increase crew workload.

flightleader

17th Dec 2022, 20:39

https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1481/85f67fad_f15a_47db_89f4_2b4e0fead595_e78fb95fc01f3bf95992a5f f656c9fb40906018e.jpeg
GBO suggested that the pilots programmed this diversion to Bandar Aceh. Absolute garbage!

flightleader

17th Dec 2022, 20:44

https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1504/1cd58f7e_7dbb_4f89_a90d_7797cfc54a72_0e10a298b9ef6351a101674 0cf6d89951a01f180.jpeg
Without a functioning AMU, the cockpit is deaf and dumb. Possible explanation of why SATCOM call from ground was not answered. You can forget about announcement to passengers and intercom with cabin crew too.

BuzzBox

17th Dec 2022, 20:45

Now why would anyone NOT use LNAV? Because it’s not available at that time.

Not necessarily. The pilot might well have turned back in HDG mode, then engaged LNAV once he had determined the correct waypoint to enter in the FMC. That waypoint would not have been in the existing flight plan. HDG mode is often used for short-term manoeuvring, so it’s hardly unusual.

Even if LNAV wasn’t engaged until much later, so what? It doesn’t necessarily mean it wasn’t available, as you claim. The prevailing theory is that the pilot had no intention of landing at Penang, or anywhere else. You don’t need LNAV for that.

flightleader

17th Dec 2022, 20:52

All facts and leads are welcome. But loads of garbage posted here are pure speculations that came out by twisting the posters own limited knowledge of the plane, reading between the lines of reports and their own wild wet dreams.

flightleader

17th Dec 2022, 20:54

Buzz,

You are upgrading a simmer to an advance simmer.

GBO

17th Dec 2022, 21:12

Without a functioning AMU, the cockpit is deaf and dumb. Possible explanation of why SATCOM call from ground was not answered. You can forget about announcement to passengers and intercom with cabin crew too.

Yes, you are correct. Hence the crew is unable to make any voice radio call or even talk to the passengers.
Note, no radio calls or SATCOM calls where received from MH370.

GBO

17th Dec 2022, 21:16

GBO suggested that the pilots programmed this diversion to Bandar Aceh. Absolute garbage!

And where would the aircraft end, if the aircraft is flying on autopilot with an unresponsive crew and failed left Autothrottle, for the route that you drew?

GBO

17th Dec 2022, 21:19

Buzz,

You are upgrading a simmer to an advance simmer.

Yet another one, playing the man without basic detective skills.
If you want to play the ball, what flightpath and endpoint have you determined for MH370?

flightleader

17th Dec 2022, 21:22

GBO

17th Dec 2022, 22:34

You have no evidence to suggest the aircraft was on autopilot.
You have no evidence to suggest the crew was unresponsive at that time where the plane was near Banda.
You have no evidence to suggest Left A/T was failed.

You suggested that route! Why are you asking me? You don’t even know what you posted earlier?

Correct, without the FDR/CVR there is no concrete evidence, however there are clues which strongly suggest the autopilot was engaged with an unresponsive crew.

The primary radar recordings showing the aircraft tracking via VAMPI-MEKAR-NILAM.
The inability of the GES to connect to the AES at 1803 via the left HGA.
The crew not answering any calls at 1840 or 2314.
The aircraft continuing on a constant heading from the statistics of the satellite data.
The aircraft continuing until fuel exhaustion, 7 hours after the event at IGARI.
The fuel flow analysis pointing to an exact fuel exhaustion at the seventh arc.
The lack of Flight ID at SATCOM log on, which was not manually cleared via the MCDU.
The exact timing of the 1825 log on at NILAM.
The simplicity of flightpath, compare Captain Mike Glynn’s WSPR flightpath.
The rate of descent observed by BFO at the seventh arc at fuel exhaustion: 15,000feet/min
The position of the flaps at fuel exhaustion as determined by the ATSB.
The condition of the debris findings.
The beaching location and timing of debris findings.
The barnacle analysis on the debris.
The servicing of the oxygen bottle prior to departure by Malaysia, and equipment adjacent to it.

Yes, no concrete evidence, but we have a good idea where it is, most likely inside the seventh arc in the unsearched region at 34S 93E.

Where do you think it is? I haven’t seen your flightpath.

Eclan

17th Dec 2022, 23:32

Must be a weak theory.
It's not my theory and I don't care if it's weak or not. I'm simply interested in seeing it tested and found either to be underdetermined by a more sound theory or not, in a process of civil discussion free from emotional and thick-headed input. As yet the former has not occurred in this forum. Why are you and Dre so emotionally invested in it?

Classic example of playing the person not the ball.
Actually, it's not a classic example of any such thing. Don't be ridiculous. It appears from the discourse here that Dre is not as smart as he likes to hold himself to be and has soon resorted to playing the person as you call it, calling the person a flight simmer, casting aspersions on the person's aeronautical experience and qualification, etc, and then leaving. It's not very nice, not at all useful and the overall pattern is certainly indicative of narcissistic behaviour. Therefore the comments are not at all aimed at playing the man but at questioning the real motivation for the attack on this theory and the discussion thereof.

If you want a "classic example" look at posts #101 and 109 plus a few by other posters. Maybe you're his mummy in which case I aplogise for holding up the mirror.

Originally Posted by Icarus2001
How does the primary radar track reveal which mode the aircraft was in laterally?

I would still like to know this too, please.
This may not have been specifically addressed. I think the theory on this is based on observed turn radius, speed, altitude and AFDS limitations. Is that what you're saying, GBO?

Chronic Snoozer

18th Dec 2022, 00:00

Why are you and Dre so emotionally invested in it?

Isn't everyone? This is a professional pilots forum. Every pilot wants to know what happened and how, I'd have thought.

Actually, it's not a classic example of any such thing. Don't be ridiculous. It appears from the discourse here that Dre is not as smart as he likes to hold himself to be and has soon resorted to playing the person as you call it, calling the person a flight simmer, casting aspersions on the person's aeronautical experience and qualification, etc, and then leaving. It's not very nice, not at all useful and the overall pattern is certainly indicative of narcissistic behaviour. Therefore the comments are not at all aimed at playing the man but at questioning the real motivation for the attack on this theory and the discussion thereof.

There is a pretty good BS filter on this site. If the theory pans out - fine, but robust discussion is warranted. If regular users smell something fishy then expect them to rummage around to see where this is going. When people start attacking each other instead of the subject it probably means the discussion is done.

Eclan

18th Dec 2022, 00:12

Isn't everyone? This is a professional pilots forum. Every pilot wants to know what happened and how, I'd have thought.

There is a pretty good BS filter on this site. If the theory pans out - fine, but robust discussion is warranted. If regular users smell something fishy then expect them to rummage around to see where this is going. When people start attacking each other instead of the subject it probably means the discussion is done.
Good (strawman) comeback.

dr dre

18th Dec 2022, 00:33

It appears from the discourse here that Dre is not as smart as he likes to hold himself to be and has soon resorted to playing the person as you call it, calling the person a flight simmer, casting aspersions on the person's aeronautical experience and qualification, etc, and then leaving.

Actually I had better things to do. The hypoxia theory relies on pilots performing complex tasks far greater after the event than they would be able to perform after suffering hypoxia for that long, after they’ve seemingly lost the ability to simple tasks like descend the aircraft.

Truth is until the FDR/CVR are found people are filling in the (very large) blanks with their own theories. None of them can be proven true.

Even if the FDR/CVR are found then that may not put speculation to rest. Chances are the CVR may only contain hours of silence. The FDR would contain the recorded control inputs, but then it may be unclear who or why or under what psychological state those inputs were made, leading to further debate and disagreement on what the root cause of the accident was.

GBO

18th Dec 2022, 01:11

dr dre

Welcome back.

Yes, a ghost flight will probably have a quiet CVR for the last 6 hours.
Even if Malaysia decide to search the accident scenario site, and find the aircraft, Malaysia has already covered its tracks.
By restructuring the company from MAS to MAB, they struck out liability and are not responsible. Any salvaged wreckage is to be transport to KL.
No one will ever see the oxygen bottle. Clever.

Do you have a flightpath and endpoint for MH370?

Icarus2001

18th Dec 2022, 01:39

So you are also a legal expert on liability. Excellent

EXTRACT ANNEX 13 to the Convention on Civil Aviation...
Release from custody 3.4 Subject to the provisions of 3.2 and 3.3, the State of Occurrence shall release custody of the aircraft, its contents or any parts thereof as soon as they are no longer required in the investigation, to any person or persons duly designated by the State of Registry or the State of the Operator, as applicable. For this purpose the State of Occurrence shall facilitate access to the aircraft, its contents or any parts thereof, provided that, if the aircraft, its contents, or any parts thereof lie in an area within which the State finds it impracticable to grant such access, it shall itself effect removal to a point where access can be given.

Eclan

18th Dec 2022, 01:55

Actually I had better things to do.
Seriously? Better than winning arguments with strangers on the internet all weekend? Now that's not believable.

GBO

18th Dec 2022, 02:11

Icarus2001

You must have missed it.
According to court papers, MAB is not liable for the loss arising from MH370. That was MAS.

And what flightpath and endpoint do you have for MH370?

Dora-9

18th Dec 2022, 05:59

GBO:

I’m a pilot

So am I. I was an airline pilot (which included flying the B777) for nearly 40 years (gulp) with 75% of this time being involved in the Check and Training world. I'm not attempting a "mine's bigger than yours" exercise here, merely laying out my background/exposure to the realities of airline flying. Dare I ask, without resorting to "playing the man", just what operational experience do you have? Some of your responses show ignorance of the realities of operating an airline aircraft.

For instance:

Diverting to an airport 30 minutes away and purposely choosing to use heading mode over LNAV for the entire leg does not happen regularly.
It would be a poor decision and increase crew workload.

Rubbish! If an immediate return is required, then most crews that I've observed would use HDG, then sort out the return track and LNAV later. Pushing the heading knob and then rotating it hardly increases the crew workload.

You also insist, presumably because this fits your hypothesis, that the crew would have diverted to Penang, and not returned to KL. Your critique of my suggestion that's there's more than an even chance that the crew would not have selected Penang shows a lack of appreciation of the realities:

So you are diverting from IGARI to Kuala Lumpur without a serviceable radio, to an airport further away, with more traffic and higher risk of collision. Seems like a dumb decision.

Penang is closer, has a lot less traffic, familiar to the crew and open.

How much further away? A mere 60 nm by my quick calculation (i.e. 8 minutes in cruise). At this point none of your mooted failures were time critical. Are you seriously suggesting that "more traffic" is a valid reason for not selecting KL? Isn't that what surveillance radar is for? Would Penang even have been open that late (from my experience not, but that was a long time ago)? You state elsewhere that the crew would have been familiar with Penang, but arguably not recently - did MAS ever operate the B777 there? Certainly in my last airline, Penang had a reputation of being "tricky".

There are attractions for proceeding to KL. This was "Home Base", with major maintenance facilities, sufficient facilities to handle (and if necessary accommodate) a B777-load of passengers and a likely location of a replacement aircraft to continue the service. Further if the crew are stood down then they're going home to their own beds. In the theoretical world, none of these commercial/personal factors should influence command decisions but if you think that they don't (and from observation MAS crews are very eager to "help" their airline) then you're not living in the real world.

GBO

18th Dec 2022, 08:16

GBO:
Rubbish! If an immediate return is required, then most crews that I've observed would use HDG, then sort out the return track and LNAV later. Pushing the heading knob and then rotating it hardly increases the crew workload.

I’m with you on the quick heading turn not in LNAV, and once that’s sorted enter the return track and engage LNAV, but you’re missing the critical point. The ENTIRE diversion to Penang is in heading mode or manually flown. The aircraft has not flown via waypoints, a STAR, or instrument approach. This will increase workload. This is not a hypothesis but the primary radar recording EVIDENCE.

As far as diverting to Penang or Kuala Lumpur without radios and transponder, well Penang is closer, open 24 hours, very familiar to the crew and has virtually no traffic at night. And that’s what MH370 did.
But if you want to divert to Kuala Lumpur then go for it, but just remember that it’s further, and you’ll be playing chicken with a LOT of traffic. So you may make it to “home base”, but you have increased the risk of a mid air collision and ending up in an aluminium ball!

Dora-9

18th Dec 2022, 09:30

As far as diverting to Penang or Kuala Lumpur without radios and transponder, well Penang is closer, open 24 hours, very familiar to the crew and has virtually no traffic at night. And that’s what MH370 did.
But if you want to divert to Kuala Lumpur then go for it, but just remember that it’s further, and you’ll be playing chicken with a LOT of traffic. So you may make it to “home base”, but you have increased the risk of a mid air collision and ending up in an aluminium ball!

That suggests to me that you have little idea about the realities of this sort of flying, but you're welcome to your opinions. Can you imagine the subsequent interview with the Chief Pilot being asked to justify the reasons that you diverted to Penang and didn't return to KL, and then trotting out your response? I did a quick straw poll today amongst various ex-QF/SQ/MAS/CX friends (7 of them; 5 said they'd go to KL).

Can you support the Penang being "very familiar to the crew" contention?

Eclan

18th Dec 2022, 10:16

The ENTIRE diversion to Penang is in heading mode or manually flown. The aircraft has not flown via waypoints, a STAR, or instrument approach. This will increase workload. This is not a hypothesis but the primary radar recording EVIDENCE.

As far as diverting to Penang or Kuala Lumpur without radios and transponder, well Penang is closer, open 24 hours, very familiar to the crew and has virtually no traffic at night. And that’s what MH370 did.
But if you want to divert to Kuala Lumpur then go for it, but just remember that it’s further, and you’ll be playing chicken with a LOT of traffic. So you may make it to “home base”, but you have increased the risk of a mid air collision and ending up in an aluminium ball!
You're losing me here, GBO. It's all a nice theory except for the navigation. You don't have to be a 30 years C&T captain to think through the Nav side of it. You could possibly argue they were so worked up over failures they never got around to LNAVing it. Maybe. But I think it's a stretch to choose Penang over KL although admittedly we are all sitting in armchairs while in the cockpit at the time it is a very different proposition especially if there's been an explosion of some sort. Who really knows which way he would go? Apparently 29% of international pilots polled would support your hypothesis. Nearly a third. That's not an insignificant percentage. On the basis of what we know, however, I think I'd have gone to KL.

It's been fun, though, and worth it just to see some of the sensitive ideological entities and online superhero saviours (you know who you are) in here getting wound up over someone else's theory which most likely will never make it beyond this thread.

Keep it coming, GBO, I find it very interesting.

Icarus2001

18th Dec 2022, 10:31

Another howler showing a lack of airline experience…

But if you want to divert to Kuala Lumpur then go for it, but just remember that it’s further, and you’ll be playing chicken with a LOT of traffic.

Is ATC a mystery to you as well? NINC

About eight minutes difference.

Capt Fathom

18th Dec 2022, 11:12

As they say in the classics…. Do not feed the troll.

GBO

18th Dec 2022, 11:46

That suggests to me that you have little idea about the realities of this sort of flying, but you're welcome to your opinions. Can you imagine the subsequent interview with the Chief Pilot being asked to justify the reasons that you diverted to Penang and didn't return to KL, and then trotting out your response? I did a quick straw poll today amongst various ex-QF/SQ/MAS/CX friends (7 of them; 5 said they'd go to KL).

Can you support the Penang being "very familiar to the crew" contention?

That’s strange because everyone I have spoken to in my crewroom elected to divert to Penang. None of them was going to play chicken at KL without a serviceable radio and inoperative transponder. Penang is very quiet and closer in an emergency.

I would think that the Chief Pilot would be pleased that I took the safer option and flew to Penang. I would hate for the Chief Pilot having to explain to the NOK why the aircraft diverted to the crowded airspace of Kuala Lumpur, without a serviceable radio and inoperative transponder, and then had a mid air collision, when Penang was closer and quieter.

You said “Can you support the Penang being very familiar to the crew contention?”
This seems like a strange question, everyone knows he was born in Penang and had flown many hours at Penang Airport.

GBO

18th Dec 2022, 11:49

As they say in the classics…. Do not feed the troll.

Still playing the man.
And we still wait for your flightpath and endpoint of MH370.
Do you support Captain Mike Glynn’s WSPR flightpath?

GBO

18th Dec 2022, 11:53

Another howler showing a lack of airline experience…

Is ATC a mystery to you as well? NINC

About eight minutes difference.

ATC would be unaware of your presence if the aircraft does not have a serviceable radio and inoperative transponder and SATCOM.

BuzzBox

18th Dec 2022, 14:02

But if you want to divert to Kuala Lumpur then go for it, but just remember that it’s further, and you’ll be playing chicken with a LOT of traffic. So you may make it to “home base”, but you have increased the risk of a mid air collision and ending up in an aluminium ball!

How much traffic do you think there is at KL between 1730-1800 (ie 0130-0200 (tel:0130-0200) local)? Some, but not a LOT as you have claimed several times. Furthermore, KL might be a bit further away than Penang, but it does have a significant advantage: The crew departed from there not long before and they already knew the weather and the duty runway. If they had communication problems and couldn’t easily access that information for Penang, then KL might well have been a better alternative.

You claimed that you’re a a pilot and that you consulted people in your crew room, but you didn’t answer Dora-9’s question: What operational experience do you have and what type of aircraft do you fly in the real world?

Dora-9

18th Dec 2022, 18:31

everyone I have spoken to in my crewroom

Your technical knowledge is impressive, but getting back to my question about your lack of real time experience and your failure to respond to this, just who were these people you polled? Junior FO's of what sort of outfit? My 7 are all former captains/colleagues/compatriots, at least 150,000 hours collectively, i.e. they've seen it all/done it all before - and have graduated, with honours, from the Aviation School of Applied Cynicism.

ATC would be unaware of your presence if the aircraft does not have a serviceable radio and inoperative transponder and SATCOM.

So surveillant radar doesn't work without a transponder being detected? Maybe ATC would be a bit slower at "seeing" you, but they assuredly would.

I would think that the Chief Pilot would be pleased

Given the amount of second-guessing that goes on in these events, I'm not so sure...

This seems like a strange question, everyone knows he was born in Penang and had flown many hours at Penang Airport.

Another unanswered question. My question was how recently had the crew been to Penang? The only MAS aircraft I've ever seen there were B737's. There's a huge difference between learning to fly somewhere and what it's like currently.

GBO

18th Dec 2022, 19:05

Dora-9, BuzzBox

How recently had the Captain been to Penang?
Not recently inflight in a B777, but he did on his home flight simulator on 21Dec2013 in a Boeing 737-800.

Diverting to the nearest suitable airport (Penang) in an emergency is a valid response to an incident at IGARI.

GBO

18th Dec 2022, 19:28

You could possibly argue they were so worked up over failures they never got around to LNAVing it.

Yes, it would be very chaotic in the cockpit following an oxygen bottle rupture in the electronics bay. Many things would be overlooked.

The lack of Flight ID, but with the AES ID present at the 1825:27 SATCOM logon is the clue. What is the point of just deleting the Flight ID portion, it doesn’t hide the identity of the aircraft. Since there wasn’t a log off recorded by the GES, then the Flight ID was not manually cleared via the MCDU. It requires the AIMS to be depowered or a power reset of the FMC. So possibilities include someone going down into the MEC and pulling circuit breakers (highly unlikely), or there has been an FMC failure and software reset to the other FMC. Thus, there will be a period where the aircraft doesn’t have LNAV capability. Given that the aircraft was observed on primary radar to NOT be flying via LNAV between IGARI and Penang, then it’s possible that during this diversion, LNAV was not available, forcing the crew to fly on heading or manually. It’s not until west of Penang where primary radar shows the aircraft flying via waypoints ie LNAV is now available.

flightleader

18th Dec 2022, 22:44

GBO, you need to snap yourself out of this mind set of flying LNAV west of PEN. It headed towards VAMPI then 10nm north of MEKAR. That’s not a normal LNAV way to fly let alone on airways. Please Flight ID comprises of a few info. Please be specific what you are referring to. Please stop embarrassing yourself about Flight ID entry via MCDU.

Why is everyone thinking of multiple system failures that knocked out the FMC, Displays, comms, pressurisation system etc to fit into the scenario? If you have read enough to understand the B777, only one system failure can caused this scenario. Please read more instead of keep pushing everyone to suggest for a flightpath and final position. You think Mike G came out with that final location? Read more!

Dora-9

18th Dec 2022, 23:02

Not recently inflight in a B777, but he did on his home flight simulator on 21Dec2013 in a Boeing 737-800

Thanks for answering that.You're dodging another question though, namely about what's your experience of operating in this enviroment? Just who were the "20 crew room occupants" you polled? Do they have any experience of that environment? Given your dogmatic and emotive reasons for contending that MH370 MUST have diverted towards Penang and how this destination is essential to your suggested scenario, I'd really like to know.

A statistician would have a field day with the validity of either of our polls (insufficient data base for one), but I was very careful to pose your scenario as objectively as I could and individually, either in person or on the phone. I'm very wary of crew room Group Think - you should be too. My pollees comprised 4 current pilots and 3 retirees (4 Check Captains, 1 Training Capt and 2 Line Captains), all of whom have flown in that airspace. And yours were...?

Lookleft

19th Dec 2022, 01:11

Eclan

19th Dec 2022, 01:31

So to suggest that an exploding oxy bottle is going to take out the crew and multiple systems just does not get past any rational scrutiny.

If the crew, particularly an experienced PIC wanted to get that aircraft on the ground following an internal failure they would have done so.

Any suggestion otherwise demonstrates a complete misunderstanding of the mind set and competency of a well trained professional flight crew.
Now that is some of the funniest and most ironic input I've read on here in a fair while. Or something-onic. So no one ever crashes? Or everyone who does is incompetent?

So surveillant radar doesn't work without a transponder being detected? Maybe ATC would be a bit slower at "seeing" you, but they assuredly would.
I'm not so sure about that second statement. I believe once SSR has lost the transponder that's it and depending on the system they might not get you back because of the computer interface even if your transponder begins transmitting again. I believe that's how the Aussie system works (or used to work) but not sure if it's the same there. If that's not accurate or I'm just wrong I'm sure someone with more knowledge on it will pounce within minutes to correct it. Primary radar, on the other hand, would pick them up if within range and if the RMAF were operating it at the time and if they were looking, but would have other deficiencies.

PiperCameron

19th Dec 2022, 01:35

The 777 was built to cope with redundancies that did not require extensive crew input. The QRH consists of a lot of condition statements rather than a lot of procedural steps. The number of 777 hull losses where no one was killed is impressive for a WB and is a testament to its engineering. So to suggest that an exploding oxy bottle is going to take out the crew and multiple systems just does not get past any rational scrutiny. If the crew, particularly an experienced PIC wanted to get that aircraft on the ground following an internal failure they would have done so. Any suggestion otherwise demonstrates a complete misunderstanding of the mind set and competency of a well trained professional flight crew.

..and I suspect that's one reason many in the industry find this niggling incident so troubling, coming as it does after QF32 where a cascade of unlucky events, combined with no-so-great-in-hindsight design decisions to very nearly, almost, trigger disaster.

Manufacturers, Air Transport Investigations folks and well trained professional flight crew alike all like to learn from incidents. Could "Gee, we didn't think about THAT one!!" ever be said about about the B777? Without firm evidence from MH370, maybe they'll never know.

Eclan

19th Dec 2022, 01:40

Thanks for answering that.You're dodging another question though, namely about what's your experience of operating in this enviroment?
Sorry, one more thing... why's his experience in that specific environment so important? If he's flown jet airliners for a while and if he's switched on wrt systems and SOPs he's eminently qualified to comment on a technical scenario. I don't think you really need to have flown into Penang to have an educated opinion on it all. There is almost an infinite number of small variables which might've influenced the capt that night to make numerous decisions on one plan or another and GBO having flown to Penang or through that airspace last month or last year or never won't change anything.

Dora-9

19th Dec 2022, 02:44

Eclan:

why's his experience in that specific environment so important?

Because the operating environment in SE Asia is VERY different from the Australian domestic scene. I'm not commenting on, nor criticizing, his impressive technical expertise. He doesn't have to have flown specifically into Penang to offer a valid opinion (although that might "open his eyes" somewhat) but his responses to my criticism leave me thinking he's never been in that environment. And, notably, he's never rebutted that.

I believe once SSR has lost the transponder that's it

I checked with an Air Services friend and he thought you'd just be harder to "see" - but there would be a return. I ended up entering BNE without a Xpdr once and it took them a few minutes to "find" me, but then again I did tell them I was coming!

BuzzBox

19th Dec 2022, 03:29

...or there has been an FMC failure and software reset to the other FMC. Thus, there will be a period where the aircraft doesn’t have LNAV capability.

You made this statement previously and you were told then that your understanding is incorrect. With both FMCs operating normally, one of them is active and the other is inactive. The active FMC synchronises the inactive FMC any time there is a change to the flight plan or performance data. If the active FMC fails with the FMC selector in AUTO (ie the usual position), there will be an automatic failover to the previously inactive FMC, which already has all the data it needs to take over as the active FMC. There is no "software reset" and LNAV remains engaged.

Indeed, LNAV capability remains available even if both FMCs fail. In that case, the alternate navigation system uses the flight plan data stored in the internal memory of the CDUs; however, LNAV must be re-engaged.

BuzzBox

19th Dec 2022, 03:41

If he's flown jet airliners for a while and if he's switched on wrt systems and SOPs he's eminently qualified to comment on a technical scenario.

Of course, but is that actually the case? Some of his comments indicate that he is not very well versed in certain aspects of airline operations that should be well known to anyone with airline experience. That leads people to question the accuracy of his other claims. The question about his background has been asked several times, with no response.

Lead Balloon

19th Dec 2022, 03:49

Eclan:
I checked with an Air Services friend and he thought you'd just be harder to "see" - but there would be a return. I ended up entering BNE without a Xpdr once and it took them a few minutes to "find" me, but then again I did tell them I was coming!I think your friend meant to say that ATC can still find you on primary RADAR.

No Xponder = No SSR return.

I note this from Airline Online:Three radar industry and ATC sources in southeast Asia consulted by AIN confirmed that air traffic controllers rely almost exclusively on SSR and receive little or no refresher training on the use of primary radar after their initial qualification. Military radar controllers also rely on SSR to identify civilian air traffic.I suspect you were ‘found’ on the primary RADAR because they knew you were ‘there’ and where to ‘look’ to find your primary return.

BuzzBox

19th Dec 2022, 04:27

I checked with an Air Services friend and he thought you'd just be harder to "see" - but there would be a return.

In Malaysia's case the civilian long-range surveillance radars are SSR only, with a range of 200 NM; there is no primary radar. The major airports (eg KL, Kota Bharu) generally have a 60 NM primary surveillance radar collocated with a 200 NM SSR. An approach controller could see you on primary radar at short range if they knew where to look, but they'd be blind to anything outside 60 NM.

Dora-9

19th Dec 2022, 05:49

Lead Balloon and Buzzbox:

Thanks very much for the clarification. I just keep out of the way these days. In my BNE example, as I stated they did know I was coming (and they were extremely helpful too).

The Love Doctor

19th Dec 2022, 06:25

And how do you know when to descend without VNAV?

You've got to be kidding right? :cool:

GBO

19th Dec 2022, 10:12

With both FMCs operating normally, one of them is active and the other is inactive. The active FMC synchronises the inactive FMC any time there is a change to the flight plan or performance data. If the active FMC fails with the FMC selector in AUTO (ie the usual position), there will be an automatic failover to the previously inactive FMC, which already has all the data it needs to take over as the active FMC. There is no "software reset" and LNAV remains engaged.

There are software resets, as stated in the FCOM.

“A software reset may occur while in single FMC operation. The active route becomes inactive, the performance data is erased, and LNAV and VNAV (if engaged) modes fail.”

It is not possible for an active FMC to synchronise to the inactive FMC if the link is severed.

If the active FMC always changes automatically, then there wouldn’t be a need to install a FMC selector switch for Left, Auto, or Right.

GBO

19th Dec 2022, 10:22

flightleader,

Refer to table 2.5A of the Safety Information Report for information on the Flight ID change status at the 1825 SATCOM logon.
Manually clearing the Flight ID via the MCDU with power interrupt is not possible.

BuzzBox

19th Dec 2022, 11:00

There are software resets, as stated in the FCOM.

“A software reset may occur while in single FMC operation. The active route becomes inactive, the performance data is erased, and LNAV and VNAV (if engaged) modes fail.”

Yes, a software reset MAY OCCUR WHILE IN SINGLE FMC OPERATION because there is no redundancy in single FMC operation. That is NOT the case while in dual FMC operation; if one fails, the other automatically takes over.

It is not possible for an active FMC to synchronise to the inactive FMC if the link is severed.

You missed the point. The active FMC synchronises the inactive FMC any time a change is made to the active flight plan or the performance data. When the active FMC fails, the inactive FMC IS ALREADY SYNCHRONISED and ready to assume operation; further synchronisation is not necessary.

If the active FMC always changes automatically, then there wouldn’t be a need to install a FMC selector switch for Left, Auto, or Right.

So what? The inactive FMC still has the data that was synchronised from the active FMC before the failure occurred. If the automatic failover does not occur, all the pilot needs to do is switch to the operative FMC and re-engage LNAV. Your claim that LNAV is not available is bollocks.

birdspeed

19th Dec 2022, 13:56

All this talk about whether LNAV is engaged, is all a bit irrelevant if as I suspect the autopilot has failed, due to the flight controls degrading to secondary.

As GBO correctly concludes, the analysis of the primary returns coming back to Penang show no straight line portions… after the turn at Penang and after 18:01z we have no radar returns to work from. Therefore, we don’t know if LNAV was engaged or not.

I see no reason to make the claim the autopilot was ever engaged again and connected to an active route….

GBO is correct in his initial failure scenario, it’s just the aftermath of that failure that need to be ironed out.

Dora-9

19th Dec 2022, 18:35

The question about his background has been asked several times, with no response.

And still deafening silence from GBO about this.

Lookleft

19th Dec 2022, 21:52

Sorry, one more thing... why's his experience in that specific environment so important?

Because he is making a lot of noise about what he thinks might have happened to MH370 so he should state his credentials. All he has stated is that he is a pilot, so what. A pilot of a trike, an ultralight or a 172 has no credibility to discuss on an open forum how an airline pilot responds, reacts or manages an inflight emergency. In this case the inflight emergency he has proposed is just a theory based on a multi-level series of failures to explain a flight path that took an airliner to the far reaches of the Indian Ocean.

Icarus2001

20th Dec 2022, 01:15

Originally Posted by GBO View Post (https://www.pprune.org/australia-new-zealand-pacific/645199-mh370-new-news.html#post11349434)
And how do you know when to descend without VNAV?

How would you do it in the jet you fly GBO?

GBO

20th Dec 2022, 04:03

The active FMC synchronises the inactive FMC any time a change is made to the active flight plan or the performance data. When the active FMC fails, the inactive FMC IS ALREADY SYNCHRONISED and ready to assume operation; further synchronisation is not necessary .

Actually, “The active FMCF sends its flightplan data to the inactive FMCF for these conditions:
- Long term power ups
- BITE induced restart
- Flight plan entries and performance data changes.
When the active FMCF fails, a resynchronization (resync) occurs. Resyncs take about 1 second for an entire flight plan update. The active FMCF always resyncs the inactive FMCF. The active FMCF selection is a function of the FMC selector position and FMF partition health.” 777 Training Manual 34-61-00 p106

If the link between both FMCFs in the respective Left and Right AIMS Cabinet is severed, and the active Left FMCF has failed, a resync is not possible. An auto fail switch is not possible.
A software reset is a function of BITE/fault monitoring. If a software reset should occur, the active route becomes inactive, the performance data is erased, and LNAV and VNAV (if engaged) modes fail. At this time, the crew cannot be using LNAV because it has failed eg diverting to Penang in a chaotic cockpit. The Flight ID has been erased. To regain FMC operation, manually selecting the FMC selector to the right, will make the right FMCF as the active. The crew need to activate and execute the flight plan, enter the necessary performance data, and engage LNAV and VNAV. Now LNAV is available eg tracking west from Penang.

When the SATCOM logged on at 1825:27, the Flight ID was missing.

dr dre

20th Dec 2022, 05:25

GBO is correct in his initial failure scenario, it’s just the aftermath of that failure that need to be ironed out.

How can you possibly know that he is correct?

Sometimes people just need to take a step back and look at the big picture. There’s very little hard facts that can be established with this incident. Any theories on hypoxia or smoke inhalation or massive avionics failure are speculation. There’s no way they can be proven correct. Even if/when the data recorders may be recovered it still probably won’t be conclusive enough to end speculation.

Maybe this will be unsolved forever.

BuzzBox

20th Dec 2022, 07:05

Actually, “The active FMCF sends its flightplan data to the inactive FMCF for these conditions:
- Long term power ups
- BITE induced restart
- Flight plan entries and performance data changes.
When the active FMCF fails, a resynchronization (resync) occurs. Resyncs take about 1 second for an entire flight plan update. The active FMCF always resyncs the inactive FMCF. The active FMCF selection is a function of the FMC selector position and FMF partition health.” 777 Training Manual 34-61-00 p106

If the link between both FMCFs in the respective Left and Right AIMS Cabinet is severed, and the active Left FMCF has failed, a resync is not possible. An auto fail switch is not possible.
A software reset is a function of BITE/fault monitoring. If a software reset should occur, the active route becomes inactive, the performance data is erased, and LNAV and VNAV (if engaged) modes fail. At this time, the crew cannot be using LNAV because it has failed eg diverting to Penang in a chaotic cockpit. The Flight ID has been erased. To regain FMC operation, manually selecting the FMC selector to the right, will make the right FMCF as the active. The crew need to activate and execute the flight plan, enter the necessary performance data, and engage LNAV and VNAV. Now LNAV is available eg tracking west from Penang.

When the SATCOM logged on at 1825:27, the Flight ID was missing.

You've made two assumptions: First, that an auto failover is not possible; and second, that a software reset will occur. The manual does not state either of those things. You also conveniently ignored the first part of that paragraph you quoted from the manual:
FMC synchronization monitoring occurs at power-up and during normal operation. The active FMCF sends flight plan data to the inactive FMCF. This occurs so the inactive FMCF can take over if the active FMCF fails.

As I said previously (and as described in the manual), during normal operation the active FMC synchronises the inactive FMC any time there is a change to the flight plan or performance data. If a resync did not occur in your scenario, the inactive FMC is already synchronised with the active FMC that has failed.

Now, how about answering the questions you were asked, which you have not answered?

GBO

20th Dec 2022, 11:36

How would you do it in the jet you fly GBO?

Since dr dre didn’t respond to the original question, my response would be to use old school methods if VNAV was not available. You can approximate the descent point based on the 3-in-1 method or the metres button. eg From FL340 to sea level, 3x34=102NM, or FL340=10363m (103.63NM).

But if VNAV was available, what distance from Penang do you predict for the VNAV Top Of Descent Point into Penang if:
Cruise at FL340/294CAS,
Descent speed 268CAS,
Nil wind,
No STAR or approach loaded.

ferry pilot

20th Dec 2022, 20:05

The disappearance of MH370 is a somewhat complicated but straightforward story. It is not a mystery. Very few people today will take the time to research anything Google has not already done for them, and the reason you don’t find this there or anywhere else is because this story has every one of the buttons we dare not push for fear of offending someone. For anyone truly interested in what happened, and especially why it happened, all you need is a case of real curiosity, patience and persistence.

Genuine failures of transponders tend to happen very close to the scene of the accident and valuable things that deliberately disappear at sea do so for one reason and one reason only. Also, professional pilots with good reputations and no apparent deficits would have to be highly motivated to do what this one did. The events surrounding this man’s life prior to his final flight are well documented and very helpful.

Most of those with any need have known the facts and the true story since the event.
For the mildly curious and most of the world however, it will remain the greatest aviation mystery of all time.

Lookleft

20th Dec 2022, 21:09

Since dr dre didn’t respond to the original question, my response would be to use old school methods if VNAV was not available. You can approximate the descent point based on the 3-in-1 method or the metres button. eg From FL340 to sea level, 3x34=102NM, or FL340=10363m (103.63NM).

Nice try GBO but there are a few more considerations when manually calculating a ToD point. All you have done is demonstrate, once again, that you have NFI what you are talking about.

AreOut

20th Dec 2022, 22:14

I had a (possible) theory 8 years ago and I still stand by it. He maybe(just maybe) wanted to land on Christmas Island(which he frequently practiced on a simulator) and he went around to be so far from the radar and air traffic (which correlates with pings) and then failed because he was under pressure in cabin from other pilot/passengers or just lost the nav or what not, even the drift data supports this (the parts that washed ashore on Madagascar). Of course I don't think it IS what happened but just a possibility that's not being discussed because people are so convinced that he performed suicide just because of that. It's crazy how dark thoughts prevail in people's minds that they can't think of anything else.

ferry pilot

20th Dec 2022, 22:55

GBO

20th Dec 2022, 23:08

Nice try GBO but there are a few more considerations when manually calculating a ToD point. All you have done is demonstrate, once again, that you have NFI what you are talking about.

Lookleft, thanks for your compliments.

I’m interested to know where you think the VNAV Top Of Descent point is for Penang if:
VNAV is available,
Cruise at FL340/294CAS,
Descent speed 268CAS,
Nil wind,
No STAR or approach loaded,
Distance from IGARI to Penang is 222NM.

Lookleft

20th Dec 2022, 23:42

Why are you interested? So that you can add more information to your "How I can pretend to sound like an airline pilot" folder? I am going to keep my information about how to calculate a ToD in my SAPB folder. The information you have provided to calculate the ToD is just stupid and has some very unrealistic assumptions. I will leave you to discuss with other pilots within your "airline" when next you are in your "crewroom" what the unrealistic assumptions are.

ferry pilot

20th Dec 2022, 23:48

How can you possibly know that he is correct?

Sometimes people just need to take a step back and look at the big picture. There’s very little hard facts that can be established with this incident. Any theories on hypoxia or smoke inhalation or massive avionics failure are speculation. There’s no way they can be proven correct. Even if/when the data recorders may be recovered it still probably won’t be conclusive enough to end speculation.

Maybe this will be unsolved forever.
It was solved right after it happened.

GBO

20th Dec 2022, 23:50

I am going to keep my information about how to calculate a ToD in my SAPB folder. The information you have provided to calculate the ToD is just stupid and has some very unrealistic assumptions.

Thank you for your quick reply.

It’s OK to say you couldn’t calculate it, it’s not a competition.
Which assumption do you think is unrealistic?

Lookleft

21st Dec 2022, 00:35

Which assumption do you think is unrealistic?

See that was the trap right there and you walked into it. An actual airline pilot would have looked at your data and gone "Well you can't assume that parameter and why would you calculate a ToD based on that measurement." All I will say is that if you have calculated a ToD of 102nm in a WB from 340 then you better make the cabin preparation call very very early.

GBO

21st Dec 2022, 01:10

Lookleft, thanks for your insightful answer.

Given that the distance from IGARI to Penang is 222 NM, there is no requirement for MH370 to commence a descent immediately after the turn back.
It hasn’t reached the VNAV Top of Descent point from FL340 / 294CAS, for an ECON desc speed 268CAS in nil wind and without a Penang STAR or approach loaded.

Lookleft

21st Dec 2022, 02:17

Given that the distance from IGARI to Penang is 222 NM, there is no requirement for MH370 to commence a descent immediately after the turn back.

You say that with such authority. Ok if there is no requirement is there anything else that you can think of that might have MH370 needing to start its descent?

It hasn’t reached the VNAV Top of Descent point from FL340 / 294CAS, for an ECON desc speed 268CAS in nil wind and without a Penang STAR or approach loaded.

I like all the numbers used but without an FDR or CVR or any clue at all, what makes you think they are the precise numbers that MH370 used on its engineer/FA/expert flight simmer programmed descent to Penang?

BuzzBox

21st Dec 2022, 02:52

I’m interested to know where you think the VNAV Top Of Descent point is for Penang if:
VNAV is available,
Cruise at FL340/294CAS,
Descent speed 268CAS,
Nil wind,
No STAR or approach loaded,
Distance from IGARI to Penang is 222NM.

I'm curious to see where you intend going with this. At a heavy weight of about 210 T, the descent point from FL340 would be about 130 NM from Penang.

ferry pilot

21st Dec 2022, 03:14

The true story of MH370 is available to anyone but likely to be found by very few.
Even listing the primary elements of it would be frowned on by this and any other public forum.
The media lost interest as soon as they saw what it was. Their focus went straight to the accident theories that flourish to this day.

What really happened is no secret, and certainly no mystery. A cursory internet search of the pilot will reveal a man with a very interesting life beyond his professional one. Deeper investigation leads to more of the story, but it is far from simple. Like any investigation, there are leads that go in different directions, many of them wrong.

The internet is a marvelous tool for the amateur sleuth, but this is like a maze in a foreign country. They do things different here, but in the end the same human nature that drives anyone to crisis drives us all. Once you see what really happened it all comes together and makes as much sense as anything like this can.

This is a story worth knowing. And worth telling. A guaranteed Pulitzer Prize winner if it ever finds its way to the writer who can do it justice. Once you know what happened here you will never think about pilot suicide and murder.in the same way again.

Lead Balloon

21st Dec 2022, 03:21

I’ll bite: Please just tell us what happened, ferry pilot. I for one will vote 1 ferry pilot for a Pulitzer Prize.

ferry pilot

21st Dec 2022, 05:43

I told you what to look for. You have a keyboard and curiosity. Now all you need is time and patience.

Lookleft

21st Dec 2022, 06:12

Grasshopper, you forgot to address him as grasshopper.

ferry pilot

21st Dec 2022, 06:31

Grasshopper, you forgot to address him as grasshopper.

Looks like I am in the wrong room. Wouldn't be the first time.

Lead Balloon

21st Dec 2022, 06:33

Is it a padded cell? If yes, you’re in the correct room.

Icarus2001

21st Dec 2022, 10:11

oint from FL340 / 294CAS, for an ECON desc speed 268CAS

Another example showing why you are not a jet pilot. We fly IAS, we cannot see CAS.

dr dre

21st Dec 2022, 10:18

m
The internet is a marvelous tool for the amateur sleuth

And that’s why the internet sucks…..

AreOut

21st Dec 2022, 15:36

If you look carefully you will find quite a number of facts that support the real story.

I have looked carefully and found none. The "real story" just doesn't stand, it's based on assumption that the pilot succeeded to do what he wanted to do which has been a false premise from the beginning. Drift data doesn't support it, also from psychological POV it doesn't fit any known human behaviour. But investigators have decided that it has to be suicide and based all further investigation upon that assumption.

ferry pilot

21st Dec 2022, 16:20

Grasshopper, you forgot to address him as grasshopper.
Am I wasting my time here? Maybe. But this is a serious forum, read and contributed to by professionals. People who know when to listen and learn. And how to read between the lines.
They know exactly what I am talking about and sooner or later, one of them is going to start asking the right questions.

Lookleft

21st Dec 2022, 21:32

Am I wasting my time here?

No, you are wasting ours.

But this is a serious forum, read and contributed to by professionals. People who know when to listen and learn. And how to read between the lines.

Again no,have you read GBO's posts?

They know exactly what I am talking about

Thrice no. The only one who knows what you are talking about is you. Just state what you think happened and why then a discussion can ensue. You can start with my post at #82 if you like. No requirement for deep dives on the internet, just my assessment of why MH370 did what it did.

If you want to be an international man of mystery go right ahead but when you get ridiculed don't blame other people.

kingRB

21st Dec 2022, 21:43

Am I wasting my time here? Maybe. But this is a serious forum, read and contributed to by professionals. People who know when to listen and learn. And how to read between the lines.
They know exactly what I am talking about and sooner or later, one of them is going to start asking the right questions.

Guys, I'm the one who REALLY knows what happened, but i'm not going to tell you. You should just do your own research while I continue to make vague references and maintain my imagined position of superiority.

Icarus2001

21st Dec 2022, 21:46

… also from psychological POV it doesn't fit any known human behaviour.

Doesnt fit? Really? Are you aware of the German wings murder suicide? Are you aware of the Palembang murder suicide? Less well known is the Egyptair crash.

If we know anything about human behaviour it is that it holds an infinite number of ways to surprise by acting in a new and unthought of way. Think about the 2001 flights in to the world trade centre. Unheard of before it happened.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germanwings_Flight_9525

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SilkAir_Flight_185

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EgyptAir_Flight_990

ferry pilot

22nd Dec 2022, 01:58

Doesnt fit? Really? Are you aware of the German wings murder suicide? Are you aware of the Palembang murder suicide? Less well known is the Egyptair crash.

If we know anything about human behaviour it is that it holds an infinite number of ways to surprise by acting in a new and unthought of way. Think about the 2001 flights in to the world trade centre. Unheard of before it happened.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germanwings_Flight_9525

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SilkAir_Flight_185

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EgyptAir_Flight_990

You have that right Icarus

I am here for conversation, not argument. My apologies to anyone I have offended.
If I appear to be anything other than an amateur researcher with information to share
I can see how that would happen.

There is a story, but the media had no interest in it and neither did anyone else. Foreign country,
politics, religion and other things we tend to sweep under the carpet. And it is complicated.
Suicide, mass murder, airplane disappearance. That does not happen because someone’s lover was unfaithful. It is the kind of story investigative journalists would spend months uncovering
in former times. I found enough to know what happened but of course I can’t talk about it here.The first mention of the wrong topic on this or any forum would end it before it began.
Regrettably, no one cares. It appears to be a better tale of unsolved mystery than one of sordid
facts of life and hard ugly truths. For me, the attraction was the puzzle and the search for the solution. All I wanted to do here was pass this on to anyone else who likes that sort of thing. It really is a superb story.

slats11

22nd Dec 2022, 09:17

Interesting parallels between MH370 and C19.

MH370
A highly specific mechanical failure which took out all communications and pressurisation, but left other flight systems intact
Versus
Malfeasance and human involvement

C19
Sudden appearance of a virus with many odd features (including a furin cleavage site and a spike with a higher affinity for human than any animal ACE2 receptor) AND with no animal host found after 3 years of looking
Versus
A human engineered virus emerging in a city where AND when US was funding precisely this research.

In both cases, a preponderance of circumstantial evidence and Occams razor points strongly towards the 2nd explanation.
However in both cases there has been obfuscation by officials, political influence, and censorship which have kept trying to prop up the first explanation.

Interesting.

AreOut

22nd Dec 2022, 10:32

Doesnt fit? Really? Are you aware of the German wings murder suicide? Are you aware of the Palembang murder suicide? Less well known is the Egyptair crash.

If we know anything about human behaviour it is that it holds an infinite number of ways to surprise by acting in a new and unthought of way. Think about the 2001 flights in to the world trade centre. Unheard of before it happened.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germanwings_Flight_9525

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SilkAir_Flight_185

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EgyptAir_Flight_990

this really has nothing to do with those cases, this guy was a fervent opponent of Malaysian dictatorial government and there is a high likelihood he wanted to see the result of his action (making them look stupid by overflying the country), he practiced landing on CI with big planes on his simulator and likely wanted to request the asylum there (as there is already an asylum centre), facing death penalty in his own country Australia probably wouldn't extradit him to Malaysia

there is also a confirmed turn to Australia after he cleared indonesian FIR, if he wanted to crash the plane somewhere far he wouldn't bother to do that turn

facing the huge stress and possibly a resistance inside the plane he might have changed his decision along the way and really suicided himself, but I highly doubt that would be his original plan

Icarus2001

22nd Dec 2022, 10:49

this really has nothing to do with those cases, The shared characteristics are a pilot deliberately flying a serviceable aircraft into the ground (or water) thereby killing all occupants.

there is also a confirmed turn to Australia after he cleared indonesian FIR,

Do you have a graphic showing this or some reference?

Lead Balloon

22nd Dec 2022, 11:31

If I appear to be anything other than an amateur researcher with information to share
I can see how that would happen.But you're not sharing any information.

I found enough to know what happened but of course I can’t talk about it here.Yes, you can talk about it here. If you think there's any impediment, just PM me the information that shows what happened, and I'll talk about it here.

ferry pilot

22nd Dec 2022, 15:57

I posted it online, including here, and my posts were deleted immediately. I spelled it out and sent it to the media. Dead silence. But everyone I told in person agreed with the facts and came to the same conclusion.

You only have to look in two places to figure it out for yourself, as no doubt many, many others have. It will not be found in the media anytime soon, and you will see why as you learn more.
There was a court case shortly before the pilot’s final departure. He was there, and left “ visibly
upset” according to witnesses. Know what that case was about and how and why the pilot was
involved and you will have half the story.

The flight data recorder contains the other half. Obviously, the pilot did not want it to be found. He was not alone in that.

It took me about three days. You should have it in a matter of hours.

AreOut

22nd Dec 2022, 18:41

The shared characteristics are a pilot deliberately flying a serviceable aircraft into the ground (or water) thereby killing all occupants.

no it is not shared because we do NOT know if he deliberately did that, we don't know what was happening on the plane before the crash and it certainly wouldn't be the first time that their was a brawl in and around the cabin

Do you have a graphic showing this or some reference?

I don't have a graphic but it's assumption also made by investigators based on pings and max speed/range of the plane, if he wanted to go somewhere unnoticed he would turn further from Australia not closer to it

JustinHeywood

22nd Dec 2022, 18:56

Guys, I'm the one who REALLY knows what happened, but i'm not going to tell you. You should just do your own research while I continue to make vague references and maintain my imagined position of superiority.

No, actually it is I who know the truth about what happened that night. I can’t post it here because it will immediately be deleted, ‘they’ are monitoring every internet site across the globe in case some random poster works it out.

You might say that only someone of superior intelligence could join the dots and solve the mystery; that may be true, although it’s not for me to say.

slats11

22nd Dec 2022, 19:23

I don't have a graphic but it's assumption also made by investigators based on pings and max speed/range of the plane, if he wanted to go somewhere unnoticed he would turn further from Australia not closer to it

I always thought the proximity of the solar terminator was not coincidental. I suspected that dictated the final heading.

AreOut

22nd Dec 2022, 20:12

You only have to look in two places to figure it out for yourself, as no doubt many, many others have. It will not be found in the media anytime soon, and you will see why as you learn more.
There was a court case shortly before the pilot’s final departure. He was there, and left “ visibly
upset” according to witnesses. Know what that case was about and how and why the pilot was
involved and you will have half the story.

yeah it was likely the trigger but we still don't know another half of the story, we can just suppose

Now, what else happened just a week or two before MH370 flight?An ethiopian copilot has successifully hijacked the plane to Italy and landed in another country(Switzerland). So I am quite sure that story couldn't pass by the captain as he was proven aviation enthusiast and it sure went through his head many, many times during those two weeks, maybe he just wanted to imitate the action.

also if he searched about it, it would quickly lead him to the website of unsuccessful Ethiopian hijack in 1996 which had Australia as a destination for seeking asylum...

besides he was old enough (16yo back then) to remember hijacking of Malaysian MH653 which happened in 1977 and hijackers also changed the destination country but that one crashed

ferry pilot

22nd Dec 2022, 21:05

I may have said earlier that this is for the folks who like this sort of thing. If its not for you that’s fine but why do you feel the need to shoot the messenger just because drift data or whatever else you prefer does not support it? I am not trying to convince anyone of anything. There is nothing in this for me.

This is not a theory, or some brilliant idea. I am just an old airplane driver looking to see what happened here, same as you. I just happened to look somewhere maybe you didn’t. What I found was a puzzle that did not fit together very well, but I like puzzles. I stayed with it until I figured it out. It was not easy.

You want me to tell you the story, but what do you have if I do. A crock of BS from some old geezer with too much time on his hands. Do it the hard way and you learn things Google can’t teach you and other people will not believe.

slats11

22nd Dec 2022, 21:55

It is very likely the location is known.

SBIRS scans the entire global surface every 8 seconds looking for missile launch signatures. It has a higher resolution continuous tracking mode for anything of interest.

that’s how they knew which corner of which field the missile shooting down MH17 was launched from.

SLOW WALKER (1970s) demonstrated the ability to track (sliw) USSR bombers using the precursor of SBIRS. Think what happened to sensor technology, satellite coverage and computer processing in 50 years.
https://everything2.com/title/SLOW+WALKER

The plane was flying for hours after it was reported missing. You think no one looked?

Inmarsat may well be a cover for this. If US wanted to create a plausible alternative explanation for some data, they may well turn to UK.

For some reason, we don’t want to find that plane.

AreOut

22nd Dec 2022, 22:02

Icarus2001

22nd Dec 2022, 22:21

Because he knows what he has is…

You want me to tell you the story, but what do you have if I do. A crock of BS from some old geezer with too much time on his hands.

They are his words. Just another wacky theory based on snippets of data linked together illogically.

JustinHeywood

22nd Dec 2022, 23:16

I may have said earlier that this is for the folks who like this is not for you that’s fine but why do you feel the need to shoot the messenger just because drift data or whatever else you prefer does not support it? I am not trying to convince anyone of anything. There is nothing in this for me.

….I just happened to look somewhere maybe you didn’t.

A contentious discussion will almost always have people who claim to have the cure/answer/truth, but respond to any queries with some version of ‘do your own research’

When pressed, the ‘research’ they rely upon is invariably unconvincing- a crackpot website or YouTube ‘documentary’ - and the real reason for the reticence is revealed - they know that their evidence is weak.

Some sort of confirmation bias or motivated reasoning is usually involved. On the web, you can find support for almost any idea you may have.

Even a look at this thread will show people who are just as convinced as you are that they have the answers. All but one theory is wrong.

But we’re all just spitballing here, and it’s certainly fascinating for a dabbler like me to follow a reasonably friendly discussion by genuinely knowledgeable people.
I do find it frustrating when people make unsupported claims though.

AerialPerspective

22nd Dec 2022, 23:49

this really has nothing to do with those cases, this guy was a fervent opponent of Malaysian dictatorial government and there is a high likelihood he wanted to see the result of his action (making them look stupid by overflying the country), he practiced landing on CI with big planes on his simulator and likely wanted to request the asylum there (as there is already an asylum centre), facing death penalty in his own country Australia probably wouldn't extradit him to Malaysia

there is also a confirmed turn to Australia after he cleared indonesian FIR, if he wanted to crash the plane somewhere far he wouldn't bother to do that turn

facing the huge stress and possibly a resistance inside the plane he might have changed his decision along the way and really suicided himself, but I highly doubt that would be his original plan

Could you please consider punctuation, it's hard to tell with all those lower case letters whether you've accidentally hit return and it's a continuation of the previous sentence or a new one.

ferry pilot

23rd Dec 2022, 02:45

This is a long thread. I looked back through it and don’t see anything that looks promising in
the way of answers to what happened. Nothing. It has been almost nine years and the mystery is still a mystery. No one has any idea what happened or why aside from guesses, theories and speculation. I can certainly understand why you see me as one more wingnut with a new one.

Someone somewhere has to know something. This disaster took place at the culmination of a series of events that drove an apparently normal, intelligent and logical man to commit suicide and mass murder. He was not an introvert. He was in fact, an open book with an online presence and plenty of friends.

I don’t see much about him or his final days on this thread, in spite of the fact he is the only
suspect. And if you don’t think he did it, where is the serious and in depth discussion of why he should be considered innocent. Where is the serious and in depth discussion about anything?

That is certainly no mystery to me. Trying to start one has generated no end of ridicule and scorn.
I came here believing there would be people with a real interest if finding out what happened and why. I want you to see what I see and tell me what you think. Maybe I am wrong, but tell me that after you look. What have you got to lose?

ferry pilot

23rd Dec 2022, 04:20

I think there was a history of mental illness with the perpetrator of the GermanWings crash.

It's been suggested that if, as has been speculated, the Captain of MH370 had taken control of the flight and deliberately navigated it to the Southern Indian Ocean, his motivations were very different. If all you want to do is kill yourself, there are easier ways to do it. But if you want to leave behind a huge mystery and maybe cause enormous embarrassment to a government you are bitterly opposed to, then it makes sense.
Do you know why he was opposed to the government? It was their airline that employed him.

megan

23rd Dec 2022, 04:23

I came here believing there would be people with a real interest if finding out what happened and why. I want you to see what I see and tell me what you think. Maybe I am wrong, but tell me that after you look. What have you got to lose?Well, lets see what you've got, stating you know but not telling is not a way to initiate a conversation. If a prior post telling the story was deleted please PM me what you have.

ferry pilot

23rd Dec 2022, 04:33

AreOut

23rd Dec 2022, 04:54

Could you please consider punctuation, it's hard to tell with all those lower case letters whether you've accidentally hit return and it's a continuation of the previous sentence or a new one.

Sorry, I'll tend to use it more.

OK. the previous post asks Andy S if he knows why the pilot was so opposed to the government. Do you?
Yes or no is fine. Be patient please, but how much you know is important. It is not a short story and if it had to be
told from scratch we would be here a very long time.

He was opposed to the government for the same reasons most Russians are opposed to their government. Now imagine a Russian pilot going rogue, would he try to land in another country and request asylum or suicide himself and 200 passengers?

BuzzBox

23rd Dec 2022, 04:56

OK. the previous post asks Andy S if he knows why the pilot was so opposed to the government. Do you?
Yes or no is fine. Be patient please, but how much you know is important. It is not a short story and if it had to be
told from scratch we would be here a very long time.

Oh for FFS, stop talking in riddles and spit it out, or go away.

Yes, the pilot was opposed to the government. He was politically active in Anwar Ibrahim's People's Justice Party, had met the man several times, was supposedly related to him, and was extremely upset when Anwar's acquittal on sodomy charges was overturned and he was sentenced to jail.

Lead Balloon

23rd Dec 2022, 05:03

Ah. So the 'real' story is that the pilot intended to fly to Australia, to seek asylum and embarrass the Malaysian government, but something went wrong out over the Indian Ocean.

*yawn*

ferry pilot

23rd Dec 2022, 05:42

OK so you know what the court case was all about. and the fact the pilot was upset by the verdict. Perhaps you also know why he was upset.
The sodomy conviction had been overturned., and for quite some time it looked like there would be a more open acceptance of alternate lifestyles.
The pilot, protected by his union, may have been less discreet during this time and increased the animosity between himself and his employer, the government owned airline. It is quite possible they had quietly built a case against him similar to the one his friend was once again facing prison for when the government won their appeal.
If this seems credible to you then we can move on with rest of it. Almost done

Thanks for chiming in here. Sorry I was so hesitant but when I first tried to get this out right after it happened the lid came down so fast I hardly got started.

AreOut

23rd Dec 2022, 06:21

Ah. So the 'real' story is that the pilot intended to fly to Australia, to seek asylum and embarrass the Malaysian government, but something went wrong out over the Indian Ocean.

*yawn*

I don't claim it's the real story, just one of the possibilities which is not being considered because people are so blindfolded by suicide theory. Majority of plane hijacks didn't go according to plan but somehow this one had to.

GBO

23rd Dec 2022, 07:00

I'm curious to see where you intend going with this. At a heavy weight of about 210 T, the descent point from FL340 would be about 130 NM from Penang.
The TOPD from FL340 in nil wind, for 210T, is approximately 130 NM from the airport.

If we now look at the potential diversion to BANDA ACEH, then at the last primary radar position, approximately 10 NM north-west of MEKAR at 1822:12, the aircraft is 110.4 nautical track miles from Banda Aceh via NILAM-SANOB ie it is past TOPD.

If everyone was deceased at TOPD, then the autopilot mode changed to VNAV ALT, maintained FL340, and the serviceable right Autothrottle reduced speed to 267 KIAS (268 CAS for MH370).

Given the known winds (010T/3kts) and ISA deviation (+10.9), then the groundspeed has reduced from 498 knots to approximately 458 knots.

The SATCOM logged on again at 1825:27, therefore from the last radar point it has travelled 24.8 NM, thus on the LNAV route it is approximately 2 NM west of NILAM turning left to SANOB through heading 262T. The track to the Indian Ocean satellite at this point is 262T.

Therefore, without any human intervention, it is highly likely that the SATCOM could finally commence its log on, when it automatically switched from the inoperative left HGA to the right HGA, which is now exposed to the satellite on the right side of the fuselage!

BuzzBox

23rd Dec 2022, 07:13

If this seems credible to you then we can move on with rest of it.

I guess it’s as credible as some of the other theories. Is there any evidence?

Lead Balloon

23rd Dec 2022, 07:18

For the sake of whatever deity/ies you worship, GBO, will you stop treating TOPD as some kind of immutable and immovable outcome of some holy manual? It's not the Bible or whatever equivalent document you thumb through to avoid going to whatever bad place you imagine you could go.

When a real pilot in the real world is "overwhelmed and bombarded with ... systems failures" - your words - the first thing the pilot will do, after recovering from the HSM, is point the f*cker downhill in the general direction of a friendly piece of tarmac. The first thing, that is, if the pilot wants to save the aircraft and POB as quickly as practicable. TOPD calculations? Please: Give it a break.

GBO

23rd Dec 2022, 09:39

When a real pilot in the real world is "overwhelmed and bombarded with ... systems failures" - your words - the first thing the pilot will do, after recovering from the HSM, is point the f*cker downhill in the general direction of a friendly piece of tarmac. The first thing, that is, if the pilot wants to save the aircraft and POB as quickly as practicable. TOPD calculations? Please: Give it a break.

MH370 conducted a 180 degree turn, descended 1000 feet to the appropriate hemispherical cruising level, headed to the nearest suitable airport, and did not descend for 23 minutes.

QF1 conducted a 180 degree turn, descended 1000 feet to the appropriate hemispherical cruising level, headed to the nearest suitable airport, and did not descend for 23 minutes.

C441

23rd Dec 2022, 11:09

…...QF1 conducted a 180 degree turn, descended 1000 feet to the appropriate hemispherical cruising level, headed to the nearest suitable airport, and did not descend for 23 minutes.

QF1 (assuming you mean the very recent event) had a single intermittent failure indication, followed the checklist instructions that did not include any mention of an immediate descent requirement, and diverted to the nearest suitable airport - probably after discussion with engineers via satcom and clearance from ATC. At no point was there a checklist directed requirement to do other than a normal descent as per normal SoPs. All indications are that this was a very different scenario to MH370 so your comparison is not particularly valid.

Are you now asserting that MH370 did not have a pressurisation problem that would have required an immediate descent to 10,000ft or LSAlt? If so, even if the crew were overcome by smoke or some other contaminant, why did they not make a single radio call to advise of their emergency and required diversion?

AreOut

23rd Dec 2022, 11:14

are there still people that believe this wasn't a deliberate action to take the plane towards IO/Australia as undetected as possible?

ferry pilot

23rd Dec 2022, 16:19

I guess it’s as credible as some of the other theories. Is there any evidence?
The answer is no, and there never will be. That is why the airplane is where it is. There is no theory here, just indisputable facts. The pilot left the courtroom immediately after a verdict that drove him to suicide. A few hours later he flew an airplane full of passengers to a place he was certain it would never be found. There have been countless deliberate disappearances at sea, all for the same reason. Insurance.

Seventy five thousand dollars a seat if the airplane is never found. If it were found, and proved to be the fault of the airline through the actions of their employee Shah, liability is unlimited. Sue for all you can get.

Whatever it was the government held over his head was unleashed by the verdict. Very likely loss of his job, pension and reputation in addition to prison. Enough to drive a man to suicide. But even then, scandal and disgrace, loss of face, reputation and even the pension his family would need.

He was in a position so unique it could not be written in fiction. A devil’s choice no one could ever imagine having to make. He was a good man. Ask anyone who knew him, especially at the airline where he worked for so long. Stellar reputation, no possible way he could have done this.

AreOut

23rd Dec 2022, 20:40

people who are committed to fight for justice don't suicide just like that, especially if they have to bring 200 innocent people along

GBO

23rd Dec 2022, 21:49

Referring to the report, “Bayesian Methods in the Search for MH370”(Fig 4.3), it predicts that the speed observed on primary radar from Penang to the last primary radar point at 1822:12, will equate to the aircraft being too far west of the 1825:27 BTO arc (satellite data).

Using THEIR thinking, then the only way around this is to disregard the 1825:27 BTO arc and use the 1828:06 BTO arc i.e. continue northwest along N571 to an arbitrary point 25 NM north west of NILAM. It also requires human intervention to repower the SATCOM. Then at the 1828 position, the aircraft would need to turn south to meet the remaining BTO/BFO data. Thus, to reach the 1941:03 BTO arc, it is still travelling at cruise speed. This leads to an endpoint around 38S 88E, but has the problem of not enough fuel on board to do that, and a search area that has been extensively searched to no avail.

But if we look at the diversion to Banda Aceh via NILAM-SANOB with an inoperative left HGA and left Autothrottle, then at the slow down at TOPD to Banda Aceh, the aircraft will NOT overshoot the 1825:27 BTO arc. The primary radar and satellite data are then correct. No human intervention is required (crew deceased), since the switch to the right HGA completes the log on. The BTO and turn at 1828:06 is also correct, since the aircraft is turning left at SANOB to Banda Aceh, or possibly ANSAX. Note, if it is ANSAX, then the ANSAX 2C arrival and ILS RWY 17 has NOT been loaded, as this would not match BTO data, and the recorded easterly wind over Banda Aceh is slightly in error.

The aircraft overflies Banda Aceh airport, reverts to magnetic heading, and continues south. Note, the recordings from the Indonesian radars at Lhokseumawe and Sabang are not available. The flightpath south meets all BTO/BFO data and crashes near the seventh arc, most likely inside the seventh arc at 34S 93E. It matches the fuel exhaustion point precisely. This site remains unsearched to the 40 nautical mile allowance.

slats11

24th Dec 2022, 04:45

This guy wanted an enduring mystery. Hence he did not want the plane to randomly crash after fuel exhaustion. There was always the small chance this would be seen by a stray fishing trawler or yacht or other vessel.

Hence you can make 2 probable assumptions
1. Conscious and in control until the end
2. The water would have been sufficiently dark that ships running lights would have been visible.

Did he ditch, or a high speed dive? If a controlled ditching to reduce fragmentation and debris, then he would have needed some early daylight.

So pretty close to the solar terminator - perhaps a bit west of it so he had some twilight but not yet sunrise.

GBO

24th Dec 2022, 06:58

slats11

So you’ve started with a conclusion and now working backwards.

Do you have any science or evidence to back it up?

Do you have a flightpath and endpoint?

Have you considered the satellite data, or the fuel burn, or the radar flight path, or the lack of Flight ID reason, or the autopilot modes used, or the reason for the logons at 1825 & 0019Z?

slats11

24th Dec 2022, 08:13

I’m not certain the data really came from Inmarsat. It certainly hasn’t led us to the wreckage.

Maybe SBIRS rather than Inmarsat.

Icarus2001

24th Dec 2022, 09:10

Do you have any science or evidence to back it up?

Well you certainly don’t.

AreOut

24th Dec 2022, 21:36

I’m not certain the data really came from Inmarsat. It certainly hasn’t led us to the wreckage.

because the data isn't conclusive and it was interpreted incorrectly (obv) based on false assumptions

grizzled

24th Dec 2022, 22:54

[QUOTE=GBO; the speed observed on primary radar from Penang to the last primary radar point at 1822:12, will equate to the aircraft being too far west of the 1825:27 BTO arc (satellite data).

Using THEIR thinking, then the only way around this is to disregard the 1825:27 BTO arc and use the 1828:06 BTO arc [/QUOTE]

This is an example of taking one bit of information and using it -- incorrectly -- to build a pillar for a preferred theory. To suggest that the "only way around" the speed observed on primary radar is to disregard the 1825.27 BTO arc divulges an ignorance of primary radar -- especially that particular primary radar.

Grizz

GBO

25th Dec 2022, 22:45

This is an example of taking one bit of information and using it -- incorrectly -- to build a pillar for a preferred theory. To suggest that the "only way around" the speed observed on primary radar is to disregard the 1825.27 BTO arc divulges an ignorance of primary radar -- especially that particular primary radar.

Grizz

Exactly, trying to fit a flightpath continuing northwest at the same airspeed from MEKAR, does NOT meet all the evidence.
It ignores the 1825:27 BTO arc.

The flightpath that fits the evidence (primary radar, satellite data) is:
MEKAR-NILAM-SANOB-(ANSAX)-Banda Aceh, with a slow down at TOPD.
The slow down doesn’t fly past the 1825:27 arc.

Those pesky facts!

Icarus2001

25th Dec 2022, 23:40

GBO if the crew had the presence of mind to divert to Penang why did they not descend?

Why did they miss a master warning for cabin altitude?

Why did they overfly Penang and turn NW?

If flight modes changed from LNAV to HDG then who did this if the crew were unconscious?

Why did the aircraft then turn S?

Finally your thoughts on this track…

https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1072x756/331301af_2935_4dbf_90b2_5cfda6c10b19_0d59b4866aa530a6e112997 e56b8653e15346f9a.png

GBO

26th Dec 2022, 07:03

GBO if the crew had the presence of mind to divert to Penang why did they not descend?If the crew oxygen bottle has ruptured in the Main Equipment Center, and the P105 Left Wire Integration Panel & Left AIMS Cabinet are destroyed, the crew will be overwhelmed by failures.

The resultant failures, task complexity, mental overload and higher priorities can result in the descent being overlooked.

Why did they miss a master warning for cabin altitude?Without the valid landing altitude data, the cabin altitude warning message shows at 15,000 feet, not 10,000 feet. Without 4 DUs, the PFD, ND, MFD and EICAS information are competing for space on the remaining 2 DUs. The crew may have selected the right inboard to MFD to run checklists, thus there is no EICAS information immediately visible, it requires the crew to switch the right inboard back to EICAS. Things can be overlooked in a stressful cockpit and mildly hypoxic.

Both pilots were smokers, as stated on their last medical renewals. They are more susceptible to hypoxia.

Why did they overfly Penang and turn NW?
If the crew should miss the GRADUAL decompression event, hypoxia will lead to mental confusion. Strange decisions will be made.

If flight modes changed from LNAV to HDG then who did this if the crew were unconscious?At the end of route to Banda Aceh in LNAV, the autopilot mode remains in LNAV but reverts to maintaining the last magnetic heading. No crew input is required.

Why did the aircraft then turn S?The aircraft was heading south because the autopilot was following the diversion route to Banda Aceh via VAMPI-MEKAR-NILAM-SANOB-(ANSAX)-Banda Aceh. Once it reaches Banda Aceh it is already heading south. It continues south on autopilot until fuel exhaustion. ie 34S 93E with inop left Autothrottle

Finally your thoughts on this track…It ignores the primary radar data through the Malacca Strait.
WSPR data is not accurate enough to plot a course.
The WSPR flight path is extremely complex, when compared to the simple diversion to Banda Aceh route via NILAM-SANOB.