Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific
Reload this Page >

CSIRO says it knows where MH370 is

Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Airline and RPT Rumours & News in Australia, enZed and the Pacific

CSIRO says it knows where MH370 is

Old 24th Apr 2017, 13:39
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Sunshine Coast
Posts: 836
Received 20 Likes on 8 Posts
Originally Posted by Capt Kremin View Post
The track taken from the tip of Sumatra to the most likely search area was a straight line.
There is no evidence to suggest that MH370's track on its final leg south into the Southern Indian Ocean had to have been a straight line. In fact, Dr Bobby Ulich recently published a paper Interpretation of MH370 18:25–18:41 Satellite Data that demonstrates that the curving path generated by having the final leg flown on a constant heading of 180T from near waypoint ANOKO at Best Holding speed produces an excellent fit to the BTO and BFO data. The flight path produced initially curves to the west and then to the east under the influence of the prevailing winds.
MickG0105 is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2017, 03:14
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: FL290
Posts: 753
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
A 25Cent levy should be paid on every airline ticket and funds kept in trust for this type of SAR op. To say there is no money is like saying we dont care
1a sound asleep is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2017, 05:14
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 2,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Talk about "alternative facts". It is NOT known that the transponder was "turned off". What is known is that the transponder signal ceased. That could be because someone turned it off or because the system failed for some reason.
Go and find the commentary from the CNN panel that happened after the event. The facts described are hardly 'alternative'. They were presented immediately after the event. Only when they didn't fit into the story that wanted to be presented that they became 'alternative'.

Ask your mate about the descent profile flown and tracking after it turned around.
neville_nobody is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2017, 06:13
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by neville_nobody View Post
....the commentary from the CNN panel that happened after the event....
You're relying on MEDIA as your source of the facts? As opposed to the raw data being analysed and presented by the ATSB investigators? Says it all.

Originally Posted by neville_nobody View Post
Ask your mate about the descent profile flown and tracking after it turned around.
I have. And at the end of the day nothing is absolutely clear-cut and nothing is conclusive. Problem is, media will turn that grey information into "facts" and they become self-perpetuating.
Ushuaia is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2017, 06:39
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Sunshine Coast
Posts: 836
Received 20 Likes on 8 Posts
Originally Posted by neville_nobody View Post
Go and find the commentary from the CNN panel that happened after the event. The facts described are hardly 'alternative'. They were presented immediately after the event. Only when they didn't fit into the story that wanted to be presented that they became 'alternative'.

Ask your mate about the descent profile flown and tracking after it turned around.
This is a reasonable example of the over-reliance on the media and the under-reliance on proper factual information and research that has plagued the discussions on MH370 pretty much since the get go.

The transponder stopped transmitting at 1720:36 UTC; the reason for that is unknown, it may have been a failure or it may have been turned off. It is worth noting that the right and left transponder circuit breakers are rated at only 5 amps, making them amongst the less heavily rated circuit breakers in the P11 Overhead Panel.

As for "the descent profile flown"; there wasn't one. Of the various primary radar traces for the airplane as it tracked back over the Malaysian peninsular, only three contain altitude data:

1. 17:30:35 - 17:35 UTC (01:30:35 - 01:35 MYT), the radar return was at a registered height of 35,700 ft.

2. 17:36 - 17:36:40 UTC (01:36 - 01:36:40), the radar return was at a registered height of between 31,100 and 33,000 ft.

3. 17:39:59 UTC (01:39:59 MYT) , the radar return was at a registered height of 32,800 ft.

Allowing for the vagaries of primary radar with regards to determining altitude over short traces, that data suggests an altitude, or band of altitudes in a tight range, just below the previously established cruise of 35,000 feet, possibly consistent with a decent to FL340 as appropriate for the new westerly heading. Contrary to some early media reports, there was no radar-evading, low level run across the Malaysian Peninsula. Subsequent to the loss of transponder signal the airplane executed a fairly standard diversion manoeuvre, initially towards the nearest airport, Kota Bharu (which was closed), and then towards the nearest suitable airport, Penang.
MickG0105 is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2017, 06:51
  #26 (permalink)  
TWT
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: troposphere
Posts: 791
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
There isn't the money available to search every 'possible' crash site. We could search this 'new' 25,000 km3 area and still come up with nothing. Then the boffins would come up with another new area,and so on. The cost/benefit equation is not very promising.

If a wealthy person wanted to donate money to fund more searches,that would be good but I think it's time to let it go,accept that we'll never know what happened and move on.
TWT is online now  
Old 25th Apr 2017, 08:18
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 2,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
You're relying on MEDIA as your source of the facts? As opposed to the raw data being analysed and presented by the ATSB investigators? Says it all.
Except that the information presented by CNN at the time is very similar to what the ATSB has.

Other than the guessimates made on the Satellite links there hasn't been much more 'new' information.

What has changed is the rhetoric, and anyone who suggests hijack or military op is quickly shot down as being 'conspiracy' nut. Like it or not every option is still on the table until more evidence is found.
neville_nobody is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2017, 10:26
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 1998
Location: Mesopotamos
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I suspect the reason China is not throwing big money into any future search is because they must already know something.

If we don't spend a single cent from this point on then a version of the truth will eventually wash up on a shore, guaranteed.
cattletruck is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2017, 12:06
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by neville_nobody View Post
What has changed is the rhetoric, and anyone who suggests hijack or military op is quickly shot down as being 'conspiracy' nut.
Nonsense. I'm not dismissing nefarious conduct or outside interference either. They are certainly possibilities.

Originally Posted by neville_nobody View Post
Like it or not every option is still on the table until more evidence is found.
You are exactly correct. But that is precisely NOT some people assert. Read post #15, for instance. And red herrings, outright disinformation about "descent profiles" for example, are outright mischievious.

Originally Posted by MickG0105 View Post
This is a reasonable example of the over-reliance on the media and the under-reliance on proper factual information and research that has plagued the discussions on MH370 pretty much since the get go.
Absolutely spot on, MickG0105. Your entire post, in fact, is spot on.
Ushuaia is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2017, 12:34
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: asia
Posts: 196
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I'm with Pinky on this one.
International Trader is offline  
Old 26th Apr 2017, 03:53
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Near St Lawrence River
Age: 52
Posts: 198
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Both CSIRO and the ATSB have been contacted by Guardian Australia for their response. Godfrey said he believed a crash at 30 deg S latitude, well north of the seabed search, “fit the available data” published by CSIRO as well as the timing and location of debris that had been found.
“A MH370 endpoint at 35 deg S latitude does not fit the fact that the underwater search has already discounted this location to a 97% level of certainty.”
I strongly presume that 97% level of confidence comes from assumption that MH370 flew at cruise altitude, also I guess there is kind of confidential notice 97% we didn't see it, hence it was not there period! Better never find it instead admitting that we didn't see it right under our nose"
_Phoenix is offline  
Old 26th Apr 2017, 05:26
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Sydney
Age: 59
Posts: 1,543
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Icarus2001 View Post
To those that still believe that there is an issue with the aircraft that caused the loss please apply some logical and critical thinking. It is known that the aircraft turned off route and flew along an FIR boundary, transponder was turned off. That is not an aircraft fault.

Secondly the "authorities" have more information that is not in the public domain. I have this from a friend close to the action, there was no fault with the aircraft.
"transponder was turned off. That is not an aircraft fault"
Prove it! The transponder stopped transmitting, nobody knows why, therefore it COULD be an aircraft fault.

"I have this from a friend close to the action, there was no fault with the aircraft."
Your friend could only KNOW this if he/she was on board the aircraft, therefore speculation.
Tankengine is offline  
Old 26th Apr 2017, 05:42
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Brisvegas
Posts: 3,594
Likes: 0
Received 28 Likes on 21 Posts
"I have this from a friend close to the action, there was no fault with the aircraft."
Your friend could only KNOW this if he/she was on board the aircraft, therefore speculation.
This is simply untrue, you need to think a little more laterally.

Non so blind as those who will not see.
Icarus2001 is offline  
Old 26th Apr 2017, 06:20
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Enzed
Posts: 2,289
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Icarus, the only lateral thinking I can come up with is if someone knows for certain it wasn't a problem with the aircraft why hasn't this been made public and why have they allowed the search charade to continue?

There's not much point in such an extensive search if there incontrovertible evidence the aircraft wasn't at fault.
27/09 is offline  
Old 26th Apr 2017, 06:25
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Brisvegas
Posts: 3,594
Likes: 0
Received 28 Likes on 21 Posts
There's not much point in such an extensive search if there incontrovertible evidence the aircraft wasn't at fault
How much has Boeing contributed?
Icarus2001 is offline  
Old 26th Apr 2017, 07:18
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Sydney
Age: 59
Posts: 1,543
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Icarus2001 View Post
This is simply untrue, you need to think a little more laterally.

Non so blind as those who will not see.
Your second line is true.
The rest of your story is speculation, you call "facts".

It is a fact it crashed, there are alternative speculations as to why, and even where.
Tankengine is offline  
Old 26th Apr 2017, 07:21
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Sydney
Age: 59
Posts: 1,543
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Icarus2001 View Post
How much has Boeing contributed?
Probably nothing?
They would not want it found if there is a chance it is their fault.
Better to whisper "murder/suicide, nothing wrong with our aircraft"
Tankengine is offline  
Old 26th Apr 2017, 11:44
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: ...second left, past the lights.
Posts: 1,093
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Yeh right... Boeing was not at fault and you can guarantee they have been heavily consulted, behind closed doors (without Perth's flogga G.T.!) right from the very moment it "went off the screen" and a number of Gulstreams darted out of Diego Garcia & Guam into KL!
Let's keep to the know facts - the aircraft was deftly manoeuvred along the borders of Malay; Thai and Indo airspace right to a point above Bandah Aceh, both in altitude and headings. There were over a dozen "suitable" and capable airfields he flew past, he could have used, if they wanted to.
I personally thought he took the northern arc of "engine pings" to sneak up into the back of China with his "Cargo" but who knows?
What was on the Cargo manifest needs to be examined. Lips have been sealed over this part haven't they!
Herein lies the motivation for such a stunt, I contend.
Chocks Away is offline  
Old 26th Apr 2017, 12:27
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Enroute from Dagobah to Tatooine...!
Posts: 790
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It is a fact it crashed
Is it? Do we know that with certainty?
Captain Nomad is offline  
Old 26th Apr 2017, 13:02
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Sunshine Coast
Posts: 836
Received 20 Likes on 8 Posts
Originally Posted by Chocks Away View Post
Let's keep to the know facts - the aircraft was deftly manoeuvred along the borders of Malay; Thai and Indo airspace right to a point above Bandah Aceh, both in altitude and headings.
Well let's start by replacing that media hype you're spruiking with the real known facts. The airplane most assuredly did not manoeuvre, deftly or otherwise, along the Malaysian-Thai FIR boundary. After turning back off its planned flight path near IGARI MH370 flew on a track that took it over, not along, a stretch of about 120 kilometers of the Bangkok (Thailand)‐ Kuala Lumpur (Malaysia) airspace boundary that traces the Golok River. Subsequently, MH370 remained firmly in the Kuala Lumpur FIR (Malaysian airspace) at all times until it was lost from radar.

The turnback from near IGARI is pretty much what would be expected in the case of an evolving inflight emergency with the flight crew commanding an initial diversion to Kota Bharu (WMKC) by selecting it off the FMC Alternate Page (WMKC would have been the No 1 “default” option) and commanding Divert Now, Execute followed a few minutes later by the choice of destination being amended to Penang (WMKP).

There is not a scintilla of evidence to support the notion that MH370 flew to a point above (over?) Banda Aceh; it disappeared off radar heading west-north-west about 80 nautical miles north-north-east of Banda Aceh and its final turn south would have brought it no closer than about 50 nautical miles to the west of Banda Aceh.
MickG0105 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Copyright © 2023 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.