Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

Malaysian Airlines MH370 contact lost

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Malaysian Airlines MH370 contact lost

Old 16th Mar 2014, 16:24
  #4621 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: wherever
Age: 55
Posts: 1,616
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The difference is you add it as an afterthought whereas it's the first investigative action in the procedures. It shows clearly the reason electrical equipment must be able to be electrically isolated individually and therefore addresses the original point.
FE Hoppy is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2014, 16:26
  #4622 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Hollywood, CA
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The latest speculation (Daily Mail) suggests that Captain Shah was behind this, given his political obsessions, sympathy for the Malayan opposition leader whom he'd just watched being jailed, along with a picture of him wearing a tee shirt with the slogan "Democracy is Dead." Oh, and he has a home simulator. Let's go along with this for a moment.

He's secured the flight deck, turned off the transponder(s), and turned off the pax oxygen rendering passengers harmless or dead. Now what? He has the fuel, and is now in a position to aim his ship and do something somewhere to shock the world, as happened on 9/11. So should he fly to the Northwest, or Southwest, and land the plane, and then do it? No sense in that. The time is now. But he doesn't do it . . .

Which is where the theory falls down. We are all theorists now. Every one of us, governments and people. An answer had better be forthcoming eventually, because it is driving us nuts. The only people made happy are Hollywood screen-writers, free to write a bunch of stories to fanciful conclusions.
Tfor2 is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2014, 16:34
  #4623 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: On Ground
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I hope this doesn't get lost in the spotters conspiracy theories on here. But if you go back to

this article here: it says in black and white that MAS had information that the plane landed in Nanning.

Who told them that? And why didn't they dismiss it like they dismissed the "possible air turn back" as far back as 9 March,

here,

possible oil slicks,

possible debris fields on the 10th and 12th, a "seafloor event" at 2:55am on 8 April.

Why hasn't anyone asked them about Nanning? And most of all, WHERE DID THEY GET THAT INFORMATION FROM? They're first reports said radar contact was lost at 0220 local, quickly corrected to 0121 when they decided to hide their primary radar data. Fair enough, but why then did they leave six navies searching for almost a week in the South China Sea, when they knew from the get go that that 9M-MRO was not there?

I'm not trying to put the blame on some night shift military radar operator not wondering what that blip was at FL350, then FL450, then 230, then 295. If he missed it then it probably represents a culture that filters down from the top. If he reported it (which is likely considering the minister's two 180s before arriving back at the same place we were at before he was woken up on the 8th) then I shudder to think what else is known but but must be kept from the rest of us. Mr Minister, you had your own primary radar plots but because you were asleep now you want 25 other countries to share their primary radar data with you?

Considering where we're at now they may just do that. I just hope at the least you lose your job, regardless of whether or not we recover the 237 people on board. Besides that, I would hope you're police force would have searched the pilots' homes before that stage-managed search we saw on Saturday.

They knew it was a hijack from the first morning, just hoping it would be found crashed before they had to admit it. Sad to say, and not likely, but now I'm hoping it was some rogue action by the crew and the passengers are waiting for a ransom somewhere.
mikechekker is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2014, 16:35
  #4624 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: California
Age: 63
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
ACARS manual shutdown

@Ian_W

Precisely right!

If the ACARS went through a normal log-off sequence then it was shut down deliberately. If it just stopped reporting then it could have been some other reason. As it has been said multiple times 'the ACARS was deliberately switched off' that implies that it went through a log-off sequence and tidy shut down, something it would NOT have done if the power to it was cut by the circuit breaker being tripped.
ACARS log-off from the cockpit is a reasonable interpretation that fits two stated facts:
  1. cessation of normal ACARS data
  2. multiple hourly SAT data link connections with no buffered data to send

For those in the catastrophic failure camp - I haven't seen ACARS - LOGGED OFF in the various emergency procedures stated here so far.
techgeek is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2014, 16:37
  #4625 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Zone of Alienation
Age: 79
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The difference is you add it as an afterthought whereas it's the first investigative action in the procedures. It shows clearly the reason electrical equipment must be able to be electrically isolate individually and therefore addresses the original point.
When/if I have smoke in the flight deck, I'm going to know right away which system is offending? You sure about that?

I'm going far, far out on a limb here and pretty much say that unless it's clear it's a coffee maker, oven, or something not in the FD, I'm not going to have time, nor want to waste time analyzing which system it is, then waste more time considering how to do that ("where is that darn VHF3 circuit breaker again?!"). Rather, I'm going to depower busses PER THE CHECKLIST, and wait to see if smoke decreases or not. All the while running toward the ERA or nearest airport.

To add to my point, an airplane like a 777 has avionics in the bay. Most panels in the flight deck are merely control heads. To try and determine from which LRU/bussbar the smoke is emanating is virtually impossible.
FIRESYSOK is online now  
Old 16th Mar 2014, 16:37
  #4626 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: On Ground
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I hope this doesn't get lost in the spotters conspiracy theories on here. But if you go back to

this article here: it says in black and white that MAS had information that the plane landed in Nanning.

Who told them that? And why didn't they dismiss it like they dismissed the "possible air turn back" as far back as 9 March,

here,

possible oil slicks,

possible debris fields on the 10th and 12th, a "seafloor event" at 2:55am on 8 April.

Why hasn't anyone asked them about Nanning? And most of all, WHERE DID THEY GET THAT INFORMATION FROM? They're first reports said radar contact was lost at 0220 local, quickly corrected to 0121 when they decided to hide their primary radar data. Fair enough, but why then did they leave six navies searching for almost a week in the South China Sea, when they knew from the get go that that 9M-MRO was not there?

I'm not trying to put the blame on some night shift military radar operator not wondering what that blip was at FL350, then FL450, then 230, then 295. If he missed it then it probably represents a culture that filters down from the top. If he reported it (which is likely considering the minister's two 180s before arriving back at the same place we were at before he was woken up on the 8th) then I shudder to think what else is known but but must be kept from the rest of us. Mr Minister, you had your own primary radar plots but because you were asleep now you want 25 other countries to share their primary radar data with you?

Considering where we're at now they may just do that. I just hope at the least you lose your job, regardless of whether or not we recover the 237 people on board. Besides that, I would hope you're police force would have searched the pilots' homes before that stage-managed search we saw on Saturday.

You guys knew it was a hijack from the first morning, just hoping it would be found crashed before they had to admit it. Sad to say, and not likely, but now I'm hoping it was some rogue action by the crew and the passengers are waiting for a ransom somewhere.
mikechekker is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2014, 16:38
  #4627 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: home
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The latest speculation (Daily Mail) suggests that Captain Shah was behind this, given his political obsessions, sympathy for the Malayan opposition leader whom he'd just watched being jailed, along with a picture of him wearing a tee shirt with the slogan "Democracy is Dead." Oh, and he has a home simulator. Let's go along with this for a moment.

He's secured the flight deck, turned off the transponder(s), and turned off the pax oxygen rendering passengers harmless or dead. Now what? He has the fuel, and is now in a position to aim his ship and do something somewhere to shock the world, as happened on 9/11. So should he fly to the Northwest, or Southwest, and land the plane, and then do it? No sense in that. The time is now. But he doesn't do it . . .

Which is where the theory falls down. We are all theorists now. Every one of us, governments and people. An answer had better be forthcoming eventually, because it is driving us nuts. The only people made happy are Hollywood screen-writers, free to write a bunch of stories to fanciful conclusions.
The theory does not fall down. Maybe he did not manage to complete whatever the plan was. Or he did not had a precise plan at all. Maybe someone was able to enter the cockpit and a struggle ensued, crashing the airplan. Or it flew a long way with nobody at the controls. We just don't know. What we know, with much probability, is that this has been caused by intentional actions, unfortunately both pilots are prime suspects.

Last edited by lapp; 16th Mar 2014 at 16:49.
lapp is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2014, 16:40
  #4628 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: 12E CTY
Age: 69
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by ana1936
We are trying to reconstruct an explanation for that map.
The last ping received was on the red arc. The aircraft was not necessarily on the arc prior to that time.

The aircraft was not necessarily at the western-most end of the arc at that time. The western end of the arc is probably where the pings would have been seen by next satellite west (but were not).

For all we know, the aircraft may have been on the ground at that time (but that implies the northern arc). Being on the ground may have resulted in two very similar pings tho.

I do not believe there has been anything that describes which arc earlier pings were on. Earlier would still have been mirrored north/south, but might (with some squinting of the eyes) given clues to which was it was moving after the last PSR contact.

Also keep in mind that there could have been some amount of time after the last ping that the aircraft continued to move.
SLFgeek is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2014, 16:40
  #4629 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Internet
Age: 47
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Now India has suspended the search:

India suspends search operation for missing Malaysian aircraft - The Times of India

Then Malaysian PM calls Indian PM for help in locating plane:

Missing plane: Malaysia?s premier calls Indian PM for help | Business Line

Rumor is that, India is not happy with information shared by Malaysia so far. India feels that they are being sent on wild goose chase and seem they support China theory that plane never flew west.

Seriously, whats happening.
Neogen is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2014, 16:44
  #4630 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: California
Age: 63
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
@Surtchris

My gut instinct has never wavered that MH370 lost contact when it suffered a fatal decompression as a result of structural failure and if this is the case then this hasnít happened since the Comets in the fifties.
... and the wreckage continued to contact satellites for hours thereafter but was missing when everyone went looking for it so the US Navy decided to go to the Indian Ocean to search for it.
techgeek is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2014, 16:47
  #4631 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: MURDO
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
DC, if Vietnamese ATS gets no reply, it will eventually start a SAR phase, as it probably did. If being voodoo, it would be far better to wait until after contact with Vietnamese ATS, that way you would only be missed after the next reporting point, not immediately.
It's nominally a radar environment, so there may not be a next mandatory reporting point...

Each minute you fly along the cleared route puts you another minute from your destination, wherever that is, and behind schedule.

A missed/delayed handoff at zero-dark-thirty isn't something the next sector is going to get immediately stressed about, unlike an identified target in your sector suddenly going dark.

In the event, Vietnam ATC (which seems a bit more competent than Malaysia's) did wig out, and after not much time elapsed (a previous poster to this thread said he was on-freq at the time...).
DCrefugee is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2014, 16:48
  #4632 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida and wherever my laptop is
Posts: 1,350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by PA28Viking
How have they determind that VFR ACARS was disabled before the handover comms?

MH370 reached its cruising altitude FL350 at 17.03 UTC. At 17.07 UTC (01.07 local) the last RR (TOC) message was transmitted).
After that no RR ACARS messages was to be expected for a long time.

So how do they conclude 'disabled' and not just 'not transmitting'?

I would say the ACARS could have been disabled around the same time as the transponder - at 17.21 UTC.
This is the reason they are saying that ACARS was 'deliberately turned off'. It would appear it went through a tidy log off of some sort at 1:07 local. Had it just been failed by circuit breaker then it would just not have reported any more and there would be no time of its disconnect. A tidy shut down means it was not (name a disaster) and that as the briefings have repeatedly been told 'deliberately turned off'. That the Malaysian authorities can repeat very simple things and be continually disbelieved only adds to the confusion.
Ian W is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2014, 16:49
  #4633 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Sky Island
Age: 70
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
How many times have we done this at recurrent, regardless of type, make or model???
Over water, in the dark with a lot of fuel. Hurtling along through space in a giant aluminum and plastic tube filled with flammable insulation and miles of electrical cables. Everything, with the exception of the engines and flight controls need those pesky electrons. Whether from the batteries or generators or alternators, in older jets. Mr. Murphy shows up. Do you smell something? Yeah, smells like burning wires. Get out the checklist. What does it say? Gang bar and start turning everything off, pull circuit breakers. Now itís dark and the flashlights are all youíve got.
Captain takes the stick/yoke, FO runs the checklist.
Now you wait. Still smell the smoke? Roger. Batteries back on.Now you get a few things back. Check the voltage. Voltage is normal. Wait. Still smell smoke? Yup. And on through the checklist, trying to isolate the culprit. Worse case scenario: Canít get the fire out. Everything is gone, no nav, no autopilot, no transponder, no radios and youíre hand flying, battery voltage is dropping. Molten aluminum is raining in the cockpit (Swissair 111) Trying to maintain altitude and heading. Smoke is getting pretty thick, O2 is depleted, sheís trimmed up as good as possible. Cough, cough, now youíre dead. Engines keep running, no one at the controls, now itís either fire gets to the fuel and BANG, little sparkles fall from the sky, or kerplunk, into the drink and maybe a few larger piecesÖ.

Or, the fat boy from North Korea was playing with his new drone...
ArthurQUnit is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2014, 16:50
  #4634 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: United States
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Couldn't have entered Indian Airspace without detection

Article in Times of India - says its tough for the aircraft to fly over Indian mainland. Not a surprise, but thought I'd share it here for some interesting quotes from spokespersons:

Link to the article

According Guild member Sushil Mondal, all hell would break loose if the IAF detected an aircraft that did not have air defence clearance. Any plane flying through Indian airspace is first required to submit the flight plan and manifest to the air traffic controls in its flight path. This is then relayed to the air force for permission.

"There are times when the Air Force finds a blip that does not match a flight plan. That usually happens when flight plans going missing at their end due to a system or link failure. They then immediately contact us for information. If the plane flight plan isn't of suspicious nature, a clearance is granted. Or else, it is asked to return to wherever it came from. In case, we too don't have any information of the aircraft, there will be trouble and the Air Force scramble jets to take the plane down. Nothing of the kind happened last Saturday," said Mondal.

Recently, the IAF scrambled a Su-30MKI in the western sector after noticing an unidentified 'blip' crossing over from Pakistan, It turned out to be a weather balloon.
LukeSkyRunner is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2014, 16:50
  #4635 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Brazil
Posts: 82
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Just because of 9/11 a plane hit something does not mean that every single event will repeat that ending. US narrow mindedness about possible endings is really shocking. There is a difference between a pilot taking a plane for political ransom and a terrorist group hellbent on murdering people.
dmba is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2014, 16:52
  #4636 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: uk
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Well said

Until resolved it would be respectful to recall that the 259 on board who have families who can read if not this site but the increasing links to it
david44 is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2014, 16:52
  #4637 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: wherever
Age: 55
Posts: 1,616
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
FIRESYSOK
The difference is you add it as an afterthought whereas it's the first investigative action in the procedures. It shows clearly the reason electrical equipment must be able to be electrically isolate individually and therefore addresses the original point.
When/if I have smoke in the flight deck, I'm going to know right away which system is offending? You sure about that?

I'm going far, far out on a limb here and pretty much say that unless it's clear it's a coffee maker, oven, or something not in the FD, I'm not going to have time, nor want to waste time analyzing which system it is, then waste more time considering how to do that ("where is that darn VHF3 circuit breaker again?!"). Rather, I'm going to depower busses PER THE CHECKLIST, and wait to see if smoke decreases or not. All the while running toward the ERA or nearest airport.
I suggest you follow the checklist for your type.

I have had smoke in the cockpit.
We were some way from a suitable airport.
We could identify the area the smoke was coming from and by opening a panel could identify the item.
We isolated it then removed it to a safe area.

In doing so we were able to maintain the other systems powered by the same bus.

This was according to our checklist.


All electrical smoke checklists have the same flow.

OXY/COMMS

ISOLATE THE SOURCE

IF UNABLE TO IDENTIFY THE SOURCE AND CLOSE TO A RUNWAY LAND

IF NOT CLOSE TO A RUNWAY POWER DOWN BUSBARS TO TRY AND STOP THE SMOKE.

They all are written in that priority.
FE Hoppy is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2014, 16:55
  #4638 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Brazil
Posts: 82
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by mikechekker
I hope this doesn't get lost in the spotters conspiracy theories on here. But if you go back to

this article here: it says in black and white that MAS had information that the plane landed in Nanning.

Who told them that? And why didn't they dismiss it like they dismissed the "possible air turn back" as far back as 9 March,
They did dismiss this early on. In the first few hours after announcing the disappearance. They said they'd contacted the airport, after having mentioned reports of an emergency landing in Nanming in an updated official statement.
dmba is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2014, 16:59
  #4639 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Earth
Posts: 249
Received 10 Likes on 8 Posts
DC, ok, if it's a radar environment then that's valid (if there was unlawful interference).

Ian W, until I see a copy of an ACARS 'log off' etc message, I won't accept any implication of what the Malaysians or anyone else says.
The Wawa Zone is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2014, 17:01
  #4640 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Germany
Age: 67
Posts: 1,777
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Hi,

Terrorism ??
Rep. Michael McCaul on Flight 370: All signs point to cockpit | WashingtonExaminer.com
jcjeant is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.