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 17th Mar 2014, 14:24
  #5141 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Patterson, NY
Age: 62
Posts: 436
Nortwest Orient Airlines flight 2501 was a DC-4 aircraft which was flying between NYC and Seattle, WA in June 1950, carrying 55 passengers and 3 crew members.

Last contact with the aircraft was when it was flying over Lake Michigan at 3,000 ft. She abruptly disappeared from radar and the presumed wreckage was never located. This despite the use of sonar and dragging the bottom of Lake Michigan with trawlers.

Even with modern technology in use (side-scan sonor, etc) the presumed wreckage was never found.
rgbrock1 is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2014, 14:24
  #5142 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 1,955
Originally Posted by overthewing View Post
And I don't think TCAS on /transponder off makes you visible to other a/c? Does it?
Like others have said you can't have one without the other. So for you to be able to track an other aircraft using TCAS the other aircraft will be able to see you, as will all the other SSR receivers in the area.

Buy like you said, I'd would be pot luck as to which aircraft you came across, there's no info from TCAS except height and to visually identify the type and the airline you need to be within about ten miles at the most.
Lord Spandex Masher is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2014, 14:25
  #5143 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: wales
Age: 76
Posts: 316
Originally Posted by Xeptu View Post
If SQ68 had no message to send, the acars would remain silent and the satcom would ping. There is definitely no identifiable data in a ping

EDIT: If data is to be sent either way then it will be preceded by a connection request (handshake) and yes that has identifiable date of course, I understood we were dealing with a ping.
As you have only just joined the thread let me bring you up to speed as I understand it.

yes they are pings

MAS did not subscribe to acars on satcom

MAS adverts say 1st class has sat phones

PAx, engineers etc say this aircraft does not have sat phones

It does not use the newer satcom aerials which were subject to AD for corrosion but has the older two aerials.

"established" opinion and understanding over the read says that it was obviously on and pings include the unique airframe code as that is embedded into all data transmitting devices (If that is not the case there will be loads of aircraft in a similar config where satcom keeps pinging with unidentified sources.)

Not being rude can you tell us what your filed is to make your statement so emphatically, if it is sat comms pls read my post #5173 page 259
oldoberon is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2014, 14:35
  #5144 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: wales
Age: 76
Posts: 316
Originally Posted by skytrax View Post
Guys, forget about robbery scenarios and all that nonsense. Forget about the cargo, tones of gold etc that might have been on board.
Nobody in the right mind and familiar with the aviation field would try something like this because you cannnot get away with something like this. Too complicated to put in practise such thing.

I personally belive this was planned but for completly other reasons which are yet to be revealed. Hopefully we will get to know one day. Without finding the plane and black boxes information is very limited.
in the 60's we would have said you can't rob a train carrying £2m but Biggsy and co did, yes it was less complicated but had you hypothesised that in the 60's the reaction would be the same as yours. WHERE THERE IS A WILL THERE IS A WAY

However I agree your last sentence.
oldoberon is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2014, 14:35
  #5145 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Perth
Age: 56
Posts: 65
Since the pings are initiiated by the satellite the idea of the pings being from the wong aircraft need some one else to want to pretend to be MH370 for six hours.
ana1936 is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2014, 14:35
  #5146 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: NJ
Age: 38
Posts: 52
SLF: " A turn west from/after IGARI was entered into the active flight plan in the FMS; this is known as the last ACARS report indicated this waypoint change event."

IF this is TRUE and corroborated, it is extremely important, since said "last ACARS rpt" is 1:07
Ongoing events timing, including goodnight signoff, would CLEARLY RULE OUT electro-mechanical mishap, hypoxia as major cause, etc. It would make deliberate human action part of the equation for sure!

I am sure this is obvious to even the non-believers. If someone entered this waypoint request into the FMC in the 30 minutes before the 1:07 automatic (when ON) ACARS report (which listed it in event log) then it is what it is.

SO: Can this SLF quote be substantiated by any source other than "XYZ NEWS says unnamed sources tell them that..." and so forth? (or can a journalist viewing this thread ASK this of PM next chance?)

SO: Does the 40degree flight correction turn tracked by FR24 at IGARI around 1:20, ALSO show on the ACARS? IS it consistent with a pre-programmed LEFT turn? Or would it override the 40degree course correction for Vietnam. Credit to BARREL for raising this confliction.
rigbyrigz is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2014, 14:36
  #5147 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Kent
Age: 61
Posts: 215
Overthewing, all of the TCAS units I've played with have been integrated with the transponder. Turn the transponder off and you don't have a TCAS, at all, not for receiving or transmitting. Think of TCAS as a type of transponder rather than a separate system.
Thanks for this. Not sure this is relevant to the current thread, but does that mean that your working TCAS becomes inop if you switch the transponder to Standby?
overthewing is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2014, 14:36
  #5148 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Toronto
Posts: 6
Arcs and pings

On the arcs and the pings, the published arc represents points on the earth's surface which are equidistant from the satellite and where the aircraft could be - we understand this was from the last ping received.

If, during its flight, the aircraft had been at some point, other than on the published arc, an earlier ping would have shown this - with a concentric arc of different radius - this would be pretty valuable information giving further hints as to speed and direction e.g. if two arcs an hour apart had almost the same radius then it's pretty likely the aircraft's path would have been substantially along that arc.

Again, if transit times for the earlier pings are available, all such data will surely have been already extracted but, seemingly, not yet published.
macilrae is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2014, 14:38
  #5149 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Malaysia
Age: 49
Posts: 1
Hi Clayne. ARB is correct. It's indeed "Indian Muslim" restaurant. "Mamak" is a colloquial term, a corruption of the South Indian Tamil word, "Maama", which means Uncle. Nevertheless, in M'sia, you would almost certainly say "mamak" instead of "Indian-Muslim" restaurant

Mahatma, the pilot is Malay. Which in Malaysia means he is a Muslim. No two ways about it. It is certainly possible he may have Indian blood. M'sia is often touted as being multi-racial. However, in the old days, we actually attempted to be a melting pot of cultures and inter-racial marriages were common. Hence he could be a mixture of Malay, Indian, Chinese, Arab, etc for all we know.

Regarding usage of the words/terms "all right", "roger that", "good night" etc, I can't speak on behalf of M'sian pilots, but it is certainly commonly used here. In my organization, gentle instructions to the chaps I supervise is usually met with an " All right, Boss" response. A more terse order usually elicits a "Roger that, Boss!"
And no, I don't work for the military.

Lastly, plenty of Malaysians, yours truly included, are fervent supporters of the Opposition party. I'm happy to state here that the Oppositon party in M'sia espouses the principles of democracy and equal rights for all Malaysians.
It is certainly not run by a bunch of zealots who would encourage their members to show their affiliations to the party cause by bringing down an aircraft full of innocent people. Or hijack a plane just to vent their anger at court rulings favouring the BN government.

Hope this helps.

Cheers
Hang Jebat is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2014, 14:40
  #5150 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: South East England
Posts: 304
The northern route potential land area is immense and a big plane going in fast and vertical only makes a fairly small crater. Also the ELTs wouldn't survive the impact.

This is a 757:



Do this where there are no population and it may never be discovered.
Eclectic is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2014, 14:40
  #5151 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: London, UK
Posts: 90
There must be a finite number of airfields that can receive a 777 with full pax & cargo load, even with low fuel load. It's hardly going to land on a grass strip in the middle of nowhere. So in the unlikely event it's landed in one piece how hard could it be to find?
Beanbag is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2014, 14:42
  #5152 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 55
Posts: 4,245
Beanbag

The media said over 600 airfields within the range of the 777 !
500N is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2014, 14:43
  #5153 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: wales
Age: 76
Posts: 316
Originally Posted by litinoveweedle View Post
IMHO pings are probably TDMA channel sync or frequency sync bursts. This means, that inside of data, there could be probably two low level identifiers.
1. the HW identifier (something like serial number of your phone (IMEI) or MAC address of you computer)
2. artificial identifier of the connection (which could be correlated with connection information stored previously in time of connection handshake)

There would be no data inside of these burst, as these serve only to SATCOM to keep connection to satellite synced and alive,

I would say that forging data connection on TDMA is possible and it is used for example to intercept GSM connections (man in the middle attack), but this process is definitely not trivial.

I would say, that probability, that these pings were mistakenly from another plane or forged to pretend to be from HM370, is really low.
Good post

yes it was posted earlier about the Imei/mac code principle I like it.

your 2nd point not valid MAS did not use satcom for any data transfer (no contract) used vhf (and perhaps HF)
oldoberon is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2014, 14:46
  #5154 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Brazil
Age: 51
Posts: 41
Originally Posted by SLFplatine View Post
The current 'official' operational theory is this plane was, for lack of a better word, 'stolen' by person or persons unknown who knew what they were doing (disable transponder, ACARS, etc., took flight path to avoid radar detection) and who had meticulously planned the operation in advance. A turn west from/after IGARI was entered into the active flight plan in the FMS; this is known as the last ACARS report indicated this waypoint change event.
So, how come the highly knowledgeable careful planning 'perp(s)' left this big fat clue? -yes, perhaps the were unaware ACARS would report a waypoint change event however if one has carefully planned this type of operation one would certainly not do anything out of the ordinary before disabling ACARS.
So, again the Q
I dedicated not less than five posts last night trying to explain why it is impossible that VAMPI had been programmed in the FMC as next waypoint after IGARI.
The behavior of the aircraft completely disproves this claim. As anybody else here, I have no clue what the aircraft did after 1:21 MYT, but it is safe to say that BEFORE 1:21 it was still following its original flight plan.

http://www.pprune.org/8381692-post4796.html
http://www.pprune.org/8381648-post4781.html
http://www.pprune.org/8381726-post4809.html
http://www.pprune.org/8381732-post4810.html
http://www.pprune.org/8381954-post4864.html

Please note that this "report" comes from Daily Mail and ABC News, both quoting unverified and unverifiable sources.

Last edited by barrel_owl; 17th Mar 2014 at 14:47. Reason: minor edits
barrel_owl is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2014, 14:49
  #5155 (permalink)  
Está servira para distraerle.
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: In a perambulator.
Posts: 2
It's not the potential existence of a landing field based upon length that should be concerning anyone as much as the location of a runway based upon the take off requirement for a heavily loaded machine.
cavortingcheetah is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2014, 14:51
  #5157 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 37
Originally Posted by 500N View Post
Beanbag

The media said over 600 airfields within the range of the 777 !

The one that "landed" at Heathrow took less than 300m to stop. depends whether you want it down, or want it to be able to fly again.

So add up all the flat pieces of ground, beach etc. ..................................
Msunduzi is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2014, 14:56
  #5158 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: wherever
Age: 50
Posts: 1,609
barrel_owl

Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Brazil
Age: 45
Posts: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by SLFplatine View Post
The current 'official' operational theory is this plane was, for lack of a better word, 'stolen' by person or persons unknown who knew what they were doing (disable transponder, ACARS, etc., took flight path to avoid radar detection) and who had meticulously planned the operation in advance. A turn west from/after IGARI was entered into the active flight plan in the FMS; this is known as the last ACARS report indicated this waypoint change event.
So, how come the highly knowledgeable careful planning 'perp(s)' left this big fat clue? -yes, perhaps the were unaware ACARS would report a waypoint change event however if one has carefully planned this type of operation one would certainly not do anything out of the ordinary before disabling ACARS.
So, again the Q
I dedicated not less than five posts last night trying to explain why it is impossible that VAMPI had been programmed in the FMC as next waypoint after IGARI.
The behavior of the aircraft completely disproves this claim. As anybody else here, I have no clue what the aircraft did after 1:21 MYT, but it is safe to say that BEFORE 1:21 it was still following its original flight plan.

Malaysian Airlines MH370 contact lost
Malaysian Airlines MH370 contact lost
Malaysian Airlines MH370 contact lost
Malaysian Airlines MH370 contact lost
Malaysian Airlines MH370 contact lost

Please note that this "report" comes from Daily Mail and ABC News, both quoting unverified and unverifiable sources.
You might have dedicated 5 posts but you proved nothing.

Insert waypoint at 07. Approaching boundary sync and select heading(incase you failed to make the waypoint a flyover).

After waypoint faint right then shortly afterwards when you think you are out of range turn left.

All the time you have your next waypoint in view for reference.

Prove that what I have written is "Impossible"!
FE Hoppy is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2014, 15:02
  #5159 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: paradise,bc
Age: 78
Posts: 22
everyone pings all the time

The main barrier to requent, rich-content data packets is the infrastructure to support the comms. Terrestrial no big deal, but satellite bandwidth is another story. Haven't done the math, but ACARS context stuff was widely discussed in the AF447 thread, with cost also being a major hit.
cribbagepeg is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2014, 15:09
  #5160 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Found in Toronto
Posts: 608
Originally Posted by FE Hoppy View Post
You might have dedicated 5 posts but you proved nothing.

Insert waypoint at 07. Approaching boundary sync and select heading(incase you failed to make the waypoint a flyover).

After waypoint faint right then shortly afterwards when you think you are out of range turn left.

All the time you have your next waypoint in view for reference.

Prove that what I have written is "Impossible"!
You are correct. It is possible.

1) The aircraft could have turned right while still on autopilot if someone put it in heading mode and selected a new heading

Or...

2) The autopilot could have been disconnected and was being hand flown.

Or...

3) It could also mean the autopilot was off and no one was at the controls while there was a struggle in the flight deck. (That could also account for the altitude variations)
Lost in Saigon is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.