Malaysian Airlines MH370 contact lost
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
May I please just clarify from one who operates the equipment commercially and has flown for 35 years:
- With the sole exception of the 'handshake' pings no information has come from the aircraft. The only other information on the flight may be the primary radar information and the accuracy and interpretation may be suspect.
- The transponder may have been turned off or may have failed but there is no way of knowing which.
- Pilots cannot turn off the ACARS from the flight deck. If you doubt this ask one who flies a B777 or perhaps explain why I am wrong?
- There was no position, altitude or speed information transmitted to the ground after the incident. The only way that may happen is through the transponder (off/failed) or CPDLC. CPDLC would not have been used on this sector as KL and Vietnam do not use it.
- The 'ACARS' does not transmit any flight plan information that the pilots may have programed into the FMC. CPDLC does so through the ACARS but CPDLC was not used. There is no way of knowing what was in the plan or changes.
All of these theories of hijack/interference/crew involvement appear to be based on information that the aircraft did not and could not transmit. They came from officials listening to pilots, misunderstanding and trying to look important by telling the media inaccurate information and the media then happily published it.
- With the sole exception of the 'handshake' pings no information has come from the aircraft. The only other information on the flight may be the primary radar information and the accuracy and interpretation may be suspect.
- The transponder may have been turned off or may have failed but there is no way of knowing which.
- Pilots cannot turn off the ACARS from the flight deck. If you doubt this ask one who flies a B777 or perhaps explain why I am wrong?
- There was no position, altitude or speed information transmitted to the ground after the incident. The only way that may happen is through the transponder (off/failed) or CPDLC. CPDLC would not have been used on this sector as KL and Vietnam do not use it.
- The 'ACARS' does not transmit any flight plan information that the pilots may have programed into the FMC. CPDLC does so through the ACARS but CPDLC was not used. There is no way of knowing what was in the plan or changes.
All of these theories of hijack/interference/crew involvement appear to be based on information that the aircraft did not and could not transmit. They came from officials listening to pilots, misunderstanding and trying to look important by telling the media inaccurate information and the media then happily published it.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Antipodes Islands
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2. They were published. http://i.imgur.com/zNgnicG.png?1
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Internet
Age: 47
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
UPDATE 8 (Day 14): MISSING MH370: India says no to China - Latest - New Straits Times
China still interested in searching near Andaman!! Do these Chinese know that others dont know.. why working on separate line?
India has declined China's request for permission to allow four of its warships near the Andaman and Nicobar archipelago.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Auckland
Age: 80
Posts: 191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interested Party
The Aviationist » What SATCOM, ACARS and Pings tell us about the missing Malaysia Airlines MH370
ACARS transmissions can be switched off by the pilot from inside the cockpit, by disabling the use of VHF and SATCOM channels. This means that the system is not completely switched off, but it can’t transmit to the receiving stations.
The Aviationist » What SATCOM, ACARS and Pings tell us about the missing Malaysia Airlines MH370
ACARS transmissions can be switched off by the pilot from inside the cockpit, by disabling the use of VHF and SATCOM channels. This means that the system is not completely switched off, but it can’t transmit to the receiving stations.
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: wherever
Age: 55
Posts: 1,616
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interested_Party
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 12
May I please just clarify from one who operates the equipment commercially and has flown for 35 years:
- With the sole exception of the 'handshake' pings no information has come from the aircraft. The only other information on the flight may be the primary radar information and the accuracy and interpretation may be suspect.
- The transponder may have been turned off or may have failed but there is no way of knowing which.
- Pilots cannot turn off the ACARS from the flight deck. If you doubt this ask one who flies a B777 or perhaps explain why I am wrong?
- There was no position, altitude or speed information transmitted to the ground after the incident. The only way that may happen is through the transponder (off/failed) or CPDLC. CPDLC would not have been used on this sector as KL and Vietnam do not use it.
- The 'ACARS' does not transmit any flight plan information that the pilots may have programed into the FMC. CPDLC does so through the ACARS but CPDLC was not used. There is no way of knowing what was in the plan or changes.
All of these theories of hijack/interference/crew involvement appear to be based on information that the aircraft did not and could not transmit. They came from officials listening to pilots, misunderstanding and trying to look important by telling the media inaccurate information and the media then happily published it.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 12
May I please just clarify from one who operates the equipment commercially and has flown for 35 years:
- With the sole exception of the 'handshake' pings no information has come from the aircraft. The only other information on the flight may be the primary radar information and the accuracy and interpretation may be suspect.
- The transponder may have been turned off or may have failed but there is no way of knowing which.
- Pilots cannot turn off the ACARS from the flight deck. If you doubt this ask one who flies a B777 or perhaps explain why I am wrong?
- There was no position, altitude or speed information transmitted to the ground after the incident. The only way that may happen is through the transponder (off/failed) or CPDLC. CPDLC would not have been used on this sector as KL and Vietnam do not use it.
- The 'ACARS' does not transmit any flight plan information that the pilots may have programed into the FMC. CPDLC does so through the ACARS but CPDLC was not used. There is no way of knowing what was in the plan or changes.
All of these theories of hijack/interference/crew involvement appear to be based on information that the aircraft did not and could not transmit. They came from officials listening to pilots, misunderstanding and trying to look important by telling the media inaccurate information and the media then happily published it.
There are many ACARS message formats including position reports and flight plan reports. Just because your company doesn't use them doesn't mean they don't exist. Google ACARS if you don't have the documentation.
I know lots of pilots who have learnt a lot about ACARS and SATCOM from this tragic event. You may wish to take the opportunity also.
@ExSp33db1rd
Totally agree, and I hope that they are in fact giving the families that support, I would expect no less from my membership in similar circumstances, but the question was asked as to why "we" hadn't heard from them, "we" don't need to know at this stage, and if the support isn't there, what are "we" able to do about it anyway ?
I repeat, if there's nothing to say, don't say it - just get on with it. The Malaysian Pilots' Union - if there is one - doesn't need our approval or otherwise.
It might be "nice" to know, it certainly isn't "need" to know.
Maybe the role should be to constantly point out that one or both of the pilots may be totally inocent and to support them and their families until the facts are known.Quote:
Quote:
DOES ANYONE KNOW if malyasian air has a pilot's union? IFALP? wondering why we haven't heard from them if they have one?
Why should we, if there's nothing to say, don't say it ?
We don't know if the pilots were HERO or ZERO, and 'suggestions' that the pilots might have been implicated in some deliberate way are perfectly valid at the moment but until any unproven allegations are made against them the Union has no role to play - yet.
Quote:
DOES ANYONE KNOW if malyasian air has a pilot's union? IFALP? wondering why we haven't heard from them if they have one?
Why should we, if there's nothing to say, don't say it ?
We don't know if the pilots were HERO or ZERO, and 'suggestions' that the pilots might have been implicated in some deliberate way are perfectly valid at the moment but until any unproven allegations are made against them the Union has no role to play - yet.
I repeat, if there's nothing to say, don't say it - just get on with it. The Malaysian Pilots' Union - if there is one - doesn't need our approval or otherwise.
It might be "nice" to know, it certainly isn't "need" to know.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ornis, I read the Aviationist article and they quote "Although this is still debated, according to several pilots the ACARS transmissions can be switched off by the pilot from inside the cockpit, by disabling the use of VHF and SATCOM channels".
FE_Hoppy, I have just re-read my FCOM. No way is explained to turn off the SATCOM. Yes each ACARS is customized to an airlines specs. I have carefully read through all I could find on available specs and it did not appear to offer downloading of flight plan data to the airlines ops. Yes, we can all uplink a plan.
Would you agree that with the acars and transponder off then no data apart from the ping response came from the aircraft after the incident?
FE_Hoppy, I have just re-read my FCOM. No way is explained to turn off the SATCOM. Yes each ACARS is customized to an airlines specs. I have carefully read through all I could find on available specs and it did not appear to offer downloading of flight plan data to the airlines ops. Yes, we can all uplink a plan.
Would you agree that with the acars and transponder off then no data apart from the ping response came from the aircraft after the incident?
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow
Posts: 735
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
News Flash: Indian Navy's P-8I and Air Force's C-130J take off from Indian shores to re-join search for missing Malaysia Airlines jet....
Not sure if they are headed out to Bay Of Bengal or down to Perth. If the former is there some new information that is in synch with the Chinese request to enter Bay of Bengal
Not sure if they are headed out to Bay Of Bengal or down to Perth. If the former is there some new information that is in synch with the Chinese request to enter Bay of Bengal
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Sydney
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SLFplatine
Early in this blog, I made a post concerning radar tracking by naval vessels that may have been close to the flight path of the aircraft. I did not receive a reply from anyone at the time and maybe you could answer the question: would naval vessels be able to track the aircraft using primary returns and, if so, what would be the range if the aircraft remained at a FL greater than FL200?
I was assuming that there would have been some naval vessels, from various countries, operating somewhere in the area believed to have been overflown by the aircraft.
Regardless I would think it would be safe to assume the U.S. has satellite coverage of everything that moves in that neighborhood.
Early in this blog, I made a post concerning radar tracking by naval vessels that may have been close to the flight path of the aircraft. I did not receive a reply from anyone at the time and maybe you could answer the question: would naval vessels be able to track the aircraft using primary returns and, if so, what would be the range if the aircraft remained at a FL greater than FL200?
I was assuming that there would have been some naval vessels, from various countries, operating somewhere in the area believed to have been overflown by the aircraft.
Regardless I would think it would be safe to assume the U.S. has satellite coverage of everything that moves in that neighborhood.
There may well have been many warships out there but the radar operators are trained to take notice of a contact if it threatens the ship, ie... Flies towards it. Single contacts at high altitude on a constant heading are usually deemed friendly and ignored.
Last edited by xgjunkie; 21st Mar 2014 at 08:00. Reason: Typo
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: NYC
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FE_Hoppy, I have just re-read my FCOM. No way is explained to turn off the SATCOM. Yes each ACARS is customized to an airlines specs. I have carefully read through all I could find on available specs and it did not appear to offer downloading of flight plan data to the airlines ops. Yes, we can all uplink a plan.
An ACARS contract can be set up so that a Waypoint Change triggers an ACARS event report.
Last edited by rampstriker; 21st Mar 2014 at 08:15. Reason: typo
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Lincolnshire
Posts: 365
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Infrequentflier 511
Do you mean Lidar? Green laser Lidar can penetrate up to 70 metres or so depending on the properties of the water (and atmosphere) so yes it can be used to detect objects under the surface. My understanding is that a swathe is recorded which is dependent on height of the aircraft above the sea. There will be an optimum height for maximum penetration but clearly the lower you fly the narrower the swathe. Its an angular thing.
Another complication is that other sensors on the aircraft will benefit from height eg if you are looking for a large object then you might want to fly higher and this would conflict with a deep penetrating Lidar survey.
They will also be using other sensors such as radar and various types of photography.
Do you mean Lidar? Green laser Lidar can penetrate up to 70 metres or so depending on the properties of the water (and atmosphere) so yes it can be used to detect objects under the surface. My understanding is that a swathe is recorded which is dependent on height of the aircraft above the sea. There will be an optimum height for maximum penetration but clearly the lower you fly the narrower the swathe. Its an angular thing.
Another complication is that other sensors on the aircraft will benefit from height eg if you are looking for a large object then you might want to fly higher and this would conflict with a deep penetrating Lidar survey.
They will also be using other sensors such as radar and various types of photography.
Freight God
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: LS-R54A
Posts: 307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The gorgeous Megan Kelley ( fox news)interviewed the vice chairman of the senate intelligence committee, Senator Chambliss and he told her. (And I quote from the video):
"We know for example that somebody manually turned that transponder off."
Kelley asked how do we know that?
answer: "well those that have examined it and er particularly the folks from Boeing who obviously made the airplane , from what they have been told, ah there just simply is no way that a catastrophic event turned that transponder off. Somebody had to manually turn it off. "
She said she asked him if that means its a highjacking or a terroist act and he said absolutely no question about it.
she then asked tom blank a former deputy had of tsa and he wildly veered off the subject talking goobldy gook.
"We know for example that somebody manually turned that transponder off."
Kelley asked how do we know that?
answer: "well those that have examined it and er particularly the folks from Boeing who obviously made the airplane , from what they have been told, ah there just simply is no way that a catastrophic event turned that transponder off. Somebody had to manually turn it off. "
She said she asked him if that means its a highjacking or a terroist act and he said absolutely no question about it.
she then asked tom blank a former deputy had of tsa and he wildly veered off the subject talking goobldy gook.
If those conversations with Boeing effectively happened the only advise I can give their General Counsel is to hire the lawfirms already.
Who did Boeing send there to make such unqualified remarks? An accountant? A lawver? A salesman?
INCREDIBLE!!! No wonder the aircraft has not been found yet. aif even the 'experts' can't give you any reasonable answers...
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Source of map showing earlier "pings"
Are we still doing this? Just to be clear, the original source of this infographic was Reuters Asia Financial Graphics team. Their version did not show information about earlier handshake signals. The “ping” arcs were added by an Australian designer and are simply (quote) “rough reverse extrapolation of NTSB tracks based on constant speed and track assumptions”. As has been previously noted here, the nature of these additions is clearly indicated on the graphic.
Freight God
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: LS-R54A
Posts: 307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How did "the people" know the aircraft's altitude, speed and whether it was over water from the last ping? If this is true, then it's pretty evil for them to allow the current goose chasing in desert Central Asia. Good catch!
There are still too many loose ends and obviously too many people involved who do not have the necessary knowledge to advise the right decision. See the alleged Boeing replies regarding the transponders.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: USA
Age: 46
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Neogen said,
are probably dying to see what all equipment India is hiding on them.
There have been a few reports indicating they were kind of dying to get on the other side of the Peninsula, period, for a while. They were eventually invited over to the other side to help search when Malaysia finally gave up on the public (not private) 'it didn't turn around' stance, and now they are refining the area they specifically want to look at? Hummm... they could always just tell India to specifically look wherever if they had an idea - it is not like they physically have to do it themselves
Remember, there is a reason nearly everyone in the area distrusts China.
China still interested in searching near Andaman!! Do these Chinese know that others dont know.. why working on separate line?
There have been a few reports indicating they were kind of dying to get on the other side of the Peninsula, period, for a while. They were eventually invited over to the other side to help search when Malaysia finally gave up on the public (not private) 'it didn't turn around' stance, and now they are refining the area they specifically want to look at? Hummm... they could always just tell India to specifically look wherever if they had an idea - it is not like they physically have to do it themselves
Remember, there is a reason nearly everyone in the area distrusts China.
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Runcorn,Cheshire,England
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Takes a bit more than loss of C Vhf on the 777 that I fly. 777 has satcom. Not going to go into details of how to do it here; suffice to say that one has to Know a bit about the 777 to fully disable the ADS/ACARS system
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Seattle, USA
Age: 57
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by D.S.
Hunter58
Quote:
Now BOEING should know better than that.
...uhm, but we don't know what Boeing knows, nor why they would have said what they said
Quote:
Now BOEING should know better than that.
...uhm, but we don't know what Boeing knows, nor why they would have said what they said
I also agree with you that it's an excuse for China to do some spying - my first instant instinct was the camel's nose was trying to poke under the tent...
Join Date: Feb 2000
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Excellent interview by Fox`s Megan Kelly with Inmarsat ceo Chris Mclaughlin. He explained in layman`s terms exactly why the hourly ping was identified as that particular aircraft and the Inmarsat equipment responsible for the signal His measured answers to other leading questions were an example to all.
