Malaysian Airlines MH370 contact lost
With respect, this is a non-story Carjockey.
Makes sense. Get some eyes up in the air, be already on station as people on the ground try to figure out the situation and where the LKP is to start a search.
Not A New Development. This tidbit is "filling in the blanks of a month old story."
Per above, they knew something was amiss, and got some planes in the air to have a look. Good job to at least have a look, rather than sitting about twiddling their thumbs.
BFD. If they'd found something, doubtless they'd have let someone know.
A senior Malaysian government official has revealed that the Royal Malaysian Air Force (RMAF) had scrambled search aircraft at 8am on the morning of March 8, soon after Malaysia Airlines had reported that flight MH370 was missing.
In a surprising new development,
CNN reported today that it was informed by the official that the RMAF search aircraft were scrambled well before authorities had corroborated data indicating that the missing commercial aircraft had turned back westward from its last-known location over the South China Sea.
According to CNN, the source also told them that RMAF did not inform the Department of Civil Aviation nor anyone in the search and rescue operations team until March 11, three days after the aircraft disappeared.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: UK
Age: 69
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lonewolf
4. Related to 3, political/cultural issues in re body recovery? How serious, how expensive? But, as some have discussed earlier from the pathology point of view, would not examining some of the dead provide a clue regarding how all of the people on board died?
4. Related to 3, political/cultural issues in re body recovery? How serious, how expensive? But, as some have discussed earlier from the pathology point of view, would not examining some of the dead provide a clue regarding how all of the people on board died?
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: firmly on dry land
Age: 80
Posts: 1,541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The source, quoted yesterday, see post #9648 from recanted, was the acting transport minister.
He said he had had the Chief of the Malaysian Defence Force contact his Indonesian counterpart.
Subsequent discuss in this thread suggested that what he said may have been a limited answer.
Source would appear to have been quoted in thestar.com 7 April.
He said he had had the Chief of the Malaysian Defence Force contact his Indonesian counterpart.
Subsequent discuss in this thread suggested that what he said may have been a limited answer.
Source would appear to have been quoted in thestar.com 7 April.
Last edited by Wader2; 10th Apr 2014 at 16:23.
" ..........................the use of a sonobuoy pattern in the ocean to detect and localise a target is one of the first and basic detection methods used in Anti Submarine Warfare for over 50 years."
As an Ex-Navy pilot, I'm wondering why some agency, aircraft company, or even the CVR/FDR makers, didn't previously contract for a thousand or two sonobuoy's especially configured to detect these signals, perhaps with a cable depth option of greater than 1000 feet. There should have been a stack of these devices sitting in some warehouse just waiting for the next airliner to go down at sea, especially where the water is deep or the exact crash location isn't known.
These special sonobuoys could then be flown anywhere in the world and scattered, if necessary, over a wide area without interfering with any other concurrent search effort. Plenty of aircraft are capable of deploying these devices.
I don't understand why they have to modify an anti-submarine sonobuoy a month after MH370 went down, especially given the Air France search of several years ago.
As an Ex-Navy pilot, I'm wondering why some agency, aircraft company, or even the CVR/FDR makers, didn't previously contract for a thousand or two sonobuoy's especially configured to detect these signals, perhaps with a cable depth option of greater than 1000 feet. There should have been a stack of these devices sitting in some warehouse just waiting for the next airliner to go down at sea, especially where the water is deep or the exact crash location isn't known.
These special sonobuoys could then be flown anywhere in the world and scattered, if necessary, over a wide area without interfering with any other concurrent search effort. Plenty of aircraft are capable of deploying these devices.
I don't understand why they have to modify an anti-submarine sonobuoy a month after MH370 went down, especially given the Air France search of several years ago.
Not to be undertaken lightly. At a depth of over 10,000 feet, get remote vehicle into the cabin, get a grip on body, bring it to surface, get it into an appropriate box/bag/container, keep it on ice so that it doesn't rot away/become a health hazard. Rinse and repeat 238 more times ... presuming all bodies are still with the aircraft. Grim business.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: N. California
Age: 80
Posts: 184
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Wader2
The source, quoted yesterday I believe, was the Malaysian Minister or Defence or similar top Airman who spoke with his Indonesian opposite number.
I see your point, Carjockey, and we sort of agree. The points you make weren't what the story was going on about.
If the initial reaction was to begin with own assets, and they then later called for help because their first estimate on where to look didn't pay off, how is that different from usual procedures?
The larger question strikes me as
"What was going on between about 2 in the morning and 8 in the morning as it became clear that the aircraft wasn't going where it was supposed to be going, and had been out of contact"
rather than
"you went looking for it and told nobody else that you went looking for it."
Not sure if that is true or not, but my gut feeling is that you are right.
Cheers.
If the initial reaction was to begin with own assets, and they then later called for help because their first estimate on where to look didn't pay off, how is that different from usual procedures?
The larger question strikes me as
"What was going on between about 2 in the morning and 8 in the morning as it became clear that the aircraft wasn't going where it was supposed to be going, and had been out of contact"
rather than
"you went looking for it and told nobody else that you went looking for it."
If the ATC's, military and civil aviation authorities of neighboring countries had been informed of the situation immediately, the chances of 370's flight path being tracked would have increased dramatically and we would not be faced with the present situation.
Cheers.
Last edited by Lonewolf_50; 10th Apr 2014 at 16:32.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: firmly on dry land
Age: 80
Posts: 1,541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the ATC's, military and civil aviation authorities of neighboring countries had been informed of the situation immediately, the chances of 370's flight path being tracked would have increased dramatically and we would not be faced with the present situation.
The RMAF response would have been for surface search and not an air search. Depending on what they had available they might either have set up for a day search or an immediate launch to locate survivors based on the ELT. There was of course no ELT so where would you start a night search?
Wader2, I think the question being asked about the time between about 0200 and 0800 (KL time) is "why no air search/scramble." I don't think anyone would fault the Malaysians for looking on the surface after first light ...
Regarding that gap.
"What did the folks who got the info that an aircraft had not reported in/was missing think the problem was?"
Did RMAF have any radar contacts that were heading toward sensitive areas, or 9-11 type targets in KL or other major city?
Assessment was probably "no" on that score. If no, why scramble fighters?
The depressurization scenario would be the assumption where one probably would ... but where was it? Fighters don't have infinite fuel. Did Malaysia have a ready AAR tanker on alert?
Was there certainty that it had gone down, rather than it being still in the air in the early period of the 0200 - 0800 gap?
Probably not.
Was the first practical time to start a search for a downed aircraft during daylight?
Yes.
Well I'll be, they sent some planes up after sunrise to go and have a look.
Seems to me that morning launch is a non story.
The coordination and comms questions, 0200ish to 0800, may be a story. Depends on the facts and what the investigation uncovers.
Regarding that gap.
"What did the folks who got the info that an aircraft had not reported in/was missing think the problem was?"
- Did they think it was simply lost comm? Maybe.
- Did they think it had gone down? Most likely
- Did they think that there'd been a Payne Stewart type problem (depressurization) and was flying about with no hand at the wheel? Maybe.
- If so, they'd probably expect to hear from another agency when it wandered further into foreign airspace.
- Did they think it was hijacked? Probably not, given a lack of a hijack code
- Other estimates inserted here _______________
Did RMAF have any radar contacts that were heading toward sensitive areas, or 9-11 type targets in KL or other major city?
Assessment was probably "no" on that score. If no, why scramble fighters?
The depressurization scenario would be the assumption where one probably would ... but where was it? Fighters don't have infinite fuel. Did Malaysia have a ready AAR tanker on alert?
Was there certainty that it had gone down, rather than it being still in the air in the early period of the 0200 - 0800 gap?
Probably not.
Was the first practical time to start a search for a downed aircraft during daylight?
Yes.
Well I'll be, they sent some planes up after sunrise to go and have a look.
Seems to me that morning launch is a non story.
The coordination and comms questions, 0200ish to 0800, may be a story. Depends on the facts and what the investigation uncovers.
.
ECHO
HMS Echo now seems to be at edge of Ocean Shield's search area doing a much reduced speed of 7 knots
ECHO
HMS Echo now seems to be at edge of Ocean Shield's search area doing a much reduced speed of 7 knots
The weakening signals will give them a more accurate location.
I think the retired AM is doing a great job. He will not be rushing anything that is for sure.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Malaysia
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@Lonewolf
We don't know what was going on between 2.00am & 8.00am, but something was obviously wrong because the aircraft transponder and comms were "off" or "disabled" for whatever reason. The question must surely be why didn't ATC pick up on this and alert the civil and military authorities of neighboring countries immediately? Why the big delay?
The larger question strikes me as "What was going on between about 2 in the morning and 8 in the morning as it became clear that the aircraft wasn't going where it was supposed to be going, and had been out of contact"rather than "you went looking for it and told nobody else that you went looking for it.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Clinton WA
Age: 75
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bottom contours
RE Lonewolf #9753: "1. Bottom contour of the local area. If...valleys and peaks....sound could be reflecting/echoing..."
I believe I have read all posts and do not recall any that address whether wreckage located next to a largely vertical and non-sedimented seafloor face (cliff) would reflect pings directionally, and if so might increase distances that a ping could be heard. By now it is improbable that any wreckage is perched high on a promentory with no impediments to pinging in every direction, so ping blanketing must be occuring. Valleys would have an axis; deep circular depressions would not; narrow chasms would have an axis but short duration of pings if transecting, etc. If a pinger was located between two cliffs and a receptor perpendicular to those axes, to what degree would an echo represent additional information? The questions are distinct from thermoclines and salinity issues. Could someone with experience speak to these several situations?
Ocean Shield is not close to the large sea floor variations to the NW and SW but despite sediment the sea floor near it might be quite jagged relative to wreckage. The two hour acquisition a few days ago would seem suggestive.
I believe I have read all posts and do not recall any that address whether wreckage located next to a largely vertical and non-sedimented seafloor face (cliff) would reflect pings directionally, and if so might increase distances that a ping could be heard. By now it is improbable that any wreckage is perched high on a promentory with no impediments to pinging in every direction, so ping blanketing must be occuring. Valleys would have an axis; deep circular depressions would not; narrow chasms would have an axis but short duration of pings if transecting, etc. If a pinger was located between two cliffs and a receptor perpendicular to those axes, to what degree would an echo represent additional information? The questions are distinct from thermoclines and salinity issues. Could someone with experience speak to these several situations?
Ocean Shield is not close to the large sea floor variations to the NW and SW but despite sediment the sea floor near it might be quite jagged relative to wreckage. The two hour acquisition a few days ago would seem suggestive.
Carjockey:
I was under the impression that Viet Nam ATC alerted someone in Malaysia ATC. (around 0130-0140 or a bit after, when their attempt to contact the aircraft they expected went for naught) What happened within the various bits of Malaysian bodies who keep track of such things remains unclear. I am not sure that the assumptions you are making are correct, but your questions are well asked.
What became obvious was that the flight was not on scheduled route. What seems to have become apparent was that attempts to contact and pick it up on secondary via squawk were unsuccessful.
Good questions, but the answers aren't on this forum. They are within the various agencies in Malaysia.
This is why I asked the question about bottom contour. The terrain underwater can influence sound propagation.
I was under the impression that Viet Nam ATC alerted someone in Malaysia ATC. (around 0130-0140 or a bit after, when their attempt to contact the aircraft they expected went for naught) What happened within the various bits of Malaysian bodies who keep track of such things remains unclear. I am not sure that the assumptions you are making are correct, but your questions are well asked.
but something was obviously wrong because the aircraft transponder and comms were "off" or "disabled" for whatever reason.
The question must surely be why didn't ATC pick up on this and alert the civil and military authorities of neighboring countries immediately?
Originally Posted by Leightman
I believe I have read all posts and do not recall any that address whether wreckage located next to a largely vertical and non-sedimented seafloor face (cliff) would reflect pings directionally, and if so might increase distances that a ping could be heard.
then the submarine may have a use as a faster way of carrying out a 'quick and dirty' search for metallic debris on the sea bed.
As far as magnetometers go, you cannot detect an engine-sized lump of steel in a depth of 4000 m, using a P-3's MAD or from a surface-towed magnetometer.
A submarine might be able to get one down to a depth of perhaps 500 m, but that still isn't going to help.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Malaysia
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@Clear Prop
It's this kind of casual attitude that I find extremely frightening. No matter if it's Friday or any other day of the week; no matter if it's "calm", no matter what time of day or night it is. An aircraft disappeared from ATC radar and it seems that no one was sufficiently concerned to alert all relevant authorities until six or seven hours after the event. You think that's OK?
Re the 2am - 8am time span:
Be careful not to look back with the benefit of hindsight and imagine that everyone was wide awake at 2am thinking "Right then! Emergency! Now what?" it was a calm Friday night and the initial moments of this emergency started after the flight had handed off from its departure nation and began flight in an oceanic territory with moderate to poor coverage.
Unless you have significant information of distress beforehand, it is normal not to initiate an alert phase until after the aircraft is confirmed as not arriving where it departed to.
Be careful not to look back with the benefit of hindsight and imagine that everyone was wide awake at 2am thinking "Right then! Emergency! Now what?" it was a calm Friday night and the initial moments of this emergency started after the flight had handed off from its departure nation and began flight in an oceanic territory with moderate to poor coverage.
Unless you have significant information of distress beforehand, it is normal not to initiate an alert phase until after the aircraft is confirmed as not arriving where it departed to.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida and wherever my laptop is
Posts: 1,350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@Lonewolf
We don't know what was going on between 2.00am & 8.00am, but something was obviously wrong because the aircraft transponder and comms were "off" or "disabled" for whatever reason. The question must surely be why didn't ATC pick up on this and alert the civil and military authorities of neighboring countries immediately? Why the big delay?
We don't know what was going on between 2.00am & 8.00am, but something was obviously wrong because the aircraft transponder and comms were "off" or "disabled" for whatever reason. The question must surely be why didn't ATC pick up on this and alert the civil and military authorities of neighboring countries immediately? Why the big delay?
The stop squawk and no VHF contact at the handoff meant that there was an administrative problem on who was responsible for initiating SAR. The Malaysian controllers cannot be expected to take SAR action on an aircraft that they handed off in good order, and could then no longer see. In theory an aircraft becomes overdue 30 minutes after it should have landed. That was several hours into the future.
This is yet another area where old protocols are no longer adequate or sensible. I think that this MH370 and to some extent AF447 losses are going to result in a major international rework of procedures and protocols on aircraft overdue/loss of contact, aircraft tracking, and the international protocols for setting up accident investigations.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: KMRY
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
submarine passive sonar
Perhaps you're thinking of active sonar? Not applicable here, nor is it much used on the boats for that matter. But the OBERON's Type 197 passive set is very capable of receiving and recording underwater beacon signals in the required KHz band.