Malaysian Airlines MH370 contact lost
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Iver
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Please excuse my ignorence but I have a question (I'm not a flyer)
As aircraft fly a lot over sea, why do they not have an EPIRB that operates completely seperate and independent of any other system on board ?
They are cheap, reliable and seem to save a lot of lives.
As aircraft fly a lot over sea, why do they not have an EPIRB that operates completely seperate and independent of any other system on board ?
They are cheap, reliable and seem to save a lot of lives.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: NNW of Antipodes
Age: 81
Posts: 1,330
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@thommo101
Source:- http://jacc.gov.au/...
Contrary to what JACC has said (and repeated), the Bluefin-21 search area was centered on the #2 Ping detection of 05 April, i.e. 21°04'S 104°00'E.
As you have rightly pointed out, the #1 Ping detection was outside the 10km radius and in 4600m of water.
The focused underwater search area is defined as a circle of 10km radius around the second Towed Pinger Locator detection which occurred on 8 April.
Contrary to what JACC has said (and repeated), the Bluefin-21 search area was centered on the #2 Ping detection of 05 April, i.e. 21°04'S 104°00'E.
As you have rightly pointed out, the #1 Ping detection was outside the 10km radius and in 4600m of water.
Please excuse my ignorence but I have a question (I'm not a flyer)
As aircraft fly a lot over sea, why do they not have an EPIRB that operates completely seperate and independent of any other system on board ?
They are cheap, reliable and seem to save a lot of lives.
As aircraft fly a lot over sea, why do they not have an EPIRB that operates completely seperate and independent of any other system on board ?
They are cheap, reliable and seem to save a lot of lives.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Double Oak, Texas
Age: 71
Posts: 180
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah, those ULB's are remarkably efficient (sarcasm) in both their range and battery endurance assisting in locating lost aircraft, assuming they survive and are exposed toward receivers.
Autonomous ELT's with self contained GPS chips, in aircraft structure could be designed to ping satellites with a simple request from a satellite to an aircraft which could be initiated by an Airline Ops center, Air Traffic Control facility or other government agency.
I know, it would cost $$$$$$$, and have to go thru regulatory circus antics, but thankfully so few $$$$ have been wasted, sorry, spent so far with just this one missing T7.
Autonomous ELT's with self contained GPS chips, in aircraft structure could be designed to ping satellites with a simple request from a satellite to an aircraft which could be initiated by an Airline Ops center, Air Traffic Control facility or other government agency.
I know, it would cost $$$$$$$, and have to go thru regulatory circus antics, but thankfully so few $$$$ have been wasted, sorry, spent so far with just this one missing T7.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida and wherever my laptop is
Posts: 1,350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You have just described ADS-C (Automatic Dependent Surveillance - Contract) part of the FANS 1/A suite of capabilities. ADS-C allows airline ops, ATC or any other agency in the ADS-C list to request GPS position and time, flight level, speed, climb rate, turn rate and often an abbreviated future trajectory from the FMC. This is done either as a one off request or as a 'contract' for reports at intervals, at waypoints, or changes in flight level or all of the above.
See section 2.2.6 in Global Operational Data Link Document (GOLD) ( http://www.icao.int/APAC/Documents/e...D_2Edition.pdf )
Around 50% of widebodies have this fitted already and it will be mandated in the near future for oceanic flight. This is what INMARSAT is now saying it will provide 'free' as a tracking service.
See section 2.2.6 in Global Operational Data Link Document (GOLD) ( http://www.icao.int/APAC/Documents/e...D_2Edition.pdf )
Around 50% of widebodies have this fitted already and it will be mandated in the near future for oceanic flight. This is what INMARSAT is now saying it will provide 'free' as a tracking service.
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Las Vegas NV.
Age: 63
Posts: 165
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Something to keep in mind about the beacons (pingers)
They were not designed to find a missing aircraft in the middle of nowhere. They were designed to aid in the location of the recorders in and around a known crash site.
They were not designed to find a missing aircraft in the middle of nowhere. They were designed to aid in the location of the recorders in and around a known crash site.
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: UAE
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ADS-C will be great, providing the ability for crew to select ADS off or disable the SATCOM/VHF is inhibited.
No doubt it's possible, but a lot of soft and hard modifications required.
No doubt it's possible, but a lot of soft and hard modifications required.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida and wherever my laptop is
Posts: 1,350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well not that many modifications. Already the recipient of the ADS-C output decides what the 'contract' will contain and when the reports will be made. The only change would be to the FANS logon software that would need to initiate and maintain a basic ADS-C logon regardless of crew selection. Of course any failure or disabling of ADS-C would then be treated as an indication of emergency or interference with the flight.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: US
Age: 36
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is there any legitimate feasibility that JORN did indeed track the plane off it's coast, but Australia is reluctant to divulge the information? Or that JORN tracked the flight and this is known by all involved in investigation, but not released to the public for national security purposes? Not to throw out baseless speculation, but I have read a few comments by reputable sources that "we may have tracked 370 off our coast until it crashed using our OTH Radar Network."
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would say Yes.
They could have tracked it if it was turned on.
And yes, if they had it they almost certainly would have shared the data with those that need to know.
Everyone - the media, public - seem to forget that they are not under any obligation to share anything
with the those outside the need to know, as much as the media and public think they have a right !
You don't expect the Gov't to share data from Pine Gap, so why JORN ?
In fact, I would go so far as to say it causes more problems when you do
share information - because of wild media speculation.
They could have tracked it if it was turned on.
And yes, if they had it they almost certainly would have shared the data with those that need to know.
Everyone - the media, public - seem to forget that they are not under any obligation to share anything
with the those outside the need to know, as much as the media and public think they have a right !
You don't expect the Gov't to share data from Pine Gap, so why JORN ?
In fact, I would go so far as to say it causes more problems when you do
share information - because of wild media speculation.
Last edited by 500N; 18th May 2014 at 22:11.
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: france
Posts: 760
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
they are not under any obligation to share anything
kayej1188
I would say that India, Indonesia, Malaysia and Australia, plus any of the countries that had naval vessels in the area would be just as reluctant to publicly acknowledge what their systems saw as they would be to acknowledge what their systems didn't see. The release of such information into the public domain would not be in their national interest.
Australia is reluctant to divulge the information
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Australia
Age: 76
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JORN OTH Radar detected MH370?
I'd say that it's unlikely that JORN did track MH370.
Two reasons, firstly I suspect that if they had they'd be crowing about the capabilities of the system to enhance its effectiveness as a deterrent.
Secondly I doubt that with that knowledge, the Australian authorities would have wasted hundreds of flight/seatime hours on the search far to the SW of WA.
Two reasons, firstly I suspect that if they had they'd be crowing about the capabilities of the system to enhance its effectiveness as a deterrent.
Secondly I doubt that with that knowledge, the Australian authorities would have wasted hundreds of flight/seatime hours on the search far to the SW of WA.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: US
Age: 36
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re the possibility of JORN having tracked this flight--Intriguing possibility nonetheless considering the fact that the investigators do seem awfully confident of the resting spot--confidence that would seem suspect with ONLY Inmarsat's data as evidence. However I presume the black box pings have a lot to do with this confidence. On the other hand, it seems that they're reluctant to conclude that the black box pings are without a doubt from MH370.
I had another thought that I was hoping someone with technical expertise could answer. Could there be there any (technical/electrical/"____-"al) occurrences that would give off erroneous satellite pings? In other words, is there a situation in which the handshake signals to Inmarsat were completely wrong and not indicative of MH370's flight in the later hours (beyond where the track was known)?
I had another thought that I was hoping someone with technical expertise could answer. Could there be there any (technical/electrical/"____-"al) occurrences that would give off erroneous satellite pings? In other words, is there a situation in which the handshake signals to Inmarsat were completely wrong and not indicative of MH370's flight in the later hours (beyond where the track was known)?
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida and wherever my laptop is
Posts: 1,350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They are not under any obligation to put information into the public domain. There will be a huge amount of information that has been made available to the SAR teams that they have zero obligation to release to the media.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Debris v Technology
Unless I've missed something key (which is highly likely given we're now on page 540 and I struggle to remember if/when I've ever read so many pages), the primary search area is defined purely on the advice of 'techies' (Inmarsat?) and some unsubstantiated acoustic 'noise' including some allegedly heard over the side of Chinese inflatable with a hand held mic?
Still, not one single piece of debris fished from the ocean has been directly linked to MH370?
I guess I have two questions, which those with infinitely more wisdom than I, will no doubt answer/tear to shreds:
1. Is it even remotely conceivable that an airliner could ditch/crash in the ocean and subsequently sink to the seabed without any debris whatsoever surfacing? Surely if the initial impact didn't dislodge some debris, the forces, currents and contact with the seabed could/would cause enough damage to the airframe to allow something, anything, to escape to the surface and at some point present itself as evidence of a crash site (albeit 100's of Kms away)
2. At what point in future do people start questioning the techies analysis over logic and the absence, after such a number of weeks, of any physical evidence? Are there any similar aviation incidents in the past where not one single fragment of debris was identified so long after the disappearance?
I know it's a huge ocean (which is deep and moves), the techies are probably the best/only chance the search authorities have at locating the haystack, etc.
Essentially I guess I'm simply asking, how long do the search teams keep searching without any evidence presenting itself?
Still, not one single piece of debris fished from the ocean has been directly linked to MH370?
I guess I have two questions, which those with infinitely more wisdom than I, will no doubt answer/tear to shreds:
1. Is it even remotely conceivable that an airliner could ditch/crash in the ocean and subsequently sink to the seabed without any debris whatsoever surfacing? Surely if the initial impact didn't dislodge some debris, the forces, currents and contact with the seabed could/would cause enough damage to the airframe to allow something, anything, to escape to the surface and at some point present itself as evidence of a crash site (albeit 100's of Kms away)
2. At what point in future do people start questioning the techies analysis over logic and the absence, after such a number of weeks, of any physical evidence? Are there any similar aviation incidents in the past where not one single fragment of debris was identified so long after the disappearance?
I know it's a huge ocean (which is deep and moves), the techies are probably the best/only chance the search authorities have at locating the haystack, etc.
Essentially I guess I'm simply asking, how long do the search teams keep searching without any evidence presenting itself?
Agree Ian W.
The timing always did look a bit suspicious. They managed to get the Ocean Shield in location just in time to hear the last signals from the pincers. Well away from the location of the previous aerial search area.
I suspect it is very likely some other data was made available to allow this to happen. The nature of this may never be released. It could be a satellite, or could be JORN.
We don't know much about JORN. Its capabilities are likely understated. It is publicly acknowledged this technology is less effective at night. Defence dollars are tight, and it may not have been operational overnight. If operational, its focus was most likely on maritime traffic (people smugglers) between Indonesia and Christmas Island (i.e. north of Christmas Island) - people smuggling being a key political issue at present.
But maybe it was on.
And maybe it did pick up an aircraft almost 1000km SSW of Christmas Island close to the time of impact. Which does make you wonder about the days of searching well SW of Perth.
Or maybe it picked up a signal much earlier that night on while MH370 was still somewhere west of Sumatra, and used this datum to refine the Inmarsat data. That process might take some time, and could explain the apparent "delay."
There will be a huge amount of information that has been made available to the SAR teams that they have zero obligation to release to the media.
I suspect it is very likely some other data was made available to allow this to happen. The nature of this may never be released. It could be a satellite, or could be JORN.
We don't know much about JORN. Its capabilities are likely understated. It is publicly acknowledged this technology is less effective at night. Defence dollars are tight, and it may not have been operational overnight. If operational, its focus was most likely on maritime traffic (people smugglers) between Indonesia and Christmas Island (i.e. north of Christmas Island) - people smuggling being a key political issue at present.
But maybe it was on.
And maybe it did pick up an aircraft almost 1000km SSW of Christmas Island close to the time of impact. Which does make you wonder about the days of searching well SW of Perth.
Or maybe it picked up a signal much earlier that night on while MH370 was still somewhere west of Sumatra, and used this datum to refine the Inmarsat data. That process might take some time, and could explain the apparent "delay."
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Family of pilot of missing flight MH370 speaks out"
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: uk
Posts: 180
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ian W, I am not sure about your ANY obligation. how about a moral one? after all 239 souls have been lost. this isnt some ambiguous spying/ eavesdropping/whistleblowing event where claiming national interest is the usual default option. what could be more of a national interest than to help to find out what happened to 239 lives by declaring what you know or dont know? non-disclosure leads to distrust and conspiracy theories which may be entirely unjustified. agreed that "those who need to know" probably know by now but making the public wait for the final report which could be light years away doesnt seem a good pr move.
that said, I am not yet ready to believe that the good folks currently investigating this mystery are colluding in withholding information. as with the law of the sea, I am sure the law of the air is in full operation to find this aircraft.
that said, I am not yet ready to believe that the good folks currently investigating this mystery are colluding in withholding information. as with the law of the sea, I am sure the law of the air is in full operation to find this aircraft.