Malaysian Airlines MH370 contact lost
Pegase Driver
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 74
Posts: 3,687
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Blake 777
There is a serious flaw in the Minister's reponse : How does he ( and the Malysian air force ) knew it was civilian and not hostlile ? We were told the primary target was never identified in real time. That was acknowledged by a Malaysian general in a press conference in the early days.
Otherwise if it was identified, then why leave the search going on for days in the Souh China sea?
For me the minister response in the programme is just Communications crisis management to hide the fact that their air defence did not work very well that night.
.
Possibly the biggest disappointment of Hishamuddin's responses to 4 Corners was his inability or unwillingness to acknowledge that in choosing not to have the military scramble an intercept to the unidentified aircraft showing on primary radar, the opportunity to gather valuable information was lost. Hishamuddin took the tack "What would have been the point? We weren't going to shoot it down - it was civilian
Otherwise if it was identified, then why leave the search going on for days in the Souh China sea?
For me the minister response in the programme is just Communications crisis management to hide the fact that their air defence did not work very well that night.
.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Oceania
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Malaysia now says they need Inmarsat's help in order to release the data "in a presentable way", without saying how long this preparation will take.
They say "all parties" are working towards the release... how many people do they need, how long can it take to publish a simple copy of the data they have already been sharing amongst themselves?
I thought the whole point of "raw data" was that it was, well, raw, and not edited "for public consumption".
They say "all parties" are working towards the release... how many people do they need, how long can it take to publish a simple copy of the data they have already been sharing amongst themselves?
I thought the whole point of "raw data" was that it was, well, raw, and not edited "for public consumption".
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Perth Western Australia
Age: 57
Posts: 808
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I thought the whole point of "raw data" was that it was, well, raw, and not edited "for public consumption".
I would presume there's some back and forth going on about how to release what data and its formating. There could be for instant, a huge binary file with data for all pings of all aircraft for the birds field of view for x hours. Or there could be one that has only the data for that flight extracted.
Any decision they make will be criticized, and accused of a conspiracy, so they will most likely be taking the time to be extra careful with a decision that would normally be flippant.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: N. California
Age: 80
Posts: 184
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@rh200
Yes, we'll take the raw binary file and we will parse it later as we decode its format. Once the data is in the public domain it cannot be edited and that is a significant point.
When you say "they will most likely be taking the time to be extra careful with a decision that would normally be flippant." you should keep in mind ATC watcher's post just above yours which points out that 71 days after the event, the Malaysian Minister of defense is still issuing inaccurate versions of the first days' events.
You are not the only poster here who is providing support for an obvious coverup of the events of March 9 -10 by elements of the Malaysian government. Others have made insulting posts about "amatur detectives" etc wanting information from the Malaysians (supposedly just to satisfy idle, or somehow juvenile curiosity.) The fact is that many people have a justified interest in finding out what happened to MH370; that presumably is why the search goes on.
There is much information about the early portion of that flight which is being withheld, and there have been a series of statements issued by the Malaysian Government which have been shown to be at variance with the truth. They have denied making statements they are on record as having made; and they have issued revisions to every detail issued prior to March 11th.
We still don't know the location (time, coordinates, heading, along with estimated speed and altitude) of the last radar sighting; although, the Malaysians have had that information since the evening of March 9th.
The Vietnamese, Thai, and Indonesian* radars tracked that flight, yet they haven't been forthcoming with detailed data; we can assume this to be because of diplomatic exchanges from the Malaysians requesting silence.
* The Indonesians issued a statement stating that they did not track MH370 "over their territory" - a qualifier which would hardly have been necessary if they hadn't tracked MH370 at all.
Another major failure to disclose by the Malaysians was the failure to announce to the nations searching for the wreckage in the SCS that Inmarsat had given them information that the flight had continued on for another seven hours. It took them at least three days to finally let that cat out of the bag. It is clear that in the absence of Inmarsat's release of data Malaysia would never have admitted tracking the plane into the Malacca Strait - we would still be looking in the South China Sea or the Western Pacific.
Much of the support here for the withholding of information has been based on the premise that primary radar data is some kind of a big secret. It is true that there is radar information in this world which is secret for good reason (modern over the horizon stuff such as JORN, or the defenses of a carrier group, or specific radiation patterns effected by ground clutter); but the garden variety stuff that the Malaysians bought from the British, or what Thailand or Indonesia is using is no secret at all - the range is limited by the horizon and that's that. There is no valid reason to withhold tracking information about MH370 (unless someone is trying to cover up the details of who and why MH370 went to its southern demise.) Another reason appears to be a person's political outlook - whether one sees government as a godlike entity over the people, or a creation of the people, paid for by the people and at the service of the people. I am of the latter, I assume that many others here share that view.
Yesterday someone posted here that one of the possibilities behind the disappearance of MH370 was that there may have been "another shoe to drop" or a message which was supposed to be released to the world failed to get out. I believe that is a strong possibility and I believe that the behavior of the Malaysian government supports that premise.
My point is: the disappearance of a commercial airliner with all its passengers is an event of global interest, it affects all of us.
Yet it appears that the root cause of this event is being hidden due to local politics in a small part of the world. I object to that.
Yes, we'll take the raw binary file and we will parse it later as we decode its format. Once the data is in the public domain it cannot be edited and that is a significant point.
When you say "they will most likely be taking the time to be extra careful with a decision that would normally be flippant." you should keep in mind ATC watcher's post just above yours which points out that 71 days after the event, the Malaysian Minister of defense is still issuing inaccurate versions of the first days' events.
You are not the only poster here who is providing support for an obvious coverup of the events of March 9 -10 by elements of the Malaysian government. Others have made insulting posts about "amatur detectives" etc wanting information from the Malaysians (supposedly just to satisfy idle, or somehow juvenile curiosity.) The fact is that many people have a justified interest in finding out what happened to MH370; that presumably is why the search goes on.
There is much information about the early portion of that flight which is being withheld, and there have been a series of statements issued by the Malaysian Government which have been shown to be at variance with the truth. They have denied making statements they are on record as having made; and they have issued revisions to every detail issued prior to March 11th.
We still don't know the location (time, coordinates, heading, along with estimated speed and altitude) of the last radar sighting; although, the Malaysians have had that information since the evening of March 9th.
The Vietnamese, Thai, and Indonesian* radars tracked that flight, yet they haven't been forthcoming with detailed data; we can assume this to be because of diplomatic exchanges from the Malaysians requesting silence.
* The Indonesians issued a statement stating that they did not track MH370 "over their territory" - a qualifier which would hardly have been necessary if they hadn't tracked MH370 at all.
Another major failure to disclose by the Malaysians was the failure to announce to the nations searching for the wreckage in the SCS that Inmarsat had given them information that the flight had continued on for another seven hours. It took them at least three days to finally let that cat out of the bag. It is clear that in the absence of Inmarsat's release of data Malaysia would never have admitted tracking the plane into the Malacca Strait - we would still be looking in the South China Sea or the Western Pacific.
Much of the support here for the withholding of information has been based on the premise that primary radar data is some kind of a big secret. It is true that there is radar information in this world which is secret for good reason (modern over the horizon stuff such as JORN, or the defenses of a carrier group, or specific radiation patterns effected by ground clutter); but the garden variety stuff that the Malaysians bought from the British, or what Thailand or Indonesia is using is no secret at all - the range is limited by the horizon and that's that. There is no valid reason to withhold tracking information about MH370 (unless someone is trying to cover up the details of who and why MH370 went to its southern demise.) Another reason appears to be a person's political outlook - whether one sees government as a godlike entity over the people, or a creation of the people, paid for by the people and at the service of the people. I am of the latter, I assume that many others here share that view.
Yesterday someone posted here that one of the possibilities behind the disappearance of MH370 was that there may have been "another shoe to drop" or a message which was supposed to be released to the world failed to get out. I believe that is a strong possibility and I believe that the behavior of the Malaysian government supports that premise.
My point is: the disappearance of a commercial airliner with all its passengers is an event of global interest, it affects all of us.
Yet it appears that the root cause of this event is being hidden due to local politics in a small part of the world. I object to that.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Earth
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Not releasing" to the genuine populus is (a lot) different to "being hidden".
While there may be people who have a requirement to know beyond idle curiousity or some dream of being the next Encyclopedia Brown or Sherlock Holmes, I would suggest those people may be able to access such data through channels are than protesting on PPRuNe that it's not being made public.
The data not being released is different to the data not being available someone with a genuine need to know, however I put it to you that most (I suspect all) people complaining about it here aren't in a position where they would have any cause to know....
While there may be people who have a requirement to know beyond idle curiousity or some dream of being the next Encyclopedia Brown or Sherlock Holmes, I would suggest those people may be able to access such data through channels are than protesting on PPRuNe that it's not being made public.
The data not being released is different to the data not being available someone with a genuine need to know, however I put it to you that most (I suspect all) people complaining about it here aren't in a position where they would have any cause to know....
Hishammuddin's comment in the Four Corners interview, in response to almost every specific question was:
'It will come out..do you really think that Malaysia can hide this information?'
I'm curious as to when he thinks 'it' will come out and under what conditions.
I don't have a problem with his not revealing sensitive and/or complex information to the interviewer but it is hard to comprehend exactly what is being witheld, and why, and how much of an impact the witheld information would have on the public perception of the incident were it to be released.
'It will come out..do you really think that Malaysia can hide this information?'
I'm curious as to when he thinks 'it' will come out and under what conditions.
I don't have a problem with his not revealing sensitive and/or complex information to the interviewer but it is hard to comprehend exactly what is being witheld, and why, and how much of an impact the witheld information would have on the public perception of the incident were it to be released.
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Australia
Age: 76
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Confusion?
I'm trying to imagine being involved in that search during the early days. With reported sightings from around the SCS and of wreckage, oil slicks and a life raft. Even a report from Chinese scientists of a seismic event that coincided with the last known position and timing.
Then the claim from Inmarsat that the plane likely flew on for hours ending up who knows where.
Who (or what) do you believe?
Then the claim from Inmarsat that the plane likely flew on for hours ending up who knows where.
Who (or what) do you believe?
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: London
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Who (or what) to believe?
Tas62 asks who (or what) to believe?
Well . . let's look at some possible facts. Inmarsat basic data indicates that the aircraft was still viable (flying or landed safely) for several hours after loss of ATC and ACARS comms, based on hourly logon request/renew data (engines turning/ FMS operative).
Inmarsat then went on to do an innovative analysis of doppler shifts on the received data which gave some possible routes which appeared to preclude a landing.
Inmarsat have been slow to release the full data, possibly because as a telecommunications operator they may not release full logs as that would reveal other customer activity. Thus we can expect " edited" logs when they do appear.
There may well be conspiracies at work here but to date there is no firm evidence to support that view. Let's wait and see just what comes out. None of the parties involved (other than the designated SAR authority) has any clear reason or mandate to keep the guessing public-at-large informed.
Well . . let's look at some possible facts. Inmarsat basic data indicates that the aircraft was still viable (flying or landed safely) for several hours after loss of ATC and ACARS comms, based on hourly logon request/renew data (engines turning/ FMS operative).
Inmarsat then went on to do an innovative analysis of doppler shifts on the received data which gave some possible routes which appeared to preclude a landing.
Inmarsat have been slow to release the full data, possibly because as a telecommunications operator they may not release full logs as that would reveal other customer activity. Thus we can expect " edited" logs when they do appear.
There may well be conspiracies at work here but to date there is no firm evidence to support that view. Let's wait and see just what comes out. None of the parties involved (other than the designated SAR authority) has any clear reason or mandate to keep the guessing public-at-large informed.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Perth - Western Australia
Age: 75
Posts: 1,805
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hishamuddin's statement on the Four Corners program was pretty clear on the delay relating to the release of the Immarsat information - Malaysia just wanted it verified.
However, I fail to see where it would take 3 days to verify it - particularly when there was an urgent SAR operation in progress.
However, I fail to see where it would take 3 days to verify it - particularly when there was an urgent SAR operation in progress.
Last edited by onetrack; 21st May 2014 at 16:07. Reason: sp ...
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: South Korea
Age: 62
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Then the claim from Inmarsat that the plane likely flew on for hours ending up who knows where.
Who (or what) do you believe?
Who (or what) do you believe?
I can also recall when the Malaysian authorities released the Inmarsat data many weeks ago it was interpreted that ACARS data had been received for another 7 hours (actual data, not just the pings). Rolls Royce and Boeing denied this – more confusion. Any cover up attempt is probably just to cover their incompetence concerning tracking the plane - nothing too sinister. Smart(normal) people will understand, these things happen, hopefully people will learn. In the end I don’t think the end result would be much different. Unfortunately the Malaysian authorities will have to consider the media and “ambulance chasing”lawyers before they release anything.
Last edited by Cool Guys; 21st May 2014 at 09:49.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida and wherever my laptop is
Posts: 1,350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hishahmuddin's statement on the Four Corners program was pretty clear on the delay relating to the release of the Immarsat information - Malaysia just wanted it verified.
However, I fail to see where it would take 3 days to verify it - particularly when there was an urgent SAR operation in progress.
However, I fail to see where it would take 3 days to verify it - particularly when there was an urgent SAR operation in progress.
The information would need to be checked and double checked by the appropriate experts to ensure that attention was not taken away from current search by incorrect assumptions.
Then the release would need to be cleared by the company managers/directors and the wording of any documentation and information release very carefully checked.
Lawyers will have been required to check the INMARSAT liability for the use of the information by foreign SAR and the contractual and legal (data protection) terms that may limit the release of 'private' information. Given the amount of technical, legal and administrative work involved, INMARSAT getting the information out in only 3 days was startlingly efficient.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Kent
Age: 65
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Relatives of the passengers of Malaysia Airlines MH370 have been dealt a fresh blow with news that pings heard in waters off the Australian coast are thought to be unrelated to the missing plane.
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: vancouver
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pings not from 370
Something is not right here
These folks are truly experts and immensely experienced. They expressed no doubts as to the origin of the Pings, which occurred where, obviously, they expected them to occur. Now they all believe the Pings were not from 370 and that is the reason for not releasing the recordings. I'm not much into conspiracy theories but something very odd has happened here.
These folks are truly experts and immensely experienced. They expressed no doubts as to the origin of the Pings, which occurred where, obviously, they expected them to occur. Now they all believe the Pings were not from 370 and that is the reason for not releasing the recordings. I'm not much into conspiracy theories but something very odd has happened here.
Just a bit confused.
Are the "pings near Australia" that are being referred to the Inmarsat satellite signals, or the underwater (hopefully the FDR/CVR beacon) signals being pursued by the maritime search teams?
Are the "pings near Australia" that are being referred to the Inmarsat satellite signals, or the underwater (hopefully the FDR/CVR beacon) signals being pursued by the maritime search teams?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Kent
Age: 65
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Black box pings, apparently:
MH370 'pings' may NOT have been from aircraft | Mail Online
Audio recordings of the 'ping' signals believed to have come from the black box of Flight MH370 will now not be released as doubt grows over whether they are connected with the missing plane.
The Joint Agency Coordination Centre (JACC) headed by Angus Houston told the Herald Sun that the search group's original confidence the four accoustic 'ping' signals were from the plane had waned and the recordings would not be made public.
'The recordings of the detections will not be released at this point in time,' the JACC said.
'We continue to pursue this lead to either discount or confirm the area of the detections as the final resting place of MH370.'
The Joint Agency Coordination Centre (JACC) headed by Angus Houston told the Herald Sun that the search group's original confidence the four accoustic 'ping' signals were from the plane had waned and the recordings would not be made public.
'The recordings of the detections will not be released at this point in time,' the JACC said.
'We continue to pursue this lead to either discount or confirm the area of the detections as the final resting place of MH370.'
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Perth - Western Australia
Age: 75
Posts: 1,805
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's entirely possible that the interpretation of the pings that were stated as "definitely being from an aircraft", have now been thrown into doubt, since the hardware and software faults were discovered, both on the Bluefin-21, and on the Ocean Shield equipment.
Excerpt from news article dated 15th May -
The faults discovered may have led to a re-assessment of the interpretation of the pings recorded, that then placed serious doubt on what was actually recorded.
If this is the case, then it's a major blow to the whole search exercise, that effectively throws the search effort back to almost square one.
Excerpt from news article dated 15th May -
"Examination of the communications problem has established that a hardware defect exists in the transponder mounted on the Ocean Shield, and a defect may also exist in the transponder mounted on the Bluefin-21," JACC said.
"This inhibits the ability of the two devices to communicate with each other."
"This inhibits the ability of the two devices to communicate with each other."
If this is the case, then it's a major blow to the whole search exercise, that effectively throws the search effort back to almost square one.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: NNW of Antipodes
Age: 81
Posts: 1,330
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by onetrack
The faults discovered may have led to a re-assessment of the interpretation of the pings recorded, that then placed serious doubt on what was actually recorded.
A by-product of this operation, is that the bathymetric data obtained will be far better than anything previously obtained over the Zenith Plateau.
Last edited by mm43; 22nd May 2014 at 02:10.
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Australia
Age: 76
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JACC Chief Interview.
Angus Houston interviewed on ABC TV (Aus);
In summary:
Ocean Shield arrived at midnight to resume underwater search.
Chinese survey ship 872 will arrive shortly to conduct bathymetric surveys of the area. She will be supported by Hai Xun 01 which will transport data to shore on a weekly basis.
The expert review is ongoing and results will be released on completion, but so far there's been nothing to suggest that they may be searching in the wrong area or that any of the data (including ULB pings) should be discounted.
In summary:
Ocean Shield arrived at midnight to resume underwater search.
Chinese survey ship 872 will arrive shortly to conduct bathymetric surveys of the area. She will be supported by Hai Xun 01 which will transport data to shore on a weekly basis.
The expert review is ongoing and results will be released on completion, but so far there's been nothing to suggest that they may be searching in the wrong area or that any of the data (including ULB pings) should be discounted.