Malaysian Airlines MH370 contact lost
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Earth
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Am I the only one who thinks that if the 'pilot suicide' line currently in favour by many commentators turns out to false (as I suspect it is), we may well see all airlines forced to adopt what I think is already the El Al system where the pilots are totally isolated from the cabin for the whole flight? (Does El Al allow a small servery hatch for meals, or is everything the pilots require, including food, put in with them before the flight?)
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Berks
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@PA28Viking
"...all three types of transmission could have stopped/been disabled at the same time due to human action or technical malfunction"
I believe the authorities have said/implied that they know that "ACARS was disabled by someone on board" and readers here have suggested that's because it did a tidy "log-off", which itself sends out a transmission, rather than suddenly stopping transmissions. But (I think) you're right in saying that all 3 of comms, xpdr and ACARS could have been disabled at the same time at or around the FIR boundary
"...all three types of transmission could have stopped/been disabled at the same time due to human action or technical malfunction"
I believe the authorities have said/implied that they know that "ACARS was disabled by someone on board" and readers here have suggested that's because it did a tidy "log-off", which itself sends out a transmission, rather than suddenly stopping transmissions. But (I think) you're right in saying that all 3 of comms, xpdr and ACARS could have been disabled at the same time at or around the FIR boundary
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Sand ATC
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@Lord Spandex Masher
Correct TCAS does not display direction of travel per se, it does however show the position of the other aircraft relative to yourself.
Hopefully a TCAS is that accurate otherwise the sole purpose of its use is for naught.
Correct TCAS does not display direction of travel per se, it does however show the position of the other aircraft relative to yourself.
Hopefully a TCAS is that accurate otherwise the sole purpose of its use is for naught.
Keeping Danny in Sandwiches
Join Date: May 1999
Location: UK
Age: 76
Posts: 1,294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Malaysia Airlines revealed the planes co-pilot, Fariq Abdul Hamid, was the last person to communicate to the ground from the cockpit, apparently after the communications system was shut off."
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: MA, USA
Age: 54
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I thought it had already been reported here a while back that he was doing some work for the flight sim software development company (PMDG?)
PMDG Simulations Comments on the loss of MH 370 - PMDG General Forum - The AVSIM Community
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Behind you all the way!
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FE Hoppy
What is the elapsed time from the last known position (Malaysian/Vietnamese FIR boundary) to the nearest point on the 'arc inducing, satellite-based ping'?
What is the distance from the last known position (Malaysian/Vietnamese FIR boundary) to the nearest point on the 'arc inducing, satellite-based ping'?
Do the facts suggest that the aircraft 'flew in a circle'?
If the flight crew, a member of it or a knowledgable intruder into the flight deck were trying to make the aircraft 'disappear', why would they fly around in circles inside airspace that has SSR & Primary radar capability? Isn't the airspace around there fairly busy at that time of night?
The flight had NO crew-actioned communication whatsoever, post the 'Goodnight' sign off at handover. The transponder & ACARS were manually selected OFF. If the aircraft had a bonafide emergency, the crew still had 2 or 3 VHF radios & probably a pair of HF radios & maybe even a SATPHONE on the flight deck, depending on the MAS fit, in order to communicate a problem. Lots of communications methods available, none were utilised.
What is the elapsed time from the last known position (Malaysian/Vietnamese FIR boundary) to the nearest point on the 'arc inducing, satellite-based ping'?
What is the distance from the last known position (Malaysian/Vietnamese FIR boundary) to the nearest point on the 'arc inducing, satellite-based ping'?
Do the facts suggest that the aircraft 'flew in a circle'?
If the flight crew, a member of it or a knowledgable intruder into the flight deck were trying to make the aircraft 'disappear', why would they fly around in circles inside airspace that has SSR & Primary radar capability? Isn't the airspace around there fairly busy at that time of night?
The flight had NO crew-actioned communication whatsoever, post the 'Goodnight' sign off at handover. The transponder & ACARS were manually selected OFF. If the aircraft had a bonafide emergency, the crew still had 2 or 3 VHF radios & probably a pair of HF radios & maybe even a SATPHONE on the flight deck, depending on the MAS fit, in order to communicate a problem. Lots of communications methods available, none were utilised.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Denmark
Age: 64
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It was clarified at the press conference today, that they do not know when the ACARS was turn off/stopped. They only know that the last transmission was at 17.07 and that the next transmission expected 17.37 never happened.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Patterson, NY
Age: 66
Posts: 436
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As many others, I am thoroughly perplexed by this whole incident. Some of the questions is my mind are:
1. If this was a case of pilot suicide (which I personally highly doubt) why would he have gone through the bother of shutting comms systems down and taken another course instead of simply ditching the plane as soon as possible?
2. If this was a case of a hijacking this would also be highly unusual in that hijackers usually want to make some sort of statement and have their demands met.
3. If this was a case of mechanical failure then why did the aircraft 'ping' a satellite(s) hours later?
4. If this was a case of cabin depressurization, and resulting hypoxia, then the aircraft would not have been able to be turned around to another flight path?
5. Why would anyone fly the aircraft to 45,000'? What purpose would this serve other than "ridding" the aircraft of coherent, or semi-coherent, passengers?
I'm sure there are several other questions I'm not asking.
However, having said all that and this is just my own feelings on this issue: I wonder if the aircraft and passengers landed somewhere else and was refueled to await "further orders"?? I know this scenario is a bit "out there" but......
1. If this was a case of pilot suicide (which I personally highly doubt) why would he have gone through the bother of shutting comms systems down and taken another course instead of simply ditching the plane as soon as possible?
2. If this was a case of a hijacking this would also be highly unusual in that hijackers usually want to make some sort of statement and have their demands met.
3. If this was a case of mechanical failure then why did the aircraft 'ping' a satellite(s) hours later?
4. If this was a case of cabin depressurization, and resulting hypoxia, then the aircraft would not have been able to be turned around to another flight path?
5. Why would anyone fly the aircraft to 45,000'? What purpose would this serve other than "ridding" the aircraft of coherent, or semi-coherent, passengers?
I'm sure there are several other questions I'm not asking.
However, having said all that and this is just my own feelings on this issue: I wonder if the aircraft and passengers landed somewhere else and was refueled to await "further orders"?? I know this scenario is a bit "out there" but......
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 1,955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I guess that's why fighters have expensive radar kits as opposed to TCAS.
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: entre ici et lā
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pax
Quote:
something about a Flight Engineer as a PAX on board the aircraft? any one else heard about this?
-early article in WSJ indicated a Malaysian aircraft engineer aboard -did not indicate whether Pax or crew
something about a Flight Engineer as a PAX on board the aircraft? any one else heard about this?
-early article in WSJ indicated a Malaysian aircraft engineer aboard -did not indicate whether Pax or crew
Last edited by SLFplatine; 17th Mar 2014 at 12:17. Reason: sp errors corrections
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Swansea
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It was clarified at the press conference today, that they do not know when the ACARS was turn off/stopped. They only know that the last transmission was at 17.07 and that the next transmission expected 17.37 never happened.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Denmark
Age: 64
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It was clarified at the press conference today, that they do not know when the ACARS was turn off/stopped. They only know that the last transmission was at 17.07 and that the next transmission expected 17.37 never happened.
We have three phases of the flight:
1) The known part which took MH370 to IGARI. Around 17.20 we had the last voice comm and transponder stopped. Last ACARS was 17.07 and next expected ACARS was 17.37. So all three types of transmission could have stooped/been disabled at the same time due to human action or technical malfunction.
2) The primary radar part where the flight is seen tracking towards VAMPI/GILVA/IGREX. We know little about that track. Important is if the aircraft could be seen to be manoeuvring in a way indicating humans controlling the flight path.
3) The 'dark' part where MH370 is travelling to its faith on the 40 dgr arc north or south. This could either have been under control of humans as intended by pilots/hijackers OR just a continuation of whatever was programmed at some stage before loss of control (HELIOS style).
Remember that what happened may not be what hijackers intended or the pilots tried to accomplish in an attempt to save the aircraft.
We have three phases of the flight:
1) The known part which took MH370 to IGARI. Around 17.20 we had the last voice comm and transponder stopped. Last ACARS was 17.07 and next expected ACARS was 17.37. So all three types of transmission could have stooped/been disabled at the same time due to human action or technical malfunction.
2) The primary radar part where the flight is seen tracking towards VAMPI/GILVA/IGREX. We know little about that track. Important is if the aircraft could be seen to be manoeuvring in a way indicating humans controlling the flight path.
3) The 'dark' part where MH370 is travelling to its faith on the 40 dgr arc north or south. This could either have been under control of humans as intended by pilots/hijackers OR just a continuation of whatever was programmed at some stage before loss of control (HELIOS style).
Remember that what happened may not be what hijackers intended or the pilots tried to accomplish in an attempt to save the aircraft.
I think since every second post is about the pings, we need to put that into perspective.
Firstly its very clever and definitely a line of enquiring worth persuing, however it must still be treated with caution, there are some assumptions made just the same as in any other theory.
Firstly the ping is literally just that a ping, it has no identifiable data with it. Its purpose is purely to check a devices readiness it is not limited to just aircraft satcom systems.
The assumptions that have been made in this particular case is that MH370 satcom unit has pinged one hour after its last transmission or acars shutdown and that MH370 was in fact the unidentified military radar target in the malacca strait at the time of the ping. If the assumptions are correct then we listen out for each hourly ping. If on the other hand the assumptions are not for example the ping came from another source say SQ68 bound for Barcelona, then that line of enquiry ends right there.
The 0811 ping is the last one received at the expected time, not necessarily the only ping received that could be from MH370 because the next expected time would be beyond the time that the satcom could possibly be powered. (fuel)
The difficulty is that as the hours tick by the probability of a ping at the expected time becomes more likely that it could be from a different source, particularly towards Europe on the northern arc as aircraft and satcom units start powering up for their days work. I hope this puts the satcom ping back into perspective.
Firstly its very clever and definitely a line of enquiring worth persuing, however it must still be treated with caution, there are some assumptions made just the same as in any other theory.
Firstly the ping is literally just that a ping, it has no identifiable data with it. Its purpose is purely to check a devices readiness it is not limited to just aircraft satcom systems.
The assumptions that have been made in this particular case is that MH370 satcom unit has pinged one hour after its last transmission or acars shutdown and that MH370 was in fact the unidentified military radar target in the malacca strait at the time of the ping. If the assumptions are correct then we listen out for each hourly ping. If on the other hand the assumptions are not for example the ping came from another source say SQ68 bound for Barcelona, then that line of enquiry ends right there.
The 0811 ping is the last one received at the expected time, not necessarily the only ping received that could be from MH370 because the next expected time would be beyond the time that the satcom could possibly be powered. (fuel)
The difficulty is that as the hours tick by the probability of a ping at the expected time becomes more likely that it could be from a different source, particularly towards Europe on the northern arc as aircraft and satcom units start powering up for their days work. I hope this puts the satcom ping back into perspective.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: wales
Age: 81
Posts: 316
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can Pings give more accurate data ie a constant Track
About 8 pages back EPPo posted today's update and says they had 6 pings that is basically 1 an hour after falling of milrad.
Please follow me through this.
If you look at the map by Volcanicash page 203 #4043 ( http://s8.postimg.org/ye87yekz9/isat.jpg )
Counting back that is 40, 45,50,55,60 65. He clearly could not have gotten that close to the centre of the elevation rings ,and still get to those final arcs, so he must have flown at tangent to them, My best guess is
1st ping 45 - west bound from final radar loss point
2nd ping 50 still west ish bound
3rd ping 55 still west ish bound
he then turns NW or SW
4th ping 50
5th ping 45
6th ping 40
and ended up on the north or south arc.
But there was a rush to the north (Andam sea) why?
Finally if you look at this link from Vinnie_boombatz p201 #4011
http://telecom.esa.int/telecom/media...-Obj4-hres.jpg
It shows the beaming arrangement of the I-4 series inmarsats (3 cover the world), there is wide beam (the whole area), a number of regional beams and finally the narrow beams. ( used I-3 diag for explanation purpose only)
To my knowledge the signals were picked up by the old I-3 sats which use 4 to cover the world and only have wide and regional beams.
As I understand the workings of the system the sat send a "hello anyone there" signal using the wide beam and if a reply is received it calculates the best regional beam to use transmits back to the response using the regional beam. Sat engineers pls confirm/correct.
The point of this post is to ask an expert if it can do that why don't we know a more accurate position ie a shorter arc based on the regional beam.
Please follow me through this.
If you look at the map by Volcanicash page 203 #4043 ( http://s8.postimg.org/ye87yekz9/isat.jpg )
Counting back that is 40, 45,50,55,60 65. He clearly could not have gotten that close to the centre of the elevation rings ,and still get to those final arcs, so he must have flown at tangent to them, My best guess is
1st ping 45 - west bound from final radar loss point
2nd ping 50 still west ish bound
3rd ping 55 still west ish bound
he then turns NW or SW
4th ping 50
5th ping 45
6th ping 40
and ended up on the north or south arc.
But there was a rush to the north (Andam sea) why?
Finally if you look at this link from Vinnie_boombatz p201 #4011
http://telecom.esa.int/telecom/media...-Obj4-hres.jpg
It shows the beaming arrangement of the I-4 series inmarsats (3 cover the world), there is wide beam (the whole area), a number of regional beams and finally the narrow beams. ( used I-3 diag for explanation purpose only)
To my knowledge the signals were picked up by the old I-3 sats which use 4 to cover the world and only have wide and regional beams.
As I understand the workings of the system the sat send a "hello anyone there" signal using the wide beam and if a reply is received it calculates the best regional beam to use transmits back to the response using the regional beam. Sat engineers pls confirm/correct.
The point of this post is to ask an expert if it can do that why don't we know a more accurate position ie a shorter arc based on the regional beam.
CAN PINGS GIVE CONFIRMATION OD A CONSTANT HDG ( not the actual hdg)
The following assumes the rings shown are just the five degree rings for clarity ie they not fixed aerials on the satellite but dependent on aircraft position and all others are possible ie 51,52,53,53 etc
If you used this speed and assumed at any previous ping the aircraft crossed 1st ring at 90 deg, then you can calculate at which ring the next ping should occur at, if it is less than this radius , you should be able to using this difference calculate the angle at which he crossed the second ring to give this reduced distance ( ie actual distance traveled is the same but not at 90 deg to 2nd ring. If following pings show the same ring spacing he is on a constant track. You will not know where on the arc he crossed it or the hdg.
If plane on a constant track I would suspect heading south because north would certainly end up with a contact on radar unless evasive action taken.
Any maths folk out there who can confirm this is a valid idea.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Behind you all the way!
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FE Hoppy
I've re-read your posts. How big a circle are you talking about? Enough to 'lose' a bit of time until MH370 could get close enough to another airliner, for example SIA68, to 'shadow'? To use this unsuspecting 'host' to mask MH370's transit through SSR, Primary & Procedural airspace?
It's feasible but isn't it all a bit too 'James Bond'?
I've re-read your posts. How big a circle are you talking about? Enough to 'lose' a bit of time until MH370 could get close enough to another airliner, for example SIA68, to 'shadow'? To use this unsuspecting 'host' to mask MH370's transit through SSR, Primary & Procedural airspace?
It's feasible but isn't it all a bit too 'James Bond'?
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Earth
Posts: 3,663
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As an IT professional I have been wondering about the following the last few days. We all have seen tomnod publishing DigitalGlobe maps where users can search for the plane. Wouldn't it be possible for someone smarter than me to come up with an algorithm to scan all the satellite imagery from DigitalGlobe to eliminate big parts of the ocean in the search operation. Water has a characteristic pattern / color and I'm sure an algorithm could be developed to search for patterns out of the ordinary (floating debris). Then these hits could be checked by specialists or even through crowdsourcing.
The best you can hope for in that area is that, seeing as they are in the business of analysing satellite images for people trying to hide stuff, the intelligence agencies already have such an algorithm already in-use and that their masters may permit them to use it for this purpose to see what they can come up with (obviously findings would never be publicly released for obvious reasons, but would be passed in some obfuscated form to the nations taking part in the SAR). But I suspect satellite resources in that part of the world may be busy elsewhere... and they'd need a lot of fresh imagery becasue of the vast search area of seas + some landmass.
As for "crowdsourcing" don't make me laugh. Tomnod is no more than marketing PR excercise for its owners. Have you seen the sort of nonsense the "crowdsourcing" community have been highlighting on the images ? People with no SAR and no satellite imagery analysis experience are not going to come up with anything of remote use.
Last edited by mixture; 17th Mar 2014 at 12:41.
"Flight Engineer"
The police have been looking into the background of this so-called flight engineer travelling as pax and it seems he has been employed as an engineer by a business jet outfit, for what itīs worth.
Missing MH370: Flight engineer aboard plane under probe - Nation | The Star Online
As an engineer specialising in executive jets, Khairul would not necessarily have all the knowledge needed to divert and fly a large jetliner.
Khairul had said he worked for a Swiss-based jet charter firm called Execujet Aviation Group, but the company declined to say whether it still employed him.
In a picture posted on Khairul's Facebook account in 2011, he identified himself as an employee of Execujet's Malaysian operations.
Khairul had said he worked for a Swiss-based jet charter firm called Execujet Aviation Group, but the company declined to say whether it still employed him.
In a picture posted on Khairul's Facebook account in 2011, he identified himself as an employee of Execujet's Malaysian operations.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My first post and sorry I haven't read all previous.
I was wondering is it possible the signals from MH370 could be replicated by another party on another aircraft while 370 diverts to wherever it is now.
I remember getting a Tcas RA ONCE due to a person on the ground calibrating a transponder, to us it looked like an aircraft was coming up from beneath at a very fast pace and we got an RA but there was nothing there.
Equipment could be used to show it went to 45,000 when it actually didn't or that the signal was a decoy.
I was wondering is it possible the signals from MH370 could be replicated by another party on another aircraft while 370 diverts to wherever it is now.
I remember getting a Tcas RA ONCE due to a person on the ground calibrating a transponder, to us it looked like an aircraft was coming up from beneath at a very fast pace and we got an RA but there was nothing there.
Equipment could be used to show it went to 45,000 when it actually didn't or that the signal was a decoy.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: wales
Age: 81
Posts: 316
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Xeptu I understood even a basic ping containing the embedded code for the aircraft frame number.
Also if SQ68 (and assuming SIA use satconm for acars) that would definitely identify it as SQ68
Also if SQ68 (and assuming SIA use satconm for acars) that would definitely identify it as SQ68
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 1,955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe what he's saying is that MH370, with transponder off, is invisible to any other TCAS system switched on nearby. However, MH370 could still have TCAS switched on, and detect any a/c nearby with its transponder working. His TCAS theory holds water, it seems to me.
Last edited by Lord Spandex Masher; 18th Mar 2014 at 02:30.
