Malaysian Airlines MH370 contact lost
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 1,955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Buy like you said, I'd would be pot luck as to which aircraft you came across, there's no info from TCAS except height and to visually identify the type and the airline you need to be within about ten miles at the most.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: wales
Age: 81
Posts: 316
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If SQ68 had no message to send, the acars would remain silent and the satcom would ping. There is definitely no identifiable data in a ping
EDIT: If data is to be sent either way then it will be preceded by a connection request (handshake) and yes that has identifiable date of course, I understood we were dealing with a ping.
EDIT: If data is to be sent either way then it will be preceded by a connection request (handshake) and yes that has identifiable date of course, I understood we were dealing with a ping.
yes they are pings
MAS did not subscribe to acars on satcom
MAS adverts say 1st class has sat phones
PAx, engineers etc say this aircraft does not have sat phones
It does not use the newer satcom aerials which were subject to AD for corrosion but has the older two aerials.
"established" opinion and understanding over the read says that it was obviously on and pings include the unique airframe code as that is embedded into all data transmitting devices (If that is not the case there will be loads of aircraft in a similar config where satcom keeps pinging with unidentified sources.)
Not being rude can you tell us what your filed is to make your statement so emphatically, if it is sat comms pls read my post #5173 page 259
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: wales
Age: 81
Posts: 316
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guys, forget about robbery scenarios and all that nonsense. Forget about the cargo, tones of gold etc that might have been on board.
Nobody in the right mind and familiar with the aviation field would try something like this because you cannnot get away with something like this. Too complicated to put in practise such thing.
I personally belive this was planned but for completly other reasons which are yet to be revealed. Hopefully we will get to know one day. Without finding the plane and black boxes information is very limited.
Nobody in the right mind and familiar with the aviation field would try something like this because you cannnot get away with something like this. Too complicated to put in practise such thing.
I personally belive this was planned but for completly other reasons which are yet to be revealed. Hopefully we will get to know one day. Without finding the plane and black boxes information is very limited.
However I agree your last sentence.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: NJ
Age: 43
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SLF: " A turn west from/after IGARI was entered into the active flight plan in the FMS; this is known as the last ACARS report indicated this waypoint change event."
IF this is TRUE and corroborated, it is extremely important, since said "last ACARS rpt" is 1:07
Ongoing events timing, including goodnight signoff, would CLEARLY RULE OUT electro-mechanical mishap, hypoxia as major cause, etc. It would make deliberate human action part of the equation for sure!
I am sure this is obvious to even the non-believers. If someone entered this waypoint request into the FMC in the 30 minutes before the 1:07 automatic (when ON) ACARS report (which listed it in event log) then it is what it is.
SO: Can this SLF quote be substantiated by any source other than "XYZ NEWS says unnamed sources tell them that..." and so forth? (or can a journalist viewing this thread ASK this of PM next chance?)
SO: Does the 40degree flight correction turn tracked by FR24 at IGARI around 1:20, ALSO show on the ACARS? IS it consistent with a pre-programmed LEFT turn? Or would it override the 40degree course correction for Vietnam. Credit to BARREL for raising this confliction.
IF this is TRUE and corroborated, it is extremely important, since said "last ACARS rpt" is 1:07
Ongoing events timing, including goodnight signoff, would CLEARLY RULE OUT electro-mechanical mishap, hypoxia as major cause, etc. It would make deliberate human action part of the equation for sure!
I am sure this is obvious to even the non-believers. If someone entered this waypoint request into the FMC in the 30 minutes before the 1:07 automatic (when ON) ACARS report (which listed it in event log) then it is what it is.
SO: Can this SLF quote be substantiated by any source other than "XYZ NEWS says unnamed sources tell them that..." and so forth? (or can a journalist viewing this thread ASK this of PM next chance?)
SO: Does the 40degree flight correction turn tracked by FR24 at IGARI around 1:20, ALSO show on the ACARS? IS it consistent with a pre-programmed LEFT turn? Or would it override the 40degree course correction for Vietnam. Credit to BARREL for raising this confliction.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Kent
Age: 65
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Overthewing, all of the TCAS units I've played with have been integrated with the transponder. Turn the transponder off and you don't have a TCAS, at all, not for receiving or transmitting. Think of TCAS as a type of transponder rather than a separate system.
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Toronto
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Arcs and pings
On the arcs and the pings, the published arc represents points on the earth's surface which are equidistant from the satellite and where the aircraft could be - we understand this was from the last ping received.
If, during its flight, the aircraft had been at some point, other than on the published arc, an earlier ping would have shown this - with a concentric arc of different radius - this would be pretty valuable information giving further hints as to speed and direction e.g. if two arcs an hour apart had almost the same radius then it's pretty likely the aircraft's path would have been substantially along that arc.
Again, if transit times for the earlier pings are available, all such data will surely have been already extracted but, seemingly, not yet published.
If, during its flight, the aircraft had been at some point, other than on the published arc, an earlier ping would have shown this - with a concentric arc of different radius - this would be pretty valuable information giving further hints as to speed and direction e.g. if two arcs an hour apart had almost the same radius then it's pretty likely the aircraft's path would have been substantially along that arc.
Again, if transit times for the earlier pings are available, all such data will surely have been already extracted but, seemingly, not yet published.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Malaysia
Age: 53
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Clayne. ARB is correct. It's indeed "Indian Muslim" restaurant. "Mamak" is a colloquial term, a corruption of the South Indian Tamil word, "Maama", which means Uncle. Nevertheless, in M'sia, you would almost certainly say "mamak" instead of "Indian-Muslim" restaurant
Mahatma, the pilot is Malay. Which in Malaysia means he is a Muslim. No two ways about it. It is certainly possible he may have Indian blood. M'sia is often touted as being multi-racial. However, in the old days, we actually attempted to be a melting pot of cultures and inter-racial marriages were common. Hence he could be a mixture of Malay, Indian, Chinese, Arab, etc for all we know.
Regarding usage of the words/terms "all right", "roger that", "good night" etc, I can't speak on behalf of M'sian pilots, but it is certainly commonly used here. In my organization, gentle instructions to the chaps I supervise is usually met with an " All right, Boss" response. A more terse order usually elicits a "Roger that, Boss!"
And no, I don't work for the military.
Lastly, plenty of Malaysians, yours truly included, are fervent supporters of the Opposition party. I'm happy to state here that the Oppositon party in M'sia espouses the principles of democracy and equal rights for all Malaysians.
It is certainly not run by a bunch of zealots who would encourage their members to show their affiliations to the party cause by bringing down an aircraft full of innocent people. Or hijack a plane just to vent their anger at court rulings favouring the BN government.
Hope this helps.
Cheers
Mahatma, the pilot is Malay. Which in Malaysia means he is a Muslim. No two ways about it. It is certainly possible he may have Indian blood. M'sia is often touted as being multi-racial. However, in the old days, we actually attempted to be a melting pot of cultures and inter-racial marriages were common. Hence he could be a mixture of Malay, Indian, Chinese, Arab, etc for all we know.
Regarding usage of the words/terms "all right", "roger that", "good night" etc, I can't speak on behalf of M'sian pilots, but it is certainly commonly used here. In my organization, gentle instructions to the chaps I supervise is usually met with an " All right, Boss" response. A more terse order usually elicits a "Roger that, Boss!"
And no, I don't work for the military.
Lastly, plenty of Malaysians, yours truly included, are fervent supporters of the Opposition party. I'm happy to state here that the Oppositon party in M'sia espouses the principles of democracy and equal rights for all Malaysians.
It is certainly not run by a bunch of zealots who would encourage their members to show their affiliations to the party cause by bringing down an aircraft full of innocent people. Or hijack a plane just to vent their anger at court rulings favouring the BN government.
Hope this helps.
Cheers
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: South East England
Posts: 304
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The northern route potential land area is immense and a big plane going in fast and vertical only makes a fairly small crater. Also the ELTs wouldn't survive the impact.
This is a 757:
Do this where there are no population and it may never be discovered.
This is a 757:
Do this where there are no population and it may never be discovered.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: London, UK
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There must be a finite number of airfields that can receive a 777 with full pax & cargo load, even with low fuel load. It's hardly going to land on a grass strip in the middle of nowhere. So in the unlikely event it's landed in one piece how hard could it be to find?
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: wales
Age: 81
Posts: 316
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IMHO pings are probably TDMA channel sync or frequency sync bursts. This means, that inside of data, there could be probably two low level identifiers.
1. the HW identifier (something like serial number of your phone (IMEI) or MAC address of you computer)
2. artificial identifier of the connection (which could be correlated with connection information stored previously in time of connection handshake)
There would be no data inside of these burst, as these serve only to SATCOM to keep connection to satellite synced and alive,
I would say that forging data connection on TDMA is possible and it is used for example to intercept GSM connections (man in the middle attack), but this process is definitely not trivial.
I would say, that probability, that these pings were mistakenly from another plane or forged to pretend to be from HM370, is really low.
1. the HW identifier (something like serial number of your phone (IMEI) or MAC address of you computer)
2. artificial identifier of the connection (which could be correlated with connection information stored previously in time of connection handshake)
There would be no data inside of these burst, as these serve only to SATCOM to keep connection to satellite synced and alive,
I would say that forging data connection on TDMA is possible and it is used for example to intercept GSM connections (man in the middle attack), but this process is definitely not trivial.
I would say, that probability, that these pings were mistakenly from another plane or forged to pretend to be from HM370, is really low.
yes it was posted earlier about the Imei/mac code principle I like it.
your 2nd point not valid MAS did not use satcom for any data transfer (no contract) used vhf (and perhaps HF)
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Brazil
Age: 55
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The current 'official' operational theory is this plane was, for lack of a better word, 'stolen' by person or persons unknown who knew what they were doing (disable transponder, ACARS, etc., took flight path to avoid radar detection) and who had meticulously planned the operation in advance. A turn west from/after IGARI was entered into the active flight plan in the FMS; this is known as the last ACARS report indicated this waypoint change event.
So, how come the highly knowledgeable careful planning 'perp(s)' left this big fat clue? -yes, perhaps the were unaware ACARS would report a waypoint change event however if one has carefully planned this type of operation one would certainly not do anything out of the ordinary before disabling ACARS.
So, again the Q
So, how come the highly knowledgeable careful planning 'perp(s)' left this big fat clue? -yes, perhaps the were unaware ACARS would report a waypoint change event however if one has carefully planned this type of operation one would certainly not do anything out of the ordinary before disabling ACARS.
So, again the Q
The behavior of the aircraft completely disproves this claim. As anybody else here, I have no clue what the aircraft did after 1:21 MYT, but it is safe to say that BEFORE 1:21 it was still following its original flight plan.
http://www.pprune.org/8381692-post4796.html
http://www.pprune.org/8381648-post4781.html
http://www.pprune.org/8381726-post4809.html
http://www.pprune.org/8381732-post4810.html
http://www.pprune.org/8381954-post4864.html
Please note that this "report" comes from Daily Mail and ABC News, both quoting unverified and unverifiable sources.
Last edited by barrel_owl; 17th Mar 2014 at 13:47. Reason: minor edits
Está servira para distraerle.
It's not the potential existence of a landing field based upon length that should be concerning anyone as much as the location of a runway based upon the take off requirement for a heavily loaded machine.
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The one that "landed" at Heathrow took less than 300m to stop. depends whether you want it down, or want it to be able to fly again.
So add up all the flat pieces of ground, beach etc. ..................................
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: wherever
Age: 55
Posts: 1,616
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
barrel_owl
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Brazil
Age: 45
Posts: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by SLFplatine View Post
The current 'official' operational theory is this plane was, for lack of a better word, 'stolen' by person or persons unknown who knew what they were doing (disable transponder, ACARS, etc., took flight path to avoid radar detection) and who had meticulously planned the operation in advance. A turn west from/after IGARI was entered into the active flight plan in the FMS; this is known as the last ACARS report indicated this waypoint change event.
So, how come the highly knowledgeable careful planning 'perp(s)' left this big fat clue? -yes, perhaps the were unaware ACARS would report a waypoint change event however if one has carefully planned this type of operation one would certainly not do anything out of the ordinary before disabling ACARS.
So, again the Q
I dedicated not less than five posts last night trying to explain why it is impossible that VAMPI had been programmed in the FMC as next waypoint after IGARI.
The behavior of the aircraft completely disproves this claim. As anybody else here, I have no clue what the aircraft did after 1:21 MYT, but it is safe to say that BEFORE 1:21 it was still following its original flight plan.
Malaysian Airlines MH370 contact lost
Malaysian Airlines MH370 contact lost
Malaysian Airlines MH370 contact lost
Malaysian Airlines MH370 contact lost
Malaysian Airlines MH370 contact lost
Please note that this "report" comes from Daily Mail and ABC News, both quoting unverified and unverifiable sources.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Brazil
Age: 45
Posts: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by SLFplatine View Post
The current 'official' operational theory is this plane was, for lack of a better word, 'stolen' by person or persons unknown who knew what they were doing (disable transponder, ACARS, etc., took flight path to avoid radar detection) and who had meticulously planned the operation in advance. A turn west from/after IGARI was entered into the active flight plan in the FMS; this is known as the last ACARS report indicated this waypoint change event.
So, how come the highly knowledgeable careful planning 'perp(s)' left this big fat clue? -yes, perhaps the were unaware ACARS would report a waypoint change event however if one has carefully planned this type of operation one would certainly not do anything out of the ordinary before disabling ACARS.
So, again the Q
I dedicated not less than five posts last night trying to explain why it is impossible that VAMPI had been programmed in the FMC as next waypoint after IGARI.
The behavior of the aircraft completely disproves this claim. As anybody else here, I have no clue what the aircraft did after 1:21 MYT, but it is safe to say that BEFORE 1:21 it was still following its original flight plan.
Malaysian Airlines MH370 contact lost
Malaysian Airlines MH370 contact lost
Malaysian Airlines MH370 contact lost
Malaysian Airlines MH370 contact lost
Malaysian Airlines MH370 contact lost
Please note that this "report" comes from Daily Mail and ABC News, both quoting unverified and unverifiable sources.
Insert waypoint at 07. Approaching boundary sync and select heading(incase you failed to make the waypoint a flyover).
After waypoint faint right then shortly afterwards when you think you are out of range turn left.
All the time you have your next waypoint in view for reference.
Prove that what I have written is "Impossible"!
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: paradise,bc
Age: 82
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
everyone pings all the time
The main barrier to requent, rich-content data packets is the infrastructure to support the comms. Terrestrial no big deal, but satellite bandwidth is another story. Haven't done the math, but ACARS context stuff was widely discussed in the AF447 thread, with cost also being a major hit.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Found in Toronto
Posts: 615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You might have dedicated 5 posts but you proved nothing.
Insert waypoint at 07. Approaching boundary sync and select heading(incase you failed to make the waypoint a flyover).
After waypoint faint right then shortly afterwards when you think you are out of range turn left.
All the time you have your next waypoint in view for reference.
Prove that what I have written is "Impossible"!
Insert waypoint at 07. Approaching boundary sync and select heading(incase you failed to make the waypoint a flyover).
After waypoint faint right then shortly afterwards when you think you are out of range turn left.
All the time you have your next waypoint in view for reference.
Prove that what I have written is "Impossible"!
1) The aircraft could have turned right while still on autopilot if someone put it in heading mode and selected a new heading
Or...
2) The autopilot could have been disconnected and was being hand flown.
Or...
3) It could also mean the autopilot was off and no one was at the controls while there was a struggle in the flight deck. (That could also account for the altitude variations)