Malaysian Airlines MH370 contact lost
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Oakland, CA
Age: 72
Posts: 427
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Isn't there anyone to act as voice/advocate for the crew on that aircraft?
I think some people are thinking in retrospect how they would have liked authorities to have acted at the time. But that is often unfair, and 20-20 hindsight is all too easy.
Fact is it was the middle of a routine night right at handover. Could not have been better planned to create doubt and delay. I see some delay and confusion and procrastination as almost inevitable in this setting. It would have been a big call to have immediately escalated things to a more senior level.
Routine things (like transponder failure) are ... well routine.
4 weeks later we are still trying to work out what really happened.
Same as when a child goes missing. Or someone gets diagnosed with a serious illness. Yes in retrospect the alarm could usually have been raised a bit earlier. But do we really want to live in such a world?
I have no idea whether the following oft quoted anecdote is true or not. Probably not exactly. But it does serve to illustrate the different responses inevitable when someone is "primed" versus "out of the blue."
When Jimmy Carter became President [in 1977], an Air Force general promptly came to the Oval Office to explain the procedure for evacuating the Chief Executive if it ever came to that. The general informed Carter that it would take less than five minutes to get him out of the White House and winging toward safety. "Okay," said the President, "go." "Go?" asked the general incredulously. "That's right," said Carter. "Go." The general turned pale and scrambled into action. Aides scurried about. Phones rang. Carter went back to work. Forty-five minutes later, as the general was still shouting orders into a telephone, Carter calmly asked, "Got the time, General?"
Fact is it was the middle of a routine night right at handover. Could not have been better planned to create doubt and delay. I see some delay and confusion and procrastination as almost inevitable in this setting. It would have been a big call to have immediately escalated things to a more senior level.
Routine things (like transponder failure) are ... well routine.
4 weeks later we are still trying to work out what really happened.
Same as when a child goes missing. Or someone gets diagnosed with a serious illness. Yes in retrospect the alarm could usually have been raised a bit earlier. But do we really want to live in such a world?
I have no idea whether the following oft quoted anecdote is true or not. Probably not exactly. But it does serve to illustrate the different responses inevitable when someone is "primed" versus "out of the blue."
When Jimmy Carter became President [in 1977], an Air Force general promptly came to the Oval Office to explain the procedure for evacuating the Chief Executive if it ever came to that. The general informed Carter that it would take less than five minutes to get him out of the White House and winging toward safety. "Okay," said the President, "go." "Go?" asked the general incredulously. "That's right," said Carter. "Go." The general turned pale and scrambled into action. Aides scurried about. Phones rang. Carter went back to work. Forty-five minutes later, as the general was still shouting orders into a telephone, Carter calmly asked, "Got the time, General?"
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Magenta (Pink) Boxes on Marine Traffic map
Evey_Hammond those "pink boxes" seem to correspond to the search areas as published By AMSA for each day's search.
I can't find any official legend either but check today's boxes against the boxes on the hand-outs shown at Search and recovery continues for Malaysian flight MH370
I can't find any official legend either but check today's boxes against the boxes on the hand-outs shown at Search and recovery continues for Malaysian flight MH370
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Perth
Age: 77
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Justification for narrowing the search zone...
I've been watching the Fox and CNN coverage this morning, where all the theorists are bemoaning the lack of debris and whether or not the black-box pinger batteries are almost spent. It would appear that they are totally disregarding any scientific nexus between the lack of a continuous pinger signal and the total absence of debris.
To me the answer is self-evident:
a. The pinger detections are 2nd or third convergence zone (which in deep water puts the impact area some 100's of miles away from the pinger detections locus - in any direction. And the debris field may be further on in the opposite direction (to the pinger-ensonified area). i.e. debris has floated one way in its wind and current-affected splaying migration, and the pinger detection location is anything up to 180 degrees away directionally (i.e. presently being detected somewhere in the opposite hemisphere of this very largish encirclement of the actual impact area).
b. Because of the I.O.'s sea-floor topography and depth, and the fact that the acoustic sound source for MH370 pingers is ON the bottom, the usual assumptions about bottom bounce propagation over great distances will be to some extent inapplicable. ASW experience has always dealt with a sound source "hiding" beneath a layer (i.e. a steep thermocline) at some intermediate depth - not emanating from a "bottomed" target. In the case of MH370, if it has settled within a sea-floor canyon, anywhere near its vertex, you will have a focused (and thus strengthened) pinger signal compounding the convergence zone effect. There is also an attenuation effect due to any silt and irregularities in the bottom contours (both vertically and horizontally). That can lead to the acoustics displaying a rippling, frequency modified and highly directional characteristic. Those "ripples of sound" have (in my opinion) been passing through the present search area - as they wax and wane. That is a distinct deviation from the toroidal annulus that is the normal ASW experience (the afore-mentioned distorted and incomplete doughnut of sound that reaches up to the towed arrays and passive listening air-deployed sonobuoys).
c. To sum up, it's apparent that the vagaries of sound propagation from a bottomed pinging source in deep water has seduced the searchers into a misbegotten belief that their target is proximate. I doubt very much that it is.
To me the answer is self-evident:
a. The pinger detections are 2nd or third convergence zone (which in deep water puts the impact area some 100's of miles away from the pinger detections locus - in any direction. And the debris field may be further on in the opposite direction (to the pinger-ensonified area). i.e. debris has floated one way in its wind and current-affected splaying migration, and the pinger detection location is anything up to 180 degrees away directionally (i.e. presently being detected somewhere in the opposite hemisphere of this very largish encirclement of the actual impact area).
b. Because of the I.O.'s sea-floor topography and depth, and the fact that the acoustic sound source for MH370 pingers is ON the bottom, the usual assumptions about bottom bounce propagation over great distances will be to some extent inapplicable. ASW experience has always dealt with a sound source "hiding" beneath a layer (i.e. a steep thermocline) at some intermediate depth - not emanating from a "bottomed" target. In the case of MH370, if it has settled within a sea-floor canyon, anywhere near its vertex, you will have a focused (and thus strengthened) pinger signal compounding the convergence zone effect. There is also an attenuation effect due to any silt and irregularities in the bottom contours (both vertically and horizontally). That can lead to the acoustics displaying a rippling, frequency modified and highly directional characteristic. Those "ripples of sound" have (in my opinion) been passing through the present search area - as they wax and wane. That is a distinct deviation from the toroidal annulus that is the normal ASW experience (the afore-mentioned distorted and incomplete doughnut of sound that reaches up to the towed arrays and passive listening air-deployed sonobuoys).
c. To sum up, it's apparent that the vagaries of sound propagation from a bottomed pinging source in deep water has seduced the searchers into a misbegotten belief that their target is proximate. I doubt very much that it is.
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've checked in on the marine traffic site a number of times since SAR started in that area but have only just noticed the pink boxes. I guess they are new and indicate the SAR focus areas? Can't seem to find a legend that explains them...
I see Angus Houston has made a cautiously optimistic statement to the effect they have picked up further signals which are consistent with being man made.
Looks like our two Chinese dudes in the inflatable, with an iPhone microphone wrapped in a ziplock bag and dangled under their boat got lucky!
Fingers firmly crossed they will be able to triangulate the remaining few days worth of signals to the point where they can confidently launch the ROV.
If they do locate the aircraft, it will have been due to the genius of the Inmarsat boffins who first narrowed the search area so dramatically. They turned science into magic.
Looks like our two Chinese dudes in the inflatable, with an iPhone microphone wrapped in a ziplock bag and dangled under their boat got lucky!
Fingers firmly crossed they will be able to triangulate the remaining few days worth of signals to the point where they can confidently launch the ROV.
If they do locate the aircraft, it will have been due to the genius of the Inmarsat boffins who first narrowed the search area so dramatically. They turned science into magic.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
lucille:
I gather your point is more like, "Looks like they didn't let on about the equipment they were actually using!"
Looks like our two Chinese dudes in the inflatable, with an iPhone microphone wrapped in a ziplock bag and dangled under their boat got lucky!
Props are for boats!
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: An Asian Hub
Age: 56
Posts: 994
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Paper shuffled,
I agree. When a SAR is initiated and Inmarsat is still getting live handshakes. Maybe they can enable the account so to speak. If Malaysian Airlines had payed for the extra service, they would have had much more info as they had in the case of AF447. I would say this point will be brought up in legal action against the airline by victims families. Bean counters need to be more aware of what to chop or keep as far as Safety is concerned.
I agree. When a SAR is initiated and Inmarsat is still getting live handshakes. Maybe they can enable the account so to speak. If Malaysian Airlines had payed for the extra service, they would have had much more info as they had in the case of AF447. I would say this point will be brought up in legal action against the airline by victims families. Bean counters need to be more aware of what to chop or keep as far as Safety is concerned.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
News 24 is geo blocked, can only be watched in aus
This Malaysian channel has carried almost all of the previous news conferences live and it works in most countries:
Live TV | Malaysia, Breaking news, LIVE streaming | Astro Awani
We'll probably get a heads up here when the news conference starts.
That is 0645 UTC correct?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: EU
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JACC 11 April pm media release
Link to latest JACC media release 11 April pm - Update on search for Malaysian flight MH370. Release reads as follows:
QUOTE:
UNQUOTE
QUOTE:
The Chief Coordinator of the Joint Agency Coordination Centre, Air Chief Marshal Angus Houston (Ret'd), said an initial assessment of the possible signal detected by a RAAF AP-3C Orion aircraft yesterday afternoon has been determined as not related to an aircraft underwater locator beacon.
"The Australian Joint Acoustic Analysis Centre has analysed the acoustic data and confirmed that the signal reported in the vicinity of the Australian Defence Vessel Ocean Shield is unlikely to be related to the aircraft black boxes,” Air Chief Marshal Angus Houston (Ret'd), said.
"Further analysis continues to be undertaken by Australian Joint Acoustic Analysis Centre.
"Today Ocean Shield is continuing more focussed sweeps with the Towed Pinger Locator to try and locate further signals that may be related to the aircraft's black boxes. It is vital to glean as much information as possible while the batteries on the underwater locator beacons may still be active.
"The AP-3C Orions continue their acoustic search, working in conjunction with Ocean Shield, with three more missions planned for today.
"A decision as to when to deploy the Autonomous Underwater Vehicle will be made on advice from experts on board the Ocean Shield and could be some days away.
"On the information I have available to me, there has been no major breakthrough in the search for MH370. I will provide a further update if, and when, further information becomes available.”
"The Australian Joint Acoustic Analysis Centre has analysed the acoustic data and confirmed that the signal reported in the vicinity of the Australian Defence Vessel Ocean Shield is unlikely to be related to the aircraft black boxes,” Air Chief Marshal Angus Houston (Ret'd), said.
"Further analysis continues to be undertaken by Australian Joint Acoustic Analysis Centre.
"Today Ocean Shield is continuing more focussed sweeps with the Towed Pinger Locator to try and locate further signals that may be related to the aircraft's black boxes. It is vital to glean as much information as possible while the batteries on the underwater locator beacons may still be active.
"The AP-3C Orions continue their acoustic search, working in conjunction with Ocean Shield, with three more missions planned for today.
"A decision as to when to deploy the Autonomous Underwater Vehicle will be made on advice from experts on board the Ocean Shield and could be some days away.
"On the information I have available to me, there has been no major breakthrough in the search for MH370. I will provide a further update if, and when, further information becomes available.”
Last edited by dxzh; 11th Apr 2014 at 04:32. Reason: Missing punctuation and unquote.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
A somewhat confusing 'breaking news' update with headline and URL from CNN :
5th signal detected 'not likely' from MH370 black boxes, officials say - CNN.com
Australian PM 'very confident' signals are from MH370 black box
By Tom Watkins and Catherine E. Shoichet, CNN
updated 11:50 PM EDT, Thu April 10, 2014
(CNN) -- Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott told reporters in China on Friday that authorities are "very confident" the signals picked up by acoustic detectors are coming from the black box of missing Malaysia Airlines Flight 370, CNN affiliate Sky News Australia reported.
The remarks came after search officials reported a possible fifth signal detected by a plane on Thursday. But on Friday, the Australian agency coordinating search efforts said that signal "is unlikely to be related to the aircraft black boxes."
"On the information I have available to me, there has been no major breakthrough in the search for MH370," retired Air Chief Marshal Angus Houston said in a statement. "I will provide a further update if, and when, further information becomes available."
It's unclear whether Abbott was referring to four signals detected earlier this week.
By Tom Watkins and Catherine E. Shoichet, CNN
updated 11:50 PM EDT, Thu April 10, 2014
(CNN) -- Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott told reporters in China on Friday that authorities are "very confident" the signals picked up by acoustic detectors are coming from the black box of missing Malaysia Airlines Flight 370, CNN affiliate Sky News Australia reported.
The remarks came after search officials reported a possible fifth signal detected by a plane on Thursday. But on Friday, the Australian agency coordinating search efforts said that signal "is unlikely to be related to the aircraft black boxes."
"On the information I have available to me, there has been no major breakthrough in the search for MH370," retired Air Chief Marshal Angus Houston said in a statement. "I will provide a further update if, and when, further information becomes available."
It's unclear whether Abbott was referring to four signals detected earlier this week.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Arizona
Age: 76
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Echo now in the box
Earlier someone noted that Ocean Shield was departing the acoustic search box at faster than detection speed.
Now, Echo is in the box and almost stationary (.5 kts) - suggesting that they may be doing an active sonar search
Meanwhile, Ocean Shield is headed back towards the box at 2 kts.
Now, Echo is in the box and almost stationary (.5 kts) - suggesting that they may be doing an active sonar search
Meanwhile, Ocean Shield is headed back towards the box at 2 kts.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: japan
Age: 72
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
industry support
I read this and must respond
Quote:
Isn't there anyone to act as voice/advocate for the crew on that aircraft?
Accident investigation isn't like a courtroom drama with prosecution and defence. Investigators come up with what is often called the "most probable" cause. NTSB publishes many aircraft accident reports daily and there is no prosecution/defence as pilots are concerned. If you later want some civil lawsuits relating to such accidents - this is where you can get courtroom drama.
I dont think that the press and some of the people that have contributed to this thread have done any justice to both the crew and to the industry.
I keep saying we cannot and must not blame the crew or the aircraft without 150% proof of the events that took the aircraft to where it is.
As for some from this industry that have effectively hanged the crew for being responsible for this I find I cannot accept. This aspect and attitude of those would make me think very hard and fast about them being either crewed or SLF with them up the front.
We dont know what went on up there and as some have said on here that the crew may have tried but failed to recover from a situation. As to what we as yet still do not know.
The captain and FO are from our industry and the protection of reputations rests with us guys untill the facts can prove otherwise.
I see very little support for the crews on here from other flight crews. Or is it because they are not English/Oz/American.
Quote:
Isn't there anyone to act as voice/advocate for the crew on that aircraft?
Accident investigation isn't like a courtroom drama with prosecution and defence. Investigators come up with what is often called the "most probable" cause. NTSB publishes many aircraft accident reports daily and there is no prosecution/defence as pilots are concerned. If you later want some civil lawsuits relating to such accidents - this is where you can get courtroom drama.
I dont think that the press and some of the people that have contributed to this thread have done any justice to both the crew and to the industry.
I keep saying we cannot and must not blame the crew or the aircraft without 150% proof of the events that took the aircraft to where it is.
As for some from this industry that have effectively hanged the crew for being responsible for this I find I cannot accept. This aspect and attitude of those would make me think very hard and fast about them being either crewed or SLF with them up the front.
We dont know what went on up there and as some have said on here that the crew may have tried but failed to recover from a situation. As to what we as yet still do not know.
The captain and FO are from our industry and the protection of reputations rests with us guys untill the facts can prove otherwise.
I see very little support for the crews on here from other flight crews. Or is it because they are not English/Oz/American.
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Australia
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'Located' would mean visually identified on the bottom of the Ocean.
Clearly this can't be the case.
Clearly this can't be the case.
When South African Airlines lost a 747 in 1987, after two months of searching for the recorder pingers, a deep sea sonar scan gave them a definite crash site within two days of searching.
If they can find wreckage at 4900m in two days, why is anyone surprised they can do the same more than twenty years later? With MH370 they have pretty much followed the same techniques
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: 3rd rock
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Innocent until proven
Agree with rampstalker
The crew are innocent until proven otherwise. Everything said so far is speculation even if some facts may point to crew involvement.
JAL123 is a good example where pilots kept the a/c in the air for 32 mins after the vertical stabilizer disintegrated which was never matched by anyone on a simulator.
Japan Airlines Flight 123 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"Elapsed time from the bulkhead explosion to the final crash was estimated at 32 minutes – long enough for some passengers to write farewells to their families.Subsequent simulator re-enactments (of the mechanical failures suffered by Flight 123) failed to produce a better solution, or outcome; despite best efforts, none of the four flight crews in the simulations kept the plane aloft for as long as the 32 minutes achieved by the actual crew."
The crew are innocent until proven otherwise. Everything said so far is speculation even if some facts may point to crew involvement.
JAL123 is a good example where pilots kept the a/c in the air for 32 mins after the vertical stabilizer disintegrated which was never matched by anyone on a simulator.
Japan Airlines Flight 123 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"Elapsed time from the bulkhead explosion to the final crash was estimated at 32 minutes – long enough for some passengers to write farewells to their families.Subsequent simulator re-enactments (of the mechanical failures suffered by Flight 123) failed to produce a better solution, or outcome; despite best efforts, none of the four flight crews in the simulations kept the plane aloft for as long as the 32 minutes achieved by the actual crew."
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: some where on the Big Blue Marble
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I read this and must respond
Quote:
Isn't there anyone to act as voice/advocate for the crew on that aircraft?
Accident investigation isn't like a courtroom drama with prosecution and defence. Investigators come up with what is often called the "most probable" cause. NTSB publishes many aircraft accident reports daily and there is no prosecution/defence as pilots are concerned. If you later want some civil lawsuits relating to such accidents - this is where you can get courtroom drama.
I dont think that the press and some of the people that have contributed to this thread have done any justice to both the crew and to the industry.
I keep saying we cannot and must not blame the crew or the aircraft without 150% proof of the events that took the aircraft to where it is.
As for some from this industry that have effectively hanged the crew for being responsible for this I find I cannot accept. This aspect and attitude of those would make me think very hard and fast about them being either crewed or SLF with them up the front.
We dont know what went on up there and as some have said on here that the crew may have tried but failed to recover from a situation. As to what we as yet still do not know.
The captain and FO are from our industry and the protection of reputations rests with us guys untill the facts can prove otherwise.
I see very little support for the crews on here from other flight crews. Or is it because they are not English/Oz/American.
Quote:
Isn't there anyone to act as voice/advocate for the crew on that aircraft?
Accident investigation isn't like a courtroom drama with prosecution and defence. Investigators come up with what is often called the "most probable" cause. NTSB publishes many aircraft accident reports daily and there is no prosecution/defence as pilots are concerned. If you later want some civil lawsuits relating to such accidents - this is where you can get courtroom drama.
I dont think that the press and some of the people that have contributed to this thread have done any justice to both the crew and to the industry.
I keep saying we cannot and must not blame the crew or the aircraft without 150% proof of the events that took the aircraft to where it is.
As for some from this industry that have effectively hanged the crew for being responsible for this I find I cannot accept. This aspect and attitude of those would make me think very hard and fast about them being either crewed or SLF with them up the front.
We dont know what went on up there and as some have said on here that the crew may have tried but failed to recover from a situation. As to what we as yet still do not know.
The captain and FO are from our industry and the protection of reputations rests with us guys untill the facts can prove otherwise.
I see very little support for the crews on here from other flight crews. Or is it because they are not English/Oz/American.