A bit unfair. He's done a good report as best he can. It's just that lots of phenomena occur at night over the sea that are not easily explain. A common one is the bright lights from squid boats that reflect off clouds or are refracted by inversions. Space debris is falling frequently also. Oil fires are often briefly refracted. You see this over the middle East with the right cloud conditions.
We cannot entirely rule his observation out; it's just improbably MH370.

Occam
 

That isn't how I usually see it used. Occam's razor is about shaving away "hypthoseses" not "facts". As wikipedia puts it

OldPilot55 said

He was 370 miles away

http://tvaraj.files.wordpress.com/20...pg?w=584&h=318

You'd be surprised...
 

JugofPropwash said: (apropos Shadow post 16th Mar 2014 05:25 "The Elephant outside the Room")
What if it was a single MAS Engineer with credentials? There was one aboard. I believe the hatch in the fwd galley area isn't visibly apparent to pax. Can't imagine an F/A not being duped in this scenario (but may well check with the flight-deck after consulting the chief purser). The hatch has been plotted by then. Terrorists can look just like any other pax until they declare their hand.

Agreed Rif Raf... Parallax Error perhaps?

A scathing review of the MH 370 search situation from the New York Times wire:

Series of errors by Malaysia mounts, complicating the task of finding flight MH370 - The Times of India

It seems that the earlier speculation here about the 'A' team being off duty on the weekend at the military radar sites was on target. :eek:

jugofpropwash: "You really believe that in this post 9-11 world, 200+ passengers are going to calmly sit there and allow a couple hijacker/terrorists access to the area, especially when there's a FA standing there screaming "Stop them!"??? "


A mechanic could have been riding along, troubleshooting something in the E&E bay. Some airlines allow this. It can make the passengers nervous, but as long as he has on airline coveralls, they wouldn't be very alarmed. Maybe such a mechanic was "in on it", or maybe his screwdriver slipped, frying some of the electronics, starting a series of events that led to the disappearance of the 777.

Would you say that would be a 'usual' practice? In my experience I've had engineers 'ride along' only twice in more than 6 years- once was an overwater sector and an insurer requirement to prevent unsched overnight in an unfavorable port... the other was an empty ferry sector.

Damn straight if someone came up to me saying they wanted in to the E&E bay during flight I'd be calling the captain first.

If they forced their way in I'd be doing a lot more than standing there to watch!

Sadly I'd guess this points to the CC being unable, or as has been put forward, 'someone' in the airline telling them that it was kosher... don't think that is as likely as the first one though...

G-ARVH, you don't have to lecture me on the ins and outs of fuel planning. I'm well aware of how it works and also a regular operating into Beijing. The point of my question was that if there was a significant difference from the plan without weather considerations, or from the Capt's normal extra fuel carriage, then that would be significant.

It's a very obvious question to an experienced operator but it hasn't been addressed in public. Someone's flight plan was different to MAS, whose plan was it?

But American administration was categorical in denying that their satellite picked-up anything.

However, why was MacKay's email dismissed so quickly is a point.

I saw a report that there was a MH engineer on the flight.

CNN interview his father at KLIA.

wow... Just stumbled upon something that I had completely missed until now

That is Vietnam’s deputy minister of transport, Pham Quy Tieu, and the quote was reported at least 4 days ago

(as can be seen here Vietnam suspends air search for missing Malaysian jet | NDTV.com )

So that means
A) Vietnam has the plane on radar turning around, and tried to tell Malaysia that day
B) Malaysia knew they had it on their radar at 2:40 in the Straights anyway

...yet still they let 14 countries waste 8 days in the Gulf looking for a plane that wasn't ever there.

Unbelievable

It might well be that the reason nobody was watching the Military radar that night is because nobody was assigned to watch the scope, the operator(s) may have been on standby in case they were needed. I will add another voice to a couple of previous posts - many people have an exaggerated view of military capabilities / readiness. This was on a sleepy Malaysian night shift in peacetime conditions, not West Germany at the height of the cold war or on any cocaine smuggling route. There may be valid reasons to criticize the Malaysian government but this is not one of them.

Another point I would like to mention is that the reason that the ACARS was turned off and the aircraft "soared" to a higher altitude appears to some of us (it has been alluded to here but I may be the first to come out and state it bluntly) as if the man at the controls wanted to prevent data transmission of the fact that that the cabin pressure had been vented to ambient outside air pressure. The increased altitude appears to have been to insure the least amount of resistance for the shortest time from the people in the back of the plane.

Southern Corridor
 

As per my last post PM Tony Abbott has just announced that 2 x AP3C's will be sent to search on the 40 deg line the Indian Ocean.

Given the B777 range ring on the 40 deg line I imagine that the P3 will be limited in its search time at the extremities of the range ring. Any P3 drivers able to comment. I would suggest an aircraft carrier is going to be the only option unless there can be some descent sat coverage.

If you want to make sure no one finds you this is the place.

Anyway good luck to no 10 / 11 SQDN's

Neogen said

again, 370 miles away

http://tvaraj.files.wordpress.com/20...pg?w=584&h=318

How did you come to that conclusion? How do you know it was standard? The captain may have requested more than standard and if he did, then you'd have to ask why. That's the whole point of people here wanting to know what the fuel load was for the flight.

So far, pretty much all political/terror related scenarios end with: "But why has no-one come forward to claim responsibility?"

If there was foul play, why couldn't that have been the *intention*, i.e. making this event be a paradigm shift, just as Sept 11 was?

Prior to Sept 11, hijacks ended with landing & making demands. Which is what the Sept 11 hijackers indeed broadcast to the passengers and to ATC.* But they changed the paradigm, as we know, and those statements were active misinformation.

Why change the paradigm again? To sow the maximum amount of fear and uncertainty into commercial transportation -- make a modern first world jet appear to disappear into thin air, with no ability to find it. (Because whatever happened to it has happened somewhere *well away* from its last known position.) A crash is unsettling, but can be dealt with. A simple disappearance with nothing more -- no debris, no recorded crash, no demands, with everyone looking 1,000s of NM away -- would inflict maximum uncertainty. It already has inflicted a lot, but imagine how much more there would be if the pinging wasn't there, and especially if the pilot had evaded Malaysian radar?

That could be the aim itself. So a lack of any claim of responsibility may no longer be a pointer against foul play.

Remember, bin Laden's strike was symbolically at the three limbs of the USA - economic (4 planes + 2 towers); military (Pentagon); and political (intended target of UA93 was likely the Capitol). This could be a strike at one, the easiest to get to (economic).



* United 93, which had the only CVR to survive, recorded the pax being told "Here's the captain. I would like to tell you all to remain seated. We have a bomb aboard, and we are going back to the airport, and we have our demands. So, please remain quiet." On AA 11, Atta told ATC "We have some planes. Just stay quiet, and you'll be O.K. We are returning to the airport."

Staging out of Cocos Islands should give them good endurance?

http://goo.gl/maps/4cDSX

I hope the SAR have more information than just 40° line. That was only the last ping, what were the previous pings and the heading.

If the aircraft was down south, it likely made it much further west than the 40° line, and that should only be the starting point.

all data points aligned ?
 

Shadoko answered:

http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/5...ml#post8379709

To my post:

To the psychological aspect:

- Maybe the initial plan was to hit the petronas towers.
- The above maneuvre is physicaly extremly challenging. Going "semi-ballistic" in a depressurized cabin on o2 only.
- After recovery you might see things differently and refrain from original plan=> erratic flightpath.

- You are now in a psychological challenging environment with harm done to every soul on board.
- There is no way to fix this situation, but you don't want to cause any more harm any longer.

- Program FMS to go above the Malaca Strait into the Indian Ocean an then set a last waypoint, the obvious one would be 90 degrees south.
- Now depressurize again, don't put your o2 mask and doze away.

The aircraft or what remains of it would be found south of where longitude ~95°E intersects with the southern branch of the "ping arc".

Indian city a target?


https://twitter.com/strobetalbott/st...90319323406337

I don't need to prove anything and there isn't enough factual data to prove anything at all in any case, including how long this aircraft stayed airborne, in which direction it went after last contact and how far into an event it was without the crew being aware, if at all.

Just because the acars and transponder went offline does not necessarily mean the crew must have known, although I'm tipping it wouldn't have been much later when all hell broke loose. I don't see any reason at all why this aircraft could not possibly be within observation range.

You can run with the turnaround theory and pinging satellites, but do we really know that, its equally plausible.

Look again at my map from earlier. Considering the southern option.

http://www.csse.uwa.edu.au/~mark/per.../australia.png

Diego Garcia is the dark patch mid-ocean between Thailand and Madagascar.

If the plane reached the red circle (where ping was) by 8:11am (after being near Phuket at 2:15am) then it was within the blue circle by then (time and speed limit).

Thus it was not heading for Diego Garcia, or Africa.

After perhaps rounding Sumatra and turning South, it was headed for Antarctica, due South, or just perhaps French Antarctic Islands, Heard Island or maybe even Perth, or inland Australia.

It is a pity that the Australian radar (white circle) was probably off for the weekend.

givemewings:
"Would you say that would be a 'usual' practice? In my experience I've had engineers 'ride along only twice in more than 6 years- once was an overwater sector and an insurer requirement to prevent unsched overnight in an unfavorable port... the other was an empty ferry sector."


I haven't seen it done in a US airline, but I've seen it elsewhere. For instance, I was on a 737 flight in Argentina, and there was the technician, in airline coveralls, in view of passengers, with a panel open and screwdriver out. The aircraft would make sudden maneuvers, each time he'd stick the screwdriver into the panel. Everyone would gasp. Of course, it was just coincidence. The sudden maneuvers were just the pilot thinking he was still in his Mirage fighter from his Falkland Island War days.

Can any ATS people say when the SAR Phases were declared and by whom ?

Sunday is a normal work day for them.

weekend is Friday and Sat.

OTHR - Australian and Diego Garcia JORN Range Revisited
 

Post #4280 refers to Communicator's post #4062, but quotes someone else's contribution. (See details below.)

In substance, everyone seems to be on the same page - JORN's public statements no doubt understate the system's actual capabilities. The Soviet term dezinformaciya seems a tad harsh to characterize strategic modesty by a trusted and trustworthy ally.

U.S. facilities on Diego Garcia, to say nothing of airborne and space based assets are probably much more powerful.

The gist of Communicator's earlier #4062 is that JORN in Australia publicly admits to 1,000 - 3,000 km for their OTHR system, implying that actual range may be rather wider.

===============

Saturday and Sunday is weekend in most parts incl capital. Some parts Friday and Saturday. Get your facts right.

This is not true. Sunday is an off day and part of the weekend, except for a few states ( only in the states of Johor, Kelantan, Terengganu, and Kedah ).

Subang / KLIA are in an unaffected state / Territory.

Workweek and weekend - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Folks,
Based on answers to a "Question without Notice" in the Australian Commonwealth Parliament some time in 2013 ( as I recall) Jindalee does not work H24, so it would be very lucky if its restricted operations hours coincided with this occurrence.
Jindalee would certainly have been able to track the target well into the Indian Ocean, and well towards the surface, if it was in range.
Tootle pip!!

The route taken by the B777 could have been carefully planned to avoid Singapore airspace. An unidentified aircraft would have been detected and intercepted very quickly, as someone trying to sneak through in a Cessna Caravan a few years ago discovered.

Misc. Thoughts
 

1. Malaysian politics is turbulent and corrupt, but generally not violent.

2. The trustworthiness of Malaysia's current government is not beyond doubt in light of what has emerged in connection with MH370. (See, for example, this interesting discovery by D.S.)

Given that the captain was reported to be a vocal supporter of Malaysian opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim, "official" statements concerning the (now absent) captain should be treated with great caution and checked closely for factual backup.

Anwar Ibrahim would decidedly not wish to be associated with any criminal actions by a prominent supporter.

3. There have been many comments about the high level of flying skills exhibited by the hijackers after MH370 lost contact with ATC.

However, going through the best scenarios available at present, hard flying skills involved are minimal. The aircraft went through a few turns and changes of altitude. Indeed, some comments here appear to indicate that the only "flying" that occurred may have been achieved through step-by-step programming of the FMS.

Where the hijackers have exhibited great sophistication is in their ability to evade ATC and various radar systems based on a shrewd understanding of the practical limitations of those systems, likely acquired through extensive observation. However, such knowledge and expertise is by no means confined to professional pilots.

P.S.: There may be only a single hijacker.

SIN
 

RE: The route taken by the B777 could have been carefully planned to avoid Singapore airspace.
Agreed, the SAF will scramble very quickly and are happy to show their strength. But the same goes for India, China and a few others. Also bear in mind Singapore and it's airspace is relatively small.
However I am hopeful the investigators are close to coming to a conclusion. I will hope for the best but fear a long salvage operation.

Since the pilots have now reluctantly been included as hijacking suspects, forensic computer investigators who are extracting data from the captain's flight simulator hard drive may find clues as to MH370's bizarre routing. :suspect:

The New Straits Times is reporting that the Malaysians have flown a 777 on a course to re-enact the likely scenario of MH370 turning west across the Malay peninsula and to see if the same primary radar and satellite data could be reproduced. They are satisfied this is the case.

Next press conference seems to be scheduled to 17:30 MYT (9:30 GMT)

Twitter Source:

@ReutersAero
"Next press conference 1730 local #MH370"

In addition to security issues, the "cagyness" of the ADF about the range of the Jindalee system is due to the fact that the range varies depending on the atmospheric conditions which dictate the frequencies being used. Throughout the day/night, many different frequencies are used just like in normal HF communications - generally higher freqs in the middle of the day and low freqs in the middle of the night.

Tscottme
 

I'm sure this question will be addressed in the eventual accident report, so a few words from an engineer.

Let's recall that the B777 and its systems design was done in the early 1990s. Electronics and communications systems design has made immense progress since then.

While the above hijack or crash prevention system may be a difficult task, a far easier goal would be to improve the communication and reporting capabilities, as well as the "tamper-proofness" of the airplane so that it would be almost impossible to go invisible the way MH370 did.

For example, it is not that difficult to design a smart circuit breaker which before actually cutting the power instructs a communication device (e.g. ACARS) to send out an alert , for example "I was manually pulled" or "I need to break now due to overcurrent" or even "I'm sensing high overtemp".

Likewise, an "Equipment bay hatch being opened" alert would be a piece-of-cake to implement.

With some careful systems design, the act of "going invisible" would then not be possible without at least an alert message with some details getting out to the outside world. In the MH370 case, it might have been the difference between scrambling primary radar or military interceptors, and the agony the world has experienced last week. Perhaps even the knowledge that "you can't go hiding without announcing it" will discourage anyone from trying.

PS: It is a bit startling to realize that MH370, as it now seems, was just one circuit breaker pull away (Satcom) from full success in its go-hiding maneuver. As this reached the public domain yesterday, it becomes evident that something needs to be done to prevent further attempts.

They have : see 2-b in the last Malaysian government PR