@brika; answer=42
 

Does the ping include identity information though?



From post on flyertalk:

Somewhat contradictory; for them to be searching in the Bay of Bengal, the plane would have had to circumvent the Andaman Islands?

Other radar coverage info:
Vietnam - Products & Services

@papershuffler
Yes, it must do. The primary purpose is to provide information for maintenance of the particular aircraft.
Someone with more knowledge than I posted ages ago about the data packet structure and encryption.

@papershuffler

It would be better if it did, but, in a way, it doesn't have to include identity, if you think about it. If, after all the data analysis, the sat monitoring of the pings produced the track of an aircraft (carrying the capability to ping this system), non-identifiable*, in this region, then you could take a fair guess it could be MH370.

*non-identifiable via passive radar/ATC, that is.

I really don't think someone who has a Flight Sim at home for sinister purposes would be broadcasting the fact, along with all the hardware that he's bought to put it together (sounds like he built his own -rather impressive - Gaming PC for this purpose), and more importantly using his own name.

He's obviously a really keen gamer and SIM'er, so people that keep harping on about this point really aren't doing themselves any favours.

Background chatter that can be turned down I think.

Because the Americans state this is what they have? It might be triangulated from data collected by other Spook satellites so don't expect them to be too specific.

Professional pilots flying flight sims at home - in the short haul sector at least - is more of an exception then a rule. Or at least pilots don't tell, don't ask. Admittedly, the long haul sector I know little about and perhaps the lack of landings/take offs - and my imagination may be able to stretch so far - is reason for having fun in a computer sim. If capt Shah had a business or interest on the side helping to develop sims, now that is an ENTIRELY different story and I would cordially withdraw any of my comments if that's the case.

All through this tragic and appalling episode I have been most persuaded by the simplest solution - catastrophic malfunction, pilot tries to go back to KL, passes out and plane flies on in straight line until fuel runs out.

But I do wonder:

1 why Hashimmuddin is so evasive on background checks on crew. Maybe it is a "police matter" as he says but he is big shot enough to get the police to report, unless they have already done so and he doesn't like the answers. Ditto for the pilot's sim - seems not unreasonable to me that he should have one at home, so why not just go and take a look at what's there?

2 why no-one has said what's in the cargo - though to be fair, I'm not sure that anyone other than posters on this site has asked. The journalists certainly haven't at the last two news conferences.

3 what is the source of this notion of zig-zagging round the waypoints in the Andaman Sea and tracking the SQ flight? I can't find the original post, which might (very reasonably) have been deleted, I have only seen the comments which sound totally bizarre.

Tracking
 

Not sure if all or any DME stations have recording facilities but it could be possible to ID an aircraft from the DME pulses. Each DME transmits an unique set of pulses specifics to the transceiver.

The pilots obviously knew what they were doing if it is eventually found out that it was stolen / hijacked. My guess anyway.

Probably used JepView on an iPad connected to a Bluetooth GPS to navigate.
If the guy was into flight sim etc, no doubt had Jeppersen on his iPad. Or any other multitude of standalone map apps.

No need for any Flight management transmissions to give their position away.

Radar coverage on Malaysian Pelinsula
 

Way way back in this thread, someone posted a nice map showing a corridor with no overlapping radar coverage on the MP. That was when there were only vague suggestions of a primary paint turning back to the Northwest.

Can't find it now. Anyone have the post #?

Peninsula

Agree, however the posts here using the simulator as proof of foul play are a joke, as it's been said people have hobbies, private planes, radio controlled, all sorts just because it's different to others doesn't make it evidence.

If he had a SCUBA qualification and crashed in the water then he must be guilty, imagine if he did skydiving as a hobby.

Map
 

... this one? http://www.pprune.org/8368697-post2138.html

FE Hoppy
 

Whilst I would search the homes of the two flight crew, it would be to eliminate, as things stand now.

Having dealt with thousands of criminals, bigtime and smalltime, my instinct on this is that the crew were not involved. They are clearly both intelligent men and would be highly unlikely to do anything so stupidly obvious as to build. A simulator in their house and tell the world. They'd do it on the QT. And the pics I've seen, where he shows all the PC hardware in boxes is not in keeping with a criminal mastermind, just a bloke who loved his hobby.

There are no towers in the ocean.

Wrong, phones off or in airplane mode do not make any network activity whatsoever.

So catch a fly to KL, join the investigation, they will tell you the clown you are instead of me.

So did they make it to IGREX or was that the last TO waypoint? Or did they get any further according to the pings?

I got one - computer FMS simulator only. It's a waste of time to use a multimullion level D dollar simulator to practise punching buttons.

Came in handy when I took a B-717 recurrent ride and the powers that be stuck a DC-9 pilot in the right seat (hey, it's the same type rating, isn't it?)

Lapp.

You are incorrect. Even with the phone off, it can be activated by suitable equipment and the mic turned on. Someone can listen in to your conversation.

The only way to deactivate the phone is to take the battery out and this is an absolute fact! Google it if you don't believe me. Mobile phones are a tracking device off or on. Fact!

Of course not over the ocean but it was reported to be flying over land.

Pax families will have phone numbers.

I doubt if all the pax were duped. I usually carry a hand held satnav which works fine by a window seat. Surely there must have been a few awake by the window seats could see that the a/c had changed course dramatically and it being a half moon that night would cast changing shadows on the wing. Therefore it would seem to me that intervention by the pax is highly likely at the later end.

RE. flight simulators
 

MS Flight simulator is history. It was taken over by Lockheed Martin, and is promoted as a training tool.
As for the 777: This is a picture of a MS Flight simulator addon from PMDG. It is not just eye candy, it has a programmable FMC, nearly all switches work as they do in a real cockpit. TCAS works. You can simulate failures. You can autoland. All APFD modes work. Autobrakes, autospoilers, cockpit lights. LNAV/VNAV. Radios. Transponder. All displays work. You can download realtime weather. Download nav database which is just the same as the one you got in the real aircraft. You can set it up as a virtual cockpit with the right equipment. Look around the cockpit by turning your head.
Ii is not a toy, it is usable as a training tool on your home PC at the fraction of the cost of a real simulator.

http://www.precisionmanuals.com/img/...77_VC_gate.jpg

MPN11

Similar, but the one I'm thinking of also showed the coverage coming down from Thailand, depicting an uncovered "corridor" at about 10N.