|
@Surtchris
My gut instinct has never wavered that MH370 lost contact when it suffered a fatal decompression as a result of structural failure and if this is the case then this hasn’t happened since the Comets in the fifties. |
DC, if Vietnamese ATS gets no reply, it will eventually start a SAR phase, as it probably did. If being voodoo, it would be far better to wait until after contact with Vietnamese ATS, that way you would only be missed after the next reporting point, not immediately. Each minute you fly along the cleared route puts you another minute from your destination, wherever that is, and behind schedule. A missed/delayed handoff at zero-dark-thirty isn't something the next sector is going to get immediately stressed about, unlike an identified target in your sector suddenly going dark. In the event, Vietnam ATC (which seems a bit more competent than Malaysia's) did wig out, and after not much time elapsed (a previous poster to this thread said he was on-freq at the time...). |
Originally Posted by PA28Viking
(Post 8380992)
How have they determind that VFR ACARS was disabled before the handover comms?
MH370 reached its cruising altitude FL350 at 17.03 UTC. At 17.07 UTC (01.07 local) the last RR (TOC) message was transmitted). After that no RR ACARS messages was to be expected for a long time. So how do they conclude 'disabled' and not just 'not transmitting'? I would say the ACARS could have been disabled around the same time as the transponder - at 17.21 UTC. |
How many times have we done this at recurrent, regardless of type, make or model???
Over water, in the dark with a lot of fuel. Hurtling along through space in a giant aluminum and plastic tube filled with flammable insulation and miles of electrical cables. Everything, with the exception of the engines and flight controls need those pesky electrons. Whether from the batteries or generators or alternators, in older jets. Mr. Murphy shows up. Do you smell something? Yeah, smells like burning wires. Get out the checklist. What does it say? Gang bar and start turning everything off, pull circuit breakers. Now it’s dark and the flashlights are all you’ve got. Captain takes the stick/yoke, FO runs the checklist. Now you wait. Still smell the smoke? Roger. Batteries back on.Now you get a few things back. Check the voltage. Voltage is normal. Wait. Still smell smoke? Yup. And on through the checklist, trying to isolate the culprit. Worse case scenario: Can’t get the fire out. Everything is gone, no nav, no autopilot, no transponder, no radios and you’re hand flying, battery voltage is dropping. Molten aluminum is raining in the cockpit (Swissair 111) Trying to maintain altitude and heading. Smoke is getting pretty thick, O2 is depleted, she’s trimmed up as good as possible. Cough, cough, now you’re dead. Engines keep running, no one at the controls, now it’s either fire gets to the fuel and BANG, little sparkles fall from the sky, or kerplunk, into the drink and maybe a few larger pieces…. Or, the fat boy from North Korea was playing with his new drone... |
Couldn't have entered Indian Airspace without detection
Article in Times of India - says its tough for the aircraft to fly over Indian mainland. Not a surprise, but thought I'd share it here for some interesting quotes from spokespersons:
Link to the article According Guild member Sushil Mondal, all hell would break loose if the IAF detected an aircraft that did not have air defence clearance. Any plane flying through Indian airspace is first required to submit the flight plan and manifest to the air traffic controls in its flight path. This is then relayed to the air force for permission. "There are times when the Air Force finds a blip that does not match a flight plan. That usually happens when flight plans going missing at their end due to a system or link failure. They then immediately contact us for information. If the plane flight plan isn't of suspicious nature, a clearance is granted. Or else, it is asked to return to wherever it came from. In case, we too don't have any information of the aircraft, there will be trouble and the Air Force scramble jets to take the plane down. Nothing of the kind happened last Saturday," said Mondal. Recently, the IAF scrambled a Su-30MKI in the western sector after noticing an unidentified 'blip' crossing over from Pakistan, It turned out to be a weather balloon. |
Just because of 9/11 a plane hit something does not mean that every single event will repeat that ending. US narrow mindedness about possible endings is really shocking. There is a difference between a pilot taking a plane for political ransom and a terrorist group hellbent on murdering people.
|
Well said
Until resolved it would be respectful to recall that the 259 on board who have families who can read if not this site but the increasing links to it
|
FIRESYSOK The difference is you add it as an afterthought whereas it's the first investigative action in the procedures. It shows clearly the reason electrical equipment must be able to be electrically isolate individually and therefore addresses the original point. When/if I have smoke in the flight deck, I'm going to know right away which system is offending? You sure about that? I'm going far, far out on a limb here and pretty much say that unless it's clear it's a coffee maker, oven, or something not in the FD, I'm not going to have time, nor want to waste time analyzing which system it is, then waste more time considering how to do that ("where is that darn VHF3 circuit breaker again?!"). Rather, I'm going to depower busses PER THE CHECKLIST, and wait to see if smoke decreases or not. All the while running toward the ERA or nearest airport. I have had smoke in the cockpit. We were some way from a suitable airport. We could identify the area the smoke was coming from and by opening a panel could identify the item. We isolated it then removed it to a safe area. In doing so we were able to maintain the other systems powered by the same bus. This was according to our checklist. All electrical smoke checklists have the same flow. OXY/COMMS ISOLATE THE SOURCE IF UNABLE TO IDENTIFY THE SOURCE AND CLOSE TO A RUNWAY LAND IF NOT CLOSE TO A RUNWAY POWER DOWN BUSBARS TO TRY AND STOP THE SMOKE. They all are written in that priority. |
Originally Posted by mikechekker
(Post 8381162)
I hope this doesn't get lost in the spotters conspiracy theories on here. But if you go back to
this article here: it says in black and white that MAS had information that the plane landed in Nanning. Who told them that? And why didn't they dismiss it like they dismissed the "possible air turn back" as far back as 9 March, |
DC, ok, if it's a radar environment then that's valid (if there was unlawful interference).
Ian W, until I see a copy of an ACARS 'log off' etc message, I won't accept any implication of what the Malaysians or anyone else says. |
|
Originally Posted by FE Hoppy
(Post 8381048)
@Snowfalcon2
You are not thinking of the impact such a regulation has on the industry. This would require that every aeroplane has a realtime data transmission of every system. Including everything! It's basically more data than the FDR records transmitted real time. Have you thought about the finical implication and time frame required to implement this regulation? This would solve both MH370 and the AF447 issues in one simple regulation. |
By the way, it's possible to track the Greek freighter Elka Athina, mentioned a few pages back, in relation to possible sightings of floating luggage in Malacca Strait:
Live Ships Map - AIS - Vessel Traffic and Positions - AIS Marine Traffic What is odd is that the Strait is incredibly busy with ships, so why this one would be singled out is odd. One would think many ships would be asked to be on the lookout. |
The media keep reporting that the two pilots did not ask to fly together. That of course predicates that it was 'essential' that it was this flight that was chosen. It might equally have been that the two pilots waited until chance put them on the same flight. This is not to say that the pilots were the culprits but that not asking to fly together is a red herring. |
This is not true. If the ACARS went through a normal log-off sequence then it was shut down deliberately. If it just stopped reporting then it could have been some other reason. As it has been said multiple times 'the ACARS was deliberately switched off' that implies that it went through a log-off sequence and tidy shut down, something it would NOT have done if the power to it was cut by the circuit breaker being tripped. |
So many agencies involved now,I get the feeling they have rough idea where the T7 is. But if you trying to catch a car thief you won't broadcast to world you know where they are and coming for them. Hence the Southern corridor. Wild speculation, but as possible as anything else. |
Originally Posted by XB70_Valkyrie
(Post 8381248)
Can you share that tidy shutdown sequence from the ACARS protocol with us?
|
A question please. If the aircraft sent out pings until approx 0800 hours, if it was on the ground somewhere would it not still send out pings?
|
Quick word on circuit breakers. They are not to protect the box, but the power wiring to it. We are trying to prevent the wiring from setting a fire, not prevent the box from smoking.
On the E&E door. Are you folks (pilots) really worried about this? It would be simple enough to retrofit an electric lock controlled from the flight deck. Might as well do it to the 747's too while we are at it. On someone entering the E&E bay and pulling breakers. I would hope that if someone was pulling breakers on an active system, you would get an immediate advisory message ( if not a caution) on the EICAS "ACARS MU FAIL" "TRANSPONDER 2 FAIL"etc I would assume even if you were to send the FO to investigate, that would be worthy of a radio call to someone first? |
lonewolf 50
Quote:
The US and Malaysian agenda will be to deflect the public’s attention from the probable cause of the disappearance of the AC for obvious reasons. The radar contacts and satellite comms probably relate to other AC/drones. I hope I am proved wrong. I hope I am proved wrong . I really hope you win the case of Guinness. I have no expertise on radar/ satellites or drones but some on aviation matters in general. I was quoting from a previous thread (so many now I can't remember which) to suggest that there was some other explanation for the radar contact and pings. This closing comment was to suggest that at the moment the US and Malaysia would prefer the public to think hijackers took one plane rather than the possibility that there were safety issues on other planes. Perhaps I could have expresses it better it was not meant to be political statement. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 06:05. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.