For those who do not believe the ping accuracy or the accurate interpretation of the pings - the new evidence from investigators that the B777 flew as low as 5000' in a radar-avoiding move, is now verified by the eyewitness evidence of the 4 men in Kelantan - who all gave solemn evidence that they sighted "a large aircraft flying low", early on the morning of the 8th March.

My understanding is that if engine parameters dont change then no data other than a handshake occurs. That handshake essentially has no data.

Well put together onetrack, there are a few things starting to come together.

Thanks Ana. Even I can understand your clear illustrations and follow your clear explanation. You remind me of someone from AF447 days - she had similar expertise and we all benefitted from her insights.

How "narrow" would these lines of arc be? I understand could be very narrow as for GPS. But would communication satellites have that degree of accuracy with respect to timing?

If latest reports of low level flight are true, I guess this shortens the length if arcs somewhat. Has these been verified, or just rumor?


This was not an impulsive decision. Someone knew a lot about flying a T7, but a whole lot more as well. No way this was the response of someone who had a bad day.

If very low level flight is true, this further suggests pax out of equation by then. Anyone here think he/she wouldn't call when crossing land at low level?


Depressurisation and hypoxia still likely method. Eliminating all interference was crucial. How else could this be done. People don't come back after a sufficient period of hypoxia - anaesthetic data is clear on this point. Not at FL400 or close to. These people were not acclimatised like Everest climbers - even they wouldn't survive 40,000 (and plenty of them don't survive 30,000). 1 pilot on the deck have more oxygen than anyone else.

Few other questions
1. Engineer. Do we know if on duty or off duty? Could he have selected flight as pax, or was he assigned on duty.
2. Chinese satellite photos still puzzle me. Very embarrassing for them. They have the resources for higher res photos. Seems strange they did not given the delay of several days. Very strange they got caught out like that.

@xgjunkie: as I understand it, MH370 signal was just ping, not ping/handshake

Well the kiwi on the oil rig made a statement too about a fireball.

But Sultan Ismail Petra airport is in Kelantin, any chance of a passenger jet on approach?

why would the United States intelligence community (whoever that may be in this matter) make a point of calling up CNN and informing them all of a sudden that they were focusing on the flight crew?




why would they want CNN to tell the world that?


maybe because its true, but, since when is mass communication of whats going on the concern of the intelligence community?


I don't get it.


were they prodding the Malaysians? maybe, maybe not. but I really doubt they did it to tell us what they are thinking. since when does an intelligence agency want the world to know what its thinking?

Here are two of the eyewitness reports of the low-flying aircraft, as I understand -

A fisherman Azid Ibrahim who was in his boat at sea, says that at about 1.30am he saw the lights of a low-flying aircraft in the area of (Jalan) Kuala Besar.
He told The Star newspaper in Malaysia that the plane was flying so low, that the lights were “as big as coconuts”.

Another man, is reported to have seen “bright white lights” from his home about 30km south of Kota Bharu, describing what he thought was a fast-descending aircraft, at about 1.45am on Saturday morning.@xgjunkie - Yes, it's extremely likely, seeing as they appear to be reporting an aircraft with landing lights on.
However, I'm sure some quick checking on actual aircraft movements into SIP very early on the 8th would soon eliminate any doubts, or confirm what they saw.

I'm fully of the opinion now, that the fireball sighted by the oil rig worker, and the "extremely loud noise" heard by the 8 men near Marang beach, was by pure coincidence, a meteorite explosion.
I have never actually heard a meteorite explode, but it's certainly not a rare event.

@p.j.m.

The Spidertracks product linked above looks like it costs $1000 - $2000 per aircraft for hardware. And appx $1.60 per hour operating cost. It is a small standalone product that would provide a tamper proof method of continuous flight tracking.

Seems like a smart and minimal cost idea - especially now that we know you can apparently easily disappear a 777 ...

I suspect something similar will be required on all commercial aircraft in a very short time - even if as a backup system.

Smart airlines should be stepping all over each other to see who can announce and install these quickest - as a safety and PAX security tool.

While I lack specific knowledge of the system in question it is very likely that the system functions in a similar way as any modern network.

For example devices that are hooked up to the internet have a unique number assigned to them called a "MAC address". No other device on the entire network has the same address. This way information can be routed though the network to an individual end user. IP addresses are similar except they function at a different OSI layer.

Same goes for 11 digit postal codes for your street address (USA). No one else has the same address in the entire country.

I'm almost certain that the plane would have a unique identifying code of some kind.

OSI model - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

@lakedude: agreed, in networking the ping is 'is anyone there?' so in order for a correct response the reply has to return to the originating address, therefore the ping must contain a unique ID.

Re the fuel question -

"The plane had enough fuel to fly for a total of about seven-and-a-half to eight hours, Malaysia Airlines' Chief Executive Ahmad Jauhari Yahya said on Sunday."

Its a good point Lakedude but just to throw a question back at you,

Malaysian Airlines apparently economically was not doing to good and airlines in that kind of climate tend to swap parts backwards and forwards between aircraft to keep them operational.
Is the part responsible for this ping swapped into another aircraft.

Also has any info on the other ping distances been released? Or are they all on the same arc.
Its been mentioned that they are only position fixes along that arc and not proof the plane was flying the arc.
What if all the pings are on the same arc....then it is quite conceivable that the pings are coming from exactly one stationery point! .....on the ground....at Kuala Lumpur

It cannot be discounted.

How is a little pinger going to improve your safety and security as a passenger?

"An Inmarsat official, while declining to discuss specifics of Flight 370, tells CNN the satellite system is highly reliable, that each signal to an aircraft is met by a return signal and that those signals always contains a code verifying the identity of the aircraft. It is "virtually impossible" to change an aircraft's identifying code or to confuse one aircraft with another, the Inmarsat official said."

Source: CNN

For those in the know, What is the range of a 777 flying at SL?

KL is not on the 40 degree circle. The signals would not be coming from there.

As far as I know the other ping details have not been released. They would be very useful for deducing a track.

Pinging
 

It's been discussed many posts back
Aircraft Pings Satellite " hello you there ? "
Satellite pings aircraft back " yes I'm here "
Then comes the handshake " ok let's do business"
Data transfer follows.

Malaysians go south

MISSING MH370: RMN and RMAF to deploy assets to the southern corridor - Latest - New Straits Times

So how far is it? 300-500 miles?
Its pretty close, while I accept that it is not right on that line, its within the degree of error. Considering distance is calculated from the return ping then there will be a large fudge factor
Also the original distance was calculated with an aircraft at 35,000ft. Well recalculate that for sea level.