No it's not. Chip components are a tiny fraction of the built device price - perhaps 1%. The vast majority is profit and to a lesser extent insurance. This is followed by certification costs, QA costs, and materials.

Work on manufacturing costs of around 10% of final device price.

NB Software costs are often a component of the final price. But that is a fixed cost per product line rather than a marginal cost.

RifRaf3

I disagree with your assessment that the two are completely different, specifically regarding the physics. But fine, let us just move past whether it is even physically possible and instead move onto the second issue with the theory

If a plane did this, think of the force of impact that would be needed. (and we will just skip the waves and particle displacement, jumping straight to...)

The impact would be unbelievably strong, and certainly picked up on the many geological instruments in the region (including those of USGS) ~ China already proved to us there wasn't suspicious activity until 2 hours later though (activity which was later explained as being an earthquake off the coast of Sumatra)

Is all of it possible this all happened, while leaving zero trace of it happening? I guess theoretically, if absolutely everything went absolutely perfectly right - but it would be one of the more amazingly unexplainable incidents ever witnessed and therefore unbelievably unlikely.

Most likely? Someone who knew what they were doing did what they knew how to do - darkening then piloting the plane to a location we are unaware of (as the experts concluded off the known evidence)

Electronics in cold ambient temperatures
 

From ve3id ... I believe avionics uses mil/aerospace qual chips, therefore should not be a problem at -40.

That's why avionics is so expensive.

....... That's part of the reason but also the need for extensive qualification and type testing amortised over a relatively low production base contributes also the the cost.

I

Electronics in cold ambient temperatures
 

Aviation electronics are specified to -55C, non-condensing atmosphere.
In the case of a hull breach and sudden drop in temperature, the humidity in the atmosphere will be condensing and could coat internal electronic components with ice / water.
Under this unusual condition, how well would the avionics work?

The Malaysians are saying it's the F/O on the radio because the captain flies the plane, the co-pilot does the radio. There's no PF or PM to those unfamiliar with how sectors are operated, and those giving the media briefings don't actually know that first officer also often gets to fly a sector in the modern world.
That's my understanding, from the Malaysian press briefings. I wouldn't place any value on what the Malaysians are saying as to who made the final radio call, I'd wait until someone knowledgable like the NTSB comes forward with their information.
Or explains to the Malaysians how a commercial airliner works and how the crew retain currency in their operation.

Thinking of the future, what can be done about FDR/CVR? Maybe there should be several devices, synched, one fixed as at present and two ejected by force - compressed gas, spring, or a small pyrotechnic charge? The technology is off the shelf and has been for decades in 'cluster bomb' systems which survive incredibly high forces. One to my knowledge survives > 100,000g (sic). We cannot accept the present designs as fit for purpose.

There is a margin of error on the final resting place for several reasons, the biggest being that there is no way to know how much fuel was left after the last ping. Sure the plane must have been very near that arc @ 8:11 but then there is up to 59 minutes more fuel to burn plus glide time.

Y'all might be talking about 2 different things. One thing is where the plane was @ 8:11 which is very near the arc. The other thing is the final resting place of the plane which could be hundreds of miles away from the arc...

RifRaf3 said

Regardless of how the fire would have to act, how is it ACARS never sends out a message saying the fire is there?

Edit to say, also see this great post from MountainBear (just in case you missed it before reading my question)

http://www.pprune.org/8384502-post5470.html

to the best of my knowledge no ping has been picked up from two satellites, where is the source for that?

Picky picky picky.

The cost of the parts is not just what you pay to the supplier, but the qualifying and testing that has to be done to mil spec standards. I stand by my original statement.

I have no idea what level of ACARS reporting Malaysian has but.....

ACARS is not all knowing. If there is un-annuciated fire, ACARS will not know about it and will not report it.

How could it?

I see some comments about 1 v 2 satellites. When CNN started drawing two boxes a few days ago, I assumed they had reads from two satellites. Now that they've released the single arc picture, it makes sense why. Even if the plane was in range of two Inmarsat satellites, it doesn't mean both recorded the ping registration.

Think of that ping like your cell phone. Even if you hit 3 towers, the only one that will record your checkin is the one that holds your registration at that moment. It's very possible that, like your cell phone, the SATCOM decides which sat is the right sat to register with, and it will make that clear in it's ping. Then, the other one knows to disregard it.

Can't answer Q's right away since I'm driving.

I'm really curious as to why Inmarsat hasn't released the arcs for the other 5 pings. Couldn't hurt anything.

Ornis:

Could you elaborate on what you said re the plane linking up to a satellite in the Perth area? You seem to be the only one with a sane (or sober) mind left? Thank you.

The future of ELT and tracking
 

Great question. it seems ludicrous to assume anything will wok perfectly in a crash, including ELT systems.

Firstly let me say I am not a pilot, however there are some common-sense options that we can all see, and have been suggested before.

I have been for a long time advocating a live video feed of the cockpit and tailcam video streaming to a remote black box - something like Skype . It can be done today. Many airlines host internet facilities.

Failing this we should have an on - all - the -time ELT tracking system - satellite based. When it stops, we know there is a problem, and any time the signal is lost it should be the subject of an immediate investigation and intercept by the closest air force.

Also, mandate the immediate notification of loss of online tracking of any aircraft to the relevant military and handover to military radar tracking for resolution.

Mandate the carrying on person of a satellite tracking device on the pilots and flight crew.

Many ideas, all been said before, it is upto the ariline industry to step up to the plate and start giving us passengers some assuarance that they can take better care of us.

lakedude

While I agree 100% with everything else you said, it needs to be pointed out Fuel Levels would indicate it likely touched down extremely close to the last ping. (if it were not already grounded)

The plane being in the air at 8:11 itself is already pushing what they would have been able to do (barring the extremely unlikely landing/refuel option, of course)

nitpicker.

Your point 3, "under inflated wheels will not catch fire" is not quite true.
Research the DC8 fire in Jeddah in 1991 operted by a Canadian company,National? on behalf of Nigerian Airways.

Cause of fire and subsequent loss of aircraft, under inflated tyre(s).

Wunwing

Re: Electronics bay
 

LD7, perhaps flip your question around and ask 'can you get out of the electronics bay in flight?'

Under the scenario that some third party had access to this area in order to shut down comms, who's to say they weren't occupying the avionics compartment prior to pax boarding?

the inmarsat coverage data shows it could only ever have been picked up by one sat, except for possibly a tiny period around the time the incident started.

I doubt if the decision to release the data from the other earlier pings is now int he hands of inmarsat.

On many biz jets, which do have the space for EE bays within the pressure vessel, the majority of the avionic boxes are located in compartments which are completely unheated and unpressurized in flight e.g. the Lear 45, in which the central avionics computer, air data computers, nav and com radios, transponders, attitude/heading computers etc. are all located in the nose, forward of the flight compartment. There is nothing between the avionics and the intense cold found at the flight levels but the thin metal skin of the two removable doors used to access the equipment on the ground.

A similar situation exists on a Hawker 800, where all sorts of avionics are crammed into a space in the upper portion of the nose gear wheel well. Again, this compartment is completely unheated and unpressurized, and is also exposed to wind blast and moisture anytime the nose gear is deployed.

The point being that the majority of commercial avionics systems are designed to operate perfectly well over a very broad range of environmental conditions, including prolonged exposure to extreme cold.

Could any B777 drivers explain what the problems are with flying at FL45 with an aircraft configured and loaded as MH370 was?
Is it simply that you are much closer to coffin corner?