|
@Airbubba
It is also possible that they decided it was just too hard to bother with the area after Indonesia refused the overfly of territory and used the excuse of the southern area which is easier under the circumstances. BBC News - Missing Malaysia MH370: Search planes grounded by 'red tape' |
Would be interesting to see the past 6 months flights of both the crew.
If and a big if any one of them were involved part of the meticulous approach would have been to probe reaction to transponder switch offs and military radar reaction etc. MH flies the north west route and the part of the southern route too with the 777 so it could be a probability which I am sure the investigators should have analysed. |
rubyrigz
You're perhaps a bit misinformed or I'm perhaps misunderstanding you. There is no 'emergency flight plan' by default in the 777 FMC.
There is one active flight plan. There is also a route 2, which can be any other plan. It can be used in a variety of ways, for example route 1 copied identically in to route 2, but at the end of route 2 have a different STAR or approach. Many also will use route 2 to input enroute diversions, around high terrain in the event of a depressurisation or engine failure, etc. Regardless of what you put in the second route, it only takes 2 button pushes to activate it. The first push brings up route 2, and the second push 'executes' it, which makes route 2 the active route. ATC via CPDLC/ADS-C will not see anything from route 2 until it is 'executed' and actively navigating the aircraft. Likewise for any amendments to the active route 1. Over the planned route of MH370, I don't see a reason for route 2 to be different to route 1 in the cruise phase. I also would find it highly unlikely that route 2 could be inadvertently selected AND executed. If it was, and a turn to the left suddenly ensued, why not just re-activate route 1? |
Shadoko that second question is answered here:
Triangulation using cell phones fails - General - New Straits Times |
Now my REAL question. How easy is it to "execute" alternate Flight Plan B by accident? A slip, a slide, a push-pull? By definition, an emergency back-up flight plan should be quick and easy to execute, was it too easy? Since you have to select the secondary flight plan and then activate it, I can't think of a time when I've seen it done accidentally (or on purpose, for that matter) in the aircraft. I have practiced using the secondary flight plan in the sim on occasion. Some folks use the secondary flight plan to plot things like ETP's and other stuff over water. I'm a minimalist, the less buttons I push, the less chance of screwing it up is my thinking. We still do legacy plotting and position tracking paperwork. However, in a modern jet I'd rather mess up the paperwork and get it right in the FMS than the other way around. The primary and secondary flight plans are normally erased automatically after a flight. Some, but not all, carriers also have canned flight plans stored for frequently flown routings that can be called up on preflight into the primary and secondary FMS flight plans. Over the planned route of MH370, I don't see a reason for route 2 to be different to route 1 in the cruise phase. I also would find it highly unlikely that route 2 could be inadvertently selected AND executed. If it was, and a turn to the left suddenly ensued, why not just re-activate route 1? |
If and a big if any one of them were involved part of the meticulous approach would have been to probe reaction to transponder switch offs and military radar reaction etc. |
Thank you for all the pilots and expert commentary on Flight 1&2, ACARS, FMS, and general topics as well!
I have seen what here is often called Flight-2, referred to as "Alternate Flight Plan" in many ACARS documents available to peruse. There also seems to be many many versions of ACARS packages, and development over the years. Suffice it to say different airlines in different countries with different manufacturer models and different budgets, might have different ACARS versions? Documentation for some, under "Flight Plan Report" (in-flight) do say the report includes both "active" and "alternate" flight plan. One might think the MH370 ACARS 1:07 report must have such a version for this 12 minutes story to make any sense at all...(but what makes sense w/ MH370) ...after all, if the Active or Flight 1 shows a change at 1:07 to the West, why isn't ground control going ballistic? If I am all wet, then sorry, but, just sayin. Anyway It's good to know the conscientious pilots here do not seem to ever have willy-nilly Flight 2... wonder if that's true worldwide? |
Over the planned route of MH370, I don't see a reason for route 2 to be different to route 1 in the cruise phase. I also would find it highly unlikely that route 2 could be inadvertently selected AND executed. If it was, and a turn to the left suddenly ensued, why not just re-activate route 1? |
rubyrigz
There certainly are numerous operator options on ACARS packages, and the like. However, what we've been talking about is standard. It is part of the FMC/CDU from Boeing/Honeywell. There is one active route, and one 'backup' which can be used for the reasons mentioned.
What is in the inactive route will not be shared via ACARS, regardless of what operator options are chosen. Jug: In a word, yes. Or said route could be manually flown, or flown in basic modes. I'm not sure what your point is. In summary, two flight plans can be loaded in to the FMS. One is active, the other isn't. The inactive route can contain anything - a diversion, an escape route, a mirror image of the active route, a modified version of the active route, or something completely irrelevant. To activate it, it's just short keystroke sequence. What is in the inactive route is not displayed to ATC in any way. There's a good reason for that, as many of us like to make many modifications to it en-route - particularly over high ground. |
JugofP... "If there was a plan to steal the plane, could the carefully planned "hijack route" meant to confuse/avoid radar/etc have been pre-entered into the computer as route 2, so that at the appropriate time, all that would be needed to execute would be to press a couple buttons?"
I just watched Hannity on Fox and by coincidence this McInerney retired AF general was on. Not my usual network, by the way. If he is not off his rocker, anything is possible! It certainly would explain this campaign of misinformation-trickle. Very scary though. Scary if he is wrong that he would espouse such views in a serious forum under presumably legitimate media coverage. Even scarier if he is right! ETOPS240: Thank you for insights. Does this mean the 12-minute story, if true as widely reported by good news organizations, implies the re-programmed route was in the ACARS 1:07 as "Active"? If yes, it begs the question; does not ATC or anyone on the ground react to these reports in a way that helps protect the public interest? (in that neck of the woods) - Surely it would stand out as more than a course correction to avoid bad weather. |
Jug: In a word, yes. Or said route could be manually flown, or flown in basic modes. I'm not sure what your point is. |
jug
In which case, yes, you're right.
It would still require the route to be entered at some stage, though. In all actuality, however, once you have control of the aircraft, there are a zillion ways to take it off the planned route, which would take nigh-on zero time. I think that any route 2 garbage is just a moot point. |
If they had the Inmarsat ping, and another satellite in a different orbit recorded the same ping, that would help. Both these bird, was well as some older satellites which may no longer be functional, would be able to see the region in question and, as others have alluded to, be able to detect and localize Inmarsat signals. As "national assets", their involvement would not be disclosed but I'm reading something into the White House press officer's statements last week as suggesting the call on what role they could play was Obama's, as CINC. |
If there was a plan to steal the plane, could the carefully planned "hijack route" meant to confuse/avoid radar/etc have been pre-entered into the computer as route 2, so that at the appropriate time, all that would be needed to execute would be to press a couple buttons? Also, some of the folks I fly with seem to spend more time out of the seat than in it once airborne, don't know about this crew. One of the pilots could have programmed the second route after takeoff without the other's knowledge. In the Egyptair 990 crash the FO waited for the captain to go to the lav, then he started chanting and pulling circuit breakers. Since the waypoints on the turnback route were well behind the KUL-PEK route, they would not appear as clues on the nav display screens in front of the pilots. |
What is in the inactive route will not be shared via ACARS, regardless of what operator options are chosen. The "B" route is not shared via ACARS until it is selected. When/if it is selected, it shares essentially a step ahead of what the plane is currently doing? So if you programmed the plane to fly straight for ten minutes (or miles, or to a specific point) and then turn to a specific heading, ACARS would send out the information that you intended to turn while you were still going straight? If I'm correct on this - that could explain a lot. PF pre-programmed route B with the hijack route - but the first 10 minutes of that route were the same as route A. While the PNF is distracted, PF activates route B. Not knowing of the change, PNF proceeds to contact ATC. PF then gets PNF out of the cockpit, locks the door, and flight turns and continues along the remainder of route B. |
indicators...
Let's consider the vested interests involved... if this is a "nutty pilot commits suicide" story, the cost will be born by airline training and line management departments. If it's a "loony fundos steal plane and screw up" story, the cost will be carried by security and intelligence departments and communities. (ie in both these cases, ultimately by us, the travelling public).
If, however, there was (another) 777 electronics bay fire - remember Egyptair on the ground at Cairo a couple of years ago - it will be Boeing that carries the can. And after the 787 PR fiasco, I wonder if Boeing can survive if their cash-cow 777 turns out to be prone to spontaneous in-flight ignition... Check the Boeing share price ticker for the past couple of weeks. Big drop 12 days ago when MH370 disappeared. Back up again when the suicidal pilot/loony fundo theories took hold. Starting to drop away again now.... Follow the money, as always. |
The secondary flight plan/route in the FMS is exactly what ETOPS240 has quoted.
In summary, two flight plans can be loaded in to the FMS. One is active, the other isn't. The inactive route can contain anything - a diversion, an escape route, a mirror image of the active route, a modified version of the active route, or something completely irrelevant. To activate it, it's just short keystroke sequence. @Jug The secondary flight plan is displayed on the MFD as "secondary" when activated you cannot pretend to use the primary flight plan while actually using the secondary. |
slats11 said,
However it does seem an odd coincidence that the claimed level of precision should just happen to produce a result of 40 degrees. The Map http://tvaraj.files.wordpress.com/20...ansmission.jpg The lines are fairly close to begin with and a little bit of rounding would likely make little to no difference when we are talking about a last known with an up to a 59 minute margin for variance anyway, imo The 8:11-9:10 time frame seems to mean a 4-5 Degree +/- in both directions is possible considering that (4-5 degrees) is roughly what the plane managed between last Contact and last Radar hit (roughly an hours time). The "40 degrees" already becomes anywhere from roughly 35-45, with fuel levels (as we believe we understand them) indicating it is probably closer to the initial 8:11 time anyway. Plausible theory - 40 is easy for all to remember and report, and doing so would make no real difference, so they rounded it to that. Or am I just thinking about this incorrectly? |
To be totally honest, I don't know exactly how much information can be sent by ACARS regarding position reports.
I do know that as a minimum, an automated position report sends from your aircraft tells them the waypoint you're heading to (the active waypoint, as it's known), and the one after that. Whether CPDLC can provide more info further down your flight plan automatically, I'm not sure. So to answer your question, yes. An ACARS position report will tell ATC you're at XYZ, at 11:12z, FL350, estimating next WPT ABC at 11:25z, and then heading WPT DEF after that. All of this elaborate conjecture of pre-loading RTE 2 is all well and good, but wouldn't be a deal-breaker. Ultimately, if someone got control of the aircraft, the use of automation, LNAV/VNAV, hand-flying etc. is a all irrelevant. If you lock the other pilot out of the flight deck, who cares what medium you use to navigate? I'd have thought the big 'breakthrough' in your hypothesis isn't a clever or covert insertion of a second route. The bigger news that someone locked themselves in the flight deck in order to hijack the aircraft. |
@TheShadow
Parallels with prior inflight fires If we look at the stats #1 cause is pilot error, #2 cause is mechanical failure. However the flight path/9-11 style stealth is more consistent with an intentional act. It is hard to explain no communications were detected from mobile phones or other signal when the a/c crossed the peninsular and apparently this might have been at low altitude. For me what is most odd about this incident is that after 10 days we have inconsistent data released, contradictions and an apparent lack of co-operation between the parties involved. Unlike AF447 there is very little stated plan of action and I fear there is a lack of leadership and focus in the investigation. I understand that some data is classified however it appears that even the skunk works data has not helped locate the a/c except within a vast area. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 05:09. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.