@9190 Londonman.

We cannot know that assorted radios etc were swtched off. All that we know is that, for example, the Transponder/s stopped giving out info, and none of the VHF radios transmitted any more, nor did the ACARS perform later on. We have no info that says 'Radios were switched off'.

And we still don't get to see the cargo manifest (which of course might not be accurate, in that some 'goods' might not have been manifested), nor have we got any access to the military radar records of several, probably useful, surrounding nations - as well as that of Malaysia itself.

Re create flight.
 

Best suggestion I have seen on CNN, FAA chap talking about recreating the flight, according to the Pings, to try and narrow down possible crash site.

Will have to use the exact same equipment.

Should have been done weeks ago.

That is incorrect, and has been covered earlier in the thread... the blow out panels will open, but the door will remain locked

FWIW, "we" also know that the 01:37 ACARS data was not transmitted. As I understand how MAL was applying ACARS, they used the VHF option, not the satellite option.

That info and a buck fifty might get us a cup of coffee.

Ian w. my reply to lonewolf 50 was modded out but I have to advise both of you of what goes on in atc from personal hands on experience. worldwide procedures as laid down by ICAO would have been followed by on-watch atcos in the KL and Ho Chi Minh FIRs immediately following the aircraft's disappearance which was when it failed to contact HCM. Search and Rescue action, mandated by ICAO, is usually devolved to military units since the states involved will not usually want to maintain specialised civil aircraft for this task. hence the military air forces in KL and vietnam would be in the loop immediately followed by those of other surrounding atccs.
It is likely that Lumpur Radar on 132.6 who was controlling 370 at the handover point, would have been looking at a feed from Khota Bharu radar whose cover stretches almost to the vietnamese coast. meanwhile HCM's radar cover reached at least to the handover point if their report of observing a turnback is correct, so I think 370 was not out of radar cover at any time. this would have considerably shortened any uncertainty time. look up incerfa/alerfa/detresfa... all will be revealed in the accident report and not before, at least to us onlookers and the media.

one thing that still puzzles me.....AAIB say that 6 complete handshake were analyzed to plot the possible route after ACARS was disabled....So we "assume" that the 18:25 and 18:28 pings may have not been complete pings (????) Would that then make it difficult to accurately determine the doppler offset frequency if they were not complete pings??...One of these is the "possible turn" ping, so it could be even more important!
I still dont understand why anyone would release a statement saying 6 pings, then release a chart that shows 8?!!!

Noise...
 

Hi,
I do remember the very high level of speculations following AF447 tragedy, and also that most of it (if not all of it) was simply based on false assumptions due to erroneous media releases, usually sourced from unknown people being 'familiar with the investigation'. Even those preliminary reports were not convincing people that no Airbus/BEA 'cover up' was taking place...

As I'm trying to cross-check some of the facts concerning MH370 published so far, it appears that the same context is producing exactly the same effects:

i.e.: those radar data showing:
- sharp turn... or shallow turn(s)?
- altitude changes ranging from 12,000 (or 23,000) to 45,000 ft... or no change from cruising altitude?


Check the previously posted link here: MH370 wreckage, probable cause may never be found, says ex-NTSB investigator | Leeham News and Comment
interview with Greg Feith, a former investigator for the National Transportation Safety Board
Source: Aviation Week.

As for the related theory that the auto pilot took over after the crew was disabled by hypoxia, the series of left and right hand turns belies this, he said. If the crew were overcome, the airplane would have continued on its original course to Beijing. Instead, it made a “shallow” left turn after its last radio communication with Malaysian Air Traffic Control to a new course almost behind its original course. Then, over the Strait of Malacca, it made a right turn, a left turn and another left turn going south over the Indian Ocean.

Citing his sources familiar with the investigation, Feith said these were shallow banks of perhaps 20 degrees, normal turns that would not have alerted passengers that anything was out of the ordinary.

“The auto pilot isn’t smart enough [on its own] to make the maneuvers the airplane did,” Feith said.

All the altitude changes that have been reported in the media are incorrect, he said, citing his sources. The airplane never left its cruising altitude of 35,000 ft.

Well, I would wait for the first report to be released in order to check out what they really come up with...

"While on the ground at Kuala Lumpur airport, and during the early stage of the flight, MH370 transmitted several messages. At this stage the location of the aircraft and the satellite were known, so it was possible to calculate system characteristics for the aircraft, satellite, and ground station."

Tuesday, March 25, 06:50 PM MYT +0800 Malaysia Airlines MH370 Flight Incident

MH370 Flight Incident | Malaysia Airlines (as of today on dynamic page 3)

Would have been. How long does "immediately" take in your experience? I appreciate your familiarity with ICAO standards and with air traffic control. That doesn't answer the question originally posed.
Again, how long does "immediately" take in your experience?
Aye.
OK. This explains HCM contacting Maylaysian POC when they didn't get a check in.
Am familiar with those terms, thanks. :ok:

VHF vs. Satcom
 

@lonewolf:
That is what I surmised as well, however the Inmarsat provides a datum at 17:07 for satcom. Is that coincidential with the ACARS-VHF transmission, or is it possible that the ACARS tx was echoed by satcom?

It has been suggested that the cause may never be found, I think that is now highly likely. However historically as only about 10% or less of air crashes are caused by high jack or suicide then it has to be assumed that an aircraft malfunction has occurred. As such the travelling public are going to be very unhappy climbing aboard a B777 with a mechanical flaw. Boeing will try to pretend its not their machine but truth usually comes out. Its in their interest to press for a discovery of the reason. If there is a repeat it will lead to a grounding of the a/c. look what happened to the Comet.

Walnut

I think we are a long way from a Comet type scenario.

lonewolf 50. you are the KL radar controller watching 370 on the screen in front of you. you instruct it to contact HCM then watch it continue NE. the moment you see its label vanish ( when the aircraft transponder stops), you reach for the phone to ask HCM atcc fellow controller on a direct line, whether he has ok contact with 370. he says no and may even tell you then that he can see it has turned back. you and he there and then initiate standard search and rescue procedures. atcos do not have to refer to anyone else first, their responsibility is to get the procedure under way without delay because time is of the essence. adjoining atccs are informed at the same time.

In the absence of anything new to report and the re-emergence of silly conspiracy theories, I’ve been avoiding any discussion of MH370. But I can’t let nonsense like this go unchallenged.

No, it does not have to be assumed that an ‘aircraft malfunction’ took place. There’s not one, tiny, shred of evidence to support such an absurd statement.

How long has the 777 been in service? How many 777’s are currently flying? And how many 777 hull losses have there been? You don’t have to be a mathematician to work out that the aircraft has an excellent safety record.

It’s been over three weeks now since the disappearance of MH370. I have seen no evidence, anecdotal or otherwise, that in that time the ‘travelling public’ have been ‘very unhappy’ about ‘climbing aboard’ a 777. If you have such evidence, perhaps you could present it to back up your assertion.

Why is there a requirement that any assumptions should be made ?

Having instructed many, many, thousands of aircraft to contact the next control agency in my career, I can assure you that from an ATCO's perspective that's it. He's gone, flight strip in bin, screen wiped, Endex.

If we went around calling colleagues saying "Have you got him yet?" There would be no time left to control the remaining aircraft on frequency.

It doesn't happen.

Sorry, simple question, maybe already answered (blacksheep ?)

Does the Doppler analysis / projected track, depend, OR does not depend, on the accuracy
of the local clock (the clock of the SATCOM terminal on the aircraft) ?

I may have missed it but I have seen no consideration given to the "Divert to ----" key on the FMC. If that was selected surely the a/c would turn to fly there and continue on if no further selections made:confused:

Re: Inmarsat data
 

Having read Duncan Steel's writings on Inmarsat data not ruling out a northerly route, and the apparent high confidence in government officials that the Inmarsat data confirm a southerly route . . .

I would like to see some type of confirmation that the folks that undertook the analysis of the data can reproduce accurate findings with aircraft that were not lost.

In other words - provide them the raw data from completed flights. Only the data that would be similar to that data sent by MH370. Have them calculate the position of that aircraft along the flight route and compare it to what actually happened. Possible? Was it done?

Basic scientific method - right?

Prof. Duncan Steel's CV is extremely impressive, to the extent that he is likely one of the few people on earth with the credentials to be taken seriously in disputing the data, having arguably comparable if not greater experience than the Inmarsat team members.

With no flotsam found to date I for one remain somewhat skeptical the a/c ended up in the Indian Ocean.

Additionally I just don't feel confident that we have been told the entire story.