Question on transponder / MH370
 

Hi everyone,

After watching an interesting video on the MH370 flight that disappeared, I have a simple general question.

1) When the transponder on the XPNDR/TCAS panel is set to STBY, does it mean ATC can't see you on his screen and you fly undetected, the only way to detect you being primary radar pulses ? Or you can still be detected but without altitude, speed etc...
2) It leads to my second question regarding flight MH370: did the flight do what I said in 1), or did they do other things to remain undetected, like tripping CB's, or disconnecting from ACARS ?

Thank you for your answers

From my understanding setting the transponder to STBY prevents operation of the transponder so the aircraft would only visible on the primary radar. It’s speculation but it seems like other systems were also deactivated like company acars.

We know the transponder stopped working..Satcom stopped working for about an hour..the Autopilot appears to be off…no Comms from the pilots… the aircraft then appeared to follow a flight path resembling a hypoxic ghost flight.

All the above looks like a mechanical accident failure scenario..

No need for all this wild hijack/suicide/murder speculation

There's never any need for speculation, but in the absence of a definitive answer as to probable cause, speculation is just human nature.

I take it, birdspeed, that you are speculating it was a 'mechanical accident failure scenario'?

No, not really, unless you call flying for hundreds of miles in a straight line, making a turn, then doing the same again normal for a “ghost flight”?
Having looked at this from many angles, as 777 rated pilot, I can’t think of anything that would produce the recorded flight path with no pilot input.
IMHO the wild speculation is mostly centred about trying to explain what happened by trying to shoehorn sequences of improbable failures into the recorded flight, without much understanding of the technical ramifications. Unlawful interference fits without any contortions and this is not an isolated one-off, unfortunately.

[QUOTE=FullWings;11646665]No, not really, unless you call flying for hundreds of miles in a straight line, making a turn, then doing the same again normal for a “ghost flight”?

FullWings, that’s the big misconception. The raw primary radar data shows a meandering flight back towards Penang and then a lazy gentle turn at Penang. Then after 18:01z we have NO radar evidence how it flew. In early reports, straight lines were drawn, but they have never been backed up by evidence. It took 4 years before the actual primary raw data was released, and of course, by then everyone had made up their minds it was nefarious.

From this same primary radar, it flew along N571 for a considerable distance after turning Penang, which is astounding work for a ghost ship with no crew or autopilot. For this to happen in real life, it would need LNAV + AP or someone at the controls tracking the airway manually.

FullWings, that is the big misconception. There is no evidence it flew the centreline of N571. The best that can be said, is it possibly went roughly in that direction.
The Malaysian military have never released raw radar data from this part of the flight- I suspect they don’t have it!

Oh. 10 seconds on Google turned up this, which shows it tracking towards a point on an airway then following the airway:


https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....eb43d2c038.jpg

FullWings, that is a screen shot from a press conference to the relatives…it has never been included in any official report… there is nothing that can confirm what that picture is showing.

And even if that is the correct target, you can’t tell how it is flying(autopilot on or off).

The last group of self appointed experts determine that the autopilot is OFF and the aircraft is meandering.

Well, obviously, it’s an EasyJet flight to Corfu that’s avoiding weather. That would make absolute sense at a press conference for the relatives of those lost aboard MH370.

If you selectively disregard actual evidence/data (radar, satellite) in favour of things which have no evidence or data (various outlandish stacked failures), then that falls more into the realm of conspiracy theory. For the aircraft do do what it did, requires human intervention or a sequence of events so improbable that it can be ruled out almost immediately.

Got any proof of unlawful interference?

I’m being very careful to only focus on actual evidence. That includes there is no evidence the autopilot was ever re-engaged and the aircraft may not have flown on the centreline of airway N571. So it looks like it could have been a hypoxic ghost flight.

As for the cause, there is a ‘single point of failure’ that doesn’t need to be shoehorned too much to fit the evidence. So what is that evidence? L transponder stops, Satcom stops for about an hour, autopilot appears to be off, no Comms from pilots, hypoxic flight path(possible).

All the above failures would likely happen if an oxygen bottle were to rupture in the left side of the avionics bay.

But, of course, it has always been much easier to blame a nefarious pilot.

Fullwings,

From the very beginning, the term ‘Ghost Flight’ was used to describe ‘silence’ and lack of data to the portion of flight beyond the primary radar detection to the end of flight, which could possibly be a straight line.Not any portion prior.

There is no evidence of:

-Autopilot disconnect
-Autopilot reconnect
-Transponder being ‘switched off’
-Hypoxia
-Following any airways
-Unlawful interference
-Tripping transponder CB
-“Satcom stopped working for about an hour”
-“Mechanical accident failure”
-Nefarious pilot

Dave,

Speculation is only natural for human who can’t refrain from making a statement before having their own thoughts sorted.