I suppose the problem with this is that one of the communication systems shut down before the pilot last spoke to ground control. He didn't give any indication of a problem. So why was he not aware? The plane couldn't have suffered a total power failure in those circumstances. http://www.arabnews.com/news/541526
See the added hyopthesis in my post: a problem starts in the ACARS transmitter (which was the first communication to be lost - but no-one would immediately notice that on the ground). It could have been insignificant enough at the time for the pilots not to notice. But suppose that it did have an electrical issue, and this caused a fire or explosion. That could affect other avionics and comms systems. An explosion in that area, would take out the remaining comms antennae (but not the Comsat array).
Please don't mention the phones again. It has been confirmed many times that the phones would not have worked.
Well that was a nice polite put down. OK, thanks .
It's just that info changes daily regarding altitude/where the plane was/blah blah blah. And if the oil rig person saw it so clearly then it must have been reasonably low and within range of mobile phone use.
Carry on.
eta: Hypothesis: A problem in the ACARS transmitter causes a fire/explosion that takes out much of the avionics in the avionics bay - including the fly-by-wire computers?
Debunked:
Another clue is that part of the Boeing 777’s Aircraft Communications Addressing and Reporting System (ACARS) was shut off.
The system, which has two parts, is used to send short messages via a satellite or VHF radio to the airline’s home base. The information part of the system was shut down, but not the transmission part. In most planes, the information part of the system can be shut down by hitting cockpit switches in sequence in order to get to a computer screen where an option must be selected using a keypad, said Goglia, an expert on aircraft maintenance.
That’s also something a pilot would know how to do, but that could also be discovered through research, he said.
But to turn off the other part of the ACARS, it would be necessary to go to an electronics bay beneath the cockpit. That’s something a pilot wouldn’t normally know how to do, Goglia said, and it wasn’t done in the case of the Malaysia plane. Thus, the ACARS transmitter continued to send out blips that were recorded by the Inmarsat satellite once an hour for four to five hours after the transponder was turned off. The blips don’t contain any messages or data, but the satellite can tell in a very broad way what region the blips are coming from and adjusts the angle of its antenna to be ready to receive message in case the ACARS sends them. Investigators are now trying to use data from the satellite to identify the region where the plane was when its last blip was sent.
Interestingly, after a bit of Googling, it seems that on a 777, the VHF (including ACARS), ATC (radio comms), TCAS (secondary radar transponder) and DME (traditional guidance system, which doesn't transmit) antennae are all located in a small cluster directly underneath the front fuselage, just aft of the avionics bay under the rear part of the cockpit.
There are other antennae on the 777, including GPS on the top of the fuselage above the same point, HF on the front edge of the vertical stabliser (used for in-flight data-link voice communications before Inmarsat), the VOR (used for identifying track to ground VOR arrays, but again not transmitting) on the top of the vertical stabliser, and the COMSAT array (used for in-flight entertainment comms) on top of the rear part of the fuselage.
eta: Oh, and the ILS localiser and weather radar, in the nose cone.
Notice anything here? All the antennae that identify the aircraft to ATC/secondary radar are all in one place. The one thing that continued to identify the aircraft's existence was in a completely different part of the aircraft.
Is it so unreasonable to accept that a fire or electrical explosion could create a series of events that started to take out all those communications? What about the hydraulics from the avionics bay to the wings/tail/stabiliser? Could they have been routed through the same area? Again, not saying that this *is* the cause of MH370s disappearance, but it is food for thought....
eta: Hypothesis: A problem in the ACARS transmitter causes a fire/explosion that takes out much of the avionics in the avionics bay - including the fly-by-wire computers?
BIB.....Given the number of 'back ups' of 'back ups' it has onboard i'd say a 'series of events' leading to a fire/explosion, no.....unless we are talking a massive sudden explosion which took the entire plane (and passengers) out in a split second? The latter i could believe as then it's physically impossible for anything to be left working at all, plus no vital minutes to communicate or send out distress.
The former would still leave something working, even if the plane is not going to survive or make landfall, giving opportunity for pilot or co-pilot to communicate.
Interestingly, after a bit of Googling, it seems that on a 777, the VHF (including ACARS), ATC (radio comms), TCAS (secondary radar transponder) and DME (traditional guidance system, which doesn't transmit) antennae are all located in a small cluster directly underneath the front fuselage, just aft of the avionics bay under the rear part of the cockpit.
There are other antennae on the 777, including GPS on the top of the fuselage above the same point, HF on the front edge of the vertical stabliser (used for in-flight data-link voice communications before Inmarsat), the VOR (used for identifying track to ground VOR arrays, but again not transmitting) on the top of the vertical stabliser, and the COMSAT array (used for in-flight entertainment comms) on top of the rear part of the fuselage.
eta: Oh, and the ILS localiser and weather radar, in the nose cone.
Notice anything here? All the antennae that identify the aircraft to ATC/secondary radar are all in one place. The one thing that continued to identify the aircraft's existence was in a completely different part of the aircraft.
Is it so unreasonable to accept that a fire or electrical explosion could create a series of events that started to take out all those communications? What about the hydraulics from the avionics bay to the wings/tail/stabiliser? Could they have been routed through the same area? Again, not saying that this *is* the cause of MH370s disappearance, but it is food for thought....
eta: Hypothesis: A problem in the ACARS transmitter causes a fire/explosion that takes out much of the avionics in the avionics bay - including the fly-by-wire computers?
I have had this feeling for a while now.
Its all to strange if it was a hijacking or pilot off the rails.
As with many airline disasters it usually boils down to some sort of failure and series of events. Air France was one of them... Everyone saying lightning when it turned out to be freezing over of a simple air speed instrument.
In this case I bet it was a catastrophic problem in that communications area that lead to a series's of unfortunate events.
A telling sign is the fact the plane turned back.
As for what happened next, they can only go of one radar sighting. The plane may have suffered a impact or fire causing the cabin to loose pressure also. Hypoxia can render the rest a one way trip.
Well that was a nice polite put down. OK, thanks .
It's just that info changes daily regarding altitude/where the plane was/blah blah blah. And if the oil rig person saw it so clearly then it must have been reasonably low and within range of mobile phone use.
Carry on.
You're forgetting that that witness doesn't appear to exist. Someone mentioned earlier on that no one works on that work rig with that name. If the plane came crashing down it would be very quick. You would be too busy screaming and seeing as oil rigs are normally in the middle of the sea or if it is closer to the coast you still would have issues with the signal.
ACARS didn't just stop working, it went through a shutdown sequence similar to when you shutdown your computer.
Again, making the assumption that any failure of the system couldn't have been gradual, e.g. a latch-up in the baseband interface between the data CPU and the transmitter could cause the data not to be sent initially, but would crowbar the power-supply on the modulator, which can cause an overcurrent, causing the link to turn off, before a PCB fire and so on...
You're forgetting that that witness doesn't appear to exist. Someone mentioned earlier on that no one works on that work rig with that name. If the plane came crashing down it would be very quick. You would be too busy screaming and seeing as oil rigs are normally in the middle of the sea or if it is closer to the coast you still would have issues with the signal.
I can't find anything saying he doesn't exist. There is one forum post somewhere suggesting it is a hoax, but that is all.
You're forgetting that that witness doesn't appear to exist. Someone mentioned earlier on that no one works on that work rig with that name. If the plane came crashing down it would be very quick. You would be too busy screaming and seeing as oil rigs are normally in the middle of the sea or if it is closer to the coast you still would have issues with the signal.
But he seems to have met with officials and his employers confirmed the email
ABC News correspondent Bob Woodruff, who obtained a copy of Mckay’s email, twitted that Richard Beaton at Japanese Idemitsu Oil & Gas Co, who hired Songa Mercur to drill, confirmed with him that McKay’s email is real.
Well that was a nice polite put down. OK, thanks .
It's just that info changes daily regarding altitude/where the plane was/blah blah blah. And if the oil rig person saw it so clearly then it must have been reasonably low and within range of mobile phone use.
Carry on.
No really, the phone thing has to be dropped. You can't get a signal on the ferry to Ireland, let alone in a much larger area of sea and gawd knows how far from the ground.
Also, oil rig man was debunked days back.
Anyway, I want to believe accident, but the sheer amount of countries involved and the announcement that communications were manually turned off means it's far more likely to have criminal intent behind it, unfortunately.
A smouldering fire taking out key systems one by one, even with backup systems, is plausible. In fact, I believe there have been a few accidents caused by fire that were quite gradual. I don't believe everything has dual redundancy as there's the issue of cost, weight etc.
If the radio was taken out by the time a problem was noticed (as in alarms going off, someone smelling something or seeing smoke, the plane starting to fail to respond to controls etc) then how would the crew have alerted anyone to the problem?
Of course they'd then try and do whatever they had to do, but without being able to communicate. And all the time, more things were going wrong until the plane couldn't be controlled. And that could have potentially been some time?
No really, the phone thing has to be dropped. You can't get a signal on the ferry to Ireland, let alone in a much larger area of sea and gawd knows how far from the ground.
Also, oil rig man was debunked days back.
Anyway, I want to believe accident, but the sheer amount of countries involved and the announcement that communications were manually turned off means it's far more likely to have criminal intent behind it, unfortunately.
A smouldering fire taking out key systems one by one, even with backup systems, is plausible. In fact, I believe there have been a few accidents caused by fire that were quite gradual. I don't believe everything has dual redundancy as there's the issue of cost, weight etc.
If the radio was taken out by the time a problem was noticed (as in alarms going off, someone smelling something or seeing smoke, the plane starting to fail to respond to controls etc) then how would the crew have alerted anyone to the problem?
Of course they'd then try and do whatever they had to do, but without being able to communicate. And all the time, more things were going wrong until the plane couldn't be controlled. And that could have potentially been some time?
So this fire took out the ACARS data generator 30 minutes into the flight, but it was 5-7 hours before the part of ACARS that pings, which presumably is on the same piece of hardware, was destroyed by the fire?
So this fire took out the ACARS data generator 30 minutes into the flight, but it was 5-7 hours before the part of ACARS that pings, which presumably is physically part of the same unit, was destroyed by the fire?
No, no. The ACARS system stopped sending data shortly after take-off (before the last voice comms with ATC). The "pings" we are being told about come from the Comsat array on top of the rear part of the fuselage. This communicates to Inmarsat satellites as part of the in-flight phone system (from seat-back phones and the pico-cell). I don't know if ACARS data is relayed by this system (I thought it was via VHF, but it could be satellite based as well - I'll try and find out).
No really, the phone thing has to be dropped. You can't get a signal on the ferry to Ireland, let alone in a much larger area of sea and gawd knows how far from the ground.
Also, oil rig man was debunked days back.
Anyway, I want to believe accident, but the sheer amount of countries involved and the announcement that communications were manually turned off means it's far more likely to have criminal intent behind it, unfortunately.
Well I follow the thread off and on and never noticed him being debunked
But I'll drop the phone issue since it clearly has been zapped.:)
No, no. The ACARS system stopped sending data shortly after take-off (before the last voice comms with ATC). The "pings" we are being told about come from the Comsat array on top of the rear part of the fuselage. This communicates to Inmarsat satellites as part of the in-flight phone system (from seat-back phones and the pico-cell). I don't know if ACARS data is relayed by this system (I thought it was via VHF, but it could be satellite based as well - I'll try and find out).
No, no. The ACARS system stopped sending data shortly after take-off (before the last voice comms with ATC). The "pings" we are being told about come from the Comsat array on top of the rear part of the fuselage. This communicates to Inmarsat satellites as part of the in-flight phone system (from seat-back phones and the pico-cell). I don't know if ACARS data is relayed by this system (I thought it was via VHF, but it could be satellite based as well - I'll try and find out).
The inflight phone system uses the Mini-M network of satellites, while ACARS uses Inmarsat-3 or VHF to relay data about the flight. Both these networks are operated by a company called Inmarsat. I imagine ACARS and the phone system communicate with their respective satellites through separate transmitters on the plane, but I could be wrong.
Anyway, pings are not generated by a transmitter. They were generated by the ACARS system after it was shut down (it might be more accurate to say that it was placed on standby), in order to maintain registration with the network in case a communications link needed to be established again (ie. in case the ACARS system is switched back on).
If fire destroys the ACARS hardware then it is unable to send any pings.
Great explanation, but just one glaring question I'm left with after watching that guy explain things. He said near to the end that he thought the airliner was going to be found "in one piece". By saying that he must mean on land. Yet he previously stated that it was most likely on the southern arc. But on that southern arc there is simply no place to land a 747. So he's somewhat contradicted himself.
Oh FFS will you all give it a rest about Prince William, I think terrorists have a lot more significant targets than him to hit with a 777 FGS.
With comments about this UNEXPLAINED flight mentioning it being used as an assassination tool against certain individuals, and others about it being modified into a nuclear weapon ready for use against a US city, it's not just MH370 that has clearly deviated from its path but this whole discussion too.
Late tonight, live on BBC news, yet another aviation expert posed another possibility, that the pilot quite legitimately turned off all his radar communications data on the flightdeck for as yet unknown reasons, that may seem crazy from a distance but made sense in the cockpit due to some extraordinary event. One suggestion made was that it could have been done to deliberately confuse a hijacker who had entered and attempted to overpower the aircraft.
What I also found rather sad was how these probable 239 "victims" have now officially all become "suspects" tonight according to BBC.
A smouldering fire taking out key systems one by one, even with backup systems, is plausible. In fact, I believe there have been a few accidents caused by fire that were quite gradual. I don't believe everything has dual redundancy as there's the issue of cost, weight etc.
If the radio was taken out by the time a problem was noticed (as in alarms going off, someone smelling something or seeing smoke, the plane starting to fail to respond to controls etc) then how would the crew have alerted anyone to the problem?
Of course they'd then try and do whatever they had to do, but without being able to communicate. And all the time, more things were going wrong until the plane couldn't be controlled. And that could have potentially been some time?
I think there was one crash that had the investigators puzzling over "noise" on the flight data recorder that started much earlier than the crash or any signs of a problem from the recorded data or what the cockpit crew said.
From memory it turned out that the "noise" was down to electrical arcing from a damaged cable that ran near the cable carrying the cabin voices, the arcing wasn't enough to stop the equipment the cable was powering from working but was enough to start damaging other more vital lines, and cause transient noise on the recorder (a bit like sometimes turning on an old light switch can cause a pop on your speakers, or a ropey petrol mower or electric motor can cause interference on your radio*).
From what I recall the pilots didn't know anything at all was wrong for a long time, then that there was only a minor problem, then I think they lost a lot of stuff at once, and the investigators only pieced together what had happened when they looked into the noise on the voice recorder as all else had failed, which led them to checking the wiring bundles on that specific model and configuration (it turned out a bunch of the aircraft with that specific set up showed signs of wiring chaffing as I think they'd had a refit to add more cabin electrics and the result was wiring was being pushed towards hard edges - the mandated fix was something like additional padding and more visual inspections of the hard to check wiring).
So it's entirely possible that depending on exactly how the system works, things can go wrong without sounding an alarm, or with it looking like something done deliberately, and without the pilots being aware of any serious problem.
*As the spark plugs can from memory cause a bit of RF noise, and RF noise from electric motors especially ones with worn brushes thus sparking (old open vented drills were great for watching the sparks...) cause RF noise, and even a healthy motor that has a heavy load (such as that found in your fridge/freezers compressor, or your hoover) can cause it, which is one of the reasons most such things have small component to help reduce it.
MH370 flew low to avoid radar, says report
MARCH 17, 2014
KUALA LUMPUR, March 17 — Malaysia Airlines’ (MAS) flight MH370 descended to as low as 5,000 feet to avoid being detected by commercial radar in at least three countries using a technique called “terrain masking”.
The New Straits Times reported that the technical team of investigators, tasked to locate the flight ferrying 239 people, is trying to determine if the plane was circumnavigating below radar detection for most of the eight hours it was reported missing.
“The person who had control over the aircraft has a solid knowledge of avionics and navigation, and left a clean track. It passed low over Kelantan, that was true,” an unnamed official was quoted as saying.
“It is possible that the aircraft had hugged the terrain in some areas that are mountainous to avoid radar detection,” the official was reported as saying, adding that the flight had used busy airways over the Bay of Bengal.
The report said that by keeping to commercial routes, the low-flying plane could have managed to stay inconspicuous despite having been detected on primary radars operated by the military across the nations.
The stealthy technique employed by military pilots uses topography to mask approach but is considered a perilous technique in low-light conditions. An aircraft weighing 250 tonnes flying at a low altitude may cause “spatial-disorientation and airsickness” and increased pressure on its airframe, according to the report.
MH370 flew low to avoid radar, says report
MARCH 17, 2014
KUALA LUMPUR, March 17 — Malaysia Airlines’ (MAS) flight MH370 descended to as low as 5,000 feet to avoid being detected by commercial radar in at least three countries using a technique called “terrain masking”.
Well it was reported that the plane had significant changes in altitutude. Could it be that the plane was trying to dodge radars, or is that not possible?
It would explain the rise and fall of the altitude. Also maybe it could explain the path the plane took after being diverted because it was trying to dodge the radars. Furthermore, that's kind of why I believe the plane would have taken the South arc because there would be less chance of being found (if that's the main idea for this whole shitstorm) because beyond that point there's nothing else.
Comments
See the added hyopthesis in my post: a problem starts in the ACARS transmitter (which was the first communication to be lost - but no-one would immediately notice that on the ground). It could have been insignificant enough at the time for the pilots not to notice. But suppose that it did have an electrical issue, and this caused a fire or explosion. That could affect other avionics and comms systems. An explosion in that area, would take out the remaining comms antennae (but not the Comsat array).
Well that was a nice polite put down.
It's just that info changes daily regarding altitude/where the plane was/blah blah blah. And if the oil rig person saw it so clearly then it must have been reasonably low and within range of mobile phone use.
Carry on.
Debunked:
http://www.nst.com.my/latest/font-color-red-missing-mh370-font-3-pieces-of-evidence-point-to-jet-s-takeover-1.515830
ACARS didn't just stop working, it went through a shutdown sequence similar to when you shutdown your computer.
The former would still leave something working, even if the plane is not going to survive or make landfall, giving opportunity for pilot or co-pilot to communicate.
That's not happened.
I have had this feeling for a while now.
Its all to strange if it was a hijacking or pilot off the rails.
As with many airline disasters it usually boils down to some sort of failure and series of events. Air France was one of them... Everyone saying lightning when it turned out to be freezing over of a simple air speed instrument.
In this case I bet it was a catastrophic problem in that communications area that lead to a series's of unfortunate events.
A telling sign is the fact the plane turned back.
As for what happened next, they can only go of one radar sighting. The plane may have suffered a impact or fire causing the cabin to loose pressure also. Hypoxia can render the rest a one way trip.
You're forgetting that that witness doesn't appear to exist. Someone mentioned earlier on that no one works on that work rig with that name. If the plane came crashing down it would be very quick. You would be too busy screaming and seeing as oil rigs are normally in the middle of the sea or if it is closer to the coast you still would have issues with the signal.
Again, making the assumption that any failure of the system couldn't have been gradual, e.g. a latch-up in the baseband interface between the data CPU and the transmitter could cause the data not to be sent initially, but would crowbar the power-supply on the modulator, which can cause an overcurrent, causing the link to turn off, before a PCB fire and so on...
I can't find anything saying he doesn't exist. There is one forum post somewhere suggesting it is a hoax, but that is all.
This article suggests his email is genuine.
Employer confirms it is not a hoax.
http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/kiwi-reports-seeing-malaysia-airlines-flight-go-down-5863974
Of course, what he actually saw is unknown.
But he seems to have met with officials and his employers confirmed the email
http://www.saach.tv/2014/03/14/eye-witness-who-spotted-mh370-burning-talks-to-officials/
Hanoi: An oil rig worker who says he believes he may have seen Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 come down met with officials in Vietnam Friday (March 14) to provide details of what he saw. -
http://tuoitrenews.vn/politics/18298/vietnam-to-meet-oilrig-worker-who-saw-mh370-plane-crash
ABC News correspondent Bob Woodruff, who obtained a copy of Mckay’s email, twitted that Richard Beaton at Japanese Idemitsu Oil & Gas Co, who hired Songa Mercur to drill, confirmed with him that McKay’s email is real.
No really, the phone thing has to be dropped. You can't get a signal on the ferry to Ireland, let alone in a much larger area of sea and gawd knows how far from the ground.
Also, oil rig man was debunked days back.
Anyway, I want to believe accident, but the sheer amount of countries involved and the announcement that communications were manually turned off means it's far more likely to have criminal intent behind it, unfortunately.
If the radio was taken out by the time a problem was noticed (as in alarms going off, someone smelling something or seeing smoke, the plane starting to fail to respond to controls etc) then how would the crew have alerted anyone to the problem?
Of course they'd then try and do whatever they had to do, but without being able to communicate. And all the time, more things were going wrong until the plane couldn't be controlled. And that could have potentially been some time?
By whom ?
Night time = could be a big meteor burning up.
Wrong direction = plane turned back, radar spotted something.
So this fire took out the ACARS data generator 30 minutes into the flight, but it was 5-7 hours before the part of ACARS that pings, which presumably is on the same piece of hardware, was destroyed by the fire?
No, no. The ACARS system stopped sending data shortly after take-off (before the last voice comms with ATC). The "pings" we are being told about come from the Comsat array on top of the rear part of the fuselage. This communicates to Inmarsat satellites as part of the in-flight phone system (from seat-back phones and the pico-cell). I don't know if ACARS data is relayed by this system (I thought it was via VHF, but it could be satellite based as well - I'll try and find out).
edit: According to this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_Communications_Addressing_and_Reporting_System#VHF_subnetwork
ACARS data is typically sent via the VHF transmitter, but there are recent developments by which it can be sent via satellite or High Frequency (sub-VHF) datalink, though the 777 was designed before these.
Well I follow the thread off and on and never noticed him being debunked
But I'll drop the phone issue since it clearly has been zapped.:)
You said "phones". You are in BIG trouble .
The inflight phone system uses the Mini-M network of satellites, while ACARS uses Inmarsat-3 or VHF to relay data about the flight. Both these networks are operated by a company called Inmarsat. I imagine ACARS and the phone system communicate with their respective satellites through separate transmitters on the plane, but I could be wrong.
Anyway, pings are not generated by a transmitter. They were generated by the ACARS system after it was shut down (it might be more accurate to say that it was placed on standby), in order to maintain registration with the network in case a communications link needed to be established again (ie. in case the ACARS system is switched back on).
If fire destroys the ACARS hardware then it is unable to send any pings.
http://www.inmarsat.com/news/inmarsat-statement-malaysia-airlines-flight-mh370/
Great explanation, but just one glaring question I'm left with after watching that guy explain things. He said near to the end that he thought the airliner was going to be found "in one piece". By saying that he must mean on land. Yet he previously stated that it was most likely on the southern arc. But on that southern arc there is simply no place to land a 747. So he's somewhat contradicted himself.
With comments about this UNEXPLAINED flight mentioning it being used as an assassination tool against certain individuals, and others about it being modified into a nuclear weapon ready for use against a US city, it's not just MH370 that has clearly deviated from its path but this whole discussion too.
Late tonight, live on BBC news, yet another aviation expert posed another possibility, that the pilot quite legitimately turned off all his radar communications data on the flightdeck for as yet unknown reasons, that may seem crazy from a distance but made sense in the cockpit due to some extraordinary event. One suggestion made was that it could have been done to deliberately confuse a hijacker who had entered and attempted to overpower the aircraft.
What I also found rather sad was how these probable 239 "victims" have now officially all become "suspects" tonight according to BBC.
I think there was one crash that had the investigators puzzling over "noise" on the flight data recorder that started much earlier than the crash or any signs of a problem from the recorded data or what the cockpit crew said.
From memory it turned out that the "noise" was down to electrical arcing from a damaged cable that ran near the cable carrying the cabin voices, the arcing wasn't enough to stop the equipment the cable was powering from working but was enough to start damaging other more vital lines, and cause transient noise on the recorder (a bit like sometimes turning on an old light switch can cause a pop on your speakers, or a ropey petrol mower or electric motor can cause interference on your radio*).
From what I recall the pilots didn't know anything at all was wrong for a long time, then that there was only a minor problem, then I think they lost a lot of stuff at once, and the investigators only pieced together what had happened when they looked into the noise on the voice recorder as all else had failed, which led them to checking the wiring bundles on that specific model and configuration (it turned out a bunch of the aircraft with that specific set up showed signs of wiring chaffing as I think they'd had a refit to add more cabin electrics and the result was wiring was being pushed towards hard edges - the mandated fix was something like additional padding and more visual inspections of the hard to check wiring).
So it's entirely possible that depending on exactly how the system works, things can go wrong without sounding an alarm, or with it looking like something done deliberately, and without the pilots being aware of any serious problem.
*As the spark plugs can from memory cause a bit of RF noise, and RF noise from electric motors especially ones with worn brushes thus sparking (old open vented drills were great for watching the sparks...) cause RF noise, and even a healthy motor that has a heavy load (such as that found in your fridge/freezers compressor, or your hoover) can cause it, which is one of the reasons most such things have small component to help reduce it.
MARCH 17, 2014
KUALA LUMPUR, March 17 — Malaysia Airlines’ (MAS) flight MH370 descended to as low as 5,000 feet to avoid being detected by commercial radar in at least three countries using a technique called “terrain masking”.
The New Straits Times reported that the technical team of investigators, tasked to locate the flight ferrying 239 people, is trying to determine if the plane was circumnavigating below radar detection for most of the eight hours it was reported missing.
“The person who had control over the aircraft has a solid knowledge of avionics and navigation, and left a clean track. It passed low over Kelantan, that was true,” an unnamed official was quoted as saying.
“It is possible that the aircraft had hugged the terrain in some areas that are mountainous to avoid radar detection,” the official was reported as saying, adding that the flight had used busy airways over the Bay of Bengal.
The report said that by keeping to commercial routes, the low-flying plane could have managed to stay inconspicuous despite having been detected on primary radars operated by the military across the nations.
The stealthy technique employed by military pilots uses topography to mask approach but is considered a perilous technique in low-light conditions. An aircraft weighing 250 tonnes flying at a low altitude may cause “spatial-disorientation and airsickness” and increased pressure on its airframe, according to the report.
- See more at: http://www.themalaymailonline.com/malaysia/article/mh370-flew-low-to-avoid-radar-says-report#sthash.D46vsx9F.dpuf
If true, this guy is the real life James Bond.
It would explain the rise and fall of the altitude. Also maybe it could explain the path the plane took after being diverted because it was trying to dodge the radars. Furthermore, that's kind of why I believe the plane would have taken the South arc because there would be less chance of being found (if that's the main idea for this whole shitstorm) because beyond that point there's nothing else.