The thing I can't understand with this though (not saying it's wrong, I might just be badly informed!)
1) If a fire was serious enough to knock out communications, would the plane carry on flying that long?
2) how does this square with the supposed changes in altitude?
3) the way I have understood this 'pinging' issue is that the unit that houses the communications is still sending a signal out, it's just limited because the device is off. If the unit itself was disabled by fire, would the fire not destroy the unit housing the communications too, therefore meaning it couldn't be picked up at all by satellite?
Difficult to answer accurately. Fires can destroy something and leave bits intact.
I am not saying the 'plausible' fire scenario is what happened with MH370 by the way.
I was jogged into thinking about New Scientist, on another thread, which I have not read for ages.
They have a couple of articles which are worth a read.
The ping data and disabling is stressed more strongly.
At least with NS you get a much better standard of reporting compared to the papers/TV.
One thing I still don't understand is why Inmarsat haven't revealed all the previous arcs calculated from the COMSAT pings? That would at least give us an idea of whether the aircraft was flying in a consistent westward track or going backwards and forwards or flying roughly along an arc.
Maybe they will, but I don't think it would be much of an improvement really. Probably best to do what they've done - figure out the arc of possible final 'ping' locations and then expand it by one hour's flying time (or is it half an hour now?) to set the limit on where it could have ended up.
They now have a fat arc to search (which incidentally includes the whole of Malaysia and most of Indonesia!).
It's not a surprise it hasn't been found given the lack of radar information which doesn't really narrow the search area beyond a huge arch. Usually the radar systems are not purposely switched off. It's got to be in the sea. I can just can't fathom the plane landing on land in the middle of nowhere.
Have they still got planes, boats etc from numerous countries searching down there? Even if the wreckage is found, this still may turn out to be a mystery and never be solved.
I really can't buy any "fire or malfunctioning" theories. It just seems so deliberate. Everything that happened between take off and disappearing seemed to gradually happen, as if it was planned at certain times :-
- The ACARS stops
- The last communication given before entering Vietnamese airspace is given. It's a "goodnight" which apparently isn't correct terminology
- Transponder stops
- Plane is diverted off course
Definitely doesn't sound like anything accidental took place. There were no distress calls or anything to indicate things were problematic.
From what I've read the "goodnight" is exactly what they expected and used thousands of times when switching over to the next group.
What a strange question. The US isn't universally loved you know. There's a whole host of reasons why a country might wish the US to butt out and mind its own business. To a lot (probably most countries) the US is this big kid on the block that always gets its own way and doesn't give a toss about anyone else.
Sometimes that is put to one side because the US can be helpful but there are limits. It's entirely normal (and not unreasonable) for a country to get shirty and no longer want the US interfering in its business. No reason to see anything more here than fairly normal run-of-the-mill politics.
- The ACARS stops
- The last communication given before entering Vietnamese airspace is given. It's a "goodnight" which apparently isn't correct terminology
- Transponder stops
- Plane is diverted off course.
The ACARS pings, then sometime in the next 30 minutes it stops - so it could have stopped at the same time (or even after) the transponder did.
For the aircraft to make a gentle landing in the ocean, it would need to be under control of a pilot. If the crew are incapacitated, then the aircraft runs out of fuel, engines stop, speed drops and it nose dives into the ocean.
Even if someone was flying the aircraft, landing on water is no picnic. In a Boeing 777, you need to be travelling about 137 knots or 156 mph or more to prevent stalling. That's not easy to do without leaving some trace on the surface.
From what I've read the "goodnight" is exactly what they expected and used thousands of times when switching over to the next group.
Ahh. That's okay then. I thought someone mentioned before they had to "Roger out" or something. That being said, it still all appears extremely fishy. It's just very convenient that communications were gradually lost, and then just as the plane is meant to pass into Vietnamese airspace, the transponder stops and the plane is diverted.
Difficult to answer accurately. Fires can destroy something and leave bits intact.
I am not saying the 'plausible' fire scenario is what happened with MH370 by the way.
I was jogged into thinking about New Scientist, on another thread, which I have not read for ages.
They have a couple of articles which are worth a read.
The ping data and disabling is stressed more strongly.
At least with NS you get a much better standard of reporting compared to the papers/TV.
NS is quoting someone on the deliberate disablement of the data systems, they aren't claiming it themselves. They are just regurgitating the same information other sources are using
I really can't buy any "fire or malfunctioning" theories. It just seems so deliberate. Everything that happened between take off and disappearing seemed to gradually happen, as if it was planned at certain times :-
- The ACARS stops
- The last communication given before entering Vietnamese airspace is given. It's a "goodnight" which apparently isn't correct terminology
- Transponder stops
- Plane is diverted off course
Definitely doesn't sound like anything accidental took place. There were no distress calls or anything to indicate things were problematic.
I noticed that media outlets "cocked up" on the ACARS timetable.
What the CEO of Malaysian said was that ACARS sent a data transmission at 0107 hours. The co-pilot said goodnight around 0112 hours. ACARS wasn't due to transmit again until 0137 hours...........................which it didn't.
So they get handed over to Vietnam ATC........................they don't do the initial radio call to them, switch of the ADS-B and at the same time switch off ACARS................................presto aircraft disappears (as far as ground controllers are concerned)
For the aircraft to make a gentle landing in the ocean, it would need to be under control of a pilot. If the crew are incapacitated, then the aircraft runs out of fuel, engines stop, speed drops and it nose dives into the ocean.
Even if someone was flying the aircraft, landing on water is no picnic. In a Boeing 777, you need to be travelling about 137 knots or 156 mph or more to prevent stalling. That's not easy to do without leaving some trace on the surface.
Assuming the control systems are working it would glide rather than dive. It could have had a relatively gentle arrival on the sea so that debris is minimised especially if the fuselage doesn't split. And if it's in the southern Indian Ocean there are few ships to spot debris.
It's a presumption, I know, at this point but the real worry remains that there are people "out there" willing, able and trained to commit terrorist acts on this scale. Like the aliens in John Carpenter's "They Live" film, these people are moving around us, unseen and unknown. It's how we deal with this. I was amazed to learn that you can still buy a ticket and board a flight with a stolen passport.
This story is starting to drop down the news agenda after a lack of developments.
Inevitable really. Nine days is a long time in news media. Channel 4 this evening led with Ukraine and the Crimea issue which is hardly surprising given the seriousness of that.
On MH370 there isn't much media can add to which has already been churned over God knows how many times before. Until there is any significant new development it will drop down the News reporting.
At least a lot of DS'ers now know more about aviation and avionics than they ever did before. I think the thread has spawned a new breed of Pilot (or hi-jacker).
Ahh. That's okay then. I thought someone mentioned before they had to "Roger out" or something. That being said, it still all appears extremely fishy. It's just very convenient that communications were gradually lost, and then just as the plane is meant to pass into Vietnamese airspace, the transponder stops and the plane is diverted.
I agree it's fishy. And that communication firstly said to be from the Capt, and now credited to the co-pilot, makes me wonder if the investigation isn't being held up by tunneling in on the pilot as the cause.
I'm still weirded out that handing over involves saying goodnight to the one you're leaving, but not being in contact with the one you're now dealing with, just to say hello. And the aviation "experts" all have differing views that is making me slightly worried about ever taking another flight.
I really can't buy any "fire or malfunctioning" theories. It just seems so deliberate. Everything that happened between take off and disappearing seemed to gradually happen, as if it was planned at certain times :-
- The ACARS stops
- The last communication given before entering Vietnamese airspace is given. It's a "goodnight" which apparently isn't correct terminology
- Transponder stops
- Plane is diverted off course
Definitely doesn't sound like anything accidental took place. There were no distress calls or anything to indicate things were problematic.
There's a bit of confusion going on here about the ACARS. Its last transmission was 1:07 am, 12 minutes before the co-pilot verbally signed out of KL ATC at 1:19 am. The transponder stopped squawking at 1:21 am, so the next ACARS transmission wasn't due until 1:37am, 16 minutes *after* the plane "disappeared". So it is entirely possible that all comms went off-line at once. Why the Malaysians have deduced this to mean it was deliberate, I cannot fathom.
Inevitable really. Nine days is a long time in news media. Channel 4 this evening led with Ukraine and the Crimea issue which is hardly surprising given the seriousness of that.
On MH370 there isn't much media can add to which has already been churned over God knows how many times before. Until there is any significant new development it will drop down the News reporting.
At least a lot of DS'ers now know more about aviation and avionics than they ever did before. I think the thread has spawned a new breed of Pilot (or hi-jacker).
FFS - Sky are just rehashing the same bloody programme that they've been repeating since Saturday morning with a couple of additions from the pilots dentally challenged mate saying he thinks the relatives must be worried!! No Shit!!
Next will we get that Burley bird interviewing the pilot's sister-in-law's nail technician's dog walker's best friend for their words of wisdom?????
Assuming the control systems are working it would glide rather than dive. It could have had a relatively gentle arrival on the sea so that debris is minimised especially if the fuselage doesn't split. And if it's in the southern Indian Ocean there are few ships to spot debris.
Sorry Ethel - that's not right. For an aircraft to stay in the air it needs forward momentum to create lift. You can do that with engine power or in extremis by maintaining a slight nose down attitude to maintain speed. In the former, the aircraft would continue (if the crew were incapacitated) at the flight level set in the autopilot until such times as the fuel ran out. At this point speed would drop below 137 kts and the aircraft wings would stall...............................big crash in the sea.
In the latter - you'd need a lucky pilot and good sea states and weather, but as I said you're still hitting the sea at 156 mph. Even in the unlikely event of nothing breaking off the wings etc........................once it sank into the depths of the Indian Ocean it would break up due to the pressure. In any case that latter doesn't fit in with your scenario of both pilots being "out of it". Without pilots, there is no gliding down to a nice feathery sea landing - just a steep drop from whatever altitude the ap is set at, once the fuel runs out.
There's a bit of confusion going on here about the ACARS. Its last transmission was 1:07 am, 12 minutes before the co-pilot verbally signed out of KL ATC at 1:19 am. The transponder stopped squawking at 1:21 am, so the next ACARS transmission wasn't due until 1:37am, 16 minutes *after* the plane "disappeared". So it is entirely possible that all comms went off-line at once. Why the Malaysians have deduced this to mean it was deliberate, I cannot fathom.
I was thinking the same....not read much press today but I wonder if there has been any media comment about this....To be honest the Malysian Government should serioulsy think about letting one of the investigating teams host a press conference...in essence let an expert explain in detail what they do know...I don`t believe there has been a cover up or a conspiracy...but the Malayians seem to be confusing the issue somewhat with their press releases
Comments
Difficult to answer accurately. Fires can destroy something and leave bits intact.
I am not saying the 'plausible' fire scenario is what happened with MH370 by the way.
I was jogged into thinking about New Scientist, on another thread, which I have not read for ages.
They have a couple of articles which are worth a read.
The ping data and disabling is stressed more strongly.
At least with NS you get a much better standard of reporting compared to the papers/TV.
Data transmission system on MH370 deliberately disabled
Did US spy satellites track Malaysia Flight MH370?
Maybe they will, but I don't think it would be much of an improvement really. Probably best to do what they've done - figure out the arc of possible final 'ping' locations and then expand it by one hour's flying time (or is it half an hour now?) to set the limit on where it could have ended up.
They now have a fat arc to search (which incidentally includes the whole of Malaysia and most of Indonesia!).
Have they still got planes, boats etc from numerous countries searching down there? Even if the wreckage is found, this still may turn out to be a mystery and never be solved.
From what I've read the "goodnight" is exactly what they expected and used thousands of times when switching over to the next group.
Sometimes that is put to one side because the US can be helpful but there are limits. It's entirely normal (and not unreasonable) for a country to get shirty and no longer want the US interfering in its business. No reason to see anything more here than fairly normal run-of-the-mill politics.
One slight snag Ethel.
For the aircraft to make a gentle landing in the ocean, it would need to be under control of a pilot. If the crew are incapacitated, then the aircraft runs out of fuel, engines stop, speed drops and it nose dives into the ocean.
Even if someone was flying the aircraft, landing on water is no picnic. In a Boeing 777, you need to be travelling about 137 knots or 156 mph or more to prevent stalling. That's not easy to do without leaving some trace on the surface.
Ahh. That's okay then. I thought someone mentioned before they had to "Roger out" or something. That being said, it still all appears extremely fishy. It's just very convenient that communications were gradually lost, and then just as the plane is meant to pass into Vietnamese airspace, the transponder stops and the plane is diverted.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Entebbe
Personally, I think it's in the sea.
I noticed that media outlets "cocked up" on the ACARS timetable.
What the CEO of Malaysian said was that ACARS sent a data transmission at 0107 hours. The co-pilot said goodnight around 0112 hours. ACARS wasn't due to transmit again until 0137 hours...........................which it didn't.
So they get handed over to Vietnam ATC........................they don't do the initial radio call to them, switch of the ADS-B and at the same time switch off ACARS................................presto aircraft disappears (as far as ground controllers are concerned)
On MH370 there isn't much media can add to which has already been churned over God knows how many times before. Until there is any significant new development it will drop down the News reporting.
At least a lot of DS'ers now know more about aviation and avionics than they ever did before. I think the thread has spawned a new breed of Pilot (or hi-jacker).
Learn to fly a 777 in one week with DS. :cool:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/malaysia/10700652/Malaysia-Airline-MH370-911-style-terror-allegations-resurface-in-case-of-lost-plane.html
I agree it's fishy. And that communication firstly said to be from the Capt, and now credited to the co-pilot, makes me wonder if the investigation isn't being held up by tunneling in on the pilot as the cause.
I'm still weirded out that handing over involves saying goodnight to the one you're leaving, but not being in contact with the one you're now dealing with, just to say hello. And the aviation "experts" all have differing views that is making me slightly worried about ever taking another flight.
There's a bit of confusion going on here about the ACARS. Its last transmission was 1:07 am, 12 minutes before the co-pilot verbally signed out of KL ATC at 1:19 am. The transponder stopped squawking at 1:21 am, so the next ACARS transmission wasn't due until 1:37am, 16 minutes *after* the plane "disappeared". So it is entirely possible that all comms went off-line at once. Why the Malaysians have deduced this to mean it was deliberate, I cannot fathom.
I have already added it to my CV
I'd take it off again. People will think you're a terrorist.
Get rid of any simulators you have knocking around too.
Next will we get that Burley bird interviewing the pilot's sister-in-law's nail technician's dog walker's best friend for their words of wisdom?????
Should I also remove the bit about chemistry experiments in the garden shed as a hobby?
I wondered why Microsoft stopped developing Flight Simulator, beyond Flight Sim X
Terrorists trying to train up using it, was probably on the agenda
Sorry Ethel - that's not right. For an aircraft to stay in the air it needs forward momentum to create lift. You can do that with engine power or in extremis by maintaining a slight nose down attitude to maintain speed. In the former, the aircraft would continue (if the crew were incapacitated) at the flight level set in the autopilot until such times as the fuel ran out. At this point speed would drop below 137 kts and the aircraft wings would stall...............................big crash in the sea.
In the latter - you'd need a lucky pilot and good sea states and weather, but as I said you're still hitting the sea at 156 mph. Even in the unlikely event of nothing breaking off the wings etc........................once it sank into the depths of the Indian Ocean it would break up due to the pressure. In any case that latter doesn't fit in with your scenario of both pilots being "out of it". Without pilots, there is no gliding down to a nice feathery sea landing - just a steep drop from whatever altitude the ap is set at, once the fuel runs out.
I was thinking the same....not read much press today but I wonder if there has been any media comment about this....To be honest the Malysian Government should serioulsy think about letting one of the investigating teams host a press conference...in essence let an expert explain in detail what they do know...I don`t believe there has been a cover up or a conspiracy...but the Malayians seem to be confusing the issue somewhat with their press releases