Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Malaysia Airlines Loses Contact With 777 en Route to Beijing

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Evan View Post
    Even in a best-case scenario they would have run out of fuel by now.
    You are speculating. Let's wait for the final report.

    --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
    --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

    Comment


    • I'm very late at this but is Sir Tim Clark (Emirates CEO) drunk?

      There hasn’t been one overwater incident in the history of civil aviation — apart from Amelia Earhart in 1939 — that has not been at least 5 or 10 per cent trackable
      Why is there still no trace of flight MH 370? In an interview, Sir Tim Clark, head of Emirates Airline, is sharply critical of the investigation thus far. He believes someone took control of the plane and maintained it until the very end.


      right off the bat:





      (Not civil but still significant)





      A Boeing C-97C Stratofreighter plane, serial 50-702, was involved in an accident 320 km SE off Tokyo, Japan, Pacific Ocean. There were 57 passengers and crew members on board. The airplane operated on a flight from Wake Island Airport (AWK) to Tokyo-Yokota AFB (OKO).
      AirDisaster.com Forum Member 2004-2008

      Originally posted by orangehuggy
      the most dangerous part of a flight is not the take off or landing anymore, its when a flight crew member goes to the toilet

      Comment


      • seems the KL ATC went to sleep after losing contact...
        2123:18 UTC
        [0523:18 MYT]
        KL ATCC Aaaa… never mind laa I wake up my supervisor and ask
        him to check again to go to the room and check what
        what the last contact all this thing lah.
        moving quickly in air

        Comment


        • Investigators may go "back to the drawing board"


          Comment


          • Originally posted by Observer View Post
            Investigators may go "back to the drawing board"


            http://www.businessinsider.com/afp-b...ia-says-2015-3
            I will not be surprised AT ALL if they don't find the plane here.

            Even if all the arcs, burst-time offset, burst-frequency offset, performance calculations and the like that were used to determine the "high priority search zone" are fully correct, there is not a very big probability that the plane will be there. That's because the "high priority area" is the area of "highest probability", but that something is the "highest" doesn't mean that it is very "high" to begin with, just that it's not as "low" as the rest (just as the tallest pigmy of the tribe doesn't need to be a very tall person to be the tallest one).

            To quote myself in post #1767 on June 2014:


            The ATSB report mentioned above, explaining how the search area was defined.



            It's a very interesting report. Detailed, sound, technical, but very understandable and convincing too.

            The bottom line is that the ATSB has a high confidence that the missing plane hit the water in the 1,120,000 km2 "grey area". But they were asked to defined a "higest probability area" of 60,000 km2 that can be searched within one year, so they started to add enough assumptions until the area got small enough to meet the size goal: The "orange area".

            Now, "highest probability" doesn't mean "high probability".
            If we take that the plane hit the water in the grey area with 100% probability, then each and any area of 60,000 km2 will have an about a 5% probability. If the particular orange area selected as "highest probability" had 10 times more probability than the average of the areas of the same size, that would be 50%. Still the toss of a coin that the plane is either there or not there in the orange area.

            And if searching the orange zone will take one year, searching the grey zone with the same resources will take nearly 20 years.

            --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
            --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
              I will not be surprised AT ALL of they fin't find the plane here.

              Even if all the arcs, burst-time offset, burst-frequency offset, performance calculations and the like that were used to determine the "high priority search zone" are fully correct, there is not a very big probability that the plane will be there.
              Can we list the things that can be assumed with near certainty?

              - We know FOB. Do they have fairly accurate wind and meteorological data?

              - We don't know with certainty the speed or altitude so we can't establish burn rate or pinpoint the point of fuel exhaustion. I take it the search area is based on the probability that these were standard cruise settings optimized for range. The last radar return indication approx. FL300 and 540kts TAS. The pilot could have deviated from these settings after dropping off radar, but with what motive if he simply wanted to point it south and wave bye bye?

              - We know the LNP as an arc, or an LNR I suppose (last known radial).

              - We have made the assumption that, for an aircraft to fly unpiloted for many hours, it would be flying a fixed heading and airspeed on autopilot. It's a pretty fair assumption because the 'ping' radials are spaced in a way that supports this.

              So it seems to me that the area of highest probabilty is aligned with the probability that the plane was flying typical AP settings and the probability of the grey area is aligned with the probability that it was not, with the distance from the priority search area representing a greater divergence from typical settings and therefore a lesser probability.

              Therefore I think there is validity to the assumption described by the priority search area but the lesser probability areas could still be where it lies.

              (just as the tallest pigmy of the tribe doesn't need to be a very tall person to be the tallest one).
              We can't all be 6'4" Gabriel.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Evan View Post
                Can we list the things that can be assumed with near certainty?
                IIRC, the grey area considered all the area that was compatible with all of the following:
                - BTO at each handshake (i.e. the arcs themselves).
                - BTF at each handshake (i.e. a hint about the direction the plane was flying relative to the satellite)
                - The best glide distance from the 7nth arc.

                The blue and orange areas restricted other variables assuming that the plane was left on AP in a constant mode after the final turn South. Some of the variables included:
                - When/where did the plane turn south.
                - What AP mode was the plane flying.
                - What altitude and speed was the plane flying.
                - Winds aloft.
                - Airplane fuel, endurance and range.

                --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
                --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Evan View Post
                  So it seems to me that the area of highest probabilty is aligned with the probability that the plane was flying typical AP settings and the probability of the grey area is aligned with the probability that it was not, with the distance from the priority search area representing a greater divergence from typical settings and therefore a lesser probability.

                  Therefore I think there is validity to the assumption described by the priority search area but the lesser probability areas could still be where it lies.
                  The problem is that the input that the team received was "give us the best 60K Km2 area that you can determine", not "give us the area with 90% of probability". So they started to cut into the uncertainty range of the different variables beyond what they would have liked, just to fit the resultant area into a 60K Km2 rectangle.

                  The orange priority area is 1/20 of the grey area and 1/5 of the blue "medium" area. While they never said it, I feel that the blue area is the one the team that studied these variables wanted to provide as a high confidence area.

                  --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
                  --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

                  Comment


                  • Official preliminary factual report:


                    --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
                    --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
                      The problem is that the input that the team received was "give us the best 60K Km2 area that you can determine", not "give us the area with 90% of probability". So they started to cut into the uncertainty range of the different variables beyond what they would have liked, just to fit the resultant area into a 60K Km2 rectangle.

                      The orange priority area is 1/20 of the grey area and 1/5 of the blue "medium" area. While they never said it, I feel that the blue area is the one the team that studied these variables wanted to provide as a high confidence area.
                      Well, you've got to start somewhere...

                      I think this search is probably a waste of time. The thing is a needle in a haystack and I doubt finding it will reveal anything that can be used to prevent a reoccurrence. I think we already know what happened here, just not the sordid details. But then, I don't have relatives on board, and I hope they find it for that reason alone. At some point though, they have to call it a day.

                      Comment


                      • Search Update - March 25, 2015



                        AirDisaster.com Forum Member 2004-2008

                        Originally posted by orangehuggy
                        the most dangerous part of a flight is not the take off or landing anymore, its when a flight crew member goes to the toilet

                        Comment


                        • 6/10/2015

                          News articles to the effect that:

                          A mathematician says his figures indicate that the plane could have dove vertically into the water and not broken up.

                          Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

                          Comment


                          • Opposite to what we have heard from many others

                            TEAMS searching for lost Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 believe the plane could have spiralled out of control into the southern Indian Ocean – and they could be searching in the WRONG place.


                            And does not explain the complete lack of wrackage. Remember Swissair SWR 111?
                            Just another "scientific" way to justify the biggest failure of this research (by the way, full of gaps)

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by 3WE View Post
                              News articles to the effect that:

                              A mathematician says his figures indicate that the plane could have dove vertically into the water and not broken up.

                              And Santa Claus and the tooth fairy really do exist!

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by 3WE View Post
                                News articles to the effect that:

                                A mathematician says his figures indicate that the plane could have dove vertically into the water and not broken up.

                                Binienda!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X