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 pothole View Post
    One sequence that has always intrigued me for MH370 is the following:
    1. There is a rapid depressurization event. Either a small structural failure or possibly a small bomb.
    2. This event knocks out the ACARS and the transponder (where is the wiring for these two in the same place?) Communications wiring may or may not be affected by this event.
    Pothole, aside from everything that Gabriel has pointed out, this theory suffers from what I call 'plot convenience'. First you must tell us what sort of structural failure can cause these effects without causing others as Gabriel described. Or, alternatively, what sort of bomb placement.

    Secondly, the aftermath has to fit the scenerario in a logical causitive chain of events.

    Plot conveniences bypass this entirely. They make good blockbuster entertainment but to anyone with a technical understanding they tend to make the eyes roll around in the head.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
      As a side and much uniteresting note, I agree with that, but also believe that confirmation bias starts playing a role very early, in the formation of the conspiracy theory, even before they start to try to convince others.
      I was speaking of the proselyte, not the proselytizer. But I also think many originators of these conspiracy theories don't actually believe in them. They just have a need to be followed and admired. For the one's who actually believe in their theories, yes, confirmation bias is at that heart of it.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Passion for flying View Post
        Now,
        What disturbs me in the fly-back-across-Malaysia theory is that not one cellphone of all available in the cabin was switched on / checked in on any of the cellular networks during the passage across the Malay peninsula. Let's discuss the probability of that, against the background of human behaviour under stress.. If there was a cabin decompression, oxy masks deployed and the 'plane turning back I would expect there to be a massive amount of attempts to call home or at least send text messages. Just review the 9/11 events for reference.
        Chances of getting a network connection on your cell phone from an airliner at cruising high altitudes are slim to none. If the passengers were conscious on board MH370 during this phase of flight, they might have tried to phone home, but would not have been successful. Furthermore, the Malay peninsula has quite a few jungles and wild areas, so cell phone reception and network density is probably a lot less there than in the US. This further decreases the chance of getting a call out from onboard MH370.
        And all this is assuming that the passengers were a) conscious at this time and/or b) aware that something was wrong.

        Comment


        • Questions

          I am not an expert in aviation but, by following this Forum for many years and particularly this threat since the beginning, I have some questions (which seem very basic) about this incident which I did not see them discussed and in my opinion, are key to the topic:
          Regardless the reason (s) for the AC disappearance and the path it took, the airplane flew at least for 8:30 hours (as satellite data registered) in a fight that should take 5:30hs to 6hs. Pending on the safety parameters, the amount of fuel required in this flight should be 6hs to 6:30hs. If this is true, the MH 370 flight was refueled with at least additional 2hs of combustible (let´s say additional 2 Tons or US$ 200,000 – do not know if these figures are accurate but for the sake of rationale, let me take them)
          1) Who is the person in charge of the final approval process of refueling (I am not referring to calculations at cockpit but administrative approval). Who approved this additional cost?
          2) With such amount of additional weight, didn´t this fact ring the bell at cockpit? Both left and right chair? How couldn´t anyone at the cockpit be aware that the MH 370 flight was heavier than it should be?

          Comment


          • A typical minimum fuel calculation is:
            Trip fuel (which you say can be up to 6 hours), including full procedure instrument approach down to minimums and missed approach.
            10% of that as reserve (0.6 hs).
            Flight to the declared alternate, say for the sake of the argument another 30 min or 0.5hs.
            And the airplane must land with 30 minutes in its tanks, so that's another 0.5 hs.

            Add all that and we have 7.6 hs (7:42) of fuel. And that's MINIMUM required for take-off.
            And captains tend to add "a bit more for grandma"
            And some airlines make "tankering" in some trips (because the fuel at the point of departure is cheaper than at the destination).
            And if the plane flew in a condition of lower fuel burn (higher, slower...), the actual endurance can be increased.

            --- 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


            • Gabe, think of it as ... one long squeeze of the fuel nozzle for Mom and one more for each of your kids ..

              Granny? Well one (actually great great granny), held the record for passenger Atlantic steamship crossings and was a regular on the White Star Line's trips between Ireland and New York.
              Live, from a grassy knoll somewhere near you.

              Comment


              • [quote=TheKiecker;621779]Which deceitful Government told you that did/did'nt happen ?

                Well, there´s a point! However, it would be a heck of a job protecting that secret from leaking..

                Comment


                • Still the question

                  Thanks Gabriel
                  I fully understand your points.
                  However these are very flexible figures.
                  One can say that any flight between Kuala Lumpur and Beijin can be loaded with 6hs to 14hs of fuel ( maximum of 7hs times 2 ways in case of retankeling due to costs issues )
                  With that in mind, this situation raises another question :
                  Does the aircraft that made flight 370 in March 7th was loaded with "regular" amount of fuel in comparison to other aircrafts that made this route in the previous months?
                  Sorry to insist in this point.
                  If am not fan of conspiracy theories but this information may partially exclude some of them.

                  Comment


                  • Observer, I don't know how much fuel load did the plane have on take-off, but:

                    - In my previous calculation, 7.6hs was the absolute legal minimum. With no tankering, with no "plus for mom", with no "max endurance" flight condition, you have 7.6hs. The rest of the factors would be "bonus" beyond that 7.6 hs. So please stop saying "can be loaded with 6hs of fuel". It'd be illegal with so little fuel.
                    - The performance of the plane (including fuel burn) was taken into account to define the current search area. In that performance calculation participated experts from Malaysia, Boeing, Rolls Roys, the NTSB, and the ATSB. You can bet that they took into account the quantity of fuel that was aboard. That, or they are intentionally fabricating the data to mislead the investigation and cover the truth. If you believe that, I quit.

                    --- 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


                    • No Gabriel
                      I am not looking for any Government coverage.
                      Just trying to understand how a plane flew for 8.5 hours in a flight scheduled to 5.5hs

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Observer View Post
                        No Gabriel
                        I am not looking for any Government coverage.
                        Just trying to understand how a plane flew for 8.5 hours in a flight scheduled to 5.5hs
                        Originally posted by Official preliminary report
                        At 00:41:43 MYT on 8 March 2014 (Saturday), MH 370 took off from Runway 32R at Kuala Lumpur International Airport (KLIA)

                        [...]

                        After ACARS stopped transmitting the satellite communication system automatically transmitted seven messages that confirmed that the system was still logged onto the network. The last message was received by the satellite ground station at 08:19 MYT.
                        That's 7h 38m of flight time. Had I said before that minimum legal fuel was 7h 42m? I admit I was partially lucky.

                        Originally posted by malaysiaairlines.com

                        Flight....Departs..Arrives...Airports...Duration
                        MH360......18:00...00:20+1...KUL-PEK.....6h 20m
                        That's 6h 20m

                        Now you can keep wondering how it's possible that the plane had enough fuel to remain flying for 238.93 hours when scheduled flight time was just 5 minutes and 14 seconds.

                        Any other question?

                        --- 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


                        • [QUOTE=Passion for flying;621797]
                          Originally posted by TheKiecker View Post
                          Which deceitful Government told you that did/did'nt happen ?

                          Well, there´s a point! However, it would be a heck of a job protecting that secret from leaking..
                          Oh i remember the Tale of cell phones still pinging hours after the flight went missing . Things like " Their cells were still ringing"

                          Not sure which side of the tree you are barking up here... nothing has been confirmed.

                          So when is the radar data that was " coming out immediately " (6 days ago) actually coming out.

                          Its a bunch of bullshit that makes that area of the world look like such a joke.

                          Stick to boating. ( oh , wait)

                          Comment


                          • Gabriel / Evan,

                            I am sure you are familiar with Helios. In Helios, the pilots and most or all of the passengers were unconscious or dead due to climbing to altitude without pressurizing the airplane. According to the interceptor jets observations, one cabin crew was still (barely) conscious and (unsuccessfully) trying to make radio contact or fly the airplane, which eventually ran out of fuel and crashed.

                            To me, the later parts of MH370 have some similarity to Helios. Going out over the Straits, turning south to the Indian Ocean, possibly a garbled radio contact with a military base (if not completely disproved), flying until fuel exhaustion (if those are indeed what occurred).

                            Thus I am simply asking a conditional question: if the later stages of the MH370 flight were indeed similar to Helios, what event (or events) could have occurred to cause this situation?

                            I am not gifted enough to be able to fill in all the blanks. But perhaps some small structural failure (or explosion or bomb) presumably somewhere near or below the cockpit, that caused some significant damage (failure of the ACARS, transponder and possibly the pilots' oxygen system) but still allowed the plane to keep flying. Unlikely? Sure. Apparently it has only occurred once in the hundreds of millions of flights since aviation began 100 years ago.

                            At least slightly more likely than meteorites or aliens, I think.

                            pothole
                            You just can't avoid the potholes.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by TheKiecker View Post

                              So when is the radar data that was " coming out immediately " (6 days ago) actually coming out.
                              There's a link to it here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-27576409

                              Edit: actually, that's the raw satellite tracking data, not radar. Is that what you meant?

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Evan View Post
                                Confirmation Bias plays a role later on, when their treasured ideas are challenged, but initially two other human factors are essential in recruiting the conspiracy theory proselyte:

                                "the illusion of explanatory depth"

                                and... "cognitive miser" theory

                                Essentially, our Starchyme and the legions of other 9/11 conspiracy 'believers' are under the influences of these human tendencies. Confirmation bias comes later, when they might have doubts or when anything might challenge their assumptions.

                                There are many great examples of the illusion of explanatory depth to be found in those 9/11 "inside job" videos. There are even some in Pothole's post above. Since the disappearance of MH-370 many people have been fooled by hackneyed 'technical' theories posited by a supposed expert who, to the learned, obviously betray a lack of depth in technical understanding. The 'fire in the wheelwell' theory is a great example of this, and several people have thrown that one at me in bars lately.

                                "the illusion of explanatory depth" is particularly powerful. Basically, if someone explains a theory in what appears to be technical explanatory depth, many people will accept it as knowledge and truth. Most people, suffering themselves from a 'cognitive miser' thought process, choose to accept this illusion without pursuing greater understanding of the tichnical circumstances.

                                Hence, we have the illustrious and neverending conspiracy theories that insult our intelligence, disrespect those lost in the tragedies, and distract from the process of true understanding.

                                Starcyhme, you could be a better informed, less susceptible person if you care to research these human factors. Don't be a cognitive miser! Start here:



                                and here...

                                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_miser
                                Cool. Thanks.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X