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 Brainsys View Post
    There is the small matter of keeping 239 people quiet, watered and fed. Or disposing of same.

    Those of us who remember Dawson's Field will get a grip of the problem.
    I know it may be far fetched but if an organization can "steal" a 777 I bet they can have enough people on the ground to keep the situation under control.

    Of course I think the scenario is not that plausible given the fact it would have shown up on other countries radar w/ identifiers or not.

    Are there places in Asia with fields and no radar coverage? I would be inclined to say no but again I'm not familiar with the area.
    AD.com apocalypse survivor. 727 Fan.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Peter Kesternich View Post
      At this point, what I have a real problem is those people calling themselves experts and accident investigators out there. Nevermind that mainstream journalism doesn't know the first thing about aircraft and flight operations. But those same journalists have no expertise at all to determine if somebody is an expert when they get called on the phone by a self-proclaimed authority with an interesting story to tell.
      Don't get me wrong - I know there are a lot of serious and determined people out there trying to figure out what happened to MH370. However, I suspect they share my scepticism about the media and are not really eager to talk to WSJ, NY Times, CNN and the like. So who does that leave us with?
      My favorite was Rachel Maddow;

      Barbara Peterson, special correspondent for aviation for Condé Nast Traveler, talks with Rachel Maddow about the search for Malaysia Airlines flight 370.


      Who interviewed Barbara Peterson (who is a Conde Nast "Aviation Correspondent") ;
      Barbara S. Peterson is the author of BLUE STREAK: Inside JetBlue, the Upstart that Rocked an Industry.


      Who's greatest foray into the "Security" field was working for the T.S.A. for 2 months and wrote an 'investigative report' about it;


      Are we kidding? National news and this person. I guess Greg Feith is all tied up at NBC proper. Why are there no other authentic aviation experts out there? Do we have no 777 pilots out there that can speak with the press?
      Whatever is necessary, is never unwise.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by AVION1 View Post
        TWA800 flew several miles without 80% of the fuselage, before crashing into the ocean. Just saying.

        Wrong again! As are most of your idiotic posts!!

        Comment


        • Originally posted by AA 1818 View Post

          On another topic - what is the range of a cellphone when flying? How much after take-off would an average cell-phone work in most cases?
          Not at all at FL350, And not very long after take-off. After around 5000' AGL they will not work at all.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by AA 1818;6m18681
            My favorite was Rachel Maddow;

            httpR://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-...y-193635395947

            Who interviewed Barbara Peterson (who is a Conde Nast "Aviation Correspondent") ;
            Barbara S. Peterson is the author of BLUE STREAK: Inside JetBlue, the Upstart that Rocked an Industry.


            Who's greatest foray into the "Security" field was working for the T.S.A. for 2 months and wrote an 'investigative report' about it;


            Are we kidding? National news and this person. I guess Greg Feith is all tied up at NBC proper. Why are there no other authentic aviation experts out there? Do we have no 777 pilots out there that can speak with the press?
            Wall Street Journal killed it too:

            The Journal, citing “two people familiar with the details,” said data automatically downloaded from the plane’s Rolls Royce Trent 800 engines as part of a maintenance program continued to reach the ground for four hours after the flight went off radar.

            I mean, we here are all "familiar with the details."

            It's the first hyper-connected society smartphone air disaster. People want answers now and rumor and propaganda become pure fact, until they aren't. Can you imagine how much worse the conspiracy theories around TWA800 or EA990 would have been in today's world. It's totally at odds with the way air accident investigation works.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Kpeters View Post
              I know it may be far fetched but if an organization can "steal" a 777 I bet they can have enough people on the ground to keep the situation under control.

              Of course I think the scenario is not that plausible given the fact it would have shown up on other countries radar w/ identifiers or not.

              Are there places in Asia with fields and no radar coverage? I would be inclined to say no but again I'm not familiar with the area.
              With fuel on board is Africa in reach?

              Should the search (at least sat images) now be following a straight line on the estimated path toward Sumatra, out a few thousand miles into the Indian ocean? How about the mountains of Sumatra?

              We need to hear more from Royals Royce. Did the engines squawk or not?

              Comment


              • My theory: Time to start looking at the financial situations of both the Captain and First Officer. Large insurance policies? Who are the beneficiaries? Recent or pending divorce? Woman problems in general? (Well wait a second if there is a woman involved there are always problems). If there is a large insurance policy, it will only pay out if it was an accident. If the insurance company can prove that it was a suicide they will not pay. If one or both had been planning this for a while, they would have looked for a place to put the ship where it is going to be very difficult to find. (Seems they might have done a good job at it). Also it would take someone with some pretty good knowledge of the systems to start pulling the right breakers to shut down not only both transponders, but the complete ACARS system. Not sure how many of you know that part of the world, but there are vast expanses of dense jungle where it will be very hard to spot a crash site from the air if it was well planned. Turn out over the ocean, let them see that, shut down the electronics and head for the jungle.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Bryan View Post
                  (...)
                  We need to hear more from Royals Royce. Did the engines squawk or not?
                  They did not.

                  From AVHerald:

                  (...) Boeing, Roll Royce, and NTSB confirmed the last data transmission received from the aircraft was at 01:07L. (...)

                  Aviation Herald - News, Incidents and Accidents in Aviation

                  By the way... it's spelled "Rolls Royce"

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
                    Hard? No.
                    Expensive? A lot!!!

                    In each ariplane, buy a sort of a special "satelite phoneit" that is certified to fixed aircraft-equipment standards (TSO), have it installed by an FAA certified party, pay the bill of the phone being continuously "in a call" every time the wheels are off the ground 7/24, add the maintenance cost. And by the way, you might find that more infrastructure might be necessary (more satellites).

                    All that, just in case one plane crash and can't be found by other means.

                    Don't take me wrong. It's technically feasible and decreasingly expensive as time goes by, and the industry is already working around this. But it's not piece of cake.

                    And my previous comment was because you've said:
                    "It amazes me that we can track automobiles [but not all automobiles are tracked], monkeys in the jungle [but not all monkeys are tracked], thugs on parole [but not all thugs on parole are tracked]... but we can't track or monitor a 1/4 billion dollar plane [yes, we can and we do track a plane, but nor all planes are tracked]."

                    And by the way, if one of the monkeys you are tracking is eaten by a lion you'll probably never find its remains either.
                    They said the same about AF447. It would have shaved off what, a day or two on the search which would have helped exactly none.

                    Forget a sat phone, MH370 had no wi-fi which could have been of great assistance here. Well, unless it got switched off or somebody pulled the fuse on that too.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by AA 1818 View Post
                      How is it possible to 'make the airplane undetectable'? What steps would be needed to be done, in a regular (and/or in an emergency situation)?
                      Secondary (normal ATC) radar: Out of range or transponder off (intentionally or not)
                      ACARS: ACARS system off or communication links (VHF/HF/satellite) off or unavailable.
                      Communications: Radios off, out of range, or pilots not transmitting.
                      Primary radar (mostly military use): Out of range (too far or too low) or stealth technologies that don't apply here.

                      A sudden catastrophic failure will make all of them at once, but then you'll find the debris very close to the last known position.

                      An important note on the primary radar.
                      One thing is to "detect" the plane and another to know which pane you are detecting. In the 9/11 case, the planes were continuously detected by the primary radar, as well as other thousands of targets. With the primary radar a blip is just a blip, and the blips don't have identification that tell one form the other. ATC and the Air Force knew that one of those blips was the airplane that they were looking for, but they didn't know which one.

                      However, in the aftermath, analyzing and comparing the records of the primary and secondary radars they could find which primary radar return matched the secondary radar data to the point of loss of secondary radar, and then they could follow this now known blip and the trajectory of these flights were full re-constructed.

                      There is a technology that existed back then but was not widely deployed where a computer gets data from primary and secondary radars (could be many of each) and makes a "big picture". In this case, when a target is both on primary and secondary radar the computer "matches" both of them. If the secondary radar target is suddenly lost the computer keeps showing and tracking the primary radar blip with the previous ID of the secondary radar, so you can now keep tracking the plane with primary radar also... as long as the path of this primary radar return doesn't cross with that of another primary radar return that also lacks secondary radar information, because then you don't know which of the two followed each of the two paths.

                      Take the Gol vs Legacy accident as an example of this technology. The Legacy was flying at 37000 ft with the transponder on and under secondary radar surveillance. At a point the Legacy lost its transponder for reasons still unknown (the transponder worked ok in post-accident checks, and the pilots swear that they didn't turn it off, but they did note that it was turned off and turned it on again AFTER the collision with the Gol). So the secondary radar return was lost but then the computer "kicked in" and kept showing the return of the plane (identified and all) based on the primary return only (and the previous ID of the secondary radar). The icon in the radar screen changed to show to the controller that the secondary radar had been lost and the info was based only on primary radar. But the controller missed that cue. At a point the flight plan called for 36000ft, however the pilots can't change level without the ATC clearance. The pilot called ATC and informed that they were at that point with 37000ft and ATC just replied "roger", so they kept 37000 ft.
                      There was a shift change in the ATC room. The new controller also missed the cue that the plane was only on primary radar. To make it worse, based on 3D primary radar data (which is not a very accurate technology), the screen also showed the plane at an estimated altitude of 36000ft (which was 1000ft lower than what it really was). So he thought "Ok, they are at 36000, as the flight plan shows, and it's ok to cross with the Goal that comes heads on at 37000ft". Neither the Gol nor the Legacy knew of each other. The lack of transponder in the Legacy also rendered the TCAS unavailable. The rest is history.

                      Is that technology available in the Gulf of Thailand? Let me bet that it isn't. So, like after 9/11, now they likely have the records of a few military primary radars and have dozens of blips whose paths cross each other, with "black holes" of zones of no coverage in the middle, and they are trying to figure out which one is the Malaysian flight. Or they know and won't tell (think for example that they loose this flight when it flew out of radar 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


                      • A new development:

                        PETALING JAYA: U.S. officials have an "indication" the missing Malaysia Airlines plane may have crashed in the Indian Ocean and is moving the USS Kidd to the area to begin searching, according to ABC News.

                        Comment


                        • New search area in Indian Ocean

                          Just posted on The Guardian's website:

                          "It seems that the White House is better briefed than the Pentagon press office. Jay Carney, the White House spokesman, has just confirmed thata new search area*may be opened in the Indian Ocean, reports the Guardian’s Paul Lewis in Washington.“It is my understanding the one possible piece of information, or pieces of information, has led to the possibility that a new search area may be opened up over the Indian Ocean,” Carney said, without detailing the nature of the new information.He said discussions were ongoing with international partners to “deploy the appropriate assets” in any new search in the Indian Ocean. He added the new search would be based on “additional information” that was not yet “conclusive”.His comments appear to*confirm that earlier story*by ABC’s Martha Raddatz."

                          Also saw that Nasa has joined the 14-country search effort and is providing their satellite technology.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by BoeingBobby View Post
                            My theory: Time to start looking at the financial situations of both the Captain and First Officer. Large insurance policies? Who are the beneficiaries? Recent or pending divorce? Woman problems in general? (Well wait a second if there is a woman involved there are always problems). If there is a large insurance policy, it will only pay out if it was an accident. If the insurance company can prove that it was a suicide they will not pay. If one or both had been planning this for a while, they would have looked for a place to put the ship where it is going to be very difficult to find. (Seems they might have done a good job at it). Also it would take someone with some pretty good knowledge of the systems to start pulling the right breakers to shut down not only both transponders, but the complete ACARS system. Not sure how many of you know that part of the world, but there are vast expanses of dense jungle where it will be very hard to spot a crash site from the air if it was well planned. Turn out over the ocean, let them see that, shut down the electronics and head for the jungle.
                            we are tired of your idiotic posts too !
                            A Former Airdisaster.Com Forum (senior member)....

                            Comment


                            • This seems to be another flip-flop, like the Malaysian Air Force saying they saw it on radar an hour later, then saying they didn't, then saying they may have done but they were actually denying that they'd said anything, not that they were denying seeing it.

                              Now, they're saying it flew for 4-5 hours, but that previous statements saying it flew for 4 hours were wrong, but that it may have done anyway but they certainly didn't have evidence from Rolls Royce that it did...

                              Well, this is certainly going to be one to be used in training courses, even if it is just for training courses on how not to organise a search or how not to coordinate speaking to the media! That said, it clearly is all very odd.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by BoeingBobby View Post
                                My theory: Time to start looking at the financial situations of both the Captain and First Officer. Large insurance policies? Who are the beneficiaries? Recent or pending divorce? Woman problems in general? (Well wait a second if there is a woman involved there are always problems). If there is a large insurance policy, it will only pay out if it was an accident. If the insurance company can prove that it was a suicide they will not pay. If one or both had been planning this for a while, they would have looked for a place to put the ship where it is going to be very difficult to find. (Seems they might have done a good job at it). Also it would take someone with some pretty good knowledge of the systems to start pulling the right breakers to shut down not only both transponders, but the complete ACARS system. Not sure how many of you know that part of the world, but there are vast expanses of dense jungle where it will be very hard to spot a crash site from the air if it was well planned. Turn out over the ocean, let them see that, shut down the electronics and head for the jungle.
                                A suicide pact between the Captain and the First Officer? Hmmmmm... would be a first (as far as I know). But then again there's a first time for everything. Remember PSA Flight 1771?
                                Last edited by Peter Kesternich; 2014-03-13, 18:44.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X