Malaysia airlines plane may have crashed 239 people on board #24

[geevee]

My opinions only, no facts here:

My post above suggests that the report of the First Officer's cell phone contacting a tower, may be wrong. This cell phone-tower contact conveniently validates the westward track and plays into the whole southern Indian Ocean scenario. BUT, this supposed cell phone contact forces us to accept an impossible chain of events leading up to it.

Think about it my friends.

Thanks for your always thoughtful and informative posts Mr. Noatak, it seems exceedingly odd that there has been no mention at all about cell phone pings from passenger cells as the plane went westward over land, I too find it impossible to believe that all phones were turned off, or that whatever happened was so rapid that not one person reached for their phone and at least tried to get a call out. So curious.

 

[CARIIS]

If they were incapacitated by hypoxia, they not be able to each reach for their phones.

The co-pilot on the other hand, could have had extra oxygen supply.

Could explain the "mumbling" heard by the pilot who was asked to contact MH370.

JMO

Sent from my GT-P5210 using Tapatalk

Yeh both pilots have own oxygen

 

[Nymeria]

Yeh both pilots have own oxygen

But only 30 minutes worth, and if they do not put on the mask immediately they will be too disoriented to function (Not sure exact time they have to get the mask on, but it is a very short amount of time....back in this mass of threads somewhere though :facepalm.

 

[Momoffourboys]

A new tip line set up by MH370 families.

https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.521839531261408.1073741830.484412145004147&type=1

 

[newone]

Yes, I agree.
They (the Malaysian government) have not shown anyone any evidence or proof that the plane's disappearance was in fact a deliberate action. Which is why I'm still of the belief that this was an accident of sorts.

radar jamming could be deemed deliberate and if military exercises were taking place - or if someone on board was experimenting with a new toy - who knows...:truce:

o/t

I just found an NTSB item relative to lithium ion batteries potentially causing short circuit...while checking out jamming avionics at the boeing site.

Perhaps there was something on MH370 avionics that was lithium ion battery powered that just ''out and out failed''.

http://www.aviationanalysis.net/2014/05/ntsb-issues-new-recmmendations-for.html

 

[SouthAussie]

Has anyone seen any explanations for the discrepancies in the "hourly" satellite handshakes ?

@16:41 UTC (@12:41am MYT) take off

17:41 Why wasn't there an hourly handshake ?
18:28 Why the time change instead of the regular 18:41 handshake ?
23:41 Why wasn't there an hourly handshake ?
00:11 Why was there a handshake at this time ?

Supposedly the 00:19 handshake was supposed to be on reboot after fuel exhausion.

Do these time change variations occur because something is wrong with the plane ?

From what I remember, the transponder pings the satellite with data every time a change is initiated … at take off, ascents, turns, descents. At the start of a flight there are many pings as the plane goes through the motions of take off, ascent, turning, and achieving cruising altitude.

If the satellite doesn’t hear from the plane for an hour - because it is at cruising altitude and flying steady - it will ping the skin of the aircraft and make sure it is still there.

So the hourly pings would not have started until about an hour after 17:22 .. when the transponder stopped operating.

There is a really informative forum with satellite people, techies, and other interested parties that are very into the pings and the calculations. You can find it by Googling ‘TMF Associates MSS blog understanding satellite pings’ and ‘TMF Associates MSS Blog understanding the satellite ping conclusion’. Warning … it is a massive forum, not a quick read.

 

[Mr. Noatak]

Isn't that discounted by the fact that the plane identified itself
for hours after that to the Inmarsat satellite ?
Are you saying that you think all the satellite info is fake ?

My opinions only, no facts here:

My post was not about the Inmarsat data model. But your question is a fair one.

We have an overall theory or hypothesis of an "Incredible Journey" to the southern Indian Ocean. This journey is divisible into three stages:

Stage 1: this is the probable stage. It consists of travel up to the time that the transponder fell silent.
Stage 2: this is the possible stage. It consists of many eyewitness accounts.
Stage 3: this is the modeled stage. It consists of one or more 'hits' of a UFO by military radar and the Inmarsat satellite data.

The First Officer's cell phone is reported to have contacted a tower at about the end of the second stage of the journey. If this event is true and no other device on the plane connected with that cell tower at the same time, something very, very odd is occuring. Until this conundrum is resolved, stage 3 of the journey takes a back seat. However, if the First Officer's cell phone DID NOT contact a tower, then we can proceed with the quest for the southern Indian Ocean.

Sleuth On!

 

[2rose]

There is a video done by some family members holding up written cards
that offer a reward to a whistleblower ... "Reward MH370"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8smuq4qWbc

The committee is made up of 7 people
- 2 fundraisers
- 5 family representatives.

I noticed these families represented:
France - Wattrelo
India - Sharseth
Australia - Weeks
USA - Sarah Bajc for partner Philip Wood

I think the 5th family member is from India also.

 

[2rose]

We have an overall theory or hypothesis of an "Incredible Journey" to the southern Indian Ocean.

What you are referring to here is the Inmarsat analysis ... which is theory.
However what I am referring to is the Inmarsat RAW data ... which is physical
evidence that the MH370 was communicating with the satellite 7 hours after takeof
... here it doesn't matter whether the plane went north or south.
The evidence shows that the plane was still flying at 8am & identifying itself
to the satellite ... therefore it can NOT have crashed some 5 hours earlier.

In contrast to this, the military radar blips ARE circumstantial
based on assumptions that an unknown aircraft "may" have been MH370.

The First Officer's cell phone is reported to have contacted a tower

IIRC the media reported that an unnamed telecommunications company
had received an attempt from someone to use the co-pilot's phone.
However, I do not recall that the authoritaties ever confirmed that as a fact
... If so, please share a reference.

This journey is divisible into three stages:

It doesn't matter what stage you are at ... hard evidence trumps any stage
that involved assumptions. Investigators move from the known to the unknown.
If the plane was flying at 8am, then it couldn't have crashed around 2:30am.

So it comes down to ... either the public is being told the truth by the investigative authorities &
the plane was still airborne at 8am ... OR we have to move into the realm of conspiracy theories ???

 

[ElleElle]

Remember when we discussed another aircraft "piggy-backing" 370? Could this even be possible, and if so, mess up Inmarsat's raw data? 3 months later and we still have nothing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[2rose]

Remember when we discussed another aircraft "piggy-backing" 370? Could this even be possible, and if so, mess up Inmarsat's raw data? 3 months later and we still have nothing.

You are thinking about the military RADAR blips ... where the ACARS system was turned off so the plane was not identifying itself to the radar system.

The satellite doesn't use ACARS ... but an entirely different communication system. Every plane that talks to the satellite IDENTIFIES itself (probably with something like a manufacturer's serial number) ... so there can be no confusion about which plane was doing the satellite handshake.

 

[2rose]

http://www.thelocal.at/20140608/glitch-disrupts-austrian-air-traffic-control

08 Jun 2014 ... Austria's civilian air traffic control experienced a glitch on Thursday [June 5].
Controller's screens were unable to track aircraft for 25 minutes ...

At the same time, there were similar failures in air traffic control experienced by Hungary, Germany, Slovakia and the Czech Republic. Technical checks confirmed that there were no problems with Austria Control's systems, leading them to conclude that the problems may be linked to NATO exercises occurring in Hungary at the time of the failure.

The Federal Army, which oversees the military airspace,was not affected by the failure.

"We have both a primary and a secondary radar," said Colonel Michael Bauer. The primary radar can locate flying objects themselves.

The Austro Control, however, works with secondary radar. This is dependent on a transponder signal from the aircraft, which provides additional information to identify the aircraft. If this transponder signal is absent, the aircraft will not be noticed by a secondary radar.

According to the Kurier newspaper, a NATO exercise for electronic warfare was being conducted in Hungary at the time, which included the blocking of aircraft transponders on the practice schedule. Problems with radar systems were also reported from several NATO member countries.

Also affected was the Karlsruhe control center of the German Air Traffic Control (DFS), who monitor a significant part of German airspace.

An earlier message here, reported that a similar incident occurred in the USA on 30 April 2014 when the Los Angeles air traffic control computer experienced confusion about the flying altitude of a U-2 spy plane resulting in more than 200 flights were delayed or had to be canceled.

These 2 unique aviation incidents in April & June 2014 may make some wonder whether the March MH370 flight might have been the first testing of this new electronic warfare ???

ETA: Analysts have said that Russian hackers (state-linked or otherwise) were probably responsible for a small attack that temporarily crashed the NATO website in March 2014.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/05/27/us-nato-cybercrime-exercise-idINKBN0E729A20140527

 

[2rose]

Meanwhile, some air traffic controllers are going on a work strike ...

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/06/08/us-lebanon-airtraffic-idUSKBN0EJ0AT20140608
Beirut Sun Jun 8, 2014 Lebanon's air traffic controllers to stop work on June 10

 

[ElleElle]

You are thinking about the military RADAR blips ... where the ACARS system was turned off so the plane was not identifying itself to the radar system.

The satellite doesn't use ACARS ... but an entirely different communication system. Every plane that talks to the satellite IDENTIFIES itself (probably with something like a manufacturer's serial number) ... so there can be no confusion about which plane was doing the satellite handshake.

What I don't understand is why Inmarsat was contracted to do this. Wouldn't ping handshakes be recorded somewhere?

 

[ElleElle]

Was thinking that since 370 went missing through the equator, can pings be mirrored? If so, could they be in the opposite direction?

 

[redheadedgal]

MH370: Is Inmarsat right?

So why is Dickinson so sure he is right? Because the model they created showing arcs and Doppler readings was rigorously tested, initially on other aircraft on the satellite at the same time, and then against previous flights by the same aircraft. With minor disagreements both the position and the Doppler reading of those aircraft was predicted accurately.

Other organizations created their own models, ran the comparisons and came to the same conclusions. It is essential to understand: This is not just Inmarsat's frolic.

"No-one has come up yet with a reason why it shouldn't work with this particular flight when it has worked with others," Dickinson told me.

more @ http://edition.cnn.com/2014/05/27/world/asia/mh370-is-inmarsat-right-quest-analysis/index.html

 

[ElleElle]

http://www.thelocal.at/20140608/glitch-disrupts-austrian-air-traffic-control



An earlier message here, reported that a similar incident occurred in the USA on 30 April 2014 when the Los Angeles air traffic control computer experienced confusion about the flying altitude of a U-2 spy plane resulting in more than 200 flights were delayed or had to be canceled.

These 2 unique aviation incidents in April & June 2014 may make some wonder whether the March MH370 flight might have been the first testing of this new electronic warfare ???

ETA: Analysts have said that Russian hackers (state-linked or otherwise) were probably responsible for a small attack that temporarily crashed the NATO website in March 2014.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/05/27/us-nato-cybercrime-exercise-idINKBN0E729A20140527

Ironically, MH370 vanished at beginning of Crimea take over.

Electronic warfare would not surprise me. This world is crazy.

JMO

 

[newone]

http://www.thelocal.at/20140608/glitch-disrupts-austrian-air-traffic-control



An earlier message here, reported that a similar incident occurred in the USA on 30 April 2014 when the Los Angeles air traffic control computer experienced confusion about the flying altitude of a U-2 spy plane resulting in more than 200 flights were delayed or had to be canceled.

These 2 unique aviation incidents in April & June 2014 may make some wonder whether the March MH370 flight might have been the first testing of this new electronic warfare ???

ETA: Analysts have said that Russian hackers (state-linked or otherwise) were probably responsible for a small attack that temporarily crashed the NATO website in March 2014.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/05/27/us-nato-cybercrime-exercise-idINKBN0E729A20140527

Thanks............this sure ''seems'' to fit....

I am so lousy at posting -- was trying to capture both of your cited sources couldn't do it. All of what you posted was fascinating as 'credible' possibilities. I apologize for not doing it justice.:blushing:

 

[ElleElle]

MH370: Is Inmarsat right?



more @ http://edition.cnn.com/2014/05/27/world/asia/mh370-is-inmarsat-right-quest-analysis/index.html

They are right all right. So right that the search area is now on a different arc.

JMO

 

[ElleElle]

MH370: Is Inmarsat right?



more @ http://edition.cnn.com/2014/05/27/world/asia/mh370-is-inmarsat-right-quest-analysis/index.html

From link above:

"So, will*the publication*quell the critics? Probably not. They want every last digit and bit of data so they can re-create the work, something that is impossible without detailed knowledge of the plane's modem, the satellite's own movement and the performance capabilities of the 777 aircraft."

The modem can be hacked.

JMO