Malaysia airlines MH370 with 239 people on board, 8 March 2014 #26

[tezi]

I have watched the YouTube video you shared a link to.

The big problem i have is that the whole documentary (if you could call it that), was made to show that the plane's disappearance, was a plan of Zaharie.

Another problem i have is that it mixes facts with fiction! A bit like watching a movie that is "based on a true story".

Right from the start when it says that the pilot, Zaharie, asked Fariq, the co-pilot, to get a coffee, it is mixing up fact with fiction. There is no evidence at all that this took place yet it continues the story until poor Fariq dies in the corridor.
All completely fictional!

With regard to the transponder, it really doesn't say if it being switched off could have happened another way other than the pilot switching it off.

I am trying my best to not get "tunnel vision" whilst there are still several possibilities on the table.

With all due respect, none of us were there. We don't know if it is entirely fictional. How do we know it mixes fact with fiction?

JMO, IMO, and all other disclaimers.

 

[Charlot123]

Yes, it explained that for a split second the plane's position was showing on radar without it's altitude. Their conclusion being it "must" have been manually tuned off because on the way to turning the transponder knob to "STBY", it clicked through another setting "ALT RPTG OFF", that shows position without altitude.

My understanding is that radar showing no altitude for a split second, "may" be caused by the transponder being manually turned off, not "must".

I have my opinion on what happened which I shared a few posts ago. Its just my opinion for what it's worth...

You said that it was an accident. There may be a mechanical accident, there still may be accident with a pilot (disorientation), there may be a bomb, there may be a number of steps taken by a pilot to avoid the accident.

Would manually switching off transponder help in, say, generator failure?

 

[Trebor5591]

Anyone watching the plane on a flight tracker would have immediately seen that the plane has turned around.
It was only through a bumbling response that it took so long to work out the plane was missing.
Ordinarily, this wouldn't happen. The pilot certainly wouldn't have known that the response was going to be poor and that he'd have hours and hours to fly to the Indian Ocean somewhere.

I feel awful that the pilots keep getting blamed for mass murder when there is simply no evidence at all.

Except there wasn't anyone actively watching the plane on a flight tracker. The "turnaround" occurred in the area between control of Indonesia and Viet Nam. Indonesia had said goodbye to the plane and Vietnam was waiting for the plane to radio in its position to them. Except the plane never contacted the Viet Nam controllers. (This is my recollection of what happened). IMO

 

[SouthAussie]

Would manually switching off transponder help in, say, generator failure?

Apparently, turning off the transponder only takes away the planes identification from the radar. The primary radar can still track the plane's path (but not its altitude) .. it just doesn't have an identifier next to it on the screen.

While transponder failure is rare, there has been at least two known transponder failures in Europe (as at May 2014) - where planes had to turn around and go back to a major hub.

I underlined 'turn around' as I believe this is what MH370 did, or tried to do?

https://skybrary.aero/sites/default/files/bookshelf/2711.pdf

 

[Charlot123]

Anyone watching the plane on a flight tracker would have immediately seen that the plane has turned around.
It was only through a bumbling response that it took so long to work out the plane was missing.
Ordinarily, this wouldn't happen. The pilot certainly wouldn't have known that the response was going to be poor and that he'd have hours and hours to fly to the Indian Ocean somewhere.

I feel awful that the pilots keep getting blamed for mass murder when there is simply no evidence at all.

I think it is not like this. When they collect all the data and look at probabilities, the pilot's plan explains most. It doesn't explain all, hence some additional explanations are involved. There is a probability of an accident, of terrorism, of the other pilot being involved. And IRL, we'll never know. So we are discussing probabilities.
It doesn't mean that it is what has happened.

 

[Bats]

I think it is not like this. When they collect all the data and look at probabilities, the pilot's plan explains most. It doesn't explain all, hence some additional explanations are involved. There is a probability of an accident, of terrorism, of the other pilot being involved. And IRL, we'll never know. So we are discussing probabilities.
It doesn't mean that it is what has happened.

Yes, i can understand why people gravitate to the theory that the pilot, Zaharie, orchestrated the event.

However, when I think about this theory, there are many parts that I find very strange. When I put together all of the "but why would you" questions (and there are lots), something seems fishy about it all.

 

[CrimeDawg123]

Let's say they find the plane someday. What would they need to find in order to determine the cause of the crash?

 

[Warwick1991]

Let's say they find the plane someday. What would they need to find in order to determine the cause of the crash?

I think the cockpit voice recorder (CVR) and flight data recorder (FDR) would be critical if they were recovered and yielded usable data. The FDR would have data on most of the aircraft systems, and show everything - pilot inputs, alarms, emergency oxygen deployment and electrical data. Conversations might yield information, also, depending on the duration of the CVR recording.

The wreckage itself might not be as informative, depending on its condition. There are signs of various events in the remnants of crashed planes, but we don't know what kind of condition it's in.

 

[Charlot123]

Apparently, turning off the transponder only takes away the planes identification from the radar. The primary radar can still track the plane's path (but not its altitude) .. it just doesn't have an identifier next to it on the screen.

While transponder failure is rare, there has been at least two known transponder failures in Europe (as at May 2014) - where planes had to turn around and go back to a major hub.

I underlined 'turn around' as I believe this is what MH370 did, or tried to do?

https://skybrary.aero/sites/default/files/bookshelf/2711.pdf

Interesting reading. Thank you. Now I have to read what are they made of, whether they are fed by electricity, what most often can cause their failure.

Do you know if there is a situation that can kick off both transponders and the communication with the ATC? How often can it happen?

- if this happens, the plane is not visible to ATCs or other planes. It is, however, visible to military radars, but how would they know it is “friendly”? Malaysian radars mentioned seeing the plane and…what?

The plane had “handshakes” with Inmarsat satellite. That’s Britain, and this is the only verifiable source of the plane’s existence. But how would immarsat know it was that plane? I mean, it just registered all handshakes with some plane.

Strange that the plane wasn’t visibly seen by any other plane

All I can see now is that all info about MH 370 comes from Malaysia. The two people that you mentioned are not the only source, but they may not be the most legit one. This one seems more verifiable.

New findings support that MH370 was seen above Maldives

Male’, Maldives — New findings shows that the claims of several Maldivians six years ago saying that they had seen a large, very noisy aircraft flying low above the Maldives was indeed the Ma…

timesofaddu.com

 

[Charlot123]

I think the cockpit voice recorder (CVR) and flight data recorder (FDR) would be critical if they were recovered and yielded usable data. The FDR would have data on most of the aircraft systems, and show everything - pilot inputs, alarms, emergency oxygen deployment and electrical data. Conversations might yield information, also, depending on the duration of the CVR recording.

The wreckage itself might not be as informative, depending on its condition. There are signs of various events in the remnants of crashed planes, but we don't know what kind of condition it's in.

How high is the chance that either would survive an obviously high-impact crash and so many years in the sea? I think, close to zero.

 

[Warwick1991]

How high is the chance that either would survive an obviously high-impact crash and so many years in the sea? I think, close to zero.

It's a challenging scenario, but the case of Air France Flight 447 is one where the FDR and the CVR were eventually recovered from the Atlantic, at a depth of over 13,000 ft, about 2 years after the plane was lost. The data was recovered, and the reasons for the loss of the flight understood. Air France Flight 447 - Wikipedia

 

[Warwick1991]

Interesting reading. Thank you. Now I have to read what are they made of, whether they are fed by electricity, what most often can cause their failure.

Do you know if there is a situation that can kick off both transponders and the communication with the ATC? How often can it happen?

- if this happens, the plane is not visible to ATCs or other planes. It is, however, visible to military radars, but how would they know it is “friendly”? Malaysian radars mentioned seeing the plane and…what?

The plane had “handshakes” with Inmarsat satellite. That’s Britain, and this is the only verifiable source of the plane’s existence. But how would immarsat know it was that plane? I mean, it just registered all handshakes with some plane.

Strange that the plane wasn’t visibly seen by any other plane

All I can see now is that all info about MH 370 comes from Malaysia. The two people that you mentioned are not the only source, but they may not be the most legit one. This one seems more verifiable.

New findings support that MH370 was seen above Maldives

Male’, Maldives — New findings shows that the claims of several Maldivians six years ago saying that they had seen a large, very noisy aircraft flying low above the Maldives was indeed the Ma…

timesofaddu.com

Malaysia Airlines used Inmarsat’s satellite phone service. They, in essence, subscribed to Inmarsat’s service and had a unique subscriber ID. The service aboard MH370 periodically checked in with Inmarsat satellites as the aircraft moved into different areas. Inmarsat - Wikipedia

 

[Charlot123]

Malaysia Airlines used Inmarsat’s satellite phone service. They, in essence, subscribed to Inmarsat’s service and had a unique subscriber ID. The service aboard MH370 periodically checked in with Inmarsat satellites as the aircraft moved into different areas. Inmarsat - Wikipedia

I understand that “find my phone” may be imprecise in my own house, so a satellite of 2014 was far from ideal in locating coordinates.

“Normal communications from Flight 370 were last made at 1:07 MYT. The datalink between the aircraft and satellite telecommunication network was lost at some point between 1:07 and 2:03, when the aircraft did not acknowledge a message sent from the ground station. Three minutes after the aircraft left the range of radar coverage—at 2:25—the aircraft's satellite data unit (SDU) transmitted a log-on message, which investigators believe occurred when the SDU restarted after a power interruption. Between the 2:25 message and 8:19, the SDU acknowledged two ground-to-aircraft telephone calls, which were not answered, and responded to automated, hourly requests from the ground station that were made to determine whether the SDU was still active. None of the communications from 2:25-8:19 contain explicitinformation about the aircraft's location. The aircraft's final transmission at 8:19 was a log-on message; the aircraft did not respond to a message from the ground station at 9:15. Investigators believe the 8:19 log-on message was made when the SDU was restarting after the aircraft ran out of fuel and the aircraft's auxiliary power unit was started.”
And,
“The last verbal signal to air traffic control occurred at 01:19:30, when Captain Zaharie acknowledged a transition from Lumpur Radar to Ho Chi Minh ACC“

So basically they lost communication between 1:07 and 2:03 but at 1:19:30 captain Shah spoke to Lumpur ATC.

Did they not check between 1:07 and 2:03? If the plane doesn’t answer, does the system dumbly sends messages? At what point should it alert someone? It is an hour…

 

[Warwick1991]

I understand that “find my phone” may be imprecise in my own house, so a satellite of 2014 was far from ideal in locating coordinates.

“Normal communications from Flight 370 were last made at 1:07 MYT. The datalink between the aircraft and satellite telecommunication network was lost at some point between 1:07 and 2:03, when the aircraft did not acknowledge a message sent from the ground station. Three minutes after the aircraft left the range of radar coverage—at 2:25—the aircraft's satellite data unit (SDU) transmitted a log-on message, which investigators believe occurred when the SDU restarted after a power interruption. Between the 2:25 message and 8:19, the SDU acknowledged two ground-to-aircraft telephone calls, which were not answered, and responded to automated, hourly requests from the ground station that were made to determine whether the SDU was still active. None of the communications from 2:25-8:19 contain explicitinformation about the aircraft's location. The aircraft's final transmission at 8:19 was a log-on message; the aircraft did not respond to a message from the ground station at 9:15. Investigators believe the 8:19 log-on message was made when the SDU was restarting after the aircraft ran out of fuel and the aircraft's auxiliary power unit was started.”
And,
“The last verbal signal to air traffic control occurred at 01:19:30, when Captain Zaharie acknowledged a transition from Lumpur Radar to Ho Chi Minh ACC“

So basically they lost communication between 1:07 and 2:03 but at 1:19:30 captain Shah spoke to Lumpur ATC.

Did they not check between 1:07 and 2:03? If the plane doesn’t answer, does the system dumbly sends messages? At what point should it alert someone? It is an hour…

The Inmarsat system was an automated system, and the transmissions were to verify the status of the communications service. It had no alert functions for any other purpose, and in the event of a power outage, would probably have some kind of reboot process. It apparently didn't alert people at all, a situation that was understood to be lacking after the disappearance of MH370.

 

[Charlot123]

The Inmarsat system was an automated system, and the transmissions were to verify the status of the communications service. It had no alert functions for any other purpose, and in the event of a power outage, would probably have some kind of reboot process. It apparently didn't alert people at all, a situation that was understood to be lacking after the disappearance of MH370.

But Malaysian airlines subscribed to it.
It was of limited use at the moment, obviously, because lack of any response except for automatic was not paid attention to.

But, it is still useful. Basically, this is considered to be one of mistakes made by the pilot. Without the system, it would be difficult to prove accident, anywhere.

With the system, an accident after which the plane cruises for six more hours can be either temporarily depressurization or some other human intent, likely, of the pilot.

 

[Charlot123]

Not a new article, but I haven’t seen it here.

Flight MH370 debris suggests pilot lowered plane's landing gear and crashed deliberately, report says

A new report published by British engineer Richard Godfrey and American MH370 wreckage hunter Blaine Gibson, claims the piece of debris most likely penetrated from the inside by the jet's disintegrating engines.

news.sky.com

 

[Vaderman]

I'm giving up hope on this one being satisfactorily resolved. It seems every half year or so there's a new, sensational news article boasting about new efforts only for us to be let down.

I obsessed over this plane's disappearance and devoutly watched every press conference about it during those early days.

I want to know what happened, but I'm just really giving up hope.

 

[Charlot123]

JMO, I belive that we'll find more pieces, but not enough to solve the puzzle of its disappearance.

I Googled, "how often planes disappear"? The article lists 8 mysterious cases, from different times, with turbo and jet engines, different sizes.

The Unsolved Mysteries of 8 Missing Passenger Flights | HISTORY

As the search for a missing Malaysian airliner continues, look back at six other times when passenger flights mysteriously vanished over water.

www.history.com

List of missing aircraft - Wikipedia

List of missing aircraft - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Even here, MH370 stands out. It was so huge.

Some food for thought: the the materials used for Boeing 777 were aluminum alloy, titanium alloy and plastic. Titanium can survive for decades in saltwater.

Titanium - Corrosion by Water

Titanium is highly resistant to corrosion by water, steam and seawater, except at elevated temperatures. Other corrosion mechanisms such as stress corrosion cracking, corrosion fatigue, biofouling, microbiologically influenced corrosion, crevice corrosion and galvanic corrosion are also covered.

www.azom.com

Aluminum alloy can survive for a very long time. Most articles that I read about it were dedicated to recycling, so I would not err on the side of their timeframe provided, but aluminum parts may definitely still exist in the ocean.

Maybe someone is a better specialist on plastic. Plastic is a known pollutant, but question is, how long can it stay in the ocean in one piece? Also, thick film of bacteria and algae on its surface might prevent its recognition as once having been a part of the airplane.

 

[Warwick1991]

I think the condition of the wreckage, and whether there are relatively intact sections, depends on the final approach angle of the aircraft, its speed, and its last cruising altitude. Impact damage would have been severe, but substantial sections of the aircraft might be on the bottom. The final transmissions from the aircraft suggest that the APUs (auxiliary power units) came on at fuel exhaustion, and I think there's a lot of uncertainty about those final moments - in addition to everything else. Perhaps the fuselage is relatively intact, with most of the wings torn off.

I think the plastic is carbon fiber reinforced plastic, with a lot of it at the tail. It might be broken, but I don't think it would fall apart.

 

[Warwick1991]

Some of the attempts to reconstruct the final approach of MH370 assume that the final descent was at a very high speed, possibly with a pilot still at the controls. How the APU (there was 1, not 2) would have influenced the speed is uncertain. The wreckage that drifted across the Indian Ocean seems to show that there was no attempt to position the flaperons for a landing.

It's possible that there's just pieces of the fuselage, but at this point no one really knows. I am looking forward to the next search, and I hope Ocean Infinity finds MH370, or what's left of it on the seabed. The CVR and FDR could still yield data if they are found. JMO