My opinions only, no facts here:
Looking at the map of the ping detection locations, and considering the implied distances between detection sites, this map makes no sense, even if the ocean was only one foot deep. As I pointed out in an earlier post, the TPL-25 ping detector that was used has a detection range of ONE MILE from the black box (this info is from a navy.mil site). Here is exactly what the site says: "The TPL is able to detect a signal from a distance of approximately one mile with a maximum depth of 20,000 feet." That means the device can be towed up to 20,000 feet deep, but can detect a signal only one mile from the source. However, as I previously stated, there are cases where a black box might be detected from 2 miles away, but a three mile detection range may be somewhat mythical.
The pings were detected from points 24.3 km (15 miles) apart! If the black box is dead-center in the search area AND if the TPL-25 was towed just above the bottom of the ocean, this requires that the signal was detected up to 7.5 miles away. Now, if the two black boxes were separated from each other by many miles and you had a three mile detection range, the map makes at least a little sense to me. But, I cannot think of a realistic plane crash scenario that would deposit the two black boxes so far apart from each other.
Remember that the frequency of the pings was about 33 khz, rather than the expected 37.5 khz. I can think of only one other logical man-made source for such a signal. And that is a depth sounder, a device that is on many boats and ships (you know- a fish finder). Depth sounders have significant military and research applications on the oceans. Depth sounders in deep water commonly use 33 khz as one of their frequencies. If a depth sounder was operating at between 50 to 70 pulses a minute, I suppose it would approximate a black box signal. But we have to assume that the searchers have fully accounted for this possibility. They do this for a living, and I do not.
Look up "Echo sounding" on Wikipedia if you want more information.
On a second subject, I read articles from and listened to various experts with quiet amusement over the past many weeks talking about how it is impossible to use a cell phone from a jet. Yes, they were all kind-of right, but many missed the point that your phone can make contact with cell towers, even if your text or voice message ultimately fails. Now that we know the MH-370 copilot's cell phone made contact with a cell tower, the subject will hopefully get a more serious analysis. Cell phone calls from high altitude cause all sorts of problems with ground-based cell tower systems because the plane is traveling so fast and can "see" so many towers at the same time. So, most of your attempts to dial from high altitude will fail. BUT, you should make contact with various towers. Continuing, I find it hard to believe that the copilot is the only one on MH 370 who forgot to shut his phone off. With a list of the cell numbers of every passenger on board MH-370, a wealth of information might be recovered (before the plane got far away from land). There will likely be other cell tower contacts and maybe, just maybe a truncated text or partial mailbox voice message.
Sleuth On!
I wonder if that has to do with Boeing or something?
lease:
