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

[ilovepierre]

It sure DOES mean that the plane could NOT have been at the Maldives !!!
The Maldives is only about 500 miles east of the satellite.
It is very OLD science that the plane was about 2000 miles from the satellite !
Knowing exactly how radar-like technolgy works is why planes do not collide every day.

The ONLY new science used by Inmarsat was whether the plane was
2000 miles northeast OR 2000 miles southeast of the satellite !!!!!

If old trusted science says an object is 2000 miles away,
then it definitely can NOT be found 500 miles away.

Considering there has been no debris found anywhere near where Immersat has determined the plane to be means one of 2 things IMO:
1) The plane is going to be somewhere on the Northern Arc
2) Immersat's data is inaccurate, and the plane is somewhere else near or around the Southern Arc data

Since we don't know for sure what data or factors Immersat used to determine the arcs, it is of my opinion that their data is a tad inaccurate. I guess for now we can agree to disagree about Immersat.

 

[2rose]

That could be possible too.
I just think that the Maldives sighting(s) should be looked at closer and also the water near the island(s) should be looked at too.

I really DO wish we had a better explanation of the Maldives signting too !

What the authorites seem to have done is simply dismissed the signting as eroneous
Instead I would rather have seen a valid investigation & explanation
as to what the Maldives sighting actually was.

For instance, I wish they had said something like we have gone over the
radar records & have accounted for ALL the planes in the Maldives area
at 6am on 8 March 2014 which include ... etc. etc. etc.

Then they could draw some conclulsion from the data.
For instance, maybe they know of some cargo plane that was experiencing some mechanical problems
... or maybe a new pilot training ... or whatever the investigation turned up.

Transpaency breeds respect

 

[Momoffourboys]

http://au.ibtimes.com/articles/549105/20140423/mh370-malaysian-airlines.htm#.U6jznye9KSM

MH370: Radar Detected UFO Before Jet Goes Missing; Malaysian Air Force Head Reportedly Confirms Sightings


...it was only a matter of time for them to blame it on UFO's.

 

[Momoffourboys]

MUFON State Director Claims Malaysia Airline 370 Was Abducted by Extraterrestrials



http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-1103807

 

[Elainera]

OK let us review HOW the arcs are determined.
The satellite sends a signal to the plane ... then the plane sends a return
signal back to the satellite in which it give its unique identification code.
The TIME it takes for these signals to go back & forth is a scientifically known entity.
A rapid answer back tme means the plane is close to the satellite.
A long answer back time means the plane is further away from the satellite.
So irregardles of whether some cloaking technology is used to hide the plane
from physical eye contact, the signal response time does NOT change ...
therefore the distance between the satellite & the plane will still be
a known circular range (what we familiarly know as a radar range).

bbm - why is the plane not giving its exact location at the same time?

 

[tarabull]

http://nypost.com/2014/06/23/pilot-of-missing-flight-370-has-been-named-chief-suspect/

 

[2rose]

I want to know how much fuel was onboard and if it is a discrepancy between the amount needed to get to Beijing or not.

I have not seen a number for the fuel amount ... however the authorities do know it.

When the ACARS transmission was still operating one of the pieces it transmitted was the remaining amount of fuel.
So the last info they have was sent at 1:07 am MYT.

Per the governemnt website for the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) ...

http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/2014/considerations-on-defining-the-search-area-mh370.aspx

ACARS and radar data

The final ACARS transmission was at 17:07 UTC and provided location reports from the initial stage of the flight as well as a recording of the aircraft fuel remaining.

 

[Mr. Noatak]

OK let us review HOW the arcs are determined.
The satellite sends a signal to the plane ... then the plane sends a return
signal back to the satellite in which it give its unique identification code.
The TIME it takes for these signals to go back & forth is a scientifically known entity.
A rapid answer back tme means the plane is close to the satellite.
A long answer back time means the plane is further away from the satellite.
So irregardles of whether some cloaking technology is used to hide the plane
from physical eye contact, the signal response time does NOT change ...
therefore the distance between the satellite & the plane will still be
a known circular range (what we familiarly know as a radar range).

My opinions only, no facts here:

Because light travels at a fixed speed (186,282 miles a second), it is theoretically possible to determine distances IF the accuracy of your electronic clocks are good enough to measure it. I hope that the satellite/ground stations all had caesium atomic clocks! And there is the little problem of relativity when such minute intervals of time are being measured. Because of relativity, all events are relative. Let me give you an extreme thought experiment about relativity. I am on earth and a satellite is traveling above and past me at 0.9999999999999999999999999999% the speed of light. I send a ping that intersects the satellite when it is directly overhead. But I wait and wait and wait and no ping comes back. What has happened? Because of the great speed of the satellite, all electronic systems on the satellite are slowed waaaaaay down from my stationary perspective. From my stationary perspective it might take centuries for the ping signal to be processed by the electronic system on the satellite and sent back towards me. OK, the Inmarsat satellite is traveling MUCH slower, but the principles are the same.

There may be quantum mechanical effects to consider too.

Inmarsat also used the principle of Doppler shift, whereby if the plane is moving away from the satellite the radio wavelengths returned from the plane to the satellite will be very slightly longer than expected. If the plane is moving towards the satellite, the radio wavelengths returned from the plane to the satellite will be very slightly shorter than expected. This is also good theory, IF radio frequency variations due to atmospheric conditions do not exceed those due to the Doppler effect AND if the frequency variations are not so small that they are exceeded by the error range of the measuring equipment.

In a nutshell, these are some of the reasons that many serious scientists want to know the exact parameters of the Inmarsat study. The raw data is useless, without knowing every detail of how this raw data was processed. Every piece of equipment used during the original data transmissions must also be known.- the manufacturer, the schematic diagrams, etc.

Frankly, in my opinion, if the Inmarsat study had been offered for publication in an esteemed journal such as Earth and Planetary Sciences, the editors and reviewers would be asking many of the same questions.

The Inmarsat theory is interesting and relevant. It simply needs thorough independent peer review, the same as for any theory.

 

[2rose]

Point taken. This is a better image of the zig zag on another arc.

The black dotted lines at the bottom of this blow up do NOT represent
any kind of zig-zag flight path. They represent an "EITHER OR" situation.

The red arcs represent certain distances from the satellite & it is saying
that, for instance, at 8:11am MYT, the location of flight MH370 was
"somewhere" on the farthest red arc because that is the certain distance
that the signal takes to go from the plane to the satellite.

This photo is showing some examples of where the plane could have
been at certain specific times. It could have been either on the
LEFT hand foute (in a straight line from north to south)
OR
RIGHT hand route (in a straight line from north to south).

Either of these routes could have resulted in debris being
found in the pentagon area at the very bottom of the photo.

----

Sligtly further up the red arcs, this photo also shows a 3rd example of
where the flight COULD have been at these times however then it would have been
far away from where the debris was signted. So the purpose of this dated map photo,
was to show how the plane & the debris could have intersected in time & space.

 

[2rose]

Good article MAS explaining where they messed up.

http://au.ibtimes.com/articles/556739/20140624/mh370-mas-boss-malaysian-airline.htm#.U6jwbmYTHMI

Now, the contents of THIS article are believeable & it does help explain away some
of the confusion & delays that existed at the time of the plane's disappearance.
If Malaysia had disclosed this info at the time, then the public could have been
more understanding of the troubles they were dealing with. As it is now some
3+ months later, most people won't ever hear about the problems the difficulties
they encountered such as passports, etc. Too little, too late ?

 

[2rose]

Since we don't know for sure what data or factors Immersat used to determine the arcs, it is of my opinion that their data is a tad inaccurate. I guess for now we can agree to disagree about Immersat.

Yes we have different opinions ... & that is OK

Just to be accurate ...
We DO know how the northern & southern arcs were determined.
It is simply a time/distance equation for the signal to travel from plane to satellite.
It is the same principle that all radar is used world wide.

Where we lack some info is WHY Inmarsat favours the southern arc over the northern arc.
So far, the public has only heard about general comparisons Inmarsat made
& Malaysia has chosen not to release the specifics of their research.

Just to point out one subtle difference that some people seem to not appreciate.
Before the Malaysians released part of Inmarsat's raw data on 27 May 2014,
outside scientists were very critical about the chosen search area.
But after the partial data release, these same scientists are now in agreement that
the plane will be found in the Indian Ocean. So that is one small step forward.


http://www.duncansteel.com/

2014/06/17 Statement from an Independent MH370 Investigation Team

 

[2rose]

why is the plane not giving its exact location at the same time?

The quick answer is because it was never designed to do that.

When the plane is built, a main computer is installed that handles all the
important aspects of flight navigation (including plane location). After that,
the customers who buy the plane can install certain "modules" of their choosing.

For insatance, an easy example is the entertainment system for passengers.
Some planes only fly short distances & don't offer this added feature.
Other planes who do want this future would hire an entertainment company
to come & install an entertainment system (including a seperate computer),
so that movies can be shown to the passengers.

The satellite communication system works on this same principle.
Depending on whether Boeing sells the planes with or without the satellite
communications system, it would either be up to Boeing or the plane owner
to subcontract the job to a satellite company. The satellite intenna
(& its own computer) would then be installed on the top of the airplane.

A satellite company (like Inmarsat) would feel there was no need to design their
communications system with an abilitiy of plane location because ALL commercial
airplanes already have that built-in capacity to that automatically.

What makes MH370 different from all the other commercial airplanes flying around
is that shortly after 1am on 8 March 2014, the transponder & ACARS ceased working
... so the built-in systems to determine plane location were no longer providing
that info to anyone or anything.

 

[LambChop]

I just recently returned from a trip. The pilot announced that for the 1700 mile trip they had 4,000 gallons of jet fuel aboard. It is approximately 2,700 miles from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing so that would be approximately 6,000 gallons they could have had on board, I would imagine.

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

Malaysia Airlines' Hugh Dunleavy: MH370 Hunt Will Take 'Decades'

A Malaysia Airlines boss reportedly said he thinks it will take "decades" to find the missing Flight MH370. In a rare interview, commercial director Hugh Dunleavy told the London Evening Standard newspaper that he believes the Boeing 777 is "somewhere in the south Indian Ocean." He added: "When [a plane] hits the ocean it’s like hitting concrete. The wreckage could be spread over a big area. And there are mountains and canyons in that ocean. I think it could take a really long time to find. We’re talking decades." ...

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/mi...dunleavy-mh370-hunt-will-take-decades-n139061

 

[2rose]

I want to know how much fuel was onboard

I have now seen that Malaysia Airlines has confirmed that the fuel load was 49,100kg
& I also noticed that is the figure being used by the outside scientists ...

http://www.duncansteel.com/690-2

http://stream.wsj.com/story/malaysia-airlines-flight-370/SS-2-475558/SS-2-487633/

Mar 21, 2014 Twitter - Jon Ostrower@jonostrower
RT @FlightDKM: Malaysia Airlines confirms fuel load on #MH370 was 49,100kg.
// ~16,120 US gal. 777-200ER: 45,220 gal capacity. 6.7 lb/gal.

 

[Hatfield]

I really DO wish we had a better explanation of the Maldives signting too !

What the authorites seem to have done is simply dismissed the signting as eroneous
Instead I would rather have seen a valid investigation & explanation
as to what the Maldives sighting actually was.

For instance, I wish they had said something like we have gone over the
radar records & have accounted for ALL the planes in the Maldives area
at 6am on 8 March 2014 which include ... etc. etc. etc.

Then they could draw some conclulsion from the data.
For instance, maybe they know of some cargo plane that was experiencing some mechanical problems
... or maybe a new pilot training ... or whatever the investigation turned up.

Transpaency breeds respect

Exactly. Any type of serious investigation should have done thorough analysis and reports that explain how they dismissed the other sightings and theories. They dont give us any confidence they even pursued them.

 

[2rose]

So I want to repeat the question Elle asked on the previous page - why have there been no searches in the Northern arc? It doesn't even seem to be discussed.

Inmarsat is supposed to have compared the numbers to equivalent data from
flights of 7 other Boeing 777 jets in and out of the area to see where the
Doppler effect would result in a pattern that matched the data from Flight MH370.
And it was the planes flying in the southern arc that matched.

Inmarsat is also supposed to have asked another satellite company
to evaluate their research & that company concurred with their work.

http://edition.cnn.com/2014/05/27/w...sat-right-quest-analysis/index.html?hpt=hp_c2

May 27, 2014 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. "It's very important that this isn't just an Inmarsat activity."

If you want to give a try to following a more technical article ...

http://www.airtrafficmanagement.net/2014/06/mh370-what-does-inmarsat-ping-data-reveal/

This means that the Doppler shift due to the satellite’s motion is not removed by the plane’s terminal when it pre-corrects the frequency of transmission, and thus there is an asymmetry between the BFO which would be produced by a plane flying north of the equator (and thus situated to the north of the satellite) compared to one flying south on a similar track.

In addition, the satellite position used in the plane’s pre-correction algorithm is different from the actual position, and thus the frequency pre-correction that the terminal makes in respect of the plane’s own speed relative to the satellite is not perfect, indeed it is worst when the satellite is furthest north in its orbit.

This explains the confusion in Ari Schulman’s The Atlantic article, which suggested incorrectly that there should be no difference in the residual frequency offset between the north and south tracks when the satellite was stationary at the extreme northern point of its orbit.

 

[time]

I have now seen that Malaysia Airlines has confirmed that the fuel load was 49,100kg
& I also noticed that is the figure being used by the outside scientists ...

http://www.duncansteel.com/690-2

http://stream.wsj.com/story/malaysia-airlines-flight-370/SS-2-475558/SS-2-487633/

Mar 21, 2014 Twitter - Jon Ostrower@jonostrower
RT @FlightDKM: Malaysia Airlines confirms fuel load on #MH370 was 49,100kg.
// ~16,120 US gal. 777-200ER: 45,220 gal capacity. 6.7 lb/gal.

So, it was supposedly at about 1/3 it's capacity? Just checking.

 

[time]

Good article MAS explaining where they messed up.

http://au.ibtimes.com/articles/556739/20140624/mh370-mas-boss-malaysian-airline.htm#.U6jwbmYTHMI

Dunleavy shared that during the first hours that the plane was missing, MAS executives believed the plane diverted. However, alarm escalated when the plane did not land in Beijing.

See, I don't understand statements like this. But maybe I am assuming this means they did not contact the military to see what they knew... maybe I'm not following closely enough, but how could they expect the plane to land in Beijing when it's been AWOL for hours?

The next hours were hazy as media in Beijing clank for MAS executives to explain what happened. Dunleavy said 130 MAS executives needed to fly to Beijing to face the media, but none of them had Chinese visa. It did not help that another two hours were wasted negotiating for officials to issue visas.

IDK, this just sounds like typical, Malaysia blaming of others. It doesn't make sense to me that he is claiming it created much more of a fiasco because 130 executives had to fly to Beijing before one could face the media??? 130? And if they could get that many in two hours, that seems fast to me. Maybe they need more or any Chinese-Malaysians as executives. This is a state run airline that's like everything else in Malaysia ... 40% of the population (Chinese and Indian) is not considered for these jobs.

 

[Hatfield]

Yes we have different opinions ... & that is OK

Just to be accurate ...
We DO know how the northern & southern arcs were determined.
It is simply a time/distance equation for the signal to travel from plane to satellite.
It is the same principle that all radar is used world wide.

Where we lack some info is WHY Inmarsat favours the southern arc over the northern arc.
So far, the public has only heard about general comparisons Inmarsat made
& Malaysia has chosen not to release the specifics of their research.

Just to point out one subtle difference that some people seem to not appreciate.
Before the Malaysians released part of Inmarsat's raw data on 27 May 2014,
outside scientists were very critical about the chosen search area.
But after the partial data release, these same scientists are now in agreement that
the plane will be found in the Indian Ocean. So that is one small step forward.


http://www.duncansteel.com/

2014/06/17 Statement from an Independent MH370 Investigation Team

Thanks 2Rose for all your Immarstat knowledge and if you want, we can elect you to be the "go to" person for any Immarstat questions. :floorlaugh:

JMO
I have long since stopped picking just 1 theory and instead I am considering all theories and just making a list of which ones are probably most likely.

Immarstats approach is close to the top of my list but at least for me, its not at the very top of the list. They are 2nd though, and were first when the underwater pings were heard...LOL If they would have spotted any type of surface debris anywhere near where they were looking, I would most likely move their approach right back to the top. The lack of debri is very bothersome to me because they had so many boats and planes and nothing was ever spotted. There could be reasons for that if their analysis is off course by X number of miles.

I like the Maldives theory the best right now (and I reserve the right to change my opinion at any moment...LOL :floorlaugh: ). The multiple eye witnesses that morning seemed very compelling to me.

I do agree that the Maldives theory does not jive with the Immarstat theory so both theories seem to contradict each other. One possible explanation could be that maybe the last signal for Immarstat was in the area they said and maybe there was enough fuel left to make it back west to Maldives from the last ping. Maybe somehow the satellite handshakes stopped but plane kept going. Im not sure if they had enough fuel left at that point in time or not. Another possibility is if the Immarstat data was picking up something else just like they say the underwater pings were now something else. Or maybe the "cloaking" software confused the satellite handshakes if freescale somehow was testing their devices while plane enroute.

After so much disappointment with the search for MH370, I am just taking everything with a huge grain of salt at this point and not outruling anything until a solid lead is proven to the public. So far, there seems to be no solid evidence of its location. Evidence like debri or more eye witness statements or people who were involved is the type of evidence I would like to see at this point. Until that happens, I am keeping all options open.