Originally posted by TNHunter
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Malaysia Airlines Flight Goes Missing En Route to China - Flight MH370
Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
-
Originally posted by mcjensen View PostI will add to what I said before:
Lets be real folks, there was no fire, no smoke, no flames, no mechanical failure, no catastrophic failure...this was an abduction..
A list of conspiracy theories would not be complete without the obligatory alien abduction narrative. Alexandra Bruce, of Forbidden Knowledge TV, has used flight mapping website Flightradar as an example of extra-terrestrial involvement in the disappearance of MH370.
Pointing to a video by “intrepid citizen reporter” YouTube user DAHBOO7, Bruce claims radar readings in the clip “captured signals from what for now, can only be termed a UFO”.
The video recreates the plane’s final moments and shows a “mystery object” flying at an accelerated speed which is in fact marked as the Korean Airlines Flight 672.
Others however have needed less convincing on the alien-as perpetrator forefront.
Comment
-
Originally posted by 1090 MHz View PostYes... it's got to be Aliens! Where's Scully and Mulder when you need them ?
sunday-sport-mh370.jpg
"Problem solved!"
Comment
-
Originally posted by TNHunter View Post
Comment
-
Originally posted by smay69 View PostIs it possible for a pilot to change the transponder ID so it looks like another plane?
ICAO 24-bit address
Mode S equipment on aircraft are assigned a unique ICAO 24-bit address or (informally) Mode-S "hex code" upon national registration and this address becomes a part of the aircraft's Certificate of Registration. Normally, the address is never changed, however, the transponders are reprogrammable and, occasionally, are moved from one aircraft to another (presumably for operational or cost purposes), either by maintenance or by changing the appropriate entry in the aircraft's
Flight management system http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_management_system
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cambridgebreakingnews on bbc tv in uk is that australia says it detected the pings from mh370 and is searching towards south pole , no im not joking that vague info but thats what was said..so again tomnod.com we need new images for new suspect area
Comment
-
Originally posted by smay69 View PostSo switching off the transponder also switches off the broadcast of ADS-B but not necessarily the ADS-B itself?
Is it possible for a pilot to change the transponder ID so it looks like another plane?
Comment
-
Originally posted by SpaxmoidJAm View PostNo if the inmarsat system time stamps its data and there is a handshake before data starts(a known set of comands to establish the link) and you know how long that command takes to process or there is a deliberate wait time before a reply is given (i.e. plane receives command processes but wait 200ms from receiving the command to sending its reply) you can deduce distance from the satilite by the two way travel time.Last edited by smay69; 2014-03-19, 23:28.
Comment
-
Originally posted by airnrail View PostFunny there's not a word about this "revelation" on any Australian media site that I've looked at and they are on the case 24/7. Nothing that I can find on the BBC website either.
Comment
-
Originally posted by SpaxmoidJAm View PostNo if the inmarsat system time stamps its data and there is a handshake before data starts(a known set of comands to establish the link) and you know how long that command takes to process or there is a deliberate wait time before a reply is given (i.e. plane receives command processes but wait 200ms from receiving the command to sending its reply) you can deduce distance from the satilite by the two way travel time.
Edit:
smay69 your post further validates it.
flyingduck: I thought about using amplitude, but seeing as that could be affected by weather, and because it's a 2 way communication, it seemed better to use latency. Still could be amplitude though, and it would be useful for validating your calculations.Last edited by xlynx; 2014-03-19, 23:31.
Comment
-
Originally posted by SpaxmoidJAm View PostNo if the inmarsat system time stamps its data and there is a handshake before data starts(a known set of comands to establish the link) and you know how long that command takes to process or there is a deliberate wait time before a reply is given (i.e. plane receives command processes but wait 200ms from receiving the command to sending its reply) you can deduce distance from the satilite by the two way travel time.
I think the confusion is arising because the "ping" used in the context of the missing MH flight is being confused by the UNIX/Windows/DOS Networking ping command (ie, ping 192.168.1.1). Below is link that explains just that:
Eight days since the Malaysian Airlines flight MH370 disappeared somewhere over southeast Asia, the last known details about the missing Boeing 777 come
"Ping
A Ping is a quite common term for IT Networking. It refers to a utility used to test the reachability of a host on an IP network and measure the round-trip time (RTT) of the packets even if it is more frequently associated to the data messages themselves, or “pings”.
Similarly to what happens on a Local Area Network, satellites send pings (once a hour) to their receiving peers that respond to it thus signaling their network presence. Hence, these pings are no more than simple probes used to check the reachability of SATCOM systems aboard the planes.
Based on details recently disclosed, the last response to a satellite ping, was sent by the SATCOM aboard MH370 at 08.11AM Malaysia time, some 7 hours past the loss of contact with the Boeing 777.
From the analysis of the time between request and responce it is possible to work out the distance of the plane which is a circumference of certain radius from the satellite based on which, two possible routes were drawn by the investigators."
Comment
-
Originally posted by cretanrunner View PostThanks for reminding me what I said. Let's just forget this conversation shall we? Maybe you are a troll, maybe not. I was having a conversation with someone else about Goodfellow's theory, and you dived in on one specific detail. Troll-like behaviour possibly, but never mind.
Now, why don't you elaborate on what you believe?
You seem to be saying that because the Yanks and Aussies seem to be concentrating on a particular area, that must be where the plane went. You may well be right, and I don't have any info that says either way. But what about the claim, (maybe rubbish again), that the plane headed west to the Malacca Strait and was logged there by radar?
What is the latest consensus about an actual flight path? Do we know, or are we all just speculating? If it did go west to the Malacca Strait, the Aus/US search area looks wrong. If the westerly flight path never happened, then do we have info, (rather than assumptions), about a flight path towards WMKN, then onward to west of Australia?
I'm not pretending I know any of these answers. But if someone does it would be helpful to know. Hopefully the authorities have better data than what is being thrown around here.
Presumably, you are thinking that they had a problem, (fire), that knocked out comms. They tried to get to WMKN, but having set that course on autopilot, were overcome by fumes or whatever, and the plane just flew on till it ran out of fuel. Could well be.
The other thing that is so vague is whether or not the comms were switched off deliberately or not.
The Australians have drawn a four sided figure which defines the search are. The Inmarsat radial dimension of the figure can be used to estimate the precision and accuracy of that data. And the length along the circumference represents the uncertainty in the endurance and track of the aircraft.
The Australians have been requested by the Malaysians to perform this search and I do not believe that they, the US and New Zealand are prepared to be jerked around and send their planes out in the middle of the Indian Ocean on no good basis. So, I believe, they will have talked to the technical people at Inmarsat, MAS, the Thais and the Malaysian Defense Dept. So they probably have the best data and have done the best analysis (or even the only analysis) of the data.
Other less ephemeral data that they would have access to would be the general capabilities of the PRC's, India's, Pakistan's and the US's (in Afghanistan) air defense radar systems.
Plainly the NTSB/ Australians do not give credence to some of the statements made by the Malaysian administration, much if which is inconsistent and has been negated. For instance, MAS negated the administration's statements regarding the ACARS data.
I think that the NTSB / Australians believe that the plane turned back to Malaysia but, for reasons unknown, failed to land there and flew on a track that was the extension of the return track to Malaysia. Hence they are searching where they are.
Comment
-
Originally posted by TNHunter View PostADS-B is NOT a transponder function. It is separate avionics. It has it's own GPS receivers and formulates it's own data packet extensions. It is broadcast as an extension to the Mode S transponder making it a Mode ES transponder. Mode S does not broadcast a position within it's data packet. Baro altitude is part of the data packet as well as ICAO codes, Flight numbers and much more. ADS-B does NOT use GPS altitude, it uses BARO altitude or Mode C information.
Originally posted by MIT EE View PostFrom the analysis of the time between request and responce it is possible to work out the distance of the plane which is a circumference of certain radius from the satellite based on which, two possible routes were drawn by the investigators."
Now, my only real remaining question is #1, reworded:
Is there any evidence ACARS was switched off and did not fail? Was MH370's ACARS equipment built to send a disconnect signal to indicate a graceful shutdown?
This seems a crucial question, because the original suspicions were based on a faulty assumption about ACARS offline time and the likely incorrect belief this occurred before the last comms and transponder offline. There's still the reprogrammed flight computer, but is that a strong enough case to focus on possible hijacking rather than equipment failure?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Speed Daemon View PostADS-B is a specification, not a thing. The device on a plane that would implement the "ADS-B out" specification is the transponder.
Not without specialist tools. Under the "never say never" rule this might possibly be done while the plane is in flight, but isn't very probable.
Comment
-
Comment