Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Malaysia Airlines Flight Goes Missing En Route to China - Flight MH370

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by smay69 View Post
    How do we know the FL450 is real? Do a playback on this site for MH370 the next night (ie 24 hours after this plane went missing) - Mar 8, 17:00 UTC. That one does a weird FL450 loop but I think it may be a reading anomaly based on perhaps reads from 2 different ADS-B receivers over their maximum range...
    I was going to ask the same question yesterday, has FL450 been confirmed anywhere, if not my guess is the data from Flightradar24 has been used from the following day. The data from the following day had a data error in it and the Flight would not have moved like that in reality.

    To be honest the only information i am certain is correct for MH370 is that the Aircraft disappearing off Flightradar24's Map and the last contact from the Aircraft tie in time wise.

    All other information from various source's is vague or guesswork, the Inmarsat data being a prime example as the Aircraft could be anywhere.
    AMS Daily Fight Information: http://schiphol.dutchplanespotters.nl/

    Comment


    • Originally posted by speedbird1960 View Post
      I was going to ask the same question yesterday, has FL450 been confirmed anywhere, if not my guess is the data from Flightradar24 has been used from the following day. The data from the following day had a data error in it and the Flight would not have moved like that in reality.

      To be honest the only information i am certain is correct for MH370 is that the Aircraft disappearing off Flightradar24's Map and the last contact from the Aircraft tie in time wise.

      All other information from various source's is vague or guesswork, the Inmarsat data being a prime example as the Aircraft could be anywhere.
      The report of 45,000 feet appeared in the NYT. Apparently the transponder went off and this was followed by a climb to 45,000 feet. This report only lasted a day or two. It was followed by a report in the NYT that, after the transponder went off, the plane executed a turn to the west "under computer control" (at 35,000 feet). Go figure!

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Mac Attack View Post
        Did not check into this forum for 12+ hours and suddenly it became a tomnod support site.... with people seemingly "yelling at each other" (albeit the texts were not capitalised / bolded) and claiming of leaving....

        Folks... this IS a Flightradar24 site and this thread IS generously hosted by Flightradar24 so I believe we should all give a little respect and gratitude to the site owners on allowing us to leverage on this resource. Most of us here are all worried about the passengers on board and if the newbies pay a little respect to this thread's contributors by READING what was previously written they would see that.

        Barging in and flooding this site with referrals to another site is simply RUDE. Arguing with this site's moderator(s) is simply STUPID. If you don't like this, please LEAVE. No one forced you to be here in the first place.

        Now let's get back to the high quality discussions we had before which is why some of us stuck to this site.

        And if our discussions are deviating from this site's main intention, I respectfully ask the moderators to either guide us appropriately, or kick us out which the moderators and owners have the absolute right to do so.

        BTW Flightradar24.... thank you for allowing us to share our thoughts for the past 110+ pages and hope we get a little more leeway until MH370 is located.

        Also BTW, I am a strong supporter of mandating a system which allows the continuous tracking of of an aircraft and one which cannot be turned off by anyone on the plane. Satellite-based ADS-B /transponder system would work as long as someone works out how to make it conflict free (maybe via assigning more digits to squawk and setting some form of globally structured digit assignment) and tamper-proof. I hope I am making sense as again I am a newbie.... but I have learnt so much in the past couple of days.
        Circuit breakers exist for a very good safety reason. If the answer is to install electronics onto airliners in an unsafe manner then what is the question?

        Lets assume that such equipment had been installed on this flight and people on the ground had a real-time knowledge of the plane's position. Under whatever your pet hypothesis of what occurred during this flight how many lives would have been saved? The answer is zero.

        I cannot see any aircraft manufacturing company producing, or any regulatory agency allowing, electronics equipment which cannot be turned off by having the breaker pulled.

        IIRC there has been at least one fire induced crash related to electronic equipment and breakers. As I remember the crew thought that they had isolated an electronic system but it was not on the breaker it should have been. IIRC all on board died. I cannot remember more than that but a search of the NTSB reports will find it.

        Comment


        • Not sure if anyone has raised this earlier but - why would the facility to switch off the transponder be in the cockpit? Why would the crew ever need to switch off the transponder? Engineering will/could require the option but then it could be (the on/off switch) mounted elsewhere. Am I missing something? I'm not into aeroplanes other than flying in them so please excuse if I'm being ignorant! Bob Cartmell

          Comment


          • As a super Moderator, I am inclined to listen to and believe Speedbird 1960s comments and observations more than anything else posted here or in the media, due to experience of the site and the industry.

            So until something more concrete becomes available, I think we should all take a backseat, instead of creating more wild speculation that often gets looked at by journalists and others and taken wrongly as fact. There remains precious little fact about the case and until the relevant authorities come up with a conclusion, we should resume our own lives. We are currently adding nothing and probably creating lots more confusion. Bear in mind the Air France disappearance took two years to find the black box and in this case, it may never be found.

            Even if it is, there may still be gaps and omissions, but it is for those with greater access to the facts to determine these, rather than some plane spotters internet forum, where most of the current posters, including myself, have only joined up recently. I would like to thank the knowledgeable and experienced posters for sharing their wisdom. I think all possibilities have now been aired here. The best thing we could all do now is sign up with FR24 and provide them with income for utilising so much bandwidth over the past weeks.
            Last edited by RAFF; 2014-03-22, 12:28.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by cartmell100 View Post
              Not sure if anyone has raised this earlier but - why would the facility to switch off the transponder be in the cockpit? Why would the crew ever need to switch off the transponder? Engineering will/could require the option but then it could be (the on/off switch) mounted elsewhere. Am I missing something? I'm not into aeroplanes other than flying in them so please excuse if I'm being ignorant! Bob Cartmell
              Yeah i'm on your level of expertise, but i guess someone can correct me if i'm wrong... But for example is the switch to turn of the "black box" also in the cockpit. It's because if theres a Power drop or a failure in any way, the pilot should be able to re-route the electricity to get the capacity needed.

              BTW, I've used this website purely for personal Aviation interest but since this happened i became a member, and I understand that this website or threads wasn't supposed for this purpose, but frankly it is the best way to get some unfiltered information. I like it alot

              Comment


              • Originally posted by deijnoff View Post
                ... is the switch to turn of the "black box" also in the cockpit.
                No. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_Data_Recorder
                Originally posted by deijnoff View Post
                I've used this website purely for personal Aviation interest but since this happened i became a member, and I understand that this website or threads wasn't supposed for this purpose, but frankly it is the best way to get some unfiltered information. I like it alot
                Same here. Aviation enthousiast since +30 years. Bought the fr24 app when first ipad surfaced, years ago. Still using it, daily. Only became member of this forum for this thread (since page 7 or so), but I've read every single post.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by RAFF View Post
                  I think we should all take a backseat, instead of creating more wild speculation that often gets looked at by journalists and others and taken wrongly as fact. There remains precious little fact about the case and until the relevant authorities come up with a conclusion, we should resume our own lives. We are currently adding nothing and probably creating lots more confusion.
                  I am new to these forums but have been an aviation enthusiast all my life. One of the reasons I came here to discuss is because as forums go you are likely to get more technical information/analysis about what could have happened.

                  One thing we can't ignore at this point is the current focus of the search. One has to believe many countries would not put all the resources they are into this particular area if it were based solely on grainy Tomnod photos. They, and their militaries, obviously have access to much more information than we do so the current search efforts likely have some more credible information than we do.

                  That being said, there is no reason our armchair observations may not have some merit. Maybe we can figure out things "they" already know purely from freely available data. One example is archived ATC - they released a transcript they other day but you could listen for yourself on the web from day 1.

                  Another question I have is about the data on these sites. Can we ascertain how long it took for a plane to take off from it, ie how much runway they used? Or is the resolution of readings too coarse and/or not switched on for the ride down the runway. The reason I ask if we can get all other relevent data from that night, including another 777-200ER of the same model taking about 20 minutes later going for an 11 hour flight. Based on the takeoff distance and the known passenger loading of the aircraft one may be able to make a reasonable estimate of fuel on board (ie 6 hours worth vs 8 hours worth)

                  The other thing I have no idea about but maybe someone else here does is how is jet fuel priced in a country - are they all the same based on market prices? Are their extra taxes in certain countries? Do national flag carriers get preferential pricing/tax rebates in their country? If fuel was considerably cheaper in Malaysia for Malaysian Airlines for a relatively short (for a 777-200ER) flight to Bejing it may be more economical to fuel it up in Malaysia to have a significant amount still left for the return trip so they purchase less (or none) in China - even with the extra weight.

                  Again much of this is armchair theory, but with the mix of people who visit these forums you are likely to get credible, well thought out answers here.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by cartmell100 View Post
                    Not sure if anyone has raised this earlier but - why would the facility to switch off the transponder be in the cockpit? Why would the crew ever need to switch off the transponder? Engineering will/could require the option but then it could be (the on/off switch) mounted elsewhere. Am I missing something? I'm not into aeroplanes other than flying in them so please excuse if I'm being ignorant!
                    Yeah, I wondered this too. Any experts know the answer? I'm guessing because sometime after landing, if ATC and Captain decide it's not needed any more, it is switched off to minimise clutter on ATC screens when they are trying to concentrate on airborne traffic. This might happen long before aircraft is parked and powered down. Just a guess.

                    Comment


                    • Is it possible that the Captain pilot pre-programmed all of the planes flight plans into the flight computer before takeoff, after specific training on his simulator, including every change of direction and altitude change? Calculating exactly where the plane would end up with the permitted fuel?
                      Then the only real thing he had to focus on was eliminating the co-pilot( i.e. locking him out of the cabin), and somehow knocking out the passengers in the other part of the plane. Can it be done with relative ease?
                      Obviously, this particular scenario is a suicide mission with total destruction of the plane and the passengers.
                      Last edited by mcjensen; 2014-03-22, 13:48.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by smay69 View Post
                        The other thing I have no idea about but maybe someone else here does is how is jet fuel priced in a country - are they all the same based on market prices? Are their extra taxes in certain countries? Do national flag carriers get preferential pricing/tax rebates in their country? If fuel was considerably cheaper in Malaysia for Malaysian Airlines for a relatively short (for a 777-200ER) flight to Bejing it may be more economical to fuel it up in Malaysia to have a significant amount still left for the return trip so they purchase less (or none) in China - even with the extra weight.
                        Fair point, but I think I saw somewhere that Malaysian Airlines had actually released the exact amount of fuel that was loaded?

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by cartmell100 View Post
                          Not sure if anyone has raised this earlier but - why would the facility to switch off the transponder be in the cockpit? Why would the crew ever need to switch off the transponder? Engineering will/could require the option but then it could be (the on/off switch) mounted elsewhere. Am I missing something? I'm not into aeroplanes other than flying in them so please excuse if I'm being ignorant! Bob Cartmell
                          One reason - the transponder malfunctions, starts squawking garbage and clutters up ATC with bogus data. Not good. On/Off selector switch in the cockpit makes sense.

                          This is the first time to my knowledge that a transponder has been turned off in flight so that someone could steal a commercial aircraft. To suggest that "we" need to take away the ability to turn off a piece of equipment is premature at this juncture. Maybe if air crews start stealing aircraft left and right, or they let unauthorized personnel onto the flight desk who then hijack the plane, then "we" institute the "always track me" tech. The good old days of the standard hijack for whatever are 13 years gone. Now we worry about Boeing / Airbus Cruise Missiles. But in the time since 9/11/01, how many times has a plane been "re-purposed" in flight? It's an anomaly, provided the flight crew keep the dang door shut. Now if the Captain or Co-Pilot decide to divert from the scheduled flight plan, there is no real way to mitigate that scenario. We trust them, but they're human, just like the rest of us.

                          A.J.
                          F-KBOI2

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by jhmb View Post
                            No. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_Data_Recorder

                            Same here. Aviation enthousiast since +30 years. Bought the fr24 app when first ipad surfaced, years ago. Still using it, daily. Only became member of this forum for this thread (since page 7 or so), but I've read every single post.
                            Oh, ok! learned something new then. Allthough on BBC they said that it is possible to re-route all the Power, including the flight data recorder, or is that a different thing? Maybe they got it wrong or something

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by ajrystad View Post
                              ....Now if the Captain or Co-Pilot decide to divert from the scheduled flight plan, there is no real way to mitigate that scenario. We trust them, but they're human, just like the rest of us....
                              A.J.
                              F-KBOI2
                              Sure, and I think it would be very difficult to totally ascertain a pilots demeanor before boarding...generally speaking, they seem to do an exceptional job of flying safely (with the added help of the airplanes computers) 50,000 airplanes per day.

                              If one pilot decides to go rogue...it would be a great betrayal, to the airline, the flight crew, the passengers, his family, his country and all the families involved.
                              While only a very few pilots have gone on a suicide mission, so far, I don't think there's been one pilot who has turned into a terrorist or
                              hijacked a plane. If I'm correct, that's quite amazing.

                              Still, despite this potential unknown human factor or human error, along with the potential mechanical problems, there should be extraordinary steps taken to always know where each plane is exactly at, in the world. We have the technology.
                              Last edited by mcjensen; 2014-03-22, 14:11.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Speed Daemon View Post
                                Interesting. The Telegraph article that you included is proof positive that if someone wants to find something significant enough, that anything will do.

                                In the spirit of the Telegraph article, I found some "odd features" of my own:
                                • The tower needlessly identified itself "this is KL control tower..." which is sort of like a man in a Captain's uniform with a name tag reading "Obvious" declaring "I am Captain Obvious!" Yes, we can see that ourselves, Captain Obvious.


                                Probably it's a needed, and used to habit,.... and since the plane can talk to the tower of KL, reaching tower of Vietnaam ( confirming of their arrival and runway ready,.. etc. ) and even beijjing,.. so just to verify the conversation, that " 'here you are talking to, right now' " - perhaps a usual way of speaking.
                                • At 12:40 in the morning, the tower says "good night", even though it previously had said "good morning".

                                MH370 says "goodbye" to the tower. Proof positive that they never intended to return!
                                • In their last transmission at 1:29AM, MH370 says "good night", even though it previously had said "good morning".

                                That's significant...if you want it to be...

                                Especially, the plane is in air, and traveling towards East at 12.00 around night time,
                                night/morning confusion will always remain,... for the receiving and leaving country versus the plane pilots,...
                                also towards the east, further you travel, the time is 'earlier/ahead' .

                                ------------
                                Last edited by voyager10; 2014-03-22, 15:23.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X