No announcement yet.

FR24 MH370 Data

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • FR24 MH370 Data

    I searched all 146 MH370 pages and only saw discussion of the FR24 data in about the first 10 pages. Now that the thread is locked, I hope I am posting in the right place. Someone compiled MH370's fr24 data from different databases and posted it here:

    The last few lines of this data are:

    17:18:XX;6,6800;103,4600;025;35000;473;0;2157;F-WMKC1;FR24 Pb
    17:19:04;;;;35000;473;;;;FR24 Gr
    17:19:08;;;;35000;473;;;;FR24 Gr
    17:19:10;;;;35000;474;;;;FR24 Gr
    17:19:15;;;;35000;474;;;;FR24 Gr
    17:19:XX;6,8000;103,5200;025;35000;474;0;2157;F-WMKC1;FR24 Pb
    17:19:35;;;;35000;474;;;;FR24 Gr
    17:19:45;;;;35000;473;;;;FR24 Gr
    17:20:05;;;;35000;472;;;;FR24 Gr
    17:20:11;;;;35000;472;;;;FR24 Gr
    17:20:XX;*;*;028;35000;472;;;;FR24 Pn
    17:20:15;;;;35000;471;;;;FR24 Gr
    17:20:22;;;;35000;471;;;;FR24 Gr
    17:20:33;;;;35000;471;;;;FR24 Gr
    17:20:49;;;;35000;471;;;;FR24 Gr
    17:20:XX;6,9300;103,5900;040;0;471;0;2157;F-WMKC1;FR24 Pb
    17:21:XX;6,9700;103,6300;040;0;471;0;2157;F-WMKC1;FR24 Pb

    I am interested in why the altitude data sourced from "FR24 Pb" was 0 at 17:20:XX and 17:21:XX. Mike posted on page 6 that it was "It could just be bad signal" and on page 15 that " 0 is a data error from the receiver or signal reception"

    The post below is a table that includes the seconds that are XX in the above data and shows altitude data.

    Was the 0 altitude data due to the lack of a transmitted altitude number from the aircaraft or might it have been omitted in a conversion of data between FR24 databases? Mike does include altitude in the chart at above. If I put the time/data in chronological order:

    17:20:35 6.9300 103.5900 40 0 471 0 2157 F-WMKC1 FR24 Pb
    17:20:49 35000 471 FR24 Gr
    17:21:03 6.97 103.63 40 0 471 0 2157 F-WMKC1 FR24 Pb

    It seems the Graph data reports Alt at :49 while PLAYBACK data reports altitude 0 at :35. Why would "FR24 Pb" data report altitude of 0 14 seconds befor "Fr24 Gr" data reports alt of 35000?

    If the 0 is because the aircraft did not transmit an altitude value, could the Transponder in the plane have been turned from "XPNDR" to "ALT Rptg OFF"? Here is a picture of the transponder:

    I know FlightRadar 24 pinned the MH370 flight playback for March 7. Is there a way to see the previous 30 days of MH370 flights? BTW I did purchase the fr24 app and I like it.

  • #2
    As I understand it Malaysia was certified to operate FANS 1/A from November 2013 and this in turn required aircraft equipped with ADS-C, rather than ADS-B. In this context -B stands for Broadcast, whilst -C stands for Contract. In this context the mode-S transponder needs to be contracted to the ATS region in which it is flown. The only way that the aircraft can break this contract is by initiating a change from one Flight Information Region (FIR) to another. This is done by entering a new four letter code into the system.

    In this context they automatically logged off with Kuala Lumpur by logging in with Ho Chi Minh. It would have appeared to Kuala Lumpur at 17:21 that the transponder was switched off but in actual fact it was Contracted to another ATS.


    • #3
      Wiki says ADS-C is a one-to-one contact protocol, but the FR24 receivers were receiving broadcast transmissions ... until they stopped. Is there a reason that they couldn't have ADS-B and ADS-C?


      • #4
        Originally posted by peterhr View Post
        Wiki says ADS-C is a one-to-one contact protocol, but the FR24 receivers were receiving broadcast transmissions ... until they stopped. Is there a reason that they couldn't have ADS-B and ADS-C?
        Software protocols for ADS-C still permit aircraft details to be transmitted and displayed on FR24 however the same protocols also use fuzzy logic which infer the position from the electronic flight plan uploaded to the aircraft's flight management computer and from receiving actual contact. It is one to one in the sense that electronic flight plan protocols required a one to one "contract" to be formed with the relevant ATS.

        Ho Chi Minh control contacted Lumpur control at 1:38am MYT to say they lost MH370 off their radar at BITOD. This could only be true if MH370 had logged on with HCM using their transponder after 1:21am MYT.

        Vietnam has SSR (only) radar at Ca Mau airport. They only have Primary radar at Ho Chi Minh and this is limited to 90nm radius. In other words HCM could not have lost MH370 off radar if the transponder was not still working.

        There are a number of recent incidents where B777/B787 aircraft have suffered electrical power failures and either lost transponder functions altogether or else pilots perceived a "fail" warning about their transponders, but could still be detected by Air Traffic Services.
        • 28 September 2013 inbound to Canada Transponder failure: LOT Polish Airlines Boeing 787-800, registration SP-LRA performing flight LOT41 from Warsaw to Toronto, was descending through 9,000 feet towards Toronto when approach control directed crew to use another transponder. ATC lost LOT41's tag on the radar screen and were not receiving any signal from their transponder. Approach queried again a minute later and crew responded they had tried the other transponder but received a fail indication.
        • 28 September 2013 outbound from Canada Transponder failure: LOT Polish Airlines Boeing 787-800, registration SP-LRA performing LOT42 from Toronto to Warsaw climbing out of Toronto when crew stopped the climb at FL270 due to transponder failure, but decided to continue across Greenland towards Warsaw at FL270. Aircraft was about 130 nm westsouthwest of Keflavik when crew diverted to Iceland. The airline reported that the transponder malfunctioned prompting Norway to not permit overflight of the aircraft. Radar data show the Mode-S transponder of the aircraft, including position reporting, worked without flaw throughout the flight.
        • United B772 over Pacific 11 July 2014, transponder failure & smoke haze on board. United Boeing 777-200, registration N210UA performing flight UA-201 (dep Jul 10th) from Honolulu to Guam, with 335 passengers and 13 crew, enroute at FL350 over the Pacific Ocean about 300nm southsouthwest of Midway Islands,UM (USA) and about 850nm west of Honolulu when crew decided to return to Honolulu due to smell of smoke on board. The aircraft descended to FL300 for the way back. About 10 minutes later haze was observed in the cabin prompting the crew to turn north and divert to Midway Islands. The aircraft dumped fuel and landed safely in Midway about one hour after turning around. There is a report on the Internet telling that the aircraft lost transponder, radios and other systems one by one, however, radar data indicate the transponder worked until touchdown. A passenger reported that there had been a burning smell prior to departure. In flight the smell returned becoming stronger and stronger, the smoke detectors in the aft cabin triggered. The captain announced there were electrical problems and the (weather) radar had ceased functioning with loss of some Nav comms.
        • United B772 near Santo Domingo on Aug 26th 2012, partial loss of communication: United Airlines Boeing 777-200, registration N209UA performing flight UA-861 (dep Aug 25th) from Washington Dulles,DC (USA) to Sao Paulo Guarulhos,SP (Brazil), was enroute at FL350 over the Atlantic about 200nm north of Santo Domingo (Dominican Republic) when the crew decided to return to Washington and turned initially west before turning north remaining east of Tropical Storm Isaac. According to a passenger the captain announced the aircraft had suffered a partial loss of the communication equipment and therefore returned to Washington.
        • Jet Airways B773 over Germany on Mar 13th 2014, loss of communication Jet Airways Boeing 777-300, registration VT-JEG performing flight 9W-117 from London Heathrow,EN (UK) to Mumbai (India), was enroute at FL330 over Netherlands being handed off to Germany near Münster (Germany), when Maastricht Upper Area Control informed Germany's DFS at 23:01L (22:01Z) that voice communication with the aircraft had been lost. Germany's DFS contacted Germany's Luftwaffe at 22:05Z, however, no fighter aircraft were dispatched to intercept the aircraft because of positive radar contact and the aircraft following its planned flight track and remaining within clearance. About 22 minutes later radio contact was re-established and the aircraft continued to Mumbai for a safe landing without further incident.
        • Air India B773 near Delhi on Mar 10th 2014, transponder failure: An Air India Boeing 777-300, registration VT-ALS performing flight AI-127 from Delhi (India) to Chicago O'Hare,IL (USA) with 313 passengers and 16 crew, was climbing out of Delhi when the crew stopped the climb at FL280 reporting a problem with the transponders. The aircraft descended to FL150, entered a hold to dump fuel and landed safely back in Delhi about 140 minutes after departure.
        • THY B773 near Toronto on Jan 16th 2014, unreliable air data: THY Turkish Airlines Boeing 777-300, registration TC-JJI performing flight TK-18 from Toronto to Istanbul with 307 people on board, was climbing out of Toronto when numerous air data systems failed. The crew stopped the climb at about 15000 feet, declared emergency, dumped fuel and returned to Toronto for a safe landing.
        Last edited by Chopstyx; 2014-08-02, 23:44. Reason: improving gramar