Malaysia Airlines 777 - Missing

[GyvAir]

I think what he's referring to is the chatter about how the projected flight paths to the south take the plane over or very close to Sumatra, yet Indonesian radar apparently did not pick it up; a combination that some are saying is impossible and therefore the calculations or the assumptions they are based upon must be flawed.

[Gino Under]

Interesting.
Examination of the charts covering the "implied" routing of MH370, if it really had avoided Indonesian airspace, means it would have potentially passed through Malaysian, Indian, Sri Lankan and Australian FIRs and NONE of them knows anything about this flight's presence during this time period.

The question of this aircraft being seen (without a functioning transponder) by SSR in any of these FIRs should no longer be a question. Regardless of their radar range or capability. What about satellite and AWACS?

What might they reveal? Someone asleep at the switch?

Gino Under

[frozen solid]

While I admit I don't know very much about FBW control systems, I find it very difficult to believe that the 777 can be remotely accessed by "hackers" and then flown to a drone-like remotely piloted landing. I suppose I can picture false GPS or VOR signals being sent to the aircraft that could influence the direction it flies, and I suppose I can almost picture it being possible to remotely access the plane's AFCS while it is flying on autopilot, but I find it difficult in the extreme to believe that a pilot, upon noticing the plane's course being altered by the AFCS, couldn't press the red button on the control column and override anything the autopilot is up to by steering the ship himself. I am aware that the 777's physical flight controls are only connected electronically to the plane, through a computer, but surely the thing is hard-wired or programmed to give priority to signals from the control column and pedals, over any spurious transmissions from outside the plane? Surely? I mean I know control column movements are translated through artificial flight-envelope filters but really, does that actually result in a situation in which if a control column is deflected say to the right, the aircraft will actually refuse to go right? Even a little? I find that difficult to swallow. Just because something is electric instead of mechanical doesn't mean it can be "controlled by a hacker".

EDIT: Never mind. I just read this:
http://conference.hitb.org/hitbsecconf2 ... Series.pdf

Sounds like a giant crock of shit. I guess the guy figures he can monkey with the FMS and use it to tune radios and present data to pilots that causes them to unwittingly manoeuvre the plane in response to false traffic warnings, because they are routine-driven and rely on checklists. This is how he figures a hacker could deal with the difficulty presented by the pilots just being able to turn the autopilot "OFF".

Pretty far cry from being able to take over the plane and steer it to a secret airfield. There was a question in another thread bout what do you tell your friends when they ask what YOU think happened to this aircraft... I feel like I spend most of my time de-bunking media-invented garbage like this!

[crazy_aviator]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a__VZMkUlPI here is an interesting idea follow the $$$ they all say !

[B52]

Correct,
You only need to look at the map and see that the claimed flight path could have been seen by radar at
the bottom end of Thailand and the top of Malaysia.

We don't know the exact location of those radars, their height above sea level however
in that area, at that time, it is reasonable to assume that some ducting conditions were in effect
that would have allowed Military L Band Radar to see hundreds of miles more than normal.

We also don't know who supplied that radar equipment and its normal capabilities let along
under good atmospheric conditions.

I recall 30 plus years ago being shown a primary radar and the very strong echos at nearly 300 miles was some very stationary
areas of granite. Even back there, a Doppler filter only worked on moving objects within NORMAL Range.
The very long ranges may not even show on some screens.

And, we have not heard of any tests flights to see exactly how far those radars are effective.
The Chinese may well have that information and applied it to come up with their own theories.

The trouble is, these countries have kept all that radar information classified and
decided not to fully disclose their information.

Interesting.
Examination of the charts covering the "implied" routing of MH370, if it really had avoided Indonesian airspace, means it would have potentially passed through Malaysian, Indian, Sri Lankan and Australian FIRs and NONE of them knows anything about this flight's presence during this time period.

The question of this aircraft being seen (without a functioning transponder) by SSR in any of these FIRs should no longer be a question. Regardless of their radar range or capability. What about satellite and AWACS?

What might they reveal? Someone asleep at the switch?

Gino Under

[GyvAir]

Reporting now that Australian ship Ocean Shield has picked up two distinct signals consistent with that of ULBs, 300 miles to the north of where the Chinese reported hearing something on Friday.

The Australian navy's Ocean Shield, which is carrying high-tech sound detectors from the U.S. Navy, picked up two separate signals within a remote patch of the Indian Ocean far off the west Australian coast that search crews have been crisscrossing for weeks. The first signal lasted two hours and 20 minutes before it was lost. The ship then turned around and picked up a signal again — this time recording two distinct "pinger returns" that lasted 13 minutes, Houston said.

http://www.denverpost.com/entertainment ... ane-search

[GyvAir]

Angus Huston explaining on Monday how the underwater search area was narrowed down:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KU3pialcRgE

Search Area.JPG (107.94 KiB) Viewed 3807 times

http://www.jacc.gov.au/media/releases/2 ... mr012.aspx

[boeingboy]

There is a lot of research and hard work going on behind the scenes, some of it groundbreaking - with some real out of the box thinking...and people still want to scream coverup simply because it's out of their realm of comprehension. It's nausiating.



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... shake.html
MH370 missing plane: 'black box pings' tracked to same point as final 'half-handshake'

A final unexplained signal emitted by the missing Malaysia Airlines plane was tracked to the same point in the Indian Ocean at which authorities believe they have found the aircraft, it can be revealed.

It is thought that this final "half-handshake" – or satellite contact – could have been the moment at which the plane ran out of fuel and plunged into the Indian Ocean.

The breakthrough in the search has assisted analysts to gain a picture of the likely final sequence for the aircraft, which is believed to have run out of fuel and then experienced a last jolt of power that triggered an incomplete satellite handshake before entering the water.

Chris McLaughlin, from British satellite company Inmarsat, which helped to identify the route of the plane by analyzing its satellite "handshakes", said the location of the new signals appears to coincide with the likely site of the aircraft's final mysterious transmission at 00:19 GMT – eight minutes after its last regular hourly handshake.

Likening the sequence to a car spluttering as it runs out of fuel, Mr McLaughlin told The Telegraph: "The partial handshake would be the plane running out of fuel and faltering for a moment, so the system went off network and then briefly powered up and had communication with the network. The plane looked for a final communication before it went off – and that was it."

"The first set was heard on Saturday and lasted for two hours and twenty minutes. The Ocean Shield ship then lost contact with the "pings" but turned around and later heard further signals for 13 minutes. It has since lost contact again and was last night trying to relocate the signals.

Significantly, Mr Houston said, the second set included two distinct sounds which would be consistent with transmissions from separate pingers attached to the black box's flight data recorder and cockpit voice recorder. "

[Learning2Fly]

I've been monitoring this topic for quite some time, and I'm shocked about the current status of this investigation.

At the risk of adding more speculation to this discussion, I'd like to relay some information that I learned
from talking to pro pilots whom have flown 777's here at my workplace.

Please note: I have not read this thread entirely; I've checked in days at a time to read the
last few posts to get the latest info. If this has already been presented, then please accept my apology!

One of our instructors has SUGGESTED that the aircraft may have experienced some sort of pressurization
failure (whether it be windshield, or frame penetration).

"He" cited another 777 incident where the oxygen bottle exploded due to heat/fire caused by an
electrical failure. The bottle apparently kicked out the side of the aircraft leaving a large hole.

Egyptair
http://www.avherald.com/h?article=44078aa7&opt=0

An Egyptair Boeing 777-200, registration SU-GBP performing flight MS-667 from Cairo (Egypt) to Jeddah (Saudi Arabia) with 291 passengers, was preparing for departure at gate F7 with the passengers already boarded when a fire erupted in the cockpit causing smoke to also enter the cabin. The crew initiated an emergency evacuation. 5 occupants received minor injuries in the evacuations. Emergency services responded and put the fire out. 2 fire fighters were taken to a hospital for smoke inhalation. The aircraft received substantial damage, the fire burned through the right hand side of the cockpit leaving a hole of about the size of the first officer's side window in the fuselage just below that window.

There "may be" an inherent fault with the electrical system in these aircraft, or certain models?
Probably not as I'm not aware of any recall, or service bulletin. Does a SB exist? If so,
then you would think MH370 would have been serviced?

Where is the 02 bottle located? Was it the bottle that blew a hole in Egyptair's case, or was it fire?
I cannot find a credible source for 02 bottle location.

The four of us (3 pilots, 1 tech) chatted for nearly 20 minutes about the avionics systems, the electrical
buses,
the airline industry, ATC protocol, pilot protocol, etc.

Nothing really adds up based on the evidence presented by the media *(cough BS)*. With all of the
backup systems available on the aircraft (including a R.A.T.), we find it difficult to believe that a
distress call was not placed.

Having said that, one of the pilots SPECULATED that the availability of oxygen at that altitude would
be scarce, and without an 02 mask available, the pilots MAY have been unable to respond as they
would have tried to resolve the immediate issue first (IE: via checklist) before calling ATC.

Smoke detectors? Warning lights? Apparently an electrical fire can spread quickly, and fill
the cabin with smoke very rapidly. Is it possible the pilot(s) did not have enough time to diagnose
the problem, and things escalated before they were able to communicate their trouble?

Even IF the above was the case, it still does not explain several anomalies in this story. The final
report will have to be spectacular to give any credit to this investigation.

After studying a few prior NTSB reports, I won't hold my breath for anything substantial, or promising.

In nothing else, I hope that the families affected will find peace...because I can't imagine losing
a family member in this manner.

[Gino Under]

Learning2Fly

Your post IMHO is rational and not far fetched.
There are a surprising number (while not necessarily unusual) of ADs regarding the Oxygen system and Horizontal stabilizer for the 777. The "possible" outcomes of non-compliance could place the aircraft in serious peril.

On the FAA website you can read them all for yourself, if you like.
http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_an ... enFrameSet

With regard to the crew oxygen and the EgyptAir incident you refer to....quote:

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain The Boeing Company Model 777-200, -200LR, -300, -300ER, and 777F series airplanes. This AD was prompted by a report indicating that a fire originated near the first officer's area, which caused extensive damage to the flight deck. This AD requires replacing the low-pressure oxygen hoses with non-conductive low- pressure oxygen hoses in the flight compartment. We are issuing this AD to prevent electrical current from passing through the low-pressure oxygen hose internal anti-collapse spring, which can cause the low-pressure oxygen hose to melt or burn, and a consequent oxygen-fed fire in the flight compartment.

DATES: This AD is effective August 16, 2012.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain
publications listed in the AD as of August 16, 2012.

I've been taking flak for my references to ADs. I get that. Even David Learmont from Flight Magazine, their former editor and present safety guru, has scoffed at them (ADs, not me). Sorry, from a product liability perspective and an investigative perspective they are very relevant. Boeing is very quiet so far and is unlikely to want to comment. No one should be surprised.

We don't know what went on that night, but I suspect should they have had an electrical fire, possibly in the E&E bay, who's to say whether or not they were able to use NAVCOMMs or crew oxygen regardless of a RAT deployment. Catastrophes tend to have some very surprising chains of events.

Make of it what you will.

Gino Under

[flyinthebug]

Having said that, one of the pilots SPECULATED that the availability of oxygen at that altitude would
be scarce, and without an 02 mask available, the pilots MAY have been unable to respond as they
would have tried to resolve the immediate issue first (IE: via checklist) before calling ATC.

Smoke detectors? Warning lights? Apparently an electrical fire can spread quickly, and fill
the cabin with smoke very rapidly. Is it possible the pilot(s) did not have enough time to diagnose
the problem, and things escalated before they were able to communicate their trouble?

I completely agree with this part of your theory on why there was no communication from the aircraft. It is very possible that whatever was going on in that cockpit was far more important than making a call to ATC. Having lived through a crash I know the very LAST thing I thought of was making my mayday call. When things are going south fast and you have limited precise seconds to try to save your bacon, the last thing you are thinking of is communicating with someone on the ground who cant do a thing to help you in the moment.

I have no real speculation as to what caused this 777 to disappear but I do believe you and your peers were possibly accurate in speculating that is why ATC was never contacted. Maybe they just didn't have time? Regardless of the situation they were in.

[boeingboy]

Really?

So what is the likely hood that some fire spread so quick that it knocked them out, possibly melted through the fuse and put itself out so the plane could fly on normally for hours and hours????

No way that happened - not even remotely possible.

[flyinthebug]

Really?

So what is the likely hood that some fire spread so quick that it knocked them out, possibly melted through the fuse and put itself out so the plane could fly on normally for hours and hours????

No way that happened - not even remotely possible.

All I was commenting on is that communicating in any true emergency situation is very low on this list of priorities. None of us know what happened to that aircraft, so all I was suggesting is that there was no communication maybe because they were dealing with some other emergency situation.

You will note that I said and only quoted the communication theory that Learning2Fly posted, as I didn't agree with the fire theory. I do not agree that there was a fire nor that it was the cause of the lack of communication. I simply agree that if something went south all of a sudden in the cockpit (whatever the cause) that communicating is the last thing on your mind.

[boeingboy]

I simply agree that if something went south all of a sudden in the cockpit (whatever the cause) that communicating is the last thing on your mind.

To this i fully disagree - it is near the top of the list. In fact I cannot think of a single situation where ATC has not been contacted, no matter what the emergency. They are not only a lifeline - but they need to know what your doing and what you need.

It's true that you first respond to the situation - but first thing after is to contact ATC. In most cases these days, one crew member is flying the plane and the other is running the checklist. Short of a bomb or some other sudden catisrophic event, or in some case where the crew doesn't realise they are in trouble, ATC has and always would be contacted.

[Gino Under]

boeingboy

My first recommendation, based on your latest reply, would be to do more research.

There are many examples of flight crew not contacting ATC in an emergency but I won't bore you.
Adam Air immediately comes to mind. Interesting read.
There was the Avianca B707 crash in New York due to fuel starvation where the crew DID talk to ATC but never even used the term Emergency or even let on that they were critically low on fuel despite being asked to hold. THAT is also an interesting read.
The Helios B737 crew never said a word to ATC. They couldn't, mind you.

Your comment on the suddenness and severity of in-flight fire suggests a review of SR111. WRT MH370, you suggest no way that happened? Really?

Anyway.... Your comments are becoming suspect.

Gino Under

[boeingboy]

Gino,
What did I do to piss you off so royally? You really need to read my post a little closer instead of looking for a fight that isn't there.

There are many examples of flight crew not contacting ATC in an emergency but I won't bore you.
Adam Air immediately comes to mind. Interesting read.
There was the Avianca B707 crash in New York due to fuel starvation where the crew DID talk to ATC but never even used the term Emergency or even let on that they were critically low on fuel despite being asked to hold. THAT is also an interesting read.
The Helios B737 crew never said a word to ATC. They couldn't, mind you.

Actually - I'm quite familiar with all 3 of those accidents and if you read my post more carefully, you would have picked this up....

" or in some case where the crew doesn't realise they are in trouble"

Ala.... Helios, Air france and a few others

Your comment on the suddenness and severity of in-flight fire suggests a review of SR111. WRT MH370, you suggest no way that happened? Really?

I have no idea where this is going. Where did I say fire wasn't an issue - or couldn't happen quickly? I've said that from the beginning when people were suggesting they were droning around for hours trying to fight a fire. What part of this even remotely seems similar to SR111? As you seem to be so well versed in that accident - you well know the fire happened quick, ATC was contacted, electrical, instruments, and flight controls were affected, and the crew was incapacitated........but the plane crashed in short order. If MH370 was in the Gulf of Thailand in a million pieces, this could be a real possibility. But it chugged on for 7 hours, most likely on autopilot for the entire time, and certainly navigated. That didn't happen with a compromised (burnt) electrical system such as the relation to either SR111 or the Egypt air 777. Again read my post....

So what is the likely hood that some fire spread so quick that it knocked them out, possibly melted through the fuse and put itself out so the plane could fly on normally for hours and hours????

You really think it flew for 7 hours looking like this??? No way.

[Gino Under]

boeingboy

The unfortunate thing about the written word is that the reader might think there's a tone in what's written by the author. In this case, based again on your comments, I think you've done that.

I haven't (knowingly) written any confrontational rebuttals to your comments and I'm not looking for a fight with anyone over this topic. I haven't a clue what happened OR didn't happen. I'm speculating like everyone else but in my analysis all bets are off and anything is possible until we learn otherwise.

I'm certainly not pissed off at any of your comments or trying to goad you into a pissing contest. I could say a few things in disagreement with you as you could with me, but I simply gave you a variety of examples NOT intended to say or imply they are what could have happened to this flight OR did happen. Especially when talking about the communication aspect of it. You say you're familiar with my examples. Great. I only wasted my time offering them up as various examples of communications in aircraft accidents.

Your cockpit photo is nice but unlike yourself I don't know within the realm of possibilities whether or not something like that is possible or not (with regard to this flight). We don't have the evidence. Who's to says a cockpit fire damaged the flight deck to the extent you offer as evidence? There are variations to damage or the extent of damage. Including fire.
Like I said, it may warrant review of SR111 and that wasn't specifically aimed at you.

I'll re-read your posts.

Gino Under

[AirFrame]

It's true that you first respond to the situation - but first thing after is to contact ATC.

As Gino said... If "responding to the situation" takes longer than you have (I think 10-15 sec without supplemental O2 is all you'd have in a decompression?) you're never going to make that call. Say a window blew out in the cockpit for some odd, completely random reason (meteor? like the skydiver that was just about hit by one recently?), that would be rather disorienting on its own, and I could easily see it causing 10-15 seconds of complete confusion in the cockpit. Papers flying, in-flight meal scattered everywhere, coffee on your lap, whatever.

As for the cockpit photo, remember that the cockpit isn't a lifting surface...

[Old fella]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/wor ... e17948774/

Another instant media arm chair expert, a 77 yr old one at that. Where in the name of Christ do they(media) drag these people up.

[B52]

Gino Under,
Thanks for putting it so politely.


What we know now is that the Malaysian Government has just revealed, that after MH370 "turned back"
the co-pilot attempted to make a call on his cell phone near Penang Island and at the same time, other voices in the Malaysian Government say if that was true we would have known about it.

"A pilot of the missing Malaysian airliner made a call on his mobile telephone after it had turned back from its scheduled flight path and was flying low near the island of Penang, according to a Malaysian government controlled newspaper." However, the NST is unable to ascertain who Fariq was trying to call

"""as sources chose not to divulge details of the investigation"""

http://www.nst.com.my

His call, however, ended abruptly, but not before contact was established with a telecommunications sub-station in the state.
Same story at
http://www.theage.com.au/world/mh370-se ... zqu2q.html

LATER - they corrected themselves and say that the phone "registered" but NO evidence that a call was attempted.






IMHO - That probably means some of the passenger's phones may have also registered. At least some of the passengers, and most likely the crew would have realized something was wrong with the 300 degree turn and massive change in altitude which probably caused others to try to use their phones.

That begs the question as to why it has taken over a month to without any data on any of the phones until now, we get info on just one phone's brief contact with a Penang tower?

The other test that is needed to be done is some practical airborne tests of cell phones at the same altitudes to see just how far away a phone can connect from.

Perhaps someone can comment on getting cell phone connections at altitude... Every time I've checked my phone at altitude, the rage is abysmal.

http://www.nst.com.my

boeingboy

The unfortunate thing about the written word is that the reader might think there's a tone in what's written by the author. In this case, based again on your comments, I think you've done that.

(rest deleted)


Gino Under