Malaysia Airlines flight MH370-Updates and Discussion

BKtje

If there is a code, who would have it? The senior flight attendent? Thanks for the swift response.

Edit: just read about Helios flight. To think it might have been avoided if the flight attendent had got in.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

K.Flyer

Just a thought...
With the new search site being so remote why don't they send submarines to search the area with their underwater sonar systems.

Mellor

K.Flyer wrote: »

Just a thought...
With the new search site being so remote why don't they send submarines to search the area with their underwater sonar systems.

They are sending subs afaik, but they'll take a while to get there.

wil

K.Flyer wrote: »

Just a thought...
With the new search site being so remote why don't they send submarines to search the area with their underwater sonar systems.

wil wrote: »

Agreed.
.....
2 hrs ago in Malaysia News
Subs to be used after 30 days, but not the Scorpenes
That irony will not be lost on most Malaysians.

....

preanswered

wil

Anyone care to comment on this Australian aviation "expert".
I don't know his credentials but he was on BBC news as well.
Suggests "not an accident" but crew/hijack.

Is prefueling the norm for this flight or does it add any to anything to even mention it.

At this stage we must have an "expert" for almost every scenario, so in the end, just like the weather, one might just be right.

Mellor

wil wrote: »

Anyone care to comment on this Australian aviation "expert".
I don't know his credentials but he was on BBC news as well.
Suggests "not an accident" but crew/hijack.

Is prefueling the norm for this flight or does it add any to anything to even mention it.

WakeUp wouldn't be know for it's not notch journalism and research. Could be the case that they needed any Australian with significant aviation experience.

http://www.horizonconsultantsregister.com/neil-m-hansford/

irishmover

Mellor wrote: »

WakeUp wouldn't be know for it's not notch journalism and research. Could be the case that they needed any Australian with significant aviation experience.

http://www.horizonconsultantsregister.com/neil-m-hansford/

Where's Tracy Grimshaw when you need her?

Mellor

I'd lob her in the same boat tbh, along with the rest of them

jacksie66

This post has been deleted.

irishmover

Mellor wrote: »

I'd lob her in the same boat tbh, along with the rest of them

I don't think anything compares to Tracy Grimshaw. Just awful and surprised I haven't seen her sink her teeth into this.

dees99

Weathercheck wrote: »

Let's confirm this is where the plane is first. Still no confirmation there is any plane wreckage there.

If nothing comes of this I think interest from the foreign media will steadily wane and the mystery will probably never be solved.

No way! If they can't find one piece of wreckage, even some rubbish from the flight gloating around, passports, hats, kids toys anything then its even more worrying.

I'm still convinced an attack that was even bigger than 9/11 is on the way.

And btw I normally hate and rubbish conspiracy theorists and I'm definitely not one of them

dees99

Wetbench4 wrote: »

Yes, you'd surely think there would be an easier way to obtain a plane if it were to be used to crash into something.

Yes but not a plane with 220 hostages on board you understand?

dees99

Paddywiggum wrote: »

Call me crazy, but the fact that no group has claimed responsibility suggests no group is involved.

What if they have a future plan for the aircraft, one that involves an attack? Honestly now, would you believe they would still claim responsibility beforehand?

dees99

pfurey101 wrote: »

Anyone anywhere can pick elements of this mystery from any news site or blog or forum and make them suit their own theory. Sure even the tabloid of all 24 hr news coverage (Skynews) says:

"More outlandish claims include landing the plane somewhere to be used later in a 9/11-style attack, or it being involved in a collision with a military aircraft."

Anyone else can believe what they want but there are also counter "facts" or logical explanation put forward to all of your facts.....apart from your execution speculation and self admitted "heard whispers" facts.

The only fact is that no one has a clue what has happened. All one can do is speculate.

I didn't pick bits and pieces from blogs media etc. I have a massive interest in the middle east, politics and the rise and fall of extremism. The only media quote I used was from an ex Dept of Homeland Security individual who claimed that there was unconfirmed whispers that Al Qaida had recruited an airline pilot.

dees99

Paddywiggum wrote: »

I used the word 'suggests' for a reason.

The balance of probability is that no group is involved. I have no more answers than anyone else, and so dont discount any reasonable theory, but some theories i do find ridiculous, and the one the original poster who i was replying to believes, is just that.

But surely if what at first ruled possible proves impossible, then surely what at first ruled impossible (ridiculous) must prove possible? Or is that just ridiculous as well? ��

Happyman42

The latest update from the Guardian website

Australia’s search operation is now being conducted primarily on a visual basis, which will take longer and require more aircraft. Australia’s Maritime Safety Agency general manager John Young added that the search had not yet yielded any results, but that the weather conditions were expected to be better over the next 24 hours, but a further cold front was expected on Sunday.
The objects identified in satellite images could now be hundreds of kilometres away from their original location five days ago, posing serious difficulties for the search operation. Australian meteorological experts have said the object would be moving in a generally easterly direction closer to the Australian coast, but that the weather conditions in the area are “highly variable.” Imagery analysts have also cast doubt on whether the findings are credible based on the available images.


Five aircraft are now undertaking the search in the southern Indian Ocean. A Royal Australia Air Force P3 Orion departed on Friday morning, followed by two other Orions and a long range aircraft. A United States Navy P8 Poseidon was also due to depart soon. China has also announced it will send three warships to join the search.


Australia’s prime minister Tony Abbott has defended his decision to release the satellite images, following questions as to whether the announcement about the possible findings were premature. The Australian leader said “we owe it to the families” to do everything possible to undertake the rescue quickly.

Calina

lb1 wrote: »

Yes by local police, hardly Scotland Yard!
Is there no central authority looking into this.

sopretty wrote: »

Well this is it. I'm just trying to get my head around the technical detail so that I can better understand the media reports and try to figure out for myself what is plausible and what is pure and utter drivel. When you're coming from the base point of knowledge that I'm coming from though (i.e. none), it is proving to be a rather large learning curve! The information being drip fed from Malaysia, doesn't seem to add up to me. That's what has me asking so many questions and wrecking everyone's head!

BKtje wrote: »

If there is a code, who would have it? The senior flight attendent? Thanks for the swift response.

Edit: just read about Helios flight. To think it might have been avoided if the flight attendent had got in.

I understood that the flight attendant did get there, but not in time, plus he was not a qualified pilot.

Maximus Alexander

Calina wrote: »

I understood that the flight attendant did get there, but not in time, plus he was not a qualified pilot.

On the episode of Air Crash Investigation that covered this (which was absolutely chilling) they speculated that he may have gone into the cabin on more than one occasion, as they found the First Officer's DNA on his oxygen mask, suggesting that the flight attendant may have tried to revive him.

That was such a horribly tragic accident, particularly because I get the impression that if any number of small things had gone differently it could have been avoided. I actually had a knot in my stomach watching it.

pfurey101

From Planefinder (similar service to FlightRadar 24)

#MH370 has shown lots of people how visible aircraft are to Air Traffic (or not).Want to see the future? http://buff.ly/1etb4Oa We also tracked this flight in Plane Finder! http://planefinder.net/flight/AIB1D/time/2014-03-19T08:10:00%20UTC
Reply

Aerohead

I think in this day and age its unreal to think that there is no way to track an aircraft if the pilot turns everything off, surely they could put a transmitter in the nose cone that is powered by the aircraft but in the event of a power loss a back up battery kicks in sending out a signal of where the aircraft is. If it was in the nose the pilots would have no access to it except on the ground.

Wetbench4

pfurey101 wrote: »

From Planefinder (similar service to FlightRadar 24)

#MH370 has shown lots of people how visible aircraft are to Air Traffic (or not).Want to see the future? http://buff.ly/1etb4Oa We also tracked this flight in Plane Finder! http://planefinder.net/flight/AIB1D/time/2014-03-19T08:10:00%20UTC;
Reply

This is the flight isn't it? --> http://planefinder.net/flight/MAS370/time/2014-03-07T16:50:00%20UTC

Happyman42

From the Guardian live blog:

It emerged during the press conference that the plane was carrying lithium ion batteries that can be unstable at altitude leading potentially to a fire.

Savman

Happyman42 wrote: »

From the Guardian live blog:

So we can expect more 772's to start dropping out of the sky?

aliveandkicking

Aerohead wrote: »

I think in this day and age its unreal to think that there is no way to track an aircraft if the pilot turns everything off, surely they could put a transmitter in the nose cone that is powered by the aircraft but in the event of a power loss a back up battery kicks in sending out a signal of where the aircraft is. If it was in the nose the pilots would have no access to it except on the ground.

Asked and answered numerous times in this thread already. Pilots must have the ability to isolate and shut down every piece of electrical equipment as a short circuit/fire could ensue. No doubt if there was such a tracking device installed that pilots had no access to and it were to catch fire bringing down an aircraft we would have people complaining how stupid it is to have equipment on board the pilots can't control.

Tenger

Aerohead wrote: »

I think in this day and age its unreal to think that there is no way to track an aircraft if the pilot turns everything off, surely they could put a transmitter in the nose cone that is powered by the aircraft but in the event of a power loss a back up battery kicks in sending out a signal of where the aircraft is. If it was in the nose the pilots would have no access to it except on the ground.

The issue with this situation is what happens if the transmitter has a problem inflight and the flight crew cannot disable electrical supply to it? How can the flight crew perform a diagnostic on this transmitter? Does it cause interference with other systems? How much does this weight and what other systems need to be moved to allow it to be fitted onboard?

As for the loss of power battery set-up....is the battery self contained with its own fire suppression system? How long till it kicks in? (as aircraft lose power all the time when on the ground...lines disconnect, APU doesn't start as planned etc)

This transmitter idea isn't wrong, however as it is, the current system allow investigators to find aircraft quite quickly in 95% of air crashes. AF447 is the only other incident that springs to mind where the aircraft was lost for so long? Even then such a transmitter would not have helped underwater (depth, signal strength, cold water and battery life)
So it is not really needed.

intellectual dosser

I'm sure it's been mentioned before, but what is the range of the ping emitted by the Flight Data Recorder (black box)?

Happyman42

Savman wrote: »

So we can expect more 772's to start dropping out of the sky?

You alright there?

Tenger

intellectual dosser wrote: »

I'm sure it's been mentioned before, but what is the range of the ping emitted by the Flight Data Recorder (black box)?

Not a lot. (a dozen miles perhaps?) Even less underwater.

basill

Each life has a fixed value worked out by actuaries. That is the reality of aviation and has been since adam was a babe. In my lifetime I can remember them developing fuel additives that are non combustible and ULDs that will contain a bomb and ensure that the fuselage remains intact. None of these are on commercial aircraft.

Until Joe Soap wants to pay extra for their tickets then nothing will happen. Aviation remains the safest form of transport by far. All this drivel about safety is generally from people that buy redtops and believe everything they are told without question.