Malaysia Airlines flight MH370-Updates and Discussion

wil

Coincidence, but this doesn't help MAS, or confidence in the MAS pilots.

I'll just quote the full article NST so not out of context and all relevant. It's Kathmandu, Nepal

"A Malaysia Airlines (MAS) aircraft ferrying 180 passengers and crew 'ducked' away from a potential disaster when a flock of ducks struck the aircraft's windshield during touchdown on the runway of the Tribhuvan International Airport (TIA) on Friday night.
According to a report, the impact left the southern tip of Runway 02 strewn with broken glass, Nepal's news portal kantipuronline.com. quoted airport authorities as saying on Saturday.
There was no report of injury on board the Kathmandu-bound MH-144 aircraft from Kuala Lumpur in the incident which occurred at 10.45pm.
The airline’s cockpit crew, however, did not immediately inform the Air Traffic Controller (ATC) of the incident.
The flight captain later confirmed “suspected bird-hit”, but only after a Jet Airways crew reported it to the airport authority, said the report.
It is understood the MAS pilots might face action for failing to report the incident on time.
"The incident came to light after a pilot of Jet Airways, which landed minutes after MAS, informed us of sighting pieces of glass on the runway,” said an ATC on condition of anonymity.
Upon inspection, TIA officials found at least 10 dead ducks along with pieces of glass on the runway. The debris was cleared and the airport resumed normal operations after 30 minutes.
The officials found two more dead ducks during a routine inspection early on Saturday morning.
“It’s the first time that we have seen so many ducks in the airport area,” said an official, adding that they could be migrating ducks.
The airline cancelled a return flight to Kuala Lumpur that was scheduled at 11pm on Friday.
All passengers who were booked on the flight were subsequently, transferred to the Soaltee, Annapurna and Hyatt Regency hotels. The plane took off for the Malaysian capital at 3:30pm on Saturday after necessary repairs.
Meanwhile, the ATC official said the TIA general manager had been notified of the incident, recommending action against the MAS pilots for failing to report the incident on time.
“The pilots should have informed the airport authorities immediately to prevent any untoward incident,” said the official.
More than 75 bird strike incidents have occurred during take-off or landing at the TIA since 1990.
Three of them resulted in major damage to aircraft. While a Thai Airways Airbus A300 in 1996 and a Bangladesh Biman DC-10 in 2010 escaped accident, 19 people were killed when Sita Air Dornier crashed in September 2012. -- BERNAMA"

---

Makes you wonder how these pilots are being trained, or is there something going on internally.
Imagine the glass punctured tyres etc causing another incident.

orig source
http://www.ekantipur.com/the-kathmandu-post/2014/03/22/top-story/malaysia-airlines-plane-escapes-disaster-at-tia/260715.html

wil

I'm a little surprised that the only confirmed object reported sighted from the planes so far was a wooden pallet. Are wooden pallets common on commercial airliners. Is every single item carried itemised?

I would have thought they'd have sighted lots of flotsam other than this in days considering all the junk that must end up out there.

---

Re subs, highest speed nuclear subs probably can reach up to 45/50 knots so could take quite a while to reach the area. Pentagon is considering a request.

A little premature perhaps, but was referred to in a report, one of the only deep sea vehicle suitable for the depths of the Indian ocean is the Remus 6000.
Used during Air France black box recovery.

KM Remus 6000

OSL Remus 6000

Pdoghue

I'm just watching this Sky News news 'special' complete with background music.

Why doesn't someone in the media ask an obvious question, i.e., why can't the satellites produce a more high-res image?

In general, I find the media treatment of this story quite dozy in that they don't seem to be asking the right questions. Whether that is deliberate or not I am not sure.

sopretty

Pdoghue wrote: »

I'm just watching this Sky News news 'special' complete with background music.

Why doesn't someone in the media ask an obvious question, i.e., why can't the satellites produce a more high-res image?

In general, I find the media treatment of this story quite dozy in that they don't seem to be asking the right questions. Whether that is deliberate or not I am not sure.

I'd love to ask them a few questions also!

1. Can you give me a definitive timeline of events?
2. Can you give me a definitive timeline of the pings received and confirm their sources?
3. Can you explain why police are still present at each of the pilot's homes?
4. Have you investigated any connection between the Captain and the intended FO?
5. Can you confirm exactly how both ACARS and the transponder are completely incapacitated.
6. How many reps/experts from Boeing and RR are you liaising with?
7. Can you confirm how you know way-points were entered, after final contact with ATC?
8. Can you confirm how you know and at what times the various altitude changes were made.
9. Do you expect to get a background check on the one remaining passenger i.e. the Russian?
10. Have you concluded investigations into the aircraft mechanic?

That's ten for a start....... I could be here all day though!!!

Tenger

Pdoghue wrote: »

....Why doesn't someone in the media ask an obvious question, i.e., why can't the satellites produce a more high-res image? ......

Because they can't. Just because you want a better image doesn't mean you can magically make it happen.

You can already see how pixellated those images are. Southern Ocean is not a hi interest area, perhaps only older commercial satellites were in position to image the region......resolution of 5 metres perhaps? (Guessing due to the stated 22m x 15m of the latest Chinese object)
Commercial sats never needed to be used in this way hence were not designed to do so. I realise that Google Earth and similar programs show better resolution but I wonder are those images solely produced from satellites? It may takes days to get a hi-res satellite in correct orbit to scan this area.

On the other hand do you think the US want to release images gathered by their best military satellites, thus showing that they can get 1 metre or maybe even less resolution? In addition they best satellites will be covering other parts of the globe. Retaking them will cost precious fuel and will take time to accomplish.

On a related note there could already be a submarine in the area but I can't see the National Govt letting that info slip out. (I doubt this however do to the lack of anything down there.....maybe a good place to hide an Ohio-Class missile boat?)

Mebuntu

I took this screencap (very much reduced in size for here) from Google Earth just now. It's a cricket ground in Perth in Australia. The Perth sign seems to be slightly smaller than the length of a cricket pitch (22 yards). If any part of an aircraft this size was lying here it would be easily recognised as such. So, I am wondering why the satellite images provided so far of objects sighted and reported in the sea SW of here (and, in particular, one about the same size as the Perth sign) are of such poor quality and cannot be ID'd as being from anything let alone a crashed aircraft.

Tenger

sopretty wrote: »

I'd love to ask them a few questions also!

I'll take a stab at answering those 10. Bold in reply to sopretty

1. Its been pretty much publicised in the media over the last 10 days. Look at BBC/Sky now and you will see the timeline. If was off initially as they were still trying to figure it out themselves. Also different time stamsp were used at various times.The important times are...take-off, last ATC contact, last civil radar contact, last Military radar contact, last ping to satellite.
2. 1 ping at 8.11 by the Immarsat satellite. No further pings after that. Immarsat released this info, a 'ping' is simply that. Its a signal from the aircraft to the satellite. No data was passed along,almost like a mobile phone reconnecting to the nearest cell mast. The only info they have is that the signal arrived at the satellite at 40 degree angle...hence the 2 corridors
3. Family priacy as well as the ongoing investigation.
4. Yes they have. But they haven't released any findings, if any. They haven't released any info on this so I don't have a link. But having read previous accident reports they would look into every option. I'm sure any cabin crew/passengers who may have been supposed to fly were also looked at
5. No because they don't have the FDR or CVR yet. They can both be disable by a trained commercial pilot familiar on type. Trust me on this one, pilots are trained in all aircraft systems, they will know how to do it on their own licencsed type.
6. As many as they provided to the investigation.
7. Waypoints are preprogrammed into the flight computer as part of the pre-flight prep. It allows easy access to the waypints later while inflight. It means the flightplan is already there when needed in normal operations. Waypoints and indeed the entire flightplan can be reprogrammed in midflight if required. Perhaps the pilots used waypoints they knew if they were dealing with a comms blackout and an inflight emergency. Flight crew don't just 'turn left' when diverting, they follow known flightpaths and waypoints
8. Can you confirm how you know and at what times the various altitude changes were made. I can't answer this But I believe it is based on military radar info.
9. We would hope to get the background info but are waiting for the Russian's to get back to us.
10. The aircraft engineer has already been interviewed and all paperwork and data examined. He/She remains on call to assist the investigation as required.

fits

Because when you have high resolution, you can't cover as large an area. Think like taking photographs, if you are taking photos of a landscape, you're not going to have same resolution as a close up shot.

Collecting and assembling high res images like this screenshot would take much much longer. They probably will do this in time if the search area is narrowed down.

sopretty

Thanks for that! I've more questions now though!

Tenger wrote: »

I'll take a stab at answering those 10.



1. Its been pretty much publicised in the media over the last 10 days.
No, they say the last location was at 1.21. But then they have information about a different path taken AFTER this time. I want to know how they have this information and why are they saying the last position was that at 1.21pm.
2. 1 ping at 8.11 by the Immarsat satellite. No further pings after that.
There were reportedly 7 pings for a start. I'm referring moreso to how they have information on the path and altitudes taken between 1.21 and 8.11. What exactly was 'pinging'? What was the source of the info? (Basically I'm trying to comprehend why they are so assertive as to these changes being deliberate).
3. Family priacy as well as the ongoing investigation.
I suspected that, but would like it confirmed, in an ideal world of course, and if it was any of my business!!!
4. Yes they have. But they haven't released any findings, if any.
Have you a link?
5. No because they don't have the FDR or CVR yet. They can both be disable by a trained commercial pilot familiar on type.
I want to know specifically how to do so. Where, how etc.
6. As many as they provided to the investigation.
Grand
7. Waypoints are preprogrammed into the flight computer as part of the pre-flight prep. It allows easy access to the waypints later while inflight.
Which suggests they were pre-programmed at some point i.e. they intended to veer off course?
8. Can you confirm how you know and at what times the various altitude changes were made. I can't answer this But I believe it is based on military radar info.
Grand
9. We would hope to get the background info but are waiting for the Russian's to get back to us.
There were no Russians on that flight. says Putin......
10. The aircraft engineer has already been interviewed and all paperwork and data examined. He/She remains on call to assist the investigation as required.
Grand

Maximus Alexander

Mebuntu wrote: »

I took this screencap (very much reduced in size for here) from Google Earth just now. It's a cricket ground in Perth in Australia. The Perth sign seems to be slightly smaller than the length of a cricket pitch (22 yards). If any part of an aircraft this size was lying here it would be easily recognised as such. So, I am wondering why the satellite images provided so far of objects sighted and reported in the sea SW of here (and, in particular, one about the same size as the Perth sign) are of such poor quality and cannot be ID'd as being from anything let alone a crashed aircraft.

Those images are taken by aircraft, not satellites.

Growler!!!

Mebuntu wrote: »

I took this screencap (very much reduced in size for here) from Google Earth just now. It's a cricket ground in Perth in Australia. The Perth sign seems to be slightly smaller than the length of a cricket pitch (22 yards). If any part of an aircraft this size was lying here it would be easily recognised as such. So, I am wondering why the satellite images provided so far of objects sighted and reported in the sea SW of here (and, in particular, one about the same size as the Perth sign) are of such poor quality and cannot be ID'd as being from anything let alone a crashed aircraft.

The grainy images published were taken from a satellite.

The picture posted above was taken by a survey aircraft. Either at 2,500 feet or 8,000 feet.

mikom

Mebuntu wrote: »

I took this screencap (very much reduced in size for here) from Google Earth just now. It's a cricket ground in Perth in Australia. The Perth sign seems to be slightly smaller than the length of a cricket pitch (22 yards). If any part of an aircraft this size was lying here it would be easily recognised as such. So, I am wondering why the satellite images provided so far of objects sighted and reported in the sea SW of here (and, in particular, one about the same size as the Perth sign) are of such poor quality and cannot be ID'd as being from anything let alone a crashed aircraft.

Have google earth image mapped all the oceans and seas........

ceadaoin.

I've read on other sites that they most likely do have higher resolution satellite images. They aren't making those public though because they don't want to advertise what their satellite capabilities are. Not sure how true that is, probably not very!

this pic is starting to pop up, and Im wondering if it could actually be possible?
Could the lady have sent this pic the day after plane goes missing??


http://foxweekly.com/2014/03/23/now/photo-taken-from-inside-malaysia-airlines-flight-370-surfaces.html

Cessna_Pilot

Jake1 wrote: »

this pic is starting to pop up, and Im wondering if it could actually be possible?
Could the lady have sent this pic the day after plane goes missing??


http://foxweekly.com/2014/03/23/now/photo-taken-from-inside-malaysia-airlines-flight-370-surfaces.html

Sure i could have taken that...

123balltv

Jake1 wrote: »

this pic is starting to pop up, and Im wondering if it could actually be possible?
Could the lady have sent this pic the day after plane goes missing??


http://foxweekly.com/2014/03/23/now/photo-taken-from-inside-malaysia-airlines-flight-370-surfaces.html

I know it's just a picture but isn't there something eerie about it.

sopretty

Jake1 wrote: »

this pic is starting to pop up, and Im wondering if it could actually be possible?
Could the lady have sent this pic the day after plane goes missing??


http://foxweekly.com/2014/03/23/now/photo-taken-from-inside-malaysia-airlines-flight-370-surfaces.html

Gosh, it would take one sick b******* to fake this? Surely it can't be too difficult to disprove?

lord lucan

Jake1 wrote: »

this pic is starting to pop up, and Im wondering if it could actually be possible?
Could the lady have sent this pic the day after plane goes missing??


http://foxweekly.com/2014/03/23/now/photo-taken-from-inside-malaysia-airlines-flight-370-surfaces.html

That could've been taken on any one of a number of 772's around the world. Only Fox could run with a story like that. Reminds me of the famous "9/11 guy" who was supposedly photographed on the top of the WTC as an aircraft bore down on it!

ceadaoin.

lord lucan wrote: »

That could've been taken on any one of a number of 772's around the world. Only Fox could run with a story like that. Reminds me of the famous "9/11 guy" who was supposedly photographed on the top of the WTC as an aircraft bore down on it!

I don't think it has anything to do with Fox News. Probably they just put that in to make their site look more reputable. Not that fox news is actually that reputable!

Of course,the first thing you would do if you mysteriously received this pic is call up fox weekly and not the authorities :rolleyes: or maybe it took him a while to 'quickly remember' that his ex girlfriend is missing and presumed dead.

ceadaoin.

ceadaoin. wrote: »

I don't think it has anything to do with Fox News. Probably they just put that in to make their site look more reputable. Not that fox news is actually that reputable!

Of course,the first thing you would do if you mysteriously received this pic is call up fox weekly and not the authorities :rolleyes: or maybe it took him a while to 'quickly remember' that his ex girlfriend is missing and presumed dead.

He did say though, he hadnt checked the account in some time.

I do agree with y'all tho:) most likely fake. Sick joke if proven fake.

sopretty

How could he tell that it was sent from 'off the coast of Malaysia'? I'm not terribly familiar with gmail, but I wouldn't believe everything I'd see online either! Sure my IP address tracked me as being in the Isle of Mann there one day (probably still does!). Sounds to me like a chancer, who has his exes p/w, logged into her email, set his location as Malaysia and then sent himself an email.

Cianmcliam

How could there be daylight coming in on a night time flight?

sopretty

Cianmcliam wrote: »

How could there be daylight coming in on a night time flight?

Apparently the email was sent a day later....... :rolleyes:

And if you'd believe that, you'd believe anything!

3mm

Im sure if this photo was any big significant , we would of heard about it before this . Some guy looking for a bit of fame I think

eagerv

Such a load of rubbish. Its not even a MAS 777.

Their layout is 2+5+2, not 3+3+3.

Red Pepper

This thread is very informative but I would leave the ghoulish talk (e.g. the creepy photo) to the ghouls in After Hours - there are some serious ghouls getting off on this tragedy with feigned compassion.

spurious

3mm wrote: »

Im sure if this photo was any big significant , we would of heard about it before this . Some guy looking for a bit of fame I think

...who remembered his ex was supposed to have been on that flight. Sure I don't even know what country most of my exes are in, much less what flights they are or are not supposed to be taking.

pclancy

Oh Dear. How on earth would they even have 3G or GPRS up there to send a photo in the first place?

Terrible that this stuff gets past some kind of sanity check before being published.

3mm

ceadaoin. wrote: »

I've read on other sites that they most likely do have higher resolution satellite images. They aren't making those public though because they don't want to advertise what their satellite capabilities are. Not sure how true that is, probably not very!

I think this is one of more likely explanations . I think all of us don't understand the power the governments have in regards to surveillance

Sully

Jake1 wrote: »

this pic is starting to pop up, and Im wondering if it could actually be possible?
Could the lady have sent this pic the day after plane goes missing??


http://foxweekly.com/2014/03/23/now/photo-taken-from-inside-malaysia-airlines-flight-370-surfaces.html

Bottom of article there is an update.

UPDATE: The photo is confirmed to be fake by the owner who sent us the image.