Malaysia Airlines flight MH370-Updates and Discussion

sopretty

Growler!!! wrote: »

It's in our checklist to switch them off. But sometimes if I'm busy i only find out its still on as we approach our destination.
I've picked up 3g signal at 8000ft over the Midlands!

Murders the battery life if it's searching for a signal.

Ok, so it's not even conclusive that he turned the phone on then. Much ado about nothing it appears.

Growler!!!

sully2010 wrote: »

Thats a good point in fairness, but surely more than 1 mobile phone would have been left on by accident, and these signals would also have been picked up.

True, but the "source" only mentions the F/O.

sopretty

Growler!!! wrote: »

It's in our checklist to switch them off. But sometimes if I'm busy i only find out its still on as we approach our destination.
I've picked up 3g signal at 8000ft over the Midlands!

Murders the battery life if it's searching for a signal.

Which Midlands would that be?

Growler!!!

sopretty wrote: »

Ok, so it's not even conclusive that he turned the phone on then. Much ado about nothing it appears.

I can't really say from the report, I'm only going off my own experience. Maybe he did try to make a call. It would be unusual for him to have the phone switched off on his person - there's the possibility he was in the flight deck as opposed to the view that the captain locked him out but why not try using the radios to communicate.

sopretty wrote: »

Which Midlands would that be?

Here on the mainland:D

sopretty

Growler!!! wrote: »

but why not try using the radios to communicate.

I was wondering the same myself!

As for the midlands - we have the very best of technology here don't ya know!

pclancy

Bloody media, I see no evidance of a "desperate" or "urgent" call, just a brief signal from a phone trying to find a tower. They really love steching the boundary of truth

whitebriar

Growler!!! wrote: »

It's in our checklist to switch them off. But sometimes if I'm busy i only find out its still on as we approach our destination.
I've picked up 3g signal at 8000ft over the Midlands!

Murders the battery life if it's searching for a signal.

I've picked them up in Wexford from Wales and successfully roamed!

Mountainsandh

What about before Penang ? Are they definitely implying the phone was turned off crossing over Malaysia ? Or are they just omitting that bit of information ? Surely there must be towers around Kuala Terengganu ?

If it can be said for sure that the phone was turned off (ie had not made contact with a tower over the East Coast of M and for the entire land cross), and it only got switched on as they exited land on the Penang side, then it means a lot more.
ie : maybe they were too busy trying to fix technical problem until then to switch phone on, maybe he was being manhandled or shoved in with passengers, then jumped on his mobile as soon as he could, maybe they were dealing with decompression if the ascending move previously happened, and switched phone on as soon as they regained enough consciousness/composure... maybe he was avoiding being tracked over land and switched it back on when he thought he was in the clear (for a game of Candycrush).

That other article wrecks my head, what a shambles and lack of communication between military and government, they had to force the military to hand over radar recordings :mad:

owenc

eatmyshorts wrote: »

Well said. Some people just seem to have an inability to fathom the scale of the operation.

But if theres no experience to be had how can we??

CapriKorn

sopretty wrote: »

Because there are millions being spent. 239 lives.
There are possibly 239,000 lives who could be saved with the equivalent millions.

I completely agree about the wasted money. I do not believe we will find out anything of major significance (like a design flaw) or even why it happened. The money spent on this search could be so much better spent on other things (even though it's naive to expect that it would be). Another perspective: Lots of people disappear with no explanation every day, and we do not commit unlimited resources to finding them. Why is it that a dramatic tragedy makes people endorse this kind of effort and expense, but the day by day unsolved murders and disappearances (which add up to way more than 239) don't seem to bother them?

sopretty

CapriKorn wrote: »

I completely agree about the wasted money. I do not believe we will find out anything of major significance (like a design flaw) or even why it happened. The money spent on this search could be so much better spent on other things (even though it's naive to expect that it would be). Another perspective: Lots of people disappear with no explanation every day, and we do not commit unlimited resources to finding them. Why is it that a dramatic tragedy makes people endorse this kind of effort and expense, but the day by day unsolved murders and disappearances (which add up to way more than 239) don't seem to bother them?

Finally someone who gets the point I'm making.

sopretty

My bigger point though, is that I suspect that there is a lot more at stake here than those unfortunate lives.

billie1b

CapriKorn wrote: »

I completely agree about the wasted money. I do not believe we will find out anything of major significance (like a design flaw) or even why it happened. The money spent on this search could be so much better spent on other things (even though it's naive to expect that it would be). Another perspective: Lots of people disappear with no explanation every day, and we do not commit unlimited resources to finding them. Why is it that a dramatic tragedy makes people endorse this kind of effort and expense, but the day by day unsolved murders and disappearances (which add up to way more than 239) don't seem to bother them?

People go missing everyday, police and local authorities look for them, they get paid to do it, their case is always open, even if it goes cold. Your post answers its own question, people go missing EVERYDAY, planes dont go missing everyday, when they do, answers are needed by all involved

cuterob

CapriKorn wrote: »

I completely agree about the wasted money. I do not believe we will find out anything of major significance (like a design flaw) or even why it happened. The money spent on this search could be so much better spent on other things (even though it's naive to expect that it would be). Another perspective: Lots of people disappear with no explanation every day, and we do not commit unlimited resources to finding them. Why is it that a dramatic tragedy makes people endorse this kind of effort and expense, but the day by day unsolved murders and disappearances (which add up to way more than 239) don't seem to bother them?

sopretty wrote: »

Finally someone who gets the point I'm making.

ffs seriously lads come on, what is going through your heads? .. what do you think they should do? just forget about it?..
maybe it's the first time either of you have ever looked into air crash investigations but you are both missing something very simple it seems and it baffles the mind that there is people out there that think the way you do

it is only money, and human life trumps money every day no matter the amount, where is your common sense and empathy seriously? .. i'm at a loss of words for people like you

If either of you had family on that plane it would be a different story coming out of your mouths and that is a fact, use your heads

Nonoperational

CapriKorn wrote: »

I completely agree about the wasted money. I do not believe we will find out anything of major significance (like a design flaw) or even why it happened. The money spent on this search could be so much better spent on other things (even though it's naive to expect that it would be). Another perspective: Lots of people disappear with no explanation every day, and we do not commit unlimited resources to finding them. Why is it that a dramatic tragedy makes people endorse this kind of effort and expense, but the day by day unsolved murders and disappearances (which add up to way more than 239) don't seem to bother them?

sopretty wrote: »

Finally someone who gets the point I'm making.

Ah this is just incredible. So many flaws in the logic it's hard to imagine an adult wrote it, and if this is down to a design flaw and happens again there could be a much higher number of casualties.

Irritating.

sopretty

You're not getting the point I'm making cuterob. I'm not allowed to repeat it though haha. Hard to argue a point that way.
Suffices to say, that I would love for the world to spend every cent it has investigating every death lost. That's not going to happen.
I wonder as to the motivations for this investigation.

Synode

sopretty wrote: »

I wonder as to the motivations for this investigation.

There are many. The two most of important of which are

1. The families of those on board deserve a proper explanation of what happened (as well as the bodies of their beloved if possible, though this is less likely as time goes on).
2. The airline industry needs to know what happened to ensure they can do everything possible to make sure it never happens again.

I hope and fully expect no expense to be spared in finding MH370.

billie1b

sopretty wrote: »

You're not getting the point I'm making cuterob. I'm not allowed to repeat it though haha. Hard to argue a point that way.
Suffices to say, that I would love for the world to spend every cent it has investigating every death lost. That's not going to happen.
I wonder as to the motivations for this investigation.

People that go missing everyday or that are killed, is not the same as an aircraft or ship going missing. Your comparing apples and oranges. You can never prevent people from being killed or going missing but due to technology you can prevent aircraft or ships from going missing, if one does happen to go missing (MH370) and there is a loss of lives or frame, its imperative to find the missing aircraft or ship to piece together what happened and see if the technology is there or different procedures to prevent further lives from being lost in the same way, its a controlled environment by highly professional people and technology, so answers are needed to make sure it can be prevented. Unfortunately people go missing or get killed for umpteen different reasons, which cannot be controlled, that is why there are authorities to investigate them on an individual basis and try to get an outcome as to why each person went missing or way said person was killed.

pablo128

CapriKorn wrote: »

I completely agree about the wasted money. I do not believe we will find out anything of major significance (like a design flaw) or even why it happened. The money spent on this search could be so much better spent on other things (even though it's naive to expect that it would be). Another perspective: Lots of people disappear with no explanation every day, and we do not commit unlimited resources to finding them. Why is it that a dramatic tragedy makes people endorse this kind of effort and expense, but the day by day unsolved murders and disappearances (which add up to way more than 239) don't seem to bother them?

This time it was the middle of the indian ocean, with the loss of 239 lives. Next time a major city, or football stadium or something. For fcuk sake if a Toyota has a fault with an accelerator pedal and one person dies, there's international outrage and a massive recall.
I don't think you're seeing this mh370 situation in proper context at all.

owenc

cuterob wrote: »

ffs seriously lads come on, what is going through your heads? .. what do you think they should do? just forget about it?..
maybe it's the first time either of you have ever looked into air crash investigations but you are both missing something very simple it seems and it baffles the mind that there is people out there that think the way you do

it is only money, and human life trumps money every day no matter the amount, where is your common sense and empathy seriously? .. i'm at a loss of words for people like you

If either of you had family on that plane it would be a different story coming out of your mouths and that is a fact, use your heads

Exactly why the hella name would you just forget about a plane crash?

How daft. Could you imagine the response. "Oh we can use the money elsewhere lets forget about it".

CapriKorn

Since the first 777 entered service in June 1995, the airplane has flown almost five million flights and accumulated more than 18 million flight hours with an excellent safety record. So I find it hard to believe that finding this plane is going to uncover a design flaw that is endangering lives.
It is so much more likely that this was due to human causes. And finding the plane is unlikely to shed more light on that than an investigation of the pilots' and passengers' networks.
I personally would not hesitate to fly on a 777.
And as incredibly sad as it is, the fact is, those passengers are dead and finding bits of fuselage will not change that.

urajoke

CapriKorn wrote: »

Since the first 777 entered service in June 1995, the airplane has flown almost five million flights and accumulated more than 18 million flight hours with an excellent safety record. So I find it hard to believe that finding this plane is going to uncover a design flaw that is endangering lives.
It is so much more likely that this was due to human causes. And finding the plane is unlikely to shed more light on that than an investigation of the pilots' and passengers' networks.
I personally would not hesitate to fly on a 777.
And as incredibly sad as it is, the fact is, those passengers are dead and finding bits of fuselage will not change that.

And there we have it, the exact reason we should find it, was it an undiscovered design flaw, a fatigue issue not seen before. It's very important to find what happened here, you can't just shrug your shoulders and say well it could have been the pilots or it could have been X,Y or Z but sure we haven't found it in a month lets just go home. If there is a ticking timebomb of a fatigue issue it needs to be found and not ignored just because two or three people couldn't be arsed.

Sometimes people need to read what they are actually writing before hitting the post button. Sometimes the very answer is in what you are writing.

ProfessorPlum

Also, it's not just about hidden design flaws - we also need to see if there was an operational or human factors cause or contribution to the accident that can be mitigated for. Take for example AF447 - that incident radically changed how crews are trained to deal with a similar situation, similarly the a330 has an excellent safety record, but there are always lessons to be learned. The day you think you know it all is the day to pack up and head home.

Flippyfloppy

I'd imagine if and when the experts are certain that the black box is no longer holding data the search will be scaled down in stages but they will still spend a large amount of resources until it's found.

Daffodil.d

I have been following this thread but haven't posted up yet. I don't understand this. They're looking for a black box under water and say in its a hard task because the black box is so small. But thats assuming it's not inside the plane. And they've found no wreckage of the plane. So could the plane be down there too. Has these been any mention of wreckage for the last week or so? I haven't seen any. It's all about the black box.

sopretty

Daffodil.d wrote: »

I have been following this thread but haven't posted up yet. I don't understand this. They're looking for a black box under water and say in its a hard task because the black box is so small. But thats assuming it's not inside the plane. And they've found no wreckage of the plane. So could the plane be down there too. Has these been any mention of wreckage for the last week or so? I haven't seen any. It's all about the black box.

I believe they are focused on the black box, as A: it is the only traceable item and B: it will give a lot of information as to what happened on the flight.

They could try to look for the plane itself, but they have no way of knowing where it is (no signal emitted).

It's a vast search area, and it's not as if they can just have a look around for a plane. The black box(es), are the key to everything

K.Flyer

Is it normal for the B.B. to be found detached from the plane with no plane or wreckage to speak off nearby??

sopretty

K.Flyer wrote: »

Is it normal for the B.B. to be found detached from the plane with no plane or wreckage to speak off nearby??

I think the black box is extremely dense and heavy so would sink at the point of impact. Other items on the plane, including the metal in the planes structure, would possibly float, or be moved. If you can imagine putting a stone into your sink full of water, as opposed to a large flat object? Maybe I'm talking through me hat as usual, but that's how I see it.

eatmyshorts

K.Flyer wrote: »

Is it normal for the B.B. to be found detached from the plane with no plane or wreckage to speak off nearby??

The FDR and CVR are strongly fixed into the aircraft structure in the tail area. The boxes will still be in the wreckage.

theKillerBite

eatmyshorts wrote: »

The FDR and CVR are strongly fixed into the aircraft structure in the tail area. The boxes will still be in the wreckage.

I don't know about the FDR in the MH370 plane, but modern recorders are supposed to eject & fly away from the plane so as to avoid the burning wreckage and possible damage from fire etc. I think the NTSB made recommendation of such recorders in 1999.