Malaysia Airlines flight MH370-Updates and Discussion

eatmyshorts

warren44 wrote: »

If the aircraft were in fact at the bottom of the ocean in one piece or in huge pieces, it would have been found.

They knew exactly where AF447 went down, yet it still took 2 years of searching to find the wreckage on the sea floor.
As another poster said, you are vastly underestimating the scale of the work involved in a search like this.

warren44

eatmyshorts wrote: »

They knew exactly where AF447 went down, yet it still took 2 years of searching to find the wreckage on the sea floor.
As another poster said, you are vastly underestimating the scale of the work involved in a search like this.

Its not about underestimating the scale of work involved, of course it is a difficult task but there have been incidents in conditions just as bad and they have found way more in much less time.

The Chinese have claimed to already searched over 250,000 square miles (646,000 square kilometers) yet they still cant come up with a single shred of physical evidence.

There are plenty of airplane parts that will not sink and are buoyant and will float yet they have not found a single one. The plane isnt where they are searching. They are not even trying to search anywhere else. They are wasting time and resources searching for something that isnt there.

The supposed military malay radar that picked up the flights last location suggests the plane was heading towards the Andaman Islands yet no one is even bothering to dedicate any resources in that area.

warren44

eatmyshorts wrote: »

They knew exactly where AF447 went down, yet it still took 2 years of searching to find the wreckage on the sea floor.
As another poster said, you are vastly underestimating the scale of the work involved in a search like this.

No it didnt, they found the wreckage within a week. It took them a few days to spot fuel oil slicks and debris that was floating around. It just took them 2 years to retrieve all of it and the black boxes. They found the fuel oil slick and were recovering bodies and debris from 13,000 feet below within a week. There should have been something ANYTHING recovered by now but there hasnt.

Windy Miller

sopretty wrote: »

My reference to it being a white elephant was that it is not 'intelligent' enough to be let out on its own by all accounts! :pac: It was not in reference to the fact that it couldn't communicate with the surface (though I appreciate my question about the communication abilities immediately preceded my final statement).

'A signal that the unit is malfunctioning'? Are we back to that old nugget again? Either it knows how far down it is, or it doesn't. If it does, then it needs to go further up - not back to the bloomin' surface surely!.

Have they no other way of determining the depth of the ocean involved apart from this item?

I realise these 'yokes' are incredibly expensive. It's a little bit of a waste of money though, if you spend a small country's GDP on an item which goes underwater, decides it has gone far enough, then comes straight back up. Unless its sole function is to go down to a certain depth and then come back up.

Seems to me it is you who are completely out of your depth, yet you keep plummeting deeper.

Don't you have some sort of safety mechanism that will stop you from posting uninformed gibberish?

Calina

warren44 wrote: »

No it didnt, they found the wreckage within a week. It took them a few days to spot fuel oil slicks and debris that was floating around. It just took them 2 years to retrieve all of it and the black boxes. They found the fuel oil slick and were recovering bodies and debris from 13,000 feet below within a week. There should have been something ANYTHING recovered by now but there hasnt.

Strictly speaking, they did not find the main wreck of AF447 for 2 years. They retrieved some debris a week or two after the accident, but the bulk of the wreck, the hull of the aircraft was not found for two years.

The other point is AF447 went down somewhere akin to where they lost it. This appears to have gone down a few thousand kilometers from where they lost it. You clearly do not understand the scale of this problem.

Frankly I really, really wish they would find some evidence of the wreck because then the families get some closure, and some of the more outlandish conspiracy theorists will get shut up and we can get on with the task of finding out what happened.

Calina

warren44 wrote: »

The supposed military malay radar that picked up the flights last location suggests the plane was heading towards the Andaman Islands yet no one is even bothering to dedicate any resources in that area.

The Indian authorities searched that area a few weeks ago.

What, again, is your problem?

sopretty

Windy Miller wrote: »

Seems to me it is you who are completely out of your depth, yet you keep plummeting deeper.

Don't you have some sort of safety mechanism that will stop you from posting uninformed gibberish?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/australiaandthepacific/australia/10766581/Malaysia-Airlines-MH370-submarine-aborts-first-search-of-ocean-floor.html

"It went to 4,500 metres and once it hit that max depth, it said this is deeper that I'm programmed to be, so it aborted the mission."
Captain Matthews, a search and recovery expert, said the crew would now refine the task to cope with the depth encountered.
"It happend in the very far corner of the area it's searching. So they are just shifting the search box a little bit away from that deep water."
The US-made Bluefin-21 would embark on a second mission during the day, weather permitting, JACC said.

lord lucan

Windy Miller wrote: »

Seems to me it is you who are completely out of your depth, yet you keep plummeting deeper.

Don't you have some sort of safety mechanism that will stop you from posting uninformed gibberish?

Attack the post not the poster

seal57

Oil slick- not from plane... just another False story, wild goose chase. Families of the passengers have spoken to their own scientists and mathematicians who are telling them the Inmarsat Data is not conclusive one way or the other and the plane just as easily could have gone north/north west. Boeing and Rolls Royce know exactly where the plane went. Not one word from either company since day 1. Even Mainstream press is channeling back coverage now.

bucketybuck

seal57 wrote: »

Boeing and Rolls Royce know exactly where the plane went.

Sure they do, it went down.

warren44

seal57 wrote: »

Oil slick- not from plane... just another False story, wild goose chase. Families of the passengers have spoken to their own scientists and mathematicians who are telling them the Inmarsat Data is not conclusive one way or the other and the plane just as easily could have gone north/north west. Boeing and Rolls Royce know exactly where the plane went. Not one word from either company since day 1. Even Mainstream press is channeling back coverage now.

You are right about the Inmarsat data. There is no way to get an accurate detailed picture just from a ping. It could have been traveling in either direction and it doesnt reveal altitude or airspeed. And those pings could be spoofed.

But when it comes to Boeing and Rolls Royce knowing where the plane went, that is not true. The Engine monitoring system that transmits data to Rolls Royce are sent via VHF radio or satellite at take-off, during the climb, at some point while cruising, and on landing. Supposedly, it was via VHF transponder on this particular aircraft because it didnt have the satellite antenna option installed.

The system used to transmit plane and engine data would have been disabled once the other transponders were cut off as this is the theory still floating around, that someone deliberately disabled the planes transponders. Also if someone hijacked the plane chose to do so, they could have just used a cheap, easily acquired hand held jammer to block all types of Mobile phone, satellite, microwave and RF transmissions from leaving or entering the aircraft, so they wouldnt need to know how to disable the transponders if they didnt have the aircraft technical knowledge. So either someone with the aircraft experience knew how to disable all onboard transponders or just outright jammed the signals.

warren44

bucketybuck wrote: »

Sure they do, it went down.

Yep, it went down by landing in a clandestine air field.

Jack1985

Frankly I really, really wish they would find some evidence of the wreck because then the families get some closure, and some of the more outlandish conspiracy theorists will get shut up and we can get on with the task of finding out what happened.

PREACH..

robbieVan

warren44 wrote: »

No it didnt, they found the wreckage within a week. It took them a few days to spot fuel oil slicks and debris that was floating around. It just took them 2 years to retrieve all of it and the black boxes. They found the fuel oil slick and were recovering bodies and debris from 13,000 feet below within a week. There should have been something ANYTHING recovered by now but there hasnt.

they were looking in the wrong place for the first month, anything that was floating in the first couple of weeks eventually sunk to the bottom or it has drifted off and probably wont be found for a long while before it washes up somewhere, such as seat cushions etc

Synode

Wonder what the chances are that the plane crashed and stayed intact, sinking to the bottom in one piece.

robbieVan

Synode wrote: »

Wonder what the chances are that the plane crashed and stayed intact, sinking to the bottom in one piece.

probably little chance, planes arent designed to land on whatever or even have a really heavy landing on a runway, it will crack, the hudson crash was on pretty much very calm still water, the indian ocean is not as forgiving

Mountainsandh

Cnn say they have some bit of news, taking that with pinch of salt, but if true am I right to think it is quite significant ?

New information has come to light about the path taken by Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 before it disappeared from radar screens on March 8.
The plane deviated from its planned route from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing by turning leftward over water while it was still inside Vietnamese airspace, a senior Malaysian aviation source told CNN's Nic Robertson.
The aircraft then climbed to 39,000 feet, just short of the Boeing 777-200ER's 41,000 feet safe operating limit, and maintained that altitude for about 20 minutes over the Malaysian Peninsula before beginning to descend, the source said.
Investigators have determined that the missing jet was equipped with four emergency locator transmitters, or ELTs, which are designed to transmit a plane's location to an emergency satellite when triggered by a crash or by contact with water, the source added.
The ELTs were at the plane's front door, its rear door, in the fuselage and in the cockpit, said the source, who was puzzled over why they appear either not to have activated or, if they did activate, why they were not picked up by the satellite.

The bit I would find significant, that's if it's true, and if I recall info in this thread right, is that it climbed to 39 000 ft and stayed at that altitude for 20 minutes ?

Wasn't it said on here that in the event of depressurization, oxygen masks would help passengers for 10-15 minutes only ? Would 39 000 ft be enough to cause passengers to lose consciousness ?

In the most gruesome way, this might confirm that indeed passengers were deliberately "executed" before the plane continued on its mysterious journey.

Jack1985

Mountainsandh wrote: »

Cnn say they have some bit of news, taking that with pinch of salt, but if true am I right to think it is quite significant ?



The bit I would find significant, that's if it's true, and if I recall info in this thread right, is that it climbed to 39 000 ft and stayed at that altitude for 20 minutes ?

Wasn't it said on here that in the event of depressurization, oxygen masks would help passengers for 10-15 minutes only ? Would 39 000 ft be enough to cause passengers to lose consciousness ?

In the most gruesome way, this might confirm that indeed passengers were deliberately "executed" before the plane continued on its mysterious journey.

passengers were executed? ... This wasn't a depressurisation, the subsequent turns altitude climbs/descents are totally out of characteristic with a depressurization and that went on for over an hour and a half when it was near the waypoint IGREX approx 285nm from its actual confirmed disappearance location at IGARI.

Mountainsandh

Jack1985 wrote: »

passengers were executed? ... This wasn't a depressurisation, the subsequent turns altitude climbs/descents are totally out of characteristic with a depressurization and that went on for over an hour and a half when it was near the waypoint IGREX approx 285nm from its actual confirmed disappearance location at IGARI.

no need to me, I'm asking the question.

If the incident was isolated, and the altitude would kill people, then yes, it would seem they were deliberately killed, no ? I thought I had read on here that over a certain altitude people would lose consciousness, pilots would have a bit longer but passengers would only have 10 to 15 minutes oxygen.

What are the characteristics of depressurization that rule out this event ?
Are CNN just pulling out old information then, and why are they isolating this incident ? Are the other altitude changes you mention as extreme (the ones that went on for an hour), and are they... "official", well, sort of confirmed anyway ?

I thought it had just spiked, then descended rapidly, and stayed low until the turn.

Jack1985

I'm asking the question.

Yes and it's a weird question, where are you even getting evidence to support the question? and how can anyone answer it without evidence? That's the first reference I've seen to passengers being executed.

If the incident was isolated, and the altitude would kill people, then yes, it would seem they were deliberately killed, no ?

Altitude deliberately killed people, what? If you're referring to somebody switching off the aircon packs then yes, that would knock people out - they won't die immediately after the oxygen runs out, in hypoxia you can actually be still alive but are in a full state of unconsciousness with untold damage to the brain due to lack of oxygen but you would not be clinically dead. However - There is not one bit of evidence the aircon packs were switched off, even if they were and the person in control was using oxygen it runs out sometime after 30 minutes (in the Flight Deck each crew has a bottle of oxygen), passenger oxygen in the cabin runs out after the masks drop sometime after 10 minutes (as this is the required minimum of oxygen supply in the cabin during depressurisation). However this has been more or less ruled out because again, the flight continued to change heading/altitude which can only be done through human interaction for well over an hour.

What are the characteristics of depressurization that rule out this event ?
Are CNN just pulling out old information then, and why are they isolating this incident ? Are the other altitude changes you mention as extreme (the ones that went on for an hour), and are they... "official", well, sort of confirmed anyway ?

CNN's coverage has gone down hill massively, they continue to have nightly hourly long bulletins with the same information ramping up conspiracy theories and idiotic information being put out by so called ''experts''. The only place you'll get an actual timeline of confirmed details from the start of this disappearance is here - http://avherald.com/h?article=4710c69b&opt=0

I thought it had just spiked, then descended rapidly, and stayed low until the turn.

No the recorded timeline of events which were tracked was;

01:21 - Disappearance location (confirmed - IGARI) - Flight turns left at FL350.

02:15 - Tracked at GIVAL at FL295.

And between those times altitude fluctuated as high as FL390 and below FL295. An aircraft won't do that with passengers/crew passed out so, somebody was in control - we don't know who that was. I believe it was not depressurisation, it doesn't fit at all considering a human was interacting with the systems for the aircraft to make turns and climb/descend for well over an hour.

sopretty

Does everyone still feel that this was some mechanical failure which ended with the plane doing a u-turn and nose-diving into the ocean 4 hours later, never to be found?

Mountainsandh

Thanks for answering the questions, and no need for narkiness. I have not come up with that idea, indeed I have seen it mentioned several times in the press and on here. If the plane was deliberately brought up to an altitude where passengers could be knocked unconscious (at the flick of a switch), and like you said, with little chance of recovering consciousness, then that's very like an execution, no ? That's basically killing these people, even though clinical death may not be immediate.
I agree CNN are just rehashing stuff most of the time, but if the info that the plane maintained that altitude for 20 minutes, and the pilots have 30 minutes worth of oxygen are true, it gives them 10 minutes to survive and descend, which the plane did rapidly.
So you could have a scenario where pilot knocked everyone unconscious but him, and took the deliberate turns as planned.

seal57

sopretty wrote: »

Does everyone still feel that this was some mechanical failure which ended with the plane doing a u-turn and nose-diving into the ocean 4 hours later, never to be found?

Nope... the Plane is on land. Supposedly its been confirmed there were 4 ELTS on the plane. No way all 4 failed. Talking Heads doing their best to explain they all could have failed, such as the plane had soft landing in the ocean-lol. They are starting to run out of time, with all their official theories and reasons. If the plane landed somewhere on land the ELTs would not have gone off. If the plane crashed in the water, they would have gone off. ELT goes off, a Satellite knows the exact location. I'm surprised they are admitting to 4, but those 777's generally all have 4, so its hard to explain why that plane would have less. The press and officials delayed as long as they could talking about the ELTS. They have basically ignored ELT discussion since the the plane disappeared, but the families have hired experts and are putting enormous pressure on getting the ELT information, amongst other issues they are raising. I would imagine the training for a rescue mission has got be nearing completion. They would have built an entire mockup of the area where the plane would be. They might be struggling with intel on passenger locations and how they might be split up into groups. The Aussies have done a great job playing along and making it all look convincing.

angwd

I'm probably missing something but don't understand why if hypoxia can set in at 35000 ft why it would need to climb to 45000 ft to ensure "execution"? surely at either altitude the same result would be guaranteed? Only difference I can see is reported rise to 45000 and dip to 5000 would pin people to their seats.

Mountainsandh

angwd wrote: »

I'm probably missing something but don't understand why if hypoxia can set in at 35000 ft why it would need to climb to 45000 ft to ensure "execution"? surely at either altitude the same result would be guaranteed? Only difference I can see is reported rise to 45000 and dip to 5000 would pin people to their seats.

But according to that new ... source (sigh !) on CNN, it didn't climb to 45 000 ft, it reached 39 000 ft from the cruise 35 000 ft.

Since hypoxia/loss of consciousness happens more or less quickly depending on the altitude, I suppose another 4000 ft would have meant a quicker and surer job, for whoever might have been trying to "disable" (since the phrase seems more palatable to some) passengers.

However I was reading that page http://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/Hypoxia_(OGHFA_BN) , and even with the help of Oxygen masks, it seems so hard for the body to cope with the effects that I'm not so convinced any more.

I guess it's unlikely, but possible.
If the pilot in effect applied that logic (make sure passengers are ... "disabled" by depressurizing at altitude where he knew they didn't stand a chance), then he might have got severely affected himself/herself (I am using "pilot" loosely, as the person who took control of plane then) despite his Oxygen supply, which would explain erratic descent and re-ascension.

I thought every thing would be okey-dokeley for the pilot once he had his supply of Oxygen, but it doesn't seem so simple.

owenc

Mountainsandh wrote: »

no need to me, I'm asking the question.

If the incident was isolated, and the altitude would kill people, then yes, it would seem they were deliberately killed, no ? I thought I had read on here that over a certain altitude people would lose consciousness, pilots would have a bit longer but passengers would only have 10 to 15 minutes oxygen.

What are the characteristics of depressurization that rule out this event ?
Are CNN just pulling out old information then, and why are they isolating this incident ? Are the other altitude changes you mention as extreme (the ones that went on for an hour), and are they... "official", well, sort of confirmed anyway ?

I thought it had just spiked, then descended rapidly, and stayed low until the turn.

It doesn't kill you and i've heard that they can wake once it reaches near sea level.

Mountainsandh

After 20 minutes of serious hypoxia, would they wake up with an operative brain function

?
Sorry typos, on phone and malfunctioning

seal57

Interesting that they are now saying the Underwater Search will conclude within a week. They expect the entire area the so called pings were heard, to have been searched within a week. Translation=they are not finding the plane in the so called Ping area.

Sam Russell

seal57 wrote: »

Interesting that they are now saying the Underwater Search will conclude within a week. They expect the entire area the so called pings were heard, to have been searched within a week. Translation=they are not finding the plane in the so called Ping area.

Either that or they are giving up.

sopretty

Sam Russell wrote: »

Either that or they are giving up.

Ah they wouldn't be doing that, would they? With the safety of Aviation at stake?
And let's not forget the 'families' (I have a serious resentment to how that acting transport referred to the 'families'.)