Malaysia Airlines flight MH370-Updates and Discussion

Peppa Pig

Nimrod 7 wrote: »

Does it matter?

Why would you want news sources to speculate without any evidence?

That's the kind of thing we don't want them to do. Most of them are absolutely clueless when it comes to aviation.

That's why I asked has anyone confirmed it or is it still speculation.

Kavs8

eatmyshorts the supposed 777 captain quick question, in total how many navigation systems on the 777? another question what (only a 777 captain would know this) airline made it the ''pilots aircraft''.

LiamoSail

keith16 wrote: »

2. Busy area? Looks fairly empty to me

Those AIS trackers aren't an accurate reflection of traffic in the area. The Gulf of Thailand is a busy enough area, in that there's plenty of fishing v/l's etc that won't be on AIS, as well as merchant traffic. Ive been up there quiet a few times, and they always tended to be busy watches

I do agree with you however that it's entirely possible for an aircraft to go down in the gulf unnoticed

fits

Kavs8 wrote: »

eatmyshorts the supposed 777 captain quick question, in total how many navigation systems on the 777? another question what (only a 777 captain would know this) airline made it the ''pilots aircraft''.

Kavs8 I think you're suffering from sleep deprivation. A quick trawl of eatmyshorts' posts would back up the claim.

Kavs8

I'm asking a question, when he answers I'll accept. Please don't patronize me by the way fits.

brandon_flowers

Could we please keep the discussion to the facts and not resort to one-upmanship? There is a lot of non regular posters who will ask newbie type questions, those of us here regularly should try to be civil about it.

The_Wanderer

brandon_flowers wrote: »

Bang on 41 minutes it changed heading slightly, I am guessing there is a waypoint at that spot.

and 9M-MRO lost contact just after that waypoint. Tonight's MH370 seems to be taking the exact same route from that fateful night. It must be a sobering thought for the passengers and crew onboard to know there flying over airspace where a crash happened only a few days ago.

kona

eatmyshorts wrote: »

Given the fact that I'm a current 777 Captain, I'd take a guess I know slightly more about the situation than you do.

Well played. Lmfao.

zetalambda

eatmyshorts wrote: »

Given the fact that I'm a current 777 Captain, I'd take a guess I know slightly more about the situation than you do.

Yeah, that's right captain eatmyshorts and I have an Airbus A-380 parked out in my garage.

I think it's possible we've just discovered a new Bermuda triangle for planes.

Kavs8

Could we please keep the discussion to the facts and not resort to one-upmanship? There is a lot of non regular posters who will ask newbie type questions, those of us here regularly should try to be civil about it.

Precisely, the cost element brought into it is total nonsense. Now some of you may remember the date of 10 Feb '11, that day I was on work experience in Cork Airport. Working in duty free that morning hadn't heard an absolute thing to be called into the back room to be told a plane had crashed and there were fatalities asked how they knew? (terminal was covered in fog at the time) The crash alarm was triggered and the ELT from the plane was being broadcast on the emergency frequency. That aircraft was a metroliner, this aircraft is a triple 7 - It has the most sophisticated systems of any aircraft in the world. It will be found. The stark difference is it has gone down at sea, in Cork it crashed about 200m from the Tower - and even though it could not be seen its ELT confirmed it was down.

I am most certainly not a pilot, but everyday in my line of work I meet so called pilots - let me tell you something you rarely find one on a public forum unless retired, because most airlines ban them from speaking on them.

sopretty

Eatmyshorts - Again, maybe I'm ignorant here in what I'm saying, but saying you know more about a situation as you captain a similar plane, is like me stating that I know more about a car crash down the road, because the car involved was a Punto, and I also drive a Punto! While, you might understand more about how the aircraft operates, I doubt you know more about the situation!

andy_g

Back on topic lads final warning.

Kavs8

andy_g wrote: »

Back on topic lads final warning.

Indeed but can eatmyshorts please answer my question?

fits

Behind paywall but headline backs up the cost argument.
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304020104579429233516692014?mod=wsj_streaming_stream&mg=reno64-wsj&url=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2FSB10001424052702304020104579429233516692014.html%3Fmod%3Dwsj_streaming_stream

andy_g

Kavs8 wrote: »

Indeed but can eatmyshorts please answer my question?

Its not related to the thread so he may do so via pm

Kavs8

As this forum has gone woefully off thread by utter speculation, people not actually even bothering to study the B777 after me and many more posters have tried to help people via countless posts of information;

CONFIRMED INFORMATION

* Transponder cut at 17:21 UTC (01:21 LT), about 40 minutes after takeoff (This contradicts the official line of 01:30 of investigation which seems incorrect)

* There was no verified communication with the aircraft after this time.

* Last reported position, altitude, speed and heading as reported by FR24 correct.

* At last known position aircraft had a remaining endurance of approximately 6 hours.

* Aircraft did not enter any area with civilian primary radar coverage.

* There were two passengers with confirmed false identities on board, further two suspect.

Sully

Kavs8 wrote: »

As this forum has gone woefully off thread by utter speculation, people not actually even bothering to study the B777 which me and many more posters have tried to do;

CONFIRMED INFORMATION

* Transponder cut at 17:21 UTC (01:21 LT), about 40 minutes after takeoff (This contradicts the official line of 01:30 of investigation which seems incorrect)

There was no verified communication with the aircraft after this time.


Last reported position, altitude, speed and heading as reported by FR24 correct.


At last known position aircraft had a remaining endurance of approximately 6 hours.

Aircraft did not enter any area with civilian primary radar coverage.

There were two passengers with confirmed false identities on board, further two suspect.

Source? The Mirror? :pac:

Kavs8

Sully wrote: »

Source? The Mirror? :pac:

Haha, no . Source is from countless posts of checking information - everything else at this point is speculation.

fits

Sully wrote: »

Source? The Mirror? :pac:

Source is someone elses post on pprune.

Kavs8

fits wrote: »

Source is someone elses post on pprune.

Yes because its correct? Listen fits I've been here on this forum since day one and if you believe that information is incorrect, go prove me wrong its not. As the poster on pprune posted, it is factual.

Kavs8

Didn't notice this initially but, those involved now in the search include - Australia, Indonesia, Philippines and Thailand. A clear attempt now coupled with the Malaysians, Chinese, Vietnamese plus the US to track down any sort of evidence the aircraft is down.

And just for fitz;

http://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-updates/australia-sending-two-p3c-orions-from-darwin-to-malaysia-to-aid-with-the-search-for-missing-malaysian-flight-mh370/story-fnizu68q-1226849663966
http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2014/03/09/ri-deploys-warships-airplane-scs-search-missing-aircraft.html
http://my.news.yahoo.com/malaysian-plane-crashed-off-vietnam-coast-state-media-060229352--finance.html
http://edition.cnn.com/2014/03/09/world/asia/malaysia-airlines-plane/

Kavs8

Can we get back to the thread????

High-flyer I have already indicated that. :mad:

Sully

So the 'debris' found is actual near this oil slick? The media reported earlier that they weren't in the same area?

Kavs8

So the 'debris' found is actual near this oil slick? The media reported earlier that they weren't in the same area?

Just reading a piece from TIME magazine not mentioning the debris found near the oil slick, in-fact they are no longer referring to any oil slick which is puzzling

For those Interested, there was a previous Malaysia Airlines 777-200 incident;

''On 1 August 2005 a serious incident involving Malaysia Airlines Flight 124, occurred when a Boeing 777-2H6ER (9M-MRG) flying from Perth to Kuala Lumpur also involved an ADIRU fault resulting in uncommanded manoeuvres by the aircraft acting on false indications. In that incident the incorrect data impacted all planes of movement while the aircraft was climbing through 38,000 feet (11,600 m). The aircraft pitched up and climbed to around 41,000 feet (12,500 m), with the stall warning activated. The pilots recovered the aircraft with the autopilot disengaged and requested a return to Perth. During the return to Perth, both the left and right autopilots were briefly activated by the crew, but in both instances the aircraft pitched down and banked to the right. The aircraft was flown manually for the remainder of the flight and landed safely in Perth. There were no injuries and no damage to the aircraft. The ATSB found that the main probable cause of this incident was a latent software error which allowed the ADIRU to use data from a failed accelerometer.

The US Federal Aviation Administration issued Emergency Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2005-18-51 requiring all 777 operators to install upgraded software to resolve the error.''

Report here from the ATSB - http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2005/AAIR/pdf/aair200503722_001.pdf

I'm not suggesting something similar at all could have happened, as Boeing changed the software on the B777, but I've a feeling now the terrorism theory may be incorrect and something structurally and catastrophically failed.

So many questions now, please god they will find the aircraft at sunlight.

Peregrine

I thought they said that the oil slicks weren't related to the crash.

Sully

Nimrod 7 wrote: »

I thought they said that the oil slicks weren't related to the crash.

The sources that I am looking at haven't said that. Just not 'confirmed' it's from the plane.

Kopparberg Strawberry and Lime

also the found debris was not related too ?

Kavs8

Coming via Sky News now, Interpol says use of stolen passports "of great concern".

In relation to the debris, its very confusing because of all the sources I've so far checked (TIME, The Guardian, RTE, Sky, BBC) none are referring to the oil slicks as if they are the same location anymore, its as if the oil slicks have been dismissed without confirmation?

sopretty

Kavs8 wrote: »

Coming via Sky News now, Interpol says use of stolen passports "of great concern".

In relation to the debris, its very confusing because of all the sources I've so far checked (TIME, The Guardian, RTE, Sky, BBC) none are referring to the oil slicks as if they are the same location anymore, its as if the oil slicks have been dismissed without confirmation?

Did they state that it was of great concern in relation to this incident specifically, or whether it was of great concern in general?

cuterob

Kavs8 wrote: »

Oh christ and I'm Aer Lingus current CEO, many of you lads are on the forum.

Kavs8 wrote: »

I'm asking a question, when he answers I'll accept. Please don't patronize me by the way fits.

zetalambda wrote: »

Yeah, that's right captain eatmyshorts and I have an Airbus A-380 parked out in my garage.

I think it's possible we've just discovered a new Bermuda triangle for planes.

I've never seen either of you post regularly on this forum, if you did you'd know about eatmyshorts and you'd realise a lot of pilots post on here, embarassing for both of you seriously