Singapore Expats Forum

Malaysian Airlines Flight MH370 Missing after take off

Discuss about any latest news or current affairs in Singapore or globally. Please DO NOT copy and paste news articles from other sources without written permission.
User avatar
zzm9980
Governor
Governor
Posts: 6837
Joined: Wed, 06 Jul 2011
Location: Once more unto the breach

Postby zzm9980 » Tue, 18 Mar 2014 11:16 am

bgd wrote:Malaysian military radar didn't detect the aircraft changing course and it would have been visible. Not sure how much reliance you can place on military radar, which does surprise me somewhat. Perhaps borders are not as protected as we imagine.


The radar likely detected it. The operators just didn't react in an appropriate way. Or maybe they did. Hindsight is 20/20; it's easily possible there are dozen or hundreds of such "events" per day in system such as this, to the point where normal operators get desensitized to such noise.

This is quite how so many major computer breaches go undetected; they're detected, seen, and ignored as the amount of false positives makes finding relevant events in real time (or near realtime) impossible.

bgd
Editor
Editor
Posts: 1175
Joined: Wed, 25 Jul 2007

Postby bgd » Tue, 18 Mar 2014 11:28 am

Indeed. The article i read said it was detected but the operators didn't notice it.

Primrose Hill
Chatter
Chatter
Posts: 433
Joined: Tue, 05 Aug 2008

Postby Primrose Hill » Tue, 18 Mar 2014 11:41 am

How much longer?

User avatar
Barnsley
Manager
Manager
Posts: 2063
Joined: Tue, 10 Jun 2008
Location: Pasir Ris
Contact:

Postby Barnsley » Tue, 18 Mar 2014 11:55 am

Primrose Hill wrote:How much longer?


Until its Politically prudent to find it!!
Life is short, paddle harder!!

Steve1960
Editor
Editor
Posts: 1106
Joined: Mon, 13 Aug 2012
Location: Singapore

Postby Steve1960 » Tue, 18 Mar 2014 3:44 pm

Some interesting comments I read and listened to.

The plane shadowed a Singapore Airlines flight so that it would not be picked up by radar.

A nuclear submarine could pick up the noise created by the plane hitting the water from a long way off but if it was your submarine would you want to admit it's location by coming forward?

Beeroclock
Reporter
Reporter
Posts: 718
Joined: Thu, 31 Oct 2013

Postby Beeroclock » Tue, 18 Mar 2014 4:29 pm

Steve1960 wrote:The plane shadowed a Singapore Airlines flight so that it would not be picked up by radar.
Yeah, the original source of this hypothesis is the link I posted earlier.

User avatar
Barnsley
Manager
Manager
Posts: 2063
Joined: Tue, 10 Jun 2008
Location: Pasir Ris
Contact:

Postby Barnsley » Tue, 18 Mar 2014 4:53 pm

Steve1960 wrote:Some interesting comments I read and listened to.

The plane shadowed a Singapore Airlines flight so that it would not be picked up by radar.

A nuclear submarine could pick up the noise created by the plane hitting the water from a long way off but if it was your submarine would you want to admit it's location by coming forward?


Thats quite some planning gone into it if that turns out to be true :shock:
Life is short, paddle harder!!

User avatar
sundaymorningstaple
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 34259
Joined: Thu, 11 Nov 2004
Location: Still Fishing!
Contact:

Postby sundaymorningstaple » Tue, 18 Mar 2014 8:07 pm

What's really starting to get interesting is the fact that, as I supposed, they have now found software on his 777 simulator for 5 1000' landing strips locations. Get this.....

Mali, 3 in Indian/Sri Lanka and one in the centre of the Indian Ocean, Diego Garcia. Guess who's sitting there. All have 1000 m runways. It takes 5,098' to land a fully loaded 777-200 ER. Not sure short if it's running empty or very low on fuel. Is there a Hanger big enough to hide a 777 on Diego Garcia?

User avatar
zzm9980
Governor
Governor
Posts: 6837
Joined: Wed, 06 Jul 2011
Location: Once more unto the breach

Postby zzm9980 » Tue, 18 Mar 2014 11:25 pm

sundaymorningstaple wrote:What's really starting to get interesting is the fact that, as I supposed, they have now found software on his 777 simulator for 5 1000' landing strips locations. Get this.....

Mali, 3 in Indian/Sri Lanka and one in the centre of the Indian Ocean, Diego Garcia. Guess who's sitting there. All have 1000 m runways. It takes 5,098' to land a fully loaded 777-200 ER. Not sure short if it's running empty or very low on fuel. Is there a Hanger big enough to hide a 777 on Diego Garcia?


Pretty sure either USAF or her majesty's Royal Airforce would notice if they landed at DG. Unless we're getting really deep into truther territory and think this is a conspiracy sponsored by the West.

User avatar
the lynx
Governor
Governor
Posts: 5239
Joined: Thu, 09 Dec 2010
Location: Midgar

Postby the lynx » Wed, 19 Mar 2014 8:57 am

Any comment on this? From a pilot.

http://www.wired.com/autopia/2014/03/mh370-electrical-fire/

We old pilots were drilled to know what is the closest airport of safe harbor while in cruise. Airports behind us, airports abeam us, and airports ahead of us. They’re always in our head. Always. If something happens, you don’t want to be thinking about what are you going to do–you already know what you are going to do. When I saw that left turn with a direct heading, I instinctively knew he was heading for an airport. He was taking a direct route to Palau Langkawi, a 13,000-foot airstrip with an approach over water and no obstacles. The captain did not turn back to Kuala Lampur because he knew he had 8,000-foot ridges to cross. He knew the terrain was friendlier toward Langkawi, which also was closer.


For me, the loss of transponders and communications makes perfect sense in a fire. And there most likely was an electrical fire. In the case of a fire, the first response is to pull the main busses and restore circuits one by one until you have isolated the bad one. If they pulled the busses, the plane would go silent. It probably was a serious event and the flight crew was occupied with controlling the plane and trying to fight the fire. Aviate, navigate, and lastly, communicate is the mantra in such situations.


Regarding the additional flying time: On departing Kuala Lampur, Flight 370 would have had fuel for Beijing and an alternate destination, probably Shanghai, plus 45 minutes–say, 8 hours. Maybe more. He burned 20-25 percent in the first hour with takeoff and the climb to cruise. So when the turn was made toward Langkawi, he would have had six hours or more hours worth of fuel. This correlates nicely with the Inmarsat data pings being received until fuel exhaustion.

The now known continued flight until time to fuel exhaustion only confirms to me that the crew was incapacitated and the flight continued on deep into the south Indian ocean.


Fire in an aircraft demands one thing: Get the machine on the ground as soon as possible. There are two well-remembered experiences in my memory. The AirCanada DC9 which landed, I believe, in Columbus, Ohio in the 1980s. That pilot delayed descent and bypassed several airports. He didn’t instinctively know the closest airports. He got it on the ground eventually, but lost 30-odd souls. The 1998 crash of Swissair DC-10 off Nova Scotia was another example of heroic pilots. They were 15 minutes out of Halifax but the fire overcame them and they had to ditch in the ocean. They simply ran out of time. That fire incidentally started when the aircraft was about an hour out of Kennedy. Guess what? The transponders and communications were shut off as they pulled the busses.

User avatar
zzm9980
Governor
Governor
Posts: 6837
Joined: Wed, 06 Jul 2011
Location: Once more unto the breach

Postby zzm9980 » Wed, 19 Mar 2014 9:33 am

I read the same article. IMO it is just as plausible as an elaborate plot to steal for Al-Qaeda to steal the jet. The guy's whole description of this strange small controlled electrical fire doesn't seem realistic to me.

I'm rather sure if it was the most likely scenario that Mayalsian , US, and every other official would be preaching this theory as to reduce panic and fears over something 'bad' happening that they couldn't control.

One other point by Patrick Smith (Askthepilot.com) is that if a terrorist org wanted to steal a plane for a 'secret' future mission (not just to scare people by hijacking the plane), they could take any number of cargo jets that would never be noticed and be about the same size or larger.

User avatar
Saint
Director
Director
Posts: 3535
Joined: Thu, 16 Jun 2005
Location: The Juban Stand, Boat Quay
Contact:

Postby Saint » Wed, 19 Mar 2014 10:13 am

The US Military has cancelled its multi billion dollar research and development program into the next generation of stealth aircraft as they discover simply turning off the transponder has the same effect.

User avatar
Barnsley
Manager
Manager
Posts: 2063
Joined: Tue, 10 Jun 2008
Location: Pasir Ris
Contact:

Postby Barnsley » Wed, 19 Mar 2014 10:29 am

Saint wrote:The US Military has cancelled its multi billion dollar research and development program into the next generation of stealth aircraft as they discover simply turning off the transponder has the same effect.
:D
Life is short, paddle harder!!

User avatar
Barnsley
Manager
Manager
Posts: 2063
Joined: Tue, 10 Jun 2008
Location: Pasir Ris
Contact:

Postby Barnsley » Wed, 19 Mar 2014 10:32 am

Can someone explain to me what going on "hunger strike" will do to help the situation?

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-26626204
Life is short, paddle harder!!

Beeroclock
Reporter
Reporter
Posts: 718
Joined: Thu, 31 Oct 2013

Postby Beeroclock » Wed, 19 Mar 2014 10:58 am

If fire, I don't get why no emergency call out. In an explosion scenario perhaps no time, but fire should have some time.

I accept this guy is a pilot, but must say I'm very surprised if airline procedures say the "first response" is to start pulling out key electirical circuitry in the plane before even communicating a mayday call.

For me, the loss of transponders and communications makes perfect sense in a fire. And there most likely was an electrical fire. In the case of a fire, the first response is to pull the main busses and restore circuits one by one until you have isolated the bad one. If they pulled the busses, the plane would go silent. It probably was a serious event and the flight crew was occupied with controlling the plane and trying to fight the fire. Aviate, navigate, and lastly, communicate is the mantra in such situations.
Last edited by Beeroclock on Wed, 19 Mar 2014 12:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.


  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Return to “Latest News & Current Affairs”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests