Originally Posted by
JackTripper
Excellent video by nataylor at Tivo Community Forum showing how investigators used successive satellite pings to narrow down the search to the arc "corridors". It cleared everything up for me.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfMKGolWCAA
Agree much easier to understand from a visual explanation, than from a text one (see below).
Originally Posted by
Kiwi Flyer
Not necessarily.
Recall the final ping was unable to be confirmed if it is a location on the northern or southern arc. They have approximate distance from satellite but not bearing, or lat/long.
Go back to the prior ping. The same applies - they know distance from satellite but not bearing or lat/long.
Repeat for earlier pings.
The last "known" position based on the military radar readings was not too far from the equator.
No one knows the heading to get from that location to a point somewhere along the next arc at the time of the next ping, or to a location along the subsequent arcs at the time of the next pings.
However it is not quite as bad as this. They know there is a limit as to how far between pings the aircraft can move. But the longer the time elapsed the longer along an arc the possible position (potentially including back-tracking).
Originally Posted by
cassiewoofer
Yes I know there are problems but if taken for a purpose of a long flight by a human with a distant intended destination it is almost certain it would be straight and at cruising speed. Unless he's got plenty of fuel to spare and is not in a hurry.
In reality it is not that simple. Consider aircraft avoid flying over the Himalayas for example (for a number of reasons).
For MH370 there is also the information that the portion of flight path that is known was very far from straight.
Originally Posted by
iquitos
About how wide is the red band/corridor in nm?
If pings are hourly then the corridor is up to twice the distance able to be flown in one hour (the aircraft could go directly towards or away from the satellite from the time of the ping).