Mar 17, 2014, 3:08 pm
Last edit by: JDiver
PLEASE READ FIRST: WELCOME and MODERATOR NOTE
Welcome to the MH370 Discussion and Speculation Thread
Welcome to the MH370 Discussion and Speculation Thread
If you are new to us, welcome to FlyerTalk!
Who we are: FlyerTalk features discussions and chat boards that covers the most up-to-date traveler information; an interactive community dedicated to the topic of travel.
All travelers are welcome in the community. Just choose a forum: conversing about airlines and their programs, airports, destinations, dining and how to make the most of your miles and points, or visit our Information Desk to start.
All travelers are welcome in the community. Just choose a forum: conversing about airlines and their programs, airports, destinations, dining and how to make the most of your miles and points, or visit our Information Desk to start.
Respect our Diversity - link to this guideline
FlyerTalk members come from all walks of life and all parts of the world. We are as diverse in our makeup as we are alike in our passion for frequent flyer programs. Because we all bring a unique perspective to the forum, our collective experience is broadened, and we gain new insights.
Our diversity demands that we respect each other. Due to the inherent constraints of the Internet, humor, sarcasm, language and slang can be easily misinterpreted - especially when crossing cultural boundaries.
When posting a message, pay extra care to how it might be interpreted. And when you come across a post that offends you, read it with an eye toward giving the poster the benefit of the doubt.
If you have an issue with a post, please contact the member privately or contact a moderator (click on the
button). Do not make a situation worse by publicly responding.
FlyerTalk members come from all walks of life and all parts of the world. We are as diverse in our makeup as we are alike in our passion for frequent flyer programs. Because we all bring a unique perspective to the forum, our collective experience is broadened, and we gain new insights.
Our diversity demands that we respect each other. Due to the inherent constraints of the Internet, humor, sarcasm, language and slang can be easily misinterpreted - especially when crossing cultural boundaries.
When posting a message, pay extra care to how it might be interpreted. And when you come across a post that offends you, read it with an eye toward giving the poster the benefit of the doubt.
If you have an issue with a post, please contact the member privately or contact a moderator (click on the
button). Do not make a situation worse by publicly responding.
In order to a) keep the original thread focused on confirmed news and known facts, and b) allow folks a place to discuss their ideas about what might have happened, the MH370 moderators and Community Director have decided to open this thread.
Here are the expectations:
1. The normal FT TOS apply. (Including not discussing moderation actions on-thread). And please be particularly attentive to "discussing the idea and not the poster" when you have a disagreement. Civility and mutual respect are still expected and are what we owe each other as a community.
2. You are expected respect our diversity , and therefore refrain from posting inflammatory comments about race, religion, culture, politics, ethnicity, orientation, etc." Do not cite, copy, or report on such.
3. Please do continue to be attentive to the sensibilities of the families of those on the flight. Think about if you were them what you would and would not want to see posted. Speculation about what happened is permissible; please, though, do not indulge in inflammatory or overly-lurid descriptions that could well be hurtful.
4. Overly / extravagantly exaggerative posts such as conspiracy theories, posts beyond the realm of science and known facts, etc. as well as posts with information that has been posted several times previously, information that has been posted in the News thread wiki or FAQ, may be deleted. E.g. the aircraft was vaporized.
In terms of housekeeping, posts may get moved from the "news" thread if and as needed, and posts that do not conform to these simple expectations, above, will be deleted.
Also note: this wiki is locked; changes can only be made by moderators.
Thank you.
Your MH370 Moderation Team
aBroadAbroad; cblaisd; JDiver; l'etoile; NewbieRunner; oliver2002; Prospero
and Community Director
SanDiego1K
MH370 Discussion and Speculation Thread
Mar 20, 2014, 11:37 pm
#811
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 91
Interesting. One of the private jets doing some searching went out to:
-42.6617 92.9562
before returning on a course to Perth.
However, somewhere around
-38.3177 103.9834
they've been flying at 400 feet down to 100 feet for about an hour:
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/V.../YPPH/tracklog
-42.6617 92.9562
before returning on a course to Perth.
However, somewhere around
-38.3177 103.9834
they've been flying at 400 feet down to 100 feet for about an hour:
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/V.../YPPH/tracklog
Mar 20, 2014, 11:46 pm
#812
Ambassador: Japan Airlines
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: LAX
Programs: JAL Mileage Bank, JMB Diamond, oneworld Emerald, Bonvoy Platinum
Posts: 16,398
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...r-airport.html
If this is true, how come they didn't find out he made a phone call until now?
The pilot of the missing Malaysian Airlines plane made a mystery phone call just minutes before flight MH370 took off from Kuala Lumpur, it emerged last night.
Investigators are now urgently trying to work out who Capt. Zaharie Ahmad Shah spoke to in the cockpit before the plane took off on March 8.
There is a hope that the phone call could hold the answer to the plane's mysterious disappearance.
...
Investigators are now urgently trying to work out who Capt. Zaharie Ahmad Shah spoke to in the cockpit before the plane took off on March 8.
There is a hope that the phone call could hold the answer to the plane's mysterious disappearance.
...
Mar 20, 2014, 11:52 pm
#813
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Helvetia
Programs: AS; BA Silver; UA; HH Gold; Sprüngli Connaisseur
Posts: 2,912
I see no reason why they couldn't fly at night, but given the short period that they can linger before having to return for fuel, I'd imagine you'd want the whole flight to be in daylight so that you can at least have a look coming and going. Here's the Boeing link, which starts off with "nowhere to run, nowhere to hide":
http://www.boeing.com/boeing/defense.../military/p8a/
http://www.boeing.com/boeing/defense.../military/p8a/
Mar 21, 2014, 12:12 am
#814
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 91
Mar 21, 2014, 12:48 am
#815
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: BNE AUS.
Programs: Skywards Gold & Others
Posts: 46
Interesting. One of the private jets doing some searching went out to:
-42.6617 92.9562
before returning on a course to Perth.
However, somewhere around
-38.3177 103.9834
they've been flying at 400 feet down to 100 feet for about an hour:
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/V.../YPPH/tracklog
-42.6617 92.9562
before returning on a course to Perth.
However, somewhere around
-38.3177 103.9834
they've been flying at 400 feet down to 100 feet for about an hour:
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/V.../YPPH/tracklog
Mar 21, 2014, 12:53 am
#816
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: SW London
Programs: BAEC Silver; Hilton Diamond;a miscellany of other hotel non-statuses
Posts: 3,607
News outlets seem to be reporting only 2 hours on search due to distance from land, implying no in flight refueling available as yet. I was surprised at this, and hope they can get some in place soon as it'll allow much greater use of daylight.
Mar 21, 2014, 1:03 am
#817
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Brisbane (BNE), Australia, QF/VA Forums Meeting Organiser
Programs: VA Plat, QF Gold (97.4% LTG), QP Life, AA (66% LTG). HH Diamond. Amex Plat, Visa Plat
Posts: 6,519
That's because it landed at that time.
Maybe it as doing a low viewing on the track back near the Coast, in case the current drift might have pushed debris towards PER?? Maybe they were doing some other work for AMSA? Although if I am reading the number correctly, it came down very rapidly (in 5 mins it lost 39,600 feet).
Have been told Given the time stamp and coordinates it looks like it may have returned to base and flightaware missed a stack of the return flight?
Further details about the chartered Bombardier can be found in my post on the other thread
Interesting. One of the private jets doing some searching went out to:
-42.6617 92.9562
before returning on a course to Perth.
However, somewhere around
-38.3177 103.9834
they've been flying at 400 feet down to 100 feet for about an hour:
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/V.../YPPH/tracklog
-42.6617 92.9562
before returning on a course to Perth.
However, somewhere around
-38.3177 103.9834
they've been flying at 400 feet down to 100 feet for about an hour:
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/V.../YPPH/tracklog
Have been told Given the time stamp and coordinates it looks like it may have returned to base and flightaware missed a stack of the return flight?
Further details about the chartered Bombardier can be found in my post on the other thread
Last edited by QF WP; Mar 21, 2014 at 1:32 am
Mar 21, 2014, 1:24 am
#818
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: SW London
Programs: BAEC Silver; Hilton Diamond;a miscellany of other hotel non-statuses
Posts: 3,607
This is true. The Inmarsat circles will always be centred around the same point on the equator, at 64 degrees east. The plane's nominal airspeed is something like 900 km/hr; ground speed is affected by the winds but for now assume 900 kph. So the circle around the last radar fix has a radius of about 900 km, which also goes north and south from the latitude of the last radar fix point.
Yes, but the intersection will be an arc going both north and south from the latitude of last radar contact. (Except for the unlikely case where the two circles only touch at one point, rather than overlap.)
Yes, but these get bigger each time and continue to grow in both the north and south direction. You start from ALL the points on the previous arc and draw a radius of 900 km and see where it intersects the Inmarsat circle (which continues to be symmetric about the equator) and you will continue to get points going both north and south.
No, it doesn't.
Yes, but the intersection will be an arc going both north and south from the latitude of last radar contact. (Except for the unlikely case where the two circles only touch at one point, rather than overlap.)
Yes, but these get bigger each time and continue to grow in both the north and south direction. You start from ALL the points on the previous arc and draw a radius of 900 km and see where it intersects the Inmarsat circle (which continues to be symmetric about the equator) and you will continue to get points going both north and south.
No, it doesn't.
Given that in the absence of extra info it will be almost impossible to find the aircraft quickly it seems to me to be a useful strategy to look at the less conspiratorial areas first.
Mar 21, 2014, 1:44 am
#819
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: SW London
Programs: BAEC Silver; Hilton Diamond;a miscellany of other hotel non-statuses
Posts: 3,607
[/EDIT]
I'm assuming the plane wouldn't automatically land at the end point, so what would it do if no further action were taken? If for example a flight level change from 1 to 0 could be programmed you might not want the impact point to be PEK airport, but some nearby location or building.
But what is the significance of the southerly point? Is it unusually close to the arc, search area, etc? Does anyone have a KML file or similar or all these points to play with on Google Earth l?
Last edited by EsherFlyer; Mar 21, 2014 at 2:35 am
Mar 21, 2014, 1:58 am
#820
Senior Moderator, Moderator: Community Buzz and Ambassador: Miles & More (Lufthansa, Austrian, Swiss, and other partners)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: 150km from MAN
Programs: LH SEN** HH Diamond
Posts: 29,514
http://goo.gl/maps/Qj26q
Mar 21, 2014, 1:59 am
#821
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 5
The avionics design of even modern airliners is still a nightmare from a UI perspective but there are unique problems in that environment. However, there is a lot of feedback if one is following protocol.
Consider the rough schematic of a 777 cockpit (the look may change depending on which model and year but functionality is in the same place)
777 cockpit schematic
This is an example cockpit photo
Cockpit photo
In the schematic, C7 is the FMS interface. Has a display and a LOT of buttons as you can see in the cockpit photo. This is where one makes a selection of a waypoint/airport. An airport can be selected from a list. But punching in a co-ordinate or an airport here doesn't automatically make the plane go there until positively confirmed by the pilot who also consults the co-pilot (or vice-versa) before confirming.
C2 displays the current navigation like a moving map display. Punched in destinations appear with a route to it in a different color on that screen before confirmation. So, unless one is completely situationally unaware of where they are and their current direction, gross mistakes like this (for example if it showed a full 180) can be caught by the pilot or co-pilot.
When the pilot confirms the selection in C7, the FMS takes over to turn the aircraft to the new route.
The above is in a normal situation with two functional pilots. If only a single pilot is functional and there are other things going on that may distract, no amount of feedback or redundancy might be sufficient.
Consider the rough schematic of a 777 cockpit (the look may change depending on which model and year but functionality is in the same place)
777 cockpit schematic
This is an example cockpit photo
Cockpit photo
In the schematic, C7 is the FMS interface. Has a display and a LOT of buttons as you can see in the cockpit photo. This is where one makes a selection of a waypoint/airport. An airport can be selected from a list. But punching in a co-ordinate or an airport here doesn't automatically make the plane go there until positively confirmed by the pilot who also consults the co-pilot (or vice-versa) before confirming.
C2 displays the current navigation like a moving map display. Punched in destinations appear with a route to it in a different color on that screen before confirmation. So, unless one is completely situationally unaware of where they are and their current direction, gross mistakes like this (for example if it showed a full 180) can be caught by the pilot or co-pilot.
When the pilot confirms the selection in C7, the FMS takes over to turn the aircraft to the new route.
The above is in a normal situation with two functional pilots. If only a single pilot is functional and there are other things going on that may distract, no amount of feedback or redundancy might be sufficient.
Mar 21, 2014, 2:21 am
#822
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 91
"We have not seen convincing evidence that there is a high probability of finding the flight..." is what could have been said. Perhaps such a blunt and accusatory statement is the norm and if so, carry on.
Mar 21, 2014, 2:37 am
#823
Moderator, Hilton Honors
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: on a short leash
Programs: some
Posts: 71,422
The ends of the arc are the greatest distances able to be reached without running out of fuel and in the time flown.
Mar 21, 2014, 2:39 am
#824
Moderator, Hilton Honors
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: on a short leash
Programs: some
Posts: 71,422
Mar 21, 2014, 2:40 am
#825
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: SIN
Programs: SQ, UA, Delta, BMI(RIP), Marriott Lifetime Titanium, Hilton Diamond (Thanks Amex) Hyatt Discov
Posts: 1,942
I'm not suggesting that the search be allowed - rather that the reason given for denying the search is terribly undiplomatic at a time when cooperation is needed.
"We have not seen convincing evidence that there is a high probability of finding the flight..." is what could have been said. Perhaps such a blunt and accusatory statement is the norm and if so, carry on.
"We have not seen convincing evidence that there is a high probability of finding the flight..." is what could have been said. Perhaps such a blunt and accusatory statement is the norm and if so, carry on.