jgheggie
Well-Known Member
Could they have made it to Oakland? I hear 777 rims are a hot commodity there!
Malaysia Airlines 777 missing
- Thread starter ComplexHiAv8r
- Start date
thewaffles
Well-Known Member
So ILL
Weightless
That's Putin it in perspective.
D
Deleted member 27505
Guest
Patrick
Well-Known Member
I didn't know that they recorded their radar feeds, but if that's the case, that could certainly be useful in this instance.
If the 777 was a surface ship or low-level flying the ocean surface, sure.
Worth checking, but very doubtful it would turn up anything.
🦈💜
Well-Known Member
I don't know if it's even worth checking unless this drags out far longer than it has. My understanding of radar is fairly limited, I confess, but to my knowledge you don't aim nautical radar high for many reasons... mostly to avoid error. Its purpose is short range traffic and obstacle detection, not aerial surveillance... and given the shape of the earth, propagation phenomena and other pertinent issues, I can't help but think that, based on my limited knowledge of the subject, it would be rather silly indeed to try to take that angle.
Of course, I could be mistaken. I've never crewed a vessel with radar.
-Fox
Agree. Very doubtful it would turn up anything remotely useful. It is short range, and surface or very low aircraft primary returns. And like you say, surface only; there's no aerial surveillance being done as would be done on a combat ship such as a destroyer/cruiser/frigate etc, with their target tracking radars and such.
The only reason I say "potentially worth checking", is simply due to the complete absence of anything else at this point, and to truly leave no stone unturned, if it's possible to get this information.
BobDDuck
Island Bus Driver
Ships mostly use X and S band radar sets that generally don't point up more than a few degrees. They wouldn't capture anything air born above 500 to 1000 feet. Even if a dish happened to pointing in the correct direction at the moment that a plane (hypothetically) descended (fell) through the beam you'd only get a return for one sweep and as such it would be disregarded.
Of more use would be a SONAR feed. Who knows if we or any other countries have any assets placed out there that may have heard an impact and breakup noises. It's shallow water, which can play hell with acoustic signals.
Of more use would be a SONAR feed. Who knows if we or any other countries have any assets placed out there that may have heard an impact and breakup noises. It's shallow water, which can play hell with acoustic signals.
That's what I was inferring, that anything that might have been seen by a surface radar for a quick sweep as it's falling through, and considering its short range, likely would've been seen visually by lookouts, assuming clear visibility.
SeanD
Well-Known Member
No.
Boris Badenov
Fortis Leader
IMS, SOSUS proved to be far more effective than expected, picking up soviet subs thousands of miles away....in the 60s. With the advances in sensors since then, I'd be surprised if there wasn't usable data. Whether such a thing would be released publicly is a very different question. The area where this occurred is er..."sensitive".
SeanD
Well-Known Member
Well then; now it's your last night here on JC.
Good job. And good bye.
I completely understand. Farewell everyone.
BobDDuck
Island Bus Driver
I am far (far, far far) from being an acoustic engineer but I don't think something like a SOSUS line would work in water as shallow as the South China Sea. That said, with the amount of... activity going on there recently I wouldn't be surprised if we had a sub or two in place out there already who may have heard something.
