Malaysia Airlines 777 missing

The more that I get into this story the more completely dumbfounded I am by it. Here's where I'm hung up and if any of the "Heavy" guys can shed a little light into this, I'd appreciate it.

1. Via dispatch, I was under the impression that almost every modern 121 airplane had real-time telemetry being beamed back to dispatch. By assuming this, I am assuming that EVERY detail of the flight is being observed; alt, as (gs/TAS), heading/routing, fuel state, and the health state of the acft.
2. These airplanes will snitch on you in a nano-second. If you've screwed something up, they know it almost as soon as you had the thought of doing it. But, then, since nothing was "abnormal" in the flight, maybe it didn't send any bells or warnings.
3. I was also under the impression that Boeing could access all of the aforementioned data to deal with acft maint. issues in real time. Yea? Nay?

I'm sure there's more, but that's all I got for now.
 
GX said:
The more that I get into this story the more completely dumbfounded I am by it. Here's where I'm hung up and if any of the "Heavy" guys can shed a little light into this, I'd appreciate it.

1. Via dispatch, I was under the impression that almost every modern 121 airplane had real-time telemetry being beamed back to dispatch. By assuming this, I am assuming that EVERY detail of the flight is being observed; alt, as (gs/TAS), heading/routing, fuel state, and the health state of the acft.
2. These airplanes will snitch on you in a nano-second. If you've screwed something up, they know it almost as soon as you had the thought of doing it. But, then, since nothing was "abnormal" in the flight, maybe it didn't send any bells or warnings.
3. I was also under the impression that Boeing could access all of the aforementioned data to deal with acft maint. issues in real time. Yea? Nay?

I'm sure there's more, but that's all I got for now.
Click to expand...

+1 this. I am also under this assumption.
 
Anyone got any reliable source - even Reuters is fighting with itself....!!!

Rueters (India) - KUALA LUMPUR Wed Mar 12, 2014 6:17am IST

Malaysia military source says missing jet veered to west. http://in.reuters.com/article/2014/03/12/malaysia-airlines-idINDEEA2900B20140312

Rueters (India) - KUALA LUMPUR Wed Mar 12, 2014 6:48am IST

Malaysia air force denies tracking missing jet to Strait of Malacca http://in.reuters.com/article/2014/03/12/malaysia-airlines-military-idINDEEA2B00F20140312

I give up - but one last post before Irish bedtime.... what would happen if the aircraft lost it's SATCOM - and decompressed?

We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain The Boeing Company Model 777 airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by a report of cracking in the fuselage skin underneath the satellite communication (SATCOM) antenna adapter.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-09-26/html/2013-23456.htm
 
If it was up to me, Id yank all of those countries from the investigation and leave to a more competent organization to handle everything.
 
GX said:
The more that I get into this story the more completely dumbfounded I am by it. Here's where I'm hung up and if any of the "Heavy" guys can shed a little light into this, I'd appreciate it.

1. Via dispatch, I was under the impression that almost every modern 121 airplane had real-time telemetry being beamed back to dispatch. By assuming this, I am assuming that EVERY detail of the flight is being observed; alt, as (gs/TAS), heading/routing, fuel state, and the health state of the acft.
2. These airplanes will snitch on you in a nano-second. If you've screwed something up, they know it almost as soon as you had the thought of doing it. But, then, since nothing was "abnormal" in the flight, maybe it didn't send any bells or warnings.
3. I was also under the impression that Boeing could access all of the aforementioned data to deal with acft maint. issues in real time. Yea? Nay?

I'm sure there's more, but that's all I got for now.
Click to expand...

You are correct. Here's the thing. You cannot turn that stuff off from the cockpit unless you start pulling out circuit breakers or access the E&E bay to get at the transmitters. Pulling CBs will also degrade other systems on those circuits.
 
Boeing has a new updated system on the 787 but with normal ACARS, it will send back any anomalies/issues in the flight systems, engines, etc., and communicates with various departments like mx. It's basically a monitoring system. What the company can also do is pull little snapshots of the flight from the ACARS at whatever various time points they choose to for whatever reasons it deems necessary, where there are transmits. The company and the pilots can create and send messages and updates back and forth as well. It can be used for example to obtain met forecasts, reports, transmit/receive operational info, revised flight plans etc., let the company know if you are going to be late because ATC has you on a hold, and in conjunction with an electronic maintenance computer it will transmit a whole variety of engine and other system parameters to the home base central computer for real time analysis. It's used for many types of communications and you get printed out load sheets, for example. There are various options and reconfiguring of them that airlines can choose from to customize the system as well. And as stated above you can't just turn it off.
 
Last edited:
SeanD said:
If it was up to me, Id yank all of those countries from the investigation and leave to a more competent organization to handle everything.
Click to expand...

So what legal entity has the right to tell a sovereign nation that they cannot conduct SAR operations within their legal boundries? As for the Malaysians, it was their aircraft, flying in their airspace. As much as this mystery annoys peple around the world apparently, it's their show. Whether or not they are up to it is immaterial. We are along for the ride.
Same as the subsequent accident investigation. Depending what country it ends up in, they will take the lead in investigating it, even if it made it all the way to Somalia.
 
GX said:
The more that I get into this story the more completely dumbfounded I am by it. Here's where I'm hung up and if any of the "Heavy" guys can shed a little light into this, I'd appreciate it. 1. Via dispatch, I was under the impression that almost every modern 121 airplane had real-time telemetry being beamed back to dispatch. By assuming this, I am assuming that EVERY detail of the flight is being observed; alt, as (gs/TAS), heading/routing, fuel state, and the health state of the acft.
Click to expand...

In my experience dispatching for a 121 airline, we use ASD's in combination with position reports from the crew to flight follow. We can load the planned route in the ASD and then see if there is any deviation by the actual route being flown. The ASD shows FL, AS, Dep/Dest, and ETA. In addition, by referencing the actual flight plan, we can verify that what we see on the ASD jives - that the a/c is where they are supposed to be at any given time.

Position reports are what keep us apprised of FOB at that given point, which we can track on the flight plan to ensure the burn is what it should be.

This being said, I've had aircraft drop off ASD in certain parts of the world. We are then reliant on position reports alone, and knowing where the aircraft "should be", based on the flight plan. We don't have access to real time anything at that point, unless of course we call the crew.

The only thing being "beamed back to dispatch" are ACARS messages from the crew ;-)

(Again, this is my experience, and with wide body a/c other than 777)
 
Cptnchia said:
So what legal entity has the right to tell a sovereign nation that they cannot conduct SAR operations within their legal boundries? As for the Malaysians, it was their aircraft, flying in their airspace. As much as this mystery annoys peple around the world apparently, it's their show. Whether or not they are up to it is immaterial. We are along for the ride.
Same as the subsequent accident investigation. Depending what country it ends up in, they will take the lead in investigating it, even if it made it all the way to Somalia.
Click to expand...

The thing is, it depends on what version you're following. It might be in their territory. It might not. The story keeps changing.
 
Image found from some crowd-sourcing....


Tomnod6060200percentMikeSeberger-3189824_p9.jpg
 
Cptnchia said:
So what legal entity has the right to tell a sovereign nation that they cannot conduct SAR operations within their legal boundries? As for the Malaysians, it was their aircraft, flying in their airspace. As much as this mystery annoys peple around the world apparently, it's their show. Whether or not they are up to it is immaterial. We are along for the ride.
Same as the subsequent accident investigation. Depending what country it ends up in, they will take the lead in investigating it, even if it made it all the way to Somalia.
Click to expand...

I agree and know its their show but when their military fails to report vital information then backtracks then denies knowing anything and so on, I cant see how they can be trusted to conduct a proper investigation if or when they find the wreckage. Im nothing special, just an observer like everyone else but if its frustrating for a pee on like me, I cant imagine how those families are getting by.
 
Last edited:
GX said:
The more that I get into this story the more completely dumbfounded I am by it. Here's where I'm hung up and if any of the "Heavy" guys can shed a little light into this, I'd appreciate it.

1. Via dispatch, I was under the impression that almost every modern 121 airplane had real-time telemetry being beamed back to dispatch. By assuming this, I am assuming that EVERY detail of the flight is being observed; alt, as (gs/TAS), heading/routing, fuel state, and the health state of the acft.
2. These airplanes will snitch on you in a nano-second. If you've screwed something up, they know it almost as soon as you had the thought of doing it. But, then, since nothing was "abnormal" in the flight, maybe it didn't send any bells or warnings.
3. I was also under the impression that Boeing could access all of the aforementioned data to deal with acft maint. issues in real time. Yea? Nay?

I'm sure there's more, but that's all I got for now.
Click to expand...
Cptnchia said:
You are correct. Here's the thing. You cannot turn that stuff off from the cockpit unless you start pulling out circuit breakers or access the E&E bay to get at the transmitters. Pulling CBs will also degrade other systems on those circuits.
Click to expand...

Gonna have to say nay on all three counts.

There is no continuous feed of data from the aircraft. The most you'll usually have is periodic reports: after takeoff, top-of-climb, winds aloft, etc., are brief snapshots of data. For example, the after takeoff report may have single values of time, aircraft, Lat/Long, ambient temperature, peak EGTs, bleed valve states, fuel flow, etc. It plain, formatted text that gets relayed to a ground service computer (usually either at the airline, or by a service provider like ARINC).

Generally, Boeing or other OEMs do not get access to the information unless the operator has agreed to share the data (which is common in a power-by-the-hour deal, less-so with the airframer, unless the operator has made a specific request for support).

Interestingly, on the 787 and other more "integrated" aircraft (fewer dedicated LRUs) the manufacturers' lawyers have gotten out ahead and have started to make claims of ownership over the information produced by the aircraft, restricting even the airline's access to information about their own flights. It's a similar situation as when Toyota was generally refusing to perform event data recorder readouts when they had their runaway accelerator pedal problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GX
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top