Malaysia Airlines 777 missing
- Thread starter ComplexHiAv8r
- Start date
If the crew became incapacitated, wouldn't the plane just go on the assigned route, hold, and crash when it ran out of fuel? I just imagine that the plane would've been programmed to fly for origin to destination as soon as they were airborne, but I'm a non pilot speaking so excuse me if that isn't what happens in flight.
gotWXdagain
Polished Member
Unless they inadvertently set heading hold on the autopilot and the last set heading was westbound?
inigo88
Composite-lover
Apparently we're talking past each other. But like I said, from an investigative (read law enforcement) standpoint, the log files they have are significant. They're using a trick that has been applied to cellular networks for over a decade, and applying it to outer space (which I think is kinda neat!).
Pilot Fighter said:
Maybe you could help me understand what you mean by performance data? Are we talking concrete telemetry from the aircraft, or the performance of the digital packets themselves? I've gone into fairly mind-numbing detail about how that roaming handshake takes place, and it requires specific identification and serial numbers from the subscriber unit in order for it to authenticate itself as a valid user on the system. In order for the log file to be created, that has to happen. Nevermind the fact that forward error correction techniques are employed to make sure the data packet itself is authentic (and not a bad decode) when it is received by the satellite and relayed to the telecom headquarters (where it is logged in their computers for later review). I thought this is what you were talking about, since we aren't referring to "NULL" messages, but complicated SATCOM data transactions triggered by changes in geographic position. If you'd care to elaborate, I'd enjoy continuing the discussion.
MikeD said:
I'm having the same problem Mike. If they took the northwest route and overflew the Indian peninsula, they would likely be detected and intercepted. If they flew southwest towards Diego Garcia, what's the point? If they flew due south, where is there to go? Indonesia? Borneo? Western Australia? The whole thing doesn't make much sense, especially if the report that they flew for seven hours instead of four turns out to be accurate.
BobDDuck
Island Bus Driver
I think he's asking if the the fact that there is a log file means that there was actual communication occurring between the remote and local units.
My understanding is that while there was no actual data transfer (no "performance data" being sent from the plane) the log includes timestamps and rough locations (geographic regions) from every time the remote unit called in to say "hey, I'm here, but I'm not sending you anything right now".
inigo88
Composite-lover
^ This exactly! SATCOM uses one type of proprietary digital messages to try and acquire, log on and maintain a link to the satellites. ACARS uses a completely different format, which is normally sent directly over VHF radio. However when sending ACARS messages via SAT, you're piggy backing one type of message inside another.
The potential hijackers apparently didn't realize this, and by shutting off the ACARS they left the SATCOM running... Sending hours of its own proprietary data (but with no ACARS embedded in the message body). Hopefully that makes sense?
I spent 2 months there on an accident investigation. Which is what prompted my question. Not a heck of a lot there of any major importance. Unless the Merchant Marine Club......wretched hive of scum and villainy it is......was targeted for destruction.
NiallG
Well-Known Member
QFT = Quantun Field Theory ???
That's because it's Bike Week 2014 !!!Meanwhile, back at Embry Riddle...
NiallG
Well-Known Member
In the hijack of ETH702 one passenger reported that an hour into the flight (when it was actually hijacked over southern Sudan) "Suddenly, a deep and angry voice talked through the cabin radio: "SIT DOWN, PUT YOUR MASKS ON, I'M CUTTING THE OXYGEN", three times. " I cannot verify the source or story (http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/related/1y8qmh/iama_passenger_on_yesterdays_hijacked_plane_from/) - but would that not have the same effect i.e. putting the passengers to sleep - i.e. reduce cabin pressure - or maybe that is impossible too - my Cessna 150 was not pressurised.
On another point this flight (ETH702) flew for 6 hours or more squawking 7500 - overshot Rome by one hour and it was not until people monitoring ATC heard the word "asylum" that people really took notice - no official information was forthcoming from any authority despite a report "Italian fighter jets were scrambled and escorted the plane out of Italian airspace." (http://www.liveatc.net/forums/aviation-incidents/eth702-squawks-7500/) - so lots of officials knew a lot but nothing was said til the incident was over.
Could it be the same in this case, that there is information that is not or cannot be released because the investigation is ongoing?
For example if Malaysian Airlines have not signed up to have their engines monitored in real time and the data is being collected anyway (as reported at some point) is it not like your IPhone (Android or whatever) uploading your photographs to a Cloud as you take them, even though you have not signed up to the service?
Would revealing that data had been uploaded without an airlines consent not open a whole new can of worms?
We did not say that revealing Military Radar (or Satellite) data would also require displaying a capability - it could only be done by a "hint" of something - and not releasing physical recording data!!!
There are so many big players in this that we do not know what is happening behind the scenes, or how much confidential information is being exchanged - that by it's very nature cannot be revealed - yet can lead to the switching or expanding of the search area. - my 2 cents worth.
Pilot Fighter
Well-Known Member
@inigo88,
I have a bit of RF, microwave, and satcom experience and I am a computer science major. At issue is not my misunderstanding of how the system works, in general. I'm identifying a classic problem, does the logged data really mean what you think it means? In an earlier post, I mentioned how many data collection and logging systems work, they keep collecting data until they receive a termination string or timeout. If an aircraft crashes, communication ends ... but how is that event reflected in the data? Is there the potential that it continues to repeat the last data item until the loop times out?
If good performance data is being received, nobody questions that two-way communications with the aircraft are taking place. When the data reflects stand-by mode, is there a possibility of erroneous data in the case of a data interruption?
Correct me if I'm wrong. When good data is being received (engine telemetry) it is accompanied by location data. When an aircraft is in stand-by mode, it is technically possible to record location data but they have chosen not to log that data, they don't feel it's important. Given the low priority for logging useless null data and its accompanying location data, is it a stretch to think that they haven't provided a graceful recovery to a data interruption? What is the motivation to make sure the logging of stand-bys is robust?
I am not making any claims, just posing questions about the ACARS system, very specific questions about its data logging. The fact that somebody has said that a data log showing hours of stand-by statuses indicates that two-way communication persisted is what I'm questioning. I understand how the system is supposed to work, I'm just identifying potential failure modes that could result in erroneous data.
In an investigation, it is important to question first principles, do things really work like you think they work in unusual circumstances.
I have a bit of RF, microwave, and satcom experience and I am a computer science major. At issue is not my misunderstanding of how the system works, in general. I'm identifying a classic problem, does the logged data really mean what you think it means? In an earlier post, I mentioned how many data collection and logging systems work, they keep collecting data until they receive a termination string or timeout. If an aircraft crashes, communication ends ... but how is that event reflected in the data? Is there the potential that it continues to repeat the last data item until the loop times out?
If good performance data is being received, nobody questions that two-way communications with the aircraft are taking place. When the data reflects stand-by mode, is there a possibility of erroneous data in the case of a data interruption?
Correct me if I'm wrong. When good data is being received (engine telemetry) it is accompanied by location data. When an aircraft is in stand-by mode, it is technically possible to record location data but they have chosen not to log that data, they don't feel it's important. Given the low priority for logging useless null data and its accompanying location data, is it a stretch to think that they haven't provided a graceful recovery to a data interruption? What is the motivation to make sure the logging of stand-bys is robust?
I am not making any claims, just posing questions about the ACARS system, very specific questions about its data logging. The fact that somebody has said that a data log showing hours of stand-by statuses indicates that two-way communication persisted is what I'm questioning. I understand how the system is supposed to work, I'm just identifying potential failure modes that could result in erroneous data.
In an investigation, it is important to question first principles, do things really work like you think they work in unusual circumstances.
NiallG
Well-Known Member
I postulated that some time ago - a crack (or fire) takes out some systems and incapacitated the crew.
Interestingly enough the aircraft was turning onto a heading of 058 degress (approx) as the preceding aircraft had done 30 minutes earlier - and on that heading the aircraft would fly south of Taiwan and north of the Philippines and south of Japan over the North Pacific - but then there is too much evidence that this did not happen - so I defer to the experts.
Vector4Food
This job would be easier without all the airplanes
If anyone thinks this airplane couldn't have flown across India/Pakistan without being noticed, well, it's definitely a possibility if the crew made deliberate efforts to avoid radar detection.
We're going to the extreme now, but there's no evidence this wasn't highly trained personnel with in depth knowledge of Indian PSR radar sites and suggested evasion altitudes.
Any theory is possible at this point.
We're going to the extreme now, but there's no evidence this wasn't highly trained personnel with in depth knowledge of Indian PSR radar sites and suggested evasion altitudes.
Any theory is possible at this point.
Vector4Food
This job would be easier without all the airplanes
What if another flight was hired to fool military radar, like a G3-G5.
Then they flew off to who knows where in the Pacific?
I mean like I said, ANY theory is possible. If you go to the trouble to steal a 777 (Not sure why though) anything is possible.
Also I want to be clear, altitude estimation off of PSR radar is HIGHLY erroneous at the best of times. Unless their military has fancy American gear anyway.
Then they flew off to who knows where in the Pacific?
I mean like I said, ANY theory is possible. If you go to the trouble to steal a 777 (Not sure why though) anything is possible.
Also I want to be clear, altitude estimation off of PSR radar is HIGHLY erroneous at the best of times. Unless their military has fancy American gear anyway.
Pilot Fighter
Well-Known Member
I'm curious if the military is refraining from describing it's OTH radar capabilities in some parts of the world [cough].
ChasenSFO
hen teaser
This is all so cray-cray. No new evidence and even the international news networks are jumping to conclusions. Ugh. I think I'm just going to tune this incident out until they find wreckage or another significant, indisputable FACT is released.
Edit: Friends in Hong Kong tell me that the story has dropped off the news networks there and people are complaining about it. Honestly I'd much rather have that then a new hypothesis everyday.
Edit: Friends in Hong Kong tell me that the story has dropped off the news networks there and people are complaining about it. Honestly I'd much rather have that then a new hypothesis everyday.
Last edited:
NiallG
Well-Known Member
It's hard to tell fact from fiction and what can be lost in translation or interpretation or is deliberate misinformation - but at least this thread allows some of us to understand a bit more about the possibilities and practicalities of the popular press related theories and even share links to sources...
Only post this because there seems to be something like an official stamp on it... but anyone could make a stamp like that suppose.
(source: https://twitter.com/chicoharlan/status/444770687064875009/photo/1 )
brent p h
Well-Known Member
ChasenSFO
hen teaser
Correct me if I'm wrong, but from what I've read thus far, the only facts we have publicly are:
-MH370 was on course for an hour, then went off radar and never checked in after a hand off.
-Debatable parameters which may or may not have included position reports continued for several hours after the disappearance.
-The range which the plane could have flown in any given direction with the fuel on board.
In addition, the following are potential facts but can't yet be proven with 100% accuracy:
-Another airliner may have gotten a reply from MH370 after ATC communications ceased.
-A primary target West of the Malay Peninsula may have been MH370, indicating a possible Northwesterly course reversal.
-Means of communication may have been shut down separately, deliberately.
But that's really it. The rest is hearsay, and the only verified facts I've seen thus far are the first 3. Given the wild media speculation, and even announcements from government officials, these conclusions seem premature and unfounded. That is, of course, unless information is being withheld from the public. But calling it a hijacking, bomb, pilot suicide, structural failure, or on board fire seems ludicrous given the confirmed facts at this point. Again, correct me if I'm wrong, but at this point, I think the world just needs to sit back and wait weeks, months, or years for more information. As hard as that may be.
-MH370 was on course for an hour, then went off radar and never checked in after a hand off.
-Debatable parameters which may or may not have included position reports continued for several hours after the disappearance.
-The range which the plane could have flown in any given direction with the fuel on board.
In addition, the following are potential facts but can't yet be proven with 100% accuracy:
-Another airliner may have gotten a reply from MH370 after ATC communications ceased.
-A primary target West of the Malay Peninsula may have been MH370, indicating a possible Northwesterly course reversal.
-Means of communication may have been shut down separately, deliberately.
But that's really it. The rest is hearsay, and the only verified facts I've seen thus far are the first 3. Given the wild media speculation, and even announcements from government officials, these conclusions seem premature and unfounded. That is, of course, unless information is being withheld from the public. But calling it a hijacking, bomb, pilot suicide, structural failure, or on board fire seems ludicrous given the confirmed facts at this point. Again, correct me if I'm wrong, but at this point, I think the world just needs to sit back and wait weeks, months, or years for more information. As hard as that may be.