Dav8or
Final Approach
Shhhhhh... Don't disturb the inmates. They're less annoying when they are distracted by fantasy!
New Information On MH 370
- Thread starter ggroves
- Start date
Shhhhhh... Don't disturb the inmates. They're less annoying when they are distracted by fantasy!
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 11,179
- Location
- Lone Jack, MO
- Display Name
Display name:
Greg Bockelman
Well, all I meant was that the other aircraft might be easier to FIND at night. I have no experience to comment on as far as a join up goes.
dtuuri
Final Approach
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 11,179
- Location
- Lone Jack, MO
- Display Name
Display name:
Greg Bockelman
I am saying it based on personal experience. Not with big airplanes but trying to meet up with a friend. We knew where each other were supposed to be but the only way we could actually find each other was by communicating with each other. Without that, there would have been no way.
As far as meeting up between a couple of airliners, unless the timing of the meetup was ABSOLUTELY perfect, there is very little chance of a successful meet up. There isn't enough speed differential at cruise speed for a trailing plane to catch up.
dtuuri
Final Approach
Out there over the water on the back of the clock with just one other plane for miles around I doubt you would even need TCAS. This is absolutely amazing that you guys think this would be too tough. Using the method I mentioned, if you can tell when the other plane is behind you on the course it takes every time, all you need do is turn to converge on one of the fixes it's tracking to and keep your eyes peeled.
dtuuri
dtuuri
Final Approach
Ok, I've been reading up on TCAS, a device I have never operated. In my experience TCAD was as close as I got. TCAD operates on mode C, as you know, EDIT:I suppose you could simply Google "TCAS" and read the Wkipedia page if you want to learn more about the basics of what it is and what it isn't.
TCAS is intimately tied in with the Mode S transponder, it simply does not work without it. Furthermore TCAS would be completely unsuitable for use as an intercept or formation flying platform as it's directional resolution is extremely crude, not much better than quadrant accuracy. When a traffic conflict is detected TCAS gives absolutely no directional advisories, it can only tell you to either climb, descend or maintain altitude. The entire notion of using TCAS to accomplish this fantastical feat is ludicrous.
This isn't personal and you don't have to get mad about it, that's just the way it is.
EDIT: Disregard the above, I misread it.
dtuuri
Last edited:
Fearless Tower
Touchdown! Greaser!
Several of us over multiple posts have already pointed out the obstacles that make this theory (while perhaps not impossible - as is a meteor strike) highly unlikely....or at least extremely unlikely to pull it off and it not be noticed on the primary radar.Educate us, oh wise one - Because "I don't waste my time with your type" does not tell us anything other than you may not be able to make a solid case for why it couldn't happen.
IF it did happen that way, those involved in the investigation are already on it. No one is going to solve world hunger by theorizing on the internet.
Dav8or
Final Approach
Last edited:
JimNtexas
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2006
- Messages
- 2,259
- Location
- Austin, Texas
- Display Name
Display name:
Jim - In Texas!
I think it's a bit too soon for jokes about MH370.
When it first happened I was pretty sure it was some kind of catastrophic failure, such as a fuel tank explosion or a bomb.
My former USAF wing commander was on CNN the other night saying he's sure that the plane was landed in Pakistan.
The Australians are looking for it way south based on a picture of junk floating in the ocean.
Immarsat is drawing circles on the chart based on 'pings' from a satellite.
Like you guys, I get asked about MH370 a lot. Now I just say WTF, I have no idea!
When it first happened I was pretty sure it was some kind of catastrophic failure, such as a fuel tank explosion or a bomb.
My former USAF wing commander was on CNN the other night saying he's sure that the plane was landed in Pakistan.
The Australians are looking for it way south based on a picture of junk floating in the ocean.
Immarsat is drawing circles on the chart based on 'pings' from a satellite.
Like you guys, I get asked about MH370 a lot. Now I just say WTF, I have no idea!
A picture of floating junk that Courtney Love found in the ocean no less....
denverpilot
Tied Down
And we are supposed to care because?
(Oops. I forgot my conformity to Jim's stopwatch merit badge on the dresser. Be right back.)
What is the official societal-approved amount of time before jokes may commence? Can we get a chart for different types of tragedies with tragedy type, time, and number of jokes approved?
Just poking at you Jim. More at the silly notion that society has a checklist. Sorry if it has affected you in some way.
flyingcheesehead
Touchdown! Greaser!
Jesse,
That's true if you're trying to intercept by catching up to it. What dtuuri is suggesting seems a lot more plausible: Get in front of and at an angle to the one you're trying to intercept, then when you get their position - and I do believe this would require ADS-B to be plausible - You also know their performance and yours, and you can calculate a time they'll be at a certain fix in space farther up the line and you can time your own turn to that fix to intercept.
It sounds like MH370 was quite a bit lighter than the other 777, so they would have had a few extra knots to adjust after making the intercept.
It'd be fun to take a couple of networked computers and try this with a sim.
jesse
Touchdown! Greaser!
Not something I have the time to bother trying but I strongly suspect it's a hell of a lot harder than it sounds. Given everything that would have to go perfect to make that happen I'm not sure why the hell someone would use that as their plan since it's so likely to fail.
Silvaire
En-Route
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2012
- Messages
- 4,674
- Display Name
Display name:
Silvaire
My hunch is it's based on more than just that. The US obviously has the most sophisticated satellite surveillance network on Earth and granted, nobody is normally spending a lot of time watching the southern Indian Ocean but there is certainly some form of intelligence data we have that isn't going to be shown on CNN and the Australians were looking in that particular area because US officials insisted they do so. You'll also note that there are an awful lot of resources being deployed there from all countries so I'm pretty certain there are some things known that we aren't going to hear about on the TV.
My money is still on that ocean
olasek
Pattern Altitude
And I agree 100%.
denverpilot
Tied Down
Something on board that airplane is extremely embarrassing to someone, methinks. But maybe not.
Guess we have to keep the kids in Alice Springs busy...
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 11,179
- Location
- Lone Jack, MO
- Display Name
Display name:
Greg Bockelman
Wonder who it belonged to, Wasn't a CAL or UAL airplane.
dtuuri
Final Approach
Well, since Fearless Tower said, "Adios!", I had to do his work too. I added the distances involved to GIVAL and came up with 504nm for SQ68. MH370 would have to fly 615nm to get there and that's even taking a short-cut as soon as it hits the strait. If the last four flights by both aircraft were typical of those before March 8, MH370 didn't leave early enough to make up the difference. It only left between 5 and 10 minutes earlier each time according to FlightAware.
So, it's a good theory IF MH370 can beat SQ68 to the intercept point, but I can't find specific enough data points to say it did. Departure times in FlightAware I think are based on radar contact (not sure). Media reports might be based on push-back. Lat-lon coordinates and routings are murky too. Published maps show fixes the aircraft was supposed to be headed toward, but did it actually go all the way there?
I'd say an intercept would require a :15 minute head-start plus a fudge factor to have a chance. And more accurate reporting by the media. Trouble is, they don't know enough about it to ask the right questions. Like me with TCAS, for instance.
dtuuri
So, it's a good theory IF MH370 can beat SQ68 to the intercept point, but I can't find specific enough data points to say it did. Departure times in FlightAware I think are based on radar contact (not sure). Media reports might be based on push-back. Lat-lon coordinates and routings are murky too. Published maps show fixes the aircraft was supposed to be headed toward, but did it actually go all the way there?
I'd say an intercept would require a :15 minute head-start plus a fudge factor to have a chance. And more accurate reporting by the media. Trouble is, they don't know enough about it to ask the right questions. Like me with TCAS, for instance.
dtuuri
Silvaire
En-Route
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2012
- Messages
- 4,674
- Display Name
Display name:
Silvaire
I doubt that, I'm just saying that there most likely exists intelligence gathering technology that's well...secret and if it knew something they aren't necessarily going to release it to the public and have certain interests wondering hmmm, how did they do that? What I mean is it's probably better that no one knows that we can do that.
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2005
- Messages
- 9,486
- Display Name
Display name:
Pilawt
3393RP
En-Route
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2012
- Messages
- 4,204
- Display Name
Display name:
3393RP
I have avoided reading this thread until now, but it's a boring night and thought it might be worth a look.
For some reason I thought people that actually flew airplanes would rationally discuss the possible reasons for the disappearance of MH 370 and not succumb to the nonsense that has been floated on the internet for the last two weeks.
I would classify the idea of an airliner joining up and flying in formation with another at night while traveling over eight miles a minute a perfect example of that. To do so for thousands of miles without being observed?
In an area which is among the most remote on Earth, Flight Aware tracks are being used as "evidence" that a highly coordinated action took place. Flight Aware tracks in the contiguous US of GA aircraft flying below 10,000' and at speeds less than 200 kts are not reliable representations of the actual flight path.
In spite of this, to support a ridiculous theory we are supposed to trust as absolutely reliable the information provided by Flight Aware, gathered in an area with spotty air traffic management of an unknown quality and capability.
The possibility of refueling a 777 with drums and a hand pump or the aircraft landing somewhere unannounced and taking on thousands of gallons of fuel without being noticed cannot be considered serious. It is similarly unbelievable that Al Qaeda has access to "hundreds of tanker trucks [and] tanker ships" and can place tons of jet fuel "anywhere on Earth" on demand.
A scenario of a "shadow[ing] an airline flight over the north pole to Toronto or Chicago to make an attack on us" is nothing more than ill considered fantasy. Just how would this 9,000 mile 20 hour trip be accomplished?
Somalian pirates have the aircraft on the ground and have already repainted it? These are the same guys that run around the Arabian Sea armed with Kalashnikovs in open skiffs with 90 HP outboards.
Silvaire
En-Route
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2012
- Messages
- 4,674
- Display Name
Display name:
Silvaire
As did I and I don't know why this is going on. It's like some sort of mass insanity brought on by the relentless 24 hour a day news blitz we've been subjected to for the past 13 years. We call them "terrorists" for good reason because if a guy in a turban yelled boo half the people in the room would probably have a cardiac incident. Any sane discussion is like a wet blanket at the slumber party, they don't want to hear it, not exciting enough.
Then there are the jokes, that my friend is down right embarrassing
flyingcheesehead
Touchdown! Greaser!
That nonsense is all we have to go on for now, so that's what we're doin'.
While it may be improbable, it's not impossible. Frankly, every single scenario I've heard has evidence both for and against it, but the main evidence against this one is "it would be really hard." We used to say the same thing about hijacking an airliner in the US. We were wrong.
Nobody's using a FlightAware track as evidence - FlightAware only shows the plane taking off and heading on its original course. The track that's been talked about is one that came from, I believe, some military radars.
Who said that? They only need one truck.
I don't think they'd bother shadowing again. File a flight plan as a GV and you're practically in.
Dav8or
Final Approach
Don't like all the other theories? Well how about this then?
The airplane was hijacked and flown somewhere it did have enough fuel for. Pakistan. It landed in an area largely controlled by the Taliban who are supported by rebel, splinter elements of the Pakistani military and not totally beholden to the central government.
Now you have a load of Chinese nationals and others being held hostage in nuclear armed Pakistan by elements of the Army the central government can't control. All the major nations are fully aware of this, but keeping the truth out of the papers so they can try to find a resolution to this crisis without starting a real war and getting the general public all riled up.
The Chinese are losing their temper and ready to attack. The Pakistanis have their finger on the bomb and guns to the heads of all the hostages. Navy Seals are on the way...
Spicy enough for you?
The airplane was hijacked and flown somewhere it did have enough fuel for. Pakistan. It landed in an area largely controlled by the Taliban who are supported by rebel, splinter elements of the Pakistani military and not totally beholden to the central government.
Now you have a load of Chinese nationals and others being held hostage in nuclear armed Pakistan by elements of the Army the central government can't control. All the major nations are fully aware of this, but keeping the truth out of the papers so they can try to find a resolution to this crisis without starting a real war and getting the general public all riled up.
The Chinese are losing their temper and ready to attack. The Pakistanis have their finger on the bomb and guns to the heads of all the hostages. Navy Seals are on the way...
Spicy enough for you?
Don't like all the other theories? Well how about this then?
The airplane was hijacked and flown somewhere it did have enough fuel for. Pakistan. It landed in an area largely controlled by the Taliban who are supported by rebel, splinter elements of the Pakistani military and not totally beholden to the central government.
Now you have a load of Chinese nationals and others being held hostage in nuclear armed Pakistan by elements of the Army the central government can't control. All the major nations are fully aware of this, but keeping the truth out of the papers so they can try to find a resolution to this crisis without starting a real war and getting the general public all riled up.
The Chinese are losing their temper and ready to attack. The Pakistanis have their finger on the bomb and guns to the heads of all the hostages. Navy Seals are on the way...
Spicy enough for you?
A very plausible ..IMHO...
denverpilot
Tied Down
Welcome to the Internet, you must be new here...
The nonsense is not all we have to go on, more likely there was a structural failure that lead to this.
Not impossible, but next to it. The 9/11 high jacking required willful stupidity on the part of the FBI and the violation of human laws, that's a lot simpler than violating the laws of physics. A quick, unnoticed intercept would require at least a 30% speed differential.
Don't like all the other theories? Well how about this then?
The airplane was hijacked and flown somewhere it did have enough fuel for. Pakistan. It landed in an area largely controlled by the Taliban who are supported by rebel, splinter elements of the Pakistani military and not totally beholden to the central government.
Now you have a load of Chinese nationals and others being held hostage in nuclear armed Pakistan by elements of the Army the central government can't control. All the major nations are fully aware of this, but keeping the truth out of the papers so they can try to find a resolution to this crisis without starting a real war and getting the general public all riled up.
The Chinese are losing their temper and ready to attack. The Pakistanis have their finger on the bomb and guns to the heads of all the hostages. Navy Seals are on the way...
Spicy enough for you?
I had pretty much the same theory but I said the plane is in Iran.
Maybe next time those folks should take the train. They're harder to hijack.
Hey! He's an idea from an airliner captain!
What If they had an electrical fire?
http://www.wired.com/autopia/2014/03/mh370-electrical-fire/
What If they had an electrical fire?
http://www.wired.com/autopia/2014/03/mh370-electrical-fire/
dtuuri
Final Approach
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 11,179
- Location
- Lone Jack, MO
- Display Name
Display name:
Greg Bockelman
Makes more sense than most of the rest of the crap that is being presented.
3393RP
En-Route
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2012
- Messages
- 4,204
- Display Name
Display name:
3393RP
Oh, well. That makes it possible. Can you provide a link to the invisible cloaking stuff they'll need?
timwinters
Ejection Handle Pulled
I haven't seen it mentioned here...
A few days ago it was announced (for whatever that's worth) that they did indeed have a cargo load of lithium ion batteries onboard.
Maybe that's been debunked since, like so many other reports have been but if it has been, I haven't seen it.
A few days ago it was announced (for whatever that's worth) that they did indeed have a cargo load of lithium ion batteries onboard.
Maybe that's been debunked since, like so many other reports have been but if it has been, I haven't seen it.
Last edited:
Weren't there two course changes after they turned aorund and overflew Malaysia? How does an electrical fire account for that?
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 11,179
- Location
- Lone Jack, MO
- Display Name
Display name:
Greg Bockelman
For what it is worth, I haven't felt the need to follow this all that closely since it is mostly wild speculation anyway. But if you were on fire, or suspected so, wouldn't you want to turn to the nearest suitable airport? If they had an electrical fire, that does not preclude them from making a turn. In fact, I would expect them to make the turn.
But I have not seen enough verifiable evidence to make any such speculations.
us AAirways
Line Up and Wait
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2012
- Messages
- 973
- Display Name
Display name:
us AAirways
Makes sense, but Swiss Air, Valujet, and UPS all were able to declare an emergency despite a fire??