I had fairly well concluded that the most likely cause was a fire disrupting the electrical and control systems, when CNN now say the sharp left turn was pre-programmed 12 minutes before sign off from Malaysian Air Traffic control, which was followed fairly quickly by that left turn.
CNN claim to have this from an US official, from data sent back before the reporting systems went off. It is hard to know what to make of it: obviously there are large economic interests that much prefer blame to lie with the pilots rather than the aircraft. But if it is true then the move was not a response to an emergency. (CNN went on to say the pilot could have programmed in the course change as a contingency in case of an emergency. That made no sense to me at all – does it to anyone else?)
I still find it extremely unlikely that the plane landed or crashed on land I cannot believe it could evade military detection as it flew over a highly militarized region. Somewhere there is debris on the ocean. There have been previous pilot suicides that took the plane with them; but the long detour first seems very strange and I do not believe is precedented. However if the CNN information on pre-programming is correct, and given it was the co-pilot who signed off to air traffic control, it is hard to look beyond the pilots as those responsible for whatever did happen. In fact, on consideration, the most improbable thing is that information CNN are reporting from the US official.
Ben-Scot NON-collaborator: 1 Apr, 2014 – 10:28 pm
”The smart money appears to be on some kind of gradual decompression – a fault causes an aeroplane to leak breathable air so slowly out of the cabin that the pilots don’t realise they have a problem until it’s too late, when oxygen starvation prevents them from taking any decisions.”
Some “experts” say some auto-pilots automatically descend to a safe altitude when cabin decompression is detected. They couldn’t verify if this 777 was so equipped.
absolutely bb
here we have something quite different but no one addresses this point as to how it could be. it must have a technical explanation and someone must know
Tim V
1 Apr, 2014 – 11:17 pm – in addition to the airline state of course i shud have said. hopefully every one knew wot i meant
@Tim V 1 Apr, 2014 – 11:17 pm
In the UK and Australia the opposition could ask during question time, “Do the intelligence services or the military have any information as to what happened to MH370?” Just for fun. Not that there will be a straight answer.
The search is also entwined with Australian politics. There’s an election on the horizon and pundits are saying once that’s done the PM loses interest.
Also that when searchers spotted orange debris, the worry was they might be orange life rafts used by Australia to send refugees on their way when it’s safe to do so.
@Tim V 10:53 pm: Any large, unexplained clouds of dust in the vicinity at the time?
The transcript, in English, of MH370’s last flight:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/interactive/2014/apr/01/mh370-cockpit-transcript-full
Ben-Scot NON-Collaborator
1 Apr, 2014 – 10:28 pm
” The smart money appears to be on some kind of gradual decompression – a fault causes an aeroplane to leak breathable air so slowly out of the cabin that the pilots don’t realise they have a problem until it’s too late, when oxygen starvation prevents them from taking any decisions.”
Ben ,NR.
The ‘smart money’ can’t be right, in fact it’s a pretty shallow idea don’t you think ?
The obvious question to ask them is then, how could the pilots then make the decision to turn off course & fly on for four more hours ?
If air was sucked out slowly how come it happened after only 40 mins of flying time & a decision was also made to turn off the transponder ?
So much for ‘smart money’, I reckon they must be, ‘bankers’. ;-))
Q.
Has no one spotted that odd part in the transcript.
>>>>>> 12:32:13 MAS 370 377 request taxi. <<<<<< Who is 377 ?
12:32:26 ATC MAS37….. (garbled) … standard route. Hold short Bravo
12:32:30 MAS 370 Ground, MAS370. You are unreadable. Say again.
12:32:38 ATC MAS370 taxi to holding point Alfa 11 Runway 32 Right via standard route. Hold short of Bravo.
12:32:42 MAS 370 Alfa 11 Standard route Hold short Bravo
MAS370. 12:35:53 ATC MAS 370 Tower
12:36:19 ATC (garbled) … Tower … (garbled)
MAS 370 1188 MAS370 Thank you
Who is 377 ?
Only after that are the messages garbled, three times.
Tim V 10.33pm
This has all been posted in this thread before, you are just 3 weeks behind:-
The registration of the missing aircraft is 9M-MRO this new youtube video shows the registration 9M-MRQ. This is the replacement aircraft that has flown the route since the disappearance.
Great detailed explanation of Satcom and Acars on the 777.
http://theaviationist.com/2014/03/16/satcom-acars-explained/
So then, the ‘ping’ relies on an IP address and is sent once an hour.
As we know from basic computer networks, it is nothing easier than to fake an IP address. If somebody knows the IP address then you could send any kind of another airplane or even a drone into completely different area, faking that IP address. You even have an hour between the pings to update the faking IP address.
Due to what we know today it is quite likely that the IP address of that plane’s engine satcom was deliberately used on another plane or on a drone while the original IP address was either jammed (could be even done from inside the plane by some kind of DoS attack) or the original plane already went down previously and the engines were already shut down. Ofcourse, such a scenario requires military assistance because it won’t get unnoticed by radar surveillance.
Katie
I did notice on the transcript that ATC talks to more than one aircraft at a time, however MAS 377 flies from Guangzhou to KL.
http://info.flightmapper.net/flight/Malaysia_Airlines_MH_377
So an error in the transcript? The return flight is MH 376 but is scheduled to depart at 9.35 am so it cant be that either.
http://uk.flightaware.com/live/flight/MAS376
I will try and check KL departures about 12.30 am that night.
Here it is a nice summary as how to hack with fake IP addresses, one of those IPs a Satcom IP.
https://citizenlab.org/2014/02/hacking-team-targeting-ethiopian-journalists/
Quote:
Hacking Team, also known as HT S.r.l., is a Milan-based (Zygier??) purveyor of “offensive technology” to governments around the world. One of their products, known as Remote Control System (RCS), is a trojan that is sold exclusively to intelligence and law enforcement agencies worldwide. Hacking Team’s website describes the product as “the solution” to monitor targets that are increasingly using encryption, or those located outside the borders of the government that wants to monitor them.
This page is by Duncan Steel, a New Zealand physics professor. He and two colleagues have been working on the Inmarsat Doppler Shift theory since it was first announced. He claims there is nothing that excludes the Northern Track. Not that the plane necessarily went that way. It’s too technical for me to understand completely.
http://www.duncansteel.com
Katie cont
The next 3 aircraft taking off were:-
MAS 6075 -MAS KARGO – a cargo plane heading to Jakarta
MAS 30 (9M-MRM) to Istanbul
XAX 506 Air Asia to Seoul
Maybe they wanted to change to position of the aircraft, to clear the gate but most likely for refuelling.
There are historic flight data of lost airplane 9M-MRO
http://planefinder.net/data/airplanes/9M-MRO
Here are the historic flight data of MH370
http://planefinder.net/data/flights/MH370
What i dont understand. The march 8th flight is listed as 9M-MRQ.
However, the March 8th flight was definitely 9M-MRO because that was the lost flight.
Straw, could you explain that please?
I agree that MH377 couldnt have been even close to MH370 on march 8th. However, pilots can make errors, too. Maybe he was on the MH377 flight previously.
Thanks Straw.
But the controller is speaking ‘only’ to 370 in that transcript yet up pops 377 in that request to Taxi.
I don’t understand how that could happen.
PS,
Nor do I find it very reassuring that garbled messages are not verified clearly.
At a glance it looks like confusion in the cockpit…..sorry ‘flight deck’. 😉
NR.
Thanks for that link.
I don’t understand the technical jargon by Duncan Steel either.
But the fact he is a highly trained man on such data is good enough for me to see that Inmarsats data is open to errors…………therefore we should not take it as conclusive.
I wonder if the Malaysian PM, who rushed to announce their findings, ever thought of getting a second opinion on that data ?
That is a rhetorical question.
Katie, The railways has the same system, all the worker’s and Driver’s radios are set to the same frequency and that way everybody involved hears what is going on, garbled messages are from people using the same frequency but far away or from people not holding the mike properly and so on. All commercial planes within the same curvature of the Earth can hear each other at that altitude and what with satellites probably a great deal more too.
Hi Donald, yes I’ve heard that sort of chatter & always wondered how pilots could make any sense of it….but here we are talking about a plane on the ground preparing for take off.
It cannot be right to have such a fuzzy message & the wrong number.
Geez, I’m a twitchy flyer & this does nothing for my confidence in pilots or traffic control.
Katie, on the ground or in the air communications is not really a problem, one gets used to locations, procedures and other such things plus call numbers for other jobs (planes/trains) and their timetables.
Here is a new angle for everybody.
“…..The Philippine government said Tuesday international support is … stop” in order to avoid collision in the South China Sea on March 8, 2009…….”
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2014/04/01/Support-growing-in-sea-dispute-with-China-Philippines-says/7441396374717/
On that day the Philippine Navy had three planes up in the air …. what if the Chinese sent one of their fighters and it was suddenly confronted with a transponderless plane at high altitude over Chinese territory?. (you need to check what the Chinese claim as theirs)
Let’s not forget, this unfriendly incident between two countries happened on the day of the disappearance of MH-370 and almost in the same area.
From 12: 32: 13 when the wrong number of 377 was given, messages were garbled for the following 4 minutes.
Out of those two countries Donald, the Chinese are the only ones to have the ability to shoot down a plane aren’t they ?
I still can’t see it though, why would the US & others want to cover for China especially on such a grand scale ?
Katie – I just found out that the three planes in the area on 8th of March were A U.S. navy plane, a Philippine military aircraft and a Chinese plane – all visible from their markings – they were flying above the Chinese and Filipino ships at different intervals.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/30/us-philippines-china-reef-idUSBREA2T02K20140330
Although not mentioned in the article I remember reading somewhere that the ship broke the blockade very late at night.
I would say that the cover up is to avoid a war
Also, a US navy plane means an aircraft carrier must have been in the area
Donald
2 Apr, 2014 – 10:24 am
Regardless of what they were doing, that proves one positive thing…………that there were more than enough eyes & ears in the region to know exactly what happened to MH370 that night.
Bluebird 9.26 am
Flightradar24 uses UTC time so the missing aircraft took off at 16.41pm on 7/3/14 GMT which equals UTC (+8 Hours) for Malaysia, 00.41am local time on 8/3/14.
Therefore when following this flight on Flightradar24.com you need to start from 16.40 on 7/3/14.
The 9M-MRQ is the plane that flew the route the following day. The missing plane is 9M-MRO which is how I spotted Dahboo77’s error.
Katie 9.27am
I used the transcript from here, not initially realising that MH370 entries were from the aircraft. Doh
http://news.sky.com/story/1235201/full-transcript-of-last-contact-with-mh370
A Malaysian Airlines plane
The plane with 239 people onboard disappeared on March 8. Pic: File
Email
A transcript of the final conversations between the control tower and Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 has been released.
MAS 370 (Kuala Lumpur to Beijing)
PILOT-ATC RADIOTELEPHONY TRANSCRIPT
Departure from KLIA: 8 March 2014
ATC DELIVERY
12:25:53 MAS 370 Delivery MAS 370 Good Morning
12:26:02 ATC MAS 370 Standby and Malaysia Six is cleared to Frankfurt via AGOSA Alpha Departure six thousand feet squawk two one zero six
12:26:19 ATC … MAS 370 request level
12:26:21 MAS 370 MAS 370 we are ready requesting flight level three five zero to Beijing
12:26:39 ATC MAS 370 is cleared to Beijing via PIBOS A Departure Six Thousand Feet squawk two one five seven
12:26:45 MAS 370 Beijing PIBOS A Six Thousand Squawk two one five seven, MAS 370 Thank You
12:26:53 ATC MAS 370 Welcome over to ground
12:26:55 MAS 370 Good Day
LUMPUR GROUND
12:27:27 MAS 370 Ground MAS370 Good morning Charlie One Requesting push and start
12:27:34 ATC MAS370 Lumpur Ground Morning Push back and start approved Runway 32 Right Exit via Sierra 4.
12:27:40 MAS 370 Push back and start approved 32 Right Exit via Sierra 4 POB 239 Mike Romeo Oscar
12:27:45 ATC Copied
12:32:13 MAS 370 MAS377 request taxi.
12:32:26 ATC MAS37….. (garbled) … standard route. Hold short Bravo
12:32:30 MAS 370 Ground, MAS370. You are unreadable. Say again.
12:32:38 ATC MAS370 taxi to holding point Alfa 11 Runway 32 Right via standard route. Hold short of Bravo.
12:32:42 MAS 370 Alfa 11 Standard route Hold short Bravo MAS370.
12:35:53 ATC MAS 370 Tower
12:36:19 ATC (garbled) … Tower … (garbled)
MAS 370 1188 MAS370 Thank you
Comment:- This is how I first read the transcript and I did think (mistakenly) he was talking to 2 aircraft. After 12.32.13 with the pilot/first officer misnaming the flight, the control tower garbled message, ?correcting impolitely?
The pilot/first office replies:- You are unreadable. Say again.
Perhaps James might add his view. Or was this the hidden message that they were already under coercion.
Donald 10.24 am
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/30/us-philippines-china-reef-idUSBREA2T02K20140330
Excerpt:-
They had been scheduled to go home three weeks ago but Chinese ships blocked two Philippine supply vessels from reaching them on March 9, a move protested by Manila and which the United States described as “provocative”. The Philippines resorted to air dropping food and water instead.
Comment:-
This article says March 9, after MH370 had gone missing.