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.
Q
The “hair removal product” of the bygone days say “it was shot down after crossing Malay air space”. (It had no T’s pinging away. It crossed “internal” airspace, it entered “foreign” airspace…it was a threat).
Katie says, so where is the debris ?
I say… I haven’t a clue.
But “two months” makes things very sinkable.
Malaysian ex PM: CIA is withholding information.
http://m.smh.com.au/world/cia-withholding-information-on-flight-mh370-says-former-malaysian-pm-mahathir-mohamad-20140519-zrh0a.html
“From day one they [Malaysia Airlines] said that we are all family. ‘Anything you want, just come to us, we will help you.’ That’s why caregivers were assigned to us,” Ms Gonzales, 51, said. “But to take away our caregivers, our lifeline to MAS, just like that … it’s actually not right because our caregivers are not there to advise on legal matters.”
Ms Gonzales said the airline had told relatives to now engage with the airline through lawyers.
“As far as I am concerned, my husband is still an employee of MAS … as far as I am concerned, my husband is still on MH370, a flight to Beijing and he has not come back from Beijing yet,” she said.
Malaysia Airlines has not responded to the relatives’ comments.
“GCHQ can engage in travel tracking of passengers on airplanes. The program is called “Thieving Magpie.” The “top secret” slide reads, “We can confirm that targets selectors are on board specific flights in near real time, enabling surveillance or arrest teams to be put in place in advance” … “Specific aircraft can be tracked approximately every 2 minutes whilst in flight.””
https://squonk.tk/blog/2014/01/20/the-general-discussion-thread/comment-page-18/#comment-7429
Two and a half thousand comments – ARE YOU PEOPLE NUTS?
Enjoy! – http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/stories/2014/05/15/4005244.htm
I can’t see the video Four corners ,I did find a portion of it on facebook if anyone finds a working link can they post it please.
Nik Huzlan comments on 4 Corners:
http://mpegmedia.abc.net.au/news/fourcorners/video/20140519_4c_huzlan_iv_288p.mp4
https://www.facebook.com/friendsofcaptainzahariemh370?fref=nf
How does this make sense?
http://www.news24.com/World/News/Malaysia-defends-military-MH370-inaction-20140519
”
“If you’re not going to shoot it down, what’s the point of sending it ([a fighter] up?” Hishammuddin asked.”
Ah, but how do you know you’re not going to shoot it down, if you don’t even have a clue what’s going on?
Standard protocol elsewhere in the world dictates that the fighter jets would go up to escort the plane, and attempt to contact it. The chicken and egg question is another one of Malaysia’s attempts to distract from what really happened.
@Pink
Here ya go (link at the bottom).
The “large” on at the top doesn’t work.
So scroll down and click on the links (marked “video”)underneath the smaller pic.
The former chief pilot makes some interesting comments.
You’ll here him speak about handling the radio.
Remember what I wrote before ?
The voice heard on the ground, isn’t the same as the voice heard when in the air.
At MAS the Co-Pilot handles ground communications even when he is the designated Pilot Flying on that sector. So in reality we don’t know who was “designated” PF and “designated” PNF….but we can assume, it was the Captain communicating on the radio when they were airborne, therefore the Co-Pilot was flying.
…unless the Captain was doing both !
http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/stories/2014/05/15/4005244.htm
http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/stories/2014/05/15/4005244.htm
We know that RMAF Butterworth has an Australian in charge. We know that Australia’s and New Zealand’s air forces train the pilots at RMAF Butterworth. It is therefore logical that RMAF in Butterworth would follow the Australian protocol for scrambling fighter jets, and that the order to scramble would have followed the chain of command from their Australian leader down. So now we must conclude that it was an Australian who gave the order not to scramble fighter jets because he predetermined that MH370 was not to be shot down, thereby negating any need to get involved. We must also recognize that an Australian, Allan Houston, aka “Angus”, is in charge of the search for MH370. This begs the question as to why Australia and its representatives would not allow RMAF to scramble fighter jets when MH370 lost contact. Very intriguing, this is. I can understand the attraction of using the moniker of the famous Australian AC/DC rock star, but I cannot understand why it would be in Australia’s interest to deviate from protocol in its handling of a Malaysian commercial airliner going off the grid. Any way you look at it, this lands squarely in Australia’s lap.
Please correct this line of thinking if it is flawed, but I don’t think it is.
Thanks James I am getting through them slowly my connection is terrible so its slow progress.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RMAF_Butterworth
“It is currently the headquarters of the Five Power Defence Arrangements Integrated Area Defence System for Malaysia and Singapore, which is commanded by an Australian Air Vice Marshal.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Power_Defence_Arrangements
Posting this again, because it is relevant. Why isn’t anyone asking the Australian Air Vice Marshal in charge of Five Power Arrangements Integrated Area Defence System for Malaysia and Singapore why no fighter jets were scrambled when MH370 went missing?
Not only is there the FPDA, there is a cooperative “Eyes in the Skies” project between Malaysia and other countries in the area:
http://mg.co.za/article/2006-03-27-states-mull-security-in-the-straits-of-malacca
“Under the FPDA, which was signed in 1971, the five nations will consult each other in the event of external aggression or threat of attack against either Southeast Asian country.
Najib said the FPDA had been expanded beyond traditional territorial threats to also deal with non-conventional security threats such as terrorism, and conducts regular security exercises focusing on acts of terror.
The “Eyes in the Sky” project involving Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore and Thailand was launched last September, with each of the countries taking turns conducting aerial patrols of the strait.”
Whose turn was it to patrol the skies when MH370 went missing: Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore or Thailand? Were fighter jets from Thailand scrambled, rather than fighter jets from Malaysia? This would make it a matter of semantics: maybe Malaysia didn’t scramble fighter jets when MH370 lost contact. Maybe another member nation of the “Eyes in the Sky” scrambled its fighter jets, because it was their turn that night. Maybe various air forces shut off their radar at bedtime, because the other Eyes will ensure a peaceful sleep.
According to page 125 of this book, the second phase of the “Eyes in the Sky” project allows extra-regional participation by countries such as the U.S.
http://www.ashgate.com/isbn/9780754677277
The same page states that the maritime aircraft are allowed to patrol the waters of the Malacca Strait only, and will not be allowed to cross over land. They must remain three nautical miles away from another country’s land. This seems important in the matter of MH370’s disappearance.
Cross-border hot pursuit was restricted at the time the book was written. Singapore and Malaysia had to seek approval for cross-border hot pursuit at the time of writing, but Singapore and Indonesia, and Indonesia and Malaysia had bilateral agreements concerning hot pursuit.
What would happen if someone violated the hot pursuit terms? What would happen if one country’s patrol passed over a tiny island within three nautical miles in error? This mistake could happen easily.
Sorry to post & run again, hopefully I can get back later, but received this alert today.
Malaysia to Release Satellite Data on Missing Jet.
‘After demands by some family members of passengers, Malaysia said it will publicly release satellite data used to search for the missing jetliner
(KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia) — Malaysia says it will publicly release satellite data used to narrow down the search for the missing jetliner to the southern Indian Ocean.
The Civil Aviation Department and British company Inmarsat said in a joint statement Tuesday said they would do this “in line with our commitment to greater transparency.”
http://time.com/105688/malaysia-to-release-satellite-data-on-missing-jet/
Thanks, Katie. Here’s another version from Fox News:
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/03/20/malaysia-officials-waited-four-days-to-release-crucial-satellite-data-report/
More and more this is being portrayed as the Malaysian government running interference. What are they trying to hide?
Malaysia calls for the release of Pine Gape information:
http://www.smh.com.au/world/missing-malaysia-airlines-plane-plea-to-us-to-release-pine-gap-data-20140319-hvkf2.html
Meanwhile, there is no word at all on whatever was or wasn’t done or found/not found in the Bay of Bengal: stone cold silence from all parties, including GeoResonance.
Er, Pine Gap. Freudian slip.
Meanwhile, back in the beginning, with maps, and no mention of the “Eyes in the Sky” arrangement that is critical to understanding:
http://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-updates/mh370-thailand-failed-to-share-radar-data/story-fnizu68q-1226858785980
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2014/03/18/mh370_thailand_s_military_finally_shares_radar_data_that_would_have_been.html
And today:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/20/thailand-army-declares-martial-law-denies-coup-live
It’s not a coup, really!
With “thai” food being served (do not forget the incident reportedly began 50 minutes after take-off), don’t they keep “track” on secundary radars, regardless of what “systems” may/may not have been disabled, of the current status of the IFE system? Mein Gott, would the flight “crew” be involved, that’s the first “step” they should have made. No IFE, no sattelite phones, no cruising “map”.
Now if 370 was accidentally shot down “during” a driil exercise, we “can” expect the US NAVY to have retreived all sensible “debris” (those that float). They’re “good” at that.
But with the recent “coup”, there might be another “twist” in that story. And I wonder if FL 350 (very unusual in Cruise) was not a “message” in a bottle.
It is a coup after all:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-27517591
Do you suppose they were respecting the “Eyes in the Sky” Program when MH370 went down?
A helpful article from 2012 for understanding the “Eyes in the Sky” Program:
http://piracywatch.net/2012/03/18/china-balancing-powers-in-the-malacca-strait-by-bill/
It looks like Thailand keeps its radar systems up to date. This article from 2012 on the addition of the TPS-77 radar explains:
http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/mst/features/121016-thai-air-force-takes-the-long-view-with-new-radar.html
“When the Royal Thai Air Force (RTAF) activated its new TPS-77 radar recently, it greatly expanded the Thailand’s long-range air surveillance network capability. In particular, the radar helps provide greater air sovereignty, security and safety over much of the Gulf of Thailand.
“With this direct commercial sale and installation now successfully completed, Thailand became the owner of the 34th Lockheed Martin long-range radar operational in the Asia Pacific region. Thailand joins countries such as Korea, Taiwan and Australia, who have relied on Lockheed Martin’s family of 3-D, solid-state, L-band surveillance radars for decades….
“The TPS-77 is the latest configuration of the world’s most successful 3-D solid-state radar design. This transportable radar provides continuous high-quality 3-D surveillance on aircraft targets at ranges out to 250 nautical miles. The TPS-77 shares commonality with Lockheed Martin’s FPS-117 radar with regard to maintenance activity and Line Replaceable Units. Many have performed for years completely unmanned in remote areas, and in a wide range of operational environments.”
The “pings” are NOT from the Black Box of MH370 say JACC.
Earlier they discounted the first two pings. Now also the latter two pings.
So that makes “no pings” in the Indian Ocean.
So that just leaves the INMARSAT data (and the subsequent Doppler Effect calcs).
Talk about “on a wing and a prayer” !
The only thing that seems to be confirmed is the Secondary radar track.
Clearly there is something “amiss” with the Primary (military) radar track.
Every “ping” needs a “pong”. There were seven pings “recorded” by the IMS. Seven is a sacred number in “those” latitudes. Lucky are those who carry “batteries” and just fade away, instead of “burning” in the Reich.
One air traffic controller in training:
http://www.cnn.com/2014/05/23/travel/texas-near-miss/
Consider KLIA2, in March 2014, with 178 air traffic controllers in training (50 of whom were green recruits) on air traffic control systems similar to those in Subang. Subang’s ATC radar spontaneously shut itself down for two hours in September 2012. Imagine the chaos if the same thing happened at KLIA2 when everyone was “in training” back in March of this year.
More about the military exercises that were going on when MH370 went missing:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/24/us-cancels-military-exercises-thailand-coup
Even the FBI tour has been cancelled. Handy thing that the FBI were nearby when MH370 vanished, and were able to lend a hand with that flight simulator.
Even when KAL007 was shot down by the USSR, there were radio transmissions picked up by Tokyo Tower.
Whilst there was no “may day” called, they did transmit.
With a rapid decompression the pilots descended (and called in) their descent.
This was between 39 to 49 seconds after the missile attack.
Maybe we can get some info from a film. Immarsat release is the anticipated dud.
http://m.thenation.com/article/179986-western-media-coverage-ukraine-crisis-distorted-soviet-propaganda
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2014/05/26/mh370-data-to-be-released/9603371/
Dud, indeed, Ben.
http://georesonance.com/20140521%20Press%20Release.pdf
“GeoResonance has been informed by sources quoting the Malaysian and Australian Governments that the precise location identified by GeoResonance in the Bay of Bengal, contrary to reports, has not been searched by the Bangladesh Navy and will not be as the JACC are certain MH370 is in the Southern Indian Ocean. This is very disappointing as GeoResonance stands by its claim of discovering what appears to be the wreckage of an aircraft. GeoResonance does not and has never claimed this is MH370, simply a lead that should be followed up.”
More smoke and mirrors from Angus Houston and crew: Georesonance claims that in spite of the bluster about the Bangladesh navy sending two or three ships to follow up on their lead, absolutely nothing has been done.
Why are Angus Houston and the JACC lying (allegedly) to the international public? Why do they feel the need to lie (allegedly)? And why do they cling to the rather embarrassing theory about the plane being where they say it is, rather than considering the obvious? After all this time with no evidence to support their theory, they refuse to consider that they might be wrong. There can be only one explanation: it will be “found” there, no matter what. Getting it to be “found” there is taking more time than originally planned.
This could be in the running for the title of “Grandest Deception of All Time”.
Howdy, Q. Wrong film link above….http://edition.cnn.com/2014/05/19/business/cannes-mh370/index.html?hpt=bosread
Truly, the bottom has dropped out of this story.
http://www.airtrafficmanagement.net/2014/05/mh370-search-turns-to-nuclear-technology/
“Investigators have confirmed they will review feedback from a series of ultra-sensitive deep sea microphones designed to detect nuclear blasts to help find the final resting place of Malaysia Airlines Flight 370.
|Shortly after the aircraft was reported missing on March 8, experts at the United Nations’ Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty Organization (CTBTO) were asked to review automatic reports from its network of infrasound monitoring stations in the region and make a detailed investigation.”
Detecting a nuclear blast, or just using nuclear detection equipment?
There are several more articles in the archives from May 26 and 27:
http://www.airtrafficmanagement.net/
I still cannot believe that the international media seem to have missed all the confusion, equipment failures and newbies at the helm in the air traffic control towers at Subang, KLIA and KLIA2 leading up to and during the disappearance of MH370. They were all quick to jump on the bandwagon of suspecting the pilot of malevolence, but stone cold silent on looking at the recent documented incidents of hazards in ATC in Malaysia. Bad reporting or silenced reporters?