Missing Malaysia Airlines MH370... Thread 4

[GoldieMumbles]

Thread 1

Thread 2

Thread3

can you programme lots of different manoevres at the same time? Pilots could have programmed in erratic flying pattern hoping to alert the ground that something awful was happening. Risky, maybe, depending on hijackers' systems knowledge but maybe woth a shot knowing the worst would happen to them personally anyway

Quint, I think Goldie said the "handshake" worked whilst the plane was in flight (otherwise it'd be noisy signally when the pings hit an airport )

Bonsoir. I was hoping that the Aussies were going to solve the mystery when I saw the news this morning. Not looking that way, is it?

All I've seen on just about every froum I frequent has been rehashing of the things we already do or, in most cases, don't know. The only new bit of data of any calue was Malaysia saying that the aircraft had (I think) 49 tonnes of fuel on board, so it wasn't really tankering much. It brought the actual take-off weight up to around 223 tonnes of a potentially available 297 tonnes. The wing tanks apparently hold around 35000 litres of fuel each (SG of the fuel is about 0.85 as opposed to the 1 of water).

Sadly I don't think I can add much. It's all still a mystery and we are all waiting for the Aussies to complete their search in clearer weather.

I'd just like to wish them well - it's not easy flying in muck and clag at low altitude over a bubbling ocean. It's rather intimidating, actually. Much love going out to them.

I think the pings are dependent on the engine running, Quintzilla.
Though someone upthread did say that Rills Royce may also have additional info about whether the plane landed/crashed before the final ping was received. (Apols If I've gotten that wrong)

Hi goldie :)

"Quint, I think Goldie said the "handshake" worked whilst the plane was in flight "

The pings come off of the SatCom system which wrequires electrical power either from the APU ) small jet engine in the tail taht provides power on the ground or emergency power in the air if both engines go kaput but you still have fuel) or from the IDGs (Integrated Drive Generators) on the engines. It'll work on the ground but not if the engines or APU aren't running. It doesn't have its own battery.

Trying to avoid being sociable before pregnancy yoga. What are your thoughts on what happened with the search goldie?

Oh doh sorry just read your earlier post properly.

Goldieee!!!!

Hi living - hope you're doing ok and not too uncomfy with bump.

Hi Goldie - welcome back. I hope you had a relaxing and enjoyable evening yesterday.

I loved PG yoga!

"What are your thoughts on what happened with the search goldie?"

They're doing their utmost in shite weather. It could well be a bit of an aircraft; it might not be. It may have sunk without trace now anyway. But I don't think they'd be rushing all their assets out there if they didn't have a realtively good idea. I also think that they have many, much better images than the ones they've shared.

Just to answer an earlier question in the thread about the Maldives sighting - it is where the Aussies think it is, the Maldives sighting can't be true. It wouldn't get all that way at an altitude where you could make out the individual doors from the ground.

Range is drastically reduced at lower altitudes due to the density of the air increasing the drag.

Goldie someone asked earlier whether it might have been possible for a small fire to have released noxious fumes which knocked out the passengers and crew but then burnt itself out and the plane just carried on until it ran out of fuel. Something like that anyway. Do you think that is likely?

"Goldie someone asked earlier whether it might have been possible for a small fire to have released noxious fumes which knocked out the passengers and crew but then burnt itself out and the plane just carried on until it ran out of fuel. Something like that anyway. Do you think that is likely?"

Possible, I suppose, but very, very unlikely.

MerryMarigold - Garlic, so are you saying the satellite pings likely held more info like altitude, fuel etc. re your post at 4.53.

We know the satcom is equipped to relay detailed information about the engine's state to Rolls Royce. We know Malaysian subscribed only to the basic service, so did not receive engine updates. We think RR probably collected this data anyway, for its own technical use. We inferred that this is the information Inmarsat said it shared with its 'partner' and was working to extract.

If they have got the engine updates, they'll know a heck of a lot about what the plane did. As it wasn't subscribed, though, it might have gone into an anonymised stream of data which would then have to be painstakingly pulled out.

is it known whether the plane could "ping" from a part floating on water

Lovely idea, but no. The engine has to be on, to power the antenna.

Another thing Goldie, did you see the post upthread:

The US Embassy in Beijing claims that USAF Base at U-Tapao in Thailand monitored a distress call from Malaysia Airlines MH370 at 2.43 am. The pilot said that the cabin was starting to break apart and he was making a forced landing. Malaysia Airlines were notified.

(that is just copied from the link given)

Think the Chinese paper translated this as the 'cabin disintegrating'.

Apparently the post was deleted from Pprune pretty quickly.

Any idea what it could possibly mean, if true?

Ooh, Goldie's back! Catching up now :)

If the base in Thailand heard anything - big if - then it would suggest to me either massive structural failure, potentially from a bomb or potentially from a structural defect (this happened on DC-10s in the 1970s when cargo doors came open in flight due to a structural weakness) or a massive fire causing the aircraft to begin to split apart or buckle the floor beams (happened when a DC-8 had a wheel fire near Jeddah).

Goldie has the search location changed your opinion on what's happened?

Goldie if there was a massive structural failure (which the message certainly implies if true), then surely the plane couldnt' have carried on flying for as long as it did?

"Goldie if there was a massive structural failure (which the message certainly implies if true), then surely the plane couldnt' have carried on flying for as long as it did?"

No, it couldn't, and it wouldn't have been controllable either. It's why I dn't tend to believe it's true.

So if this is the plane is it deliberate sabotage by pilot or hijack?

I hope this is it, it must be torture for the friends and family :(