Missing Malaysia Airlines MH370 - Thread 5

[KenAdams]

Thread 1

Thread 2

Thread 3

Thread 4

Well now I understand why Inmarsat weren't releasing all the data.

They knew very well that geometrical and statistical inferences about the flight path could be drawn from the data and didn't want others pre-empting that analysis and/or stealing their thunder.

Vested interests, eh ?

Achy if they owned the data though, how could anyone else analyze it? Or did they just do the analysis on freely available satellite data?

I also don't get how this is a big announcement, because surely they knew where the plane was most likely to be already, and were already searching there.

Or am I missing something?

The other thing is that this does have the hallmark of an accident rather than hijack.

In order for a differentiation to be made from the North/South routes the data must match very very closely a straightline, fairly constant speed model, for all of the 6 data points.

Clearly for the aircraft to be flying straight for 5-6 hours is highly inconsistent with a hijack.

"I also don't get how this is a big announcement, because surely they knew where the plane was most likely to be already, and were already searching there."

The announcement is that it's beyond all reasonable doubt; they have gleaned directional data from information that shouldn't normally be used that purpose, proving that the plane was travelling south and that the last known position was therefore over an ocean, too far from land to turn back.

Before this analysis, there was a high probability this was true, because no land based radar saw the plane, but it wasn't proved and so Malaysia couldn't make the statement they did.

"They knew very well that geometrical and statistical inferences about the flight path could be drawn from the data and didn't want others pre-empting that analysis and/or stealing their thunder."

This is a very unfair statement. The data is not designed for this purpose and they have done some very heavy duty analysis with a lot of people no doubt working their socks off to get to this.

Plus I am sure Inmarsat have been liaising closely with various authorities about what they can and can't say.

I am still bemused that no mayday call was made if crisis happened eg fire ec. I recognise that the drill is secure air craft.navigate then communicate in order . If there was time to turn and re navigate maybe twice then why no mayday call? I believe that it is quick to do . There are smoke hoods and oxygen masks in cockpit .
The last communication was with a Japan bound airline who through static thought they heard the pilot mumbling . Nothing more said about that report .
So so sad .RIP .

Michonnes previously Inmarsat only released the last data point and the 8000km or so arc associated with that point.

The announcement narrows that search area by a factor of a 100.
So yes it is big news

Thing is they knew this all along because the data fitted a straightline model well, and knew if they released the data some bright spark may well pre-empt their analysis.
It's not rocket science (well....), they just wanted the credit.

According to an interview I heard this afternoon on Radio 5 it appears that Inmarsat and Cranfield Uni spent the weekend modelling data, doing something that has never been attempted before, to come up with this likely outcome. I think it is such a shame that this wasn't done earlier (as the data was available) or alternatively they waited until they had positive recovery of debris. It must be so hard for the families to accept the death of their loved ones without any positive proof

*Dr Boxall continued: "They [Inmarsat] started from scratch. They've probably crammed almost a year's worth of research into maybe a couple of weeks, so it's not a routine calculation they would ever, ever make.

"So they've been looking at all the signals they have, all the recordings they have, and processing that many times over to try and pinpoint where the plane's signal came from. Technologically it's really quite astounding."

He added Inmarsat "wouldn't have released this sort of information without being 100% certain"*

From the Telegraph article.

Agree with Doctrine

Unfair and unnecessary to try to infer ulterior motives.

All they had was a ping and how long it took for this ping to return, even thinking of new theories of how to potentially use this, trying out ideas that ultimately failed would take a long time. Nevermind testing it out properly and thoroughly before giving the go ahead to announce that all crew and passengers were definitely dead. They don't usually use this data for locating a plane, that wasn't what it was designed to do

Or what Charlie said quicker than me

As an analyst, it can take so long to come up with "the answer". This is one answer. I hope they are able to conclusively say they have evidence for the families, to give them that concrete - but awful awful - information they need. I then hope they are able to identify what happened.

Yes I find it odd that there was no indication anything was wrong before it happened. Surely most flight incidents involve notification, why not this one?

I'm thinking it was hypoxia or whatever it's called.

The pilots realised something was wrong and tried to turn back but all on board became unconscious and the plane flew on until it ran out of fuel.

The pilots couldn't send a mayday due to communication faults. The plane that heard mumbling may have been a mayday call and is further evidence of hypoxia.

The passengers phones apparently still rang but if they were unconscious, they wouldn't have been able to answer or call for help.

The plane flew on until it ran out of fuel.

So hypoxia and communication faults?
What caused the hypoxia?
And why does everyone keep using faces -am I missing something? There seems to be loads of them in really starnge places on this thread, is it some indication that people don't believe what we're being told?

But this is proof beyond all reasonable doubt.Debris may never be found - Inmarsat were working on this before debris was found.

I'm sure they shared their preliminary findings and this along with debris sightings and the lack of plane appearing on land based radar directed the search to the south. And the starting assumption was to search from the ends of the arc ie assuming minimal further navigation.

Results from controlled physics experiments with carefully designed measuring equipment take months/years to analyse and they are designed to be analysed IYSWIM. This wasn't.

And to assume Inmarsat were in it for the glory - what glory? Suddenly we're all going to use them for our satellite needs?

These are real people who I'm sure want to find the plane as much as any of us and have worked weekends to try and glean data above and beyond the design of the satellite.

Hats off to Inmarsat and their collaborators.

Not aimed at you specifically Frankie, ust that you've used one and I'm wondering what it means. I think someone used one after a "how sad" downthread so am wondering if there is a subtext.

"The passengers phones apparently still rang but if they were unconscious, they wouldn't "

Frankie, the tower returns a ringing sound often when the phones are out of range, which they are at 35,000 feet.

Another aircraft - another 777 - was found to have a 13-inch long crack around its SatCom antenna. If the failure occurred there, it explains why a lot of comms equipment went offline, it explains decompression and it explains hypoxia. It doesn't explain the turn or the waypoints unless the crew had enough time to turn and programme those waypoints in before being overcome by hypoxia themselves. If the reports that it descended to 12000 feet are true, it's consistent with a dive to a 'breathable' level. A lot of things do add up to this theory - and for those who've followed what I've posted since I joined in way back ont he first thread, it's kind of what I've thought all along is the most likely theory.

With a bit of supposition here and there, a bit of knowledge of previous incidents, it does pretty much stack up.

The hole in the theory now is that if it dropped to 12000 feet, there wouldn't be enough fuel on board to get to south west of Perth. It'd have to climb again to do that, unless it was massively fuelled for tankering.

I still favour this theory as I did from the beginning.

"The passengers phones apparently still rang but if they were unconscious, they wouldn't have been able to answer or call for help."

Shall I?

I think the face sometimes comes up instead of Stealth.

I really hope that the passengers weren't aware of what was going on. I've just seen the images of the families just heartbreaking, and it feels so intrusive.

What about the info published today saying they have evidence the plane went down to 12,000 ft? I'd have thought you could fly at that height even if the cabin was depressurised.

how odd. Wonder how that happens/

I thought I'd save you, Goldie, but am signing off now so good luck!!

The phones never rang. This has been explained numerous times on all the threads before...

I find all the “oh they’re keeping something from us/not telling/it’s all a big conspiracy/it was cyber highjacking/inmarsat are in it for the glory/they’ve had this information all along/we should all be terrified,” comments a bit tbh.

What, exactly, is it people think the governments of the world (because let’s not forget that there are now 26 countries involved in this) keeping from everyone? With no leaks to anyone?

Sometimes things happen beyond those which we expect. Millions and millions of people fly every year. Millions of planes enter the skies every year. And then one day one of those planes does something which isn’t within expectation, and because not all possibilities can always be anticipated, it takes time to establish where within a 26000 mile radius that plane might have gone. And naturally it wouldn’t happen overnight, because you know, it wasn’t expected, and there weren’t systems in place to anticipate every eventuality.

And people think it’s all a big conspiracy? That’s just scaremongering rubbish.

And let’s say that the systems had been in place to track the plane wherever it went. Would that have changed the outcome? No. Because you can’t intercept a plane in the sky and save everyone on it, yes you can perhaps shoot it down – would that have been preferable? The only thing that would have changed is that everyone would have been confirmed dead a little bit sooner...