Missing Malaysian Airlines MH-370 - Thread 6

[member]

Thread 1

Thread 2

Thread 3

Thread 4

Thread 5

very different data to the inmarsat stuff - re: picked up on radar at point x and time 1, at point y at time 2 ergo it took z amount of time to travel from point x to point y so the speed was....? and this was information available immediately and of the key window in which the plane changed course and was the 'only' data available at that point.

tmf - if you're embarrassed don't look.

this 'new info' 3 weeks later doesn't do anything to quell the conspiracy concerns though does it? The relatives must be incredulous.

I doubt it's as simple as that HB because the time of two radar contacts has already been published. So unless one of those was wrong, and has now been corrected, I suspect there's another radar point.

there will have been more radar points - and once those radar points and times are there they can then look at satellite at that point and time.... it's not unreasonable at all to be stunned by the gaps in all this.

I don't think satellites cover the whole globe at once, do they?

we know that they do cover that area of the world. the U.S ones circle the globe in 15mins - so pass over every 15mins.

But they don't cover every square mile of the earth.

A 15 min orbit is awfully quick for a satellite.

So now all the debris they claim to have seen on satellite "isn't debris"? This is getting somewhat ridiculous. Those poor families.

There were lots of images on satellites but it's always been made clear that they can't be identified from this.

If it is every 15 mins, assuming most of them are not paying closer attention to Crimea at the moment, then that is an awful lot of info to process. Despite what some people may like to believe, I doubt this is at the top of the US's priorites considering what else is going on in the world. It's a horrible tragedy for the families but the US have had their own disasters this week. Those incidents may not be as dramatic to the more swivel-eyed amongst us but dead is dead.

I am still amazed they made that definitive statement to the families without 100% surety It is def getting suspicious now I thought uk team had 'solved' it Now looking in different area

Can someone just explain- I thought the InMARSAT data was precise as to the pings and the position of the final, partial handshake? I mean since they were able to work out speed/direction with the Doppler effect etc. had they not managed to work it out down to about 200 miles or so?

I can imagine this has put more doubt into families minds about the accuracy of the statements made about the fatality of the plane

It always looks so final when they draw it on maps. I imagine the INMARSAT data was not extremely precise. I wonder what data made them think it was travelling faster than previously thought though.

Why are the US so silent on all this?

Downton - no. The Inmarsat data is accurate to within 100 miles of the arc either side (or possibly 50 miles either side). They are still looking on the arc just further up it.

They didn't get speed from the Doppler analysis, only direction.

i don't know merry. they have massively advanced satellite and radar technology in that part of the world.

So, going faster uses more fuel? Is that what this means? Ok.

The inmersat modelling was done assuming two different speeds; 400 knots & 450 knots.

I'm slightly with Honeybadger on this. Even though I know analysis takes time,speed = distance/time (as far as I can recall) so that parameter should have been deduced early on. It smacks of someone holding back on info but being forced to reveal it because of the of the Inmersat calculations being based on a false premise.

Or, there is some new info been given to the investigative team like further satellite or radar data. Or possibly the forensics on the Captain's flight simulator which the FBI were quoted as saying a couple of days ago would be ready in a day or two.

I've been trying to stay factual with what we know with the links etc but the reason given for altering the search area does seem a comparatively easy thing to deduce.

Thank you for the link to that facebook analysis.

Ok, the radar, I assume, refers to the speed it was going it when it was heading west.

It later turned again to reach the Inmarsat arc and Doppler analysis (plus lack of radar detection) indicated it turned south, sea bound, not north, land bound.

If they've used radar to deduce the speed, they've either assumed something about how the westerly speed related to the southerly speed, or they've picked up a further radar point from some country or another that gives them more information (for example, any radar point south of the last westerly point would give an idea of southerly speed)

Downton, the partial handshake was never explained but IIRC it was only a few minutes after the full handshake so may not have been able to be fully analysed.

That wasn't clear.

The speed between the two published radar points is deductible if you assume a straight line flight.

If in fact the plane went eg south west then north west between those points, it would have been flying faster.

We don't know when after the last published radar point it turned south-easterly. Everything I've seen assumes straight lines between the known points.

I thought the initial data was accurate withing 170km

160km = 100 miles. So about right.

Accurate only to the left and right of the arc, not along it.

Where's Goldie???