As of this evening the latest network Mews reports say that still NO evidence of MH370 has been found in that location even though the authorities are still searching it.
Malaysia Airlines 777 loses contact...not found
- Thread starter 01rangerxl
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: antiqueshell
As of this evening the latest network Mews reports say that still NO evidence of MH370 has been found in that location even though the authorities are still searching it.
So...when they do find some pieces of the aircraft, are you then going to claim that it was planted by Israel or some covert government agency?
As of this evening the latest network Mews reports say that still NO evidence of MH370 has been found in that location even though the authorities are still searching it.
So...when they do find some pieces of the aircraft, are you then going to claim that it was planted by Israel or some covert government agency?
I don't think it's ever gonna be found.
I think it's sitting on a tarmac somewhere or inside an aircraft hanger.
I think it's sitting on a tarmac somewhere or inside an aircraft hanger.
Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: Trajan
Silly yes. A violation, I'm not so sure. While there are areas not subject to being watched, like a restroom, employee lounge, locker room, there really isn't a "right" to it where you are using company equipment.
I certainly agree that it's happening in a lot of places. Rather than get into the off topic political issues of that, I'd rather just state that the data recorder gets all the data needed, and a videotape of the cockpit and controls would be redundant, not to mention very clumsy. Excuse my potential ignorance on this topic, but wouldn't a forward facing camera be more sensible, at least showing what the pilots might be seeing (i.e. reduced visibility during a landing)?
Well, there isn't anything political about it. And it wouldn't be any more clumsy than a nanny cam. A data or flight recorder will not show what the pilots are doing in the pit.
Silly, yes. Illegal, no.
Originally Posted By: Trajan
Silly yes. A violation, I'm not so sure. While there are areas not subject to being watched, like a restroom, employee lounge, locker room, there really isn't a "right" to it where you are using company equipment.
I certainly agree that it's happening in a lot of places. Rather than get into the off topic political issues of that, I'd rather just state that the data recorder gets all the data needed, and a videotape of the cockpit and controls would be redundant, not to mention very clumsy. Excuse my potential ignorance on this topic, but wouldn't a forward facing camera be more sensible, at least showing what the pilots might be seeing (i.e. reduced visibility during a landing)?
Well, there isn't anything political about it. And it wouldn't be any more clumsy than a nanny cam. A data or flight recorder will not show what the pilots are doing in the pit.
Silly, yes. Illegal, no.
Originally Posted By: andrewg
Originally Posted By: antiqueshell
As of this evening the latest network Mews reports say that still NO evidence of MH370 has been found in that location even though the authorities are still searching it.
So...when they do find some pieces of the aircraft, are you then going to claim that it was planted by Israel or some covert government agency?
All part of a plot conceived by Colonel Mustard in the library while looking at a candlestick.
Originally Posted By: antiqueshell
As of this evening the latest network Mews reports say that still NO evidence of MH370 has been found in that location even though the authorities are still searching it.
So...when they do find some pieces of the aircraft, are you then going to claim that it was planted by Israel or some covert government agency?
All part of a plot conceived by Colonel Mustard in the library while looking at a candlestick.
Originally Posted By: Merkava_4
I don't think it's ever gonna be found.
I think it's sitting on a tarmac somewhere or inside an aircraft hanger.
Why? Where? Whom? What reason?
I don't think it's ever gonna be found.
I think it's sitting on a tarmac somewhere or inside an aircraft hanger.
Why? Where? Whom? What reason?
What I don't understand about this whole thing is shortly after the flight went missing they were saying that the tracking devices on the plane were purposely turned off by someone on the plane and therefore they suspected something illegal going on, so they were searching for the plane on land...what changed their minds that now has them looking for the wreckage in the ocean?
Originally Posted By: Merkava_4
I don't think it's ever gonna be found.
I think it's sitting on a tarmac somewhere or inside an aircraft hanger.
That's why I don't understand why they're looking for wreckage in the ocean...shortly after the flight went missing they suspected foul play by someone onboard the plane...I too believe they should be looking for the plane on land....
I don't think it's ever gonna be found.
I think it's sitting on a tarmac somewhere or inside an aircraft hanger.
That's why I don't understand why they're looking for wreckage in the ocean...shortly after the flight went missing they suspected foul play by someone onboard the plane...I too believe they should be looking for the plane on land....
I could not give the engineers at INMARSAT enough justice by trying to explain how they came with this solution so please read.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/03/26/inmarsat_doppler_effect_helped_locate_mh370/
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/03/26/inmarsat_doppler_effect_helped_locate_mh370/
Originally Posted By: grampi
what changed their minds that now has them looking for the wreckage in the ocean?
I thought this article (and accompanying video) does a pretty good job of explaining the process and all the "maths" behind it.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/24/world/asia/malaysia-airlines-satellite-tracking/
what changed their minds that now has them looking for the wreckage in the ocean?
I thought this article (and accompanying video) does a pretty good job of explaining the process and all the "maths" behind it.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/24/world/asia/malaysia-airlines-satellite-tracking/
Originally Posted By: Merkava_4
I don't think it's ever gonna be found.
I think it's sitting on a tarmac somewhere or inside an aircraft hanger.
So you contend that even though the plane was tracked by satellites to the middle of the Indian ocean, 1500 miles from any land, with less than an hours worth of fuel (estimated max range), and a max speed of ~600mph, that from that point on in the ocean it somehow flew and additional 1500 miles back to land (Australia) in under 59 minutes and landed and shut the plane off before the satellite could get its next ping, completely undetected, and was then hidden before anyone could see it?
Interesting theory.
I don't think it's ever gonna be found.
I think it's sitting on a tarmac somewhere or inside an aircraft hanger.
So you contend that even though the plane was tracked by satellites to the middle of the Indian ocean, 1500 miles from any land, with less than an hours worth of fuel (estimated max range), and a max speed of ~600mph, that from that point on in the ocean it somehow flew and additional 1500 miles back to land (Australia) in under 59 minutes and landed and shut the plane off before the satellite could get its next ping, completely undetected, and was then hidden before anyone could see it?
Interesting theory.
Originally Posted By: dave1251
I could not give the engineers at INMARSAT enough justice by trying to explain how they came with this solution so please read.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/03/26/inmarsat_doppler_effect_helped_locate_mh370/
Okay, but they didn't say anything about all of the equipment that was originally thought to have been turned off by someone onboard the A/C during the flight...do they still believe that was the case, and wouldn't that change the search areas?
I could not give the engineers at INMARSAT enough justice by trying to explain how they came with this solution so please read.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/03/26/inmarsat_doppler_effect_helped_locate_mh370/
Okay, but they didn't say anything about all of the equipment that was originally thought to have been turned off by someone onboard the A/C during the flight...do they still believe that was the case, and wouldn't that change the search areas?
Originally Posted By: D189379
Originally Posted By: Merkava_4
I don't think it's ever gonna be found.
I think it's sitting on a tarmac somewhere or inside an aircraft hanger.
So you contend that even though the plane was tracked by satellites to the middle of the Indian ocean, 1500 miles from any land, with less than an hours worth of fuel (estimated max range), and a max speed of ~600mph, that from that point on in the ocean it somehow flew and additional 1500 miles back to land (Australia) in under 59 minutes and landed and shut the plane off before the satellite could get its next ping, completely undetected, and was then hidden before anyone could see it?
Interesting theory.
I just find it hard to believe that someone, or more than one person onboard the A/C purposely turned off tracking equipment, but had no plan to land anywhere, so they just crashed into the ocean. If you were going to hijack a plane, or do something else that was considered foul play, wouldn't you have a plan to land somewhere?
Originally Posted By: Merkava_4
I don't think it's ever gonna be found.
I think it's sitting on a tarmac somewhere or inside an aircraft hanger.
So you contend that even though the plane was tracked by satellites to the middle of the Indian ocean, 1500 miles from any land, with less than an hours worth of fuel (estimated max range), and a max speed of ~600mph, that from that point on in the ocean it somehow flew and additional 1500 miles back to land (Australia) in under 59 minutes and landed and shut the plane off before the satellite could get its next ping, completely undetected, and was then hidden before anyone could see it?
Interesting theory.
I just find it hard to believe that someone, or more than one person onboard the A/C purposely turned off tracking equipment, but had no plan to land anywhere, so they just crashed into the ocean. If you were going to hijack a plane, or do something else that was considered foul play, wouldn't you have a plan to land somewhere?
Originally Posted By: grampi
Originally Posted By: dave1251
I could not give the engineers at INMARSAT enough justice by trying to explain how they came with this solution so please read.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/03/26/inmarsat_doppler_effect_helped_locate_mh370/
Okay, but they didn't say anything about all of the equipment that was originally thought to have been turned off by someone onboard the A/C during the flight...do they still believe that was the case, and wouldn't that change the search areas?
I do not believe you are considering all the facts. Read more please.
Originally Posted By: dave1251
I could not give the engineers at INMARSAT enough justice by trying to explain how they came with this solution so please read.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/03/26/inmarsat_doppler_effect_helped_locate_mh370/
Okay, but they didn't say anything about all of the equipment that was originally thought to have been turned off by someone onboard the A/C during the flight...do they still believe that was the case, and wouldn't that change the search areas?
I do not believe you are considering all the facts. Read more please.
Originally Posted By: dave1251
Originally Posted By: grampi
Originally Posted By: dave1251
I could not give the engineers at INMARSAT enough justice by trying to explain how they came with this solution so please read.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/03/26/inmarsat_doppler_effect_helped_locate_mh370/
Okay, but they didn't say anything about all of the equipment that was originally thought to have been turned off by someone onboard the A/C during the flight...do they still believe that was the case, and wouldn't that change the search areas?
I do not believe you are considering all the facts. Read more please.
So are they now saying that people onboard didn't turn off tracking equipment?
Originally Posted By: grampi
Originally Posted By: dave1251
I could not give the engineers at INMARSAT enough justice by trying to explain how they came with this solution so please read.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/03/26/inmarsat_doppler_effect_helped_locate_mh370/
Okay, but they didn't say anything about all of the equipment that was originally thought to have been turned off by someone onboard the A/C during the flight...do they still believe that was the case, and wouldn't that change the search areas?
I do not believe you are considering all the facts. Read more please.
So are they now saying that people onboard didn't turn off tracking equipment?
Originally Posted By: grampi
Originally Posted By: D189379
Originally Posted By: Merkava_4
I don't think it's ever gonna be found.
I think it's sitting on a tarmac somewhere or inside an aircraft hanger.
So you contend that even though the plane was tracked by satellites to the middle of the Indian ocean, 1500 miles from any land, with less than an hours worth of fuel (estimated max range), and a max speed of ~600mph, that from that point on in the ocean it somehow flew and additional 1500 miles back to land (Australia) in under 59 minutes and landed and shut the plane off before the satellite could get its next ping, completely undetected, and was then hidden before anyone could see it?
Interesting theory.
I just find it hard to believe that someone, or more than one person onboard the A/C purposely turned off tracking equipment, but had no plan to land anywhere, so they just crashed into the ocean. If you were going to hijack a plane, or do something else that was considered foul play, wouldn't you have a plan to land somewhere?
I have no idea but the motive is the biggest part of the mystery. I have no clue why anyone would do something like that, but that doesn't change the facts of the disappearance that we know so far.
It took off, all communication was lost, the plane turned around and was last located in the middle of the Indian Ocean. We can change the facts to fit the theory, we must change the theory to fit the facts.
Originally Posted By: D189379
Originally Posted By: Merkava_4
I don't think it's ever gonna be found.
I think it's sitting on a tarmac somewhere or inside an aircraft hanger.
So you contend that even though the plane was tracked by satellites to the middle of the Indian ocean, 1500 miles from any land, with less than an hours worth of fuel (estimated max range), and a max speed of ~600mph, that from that point on in the ocean it somehow flew and additional 1500 miles back to land (Australia) in under 59 minutes and landed and shut the plane off before the satellite could get its next ping, completely undetected, and was then hidden before anyone could see it?
Interesting theory.
I just find it hard to believe that someone, or more than one person onboard the A/C purposely turned off tracking equipment, but had no plan to land anywhere, so they just crashed into the ocean. If you were going to hijack a plane, or do something else that was considered foul play, wouldn't you have a plan to land somewhere?
I have no idea but the motive is the biggest part of the mystery. I have no clue why anyone would do something like that, but that doesn't change the facts of the disappearance that we know so far.
It took off, all communication was lost, the plane turned around and was last located in the middle of the Indian Ocean. We can change the facts to fit the theory, we must change the theory to fit the facts.
The RADAR "pings" received by INMARSAT were not from "tracking equipment" rather than RADAR pings from the aircraft. "From the time the signals took to reach the satellite, belonging to the UK firm Inmarsat, and the angle of elevation, Inmarsat was able to provide two arcs, one north and one south that the aircraft could have taken.
Inmarsat's scientists then interrogated the faint pings using a technique based on the Doppler effect, which describes how a wave changes frequency relative to the movement of an observer, in this case the satellite, a spokesman said.
Britain's Air Accidents Investigation Branch and experts from the European space industry were also involved in the analysis.
The Doppler effect is why the sound of a police car siren changes as it approaches and then overtakes an observer.
Mr Razak said that British firm Inmarsat had employed 'a type of analysis never before used in an investigation of this sort'.
At a press conference in Kuala Lumpur today, Malaysia's transport minister Hishammuddin Hussein gave more details on how the authorities came to the conclusion that the flight had crashed in the southern Indian Ocean.
He said that the plane last communicated with a ground station at 12.11am, but had disappeared by 1.15am, suggesting that its systems either failed or were disabled at some time between those points.
'There is evidence of a partial handshake between the aircraft and ground station at 0019 UTC (GMT),' he said. 'At this time, this transmission is not understood and is subject to further ongoing work.'
The minister added: 'The new analysis was convincing enough to brief the prime minister that MH370 flew along the south corridor.
'This type of analysis has never been done in an investigation of this type - this is a developing situation, and as soon as we know more we will share it.'"
Inmarsat's scientists then interrogated the faint pings using a technique based on the Doppler effect, which describes how a wave changes frequency relative to the movement of an observer, in this case the satellite, a spokesman said.
Britain's Air Accidents Investigation Branch and experts from the European space industry were also involved in the analysis.
The Doppler effect is why the sound of a police car siren changes as it approaches and then overtakes an observer.
Mr Razak said that British firm Inmarsat had employed 'a type of analysis never before used in an investigation of this sort'.
At a press conference in Kuala Lumpur today, Malaysia's transport minister Hishammuddin Hussein gave more details on how the authorities came to the conclusion that the flight had crashed in the southern Indian Ocean.
He said that the plane last communicated with a ground station at 12.11am, but had disappeared by 1.15am, suggesting that its systems either failed or were disabled at some time between those points.
'There is evidence of a partial handshake between the aircraft and ground station at 0019 UTC (GMT),' he said. 'At this time, this transmission is not understood and is subject to further ongoing work.'
The minister added: 'The new analysis was convincing enough to brief the prime minister that MH370 flew along the south corridor.
'This type of analysis has never been done in an investigation of this type - this is a developing situation, and as soon as we know more we will share it.'"
Originally Posted By: D189379
I have no idea but the motive is the biggest part of the mystery. I have no clue why anyone would do something like that, but that doesn't change the facts of the disappearance that we know so far.
I have no idea either, but I do know people snap and do bad things to themselves and others.
More info on the Captain:
The wife learned about the affair and moved out one day before the tragic flight. The captain called the girlfriend before the flight and things were not well either.
The captain attended a court session the day of the flight. His opposition party idol was sentenced to 5 years of prison for [censored] charge that was fabricated by the government.
He probably thought it would be a perfect disappearing with no traces left. He didn't apparently know about the ping thing.
I have no idea but the motive is the biggest part of the mystery. I have no clue why anyone would do something like that, but that doesn't change the facts of the disappearance that we know so far.
I have no idea either, but I do know people snap and do bad things to themselves and others.
More info on the Captain:
The wife learned about the affair and moved out one day before the tragic flight. The captain called the girlfriend before the flight and things were not well either.
The captain attended a court session the day of the flight. His opposition party idol was sentenced to 5 years of prison for [censored] charge that was fabricated by the government.
He probably thought it would be a perfect disappearing with no traces left. He didn't apparently know about the ping thing.
Originally Posted By: Trajan
Well, there isn't anything political about it. And it wouldn't be any more clumsy than a nanny cam. A data or flight recorder will not show what the pilots are doing in the pit.
Well, there "could" be something political about it, but we're avoiding that fine. Of course, a voice recorder and data recorder won't show if a pilot is eating a sandwich or picking his nose. However, a voice recorder will note if there's a party going on in the cockpit. And a data recorder will note if a pilot is trying to do barrel rolls in an airliner.
More to the point, is there video surveillance of the passenger compartment? That's where people engage in behaviour all the way from being drunk and unruly to trying to set off shoe bombs.
Well, there isn't anything political about it. And it wouldn't be any more clumsy than a nanny cam. A data or flight recorder will not show what the pilots are doing in the pit.
Well, there "could" be something political about it, but we're avoiding that fine. Of course, a voice recorder and data recorder won't show if a pilot is eating a sandwich or picking his nose. However, a voice recorder will note if there's a party going on in the cockpit. And a data recorder will note if a pilot is trying to do barrel rolls in an airliner.
More to the point, is there video surveillance of the passenger compartment? That's where people engage in behaviour all the way from being drunk and unruly to trying to set off shoe bombs.
- Status
Similar threads
