Malaysia Airlines 777 loses contact...not found
- Thread starter 01rangerxl
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: antiqueshell
I still wonder, did this plane land on the continent of Antarctica?
Wouldn't that indicate a death wish, too? It's not like one would choose to land in Antarctica, vanish among the crowds, and start all over again.
They wouldn't survive very long. Unless they landed on one of the airports.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_airports_in_Antarctica
Which means they'd have to be in on it too,
Originally Posted By: antiqueshell
I still wonder, did this plane land on the continent of Antarctica?
Wouldn't that indicate a death wish, too? It's not like one would choose to land in Antarctica, vanish among the crowds, and start all over again.
They wouldn't survive very long. Unless they landed on one of the airports.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_airports_in_Antarctica
Which means they'd have to be in on it too,
Originally Posted By: Trajan
Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: antiqueshell
I still wonder, did this plane land on the continent of Antarctica?
Wouldn't that indicate a death wish, too? It's not like one would choose to land in Antarctica, vanish among the crowds, and start all over again.
They wouldn't survive very long. Unless they landed on one of the airports.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_airports_in_Antarctica
Which means they'd have to be in on it too,
I didn't think they would survive for long there, even if they did somehow land the plane in tact somehow, but it could be done with all the level land/ice pack there.
You know it is going to sound strange but did the guy have one last wish to see that continent? I wonder what the nearest military/exploration base is on the continent to where the flight path would have taken them to on the coast?
Also I believe I remember that there was an scientific exploration ship that was entrapped in ice around there last year as well?
Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: antiqueshell
I still wonder, did this plane land on the continent of Antarctica?
Wouldn't that indicate a death wish, too? It's not like one would choose to land in Antarctica, vanish among the crowds, and start all over again.
They wouldn't survive very long. Unless they landed on one of the airports.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_airports_in_Antarctica
Which means they'd have to be in on it too,
I didn't think they would survive for long there, even if they did somehow land the plane in tact somehow, but it could be done with all the level land/ice pack there.
You know it is going to sound strange but did the guy have one last wish to see that continent? I wonder what the nearest military/exploration base is on the continent to where the flight path would have taken them to on the coast?
Also I believe I remember that there was an scientific exploration ship that was entrapped in ice around there last year as well?
It could be argued that it was on coarse for the French Southern and Antarctic Lands where presumably it could land on a road near Port-aux- Francais.
If there was not too much traffic
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port-aux-Fran%C3%A7ais
If there was not too much traffic
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port-aux-Fran%C3%A7ais
Last edited:
Quote:
AMSA: Due to a "credible lead", the search area is being shifted 1100 km to the northeast.
Moving search area 1100km to the northeast basically puts it in the Diamantina Deep.
Like I said, they will not find it. The pilot knew well what he was doing.
AMSA: Due to a "credible lead", the search area is being shifted 1100 km to the northeast.
Moving search area 1100km to the northeast basically puts it in the Diamantina Deep.
Like I said, they will not find it. The pilot knew well what he was doing.
Originally Posted By: Sam2000
Who here has read about SQ68?
If you read the whole thread you would find the discussion on it somewhere in the middle. Not likely to pull something like that and has not been done before (by military or otherwise). How would you hide the primary radar response just before shadowing?
Who here has read about SQ68?
If you read the whole thread you would find the discussion on it somewhere in the middle. Not likely to pull something like that and has not been done before (by military or otherwise). How would you hide the primary radar response just before shadowing?
Originally Posted By: Vikas
Every search plane seems to be propeller plane. Is it because they can fly slower and lower? Do carriers have search and rescue planes on board? I really don't know but I was surprised to notice spinning blades on P3.
Wild guess here, but flying at lower altitudes increases chances of a bird or other debris getting sucked into a jet engine. That's probably one of many other good reasons they use props.
On a side note, why don't they have a ship out there that you can land helicopter(s) on? Use the planes from land to spot debris, and then send the helicopter from the ship to inspect it, or even try to recover some of it.
Every search plane seems to be propeller plane. Is it because they can fly slower and lower? Do carriers have search and rescue planes on board? I really don't know but I was surprised to notice spinning blades on P3.
Wild guess here, but flying at lower altitudes increases chances of a bird or other debris getting sucked into a jet engine. That's probably one of many other good reasons they use props.
On a side note, why don't they have a ship out there that you can land helicopter(s) on? Use the planes from land to spot debris, and then send the helicopter from the ship to inspect it, or even try to recover some of it.
Originally Posted By: friendly_jacek
Quote:
AMSA: Due to a "credible lead", the search area is being shifted 1100 km to the northeast.
Moving search area 1100km to the northeast basically puts it in the Diamantina Deep.
Like I said, they will not find it. The pilot knew well what he was doing.
I saw a map showing the "latest" flight path aimed right at the trenches widest point. It's chilling to think about.
Quote:
AMSA: Due to a "credible lead", the search area is being shifted 1100 km to the northeast.
Moving search area 1100km to the northeast basically puts it in the Diamantina Deep.
Like I said, they will not find it. The pilot knew well what he was doing.
I saw a map showing the "latest" flight path aimed right at the trenches widest point. It's chilling to think about.
Originally Posted By: D189379
That's probably one of many other good reasons they use props.
I think this is one: Unit cost US$36 million (FY1987)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_P-3_Orion
It's being replaced by turbojet Boeing P-8 Poseidon: Unit cost
US$275.7M
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_P-8_Poseidon
Originally Posted By: D189379
On a side note, why don't they have a ship out there that you can land helicopter(s) on?
Because it's in a middle of nowhere?
That's probably one of many other good reasons they use props.
I think this is one: Unit cost US$36 million (FY1987)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_P-3_Orion
It's being replaced by turbojet Boeing P-8 Poseidon: Unit cost
US$275.7M
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_P-8_Poseidon
Originally Posted By: D189379
On a side note, why don't they have a ship out there that you can land helicopter(s) on?
Because it's in a middle of nowhere?
Originally Posted By: friendly_jacek
Originally Posted By: D189379
On a side note, why don't they have a ship out there that you can land helicopter(s) on?
Because it's in a middle of nowhere?
I think you missed my point. Let me be more clear.
I'm not asking why there isn't a randomly placed ship with helicopter landing capabilities stationed at random points all over the earths oceans, BUT I'M ASKING Why haven't they "sent" a ship out there that you can land helicopters on. It's been well over a week, which seems to me like plenty of time for a ship like this to have steamed its way into this area and help out.
Originally Posted By: D189379
On a side note, why don't they have a ship out there that you can land helicopter(s) on?
Because it's in a middle of nowhere?
I think you missed my point. Let me be more clear.
I'm not asking why there isn't a randomly placed ship with helicopter landing capabilities stationed at random points all over the earths oceans, BUT I'M ASKING Why haven't they "sent" a ship out there that you can land helicopters on. It's been well over a week, which seems to me like plenty of time for a ship like this to have steamed its way into this area and help out.
Originally Posted By: D189379
Originally Posted By: friendly_jacek
Originally Posted By: D189379
On a side note, why don't they have a ship out there that you can land helicopter(s) on?
Because it's in a middle of nowhere?
I think you missed my point. Let me be more clear.
I'm not asking why there isn't a randomly placed ship with helicopter landing capabilities stationed at random points all over the earths oceans, BUT I'M ASKING Why haven't they "sent" a ship out there that you can land helicopters on. It's been well over a week, which seems to me like plenty of time for a ship like this to have steamed its way into this area and help out.
They showed the Chinese ship heading out there to the newest site and it appeared to be a ship with helicopter capability due to the huge flat deck in the back.
Originally Posted By: friendly_jacek
Originally Posted By: D189379
On a side note, why don't they have a ship out there that you can land helicopter(s) on?
Because it's in a middle of nowhere?
I think you missed my point. Let me be more clear.
I'm not asking why there isn't a randomly placed ship with helicopter landing capabilities stationed at random points all over the earths oceans, BUT I'M ASKING Why haven't they "sent" a ship out there that you can land helicopters on. It's been well over a week, which seems to me like plenty of time for a ship like this to have steamed its way into this area and help out.
They showed the Chinese ship heading out there to the newest site and it appeared to be a ship with helicopter capability due to the huge flat deck in the back.
Originally Posted By: D189379
BUT I'M ASKING Why haven't they "sent" a ship out there
Who are "they" and who will pay for it?
BUT I'M ASKING Why haven't they "sent" a ship out there
Who are "they" and who will pay for it?
Something interesting...they were saying if the black boxes were "hidden" in a certain type of thermal layer it might not be detectable with equipment to hear the ping. They mentioned submarines can actually hide in these thermal layers and not picked up with sonar...now I wonder if these new high tech P-8 submarines hunters can see through and detect subs in these thermal layers?
Several comments on the questions being raised...
1. Turboprops are more efficient in their use of fuel. So, particularly at low altitude, where the endurance of the plane is key (not range), turboprops are a better choice. The P-3 can fly for about 12 hours. It was designed as an airliner, the Lockheed Electra, but adapted for Navy use long ago. Most of our P-3s are starting to wear out (fatigue)...so, we're buying the P-8.
2. P-3s can't be refueled in flight. P-8s can be, but it takes a tanker with a boom...that's USAF only...even Australia uses the NATO standard (and USN/USMC) probe/drogue.
3. The P-8s sensor suite is ideal for this search: EO, IR and a radar designed to find a periscope. Good speed to transit to the search area, good endurance on station.
4. Carrier aircraft aren't as ideal. While the carrier could be positioned on scene, eyeballs aren't always the best sensor...believe me, I've looked for a missing airplane on a couple of occasions. Even from 1,000 feet (where jets are guzzling fuel) every whitecap looks like an object of interest.
5. We don't have a carrier to spare. The preponderance of close air support sorties for our troops in Afghanistan are coming off the carriers in the Gulf. Hard to explain looking for a foreign airplane and failing to provide air support to our own troops in combat. Our carriers (we have 9 at the moment) are either on mission, training for the mission, or in overhaul. Budget cuts mean that we may lose one carrier (or even two) that is currently scheduled for overhaul, but isn't yet funded for it, increasing demand on the remaining ships.
6. Thermal layers duct the sound. It's physics...and the only way to hear the ping would be to get the sensor in the layer. But again, that sensor is very short range. We have to know where to start the short range search before that tool (which the US Navy has already sent to Perth) can be put to use.
7. This area of the world is about the most remote, hostile place on the planet for a search. I can't think of anything worse. Even the arctic would be better - no ocean to hide sinking debris, nor strong winds to scatter it. The roaring 40s (those southern latitudes) were legendary for fierce storms in the age of sail, they are still subject to fierce winds and the search area is thousands of miles from the nearest land.
8. The potential area in which this plane could have hit the water is HUGE...bigger than continents...you have to search every square meter as most of the pieces won't be very big if it hit the water. That's why satellite imagery and other methods to try and develop some focus areas...
We may never find this airplane, frankly. And if we don't, there will be no facts to support any of the possible explanations...they will simply remain suppositions...guesses at best...
1. Turboprops are more efficient in their use of fuel. So, particularly at low altitude, where the endurance of the plane is key (not range), turboprops are a better choice. The P-3 can fly for about 12 hours. It was designed as an airliner, the Lockheed Electra, but adapted for Navy use long ago. Most of our P-3s are starting to wear out (fatigue)...so, we're buying the P-8.
2. P-3s can't be refueled in flight. P-8s can be, but it takes a tanker with a boom...that's USAF only...even Australia uses the NATO standard (and USN/USMC) probe/drogue.
3. The P-8s sensor suite is ideal for this search: EO, IR and a radar designed to find a periscope. Good speed to transit to the search area, good endurance on station.
4. Carrier aircraft aren't as ideal. While the carrier could be positioned on scene, eyeballs aren't always the best sensor...believe me, I've looked for a missing airplane on a couple of occasions. Even from 1,000 feet (where jets are guzzling fuel) every whitecap looks like an object of interest.
5. We don't have a carrier to spare. The preponderance of close air support sorties for our troops in Afghanistan are coming off the carriers in the Gulf. Hard to explain looking for a foreign airplane and failing to provide air support to our own troops in combat. Our carriers (we have 9 at the moment) are either on mission, training for the mission, or in overhaul. Budget cuts mean that we may lose one carrier (or even two) that is currently scheduled for overhaul, but isn't yet funded for it, increasing demand on the remaining ships.
6. Thermal layers duct the sound. It's physics...and the only way to hear the ping would be to get the sensor in the layer. But again, that sensor is very short range. We have to know where to start the short range search before that tool (which the US Navy has already sent to Perth) can be put to use.
7. This area of the world is about the most remote, hostile place on the planet for a search. I can't think of anything worse. Even the arctic would be better - no ocean to hide sinking debris, nor strong winds to scatter it. The roaring 40s (those southern latitudes) were legendary for fierce storms in the age of sail, they are still subject to fierce winds and the search area is thousands of miles from the nearest land.
8. The potential area in which this plane could have hit the water is HUGE...bigger than continents...you have to search every square meter as most of the pieces won't be very big if it hit the water. That's why satellite imagery and other methods to try and develop some focus areas...
We may never find this airplane, frankly. And if we don't, there will be no facts to support any of the possible explanations...they will simply remain suppositions...guesses at best...
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: friendly_jacek
Originally Posted By: D189379
BUT I'M ASKING Why haven't they "sent" a ship out there
Who are "they" and who will pay for it?
Always the question...who should send a ship? It's not a minor proposition...this is remote, stormy, and helicopters aren't the best search tool...sure, we need ships to recover pieces, if they're ever found, but for searching, I would chose the P-3, P-8 or other dedicated maritime patrol aircraft...they're optimized for searching large areas of ocean...
Originally Posted By: D189379
BUT I'M ASKING Why haven't they "sent" a ship out there
Who are "they" and who will pay for it?
Always the question...who should send a ship? It's not a minor proposition...this is remote, stormy, and helicopters aren't the best search tool...sure, we need ships to recover pieces, if they're ever found, but for searching, I would chose the P-3, P-8 or other dedicated maritime patrol aircraft...they're optimized for searching large areas of ocean...
Originally Posted By: Astro14
We may never find this airplane, frankly. And if we don't, there will be no facts to support any of the possible explanations...they will simply remain suppositions...guesses at best...
Which will breed conspiracy theories for years to come.
We may never find this airplane, frankly. And if we don't, there will be no facts to support any of the possible explanations...they will simply remain suppositions...guesses at best...
Which will breed conspiracy theories for years to come.
Originally Posted By: friendly_jacek
Originally Posted By: D189379
BUT I'M ASKING Why haven't they "sent" a ship out there
Who are "they" and who will pay for it?
I'm not sure why you're trying to bait me into a discussion about financial responsibilty? Who cares? The ships are already built and the crews are being paid either way?
How about "they" are anyone who has a ship like this, maybe Australia, China, the USA, Britain.
Originally Posted By: D189379
BUT I'M ASKING Why haven't they "sent" a ship out there
Who are "they" and who will pay for it?
I'm not sure why you're trying to bait me into a discussion about financial responsibilty? Who cares? The ships are already built and the crews are being paid either way?
How about "they" are anyone who has a ship like this, maybe Australia, China, the USA, Britain.
Originally Posted By: Astro14
Originally Posted By: friendly_jacek
Originally Posted By: D189379
BUT I'M ASKING Why haven't they "sent" a ship out there
Who are "they" and who will pay for it?
Always the question...who should send a ship? It's not a minor proposition...this is remote, stormy, and helicopters aren't the best search tool...sure, we need ships to recover pieces, if they're ever found, but for searching, I would chose the P-3, P-8 or other dedicated maritime patrol aircraft...they're optimized for searching large areas of ocean...
I'm not suggesting the helicopters search at all. I'd think that once a plane spots it, they can radio the ship and instead of waiting for the ship to travel 24 hours to go try to find it, a helicopter can be there in an hour or two, drop down low, hover 30ft above the object, and have someone get a really good look at whatever it is.
Originally Posted By: friendly_jacek
Originally Posted By: D189379
BUT I'M ASKING Why haven't they "sent" a ship out there
Who are "they" and who will pay for it?
Always the question...who should send a ship? It's not a minor proposition...this is remote, stormy, and helicopters aren't the best search tool...sure, we need ships to recover pieces, if they're ever found, but for searching, I would chose the P-3, P-8 or other dedicated maritime patrol aircraft...they're optimized for searching large areas of ocean...
I'm not suggesting the helicopters search at all. I'd think that once a plane spots it, they can radio the ship and instead of waiting for the ship to travel 24 hours to go try to find it, a helicopter can be there in an hour or two, drop down low, hover 30ft above the object, and have someone get a really good look at whatever it is.
- Status
Similar threads
