UPDATE 5/21/14: The families of missing MH370 passengers have released a fascinating document presenting their own analysis of the preliminary report issued by the Malaysian government’s Ministry of Transport, including their own assessment of what we know and what we’d like to know. Link: Analysis of the Preliminary Report on MH370 Incident, May 20 2014
by Michael Exner
[Note: The totality of what we know about the fate of missing Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 consists of a series of electronic handshake “pings” that were received by an Inmarsat satellite in the hours before the plane disappeared for good. Unfortunately, the authorities have steadfastly refused to release the full data set to the public, and there is an ongoing dispute between Inmarsat and Malaysia as to who exactly has the data and who is authorized to release it. According to CNN, a source within Inmarsat has said that the company released satellite ping data amounting to just 14 numbers to Malaysian authorities, along with documentation explaining their methods for analyzing the data. Here Michael Exner, Chairman of the Board of Radiometrics Corporation, weights in on that claim. — Jeff Wise]
In fact, we know there are at least 51 numbers, and here’s why. The BFO chart [released on March 25 by the Malaysian government as page two of “Annex I” accompanying the Inmarsat report — ed] shows 12 times and 12 frequencies. That’s 24 numbers.
Then, on April 29, there was a photo in Beijing that showed that there were more handshakes, and ACARS messages that preceded the first handshake on the BFO chart, but there were no BFO values given in the Beijing meeting with the families. But the fact that they had the angles proves they had the times and the BFO values. Thus, we know of at least 17 events for which they have Time, BFO and Angle (or time delays). That is 51 numbers total.
We have assembled the following data from two sources. The “BFO Data” provided in the March 25th AAIB ANNEX I Chart and the photo taken in Beijing on April 29, 2014.
Note that the numbers above represent our best estimates based on digitized paper graphs and photos. The true resolution is less than that inferred by the number of digits. Apparently, the statements about “…only 14 numbers…” are in reference to the last 7 BFO frequencies and last 7 elevation angles, which the official investigation team is focused on. But all the data from the other events are also valuable for the calibration of the other data. Those first 10 events are also very important.
Until April 29, 2014, it was believed that there were only 12 events recorded. The BFO chart has only 12 events. Then the photo taken of a chart projected on the wall in Beijing on 2014-04-29 showed that they had more data than previously known. That immediately raised the question, why didn’t they disclose all the data sooner, instead of only the 12 events disclosed on March 25, 2014? How much more do they have that has not been disclosed?
The photo proves that there were at least 17 total recorded handshake/ping events. For each event, there was a time, a BFO value and a time delay (elevation angle). It is important to note that elevation angle is NOT an observable parameter. It is a derived value, based on a time delay observation. The elevation angles are calculated from the time delays and several assumptions about the geometry of the earth, etc. So elevation angles are not raw data. They are derived products that depend on data and assumptions. We prefer the raw data, not Inmarsat’s derived work products.
In addition, there were 12 “Predicted North” and 12 “Predicted South” BFO values.
The missing metadata is really important. It’s more important than filling in the missing numbers. The existing BFO data in particular is very arcane and ambiguous. Without much better descriptions of what the BFO values mean, experts are guessing. Experts are even arguing over the question of whether the BFO values need to be interpreted as positive or negative Doppler values because the document is silent on that critical question. Another example of the missing metadata is a clear explanation of the so called Predicted Track data. It has everyone totally confused.
To Richard Quest: No one thinks there are reams of data. But there are more numbers than 14, as the description above clearly demonstrates. All we want are the missing numbers, and a clear explanation of how to interpret the BFO values (metadata). We also want the raw time delay values, not derived angles. And we want the numbers in a tabular, numeric format, not graphs designed for the general public. This what we mean by “give us all the data.”
I posted the following in the comment section following Richard’s piece.
Richard has quite obviously had too much Inmarsat Kool-Aid. The point is not that the Inmarsat analysts ‘have it right’ simply because they blindly tested their algorithm on other aircraft, or that they even had other engineers review the data on the flight and perhaps their algorithm. He even points in the correct direction when he states that Inmarsat’s engineers will not assert certainty. Indeed, the correct scientific approach is to open the data AND the algorithm to the peer review process, so that ALL whom are capable can check for discrepancies.
The release of the raw data set was a good thing, but it may prove insufficient. The other missing pieces of the puzzle are: 1. Inmarsat’s algorithm; 2. Boeing’s data; and 3. whatever primary radar was figured into the equation. None of these elements save for the last need be considered proprietary information. This is really more about people either wanting to receive credit for locating the aircraft, or it is an element of game theory: what you don’t share can’t hurt you. It’s scientifically unethical, if you ask me, while Richard has chosen to to sleep in his bed of ‘expert opinion,’ one can only assume to ensure that he has unfettered access to the Malaysian authorities and Inmarsat execs. Meanwhile, what is required is true transparency by way of the pursuit of true investigative journalism. What we have in its stead, really, is nothing more than pandering to the powers that be, simply because they can provide access, which in turns makes for good television.
If you want to know what Richard should in fact be pursuing, look no further than the general tack of Mike Exner, a scientist, humanitarian and CNN commentator committed to an ethical approach to this tragedy and relieving the deep anguish of the next-of-kin of the victims of MH370. Jeff Wise, likewise a CNN commentator, has also been questioning the data set and its analysis from the very beginning, providing all with the benefit of the doubt quite graciously while steadfastly pursuing what can and should be made public regarding the flight.
From here, no conspiracy of any sort is required. What is quite obvious, however, is that Transportation and Defense Minister Hisammuddin wants MH370 to disappear as an issue, as it threatens his party’s tenuous hold on power in Malaysia. He is next in line to be PM, and he does not want this disrupted. Thus, he and the other powers that be in Malaysia drag their feet, withhold information and generally obfuscating the facts in line with game theory, seeking only to head off what they don’t know may hurt them.
The PM of Korea resigned in the wake of the ferry disaster. In contrast, in Malaysia, there are cronies, turds and incompetents in power who bristle at being questioned, seeing power as more of a right than a responsibility. The aircraft flew over their airspace for an extended period, and yet they only paint themselves as victims of an unfortunate event, rather than stepping up to the plate and releasing the full primary radar trace and disclosing any military attempts at contacting the aircraft, if any.
You, too, can drink the Kool-Aid if you wish, just as you can engender wacky conspiracy theories. The point, however, is that is not only quite sad but unconscionable that people cannot rise to the occasion and simply do the right thing by sharing what they know. There are people whom are not sharing, simply because at bottom they don’t really care. These are heartless souls, and Richard Quest has been duped into joining their milieu, period.
@Rand, again a very eloquent comment, full of truth. I couldn’t agree more with you re: the ethical aspects of information sharing. As I pointed out in my last comment as well, it is incomprehensible, why the newly published infos weren’t shared as soon as experts started to question Inmarsat’s conclusions. The passengers’families deserved that.
But, maybe, we should take a step back and ease off Inmarsat a little. As Duncan Steel has pointed out in his latest post, Inmarsat might not even be the culprit in this drama of downright criminal piece of information politics.And they have apparently provided for the first time a viable explanation of how they broke symmetry. That’s a very important piece of new info, because it means: if the data are not corrupted somehow, it’s in principle possible to determine the plane’s heading. As Duncan said, for that they should be applauded.
As to their stalling (maybe not on their own account) and obvious bungling/obfuscation by other factions, who might well try to hide something, or are just clinging to power, whatever it takes, that is indeed as worthy as ever of good investigative journalism.
@Littlefoot – the quickest way to allay the angst of the relatives was allow the work to be checked – months. Not really a big deal in science. Belatedly they instead have tossed some numbers out and said go for it. Do your best. In science you don’t get published like that, and those standards should apply among scientists. Why not this time? Commercial interest?
@Matty, I agree with you. If they had opened up earlier and had their work peer reviewed, this unfortunate situation would’t have arisen. But, remember, those engineers at Inmarsat are no publishing scientists by job description, and they might’ve been handcuffed by the British and the Malaysian government, for whatever reasons, nefarious or not. Also, in normal plane crash situations, no data are made public before the investigation is closed.
But this is not a normal plane crash. It’s a Black Swan of a plane crash and no ordinary investigation. The competing factions should’ve realized that and opened up earlier and more completely, no matter what is normally been done in an investigation.
And most of the questions, the spokespersons of the families have put together in their paper still need to be answered. And most answers could be provided by the Malaysian government, not Inmarsat.
OK, so perhaps Inmarsat could have been gagged or otherwise succumbed to bureaucratic inertia on the part of the AAIB or the Malaysian government.
As for the Black Swan reference, I am big fan of Nassim Taleb and did not even put two-and-two together. MH370: the Black Swan. It’s perfect, unfortunately, and it shows how paradigm breaking events are often met with an initially inadequate response on the part of the authorities in particular and various systems in general. Aircraft don’t simply disappear; they rather land or they crash. Whoops.
I think they probably did go out to monopolize the publicity but their secrecy combined with a fruitless search has caused them a PR issue. They should have fixed it in one swoop.
According to this article, Inmarsat said, they would share more info, if the Malaysians let them:
edition.cnn.com/2014/05/27/world/asia/malysia-missing-plane/
But I guess, the climate is so bad right now, that suspicion of data tampering would arise, no matter how many data and algorisms Inmarsat may or may not share in the future.This really could’ve been prevented.
@Rand, could it be, that different cultural mentalities are at work here? Aside from the suspicion, that the Malaysian authorities try to hide something, could it be, that they are guided by the motif to share as little as possible, because, if nothing gets out into the open, nobody can be accused of any wrongdoing? I read somewhere, that this kind of thinking is pervasive in Malaysian culture at top level as well as down below. So, they might be averse of sharing even seemingly innocent information.
http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/183093-mh370-satellite-logs-released-but-the-redactions-will-only-fuel-further-conspiracy-theories
“The document includes important timestamps, such as when the last ACARS message was transmitted. There’s also the curious inclusion of two ground-to-air telephony calls that went unanswered by the plane at 18:39 and 23:13 UTC.”
——————–
Finally my question is answered ! It was stated by inmarsat the satcom was functional for communication ..
@Tdm, indeed, there are many interesting points in the published info besides the North/South question.Those attempted satphon calls are very intriguing, and since they were unsuccessful, we can at least discard the idea, that terrorists, who abducted the plane or the captain communicated/negotiated with Malaysian authorities via the plane’s satcom.
It’s official the pings heard in Indian Ocean were not from mh370 ….cnn reporting
How long do you suppose they ( authorities)have known those pings heard under sea were not related to mh370 .i find it hard to imagine analyzation taking so long .especially since us navy is involved… what’s next inmarsat published the wrong planes handshakes…
@Littlefoot – a bit more on that acoustic data:
http://edition.cnn.com/2014/05/28/world/asia/malaysia-airlines-pinging/index.html?hpt=hp_t1
@Tdm – It’s embarrassing. They had to investigate but they didn’t have to ring all the bells. The Atlantic article hosted some heated debate on those pings – were they or weren’t they? On the mainstream news here now. And the acoustic data angle doesn’t sound too encouraging. All eyes now on BFO numbers.
@Littlefoot I believe there is indeed an element of not wanting share things openly amongst the Malaysian authorities in the interest of protecting themselves; I basically stated the same. And while we could indicate this as a nuance of the concept of ‘face,’ I believe it more relevant that this is a behavior pattern common to all authoritarian power structures. In short, they are focused on maintaining their power above all else, and I don’t believe that cultural relativism provides them with an out. Cultural relativism has its limits, and it is not something that I generally employ amongst people in positions of power, as it is really a tool that they utilize, rather than any sort of fundamental cultural disposition. World leaders are at their best when they can step up and lead in the midst of a crisis, throwing concerns for their own well being to the wind when necessary; they are at their worst when they seek only to absolve themselves from any form of responsibility.
As for the satcoms, does the Preliminary Report provide any indication who made the calls? I recall one such call to the aircraft by Malaysia Air Ops in memory serves. What is more interesting is that we still don’t have any all inclusive information regarding attempts to contact the aircraft, nor do we have a record of activities/inactivity on the part of the military. Really, they did absolutely nothing, they did not respond in any way? Perhaps. Perhaps not.
The pings: Jeff was all over the ping data from the start, while dsteel barely gave it a second thought. @Tdm is on it: why was the analysis of the ping data so long in coming? This in turn bolsters Ari Schulman’s statement that this is “more about what they don’t know than what they do.”
I don’t believe anybody has a very good idea as to the location of the aircraft at this point, while I am fairly certain that the period of flight over Malaysia could be better informed. This latter element I will pursue with the limited means at my disposal.
I’m starting to feel for Australia. I get the impression Angus Houston is determined to damn well prove whether that plane is there or not so no one can acuse them of not being thorough. So there can be no reason to doubt. Geoffrey Thomas said on CNN that the area to search now is 700 x 80km. I only wish Malaysia were putting as much effort into the other vital locations. Scrutinize those parts of the flight as closely, and let’s see what comes up.
@Juanita – Houston has kept his head throughout really. He simply said it’s our best lead and they had no choice but to follow it up. It was Abbott who pretty uncharacteristically went nuclear. Did Angus no favours.
Good news, Houston has asked DSTO to have a crack at the data as well. Wish he had of done it much earlier.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/aviation/mh370-mystery-persists-as-ping-search-draws-a-blank/story-e6frg95x-1226935428695
Angus Houston has definitely conducted himself well. He appears cautious and deligent, and he certainly doesn’t squirm like someone else we know. Matty, the article in the link says they are searching in the Southern Indian Ocean in part due to the Inmarsat data. That’s a bit of an understatement. If there is nothing to be found in the data released recently, I’m thinking our only hope might be that someone, someday speaks up.
@Matty, thanks for the link. It’s indeed a bit incredible. Credit to Jeff, that he didn’t buy it from start. I’m surprised, that so many experts like David Mearns endorsed the pings.
Angus Houston can’t be blamed IMO. He had no choice but to follow up. I wonder if they had other information or calculations, which pointed to that area, too, since many were so certain, they were at the right spot.
@Rand, thanks for your thoughts on cultural relativism. I share them. And I didn’t bring it up as an excuse for the terrible information politics of the Malaysian authorities. I just wanted to point out, that this unwillingness to share even seemingly innocent facts is not necessarily an indication of guilt – they could very well be guilty of something, of course – but a general tendency to simply keep everything secret, because if nothing comes out nobody can be blamed of anything. Keep up your work on the plane’s flight over Malaysia. That’s where the mystery started after all.
Roger that, Littlefoot.
As for the pings, I, too, feel that Angus has been doing a great job, searching for the aircraft where he has been instructed to search. As for whomever has been directing/developing the search parameters, it seems that there is a unity of command issue, and that Malaysia is not heading up the search in a proper command-and-control sort of fashion, and rather leaving it largely to others. I am sure that they would reply with “We are being open and transparent and seeking help from an international team of experts.” Ok, great. But somebody still needs to play director, most especially when we are dealing with a search area now designated at 56,000 km2.
I feel a bit of a bully, constantly harping on Malaysia. So be it.
As for the analysis of the pings, whomever even had access to the relatively immediate experience of the search for Air France 447. Here, science firm Metron discounted the ping data, allowed the Bayes algorithm that they were utilizing to send them elsewhere, and they were able to locate the aircraft withn six days.
Metron’s website refers to a media appearance on CNN in April; they have since gone dark, at least as far as their media appearances re MH370 are concerned. I would think that if anyone could find the aircraft, it would be Metron.
Jeff: I will tweet you on the same, but do know why Colleen Keller at Metron has not been asked to participate? Is it perhaps a funding issue, and the search is only now being privatized?
Hi Rand, I don’t know why Colleen hasn’t been asked back — perhaps because until now everyone assumed that the basic problem of “where” had been resolved, as they’d been assured by the Australian government.
@Jeff – It’s taken longer than I thought but that uncomfortable disequilibrium starting to set in. Where is it??
Looked like a nice moment of vindication with Richard and CNN Erin?
Thanks, Jeff. And apologies for the garbled paragraph “as for the analysis of the pings…” There was to be something else there together with my reference to Metron; I would bother to repost, it translated regardless of my flub-a-dub.
Morning everyone,
Saw Thing One and Thing Two, otherwise known as Mary Schiavo and David Soucie, on CNN this morning speaking on the pings. Two interesting notions popped up into mind when hearing them. The idea that personal bias influences how we look and this notion of “over selling and under delivering” that is seen a lot in sales these days. Commentators shifting confidences aside, it seems from my biased point of view that this whole search is suffering from these things as well. Inmarsat and others got the blinders on early and then went car sales on their abilities and analysis. Taking things a bit further I look at a situation that I am currently in.
Some months ago I began the ordering process for a project that I am on. There were some special circumstances that required six weeks for delivery on particular items. So I ordered at the end of February in order to give as much time as possible to get over any hurdles in getting said items. I was given all sorts of assurances and promises initially. I checked in from time to time and given confident answers that all was well. Well, amongst other hiccups discovered recently, it turns that a key component had not arrived 72 hours before project commencement. False positive. Not only that there is some question as to whether the item can be configured to operate as required. Flawed data interpretation. My immediate supplier wasn’t much help and basically left me with a finger pointing song and dance. I happened to know who their supplier was and contacted them. Got a similar song and dance, but in what might be considered a somewhat insulting and dismissive way. So I contacted the manufacturer via one of those “info@” contacts on their web page. I figured being a holiday Monday in the U.S. that I wouldn’t get a response and when I did it would be one of those general answers from somewhere in a PR department. It turns out that the email managed to reach someone on the executive level at head office in Tel Aviv, Israel. I was given a hopeful and yet vaguely definitive response. Now that I have digressed so far, where am I going with this one?
I have multiple questions to consider that relate to the search and in general such as, what has happened to people taking responsibility and being honest when things go wrong? What has happened being able to accurately honestly say what they can and can’t do? How come nobody from a high level is standing up and advocating for the families? What happened to being able to say that you don’t know, but you’ll figure it out? Why has appearance become more important than substance? And why do we collectively accept that?
Gene has nailed it in his last paragraph. The search is indeed bereft of enlightened leadership, and there isn’t anyone in a position of power serving as an advocate for the families. A couple of people clearly need to ask themselves: what would HH the Dalai Lama do?
@Gene, good to hear from you again!
So, everybody whom you contacted, gave you vague hope instead of admitting, that something had gone wrong or admitting that they knew zilch? Trying to keep you at bay this way? Overstating and overselling? That’s indeed all too common these days. That you finally flushed someone out in Tel Aviv should give you pause, though: SI’s from different parts of the world have regular meetings there and might’ve conspired against you! 😉
Tony Abbot and others are certainly guilty of overselling the pings in this sorry case.
I would say, though, the jury on Inmarsat is still out, though. While their new info is mighty sparse, they have at least dropped a hint on how they might’ve broke symmetry. Here’s Duncan Steel’s preliminary assessment, he gave in a comment on his own website:
http://www.duncansteel.com/archives/806#comment-5783
I promised not to contradict you for three weeks after you solved my missing helicopter riddle. I think, I kept my promise more or less.If you want to extend that period, I could give you the Curious Case Of The Missing Ironman (alas, Robert Downey and Gwyneth Paltrow are not involved), which involves a transponder, which wasn’t transponding and some serious bungling.It happened at the recent Ironman race in Lanzarote, where my husband was competing for a starting position in Hawaii in his age group. I was his oncourse helper, and the case drove us bonkers for about three and a half hours.
@Rand, ha, ha, I have infinite trust in the wisdom of the Dalai Lama, his humanity and his practical down to earth approach in many situations. And he was always curious and inquisitive concerning technical topics.
But seriously, leadership which provides coordination and guidance is indeed sorely needed.
Unfortunately, the link I gave above, leads to Victor I’s comment directly below Duncan’s assessment. His comment is directly above Victor’s, at 23:39. It’s well worth reading.
Bit of reading –
http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/families-outraged-as-search-ends-in-ping-zone-after-us-navy-says-signals-were-not-from-mh370/story-fniztvnf-1226935425606#itm=taus%7Chome%7Caus_homepage_content5_most-popular%7C5%7CMP_Perth-Now%7Chomepage%7Chomepage
Acoustics –
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-05-29/curtin-university-team-researches-mh370-sounds/5487054
Slightly curious at the moment over the disposition of the Chinese govt re the Inmarsat workings. As a search member do they have access to it? If they didn’t and they wanted it they would either demand it, or hack it, as they have a lot of expertise in that area. Either way they are a govt that are generally busting out trying demonstrate their nous and capability to the outside world. They will be hard on the bit.
Going over the various comments so far from Littlefoot’s link it’s pretty clear that Inmarsat’s release was aimed mainly at shutting the pack up for a while. If it was transparency you were after you could achieve it pretty quickly I would have thought.
As long as I interpret correctly, it’s how the BFO data was built that is going to cause an issue. Going right back this was actually what was going on in this layman’s head. Compared to other flights they said? What flights, the southern arc is not even a route, why would a plane do that? The comparison was nothing like that. It was spliced – modeled etc from other planes cutting across the arcs, not using them. How they got those numbers will be where things might have gotten stretched. Looks tenuous.
@Littlefoot
I thought I had just grown particularly sensitive to over promising and under delivering. As well as the lack of personal responsibility these days. Having had many dealings with people that are full of s**t I have begun to smell contradiction or disingenuousness like bad breath on a homeless person. At least I like to think I do… If we are this frustrated, then imagine what it is like for the families.
I’ll take the Ironman challenge. However, I have some initial instincts that are battery related. They are as follows:
1) Batteries were dead. Long flight in cold cargo hold drained them.
2) Batteries were installed backwards/incorrectly.
3) Batteries weren’t installed at all.
The only other thought that just popped into mind is that the transponder and receiver were set at different frequencies. If I’m right on this particular one, then you must admit publicly that light has mass. 😀 Hawaii? Depending on which island I can offer some tips.
@Rand
A fire side chat on this subject with the Dalai Lama would very interesting. Do you think he likes Stella Artois and hot dogs? Maybe that should be tofu dogs?
@Jeff
Seeing as we are all in the contest frame of mind, how about that the three commenters that are the closest to being right on the actual location of the plane get a trip hosted by you and sponsored by Slate? Just thought… 😀
@Matty
Inmarsat is that homeless person with bad breath.
@Gene, ha, ha, no, the Mystery Of The Missing Athlet isn’t battery related. So, light has still mass and the earth is still more or less round. The Missing Ironman case is better than that. It eerily mimics an element, which was important in the mh370 case as well. That’s why I brought it up. I will write it down later today, so you (and others if they wish) can try to take it on with a sixpack in the evening. And just to exclude that possibility: my dog had nothing to do with it. He has a perfect alibi, since he was in a dog bed and breakfast in Hannover.
Though, come to think of it, there WAS a spitzdog just like him walking with his owner along the Marathon course course at the beach walk of Puerto del Carmen, where the finish line is… 😉
@Gene, different frequencies weren’t involved either.
Am to youf charming idea of going on a trip, if we come close to cracking the mystery, I think we’re in for a long wait now. Amelia-Earhard-long… 🙁
@Gene, I had no time for the Missing Ironman tonight. So , you can claim, that light has mass for another day 🙂
I like this line from Duncan Steele –
A new working hypothesis is that the apparent reboot near 18:25 UTC may have upset the calibration of the BTOs against the values when the aircraft was stationary in a known position (at the gate at KLIO, near 16:28). If this is so then if we assume (perhaps invalidly) that the BTO at 18:27 after the reboot provides a means for a rec-calibration then it would follow that all subsequent ping rings are in the wrong positions, by hundreds of kilometres.
This would be MAJOR NEWS. And it would mean that the searches in the Indian Ocean are doubly farcical.
In trying to find some small way to contribute to finding MH370, I responded to the call to implore Inmarsat to release the original first 6 data lines from start up at KL so that the wise people working with Duncan might get the information they need. I immediately received a reply from a fellow tweeter telling me to leave them alone, that they have work to do, and that ALL conspiracy theories have been debunked already. Oh how I laughed and laughed. That’s it then. It must be where they say it is. Obviously.
@Juanita –
I have had a bit of that too? One fellow I got into debate with insisted black and blue that the pings could NOT possibly be anything else and that WERE looking in the right place. He’s probably gone underground. Ed Lake, here’s lookin at you.
Matty, I don’t bother to respond or get into a debate because I feel a little sad for closed minds. I have no strong beliefs about what has happened, other than all cards must be put on the table and nothing discounted until proven to be so. I see others have taken up the call for those six lines. Once we have them, I’ll start rallying for the next thing, until all the necessary information to help find MH370 released.
@Gene The Dalai Lama would most likely very much appreciate you providing him with a hotdog and a beer, and then he would promptly give both right back to you and tell you to enjoy them. It’s kinda his MO: if you give him something, he usually gives it right back. And you now have a gift from the Dalai Lama.
@Littlefoot Your husband’s REFID chip was not functioning correctly. He didn’t activate it properly at the start, and it was boggled throughout most or all of the race. No?
@Rand, lol! No, my husband wasn’t even the missing Ironman.
It happened like this:
Since there were only 2 Hawaii slots for about 70 starters in Lanzarote in my husband’s age group, he had to finish at least second to make it for sure. Since he had researched the personal bests of his rivals for the slots, he knew, that he could make it with a little luck, especially since you have to accept and pay for the slot the very next morning. If you don’t want it, the next in line will get it. The slot plus flight and housing in Hawaii is expensive;many don’t use their slots, if they have been there before. So, it makes sense to fight until the end even for a 6th place, since with a little luck it might be good enough.
Since you can track the progress of the athlets in the net, if you have their numbers, my husband and a friend had the bright idea to track down his progress and the progress of his closest competitors and phone me. Every athlet has a transponder chip strapped around the ankle, which initiates a handshake at certain waypoints and his/her intermediate time is recorded. I was to stand at an icecream parlour (my choice) at the promenade of the marathon course. The course was roughly ten kilometers long;so the athlets had to run up and down 4 times. Whenever I’d see my husband approaching, I was supposed to tell him his position and how far away his rivals were. That’s legal btw, but the athlets themselves aren’t allowed to carry cellphones or other communication devices. Since my husband is a great runner, a passable cyclist but an awful swimmer, he spends most of the course catching up and coming from behind. After the swim of 3,8 km he was in 47th position, after the cycling course of 180 km he was already in 9th position. And after the first waypoint of the marathon track it was pretty clear, that he was running faster than everybody else in his age group and that only two or three were probably out of reach. But the puzzling thing was, that the souvereign leader of the group after the bike race (he had in fact been much faster than expected at that point) suddenly had no intermediate times posted any longer. Normally that means, there have been no further handshakes and the athlet has dropped out for whatever reason.In this case the athet’s race number should disappear after a while from the tracking website. That would’ve been great news for my husband, because it opened up the possibility of a third place finish, which virtually guaranteed a slot for Hawaii. But the number of the leading athlet didn’t disappear at all. Even after a couple of waypoints he was still listed as the leader of the race, which led to end less speculations between me and my contact in Germany. We couldn’t explain it at all. Was the guy still competing, maybe with a broken transponder, or had he dropped out somewhere along the first 10 km of the marathon track? But why then was he still listed as the leader of his age group? At the appropriate time I went to the finish line. I wanted to see, if the guy came in. Though they called out the names of most finishers with a booming ‘CONGRATULATION’, I could’t say for sure, because so many came in at the time. When my husband came in half an hour later, completely spent but more than happy with his performance, I told him, that as far far as we knew he was in fourth place and had run (again as far as we knew) the fastest marathon. He was happy, but unsure about his chances for Hawaii, because after a couple of minutes, he was still ranked 4th, and the elusive guy with the missing handshakes was still listed in first position. Then I told him the name of the guy. My husband started to laugh and could immediately clear up everything without needing any further information.
So what had happened, and did my husband finish fourth or did he make it as number three onto the podium at the trophy ceremony?
I can tell, though, that the appropriate number of athlets in front of him declined a Hawaii slot. After years of trying he finally made it and we will travel to Kona in October for the first time in our lives 🙂
@ littlefoot
Well ,I think since the electronic transponder failed or was glitching on the listed leader of race then there is really no way to ever validate where he finished or if his route to finish line was on course .. .all we will ever know is your hubby’s in 😉 .
@Tdm, thanks for guessing, but after our friend in Germany and me marvelled for three hours, what exactly had happened to the guy, my husband knew immediately the answer as soon as I told him. As I wrote the other, some serious bungling by someone came into play.
I have been a silent reader but would like to respond to Littlefoot’s mystery. Actually my husband offers this up. The time posted was actually the winning time of the previous year. It was posted as a reference point.
@Littlefoot
I’m gonna say your husband came in third and the person who was listed as first was displayed in the wrong age category or perhaps they were even first place overall. What do I win?
Littlefoot.
Although I’ve been a silent reader for months, I had to take a shot at your ironman mystery. I went on the results website. The 4th place winner was from Great Britain. Since you mentioned Germany I deduced that your husband must have been moved up to 3rd. While I was mulling over what to do next, I read your story to my husband and without a pause he said the first place name and time must have been from last year’s winner. They may have been putting it up as a time reference for the runners. So I’m going with that.
@Gene, not quite yet. You guessed correctly, that my husband knew something I didn’t know, but the missing guy was listed in the correct age group and he didn’t win the overall race. He was fast, actually quite a bit faster than he normally is after the bike race, but he couldn’t have been fast enough to win the overall race. And that wouldn’t explain the missing handshakes from his transponder anyway. The mess up was a lot freakier than that, eerily reminiscent of something, which happened in connection with MH 370.
Clearly, this needs to be tackled with another 6pack. 😉
But I’m really looking forward to Hawaii, and since it’s such a long journey, we will stay a few more days after the race, maybe visit another island. All tips and suggestions will be appreciated.
@Littlefoot The Ironman ACARS was shut down? He was mistaken for a pod of dolphins? His transponder wasn’t waterproof and fried itself? He wrapped himself in tinfoil and shielded his transmissions?
On another note I saw this monster Unimog type thing roll through town this evening and it had a name like Wasserwerfer on it? What could it be? Something to do with water? It looked cool and I want one.
If you choose to visit another island in Hawai’i I would consider Kauai. I have spent time there and it is quite nice on the south shore in winter. Not as busy as Maui, but it has been busier lately. If you like hiking you could go along the Na Pali coast. Also the Waimea canyon is something to see. Polihale is interesting too. Food? Puka Dog and Bubba’a Burgers are a MUST!
Oh hurry up Gene! She’s killing me with the suspense! I did love the one with the mini helicopter & your dog Ittlefoot, I don’t think I’ll ever forget that story ♡ @Jeff thanks for tweeting the new York times story, it’s not easy to stay up-to-date. Glad Matty keeps us posted as well! If the media backs off all hope may be gone for the families.
@Littlefoot I forgot to mention that a good way to go is vacation rental by owner. Saves a bit both on accommodation and meals. On that note I should mention Tomkats Grille and Keoki’s.