AirAsia Tail Location Mystery: Solved?

Bill Holland mapIndependent Group member Bill Holland appears to have sorted out the head-scratcher concerning the location of the QZ8501 tail section. His explanation jibes with where we’d expect the plane’s fuselage to wind up, given the fact that just before it disappeared from radar it was descending with alarming speed. I’m pasting here Bill’s recent email in toto:

I think I have the tail GPS coordinates figured out…

I kept finding references to the tail being found that translate as:
The mapping experts who are in MGS Ship Geo Survey finds it precisely in the coordinate 03.3839S (South latitude) and 109.4343E (East Longitude).

But, I searched and found a version that seems to make more sense:
Aga pun menyampaikan titik koordinatnya, yakni: Latitude 3;38;39S, Longitude 109;43;43 E.
…in English:
Aga also convey the point coordinates, namely: Latitude 3; 38; 39s, Longitude 109; 43; 43 E.

The numbers being quoted are correct, … Only the punctuation was wrong!

-03° 38′ 39″ 109° 43′ 43″ (degrees minutes seconds)
This is about 2.5nm South East of the last SSR/ADS-B location (Google Maps measures 3.03 statute miles = 2.63nm)

In my screen grab [above]:
– the lower yellow start marke the tail section (and the blue annotation is the distance from the purple star)
– the purple circle is the last lat/lon from the SSR (ADS-B),
– the purple star is the approx location from the primary radar image.
– The red box is supposed to be “Most Probable Area 2”,
– the black tilted rectangular outline is the left (Western) section of the “Underwater Search Area”.
– The yellow diagonal line is Route M635 between TAVIP to RAFIS.
– The black diagonal line is the FR24 estimated flight path (the inverted teardrops are individual extrapolations from FR24 after the last valid ADS-B data data they received)

[ignore the white square, the blue square, the Northern yellow star, and the green diagonal line]

-Bill

Really, it’s remarkable that searchers didn’t scour this location right away, and instead spent a week searching far down-current. There appears to have been some confusion between the nature of floating debris, which disperses as it’s carried by currents, and debris on the seabed, which will tend to remain where it falls, more or less directly under the point where it impacts the water.

The latest news is that preparations are underway to raise the tail section and hoist it onto a ship. Hopefully, the black boxes will be found within, and the cause of the accident one step closer to being revealed.

347 thoughts on “AirAsia Tail Location Mystery: Solved?”

  1. @airlandseaman

    I think the 45,000 feet number was mentioned in a press release relative to the military radar track data. It has been around ever since. I seem to recall reports of altitudes between 45,000 feet and 12,000 feet…

    Yes, no one would survive long at 35,000. There are rare cases of people climbing Everest (29,000+ feet) without supplemental oxygen. Not normal humans by any measure.

  2. A couple of thoughts from a tiny but devoted peanut in the gallery:

    Spencer, when you repeatedly present your Shah scenario (and the details therein) as FACT, and dismiss all other possibilities as preposterous, you come across as an arrogant fanatic with an agenda rather than a perceptive analyst. This only serves to discredit you and whatever astute observations and insights you may have.

    Jeff et al., thank you for this well-written, riveting, and deeply thoughtful blog.

  3. @Matty:

    “It comes back to Dennis’s favourite gnawed old bone – what was the bloody motive for doing that?”

    Right. And in that regard:

    @Jeff: “In criminal cases, prosecutors are not required to establish motive. I think this is a sound principle. Motives can be inscrutable.”

    Not required from prosecution, but remember — the prosecutor also has the burden of proof — which, in criminal cases, is Beyond a Reasonable Doubt. It is the highest, most difficult standard to prove. You just need one juror not to be convinced. So yes, while motive is inscrutable, it’s also a hell of a hill to climb to meet the required burden of proof without establishing motive.

    @airlandseaman: “Can someone please explain why anyone flying the plane would attempt to climb to 45,000 feet for any reason whatsoever?”

    From a previous post of mine:

    “I’d like to draw your attention to the following:

    “As far as I can tell, there have been no updates (or corrections) to this article — meaning that no one, from Boeing or elsewhere, appears to have come forward and stated that it was impossible for MH370 to have flown at FL45 — beyond it’s certified maximum. Bradsher sure never says it, nor does he even remotely imply that is the case. But he does lay out, based on conversations with experts (and with specificity), what would happen to those in the main cabin if the plane were depressurized at 45K: a total useful consciousness of seconds. The exact same thing my cousin the T7 pilot told me.” http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1sd7gtn

    Let me also say (with the huge caveat that I did not have the weight/load info to share at that time) that when I told my cousin that it was reported that 370 flew to 45FL (briefly), he did not push back (and I would have expected him to) and say that was impossible. And in subsequent conversations, he’s not changed his view.

    @Dennis: “As far as hijackers in wheel wells and the like, why would they fly the plane into the SIO?”

    Strongly agree. And in that regard:

    @Victor: “The flight either ended in the SIO or somebody did a good job of making it look that way.”

    And if it’s the latter (and achieved via some kind of spoof), then where is the plane and what was the intended objective of perpetrators? Was the taking merely to get what was on 370 (cargo of a human or inanimate variety)? Was it to use the plane in a 9/11 style hit on the Petronas Towers in KL — and that failed — or was thwarted? (recall, Emirates’ Tim Clark appeared to allude to this.) Did the plane end up in a chop chop somewhere? Or was it taken with the intent to use it again — possibly as a WMD? (recall, I laid out that scenario here previously).

    Which all takes us back to MOTIVE.

    @Victor: “perhaps we can brainstorm about ways we can get more data. That might be the most productive activity at this point.”

    Agree and a very constructive suggestion. But how do you get more data from the parties who hold it, who also appear (given all of the happenings to date) to have a vested ‘interest’ in not disclosing it?

    Let me suggest that if folks here have any connections with insiders who might have information about what is really going down (and a conscience), now would be the time to start working on them.

    And where to dig?

    Just remember ‘Deep Throat’. His simple advice still holds true: “Follow the money.”

  4. @JudyP

    I have no agenda. You are welcome to put forth another scenario. IMO they are all verging on preposterous, other than Shah being the sole actor responsible for this tragedy.

    While there is certainly room for debate as to the means to an end (see Dennis et al.), I stand firmly by my assertion that ANY scenario not implicating Zaharie is fantasy.

    There are too many reasons to delve into on this blog as to why I believe this to be the case, but suffice to say (arrogance this is not), I would literally bet my life on it.

    Please demonstrate where I have presented as FACT anything other than opinion.

    It’s called conjecture. What is your agenda?

  5. @Victor: “The flight either ended in the SIO or somebody did a good job of making it look that way.”

    The somebody is this case is the IG and the ATSB. There is nothing unique about the fit you have obtained. Where is the cart and where is the horse?

    If you first assume FL35 and a speed appropriate to that flight level, you can develop a best fit that ends in the SIO. If you assume a different flight level and lower appropriate speed, the best fit path simply rotates North to accommodate the shorter paths needed to meet the arc crossing times at the lower speed. BFO “tags” along as the fight path rotates North, the angle to the satellite decreases.

    The SIO path is a result of your assumption, not a consequence of the data.

  6. Nihonmama:

    I don’t seem to be making much progress here. You seem determined to miss (or ignore) the point. Let me spell it out very clearly. Time to unconsciousness at 35,000 feet is <60 seconds. Time to unconsciousness at 45,000 feet is also <60 seconds. Given these facts, why would anyone (attempt to) climb to 45,000 feet if the purpose was to cause all on-board to lose conciseness? Answer: No one would ever do that. If a climb took place, it must have been for some other reason.

    This does not mean a climb did not happen. The available evidence does not support the early claims about a climb, but it does not rule it out completely.

  7. Airlandseaman,

    Re 45,000 ft. A few possible explanations (no order with regard to probability):

    1. Mechanical failure triggered by the turn at IGARI towards BITOD.
    2. Malfunction of electronics / altimeters.
    3. Disorientation of the pilots as a result of some event.
    4. A desperate attempt to extinguish fire.
    5. An intentional attempt to make crew and passengers incapacitated faster than it would happen at 35,000 ft.
    6. Error in radar data.

  8. Dennis,

    No, here I should disagree with you. Lower airspeeds require CCW-curved trajectory, while higher airspeed requires CW-curved trajectory to fit BTO & BFO. The only ‘straight’ trajectory that fits BTO and BFO corresponds to approximately 190-260 m/s airspeed interval, subject to assumed position at 19:41 arc, constrained by the distance from the last known location.

  9. Oleksandr:

    None of those scenarios make any sense to me, especially #5, which as I have already pointed out many times is ridiculous. If you don’t believe me, go take a chamber ride (like soaring pilots do to prep for wave flights), and you will see first-hand what happens.

    The difference in time to unconsciousness at 35K vs. 45K is a few seconds…a small fraction of the time it takes to climb from 35K to 45K feet. It is simply ridiculous to spend 10 minutes struggling to climb 10,000 feet (well above the service ceiling) to speed up unconsciousness by 10-12 seconds.

  10. @airlandseaman:

    “You seem determined to miss (or ignore) the point.

    why would anyone (attempt to) climb to 45,000 feet if the purpose was to cause all on-board to lose conciseness?”

    I not only get the point, I discussed it (early on) with an airline Captain who also has many hours in the 777.

    The answer to your question (and his exact point) should be obvious, but let me state it clearly since it eludes some: TO TAKE OUT THE PAX AND CREW.

    If you’re a hijacker (and assuming those on board are not needed to demand a ransom), do you want an aircraft full of people with the will to live alive and kicking in the main cabin? Recall what happened to UA Flight 93.

    “No one would ever do that.”

    Really? Is that an opinion or a fact?

    Tragically, that’s also the same kind of limited thinking that drove a legion of “smart” folks to dismiss out of hand, the idea that people would hijack a passenger airplane and fly it into a building.

    So perhaps you should consider re-phrasing your assertion:

    “No one would do that – except someone with criminal intent.”

    “This does not mean a climb did not happen. The available evidence does not support the early claims about a climb, but it does not rule it out completely.”

    Which is exactly the point.

  11. @Oleksandr

    Rotating to the North as I stated is rotating counter-clockwise. If that is not how you took it, I can assure you that is what I meant. Slower speeds will move the path up and to the East.

  12. @airlandseaman:

    And let me add – the reason to go to 45FL (per the pilot I talked to) would be to incapacitate everyone QUICKLY. Read: in about 15 seconds.

  13. As stated previously here, there are four possible hijack’ scenarios:

    1. Captain and 1st Officer, in collusion, or one of them.

    2. The Captain and/or 1st Officer, at the direction of a hijacker(s).

    3. Someone else on the plane (but all are supposedly “cleared” by INTERPOL.)

    4. A remote takeover of the plane:
    http://t.co/FP1jVOTITu

    And yes, people have been screaming (at least on Twitter) that there’s no evidence that this ‘feature’ has been deployed on the B777. But as friends in aerospace have said to me, whether it is or not, no one’s going to confirm it.

  14. A thought that came to my mind when I first saw the radar trace of the turn-back near IGARI: a desperate struggle for the controls between the pilot(s) and one or more offenders.

  15. Nihonmama:

    Please explain your new math. How do people die faster by climbing for 10-15 minues, then opening a valve, vs. opening the valve at 35,000?

  16. Airlandseaman,

    I can’t recall exactly, but I think I saw somewhere estimates from 1 to 3 minutes at 35,000 ft, depending on health conditions of a person. If your estimate <60 seconds in both cases is correct, than probably you are right with regard to #5.

    Could you elaborate a bit more why you think other reasons do not make sense?

  17. Dennis,

    Ok, I probably misunderstood you. I thought you meant a “straight line” rotated counter-clockwise (CCW) rather than a curve that is curved CCW…

  18. Airlandseaman – regarding media contacts, I recommended a while ago that some of you guys strike something up with Greg Sheridan, an excellent journalist for the Australian.

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/columnists/greg-sheridan

    He’s in the old mold with amazing contacts in defence and foreign affairs both here and abroad. He is the only guy I would take seriously here atm.

    As far as I understand it all the early altitude figures are just media artifacts that have been discarded. Virtual fiction, like a lot of stuff about Shah. You’d spend a bit of fuel going to 45?

    Spencer – Captains don’t sit robotic behind the stick for the dog hours, they hand over, stretch the legs a bit, lie down, chat some hostie, read, you name it. See AF447. Breaking with the Malaysian tower is not a completely illogical time to do that. Put it this way, first out of the seat is normally the most senior. He’s the OIC.

  19. A steep zoom to FL450 (or thereabouts) COULD achieve the following. Prevent flight crew and Fariq from being able to access supplemental O2 canisters.

    A zoom climb as depicted would also produce an excitatory response (panic) further reducing the time until LOC (loss of consciousness).

    It also may have occurred in conjunction with the turn at IGARI.

    I’m sure he had his reasons…and the 60 second figure at FL350 is dubious.

    In fact, we just had the case of a stowaway in a wheel well surviving for 5+ hours at similar altitudes.

  20. @airlandseaman:

    “Please explain your new math. How do people die faster by climbing for 10-15 minues, then opening a valve, vs. opening the valve at 35,000?”

    Not new math. It’s information obtained from a highly experienced person who flies heavy commercial aircraft for a living.

    And as he explained to me, taking out everyone in the main cabin at a lower altitude with a depressurization, would certainly be possible – but it would take longer. And interestingly, in the example he used (25FL), he said that the pax could survive a depressurization at that altitude.

    I didn’t ask how long it would take to kill people with a depressurization at 35FL, because my question to him specifically addressed the possibility of 45FL (because that altitude was reported) and IF that occurred, what would likely would have been the reason to do so — in a hijacker scenario.

  21. @Spencer, I have no agenda and no idea what happened to MH370. I certainly don’t rule out your scenario. But I do tend to view your comments with skepticism because they’re full of imagined motives, situations, and events expressed as facts. (You may know they’re conjecture, but that’s not how you write.) I was trying to say that if you want more respect for your heartfelt opinions, you might look for more accurate ways of presenting them.

    Enough unsolicited advice from me! Deepest thanks to you and everyone else for giving so much time and energy to this cause.

  22. @Matty

    Still unclear as to what your point is.

    I will remind you, however, that Shahs voice has been identified by both family members and colleagues as the voice make the final transmission to KLATCC.

    Interestingly, he failed to read back the frequency and then also failed to check in with HCM. Hmmm.

  23. Btw, does anybody here know how eventual loss of hydraulic fluid at one wing only can affect maneuverability and stability of the aircraft?

  24. @All

    I apologize for my tone. I realize full well that it is laced with emotion and can come across as omniscient and/or arrogant.

    Believe me, this is not my intent. I’ll work on more restraint in future posts. Sorry.

    Taking a break.

  25. Spencer – maybe he failed to check in with Vietnam because he had handed over. The boundary is not an illogical place to do it. We don’t know these things and in your scenario as Judy says there are lots of loose details galvanized into solidity by your will alone.

    A step zoom to FL450? There is no solid evidence of anything like it is there? Anymore than he went down to 5000 and threw it around like an F16. Even the radar altitude data has been tossed as far as I know?

  26. Dennis: With reference to your Christmas Island scenario, can you explain why this skilled and experienced captain, with sim practice for his island, would carefully select the flight path, but then make two fundamental errors (i) not realising that an approach to land into wind would require positioning to the north of Christmas Island, and (ii) flying way too far east and running out of fuel before getting close.

  27. Hi Flitzer_Flyer,

    I wondered about these points myself. Turns out the North end of the runway is surrounded by an amphitheater of trees which would serve to hide the aircraft from virtually the entire island, and which also makes a North to South landing a bit more difficult. The winds were quite light that day, and it is unclear if Shah would even know the direction on the surface. At that time of year, the wind is usually slightly from the Northwest.

    As far as fuel range, I can only assume that his simulation was slightly flawed. He certainly wanted as little fuel on board for that landing as possible since the aircraft had considerable passenger and luggage weight. The landing was doable, but not trivial either.

    I have never seen published which islands were discovered on Shah’s simulator. Are you aware of this information appearing anywhere? If so, a link would be much appreciated.

  28. Dennis – There is nothing official on the IO airstrips-simulator to my knowledge. Just investigation leaks with unnamed sources.

  29. Jeff- another good exercize if it could be done would be to head out to the priority area and detonate a charge to mimic the energy of a 777 hitting the water at around M1 and see if the marine listening devices off Fremantle and Cape Leeuwin pick anything up. I reckon they should have from an adjacent position at 1500kms away. We certainly know they were working.

    Then the Fugro boys could swoop around and collect all the fish, and maybe even have some whale sushi.

  30. @DenisW @airlanseaman @spencer

    kindly please again, may somebody exclude/consider that one reason to climb may be also to get higher altitude = energy for following better GLIDE? Is possible that whole plane is capable to stay working well in FL450? Is there some safe headroom in specifications? (remember what Eagle in Apollo 13 case did finally, etc.)

  31. While some folks here are still obsessed with Christmas (it was a month ago, folks – let’s move on), I’ve been grappling with an interesting puzzle – if a Boeing 777 is commanded to fly a particular magnetic heading, which way will it actually go (i.e., what will be the true heading)?

    The Ulich report on the “Location of MH370” gave what I thought was a sensible answer: “Knowledge of the magnetic declination along a flight route is necessary in order to generate the magnetic track and magnetic heading routes. NOAA provides such data … I used the 2015 data since it most closely matches the 2014 MH370 flight date.”

    Flitzer_Flyer has informed us that the navigation system on a plane like a Boeing 777 will calculate everything in true coordinates and then convert to magnetic at the last moment. This conversion is done via “Magvar tables”, which give the magnetic variation at different locations on earth. However, the variation changes with time.

    Which brings up the question – how current were the magvar tables on 9M-MRO? The aircraft was delivered in 2002. Apparently these tables are not updated as often as we might think, and most assuredly one should not use a 2015 table:

    http://www.boeing.com/commercial/aeromagazine/articles/qtr_04_09/4/

    “MagVar tables need to be updated periodically to ensure their accuracy since the Earth’s magnetic field is constantly changing. Responsibility for MagVar updates falls to the airlines, depending on their areas of operation. While the most recent MagVar tables were updated in 2005, some airlines are still using the 1980 version of the tables.”

    Ouch! While the variation with time is not a game-changer, it does mean that if we want to compare route calculations for routes based on a magnetic heading, it is necesary to specify the year of the magvar tables (or equivalent) that we use.

    According to an FAA NOTAM (4/8471), it is possible that 9M-MRO would not have been allowed to land under certain conditions at Anchorage, Alaska due to outdated Magvar tables.

  32. @SK999

    As Dave Barry so eloquently put it – “the only thing magnetism is good for is sticking things to your refrigerator.”

  33. @Dennis

    So he was going to land on Christmas and do what? Proclaim the sons of the sultans criminals and then fly home.

    Claim asylum but fly everyone else on to Bejing, since he’s such a sensitive guy?

    Stash the a/c and begin a new life?

    Ring up the media and make his case for…

    Enlighten me, as I seem to be missing the main thrust of your case.

    Thanks

  34. So is it common practice in Malaysia for ‘moderate’ religious leaders to shake down major corporations like MAS, and demand ‘prayer money’ for safe passage for their planes? Which minister with links to MAS dismissed these brazen demands? http://heliconiaweblog.com/2014/03/13/transkrip-temuramah-dengan-sheikh-nazim-al-haqqan
    This cheeky sheikh was a major inspiration for Kapten Norudin, a good friend of Zaharie. Is it normal to let an eccentric like KN, wacky preacher/ex-senior MAS 777 pilot, co-own a company with the Malaysian gov, and through this company,”Jet Premier One’, lease a lavishly renovated private jet to Najib at vast expense, all paid for, of course, by the Malaysian gov? Sometimes KN pilots it too –all over the world, with full diplomatic privileges, with full security clearances. Prayer services before every flight. After the disappearance of MH370, he made multiple TV appearances, saying that the plane could return by Friday, if Malaysians repented, committed to funding some religious buildings, and prayed hard enough. This is accepted by the press as being normal from a government employee.
    A senior officer at Butterworth appeals to the media that washable ink being used by BN to enable illegal duplicate voting in the last election — a subject much publicized by Zaharie before a relative FB silence until his disappearance. The officer is court-marshaled, smeared, and his military career is now over.
    The Altantuyaa Incident. Sickening.
    With the current ruthless, paranoid, corrupt leadership in Malaysia, operating with little international censure, is it really likely that Zaharie, a respected senior pilot at MAS, would be allowed to continue his political rhetoric without threats of suspension and sedition charges – or worse? After all, whoever squeaks against Najib or BN is arrested for sedition – why would Zaharie be immune? Could Zaharie have been the victim of surveillance, harassment, and threatened with blackmail, suspension and jail by the government or MAS? Who could he turn to? What if he was being blackmailed by a terror group to force a prisoner release– who could he turn to — surely not his government oppressors? There are many possibilities here, perhaps the truth is somewhere in-between “Zaharie as Villain”, and “Zaharie as Hero”.
    One thing for sure, inarguably, many of these ‘mystery’ crashes, occur after one of the pilots has got into big trouble at work. (other similarities too which I cannot state online). Is MAS or the Malaysian gov being pressured by these recent hacks to come clean?
    We, and the NoK, are reduced to begging for crumbs of data –leaks, hacks, some old-fashioned investigative reporting — come on journalists, where are you? Digging into this mess could make your career! There are many boffins here ready and willing to help with the tech stuff.
    And Spencer has put cash on the table…..

  35. So what’s the go? On the IS sympathizer grapevine they might be claiming MH370 as their work? That wouldn’t be surprising at all. Also wouldn’t be surprising if they were right.

  36. Sk999,

    “I’ve been grappling with an interesting puzzle – if a Boeing 777 is commanded to fly a particular magnetic heading, which way will it actually go (i.e., what will be the true heading)?”

    If you mean AP based on magnetic heading, it will be a CCW-curved trajectory ending in the area around “Chinese Ping”. I looked at this kind of scenarios a long time ago, in June-July. “Magnetic rhumb” ends at 99.3E, 28.7S:

    http:(slash)(slash)www(dot)duncansteel(dot)com/archives/899/comment-page-2#comment-8726

    Btw, NOAA provides Fortran code to calculate magnetic fields at any location & time, or you can simply use their online calculator. I think links were included at Duncan’s blog.

    However, it was later clarified that the magnetic heading is for display only. Unless you have explanation why magnetic heading was used, this scenario appears to be dead.

    What I am preoccupied right now is AT scenario, which ends up in the same area. It is a way more complex than AP, but it slowly takes its shape.

  37. @I’d rather not say:

    “Is MAS or the Malaysian gov being pressured by these recent hacks to come clean?”

    No fan of black hats, but let us hope.

  38. sk999,

    Here is a couple of links, where you can get geomagnetic declination, in case you are still interested in magnetic heading scenarios:

    http:(slash)(slash)www(dot)ngdc.noaa.gov/geomag-web/#igrfgrid

    www(dot)ngdc(dot)noaa(dot)gov(slash)geomag/WMM/calculators.shtml

  39. Could I ask a favour of Dr Bobby Ulich.

    I was very impressed by his original paper and follow ups (most notably his model reactions to criticisms of his paper). He made a very compelling case for consideration of a new area a long way away from where searching is taking place. His recommended area was very small 640 sq NM or 3.7% of the “official” area.

    Since then he has modified at least one of his main original conjectures – that there was just one course correction.

    Could he kindly summarise how this modification (and any others arising from post October disclosure of additional data) affects his October conclusion

    “My finding is that the MH370 route began with a southward turn off the extended military radar track at 18:27 UTC, transitioning into a great circle path directly over Maimun Saleh Airport on Weh Island at an initial bearing of 192.3 degrees, and ending at the 00:19 UTC
    handshake arc at geodetic coordinates (40.24S, 83.53E).”

    Thanks very much

  40. Why some one made the plane to c;limb to FL430? The simplest explanation is no one. Consider the pilots did not aware their plane was climbing since the pitot tubes that were used to measure altitude were all blocked by iced. The readings remained stagnant although the plane gained altitude. Engines sensors that controlled the RPMs to suit with the correct pressure ratio took the readings from some other means. Last time they realized the plane was already nosed down due to stall. During the stall the pilots got badly injured and became unconscious. Auto pilot disengaged since it was not under normal scenario. That for sure. Think about what will happen next?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.