Well, we’ve been saying it here for a long time, but at last the ATSB has ackowledged the inevitable truth: the failure to locate any wreckage on the seabed in the southern Indian Ocean will mean that MH370 must have been piloted until the very end.
To quote today’s story in the Independent:
“the possibility that someone was at the controls of that aircraft on the flight and gliding it becomes a more significant possibility, if we eliminate all of the current search area.” [Martin Dolan, chief commissioner of the ATSB, told The Times.] “In a few months time, if we haven’t found it, then we’ll have to be contemplating that one of the much less likely scenarios ends up being more prominent. Which is that there were control inputs into that aircraft at the end of its flight.”
To be clear, Dolan wasn’t saying that they’ve ruled out the ghost ship yet, but seems to be preparing the public for this eventuality when the search runs out of money and time this June. But the fact that he said it all suggests that he views it as quite a likely outcome.
The only “much less likely” scenario that Dolan pointed to was the idea that a suicidal pilot might have flown to seventh arc within the current search area, then held the plane in a glide after it ran out of fuel so that it wound up some distance beyond. If such was indeed the case, then the area to be searched would be too large to be economically viable. This led to some catastrophic headlines, such as Bloomberg‘s “Missing Malaysia Jet MH370 Weeks Away From Keeping Secrets Forever.” But this is a tad presumptious, in my opinion.
Though Dolan didn’t ennumerate them, there now three scenarios that could match the data we have in hand.
1) The one Dolan described, which we might call “straight and fast.”
2) Another controlled-flight-into-the-southern-ocean scenario, which I’ll call “slow and curvy.” This would result in the plane ending up further to the northeast, and would necessitate an even larger search area.
3) A “spoof” scenario, in which sophisticated hijackers tampered with the satellite communications system and hijacked the plane to the north.
While some at the ATSB (and maybe within the IG, too) might be wearing long faces over Dolan’s admission, in my estimation it marks the most hopeful turn in the case in a very long time. As David Gallo recently pointed out on Twitter, the ATSB search hasn’t failed to locate the plane; it’s succeeded in proving where the plane isn’t. The most likely scenario — the scenario that we’ve been told is the only reasonable one — the scenario that we’ve been told will imminently be proven correct — has been falsified. And that brings us one very big step closer to finding the truth.
The illusory “sure thing” is over. (The wonderful film The Big Short, which I saw over the weekend and which I think any MH370 obsessive will find very entertaining, at one point quotes Mark Twain: ‘It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into trouble. It’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so.’) It may make some people uncomfortable, but we now know that whatever happened to MH370, it was weird and unprecedented.
Now we can get down to work. I hope that now that the broad community of MH370 researchers, and especially the hardworking and intelligent folks at the ATSB, can embrace a new spirit of enthusiastic skepticism and turn their attention to fully evaluating all of the possibilities.
There is some important information coming down the pike that will be very illuminating, and I am very excited about pressing this story forward in the weeks and months ahead.
jeffwise, what were the assumptions of those people regarding A/P pitch mode and A/T mode?
And of course, no result can ever be “rock solid” until the FDR is recovered.
Did you really mean:
Disingenuous: lacking in frankness, candor, or sincerity; falsely or hypocritically ingenuous; insincere ?
@Gysbreght, I guess what I’m trying to say is that if you try to find an autothrottle mode to match winds aloft and the various autopilot modes described, you can’t do it. But like I said, I’d be delighted if you or anyone else wanted to dive in and have a go.
As for the word “disingenuous,” I feel that the author mentioned was trying to create the impression that there were “ghost ship” scenarios which resulted in endpoints northeast of the current search area, and that he should have known better.
@AM2: Based on private conversations I have had with Florence de Changy, the evidence suggests the recovered flaperon was indeed from 9M-MRO and not a previously replaced part.
@Oleksandr: You seem confused about what was clearly presented in the timeline, with ample references to news items. Others here seem to grasp it. Perhaps there is a language barrier as English does not seem to be your native language.
You claim I have personal issues with Asians and Muslims. I unequivocally reject your unfounded and false accusation. I also refuse to be politically correct in the search for answers.
@Trip said, “Your analysis of the 7th arc with 0 fpm vertical and 0 BFO shows an endpoint in Tibet/Xinzhang). Your map also seems to indicate that a southern landing is hard (-5k fpm vertical) and a northern landing is soft (0 fpm vertical). I’m not sure why we are discussing a glide in the south where the BFO indicates a rapid descent.”
A landing along the northern part of the 7th arc would imply the BFO values were spoofed between 18:40 and 00:11 and the flaperon was planted. Until there is more evidence, that is a difficult pill for most to swallow. The failure of the underwater search to date increases the probability of a scenario that includes a BFO spoof and a flaperon plant, but in no way proves it.
@GuradedDon
Thanks for the fuel info. I came across the ultrasound reference on PPRUNE as well, but no mention was made of the manufacturer or the accuracy. I assume 1% is relative to the full load of fuel (like an A/D converter 1% accuracy refers to 1% of the full range).
Do you know if the ultrasound technique is used as the trigger for the warning or is actually what is used to display fuel remaining in the cockpit? My investigation lead me to believe that the cockpit display was based on integrated information from accurate flow meters, and not level sensing in the tanks. The integrated usage was simply subtracted from a fuel starting point input manually by a pilot after fuel was loaded.
Oddly that ultrasound reference distracted me into ultrasonic wind measuring (no rotating little cups like I have on my personal weather station). Made me hike out to a forest service remote weather station to take a look at one up close. Funny how a little thing can spiral into a minor crusade.
Also on PPRUNE there was an extended discussion on anomalies regarding 777 fuel remaining that never reached what I would call a conclusion. I’ll see if I can find it again. As I recall, the numbers were not big enough for me to think it was a factor in MH370.
BTW, Smiths Aerospace is now part of General Electric.
@Don
Here is the PPRUNE reference I mentioned.
http://www.pprune.org/archive/index.php/t-372917.html
@Oleksandr
Relative to your point about communication at the end of the flight.
The only place within range of the VHF radios near my map pin was CI, and that radio is not manned except for scheduled traffic (I am told). So it may be that a VHF attempt was made, but there was no one who could hear it.
Also the PIC would assume that the ELT’s would provide position info on contact with the water. We all know that did not happen in any scenario.
Bottom line is that it cannot be known what actually happened with comms at the end of the flight.
Dennis,
Why not SATCOM?
Also HF, which did not work presumably due to adverse weather conditions…
ELT is not reliable in case of water crash, so it would be reasonable to activate it manually shortly before crash if there was such an opportunity. An experienced pilot would likely know about this.
Victor,
A man should do what he does best. I prefer to read your technical reports.
If you consider a semi-ghost* flight, the PIC could have stepped up the altitude earlier but was not available to glide the A/C after fuel exhaustion.
This would extend the fuel range to support Dr. Ulich’s model as the ATSB 12/3/2015 update states: “Applying the assumption that a series of step- climbs8 had been performed during cruise, produced a range greater than that required to reach the region of interest on the arc.”
*semi-ghost: MH370 became a ghost flight a few hours (maybe 4-6 hours) after the FMT
@DennisW
“The only place within range of the VHF radios near my map pin was CI, and that radio is not manned except for scheduled traffic (I am told). So it may be that a VHF attempt was made, but there was no one who could hear it.”
well..that’s another plus (or at least one minus less) for CI theory
@Oleksandr
“Why not SATCOM?
Also HF, which did not work presumably due to adverse weather conditions…
ELT is not reliable in case of water crash, so it would be reasonable to activate it manually shortly before crash if there was such an opportunity. An experienced pilot would likely know about this.”
the pilot maybe had a few folks on his shoulders at the moment…not really a situation where you could think rationally
@Oleksandr
Yes, SATCOM would be a possibility, but would not be something the pilot would normally use for such a purpose.
I generally agree with you that the apparent lack of communication at the end of the flight is a weak point for scenarios that advocate the intention to not harm the PAX.
@jeffwise
Thanks; I didn’t know there was an engine thrust issue with the northeastern paths. This is exactly the kind of thing I was wondering about.
I certainly didn’t mean to come across as disingenuous. I only started learning about this investigation a few weeks ago, so some of the details that are obvious to most people on this forum are things I am just now starting to grasp. However, having re-read my post I can see how it might have given the impression that I was preparing to push a viewpoint I knew was indefensible rather than that I was asking an honest question (it was the latter).
As to the debris inconsistencies, you’ve now got me thinking that flaperon may be emitting a rather fishy odor (pun intended).
@VictorI and jeffwise
Thanks for your replies about the flaperon. It will be very interesting to see what is said (if anything) about the damage and barnacles etc. in the March report. It would be much preferable to get a full report directly from the French investigators but I guess that Malaysia will insist that any news comes via them.
@all
Is there any info about radar installed on Cocos Islnds at the time of disappearance? I suppose there was one, but would it be operated 24/7?
I’m currently looking at routes leading to S20 (including by waypoints), and Cocos seems to be close to some paths leading to S20 @ 00:11
Note that the curvature in calculated path in my download4 [http://www.science4u.org/satcom-based-path-modelling.html] could be caused by the smooth interpolation of sparse (doppler/distance) data points.
Dennis,
The fuel related anomalies concern the performance estimates generated by the FMC not the accuracy of what’s actually in the tanks, measured by the FQIS and displayed on the EICAS.
Yes, Smiths merged into GE, GEC Avionics (B777 PFCs) merged in to BAE Systems. Much consolidation in the aerospace industry.
Concerning radio use: of course a crew would broadcast an emergency on 121.5MHz regardless of distance from an airport. Other a/c tuned in as standard procedure. I did make a request of Aus air traffic services for the path of their flex tracks over the IO on 8th Mar 14, failed to reply. The flex tracks may have routed a/c close enough to be in VHF range. SATCOM voice is absolutely intended for emergency use, short codes for company ops & other parties would be programmed in to the SDU.
@Oleksandr
To attempt to answer some of your questions.
The ADIRU has an ON/OFF switch; the OFF is so the system can be turned off (so it doesn’t flatten the aircraft battery). OFF only works on the ground and airspeed below 30 knots; in other words you can’t turn it off in flight.
When the system is turned on it enters alignment mode; a present position (latitude and longitude) must be entered and the aircraft must remain stationary. It cannot be aligned in flight.
During alignment the ADIRU determines; local vertical, true north and latitude.
Laser gyros in the ADIRU sense angular rate and accelerometers sense acceleration along each axis. Because the ADIRU is stationary all sensed angular rates and accelerations are assumed to be caused by earth rotation or gravity.
The direction of acceleration of gravity determines local vertical or position on the earth surface.
Earth rotation value determines latitude.
True north is determined by sensing the direction of earth rotation.
True north, direction of earth rotation and local vertical then determine northern or southern hemisphere.
If the ADIRU computed values agree with entered position, the system automatically enters the Navigation mode.
As for question on the loss of Doppler compensation due to ADIRU failure; I really don’t have the answer.
Possibly one of the satellite gurus could answer that one!
OZ
“Is there any info about radar installed on Cocos Islnds at the time of disappearance? I suppose there was one, but would it be operated 24/7?”
there are no primary radars on both CI and Cocos
@MH – If Najib goes, he will find warm welcome at Saudi Arabia, the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques and unwanted despots, as long as they are Muslims. A country that hosted Idi Amin will have no qualms hosting him.
Just don’t expect any secrets held to be exposed. This country is good at transitioning between one Despot to another (Mahathir to Najib, via a seatwarmer in between) and nothing gets leaked, even when their relationship soured.
Oz,
Thanks for this detailed information.
Previously I didn’t realise that true north direction can be derived with the help of a gyroscope only! Now I understand why alignment takes a little while.
Ok, basically ADIRU is a self-sufficient system. It cannot be switched off until it “thinks” that it is in the air. A criteria includes internally-estimated ground speed.
A few more questions:
1. If 1 of 3 ADIRUs fails, will pilot be able to switch the whole ADIRU system off to rely only on SAARU and GPS? Just compare with QF72 flight, when faulty ADIRU and software glitches caused accident.
2. Is there any other way to switch ADIRU off in the air, say from EE-Bay?
3. I am still not very clear: what does prevent re-initialization in the air, assuming that ADIRU was somehow switched off? Is it because alignment cannot be completed due to excessive acceleration detected by ADIRU? When on the ground, aircraft also experiences minor movements and oscillations: cargo being loaded, passengers are moving, wind is blowing, etc., perhaps comparable with those in the air in absence of turbulence.
4. A silly question: can ADIRU be switched off during an aerodynamic stall, at the moment when both ground and air speed fall below 30 knots?
5. 30 knots – horizontal or absolute?
I guess the question what feeds data into AES if ADIRU fails remain on the table.
StevanG,
There is a radar at CI. If I am not mistaken it was you who said it was used for ship traffic monitoring only. But you failed to provide any reference that CI radar is not used to monitor airspace.
daronmont.com.au/dartweb/index.php/projects/christmas-island-radar-support
Oleksandr,
you have already posted that, it’s a maritime radar, it can’t monitor airspace except for a very close range (maybe 20-30 miles or so)
StevanG,
Regardless it can or it can’t, JOR2 covers CI area as discussed. See, for instance:
http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-2012-01.html
There is a very slim chance a B777-size object could approach anywhere close to CI undetected.
@Oleksandr
If the radar was operational and looking that way it probably would have seen the aircraft. Who knows?
Hey, be a good guy, and give me the ECEF position and velocity of the satellite at 23:15. You asked for a calculation at the time, and I don’t want to work any harder than I have to 🙂
SP23 = [x y z] = [? ? ?]
SV23 = [Vx Vy Vz] = [? ? ?]
km and km/sec preferred.
Thanks in advance.
@StevanG, Oleksandr
Thanks! A Cocos located radar is also mentioned on
http://www.duncansteel.com/archives/930/comment-page-1
Probably it is the one with maritime use
Quite surprising as Cocos has a recognized strategic location, see next postings
about Cocos
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/australia/cocos-islands.htm
about Cocos
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/secret-spy-station-on-cocos-islands-20131031-2wma0.html
Let me clarify that since 2 years are about to pass since the flight disappeared, I may have lost a few details about the incidence.
When I look at the proposed flight path down the arc, it is hard for me to look at just the scenario where the plane would have flown in virtually a straight line down South.
Assuming that the pings recorded on the arcs are accurate, the plane could have flown alternate paths as well such as one towards East in the area around Christmas Island and West Java.
For above to be true, one has to assume possibilities such as the plane flying South first and then making a turn (back) east, and also that it may not have flown at a constant speed. Ideally, a turn back towards West Java could have happened after the plane passed the 4th or 5th arc.
And if the above is remotely true, it should not be surprising that the search in the current area has not yielded results.
@Victor and @MH
Great work on compiling the article about China, there are a few other things I’ve read about China also, but maybe they were proven to be untrue, not sure. But great work nonetheless. I always assumed it was the US driving the proverbial bus as it was the whitehouse who came out and announced the Inmarsat data when Hishmuddein was denying it (the same day)
As for Najib, well my opinion anyone who gives him immunity is in cahoots with him, all the articles I’ve read up on him and his cronies prove they are nothing but crooks and thieves. But Obama has become good friends with Najib….wasn’t it kind of ironic though as when OB went to Malaysia in 2014, a US President hadn’t been there in like 48 years. Now they are buds…just curious as to why? A co-worker told me that US is keeping Malaysia as an ally because of the South China Sea events.
Regardless, lots of strange things have happened in the past 2 years, nothing really surprises me anymore.
Keep up the good work.
PS Assuming that the plane was around the coordinates E90, S20 on the 5th arc and if it turned back, it would probably be around E10X and S2X, which, if I am not wrong, is South of both Cocos and Christmas Island, and also probably outside the whatever monitoring capabilities those two islands have
PPS
http://www.duncansteel.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/JDS.png
Came across the above where “MH370_S300” is similar to the path that I currently have in mind. Have areas around these been investigated?
@Bugsby: Malaysia is strategically important to the US in order to limit China’s influence in the region and to impede the growth of radical Islam in the region. The US also has tremendous leverage over Najib as there is a US Dept of Justice investigation surrounding corruption at Malaysia’s 1MDB. A grand jury has already been assembled to explore allegations of corruption.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/22/world/asia/malaysias-leader-najib-razak-faces-us-corruption-inquiry.html?_r=0
@Victor
Thanks for that article, I hadn’t read that one yet. I see what you mean about the leverage over Najib. Interesting the political choices and the background behind why things happen the way they do.
Oleksandr,
“Regardless it can or it can’t, JOR2 covers CI area as discussed. See, for instance:
http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-2012-01.html
There is a very slim chance a B777-size object could approach anywhere close to CI undetected.”
OTH radars aren’t all that reliable, plus it’s questionable if it was directed towards CI at the time and if it was working under full power
besides MH370 was likely flying very low when it approached the area
@Niels
it seems also quite interesting info why the secret spy station is openly described in public media
@DennisW – Not sure if this is what you want. I copied the following from Richard’s Flight Path Model v15.1:
7 March 2014 23:15:00
83,700 seconds
x=18,171.478407 km
y=38,056.066461 km
z=694.952592 km
Vx=0.001996 km/sec
Vy=0.001149 km/sec
Vz=0.071876 km/sec
@StevanG
You said:
besides MH370 was likely flying very low when it approached the area
Jorn is an over horizon radar. The radar energy is directed upward, reflected by the ionosphere and thus illuminates the targets from above. The reflected return from the target is again reflected by the ionosphere down to the receiver antennas on the ground.
Altitude does not matter in this case, and it has no range influence.
so it looks like Jorn should have seen it at any altitude.
@Lauren
Yep. That is exactly what I wanted. Thx.
@Lauren
Vy and Vz are negative values. 🙂 🙂
@Dennis – Yes, there should have been a minus sign in front of the values of Vy and Vz. Sorry, I’m not sure what happened.
@RetiredF4
You’re right I overlooked that.
However if JORN was active at the moment(and working at full power) it would likely see the plane even if it’s in current search area or somewhere around.
@Lauren
I was just teasing you. You were very helpful. I already knew those numbers had to be negative. Just needed the numbers because I am lazy, and if I did not do things correctly Oleksandr would pummel me senseless. Thx again.
DennisW / VictorI,
Interesting observation, in US1549 it is Captain Sully who has the flight number correct under extreme duress and ATC who mixes it up several times. Here ATC is also under duress KNOWING their situation and trying to get them to the nearest airport.
In the case of MH370, it is the MH370 pilots who keep slurring or mixing up the flight number and ATC who has it correct. ATC is under no duress for this flight at this particular juncture or point of communication, their duress begins after there is no longer any communication since they were not warned or alerted to any distress.
What it means as far as MH370 goes I don’t know but it is just interesting nonetheless.
Dennis,
Sorry for keeping you waiting. I used the following linearly interpolated values for the sample BFO = 216 Hz at 23:13:58.407 UTC:
SP23 = [18171.08, 38055.80, 687.07] km;
SV23 = [0.0019157, -0.0011677, -0.07029348] km/s.
You can apply a more complex interpolation, but the maximum difference will be around 1 Hz – immaterial in my opinion.
StevanG,
1. I was going to write the same comment as RetiredF4 with regard to the altitude.
2. Initially it was believed that MH370 ended up around 25-30S (ATSB June 2014), and a question was why JORN did not see it. Australians explained that they mainly monitor north-north-west traffic, as they do not expect anyone to come from the open ocean.
Generally, you may see how many inconsistencies are with your CI hypothesis. You have to keep the whole picture in mind, when you explain individual piece of this puzzle.
Niels,
If you are going to look at the trajectories close to Indonesia (i.e. between CI and Indonesia), their radar coverage is also worth of consideration. Just google on “Indonesia radar coverage”.
@oleksandr
Sometimes inconsistencies are fabricated. We do not know.
1) if JORN was operational that morning
2) if JORN was looking in that direction
3) if JORN saw the aircraft – maybe it was detected on is being kept secret for national security reasons
You cannot postulate that an event occurred or did not occur, and then use it as an inconsistency. Plus that, you should be working on your “coincidence” logic.
Oleksandr,
“Generally, you may see how many inconsistencies are with your CI hypothesis. You have to keep the whole picture in mind, when you explain individual piece of this puzzle.”
There are inconsistencies (still less than with other theories though) but this is not the one.
Look at official picture of coverage :
http://members.optushome.com.au/mschew/jorn01.jpg
if radar covering CI was active at full power(the “blue” one) it would see MH370 even if it went to the current search area, and I think I have already posted and explained this…