Hot on the heels of a reported possible MH370 piece in South Australia, news reaches us that Blaine Alan Gibson has found three pieces of suspected MH370 debris in Madagascar. This article says, in part:
Three new fragments which could have come from Malaysia Airlines Flight 270 were discovered on the morning of Monday, June 6, on the Island of Nosy Boraha, in the northeast of Madagascar…
These fragments were found by Blaine Alan Gibson, an American businessman, while he was accompanied by a from the France 2 TV show “Complément d’enquête.” They were on a long, almost deserted beach near the village of Sahasifotra, where tons of waste arrive every day from the Indian Ocean.
One piece in particular, 77 cm wide by 50 cm, apparently made by composite materials, strongly resembles another fragment which Gibson found in February on the coast of Mozambique.
” These two fragments are very very similar: the same paint color, the diameter of the attachment holes is identical. and on the back the texture is the same. I believe that it is a piece from MH370,” Blaine Alan Gibson told our colleagues. Two other parts were also found, a smaller panel with the inscription “FB” as well as another plastic part which could be the frame of an economy class seat’s video screen.
UPDATE 6/9/16: Here’s a screengrab of a YouTube video showing a Malaysia Airlines 777 economy class seatback (thanks to reader @sk999). The coat hook in particular looks like a good match for the third piece.
Here’s an even better shot, via @BBCwestcott. Note the color of the fabric around the “COAT HOOK” button:
Better link:
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/blob/1091852/1398948752000/mh370-press-statement-by-data.pdf
@sk999: “The aircraft was categorised as friendly by the radar operator and therefore no further action was taken at the time. ”
Was that ever stated before May 1st?
I don’t know – it may have been answered by HH in response to a question during one of the press conferences. You can listen to them all (they’re on youtube.) It is not something I ever cared about.
Here you go – March 12 press conference
http://www.themalaymailonline.com/malaysia/article/malaysia-says-last-sighting-of-plane-possibly-off-west-coast
“Rodzali said the aircraft in question was identified as not hostile at the time but did not elaborate.”
Also, the Malaysians now admit that an aircraft was seen NW of Penang, but won’t confirm it was MH370.
@Jeff Wise: you didn’t reply ?
http://jeffwise.net/2016/06/07/more-about-african-mh370-debris/comment-page-3/#comment-170221
Seeing that the general discussion is going towards the possibility of a military intervention, I’m wondering if operation “Cope Tiger” has been discussed here.
It’s a joint force operation (USA, Thailand and Singapour), going on 2 days after MH370 disappearance. What do they do ? Wikipedia says : “[…] Over the last few years, Cope Tiger has widened to include CSAR (Combat Search and Rescue) assets”
My point is : hundreds of highly trained military gather in the area, train for search and rescue, and when an actual plane goes missing… we hear nothing from them ? not a single ship sent to help the ongoing effort ?
@Greg, I didn’t respond because there isn’t really anything to say — your attitude is defeatist and unscientific. If you refuse to discard hypotheses that don’t fit the data are doomed to be forever stuck. You’re entitled to your position but it won’t take you anywhere.
@Ge Rijn, I appreciate your waiting for my input. I’m in the country this weekend with my family so only monitoring intermittently. I don’t think the military shoot-down idea has much merit but if people want to talk about it, it doesn’t bother me. My two cents:
— Corruption has made Malaysian officialdom incompetent. I find it highly unlikely that they were so on the ball that they were instantaneously able to figure out what was going on and react.
— It’s not fun for Malaysia, Australia, the US etc that this plane went missing. If they’re somehow in on cooking up a fake scenario, this isn’t the scenario they would have cooked up.
— The plane had the ability to communicate with the outside world whenever it wanted to. It chose not to.
Basically, this idea is super complicated, doesn’t fit the data well, and doesn’t explain things very well.
@Retired F4, I recall that US intelligence said they detected the missile that shot down MH17
@MH, I agree.
@Ge Rijn, You make an excellent point with your “gift from heaven” comment. It was an extraordinary stroke of luck that just when the plane seemed to have vanished forever, a new data source pops up that provides a definitive but only very un-precise evidence that the plane went south.
So, so, so lucky.
@Jeff Wise:
Ok, could you at least state why you said “If the MH370 investigation has taught us anything, is that restricting the discussion to acceptable explanations is a fatal trap.” when you DO restrict the discussion to acceptable explanations ?
And why did you criticize Duncan Steel for “forbidding to discuss [certain] scenarios” when you do the same ?
My point is that
(a) the data itself is in question and
(b) the interpretation of all the available data and the decision what hypothesis fits is subjective and thus error-prone, as is evidenced by your wrongful ban of DennisW’s Christmas Island theory and your subsequent annulation of the ban once you realized that your initial assessment (that the theory doesn’t fit the data) was wrong
You never took these 2 points into consideration and neither explained the abovementioned contradictions.
Either one of these 2 points can make you discard the right theory!
What if in 30 years the plane is found and one of the theories you had wrongfully discarded/banned turns out to be exactly the right one !?
Why take that completely unnecessary risk ?
There is no need for that.
@ Victorl
Well the plot thickens ! Have a look at flight data for the same AA 1270 flight the very next day . This time there are three qlitches of the the type I described for my flight . i.e. direction reversal of 180 deg and and speed loss of 200kts .
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/AAL1270/history/20160607/1345Z/KORD/KRSW/tracklog
This is data error is it not , may be even the same aircraft .
@Greg
I have to come to Jeff’s defense here. I was never banned for anything, but was admonished for curt (if not rude) language in response to other posters opinions.
Having said that, Jeff was never a fan of the CI theory, and did have disparaging things to say about it. He was not alone.
There are still strong supporters of the CI theory lurking about, but I have issues with it that I cannot resolve. These issues are not ISAT data related. Certainly, I have stopped evangelizing it (if I ever did) some time ago.
Like you, I think the theme of our work here should be open minded and tolerant. In my personal opinion, any theory that does not fit the physics of the ISAT data has a very big hill to climb. There have been a few theories that have climbed that hill such as Victor’s northern path theory accompanied by a clever and plausible ISAT data spoof. Stuff like that is good stuff, IMO. Theories which are not accompanied by plausible explanations of why they do not conform to the ISAT data are pretty much non-starters for me.
If the aircraft flew from NILAM to IGOGU then
FMT´d south, from there between 18:37-38, then it would have been at or near ANOKO around 18:43, when an emergency landing request may have been broadcast. ANOKO is a standard landing waypoint for Banda Aceh airport.
Something resembling NILAM to IGOGU to BEDAX passing through or near ANOKO fits the satellite data very well, being almost identical to the Inmarsat best fitting candidate flight path, e.g. IGOGU to BEDAX is heading 196°. And, after the FMT, the path initially resembles a landing attempt at WITT. Indeed, the satellite data best fits reduced speeds 800-850kts.
BEFORE the FMT the implied FLCH up 7000′ @ NILAM resembles a high and fast cruise ~NW @900-930kits. It’s hard to explain the two disparate flight characters.
I have been a lurker here for …. well about 2 years now. I find the technical discussions fascinating although I don’t have much to add or offer to that discussion. I’m not sure if it’s been discussed before, but a mere 2 weeks before the disappearance, the Sochi Olympics had wrapped up. During these games airport security was on high alert. The news/ chatter about potential “toothpaste bombs” was a big deal at the time. So big that Russia had banned all gels, toothpastes etc. from all airports. Is it possible that MH370 was just the first opportunity to set off one of these devices (or launch an attack) after the Olympic security relaxed post games? It just seems odd that the world was pretty much on high alert just 2 weeks prior and as soon as guard is let down a jet goes missing. Maybe just another coincidence among all of the other coincidences? Does anyone know the flights that 9M-MRO flew and airports it had visited) BEFORE it disappeared. Apologies if this seems ridiculous… or has already been discussed previously.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/05/world/europe/sochi-security-toothpaste/
@sk999: Thank you very much for doing that research.
With recent discussions here and elsewhere it seems the radar capture of mh370 flying back over may not have happened. Even the Malaysians were very contradictory about it. So it might be time to come up with scenarios with the Inmarsat data and the very few clues out there if new paths (not to the SIO) can be matched to the Inmarsat data.
@jeffwise
@Retired F4, I recall that US intelligence said they detected the missile that shot down MH17
Both cases are not comparable. MH17 was shot down over a hot war zone by a surface to air missile with much bigger mass, size, rocket engine and exhaust plume. The burn time of the rocket booster is longer and gives a multifold bigger signature. Satelites are monitoring hot war zones and can detect and identify vehicles the size of a BUK launcher.
“— Corruption has made Malaysian officialdom incompetent. I find it highly unlikely that they were so on the ball that they were instantaneously able to figure out what was going on and react.”
I agree, and that might be the reason that they were unable to communicate the full extent of the disappearance at once. In the four corners interview H. made the impression, that he knew much more, but didn’t know how to sell this knowledge,to the audience. He behaved haunted.
“— It’s not fun for Malaysia, Australia, the US etc that this plane went missing. If they’re somehow in on cooking up a fake scenario, this isn’t the scenario they would have cooked up.”
In this discussed shoot down scenario there is no fake scenario involved. All the discussed possibilities are still open. In connection with a shoot down the unlawfull intervention by one of the pilots or some third party is the most probable. As long as the evidence for such a hijacking is not at hand, they just omitted the intervention part. I see no fake scenario yet, and not to reveal the intervention in the early days might even be considered as a prudent choice. At that stage they could not guess, that the search for MH370 would take that long. The Nations you mention might meanwhile be informed about the intervention part or might be not. What would be the outfall if joe public would be informed?
“— The plane had the ability to communicate with the outside world whenever it wanted to. It chose not to.
Basically, this idea is super complicated, doesn’t fit the data well, and doesn’t explain things very well.”
The reason not to communicate is unchanged, the people on board who could have comunicated either choose not to do so or were unable for some reason.
I understand the reluctance to discuss that possible part of the disappearance. The world never was and never will be ready for such happenings. But let’s face the fact, air policing is besides training for wartimen a main task of air defence forces in peace time. Detailed procedures are stowed in the drawers of the respective involved units since centuries. These procedures were never restricted to be used only against military targets. Post 911 this matter was discussed in more detail and the existing procedures were overworked and refined, the line of orders specified. The reaction of the public though would be completely uncalculable.
@all,
The Malaysian reported time, position and height of the final Primary Radar return for MH370 at 1822 UTC needs to be considered carefully. If it didn’t exist, why would they have reported it? As the distance to their the Primary Radar (Butterworth) located on Penang Island is “over the horizon”, the question is; how did they come up with the altitude of 29,000 ft?
Both questions can be answered because there are plausible – relating to refraction and over the horizon radar range.
My taking on the above position is that the aircraft was deliberately descending for two reasons;
(a) to get below the crossing high level airway, and
(b) to ultimately avoid radar detection.
The real question is where did it go from there?
@Jeff Wise
Yes I agree it’s complicated and will probably be very hard to proof if it occured this way.
But if forensic evidence gets found pointing to this on the debris, this kind of a scenario will become unavoidable imo.
I still regard the ATSB as an independent capabel investigator and I therefore still trust them to sort something like this out and bring it to the open if evidence like this gets found.
Then there are the French who still haven’t released any substantial information about the flaperon. Why not? What are they waiting for? Have they found something disturbing allready?
I guess we have to wait on a full debris report from the ATSB and/or the French to consider a scenario like this more seriously. But to discuss it and walk thinghs through again from what happened and possibly happened in those first days and weeks can be important imo.
On your arguments against such a scenario I like to comment the following:
-I think they were on the ball soon but not figured out immediatly what was going on.
They admitted they tracked the plane real time over Malaysia for they declared they saw no reason to scramble jets.
What RetiredF4 suggested; they waited with scrambling jets till it was clear it was not going to land on Penang sounds quite reasonable to me.
-Sure it’s not fun for Malaysia (or anyone) if the plane went missing by a scenario like this. It might well be not intended to turn out this way. To cover it up would be a stupid thing to do but if you take incompetence and corruption in regard it might be the way people like this react. Other countries may well be not aware something like this happened (if it happened).
-‘The plane had the ability to communicate but chose not to’. Imo the more reason to scramble the plane and in the end make the decision to shoot at it.
The more reason also to doubt there statement they saw no reason to scramble jets.
If they made the decision to shoot at it before getting out of range (of the jets and/or Butterworth radar) but only damaging it and took out an engine and afterwards lost track of the plane this could fit the data also imo. It could explain the SDU reboot, the FMT with a descent and a heading south on lower altitude and speed.
It could have turned into a ghost flight after FMT (or even sometime before) or not.
A left engine taken out and extra drag could have forced the plane in a left turn losing altitude and speed. And after stabilizing more or less go on in a more or less straight heading to the south.
A failed mission maybe by a hijacker/pilot which ended into nowhere.
All very speculative I know but it’s about looking under every possible stone as you mentioned before somewhere.
I agree if this stone is argumented/proved impossible we should put the stone back on its place and leave it.
If not I think it’s worth to keep a scenario like this in mind.
@RetiredF4 and Ge Rijn
This may well have been mentioned before: even if RMAF didn’t get involved, what about the Indonesians? They have certainly been on the ball recently with unauthorised planes entering their airspace.
@AM2
Don’t know if it was mentioned before but I think you could have good point.
The Indonesians always denied they tracked/saw MH370 with their sofisticated Atjeh radar station. They never stated this station was shut off that night (as far as I know). Which still is a debated unsolved gap in the story. They also denied entrance in their waters for search operations which I always thought of as being a very strange and harsh thing to decide.
B777-Engines_and_APU.pdf
“RR Engines
…”If the engine does not recover and continues to run down below
35% N3, the EEC shuts off fuel and ignition and disables the
auto-relight function.”
Oz said;
“My reading is that the RR would give a relight the one try, fuel
being injected as the engine drops below idle.”
My point is that the EEC (Electronic Engine Control) for that RR
(left) engine “disables the auto-relight function”. Unfortunately
the paragraph states this in a general manner and doesn’t give
conditions whereat the function is reenabled. It is unclear to me
if manual (pilot) intervention is required (through setting of
switches) for the function to be reenabled. Also unclear whether
the loss of AC power, or reduction in AC power, could cause the
EEC to ‘reset’ this function.
@David, this might be a minor point against Left engine restart,
the major point being pitching and banking of the aircraft causing
the APU to fail in its attempt to continuously repressurize the
engine fuel line with remaining fuel (via the APU DC fuel pump).
@RetiredF4
Sorry, I can’t let it go unchallenged – you said “McKay made a
statement to have seen an aircraft on fire”. She actually said;
http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/f108/i-think-i-saw-mh370-127132.html
“I thought I saw a burning plane” but then clarified that by
saying “I was looking at what appeared to be an elongated plane
glowing bright orange”, – which it not the same thing as fire.
Later, she further explained what she saw;
http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/f108/i-think-i-saw-mh370-127132-42.html
…”at that stage the orange glow started to look like a plane.
I momentarily panicked, thinking it was a plane on fire.
But I couldn’t see any fire or flames, or anything like that, it
was just a plane glowing orange and surrounded by an orange glow
like a halo. As though it were being lit up by sodium lights, but
I couldn’t see sodium lights.”
@AM2, Ge Rijn
I read an article (on a webpage I can no longer find,) where an
Indonesian commentator who apparently has been interviewed on US TV
(possibly at the same time as Jeff) made an interesting statement –
words like ‘we (the Indonesian military) said we didn’t see it
(MH370) in our area, but we didn’t say about other (countries)
area, so we can’t be accused of a lie’.
Jeff can probably suggest the identity of the comentator.
@Dennis
Hi Dennis, how are things with you these days? We haven’t crossed swords lately.
Warren is conspicuous by his absence. I guess he is needing to concentrate on his lunar work.
There is a tripartite meeting of officials beginning in Kuala Lumpur, tomorrow, to discuss the future of the search effort, and the debris finds. The next couple of days will be critical iro the search prospects. Who can guess what the outcome might be.
@ROB
Well, a wish list of an outcome would be to press the
Indonesians to get their military to provide any radar
track they have of possible 9M-MRO OUTSIDE their area.
@buyerninety
I honestly don’t think the Indonesians have any primary radar data. Their military surveillance radar was most probably not switched on at the time.
The pilot knew this would be the case.
Indonesia was not expecting any potentially hostile incursions.
There is no radar data that hasn’t been disclosed.
@buyerninety
Perhaps I should rephrase that. There isn’t any undisclosed radar data that would provide any new information. If the Thai military have not been cooperative, I know, but I don’t think they have anything that would improve our knowledge of what happened that night.
@Owen Wiseman: Yes, the collected ADS-B data has some speed and heading errors.
@buyerninety
I don’t know. It could perhaps also mean they have data but those are not conflicting the Malaysian radar data and the Inmarsat data.
So they would have no persistent reason to disclose those data. In that case their silence can also be interpretated as a kind of confirmation of the Malaysian radar data and the Inmarsat data.
But if they tracked MH370 across the Malacca straight and it was scramble there I assume they would also have seen the chasing jet. Maybe they chose to stay out of the matter for the time being.
Anyway disclosure of their radar data from that night would be very welcome offcourse.
@buyerninety: The commentator you are referring to is Gerry Soejatman, a Jakarta-based aviation consultant.
The Indonesian government has offered an explanation of how MH370 might have missed Indonesian airspace:
‘I followed the Malaysian Prime Minister’s statement. [It] did not directly mention Indonesia. So, the southern corridor [of the Indian Ocean] here does not mean it [the plane] passed over Indonesia,’ Djoko said on Tuesday. ‘The last tracking point of the plane shows it headed west, near the Andaman and Nicobar Islands [west of Thailand].’…
…Agus said, ‘another military radar suggestion said that it was once detected in the Andaman Islands. So, it could very likely have cleared Sumatra island in the north before making another turn to the south until it was 2,500 kilometers from Perth.’
‘Don’t be misled by graphical illustrations and maps because our earth is not flat like those maps,’ he added.
When asked about the possibility some of the military radars could have been inactive at the time MH370 flew over Indonesia, Agus said, ‘don’t trust rumors so easily.’
http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2014/03/26/govt-insists-mh370-did-not-fly-indonesian-airspace.html
I believe the military radar referred to was a Singapore AWACS based on a comment from the ATSB to @Niels about MH370’s clearance from Singapore radar in that vicinity.
More and more, I believe that the turn to the south occurred after 18:40, which would push the crossing further northwest on the 7th arc. The BFO at 18:40 which we have assumed indicates a southerly track might be indicative a northerly track combined with a descent of about 2600 fpm. The BFO signatures would be identical.
@VictorI
Correct! Thankyou!
_
FYI @AM2, Ge Rijn
http://www.gerryairways.com/index.php/en/mh370-i-hate-conspiracy-theories-but-what-can-we-learn-from-them/
Gerry Soejatman said;
“The PSR at Lhokseumawe might have been switched on, or off… we just do not know. Besides, the Indonesian authorities have stated that our radars did not see MH370 over our territory. This means just that. If we saw MH370 outside our territory, then we haven’t lied.”
@Victor: re: descent of 2600 fpm: …possibly indicating an attempt to do what, where, when, and why? I promise not to pick it apart – just seeking examples of intrinsic logic supporting this bearing and descent pattern at 18:40, beyond a fit to the data. Thanks.
[Greg Long post redacted by JW] Greg, it seems to me that you came here for the sole purpose of stirring up trouble. If you have something positive to contribute to the discussion, then do so, then otherwise you will be banned.
@buyerninety
Thanks. To me it suggests they saw it outside their territory but had no reason to confirm or deny it for it was probably not conflicting with the allready known data.
In such a case they won’t give unnecessary insight in their radar capabilities or about which radar station was on or off that night.
And if they saw outside their territory the plane was followed/engaged by another plane they maybe chose not to mingle in internal affairs of their neighboring country.
I guess we’ll never no what the Indonesians saw or not.
<<<<<>>>>>>>
I really find it hard to believe that Indonesia didn’t see it on their radar, and especially after hearing how they forced other unidentified planes in their airspace down. I don’t buy it for a minute that all these radars in that area of the world shut down at night, seriously????
Same as the Austrailia JORN….they can pick up ships, immigrants boats etc and yet many will like us to believe they shut down too….in that area, NOBODY shuts off their radar at night.
Whatever happened to the plane, I’m leaning towards an “afterwards” cover up by Malaysia, but they didn’t act alone. So many anomalies in this case, but no real answers from investigators to clear up or debunk things. It fascinates me how everyone has a different opinion, yet nobody seems to know.
I’m glad to see some Boeing engineers contributing as to what is and what isn’t possible. The truth will come out eventually. I’m of the opinion that the data although right may have been interpreted wrong, or wrong assumptions were made. Whatever the case I do hope that this Triparte meeting will keep the search going further north than they have been. If they don’t = they don’t want the plane found. I could see if there was NO debris that turned up, but now that there is confirmed pieces, they can’t give up, they have to find the truth. But I feel that a purposeful disinfo campaign has reigned supreme in this saga.
@Brock
No trying to answer for VictorI, however, an intrinsic approach might be to look at the data (or lack thereof) surrounding the previous turns at igari and Penang, and try to determine if there was a pattern of descent preceding those changes of direction.
Extrinsically, a reason for ‘why’ might be that it was used as a tactic for evading radar and avoiding possible intervention.
However, discussions regarding partial intervention have been very interesting as of late.
@Victorl
Thank you for the confirmation of the data errors. This same aircraft seems to repeat the 179/180 heading error two or three times on each flight since then but the speed reduction error is variable by one or two hundred kts.
Should AA be made aware of this equipment problem ? Or is it not critical .My concern is the source of the error within the flight instrumentation of the aircraft.
@MH
you said:
“With recent discussions here and elsewhere it seems the radar capture of mh370 flying back over may not have happened. Even the Malaysians were very contradictory about it. So it might be time to come up with scenarios with the Inmarsat data and the very few clues out there if new paths (not to the SIO) can be matched to the Inmarsat data.”
I have never actually used the radar data (if you can actually call it data – more like graphics). It really is not needed to conclude that the aircraft had to fly almost due West from Igari in order to arrive at the 17:25 range ring on time. To my knowledge the radar data has not been useful for anything despite some herculean efforts on the part of several posters here.
@Gysbreght
“Was that ever stated before May 1st?”
hmm somewhere in April/late March maybe, the thing is they didn’t see it immediately (otherwise ATC would interrogate the aircraft) and after reviewing radar logs they weren’t sure if it was MH370 until Inmarsat came up with their data
Captain Z succeeded in one thing at least, discovered how incompetent bunch they are
@Owen Wiseman: I doubt it is an equipment problem. I would guess that the ADS-B reception is poor for the receiver in that area and errors creep in.
@dennisW. Can mh370 hit the range ping ring on another path than what is currently popular? It’s assumed to be the west arc but could be elsewhere.
@Brock: The descent at 18:40 occurred if the plane continued on a NW track after 18:40. Here are some reasons why I believe this may have been possible:
1. The ATSB statement to @Niels regarding clearance from Singapore radar suggests the plane turned after 18:40.
2. The speed profile presented by the DSTG in their report suggests changes in altitude occurred while within radar range.
3. Intermittent radar captures reported by the Malaysians and the Thais suggest changes in altitude while within radar range.
4. Drift model studies by Richard Godfrey suggest a crash site further north on the 7th arc, which is consistent with a turn after 18:40.
5. Reports (such as the one I included above) that military radar captured MH370 near the Andaman and Nicobar Islands.
6. As to why, I agree with @Oriondt that changes in altitude could have been for radar evasion.
@all Could severe turbulance cause a short loss of power and reset satcom.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/06/malaysia-airlines-mh1-turbulence-flight-london-kuala-lumpur-injured?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
Just a general question. I know there was no indication of anything that could cause this along SOM track. The only close storms were the two storm cells off the west coast of Sumatra. But officials say plane didn’t go that way.
@all Could severe turbulance cause a short loss of power and reset satcom.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/06/malaysia-airlines-mh1-turbulence-flight-london-kuala-lumpur-injured?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
Just a general question. I know there was no indication of anything that could cause this along SOM track. The only close storms were the two storm cells off the west coast of Sumatra. But official narrative is the plane didn’t go that way.
I had some private discussions with @Oleksandr about the BTO and BFO values at 18:25 – 18:28. Some of us have proposed manoeuvers such as a “jog to the right” to fit the data. @Oleksandr has proposed a different, interesting explanation based on a constant bank turn combined with a descent. I am including the link below in case some of you are interested in this work.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/3eais38phjo9h0j/descent_1822_1841.jpg?dl=0
@all
dont know if can be somehow usefull this lookback, but I found it now only; it happened just 9days vanished – this big CNN discussion aboout speculations, facts, investigations and for me it was probably MAIN reason why it seemed to me sooooo weird (not to mention I started to notice whole case may be near March 14 or so, mostly after U-turn was reported)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUY5KIMyGyw
@Bugsy
“NOBODY shuts off their radar at night.”
What time do you think they will shut it off?
Radars need continued maintenance.From memory the average operating time per day of primary radars will vary around 16 hours over time.