Here’s a link to the report broadcast today on Australian 60 Minutes about the search for MH370. Part 1:
Part 2:
Discussion after the jump…
The main thrust of the piece is that an independent air-crash expert, Larry Vance, has looked at photographs of the Réunion flaperon and decided that their relatively intact state, and the lack of debris from inside the aircraft, means that the plane must not have impacted the water at high speed, as would be expected if the plane ran out of fuel as a “ghost ship” and spiralled into the water. He interprets the jagged trailing edge of the flaperon as evidence that it was deployed at the moment of impact and was worn away when it struck the water.
I find it discomfiting when people say that the mystery of MH370 is not mystery at all–that they are absolutely confident they know the answer. Vance undercuts his credibility, I feel, by taking this stance. There is indeed a strong argument to be made that the plane must have been under conscious control to the very end; to me the most compelling is simply that the plane has not been found in the current seabed search zone. However it is less clear that someone attempted a ditching. What the show does not mention is that debris from inside the aircraft has indeed been found, suggesting that the fuselage could not have survived the impact and sunk to the bottom of the ocean intact. Indeed, the program doesn’t mention the other debris at all, with the exception of the Pemba flap, which is the other relatively intact large piece. The fact that most of the debris found so far is rather small is to me indicative of a higher-energy impact. But I have no strong opinion one way or the other; I feel that proper experts must look at the debris close up to determine what forces caused it to come apart.
The program cites the recently revealed flight-sim data from Zaharie’s computer as further evidence that the plane was deliberately piloted to fuel exhaustion and beyond. For the first time, the program showed on screen pages from the confidential Malaysian report. The producers of the show reached out to me as they were putting the program together, and asked me to comment on some of the data they had accumulated. Here are the pages of the document that they showed on-screen:
It’s worth noting that these pages offer a summary of the recovered flight-sim data which are described in greater detail and accuracy elsewhere in the confidential Malaysian documents. Here is a table showing a subset of what the documents contain:
Note that the numbering systems for the two data tables do not match. (Please do not ask me to explain this.) I suggest that for the purposes of discussion, the point saved at Kuala Lumpur International Airport be called point 1; the three points recorded as the flight-sim moved up the Malacca Strait to the Andaman Islands be called 2, 3, and 4; and the points over the southern Indian Ocean with fuel at zero be called points 5 and 6.
In order to understand the fuel load numbers in the second table, I made some calculations based on the fuel loads in a real 777-200ER. I don’t know how closely these match those in the flight simulator Zaharie was using. If anyone can shed light I’d be happy to hear it.
Worth noting, I think, is that the fuel difference between point 4 and point 5 is enough for more than 10 hours of flight under normal cruise conditions. The difference between these points is 3,400 nautical miles, for an average groundspeed of less than 340 knots. This is peculiar. Perhaps the flight-sim fuel burn rate is very inaccurate; perhaps the simulated route between the points was not a great circle, as shown in the second page of the report above, but indirect; perhaps Zaharie was fascinated by the idea of flying slowly; or perhaps points 5 & 6 come from a different simulated flight than 1 through 4. Readers’ thoughts welcome.
Also note that neither the locations nor the headings of points 1-4 lie exactly on a straight line from 1 to 4, which suggest perhaps that the route was hand-flown.
In support of Gloria . Operation Northwoods ! 1962 . Lemnitzer and the Joint Chiefs worked out a complex deception:
An aircraft at Elgin AFB would be painted and numbered as an exact duplicate for a civil registered aircraft belonging to a CJA proprietary organization in the Miami area. At a designated time the duplicate would be substituted for the actual civil aircraft and would be loaded with the selected passengers, all boarded under carefully prepared aliases. The actual registered aircraft would be converted to a drone [a remotely controlled unmanned aircraft]. Take off times of the drone aircraft and the actual aircraft will be scheduled to allow a rendezvous south of Florida.
From the rendezvous point the passenger-carrying aircraft will descend to minimum altitude and go directly into an auxiliary field at Elgin AFB where arrangements will have been made to evacuate the passengers and return the aircraft to its original status. The drone aircraft meanwhile will continue to fly the filed flight plan. When over Cuba the drone will be transmitting on the international distress frequency a “May Day” message stating he is under attack by Cuban MiG aircraft. The transmission will be interrupted by destruction of the aircraft, which will be triggered by radio signal. This will allow ICAO [International Civil Aviation Organization radio stations in the Western Hemisphere to tell the U.S. what has happened to the aircraft instead of the U.S. trying to “sell” the incident.
Ring any bells anyone?
Susie Crowe:
For what it is worth. I agree with what you say. But as I have said before, I do think that international pressure and visibility in this case will make a big difference. There are too many independent eyes on this matter and the stakes are very high. If you worry about that Shah will not get a fair “trial” and be made a scapegoat or an example, I actually do not think that is a very great risk. And this is without even seeing to the forensic situation at hand.
I also believe it is very important to acknowledge the principle rights and authority of the criminal investigation (I assume it is still in place), their investigative secrecy, and the necessity to knock over stones and “rock the boat”, if that is significant in this case and they actually are doing it properly. Malaysia is geopolitically exposed, that need also to be recognized. And this is not a simple case, it is capital crime and mass murder (cold blooded murder of his co-pilot, staff colleagues and two hundred and more innocent people according to the legion of scavenger voices that whisper out of the dark). So, I believe a dead and missing flight captain of decades’ of employment ought to be able to stand the test of scrutiny under such circumstances, and perhaps even willingly so, as it might look right now, whether he is guilty or not.
By all appearances (reaching me) Shah was nothing but a paragon for his trade. But that does not mean that he necessarily is innocent. But it makes it more likely in my eyes that the truth will surface and the guilt or responsibilities, if any, be distributed to those who might have had a share in this, whether bu criminal neglect or overriding authorities or whatever. It depends of course on what “really happened”, but there will doubtlessly be a lot of strong and determined interests watching to make sure that anything similar never happens for the same reasons again.
@Owen Wiseman:
Was there a specific reason the Northwoods Operation was never executed? 🙂
@Owen Wiseman
Sure does. Forty or years earlier than other events.
Link to proposed drone subterfuge Cuban Crisis. Starting page 10. I don’t know whether it was possible at that point in time but the idea was there.
http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/coldwar/documents/episode-10/02-06.htm
I don’t find it unusual that Shah tinkered with the simulater.
I was deep into electronic design etc, and still went home and built amateur radio equipment to use. To me in those years it was electronics 24/7.
Cheers Tom L
@Owen
We can now safely put you in the Whacko category along with Gloria.
@Nederland, My understanding is that it is not possible to extend flaps after fuel exhaustion. Also, the flaperon does not “extend” in the way that flaps do, as you can see very clearly around the 4:00 mark in this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rtl5WUA5ATE
Thus I find it very likely that Vance is wrong.
@Johan
Yes President Kennedy put a stop to it .
@ DennisW
Hey don’t shoot the messenger . Those words are a direct copy of de-classified documents released between 1997 and 2001 . The point was to show that back in 1962 the US mil thought it possible to remotely control an airliner . I am sorry you don’t believe the US own publications .If you want the actual pfd I will send them to you . This is all in the public domain.
@Johan
It is now safe to put you in the whacko category. Don’t you even think before you post?
@Owen
You just reinforced your status as a whacko.
@Tom Thank you .
@DennisW go to the link that Tom just put up and read it yourself before you start name calling !
http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/coldwar/documents/episode-10/02-06.htm
@DennisW: the CVR (if ever found) could give us very good clarity as to what happened.
For all we know, a culprit could give a lot of info. Or it was a ghost flight and there is nothing.
Aaron….thanks. Found it.
@NYBanker
The CVR will likely be blank. Moot point, since the CVR and data recorders are not likely to be found in our lifetime.
@Ge Rijn… Good eye re the EK flaperon.
@all
Operation Northwoods http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/northwoods.html
and page 11 is particularly interesting http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/northwoods14.gif
Food for thought.
Perhaps EK521 L Flaperon is not detached from wing, but in an ‘up’ position? Thoughts? Better photos out there?
http://www.24liveblog.com/share/194642321?url=http://www.airlive.net/breaking-passenger-jet-crash-lands-in-dubai/
@ventus45 Precisely my point , and this was in 1962 when I was a lad ! Be careful DennisW will think you are crazy !!
Here is another view which looks as the Flaperon is missing.
http://www.ibtimes.co.in/photos/emirates-flight-thiruvananthapuram-crash-lands-dubai-airport-7425-slide-45544
@MH,
Thank you. I think the L Flaperon remained attached and that photo in your link is taken at an angle and elevation that makes it difficult to determine L Flaperon status. Let’s keep looking for a definitive photo.
@DennisW
Or, the CVR will reveal the voices of passengers quickly trying to learn how to fly a B777.
@George Tilton. EK 521.”48 degrees centigrade, 118 F, plane could not get any lift to climb out…belly flop probably resulted from a stall…
The black boxes will tell the tale.”
Yes I would hazard late wind shear – see cross wind (it not tail), of smoke even taking account of turn during slide) – up undercarriage (at least) to reduce drag, engines slower to accelerate and low thrust at that temperature.
@Kenyon.Left flaperon up consistent with right wing low. Inner flap sections do not look separated so maybe part retracted.
@Jeff wise you’re correct the flaperon,flaps cannot be extended if fuel exhaustion has occurred..
Flaps, landing gear to name a couple use hydraulics system which is powered by the massive 777 Rolls Royce engines…
During a cold start procedure the crew will start the APU (auxiliary power unit) to supply power to AC packs,bleed etc etc..
Till engine start procedure..
Now the 777 like Airbus A330 has a RAM jet device..Basically this is a little fan that is deployed in case of sudden complete loss of power from the engines like a fuel leak.
The RAM is housed in the belly of the plane and once deployed it extend out so the fan spins freely in the air to generate a small amount of power.Enough to keep basic monitor display..
I’m curious if this was deployed after fuel starvation.
Remember Canadian A330 which had a fuel leak and the pilots had to do a controlled glide.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jjb63MBv_fo
@Ge Rijn
I’m getting more and more convinced about your Dordrecht Hole theory by the day, although I think you and I are the only ones on this blog that even remotely consider it (and I’m not sure how much you do if it all ), along with a group of folks scattered about the internets. So I’m not sure Zaharie actually made it or not, but I think he probably thought it would fit in well with his master plan, if he could execute it.
Anywhooo, I wanted to see why those depths of Dordrecht would be advantageous for a plan like that. It’s probably well known to all you guru’s here, but to a regular dude like me I found out it to be compelling new info. For example:
The Dordrecht Hole is 7,079 m (23,225 ft) at its deepest point. This depth seriously tests these device’s limits.
– Max ULB detection range is 3,000 meters roughly
– Max ULB Operating depth is 20,000 ft
– Lowest temp that ULB can withstand is -2.2C . I contacted an oceanographer I know and he said it could be slightly lower than that down there.
– The Flight data recorder has a hydrostatic pressure limit of 20,000 ft and static crush limit is only 5,000 pounds for 5 minutes.
I’m not sure I’m analyzing this all completely accurately but it seems to me that if he intended to never be found without a trace, this would be good way to do it.
If the depth didn’t ruin the devices, the temperature would probably kill it anyway. There was no need to worry about 30 days of battery life anyway since it was too deep to detect and if found, the FDR would be crushed within like 5 minutes. And if by a miracle they do pull up the plane down there, it seems like the FDR will be useless anyway.
Learning today ll this makes me believe more that this is what he had at least planned at one point. If anyone knows more about these devices that makes my info incorrect, please advise, thanks 🙂
@Get Rijin,Billy
I find this very interesting. Zaharie was known to be a very methodical intelligent person.I’m sure he would have done his research on ocean depths if he responsible for hijacking his own plane.
@Owen:
A good thing Kennedy put a stop to the plan. I believe the idea was to use it to start invasion and enter state of war? Without puttning any passengers at any risk?
So it is hard to compare.
@jeff
Maybe there would be an idea to check whether there are differences between models of 777?
I have a distinct sense of reading about extending flaps in the news, but these seems not of that type.
@DennisW:
I am getting to it: Not wholly improbable.
Care to tell me which post and why?
@jeff
Sorry! “Reading about extending flaperons” was what I meant.
@Billy & Get Rijn,
Interesting idea about the Dordrecht Hole. And you’re not the only ones considering it. While I’m mostly known here for having seriously contemplated various spoofing scenarios, the idea that Shah might’ve tried to reach the Diamantina Deep was one of my very first scenarios. It wasn’t my own idea, though. I was influenced by someone’s very elaborate scenario at reddit. This scenario was well-frequented within the first weeks but then fell completely out of fashion. But it might well have been eerily accurate. It even featured the idea of a water landing in order to sink the plane more or less whole. And if Shah or whoever piloted the plane really tried to reach a very specific location in the SIO then it would make a lot of sense to stay at the controls until the very end. Another contention, which is so far unproven would start to make more sense, too: the detective hired by a group of NOK lead by Sarah Bajc, who has the unlikely real life name Ethan Hunt, told the Guardian last he found out by talking to KLIA employees that Shah had asked for more fuel before the flight – as he is entitled to do as the captain. Now, more fuel seems hardly important if you want to fly the plane into the big Indian Ocean until you run out of fuel. It would actually omly prolong your ordeal. But if the big plan was to reach a very specific location in the SIO, it would definitely make sense.
As I said, I gave up on this idea eventually when all calculations seemed to show that the plane couldn’t have reached that destination. Maybe, it hasn’t (has someone checked if it could’ve been reached by additional gliding?). But Shah could’ve tried if he really wanted to hide the plane at a totally irretrievable spot. For me as a psychologist it makes sense in a weird kind of way, that someone who hatched such a plan set himself a goal – a true final destination instead of sinking the plane more or less randomly. And again, staying at the controls until the very end makes more sense, too, in such a scenario. I wouldn’t even see it as a prolonged kind of suicide. The way to such a specific spot in the SIO could be compared to the long hike of a suicidal person to a high cliff or bridge. The way doesn’t belong to the act of suicide itself but is done in preparation for the planned jump.
@Billy
Why hide it? It would be better to go unnoticed while flying into the pacific ocean. Besides the technology could be a few years away to go all the way down and find the plane. There isn’t any motive to hide it, and it will be found if it is in the ocean anyway.
@Aaron
How would he have known when he was above the deepest place?
@Littlefoot
Welcome back. I had missed your well argued and balanced contributions to our little group.
@Johan. Model. Point.
From the Emirates Press site, “The aircraft, a Boeing 777-300 registration A6-EMW powered by Rolls-Royce Trent 800 engines..”
@littlefoot
He would have to do the impossible. Calculating fuel and destination after his wild manoeouvres.
@ROB, thanks a lot 🙂
I’ve never have gone away from the case. I just stopped commenting for a while since I was very busy. But I’m delighted to see that the blog is still going strong.
@Johan, @Dennis, @Nederland, @Jeff, @David
Re Flaperon/Flaps extension question:
Guys, you keep drawing me out of self-imposed retirement. Yes the flaps can only be extended if either the engines OR the APU are running at the time. They cannot be extended on RAT hydraulic power alone. The ATSB are well aware of this fact, I assure you.
This is a very important point, because the damage to the flaperon (and probably the flap, also – the ATSB are investigating this possibility at the moment) very strongly suggests that the flaps were extended when the aircraft ditched (sorry Jeff, but it will turn out to be true 🙂 No bluster intended, this time.
Which means that the APU and/or the engines were running when the flaps were extended (flaps should not be extended above 20’000ft, BTW). The pilot who planned this, would not have known how long the APU would run after the LH engine had flamed out due a nearly empty tank. The ATSB now state 13.75 minutes, after previously stating 3.75 minutes, so we cant expect the pilot to have known, IMO. So consequently, I believe he had enough fuel ⛽ left, to make a powered descent, engines on idle, after he set up the 2nd logon at 00:19, by momentarily de energizing the SDU.
@Owen:
Good find on use of remote control aircraft as proposed in the Operation Northwoods document. A bit more research on this gives us Operation Aphrodite. This was a 1944 WW II op showing that UK/USA were using remote control B17 Flying Forts and Liberator bombers based at RAF Fersfield, Norwich. The planes were packed with HE and used as pilotless drone attack weapons…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Aphrodite
I would be very surprised if the technology to create remote control pilotless aeroplanes wasn’t perfected years ago. The long list of possible scenarios about MH370 incident must be expanded to include this new data.
@Trond, who says he made it? Probably not, but he might’ve set himself such a goal.
As to your contention why he wouldn’t have gone towards the Pacific and the Mariana trench: for a long time that was my argument, too, against the idea that the plane was deliberately flown into the SIO in order to hide it. It would seem to be much easier and less risky to reach the Pacific if you go dark with the plane over the SCS. But such a route would miss out the public insult of the Malaysian authorities by boldly going back over the peninsula. If Shah had a big “F..ck You All” in mind, then the route the plane has actually taken makes more sense than just quietly flying towards the Pacific.
And there’s another possibility. The simulated route starts out from KLIA and the “detour” to IGARI is missing. I was really concerned about the fact that one of the crucial points of the plan seemed to be missing. But someone has suggested to me that Shah might’ve planned originally to use another flight – maybe to Europe – for his grand plan, because the beginning of the simulated route looks a lot like the flights to Europe starting from KLIA. On such a flight the SIO as final destination makes a lot of sense. He might’ve started out with such a rudimentary plan, became fascinated with the Diamantina Deep, and then for some reason decided to use the flight to Beijing for his plan by turning the plane around at IGARI in order to pursue his original plan.
These are all wild speculations. The discussions seem to have gone full circle since we started more than two years ago. I will try to find my old comments from back then. If we more regular commenters start reading all our old comments we might well end up pulling our hair out 😉
EK521. The aircraft involved:
https://worldairlinenews.files.wordpress.com/2016/08/emirates-777-300-a6-emw-99apr-dxb-pdnlrw.jpg?w=625&h=417
@All
And another thing, about the flaperon damage. specifically the torsion noted by the French BEA chief investigator: if you look at the leading edge of the flaperon, just inboard of the outboard actuator attachment point, you can see a crease or wrinkle/buckle in the surface, about 20cms or so long, trending diagonally, and confined in extent by two of the internal ribs. I noticed this some time ago (and described it on this forum, BTW) This buckling of the leading edge was probably caused by torsion of the flaperon body as the aircraft ploughed into the water, and the inboard hinge breaking away before the outboard hinge.
@ROB and others: Maybe it’s a somewhat silly question. But if Shah had contemplated a gliding stretch and a water landing after the fuel ran out, couldn’t he have extended the flaps as long as the APU was still running? He could’ve gone down to the appropriate altitude in order to do that safely. Or would that have seriously compromised the gliding potential of the plane?
But an extended gliding stretch plus ditch with extended flaps is only one end scenario in order to explain why the plane might not be on the 7th arc. There are other combinations possible. We have to wait what the French engineers actually have to say about the flaperon – apparently they have given hints to the ATSB. But it would be nice to hear somethimg from their own mouths
@Kenyon
I think you are right. The picture I posted must be illusional.
The one you posted has the flaperon in the neutral position.
I compared my photo only with this other one below which shows the same illusion when zoomed in.
That’s why I was rather convinced.
Thanks for clearing up:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/jm26m2h3c046mvh/emirates777.jpg?dl=0
@Kenyon
I mean this photo…:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/rkxyjyrgq3wvbj2/emirates777t.jpg?dl=0
@littlefot
“But such a route would miss out the public insult of the Malaysian authorities by boldly going back over the peninsula. If Shah had a big “F..ck You All” in mind”
You’ve been watching too many American movies.
“the beginning of the simulated route looks a lot like the flights to Europe starting from KLIA”
I saw that too. It was Northern-Europe. I won’t go into closer detail yet.
“The discussions seem to have gone full circle since we started more than two years ago.”
Now you’re talking facts. All of it which doesn’t fit with what happened. The only thing I can come up with is searching in 2-4 other places. Other than that we might have to wait for Star Trek technology in the future and scan the entire ocean.
@ROB
Does it look like a giant hand tore it off vertically like butter?
Well, Trond, I’ve might’ve used American slang in order to underline what I mean. That doesn’t necessarily mean that I’m wrong 🙂
The whole thing is a no more than another hypothesis which seems to be strengthened by by the simulator tracks. But even discussing this specific option means that motives have to be considered, since this wouldn’t have been a random act.
I quickly checked the distances btw. If the current set of data is correct there’s no way that Dordrecht Hole could’ve been reached – not even through gliding. If that was ever considered as a final destination it must’ve been given up.
@Billy @Littlefoot
Yes, this Dordrecht Hole scenario I had a long time ago for the same reasons as you mention now.
It came back to me since it has become more obvious the plane probably crashed more to the north east with the 0:19 ping at ~32S ~97E on the 7th arc.
Particulary because @Victorl’s 25 june 2016 flightpath model and the current simulator ‘red route’ go straight over the Dordrecht Hole.
The Dordrecht Hole was always too far to reach at 33S 101E from the current 7th arc search area with a glide.
But now taking some room into account it will be reachable with a glide from a more north east starting point IMO.
IMO even a ditching under power can be considered now when we assume the plane was under pilot control till the end.
For he would also have had control over his fuel and when he chose this destination he would certainly have made sure he could reach it.
@Trond
In a word, no.
@ROB
It is attached like this right?
http://tinyurl.com/jfmpymb
It should still look like it was shredded off nicely like paper, and not like a brute force impact on the metal.
If I’m wrong on the facts I will take it back.
@Littlefoot
Re the APU and flap extension. I thought I had addressed that question a few minutes ago. He could have extended the flaps with the APU running alone, but he wouldn’t have known how long the APU could be expected to run on the residual fuel ⛽ in the LH tank. Which is why I believe he had made sure he had saved enough fuel to keep both engines turning over up until the moment he ditched, which is another reason why I think the 00:19 logon was deliberately set up. Boeing recommend that a ditching should be carried out while both engines are running, in order to insure adequate control.