Last month Robyn Ironside, the National Aviation Writer at the News Corp Australia Network, published what struck me as an extremely important article in the Daily Telegraph about the work of scientist Patrick De Deckker, who had obtained a sample of a Lepas anatifera barnacle from the French judicial authorities and conducted an analysis to determine the temperature of the water in which the barnacle grew. A snippet:
The same 2.5 centimetre barnacle was used by both French and Australian examiners — but different techniques applied. “For my analysis, I used a laser to create little holes of 20 microns, over the length of the barnacles. In all we did 1500 analyses,” said Professor De Deckker.
Intrigued, I reached out to Ironside, asking if she could tell me more about De Deckker’s work. She very graciously did just that, and shared this extremely interesting nugget, a verbatim quote from De Deckker:
The start of the growth was around 24 degrees (Celsius) and then for quite some time, it ranged between 20 and 18 degrees (Celsius). And then it went up again to around 25 degrees.
This is surprising. The graphic above shows the water temperature in July 2005, which I take to be a rough proxy for the water temperature in March 2014. (I would be extremely grateful if someone could extract granular sea-surface temperature maps for March 2014 to July 2015 from NASA or NOAA databases available online.) It shows that the waters in the seabed search area are about 12-14 degrees Celsius. To find 24 degree water would mean trekking 1000 miles north, above the Tropic of Capricorn.
It has long been known that Lepas anatifera do not grow in waters below about 18 degrees Celsius, and that in order to begin colonizing the flaperon (if it began its journey in the search zone) would have had to first drift northwards and wait for warmer months and warmer latitudes. What’s peculiar is that this particular Lepas would have to have waited a good while beyond that, until the flaperon arrived in water six degrees above its minimum. As I’ve written before, Lepas naupali are common in the open sea and in general are eager colonizers of whatever they can glue their heads to.
Peculiarity number two is that after this period of initial growth the flaperon then found its way into significantly colder water, where most of its total growth took place. What’s weird is that every drift model I’ve ever seen shows currents going through warm water before arriving at Réunion. Where the heck could it have gone to find 18-20 degree water? And how did it then get back to the 25 degree waters of Réunion Island, where it finished its growth?
I’m frankly baffled, and am appealing to readers to ponder historical surface temperature data and drift models to help figure out what kind of journey this plucky Lepas might have found itself on.
Here’s a map of MH370’s scheduled flight path:
http://onemileatatime.img.boardingarea.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/MH370-Flight-Plan.png#_ga=1.160781950.2116400374.1474138465
Confirmation that MH370 was in Cambodian airspace came at 2:04 and 2:15 am
It is unclear whether MAS responded to Vietnam’s clarification MH370 was not in Cambodian airspace at 2:19.
@Nederland: on suicide
I don’t have a good answer to that and as you might recall I belong(ed) to the defenders of Z’s innocence until proven guilty for quite a while. I still do, technically.
But we need to be able to state things hypothetically. It is a bizarre scenario, yes, but, if you think about it, it is — they way it seems to have been “orchestrated” — perhaps the “cleanest” suicide he could come up with, being a father and a family provider. This is thinking out loud, but still. One the one hand, it is still mass murder (should it stay more or less where we are), and his family will suffer, but on the other it is “tidy” and it is far away and can be impossible to legally prove. Obviously he must have been pretty mad at someone, his employer most likely, and Malay society, or whoever was perhaps robbing him of his livelihood, and a bit “bent”, and a bit devastated, or perhaps dying from something. But keeping the ambiguity, and carrying it far away, will save the memory of him among his own friends and family. I am not saying this out of disrespect for the next of kin, or Z’s family, who all suffer tremenduosly and will do so for years and years, but I can see this as a possibility. There are other possibilites, but not many. Why there was a logon I could not possibly guess, other perhaps than what I once stated that it could be a false trace if it occured before FMT and he believed the logon could be traced. Or a kind of gesture that the plane was still in the air if he needed to make a point. It is of course a tremendous coincidence that the Court of Appeals gave the decision to deny Anwar freedom from the sentence previously discarded by a lower legal instance only hours before take off. Z’s stunt is disastrous and sick but it has a kind of adventurous touch to it that he perhaps thought could easen the sharp edges.
I am not ruling out a crew or pax wanting to achieve more or less the above and holding him at gunpoint. Or something so weird it would be hard to imagine.
so..yet another pro for CI theory, what a surprise
it’s tragic how much people can get deluded to not see the obvious…
@Nederland:
It is of course easy to get the stupid idea that if the Malaysians were tracking a flight projection which showed the plane in Vietnam, but said on inquiry that it really was in Cambodia, it actually was flying, perhaps habitually, much farther to the south, where it, happily released of any working systems of short or long term communication with the human being on planet earth (which someone must have laboured to figure out!), was supposed to gather some intel about any arduos Chinese laborings with bucket and sand in that area.
Ge Rijn:
Ja, war’s nicht? Und du kennst den Gesang, oder?
@Ge Rijn
“The Malaysian minister declared the military saw the plane passing mainland-Malaysia and decided it was not a threat. Therefore they declared they did not scrambled jets.”
He simply lied. Malaysian govt/military is just a bunch of incompetent fools lucky enough to not get in the way of any superpower, although they angered chinese quite a bit with how they managed this search.
@Dennis
And the MAS ops headquarters was in such a deep slumber that they themselves could only bother to call MH370 ONE time (a second call occurred some 4-5 hours after the first) in an effort to query its ‘status’?
Uhm, there aircraft is missing (or wait, perhaps its meandered over into Cambodia–HUH) and they do nothing but chat back and forth with KLATCC for some hours, only trying to call the cockpit one time???
Here is why…they were getting real time orders from above. Namely, from Hishammuddin himself.
And the military, as Hishammuddin says, did track 370 in real time, did know that it was ‘friendly’, and even knew that it originated from there airspace.
The top brass knew that Z was in control and that they were at his mercy.
And Mr. Zaharie had no interest in silly ‘negotiations’. He wasn’t playing games, he was playing from the already established position of checkmate (in his mind).
@StevenG:
If you address people properly and unenigmatically you will make it possible for them to defend themselves. It is all about arguments here. And if you don’t have a personal or extra-contextual understanding of “CI”, you might have run into someone who can take good care of himself.
@Johan
Yes. Tough day on the blog. I am back from a strenuous rescue activity, and feeling much better. Life is good.I needed to blow some air through my lungs.
@DennisW:
Yes. Busy day. I was watching your six. Tomorrow you’ll have to watch mine.
I hope everyone or everything fared well? Ranch or medic?
@jeff and @all just sharing what happened back then with the hope of providing clarification. Here is another one that probably puts things in perspective:
Malaysian military withheld radar data on Flight MH370 as nations searched wrong area, sources say
Facebook | Twitter | Google+ | Email
Siva Govindasamy and Niluksi Koswanage, Reuters
Friday, Apr. 11,2014
KUALA LUMPUR — Malaysia’s government has begun investigating civil aviation and military authorities to determine why opportunities to identify and track Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370 were missed in the chaotic hours after it vanished, two officials said.
The preliminary internal enquiries come as tensions mount between civilian and military authorities over who bears most responsibility for the initial confusion and any mistakes that led to a week-long search in the wrong ocean.
“What happened at that time is being investigated and I can’t say any more than that because it involves the military and the government,” a senior government official told Reuters.
In an interview with Reuters last weekend, Malaysia Airlines Chief Executive Ahmad Jauhari Yahya said internal enquiries were under way, although he declined to give details.
A government spokesman did not respond to Reuters questions over whether an investigation had been launched. The senior government source said it was aimed at getting a detailed picture of the initial response. It was unclear which government department was in charge or whether a formal probe had been opened. Government officials have said any formal inquiry should not begin until the flight’s black box recorders are found.
The Boeing 777 was carrying 227 passengers and 12 crew when it disappeared on March 8. Malaysia says it believes the plane crashed into the southern Indian Ocean after being deliberately diverted from its Kuala Lumpur-to-Beijing route.
A search effort is taking place well out to sea off the Australian city of Perth to try to locate any wreckage as well as the recorders which may provide answers to what happened onboard.
Interviews with the senior government source and four other civilian and military officials show that air traffic controllers and military officials assumed the plane had turned back to an airport in Malaysia because of mechanical trouble when it disappeared off civilian radar screens at 1:21 a.m. local time.
That assumption took hold despite no distress call or other communication coming from the cockpit, which could have been a clue that the plane had been hijacked or deliberately diverted.
The five sources together gave Reuters the most detailed account yet of events in the hour after the plane vanished. All declined to be identified due to the sensitivity of the issue and because they were not authorized to speak to the media.
“The initial assumption was that the aircraft could have diverted due to mechanical issues or, in the worst case scenario, crashed,” said a senior Malaysian civilian source. “That is what we were working on.”
Officials at Malaysia’s Department of Civil Aviation, which oversees air traffic controllers, the Defence Ministry and the air force directed requests for comment to the prime minister’s office, which did not respond.
One senior military official said air traffic control had informed the military at around 2:00 a.m. that a plane was missing. The standard operating procedure was to do so within 15 minutes, he said. Another military source said the notification was slow in coming, but did not give a time.
Civil aviation officials told Reuters their response was in line with guidelines, but they did not give a specific time for when the military was informed.
Once alerted, military radar picked up an unidentified plane heading west across peninsular Malaysia, the senior military official said. The air force has said a plane that could have been MH370 was last plotted on military radar at 2:15 a.m., 320 km (200 miles) northwest of the west coast state of Penang.
Top military officials have publicly said Malaysia’s U.S. and Russian-made fighter jets stationed at air force bases in Penang and the east coast state of Kuantan were not scrambled to intercept the plane because it was not viewed as “hostile”.
“When we were alerted, we got our boys to check the military radar. We noticed that there was an unmarked plane flying back but (we) could not confirm (its identity),” said the senior military source. “Based on the information we had from ATC (Air Traffic Control) and DCA (Department of Civil Aviation), we did not send up any jets because it was possibly mechanical problems and the plane might have been going back to Penang.”
The military has not publicly acknowledged it tracked the plane in real time as it crossed back over the peninsula.
While fighter jets would not have had enough fuel to track a Boeing 777 for long and darkness would have complicated the operation, they could have spotted MH370 flying across peninsular Malaysia and possibly beyond, aviation experts said.
That could have enabled Malaysia to get a better fix on where it was headed and thus possibly ruled out the need to search off its east coast in the Gulf of Thailand and the South China Sea, around where MH370 was last seen on civilian radar.
Fighter pilots should be able to scramble within minutes, aviation experts said, although the time can vary widely from country to country. In Europe and North America, radar experts said controllers were trained to coordinate across civil and military lines and across borders.
They said military jets would have been scrambled, as they were from a Greek air force base in 2005 when a Helios Airways jet with 121 people on board lost contact over the Aegean Sea after suffering a decompression that knocked out the pilots. Two F-16 jets could see the captain’s seat empty and the first officer slumped over the controls. The plane crashed in Greece after running out of fuel
“This raises questions of coordination between military and civil controllers,” former pilot Hugh Dibley, a fellow of the Royal Aeronautical Society in London, said of Malaysia’s response.
Another contentious issue has been whether the military was slow in passing on its radar data that showed an unidentified plane had re-crossed the Malay peninsula.
Two civilian aviation officials said military bureaucracy delayed the sharing of this information, although they gave no precise timeframe for when it was handed over.
“The armed forces knew much earlier that the aircraft could have turned back. That is why the search was expanded to include the Strait of Malacca within a day or two,” said a second senior civilian source, who was familiar with the initial search, referring to the narrow stretch of water between Indonesia and Malaysia, on the western side of the peninsula.
“But the military did not confirm this until much later due to resistance from senior officers, and the government needed to step in. We wasted our time in the South China Sea.”
Government sources have said Prime Minister Najib Razak had to force the military to turn over its raw radar data to investigators during the first week after the flight’s disappearance.
Military officials have said they did not want to risk causing confusion by sharing the data before it had been verified, adding this was why Air Force chief Rodzali Daud went to the air base in Penang on March 9, where the plane’s final radar plot was recorded.
On the same day, Rodzali said the search was being expanded to the west coast, although Reuters has not been able to determine if that meant the data was being shared with other Malaysian officials.
On March 12, four days after Flight MH370 disappeared, Rodzali told reporters there was still no confirmation the unidentified plane had been Flight MH370, but added Malaysia was sharing the radar data with international civilian and military authorities, including those from the United States.
Authorities called off the search in the South China Sea on March 15 after Razak said satellite data showed the plane could have taken a course anywhere from central Asia to the southern Indian Ocean.
A sixth source, a senior official in the civil aviation sector, said the plane’s disappearance had exposed bureaucratic dysfunction in Malaysia, which has rarely been subject to such international demands for transparency. “There was never the need for these silos to speak to one another. It’s not because of ill intent, it’s just the way the system was set up,” the official said
The accounts given to Reuters reveal growing tensions between civilian officials, the military and Malaysia Airlines over whether more could have been done in those initial hours.
One of the Reuters sources said military officials in particular were concerned they could lose their jobs.
Tensions have also emerged between the government and state-controlled Malaysia Airlines.
Malaysia’s defence minister and acting transport minister, Hishammuddin Hussein, said in an interview with China’s CCTV that the airline would have to “answer” for its mistakes in dealing with the relatives of the some 150 Chinese passengers on board.
In his interview with Reuters, Malaysia Airlines chief Ahmad Jauhari played down talk of tension, saying there were “slight differences of opinion.”
Tags: World, Malaysia Airlies Flight 370, Malaysia Airlines Flight 370, Reuters Group Plc, South China Sea, Southeast Asia
@Johan
I don’t really want to speculate on who hijacked MH370. True, Zaharie was a supporter of Anwar Ibrahim, but so were probably many others in Malaysia or within MAS as well. And then again, there is no point to say someone deliberately crashed the plane to make a point for democracy and human rights in Malaysia.
To my mind, two major changes can be observed for flying safety after the 9/11 attacks:
– awareness by crew/passengers that it is probably best to stop the hijacker rather than to comply with demands
– enhanced cockpit door security, rendering it impossible to break into the cockpit once locked.
It is reasonable to assume that the cockpit door was locked mechanically (via a bolt), as we discussed in an earlier thread that isolating the left AC bus probably means disabling the electronic door lock. Deliberate depressuriation is just a conjecture. There is nothing to support it and many flaws connected with it too (temperature/oxygen bottles).
Now imagine MH370 was hijacked and crew/passengers were able either deliberately to kill the hijacker(s) from outside the cockpit or went into the avionics bay to regain some control of the aircraft/communicate to the outside world/try and force their way into the cockpit, and something went wrong, having a similar effect as above – and the recent Madagascar debris, if confirmed, may indicate a flash fire in the avionics bay, which normally knocks out everyone close to it – then what do you do next? Would that not be consistent with no pilot inputs at the latter stage of the flight (after the FMT) as currently theorised by the ATSB?
Additionally if one studies the available transcript of what transpired between cockpit and ATC prior to IGARI, one will notice significant silences in the exchanges. Were these silences indicative of people being forced from
the cockpit during/after which flight data was reprogrammed:
“Missing jet’s U-turn programmed before signoff: The missing Malaysia Airlines jet’s abrupt U-turn was programmed into the on-board computer well before the co-pilot calmly signed off with air traffic controllers, sources told NBC News.The change in direction was made at least 12 minutes before co-pilot Fariq Abdul Hamid said “All right, good night,” to controllers on the ground, the sources said.”
http://www.cnbc.com/2014/03/18/malaysia-flight-update-thai-radar-may-have-tracked-plane.html
It’s since been confirmed by multiple sources that it was Z who signed off.
Also a related read:
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/465369/Malaysia-Airlines-jet-Are-military-rulers-COVERING-UP-details-of-plane-s-last-flightpath
@Wazir
You are discounting the coordinates found on Shah’s simulator. It is hard to understand what anyone else needs. Is everyone doing drugs besides me?
Is the millennial influence so strong that it over-rides common sense? Most of the posters here I regard as pathetic.
there are no other information that indicate the context on the Shah’s Simulator is relevant as the data files were recovered without that context as the simulator was from a defunct computer with a corrupted file system.
Malaysia Airlines MH370 plunged into ocean in a ‘death dive’
The rate of descent of MH370 rules out a controlled ditch or glide into the Indian Ocean.
Samantha Payne By Samantha Payne
September 17, 2016 15:38 BST
Embed Feed Australia examines possible MH370 plane debris found in Tanzania IBTimes US
Missing Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 plunged into the ocean in a ‘death dive’, according to new evidence.
Further analysis of the Boeing 777 wing flap, washed ashore in Tanzania, revealed it was not deployed at point of impact, eliminating suggestions the aircraft with 239 passengers on board could have made a controlled landing.
More from IBTimes UK
Is this the smallest flat ever? Man lives in a 40 square foot cubbyhole
Another humpback whale washes up on New Jersey beach
British armed forces ‘ill-prepared’ for attack on UK, says retired commander
Why advertise with us
Speaking to the Australian Associated Press, AAP, Peter Foley, the head of the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB), reportedly told Australian Associated Press (AAP): “The rate of descent combined with the position of the flap — if it’s found that it is not deployed [which since has] — will almost certainly rule out either a controlled ditch or glide.
“If it’s not in a deployed state, it validates, if you like, where we’ve been looking.”
It confirms previous analysis of the automated flight signals that the doomed aircraft could have dropped from a height of 35,000ft at a speed of up to 20,000ft a minute before crashing into the sea.
The ATSB has led the A$180m ($134.9m, £103.8m) search, over 120,000km sq of sea floor, since the aircraft disappeared on 7 March 2014.
Despite the recent findings of the pieces of debris said to be connected to the missing aircraft in Reunion Island near Madagascar and Tanzania, no confirmed trace of the aircraft has ever been found.
Mh370 tanzania debris
Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) confirmed after examination of identification numbers (in picture) on the flaperon found off the Tanzania coast that it belongs to missing Malaysia Airlines flight MH370Australian Transport Safety Bureau ATSB
It follows continuing allegations that Captain Zaharie Ahmad Shah purposely veered the plane off course while on its way to Beijing. Malaysian officials admitted for the first time last month that data from Shah’s flight simulator at his home in Kuala Lumpur included a flight path to the southern Indian Ocean.
Malaysian transport minister Liow Tiong Lai told the local press : “Until today, (6 August 2016), this theory is still under investigation. There is no evidence to prove that Captain Zaharie flew the plane into the southern Indian Ocean.
“Yes, there is the simulator but the (route) was one of thousands to many parts of the world. We cannot just base on that to confirm (he did it).”
It has also been reported Captain Shah was separated from his wife Faizah Hanun although they still lived together at the time of the tragedy. According to Mail Online, her comments are said to be included in an interim report due to be released on the missing aircraft.
More than 50 lawsuits from grieving families have been filed against Malaysia Airlines who are seeking compensation for the deaths of their loved-ones.
Here is the link with pictures
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/malaysia-airlines-mh370-plunged-into-ocean-death-dive-1581863
@all
As for Z’s woman friend. Really, take a look at her, a typical Malay mum of three who had friended Z as volunteers at some party gathering. Since he was able to have four wives in that culture but unlikely to take on a woman who was still married and with three kids. I’d say what he thought was a friendship, she took to be more and things cooled off.
As a top dog in his world, an airline captain, he had access to plenty of single, pretty or equally plain (as the mystery woman) but better groomed, flight attendants. And overnight stays in nice hotels in exotic parts of the world were the flight attendants were also staying. And yet he is supposed to have been carrying on with plain jane mum of three. His friendship with her amounts to zero evidence.
Hishammuddin’s interview, (14 minutes)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2XQPCwY5SHk
This Four Corners interview shortly after the event.
I’ve watched it a number of times, at the start Hishammuddin is evasive, calms down but annoyed by the line of questions which are off script. He is visibly angry at 9.30 mark, when to a question about shooting down the plane, he says….
….. “well the Americans would”.
The Americans were in the region doing military exercises with Thailand and also their base at DG.
During the interview, Hishammuddin (Minister for Transport and Defense) is self censoring but not well enough to hide his anger and frustration. He is a perfect example of a well connected political appointment, son of the soil, in a system that is not unlike the West where your family connections help your passage to the top.
He is the son of Malaysia’s third prime minister, Hussein Onn, and the cousin of the sixth and current prime minister, Najib Razak. His education was British, in KL and then in UK in law and economics.
He says at 13.7 minutes into the interview, that the Chinese gave him satellite information from the South China Sea. Justifying the search there.
Another part of Four Corners interview but this with the alleged object of Zaharie’s suicidal frustration, Anwar Ibrahim, Leader of the Opposition. He describes the Z man, does not fit the media profiling.
During this interview with a relaxed Anwar Ibrahim, after the failed legal issues, accusations and charges of sodomy going back 18 years. This was not a fresh set of issues. He is battle worn but calm and apparently free of jail time.
At the 9.2 minute mark Anwar points to the protocol being broken, regarding matters of national security. The Prime Minister’s wife informed the Prime Minister in the morning.
What if Hishammuddin did notify the US military in Thailand or DG and the rest is history and more history in MH17.
@MH
Blan, blah, blah,… puff, puff, puff,…
@Gloria
I do agree with the “plain jane” description. Her link to Shah was terrorist related if you care to research it.
@dennisW – try the bcBud. That shall clear it up your misunderstanding.
@DennisW
How on earth do you get that, nothing of the kind, it was a friendship or a potential relationship. Nothing much there, no different to any other Malay man with a wife and a GF but I doubt she was a GF.
They volunteered at the opposition leader’s parties events. To say more is like labelling Hillary Clinton’s volunteers terrorists because they have an interest in a political party.
Here is a link with the face of this mystery woman. She probably became emotionally dependent on him and he withdrew. This Malay lady, so many just like her all over Malaysia, they wear colorful scarves and long floral dresses. They like sweet drinks, cakes and chili spiced food, giggle with their friends. They are very social, helping friends and family, and always a smile on their faces. They are conservative, they pray, as far from radical and can be. It is too casual and comfortable an environment, not like the Islam of Pakistan, Iran or Saudi.
These Malay woman are locally educated, get degrees as Malays have first preference at Malaysian universities, they become office workers, middle managers and teachers. They drive cars and meet friends for lunch. During fasting month they break fast over the biggest buffets I have ever seen. Please it is just not a radicalized environment.
On the preferred list of placed for expats, KL is up there as it is easier, less problematic and less polluted than Indonesia and more politically stable than Thailand. The cost of living is so much lower than Singapore plus Malaysia has more to do and see, is a hub for international flights.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/aviation/mh370-pilots-friendship-with-mystery-woman-revealed/news-story/1e5d5b18a3a87e4765830c311f1e87ac
Married guy walks into woman’s life. Shares details like he is alone at home. Uses kids as excuse to drop by even at nights. Shares,presumably, an important secret Woman revels in almost all details save one and cryptically at that and not before everything abruptly terminates temporarily……..
Setting : conservative yet prurient Malaysia where moral police abound on lookout for unmarried couples in closed environs.
What I am getting at? Go figure!
@All
Byron Baily Australian 17Sep16
BYRON BAILEY
The Australian
12:00AM September 17, 2016
Sully is a movie about how the calm professionalism and skill of captain Chesley “Sully” Sullenberger saved the lives of 155 people on board his A320 aircraft after take off from LaGuardia airport in New York, after at 2800 feet and 200 knots it flew into a flock of geese that destroyed both engines.
The US National Transportation Safety Board, the world’s premier aviation accident investigation board — using the opinion of bureaucrats relying on armchair aviation specialists, computer simulations and simulators — subjected the captain’s decision to ditch in the Hudson River to close scrutiny.
They did contend that the aircraft was capable of returning to LaGuardia or reaching the nearby Teterboro airport in New Jersey (an airfield I have flown out of recently).
When presented with the opinion of the flight crew and technical information from the black boxes, the NTSB was gracious enough to concede its initial premise was flawed.
How unlike the Australian Transport Safety Bureau’s handling of the missing Malaysia Airlines flight MH370.
Presented with the opinions of real aviation specialists such as airline pilots, the ATSB refused to acknowledge that its initial theory — an unresponsive pilot scenario in the three minutes from when MH370 captain Zaharie Ahmad Shah said goodnight to Kuala Lumpur air traffic control and the aircraft turned about obviously under pilot control — was flawed and lacked common sense.
Totally ignoring the flight deck procedures of well-trained pilots to handle emergencies, the ATSB’s position was illogical, and the more that this was pointed out the more it buried its head in the sand.
The initial premise of “unresponsive pilots” may have led to a compounding error when calculating the search area.
As for Sully, it is a brilliant movie and a must-see for all airline pilots and cabin crew.
It may possibly be one of the best crew training films made. The well-trained and experienced cabin crew performed admirably in their primary function of passenger safety.
It is a shame a movie could not be made about Qantas QF32, the A380 aircraft engine blow-up out of Singapore where the flight crew, under captain Richard Champion de Crespigny, faced a scenario that their simulator training had not covered (this was also the case with the Sully event).
The engine blow-up took out most of the electrical and hydraulic systems, and it was only the professionalism of the crew of the world’s safest airline that managed an extraordinary feat of airmanship in landing the aircraft safely back at Changi airport.
The ATSB should realise that the opinions of armchair experts, mathematical modelling and simulations do not stack up against the real-world experience and knowledge of professional airline pilots.
Who made the decision to go with the “unresponsive pilots” theory?
Former ATSB head Martin Dolan and the responsible minister at the time, Warren Truss, need to front an inquiry to answer this.
Cheers Tom L
@DennisW @JeffWise @all
“Most of the posters here I regard as pathetic.”
Of course. Well in that case… Jeff your next article must then be ‘Shah did it’, because of DennisW’s strong persuasion of how pathetic we are and he is right about the sim coords. How could we have been so blind in the obvious? Case closed.
@DennisW
VG ‘hook, line & sinker’?
Tom L
@DennisW
My last post got out of sequence .
Tom L
@All, I missed a lot of sparring matches:). Essential data is missing on many fronts and vital information is not being made public. That’s for sure. Every theory becomes challenging to reconcile for one reason or another, IMHO. MY was perhaps clueless and demonstrated incompetence at its best after the fact, but they may have feigned such on purpose to hide something else. Choice of 2 evils, look dumb or keep a secret. Everytime I see Hussein in interviews his body language speaks volumes, i.e, he could care less about 239 people losing their lives and doesn’t understand why the west is getting their knickers in a twist over it. Not ever have I seen any government official show zero empathy for victims and family. So indeed, what are they not saying? Sadly, taking the details we do know to date, Z has a bulls eye on his back, whether we like it or not. Perhaps one day we will know. As for 9/11, the USA and ramped up security cannot be compared to those in MY, IMO. US airlines are practically the only ones that will break your shenes with the trolley when pilots have to pee. If you are convinced you are not way up on someone’s target list, you tend to be more lax. Better understanding the L-AC Bus isolation and reboot including possible depressurization (and how this would really work) would be interesting, Not seen any articles on that yet.
@Wazir, @Tom Lindsey:
I assume the idea that the flight computer would have had to be programmed well before the turn at Igari is an Australian dead end, then, later discarded?
It seems to be the case in Malaysia that the military won’t open their mouths at all if they don’t get an opportunity to go in a fancy car with a driver, make a visit in person, wearing their fancy uniform and sticking it to a couple of subordinates coming in his way. That gives you some lost times. Telephones are only for non-official calls, on record by the secretary listening in. If the plane is still in the air, it will crash well before they get to the government palaces — where you may watch in on the king having breakfast if you chose the wrong door. But that is perhaps the point. It makes the situation more black and white, and you can start planning for a search after the cabin near your own cabin or some party members cabin.
A journalist asks the chief in charge of the military radar installation:
—”Where is MH370?”
—”Well, we are still evaluating. It was spotted over my colleague’s cabin, but we are convinced it landed closer to my superior’s cabin than my mistress’ cabin or my party officer’s cabin. So you might say we are still triangulating.”
It is sickening: the press is turning perverse:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3793825/MH370-plunged-ocean-death-dive.html
The “evidence” that made the controlled ditching a scenario that indicated the guilt of the pilot is now turned around, so that the “death dive” is now indicative of a crash by a heartbroken pilot. Just a couple of more twists and he is hanging. Hooray!
Machines are picking up thought-like copytext from the internet and making it look like an article, for machines to read and comment.
And who is astonished there is terror and assymetric warfare? The press. The premeditated simulation of morality and agency will eventually bite someone in the face, I am afraid. This is becoming a new 1930s.
@Nederland:
It sounds like you are lecturing me, but I can’t see the reason for it. I am only trying to push this discussion forward. I have no idea about the latest ATSB hypotheses, which is perhaps strange as I have followed this blog pretty close for quite some time now. Enlighten me! They were pretty deeep into the ditching scenario for just a little while, as you might recall.
I have by the way never spoken about anything else than a pilotless flight from right after FMT. I have neither suggested that a political hijack or political demonstration made any (political) sense. What I have tried to do above was to further interpret and contextualise what significance or rationality a suicide could have had from Z’s own point of view, given certain conditions and factors. This to correct previous assumptions by myself where I could see no logic or motive enough for Z to have done this (given what we know) — in a time when everyone in here where convinced of a ditching scenario with sun-mystic bearings and already had him hanged. As you can see, I am also holding “a door open” for a hijack at gunpoint (but wouldn’t the guy have had to be hiding in the One, avionics bay from long before the start?) And I can say that again: noone, noone (except for Anwar himself and his mother) would hijack a plane on the night of the Court of Appeals decision solely to free Anwar from a sodomy conviction. It does not happen. For crying out loud. But for someone who might have descended into a state of disappoimtment in life, blaming “the authorities”, over a long period of time, or who was about to loose out, it could be a trigger with a shade of additional significance.
From what you write I still see nothing but conjectures, and a cautious hibernation waiting for results indicating whether there was fire before the debris hit the beaches. I understand the implications of that. I trust the authorities capabilities in that respect, but I also know they will probably take their time since they like to be in the right before they say anything. And for them to be in the right they (or someone) first will have to be in the wrong, in the wrong, in the wrong. Knowledge and evidence does not necessarily pile up like a stack.
And you need to tell me more about an anonymous hijack no one heard of, without demands or target or known or likely culprit, with an unbreakable cockpit door that was broken. I happened to see parts of “Flightplan” with Jodie Foster yesterday, so if some assume Z did a “Sully”, it is certainly not unlikely that some crew/pax would do a “Jodie”. Still others might have seen Airforce One, Knight and Day, The Ten Commandments and Snakes on a Plane, though, so there might not be a common theory about how to solve the situation.
The only rational thought that came into my mind after reading
the above post was ‘This guy takes Jodie Foster to the movies?
Gee, she really MUST be hard up nowadays…’
@Johan
@TBill wrote above:
“A couple of logic points from the MH370 TV documentary on YouTube:
1. If it was a Hijack plan but the plan went wrong or fell apart, then it could be very difficult to understand the intended outcome or motive” (btw, can you provide a link?)
I think the ditching at sunrise scenario is pretty much demolished at the moment. If the flaperon detached due to flutter, it must have been an uncontrolled rather than controlled ‘death dive’. The outboard flap from Tanzania was not extended according to a preliminary ATSB assessment. The two final BFOs indicate uncontrolled descent according to the ATSB. The state of debris indicates a violent high-speed impact (perhaps sidewards or upside down, because of the heavily-damaged vertical stabiliser). This makes it more likely there really were no pilot inputs at some point after the FMT and possibly a ghost flight (indicating the person/s in control of the aircraft were unable to provide pilot inputs rather than that they did not choose to do so).
Speculating about motives is a bit idle in that case. Hijackers could have entered the cockpit after the flight reached cruising altitude (after that there were just one or two short communications by Zaharie). They could have forced the cabin crew to provide access, for example. Pilot hijack is another possibility, it just happened a month earlier.
So we don’t know who it was, much less why in that case. It may or may not have to do with the Anwar Ibrahim trial. The trial may or may not have served as a backdrop to something else (there was a terror attack following an earlier trial). Typically, hijackers don’t put forward demands while airborne but rather after they reach their destination (that would have been in the morning).
The avionics bay is accessible to anyone in the cabin. It is still early days, however, for interpreting recent debris finds. At the moment there is just speculation by independent experts that they could point to a flash fire in the avionics bay. So, I’m curious to see some official report on that.
I think for a suicide to make sense we need to have some personal rather than political motive (unless we are talking about a radical Islamist, who positions himself as a martyr, like the 9/11 attackers, and there is no evidence for that either). So, it makes sense to look at alternatives as well.
@Nederland @others
IMO there are two main assumptions:
-The flight turned into a ghost-flight just before, during or after FMT
-The flight was actively piloted from beginning till the end
If the flight turned into a ghost-flight
there must have been a catastrophic event that caused the pilot(s) and/or maybe also the hijacker(s) to die shortly after or during this event.
We know the plane was human controlled at least till 18:25 and FMT for the turn had to be executed or programmed by a pilot.
IMO then there is only one logical option where and when this catastrophic event could have taken place; between (or just before) 18:22 and FMT (probably then before 18:40).
The question then is; what could have caused this catastrophic event to a plane that was flying normal in a straight line from Penang under pilot control till at least 18:22 that took the pilot(s) and possible hijacker(s) out before, during or just after FMT?
I see two possibilities of events that could have turned the plane into a ghost-flight:
-or the plane was shot at just before or at 18:22 damaging and decompressing the plane (and possibly taking an engine out)
-or the pilot/hijacker committed suicide just before, during or after FMT (maybe by decompressing the plane himself)
If such an event did not happen during this time-span then there is no reason to assume the flight turned into a ghost-flight IMO.
Does the ATSB, KNOW something catastropic happened before, during or after FMT?
Is this why they so confidentely based their search-programm on the assumption it was a ghost-flight after FMT?
I would like to see a detailed motivation why the ATSB (or others involved) chose to use this assumption to guide them through this 180 miljon-dollar search.
@Wazir Roslan
We should have guessed, shouldn’t we. We think we’re smart don’t we.
It always boils down to the basisc, in the end. We (that’s the collective we) spend all this intellectual energy on trying to work out what happened, an endeavour Einstein would have admired, when all we needed to do was “Cherchez la Femme” and all would be revealed! Doh!
@MH
“simulator was from a defunct computer with a corrupted file system”
Would you please provide a source for this. I haven’t found anything other than the simulator was inoperable.
@Nederland:
Good, I hear you. I agree fully with the significance of TBill’s point 1. I have since early days preferred to think in terms of a complex series of events rather than a single culprit’s success story, perhaps to some part a bit spun or fooled by stupid headlines. But it is always good to keep having an open mind. And I have always preferred to discuss the conditions of Z’s possible guilt rather than taking at face value. But since Occam has some followers here as well as on New Zealand, in Australia, Manhattan, rural northern California, and in Malaysia there is also a need to estimate what is the least you will need to bring it all together. You are asking quite a lot from a hijacker. And where would he have landed, to state his demands? Wouldn’t it be a good idea think about that before you step on a flight bound for Beijing? Or did he have descions anxiety? And surely some kind of communication with someone or some authority ought have taken place, without that being known afterwards?
As a parenthesis to that, Malaysia has trouble mainly with islamist groups, and have been taking the opportunity to call everything “terrorism” to motivate pretty rough legislation. And their attempts at discrediting the political (parliamentary) liberal opposition is obvious, but there is still a long way to go between liberal parliamentary opposition and an extremist, revolutionary socially subversive opposition (of smaller religiously defined groups) which are undemocratic and potentially anti-parliamentary, and thus tyrannical or dictatorial. So Anwar Ibrahim is not Malaysia’s biggest problem (it might be the sitting govt.’s biggest problem) and politically minded people will understand that you don’t resort to terrorism to create a coup that will put Anwar in charge, it does not work that way. Who would be happy about that? The point with democracy is that you accept the leader/leading party chosen by the most people. So although there will always be blockheads and maniacs, the hijacker of mh370 you are looking for is either a proper islamist, probably mute, and with skills limited to taking over a plane at the right moment and directing it around, but apart from that with severe descisions anxiety — or a person feeling completely bereaved of everything in life and possibly blaming or at least sick and tired of the political elite’s manouvres to stay in power. Something like that.
@buyerninety:
“Starring” is the word that would have saved you from ambiguity. 🙂
She really isn’t my type anyways…. I didn’t mean to bore you to death.
@ROB, @Wazir:
That is an insight with some potency.
@Ge Rijn
I think the ghost flight could have commenced at any time after the FMT (which may well have been after 18:40). In theory that leaves open a window of 5 or so hours (for example, would a suicidal pilot/hijacker really carry on for that long and how could you not be drugged)
Imo there could be other reasons for depressurisation or unconsciousness of pilot/hijacker (a shooting, mild explosion, loss of some structural integrity while attempting to break into the cockpit, deliberate depressurisation, the pilot afterwards deprived of oxygen or depriving himself of oxygen supply, hijackers killing the pilots like in MH653, not taking into account the recent flash fire theories).
But I don’t think this is the point. The ATSB only theorised that the satellite data best match a completely straight path and the uncontrolled final descent, irrespective of the question of whether no one was in control or simply did wish to navigate or was able to do so.
@Johan
Indeed!
@Johan
If I may wildly speculate about behavioural patterns regarding MH370’s early flight path, I may theorise:
– MH370 stayed in Malaysian airspace as long as possible. Delayed reactions in that airspace indicate it was the right decision. Obviously the path taken was well planned (normal flight routes)
– MH370 then avoided to cross Indonesian airspace within range of radar detection (that would mean the FMT occurred after 18:40, as Neil Gordon theorises).
– Instead it flew close to Campbell bay, perhaps aware that this island settlement is too small to have 24/7 radar surveillance and no fighter jets either (or so Wikipedia says).
– On its flight south, it continued to keep Sumatra at bay.
So, the deduction would be that a possible plan could have been to skirt Sumatra before turning east. Typically, a hijack from a developing country aims at a developed country (with free press), that would be Australia, either one of the islands with runway or possibly Exmouth/Learmonth. This was the only way to avoid Indonesian airspace. If something unexpected happened in the meantime, the aircraft would simply maintain its last heading. Part of the plan could have been to embarass Malaysia ATC/military.
Here’s a useful list of historical hijackings:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_hijackings
Typically, hijackers tend to avoid attention from the outside world before landing and coming up with demands. I feel a meticulous planning like that probably requires a group effort, but survivors may choose to keep quiet after the plan did not work out as planned.
@Nederland:
Sounds reasonable. Still, who were they? How did get onboard? How did they get guns/explosives onboard? What the heck did they want to do? If they were moderate (non-kamikaze) as to demands and threats, would the passengers risk the integrity of the aircraft to stop them? How come noone seems to know who they were even after 30 months? No secret service getting any hint anywhere? Not the least speculation from any paper anywhere?
@Nederland:
How many hours would it take them to fly to the expected destination in Australia (by way of Banda Aceh)?
@Johan
Personally, I’m ruling Zaharie neither out nor in. Just no credible suicide (personal) motive has emerged so far, not even in media speculation or reports on the leaked police file imo. Regardless, background checks on the passengers seem to have been quite superficial. There still is some conflicting information on passport issues. Security standards in south east Asia don’t really compare to those of the western world, in my experience. Compare it to MH653 (in 1977). Circumstance of the hijacking have never been solved, the pilots were shot before landing and the plane crashed. The identity of the hijacker is unknown, even though the wreckage and flight recorders were accessible.
@Johan
There have always been speculation that the planned destination was Cocos Islands. MH370 would have been there even before an international alarm phase was raised roughly five hours after the initial diversion.
Just saying there are potential alternatives to a suicide scenario (that also has quite a few flaws).
@Nederland:
MH653 was by all appearances an extended suicide disguised as a hijacking. (And yes the security might have left some to wish for, in Penang in 1977). Or if you prefer a suicide terror attack. There were some political dignitaries onboard and the terrorist Japanese Red Army was suspected. The obvious(?) target would have been the Cuban Ambassador to Japan and Malaysia.
German Wiki describes the analysis of the CVR like this:
“Der Täter verriegelte die Tür zum Cockpit von innen. Das Flugzeug flog zu diesem Zeitpunkt mit aktiviertem Autopiloten in einem stabilen Flugzustand. Obwohl die Kommunikation zwischen der Besatzung und dem Entführer zunächst ruhig schien, folgten auf den Aufnahmen in kurzer Folge drei Schüsse. Vermutlich erschoss der Täter zunächst die beiden Piloten und anschließend sich selbst. Die weiteren Aufzeichnungen des Cockpit Voice Recorders gaben den Ermittlern Anlass zur Vermutung, dass anschließend von anderen Personen versucht wurde, in das versperrte Cockpit zu gelangen. Nach Deaktivierung des Autopiloten, vermutlich in der Absicht, das Flugzeug unter Kontrolle zu halten, wurde die Maschine zunächst stark überzogen und geriet anschließend in einen unkontrollierten Sturzflug.”
I.e. the hijacker, locked-in with the pilots, after redirecting the plane to Singapore, and reaching cruise height and seemingly calmly communicating with the pilots suddenly shot them and then himself.
@Nederland:
Okay. Not that bad. But If I were the hijacker I would choose a place with lots of people and easy access by the press (and food and supplies). And not so easy access by marines. And if I were Malaysian. not an ally of Malaysia.
@Nederland
I don’t understand “no credible suicide motive” we have
1. Marraige issues
2. Second woman
3. Political angle
Not to mention possible inferred issues:
4. Malaysian Airlines possible financial and morale issues
5. Meeting potential profile of middle aged man life crisis
So all we can say is his human black box (digital data recorder) was turned off, so we don’t have evidence of what he might have been thinking, but it looks like there could be several rather obvious explanations.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/30/boomer-suicide_n_3360869.html
@Nederland
In a way I say the same.
My point is something catastrophic must have happened after 18:22 to turn the flight into a ghost-flight. Which way remains speculative.
To assume the data best fit to a ghost-flight makes no sence at all IMO.
It makes sence to assume the data best fit a completely straight flight and probably a high speed descent at the end. That’s all.
IMO there is no reason at all to make the assumption this could therefore not be a human controlled flight till the end.
Generally every long distance flight goes in a completely straight line. The descent rate at the end is still not sure. Inmarsat advises to discarde that final BFO’s.
And even if correct there is still no reason/evidence at all the plane was not under human control till the end.
There must be a very good reason why the ATSB (or others involved) decided to depart from the most obvious (a controlled flight till the end) to the assumption it turned into a ghost-flight before or after FMT.
If you, the ATSB, or anyone else could deliver any proof why the flight turned into a ghost-flight it could be settled. Still it’s not. No one delivered any proof yet.
And as long this is not settled IMO we have to assume the flight was human controlled from beginning till end.
Just like any flight out of 99.999% of all flights.