Yesterday Twitter user @nihonmama released the first two folders from the secret Malaysian police report into MH370. Some parts relating to Zaharie’s flight simulator had been released earlier, but the bulk of this material is coming into public view for the first time. Here is “Folder 1: Pilot” and here is “Folder 2: Co-pilot.”
I was particularly interested in the section containing the psychological evaluation of the pilot, Zaharie Ahmad Shah, found on page 111. As it is in Malaysian, I had to type it into Google Translate to make any sense of it. As I have absolutely no understanding of Malaysian I am copying it and pasting it below without any changes. Corrections welcome!
Hon. Datuk Mazlan bin Mansor
Deputy Director (Intelligence / Operations),
CID,
Royal Malaysian Police,
Bukit Aman,
50560, Kuala LumpurHon. Dato ‘
Expertise help the Ministry of Health in Malysia Investigation Missing MH370: The study “Psychosocial and Behavioural Pattern” crew MH370.
Letter from Hon. Dato ‘no. ref: JSJ KPN (PR) 35/3 dated July 3, 2014 and the terms of reference of the assessment panel “behavioral pattern and psychosocial crew of MH370 is referenced.
2. The sub-committee meeting between Kiraja Malaysia Police (PDRM) and KementerianKesihatan (MOH) was held in Room Mesyusarat, Hospital Bahagia Ulu Kinta, Perak on 7 July 2014. The purpose of this meeting was to obtain an independent report (independent) The above assessment.
3. Here is the panel sub-committee has been established.
[The letter lists three officials from the Ministry of Health and six officials from the Royal Malaysian Police]
4. Assessment conducted on flight MH370 pilot Captain Zaharia Ahmad Shah and co-pilot, en. Fariq Ab. Hamid, have been guided by reference listed:
i. Quoting witnesses related conversations pilot, Captain Zaharia Ahmad Shah, total of 40 person which includes 5 members, 20 co-workers, friends WeChat 9 and 6 public witnesses.
ii. Quoting witnesses related conversations pilot, Mr. Fariq Ab. Hamid total of 9 people including 3 members of the family, his girlfriend, and five colleagues.
iii. Quotes clips CCTV video at KLIA’s movement, patterns of behavior and expression on the face (facial expression) Zaharie co-pilot En. Fariq before their flight dated 07.03.2014.
iv. Quotes CCTV video clips KLIA Zaharie on 26.02.2014 before his flight to Denpasar, Indonesia and on 03.03.2014 before his flight to Melbourne, Australia.
v. Medical reports Zaharie.5. Based on these reference sources, we have studied the background Zaharie including education, personality and coping (coping style), relationship with spouse, children, family members, friends and colleagues, including his interests and hobbies. Attention has also been given to her relationship with her maid. His physical health problems are investigated including asthma and diseases of the spine, which caused him to have to take treatment drugs painkillers “analgesics.” Religious and political tendencies he observed.
6. We also reviewed the background of the co-pilot Mr. Fariq including education, personality, relationships with family members, friends and colleagues.
7. Highlights are as follows:
7.1 In the field of career, Zaharie is an experienced pilot and a competent and respected by peers.
7.2 Available Zaharie not share the same interests with his family members. However, the difference in interest is acceptable. His family was also not reported any change of pattern of behavior (behavioral pattern) before his flight was on 07/03/2014.
7.3 Information from friends and colleagues Zaharie show that he was a friendly, warm and jokes. They are also not reported any change of pattern of behavior before his flight was on 03/07/2014.
7.4 Problems spinal pain he was a fairly chronic physical problems rather than a new stressor.
7.5 Review of comparisons based recording video clips CCTV KLIA on 26.02.2014, 03.03.2014 and 03.07.2014, found him tending to smoke before her flight and movements of his time smoking was similar in all three videos. At KLIA CCTV video clip on 03/07/2014, Zaharie not show any sign of anxiety or depression.
Finally, we have not found, any changes in terms of psychological, social and behavioral patterns Zaharie Ahman Shah before his flight was on 03/07/2014. We also did not find any demolition of psychological, social and behavioral patterns of co-pilot En. Fariq Ab Hamid before his flight was on 03/07/2014.
Thank you.
“CARING, TEAMWORK PROFESSIONALISM AND WE ARE WORKING CULTURE”
I who am following orders,
Dr. HJH. RABA’IAH BINTI MOHD. sALLEH
MMC NO: 25878
Director & Consultant Psychiatry (Forensic)
Special Grade “C”
Hospital Bahagia Ulu Kinta
Perak Darul Ridzuan
I find this to be a truly remarkable document. We’ve been hearing rumors that the investigation found no evidence that suggested Zaharie could have a psychological predilection for suicide/mass murder, but here it is at last in black and white, with details such as the fact that his pattern of smoking before a flight was unchanged before MH370. It is hard to imagine that anyone contemplating his own imminent death could exhibit such sang froid.
Indeed, I don’t think there has ever been a case where someone who is known to have carried out such an act had such an outward appearance of being balanced and well-adjusted. Andreas Lubitz, for example, had experienced years of psychological upheaval trouble, at one point temporarily washing out from Lufthansa’s flight training program, before destroying Germanwings 9525.
In my estimation this psych evaluation must be regarded as powerful evidence that Zaharie did not hijack MH370.
After the jump, the letter in the original Malay, as re-typed by me from the report.
YBhg. Datuk Mazlan bin Mansor
Timbalan Pengarah (Risikan/Operasi),
Jabatan Siasatan Jenayah,
Polis Diraja Malaysia,
Bukit Aman,
50560, Kuala Lumpur
YBhg. Dato’,
Bantuan Kepakaran Kementerian Kesihatan Malysia dalam Siasatan Kehilangan MH370: Kajian “Behavioural Pattern dan Psikososial” krew MH370.
Surat daripada YBhg. Dato’ no. ruj: JSJ KPN (PR) 35/3 bertarikh 3 Julai 2014 dan terma rujukan utama panel pengkajian “behavioural pattern dan psikososial krew pesawat MH370 adalah dirujuk.
2. Mesyuarat sub-committee antara Polis Kiraja Malaysia (PDRM) dan KementerianKesihatan Malaysia (KKM) telah diadakan di Bilik Mesyusarat, Hospital Bahagia Ulu Kinta, Perak pada 7 Julai 2014. Tujuan mesyuarat ini diadakan adalah untuk mendapatkan satu laporan yang berkecuali (independent) di atas penilaian tersebut.
3. Berikut adalah panel sub-committee yang telah ditubuhkan.
4. Penilaian yang dijalankan terhadap juruterbang pesawat MH370 Kapten Zaharie Ahmad Shah dan pembantu juruterbang, en. Fariq Ab. Hamid, telah berpandukan sumber rujukan yang tersenarai:
i. Petikan percakapan saksi berkaitan juruterbang, Kapten Zaharie Ahmad Shah, sejumiah 40 orag yang merangkumi 5 orang ahli keluarga, 20 orang rakan sekerja, 9 orang rakan WeChat dan 6 orang saksi awam.
ii. Petikan percakapan saksi berkaitan pembantu juruterbang, En. Fariq Ab. Hamid sejumlah 9 orang yang merangkumi 3 orang ahli keluarga, teman wanita beliau, dan 5 orang rakan sekerja.
iii. Petikan klip-klip video CCTV di KLIA mengenai pergerakan, corak tingkah laku dan mimik muka (facial expression) Kapten Zaharie bersama pembantu juruterbang En. Fariq sebelum penerbangan mereka yang bertarikh 7.3.2014.
iv. Petikan klip-klip video CCTV KLIA Kapten Zaharie pada 26.2.2014 sebelum penerbangan beliau ke Denpasar, Indonesia dan pada 3.3.2014 sebelum pnerbangan beliau ke Melbourne, Australia.
v. Laporan perubatan Kapten Zaharie.
5. Berpandukan sumber rujukan tersebut, kami telah mengkaji latar belakang Kapten Zaharie termasuk pendidikan, personaliti dan daya tindak (coping style), perhubungan dengan isteri, anak-anak, ahli keluarga, kawan-kawan dan rakan sejawat termasuk minat dan hobi beliau. Perhatian juga telah diberi kepada perhubungan beliau dengan pembantu rumahnya. Masalah kesihatan fizikal beliau juga diteliti termasuk penyakit asma dan penyakit tulang belakang yang menyebabkan beliau perlu mengambil rawatan ubat-ubatan penahan sakit “analgesics.” Kecenderungan keagamaan dan politik beliau juga diamati.
6. Kami juga telah mengkaji latar belakang pembantu juruterbang En Fariq termasuk pendidikan, personaliti, perhubungan dengan ahli keluarga, kawan-kawan dan rakan sejawat.
7. Rumusan kami adalah seperti berikut:
7.1 Di bidang kerjaya, Kapten Zaharie adalah seorang juruterbang yang berpengalaman dan kompeten serta dihormati oleh rakan sejawat.
7.2 Didapati Kapten Zaharie tidak berkongsi minat yang sama dengan ahli keluarga beliau. Walau bagaimanpun, perbezaan minat ini adalah sesuatu yang boleh diterima. Keluarga beliau juga tidak melapurkan apa-apa perubahan dari corak tingkah laku (behavioural pattern) sebelum penerbangan beliau pada 7.3.2014.
7.3 Maklumat dari kawan-kawan dan rakan sejawat Kapten Zaharie menunjukkan bahawa beliau merupakan seorang yang peramah, mesra dan boleh berlawak jenaka. Mereka juga tidak melapurkan apa-apa perubahan dari corak tingkah laku sebelum penerbangan beliau pada 7.3.2014.
7.4 Masalah sakit tulang belakang beliau merupakan satu masalah fizikal yang agak kronik dan bukannya merupakan suatu stressor baru.
7.5 Kajian berpandukan perbandingan rakaman klip-klip video CCTV KLIA pada tarikh 26.2.2014, 3.3.2014 dan 7.3.2014, mendapati beliau cenderung merokok sebelum pnerbangan beliau dan gerak-geri beliau semasa merokok adalah sama di ketiga-tiga video tersebut. Pada klip video CCTV KLIA pada 7.3.2014, Kapten Zaharie tidak menunjukkan apa-apa tanda kegelisahan ataupun kemurungan.
Akhir kata, kami tidak mendapati, apa-apa perubahan dari segi psikologi, sosial dan corak tingkah laku Kapten Zaharie Ahman Shah sebelum penerbangan beliau pada 7.3.2014. Kami juga tidak mendapati apa-apa perubuhan dari segi psikologi, social dan corak tingkah laku pembantu juruterbang En. Fariq Ab Hamid sebelum penerbangan beliau pada 7.3.2014.
Akhir kata, kami tidak mendapati, apa-apa perubahan dari segi psikologi, sosial dan corak tingkah laku Kapten Zaharie Ahman Shah sebelum penerbangan beliau pada 7.3.2014. Kami juga tidak mendapati apa-apa perubuhan dari segi psikologi, social dan corak tingkah laku pembantu juruterbang En. Fariq Ab Hamid sebelum penerbangan beliau pada 7.3.2014.
Sekian, terima kasih.
“PENYAYANG, PROFESSIONALISM DAN KERJA BERPASUKAN ADALAH BUDAYA KERJA KITA”
Saya yang menurut perintah,
Dr. HJH. RABA’IAH BINTI MOHD. SALLEH
MMC NO : 25878
Pengarah & Pakar Perunding Psikiatri (Forensik)
Gred Khas “C”
Hospital Bahagia Ulu Kinta
Perak Darul Ridzuan
@DrBobbyUlich
Hmm. That doesn’t really fit given that I’m the one judging the facts of your route without prejudice and making a rather obvious inference. You, on the other hand, seem to have an emotional issue with the implication of your own theory, which happens to point to a premeditated act by a pilot.
If I was emotional, I’d disregard what Honeywell told me just like you wish to do. But I’ve taken the same approach to their verdict as I have to yours. Not a lick of emotion, in fact.
@DrBobbyUlich. “… in addition to the 00:19:29 ROD of about 4,600 fpm for a net ROD of 9,100 fpm at 00:19:29.” That is where I got the 19:29 from. If I had read the phrase more carefully before posting In would have woken up that for the second 19:29 you meant 00:19:37.
As least I hope that is it!
I withdraw the earlier nose down remark.
@DennisW. “There is much evidence showing that, once an uncertain situation has been perceived or interpreted in a particular fashion, it is quite difficult to view it in any other way.”
Doubtless right but it tends to undermine its own thesis. It might have come to that by its authors finding it difficult to view the issue in any other way.
@JoeNemo3
“Does anyone else recall seeing a photograph of Captain Zaharie Shah wearing a t-shirt with a submarine on it? Searched online for it again today, but curiously without success.
Here it is…….
https://www.allmystery.de/themen/gg110370-1808
What could be learned from last days’ aircraft disasters:
Don’t practise surprise roll ground attacks on a Childrens’ Day air show. Don’t create or stay put in or allow a human habitation at the end of an international airport runway. That should not be too hard, should it?
@LouVilla:
Thanks for the link. The submarine photo is great. Adjacent material good to have seen also.
Thanks @LouVilla
There were some doubts about its authenticity, but that CNN video is almost certainly where I saw it…so clearly it must be fake!
http://edition.cnn.com/videos/bestoftv/2014/03/28/ac-mahi-quest-schmidt.cnn
I never saw this interesting exchange on CNN on March 28, 2014, between USA Today reporter Mahi Ramakrishnan in Malaysia and Anderson Cooper. The reporter claims she has a source who is a senior law enforcement official in an elite branch of the police that conducted the investigation of MH370. She claims she was told that ZS deliberately diverted the plane, but the source did not disclose the evidence. The reporter also said that ZS’s wife was not very cooperative.
What she claims is very different from the conclusions in the RMP report.
http://edition.cnn.com/videos/bestoftv/2014/03/28/ac-mahi-quest-schmidt.cnn
@VictorI
That is interesting CNN video. Most of what I recall about that early CNN coverage was their refusal to consider pijacking a likely scenario per RQuest’s attitude. Part of my interest back then was simply observing CNN avoid that path of logic (given Razak had already said by then it was likely intentional diversion).
@VictorI:
You are right. But there still remains that there will be several agendas or rationalities going about in these quite early days — and probably still. For one, a prosecutor would want to make it a criminal investigation — for obvious and realistic reasons. Irrespective of who turns up guilty. But three weeks in, it is not unlikely that those closest at hand will have, or believe they have, a good grip on what most reasonably must have occured. The lack of hard evidence to corroborate that view, evidently, is a conclusion. And not a condition.
So it is still hard to be definitive on who believes what and why at what point in time, as I see it.
@DrBobby
You may find the following of interest:
I had previously identified a possible (so I thought at the time) great circle route with FMT at IGOGU at 18:37, initial bearing 186T approx, crossing the 7th arc at S37.67, E89.09, final bearing 187.5T approx, transit speed constant M0.81 at FL350. Although the average speed for the whole journey was exactly M0.81 after accounting for the varying windspeeds and predicted air temps, I found I was unable to get exactly M0.81 for each leg. More specifically, 3rd arc to 4th arc was M0.815, 4th arc to 5th arc was M0.813, which was annoying to say the least, and with the infamous confirmation bias refusing to let me give up. I wanted a bit more tailwind to come to the rescue, but what there was, was insufficient. A bit of creative adjusting was required to make things fit, but it left a lingering doubt.
I now know what the problem was, thanks to your work: I was trying to fit a great circle constant Mach path to ping rings that had been generated by a CTH flight path! The CTH path is deflected eastwards between arcs 3 and 5, causing the distances between these arcs to “expand” in a way that prevented me getting a good fit for my great circle.
Two things to take away from this are 1) your path is likely the actual one flown that night, more likely that a constant true track or great circle, 2) We must beware the ever present and seductive lure of confirmation bias. Confirmation Bias must have an evolutionary advantage, to be so all pervasive. Possibly because it cuts down on excess day to day mental activity, but it is not so helpful when one is trying to find an aircraft in an ocean
@Nederland @DrBobbyU @all
How is everyone getting the lat/long data for the ping rings for plots?
Given “Brian’s rule”, if I understand, that MH370 probably hit the 19:40 arc from the East, looks like Victor’s CarNicobar path complies, but that depends whose 19:40 curves I use. Some curves show CarNic being east of the ring, some suggest it might be just west. I like DrBobbyU’s graphics where he shows path fitting the ping rings, but depending on what Geodetic latitude means CarNicobar VOCX maybe west of the curve.
@Rob
Interestingly your constant Mach 0.81 @ FL350 is very close to the end speed following a diversion to Banda Aceh via Nilam and Sanob.
At this slower speed you will end up with 850kg of fuel still in the Left Tank at 0017:30 UTC.
Therefore the Satcom log on can only occur if the Left Generator and both Backup Generators were off prior to the Right engine stopping due to Right fuel tank exhaustion.
The 40 NM width of the seventh arc around the ATSB hotspot is not wide enough considering the Left engine is still operating.
@Oxy
But DrBobby found that that he didn’t have enough fuel to reach the DSTG hotspot. Another scenario: Pilot deliberately sets up the 2nd logon while there is still fuel enough for several minutes more motoring. But the BFO appears to rule that one out. Personally, I think the CTH oath is a much better bet.
@ROB
“Confirmation Bias must have an evolutionary advantage, to be so all pervasive.”
It had to do with mate selection. Although in the modern era it is useful mostly as an anchoring mechanism.
@TBill
You can find geolocations and radius here, for example:
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/qlpoawrnbobxq3n/AADLfu6rbLba-vklbLe0b2b_a
Based on Jeff’s interview with Neil Gordon (this blog, 7/9/2016) and the very first ATSB report, I think it is possible to come up with a viable flight path that takes into account the Indonesian radar issue. I have yet to gain better understanding of the BFO issues, but I also believe that may very much depend on possible changes in altitude.
@Nederland
Just out of curiosity where did you find the dropbox link containing the KMz’s from, I noticed a Minor difference (nothing worth worrying about for the Arcs)in 3F1 sat positions to the ones i’ve seen?
@TBill
I have tried to modify my previous exercise to fit Brian’s rule and I think something like this may work, generally speaking:
https://www.allmystery.de/static/upics/0cece2288e_earth6.png
The operator may spot the plane en route to MABIX but would not associate it with the blip heading towards Car Nicobar.
@JoeNemo3,LouVilla. Malaysia has two Scorpenes. Chequered purchase history according to: http://www.asiasentinel.com/politics/deep-and-dirty-malaysias-submarine-scandal/.
@Joseph Coleman
As far as I know, this was originally posted in the comment section to Duncan Steel’s blog, but has since been deleted. The values seem to derive from a digitised image.
Do you know a better source?
@Nederland
https://www.dropbox.com/s/n3kwl1ayaqbvrr2/I3F1_positions.xlsx?dl=0
Just another source
@TBill,
Here is a link to a table I put out about a year ago with lat/lon’s for all the arcs:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/10QY22W6C6cZsi5Aqh05CM4ZuvOq2p8Vr89UnievM-BI/edit#gid=2046225134
Hi All,
Reading a few posts led me to a question about any theorized lockout.
On a few occasions on US domestic flights around 2011, I noticed that when a crew member left the cockpit, a flight attendant went in. Another flight attendant blocked the aisle with a cart.
Does anyone know if this is permissible/required by airline policy? I can see some logic to it – better to always have a second body in the cockpit in case of medical emergency or something. I can also see the risk.
But if this is policy or permitted on MA, then maybe this whole “locked-out copilot” can be ruled out. Further, maybe another crew member can be ruled in.
@Nederland
Got the arc files thank you.
Do we know how to calc altitude Sabang radar can see? I was estimating MH370 must be at least FL300 to be seen at 200 nM out, but that included a wild guess for the radar elevation.
@TBill
TNI-AU Radar Unit 233, Sabang, Pulau We, Republic of Indonesia.
Radar located at:-
05°53’15.05″N 095°13’41.65″E @ 1530 feet AMSL
Google Earth image shows Radar Dome (blue) nearly obscured by thin layer of cloud. A white water tower is visible 60 meters to the SE.
Does anyone have a prediction on what happens after the search is concluded and declared closed?
I am curious if an award based approach might help?
Or if we just have to wait for new evidence to turn up on a beach, or some report to declassify.
I think to myself that if Boeing REALLY wanted to find out, it would be no problem for them. $100 million, which is what has roughly been spent on this search is a lot, but it’s not even a third of the price of a single 777. This is really nothing to them.
So it makes me wonder if 1) they are just waiting it out to see if somebody else finds something first or does something to make their search easier or 2) they don’t need to find out because they already know . Boeing seriously has the resources and influence to figure this out. I have to wonder why they are not more active in it. You’d think they would want to know to rule out another accident. So that tells me, maybe they know it wasn’t an accident at all and it was truly a human caused event. And that is why they don’t want search. Maybe I just answered my own question.
@BarryC
Thank you I see it.
Good spot for a radar unfort much higher than I guessed, but that makes sense.
@Billy
I don’t think we know. The only good thing about ending the current search, is we find out if there are any new ways to continue. I suggest a joint industry project, if that is not already under consideration. Even if it was intentional diversion, conceivably there could be learnings for the future.
@TBill
Boeing is too smart to undertake a search effort based on the strength of the available data. They are quite aware of the ambiguities involved, and the probability/cost associated with trolling the seafloor with a sonar sled. Only a government entity would step up to burn money doing that.
Frankly, I would be inclined to give Dr. Stone (Metron) a small bucket of money just to see what he comes up with.
“There is no hypoxia scenario where the transponder magically turns off, BOTH pilots go gaga, FORGET to descend and forget to call MAYDAY but DO TURN back, die of suffocation over the next 20 minutes but then come back to life to plug five or six waypoints into the FMC, re-engage LNAV but STILL don’t descend, die again of suffocation and again resurrect themselves to put the NAV REF in TRUE and dial the HDG knob to 180, only to die, finally, at FL360.”
Become emotional he has. The dark fanatical side in him we sense. Yes,
Hrrmmmm.
Search suspended. http://minister.infrastructure.gov.au/chester/releases/2017/january/dc013_2017.aspx
@Oxy,
Using M0.81 at FL350 results in a PDA of -2.0%. There is no fuel left in the tanks at 00:17:29. It was empty more than 17 minutes before then. See below.
@all,
Here are some new MH370 fuel model results:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzOIIFNlx2aUaE1QUHdPbGlNMEk/view?usp=sharing
You will find a plot of PDA versus Flight Level for all the standard speed modes: ECON (LRC and MRC), fixed Mach, and fixed IAS. It’s interesting to see how the endurance depends on altitude for each mode.
The only acceptable route solution is Constant True Heading with either M0.761 at normal cruising altitudes or 257 KIAS at FL350 only. At FL350, the 257 KIAS and M0.761 are the same speed.
My latest CTH route has no deviations from FL350 after 17:21 through fuel exhaustion. The air speed was increased to LRC near the turn-around. After 18:22 there are only two pilot inputs: (1) a 10 NM right offset on N571 at 18:25 and (2) a Holding Pattern with ANOKO as the fix at 18:38. That’s it.
About 2 minutes before reaching ANOKO, the FMC decelerates from LRC to the Best Holding Speed (~257 KIAS, calculated and applied automatically by the FMC). When ANOKO is reached with the 10 NM offset, the FMC cancels the Holding Pattern because of an Offset Error (because the offset was never set to zero beforehand). The speed is still held at 257 KIAS. A second error (END OF ROUTE) occurs immediately because there are no waypoints entered after the Holding pattern, and the default lateral navigation using constant (true) heading takes over. So, as an unintended consequence, 9M-MRO flies until fuel exhaustion at 257 KIAS at FL350 using constant true heading.
There are two means for the constant heading to be true rather than magnetic. One is that Honeywell is wrong about the NORM/TRUE switch determining the navigation method, and it is, in fact, always true regardless of the switch position (as is the case in FSX). The other means is that Honeywell is correct and the NORM/TRUE switch was previously changed to TRUE, possibly during the (apparently) manual flying between Kota Bharu and Penang.
re: Search suspended. Commiserations to the NOK. Thanks for the link David. Also, various media reports such as http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-01-17/search-for-mh370-suspended/8189066
Although there have been many coincidences in this sorry saga, I can’t help thinking that the timing of this relative to Fri 20th is somehow significant.
@AM2, It’s a sad week. Especially for NOK. Perhaps one day, answers will come to this mystery.
I have to say that report shouldn’t be used to dismiss a theory or draw any conclusions from it one way or the other. Plenty of motive for the Malaysian authorities to downplay an intentional ditching. I’m not saying Capt Z is guilty beyond doubt, but the plane must be found first before dismissing anything
I feel sorry for the NoK too. I hope one day the search will be relaunched.
@Billy:
I think the way to go as a rule is that the state actor will run the show but the private enterprise will chip in with knowledge and money. There will be a lot of advantages to that way of doing things. Admittedly in this case it could be hard to say who is the bigger, but it is probably more about getting the labels right. And if states will be accused of being biased, what suspiscions would not private companies meet? And then there is employment, loyalty issues, law enforcement, corporate competiton, contracting regulations, international and domestic waters and laws, pirates and indigenes, invalidity pension, responsibilities and liability and whatnot. And costs in all areas. In some areas Boeing might do better effectively, but I assume the ideal thing for them would still be to stand and look over the shoulder of the U.S. Govt., the Aussies or Malaysians and point. I would be surprised if they hadn’t turned at least all available stones (figuratively) long ago. And in this particular case, if the plane is a goner, and, hypothetically, Boeing knew (which is unlikely given the performance of the plane — if you don’t suggest they spoofed the isat data), then I really think they would not be able to keep that to themselves in the long run, or even this long (too many stones have been turned (literally and figuratively)), too many people are involved — so then the great civil U.S. actor would risk being destroyed in a week’s time or so when it surfaced. I am not suggesting they could be counted on to take the blame for anything that is rightfully theirs (the world of laws and insurances and liabilities doesn’t work that way), but in this cas I think they would have everything to win from helping out early, not least if it would help find the hull. It is not like it is some obscure plastic lamella to blame here. The whole industry will have to carry some shame though in regard to the excellent pijack opportunities bestowed on planes since 9/11.
I find it unlikely that an accident scenario of a kind where (only) Boeing would know what had happened and why would be surpressed, in a case with so much at stake. And while the developed world is using every effort to minimize accident and loss and death in certain areas (to better the odds in relation to the grim reaper), and really couldn’t swallow much more of public unexplained and mysterious disaster in that area than what is prone to happen anyway — by accident, stupid f*cks or terrorist initiative. It takes the fun out of traveling and business trips.
This is a hijack in one form or another, not an accident (otherwise the plane would have landed). And it seems plausible to me that the truth of it is either hidden deep within a single man’s head, or equally deep in at least a couple of governments. If there was more that could have been done, Boeing would have done that while the ships were still out there.
@DrBobbyUlich said, “After 18:22 there are only two pilot inputs: (1) a 10 NM right offset on N571 at 18:25 and (2) a Holding Pattern with ANOKO as the fix at 18:38. That’s it.”
No, I don’t think that is right.
In your path, the plane is flying in LNAV mode on N571 with a 12 nm offset to the right towards IGOGU. Before reaching IGOGU, it turns to the left towards ANOKO while staying in LNAV. The hold at ANOKO never occurs because of the offset. The heading at the discontinuity is determined by the position at which the fix was changed to ANOKO.
In fact, in your proposed scenario, since the change in route was made before reaching IGOGU, it would require a change in the fix for the active leg. This would cancel the offset and result in a hold at ANOKO. On the other hand, if the plane was allowed to continue to IGOGU and then turned to ANOKO while on LNAV without modifying the active leg, the offset would remain and the hold would be canceled. However, the resulting heading (180T) would be incorrect for your route.
@DrBobbyUlich: I was being a little sloppy with my terminology. My last sentence was “However, the resulting heading (180T) would be incorrect for your route.” Actually, the track would be 180T, and with some crosswind, the heading a little different, but there is still the issue of the resulting heading if the plane flew IGOGU-ANOKO-EOR.
@DrBobbyU
In your scenario, do you have a rationale for Sabang radar not seeing MH370 make the big FMT turn?
Re: lateral offset, do we have any FlightRadar24 showing what was going on that night? I saw one screen shot of MH370 at IGARI.
@All (except Jeff, and maybe a few others) – you really believe it was just a coincidence that a mere ~3000 hours after the disappearance of 9M-MRO, another Malaysian Boeing 777 was lost?
@Johan
You said
“The whole industry will have to carry some shame though in regard to the excellent pijack opportunities bestowed on planes since 9/11.”
Where I am at too.
@TBill
“@Johan
You said
“The whole industry will have to carry some shame though in regard to the excellent pijack opportunities bestowed on planes since 9/11.”
Where I am at too.”
Funny shit.
That reminds me of the suit brought against Glock by a Los Angeles based law enforcement officer whose 3 year old son shot him with his service handgun. Glock deals with a dozen suits of this type annually, and they are well known to simply settle by writing a check for $10,000. Everyone knows this, and getting shot by a Glock unintentionally has a $10k gift certificate attached to it. Block is not going to depart from a design that has no grip or manually safety because users ultimately appreciate a handgun that goes bang every time you pull the trigger, and they sell a ton of them for this very reason.
Lots of careless folks out there with “Glock leg” resulting from pulling their Glocks out of their holsters. There is even an oft viewed youtube video of an instructor drilling himself in the leg.
Any chance the sonar data from all that scanning is going to be made available?
It would be really cool to have the data as raw as possible…i.e. grid location/signal TOF & amplitude.
I’m sure it’s a ton of data, but it would be very useful.
@FolsomMike
Yes, that has been promised a while ago:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-27589433
@Johan
Thanks, lots for me to think about that I hadn’t before, great reply, including ” If there was more that could have been done, Boeing would have done that while the ships were still out there.”
@Tbill you are right, one good thing about this end is that it is the beginning of something new, whatever that might be!
This (awesome!) blog has spent so much time speculating on what happened in the past, and rightfully so. I posed that question about what happens next and a few folks started to respond. And then conveniently the search end was publicly announced like an hour later. I’m very curious to all your thoughts on speculation moving forward. Hopefully that breathes some life into the discussion.
Meanwhile, I will think more about how the end of the search benefits Boeing and Allianz, and read up on them some more when I can. Curiously, I don’t see much ever discussed about either.
@Tbill, @Billy:
Pleasure is all mine.
@DennisW:
Be careful out there! 🙂
@JeffW:
Anything new written to expect? Or are you at the Rangers’ game?
@Johan, Thanks for asking! I wrote an OpEd for the Washington Post this morning, in hopes that they’d put it up today, but they didn’t see the urgency, so we’ll see–it basically sums up my view of the case as it stands so far, so once it’s ready I’ll post it here.
@Jeff Wise. Hi Jeff, another interesting angle may be to chat with USA Today reporter Mahi Ramakishnan in Malaysia. (CNN clip above). I am wondering if her source has disclosed anything else. Regards.
Interview with the Australian Minister.
http://minister.infrastructure.gov.au/chester/interviews/2017/dci014_2017.aspx
@all
I should not post when I have been drinking, but in this case I cannot help myself. The article by linked by David above tweaked me.
Chester is a professional, no question, and Kim is being pesky. At the end of the day Chester is setting the scientific community up for the big fail. The ATSB was only doing what it was told. The Nuremberg defense. No doubt about that.
OK, I am a big boy scientist. People already regard me as a propeller head. I have nothing to loose in this scenario. Other scientists out there might feel differently.
Another Ministerial interview, including with Greg Hood, http://minister.infrastructure.gov.au/chester/interviews/2017/dci015_2017.aspx
Quotes:
“….including debris drift analysis and further detailed analysis of satellite imagery. This activity is anticipated to conclude by the end of February 2017.” Note this year.
“We are in a position where we don’t want to be providing false hope to the families and friends”.
“a very costly exercise—in the order of $200 million Australian dollars has been spent on the underwater search effort, of which $60 million has been provided by the Australian Government. Malaysia has contributed more than anyone else in that regard”.
Enough from me.