Yesterday the “Independent Group” (IG) of technical experts looking into the disappearance of Malaysia Airlines flight 370 (of which I am a part) released a new report which made the case that the official search area now being scoured by undersea robots is not where the plane most likely crashed. The reason, the group explained, is that the Australian Transport and Safety Board has relied on a statistical model in which hundreds of possible paths were generated, then winnowed down to include only those that fit the timing and frequency data from the seven handshake pings; this resulted in a distribution whose greatest density coincides with the current search area. The Independent Group, in contrast, began by asking what possible routes most closely match the flight speeds and altitudes that a pilot would most likely choose:
The ATSB analysis used two basic analysis techniques referred to as “Data Driven” and “Flight path/mode driven”… While we agree that these statistical methods are reasonable techniques, both tend to overlook or minimize likely human factors in favor of pure mathematical statistics. This ATSB approach appears to have resulted in a conclusion that the most likely average speed was approximately 400 kts (Appendix A). However, 400 kts is not consistent with standard operating procedure (typically 35,000 feet and 470-480 kts), nor is it consistent with the likely speed a pilot would choose in a decompression scenario (10,000 feet and 250-300 kts). A speed of 400 kts may minimize the BTO and BFO errors for a given set of assumptions, but the errors can also be shown to be very small for other speeds. Given all the tolerances and uncertainties, we believe it is important to consider human factors with more weight… B777 pilots consistently tell us that under normal conditions, the preferred cruise attitude would be 35,000 feet and the TAS would be approximately 470-480 kts. We believe this is the most likely case for MH370, and note that the last ADS-B data available indicated that MH370 was at 35,000 feet and 471 kts at that time.
As can be seen in the chart above, the differing approaches result in search areas that are some 500 miles apart. The full report can be found online here.
UPDATE 9/12/14: Richard Godfrey has pointed out that a recent report from the ATSB shows that the seabed-mapping effort has recently been extended some 200 nautical miles toward the IG search area:
Is there an official statement from the authorities regarding how much fuel MH370 had either at the outset or at the time of the second ACARS message at 1:07am (1707 UTC).
On the present location of the remains of MH370:
My view is that the ATSB presents as an organization that has garnered the necessary resources and wherewithal to direct the search. That said, any scientific analysis requires peer review – thus the no-less-important role of the Independent Group. Perhaps there is additional data (e.g., Indonesian radar) or information (e.g., communication transcripts withheld by the Malaysians) that could better inform the search, but in general in believe that we can view the present search efforts as reasonably robust, based upon the level of scientific integrity displayed by those at the ATSB and in the IG.
In short, while there may be some overlooked element in the analysis that could perhaps reveal more about ‘what’ happened, I believe that we now have ‘location process’ that need not be fundamentally questioned in terms of its assumptions (e.g., fuel load and consumption), integrity (e.g., the process being manipulated by third parties), etc. There is enough cranial capacity and heart in this thing to provide for a ‘best effort’ to locate the aircraft.
As for any conspiracy (and I am strictly addressing the recovery effort here), I believe it a waste of time (at least mine) to engage in speculation regarding some sort of universal cover-up involving the official recovery effort. The aircraft is not being sought ‘here’ while a party or parties knows very well that it is ‘over there.’ This is nonsense, it is simply not feasible from a geopolitical context. Four eyes on a matter is possible; this happens daily in covert operations. But 16 eyes? Apologies, but the likelihood of some sort of conspiracy regarding the recovery efforts involving the Malaysians, the ATSB, the Americans and the Chinese is a non-starter. Don’t waste your time – there is nothing here.
On the emotional state of the NOK: while he must, out of common decency and respect, always maintain a humanistic and compassionate view of the families of the victims when communicating our thoughts on the matter, we cannot allow this perspective to blind us to a proper and logical review of the potential culpability of any and all crew members and passengers when speculating as to the ‘what and the how’ of what may be an intentional diversion. If one goes with an intentional diversion at IGARI, then one can hardly help to open the door as to speculation regarding the what elements surrounded the diversion.
The Captain, the First Officer and the other members of the crew are all suspected perpetrators, just as are all of the passengers. All must be reviewed in their respective ‘roles’ as persons listed on the manifest. The logic is simple: if the aircraft was intentionally diverted, a capable pilot diverted the aircraft. What has thus far been publicly revealed is that only the Captain and the First Officer (take note of how I do not use their names) were most certainly trained in the operation of a 777. As for the remainder of the crew and passengers, the information that is in the public domain does not, thus far, reveal any additional persons capable of operating a 777. Therefore, it is reasonably safe to say that if the aircraft was intentionally diverted, it was most likely (but not certainly) diverted by either the Captain or the First Officer, either with the coercion of a hijacker or without coercion. If we choose the route of there not being a hijacker, then it is most likely (but not certain) that either the Captain of the First Officer is the perpetrator. It’s this simple.
Wwhile I believe that the search for the remains of MH370 is now a process of reasonably high integrity, I don’t necessarily have this view of the investigation into what happened to the flight. A pall of silence regarding the whats, the hows and the whys has emerged that is distinguished by one particular feature: an absence of information. One would expect the Malaysians to have come forward by now, or perhaps the US intelligence agencies, or even perpetrators that had been on the ground, working in concert with someone aboard the plane – if the diversion at IGARI was for reasons other than in response to a mechanical failure. Yet, there is only silence, a silence that is now beginning to stand out in relief against its background, as would a trail of footprints that had been brushed over and obscured with a leafy tree branch. We need look into this pall of silence, for it is in the ‘absence of evidence’ where ironically I suspect we will find answers.
A whistleblower, a break in a highly secretive investigation involving a state sponsor, an until now concealed manifesto…such are the things that need be pursued by investigative parties in all domains, official, private and the media alike.
Rand – unfortunately the media aren’t what they used to be. It’s now a crude contest with a 24 hour reset button. MH370 is treated a bit like the one that got away. The answer didn’t jump out so they disengage and move onto the next KK side boob moment.
Rand wrote on Sept 15 at 12:48 AM: “The logic is simple: if the aircraft was intentionally diverted, a capable pilot diverted the aircraft.”
It’s not so simple. A lot of information about the operation of the airplane is readily available to anyone having an interest, on the internet and elsewhere. What exactly required the expert knowledge and skills that only “a capable pilot” has?
Gysbreght: I would beg to differ. In the 2005 Helios 552 crash, a flight attendant with UK commercial pilot certification attempted to regain control of the aircraft to no avail. Granted, he ran out of time, but it was concluded that his lack of certification on a 737 inhibited his ability to stabilize the flight. As is often the case, while knowledge of an aircraft’s flight systems may prove necessary to successful flight, they may also prove insufficient. In short, I doubt whether anyone without some level of traceable simulator training would be able to successfully commandeer a 777 and direct it to a destination. Thus far, none of the passengers or crew has been reported as being capable of aviating a 777. That leaves us one of the pilots at the controls, but not necessarily in control of the flight deck. The only out is that an investigating party has decided that it is best (for the moment) to obfuscate the identity of the pilot and/or the person in control of the flight deck.
@Rand
Gysbreght is spot on in this regard.
Perhaps you might read my response to the IG’s most recent report which is posted here in the comment section, if you haven’t already.
Or, you may access it here:
http://research-investigations.newsvine.com/
John: apologies, but I was not able to locate where in your reply to the IG update you provided substantiation of Gysbreght’s claim that an untrained person could have successfully managed the diversion. Please fill me in, as I am now going with assigning higher probabilities (in order of level) to: 1. the Captain; 2. the First Officer; 3. a hijacker familiar with the route, coercing one or both of the official pilots; and 4. an undisclosed, pilot-trained hijacker whose identity is not being disclosed in the interest of protecting an ongoing investigation (involving state-sponsored terrorism). I would then put the probability of an internet-trained hack operating solo at .02 – or “somewhere between the chiclets and the pink elephant erasers”.
@luigi asked,
Can you expand on your assertion of Zaharie’s “PARTICULAR loathing” for Hishammuddin?
————-
I can, The crux is Elections and staying in power ,the use of charter flights by Malaysian pm to garner 40,000 more votes to keep the dictatorship alive .it’s very clear the election was ….
http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/okay-to-fly-in-voters-says-ec
More on the charter flights.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/05/02/us-malaysia-election-idUSBRE9410K620130502
@Rand
In my response to the IG Report, I discuss whether it was a “pilot” or a “human” who diverted MH370 as mentioned by the IG.
Your example of 552 is apples and oranges.
You certainly wouldn’t need “simulator training” to commandeer the plane. Perhaps direct the pilot(s) under duress as you say.
As far as “direct it to a destination” it appears doubtful the plane arrived at any planned destination.
I do have a personal theory as to where it was going, but no proof at this time. I don’t buy the mechanical theory.
Rand:
“The Captain, the First Officer and the other members of the crew are all suspected perpetrators, just as are all of the passengers. All must be reviewed in their respective ‘roles’ as persons listed on the manifest.”
+100
This is so BASIC to criminal investigatory practice that it almost doesn’t need to be stated. It goes like this:
If you are the last person seen with someone who has disappeared — or been murdered — you WILL be a suspect until you are EXCLUDED. Full stop. Anywhere in the world.
And yet, there has been (and continues to be) a hyperbolic (and frankly, puerile) reaction by some to the notion that the Capt or First might be involved. As much as it might be distasteful to some, to consider that the Capt and/or First might have been involved is neither a smear nor is it slander (read: defamation). It’s BASIC investigative due diligence.
As it stands, there is nothing in either the Capt or First Officer’s backgrounds to suggest mental illness or a motive (political or otherwise) to hijack this airplane. That being said, we do not have enough information to exclude ANY of the crew – or the pax – yet. What is known (at least to the public) as that there were at minimum, two people on 370 who had the qualifications and ability to fly that aircraft – and both of them were in the cockpit.
Again, this fact by no means excludes others (among the crew or pax) who may also have had the requisite aviation skills. We don’t know enough yet to exclude ANYONE.
Very simply (and assuming, as I always have, that MH370 was a nefarious event), there are three scenarios:
1. The Capt and/or the First Officer were involved – by choice.
2. The Capt and/or the First Officer were forced to divert, and perhaps ditch MH370 – IF it was ditched.
3. The were one or more people on the plane who incapacitated the Capt and the First Officer and took control of MH370.
You can pick the one you like.
I certainly don’t want to think that the Capt or First were perpetrators in this case, but bottom line, until we have information that actually excludes them, they are logical suspects. Whether people like or agree with that or not.
@nihonmama, I couldn’t agree more with your last comment.
Everybody needs to be investigated,and since the plane apparently made many deliberate moves after the diversion from the intended flight route, everybody on the plane who had the expertise to fly it, has to be included in the list of suspects. Being a suspect means someone’s private life will be under intense scrutiny. This is certainly unpleasant and might be the cause of great heart ache for the relatives and loved ones of the suspect, but it is what it is. There is nothing distasteful or morally wrong about it. And being a pilot and the captain of an airplane doesn’t elevate someone’s personal integrity automatically. As a criminal psychologist I’ve made the experience many times that personal integrity can even become the driving force behind an incomprehensible deed.
My personal ideas have undergone considerable changes in the last month, but I still think, a plausible narrative with the captain as perpetrator can be constructed. And while there is no definite prove that the captain was involved, there is also not a shred of evidence, that he is a hero in this story.
It is mandatory that an impartial criminal investigation covers everything and leaves no stone unturned. Unfortunately I don’t have a lot of trust, that the authorities are doing just that. But that is a different story…
Thanks much Littlefoot.
And this — “personal integrity can even become the driving force behind an incomprehensible deed.” — is spot-on.
Whether the perpetrators were the Captain and/or The First – or others, human behavior (like geopolitics) is a huge factor in this story. And psychology – aka the study of human behavior – is the applicable science, although it often defies Occam’s Razor. 😉
[On a side note Littlefoot, my undergrad is in psychology – seriously considered becoming a profiler for the FBI – but couldn’t bear the thought of taking more statistics for the Ph.D! Trained as a lawyer (non-practicing), specialty – criminal].
A reminder to all: Before 9/11, most hijackings were in the form of the perpetrators instructing the flight crew where to go. I am not saying this was a hijacking but if it were, the perpetrators did not need to know how to fly the a/c. Also, in the case of Ethiopian Airlines 961, the highjackers did not believe the pilot when he said there was not enough fuel on board to reach their intended destination. Eventually, the a/c ran out of fuel and crashed.
@Brock – Actually, I used the burn rates posted on pprune.org but had to guess on the amount used during taxi and initial ascent. I do not believe the amount of fuel remaining at 17:07 was released to the public.
I used 75,000 lb of fuel remaining, heading south at NOPEK at 18:40
@John – Months ago a pilot posted that a B777 flight simulator showed a phugoid glide after fuel exhaustion. However, a later analysis said the simulators are not programmed for fuel exhaustion of both engines and presented the following for a ghost flight:
After flameout of the first engine, the FMS will adjust the rudder to accommodate the asymmetrical thrust. Later, the FMS will disconnect upon loss of power after flameout of the second engine. The plane then goes into a spiral dive because of the uncorrected offset of the rudder.
I guess nobody will know for sure until they find the FDR.
@nihonmama, statistics are indeed the bane of every psychology student. We even had protests and strikes at our university, when back in my student days the statistics courses multiplied. While I certainly didn’t like them, they are a necessary evil IMO.
While I work with old and demented people these days, I used to work with youthful deliquents and during practical terms in my student days with first generation ‘Rote Armee Fraktion’ terrorists, better known as the ‘Baader-Meinhof-Gang’, though I had never anything to do with the inner circle. Dealing with those politically motivated terrorists I learned firsthand that, as they say ‘the way to hell is paved with good intentions’.
You’re right btw, in this case performance data and BTO/BFO calculations may tell us, what is scientifically even possible, geopolitics deliver the background, but criminal human behavior was the driving force behind this disappearing act, IMO, not a freak accident, although intentional hush up and obfuscation qualifies also as criminal behavior in my book.
@LaurenH
“Months ago a pilot posted that a B777 flight simulator showed a phugoid glide after fuel exhaustion. However, a later analysis said the simulators are not programmed for fuel exhaustion of both engines and presented the following for a ghost flight:”
Yes, a “spiral dive” is a possibility, However, I’ve found the phugoid scenario to be the most likely after looking at the sims, but more importantly speaking with Boeing.
The sims can be problematic, that’s why they should be run redundantly. It’s also important that the simulator is approved by Boeing. The one CNN used for instance is NOT.
The important thing I think is that we don’t get too smart for our britches. Indicating MH370 landed within 1 NM of the 7th arc is a reckless position.
I agree with Matty in Perth, Alex, and L.G. Hamilton, etc. in that I don’t personally see a psychological profile of a killer or mass murderer in Captain Shah. From what is known of him, he is/was a very downright likeable guy, a person with a very giving nature, and a guy who probably could have hosted his own cable home improvement tv show as well. I think he is/was a “giver” not a “taker.” Look at the tribute on YouTube from about 7 or 8 of his siblings/nieces and nephews set to the music “Find Your Wings.” He was described on the Australian ABC Four Corners show by a former colleague as being “methodical” and “generous.” In the very beginning of this a few of his friends sat down and were on CNN and said when all is said and done he will come out a hero in this. His wife’s brother, Asuad Khan, has spoken out on the ABC show and in various articles (which I referenced the links to over at duncansteel.com) about how Captain Shah was not getting a divorce, had no life insurance policy, was crazy about his daughter and his little grandson, and was repairing his bathroom door (of all things!) at home the day of the court hearing before the flight. He did not even know the outcome of the court decision, his wife had to tell him. He is/was a fanatic for family, flying, and food. I think the political aspect of his life was only a small part of his life. Yes, perhaps maybe the country needs reform but I don’t think he would forsake all and put that above his family in retaliation for some age old, deep rooted, ancient practiced court decision which should have been expected for the opposition party anyway. He was a provider and what extra he had his sister has said he would invest in model airplanes to fly. This is a mass murderer? One who loved to fly model planes, cook, give home improvement ideas to save money, jump on a trampoline with his 5 year old grandson, he has/had a zest for life. His friend, Mr. Peter Chong, has also been at bat defending him on various shows. There seems to be a lot of people in his corner, and I could be all wrong and washed up and we never know what lurks in the human psyche, but I too think this man will emerge a hero when all is said and done. A generous, giving, fun loving man just does not equate in my book as a mass murderer of innocent victims, most of whom were Chinese nationals.
Mr. Khan has stated that Captain Shah’s What’sAp on his phone was active up until 7:45 I believe the evening of the flight. As far as Captain Shah getting a call from a “mystery woman” with an untraceable phone card, I don’t read much into that either. Those small foreign countries have phone card places and internet cafes all over the darn place. Not every one is well off and has billed accounts (AT&T, TMobile, etc.)like we do, a lot of them pay as they go,and it could have been a family member calling or a friend. Even if it was a girlfriend or mistress calling, in the muslim culture even his wife would accept another wife, it is the religion and culture, we cannot “Americanize” it and think of it in our terms. Muslims are allowed to marry several times (maybe 4 simultaneously) as long as they can provide equally for their wives. So I don’t buy the he was upset over a divorce and mistress bit at all. I know deep rooted muslim cultures.
Littlefoot, I agree with you that since no one knows what exactly happened to MH370, how can anyone conceivably say there is no link between MH370 and MH17? It is very strange that a major airline would suffer two major catastrophic events in a short span of 4 months, very strange indeed. And although it may be coincidental and unrelated, it certainly at least should be raising questions.
Agree with Victor, some other radars had to have seen something.
Agree too that my own KISS theory gets icky with the loitering and after the reboot and into the SIO, but who knows who was in control or how impaired they were at the time. I’m not so sure of “zero nefariousness” but don’t think the culpability rests on the pilots.
What I do think, is that since the case of MH370 is so unique in the aviation world, that the official investigative team should release to the public what has been ruled out in the investigation. Look what the IG has accomplished with the data, I bet they could come up with the how and why as well if more info was known.
Cheryl
(or Cheryl #1)
Littlefoot:
You are so right – stats are are a necessary evil indeed. I do love reading the outcomes though, just not the crunching. Mad props to those who can do the stats and love doing it.
This student of human behaiviour will continue to watch.
Cheryl:
Thanks for your comment. I’ve raised the question of linkage between MH370 and MH17 not only on Twitter, but here – just yesterday. And the response? Dead silence.
The truth is rarely pure and never simple.
~Oscar Wilde
@Cheryl, everything you say in your heartwarming description of Captain Zaharie as you perceive him, might be true aspects of his personality- and it still doesn’t exclude him from the list of suspects. The human psyche is incredibly complex, and I’ve met terrorists, who would match this description in many points – and who were actually genuinely likable. True, Captain Zaharie, from what little is known, doesn’t match the profile of a psychopatic killer, but he could well match the profile of an idealist, who somehow drifted into politically motivated terrorism. That he could match this profile doesn’t mean of course that he must’ve been behind this. While I championed him initially as the only perpetrator, I changed my mind considerably since then. Especially if we postulate a connection between mh 370 and mh 17, the theory of the captain as the lone perp becomes very shaky.
But even if Zaharie is completely innocent and/or this was all a freak disaster, I cannot see one single known fact, which points to him as a potential hero of this story. Isn’t that our desire for an uplifting narrative with a likable hero, which might get into the way of good judgement here? That said, the investigation has to go into all directions – and if Zaharie should emerge as a good guy, maybe even a hero, this needs to be told.
@nihonmama, personally I believe there’s a connection between the two planes. But while it makes a lot of sense for a nefarious Ukrainian faction to settle the shoot down of a commercial airliner on the pro-russian rebels, it’s a lot harder to understand why of all planes it had to be a B 777 from MAS. That might explain the silence here…
Cheryl – I’ve pointed out a few times that Shah’s political activities were not unlike my own, and I know plenty of people similar as well. None would ever contemplate doing harm, which doesn’t exclude anyone unfortunately. If background checks revealed nothing(do we believe anything here?)then those behind the stick get looked at more closely, but their backgrounds don’t reveal a hell of a lot either. A lot less is known about the co-pilot?? If there was more than one perp then the chances of Shah being involved go down sharply – in my view.
The General Sutarman, Indonesian police MH370 story has shown up here in English. “Two people claiming to know what happened.” No new info but maybe an opening.
Nihonmama,
Yes I should have included your name in my post with you and Littlefoot mentioning the MH370 / 17 possible connection, I realized you had mentioned it before too.
Littlefoot,
Maybe the heroic deed was the intentional or deliberate turn back itself if not nefarious, and decision was made after that crucial 90 seconds between 17:19 and 17:21 as a life saving measure? Who knows if whoever was piloting at that point was coherent after they got to the Straits? All could have gone haywire by that point on the flight deck?
Agreed, all passengers and crew are all still suspect until the official investigation team deems them cleared or the recorder is found.
Does anyone know how the earlier turn south determined by the unanswered sat call affects the loitering phase, or affects the intersection with Kate Tee’s (the sailoress) yacht? Does the earlier turn change any of that technically?
Cheryl
@Tdm
Yeah, I read the story about planes being used to bus in voters. Seems like a very expensive way to steal an election, but it’s an interesting angle. IIRC, there was also a story floating around a few months ago that Z had been or was going to be suspended or given early retirement, possibly as a politically-motivated sanction, but I have been unable to relocate that report. Whatever the truth of the matter, if we knew the whole story it would all seem obvious — 777s don’t just disappear for no reason.
It’s purely a hunch, but I doubt this started out as a suicide/murder mission. My guess is Z just wanted to put the wind up H and give him a good talking to, and he envisioned that the whole thing would end with his putting down the plane safely in KL or Penang. On that model, bad luck (e.g., Hishammuddin not at home), bureaucratic incompetence (underlings afraid to disturb their master), or intransigence/failed brinksmanship on H’s part (“I do not negotiate with terrorists, dirtbag!”) led to everything going non-linear, then pear-shaped. That hunch is based on my read of Z’s personality, plus the “return then retreat then loiter-and-activate-satcom” fact pattern.
If I had the power and really wanted to get to the bottom of this, the first thing I’d do is get a warrant for H’s phone/text/email records on the night in question, and those of his aides. Realistically speaking, though, who apart from the NSA is going to get their hands on that data?
Matty in Perth,
Agreed on what you stated. Not much has been revealed about Co-pilot Fariq Hamid other than he was engaged and about to be married. He would have had a birthday in April I believe I read, such a shame.
What is quite interesting and disturbing as well about him, or if it is to be believed is the extremely lax goings-on in the cockpit on a previous flight with him. If the young girl named Jonti Roos is to be believed, and she was on CNN recounting her ride in the jumpseat in the cockpit on a previous MAS flight with Hamid, then we have some serious disregard for security measures that went on in the past. Supposedly her and a friend were singled out by Hamid and another pilot and asked to join them in the cockpit for an entire flight. She has photos with them inside the cockpit. She was on with Pearce Morgan on CNN and I agree with Pearce that it is very important what she had to say for security reasons or lack thereof. If this indeed happened it needs to be brought out. I would imagine the flight attendants on that particular flight would be the only ones who could verify it or the other pilot involved. It’s hard to say whether this was true or a fabrication of a very impressionable young girl’s imagination? Don’t know but she has her story out there on YouTube.
At any rate their country never had a 911 and the mentality was different than ours. Unfortunately MH370 and MH17 have become their 911. Would a little proactive thinking have diffused both events, i.e. sending up fighter jets in real time to get MH370 or whoever was traversing transponderless, and assuming it WAS hostile, and with MH17 not flying over that zone in Ukraine regardless if the route was approved?
Just reading now that another MH flight diverted Sunday due to autopilot defect, landed safely after 4 hours. This makes the 4th incident that I know of these past 6 months with MAS. 2 diversions and landings and 2 catastrophic events.
Cheryl
Cheryl – I’ve leant towards some terror angle that didn’t come off. There has been plenty of ridicule for that view but it’s not exactly unprecedented so I wonder why. The ugliness of that scenario discourages some from joining those dots maybe? Hamid fits the modern Jihadi profile. Young, educated, IT savvy – and they are impulsive. Engaged as well it’s been pointed out, but a lot of these IS enlistments are married. I just saw a photo of a female medical student from London holding up a head in Iraq. They are coldly severed from humanity.
I’m uncomfortable discussing the deceased like this but I suppose this and every other scenario they have to work through.
I feel it necessary, in light of those claiming that Zaharie seemingly exhibited NOTHING that would give one reason for concern, to share just a few of his MANY worrisome (in hindsight) posts/commentaries. Here are four examples that trouble me, greatly:
“there is a rebel in each and everyone of us.. let it out! dont waste your life on mundane life style. When is it enough?
“Pru 13 over, so its time they try to dismantle us. We r not going to be quiet.
“If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor. – Desmond Tutu
” The SOLDIER FOUGHT HIS BATTLE SILENTLY
Not his the strife that stays for set of sun;
It seemed this warfare never might be done;
Through glaring day and blinding night fought he.
There came no hand to help, no eye to see;
No herald’s voice proclaimed the fight begun;
No trumpet, when the bitter field was won,
Sounded abroad the soldier’s victory.
As if the struggle had been light, he went,
Gladly, life’s common road a little space;
Nor any knew how his heart’s blood was spent;
Yet there were some who after testified
They saw a glory grow upon his face;
And all men praised the soldier when he died.
Luigi, the phone records of Hishammuddin and/or his aides would be a most curious and telling artifact. Sadly, I share in your sentiment that the wrangling away of these documents will be a herculean task. However, I don’t dare underestimate the general buffoonery of the Sultan regime, and have great hope that they will live up to their billing.
@Matty, you are quite right to also discuss the co-pilot. What’s true for the captain is also true for the co-pilot: he was able to fly the plane and certainty had the opportunity to divert it, so he has to be on the suspect list. To say:’but he was engaged to be married…he can’t have done it’ is as invalid as saying:’but the captain was such a nice family man…’.
And you point out correctly that the co-pilot fits the general profile of a religious suicide terrorist much better than the captain. This angle simply didn’t make it to the short list of likely scenarios because -according to experts like Mary Schiavo-there was no ground chatter, and no terrorist group ever claimed responsibility. But they wouldn’t do that if it went wrong or if they were after the cargo as in Victor’s scenario.
@Cheryl, someone clearly is targeting MAS Airlines. There have been so many incidents in the last 6 month and I simply cannot understand why this isn’t discussed more openly. These ongoing events were one of the reasons why I started to doubt my initially favored scenario with the captain as sole perpetrator.
John: my follow-up was in reference solely to whether an untrained pilot with no traceable training background would be able to operate/divert the aircraft. The reference to Helios 552 was to illustrate that even a certified commercial pilot was not able to engineer a safe landing – thus, apples to apples.
The destination for the diversion was most likely not the SIO; the flight just happened to (again, most likely) to terminate in the SIO.
Regardless, the general discussion (and thank you for your lengthy profile, Cheryl #1) surrounding the suspects for the diversion now enables us to frame a particular question or line of inquiry as more of a substantive element or even driver of the mix of the mystery. I alluded to the same in my first post here, but restating it, if we choose that the flight was intentionally diverted for nefarious purposes, a person or persons aboard the aircraft is responsible for the diversion. If we toss out the Captain and First Officer for a moment, this, of course, leaves us with the remaining crew and the passengers. And while it may seem a ‘mystery’ and that the permutations are endless, actually this is not the case, as once we toss out the Captain and the First Officer, we are left with a list of persons, each of which can be deemed a suspect and thereafter investigated.
Again, it is not so great a mystery as to who dunnit – although it may seem so from our seats in the peanut gallery. In reality, one need only a position of relative authority and access to information to delve into each and every detail of a person’s background and disposition, surfacing subtle proclivities, favorite fruits, sexual kinks (if any, sadly) and, of course, the big elephant in the room, motivation for jacking an aircraft. How difficult do you believe it would be able to keep the intent of jacking an aircraft and the associated preparations hidden away from everyone? Damn hazardous, I would think. The naughty-naughty, OK, ‘four eyes only.’ But jacking a commercial airliner?
The crew, we can assume, would have been properly background checked and thus profiled at the time of their hiring. From here, we can assume that every US agency from the NSA to the FDA probably has access to a Sales Force database that provides information on each and every commercial inflight service person, globally. How long would it take to exclude the crew members? A couple of weeks, I would think. This leaves us with 227 passengers. Whatever criteria (e.g., age cross referenced by nationality, etc.) you choose to use, it won’t take you much more than an hour to winnow the list of suspects down to what, say, 50 people? OK, now line up 10 investigators, assigning five suspects to each individual, providing them with six months to develop a novella on each suspect. Again: if you accept that the aircraft was intentionally diverted for nefarious purposes, then someone aboard jacked the aircraft, and that person is amongst a finite set of individuals listed as the passengers (excluding the crew, which we have stated is already well-known). It’s not a mystery, really, any more than a labyrinth is a maze (it’s not). Rather, as with a labyrinth, there is only one solution – and the ‘solution’ was aboard the aircraft.
Apologies for the round-about, but my point is that the investigation process isn’t rocket science (leave that to the IG), it’s merely a numbers game. It’s a process involving searching databases, making phone calls and knocking on doors – it’s ditch digging, really. The only other more complex element required is a personal ability to perceive subtle patterns in the garnered information. Now, ask yourself: don’t you believe that there is at least one person ‘out there’ who has been provided with the authority and the access, coupled with six months and access to the work of others, who also has this ability of pattern recognition?
Shorter: it is quite likely and perhaps even more probable that the identity of the hijacker is known to the authorities; it’s simply that the identity of the person or persons concerned has yet to be made public. The silence is revealing, once you flip it over in search of Shadow. One then need only say the magic words: “aircraft don’t just simply disappear.”
Why are the authorities not releasing the name of the perpetrator(s)? This is perhaps the question of questions, a question of substance that is more a dynamic than a question. It would a long way towards explaining the reticence of the ATSB and Inmarsat re MH370, just as it would explain the relative silence amongst the members of the intelligence and official investigative communities. Post 9-11, it is downright weird that nobody appears to have their panties in a pretzel regarding the unsolved ‘disappearance’ of a commercial airliner. This is perhaps because the matter has been solved and the aircraft did not disappear.
Perhaps we don’t have a named hijacking suspect, because the suspect is part of a larger plot involving a state, and quite a few things need to be sorted before the case can be made public and perhaps a war averted. A slow-burn mechanical failure, a hijacking by a couple of sweaty dudes with a plastic zip gun, Captain Zaharie taking a hard left, a crazed crew member devoid of any real motive…these scenarios would not be expected to hold the silence and the aura of mystery surrounding the flight that continues to be allowed to perpetuate. Nope, there there must be bigger stuff at work here, and it’s not a conspiracy per se. It’s merely an investigative process, and nobody really wants to get into it – until the remains of the aircraft – and proof – are found and properly presented. Meanwhile, feelings cool, political agendas fade and the abyss of war is averted; yes, perhaps it is best to wait before the reveal.
Nihonmama: Littlefoot knows, but I have an MA in transpersonal psychology and previously worked as a criminal defense investigator on murder and federal drug prosecutions in San Francisco – back when I was a child. Aye, it seems that there is a rather uncannily high distribution of our slightly twisted, Shadow-seeking typology amongst the members of this forum. BTW, I loathe statistics as much as you do; check out APA PsyD programs – minimal stats!
Need to work; apologies, no time for an edit.
Rand – When mobile phones became computers these guys became a lot harder to catch. They can change user details like we used to change radio frequencies. They worked out the correlation between making a call and disappearing into a cloud of shrapnel long ago. Makes it hard.
I also have a psych background, but ended up in the Army. So we have the number crunchers, and the mind twisters. The former are stuck with a questionable batch of numbers that they can torture and fight over, we have our tortured theories.
Lauren H wrote on Sept 15 at 6:01 PM: “However, a later analysis said the simulators are not programmed for fuel exhaustion of both engines”.
May be some amateur simulators don’t, but to say that a professional training simulator does not simulate double engine flame-out is absolute rubbish. Someone with no understanding of the B777 flight control system read a description of the TAC (Thrust Asymmetry Compensation) and phantasized around it. That story also said that the flight controls are ‘locked’ with two engines out, and that is also rubbish. The real airplane automatically compensates the thrust asymmetry from the first engine flameout, and immediately returns to normal at the second flameout, and the airplane remains controllable throughout.
When I said, that I believe in a connection between mh 370 and mh 17, and that someone might be targeting or sabotaging MAS Airlines, I should clarify that there are three possibilities:
– There might be a connection because of an underlying common goal behind all those incidents: those, who are responsible for the vanishing of mh 370 aren’t done, yet.
– Or those who are responsible for mh 370 try to obfuscate their true motives by causing other incidents, so that it looks like someone is targeting MAS. Also the burning of the MAS avionics shop might’ve been done in order to destroy evidence.
– Or there might be a connection simply because the first incident (the vanishing of mh 370) made MAS Airlines a notorious target. Whoever caused the crash of mh 17 might’ve thought, the public outrage and shock after the shoot down of a commercial airliner might be even greater if it hits another B 777 from MAS. Also these minor incidents like the turnarounds because of a defect or the burning of the MAS avionics shop in Kuala Lumpur might’ve been caused by someone or a group of people, who try go get back at MAS because they blame the airline for the vanishing of mh 370.
The string of incidents could’ve been caused by a mixture of those possibilities of course.
@Rand: +1 on everything you said.
“a rather uncannily high distribution of our slightly twisted, Shadow-seeking typology amongst the members of this forum.”
There are no coincidences. Shadow-seeking.
“Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men? The Shadow knows!”
@Rand, I’m not as optimistic as you are that the whittling down process of a proper criminal investigation should’ve led the authorities already to some likely suspects and motives. First of all, not all countries might’ve cooperated. It is known that Russia and the Ukraine haven’t provided background info for their passengers. Other countries might’ve held back as well. Also those who investigate must be really interested in catching the perps. It’s not clear at all if that’s really the case. Finally there is the possibility that the perps weren’t on the crew and passenger list. Victor and others pointed out, that the avionics bay of a 777 is a security liability. If there were helpers on the ground who belonged in one or another function to MAS, stowaways could’ve taken over the plane from the avionics bay. It might sound farfetched but the ongoing incidents around MAS make the possibility of a ‘ground crew’ more likely.
@littlefoot:
“It might sound farfetched but the ongoing incidents around MAS make the possibility of a ‘ground crew’ more likely.”
Not far-fetched in the slightest. Think about it: IF whatever went down with 370 involved illicit cargo (human or inanimate), the ramp in KL had to have to been involved. Knowingly, or unknowingly. In fact, Anwar Ibrahim suggested as much.
https://twitter.com/nihonmama/status/453319273813778432
I’ll just offer this: it is likely no accident that the disappeared MH370 ORIGINATED out of KL.
TBC.
Littlefoot – Taking over the plane from the downstairs bay – I don’t think it’s far fetched. As far as I’m aware you can do everything from there except look out the windscreen.
Checking out all of these passengers is a big job, yet within a week there were claims being made that no flags came up? I read that a bunch Uighurs(Chinese Muslims) just got rounded up in Malaysia for IS links. Generally forgotten that in 2001 the Malaysian govt applauded 9-11. The tinder is there.
I shall assume until told otherwise, that there is room in this blog for people with the contrarian view that the plane did not fly on for 7 hours to the South Indian Ocean but had merely crashed soon after disappearing from radar. My comments from now onwards will be directed solely to those, whether active participants or lurkers, who have not closed their mind to the possibility of the latter. Those who think it is rubbish need not get aggravated, they can just ignore these comments and carry on with their own theories.
I continue to persevere as I truly believe it is important that people continue to question the fundamental assumptions underlying the official story that the plane had somehow flown on for 7 hours undetected by radar, satellite or the naked eye, without any plausible motive or explanation, to end up in the middle of nowhere in the South Indian Ocean.
[REDACTED by JW]
Alex – I’m interested in any challenge to the BFO-BTO orthodoxy separate to where it crashed. I know JS has had an issue with the NW flight path and southern turn coinciding with the north/south sat movement(as I recall anyway?) He may correct me?
Alex,
Respectfully, in the interest of preserving bandwidth I’ve closed that topic.
Jeff
@alex
“I continue to persevere as I truly believe it is important that people continue to question the fundamental assumptions underlying the official story” I think, that part at least has wisdom.
One assumption that is still shrouded in uncertainty, in my opinion, is the stated “last known position at 18:25”. The correctness of this assumption hinges on proving that the radar track to there is indeed that of MH370.
Without getting a plausible explanation for the (too) sharp (a) turn at around 17:30-ish, this assumption seems to remain weakly founded.
A stronger assumption is that the last known position is that at 17:22. The ping’s BTO/BFOs are probably strong as well. Maybe we need some modelling based on BTO/BFO and anchored at location of 17:22.
Cheers,
Will
@Rand
” my follow-up was in reference solely to whether an untrained pilot with no traceable training background would be able to operate/divert the aircraft. The reference to Helios 552 was to illustrate that even a certified commercial pilot was not able to engineer a safe landing – thus, apples to apples.”
Sorry Rand but I still see no apples-apples there, but you’re certainly entitled to your view.
I really don’t want to devote much time to conjecture about who done it, even though I do have my theory.
The majority of my efforts have been devoted to trying to find the plane, a necessary prerequisite to all else.
@Gysbreght
“Lauren H wrote on Sept 15 at 6:01 PM: “However, a later analysis said the simulators are not programmed for fuel exhaustion of both engines”.”
Spot on again Gysbreght……….
There are simulators and there are simulators!
Just like there are facts and good research…….along with anecdotal references from the internet.
John – I’m interested to hear you elaborate on why the plane was heading to Perth? Assuming I recall your theory correctly. What struck me as odd about moving the search north was the trajectory towards Australia. A bit more gas and they would have made it, and that didn’t fit with all the discussion to that point.
@Matty
Yes, you’re right about my saying the plane was headed to Perth.
Unfortunately, if I elaborate much more, I’ll “spill the beans” so to speak on my theory.
I’ve decided disclosure now wouldn’t be appropriate for a myriad of reasons. If they find the aircraft and the black boxes have pertinent info. that still may not tell us what we need to know.
I should suspect that the FDR will prove much more helpful from a data standpoint, but the CVR might not have anything at all on it as the recording configuration between the two is quite different.
In any event, if it becomes quite apparent the aircraft probably won’t be found (in anyone’s lifetime, or it’s found and the CVR for instance is of no use, I’ll put out the theory then.
Matt – I’m actually not that flipped by those Zaharie entries. He was politically active and railing against a corrupt govt with a nasty tendency of framing people, along with thousands of others in Malaysia. Do those remarks stand out from the dissidents drumbeat overall? As someone involved in politics you often get bolshy narrative/commentary around the traps from lobby groups, minor parties etc. I’m not saying it can’t be him, but he would have to have really lost his mind – in my view. Such a big jump from being active in opposition to nicking a 777. Being engaged in politics is being enjoined to a process that he understood and participated in. If you don’t believe in the process you don’t join it, so it would amount to a massive brain snap. Funnier things have happened but.
@MuOne,
Will, the part of the radar track after 1722 UTC shown in Figure 2 of the ATSB Report is completely unsubstantiated. The Malaysians’ story about the path of the purported blip kept changing. The times where the blip was supposedly spotted at a given point eg over Pulau Perak, kept changing also. Finally this purported radar track which involves a purported diversion at 1725 UTC and an end point of MEKAR at 1822 UTC, cannot be reconciled with the evidence of the ATCs that the plane was last seen at BITOD at 1730 UTC (1.30am).
Yes, to a layman like me at least, the turn looks unnaturally sharp. Will we ever get to see a recording of this purported radar track? I very much doubt it but please do keep trying to get a full explanation from the Aussies, at least they do try to respond, unlike the Malaysians who said they have sealed their radar data.
One look at Duncan’s recent post on the radar coverage and one cannot escape the conclusion that if MH370 had flown back as depicted in Figure 2, it would have been detected on several of the radars and shown up on the radar screens of the ATCs of Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia and Vietnam. However, the fact is no ATC saw the plane after 1.30am. From the Malay Mail, a Malaysian newspaper, on March 11th:
“…The Boeing B777-200 aircraft was hovering somewhere 120 nautical miles off the coast of Kota Baru when it was last seen on the radar…..Dept of Civil Aviation director general Datuk Azharuddin Abdul Rahman, in hours after the aircraft went missing on Saturday, has said none of the control rooms in neighbouring countries found the jetliner on their radar. Azharuddin said the controllers checked with the counterparts in Singapore, Indonesia, Thailand and Vietnam before informing MAS of its missing flight…”.
The question now is how does one use the BFO and BTO data to locate the plane, even if assuming the data is not ‘dodgy’ to use Matty’s term, when one does not even know where the plane had gone from 1722 or 1730 UTC onwards. Perhaps that is why the Aussies are now talking about at least 1000 possible flight paths.
@Matty-Perth,
I have in previous comments shown that the BTO and BFO data are indeed ‘dodgy’ and cannot be relied upon. People are at liberty to prove me wrong but so far no one has come forward to dispute that.
I will reply if people address questions or comments to me, otherwise this will be my last post.
Talking about simulators:
The following video shows how a multi-million dollar Full motion&vision pilot training simulator looks like. It also shows how easy it is to control a 777 in cruise if all systems are working as designed.
https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/wa/a/22235213/flight-recreated-in-777-simulator/
Talking about phugoids:
The phugoid motion was first defined by Frederick W. Lanchester (1868 – 1946). It common to all airplanes. The period varies with speed and works out as 93 seconds for 400 knots TAS. The phugoid shown in the graph below is entirely defined by the initial condition of level flight trimmed at 400 kTAS, and a steady glide angle of -4 degrees.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/4pcoxliaqsxv4ya/Phugoid.jpg?dl=0
Gysbreght
I did not say the plane was uncontrollable. I said that in the case of a ghost flight (i.e., no one onboard was conscious) the FMS would disconnect after flameout of the second engine. My understanding is the FMS would not automatically reconnect if RAT power became available. Without a person or system available to control the plane, what compensates for the the rudder offset?