Last month, I published an article in New York magazine about a secret Malaysian police report which included details of a simulated flight into the southern Indian Ocean. As Victor Iannello revealed in a comment earlier today, that information came from French journalist Florence de Changy, who had come into possession of the full police report but only shared a portion of it with me.
I have not seen the full report, but would very much like to, because I would like to form my own judgement of what they mean, and I think everyone who is interested in trying to figure out what happened to the missing plane, including the next of kin, are entitled to the same. Some people who have read the full reports have suggested that they give the impression that the recovered simulator files do not in context seem all that incriminating. Other people who have seen the full report have told me that the report contains material that makes it hard to doubt that Zaharie is the culprit. Of course, it’s impossible to rely on someone else’s say-so. We need to see the full report.
The reason I am writing this post now is that earlier today Florence published an article in Le Monde in which she describes having the full report as well as another, 65-page secret document on the same topic. Meanwhile, another French newspaper, Liberation, has also published an article indicating that they, too, have a copy of the report. And private correspondence between myself and a producer at the television network “France 2” indicates that he has as well.
Meanwhile, I know that independent investigators here in the US have the documents as well.
At this point, the secret documents are not very secret. Someone within the investigation has been leaking them like crazy, obviously with the intention that their contents reach the public. My understanding is that this source has placed no restrictions on their use. So journalists and independent investigators who have copies of these documents need to do their duty and release them — somehow, anyhow. Some people that I’ve begged and implored to do so have said that they fear legal ramifiations. Well, if it’s illegal for you to have these documents, then you’ve already broken the law. Use Wikileaks or another similar service to unburden yourself.
Free the data!
UPDATE 8/14/16: Apparently Blaine Alan Gibson has the document, too, according to a rant he post on Facebook. He reveals that the entire set of documents is 1,000 pages long.
@jeffwise: I have asked that, at the very least, the raw simulator data are released. Personally, I see no reason to keep these data secret. I would much prefer that the raw data are openly discussed.
@Ge Rijn, Thanks for the link on the Tuninter flight, I hadn’t come across that before. Nice illustration of an airliner ditching at sea (as opposed to calm waters of the Hudson River). Of course, an ATR 72 is a lot smaller than a 777-200ER, so would likely be far easier to put down, depending on the sea conditions… a glide followed by partially successful ditch, and the fuselage breaking into multiple pieces, might well conform with the debris found so far. On the other hand, it would suggest that anyone who figured they’d end a meticulously planned, sophisticated caper with a ditching that leaves a 777 in one piece has made a serious miscalculation.
Re: The Gimly-glider…the plane ran out of fuel because the ground crew loaded XXXX pounds of fuel instead of XXXX kgs, as ordered. I believe the gages were reading the correct amount of fuel.
In any event, I see no compelling need to investigate whether the FI fuel data was fabricated or somehow botched. There were multiple consistent statements, and direct readout of the ACARS logs. Too many people know exactly what all the raw records show. I am quite comfortable assuming the data given in the FI is accurate. This is a rabbit hole fully explored in my view.
@ALSM
Re: Authorities release statement supporting IG simulator analysis and ALSM statement on 60Minutes piece: http://goo.gl/qSmrgo
Very very frustrating to me, especially Gibson’s remarks. I have a hard time understanding how coordinates in the SIO reportedly logged on Shah’s simulator would not be interpreted as extremely incriminating. Conclusive no. Incriminating yes.
Gibson’s amplification that the turn at Igari was not part of the inferred route miss the mark completely. The route was not a deviation from a flight to Beijing.
As far was the IG itself is concerned, I am afraid I have “lost it” with you guys. Your constant disclaimers relative to inferring guilt or motive are becoming extremely tiring. Nowhere in your recent simulator study did you say anything about motive or guilt yet you apparently felt obligated to include your point 8 disclaimer. Good grief. We all know where your head is at by now. Get off it already.
How can anyone build a case of guilt on a set of data that are as incoherent as the fragments snatched from Zaharie’s HDD’s?
@VictorI, That would be wonderful, and a big help. Please do keep us apprised.
@Gysbreght, I don’t think anyone’s building a plausible case for guilt on the snippet of data that’s been released. But presumably we could get a sense of the man and his possible culpability if we could look at the whole 1000-page document.
@Gysbreght
…and I find myself wondering how someone can even ask a question like yours given the ensemble of circumstances associated with this diversion. It makes no sense to even try to address your question.
@DennisW: It makes no sense to even try to discuss those data with you.
@Gysbreght
Obviously. We are in violent agreement on that point.
@Jeff
Maybe, but as Victor said people weighed in on both sides of the “Shah did it issue” in response to the latest IG paper. Said another way, no one was influenced to change their view based on that summary. Said yet another way, the summary served no useful purpose. It is likely that the 1000 page document would produce a similar result.
Well, the aircraft was piloted. I think most people would agree with that. There were only two pilots known to be on the aircraft. Take your pick.
@DennisW
It’s just that… They know something.. and that is the reason they are holding back.
@Trond
Totally agree with you. Now that the IG has ingratiated themselves with the Malays and the ATSB, we are further behind the dark curtain than ever. Things just keep getting worse.
@VictorI:
“…Frankly, I am tired of arguing. I am trying to use the simulator data to help find the plane. It all may be a complete waste of time, but we don’t have many other options at this point…”
Even if you do manage to use the flight sim data to pin down a possible crash site, do you really think the authorities will sanction another search?
I would expect this to be extremely unlikely, as it seems to me the whole purpose of this charade of an investigation into the disappearance of MH370 is for the wreckage not to be found. This would be a logical action to be taken by Western state actors if MH370 had never even crashed.
@Trond
I agree. Perhaps the consequences of telling us what they think actually happened would be really really bad for them. The best they can do is to fudge. fumble and misdirect in the hope of avoiding this.
It is curious that in 2014 MAS had a fleet of 15 B-777s, after two had been scrapped the previous year. Since the losses, they have no operational B-777s in 2016. They have sold/leased four to other airlines and the remaining nine planes are in storage at Engineering Hangar 6, KLIA. This hangar must be huge!
Comely buxom woman there, I mean Miss Liberty 😀 Any hidden allusions to New York (given the statue of liberty, ellis island and all) leading the charge, @Jeff?? It would be a wonderful paean to the good ol hometown if that was the case, wouldn’t it…..hehehehehe
But seriously, you oftentimes leave me flummoxed @Jeff, you know with all your hedging. Just observe these classics:
1. “…..which is that Zaharie had evidently conducted a flight which wound up with zero fuel in the remote southern Indian Ocean. This fact has been repeatedly confirmed”
2. “…….Anyone who is familiar with my work on this subject will know that I don’t think that Zaharie is the most likely perpetrator.”
to go with the earlier one in your previous post. So which Jeff will stand up next…I wonder ;D
I keep thinking that Z is a walking contradiction too ,a kind of living swissroll, you know kinda of dumb mixed with smart sort of person.
I see him as being very smart in evading radar,switching off comms and all, plotting “evil” on a sim, keeping a cool head about it all but then I also see an idiot who left behind enough traces of his planning to get caught. Gee…the guy must be an idiot-savant if the sim data is to be believed or probably he had a wish of being ferreted out in the end or he got plain careless…..
And the actual flight sounds as weird as the guy….adroitly flying waypoints that zigzag all over the place till FMT and then suddenly he decides to lean back into his pilot couch, lets go off the joystick and sets a straight line to nowhere in the SIO!! Sounds crazy to me. But this flight has crazy written all over it anyway.
And that probably leans me more to the battery/antennae collapse theory rather than a murder-suicide thingy ( though I am not ruling that out) cos a pilot in desperate search for an airport did what the plane did before he died at the controls and the plane took over from thence and ghostflighted him and everyone in it to the SIO.
Imagine me as a senior pilot, I have 34 days to execute my SIM plan, the first thing I will do is to check my flight schedule for the month ahead. Try to pull rank and weasel myself into a hot seat to Europe or India or wherever the initial portion of sim plot points me.
Thats what I would do….but Z (assuming he did the act) decides to pull a stunt, he waits and waits till one fine night he diverts an east bound flight west and creates a ruckus. But there are things to consider if thats true like: how did he know Military Radar wouldn’t track him, how did he guess they wont dare shoot him down if they did track him, why run through a flight alley teeming with other aircraft at that infernal hour, how did he know about Indo radar not to mention JORN, how sure was he about all the avionics and stuff….simply put to execute that diversion he was willing to take all those unknowns onboard when a simple ‘pull my rank’ stunt would have got him the flight he craved for.
Or maybe he had a bet with someone, he could pull off all that and come back whole 😀
But as i said “crazy” is streaked all over this..and thats driving everyone nuts when as simple explanation just doesnt jive.
2.@Victor
You were right regarding the SIM data. The FBI did look at it according to James Carney, the director himself. I linked that AP sourced news item in the previous thread. The FBI gave their expert input but the final report was prepared by the Malaysians. The FBI probably expected some acknowledgement in that regard but didnt get one but I bet they are not losing sleep anyways….
@Ge Rijn
I don’t think you want to go there as I did with SCS..and I have a debris photo to boot plus a Kiwi witness on an oil platform and fisher folk plying those waters plus a whole lot of other stuff.
But @ Ge Rijn if you push your luck a tad too far, who knows..you will exceed your flight envelope in these parts ;D
@Wasir Roslan your list of questions interest me. If it was Z, surely many of the answers to these questions would have involved some degree of internet searching and/or unsolicited out-of-place questioning of colleagues and associates. I want to know if the dossier includes results of any investigation into any of these points. Did he ask weird questions, did he make any new acquaintances who could have provided information etc.
@Wazir Roslan:
He may have “pulled his rank”, going in the direction he did. Wasn’t it someone in here who claimed he was “jumping in for” someone? Or is that not true? So either he prefered the more difficult stunt, or he “jumped in for” something else than what became of it. (Or it is unelated).
The radar installations are another thing. As a senior MAS captain wouldn’t one expect him to be briefed on border radar installations and wartime conditions from time to time? In case of emergencies like this one. It is a bit of a blueprint for emergency flying over Malasyia in a training cockpit isn’t it? What is the pilot students saying that he is supposed to have helped with their exams? His many previous FO’s?
@Johan:
“…Wasn’t it someone in here who claimed he was ‘jumping in for’ someone? Or is that not true?…”
Or was he ‘parachuted in’ by those who had planned the op?
@Johan
This pilot ‘stand-in’ comment was from me.
I said I cann’t prove it (offcourse).
This IMO rather confusing article talks about it:
http://www.themalaymailonline.com/malaysia/article/mas-official-denies-pilot-swap-in-mh370-roster
@airlandseaman
But still the raw refueling data are not available. Is this so difficult?
I almost get the impression you are avoiding a simple question.
Where are those data?
@all
The system is breaking down. Who was rostered on
wreckage dispersal?
We have not found any for weeks. Looks like they have got AWOL.
I think it was @VictorI that had link/s to Paul Howard blog.
Some good stuff in there, IMO. Thanks Victori.
http://www.paulhowardplays.com/blog/proof-that-capt-z-shah-did-not-plan-turn-into-sio
http://www.paulhowardplays.com/blog/archives/06-2014
http://www.paulhowardplays.com/contributions/filling-in-the-triple-7-blanks
@Ge Rijn
Sorry mate the Malaysians were not allowed to shoot down MH370, because Mr H said the Americans could/would.
Cheers Tom L
@DennisW. “Well, the aircraft was piloted. I think most people would agree with that. There were only two pilots known to be on the aircraft. Take your pick.”
A hijacker directing would be a possibility at least as consistent with the evidence?
@Tom L.
I’ve read a bunch of Howard’s stuff. I am not particularly impressed especially with his assertions, especially that the IG first pass on the simulator data was a PR exercise. That is nonsense. PR for what purpose? I thought the IG paper was generally reserved, accurate, and presented well.
My own aggravation with the simulator data is the claim by the ATSB, Malaysia, and now the IG that it is “inconclusive”. This is an extremely poor choice of words and easily misleading to those not familiar with the facts, such as they are, surrounding this event. The problem with the use of “inconclusive” is that there was never an expectation of a conclusion. When there is no expectation of a conclusion, it is simply wrong to mislead people by implying that inconclusive is akin to meaningless.
The data is not meaningless. It is dripping with meaning by way of its very existence. I really don’t care about the nuances of fuel consistency, headings, whether the dots can be connected and the like. We have Gysbreght to worry about those things. The significance lies in the coordinates in the SIO which suggest a flight path in that direction at a time just prior to a turn by MH370 diverting in that general direction.
I would ask the IG or anyone else reading this post what they expected to “conclude” from examining the flight simulator data. The answer must surely be, on reflection, that there was never anything to be concluded in the first place.
@Oz, “B777 = approx 20 seconds to door open (>70%) plus approx 40 seconds = approx 60 seconds.
Approx 60 seconds is stated in the ATSB report.
You are wrong!! Get over it.”
I forgive you for not understanding what I went to some trouble to put before you about the inlet door.
From whence did you get your 40 secs to start at altitude? How do reconcile the 40 secs with the ATSB allowing a minute’s WORTH OF FUEL for that?
I do not really expect a useful answer but the opportunity is there. Assertions just will not do.
@David
Yes, a possibility but several things way heavily against it.
1> Hijacking for what purpose?
2> The timing of the diversion relative to coincidence with an ATC handoff is unlikely to be known by a hijacker.
3> Why hijack the plane to the middle of nowhere and run out of fuel?
4> A hijacking of an airliner has never been done for anything on the aircraft – people or cargo in the history of commercial aviation.
Possible yes, probable definitely not.
@DennisW
I think we all agree, that the concept of a hijacking where the hijacker maintained control of the situation until the end does not make sense.
But what if there was a hijack, which was initially successful, and the flight diverted with the intention of going to “X”, and proceeded towards “X”, but, at a later time in the flight, there was some kind of “fightback”, by the passengers, or crew, or even both combined ?
What would you do, as crew, if by some time “T”, you knew with certainty, that any further delay in trying to regain control would lead to disaster anyway ?
What if you knew that you had reached, or were rapidly approaching, a “point of no return”, in that there would soon be insufficient time or fuel to reach any runway ?
In that situation (like in the case of the Ethiopian 767 hijack) you would know that you would be “doomed anyway”, if you did not risk taking back control, so it would be worth the risk to try.
Perhaps they did, and the result was disaster, anyway ?
@ DennisW
Let me take a stab at answering your questions.
1. purpose of highjacking – to distract the media and the world from something else happening elsewhere, especially an event that has no end or closure in sight
2. timing of ATC handoff and diversion – not unlikely if the highjacker/accomplices was monitoring the conversation and giving the go ahead via line-of-sight communication device
3. why highjack the plane to the middle of nowhere and run out fuel – so that the aircraft is never found, and there is no oil slick on the ocean surface that can be picked up by aircraft/earth obs satellite
4. important people or cargo onboard? – agree, highjacking was for neither of these
‘The MYSTERY IS THE TERROR!’
@Ventus45
Sure. It could have happened that way. However, the “efficiency” of the event leads me to believe that it was well-planned and well-executed. Given the primitive infrastructure in the region, however, it is not hard to imagine a flow of events of the type you are describing is what took place.
@Vebtus45
Of course, it would be hard to speculate that Shah anticipated such a predicament, and rehearsed it on his simulator.
@CliffG
I have heard some of that previously, as you know. I have a hard time with it. But there is no way to refute it.
As far as a distraction is concerned, if I walk up to a random person on the street and engage them in a conversation about MH370 they would look at me like I fell out of tree. Not to say at the “world leader” level that would be the case.
For the “average” person that news came and went in the space of a week if at all.
@Dennis. Yes I cannot think of a purpose other than wild speculation. Intention originally to head to the Middle East as a weapon, fails, head to oblivion to save face.. All discussed before I expect.
@DennisW. My response was to yours three above. Overtaken.
Hi CliffG,
Of course, that is possible. I have heard it before.
My sense is that it did not go down that way. If one Googles Shah’s mental state before the fateful flight it is clear that he was a man in turmoil. I won’t post links since they are so easy to find. Even his daughter, the light of his life, commented that he was not himself. Shah had some heavy stuff going on as evidenced by his wife’s testimony, his children’ testimony, and his friends testimony. All now long forgotten. Do yourself a favor and Google that.
@Ge Rijn:
I see. I remember that article. It seems like a standard “Have you stopped beating your wife”-article. With refutal. Thanks.
Anyone knows if Shah and or the FO had any military education? Any military affiliations?
@DennisW
Shah was perfectly clear, calm and collected.
Google is not gonna solve this mystery.
@DennisW:
The only thing speaking for Shah at this moment is all testimonies in the media in his favour.
It is peculiar: the most likely culprit is the least likely culprit.
That means that he, being a grandfather and family man, will have taken pains to make sure the truth would be hidden (while perhaps also obviuos to some) and impossible to prove.
He is a very intelligent man, one should not be fooled by his demeanor over the last years, which I think is likely on the para-gliding accident’s account.
So either he snapped from suddenly/gradually falling down into an unbearable life and family and professional situation (with a political twist), or he had been diagnosed with something lethal, which took the better of him. Or, there was another able pilot on the plane, or something catastrophic happened to the plane at one point and Shah was unfit to fly that day and realised he and the company would be blamed for the deaths, or…
Allow me the indulgence of re-posting the following postulated series of on-board events. I originally posted this around a year ago to the day, prior to recent debris finds – and from memory @Jeff you were somewhat dismissive because you heavily preferred ditching at the time courtesy the lack of debris. I realize this is still up for debate, but more recent debris finds prompt me to dig this up again, despite ditch vs fuel exhaustion still being an open question.
—
a) Zaharie hijacks from the cockpit after locking Fariq out (both with electronic and physical cockpit door lock)
b) Z commences depressurization of cabin, utilizing flight deck oxygen for himself
c) Pax succumb, Fariq and/or other crew scramble to portable emergency oxygen so have about ~1 hour (?)
d) In desperation (after failed attempts at cockpit door) Fariq and/or crew access EE bay and flick left AC bus breakers in trying to disable electronic lock. This coincides with 18:25 satcom reboot.
e) Physical lock in place, so still no access. Desperation escalates, and not knowing Z’s intention (maybe suspecting suicidal / homicidal attacks), Fariq(?) re-enters EE bay to also disable the flight deck oxygen supply tanks.
f) Z succumbs to no oxygen. Soon after, and with no access to cockpit, Fariq / crew portable bottles run out, and they too loose consciousness.
g) This occurred after Banda Aceh turn but before Z’s intention to subsequently turn back to KL for potentially nefarious reasons
h) Thus, with everyone on board deceased, ghost flight continues on last known leg direction, to SIO, until fuel exhaustion.
—
I still feel there is some strength to this type of scenario (or slight variation on same).
A meta-point here is that I very seldom see cohesive theories laid out in this sort of blow-by-blow format. I think such a format / approach is useful as a form of theory validation – i.e. if end-to-end coherency and internal consistency can be outlined thusly, then, the scenario may have some credence.
WELCOME —
It’s NO ACCIDENT!! Malaysian officials bet against Boeing’s WARNINGS and lost. Fraud and homicide now plague Malay Officials within our Flight 370 ICAO Investigation. Their secret was assured until these definitive facts were disclosed by me, after ~ 800 days investigating. It’s over –cap.
To: Mr. John Delisi, Director Office of Aviation Safety. NTSB
From: Captain Dirck Hecking, Air Accident Investigator. MH 370
Cc: Mr. Liow Tiong Lai, Malaysian Transport Minister.
Cc: Daniel JT O’Malley Australian Transport Safety Bureau.
Memorandum of Causality & Fraud – Regarding the Loss of Malaysia Flight 370
By Captain Dirck Hecking
Introduction. Contrary to the position of Malaysian officials, I present the following in support: 1.) this June 05, 2004 “concerned” photo, as my offer in proof Malaysian officials are directly responsible for the loss; and 2.) Malaysian officials have acted with unlawful intent and contemplated harm in furtherance of a scheme to defraud and cover the crime, … more text the concerned photo, and room to rant and comment on the website. Thank you -cap https://plus.google.com/115700015494779068942/posts/P9x5nPBLGud and 777-53A0068 background here https://plus.google.com/115700015494779068942/posts/JnNaG19PmzE
@Enzyme:
Works for me, but await other’s response. I recall seing similar scenarios at Duncan’s (you?).
“Holistic” trial and error is what much here is about I think.
A reflection further, although not neccessarily of use here: in most other flight accidents one reads of (admittedly most often with faster developments), hidden electric fire, misinterpreted or dysfunctional instruments, lack of (correct) response from pilot, slow depressurisation, have a way of messing up things with “small means”. Could be the reason why some people prefer waiting for the autopsy. Or fall back on statistics.
@Enzyme
Duration of oxygen per bottle is anything from 75 mins (4 litre per minute) to 2 hrs 25 mins (2 litres per minute). A 3 litre per minute setting would work best at c. FL300.
Part of the difficulty now is that the plane has not so far been found in the search area, so at least some further change of direction would be required to account for that.
About the data recovered from the harddisks of Zaharie’s personal computer
FSX is a computer game simulating the flight of an airplane, allowing the player to act as the pilot. An important interface between the game and the player is the display of the airplane’s instrument panel. For a B777 that instrument panel contains the Primary Flight Display (PFD) and the Navigation Display (ND). The PFD presents a dynamic color display of all the parameters necessary for flight path control, including:
Airplane pitch and roll attitude; slip and skid conditions; flight path angle vertically and drift angle laterally.
It is therfore somewhat ridiculous to suggest that the game can generate the PFD display correctly when it doesn’t know the difference between pitch attitude and flight path angle, or between sideslip and drift.
Not even speaking about the impossibility for the program to calculate the physics of the forces acting on the airplane that control its motion through the air and relative to earth.
@Enzyme
I expect within a month we’ll hear the conclusions on the outboard flap investigation.
I expect they are going to decisively confirm if this flap was deployed or retracted.
In other words; if MH370 was actively piloted till the end with an attempted ditching or not.
This news will put an end to a lot of scenarios that are now still considered IMO.
@Ge Rijn
IF (!) the public is informed on this.
Btw, anyone knows who found these additional debris?
http://mh370.gov.my/phocadownload/next-of-kin/new/Summary%20of%20Debris%20Recovered.pdf
They include more parts from the interior.
@Nederland
Interesting document. Where did you find it?
I see some pieces found by Blaine Gibson (2 interior pieces) not before identified and to me unknown pieces too (new Mozambique pieces f.i.).
Another engine cowling piece (right engine) and an outboard aft flap.
Mostly wing pieces again.
They name 4 identified interior pieces total.
It sure shows not all found debris makes it to the media.
I’m quite positive they (ATSB) will release the conclusions on the outboard flap section within one maybe two months.
@Ge Rijn
You said: “I’m quite positive they (ATSB) will release the conclusions on the outboard flap section within one maybe two months.”
Blind faith springs eternal I suppose.
It takes the ATSB 3 years to complete a simple investigation and report of a simple “fender bender” between two aircraft at YMML.
http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2013/aair/ao-2013-125/
There will be no report on the flap worth reading issued by the ATSB, IN EITHER THE SHORT TERM, OR THE LONG TERM, because they can’t, not without Malaysia’s permission, and that is not going to happen.
@Ge Rijn
That document is circulating widely on Twitter but not in the news.
It doesn’t list any more tested and identified items, but a number of items currently verified and so far unknown to the public. So far, only one item from the interior has been identified as almost certainly a part of MH370 (i.e. certainly from a MAS 777), but there are three others suspected to be from the interior as well. Number 16 even has the same pattern as the closet door.
@Enzyme
I had now problem with events a,b and c, but parted company with you from d onwards.
In the mayhem that must have taken place in the dimly lit, decompressed cabin, there is no way anyone would have been in a position to enter the EE bay (or mount an assault on the locked cockpit door) It would have required an effort just to remain conscious, under these conditions. And very difficult to see how the co pilot could have done anything meaningful in the EE bay. The situation in the passenger cabin would have deteriorated very rapidly, imo. A state of complete panic would have ensued.
Sorry, the only scenario that works for me is the deliberate pilot-controlled ditching, after fuel exhaustion. The pilot having followed a carefully pre-planned flight plan that required an arrival in the terminal area coinciding with sunrise.
@Nederland:
That is starting to look like something.
A propos the discussion ditching vs. high velocity impact: one rarely saw mentioned that also an unbroken hull which sinks will at one point — cabin rather soon, wings & similar perhaps a little later — rupture or implode from the pressure of the water around it. I can’t say what that would look like, but it seems likely that some floating debris from the interior might find its way out. Many parts in the pdf seems to have experienced something more violent though. The investigators will likely be able to tell which in many cases (if they get them at all)