Malaysian Flight 370?

[hiero2]

Alpe; I'm supposed to be working, but you got me curious. The internet is amazing. Wikipedia is amazing. I had to do very little research to find this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_landing#Commercial_aircraft

Somebody else did the research for me. I would say I overstated the case for the airframe not breaking up. It looks like, if they actually tried to ditch, and it wasn't a dive, and there wasn't midair damage, then about 60-70 percent stayed pretty much whole.

Swissair 111 and Alaska Air 261 were both in steep dives when they impacted.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Wow, that is comprehensive.

There was another aircraft that stalled and hit the ocean at high speed, Birgerinair 301. It left some debris, but much of it sank. But I think part of the issue here is time. It's been three weeks, and any wreckage may have now either sunk, or been so churned up by rough seas it's mixed in with other flotsam and jetsam.

This math guy says he's not convinced the aircraft flew south, and backs it up with a lot of hard numbers. After a while this all gets mind numbing.

Btw - the internet can be wonderful. Reports like the NTSB report referenced above were hard to get when I was working in that business...

There used to be something called a "green packet" that contained un-redacted info on top of the report. My understanding is that these still stay hidden, except in court cases and such. My ex had one of them, some ATA DC-10 that caught on fire on the ground. These often have photos and details you don't want to know about. The one she had wasn't terrible. I imagine some are.

Dollars to donuts, this will change the way that flight recorders and flight data are specced and managed.

Agree with you there. As mentioned before, they have the technology to have almost everything constantly recorded and sent back to HQ, including cameras in the cockpit. This was suggested after 9/11. I'll be surprised if we don't soon see it implemented step by step.

 

[hiero2]

Update on this issue. CNN is reporting the first new stuff in quite a while.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/18/world/asia/malaysia-airlines-plane/index.html?eref=mrss_igoogle_cnn

What's new? Aircraft behavior prior to disappearing. ELTs.

The ELTs I was strongly wondering about - I would expect them on any over-water flight. But the news coverage never mentioned them before, at least, not so I could find.

Now they notice - the aircraft should have had these. If one of these got activated, the satellites could pick up the signal from ANYWHERE on the globe.

So far, I've been sticking with K.I.S.S. Simplest conclusion, in part because we got NO cell phone calls from victims, NO announcements from political/terrorist/governmental/whatever organizations taking responsibility, nothing at all. Ok, so simple explanation is all the empty empty empty space available. Plane is in that.

But now, if it went down at sea, these beacons should have activated. If the lesser beacons attached to the black box activated, these should have activated.

So why not?
* Airline didn't include ELTs on the flight to save money. I don't think this is likely. Not that much money saved, compared to the trouble they could get for not having them.
* All ELTs failed due to old dead batteries etc. Really? The airline is going so cheap on the maintenance that they didn't maintain the batteries for years and years? Possible, but also, I think, not likely. Low probability anyway. But possible. The fact that all four failed points away from this possibility, I think.
* The satellites just didn't detect them. ?? No way. If they peeped, they would have been heard. They are designed to "shout".

* ooooops. Conspiracy theories just got a boost. Yup. I am no fan of conspiracy theories - way too complicated almost always - almost always way too reliant on "special circumstances" which are based on questionable views of reality. But now? We have something VERY unusual going on. We're putting together a lot of logic and brain power - but very little hard evidence. So, maybe the aircraft IS in ****stan at some remote airfield. Or was it claimed to be in Afghanistan? I forget - one of the two. If it IS, why is the US not coming up with satellite photos? Still way too many questions, but the fact that the beacons should have been on-board, and did NOT activate? BIG question in my mind. And why have they not been mentioned before? Another big question.

Instead of getting closer - I'm beginning to wonder if the underwater search is gonna find zilch. And I don't think this was a Bermuda triangle/Lost case. No time travel. No aliens. But we have more questions, not less. But I tell you what - if it turns out to be a maintenance issue, or a cost-savings measure, there is gonna be a whole heck of a lot of international hullaballoo. Ditto if the airlines are covering up - or the Malay govt.

 

[StyrbjornSterki]

ELTs are required in all such commercial a/c but radio waves do not propogate well through water. This is why submarines have to surface to communicate with "HQ." There also would have been at least two acoustic "pingers" (one in the CVR and another in the ELT) that are supposed to activate when submerged in water. The problem is that absent a less vague idea where it might have gone down, there's simply too much ocean and too few search vessels to stand any reasonable statistical probability of finding them before their batteries all expire.

There also is a remote possibility the signalling devices all could have been destroyed in the impact. Their design limit is 3400 Gs, and this impact would have generated considerably less than that, but there's a lot of CF in a 777 fuselage, and that stuff gets awfully sharp when it shatters. And bizarre stuff happens when you fly into an incompressible liquid at 90% of the speed of sound. But considering the size of the potential search area, Amsterhammer's characterization of the odds it ever will be found are spot-on.

The simplest explanation that encompasses all the known facts and requires no supernatural or extraterrestrial intervention (Occam's razor) is that at least one of the flight deck crew deliberately flew the a/c out of radar contact until it was almost out of fuel, then flew it straight down into the water. Deliberately nose-dived at full throttles, it could have hit the water at approaching 700 knots (1300 kph, 360 m/s), plunging to a good 100 meters depth before the momentum at impact was spent, and leaving millions of tiny pieces too small to hint they once were part of a 300,000 kg a/c.

 

[Microchip]

I can’t see any other reason but cabin decompression resulting in hypoxia to the crew and passengers. I believe the captain turned the plane in order to get back to ground when the emergency arose. Unfortunately decompression sickness can kill a person in a short space of time.

This has happened before. Helios flight from Cyprus to Athens in 2005. Malaysia airlines also had a serious incident with one of their 777 planes the same year of the Cyprus flight, making the pilot request to go back to Perth airport. The airplane ‘got away’ from his control, so to speak, when he got back control of it, they went back to Perth.

Back to the Helios flight, the crew and passengers all went unconscious from hypoxia when the cabin decompressed. The plane flew on by itself until it ran out of fuel; then crashed on land. Everyone died.

I’d like to hear the news talk about the maintenance records of the plane. I know it had been in an accident; but more details are needed to come out.

 

[movingtarget]

The only way they're going to find the wreck, if they ever do, is by a blinding stroke of luck approaching miracle status. It will require a similar act of God for them to even find any debris, since it is evident by now that they don't have the slightest idea where to look. Very depressing.

According to the guy that found the HMAS Sydney, and that took 60 years to find. He is adamant that they have found the correct location due to the signals found on the pingers. Only black boxes give off those types of signals. Locating the wreckage is the hard part. It did not help with the currents in the Indian ocean and the fact that they spent the first week or more looking in a totally different place. Maybe the plane disintegrated on impact which makes you wonder how the black boxes survived even though they are protected.

 

[StyrbjornSterki]

...Helios flight from Cyprus to Athens in 2005... ...the crew and passengers all went unconscious from hypoxia when the cabin decompressed....

The Helios flight never properly pressurised because the crew failed to follow preflight procedures. The pressurisation controls were switched to "manual" as part of the preflight checks, but were not returned to the "automatic" position when completed, as per the check list. So, sorry to pick nits, but there was no "decompression" because the a/c never pressurised to being with.

The flight crew of MH370 still were communicative at flight level 350, which they could not have been if the cabin were not pressurised, which rules out any similarity to Helios 522.

I can’t see any other reason but cabin decompression resulting in hypoxia to the crew and passengers. I believe the captain turned the plane in order to get back to ground when the emergency arose...

That doesn't explain why they turned off the transponder.

The flight deck crew have an emergency oxygen system that is separate and independent from the cabin's system. Universally, the first step in the emergency procedure for either loss of cabin pressure or smoke in the cockpit is to don the oxygen mask. This is one of the emergency procedures the pilots would have been drilled on and tested on in their semi-annual simulator training. Checking the pressure gauge on that system is part of the preflight checks, as is testing the masks themselves to confirm there is in fact pressure on the line.

Had there been a decompression event (or any other in-flight emergency), the pilots would have performed the "immediate action items" from the emergency checklist, which must be memorised and also are tested rigorously (and must be performed from rote) at every simulator session and every check ride. Once the immediate action items are complete, the non-flying pilot consults the Quick Reaction Handbook (i.e., the emergency checklist) to confirm the IAEs were properly dispatched. Then he performs the additional steps in the QRH, reading aloud as he does so the other pilot can confirm his actions. One of those additional steps would have included resetting the transponder to 7700, the international code for an in-flight emergency.

If they were conscious long enough to alter course toward an emergency landing site, they also should have been squawking 7700. There is no conceivable reason they'd have turned off the transponder unless their design was to disappear from the radar.

 

[Microchip]

StyrbjornSterki, I’ll be back to re-read your post.

Meanwhile, here’s what I did one morning while I was groggy and still filled with sleep. I filled up the electric kettle with water, to make myself some coffee. Then I placed it on the stove top, on the front left burner and left the kitchen, without turning on the burner, thinking it would soon be on its way to boiling and make myself a nice cuppa coffee! An electric kettle on a stove top…!

Sometimes the answer is the simplest. I was just so sleepy I wasn’t in my right senses! I think some things can be explained if we think that the cockpit crew may have been doing them while in a disoriented state.

There’s no evidence at all to link a single soul, whether crew or passengers, to shady criminal behaviour. And the officials have confirmed this.

 

[Microchip]

If they were conscious long enough to alter course toward an emergency landing site, they also should have been squawking 7700. There is no conceivable reason they'd have turned off the transponder unless their design was to disappear from the radar.

There's no evidence that either pilot had the temperament or plans to do anything criminal. Neither the stewards and stewardesses. Even the 2 guys who were hitching a ride on other persons' passports have been ruled out as having any nefarious intentions.

What is interesting is the SILENCE of the news media about the plane itself. Why are they so quiet? It would be NATURAL that the aircraft's condition itself would be on the checklist of things to investigate - just as a matter of routine. CNN actually began to turn toward the topic of decompression, then they stopped discussing it.

This article written in 2009 discusses the same type of plane - Boeing 777 - ALSO owned by Malaysian Airlines: http://spectrum.ieee.org/computing/software/automated-to-death

I'm surprised that the American Media hasn't jumped all over this and speculated to death about whether this is the same plane. One CNN anchor said that the plane is now probably covered in silt!!!! They are such drama queens and kings that they suggest all sorts of things on air, it's a wonder they haven't hammered this incident and wondered out loud if it's the same plane.

 

[thirteen]

i really thought they'd find some answers before i flew again but, no… off on saturday, CDG-LAX on a 777.

a pity, that, as i've always preferred them to the new Airbus… then again, all this silence really is making me start to think they are covering something up -- and it doesn't necessarily have to do with a plane malfunction.

 

[jens_attacks]

There's no evidence that either pilot had the temperament or plans to do anything criminal. Neither the stewards and stewardesses. Even the 2 guys who were hitching a ride on other persons' passports have been ruled out as having any nefarious intentions.

humans are weird. the human brain will probably never be fully understood. it all can click in seconds. or they fought the dark all the time but at some point they lost it. normal people for everybody but you can't enter in someone's mind.

you just don't crash a plane, in the middle of indian ocean, out the radar, thousands of kms away of your route.

sad for their families that's life ...

 

[Ferminal]

Meh, get excited, 777 are great like you say. And its safety record still is remarkable, pretty sure there have been zero confirmed deaths from a 777 as a result of a failure of the aircraft (Asiana were the first deaths period). Granted the Heathrow incident could have been a lot worse...

 

[Bustedknuckle]

There's no evidence that either pilot had the temperament or plans to do anything criminal. Neither the stewards and stewardesses. Even the 2 guys who were hitching a ride on other persons' passports have been ruled out as having any nefarious intentions.

What is interesting is the SILENCE of the news media about the plane itself. Why are they so quiet? It would be NATURAL that the aircraft's condition itself would be on the checklist of things to investigate - just as a matter of routine. CNN actually began to turn toward the topic of decompression, then they stopped discussing it.

This article written in 2009 discusses the same type of plane - Boeing 777 - ALSO owned by Malaysian Airlines: http://spectrum.ieee.org/computing/software/automated-to-death

I'm surprised that the American Media hasn't jumped all over this and speculated to death about whether this is the same plane. One CNN anchor said that the plane is now probably covered in silt!!!! They are such drama queens and kings that they suggest all sorts of things on air, it's a wonder they haven't hammered this incident and wondered out loud if it's the same plane.

Decompression, explosive or gradual, will result in all sorts of alarms when the interior pressure goes above 8000 feet or so..The aircrew have quick donning O2 masks..the idea that they passed out is ridiculous.

Somebody turned the transponder off because they wanted to disappear from radar. I think they are looking in the wrong place. Not sure where but after 5 weeks, the debris has scattered. The idea that it didn't break apart is also ridiculous. I think something will wash up somewhere, eventually, be linked to the aircraft but it's actual location will continue to be a mystery.

 

[Ferminal]

Something did wash up today, apparently.

 

[movingtarget]

Something did wash up today, apparently.

From initial reports it seems it's not related but they are still examining the metal.

 

[search]

Somebody turned the transponder off because they wanted to disappear from radar.

there was something about this in german tv, they said there are strict rules how to behave in case of an accident, it says react -> navigate -> inform (translated from german, no idea what are the exact words originally)

so in case of a fire (for example), you first switch off everything that can cause it (also the transponder, like in this case, and gain height to extinguish the fire), then navigate (in this case = try to head to the closest airport, Langkawi) and at last inform the ground control.

So to me it sounds reasonable that the pilotes managed to fulfill the first two steps before dying/getting unconscious, and the autopilot taking over (and continue to fly until there was no more fuel)

 

[roundabout]

I think it's aviate, navigate, communicate

 

[search]

ah, yeh, that sounds better, tried to google it but couldn't find anything, thanks

edit: so maybe I got the order wrong for the first two, I saw that on tv a couple of weeks ago

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

So to me it sounds reasonable that the pilotes managed to fulfill the first two steps before dying/getting unconscious, and the autopilot taking over (and continue to fly until there was no more fuel)

The only problem with this is that the odds that the autopilot was set to send them to the south Indian Ocean was hyper slim. They would have had to have had an ARCAS failure, plus a transponder failure, plus a full communications failure. Then, manually headed the plane towards Antarctica (presumably an airport on the way) and have the autopilot not fail as it took flew them for hours as they were asphyxiated.

It's possible I suppose, but...

Then again, maybe they're looking in the wrong place by a few thousand miles.

 

[StyrbjornSterki]

...so in case of a fire (for example), you first switch off everything that can cause it (also the transponder, like in this case, and gain height to extinguish the fire), then navigate (in this case = try to head to the closest airport, Langkawi) and at last inform the ground control.

So to me it sounds reasonable that the pilotes managed to fulfill the first two steps before dying/getting unconscious, and the autopilot taking over (and continue to fly until there was no more fuel)

This really is getting silly. TV people who know absolutely nothing about airline operations are making wild speculations because it brings in viewers: "There's nothing new on this front, so let's make up something sensational...."

As I mentioned on the previous page, the first step in the emergency procedure is to don the oxygen mask, not to go on some wild goose chase in search of the source of the fire:

Step #1 is a memory jog to remind the crew a change of course (diversion to an alternate airfield) might be in order. The second item is the first step in the Emergency Procedure proper: Don oxygen masks and smoke goggles, if needed. The goggles are discretionary; the oxygen mask IS NOT. Anything else would be both illogical and irresponsible, because if the crew pass out, it's game over.

If the crew masked up straight off, how were they supposed to have lost consciousness?

The procedure goes on for a further seven pages, mostly delving into isolating electrical systems and employing fire suppressant measures, but nowhere does it advise to switch off the transponder unless it shows direct evidence of being the source of the smoke or fire.

Speculation that there is anything in the emergency procedures about flying higher to put out the fire is pure silliness. After all, how are you supposed to keep jet engines running if there's too little oxygen to sustain a fire? What do they think jets run on, ...moonbeams?


The only possible scenario that encompasses both airline operational procedures AND the facts of this disappearance begins and ends with
1) a human being
2) with bad intentions
3) in the cockpit.

 

[Bustedknuckle]

there was something about this in german tv, they said there are strict rules how to behave in case of an accident, it says react -> navigate -> inform (translated from german, no idea what are the exact words originally)

so in case of a fire (for example), you first switch off everything that can cause it (also the transponder, like in this case, and gain height to extinguish the fire), then navigate (in this case = try to head to the closest airport, Langkawi) and at last inform the ground control.

So to me it sounds reasonable that the pilotes managed to fulfill the first two steps before dying/getting unconscious, and the autopilot taking over (and continue to fly until there was no more fuel)

Aviate, Navigate, communicate...IF they had a fire and did turn off everything, they would also don their O2 masks, one of the first thing they do when they smell smoke. Unconscious is just silly. They would also head for an alternate..not climb or descend, because they turned off their radio and are flying at night(IFR). I suspect they would also keep the transponder on, squawk 7700(emergency) and controllers would clear the airspace for them.

 

[stutue]

Electrical fire knocking out communications systems amongst others.... seems to be the opinion of pilots in my acquaintance.

Not sure we will ever know about this one.

 

[jens_attacks]

yeah i think so too. and they were heading to antarctica to cool down

 

[StyrbjornSterki]

MH370: Malaysia report indicates plane flew route to avoid detection

 

[stutue]

Its anyone's guess now