|
Flight MH370 disaster - new theory (asphyxia - air problems)
On Wednesday, March 12, 2014 6:13:46 PM UTC-4, Oren wrote:
On Wed, 12 Mar 2014 09:51:24 -0700, Oren wrote: On Wed, 12 Mar 2014 08:14:01 -0700, RobertMacy wrote: In early 60's a satellite could read the headlines of a paper lying on the ground, so why is it so hard to NOT see this plane? This region has to be one of the most monitored regions in the world. "...China yesterday pressed ten high-resolution satellites to look for the missing plane." Read more at: http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/31852827.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medi um=text&utm_campaign=cppst Breaking News: "CHINESE GOVERNMENT WEBSITE SAYS IT HAS IMAGES OF SUSPECTED DEBRIS OF MISSING MALAYSIA PLANE, AP REPORTS" Details developing...Fox News reports. http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/03/12/chinese-government-website-says-it-has-images-suspected-plane-debris/ This is a good shot of one pic of what the Chinese sat has: http://nypost.com/2014/03/12/satelli...laysia-flight/ Looks like it could be the tail section. Again there is confusion over exactly where, but it sounds like it was 140 miles east or northeast from the last contact. This looks like it could be it. But the pics are from Sunday, who knows where it is by now. |
Flight MH370 disaster - news not
On Wed, 12 Mar 2014 19:49:30 -0400, Tekkie®
wrote: big snip The media in Malaysia it mostly state-owned by government or political parties. This puts a "chilling effect" on reporters. Their version of MSNBC ? No. MSLSD. In other news: Barbara Walters hints she still enjoys sex. |
Flight MH370 disaster - new theory (asphyxia - air problems)
On Wed, 12 Mar 2014 17:02:18 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote: On Wednesday, March 12, 2014 6:13:46 PM UTC-4, Oren wrote: On Wed, 12 Mar 2014 09:51:24 -0700, Oren wrote: On Wed, 12 Mar 2014 08:14:01 -0700, RobertMacy wrote: In early 60's a satellite could read the headlines of a paper lying on the ground, so why is it so hard to NOT see this plane? This region has to be one of the most monitored regions in the world. "...China yesterday pressed ten high-resolution satellites to look for the missing plane." Read more at: http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/31852827.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medi um=text&utm_campaign=cppst Breaking News: "CHINESE GOVERNMENT WEBSITE SAYS IT HAS IMAGES OF SUSPECTED DEBRIS OF MISSING MALAYSIA PLANE, AP REPORTS" Details developing...Fox News reports. http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/03/12/chinese-government-website-says-it-has-images-suspected-plane-debris/ This is a good shot of one pic of what the Chinese sat has: http://nypost.com/2014/03/12/satelli...laysia-flight/ Looks like it could be the tail section. Again there is confusion over exactly where, but it sounds like it was 140 miles east or northeast from the last contact. This looks like it could be it. But the pics are from Sunday, who knows where it is by now. _Catherine Herridge has the latest developments_ http://video.foxnews.com/v/3331878148001/report-satellite-images-may-show-malaysia-airlines-plane/?playlist_id=930909819001#sp=show-clips |
Flight MH370 disaster - new theory (asphyxia - air problems)
On Wednesday, March 12, 2014 8:30:18 PM UTC-4, Oren wrote:
On Wed, 12 Mar 2014 17:02:18 -0700 (PDT), " wrote: On Wednesday, March 12, 2014 6:13:46 PM UTC-4, Oren wrote: On Wed, 12 Mar 2014 09:51:24 -0700, Oren wrote: On Wed, 12 Mar 2014 08:14:01 -0700, RobertMacy wrote: In early 60's a satellite could read the headlines of a paper lying on the ground, so why is it so hard to NOT see this plane? This region has to be one of the most monitored regions in the world. "...China yesterday pressed ten high-resolution satellites to look for the missing plane." Read more at: http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/31852827.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medi um=text&utm_campaign=cppst Breaking News: "CHINESE GOVERNMENT WEBSITE SAYS IT HAS IMAGES OF SUSPECTED DEBRIS OF MISSING MALAYSIA PLANE, AP REPORTS" Details developing...Fox News reports. http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/03/12/chinese-government-website-says-it-has-images-suspected-plane-debris/ This is a good shot of one pic of what the Chinese sat has: http://nypost.com/2014/03/12/satelli...laysia-flight/ Looks like it could be the tail section. Again there is confusion over exactly where, but it sounds like it was 140 miles east or northeast from the last contact. This looks like it could be it. But the pics are from Sunday, who knows where it is by now. _Catherine Herridge has the latest developments_ http://video.foxnews.com/v/3331878148001/report-satellite-images-may-show-malaysia-airlines-plane/?playlist_id=930909819001#sp=show-clips I found the long/lat that is being reported for the new sighting. More confusion, media is saying it's northeast of the last known position. The long/lat given comes up on Google maps as about 140 miles *southeast* of the last contact. The pics were taken by sat on Sunday. Wonder what the currents are there, ie could they have floated that far and it really went in near last contact? And are they still there now when they go looking for them. Seems incredible they could be that close to the last contact on Sunday and the searched for them for two days in the area in didn't see it. But I'd say this sure looks highly likely to be it. |
Flight MH370 disaster - new theory (asphyxia - air problems)
wrote in message
... stuff snipped Try it when you are reporting as "roaming" in SE Asia, then get back to us. Indeed. There are just so many legit explanations for why they might still seem to be ringing that it's sad to see people reading anything into ring counts on phone systems a world away. The only roaming those phones are doing now is if they are in the bellies of sharks consuming the remains of the passengers. T4 asked if this could get any worse and I'm thinking - finding half eaten remains - that could be worse. We have a number of different countries with a number of different languages and that has contributed to a spotty search effort. I remember the "con" job DC police pulled when they made a big show of looking for Rep. Gary Condit's dead GF in Rock Creek Park. They drove up a bus of academy cadets, set them to searching while the news cameras were there and as soon as the news crews left, they called them back and went home. Quite some time later (a year?) a guy walking his dog found her body just off the trail but forensics was almost impossible because of the state of decomp. Can't remember her name - want to say Monica Lewinsky but no - wait - Chondra Levy. The tragedy is that if people thought the area was unsearched, civilians might have discovered her body in time to exonerate Condit, whose political career died with her. The law says "innocent until proven guilty" but the reality is that for many it's "innocent until accused." While I doubt anyone would have been saved by a quicker search effort in Malaysia, it's a reminder it's a very big world out there and there's an enormous amount of debris bobbing about in the ocean. I think Trader nailed it when he pointed out they lost the only piece of wreckage that clearly looked like it was from a jet very early on. I'll bet that's where the rest of the plane is and for some reason it went down largely intact. If the fuselage was intact, the doors could easily pop open from the increased pressure as the cabin deformed upon impact. They should have put a radio buoy or even a regular one at the spot or recorded the GPS location but I am betting they fly chickens around in those planes when they're not using them for air/sea rescue. Someone pointed out that Sully's plane sank very quickly and all in one piece after his water landing. I would expect to have seen life rafts if the pilots had managed a night time water landing without instrumentation, engine power or both. But you never know. And collectively we may never know if the voice recorders failed or can't be found. Every generation needs a Flying Dutchman or Judge Crater or Amelia Earhardt story. Maybe this is going to be the latest of its kind. My current conclusion is still that it flew apart from structural issues (the US spy sats didn't see a midair explosion). Its wing had been previously repaired after a wingtip collision, Boeing just sent out a repair bulletin on large cracks in the fuselage appearing in other 777's and not a peep was heard from them ever again right after what was essentially their first turn at high altitude. One thing that bothers me about my own scenario is that the waters they flew over are said to be fairly well populated by fishing boats and gas drilling rigs. Someone should have noticed something. Another person postulated that the lost both engines and were trying to restart them by "windmilling" them back to life in a high speed dive and are rammed nose first in deep silt somewhere. The information about the AF crash reveals the ocean comes up awfully fast at night when your instruments are bad. The AF crash was one of three recent crashes over water caused by faulty airspeed indicators. I guess having three different pitot sensors isn't really redundant enough. Scary thought. Probably need a completely different sensing mechanism, like a lithium powered GPS system like the one in my $45 TomTom GPS that nags me about my speeding. -- Bobby G. |
Flight MH370 disaster - new theory (asphyxia - air problems)
On Wednesday, March 12, 2014 9:21:12 PM UTC-4, Robert Green wrote:
wrote in message ... stuff snipped Try it when you are reporting as "roaming" in SE Asia, then get back to us. Indeed. There are just so many legit explanations for why they might still seem to be ringing that it's sad to see people reading anything into ring counts on phone systems a world away. The people reading into the ring counts should aren't here, they are in Malaysia and China. Unless you have some bias against Asians, there is no reason to think they don't know how sell phones behave over there. But there are some here who don't, because I've heard several here now incredulous that there could be any difference in how you here a cell phone ring when you call it and it's on and in contact, versus when it's turned off. The only roaming those phones are doing now is if they are in the bellies of sharks consuming the remains of the passengers. Obviously you don't know that, because as of now, no one knows where the plane is. It could be in a jungle. T4 asked if this could get any worse and I'm thinking - finding half eaten remains - that could be worse. We have a number of different countries with a number of different languages and that has contributed to a spotty search effort. I doubt language has much to do with it at all. Vietnam for example has said the Malaysian military has hardly contacted them at all. I remember the "con" job DC police pulled when they made a big show of looking for Rep. Gary Condit's dead GF in Rock Creek Park. They drove up a bus of academy cadets, set them to searching while the news cameras were there and as soon as the news crews left, they called them back and went home. Quite some time later (a year?) a guy walking his dog found her body just off the trail but forensics was almost impossible because of the state of decomp. Can't remember her name - want to say Monica Lewinsky but no - wait - Chondra Levy. The tragedy is that if people thought the area was unsearched, civilians might have discovered her body in time to exonerate Condit, whose political career died with her. The law says "innocent until proven guilty" but the reality is that for many it's "innocent until accused." While I doubt anyone would have been saved by a quicker search effort in Malaysia, it's a reminder it's a very big world out there and there's an enormous amount of debris bobbing about in the ocean. I think Trader nailed it when he pointed out they lost the only piece of wreckage that clearly looked like it was from a jet very early on. I'll bet that's where the rest of the plane is and for some reason it went down largely intact. If the fuselage was intact, the doors could easily pop open from the increased pressure as the cabin deformed upon impact. They should have put a radio buoy or even a regular one at the spot or recorded the GPS location but I am betting they fly chickens around in those planes when they're not using them for air/sea rescue. Someone pointed out that Sully's plane sank very quickly and all in one piece after his water landing. I would expect to have seen life rafts if the pilots had managed a night time water landing without instrumentation, engine power or both. But you never know. And collectively we may never know if the voice recorders failed or can't be found. Every generation needs a Flying Dutchman or Judge Crater or Amelia Earhardt story. Maybe this is going to be the latest of its kind. My current conclusion is still that it flew apart from structural issues (the US spy sats didn't see a midair explosion). Its wing had been previously repaired after a wingtip collision, Boeing just sent out a repair bulletin on large cracks in the fuselage appearing in other 777's and not a peep was heard from them ever again right after what was essentially their first turn at high altitude. Boeing said today that plane was not subject to the notice. One thing that bothers me about my own scenario is that the waters they flew over are said to be fairly well populated by fishing boats and gas drilling rigs. Someone should have noticed something. Another person postulated that the lost both engines and were trying to restart them by "windmilling" them back to life in a high speed dive and are rammed nose first in deep silt somewhere. The information about the AF crash reveals the ocean comes up awfully fast at night when your instruments are bad. The AF crash was one of three recent crashes over water caused by faulty airspeed indicators. I guess having three different pitot sensors isn't really redundant enough. Scary thought. Probably need a completely different sensing mechanism, like a lithium powered GPS system like the one in my $45 TomTom GPS that nags me about my speeding. -- Bobby G. It appears there is a good chance China satellite has found the wreckage. Check the latest news. As usual more confusion as to where. They are saying it's 140 miles northeast of the last contact, but by long/lat I saw, it's souteast. In any case it's about 140 miles from last contact, at least that's where it was Sunday.... Wonder what the currents are there, could it have floated there from the last contact spot, etc. |
Flight MH370 disaster - new theory (asphyxia - air problems)
On Wed, 12 Mar 2014 18:46:52 -0400, "Robert Green"
wrote: wrote in message news:ecdddfda-e79f-4c51-9d28- stuff snipped I don't see anyone saying cell phones work exactly the same all over the world. There's a pretty strong implication that you can read something out of the scattered reports of grief-stricken people that some phones - probably from a number of different carriers - are behaving oddly. Possible reasons - journalists trying to hack them like the Murdoch newspapers in England did - government agencies tracking them in case terrorism was involved - grief stricken relatives dialing the wrong numbers - the possibilities are so endless that to read something from them seems to really be grasping at straws. If China's involved, you can bet someone's watching those phones for anything that might involve terrorism. If someone (like a journo trying to crack voicemail) was repeatedly dialing a lost cell phone, isn't it possible that would affect what someone calling in at the same time hears? So many possibilities other than "the phones are still on - somewhere." I suppose the wish is that the plane is hijacked and we'll get a ransom note one of these days but Occam's razor says: "Watery grave" the most likely explanation. A more newsworthy item would be a person who actually *talked* to a passenger - not gotten what they believe to be an odd response from a phone that's probably a few hundred feet over water. The phone "rang funny" just doesn't seem to me to be indicative of anything, especially on phones that have been transported from country to country. But don't you think that people that have been using them in Malaysia, China, etc know how they behave there? Flights between countries with roaming and all sorts of odd cell phone handoffs would lead me to believe that this is a cellular network issue, a not an indication that anyone's still alive. That includes some Malaysian Airline officials. They appear to be saying that the cell phones are ringing like they are on and in cell phone service. Dude, my confidence in ANY sort of Malaysian official is probably at an all time low. (-: Can't you tell the difference on your phone? I haven't dropped it in the ocean yet, where I am 80% confident that's where the MH370 phones are. The other 20% is reserved for crashing on land somewhere. If you believe the searchers, the crash site can't be in the water. I don't remember what crash it was, but I do remember some plane getting so thoroughly buried under silt it was nearly impossible to see from the air. If there is no cell phone service in an area the phone is in or the phone is off, and you call it, what happens in your experience? You can't tell the difference? The phone just rings the same? With all the phones I've had, all the places I've used them, I could tell a difference between how they behave when called when the phone was off or on. The phone I have right now, if it's on and I call it, I hear it ring 5 times, if it's not on it goes to voicemail in 1.5 rings. I think that is what the people over there are saying. There could be reasons, like everything else in this story it could be misreported, etc, but I don't see why it should be dismissed as nonsense because it's consistent with my experience. Your experience in America with a total of what, three carriers? These systems are infinitely configurable. With the government and press both likely to be snooping those numbers and the roaming issues, odd phone behavior is dispostive of nothing, at least in my mind. And it could be consistent with the other evidence too. They are still searching boths sides and across the middle of Malaysia, no? If crashed over land there is some chance some phones could have survived. Don't get me wrong, I don't think that's likely, but neither do I think what the people are saying is completely nuts. I don't think it likely either and I think it shows that when people are starved for information about their probably deceased love ones, they will grasp at any straw left to them. It's more a concern that these people are giving themselves false hope. It would be worse if it turns out to be the fault of snoops ringing those phones and trying to hack into their voicemail systems. Given everything we know about the Chinese government and the press, that's the most likely explanation of oddball ringing. I guess a little false hope might soften the eventual blow the relatives of the passengers will face. As you've pointed out before, we've not got the world's "best and brightest - or most truthful" working on the problem. I also read, I think in BusinessWeek, that it would cost $300M per airline to build real-time black box transmissions through a satelite link. Not gonna happen given how few of these they drop that turn into mysteries. The bottom line is that a 777 is a big honkin' thing and while one might go missing for a while, it can't *stay* missing. Even when we have video of the crash, like TWA 800, the puzzle can be very hard to solve. I saw video that sure as hell looked like a missile but I also saw the reassembled wreckage that didn't support a missile strike. I can easily see a president, R or D, deciding to conceal a terrorist attack to prevent widespread panic. Not sure it happened there, but there's enough meat to feed a small army of conspiracy theorists. These phones will not be like your typical "american" phone. They will definitely be GSM, not TDMA or CDMA. ( yes, GSM is starting to become more common in the USA,but it is not the standard, as it is virtually everywhere else in the world) |
Flight MH370 disaster - new theory (asphyxia - air problems)
wrote in message
... On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 12:39:43 -0400, "Robert Green" wrote: wrote in message news:95b02554-320f-4775-ae05- In the case of the ADS-B, you have the plane making a final small turn to the right, just like other flights on other days, then the data stops. Another mark in the wing failure category. When you bank, it shifts the load on the wing/fuselage connections and that's a very likely point of failure. Was it the right wing tip that had been previously damaged? I think so. The MAF is now saying they tracked the plane for over an hour after it turned around. If they had a decompression I would expect them to quickly dive to 6000-8000 feet so they had enough air to survive. They are starting to suggest it may have been a hijacking by the flight crew. They have moved the search to the Straight of Malacca and I suppose the Indian Ocean. My vote is that it's still where the transponder died and that the searchers missed it. It may have landed on the water like Sully's plane and then just slipped under, largely intact. From the latest news, (Chinese sat photos) it seems it's just sitting in the ocean in big pieces right along the known flight path. That many countries involved in a large search effort has all the makings of a Mongolian Cluster Fu&. -- Bobby G. |
Flight MH370 disaster - new theory (asphyxia - air problems)
|
Flight MH370 disaster - new theory (asphyxia - air problems)
wrote in message
... stuff snipped I think the phone people could debunk this in 10 seconds but they do not want to be the Debbie Downer who says this "ringing" thing does not mean anything. I am sure that at least the phones that were operating on China Mobile are now being scoured for any trace of terrorism. China's got to be worried that this is a terrorist attack aimed at them and we know they are very busy beavers when it comes to spying, hacking, etc. -- Bobby G. |
Flight MH370 disaster - new theory (asphyxia - air problems)
On Wed, 12 Mar 2014 19:42:54 -0700, Oren wrote:
On Wed, 12 Mar 2014 21:54:26 -0400, wrote: These phones will not be like your typical "american" phone. They will definitely be GSM, not TDMA or CDMA. ( yes, GSM is starting to become more common in the USA,but it is not the standard, as it is virtually everywhere else in the world) Those protocols have been available in the USA for a number of years. Mostly for travelers going abroad, using different networks. Not sure how the phone transitions from GSM to the TDMA / CDMA protocols? GSM phomes generally do not work on tdma/cdma systems, and vise versa. Complicating things, there are 4 frequencies for GSM - only 2 of which are used in North America, and the other two almost universal elsewhere, so you need a "quad band" world phone for extensive travel. My daughter had a 3 band GSM and was able to use it in large urban centers in Rwanda, but not in the outlying aread which used the 4th frequency. |
Flight MH370 disaster - new theory (asphyxia - air problems)
wrote in message news:b8e36d48-f33b-4936-981e-
stuff snipped This is a good shot of one pic of what the Chinese sat has: http://nypost.com/2014/03/12/satelli...laysia-flight/ Looks like it could be the tail section. Again there is confusion over exactly where, but it sounds like it was 140 miles east or northeast from the last contact. This looks like it could be it. But the pics are from Sunday, who knows where it is by now. I doubt it's very far from where it was all along - where the searchers missed it. If there was substantial enough floating wreckage, it will still be there or at least the currents will be predictable enough to figure out where it drifted to. As for radar trails heading off in different directions, they get bogies on radar all the time. Who knows if they were tracking an errant weather balloon or just a radar ghost the turn-around radar traces. -- Bobby G. |
Flight MH370 disaster - new theory (asphyxia - air problems)
wrote in message
... stuff snipped These phones will not be like your typical "american" phone. They will definitely be GSM, not TDMA or CDMA. ( yes, GSM is starting to become more common in the USA,but it is not the standard, as it is virtually everywhere else in the world) Then there's that, too. One thing AHR has taught me is that what I know to be "commonplace and customary" here in DC ain't that way across the nation or the world. Houses without basements are unusual to my way of thinking but standard in plenty of places. There are at least 10 carriers that might have provided cell phone service to those passengers that I could find. Maybe more. I am sure the don't all behave the same way. I am also sure those numbers are under watch by the PLA, assorted journalists and hackers and God knows who else since the crash. I just can't put much weight to the fact that the telephones seem to be ringing "oddly." -- Bobby G. |
Flight MH370 disaster - new theory (asphyxia - air problems)
"Scott Lurndal" wrote in message
... stuff snipped http://www.tomnod.com/nod/challenge/malaysiaairsar2014 Seems there's no one home. Couldn't even read the page source. Something's not quite right... - Tomnod www.tomnod.com/nod/challenge/malaysiaairsar2014 - Cached Something's not quite right... Tomnod is experiencing technical difficulties. We apologize. We're poking our servers with pointy sticks to figure out what's wrong. Says Google when entering the URL in the search box. -- Bobby G. |
Flight MH370 disaster - new theory (asphyxia - air problems)
On 3/12/2014 9:45 PM, wrote:
(And,I know how to snip....) It appears there is a good chance China satellite has found the wreckage. Check the latest news. As usual more confusion as to where. They are saying it's 140 miles northeast of the last contact, but by long/lat I saw, it's souteast. In any case it's about 140 miles from last contact, at least that's where it was Sunday.... Wonder what the currents are there, could it have floated there from the last contact spot, etc. Does air plane debris float around? I'd expect most of it to sink immediately. -- .. Christopher A. Young Learn about Jesus www.lds.org .. |
Flight MH370 disaster - new theory (asphyxia - air problems)
Robert Green wrote:
http://www.tomnod.com/nod/challenge/malaysiaairsar2014 Seems there's no one home. Couldn't even read the page source. I got the same error last night. Then I renamed my HOSTS file, closed the browser and tried again - and it worked. There was something in my HOSTS file that prevented the page from operating correctly. I spent about 1/2 hour looking at images of dark blue water and clouds. Scanned about 400 grid locations - didn't see anything man-made (no boats, nothing). Each grid image seemed to be about 2000 x 1000 ft, and anything 10 x 10 ft would be easily distinguishable, possibly something 5 x 5. About 10 to 15% of the imagery was obscured by clouds. I eventually got bored and left the site. What I would have liked to have seen was a graphic showing me the area I was looking at in terms of where the beacon signal was lost off the coast of Malaysia. |
Flight MH370 disaster - new theory (asphyxia - air problems)
In article ,
"Robert Green" wrote: Someone pointed out that Sully's plane sank very quickly and all in one piece after his water landing. I would expect to have seen life rafts if the pilots had managed a night time water landing without instrumentation, engine power or both. But you never know. And collectively we may never know if the voice recorders failed or can't be found. Every generation needs a Flying Dutchman or Judge Crater or Amelia Earhardt story. Maybe this is going to be the latest of its kind. Sully's plane did not impact from 35K either and stayed intact. The main reason it sank so quickly was because they opened up the doors to let people out. -- ³Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital.² ‹ Aaron Levenstein |
Flight MH370 disaster - new theory (asphyxia - air problems)
On 3/10/2014 11:51 PM, Home Guy wrote:
There was a suprising number of planes in the air around Malaysia at 1 am local time. ------------- A pilot flying another plane who tried to contact the pilots in the cockpit of the Malaysia Airlines plane said he heard mumbled voices before contact was lost. ------------- So another theory: Something went wrong with the cabin air inside the plane. Either it lost pressurization (slowly) or recirculation wasn't working - causing buidup of carbon monoxide. --------------- On October 25, 1999, a chartered Learjet 35 was scheduled to fly from Orlando, Florida to Dallas, Texas. Early in the flight the aircraft, which was cruising at altitude on autopilot, quickly lost cabin pressure. All on board were incapacitated due to hypoxia — a lack of oxygen. The aircraft failed to make the westward turn toward Dallas over north Florida. It continued flying over the southern and midwestern United States for almost four hours and 1,500 miles (2,400 km). The plane ran out of fuel and crashed into a field near Aberdeen, South Dakota after an uncontrolled descent. The four passengers on board were golf star Payne Stewart, his agents, Van Ardan and Robert Fraley, and Bruce Borland, a highly regarded golf architect with the Jack Nicklaus golf course design company. The NTSB determined that: The probable cause of this accident was incapacitation of the flight crew members as a result of their failure to receive supplemental oxygen following a loss of cabin pressurization, for undetermined reasons. A possible explanation for the failure of the pilots to receive emergency oxygen is that their ability to think and act decisively was impaired because of hypoxia before they could don their oxygen masks. No definitive evidence exists that indicates the rate at which the accident flight lost its cabin pressure; therefore, the Safety Board evaluated conditions of both rapid and gradual depressurization. If there had been a breach in the fuselage (even a small one that could not be visually detected by the in-flight observers) or a seal failure, the cabin could have depressurized gradually, rapidly, or even explosively. Research has shown that a period of as little as 8 seconds without supplemental oxygen following rapid depressurization to about 30,000 feet (9,100 m) may cause a drop in oxygen saturation that can significantly impair cognitive functioning and increase the amount of time required to complete complex tasks. ---------------- So either MH370 depressurized quickly - or slowly. The pilots might have been able to put their masks on - or realize they needed to put their masks on. Perhaps they did - but their supplemental oxygen supply didn't work. Perhaps in their confused state, with or without functional masks, they started an emergency descent before they blacked out, causing the plane to smash into the ocean with the pilots incapacitated on the way down. Note also that in the flight of the Lear Jet in 1999 that the pilots, even if they did don their masks, made no attempt at radio contact. After all the changes in theories and discalimers about what is known, I'm thinking someone hijacked the plane and has some super-hackers messing with electronics and data systems. Not that I know anything about flight electronics. |
Flight MH370 disaster - new theory (asphyxia - air problems)
On Wed, 12 Mar 2014 21:40:48 -0400, Stormin Mormon
wrote: In a couple weeks, this is going to be interesting, when it's solved. It gets stranger, now. "...Chinese satellite images that were said to show debris from a missing Malaysian airliner were released by mistake, Malaysia's transport minister says. Hishammuddin Hussein also denied a US report that the Boeing 777 might have flown for hours after contact with air traffic control was lost." (Rolls-Royce, engine maker, had reported the engines sent data for 4-5 hours after contact was lost) [...] "Mr Hussein also denied a report in the Wall Street Journal that the plane had sent engine data to the ground for more than four hours after it lost contact with air traffic control. He said that his team had spoken to Malaysian Airlines and Rolls-Royce, the engine's manufacturers, who both said the report was "inaccurate". BBC: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-26559627 |
Flight MH370 disaster - new theory (asphyxia - air problems)
"Kurt Ullman" wrote in message
m... In article , "Robert Green" wrote: Someone pointed out that Sully's plane sank very quickly and all in one piece after his water landing. I would expect to have seen life rafts if the pilots had managed a night time water landing without instrumentation, engine power or both. But you never know. And collectively we may never know if the voice recorders failed or can't be found. Every generation needs a Flying Dutchman or Judge Crater or Amelia Earhardt story. Maybe this is going to be the latest of its kind. Sully's plane did not impact from 35K either and stayed intact. The main reason it sank so quickly was because they opened up the doors to let people out. Correct - 370 would have had a lot *more* time than Sully had to ditch. g I doubt that if 370 DID ditch that people would have remained aboard without opening the doors to try to escape. But it's pretty unlikely they made a water landing late at night without instruments. I'm just trying to cover all contingencies that could account for very little surface wreckage, other than search incompetence. That's still my "go to" position. Today's red herring is the data RollsRoyce says it was still collecting hours after many people think the plane crashed. This 777's going to have a lot of explaining to do when they finally find the wreckage. It took 2 years for them to find the AirFrance black boxes and "close" that case. Let's hope this isn't resolved in the same, slow painful way. -- Bobby G. |
Flight MH370 disaster - news not
Oren posted for all of us...
And I know how to SNIP On Wed, 12 Mar 2014 19:49:30 -0400, Tekkie® wrote: big snip The media in Malaysia it mostly state-owned by government or political parties. This puts a "chilling effect" on reporters. Their version of MSNBC ? No. MSLSD. In other news: Barbara Walters hints she still enjoys sex. Good for her! Maybe it keeps her mouth shut? Probably BOB (battery operated boyfriend) She was tagging Greenspan wasn't she; the rise and fall of the experience. Castro had international relations. -- Tekkie |
Flight MH370 disaster - new theory (asphyxia - air problems)
On 03/13/2014 08:18 AM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
Does air plane debris float around? I'd expect most of it to sink immediately. I'd expect the flotation device under each seat to float. ;-) |
Flight MH370 disaster - new theory (asphyxia - air problems)
On Thu, 13 Mar 2014 09:29:24 -0400, Norminn
wrote: After all the changes in theories and discalimers about what is known, I'm thinking someone hijacked the plane and has some super-hackers messing with electronics and data systems. Not that I know anything about flight electronics. Hacking the computers was discussed the other day in one report. Talking about manipulating the GPS. Taking control of the entire system communications was dismissed by "experts". Complexity, redundant systems and all, it makes sense for now nothing was "hacked". |
Flight MH370 disaster - new theory (asphyxia - air problems)
On Thu, 13 Mar 2014 08:18:34 -0400, Stormin Mormon
wrote: Does air plane debris float around? I'd expect most of it to sink immediately. Yes. Your expectations are limited. Something on a 240 ton plane floats. Use your imagination for a moment. |
Flight MH370 disaster - new theory (asphyxia - air problems)
Oren wrote:
Does air plane debris float around? I'd expect most of it to sink immediately. Yes. Your expectations are limited. Something on a 240 ton plane floats. Use your imagination for a moment. Jet fuel. |
Flight MH370 disaster - new theory (asphyxia - air problems)
On 3/13/2014 8:10 PM, 0ren wrote:
On 03/13/2014 08:18 AM, Stormin Mormon wrote: Does air plane debris float around? I'd expect most of it to sink immediately. I'd expect the flotation device under each seat to float. ;-) Well, if they were made in USA, perhaps. -- .. Christopher A. Young Learn about Jesus www.lds.org .. |
Flight MH370 disaster - new theory (asphyxia - air problems)
wrote in message news:69ec0639-6689-409d-90a1-
stuff snipped about FAA 777 "crack" directive" Yes, I had seen that same report. Some more good questions that should be asked and answered, ie was this plane checked for that possible defect? They talked about corrosion, too, and that's probably something that has a strong correlation to the conditions of the route the plane most often travels. They seem to correlate these defects strongly with age, but I'll bet the environmental conditions could either advance or retard when the corrosion might appear. I've also seen where Boeing says that the plane was not part of their data logging that they offer airlines. Apparently the onboard ACRS? sends maintenance, performance data back, similar to Airbus that went down near Brazil. But Malaysian airlines chose not to participate in Boeings data collection, but Boeing says MA did use the system themselves. From what I've read, MA hasn't directly answered the question of when the last data from that was received, etc. I've read about half a dozen conflicting stories about data logging both by Rolls, who made the engines, and Boeing and while the reports are interesting they seem at the moment to be fairly inconclusive at best and conflicting at worst. One thing that caught my eye was a story about how the two different reporting systems seem to have been switched off at separate times. A fire eating through the wiring can cause the same kind of symptoms, though, as it move along conduits and equipment bays. This is the most confused, screwed up investigation that I've ever seen. They've switched major parts of the story so many times now that the Malaysian officials need to hold a major press conference, release more information and clear things up. They have zero credibility with me now. I'll concede that the plane may have been hijacked and could be *anywhere* its remaining fuel might take it. The problem with that scenario is that someone should have gotten a strong radar fix on it somewhere - other than the Malaysian authorities. I still think the search was so badly botched that it's where the transponder tracking stopped. The Chinese seem to have retracted their satellite photos according to something I just read so we're still in the "data collection" phase trying to evaluate what's likely from what's not. What needs to happen is that fake "Transponder OFF" switches need to go into these cabins so that when someone tries to turn it off (why they even CAN be turned off is another issue) they send out an emergency beacon and light up flashing lights on the airplane roof that satellites might be able to track at night. The school buses around here can do that, why not a 777? Of huge significance is on what exactly are they basing the ever changing story of the continued radar tracking of the plane after it dropped off ATC. They should just release the radar returns, at least to enough international experts, so that there is some more credibility to where the plane might have gone. At first thought, you'd think that the military probably doesn't want to disclose what they can or can't see on radar. I think that's a remarkably strong concern to them. What bothers me more is that if they were so lax in checking passports, how well did they screen the luggage for explosives? Did they cut corners there, too? If it was a terrorist attack, there would most likely be more than two people to seize and maintain control of the plane and passengers. I would hope they are really screening the passenger manifest for questionable flyers. But at this point I think it's obvious that you could fly a 777 over their airspace and they don't know WTF is going on, so it would seem releasing more descriptive information as to what exactly they have on radar would be better than looking like total idiots. Last I heard on this was that they were back to saying that all they had was some kind of radar data right after the last known ATC radar, that showed it "might have" changed direction. Yet the day before, two high ranking AF officials said that they tracked the plane all the way to the Straits of Malacca. Curiously, that would be about the two hour flight time that the airline, Malaysian officials all were giving out for two days. I don't think any of their reports are credible anymore. Which leaves us with questions like why did the transponder fail just as the plane began to change course? I think from the Flight24 radar guys analysis (who don't have political considerations) we can be pretty sure that's an "unfiltered" fact. That's what leads me to think structural failure. Wouldn't hijackers want to start off toward their destination as soon as possible? Hijacking or suicide crash dives are possibilities, but hijacking requires considerable sophistication and the newest information implies they would know how to turn off both transmitters. While we already know that terrorists have this level of sophistication (they did it on 9/11) why has no one taken credit? I say the odds are still that it went down off Kota Bharu where contact was lost 40 mins into the flight from some sudden catastrophic event. We agree on that. I am pretty sure we saw wreckage (the door) but incompetent searchers lost it. When you saw it there wasn't much doubt what it was, unlike oil slicks and log rafts that were sighted. I'm still suspicous of those two Iranians too, while it seems investigators are downplaying it as they were just two more illegal immigrants. We know a good bit about one, but I haven't seen anything about the other. And the guy who dropped them off at the airport says they only had only a backpack and two laptops? If you were going to Europe for good, wouldn't you have some real luggage? This guy knew the one guy from school, the other he didn't know at all. They stayed at his house overnight, yet he says he didn't ask them why they were in Malaysia? They got these fake passports from this mysterious guy "Ali" who I believe is Iranian? Wonder where they got the laptops from? Remember that Lockerbie's bomb was taken aboard by a woman who had no idea it was a bomb. Any passenger could have been duped into bringing a device onto the plane, or had a luggage switch pulled on them. I really wonder how well they screen for explosives. The US said it detected no mid-air explosions but entire explosion could have been contained within the airplane, invisible to satellite surveillance and yet done enough damage (the way the Lockerbie bomb did) to sever cables and destroy electrical and comms equipment. It could have been the Uighurs (pronounced "Wheat germs g") and their intention was to crash the plane into a high profile target in Beijing. Still, the simplest explanation is that it crashed where the Flight24 track ends and the wreckage has yet to be found. Given the less than stellar quality of information coming out of the concerned parties, I still lean toward incompetent searching that "cleared" an area that shouldn't have been. I just have a feeling one day soon we'll wake up to headlines "Crash site found!" -- Bobby G. |
Flight MH370 disaster - new theory (asphyxia - air problems)
wrote in message news:595e562b-09b8-43f7-ac6a-
The people reading into the ring counts should aren't here, they are in Malaysia and China. Unless you have some bias against Asians, there is no reason to think they don't know how sell phones behave over there. But there are some here who don't, because I've heard several here now incredulous that there could be any difference in how you here a cell phone ring when you call it and it's on and in contact, versus when it's turned off. I admit that's the way they behave here but people are reading way too much into this: That ringing sound to which we're so accustomed is actually a psychological trick, meant to keep us on the line while the network works to locate the other phone. "The ringing sound is generated by the originating carrier's switch while the network sets up the call," a spokesperson for CTIA-The Wireless Association told Mashable. "This keeps callers from abandoning the call when they hear no sound. The ringing sound has nothing to do with the actual 'ringing' of the called party's device," he added. http://mashable.com/2014/03/11/why-m...s-phones-ring/ The only roaming those phones are doing now is if they are in the bellies of sharks consuming the remains of the passengers. Obviously you don't know that, because as of now, no one knows where the plane is. It could be in a jungle. Not much cell coverage or roaming in a jungle, either. Especially one remote enough to have a 777 crash in it and have no one notice . . . T4 asked if this could get any worse and I'm thinking - finding half eaten remains - that could be worse. We have a number of different countries with a number of different languages and that has contributed to a spotty search effort. I doubt language has much to do with it at all. Vietnam for example has said the Malaysian military has hardly contacted them at all. Well, there might not be much contact *because* there's a language problem and hence not much to talk about. Whether language is the reason or not, there's not much apparent cooperation among search entities. I remember the "con" job DC police pulled when they made a big show of looking for Rep. Gary Condit's dead GF in Rock Creek Park. They drove up a bus of academy cadets, set them to searching while the news cameras were there and as soon as the news crews left, they called them back and went home. Quite some time later (a year?) a guy walking his dog found her body just off the trail but forensics was almost impossible because of the state of decomp. Can't remember her name - want to say Monica Lewinsky but no - wait - Chondra Levy. The tragedy is that if people thought the area was unsearched, civilians might have discovered her body in time to exonerate Condit, whose political career died with her. The law says "innocent until proven guilty" but the reality is that for many it's "innocent until accused." While I doubt anyone would have been saved by a quicker search effort in Malaysia, it's a reminder it's a very big world out there and there's an enormous amount of debris bobbing about in the ocean. I think Trader nailed it when he pointed out they lost the only piece of wreckage that clearly looked like it was from a jet very early on. I'll bet that's where the rest of the plane is and for some reason it went down largely intact. If the fuselage was intact, the doors could easily pop open from the increased pressure as the cabin deformed upon impact. They should have put a radio buoy or even a regular one at the spot or recorded the GPS location but I am betting they fly chickens around in those planes when they're not using them for air/sea rescue. It appears there is a good chance China satellite has found the wreckage. Check the latest news. As usual more confusion as to where. They are saying it's 140 miles northeast of the last contact, but by long/lat I saw, it's souteast. In any case it's about 140 miles from last contact, at least that's where it was Sunday.... Wonder what the currents are there, could it have floated there from the last contact spot, etc. Latest I read is that for some reason, China is now retracting their satellite photo info - reasons unclear but I haven't checked Google for the last twenty minutes. -- Bobby G. |
Flight MH370 disaster - Some thoughts about telemetry, hijacking
Robert Green wrote:
Apparently the onboard ACRS? sends maintenance, performance data back, similar to Airbus that went down near Brazil. But Malaysian airlines chose not to participate in Boeings data collection, but Boeing says MA did use the system themselves. It's not clear if the choice to not buy the data collection service from Boeing means that telemetry (to who? to where?) still takes place. Presumably MA wouldn't need a telemetry link for such data, as they could simply pull the data off the planes manually when-ever they felt like it - since the planes are in their possession on a frequent basis. What needs to happen is that fake "Transponder OFF" switches need to go into these cabins so that when someone tries to turn it off (why they even CAN be turned off is another issue) The "off" switch is used routinely to turn off the transponder when planes are on the ground (parked, in hangars, etc) so that ATC screens are not cluttered by useless information. It's a tough call as to how to make them automatic. I'd say that if an interlock can be reasonably well engineered, that if the plane's wheels are up, then the beacons are supplied by power that can't be turned off from the cockpit. I think that's a remarkably strong concern to them. What bothers me more is that if they were so lax in checking passports, how well did they screen the luggage for explosives? Bulletproof passport checking requires real-time data and protocal links to every conceivable authority in the world that can issue an opinion about any given passport, and the cost to "subscribe" or participate in such a network must have little or zero cost to end users (airlines, airports) if stakeholders (gov'ts, law enforcement, societies) want to experience 100% compliance everywhere. And it must happen in a way that does not require humans to do more things than they do now (press more buttons, flip through more screens, etc) and a lack of data must not be interpreted as a "thumbs-down" which causes a holdup during checkin or boarding. The implimentation and day-to-day functioning of such a system requires talents and cooperation that extend far beyond the staff at any given airport or boarding gate. To link the competency of such passport checking (which is a distributed human effort) to the competency of explosive checking (which is an effort soley performed by specific local humans at any given location) is not logical. Wouldn't hijackers want to start off toward their destination as soon as possible? Hijacking or suicide crash dives are possibilities, but hijacking requires considerable sophistication and the newest information implies they would know how to turn off both transmitters. Hijack - implies taking control of the plane away from the pilots, with several possible intentions: - (a) Direct or fly the plane safely to an alternate location that the hijackers could not otherwise travel to using legal means. - (b) Direct of fly the plane safely to an alternate location to hold the plane and passengers hostage in exchange for some political or financial demand. - (c) Direct or fly the plane into a target (a-la 9/11). In other words, to use the plane as a weapon against a hardened target for political or religious reasons. For any of the above, it becomes a question as to how necessary it is to turn off the plane's various transmission sources to render it "invisible" from normal ground operations. Presumably the thinking is that any plane that has been hijacked anywhere in the world for any reason will be shot down as the primary response, so the best countermeasure for the hijacker is to make the plane as invisible as possible as soon as possible after the hijacking event has started. We know (or we think we know) that the plane was not deemed to have been hijacked and thus not shot down by any gov't in the area. We think we know that the plane did not land at an alternate airport, and no ransom demand was made (or at least made public). If the plane went down due to a struggle for control as a result of hijacking, we must conclude the initial stages of the hijacking was successful as it probably entailed turning off the identification beacon - something that would imply the hijackers had "comfortable control" of the plane. A struggle for control of the plane would have happened later - possibly hours later - presumably after passengers had come to a consensus about the situation, gathered their courage, forumated plan, etc. |
Flight MH370 disaster - Some thoughts about telemetry, hijacking
In article , Home Guy "Home"@Guy. com
wrote: What needs to happen is that fake "Transponder OFF" switches need to go into these cabins so that when someone tries to turn it off (why they even CAN be turned off is another issue) It's a tough call as to how to make them automatic. I'd say that if an interlock can be reasonably well engineered, that if the plane's wheels are up, then the beacons are supplied by power that can't be turned off from the cockpit. I wonder if there is any reason they couldn't share a circuit with the flight recorders since they already automatically turn off on the ground. Bulletproof passport checking requires real-time data and protocal links to every conceivable authority in the world that can issue an opinion about any given passport, and the cost to "subscribe" or participate in such a network must have little or zero cost to end users (airlines, airports) if stakeholders (gov'ts, law enforcement, societies) want to experience 100% compliance everywhere. And the zero cost includes not only access but also pretty close to zero costs for airline personnel and equipment, and hassle. It would seem as though you would pretty much have to mandate it by ALL airlines from ALL terminals for it to possibly work. At least until the first time a person isn't let on an airplane because somebody somewhere transposed to digit or two on data entry. For any of the above, it becomes a question as to how necessary it is to turn off the plane's various transmission sources to render it "invisible" from normal ground operations. Presumably the thinking is that any plane that has been hijacked anywhere in the world for any reason will be shot down as the primary response, so the best countermeasure for the hijacker is to make the plane as invisible as possible as soon as possible after the hijacking event has started. But at least for most likely targets, we'll use the G-8 for short hand purposes, the lack of a transponder would not make it all that invisible to the military folks and lack of transponder alone would probably bring out the fighters. -- "Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." -- Aaron Levenstein |
Flight MH370 disaster - Some thoughts about telemetry, hijacking
Kurt Ullman wrote:
But at least for most likely targets, we'll use the G-8 for short hand purposes, the lack of a transponder would not make it all that invisible to the military folks and lack of transponder alone would probably bring out the fighters. http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-0...ries-added-mix ========= The last plot on the military radar's tracking suggested the plane was flying toward India's Andaman Islands, a chain of isles between the Andaman Sea and the Bay of Bengal, they said. http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/defau...timeline_0.jpg The last sighting of the aircraft on civilian radar screens came shortly before 1:30 a.m. Malaysian time last Saturday (1730 GMT Friday), less than an hour after it took off from Kuala Lumpur, as the plane flew northeast across the mouth of the Gulf of Thailand. That put the plane on Malaysia's east coast. Malaysia's air force chief said on Wednesday an aircraft that could have been the missing plane was plotted on military radar at 2:15 a.m., 200 miles northwest of Penang Island off Malaysia's west coast. This position marks the limit of Malaysia's military radar in that part of the country, a fourth source familiar with the investigation told Reuters. When asked about the range of military radar at a news conference on Thursday, Malaysian Transport Minister Hishammuddin Hussein said it was "a sensitive issue" that he was not going to reveal. They also gave new details on the direction in which the unidentified aircraft was heading - following aviation corridors identified on maps used by pilots as N571 and P628. These routes are taken by commercial planes flying from Southeast Asia to the Middle East or Europe and can be found in public documents issued by regional aviation authorities. In a far more detailed description of the military radar plotting than has been publicly revealed, the first two sources said the last confirmed position of MH370 was at 35,000 feet about 90 miles off the east coast of Malaysia, heading towards Vietnam, near a navigational waypoint called "Igari". The time was 1:21 a.m.. The military track suggests it then turned sharply westwards, heading towards a waypoint called "Vampi", northeast of Indonesia's Aceh province and a navigational point used for planes following route N571 to the Middle East. From there, the plot indicates the plane flew towards a waypoint called "Gival", south of the Thai island of Phuket, and was last plotted heading northwest towards another waypoint called "Igrex", on route P628 that would take it over the Andaman Islands and which carriers use to fly towards Europe. ========= Since the Malaysian military is admiting to seeing "something" on their radar, it's not clear if they've been asked (or stated) if they scrambled jets to intercept / investigate. How many times during the last month, the last year, the last decade has the military in those countries scrambled jets to investigate unknown radar contacts? Like any human system, if it's not excercised or utilized regularly there's no garantee it will operate according to plan at any given time. |
Flight MH370 disaster - Some thoughts about telemetry, hijacking
"Kurt Ullman" wrote in message
In article , Home Guy "Home"@Guy. com What needs to happen is that fake "Transponder OFF" switches need to go into these cabins so that when someone tries to turn it off (why they even CAN be turned off is another issue) It's a tough call as to how to make them automatic. I'd say that if an interlock can be reasonably well engineered, that if the plane's wheels are up, then the beacons are supplied by power that can't be turned off from the cockpit. I wonder if there is any reason they couldn't share a circuit with the flight recorders since they already automatically turn off on the ground. They certainly need some sort of protection and isolation from the plane's existing electrical system but I can understand Boeing's reluctance to add batteries to the plane for various reasons. This incident highlights the need to have a battery powered transponder or beacon that's armored and isolated and likely to still transmit information even if the engines fail catastrophically and the plane loses all power. Hint to aircraft designers: I think the terrorists have figured out how to defeat the current transponder schemes. Time for a design change to make it a little harder than it appears now to turn them off. The remote telemetry systems are a start and I'm assuming that as new planes come on line, they'll have more features like this. Some insurer, remember, is on the hook for a lot of money because of this incident. Not sure how a battery powered transponder would prevent such a loss, but it certainly would reduce the enormous funds expended searching. Governments care about that cost (which I assume the Vietnamese are not happy about footing) and they're the ones that would be able to mandate changes to the current and clearly inadequate transponder system. Bulletproof passport checking requires real-time data and protocal links to every conceivable authority in the world that can issue an opinion about any given passport, and the cost to "subscribe" or participate in such a network must have little or zero cost to end users (airlines, airports) if stakeholders (gov'ts, law enforcement, societies) want to experience 100% compliance everywhere. And the zero cost includes not only access but also pretty close to zero costs for airline personnel and equipment, and hassle. It would seem as though you would pretty much have to mandate it by ALL airlines from ALL terminals for it to possibly work. Good luck on that. It was an incredible feat of cooperation to get many of the smaller airports in the world to even CARE about screening passengers. You have to admit that we've not seen a lot of hijacking lately. I remember when growing up that it seemed there was a hijacker diverting a plane to Cuba on almost a monthly basis. Sometimes weekly around Christmas time. I think the Malaysian airports failure to check passports against Interpol is played out daily in airports across the world. At least until the first time a person isn't let on an airplane because somebody somewhere transposed to digit or two on data entry. I suspect you've just revealed why the smaller airports don't check - because they have in the past and it turned out the passengers were not terrorists - like Sen Ted Kennedy. When that happens people get very angry and complain vociferously. The best way to avoid those sorts of confrontations, in the minds of airport security officials, is not to check anyone unless there's some other indicator that they are suspicious. For any of the above, it becomes a question as to how necessary it is to turn off the plane's various transmission sources to render it "invisible" from normal ground operations. Presumably the thinking is that any plane that has been hijacked anywhere in the world for any reason will be shot down as the primary response, so the best countermeasure for the hijacker is to make the plane as invisible as possible as soon as possible after the hijacking event has started. But at least for most likely targets, we'll use the G-8 for short hand purposes, the lack of a transponder would not make it all that invisible to the military folks and lack of transponder alone would probably bring out the fighters. Talk about your unintended consequences. Yet I think that hijackers might (credibly) believe that no one but the Russians (and perhaps the PLA) would shoot down a passenger jet. There was a lot of talk about how the US should have shot down the remaining hijacked planes once the WTC had been hit. Aside from the delay in getting a pilot scrambled and authorized to shoot down a passenger jet, it's very likely that a pilot just couldn't do it. Shades of the film/novel "Failsafe." Does such a terrible order come with a suicide kit for the pilot who obeys the shoot down order? Unlike the fears the motivated the Sov pilot who shot down KAL007, we typically don't have firing squads standing by to execute pilots who fail to carry out such missions. Since every plane can be turned into an unwilling guided missile, they should all have self-destruct systems like missiles do so a plane can be brought down remotely. A sort of in-the-sky "On Star" system. sarcasm alert -- Bobby G. |
Flight MH370 disaster - Some thoughts about telemetry, hijacking
Per Robert Green:
You have to admit that we've not seen a lot of hijacking lately. I remember when growing up that it seemed there was a hijacker diverting a plane to Cuba on almost a monthly basis. Sometimes weekly around Christmas time. I can't disagree with that, but it seems to me like there's a logical fallacy when authorities present such an argument. Dunno it's proper name, but I think of it as "The Wild Elephant Whistle." Guy's walking around Manhattan at lunch time blowing this whistle over-and-over again. Somebody trying to enjoy their lunch asks "Why on earth are your blowing that whistle?". Guy replies: "To keep the wild elephants away." Somebody says "That's crazy. The nearest wild elephants are thousands of miles away." Guy replies: "See!... It works!" -- Pete Cresswell |
Flight MH370 disaster - Some thoughts about telemetry, hijacking
On 3/14/2014 4:07 PM, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
I can't disagree with that, but it seems to me like there's a logical fallacy when authorities present such an argument. Dunno it's proper name, but I think of it as "The Wild Elephant Whistle." Guy's walking around Manhattan at lunch time blowing this whistle over-and-over again. Somebody trying to enjoy their lunch asks "Why on earth are your blowing that whistle?". Guy replies: "To keep the wild elephants away." Somebody says "That's crazy. The nearest wild elephants are thousands of miles away." Guy replies: "See!... It works!" Careful; someone will tell the old one about the rape whistle. -- .. Christopher A. Young Learn about Jesus www.lds.org .. |
Flight MH370 disaster - Some thoughts about telemetry, hijacking
Per (PeteCresswell):
Dunno it's proper name, Still don't have a name, but the phrase that keeps coming up is "Correlation is not causation". -- Pete Cresswell |
Flight MH370 disaster - Some thoughts about telemetry, hijacking
"(PeteCresswell)" wrote in message
... Per Robert Green: You have to admit that we've not seen a lot of hijacking lately. I remember when growing up that it seemed there was a hijacker diverting a plane to Cuba on almost a monthly basis. Sometimes weekly around Christmas time. I can't disagree with that, but it seems to me like there's a logical fallacy when authorities present such an argument. Dunno it's proper name, but I think of it as "The Wild Elephant Whistle." Guy's walking around Manhattan at lunch time blowing this whistle over-and-over again. Somebody trying to enjoy their lunch asks "Why on earth are your blowing that whistle?". Guy replies: "To keep the wild elephants away." Somebody says "That's crazy. The nearest wild elephants are thousands of miles away." Guy replies: "See!... It works!" I remember a Gahan Wilson cartoon of the same ilk. A man is standing at a street corner with a huge gun. His wife is standing with them and they're both standing next to a dead elephant. Smoke is pouring out of the barrel of a huge elephant gun. She says "I'll never laugh at you for carrying that thing around again!" That said, I have to believe that it's much, much harder to hijack a plane these days for a number of reasons. Passenger education (people used to be told to leave the hijackers alone), better search techniques (both equipment and personnel-wise), no-fly lists, cabin door locks, transponders, etc. -- Bobby G. -- Bobby G. |
Flight MH370 disaster - Some thoughts about telemetry, hijacking
"(PeteCresswell)" wrote in message
... Per (PeteCresswell): Still don't have a name, Got it. "cum hoc ergo propter hoc", aka "false cause" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cum_hoc_ergo_propter_hoc http://philosophy.lander.edu/logic/cause.html https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/false-cause "As with any logical fallacy, identifying that the reasoning behind an argument is flawed does not imply that the resulting conclusion is false." IOW, that knife cuts both ways! -- Bobby G. |
Flight MH370 disaster - Some thoughts about telemetry, hijacking
"(PeteCresswell)" wrote in message
... Per Robert Green: You have to admit that we've not seen a lot of hijacking lately. I remember when growing up that it seemed there was a hijacker diverting a plane to Cuba on almost a monthly basis. Sometimes weekly around Christmas time. I can't disagree with that, but it seems to me like there's a logical fallacy when authorities present such an argument. This Wired article is interesting: http://www.wired.com/autopia/2014/03...ibly-hijacked/ They call the time I remember when "This plane goes to Cuba!" was a monthly occurrence as "The Golden Age of Air Piracy." They do raise an interesting question, though. If the alleged hijacker was sophisticated enough to know how to disable two different transponders, how come he didn't know there wasn't enough fuel on board to get to someplace he could land? They note that many hijackers are insane and don't usually think their crimes through very well, but the data points we have are just plain weird and counter-intuitive. I also learned today that plenty of big things have gone missing, never to be seen again like a B-47 Stratojet carrying nuclear weapons in 1956. -- Bobby G. |
Flight MH370 disaster - Some thoughts about telemetry, hijacking
"(PeteCresswell)" wrote in message
... Per Robert Green: You have to admit that we've not seen a lot of hijacking lately. I remember when growing up that it seemed there was a hijacker diverting a plane to Cuba on almost a monthly basis. Sometimes weekly around Christmas time. I can't disagree with that, but it seems to me like there's a logical fallacy when authorities present such an argument. Check out these graphs. Airplane bombing has indeed tapered off quite a bit. http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question...ism/totals.gif -- Bobby G. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:45 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 DIYbanter