By: Matt-100
- 13th March 2014 at 10:45Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Taking your first point, if verifiable, surely any unidentified aircraft in a nation's airspace will be investigated and physically identified, won't it, especially if it did not respond to radio calls?
By: PanzerJohn
- 13th March 2014 at 11:57Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
This was posted on PPRUNE, sounds a sensible and viable scenario..
"I am a licenced engineer, B747.
This post attempts to describe, with precedents, a possible single failure that would cause loss of coms, depressurisation and crew disablement due to hypoxia.
Precedent: QF30 25 July 2008 Pax oxygen bottle "explodes" tearing a hole in fuselage.
Ref: Please google "Qantas oxygen bottle explosion" and view photos of damage.
The picture taken inside the fwd cargo compartment shows one bottle missing.
there is no evidence of shrapnel damage in the photo. Therefore, no eplosion.
The bottle appears to have detached itself from its connections and propelled itself down through the fuselage skin.
777: The crew oxygen bottle is mounted horizontaly on the left aft wall of the nose wheel well structure with the fittings (propelling nozzle) facing forward. This aims the bottle, in the event of a QF30 type failure, directly into the MEC containing all boxes concerned with coms and a lot more.
Before all of its energy is spent, an huge amount of damage could be caused to equipment and the bottle could, conceivably, cause a decompression.
When the crew respond by doning oxygen mask, there is no oxygen and hypoxia is the next link in this proposed chain of events.
This link is entitled "Hypothetical" and is only that. I believe it ticks a few boxes.
Hoping this post make it and generates some discussion."
By: Bmused55
- 13th March 2014 at 13:42Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Apparently not.
Later in that thread it is mentioned that the OXY bottles are placed in such a way, that if the restraints were to fail, it'll shoot through the radome or perhaps in the space below the flight deck were the mechanism that links the yolk and rudder pedals to each other is. (note: It links the left and right set of controls to one another, so if one moves, the other does. It is not the main linkage to the flight controls)
By: J Boyle
- 13th March 2014 at 17:13Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
No, the press are more interested in ratings. Being the first with some sort of new information ups ratings and money intake.
These investigators are probably doing their level best, but are caving to the pressures of the world's press.
The press should be held on a leesh and told the back the heck off and let these people try and focus on finding the aircraft.
The "press" is hardly a unified entity. Various outlets are asking various people various questions...and surprise...they're getting various answers.
The lack of decent media relations from the Malaysian govt. isn't helping matters.
By: Reckless Rat
- 13th March 2014 at 18:45Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Sky News
Is it just me, or is that half the problem, right there? Sky News (or as I like to call them, Sky "Oh, please, GOD let there actually be some" News) and the like's rolling 24/7 'News' coverage creates an insatiable demand for something to actually happen to fill their broadcasts, to the point that any vague statement or suggestion or half-baked theory is seized upon and broadcast across the world - where it is picked up by other channels in a similar situation, thereby gaining credence as it goes. Village newspaper reports "Bloke down the pub says...". TV channel reports on that report, others report on that report of the report, and this continues until everyone disappears up their own fundament. Still, it's not like they care, because they can create some more hot air reporting on the 'breaking development' that the original hot air was, in fact, hot air. Stay tuned for more on this story as it happens...
By: TomcatViP
- 13th March 2014 at 21:14Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
This was posted on PPRUNE, sounds a sensible and viable scenario..
"I am a licenced engineer, B747.
This post attempts to describe, with precedents, a possible single failure that would cause loss of coms, depressurisation and crew disablement due to hypoxia.
[...] 777: The crew oxygen bottle is mounted horizontaly on the left aft wall of the nose wheel well structure with the fittings (propelling nozzle) facing forward. This aims the bottle, in the event of a QF30 type failure, directly into the MEC containing all boxes concerned with coms and a lot more. [...]
After 10sec searching, I found that:
[ATTACH=CONFIG]226356[/ATTACH]
close-up view:
[ATTACH=CONFIG]226357[/ATTACH]
regarding the propulsive effect:
Years ago I had to design an "Ice gun" (dry ice). At that time I had to check that the recoil effect was not like what we see in Hollywood. It was not. But I would have to check for the exact type of bottle here.
The only thing I see as plausible in the scenario above is that the cockpit sustained a fire during enough time to "cook-up" the bottle (there is a battery and a fuel tank nearby). However it does not fit with the loss of of the transponder unless you imagin a general shortcut (fuel leak?).
Anyhow. What have been said by the poster does not fit the bill of a basic check (10 secondes via google)
By: Primate
- 13th March 2014 at 21:36Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Has anyone seen or heard any reports regarding PSR coverage in the region and if it has been of any value to the search? I'm thinking along the lines of military EW stations and such.
By: Cking
- 13th March 2014 at 22:18Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The only thing I see as plausible in the scenario above is that the cockpit sustained a fire during enough time to "cook-up" the bottle (there is a battery and a fuel tank nearby). However it does not fit with the loss of of the transponder unless you imagin a general shortcut (fuel leak?).
(10 secondes via google)
A fuel tank near the battery and the oxygen bottle???? Could you tell me more? I think you may be onto something.
By: J Boyle
- 14th March 2014 at 01:01Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
You seem in an awful hurry to blame the aircraft.
1. Has a situation like you described ever happened?
2. Would it account for the turn?
3. Would it account for no ELT transmissions?
4. Would it account for the latest media reports of some systems still reporting for 4 hours after it dropped off the scope?
5. Would it account for no debris field over its intended route?
Until you can say "yes" to a majority of those questions, you're just guessing.
By: TomcatViP
- 14th March 2014 at 02:07Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
2. Yes: partial electrical failure (leak + battery) then fire then catastrophic mechanical failure (I don't want to speculate too much but I have in mind that the pilots might have died or being ejected)
3. Transponder 1 is in the cockpit. Transponder 2 might not have been reachable for crew stuck in the cabin (cockpit closed for security reasons)
4. If Structural damage was on the frwd section only, the others system might have operated "normally" and AP keep the plane flyable until... (left blank : horrible thought)
5. Cockpit only.
I fear that the loss of that 777 might have been an horrific agonizing experience for all those involved (passengers and else)
By: charliehunt
- 14th March 2014 at 05:34Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
J Boyle - no one can say yes to anything because almost nothing is known for certain apart from its disappearance, particularly as there has been so much contradictory information.
By: Bmused55
- 14th March 2014 at 08:16Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Jon Ostrower, Aerospace & Boeing beat reporter for The Wall Street Journal, is stating that the last ping from the missing aircraft to satellites was 5 hours after it went missing and was from over water.
He's holding firm to this claim. He says he does not know the exact location, but as that ping includes GPS, speed and alt data, he says there will be those that do know. And now the US is sending a ship to the Indian Ocean to search a very specific spot.
I am slowly beginning to suspect pilot suicide.
If you think about it for a moment, most previous pilot suicides involving a simple nose dive have always been found out, thus invalidating any insurance claims the suicide was supposed to cause.
So, perhaps, just perhaps, the desperate person in this case tried to be cunning and take the plane somewhere it'll never be found, thus ensuring any insurance they took out pays up?
Just as valid a theory as all the others!
A horrible one I know. And one I REALLY, REALLY hope is not found to be true. However, it does fit with the known facts and emerging information.
By: Bmused55
- 14th March 2014 at 09:17Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
This is all fascinating information.
I suspect however, there will likely be another press conference soon, denying/debunking it all or saying "cannot confirm or deny, we don't know"
Posts: 11,141
By: charliehunt - 13th March 2014 at 10:32 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I agree with Bmused's lasst point.
As for conspiracy theories as described above, they fall into the same category as tatty tabloid journalism, so can be easily avoided.
Posts: 569
By: Matt-100 - 13th March 2014 at 10:45 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
They didn't realise the significance of what they were seeing until after they had reports of a missing aircraft. Which raises the question did civil ATC wait too long before sounding the alarm?
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/03/14/world/asia/missing-malaysia-airlines-flight-370.html?_r=0&referrer=
The BBC is also reporting the Chinese satellite images were released by "accident" however that happens?
Posts: 11,141
By: charliehunt - 13th March 2014 at 10:59 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I meant to suggest that, surely, ANY unidentified aircraft must be seen as a risk and investigated. Or not?
Posts: 765
By: PanzerJohn - 13th March 2014 at 11:57 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
This was posted on PPRUNE, sounds a sensible and viable scenario..
"I am a licenced engineer, B747.
This post attempts to describe, with precedents, a possible single failure that would cause loss of coms, depressurisation and crew disablement due to hypoxia.
Precedent: QF30 25 July 2008 Pax oxygen bottle "explodes" tearing a hole in fuselage.
Ref: Please google "Qantas oxygen bottle explosion" and view photos of damage.
The picture taken inside the fwd cargo compartment shows one bottle missing.
there is no evidence of shrapnel damage in the photo. Therefore, no eplosion.
The bottle appears to have detached itself from its connections and propelled itself down through the fuselage skin.
777: The crew oxygen bottle is mounted horizontaly on the left aft wall of the nose wheel well structure with the fittings (propelling nozzle) facing forward. This aims the bottle, in the event of a QF30 type failure, directly into the MEC containing all boxes concerned with coms and a lot more.
Before all of its energy is spent, an huge amount of damage could be caused to equipment and the bottle could, conceivably, cause a decompression.
When the crew respond by doning oxygen mask, there is no oxygen and hypoxia is the next link in this proposed chain of events.
This link is entitled "Hypothetical" and is only that. I believe it ticks a few boxes.
Hoping this post make it and generates some discussion."
Posts: 10,625
By: Bmused55 - 13th March 2014 at 13:42 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Apparently not.
Later in that thread it is mentioned that the OXY bottles are placed in such a way, that if the restraints were to fail, it'll shoot through the radome or perhaps in the space below the flight deck were the mechanism that links the yolk and rudder pedals to each other is. (note: It links the left and right set of controls to one another, so if one moves, the other does. It is not the main linkage to the flight controls)
Posts: 9,823
By: J Boyle - 13th March 2014 at 17:13 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The "press" is hardly a unified entity. Various outlets are asking various people various questions...and surprise...they're getting various answers.
The lack of decent media relations from the Malaysian govt. isn't helping matters.
Posts: 2,619
By: topspeed - 13th March 2014 at 18:01 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
To me it looks like the small carco area door with window in the middle ?
Posts: 98
By: Reckless Rat - 13th March 2014 at 18:45 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Is it just me, or is that half the problem, right there? Sky News (or as I like to call them, Sky "Oh, please, GOD let there actually be some" News) and the like's rolling 24/7 'News' coverage creates an insatiable demand for something to actually happen to fill their broadcasts, to the point that any vague statement or suggestion or half-baked theory is seized upon and broadcast across the world - where it is picked up by other channels in a similar situation, thereby gaining credence as it goes. Village newspaper reports "Bloke down the pub says...". TV channel reports on that report, others report on that report of the report, and this continues until everyone disappears up their own fundament. Still, it's not like they care, because they can create some more hot air reporting on the 'breaking development' that the original hot air was, in fact, hot air. Stay tuned for more on this story as it happens...
Posts: 11,141
By: charliehunt - 13th March 2014 at 19:02 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I am sure that's right and it's not only Sky - the BBC, CNN, Al Jazeerah etc are all just as bad and you can append the same name-tag to each!!
Posts: 5,905
By: TomcatViP - 13th March 2014 at 21:14 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
After 10sec searching, I found that:
[ATTACH=CONFIG]226356[/ATTACH]
close-up view:
[ATTACH=CONFIG]226357[/ATTACH]
regarding the propulsive effect:
Years ago I had to design an "Ice gun" (dry ice). At that time I had to check that the recoil effect was not like what we see in Hollywood. It was not. But I would have to check for the exact type of bottle here.
The only thing I see as plausible in the scenario above is that the cockpit sustained a fire during enough time to "cook-up" the bottle (there is a battery and a fuel tank nearby). However it does not fit with the loss of of the transponder unless you imagin a general shortcut (fuel leak?).
Anyhow. What have been said by the poster does not fit the bill of a basic check (10 secondes via google)
Posts: 527
By: Primate - 13th March 2014 at 21:36 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Has anyone seen or heard any reports regarding PSR coverage in the region and if it has been of any value to the search? I'm thinking along the lines of military EW stations and such.
Posts: 997
By: Cking - 13th March 2014 at 22:18 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
A fuel tank near the battery and the oxygen bottle???? Could you tell me more? I think you may be onto something.
Rgds Cking (B777 licenced aircraft engineer)
Posts: 9,823
By: J Boyle - 14th March 2014 at 01:01 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
You seem in an awful hurry to blame the aircraft.
1. Has a situation like you described ever happened?
2. Would it account for the turn?
3. Would it account for no ELT transmissions?
4. Would it account for the latest media reports of some systems still reporting for 4 hours after it dropped off the scope?
5. Would it account for no debris field over its intended route?
Until you can say "yes" to a majority of those questions, you're just guessing.
Posts: 5,905
By: TomcatViP - 14th March 2014 at 02:07 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
2. Yes: partial electrical failure (leak + battery) then fire then catastrophic mechanical failure (I don't want to speculate too much but I have in mind that the pilots might have died or being ejected)
3. Transponder 1 is in the cockpit. Transponder 2 might not have been reachable for crew stuck in the cabin (cockpit closed for security reasons)
4. If Structural damage was on the frwd section only, the others system might have operated "normally" and AP keep the plane flyable until... (left blank : horrible thought)
5. Cockpit only.
I fear that the loss of that 777 might have been an horrific agonizing experience for all those involved (passengers and else)
Posts: 5,905
By: TomcatViP - 14th March 2014 at 02:08 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I tried to speculate further for the good of this discussion. (see above)
Regards,
Tom (Consultant in Eng)
Posts: 11,141
By: charliehunt - 14th March 2014 at 05:34 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
J Boyle - no one can say yes to anything because almost nothing is known for certain apart from its disappearance, particularly as there has been so much contradictory information.
Posts: 10,625
By: Bmused55 - 14th March 2014 at 08:16 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Jon Ostrower, Aerospace & Boeing beat reporter for The Wall Street Journal, is stating that the last ping from the missing aircraft to satellites was 5 hours after it went missing and was from over water.
He's holding firm to this claim. He says he does not know the exact location, but as that ping includes GPS, speed and alt data, he says there will be those that do know. And now the US is sending a ship to the Indian Ocean to search a very specific spot.
I am slowly beginning to suspect pilot suicide.
If you think about it for a moment, most previous pilot suicides involving a simple nose dive have always been found out, thus invalidating any insurance claims the suicide was supposed to cause.
So, perhaps, just perhaps, the desperate person in this case tried to be cunning and take the plane somewhere it'll never be found, thus ensuring any insurance they took out pays up?
Just as valid a theory as all the others!
A horrible one I know. And one I REALLY, REALLY hope is not found to be true. However, it does fit with the known facts and emerging information.
Posts: 11,141
By: charliehunt - 14th March 2014 at 08:48 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Reuters are now quoting sources stating the aircraft was deliberately flown to the Andaman Islands!
Posts: 8,846
By: Newforest - 14th March 2014 at 09:02 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
And we all know where they are don't we!
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/14/us-malaysia-airlines-radar-exclusive-idUSBREA2D0DG20140314?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andaman_Islands
Posts: 10,625
By: Bmused55 - 14th March 2014 at 09:17 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
This is all fascinating information.
I suspect however, there will likely be another press conference soon, denying/debunking it all or saying "cannot confirm or deny, we don't know"