Beijing-bound MAS plane carrying 239 people missing as of 20 mins ago.

Zaphod58
reply to post by Mikeultra

 

So auto landing in 1997 proves.....

Absolutely nothing.

Why does everything have to be proven? Haven't you heard of circumstantial evidence or most likely scenario? I think this is a case of anti-hijacking auto lander taking over control of MH370 from whoever was at the controls, pilot, co-pilot, or hijackers. It explains all the lies and secrecy.

reply to post by Mikeultra


Well hell in that case, you can prove anything is true if that's your standard of evidence. Me personally, I like actual facts, and evidence if you are going to make outrageous claims about something you know little to nothing about.

If you're going to go with circumstantial evidence, then the meteorite, alien, mechanical failure claims are all proven too because there's circumstantial evidence for them as well as your autopilot theory.

Zaphod58
reply to post by Up2dSno

 

And yet there is zero evidence that it ever was installed in even a test aircraft, let alone every plane built since then.

But why is the former, whistle-blowing pilot, McConnell saying it did, and that basically Boeing admitted it is???

Why, why, why???

Very confusing.

reply to post by Arbitrageur

I guess the relevant question in this case would be, what identifier was inmarsat using to determine the location along the southerly arc? Is it some identifier independent of the transponder hex code? If so, changing the hex code wouldn't fool inmarsat.

So far, what I have found is Earth Stations on Aircraft (AES) number.

edit:

it seems to be the serial number assigned to the AES equipment.

reply to post by watchesfromwall


There are people that have made all kinds of outrageous claims over the years. One supposed pilot, with nothing to back him up is nothing but a claim. I can find claims of alleged pilots admitting to almost anything you want over the years. Pilots are people too, and sometimes they may think something is true, based on little bits of things they hear, but that doesn't mean they are right.

The fact that he did it through his own website, which has little credibility to begin with, instead of blasting it to the media, or places where more people would hear about it, doesn't do much for his own credibility.

Mikeultra
reply to post by Up2dSno

 

Thank you for that information. Just because I don't have proof of it being installed on Boeing aircraft, doesn't make it not so. I would think that technology would be kept hush-hush. Raytheon is involved with this as well. I've been looking at the patents. I do that a lot...

Yes, you do, thanks for that.

Good, bad, or ugly, either you or the Iranian government are scooping your patents data (or vice versa). Perhaps some of this should be in RATS.?, lol or not.

ETA: Also, call for everyone to go dig up the lowdown on the Former Delta pilot, McConnell, as per posts above^^^, please...maybe even search BUAP more extensively?

roadgravel
So far, what I have found is Earth Stations on Aircraft (AES) number.

Thanks. So can we say that changing anything on the transponder won't change this AES number?

One might also wonder if the AES number can be changed in the air, or if it's something that must be done while on the ground, though I don't have any particular reason to suspect it was changed or that Inmarsat tracked a decoy drone or something.

I prefer the Occam's razor or simplest explanations, in the absence of facts to the contrary, but given the unusual nature of this case, there is some disagreement about which simplest explanation actually fits the facts best so far. When we are told that facts like the Air Traffic Control transcript are sealed, that doesn't help.

This Youtube video I found by doing a search for Integrinautics. I found that companies name on this NASA site. spinoff.nasa.gov... Watch the video as a Boeing 737 is automatically landed. following one site to another helps get answers sometimes.

reply to post by Arbitrageur

From what I read that when applying for service the AES serial number on the equipment is sent. Usually serial number is not an item that is changed. This could well be built into the box and difficult to change, if even possible.

reply to post by roadgravel

Thanks. That's about what I'd expect. So, if Inmarsat's analysis is correct, we don't have to wonder if the plane might be in another location due to a changed transponder hex code?

rockflier
reply to post by Up2dSno

 

Having used the autoland and autobrake systems on the 757/767, they indeed work fairly well. Not a "roll on" landing but, nonetheless, they do work.

Autoland on the B777 is a bit more sophisticated than other Boeings, cat3b single engine certificated from the start.

The system produced a few more greasers than i did back when i flew it.

reply to post by rockflier



Hi, It was on a mil reference site i go on, we were talking about a couple of mile planes who had their hex codes reversed and not for the first time(quite common and frquent i was told) anyway i posed the question if this could happen to civil aircraft? and the reply was a deffinate Yes, very easily from a hanger and even possible from the cockpit.
I was amazed by this as it sure makes a difference identifying a plane by transponder.

reply to post by watchesfromwall


Apparently, if you read his site, Able Danger is convinced of a lot of things. He claims to have proven that the Indonesia crash of a Sukhoi SuperJet was deliberately caused to prevent competition for another aircraft in development now. As well as allegedly suing Boeing after they refused to provide him a notarized letter stating that the "illegal" computer chips were removed from the plane, stating that he was no longer allowed to fly Boeing aircraft. He comes across as a little out there at best.

reply to post by Zaphod58


Wouldnt that be like a common computer virus say a trojan, its no good just pulling the plug you have to try to quaranteen it then delete it before it works through the system, if you just shut down and do nothing, every time you switch it on it just gets worst.

reply to post by UKGuy1805


If the computer that controls the flight control surfaces is powered off, there is no way for them to control the flight controls. But regardless, even if they did get into the computer, the pilots have the final authority and can override anything the plane tries to do.

Zaphod58
reply to post by UKGuy1805

 

--->even if they did get into the computer

They won't, because safety critical systems like flight control computers have no access point reachable in flight.

reply to post by Ivar_Karlsen


I know they won't, I was playing devils advocate.

No evidence to support either pilot had anything to do with the disappearance.

A senior Malaysian government official Wednesday told CNN law enforcement analyst Tom Fuentes that authorities have found nothing in 19 days of investigating the two pilots that leads them to any motive, be it political, suicidal or extremist.
And an ongoing FBI review of the two pilots' hard drives, including one in a flight simulator Zaharie had built at his home, has not turned up a "smoking gun," a U.S. official with knowledge of the investigation told CNN.
"They have accessed the data," the official said. "There is nothing that's jumping out and grabbing us right now."
And investigators haven't found anything suspicious with any of the other crew members or passengers, leaving them struggling to find an explanation.

www.cnn.com...

Mikeultra
reply to post by Up2dSno

 

Thank you for that information. Just because I don't have proof of it being installed on Boeing aircraft, doesn't make it not so. I would think that technology would be kept hush-hush. Raytheon is involved with this as well. I've been looking at the patents. I do that a lot...

You're welcome. I read earlier that the BUAP could be installed as part of a software upgrade to the existing autopilot program, and remain dormant until activated remotely. Still looking for the link to that article. Did you see any references to that in your patent research?

reply to post by Up2dSno


According to the patent it had to be installed separately, because it had its own power supply. If it was in the existing autopilot then they could pull the circuit breaker and cut it off.