It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

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

page: 359
181
<< 356  357  358    360  361  362 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 05:14 AM
link   
yeah the missing debris field is bugging me too. That's highly unusual with the given circumstances


I'm more in the "That plane landed somewhere" crowd. Funny enough, I read a small article in my local newspaper 3 weeks ago which stated, that the flight simulator in the pilots house was used to train landing on different airports in the region. It even mentioned Diego Garcia (which I never heard of before this article...) as one of the programmed landing sites in the simulator explicitly, but this "news" was never mentioned again somewhere else.
The absence of further news for the simulator convinced me that there was more behind the story than what was told officially.




posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 05:30 AM
link   
I live in Western Australia and when they first showed the spot where these new pings are coming from I thought to myself surely this would be in the path of the shipping lanes that service the west coast of OZ , it's amazing that a ship hasn't spotted anything because it is indeed close to the shipping lanes, now remember this new area is thousands of Kms north where they first looked in the Indian Ocean, it is virtually due west of exmouth a good 1100kms from north of Perth just so others can understand how far this search has shifted
edit on 7-4-2014 by auswally because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 05:35 AM
link   
id be more interested in the simulator runways that don't appear to align with any know airstrip or seem to go know where.



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 05:36 AM
link   

ThePeaceMaker
reply to post by sy.gunson
 


But an uncontrolled crash into the sea would rip apart the plane why have we not found a large debris field


No as you mentioned yourself



The only assumption I can come up with is maybe...


Which clearly alerts us to the fact you have a limited grasp of the technical issues or problems in aviation.

An airline pilot on PPruNe posted a couple of weeks back that he had used a B777 simulator to experiment what would happen in the event of an unpiloted aircraft on autopilot running out of fuel. The simulator is programmed to conform to the performance characteristics of the real aircraft authentically.

He noted that as the engines died the autopilot disengaged and whilst the RAM generator would deploy the autopilot did not re-engage. The aircraft suddenly dropped 8,000feet alarmingly at 5,000 feet per minute until it regained airspeed and then began to recover and climbed again by about 2,500ft until it again lost airspeed and repeated the exact same cycle in what are known a phugoid oscilations. These dives and climbs would continue until the aircraft ran out of altitude and hit the sea.

In all likelihood it hit the sea steeply nose down at 5,000 feet per minute. With that much kinetic energy it would have penetrated the sea surface so fast it would have entered the sea largely intact.

To rip apart requires striking the sea more slowly.

You also fail to consider this storm of the west Austrailan coast on 23 March 2014



It was at least 2 weeks before searching switched to this part of the ocean. A tropical storm swept through this area subjecting the debris field to high waves and high winds. Much of the debris field might have been scattered by that storm or sunk by high seas.



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 05:41 AM
link   

ThePeaceMaker
reply to post by sy.gunson
 


But an uncontrolled crash into the sea would rip apart the plane why have we not found a large debris field


It's also been a month since the plane vanished. Any debris field in a place like the Southern Indian Ocean would have long since been dispersed all over the place.



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 05:45 AM
link   

auswally
I live in Western Australia and when they first showed the spot where these new pings are coming from I thought to myself surely this would be in the path of the shipping lanes that service the west coast of OZ , it's amazing that a ship hasn't spotted anything because it is indeed close to the shipping lanes, now remember this new area is thousands of Kms north where they first looked in the Indian Ocean, it is virtually due west of exmouth a good 1100kms from north of Perth just so others can understand how far this search has shifted
edit on 7-4-2014 by auswally because: (no reason given)


It's amazing given how "committed" to "stopping the boats" the Federal Government is that we didn't pick up on our radar and search vessels a plane entering the area or even crashing.


I think it was like a week after the plane went missing the government were like "100 days since last asylum seeker boat! Our surveillance is working!"



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 05:52 AM
link   
reply to post by auroraaus
 


Auroraaus our radar is working fine they just can't tell us that , hence why we searched there in the first place


Long way north to it's no where near the southern ocean like others keep suggesting on here .



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 06:02 AM
link   
reply to post by sy.gunson
 


Well I don't know of you were meant to sound that way but your reply come across quite rude. I agree that I'm not up to scratch with the aviation world this doesn't mean I can't provide my input on the story. Have you ever considered not everyone on this forum have the same knowledge as others. Jees gimmie a break.

I was only assuming from what I've read and heard that what I said about the plane landing on water and sinking intact was just an idea. I'm sorry if I can't keep up on this thread 24/7 and have the time to study all 300+ pages of this thread. But I believed (again I'm probably wrong which I'm sure I'll be corrected in minute) that the pilot was able to control the aircraft and land safely on the water, just like the pilot did on the Hudson. I believed (there that word again) if the pilot and crew were unconscious or dead that even if a plane on auto pilot wouldn't be able to land on water without it breaking apart. Where as if a pilot was controlling the plane he could make them last few second judgement calls which would prevent the plane landing and breaking up.

As for the debris field. Yeah ok so tropical storms would have washed a lot of it away but I'd still expect, with the amount of boats in the area at least something related to a plane would be found. Or even parts washing up on the Australia coast maybe?

Then again as you stated .. What do I know ? Perhaps I should just go along with the cloaking plane abducted by aliens and then landed at Diego Garcia and all 200+ passengers vanished off the face of the earth type of ideas that have been mentioned. At least my belief had some kind of credibility. I'll shut up now then yeh? Sorry for having a guess



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 06:42 AM
link   
reply to post by ThePeaceMaker
 

Hey, hey. Your rational and logical argument is as good as the man with the clouds in his avatar. Don't sweat it.

Who at this point isn't throwing their hands up in the air now at the breathtaking inane media coverage of the whole sad epic? We have been led from A to B to C to D across to N and back to K and now they have us watching the dog and pony show in the main ring.

I totally agree with you. There should have been some trace of the airline found at this point. A tail section, an oil slick, a mangesteen pallet. Something.

More to the point though corporations like Rolls Royce who build the engines of those planes have information that has not been released. This is something many who know they industry well realize. They monitor those engines extremely closely. They know when those engines shut down, the moment they shut down. They know a lot more data from the engines then just that.

We don't have to be aircraft engineers to ask the simple question, why has this information not been released to the authorities around the world? Presumably when the Malaysian government was looking for a crashed plane in the vicinity of Malaysia they did not know the plane engines had been chugging along quite nicely for hours! Rolls Royce knew, and so did Boeing.

So when the media started up with 'look over there, it is in the Southern Indian Ocean not far from Perth, Rolls Royce and Boeing would have known it would be that far from Malaysia, and they would have known it all along. So us who are not pilots, who are not engineers would be asking ourselves 'what the...? If they now think the plane is this close to Australia then they knew it wasn't that close to Malaysia all along!

Then we are naturally thinking. 'What the...?' Because we now know we were initially being HAD! By the authorities, by the corporations, by the moronic 'ask no questions we are not given to ask' mass media.

Anyone who continues to make excuses for the masquerade we are continuing to be led on is either hopelessly blinded to way we have been manipulated, or they are part of the manipulation themselves, and if it is the last they are more than likely completely unaware of the fact.

To these people, the very idea someone would want to buck the status quo and disagree with the voices of authority is akin to lunacy or otherwise high treason.

YOU ARE COMPLETELY CORRECT.



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 06:53 AM
link   

Arbitrageur

sy.gunson
You made a comment dismissing the Chinese discovery saying it could be something else so I am asking you what else could it reasonably be and now you're saying you don't know?



charlyv
Not only that, but on a 1Hz duty cycle. That repetition rate is supposed to be emergency only using the 37.5 kHz frequency.
About that, yes, maybe 1.1 Hz, and I've seen no reports of the duty cycle of the pings found, in the media reports.

The "black box" recorders ping the 37.5 kHz frequency for about 10ms every 0.9s, which is not only a specific audio frequency, but a specific timing pattern to the repeating pings. I read something about the pings in this search happening for 90 seconds, but the article didn't say how many pings happened in those 90 seconds, which would be important to know.

If it was about 90/0.9 then I'd say chances are pretty good it was a "black box" recorder, but if it wasn't close to that it could be something else, but it certainly wouldn't be natural, because there is no known natural sound pattern like that. If someone in a country's military wanted to ping at the same frequency as the black box recorder, all they'd have to do to avoid having their pings confused with a "black box" is use a vastly different pinging interval, like once every 3 seconds or every 10 seconds, instead of once every 0.9 seconds.
edit on 6-4-2014 by Arbitrageur because: clarification


I remember earlier on that some engineer in a CNN report had said that the pulses were separated about a second apart. Since then, I cannot find that report, and assume it was overwritten or edited.

This is the latest, coming from the Mirror:


The government minister confirmed two separate signals - so-called "pings" - picked up by Australia's Ocean Shield was consistent with aircraft black boxes.

The first detection held for two hours and 20 minutes before the ship lost contact.

After turning around, the ship picked up the signal for around 13 minutes

The signals indicated the flight data recorder and cockpit voice recorder black boxes had been located, 340 miles from where a Chinese vessel claimed signals were emitted on Saturday.



www.mirror.co.uk...
Follow us: @DailyMirror on Twitter | DailyMirror on Facebook


A signal held for 2 hours, 20 minutes is huge.

It is puzzling that they have not talked about bearing or range info, which this sophisticated equipment is capable of determining.
Even if the bearing info was ambiguous, there is also doppler analysis that can done on the frequency itself. The added speed of the towed array to the stationary beacon would show displacements of the 35.5khz signal. The 35.5khz signal should be rather accurate at center frequency, so in example: 35,550 could indicate an up doppler, meaning you are headed towards the source, 34,450, headed away, and center frequency meaning you are oblique from the contact. I am sure they are using these techniques, but would love to be hearing this detail as well.



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 06:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Tallone
 


Thank you for understanding as I mentioned in my last reply I may of read what was said about me on the wrong way I accept that when we read text we can often read it incorrectly. It just seemed I was getting ridiculed for thinking of a what I though was a logical answer to what happened. I simply came here to give my view and also to learn. But I'll do everyone a favour now I'll shut up and just observe despite others coming up with more outrageous ideas about the plane than I did



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 07:22 AM
link   

sy.gunson

charlyv



Don't you think it would be blindingly obvious in the middle of the greatest air-sea search in history with 13 ships and 18 aircraft, if someone else had military equipment pinging away at 37.5 kHz in exactly the same location?
reply to post by sy.gunson
 


Not only that, but on a 1Hz duty cycle. That repetition rate is supposed to be emergency only using the 37.5 kHz frequency. The reason the audio frequency is so high, is that it will not traverse sound channels very well, and will be attenuated. Lower frequencies, while giving greater detection ranges, can get trapped in the sound channels produced by steep thermoclines and lead to ambiguous ranges and bearings.


...and because of the low lateral detection distance, a ship has to be almost overhead which makes determining the direction harder.

I am puzzled that the Ocean Shield reports detecting a signal 200km away and wonder if that means each black box sank in a different place or if the ping would be trapped between thermoclines and propagate sideways?


Exactly. Thermoclines can turn an audio signal into a snake. They must be very close though.
Another thing that might be at bay is the terrain. There are trenches and seamounts there, making it tougher still to get on top of the target. I think today will be the day, if it ever happens.



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 07:42 AM
link   

charlyv
I remember earlier on that some engineer in a CNN report had said that the pulses were separated about a second apart. Since then, I cannot find that report, and assume it was overwritten or edited.
0.9 seconds is about 1 second. There are other sources that refer to 1 second also but I got the 0.9 second interval from the airliner.net forum; someone posted some CVR and FDR specifications. There was also an acceptable tolerance (frequency variation) of the frequency, so it didn't have to be exactly 37.5 kHz, but pretty close.


It is puzzling that they have not talked about bearing or range info, which this sophisticated equipment is capable of determining.
Even if the bearing info was ambiguous, there is also doppler analysis that can done on the frequency itself. The added speed of the towed array to the stationary beacon would show displacements of the 35.5khz signal.
Little typo on the frequency there but yes the Doppler idea should work IF they can measure the frequency accurately enough, but I suspect some of the ships involved in the search might not have that capability.



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 07:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


Yes, thanks, meant 37.5...
As long as the signals are being recorded, they could be analyzed by better equipment. Let's hope this whole operation turns out the way it should, (from a recovery standpoint). Also read about the increased specs for new recorders the FAA had recently approved.... too bad they were not in time for this tragedy.



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 07:55 AM
link   
reply to post by Tallone
 


Investigators never release all information until the final report. They are not obligated to release anything, let alone every tiny detail.



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 07:57 AM
link   
Freescale Semiconductor...

Is/Are still very relevant...

To everything we are being told...

By media...

By authorities...

By theorists here at ATS...

Anything we keep hearing...

Can be linked to Freescale Semiconductor...

In some way or another...

& I'm gonna continue to say this...

On every page that follows...

Because people are ignoring Freescale Semiconductor...

& it's either because media is leadin people down all other avenues...

Or people here do not want to talk about it!!!


In either case...

I'd like to know why???



Peace MH370 xxx



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 08:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 




0.9 seconds is about 1 second.


One second interval with the actual signal lasting 0.1 second.



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 08:17 AM
link   

auroraaus
ENOUGH WITH THE SARAH BAJC VILIFICATION!!!

Just. Stop.



Not quite... Never throw away something odd. She has volunteered to be the spokeswoman, chosen to be in the spotlight. She has to be under scrutiny. When I first saw her interview on CNN she seemed a little too ...how should I say...professional? polish? eloquent? lack of emotion!

About Sarah Bajc... Someone has dug up her work history. I am not sure if this is just a pure coincidence...but one can't help wonder if there is a link.




posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 08:29 AM
link   

roadgravel
One second interval with the actual signal lasting 0.1 second.
No, the signal only lasts 0.01 second. (10 milliseconds).



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 08:32 AM
link   

sy.gunson In all likelihood it hit the sea steeply nose down at 5,000 feet per minute. With that much kinetic energy it would have penetrated the sea surface so fast it would have entered the sea largely intact.



i don't buy that for a minute. the aircraft would instantly shatter into thousands of pieces.



new topics




 
181
<< 356  357  358    360  361  362 >>

log in

join