It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Clarifications - MAS 370

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Mar, 16 2014 @ 11:20 AM
16. The aircraft might have flown to Pakistan? Highly unlikely without Indian air defense radar seeing it as it over-flew India. MH370 would have also been picked up by US air defense radars in Afghanistan (including AWACS).

17. Curious how MH370 appears to have flown right along the border between Thailand and Malaysia, right in the no-man's airspace between the two countries. This area is a pretty lawless area, and both Thailand and Malaysia have a common adversary in this region. But because this adversary is pretty low-tech, aviation traffic in this region is generally thought to be government related (and sometimes ignored as a result). Someone knew this, and that's why they crossed the peninsula where they did.

posted on Mar, 16 2014 @ 04:00 PM
reply to post by Flyingclaydisk

It was ungracious of me not to have said before how great the information you posted helped my understanding of things, so thanks. I did learn quite a bit.
edit on 16-3-2014 by aboutface because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 16 2014 @ 04:16 PM
Great info s+f.

posted on Mar, 16 2014 @ 04:34 PM

There’s a lot of bogus and misleading information floating around about MAS 370.

There sure is

2. ACARS (the in-flight telemetry system) CANNOT be turned off from the flight deck. Turing ACARS off is quite difficult actually and involves precise knowledge of the electronics (including location) on-board an aircraft (Boeing 777-200 in this case).

NOT TRUE. Half of it can be turned off from the flight deck. The pinging of satellites is much more difficult and unlikely to be in a pilot's repetoire. You are half right. And this matches the data we have. The satellites still got pings.

3. A transponder disappearing off of a regional ATC (Air Traffic Control) “Center” is a big deal, and generally causes a flurry of communication. It is not simply ignored as if nothing happened.

This is not in dispute. The transponder WAS turned off, and it was not ignored.

4. Further to the point illustrated in item #3; aircraft transponders DO occasionally fail. I wouldn’t characterize this as a “regular” occurrence, but it DOES happen periodically. Aircraft transponders are completely independent of radio communications. Just because one fails does not mean the other fails.

Rather a moot point. The transponder stopped. ATC contacted the airplane, apparently not yet noticing. The pilot said, "All right, good night." Subsequent to that, within a few minutes, all this was noticed. It was not immediate, nor was it ignored.

5. A commercial airliner cannot descend “40,000 feet” in one minute (60 seconds). It just CANNOT do this. Any report that says this happened is simply wrong. A descent rate of 40,000fpm could not even be accomplished with a nose down powered dive. And, if anyone ever attempted such an act the airframe would structurally fail and break apart well before this descent rate was ever approached. Simply put; it didn’t happen. The data, or the source, is wrong.

Nobody ever said that. They said the aircraft climbed from 35,000 feet to 45,000 feet, then subsequently descended to 27,000 feet, then returned to 35,000 feet. The implication is that this was the point of "the struggle."

6. A commercial airliner, like a Boeing 777-200 (which MAS 370 was), reflects a significant primary radar signature. A “primary” radar signature is different from ‘secondary’ radar which monitors the transponders (noted above). An aircraft the size of a 777 at cruising altitude can be “seen” by primary radar from hundreds of miles away. A un-announced radar contact the size of a triple 7 would be a big deal to just about anyone, especially one which was about to overfly your territory.

Which begs the question. Malaysian radar reported blips. No one else did. Conclusion? It did not fly over any one else's territory.

posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 04:55 PM
reply to post by schuyler

When you say it wasn't "ignored" I guess that was pretty much my point actually. However, if you take the initial media reports at face value you would be lead to believe the world community was unaware of this development for as long as 6-10 hours, hence my statements about things not being 'ignored'. I'm not suggesting they were ignored, what I'm suggesting is, as I've stated all along...we're not getting the full story about what is known.

posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 05:44 PM
Aside from the one they just tested, did anyone ask North Korea how many missals they have left?

posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 08:32 PM
18. With a wingspan of ~200 feet and a similar length (and 62 feet high), a Boeing 777-200ER is not going to be something easily hidden on the ground (if it made it there in one piece)! There are very few hangars / buildings on Earth (in countries where such an aircraft could land undetected) which could make such an aircraft disappear from the prying eyes of satellites (at this point).

edit on 3/17/2014 by Flyingclaydisk because: (no reason given)

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in