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.

 

MH370 missing (Part 2)

page: 13
39
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 22 2014 @ 11:20 AM
link   
a reply to: judydawg
I've been scouring the news for updates but haven't found anything...except CNN is showing a step-by-step guide about where to hide in the wheel-well of an airplane; A. Banfield even "helpfully" suggested that this would be a "good spot" for a terrorist to hide" and a "bomb could bring down a plane." Sheesh.


edit on 22-4-2014 by drwill because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 22 2014 @ 11:32 AM
link   
It's about time,,
IN MY OPINIONION, stated on page www.abovetopsecret.com...
which of course completely ignored,,as the source of Ping.

And the fact that the prevailing winds, and current's would have pushed any debre,
towards Australia by now, is also completely ignored, it was only 600 miles of shore!!!!!!

But hey, it hit the water in a Perfect 10.0



no splash,, no debre,, perfect.!



posted on Apr, 22 2014 @ 12:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: BobAthome
It's about time,,
IN MY OPINIONION, stated on page www.abovetopsecret.com...
which of course completely ignored,,as the source of Ping.

And the fact that the prevailing winds, and current's would have pushed any debre,
towards Australia by now, is also completely ignored, it was only 600 miles of shore!!!!!!

But hey, it hit the water in a Perfect 10.0



no splash,, no debre,, perfect.!





So this transmits the same ultrasonic pulse with the same frequency of a black box?



posted on Apr, 22 2014 @ 12:18 PM
link   



posted on Apr, 22 2014 @ 06:23 PM
link   
a reply to: BobAthome

I figured something like this. Why aren't the people in charge looking at all the buoy's and quake charts. We know the plane came down. Their would be something showing up ...like anywhere to the west, north or east. I never thought this plane went south.

Back to my first thoughts political sabotage. The people on the fishing boat did see this plane.

just my 2 cents



posted on Apr, 22 2014 @ 06:24 PM
link   
a reply to: BobAthome

What the world may have discovered is that Malaysia has created the most successful stealth technology.



posted on Apr, 22 2014 @ 06:26 PM
link   
a reply to: earthling42

I plotted the track from Con Son Island to the Ocean Shield location and calculated the displacements between the projected track and a datum of 2,230nm from the satellite, but also calculated the datum from the position of INMARSAT for each individual handshake ping:



Enlarged graph

That produces a kink in what plots on a map as a straight line, therefore the satellite movements do distort projections.



Also I understand that the Boeing 777 has a glide ratio of one in fifteen, therefore if as the satellite data suggests (assuming a final track from Vietnam) that MH370 glided 85nm to impact, then the altitude before descent was 34,430ft (approx).



posted on Apr, 22 2014 @ 06:28 PM
link   
a reply to: earthling42

So is this thing the source of the mysterious pings? I guess they'll never find a trace of it. What is the latest from down under? I haven't heard from our resident experts there. Are they discouraged too?



posted on Apr, 22 2014 @ 06:30 PM
link   
a reply to: BobAthome

Your theory falls down on this simple point....

The maximum detectable range of these devices is about 25km. That is why a tethered buoy has to be near the seabed transducer



posted on Apr, 22 2014 @ 06:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: qmantoo
reply to sy.gunson

It is so obvious that you've never been a pilot.

MH370 took off with 31,000 US gallons (69.5% full tanks) and was limited to 266,000kg take off weight by the length of runway.

You can't just take off with full fuel tanks and full payload. Most aircraft are incapable of that and even were that not the case you would need a runway halfway to the moon with full tanks.

In actual fact aircraft are not only limited by runway length, but also by the load bearing capacity of the runway/tarmac and even by the load bearing capacity of their structure and undercarriage.

If all you care about is creating a fantasy fiction novel then anything goes I suppose, but pilots live in the real world.

Yes you are right (and I hope you feel good about obviously guessing this correctly) - I have never been a pilot.
However, I am fairly certain I read this on the pprune.org forum as I would not have made up something like that. I just would not have thought of it by myself. Of course, it is possible that the member on pprune was not a pilot and was making it all up but it is strange for someone to claim that extra fuel is placed on board for flights to Chinese destinations.

OK, so I can see your points about needing the longer runway etc that makes sense, but so also does the extra fuel - particularly since MAS is/was trying to save money. I am sure the load bearing capacity of the aircraft undercarriage would be designed to take a maximum fuel plus some extra load as safety margin. Same for runways and tarmac.

Was the figure for fuel of 31000 an officially released figure of one that was unofficially released by "a source close to the investigation"? I will try and find the pprune post which references the extra fuel and post it for you to look at. Of course, it may be a practice which was done a few years ago and not a current practice.


You still don't get it. It is a truism for most aircraft that they can either take off with full tanks or with full payload, but I am unaware of any aircraft capable of taking off with full payload and full fuel.

It was widely reported in the first week that it took off with 31,000 US gallons. That is about 69.5% fuel for that particular type IIRC.

The runway length is the next defining limitation. With 239 Persons On Board, the difference in allowable take off weight was all used up for >4t of Mangosteen cargo and a few hundred kilos of Litium-ion batteries.

In actual fact the engines gave their last satellite handshake pings with INMARSAT slightly early indicating fuel exhaustion. Drag from depressurisation damage would account for higher fuel consumption. It is like towing a trailer up a hill having a hole in the fuselage.

I cite the runway strength as one of the considerations, though unlikely to be a factor in this runway, but the structural load capacity of the aircraft is a limiting factor. Ramp weight defines the maximum structural integrity for a static load on the landing gear.

The maximum landing weight is also a weight above which an aircraft must shed fuel weight before it can safely land again after an inflight emergency. At some airports in valleys surrounded by mountains the maximum landing weight has to be treated as maximum landing take off weight in case there is engine failure on take off. I mention all these things because it is not as simple as throwing another 10,000 gallons in so we have some spare for a return leg. It does not work like that.



posted on Apr, 22 2014 @ 07:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Mikeultra

No, i doubt that that is the source of the pings, hence that is why i posted this link in a previous post.

www.ndbc.noaa.gov...

See how far these buoys are from the location where the pings were detected.


The update from down under is that the remote-controlled submarine searching for missing Flight MH370 has now covered 80 per cent of the search area.
So likely it will be extended after it has completed this area.
edit on 22-4-2014 by earthling42 because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-4-2014 by earthling42 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 22 2014 @ 08:20 PM
link   
Just to set the record straight, it appears that the official MH370 fuel amount was/is 49,100kg


Twitter post
Malaysia Airlines confirms fuel load on #MH370 was 49,100kg. // ~16,120 US gal. 777-200ER: 45,220 gal capacity. 6.7 lb/gal.



Reddit link and comments


Duncansteel on Ping rings
edit on 22 Apr 2014 by qmantoo because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 12:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: qmantoo
Just to set the record straight, it appears that the official MH370 fuel amount was/is 49,100kg


Twitter post
Malaysia Airlines confirms fuel load on #MH370 was 49,100kg. // ~16,120 US gal. 777-200ER: 45,220 gal capacity. 6.7 lb/gal.



Reddit link and comments

Duncansteel on Ping rings


Given that this equates 15 hours flying at 7,200lb/hr and we were told by Civil Aviation Director General Azharudden Abdul Rahman on 14 March that it had only 7.5 hours worth of fuel yet another conflicting comment.

Twitter is a highly reputable source of information is it?



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 06:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: BobAthome
It's about time,,
IN MY OPINIONION, stated on page www.abovetopsecret.com...
which of course completely ignored,,as the source of Ping.
Wrong frequency and interval. The FDR and CVR ping at over 30 kHz about once a second.

Those acoustic modems operate between 9-14 kHz and only transmit once an hour in event mode, even less often in standard mode.

Technology Developments in Real-Time Tsunami Measuring

The acoustic modems are configured to operate in the 9–14 kHz frequency band...Standard Mode reports once every 6 hours....Event Mode ...Tsunami waveform data continue to be transmitted every hour until the Tsunami Detection algorithm is in a non-triggered status. At this point the system returns to the Standard Mode.
The fact it only transmits every 6 hours also explains why the batteries in the bottom pressure recorder last 4 years, instead of only 30 days like the batteries of the aircraft "black boxes", pinging every second.

And, as already pointed out, the location doesn't match and they have limited range, so it doesn't seem possible these could have anything to do with the over 30kHz pings detected.
edit on 23-4-2014 by Arbitrageur because: clarification



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 06:42 AM
link   
Debris has washed ashore at the beach of Augusta in south-west Australia.
It is not sure if this debris is from MH370 but they are investigating it.
I was unable to find any pictures of the debris.
The peculiar is, below Augusta are the exact opposite coördinates of Beijing.

www.brisbanetime... s.com.au/national/mh370-search-debris-washed-up-on-wa-coast-to-be-investigated-20140423-374fr.html



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 09:47 AM
link   

Sydney Morning Herald travel editor Anthony Dennis.

In an opinion piece, he compiles a list these consequences, quoting a number of experts, a summary of which is as follows:

...

- The wait at passport control could get a little longer, possibly up to four seconds more to screen for stolen passports

Link


Up to four seconds extra, sounds like a deal breaker to me.



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 10:21 AM
link   
a reply to: earthling42

Star*
I felt mildly hopeful until I read this:


ATSB chief commissioner Martin Dolan played down the find."It's sufficiently interesting for us to take a look at the photographs," Mr Dolan told CNN. "The more we look at it, the less excited we get."



www.smh.com.au...



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 02:20 PM
link   
a reply to: drwill

I would expect that debris would be found along the west coast, light material, bodies, and so on.
But this one 'object of interest' washed ashore at the southern coast.




posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 04:04 PM
link   
a reply to: earthling42

I don't know if this is the truth or another incorrect leak. The DM is reporting that the sheet metal wasn't from MH370.
CNN hasn't reported it yet (not that it means anything).

www.dailymail.co.uk... -plane.html



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 03:22 AM
link   
a reply to: ispyed I keep wondering what if they did intercept it, but as in all war games, people lie, and do not ever admit to anything at all. Why so certain in the beginning that the plane could not have flown south but finally capitulated because of the satellite information. Something is amiss here.




top topics



 
39
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join