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: 24
39
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 8 2014 @ 09:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: sy.gunson

It is not a change of altitude. Just it ceased to transmit data parameters about altitude. Vietnamese ATS does not have the capacity to process altitude data.


I could understand the plane not sending altitude if that parameter was not queried (and if it does function in that way).

But on the FR24 site, the planes in Vietnam air space show altitude.

edit:

Doesn't this mean the zero altitude is an anomaly?
edit on 5/8/2014 by roadgravel because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 8 2014 @ 09:52 AM
link   
This is quite a good explanation of the details of why the IO ditching theory is not as good as they say and it also shows the satellite movement, explaining how the southern arcs were arrived at.



posted on May, 8 2014 @ 10:43 AM
link   

An Inmarsat official told me that to “a high degree of certainty, the proponents of other paths are wrong. The model has been carefully mapped out using all the available data.”

The official cited Inmarsat’s participation in the investigation as preventing it from giving further detail, and did not reply to requests for comments on even basic technical questions about the analysis. Inmarsat has repeatedly claimed that it checked its model against other aircrafts that were flying at the time, and peer-reviewed the model with other industry experts. But Inmarsat won’t say who reviewed it, how closely, or what level of detail they were given.

Until officials provide more information, the claim that Flight 370 went south rests not on the weight of mathematics but on faith in authority. Inmarsat officials and search authorities seem to want it both ways: They release charts, graphics, and statements that give the appearance of being backed by math and science, while refusing to fully explain their methodologies.


This is so typical. This may end up more a face saving situation then an actual desire to find the plane at this point. I am suspicious when data is not released for others to review and work.



posted on May, 8 2014 @ 12:56 PM
link   
a reply to: roadgravel



Indeed an anomaly.
Either the transponder was set to another selection or something malfunctioned on that aircraft.

Cockpit 777 check the transponder.

The transponder transmits pressure altitude, what if something was wrong with that system...

Edit:

Pitot-Static Flight Instruments

Report 9M-MRG
edit on 8-5-2014 by earthling42 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 8 2014 @ 01:23 PM
link   
a reply to: earthling42

It would seem various systems were failing at different times or humans were making changes.



posted on May, 8 2014 @ 01:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Arbitrageur
We do know don't we that NMR satellites refers to the smaller peaks either side of the main peak on an NMR spectrograph and not an expensive machine in orbit around the earth? Most of that stuff is wrongly interpreted words explained by someone who has gotten hold of the wrong end of the stick.



posted on May, 8 2014 @ 03:13 PM
link   
a reply to: Imagewerx
Well like I said I'm over my head regarding what 20 specific technologies Georesonance uses, but I'm not over my head when it comes to understanding the basics of various known technologies like spectroscopy and NMR. They do appear to be referring to satellites in orbit around the Earth when they discuss their remote sensing phase, though I'm not sure they use NMR technology until the "on-site survey" phase.

www.georesonance.com...

GeoResonance combines over 20 technologies and patented know-hows into one methodology. The application of so many technologies requires specific skill-sets and state-of-art equipment. Our typical project involves 47 scientists and nuclear physicists, including 5 professors and 12 PhDs.

Traditional geophysical techniques produce ambiguous results. GeoResonance results are concise and unambiguous - we detect distinct resonance that is unique to nuclei of the ore minerals or hydrocarbons.

A complete GeoResonance survey starts with Sample Analysis followed by two stages: Remote Sensing and On-Site Survey.

...Subsurface deposits generate distinct electromagnetic fields that reflect physical and chemical properties of atoms. The electromagnetic fields can be captured by airborne multi-spectral images.

During the Remote Sensing stage, we process satellite multi-spectral images of the survey territory and identify areas that are anomalous to the targeted substance.
Here is the example remote sensing image they show, which looks like satellite-type imagery:


Then if you click "learn more" they say this:

Multispectral Remote Sensing
GeoResonance airborne imaging spectroscopy is an unmatched exploration tool.
They refer to spectroscopy for the airborne imaging phase. Their references to NMR are in their "on-site survey" phase.

To keep it on topic, here are the images of what they think might be MH370:
www.cbsnews.com...

The caption calls those underwater anomalies of various metals that they think resemble the shape and composition of an airplane like titanium, aluminum, etc, and it wasn't there on March 5th and it was there on March 10th which would coincide with the March 8th disappearance of MH370.

edit on 8-5-2014 by Arbitrageur because: clarification



posted on May, 8 2014 @ 03:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: roadgravel

originally posted by: sy.gunson

It is not a change of altitude. Just it ceased to transmit data parameters about altitude. Vietnamese ATS does not have the capacity to process altitude data.


I could understand the plane not sending altitude if that parameter was not queried (and if it does function in that way).

But on the FR24 site, the planes in Vietnam air space show altitude.

edit:

Doesn't this mean the zero altitude is an anomaly?


That is an interesting point.

I canonly make a guess but ADS-C is slightly different from ADS-B

It could therefore indicate an electrical fault perhaps?



posted on May, 8 2014 @ 03:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: sy.gunson

originally posted by: qmantoo
The US emabassy was the reported source of the emergency transmission about the 'collapse' of the cabin so I reckon that is pretty reliable IF we can frst of all believe the Chinese newpaper article. I can see how in the early days of a disaster things are released which later on may prove to be 'inconvenient'. The juicy stuff is in the detail of these things.


A request by a US attorney for release of the information held about MH370 by the NSA was refused by Presidential Executive Order #13526 on grounds that it would be detrimental to national security and foreign relations.

NSA confirms that it does hold information but refuses to release it.


Any chance they stated a declassification date as mandated by section 1.5 of that order? Guessing they just defaulted it to 10 years but would be interesting if they actually stated a date or upped it to the 25 year max.


Here's the link so folks can read it... sorry but I don't have time to participate today:

Executive Order 13526



posted on May, 8 2014 @ 03:52 PM
link   
On page 13 and 14 we have already lightly discussed the possibility that the acoustic signal did not came from the black box pingers, they could be acoustic tags on whales or other species.

Spect ograms on page 4

It seems indeed to be the case.

Malaysian insider

Edit:

A great article about the Inmarsat data.
Why the Official Explanation of MH370’s Demise Doesn’t Hold Up


edit on 8-5-2014 by earthling42 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 8 2014 @ 04:22 PM
link   
a reply to: sy.gunson

Maybe a cascading set of failures, some of which go unnoticed for a short time. If the radios could be lost it might make sense with no calls and transponder.



posted on May, 8 2014 @ 04:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: earthling42
Malaysian insider
I'm still unclear on whether the frequency of the black box pinger can fall out of specification when the battery gets weak. From your source:


First and foremost is the signal’s frequency of 33.3khz. This is NOT within the manufacturer's specs of 37.5 +/- 1 for the black box pinger.

It was reported that three other detections by the TPL were also at that level. According to a message to me from P.H Nargeolet, an oceanographer involved in the search for Air France 447 that crashed into the Atlantic, this frequency alone proves that the signal is not coming from the missing Malaysian plane.
But I found another source stating that the manufacturer found a 34 kHz signal to be quite credible:

news.yahoo.com...

The black boxes normally emit a frequency of 37.5 kilohertz, and the signals picked up by the Ocean Shield were both 33.3 kilohertz, U.S. Navy Capt. Mark Matthews said. But the manufacturer indicated the frequency of black boxes can drift in older equipment.

Houston said the frequency of the sounds heard was considered "quite credible" by the manufacturer, and noted that the frequency from the Air France jet that crashed several years ago was 34 kilohertz. Pressure from being so deep below the surface and the age of the batteries can also affect the transmission level, he said.
So, one source is saying if it's 33-34 kHz it can't be the black box pinger, but another source is saying the manufacturer says that frequency CAN be the black box pinger.

If it's really the manufacturer who said that, I'd think they would know what happens when the battery runs low, but the only way I know of to resolve this conflicting information is to do a test, let the battery run down and see what happens to the frequency. I'm sure the manufacturer does tests since they have to be sure the battery lasts at least 30 days, so they should really know what happens to the frequency.

Now I'm also wondering if the 34 kHz signal associated with the AF447 pinger could have been some kind of marine animal tracking? If the frequency of the black box pinger stays around 37.5 kHz even with a weak battery, then the 34 kHz ping couldn't have been the black box, but frankly I don't have any idea who to believe. If the manufacturer showed some of their test results I'd probably believe those, but I never found anything like that.



posted on May, 8 2014 @ 04:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Arbitrageur
It's over mine as well.Seems legit to me though now I've read the important bits.



posted on May, 8 2014 @ 05:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Arbitrageur

There has been a rumour that they had detected a signal from the black box at 23 June but was disputed by the french authorities.
They said that the signal did not came from the black box.
I have not found a source which stated that they had detected a signal from the black box, so i think it is save to say that no signal from the black box was detected.
edit on 8-5-2014 by earthling42 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 8 2014 @ 05:29 PM
link   
The Malaysian Insider states that there is a high degree of doubt whether the pings heard are from the aircraft MH370 and goes on to give examples where Woods Hole Oceanographic have confirmed that fish trackers are often in the same frequency ranges. They also say that these trackers do not project much more than 2-2.5Km, so by the article's inference, the distances over which these pingers were detected it would be unlikely that there came from MH370.

I think this is a big pointer to why we have not found any wreckage from MH370 yet. The authorities have also not mapped the bottom of the ocean in these areas due to the under water mapper not being able to go deep enough and into the valleys in the underwater terrain. There could be anything down there. (yes, even aliens!)



posted on May, 8 2014 @ 05:41 PM
link   
a reply to: qmantoo



I think this is a big pointer to why we have not found any wreckage from MH370 yet.


Agreed


There is still no clear answer as to why the northern route was excluded as a possibility by Inmarsat.



posted on May, 8 2014 @ 05:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Arbitrageur
The newer pingers are user selectable as to which frequency they transmit on and the duration and spacing of the acoustic ping signal(something like 25-40 KHz from memory).Something as critical as this would have I'd imagine something like a PLL (Phase Locked Loop) to keep it exactly on the desired frequency and not let it drift off this irrespective of supply voltage.This is only a guess though,it's what I'd do if I was designing and building one.

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on May, 8 2014 @ 06:32 PM
link   
a reply to: earthling42
Yeah I think the signal probably wasn't from the black box, but I was more focused on the claim that the manufacturer said that 34 kHz was possible when the specification called for 37.5 +/- 1 kHz

a reply to: Imagewerx
Yes that's the way I'd design it too, so the frequency stayed the same as the battery got weak, so sound intensity would be reduced when the battery got weak, but not frequency. I don't know how it's actually designed though. Where did you get the information about selectable frequencies? I thought the black boxes were all pretty much 37.5 kHz? Or are you talking about animal trackers?



posted on May, 8 2014 @ 06:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: Arbitrageur


a reply to: Imagewerx
Yes that's the way I'd design it too, so the frequency stayed the same as the battery got weak, so sound intensity would be reduced when the battery got weak, but not frequency. I don't know how it's actually designed though. Where did you get the information about selectable frequencies? I thought the black boxes were all pretty much 37.5 kHz? Or are you talking about animal trackers?

I got it from a random Google search in this or the old thread.Don't forget this isn't the black box but the acoustic pinger which is just bolted to one end of it and is totally self contained,i.e. it has it's own power source separate from the black box.
They aren't made exclusively for the aviation industry who lay down the spec of 37.5 KHz +/- 1KHz and not the manufacturer.Other users of them will need to dial in a different transmitting frequency and repeat frequency to that used by the aviation guys.
It's also possible to build it so that even the acoustic output level remains constant until the very last moments of the batteries life,just basic electronics such as a buck convertor to supply the transmitter module.



posted on May, 8 2014 @ 07:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Imagewerx
They aren't made exclusively for the aviation industry who lay down the spec of 37.5 KHz +/- 1KHz and not the manufacturer.Other users of them will need to dial in a different transmitting frequency and repeat frequency to that used by the aviation guys.
I had no idea anybody else was using those specific pingers. Animal tracking was mentioned but I presume those are not the same pingers as used on the black boxes.




top topics



 
39
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join