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.

 

Missing Plane Air Asia

page: 26
94
<< 23  24  25    27  28  29 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 28 2014 @ 07:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Chadwickus
Granted. I, for one though, would rather receive a change of flight number notice instead of telling my family to meet flight 8501. I would think the search and rescue efforts would also want to keep that designation restricted from further use rather than having another flight using those call numbers at the same time they are looking for 8501. Just an odd case by case precedent, it appears. Thanks for the valid considerations.

ETA
And avoiding misleading reports like this today...

Missing plane AirAsia Flight QZ-8501 has not “landed” at Changi Airport at Terminal 1 in Singapore.

A screenshot of the terminal, saying the plane “landed” there is not true. Another plane with the same number and route landed on Monday morning.

There misleading reports saying the plane had landed safely.



source

edit on 28-12-2014 by DancedWithWolves because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 28 2014 @ 08:05 PM
link   
i definitely think something weird is going on, and I'll tell you one thing....you couldn't pay me to fly anywhere near that area.



posted on Dec, 28 2014 @ 08:23 PM
link   
So...I must have missed this information previously, but does anyone know why flight 8501 departed two hours earlier than scheduled regularly?

Noticed this in this account of a missed email saving a family of 10 from boarding this flight:


An Indonesian family reportedly missed boarding Flight QZ8501 after they failed to read an email from AirAsia advising them of a change in departure time.

Ari Putro Cahyono and nine members of his family would have boarded the Singapore-bound flight on Sunday had it not been for the unread message.

Ari said he and his relatives had arrived at Surabaya's Juanda International Airport at 5:30am - 10 minutes after QZ8501 departed.

The flight was originally scheduled to depart at 7:20am.



I'm sure this has been covered and I apologize for the reask if so.
source

Ok...one more question...we have discussed that the pilot requested to climb to a higher altitude and even seen radar that indicated they were ascending...NOW I read that air traffic control DENIED the request due to traffic! What? Man I missed a ton of facts earlier...


Not long into the flight, the plane’s cabin crew requested to air traffic controllers to ascend from 32,000 to 38,000 feet to avoid a cloud,according to Indonesian authorities. But the controllers denied the request because of “traffic,” according to the Indonesian newspaper Kompas.


Source
edit on 28-12-2014 by DancedWithWolves because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 28 2014 @ 09:30 PM
link   
a reply to: DancedWithWolves

Cheers for that.

My mind is playing tricks on me though - news sources were saying the flight was supposed to be 3,5 hours but surely it couldn't be more than an hour and a half flying from Surabaya to Singapore on an A320???



posted on Dec, 28 2014 @ 09:54 PM
link   
I thought the Java Sea was fairly shallow.
Isn't it like 150 feet deep?
Is that too deep for electronic devices to home in?



posted on Dec, 28 2014 @ 09:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Sabreblade
It is when the electronic boxes (and power supply to them) is soaked in highly conductive salt water. Radio waves don't propagate through more than a few feet of water (typically) with the exception of very low frequency transmissions which generally require antennas hundreds of meters long for useful ranges.

That being said, the sonic transmitters attached to flight recorders have a range of hundreds to thousands of meters through water only.



posted on Dec, 28 2014 @ 10:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Sabreblade

it is pretty shallow - if the flight data recorder and cockpit recorder are at the bottom, it should be pretty easy to pick up a signal (compared to say, the Indian Ocean) and for divers to retrieve.

Just depends on weather at the moment. Or if indeed it crashed/landed somewhere completely different.

Indonesia currently has two naval vessels very close to the area of last contact. Fingers crossed.



posted on Dec, 28 2014 @ 10:02 PM
link   
a reply to: CraftBuilder

Think I read somewhere that the salinity of the water in the java sea isn't as high, this time of year. Will check.

Edit:

The large discharge from rivers on the surrounding islands tends to lower salinity levels in the sea.
-Encyclopedia Britannica

I think it also might be a bit diluted this time of year due to the monsoon season.
edit on 28-12-2014 by auroraaus because: more info



posted on Dec, 28 2014 @ 10:06 PM
link   
a reply to: auroraaus

2 hours 10 minutes scheduled landing time from take off, according to the NYTimes. 2 hours earlier than originally scheduled -still unclear why the change. Request to ascend also denied. 40 minutes approximately into the flight, contact is lost.


Cheers back at you.



posted on Dec, 28 2014 @ 10:13 PM
link   
a reply to: DancedWithWolves

and Singapore is an hour behind Surabaya.

Have you been able to find if any other passengers or airport workers verify the man's claims?



posted on Dec, 28 2014 @ 10:22 PM
link   
a reply to: auroraaus
It doesn't matter. Its the same effect as when you drop your smart phone into a puddle of fresh water. Generally there is enough mineral content for the water to be significantly conductive. The majority of circuits are sensitive enough to lowered resistances that if the components get wet the circuits will cease to do their job.

It doesn't matter anyway. Even if the boxes and the power supply to them were sealed against water intrusion, the transmitters could only broadcast a few feet at best, within the strong field envelope of the antenna. Even in fresh water.



posted on Dec, 28 2014 @ 10:29 PM
link   
Underwater signals are sonar and yes it has limited range.
a reply to: CraftBuilder



posted on Dec, 28 2014 @ 10:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: Nochzwei
Underwater signals are sonar and yes it has limited range.
a reply to: CraftBuilder


Hence the last sentence in my first post. But I got the impression they were asking about the usual RF transmitters that aircraft carry working under water.

Sonic transmitters also do not transmit beyond the water. So their range is limited to receivers placed in the water nearby.
edit on 28-12-2014 by CraftBuilder because: to clarify.



posted on Dec, 28 2014 @ 10:38 PM
link   
a reply to: opethPA

So if you reported that it crashed, then why can't they find the plane? Most likely that is what happened. Find the plane first before making assumptions.



posted on Dec, 28 2014 @ 10:47 PM
link   
a reply to: auroraaus

Not yet, although there are numerous news agencies reporting their story. The family's name is on the unboarded manifest, reportedly. AND, they say an airline official told them the plane crashed and how lucky they were. Which is interesting since the airline has not confirmed a crash anywhere else that I have seen reported yet.

More details:


Ari and his brother-in-law arrived together in the first of two cars at around 5am, just in time to see another pair of latecomers race through the departure process and make it to the boarding lounge.



They could have followed if they had not been waiting for the second car, which was carrying the women and children, along with the matriarch of the clan.

So they resigned themselves to their fate and began trying to negotiate a later flight with the budget carrier's ground staff.

As the family argued the toss in the airport, at 5.35am, the A320 Airbus numbered QZ8501 took off. When, 37 minutes later, at 6.12am local time, the pilot asked permission to divert around a storm, the family were cooling their heels at the airport. Five minutes later, the plane lost communication with the tower and, a minute later, fell off the radar.

The world now knows that grave fears are held for the safety of that flight and the 162 passengers and crew on board.

But it was 9am local time before an airport official approached Christianawati and her big family and said the words she will never forget.

"This must have been the best Christmas gift your family ever received," she recalls him saying. "The flight you were supposed to be on has crashed."



Bold is mine.

source



posted on Dec, 28 2014 @ 10:55 PM
link   
There's airports on most of the islands along the plane's path plus most of the coastal cities also have airports. There should be plenty of radar coverage. With such severe storms in the area, control had to be monitoring that area pretty closely.

The article in the previous post said it fell off radar within a minute of requesting a higher route. So in a minute or two the plane couldn't travel faster than 50 miles?

The search area should be pretty small.
edit on December 28th 2014 by Daughter2 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 28 2014 @ 11:00 PM
link   
a reply to: CraftBuilder

Cheers for that! I'm not too up with technology and things - If I had my way we'd be all living in caves and bark huts, save for some self-powering stereo blasting Billy Idol around the clock hehe

I guess the easiest way to find anything is eyes on the ground or - in this case, eyes under the water.



posted on Dec, 28 2014 @ 11:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Daughter2

Their request to divert was denied because of traffic. Timeline from my post above yours...

As the family argued the toss in the airport, at 5.35am, the A320 Airbus numbered QZ8501 took off. When, 37 minutes later, at 6.12am local time, the pilot asked permission to divert around a storm, the family were cooling their heels at the airport. Five minutes later, the plane lost communication with the tower and, a minute later, fell off the radar. 

Good points about other radar. I am getting the sense they knew it crashed and are waiting to find the wreckage to confirm since none of the crash alarms (laymen's terms) went off apparently.



posted on Dec, 28 2014 @ 11:18 PM
link   
a reply to: auroraaus

Its a valid and good question. Before I started designing electronics professionally, I swore up and down that I was going to make a radio controlled toy submarine work in the lake where my family's cabin was. Of course that never happened, but I learned a lot about radio and technologies used under water. It dispelled a lot of assumptions I had (many contrived by what I grew up watching on TV unfortunately).

Anyway, this is why (frustratingly) most remote submersibles are tethered to the ship above. All control and communications are done through the tether because even a few hundred feet down, communication by radio is impractical. Submersibles which are not tethered are either controlled sonically (which has considerable limitations) or pre-programmed and autonomous.


edit on 28-12-2014 by CraftBuilder because: of typos.



posted on Dec, 28 2014 @ 11:33 PM
link   
Aviation expert asks why AirAsia transmitter failed to activate on QZ8501


AS the search resumes for a missing AirAsia Indonesia aircraft, an aviation expert has questioned why the electronic locator transmitter on the plane did not activate.

Captain Des Ross who specialises in aviation security and risk assessment, said all modern aircraft were fitted with an ELT that automatically activated when an aircraft crashed into water, or on land.

MYSTERY: Air Asia jet loses contact with air traffic control

He said information from the transmitters would be relayed to satellites and on to search and rescue agencies, such as Australian Marine Search And Rescue (AMSAR) in Canberra.



edit on 28/12/2014 by Dark Ghost because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
94
<< 23  24  25    27  28  29 >>

log in

join