MH370 missing (Part 2)

Zaphod58
reply to post by minusinfinity

 

Even if it wasn't, the chances of gliding 1,000 miles are remote at best.

The problem is they would have been carrying fuel for about 3700 miles. The trip to Beijing would have been 2700 miles, plus 1000 insurance miles (redirection, circling, etc). The initial predicted location of the plane was 4900 miles from Kuala Lumpur using the predicted flight path.



Makes you kinda go hmmmmm?

Cheers - Dave

And some people still have faith in the human race?

What difference does it make? It certainly can't help it but it could hurt.

So now we know the fuel despite it being get secret?

reply to post by bobs_uruncle


I doubt they were carrying anywhere near another 1000 miles of fuel. It's usually +10-15% or so, when you're landing in an area that has divert airports nearby. With all the airports near Beijing they wouldn't have needed to have an extra 1000 miles of fuel on board. That would have been a pretty good bit less cargo to put on.

reply to post by roadgravel


We have a general idea of it, based on previous flights. The pilot asked for a little extra to be added, but we don't know how much.

Once a person grows to about 30 years of age they should have learned, if only from their own experience, that when things are keep secret or hidden then 99.5% of the time it is due to criminal activity, embarrassment, a cover of lies or incompetence being hidden.

reply to post by roadgravel


So every crash investigation is criminal, or incompetency? Because ALL crash investigations have aspects that are kept secret until the final report is issued.

Zaphod58
reply to post by bobs_uruncle

 

I doubt they were carrying anywhere near another 1000 miles of fuel. It's usually +10-15% or so, when you're landing in an area that has divert airports nearby. With all the airports near Beijing they wouldn't have needed to have an extra 1000 miles of fuel on board. That would have been a pretty good bit less cargo to put on.

If 10-15% extra is all they carry, whoa, then they had to glide for about 2000 miles, yikes!

Well, here is the original presumed debris location, just use google earth or maps, -44.5729,90.1343 and Link to make it a bit easier.

Cheers - Dave

Zaphod58
reply to post by roadgravel

 

We have a general idea of it, based on previous flights. The pilot asked for a little extra to be added, but we don't know how much.

What is true?

Paper work hidden.

Pilot asks for extra? Did he? Did he get it? Maybe he wanted extra for his special mission.

Speculation of due to fuel in China the plane is fueled to cover the return trip? True? Is that even possible?

Fuel handling personnel haven't talked.

It can only be guess work it this point.

reply to post by bobs_uruncle


They generally plan on enough to get to their destination, shoot x number of approaches, and be able to divert to a runway y miles away. If there are airfields that can handle them close enough they don't need to add a lot more fuel for that.

reply to post by roadgravel


We'll find out when the report is released.

reply to post by Zaphod58


I am saying it a bad trait of humans except under very certain circumstances. This isn't one. Even in crimes, only certain pieces are keep secret to create a unique data point.

Power trip and job security.

reply to post by roadgravel


The data is kept secret in crash investigations partly because of lawsuits, and partly to give investigators the freedom they need to do their job, and not be hounded by the media and others.

Zaphod58
reply to post by roadgravel

 

We'll find out when the report is released.

I would disagree. When the report is released, it will come out with an ounce of truth to make it look credible mixed with 10 tons of BS. It is the way it has been and will probably always be.

Cheers - Dave

reply to post by bobs_uruncle


Either you'll believe it, or you won't. That's up to you.

Zaphod58
reply to post by roadgravel

 

So every crash investigation is criminal, or incompetency? Because ALL crash investigations have aspects that are kept secret until the final report is issued.

Most are, governments protect their industries, a clear cut case is the Helderberg in 1987. Boeing didn't want it read into the record that the plane broke up before it hit the water (at around 9000 feet actually) and the South African government didn't want anyone being able to prove there was military equipment on the plane, embargo breaking. I can give you many more, Pan Am 103, Swiss Air 111, etc.... So your theory is what, that governments are honest brokers? It would be just juvenile to believe that, I hope that is not the belief you actually hold.

Cheers - Dave

I vote to quit wasting US resources on this now. Of course, that doesn't count. Let Malaysia take the full heat.

It's about power and jobs.

reply to post by bobs_uruncle


Yeah, you're right. There are no honest investigators, and there is no truth in accident investigations. It's all lies.

minusinfinity

Zaphod58
reply to post by minusinfinity

 

Because they heard pings that match the recorder locator pingers. They are not naturally occurring frequencies, and matched up to the satellite data from Inmarsat showing possible flight paths.

Right but I've heard they could receive similar pings from search craft. A similar frequency that can be misinterpreted.

Also I've heard somewhere that salt water can alter the frequency to a small degree, not sure if it's true but I hate to see them waste time searching where there is no plane.

I know they are doing their best. I wish them luck.

Passage of an audio signal through water can only suffer from attenuation.Frequency shift only occurs if either the transmitter or receiver (or both) are moving relative to each other,this is known as Doppler shift.

The first pinger signal they investigated was on 33 KHz,4.5 KHz lower than the standard frequency for this of 37.5 KHz.It was also outside the allowed tolerance of +/- 1 KHz,and I've yet to see an explanation for this.These would normally be crystal controlled transmitters,so should be VERY stable and show very small deviation from their specified transmitter frequency irrespective of battery condition and voltage.

Zaphod58
reply to post by bobs_uruncle

 

Either you'll believe it, or you won't. That's up to you.

I have had direct experience with SRO's and government spin, and have been investigating crashes that I had a personal interest in or involved the work I do, for the last 24 years. I KNOW governments lie, I KNOW investigations are tainted and spun to reduce costs or hide damaging information. It's a simple fact.

Cheers - Dave