Malaysia Airlines flight MH370-Updates and Discussion

Tigerandahalf · 10-03-2014 02:16PM

Jack1985 wrote: »

For the third time now, you keep alluding to the ACARS data as if it carries location/position data, for the third time it does not.

This happened in 30 seconds on an EgyptAir Boeing 777-200 flight on the ground in Cairo in 2011; luckily all passengers and crew escaped via the shutes in time. The cause was not found, but the fire was fueled through ruptured oxygen cylinders in the flight deck. The damage was extensive. If that happened at 35,000ft on MH370 ~ Almost certain catastrophic failure.

If no data was received from the ACARS complete electrical failure could be a possibility but the plane could still fly.

billie1b · 10-03-2014 02:17PM

fr336 wrote: »

What was this?!

I don't know about this one but I do remember Qantas flight QF32, lost an engine and multiple failures after.

Jack1985 · 10-03-2014 02:18PM

We use GPS trackers that use satellite communications to track vehicles in the Australian outback where we have no mobile signal.
I always wondered why airlines dont put something like this on their planes. We can set the trackers on our vehicles to send back a signal every second if we want.

As the previous B777 pilot posted a few pages back, the 777 have 3 of the most sophisticated trackers in the world on those aircraft. When you're tracking vechicles in the outback there not at the bottom of an ocean with all due respect.

fr336 · 10-03-2014 02:20PM

billie1b wrote: »

I don't know about this one but I do remember Qantas flight QF32, lost an engine and multiple failures after.

Yep that's the one I think I know of.

Simon Gruber Says · 10-03-2014 02:21PM

billie1b wrote: »

I don't know about this one but I do remember Qantas flight QF32, lost an engine and multiple failures after.

Had an uncontained engine failure. Engine exploded and shrapnel punctured the wing in several places, cutting hydrolic and electrical lines.

brandon_flowers · 10-03-2014 02:22PM

Just to give people an idea of how big the primary search area is I found a way to overlay the size of the 26 counties over the search area. Think about how big a plane is, then think of how long the drive from Donegal to Kerry is.

Before it gets all bigoted I didn't decide the 26 counties, it was all the website would give me as a comparison.

Jack1985 · 10-03-2014 02:22PM

Tigerandahalf wrote: »

If no data was received from the ACARS complete electrical failure could be a possibility but the plane could still fly.

Of course but neither of us know that, the most likely scenario at this stage is that the plane suffered a catastrophic failure suddenly as the ACARS data sent to MAS showed no abnormalities - And in the event of this catastrophic failure it would suggest the aircraft crashed within the preceding seconds if not minutes going by confirmed information regarding the primary radar.

SpaceTime · 10-03-2014 02:23PM

Deleted User wrote: »

We use GPS trackers that use satellite communications to track vehicles in the Australian outback where we have no mobile signal.
I always wondered why airlines dont put something like this on their planes. We can set the trackers on our vehicles to send back a signal every second if we want.

There was a big discussion on one of the news channels with a fairly serious aviation expert last night.

They were saying it's largely down to airline priorities - planes don't crash very often i.e. very rare and they don't really need to track them to that level.

What telemetry is on board tends to be more to do with maintenance and speeding up turn arounds i.e. they'll know what they need to repair / maintain before the plane arrives. That suits their needs as it's something they need to do and it saves them money and makes them more efficient and has a big impact on safety.

From an aviation industry point of view, they don't really need the technology other than in very rare circumstances like this. Where as a trucking company might find it extremely useful due to logistical requirements, theft prevention etc etc.

He was saying that maybe adapting and modernising existing systems to provide more regular pings of location would be possibly useful, but that because search and rescue operations are so highly unusual for airlines, there would be a FAR stronger argument for installing it in everyone's car.

Basically, for a lot of things, aircraft can operate very, very safely, in remote areas almost totally autonomously.

Sat tracking of aircraft might actually be useful though for improved efficiency on busier routes etc etc by allowing more direct routing rather than flying within radar coverage beacons etc etc.

I think though what it largely comes down to is that they don't trust it (yet) and that there's a lot of simplicity, tried-and-tested systems and redundancy in relatively old-fashioned ground-based radar.

Retrofitting systems, especially anything involving placing external antennae is a HUGE issue on aircraft too. It would require a lot of testing, design and approval and then more approval with a bit more just in case! Where as you can just slap an antenna onto most other types of vehicles as they're not entirely depending on their aerodynamics to keep them working and safe.

--

All that being said though, aircraft actually do have a LOT of telemetry on board. In this case, it just seems that (at least from what we know) that none of it has been much use to the investigators.

homerjay2005 · 10-03-2014 02:28PM

fr336 wrote: »

What was this?!

Rolls Royce engine failure on a plane leaving Singapore, cant believe you never heard about it..

ACI link here...plane was sending signals to the Qantas command center...the Mal plane was sending nothing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=guKJtOsevS4

jackal · 10-03-2014 02:29PM

Seeing as there is very little to go on, just wondering, and this is pure speculation and guessing...

the wing tip collision that was recorded for this aircraft in 2012, could a serious problem have developed unseen in the time since, and the wing detached or failed catastrophically at cruise speed/height?

Would would happen to the jet if something along those lines were to occur, would the airframe stay intact for a while and tumble down to the sea or would the aircraft be torn apart instantly?

Tigerandahalf · 10-03-2014 02:30PM

Jack1985 wrote: »

Of course but neither of us know that, the most likely scenario at this stage is that the plane suffered a catastrophic failure suddenly as the ACARS data sent to MAS showed no abnormalities - And in the event of this catastrophic failure it would suggest the aircraft crashed within the preceding seconds if not minutes going by confirmed information regarding the primary radar.

But why no debris then. If the flight broke up/exploded in that area some debris should have been spotted by now. Have they said whether ACARS data was sent back after the plane made the turn? ACARS gives info on altitude?

fr336 · 10-03-2014 02:32PM

homerjay2005 wrote: »

Rolls Royce engine failure on a plane leaving Singapore, cant believe you never heard about it..

ACI link here...plane was sending signals to the Qantas command center...the Mal plane was sending nothing.

[/YOUTUBE]

I did. I just thought you were talking about one over the Atlantic, sorry

billie1b · 10-03-2014 02:34PM

Simon Gruber Says wrote: »

Had an uncontained engine failure. Engine exploded and shrapnel punctured the wing in several places, cutting hydrolic and electrical lines.

Yeah I remember, due to a disc being missing from engine 2

SpaceTime · 10-03-2014 02:37PM

Just to give you a sense of the South China sea's size:

South China Sea: 3,500,000sq km
Ireland : 84,421 km2

So, 41 X Ireland roughly or 5 times bigger than France.

That's a fair old expanse of water to search!

Tigerandahalf · 10-03-2014 02:38PM

Here is a piece from Forbes from Jon Goglia, an aviation expert.

"A complete electrical failure is extremely unlikely because of redundancies in the system, especially the ram air turbine which uses the power of the wind generated by the aircraft’s motion in flight to generate electricity which would power critical navigation and communication systems, as well as flight controls. But even if the aircraft had a complete electrical failure, the aircraft could have continued to fly. If the aircraft was out of radar range when a failure occurred – but able to fly – it would eventually fly to an area with radar coverage and be picked up by air traffic control radar."

http://www.forbes.com/sites/johngoglia/2014/03/08/malaysian-air-flight-mh370-how-can-a-boeing-777-aircraft-suddenly-lose-all-contact/

billie1b · 10-03-2014 02:39PM

fr336 wrote: »

I did. I just thought you were talking about one over the Atlantic, sorry

I took it up that it was over the Atlantic aswell, thats why I was confused as I had only ever heard of the QF32 one

brandon_flowers · 10-03-2014 02:39PM

I worked with a RR test engineer in a previous life, the problem was interesting to see how it came about (if you are an engineer).

They had to bore out lines from metal forgings but because of the shape they had to bore from opposite sides and meet in the middle. The tiny discrepancy between the two bores resulted in high vibrations until the line failed eventually in turn leading to the engine failure.

mickdw · 10-03-2014 02:39PM

billie1b wrote: »

Yeah I remember, due to a disc being missing from engine 2

Think it was caused by a cracked oil pipe.

homerjay2005 · 10-03-2014 02:39PM

SpaceTime wrote: »

Just to give you a sense of the South China sea's size:

South China Sea: 3,500,000sq km
Ireland : 84,421 km2

So, 41 X Ireland roughly.

its only in small section of the south china sea.

SpaceTime · 10-03-2014 02:41PM

homerjay2005 wrote: »

its only in small section of the south china sea.

Even so, try finding a plane in even an area the size of say France, when it's quite likely underwater / scattered around. It's not that easy.

You're talking about a plane maybe covering 1 km sq out of about 700,000 km sq search area.

Try finding 1 specific farmer's field full of debris in France, with your only resources being a fleet of say 41 aircraft.

10-03-2014 02:42PM

Jack1985 wrote: »

As the previous B777 pilot posted a few pages back, the 777 have 3 of the most sophisticated trackers in the world on those aircraft. When you're tracking vechicles in the outback there not at the bottom of an ocean with all due respect.

Not talking about tracking anything underwater. It is quite clear they dont know where it crashed. With a tracker like we have you`d know its final second location before it went underwater. More than useful.

I`m heading on 4 long haul flights on these 777s next month! Should I be worried?

SpaceTime · 10-03-2014 02:44PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Not talking about tracking anything underwater. It is quite clear they dont know where it crashed. With a tracker like we have you`d know its final second location before it went underwater. More than useful.

I`m heading on 4 long haul flights on these 777s next month! Should I be worried?

What I'm surprised at is that the GPS location isn't included with the telemetry about the aircraft every say 60 seconds. It's only 1 line of information. It could be sent as a simple string of characters.

Obviously it wouldn't work under water, but it would have worked until the plane stopped working so you'd at least know exactly where to start looking.

brandon_flowers · 10-03-2014 02:44PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Not talking about tracking anything underwater. It is quite clear they dont know where it crashed. With a tracker like we have you`d know its final second location before it went underwater. More than useful.

I`m heading on 4 long haul flights on these 777s next month! Should I be worried?

No and anyone that says you should be worried is talking dung.

Iwannahurl · 10-03-2014 02:45PM

Opinion piece speculating on possible involvement of East Turkestan Islamic Movement and/or Jemaah Islamiya (if terrorism turns out to be the cause): http://www.clarionproject.org/analysis/two-islamist-terror-groups-chief-suspects-airplane-crash

Jack1985 · 10-03-2014 02:47PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Not talking about tracking anything underwater. It is quite clear they dont know where it crashed. With a tracker like we have you`d know its final second location before it went underwater. More than useful.

I`m heading on 4 long haul flights on these 777s next month! Should I be worried?

Yes true, but the reason these types of trackers are useful on cars and not aircraft is because of the very little air accidents that actually take place against normal transport - the cost outweighs the chances basically.

Absolutely not, when you compare the amount of aviation accidents against daily flights its substantially less than 1% of a chance of being remotely worried.

SpaceTime · 10-03-2014 02:47PM

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Opinion piece speculating on possible involvement of East Turkestan Islamic Movement (if terrorism turns out to be the cause): http://www.clarionproject.org/analysis/two-islamist-terror-groups-chief-suspects-airplane-crash

It could have been any number of groups, the most obvious one that springs to mind is the one that carried out the attack in Beijing recently.

The other theory is that North Korea was testing long-range missiles. It already really angered China a few days ago with a near miss where a missile crossed a Chinese airliner's flight path.

They hadn't alerted the international community that they were testing and hadn't provided their neighbours with prior warnings.

Having a rogue state even in the vague region (It's quite far away) testing long-range missiles could leave a few question marks over flight safety in range of NK.

The Chinese were furious over that, so I doubt NK would admit anything or China might decide to go in and take their toys off them if they're a threat to Chinese aviation.

If China found that they'd shot down an airliner, there could be very serious diplomatic consequences and total isolation! So, if they did have any accidents, they're not ever going to admit it.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/07/us-korea-north-china-idUSBREA260CV20140307

relaxed · 10-03-2014 02:48PM

I know the FBI will probably hunt me down for asking this, but if I was a suicide bomber I'd be able to just rock up to the plane with my regular passport, bomb in my suitcase and hope its not detected before it goes into the planes hold...correct?

Point being why bother with a fake passport if its suicide bomber, whats the benefit in somebody using a fake passport to hijack / bomb a plane?

Unless you are wanted internationally of course, but in the case of terrorists there is usually a cell operation and plenty of young martyrs with clean history available?

9/11 for example didn't have Bin Laden flying the planes but unknown lunatics.

I'd suggest the fake passports are just a red herring in all of this.

homerjay2005 · 10-03-2014 02:50PM

relaxed wrote: »

Point being why bother with a fake passport if its suicide bomber, whats the benefit in somebody using a fake passport to hijack / bomb a plane?

a man with an italian passport and no previous record per say, is less likely to attract attention.

fits · 10-03-2014 02:54PM

I don't think they have that sort of range though.

SpaceTime · 10-03-2014 03:01PM

They are known to and claim to have several :

Tapeodong 1 - Range 2200km
Tapeodong 2 - Range 6700km
Musudan : 4000 km
UNHA-3 : 10,000km !!

While none of these ranges are fully confirmed beyond their Nodong missile which goes 1000km, they are definitely testing them.

They managed to put an object into space not so long ago.

So, I'd be a BIT concerned that they're firing rather primitive and possibly inaccurate missiles into the air with potentially huge ranges and probably lousy guidance systems.

http://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2013/04/world/north-korea-missile-capabilities/

It's not that they necessarily have the capability to accurately deliver a payload that worries me, more that they could fire random rockets off thousand of miles without proper warning and have no real idea where the hell they're going.

They're one of the only places that would be irresponsible enough to do something like that.

Malaysia Airlines flight MH370-Updates and Discussion

Comments