Malaysia Airlines flight MH370-Updates and Discussion

I took this screencap (very much reduced in size for here) from Google Earth just now. It's a cricket ground in Perth in Australia. The Perth sign seems to be slightly smaller than the length of a cricket pitch (22 yards). If any part of an aircraft this size was lying here it would be easily recognised as such. So, I am wondering why the satellite images provided so far of objects sighted and reported in the sea SW of here (and, in particular, one about the same size as the Perth sign) are of such poor quality and cannot be ID'd as being from anything let alone a crashed aircraft.

Because when you have high resolution, you can't cover as large an area. Think like taking photographs, if you are taking photos of a landscape, you're not going to have same resolution as a close up shot.

Collecting and assembling high res images like this screenshot would take much much longer. They probably will do this in time if the search area is narrowed down.

Mebuntu wrote: »

I took this screencap (very much reduced in size for here) from Google Earth just now. It's a cricket ground in Perth in Australia. The Perth sign seems to be slightly smaller than the length of a cricket pitch (22 yards). If any part of an aircraft this size was lying here it would be easily recognised as such. So, I am wondering why the satellite images provided so far of objects sighted and reported in the sea SW of here (and, in particular, one about the same size as the Perth sign) are of such poor quality and cannot be ID'd as being from anything let alone a crashed aircraft.

Those images are taken by aircraft, not satellites.

Jake1 wrote: »

this pic is starting to pop up, and Im wondering if it could actually be possible?
Could the lady have sent this pic the day after plane goes missing??


http://foxweekly.com/2014/03/23/now/photo-taken-from-inside-malaysia-airlines-flight-370-surfaces.html

I know it's just a picture but isn't there something eerie about it.

Jake1 wrote: »

this pic is starting to pop up, and Im wondering if it could actually be possible?
Could the lady have sent this pic the day after plane goes missing??


http://foxweekly.com/2014/03/23/now/photo-taken-from-inside-malaysia-airlines-flight-370-surfaces.html

That could've been taken on any one of a number of 772's around the world. Only Fox could run with a story like that. Reminds me of the famous "9/11 guy" who was supposedly photographed on the top of the WTC as an aircraft bore down on it!

Im sure if this photo was any big significant , we would of heard about it before this . Some guy looking for a bit of fame I think

Oh Dear. How on earth would they even have 3G or GPRS up there to send a photo in the first place?

Terrible that this stuff gets past some kind of sanity check before being published.

A Summary of on board fire situations from a pilots network forum in response to all the fire theories. It has got plenty of kudos from other forum members:

Member - Albert Driver 23rd Mar 2014, 17:23:

Just when you thought you'd finally drowned it, the issue of fire just keeps on springing up

So, for the benefit of non-pilots, let's talk about fire - from the point of view of this former 747-400 commander's experience.

Cargo Fire:
The T7 is fully equipped with cargo fire detection and suppression for some 30 minutes or so (T7 drivers will fill in the number).
I've had a cargo fire warning. It rattles your eyeballs and soaks you with adrenaline. You can't ignore it. You do the drill and fire the bottles, put out a Mayday, ask for radar assistance, point the aircraft at a runway and get going down (in whichever order is appropriate, or all at once). It's just like we regularly practice in the sim. Mine turned out to be a false warning - but still......
In the position of MH370 there would have been radar assistance, a choice of runways within the fire suppression time available supported by the familiarity of being near base.
There is no way a cargo fire caused the loss of MH370, with no Mayday call, plenty of assistance available and time in hand to land.

Wheel bay fire:
If there had been a fire in the wheel bay the crew would have known about it from the sensors immediately after take-off. They would not have got as far as leaving departure control without asking for a return to land. Let's put this one to bed.

Flight-deck fire:
If a fire occurs behind a flight-deck instrument panel you know about it immediately. From experience, you smell it and see the smoke long before it takes hold. This type of fire can be difficult to deal with but there are extinguishers and axes/jemmies to hand. Oxygen masks on, Mayday, descent and diversion by the handling pilot while the other crew member(s) deal with the problem, is the response. There may be loss of some services depending on which panel is affected but at the end of the day the handling pilot can just take out the autopilot and fly the aeroplane, for which radar assistance resulting from that Mayday call is most helpful. Provided the fire is controlled to keep the smoke down and a runway is within reach there is no reason why a safe landing should not result.
For the reasons given for Cargo fire, a flight-deck fire did not cause the loss of MH370.

Electrics Compartment fire:
I've experienced smoke in the electrics bay. The compartment has a high airflow for cooling purposes and we smelt it on the flight-deck immediately, before there was any visible smoke. A quick check of the flight-deck panels, a zoom out into the cabin to check for smoke. a call to the galley-slaves to check the galley equipment - and it became immediately apparent where it must be coming from. In my case the appropriate CBs tripped themselves and the problem solved itself but in a more severe case it would be little different to the flight-deck fire case as above, except for some small extra difficulty of access (although our engineer was down there like a mole in a hole).
For the same reasons an electrics bay fire did not cause the loss of MH370.

Cabin fire:
Causes can be many. I've experienced a small furnishings fire (caused by an illegal cigarette we think). Smoke identified the source long before fire took hold. The cabin crew were on to it straight away with more extinguishers carried to the scene than I thought existed on the aircraft!
I've also had an electrical cabin fire. That was more difficult to locate as the smoke was distributed by the recirc fans. It eventually scorched a side panel revealing itself and the cabin crew pounced upon it relishing, it seemed, the opportunity to use the axe to get to it! We were already on approach by then but I'm confident that had we been in the middle of the Atlantic we would have dealt with it just as safely.

Incendiary devices:
In the cargo hold it becomes just another cargo fire, unless it is also an explosive device, in which case case the aircraft either breaks up (which we know MH370 did not do initially) or it may cause a decompression as well as a fire. In the latter case the fire suppression systems would likely be rendered inoperative or ineffective - clearly a more critical case. But pilots practice loss of cabin pressurisation drills frequently. If this had happened and the aircraft survived the initial explosion and the emergency descent they were still within range of a runway and they would have declared an emergency. Pilots do not forget to put on oxygen masks. In this case you just need a closer runway - and MH370 had one.
In the cabin, it's just a bigger fire. Trust me, the cabin crew will be there with extinguishers within seconds. There are more than enough extinguishers around.
If it is also an explosive device then we are back to the cargo hold explosion situation as above. The cabin crew may be stunned and react slowly but the flight crew will descend the aircraft and declare an emergency. There is no evidence that happened in this case.

The point I am making is that all fires on aircraft can be dealt with by the crew. There is ample equipment on board and sufficient crew members trained to use it. The problem is not in dealing with the initial fire but whether there is a runway close enough to use while the fire remains suppressed. That is what causes hull losses due to fire in flight. In the case of MH370 there was a choice of places to go and a radar controller to talk to and get help from.