Malaysian Airlines Flight MH-370 goes missing

[chaanakya]

Shiv garu TCAS of other plane would work only if Transponder of nearby aircraft is also squawking its code. If it is off then TCAS will not cause alert.

The first is TCAS, the Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System. TCAS gives pilots a radar-like screen on their instrument panel that depicts the bearing, distance, and altitude of other aircraft with operating Mode C transponders. If an aircraft is too close, TCAS alerts the pilot and provides a command to either climb or descend.

TCAS is an expensive system mandated on airliners, but a more affordable version of the system called TCAD (Traffic and Collision Alert Device) is available. Like TCAS, it determines the proximity of other aircraft using their Mode C transmissions, but TCAD gives the pilot range (distance) and relative altitude of conflicting traffic only. No azimuth, or bearing to the traffic, is provided. The pilot must decide which way to go to avoid the traffic.

[shiv]

The plane has crashed in the ocean west of Australia and north of Antarctica. Debris will be found in a few years as it floats up to some shore or other. The Malaysians are sending everyone on a wild goose chase, covering up for their own incompetence by trying to show that they were fooled by a very clever and very major conspiracy.

I think it would be fair to the relatives of passengers to point out that the passengers are most likely dead and that the airline will start paying out compensation.

It is absurd and unfair to bullshit the world like this.

[chaanakya]

Call sign by ATC and squawk code are assigned after flight plan is approved and plane is ready to take off. Code is fed into transponder by means of SET command and then it is Verified using VERIFY button which lights up the call sign and squawk code on ATC controller's Radar. So it is not exactly hardwired. If transponder is off Plane will not be transmitting call Sign and will be unmarked Plane. Should raise alarm but seems this is quite common incident and ATCs are alerted for faulty instruments inflight en route as well. Afterall they have to take care of many incoming and departing flights.

[shiv]

Call sign by ATC and squawk code are assigned after flight plan is approved and plane is ready to take off. Code is fed into transponder by means of SET command and then it is Verified using VERIFY button which lights up the call sign and squawk code on ATC controller's Radar. So it is not exactly hardwired. If transponder is off Plane will not be transmitting call Sign and will be unmarked Plane. Should raise alarm but seems this is quite common incident and ATCs are alerted for faulty instruments inflight en route as well. Afterall they have to take care of many incoming and departing flights.

What we don't know is whether the code is transmitted along with hardware information related to that particular transponder. That would set up a unique non spoofable combination like unique hardware ids of computers/cellphones. It would also be a simple security measure to reduce errors. Even if a plane misidentifies itself, its hardware code would not match.

[symontk]

Call sign by ATC and squawk code are assigned after flight plan is approved and plane is ready to take off. Code is fed into transponder by means of SET command and then it is Verified using VERIFY button which lights up the call sign and squawk code on ATC controller's Radar. So it is not exactly hardwired. If transponder is off Plane will not be transmitting call Sign and will be unmarked Plane. Should raise alarm but seems this is quite common incident and ATCs are alerted for faulty instruments inflight en route as well. Afterall they have to take care of many incoming and departing flights.

What we don't know is whether the code is transmitted along with hardware information related to that particular transponder. That would set up a unique non spoofable combination like unique hardware ids of computers/cellphones. It would also be a simple security measure to reduce errors. Even if a plane misidentifies itself, its hardware code would not match.

No that cannot be. say the aircraft is in repair, you have to send in another aircraft. Then how is the h/w code going to match. What you told is not practical

[shiv]

If my son had been on the flight I would be beside myself with anxiety and depression - especially if I was left high and dry and told by the media that he may be among a bunch of kidnapped hostages possible being tortured - suffering while he thought of us.

I would simply be angry with everyone for not being able to find hem after my hoopes of his being alive were raised by some totally way out unbelievable stories.

The truth is likely to be much simpler. The passengers are dead now, and in peace.

Kidnappers and hijackers who feed and keep 250 people alive have to be rich. They gain nothing by hiding the fact. Publicity is more important.

Malaysia and the media are doing no one a favor by talking crap. The stories that are coming out require organization at nation state level and if that is so then silence is pointless.

Most likely everyone is dead. Maybe there was a fight. Heroic passengers broke down the door or did something drastic. But ultimately - in a few hours it was likely all over for everyone.

It is profoundly silly to ask countries to be "more vigilant" because a plane is missing. Vigilance against threats has to be 100% anyway, whether this plane went missing or not. Maybe Malaysia is yet to reach 100% like the USA before 9-11 and my cousin who used to mock Indian airport security before 9-11.

[shiv]

No that cannot be. say the aircraft is in repair, you have to send in another aircraft. Then how is the h/w code going to match. What you told is not practical

The hardware code of the transponder (not the aircraft) is matched with the call sign assigned at verification just before take off. After take off if the identification is changed there will be a mismatch between call sign and transponder hardware code as assigned before takeoff.

The hardware id is like the MAC address of your modem or computer. You can block accessto a wireless modem depending on the MAC address - of the harware that is accessing your router.

[Lalmohan]

shiv - i dont think they do that now, but going forward they probably will

[Rajiv Lather]

I confess this pilot has proved to be smarter than me ~

[chaanakya]

Call signs are ICAO, I had posted them before. Its for Singapore airlines. But the blog was comparing MH370 which is a flight number with SIA368 which is a call sign. Is it possible to be inaccurate like that?

Too convenient

MH 370 is flight number and call sign was MAS 370.

[symontk]

No that cannot be. say the aircraft is in repair, you have to send in another aircraft. Then how is the h/w code going to match. What you told is not practical

The hardware code of the transponder (not the aircraft) is matched with the call sign assigned at verification just before take off. After take off if the identification is changed there will be a mismatch between call sign and transponder hardware code as assigned before takeoff.

The hardware id is like the MAC address of your modem or computer. You can block accessto a wireless modem depending on the MAC address - of the harware that is accessing your router.

When you spoof why do you think you need to use h/w codes, you only need to transmit data which others think it is coming from a h/w

[symontk]

Call signs are ICAO, I had posted them before. Its for Singapore airlines. But the blog was comparing MH370 which is a flight number with SIA368 which is a call sign. Is it possible to be inaccurate like that?

Too convenient

MH 370 is flight number and call sign was MAS 370.

Yes call signs are from ICAO for navigation. Flight numbers are from IATA for passengers

ICAO signs are 3 char and IATA signs are 2 char and both with flight numbers

[shiv]

shiv - i dont think they do that now, but going forward they probably will

We don't know for sure. But even if we ignore the current MH 370 event - collision avoidance is to important an issue to be left to chance and I doubt if it is simply left to punching in some alphanumeric code manually without some other code to generate a unique identity. In general I have found that if I think I am clever, someone else has also been equally clever or better and that others are not as dumb as one might expect them to be.

[Harpal Bector]

Even if you do need hardware codes, unless the verification information is passed to all ATCs along the proposed flight route, there will be nothing or the onward ATC to match the MAC address of the transponder even if the SSR can read the Mode S data. That verification has to happen at the handover point between FIRs. If there is a mismatch between the Mode S data and what the ATC thinks it should get, it would be up to the controller to raise the issue with the pilot of the plane. The pilot could just claim there is a data entry error and carry on from there.

[shiv]

When you spoof why do you think you need to use h/w codes, you only need to transmit data which others think it is coming from a h/w

There is no manual transmission. "YOU" do not ransmit anything. The transponder responds with what you have punched in plus its own MAC address or other unique hardware id that is hardwired into every transponder. You cannot chane the latter even if you change the id of your flight from MA 370 to PIA666

[chaanakya]

And what it says

Normally, the address is never changed, however, the transponders are reprogrammable and, occasionally, are moved from one aircraft to another (presumably for operational or cost purposes), either by maintenance or by changing the appropriate entry in the aircraft's Flight management system.

But they cannot be reprogrammed in flight. This is apparently a security measure linked to collision avoidance system. Read the link I posted.

Yes , it can be reprogrammed. Please read the link Posted by A_Gupta and flight check list before pushback.

[symontk]

For a flight to leave an airport, before it leaves information is send to destinations and all the airports on the way

[UlanBatori]

Aviate, Navigate, Communicate thing. Including a few instructors. It is almost like a drill/internal jargon thing.

Of course it is, but my point is that it does not take many minutes before one is free to hit the MayDay transponder and call ground control and talk to them. It takes seconds, and they didn't do that, so these people are BSing.
Its like saying "Sh*, Shave, Shampoo, that's the order taught to me in the madarssa. So on any given day I will do only one of those, so I never get to shave or shampoo." (Hmm! True, come 2 think of it).

We've been down that road many times. If the plane fell right there they would have recovered some sign of it, etc.

[symontk]

When you spoof why do you think you need to use h/w codes, you only need to transmit data which others think it is coming from a h/w

There is no manual transmission. "YOU" do not ransmit anything. The transponder responds with what you have punched in plus its own MAC address or other unique hardware id that is hardwired into every transponder. You cannot chane the latter even if you change the id of your flight from MA 370 to PIA666

there need not be manual transmission, you can create a system that mimics it. That's the s/w world all about

[shiv]

Even if you do need hardware codes, unless the verification information is passed to all ATCs along the proposed flight route, there will be nothing or the onward ATC to match the MAC address of the transponder even if the SSR can read the Mode S data. That verification has to happen at the handover point between FIRs. If there is a mismatch between the Mode S data and what the ATC thinks it should get, it would be up to the controller to raise the issue with the pilot of the plane. The pilot could just claim there is a data entry error and carry on from there.

No. That should be easy to address. Once a "verification" is done by the home ATC a verification code can be added on. Any change in programming after that will erase the verification code assigned from the home ATC and result in an invalid transmission.

[shiv]

Yes , it can be reprogrammed. Please read the link Posted by A_Gupta and flight check list before pushback.

That was about squawk codes whatever that means. Nothing was said about Mode S collision avoidance which has to be a unique code that cannot be changed.

If a pilot is being hijacked the squawk code is 1000 or something. But if the squawk code is changed the identification code must not be changed because no one will know which plane has been hijacked. Changeable squawk codes and flight identification codes are different. The flight id must remain the same for that flight and different from all other aircraft even if someone else makes an error. The squawk code may be changed.

[UlanBatori]

I guess it is true: Even UC CTs Inc. is fatigued. Guys: think about this:
What we are seeing is the classic stereotype of the East Asian/ Chinese MO: they don't say what the **** is going on. After 8 days, can u point me out to ONE government/airline operated website in that whole friggin' region that gives a clear, verified, complete list of all the things they know and are not so hugely "National Security"? With clear basis of each claim. So far the best is the PM's statement, but that is far from complete. Like, which satellite caught what on what frequency, when and what are they able to make of it. What radar station saw what exactly. When. With what certainty. What was on the plane (they published the passenger manifest, not the cargo manifest, I guess some of that is proprietary/trade secret? )

THIS shows why the passengers' relatives are mad at the govt and airline. The *****s never tell the truth and the whole truth. They have to be pompous asses. May their camels poo in their Rooh Afza!

Frankly, I too question their claim that the flight even took off. Maybe they put the passengers in buses that are even now approaching Beijing.

Time to retire from this business until someone finds wreckage. Too much danger of my comparing this behavior with that of someone I know....of similar cultural origins.

[shiv]

there need not be manual transmission, you can create a system that mimics it. That's the s/w world all about

True - but it just makes it more unlikely and less believable. That is all I am trying to say. i just don't believe that a software genius came and did all that during this flight. The story is not working for me.

[chaanakya]

Call sign by ATC and squawk code are assigned after flight plan is approved and plane is ready to take off. Code is fed into transponder by means of SET command and then it is Verified using VERIFY button which lights up the call sign and squawk code on ATC controller's Radar. So it is not exactly hardwired. If transponder is off Plane will not be transmitting call Sign and will be unmarked Plane. Should raise alarm but seems this is quite common incident and ATCs are alerted for faulty instruments inflight en route as well. Afterall they have to take care of many incoming and departing flights.

What we don't know is whether the code is transmitted along with hardware information related to that particular transponder. That would set up a unique non spoofable combination like unique hardware ids of computers/cellphones. It would also be a simple security measure to reduce errors. Even if a plane misidentifies itself, its hardware code would not match.

There is no hardwired code being transmitted. The only fixed thing is Registration Number of Aircraft like that of 9M MRO of ill fated flight. Flight plan would include that. But ATC and radar would know only by assigned call sign which is fed into transponder and can be re-porgrammed. Scary yet true.

As you say, pax are dead and RIP but I would not fly on Malaysian Airlines if I know that in the event of accident we would not be found dead or alive. It needs closure.

[Harpal Bector]

Okay Shiv - then as long as that is the SOP and it is vigourously followed by Indian ATC - then a squawk spoof is improbable and there is no possibility MAS370 entering in India's airspace. If the a/c did not cross Indian airspace, the likelihood of it being Pakistani or Bangladeshi airspace is quite low.

If otoh - the squawk code is not hardware verified, then a spoof is possible and all options are on the table.

[sohamn]

Not that I would like to be in that situation but if I was in a flight that was obviously going wrong I would switch on my cellphone and ask everyone to do that and keep trying to call. The cabin staff too would know that something was the matter. Maybe people would try and bash in the pilot's door - because after one stage you know you are going to die anyway and you don't care.

I don't know how strong cockpit doors are now but I suspect that can be bashed in by the concerted efforts of 8 or 10 men and assorted equipment that one can find in an aircraft cabin. After all - if your flight is hours overdue and the cabin crew do not have meals or water and the toilets are filthy you can't hide trouble from 250 passengers.

In fact if I was convinced that the game was up and that we would die anyway I might simply open one of the doors and say "What the heck?"

249 passengers cannot be so dumb that they sat and did nothing while a plane flew for 4 or 5 hours longer than necessary knowing that things wer badly wrong.

That plane is down in the ocean. RIP.

Passengers will retaliate only when they know something has gone wrong. Remember that the time of the flight was in dead of night, passengers would be sleeping and airhostesses would self assure themselves that they are in the hands of the most experienced pilot in MA. It is possible that the flight crashed in the southern arch after passengers retaliated but it is also equally possible that the plane is in the hands of terrorists planning to use it as a long range cruise missile.

I think countries like India & Paki and China should give their radar data to their own radar analysts to find out if that 777 could have spoofed the radar. My theory is that it took the burma - arunachal - tibet route to land the plane somewhere in central asia and is right now getting retrofitted with long range fuel tanks and HEs to attack India or China or US 7th fleet AC USS George Washington in port.

[shiv]

Passengers will retaliate only when they know something has gone wrong. Remember that the time of the flight was in dead of night, passengers would be sleeping and airhostesses would self assure themselves that they are in the hands of the most experienced pilot in MA. It is possible that the flight crashed in the southern arch after passengers retaliated but it is also equally possible that the plane is in the hands of terrorists planning to use it as a long range cruise missile.

I think the plane has crashed. I do not believe for a minute that it is sitting safely hijacked somewhere. I also think that one plane used as a cruise missile is only a pinprick of a threat to a country or the world. Only a few people will get killed. Nothing much will happen - so it's not much of a threat. If that plane kills me it kills me. Big deal.

I can never sleep on long distance flights and I usually have the company of other insomniacs. I always follow the moving map display and if it is turned off I would wonder why and ask. It on, I would know that the plane is off course. The air hostesses are in constant touch with the cockpit and they would soon know if something has gone wrong there. their lives too are in danger and they would not simply pretend that all is well if the plane had been hijacked in the cockpit.

An airline passenger would have to be a complete dunce if his flight was more than 30 minutes beyond the scheduled landing time and there was no sign of descent.

[sohamn]

Last time I was flying malaysian - the maps on the inflight console didn't work at all. The Map on the central console ( above the bassinet seats ) worked sporadically. Pilot said their was some glitch on the software that renders the info. I think this detail can be turned off and on by the pilot.

If the pilot wants to commit suicide or want to make a political statement about his political mentor anwar ibrahim then why would he try to hide the plane. Only reason one could hide the plane is because he had some nefarious intentions.

[vasu raya]

A way to verify this spoofing is to figure if any plane on that arc time stamped at 8:11am has landed anywhere within one hour flying distance

[member_22733]

I think the plane has crashed. I do not believe for a minute that it is sitting safely hijacked somewhere. I also think that one plane used as a cruise missile is only a pinprick of a threat to a country or the world. Only a few people will get killed. Nothing much will happen - so it's not much of a threat. If that plane kills me it kills me. Big deal.

I can never sleep on long distance flights and I usually have the company of other insomniacs. I always follow the moving map display and if it is turned off I would wonder why and ask. It on, I would know that the plane is off course. The air hostesses are in constant touch with the cockpit and they would soon know if something has gone wrong there. their lives too are in danger and they would not simply pretend that all is well if the plane had been hijacked in the cockpit.

An airline passenger would have to be a complete dunce if his flight was more than 30 minutes beyond the scheduled landing time and there was no sign of descent.

That is my gut feel from the moment they mentioned that the plane could have flown west. Some event cause the electronics to fail and the plane to decompress, the pilots were frantically trying to turn around. They went west first and then decided they were north of where they should be and turned south. After this they lose consciousness, and the flight crashes near Antartica.

Edit: Pilot suicide, insanity could also be another reason. But they seem to be healthy men. The wife and kids of the pilot moving out of the house means nothing. They did not want to deal with the media and paparazzo.

This particular flight has to be longest one in history that evaded the Occam's razor.

[member_22733]

Here is the map of the ocean currents:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... anicas.gif

The plane might have crashed near the Antartic circumpolar/South Indian current boundaries. 10 degrees in the map is around 1100kms, so assuming that the plane flew south, southwest for 5 - 6 hours after loss of contact, they should have travelled approx 3,800 - 4,200 kms. Which corresponds to 40 - 50 degrees South.

They should look south-southwest of Australia for any debris washing ashore (in maybe a few years).

[ldev]

Malaysia not disclosing all details: Indian officials

Posting in full. Categorical statement from unnamed Indian officials that MH370 could not have used runways at Port Blair/Car Nicobar

KOLKATA: Nearly a week after officially joining the search for Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370 that went missing with 239 people on board since March 8, India has expressed displeasure over claims by a section of Malaysian officials that the aircraft could have used runways at the Andaman and Nicobar Islands to land. The Andaman and Nicobar Command (ANC) had confirmed a couple of days earlier that there is no evidence of an air crash on or near any of the islands in the archipelago.

"We had also made it clear that the aircraft couldn't have entered Indian airspace without being detected. Today, we have come across reports that suggest that there are runways in the Andamans where the large Boeing 777-200 ER could have landed. Just because there are runways in the Andamans that are large enough to accommodate it doesn't mean it could have landed in any of those. Both runways are considered extremely sensitive and are well protected," an official said.

Of the runways mentioned are the ones at Car Nicobar and Port Blair. Car Nicobar is a full-fledged air base of the Indian Air Force. The IAF operates assets from this base routinely and any aircraft, military of civil, approaching it without necessary clearance would have been challenged. The only other option is the runway at Veer Savarkar International Airport at Port Blair. This is also a very secure establishment as it shares airside facilities with the INS Utkrosh, a naval air station of the Indian Navy. The navy operates surveillance and reconnaissance flights from here.

"There has been an effort to indicate that these runways could have been used as they are on islands that are at a distance from the mainland. People should understand the strategic importance of the Andamans for India. It is preposterous to even consider that an unscheduled flight could have landed at a runway there. We have gone through all data but there is no indication that any suspicious aircraft passed through the area on that date," the official added.

The ANC is aware of the threats that the archipelago face. During a media interaction during Milan 2014, Air Marshal P K Roy, commander in chief, ANC, had indicated that a terror strike on the islands can't be ruled out and overall level of security enhancement has been done. Under the circumstances, it isn't likely that the missing airliner even flew at a low height over the islands and remained undetected.

"We believe that the Malaysians are keeping a lot of information very close to their chests. This is hampering search operations as well. In today's world, we don't think its too possible for an aircraft without necessary clearance to fly over several countries and reach a central Asian country as is being indicated by authorities in Malaysia," another official said.

[vasu raya]

This looks more like spy mission, the southern arc has Malaysia within 1hr flying distance.

[Vayutuvan]

The plane has crashed in the ocean. Everyone is dead. Debris would have spread out hundreds of km by now because of all the bullshiting that has gone on.

Is there any chance of the debris turning up on the coasts of some of the countries as flotsam (or jetsam!) ? If so how many days approximately?

[ramana]

Looks like Malaysians need to come clean with whatevr they have for right now its like boy who cried wolf. Might not get the co-operation next time they really need.

matrimc, Definitely jetsam!

[UlanBatori]

have to be a complete dunce if his flight was more than 30 minutes beyond the scheduled landing time and there was no sign of descent.

Or circling above Ulan Bator airport on a normal day with a thundercloud on the horizon...
But anyway, so here is the Official Malaysian Airlines Website dealing with the MH370 Flight Incident.
Love the link to "Flight Status". Connects instantly too.. just like being on a phone call to Airlines Customer Service.

Due to overwhelming traffic, you are viewing the lite version of our website for quicker access. Our online flight booking is available as usual.

You go to "More info" and you get this:

We can’t find the page you’re looking for

We've done some spring cleaning to our site in order to serve your needs better. As such, the page you are looking for has probably been moved.
...but may we suggest these?
Listed below are popular links you might find useful. Or click here to be redirected home.
Book Now... Direct to Houristan
Manage My Booking
MH Experience
Flight Status
Check-in
Baggage
Deals of the Day: See All of Indian Ocean area for one lo-lo one-way price.
Travel Essentials
MH Experience
First Class
Business Class
Economy Class
Destinations: Beijing via Andamans, Cocos Islands, Antactica, Kazakhstan,
Route Map
MASholidays
Enrich
Contact Us
Careers
We sincerely apologise for the inconvenience caused.

[nachiket]

Some guy on Reddit has a theory which explains just about everything including the climb to 45k followed by the descent and second climb. Lot of assumptions in here too, but it still sounds more plausible than some of the batsh1t crazy CT's floating around on the Internet..

The Autopilot system: The autopilot isn’t as simple as being either ON or OFF. You can engage one mode (where it’s definitely ON) - like climb at the most economical climb speed and level off at the preprogrammed altitude (called VNAV – vertical navigation) – and fly the programmed route in the Flight Management System (called LNAV – Lateral navigation). Or, you can engage it to fly in a wings level mode where the airplane doesn’t care what heading it’s on – it just does its best to keep the wings level on whatever heading it happens to be on. In this case the autopilot is ON but it’s not really doing much of anything. There are other modes but they weren’t a factor.

The 777 autopilot is probably a little different than the 737 (which, again, is what I flew), but this one certainly wasn’t in a VNAV–LNAV mode while it was meandering for hours (if it was on at all). I think it was OFF completely (doing absolutely nothing), but it could have entered a wings level reversion mode after the initial problem (in which case it would have been technically ON, but not really doing anything). The point is, the autopilot was NOT flying this airplane after the first hour. The airplane meandered aimlessly in both heading and altitude for the remainder of the flight (after something – some event - happened at the end of the first hour).

The autothrottles system: “Autothrottles” automatically command the throttles to do what they need to do for the airplane to achieve what’s commanded by the Flight Management System (FMS). For the airplane to reach 45000 feet, both the autopilot and the autothrottles had to be disconnected at some point while the airplane was still in its in “climb-power” setting or it would have leveled off when the VNAV determined they had reached their programmed cruising altitude and the autothrottles would have reduced the power to a cruise power setting (which is significantly less power than a climb power setting). But the airplane just kept climbing for some reason. That means the autopilot had to have been OFF (or in some reversion mode) and the autothrottles had to have been OFF.

So, here’s how I think this went down....

After takeoff, they engaged the autopilot and autothrottles - which is normal. Once air traffic control cleared them to climb on course, they engaged VNAV-LNAV. At that point the airplane was being controlled by the computer (power setting, climb speed and ground track). All that is totally normal. “Climb on course” means to turn to your destination and climb at your desired rate – which pretty much means do what you want to do – GTFO of here.

However, while enroute to China, at some point during the climb and prior to reaching their cruise altitude (while the power was still up at a climb power setting), something happened (I have no idea what). The electrical system had a failure of some sort or other. The autopilot quit and the autothrottles quit and the airplane was pointed UP with a relatively high power setting. They were climbing and there was nothing other than the pilot that was going to level the airplane off.

note.... it’s right here that the captain should have given control of the airplane to the first officer and told him to LEVEL OFF and turn back to the departure airport in Malaysia. Then, while the FO was physically flying the airplane and getting clearance to descend back to the departure airport, the captain would address the electrical problem and try to fix what he could. No way would I fly an airplane all the way to China in the dead of night with a serious electrical problem like that. However, the captain did NOT do any of this. They just kept going (freaking stupid – major league pilot error there – MUCHO FAIL). I guarantee you that ultimately they’ll do the typical thing and “blame it on the dead guy,” but in this case it’s deserved. The decision to do nothing right then is what ultimately killed everyone.

The pressurization system: The pressurization system pumps up the interior of the airplane like a balloon. As air pressure is fed into the cabin from the engines, the “outflow valve” controls how fast air is allowed to leave the cabin. A computer automatically meters the outflow valve (open and closed) to maintain the cabin pressure within certain limits during all phases of flight. While in climb, the engines are putting out lots of air pressure, so the outflow valve is fairly open (when a lot of pressure comes in, a lot has to be allowed to flow out).

However, with an “essential bus” electrical failure (in the 727 and 737 anyway) the outflow valve freezes in it’s last position. So, if the electrical problem occurred in a climb with a climb power setting, the outflow valve would have failed in a more OPEN position. Normally, as the airplane climbs, the pressurization system automatically meters the outflow valve closed to maintain a cabin pressure differential (the “differential” being the difference between inside – cabin altitude - and the outside – airplane altitude) within certain limits. In this case, with the valve failed OPEN, the cabin-altitude (that’s the effective altitude inside the semi-pressurized airplane) would have continued to climb along with the airplane. It was either this or there was a breech in the fuselage and they lost pressurization completely. I doubt that there was a breech because that would have been noticeable (everyone’s ears would have immediately popped and a fog would have been created in the cabin and cockpit). I think their loss of pressurization was slow and not noticeable at all.

That same electrical problem (whatever it was) caused the transponder to fail (it was NOT intentionally turned off as suspected – the electrical power was interrupted). The engine power was up at CLIMB (engines are mostly unaffected by electrical problems), the autothrottles had failed, the autopilot was either OFF or in some wings level reversion mode, and the pilots were screwing around looking at the electrical problem instead of leveling off, turning back around to Malaysia, and putting their O2 masks on. As the airplane continued to climb, the effective altitude of the cabin continued to climb because the outflow valve was stuck in a more open position. As the airplane climbed and pressure outside the cabin was reduced, the outflow valve needed to CLOSE to maintain cabin pressure. As this continued, the cabin altitude continued to climb and they slowly lost the ability to think and passed out. They never leveled off and the power stayed up at the CLIMB power setting (where it had been since takeoff). The people in the back would have donned their masks which would have automatically dropped at a cabin altitude of 10,300’. There’s no telling what the airplane’s altitude was at that point (probably in the high 20,000s). Passenger oxygen is delivered by something called a gas grain generator and as I recall, those things start when you pull the lanyard down and on the 777 they work for 20 minutes or so. But the airplane was still climbing, so the passengers’ 02 units would have been exhausted and they would have probably been dead before the airplane reached 45000 feet. The airplane was still heavy after T/O so it was probably only climbing at 1000 feet per minute or so after reaching 30,000’ and slower after reaching 40,000’. It takes a while to get that high. The airplane was not being piloted at that point (by anyone or anything). It was ballistic. Passenger oxygen is designed to keep people alive while the airplane makes an emergency DESCENT. This airplane was still climbing

At 45000 feet, the airplane could no longer physically climb. The wings could no longer support the airplane and they stalled. The nose dropped and dished out to the left bottoming out at 23000 feet. Like a falling leaf (in a way), that’s what caused the 90 degree heading change. Then, in a big aerodynamic oscillation aided by the big increase in airspeed (caused by the nose dropping and the dish-out maneuver), the nose rose and continued up – the airplane climbed again to 29000 feet. The changes in heading after that were random and probably caused by minor turbulence here and there in the air.

It was at climb power the whole time, so it ran out of gas an hour early – which is probably close to where the last ACARS ping was seen. The ACARS is an automatic computer generated reporting system in the airplane that sends all kinds of real-time data back to a computerized database at Boeing, the company that owns the airplane and to the maker of the various aircraft components – like the engines). It’s all automated.

The destroyer sent to the Indian Ocean will hear the pings from the Flight Data Recorder. It’s in the water, everyone is dead.

The one thing I don’t understand is how the ACARS was powered when the transponder, the autopilot and the autothrottles weren’t. The ACARS may have its own independent power system. The wiring inside that jet has to be insanely complicated. Either way, it obviously happened.

Link

[Vayutuvan]

My CT is as follows (as an aside it would warm the cockles of dear hakim saab).

1. As soon as the ACARS was turned off, demands were made by the hijackers to allow them to proceed to FATA overflying India.

2. Malays might have tried for one hour to convince them to land somewhere in Mal/Indonesia/Vietnam/Nicobar. By then the plane was already across the Malay landmass. The Malay Mil radar picked it up and knew that they are hell bent on going towards the subcontinent.

3. They contacted India to allow and India would have said no way Jose we will shoot it down if it comes into Indian airspace. Foghters from the nearest AFB were scrambled to intercept 370. Meanwhile Chinese and Indians leaned on US to negotiate as in all likelihood their Munna is involved and they would know whom to talk to and call off the op. Or else the plan would be made public.

4. US had to hustle and GUBO some (non)-state! actors who in turn commanded their attack dogs to land as per US instructions. Four cornered negotiations are going on between Chinese, hijackers, controllers, and of course US (as the party who is mucking around in troubled waters and might even have been indirectly created all the monsters in FATA).

5. The only fly in the ointment is that Pakis would not have dared to antagonize their deeper than musharraf tarrel than KLPD friends. If these are Uighers being helped by AQ whose strings are being pulled by state non-state actors there is plausible deniability for Pakis.

6. The above assumes that Pakis overreached. That would entirely in keeping with their 1 TFTA == 10 SDRE bombast.

[Rajiv Lather]

Uighur rebel chief vows revenge on China

How did this story get swept under the carpet ?

[ramana]

nachiket, The scenario stated by that person can easily be verified by Boeing using flight simulation. Essentially it means the plane flight control software has some unintended paths.
I doubt that.