<![CDATA[AuntyPru Forum - P2 - Wheat from Chaff.]]> https://auntypru.com/forum/ Sun, 05 Apr 2026 22:26:24 +0000 MyBB <![CDATA[Simply Marvellous Horse-pooh - Beaker the media magnet.]]> https://auntypru.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=65 Tue, 28 Apr 2015 11:30:43 +0000 Peetwo]]> https://auntypru.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=65

Nowhere was this observation more prevalent than with Beaker's lunchtime interview with the SMH... Big Grin

Quote:[Image: 1416576716558.jpg]
Quote:SMH: The 57-year-old is helping solve what remains the greatest aviation mystery of all time: the disappearance of Malaysia Airlines flight MH370.

P9 : "This, all without any technical qualification (NFI in industry parlance). Doesn’t it therefore qualify (technically) as a ‘porky’? – in light of the Senate report of the Pel Air inquiry. I believe, some of the words used in Hansard transcript were: unreliable, disingenuous and untenable. Although industry further accords the “beyond all reason” approach as being directly attributable to “the team leader”. Yet our beloved Bea-cur can sit there; stuffing his now shaved face with spaghetti, intimating (in public) that ‘he’ (probably only he alone) will solve the MH 370 riddle: industry is overwhelmed and simply says “it’s beyond all reason”.
- See more at: http://auntypru.com/simply-marvellous-ho...r2zkR.dpuf
However, although Beaker quite obviously believes his own bull-shit and is drawn to the media limelight like a moth to a lamp, this thread will also attempt to record the exposure that other lesser lights within the bureau - may by happenstance - get from MSM & subjective media... Confused
For example in recent days there has been some limited coverage on the latest update to the ATSB PelAir (cover-up) re-investigation.
First there was Planetalking - ATSB releases new month old images of Pel-Air wreckage
Next there was the AA article - ATSB conducts fresh survey of ditched Pel-Air jet
Quote:Specialist divers from the NSW Police Force and Australian Federal Police have conducted a fresh survey of the Pel-Air corporate jet that was ditched off the coast of Norfolk Island in 2009 as part of the Australian Transport Safety Bureau’s (ATSB) new investigation into the crash.


The ATSB said on Friday the underwater survey was conducted over two days on March 28/29 and discovered the wreckage of the corporate jet VH-NGA was still at its last recorded position about 4.5km west of Norfolk Island and submerged about 48 metres of water.

In an update on its website, the ATSB said the tail section of the fuselage containing the flight recorders was partially buried by the movement of sand, while both wings, both engines and the rear section of the fuselage and tail were still attached.

“As part of the re-opened investigation the ATSB is taking all reasonable steps to recover the flight recorders from the accident aircraft and download and analyse the data from them,” the ATSB said.

“The information obtained from this latest underwater survey will be used to assist the ATSB in its planning and assessment of options for the next phase of the project to recover the recorders.”

The Westwind corporate jet was conducting an aeromedical flight from Apia, Samoa to Melbourne when crashed near Norfolk Island after running out of fuel.

The ATSB report into the 2009 incident cited errors by the flightcrew and found the pilot in command of the aircraft Dominic James did not plan the flight in accordance with regulatory and operator requirements.

However, the ATSB investigation was the subject of a scathing assessment by a Senate committee which found, among other things, that the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) withheld a number of documents critical of Pel-Air. A Four Corners investigation also highlighted serious flaws in the way the investigation was conducted.

In December, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development Warren Truss sought a fresh look at the 2009 crash after a Transportation Safety Board of Canada (TSB) review found the ATSB did not follow proper process and had poor oversight during its original investigation into incident.

“The main focus of the re-opened investigation to date has been the review of documentation requested from the Civil Aviation Safety Authority, the operator and other organisations, as well as interviewing a number of personnel from these organisations,” the ATSB said.

“These activities are ongoing.”
 
Finally there was this from Oz Flying:
Quote:[Image: ATSB_Pel-Air_Westwind_2015_54179D40-EC75...AEE035.jpg]

This 2015 photo shows the Westwind wreckage has not been disturbed on the ocean floor since the accident in 2009. (ATSB)


ATSB returns to Norfolk Island Crash Site
27 Apr 2015

Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) investigators have completed a new survey of the crash site of Pel-Air Westwind VH-NGA.

The aircraft was ditched off Norfolk Island in 2009 after running low on fuel. The original investigation report became the subject of a senate inquiry in 2013, after which Deputy Prime Minister Warren Truss urged the ATSB to re-open the investigation.

The latest survey, completed last month with the help of NSW Police and the Australian Federal Police, showed that the wreckage of the aircraft has lain relatively undisturbed since the last survey was done.

"Conditions for the latest survey were difficult, with large ocean swells, poor visibility and a strong underwater current, all likely as a result of the passage of Cyclone Pam to the north of Norfolk Island a couple of weeks previously," the ATSB stated. "Regardless of the less than ideal conditions, the survey exercise was successful and adequate for the ATSB to continue its planning for the next phase based on a good understanding of the state of the wreckage:
  • The wreckage remains at its last recorded position, submerged in water to a depth of 48 m, approximately 4.5 km to the west of Norfolk Island
  • Both wings, both engines, the rear section of fuselage and the tail remain attached and were accounted for during the survey
  • The two major fuselage segments are no longer connected by flight control cables (as they were in 2009) and the front section of the passenger compartment has shifted slightly as a result of underwater currents, but the two segments remain close together
  • The wreckage has been resting on a sandy-based ocean floor and as a consequence the tail section of the fuselage containing the flight recorders has been partially buried by the movement of sand. The left and right main landing gear have also been partially buried by sand
  • Both engines, as well as the left and right wings, remain clear of the sandy ocean floor."
The survey was done to help the ATSB decide what its option are with regard to recovering the flight data recorders. So far, the new investigation has been restricted to reviewing documents an conducting interviews with staff from CASA, Pel-Air and other organisations.
 
MTF...P2 Tongue
  ]]>

Nowhere was this observation more prevalent than with Beaker's lunchtime interview with the SMH... Big Grin

Quote:[Image: 1416576716558.jpg]
Quote:SMH: The 57-year-old is helping solve what remains the greatest aviation mystery of all time: the disappearance of Malaysia Airlines flight MH370.

P9 : "This, all without any technical qualification (NFI in industry parlance). Doesn’t it therefore qualify (technically) as a ‘porky’? – in light of the Senate report of the Pel Air inquiry. I believe, some of the words used in Hansard transcript were: unreliable, disingenuous and untenable. Although industry further accords the “beyond all reason” approach as being directly attributable to “the team leader”. Yet our beloved Bea-cur can sit there; stuffing his now shaved face with spaghetti, intimating (in public) that ‘he’ (probably only he alone) will solve the MH 370 riddle: industry is overwhelmed and simply says “it’s beyond all reason”.
- See more at: http://auntypru.com/simply-marvellous-ho...r2zkR.dpuf
However, although Beaker quite obviously believes his own bull-shit and is drawn to the media limelight like a moth to a lamp, this thread will also attempt to record the exposure that other lesser lights within the bureau - may by happenstance - get from MSM & subjective media... Confused
For example in recent days there has been some limited coverage on the latest update to the ATSB PelAir (cover-up) re-investigation.
First there was Planetalking - ATSB releases new month old images of Pel-Air wreckage
Next there was the AA article - ATSB conducts fresh survey of ditched Pel-Air jet
Quote:Specialist divers from the NSW Police Force and Australian Federal Police have conducted a fresh survey of the Pel-Air corporate jet that was ditched off the coast of Norfolk Island in 2009 as part of the Australian Transport Safety Bureau’s (ATSB) new investigation into the crash.


The ATSB said on Friday the underwater survey was conducted over two days on March 28/29 and discovered the wreckage of the corporate jet VH-NGA was still at its last recorded position about 4.5km west of Norfolk Island and submerged about 48 metres of water.

In an update on its website, the ATSB said the tail section of the fuselage containing the flight recorders was partially buried by the movement of sand, while both wings, both engines and the rear section of the fuselage and tail were still attached.

“As part of the re-opened investigation the ATSB is taking all reasonable steps to recover the flight recorders from the accident aircraft and download and analyse the data from them,” the ATSB said.

“The information obtained from this latest underwater survey will be used to assist the ATSB in its planning and assessment of options for the next phase of the project to recover the recorders.”

The Westwind corporate jet was conducting an aeromedical flight from Apia, Samoa to Melbourne when crashed near Norfolk Island after running out of fuel.

The ATSB report into the 2009 incident cited errors by the flightcrew and found the pilot in command of the aircraft Dominic James did not plan the flight in accordance with regulatory and operator requirements.

However, the ATSB investigation was the subject of a scathing assessment by a Senate committee which found, among other things, that the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) withheld a number of documents critical of Pel-Air. A Four Corners investigation also highlighted serious flaws in the way the investigation was conducted.

In December, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development Warren Truss sought a fresh look at the 2009 crash after a Transportation Safety Board of Canada (TSB) review found the ATSB did not follow proper process and had poor oversight during its original investigation into incident.

“The main focus of the re-opened investigation to date has been the review of documentation requested from the Civil Aviation Safety Authority, the operator and other organisations, as well as interviewing a number of personnel from these organisations,” the ATSB said.

“These activities are ongoing.”
 
Finally there was this from Oz Flying:
Quote:[Image: ATSB_Pel-Air_Westwind_2015_54179D40-EC75...AEE035.jpg]

This 2015 photo shows the Westwind wreckage has not been disturbed on the ocean floor since the accident in 2009. (ATSB)


ATSB returns to Norfolk Island Crash Site
27 Apr 2015

Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) investigators have completed a new survey of the crash site of Pel-Air Westwind VH-NGA.

The aircraft was ditched off Norfolk Island in 2009 after running low on fuel. The original investigation report became the subject of a senate inquiry in 2013, after which Deputy Prime Minister Warren Truss urged the ATSB to re-open the investigation.

The latest survey, completed last month with the help of NSW Police and the Australian Federal Police, showed that the wreckage of the aircraft has lain relatively undisturbed since the last survey was done.

"Conditions for the latest survey were difficult, with large ocean swells, poor visibility and a strong underwater current, all likely as a result of the passage of Cyclone Pam to the north of Norfolk Island a couple of weeks previously," the ATSB stated. "Regardless of the less than ideal conditions, the survey exercise was successful and adequate for the ATSB to continue its planning for the next phase based on a good understanding of the state of the wreckage:
  • The wreckage remains at its last recorded position, submerged in water to a depth of 48 m, approximately 4.5 km to the west of Norfolk Island
  • Both wings, both engines, the rear section of fuselage and the tail remain attached and were accounted for during the survey
  • The two major fuselage segments are no longer connected by flight control cables (as they were in 2009) and the front section of the passenger compartment has shifted slightly as a result of underwater currents, but the two segments remain close together
  • The wreckage has been resting on a sandy-based ocean floor and as a consequence the tail section of the fuselage containing the flight recorders has been partially buried by the movement of sand. The left and right main landing gear have also been partially buried by sand
  • Both engines, as well as the left and right wings, remain clear of the sandy ocean floor."
The survey was done to help the ATSB decide what its option are with regard to recovering the flight data recorders. So far, the new investigation has been restricted to reviewing documents an conducting interviews with staff from CASA, Pel-Air and other organisations.
 
MTF...P2 Tongue
  ]]> <![CDATA[Less Noise and More Signal]]> https://auntypru.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=58 Tue, 14 Apr 2015 23:28:40 +0000 Peetwo]]> https://auntypru.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=58 @LGHamiltonUSA - http://lghamiltonusa.tumblr.com/

The fact that someone has taken the time to collate all the MH370 data, media reports, expert analysis etc..etc. in chronological order is gold!

Example:

Quote:MH370 ~ Recent Studies & Comments

The Timing of the MH370 Final Major Turn ~ Messrs. Michael Exner, Richard Godfrey and Sid Bennett ~ March 25, 2015
Autopilot Flight Path BFO Error Analysis ~ Mr. Yap Fook Fah ~ March 25, 2015
Deducing the Mid-Flight Speed of MH370 ~ Mr. Brian Anderson ~ March 20, 2015
Further Studies on the Path of MH370: Turn Time and Final Azimuth ~ Messrs. Sid Bennett and Geoff Hyman ~ March 20, 2015
Estimation of Mean Fixed Frequency Biases: the significance of BFO Channels ~ Messrs. Geoff Hyman and Barry Martin ~ March 19, 2015
Calibration of the Mean BTO Constant ~ Messrs. Geoff Hyman and Barry Martin ~ March 19, 2015
The Locations of Inmarsat-3F1 During the Flight of MH370 ~ Mr. Duncan Steel ~ March 18, 2015
MH370 Flight Path Model Version 13.2 ~ Mr. Richard Godfrey ~ March 17, 2015
The Almaty Flight Path ~ Mr. Victor Iannello ~ March 15, 2015
Matthew C. Moriarty ~ @mattcmoriarty ~ March 1, 2015
GlobusMax ~ February 21, 2015
Captain Simon Hardy ~ Korean Airlines
MH370 Flight Path Model V13.1 Final ~ Mr. Richard Godfrey ~ December 11, 2014
MH370 Final Major Turn ~ Messrs. Michael Exner, Richard Godfrey, Sid Bennett ~ December 8, 2014
==================================
Dr. Bobby Ulich ~ 9/28/14 through 4/16/15:
White Paper ~ The Location of MH370
Addendum #1 ~ Error Sensitivity Analysis
Addendum #2 ~ Comparison Route Methods
Addendum #3 ~ New Analyses of Routes
Addendum #4 ~ Contrail Data/New Route Fit
==================================
Further Progress Report from the Independent Group, and Updated MH370 Search Area Recommendation ~ Mr. Duncan Steel ~ DuncanSteel.com ~ Mr. Michael Exner ~ @Airlandseaman ~September 26, 2014
The Search for MH370 ~ Chris Ashton, Alan Shuster Bruce, Gary Colledge and Mark Dickinson ~ September 14, 2014
Considerations in Search Area Optimization: Search Priorities and Strategy ~ Mr. Michael Exner ~ @Airlandseaman ~ September 10, 2014
New Report From The Independent Group MH370 Investigation Team ~ Mr. Michael Exner ~ @Airlandseaman ~ September 9, 2014
Further Statement From An Independent MH370 Investigation Team ~ Mr. Duncan Steel ~ DuncanSteel.com ~ Mr. Michael Exner ~ @Airlandseaman ~ August 27, 2014
Australian Transport Safety Board ~ @ATSBinfo ~ Updated August 18, 2014
Comment by Mr. Paul Sladen Regarding August 13, 2014 ATSB Update
Mr. Victor Ianello ~ @RadiantPhysics ~ August 03, 2014
Interim Statement From An Independent MH370 Investigation Team ~ Mr. Duncan Steel ~ DuncanSteel.com ~ Mr. Michael Exner ~ @Airlandseaman ~ July 19, 2014
Australian Transport Safety Board ~ @ATSBinfo ~ June 26, 2014
Statement From An Independent MH370 Investigation Team ~ Mr. Duncan Steel ~ DuncanSteel.com ~ Mr. Michael Exner ~ @Airlandseaman ~ June 17, 2014
Mr. Richard Cole ~ @Richard_E_Cole ~ June 16, 2014
Mr. Bill Holland ~ @HollandBill ~ June 13, 2014
Mr. Tim Farrar ~ @TMFAssociates ~ June 5, 2014
Mr. Don Thompson ~ @GuardedDon ~ May 29, 2014
MH370

Excellent stuff AG.."Amazing Grace.. how sweet the sound.."


 MTF...P2 Tongue]]> @LGHamiltonUSA - http://lghamiltonusa.tumblr.com/

The fact that someone has taken the time to collate all the MH370 data, media reports, expert analysis etc..etc. in chronological order is gold!

Example:

Quote:MH370 ~ Recent Studies & Comments

The Timing of the MH370 Final Major Turn ~ Messrs. Michael Exner, Richard Godfrey and Sid Bennett ~ March 25, 2015
Autopilot Flight Path BFO Error Analysis ~ Mr. Yap Fook Fah ~ March 25, 2015
Deducing the Mid-Flight Speed of MH370 ~ Mr. Brian Anderson ~ March 20, 2015
Further Studies on the Path of MH370: Turn Time and Final Azimuth ~ Messrs. Sid Bennett and Geoff Hyman ~ March 20, 2015
Estimation of Mean Fixed Frequency Biases: the significance of BFO Channels ~ Messrs. Geoff Hyman and Barry Martin ~ March 19, 2015
Calibration of the Mean BTO Constant ~ Messrs. Geoff Hyman and Barry Martin ~ March 19, 2015
The Locations of Inmarsat-3F1 During the Flight of MH370 ~ Mr. Duncan Steel ~ March 18, 2015
MH370 Flight Path Model Version 13.2 ~ Mr. Richard Godfrey ~ March 17, 2015
The Almaty Flight Path ~ Mr. Victor Iannello ~ March 15, 2015
Matthew C. Moriarty ~ @mattcmoriarty ~ March 1, 2015
GlobusMax ~ February 21, 2015
Captain Simon Hardy ~ Korean Airlines
MH370 Flight Path Model V13.1 Final ~ Mr. Richard Godfrey ~ December 11, 2014
MH370 Final Major Turn ~ Messrs. Michael Exner, Richard Godfrey, Sid Bennett ~ December 8, 2014
==================================
Dr. Bobby Ulich ~ 9/28/14 through 4/16/15:
White Paper ~ The Location of MH370
Addendum #1 ~ Error Sensitivity Analysis
Addendum #2 ~ Comparison Route Methods
Addendum #3 ~ New Analyses of Routes
Addendum #4 ~ Contrail Data/New Route Fit
==================================
Further Progress Report from the Independent Group, and Updated MH370 Search Area Recommendation ~ Mr. Duncan Steel ~ DuncanSteel.com ~ Mr. Michael Exner ~ @Airlandseaman ~September 26, 2014
The Search for MH370 ~ Chris Ashton, Alan Shuster Bruce, Gary Colledge and Mark Dickinson ~ September 14, 2014
Considerations in Search Area Optimization: Search Priorities and Strategy ~ Mr. Michael Exner ~ @Airlandseaman ~ September 10, 2014
New Report From The Independent Group MH370 Investigation Team ~ Mr. Michael Exner ~ @Airlandseaman ~ September 9, 2014
Further Statement From An Independent MH370 Investigation Team ~ Mr. Duncan Steel ~ DuncanSteel.com ~ Mr. Michael Exner ~ @Airlandseaman ~ August 27, 2014
Australian Transport Safety Board ~ @ATSBinfo ~ Updated August 18, 2014
Comment by Mr. Paul Sladen Regarding August 13, 2014 ATSB Update
Mr. Victor Ianello ~ @RadiantPhysics ~ August 03, 2014
Interim Statement From An Independent MH370 Investigation Team ~ Mr. Duncan Steel ~ DuncanSteel.com ~ Mr. Michael Exner ~ @Airlandseaman ~ July 19, 2014
Australian Transport Safety Board ~ @ATSBinfo ~ June 26, 2014
Statement From An Independent MH370 Investigation Team ~ Mr. Duncan Steel ~ DuncanSteel.com ~ Mr. Michael Exner ~ @Airlandseaman ~ June 17, 2014
Mr. Richard Cole ~ @Richard_E_Cole ~ June 16, 2014
Mr. Bill Holland ~ @HollandBill ~ June 13, 2014
Mr. Tim Farrar ~ @TMFAssociates ~ June 5, 2014
Mr. Don Thompson ~ @GuardedDon ~ May 29, 2014
MH370

Excellent stuff AG.."Amazing Grace.. how sweet the sound.."


 MTF...P2 Tongue]]> <![CDATA[MH370 - time to think of it as a criminal act]]> https://auntypru.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=28 Fri, 20 Feb 2015 12:13:37 +0000 slats11]]> https://auntypru.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=28
I expect we are pushing the Inmarsat data too hard in order to define a manageable search area. The reality is that the plane very likely does not lie in the current "priority search area" - simply because of the enormous number of other possible places it could be. That is, the probability it lies within a relatively small search area may be less than the probability it lies in one of an enormous number of individually less likely locations.

If the current search does not turn up MH370, we will need to either accept it is lost and move on (which would be deeply unsatisfactory), or else accept that the Inmarsat data alone is not sufficient and employ alternative methods to find it.

I believe MH370 was most likely a criminal act. The plane was deliberately diverted, and then flown under human control with the intent to make sure it was never found and would disappear forever. There is a fair bit of evidence that supports this theory.

Although the Inmarsat data may not be specific enough to find the plane, the information that the plane flew for many hours after "going dark" is incredibly important. There are only two explanations for this long flight. Either the plane was going somewhere specific. Or the plane was simply getting as far away as possible so as to disappear.

Going somewhere specific = the "northern route." Lots of evidence against this. The BFO analysis from Inmarsat obviously. The final partial ping suggesting fuel exhaustion doesn't sound like a planned landing. The fact India apparently saw nothing. Plus you can assume lots of satellite coverage of possible landing sites in the days after it disappeared. Collectively, this evidence goes strongly against a northern route.

That leaves the "southern route." Why go south? There is nowhere to fly to, so this was a flight to nowhere in the deep south Indian ocean. Why? The only logical reason would be to make sure the plane disappeared and would never be found. If you wanted to make a plane disappear, the deep south Indian Ocean is as good a place as any - wild weather, remote, and logistically difficult to search.

So perhaps we should consider MH370 a criminal act, assume the motive was to minimise the chance that the plane will ever be discovered, and follow that to its logical conclusion.

If you simply wanted to make it look like an accident, you would crash close to point of lost contact. There are several well known precedents for this. But Inmarsat tells us that didn't happen with MH370.

If you wanted to make a terrorist statement, you would have a high profile crash. But that didn't happen either.

So this was something different.

What would you want to do in order to maximise the probability of disappearing? Three things:
1. Go in an unexpected direction
2. Go as far as possible
3. Create as little debris as possible.

All the information we have is consistent with this. Go dark, reverse course, cross Malaysia, and leave a primary radar track WNW towards unfriendly lands. I believe we were meant to see all this. Then turn south and fly many hours. We were not meant to see that - and we wouldn't had it not been for Inmarsat (of which the perpetuator was likely unaware).

Lack of debris points towards a controlled ditching (with minimal fragmentation) rather than a high speed dive (with fragmentation and lots of debris). Sure a ditching will create some debris - control surfaces etc. But you would try to avoid the release of lots of brightly coloured buoyant items (seat cushions, life jackets, oxygen masks) from the cabin.

Adopting a Bayesian approach, the facts as we know them (i.e. the generally accepted turn south, the almost universally accepted many hours of flight, and the lack of debris) support this theory. That is, the intent was simply to take the plane as far as possible in an unexpected direction and avoid it ever being found.

Perhaps Thomas Bayes would now suggest we look at the various unknowns and input values (or scenarios) that would achieve the goal of the most remote location and a controlled ditching.

So we are looking at a point near the 7th arc, but as far SW as possible along that arc. And a location beyond (south of) the arc - assuming a controlled glide post fuel exhaustion. And a location not in darkness - need at least some light to increase prospects of a successful ditching.

At the time of the final ping, the solar terminator was in this general area - although a bit to the west of the current search area. It was running almost due N-S (near the March equinox) across the 7th arc. West of the terminator, the flight ended in darkness. East of the terminator, the flight ended in light. The perfect time to ditch would have been dawn - enough light to see the swell, but the lights of any stray ship would have been easy to see.

http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/su...n=20&sec=0

Coming back to the earlier phases of the flight. Many have speculated that the pacs were turned off to incapacitate the crew / passengers. Time of useful consciousness for non-acclimatised people at FL350 is perhaps 30-60 seconds. There was some talk about a possible climb to FL430, but I don’t recall if this was ever verified.

There has also been speculation about crossing the peninsula at relatively low level. Again I don’t know that this has ever been verified. This hint at a low level flight might be a convenient excuse to explain away the very limited primary radar data after the transponder ceased operating. I wonder however if the plane really did cross the peninsula at a low level. There are several reasons why the perpetrator would not have wanted to descend crossing the peninsula:
1. Although sudden depressurisation at FL350 will reliably incapacitate people, it won’t be immediately fatal. For a period of time, this incapacity will be reversible and people will regain consciousness upon descent to a lower level. The best way of ensuring no interference would be to keep the pacs off at high altitude for a significant period. Certainly while crossing the peninsula. The last thing the perpetrator would have wanted would have been for someone to make a call or text from the plane. I am not saying that such a call / text would have been possible – just that the plan may have been to ensure it was impossible. In addition to phones, there are other potential ways a passenger could cause interference. There would be no way for the perpetrator to know that an off duty pilot / engineer was not a passenger.
2. Less suspicious - hiding in plain sight at normal cruise levels
3. Less chance of an intercept by a military plane. Again, it is fairly unlikely this could have been achieved even if MH370 had been low level. But high level makes it even less likely.
4. A low level flight would burn extra fuel which would limit the final leg south.

So if we assume the plane didn’t descend to low level crossing the peninsula and if we assume the pacs were kept off for a significant period of time, this would have increased the maximum distance the plane could have flown by the time of fuel exhaustion. For the same endurance (i.e. the time of the final 7th handshake), fuel not burned crossing the peninsula at low level would have allowed a higher speed and a more southerly course to reach a point further SW on the arc.

In summary:
1. The plan was to go as far away as possible
2. It went south
3. It went as far SW into the Indian ocean as possible. Further SW along the 7th arc than the current search area. And a 100 miles or so glide south of the arc.
4. It was slightly to the east of the solar terminator at the time of the final handshake.
5. Controlled ditching around sunrise.

Why would someone want do this? There are lots of possible reasons.
1. It has already become one of the greatest aviation mysteries ever
2. It has successfuly embarrassed Malaysia on the world stage
3. China is the country that makes Malaysia most nervous, and the country that Malaysia would wish not to upset. Most pax on MH370 were Chinese citizens.
4. If we didn’t have the Inmarsat data (and the perpretator was likely not aware of this), then we would be left with the following. An almost certain knowledge that the plane was stolen. A vague prrimary radar track heading WNW into the Indian Ocean towards various unfriendly places. And a plane with the range to reach them. That scenario would have been deeply disturbing to many governments and intelligence agencies, and would have put further pressure on Malaysia.]]>
I expect we are pushing the Inmarsat data too hard in order to define a manageable search area. The reality is that the plane very likely does not lie in the current "priority search area" - simply because of the enormous number of other possible places it could be. That is, the probability it lies within a relatively small search area may be less than the probability it lies in one of an enormous number of individually less likely locations.

If the current search does not turn up MH370, we will need to either accept it is lost and move on (which would be deeply unsatisfactory), or else accept that the Inmarsat data alone is not sufficient and employ alternative methods to find it.

I believe MH370 was most likely a criminal act. The plane was deliberately diverted, and then flown under human control with the intent to make sure it was never found and would disappear forever. There is a fair bit of evidence that supports this theory.

Although the Inmarsat data may not be specific enough to find the plane, the information that the plane flew for many hours after "going dark" is incredibly important. There are only two explanations for this long flight. Either the plane was going somewhere specific. Or the plane was simply getting as far away as possible so as to disappear.

Going somewhere specific = the "northern route." Lots of evidence against this. The BFO analysis from Inmarsat obviously. The final partial ping suggesting fuel exhaustion doesn't sound like a planned landing. The fact India apparently saw nothing. Plus you can assume lots of satellite coverage of possible landing sites in the days after it disappeared. Collectively, this evidence goes strongly against a northern route.

That leaves the "southern route." Why go south? There is nowhere to fly to, so this was a flight to nowhere in the deep south Indian ocean. Why? The only logical reason would be to make sure the plane disappeared and would never be found. If you wanted to make a plane disappear, the deep south Indian Ocean is as good a place as any - wild weather, remote, and logistically difficult to search.

So perhaps we should consider MH370 a criminal act, assume the motive was to minimise the chance that the plane will ever be discovered, and follow that to its logical conclusion.

If you simply wanted to make it look like an accident, you would crash close to point of lost contact. There are several well known precedents for this. But Inmarsat tells us that didn't happen with MH370.

If you wanted to make a terrorist statement, you would have a high profile crash. But that didn't happen either.

So this was something different.

What would you want to do in order to maximise the probability of disappearing? Three things:
1. Go in an unexpected direction
2. Go as far as possible
3. Create as little debris as possible.

All the information we have is consistent with this. Go dark, reverse course, cross Malaysia, and leave a primary radar track WNW towards unfriendly lands. I believe we were meant to see all this. Then turn south and fly many hours. We were not meant to see that - and we wouldn't had it not been for Inmarsat (of which the perpetuator was likely unaware).

Lack of debris points towards a controlled ditching (with minimal fragmentation) rather than a high speed dive (with fragmentation and lots of debris). Sure a ditching will create some debris - control surfaces etc. But you would try to avoid the release of lots of brightly coloured buoyant items (seat cushions, life jackets, oxygen masks) from the cabin.

Adopting a Bayesian approach, the facts as we know them (i.e. the generally accepted turn south, the almost universally accepted many hours of flight, and the lack of debris) support this theory. That is, the intent was simply to take the plane as far as possible in an unexpected direction and avoid it ever being found.

Perhaps Thomas Bayes would now suggest we look at the various unknowns and input values (or scenarios) that would achieve the goal of the most remote location and a controlled ditching.

So we are looking at a point near the 7th arc, but as far SW as possible along that arc. And a location beyond (south of) the arc - assuming a controlled glide post fuel exhaustion. And a location not in darkness - need at least some light to increase prospects of a successful ditching.

At the time of the final ping, the solar terminator was in this general area - although a bit to the west of the current search area. It was running almost due N-S (near the March equinox) across the 7th arc. West of the terminator, the flight ended in darkness. East of the terminator, the flight ended in light. The perfect time to ditch would have been dawn - enough light to see the swell, but the lights of any stray ship would have been easy to see.

http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/su...n=20&sec=0

Coming back to the earlier phases of the flight. Many have speculated that the pacs were turned off to incapacitate the crew / passengers. Time of useful consciousness for non-acclimatised people at FL350 is perhaps 30-60 seconds. There was some talk about a possible climb to FL430, but I don’t recall if this was ever verified.

There has also been speculation about crossing the peninsula at relatively low level. Again I don’t know that this has ever been verified. This hint at a low level flight might be a convenient excuse to explain away the very limited primary radar data after the transponder ceased operating. I wonder however if the plane really did cross the peninsula at a low level. There are several reasons why the perpetrator would not have wanted to descend crossing the peninsula:
1. Although sudden depressurisation at FL350 will reliably incapacitate people, it won’t be immediately fatal. For a period of time, this incapacity will be reversible and people will regain consciousness upon descent to a lower level. The best way of ensuring no interference would be to keep the pacs off at high altitude for a significant period. Certainly while crossing the peninsula. The last thing the perpetrator would have wanted would have been for someone to make a call or text from the plane. I am not saying that such a call / text would have been possible – just that the plan may have been to ensure it was impossible. In addition to phones, there are other potential ways a passenger could cause interference. There would be no way for the perpetrator to know that an off duty pilot / engineer was not a passenger.
2. Less suspicious - hiding in plain sight at normal cruise levels
3. Less chance of an intercept by a military plane. Again, it is fairly unlikely this could have been achieved even if MH370 had been low level. But high level makes it even less likely.
4. A low level flight would burn extra fuel which would limit the final leg south.

So if we assume the plane didn’t descend to low level crossing the peninsula and if we assume the pacs were kept off for a significant period of time, this would have increased the maximum distance the plane could have flown by the time of fuel exhaustion. For the same endurance (i.e. the time of the final 7th handshake), fuel not burned crossing the peninsula at low level would have allowed a higher speed and a more southerly course to reach a point further SW on the arc.

In summary:
1. The plan was to go as far away as possible
2. It went south
3. It went as far SW into the Indian ocean as possible. Further SW along the 7th arc than the current search area. And a 100 miles or so glide south of the arc.
4. It was slightly to the east of the solar terminator at the time of the final handshake.
5. Controlled ditching around sunrise.

Why would someone want do this? There are lots of possible reasons.
1. It has already become one of the greatest aviation mysteries ever
2. It has successfuly embarrassed Malaysia on the world stage
3. China is the country that makes Malaysia most nervous, and the country that Malaysia would wish not to upset. Most pax on MH370 were Chinese citizens.
4. If we didn’t have the Inmarsat data (and the perpretator was likely not aware of this), then we would be left with the following. An almost certain knowledge that the plane was stolen. A vague prrimary radar track heading WNW into the Indian Ocean towards various unfriendly places. And a plane with the range to reach them. That scenario would have been deeply disturbing to many governments and intelligence agencies, and would have put further pressure on Malaysia.]]> <![CDATA[Australia, ATSB and MH 370]]> https://auntypru.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=24 Thu, 19 Feb 2015 21:15:19 +0000 Kharon]]> https://auntypru.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=24 Why, FCOL, someone tell me why?



Closely following D.C. electrics and hydraulics in my lexicon of boring or not understood things, (due massive interest failure) comes politics and the actions of politicians and their minders.  Whether they are opening their mouths to change feet or setting fire to their feet to keep their hands warm, it simply remains one of the many things I fail to understand.  Not 'thick' you understand, just the hard wiring is different.


For example; MH 370 ranks up there with the Titanic as a disaster and a mystery.  Perhaps even a bigger mystery; which was always (as demonstrated) going to draw a large crowd.  That crowd keeping a watchful eye on the many layers of vested interest, Government, manufacturer, safety agencies, military, secret services etc. etc.  Australia's SAR obligations soon became apparent and, to their credit, the government responded quickly and properly.  Rapidly despatching our very competent search crews and aircraft into the wide, wild Indian Ocean; heeding neither the cost or risk, in an attempt to locate survivors and the airframe.  The laudable SAR exercise was conducted by the first class Australian Maritime Safety Authority (AMSA) and someone had the good sense to deal Angus Houston into the game.  It was all peerlessly managed, honest, open and correct.  First class and bloody well done; by all; from the cleaning crew to Houston.  Bravo.


Long before the 'theorists' got going for real, there were difficult questions, of a technical nature to answer.  Conspiracy and piracy aside, there was enough 'smell' coming off the known facts to warn even the most naive, politically insensitive of creatures that this incident had the potential to turn very ugly, very fast.


So, why would anyone put the undermanned, under-skilled, under funded, discredited Australian Air Transport Safety Board (ATSB) management 'front of house' to replace the peerless AMSA and the impeccable Houston?.... Sure, it's an 'aviation' matter but without an aircraft to investigate and considering the world wide talent pool analysing the available 'aeronautical' data, the ATSB was pretty much one of the banjo players in the orchestra pit.  Their practical value would be 'dubious', the clever folk, with the expensive toys would, eventually pass along their information; but not until 'they' were certain of their facts and results; at best ATSB would be an also ran in the information and analysis stakes.


Then, to crown this, a short sighted, blatant PR attempt to 'resurrect' the tarnished Bea-Cur reputation by his golfing mates.  He is shoved centre stage of the MH 370 production.  This mind you following closely on the heels of a 'lacklustre' performance in a Senate inquiry which clearly identified several areas of incompetence, went very close to calling the duck-up of the cover up a collusive conspiracy, shamed Dolan and by extension discredited the entire ATSB, as an entity.  No one blamed the coal face troops, but mud does have it's own methodology.


Which ever way it plays out, MH 370 has the makings of a first class political disaster.  What I fail to understand is why throw more fat into the fire by putting the Mrdak/Dolan duo into a very fierce spotlight?, when they're joined at the hip.    One whiff of involvement in anything remotely resembling the Pel-Air debacle and the government will catch the blame; probably not all of it, but enough to 'shorten' their credibility.  If any form of cover up is ever proven and with these two, already 'suspect' under a Senate exposed 'cover up' cloud, standing front and centre it will be very hard to deny Australian complicity; given the proven track record in domestic matters.  Even if there never was a cover up of any sort; the international press are no where near as tame, frightened or benign as the local variety.


Nope, just don't get it – from a chance to shine by continuing with the great job done by AMSA and Houston to being tarred by a very dirty brush; in one ill considered, badly advised move.  No matter, Julia will sort it all out, being a Bishop on a chess board, rather than an Abbott running a monkery.  

Selah.. ]]> Why, FCOL, someone tell me why?



Closely following D.C. electrics and hydraulics in my lexicon of boring or not understood things, (due massive interest failure) comes politics and the actions of politicians and their minders.  Whether they are opening their mouths to change feet or setting fire to their feet to keep their hands warm, it simply remains one of the many things I fail to understand.  Not 'thick' you understand, just the hard wiring is different.


For example; MH 370 ranks up there with the Titanic as a disaster and a mystery.  Perhaps even a bigger mystery; which was always (as demonstrated) going to draw a large crowd.  That crowd keeping a watchful eye on the many layers of vested interest, Government, manufacturer, safety agencies, military, secret services etc. etc.  Australia's SAR obligations soon became apparent and, to their credit, the government responded quickly and properly.  Rapidly despatching our very competent search crews and aircraft into the wide, wild Indian Ocean; heeding neither the cost or risk, in an attempt to locate survivors and the airframe.  The laudable SAR exercise was conducted by the first class Australian Maritime Safety Authority (AMSA) and someone had the good sense to deal Angus Houston into the game.  It was all peerlessly managed, honest, open and correct.  First class and bloody well done; by all; from the cleaning crew to Houston.  Bravo.


Long before the 'theorists' got going for real, there were difficult questions, of a technical nature to answer.  Conspiracy and piracy aside, there was enough 'smell' coming off the known facts to warn even the most naive, politically insensitive of creatures that this incident had the potential to turn very ugly, very fast.


So, why would anyone put the undermanned, under-skilled, under funded, discredited Australian Air Transport Safety Board (ATSB) management 'front of house' to replace the peerless AMSA and the impeccable Houston?.... Sure, it's an 'aviation' matter but without an aircraft to investigate and considering the world wide talent pool analysing the available 'aeronautical' data, the ATSB was pretty much one of the banjo players in the orchestra pit.  Their practical value would be 'dubious', the clever folk, with the expensive toys would, eventually pass along their information; but not until 'they' were certain of their facts and results; at best ATSB would be an also ran in the information and analysis stakes.


Then, to crown this, a short sighted, blatant PR attempt to 'resurrect' the tarnished Bea-Cur reputation by his golfing mates.  He is shoved centre stage of the MH 370 production.  This mind you following closely on the heels of a 'lacklustre' performance in a Senate inquiry which clearly identified several areas of incompetence, went very close to calling the duck-up of the cover up a collusive conspiracy, shamed Dolan and by extension discredited the entire ATSB, as an entity.  No one blamed the coal face troops, but mud does have it's own methodology.


Which ever way it plays out, MH 370 has the makings of a first class political disaster.  What I fail to understand is why throw more fat into the fire by putting the Mrdak/Dolan duo into a very fierce spotlight?, when they're joined at the hip.    One whiff of involvement in anything remotely resembling the Pel-Air debacle and the government will catch the blame; probably not all of it, but enough to 'shorten' their credibility.  If any form of cover up is ever proven and with these two, already 'suspect' under a Senate exposed 'cover up' cloud, standing front and centre it will be very hard to deny Australian complicity; given the proven track record in domestic matters.  Even if there never was a cover up of any sort; the international press are no where near as tame, frightened or benign as the local variety.


Nope, just don't get it – from a chance to shine by continuing with the great job done by AMSA and Houston to being tarred by a very dirty brush; in one ill considered, badly advised move.  No matter, Julia will sort it all out, being a Bishop on a chess board, rather than an Abbott running a monkery.  

Selah.. ]]>