Missing Malaysia Airlines jet carrying 239 triggers Southeast Asia search

[F430murci]

Khosai:

What you said reminded of a wake turbulence experience taking off in Amsterdam. We were in an A330 right behind an MD11. We hit his wake shortly after rotation and the plane dropped and wing dipped dramatically. I don't scare easily as father was strapping me in the two seat Pitts around 5 or 6 going inverted under power lines on the lake we lived on and the abuse use got worse the older I got. Loved it actually. Anyway, that A330 incident was the only time I recall being startled in a plane and I love flying through storms and turbulence.

Dad went through 2nd Eastern 727 school in about 65/66 ish, moved to 1011, then over to FedEx DC10 and MD11. He says he could do it, but he thinks he can do anything and he flew Pitts, Christian, Cap 21 and etc. from 70s. My brother is ex F15 and typed on the larger corporates Global, 650 etc. and he says Dad's FOS and it cannot be done.

I am thinking dark, one plane with no clue capable of doing anything and how it felt in that A330 that hit wake turbulence and thinking no way.

[Tywais]

@khosai - you have some good points and you are correct about TCAS as it requires the appropriate transponder to be active. Regarding the 500 feet directly below, yes there wouldn't be any wake turbulence but the trick is getting in behind and moving up to position and still avoid it. 500 feet is not sufficiently close anyway for the more precise radars today AFAIK to avoid separate signatures. This is assuming they are going over terrestrial based radar active areas and not out in the middle of the China Sea where primary can't get to them and still beyond over the horizon (ionosphere bounce) radar.

[GentlemanJim]

Goodnight MH370.

It all looks pretty straightforward to me. Last words from Co-Pilot. Pilot was either in collaboration or taken out of action by Co-pilot.

Motive. ? Guesswork. Silent revenge for perceived injustice.

Location of Aircraft. ?

But they would be the normal last words. The guys were about to leave frequency and go on route. It was night time, they would say 'Goodnight', it is normal and polite. What is wrong with saying Goodnight?

Very conventional communication protocol by professional pilots so no 'hidden' meaning in it at all. Sometimes I may even say 'have a g'day' and my aircraft call sign.

Tywais:

What is your thought about radar blending capability of say two 777s at normal cruising speeds over long distance where one is unaware and assuming current military radar capability? How close, orientation, any wake or turbulence issue, easy to maintain and etc.? I am curious about topic.

I will try again. At the distances the aircraft was from known radars, if the military radars were switched on and of a reasonable standard the resolution would have been around about a 600ft bubble. If flying within that 600ft bubble the image returned would appear as one even if there were two aircraft. TCAS will not warn you of an aircraft sat underneath you with transponder off. Yes you get wake turbulence but that is only an issue for those who do not know what they are doing and fly directly line astern, and doing so and continuing to do so would make it impossible to hold position. As khosai correctly says, if it catches you unaware on take off or landing then it could be 'good night vienna'.

If you come up from behind and below you can settle in to close formation without spilling a gin and tonic. It would not need both aircraft to be co-operating. IF MH370 were using another aircraft as cover, the other aircraft would be a commercial aircraft on a known flight plan. It would be easy to sit underneath and follow and preempt the flight plan and also to listen in to the aircrafts transmissions/instructions. It would be hard work but is definitely doable. There would not be much talking and chit chat on the flight deck if there were two of you as it would require a lot of concentration, but personally, given a pair of night vision goggles I would be happy to give it a go, and given that if this is what happened they would have been practicing this somewhere over and over again. The tricky bit is in where do you peel off and subsequently avoid detection.

Of course if you consider theories like this then you have to consider all the way. People with this much resolve and expertise would perhaps have other technologies at there disposal. We have already heard about the Boeing remote control/anti hijack system (which could have been used to hijack!), and what other gadgets could have been in the cargo hold that when switched on would offer a significant stealth capability to an aircraft in terms of visibility to radar.

If all this has been put into play it must be for an extraordinary reason as it really would be easier to go and buy an aircraft if that is what you wanted, and surely if you wanted a person or perhaps a number of persons dead, much easier to have a person kidnapped or a car full of people (Chinese patent holders for example) involved in a pile up in KL. What has occurred has the entire world looking at it and millions of clever people constantly brainstorming, and someone will get it. Four guys killed in a head on accident with a truck in KL would have garnered the interest of nobody but the relatives.

I think when we finally know the reason, fans of Tom Clancy will be disappointed.

[wooloomooloo]

I wonder if there'll be further amendments to the last words of the pilot. Possibly "Goodnight, Jamie. Goodnight, Wordsworth."?

[F430murci]

But they would be the normal last words. The guys were about to leave frequency and go on route. It was night time, they would say 'Goodnight', it is normal and polite. What is wrong with saying Goodnight?

Very conventional communication protocol by professional pilots so no 'hidden' meaning in it at all. Sometimes I may even say 'have a g'day' and my aircraft call sign.

Tywais:

What is your thought about radar blending capability of say two 777s at normal cruising speeds over long distance where one is unaware and assuming current military radar capability? How close, orientation, any wake or turbulence issue, easy to maintain and etc.? I am curious about topic.

I will try again. At the distances the aircraft was from known radars, if the military radars were switched on and of a reasonable standard the resolution would have been around about a 600ft bubble. If flying within that 600ft bubble the image returned would appear as one even if there were two aircraft. TCAS will not warn you of an aircraft sat underneath you with transponder off. Yes you get wake turbulence but that is only an issue for those who do not know what they are doing and fly directly line astern, and doing so and continuing to do so would make it impossible to hold position. As khosai correctly says, if it catches you unaware on take off or landing then it could be 'good night vienna'.

If you come up from behind and below you can settle in to close formation without spilling a gin and tonic. It would not need both aircraft to be co-operating. IF MH370 were using another aircraft as cover, the other aircraft would be a commercial aircraft on a known flight plan. It would be easy to sit underneath and follow and preempt the flight plan and also to listen in to the aircrafts transmissions/instructions. It would be hard work but is definitely doable. There would not be much talking and chit chat on the flight deck if there were two of you as it would require a lot of concentration, but personally, given a pair of night vision goggles I would be happy to give it a go, and given that if this is what happened they would have been practicing this somewhere over and over again. The tricky bit is in where do you peel off and subsequently avoid detection.

Of course if you consider theories like this then you have to consider all the way. People with this much resolve and expertise would perhaps have other technologies at there disposal. We have already heard about the Boeing remote control/anti hijack system (which could have been used to hijack!), and what other gadgets could have been in the cargo hold that when switched on would offer a significant stealth capability to an aircraft in terms of visibility to radar.

If all this has been put into play it must be for an extraordinary reason as it really would be easier to go and buy an aircraft if that is what you wanted, and surely if you wanted a person or perhaps a number of persons dead, much easier to have a person kidnapped or a car full of people (Chinese patent holders for example) involved in a pile up in KL. What has occurred has the entire world looking at it and millions of clever people constantly brainstorming, and someone will get it. Four guys killed in a head on accident with a truck in KL would have garnered the interest of nobody but the relatives.

I think when we finally know the reason, fans of Tom Clancy will be disappointed.

I read what you said first time so no need for the try again. I was just asking opinions from different pilots because different pilots in my own family have different opinions in this subject, although none agree that 370 made it to NW Pakistan undetected.

Just curious, what type ratings or planes have you been checked out on. I sincerely believe this is one of those issue that while in theory seems plausible, is impossible in application.

Edited April 3, 2014 by F430murci

[retell]

Its about time to turn those big telescopes around , and point them to earth

Send with Commodore 64

[draftvader]

I am not a Wikipedia evangelist as I realise that, when there is conjecture, it has as much chance of being wrong as any human being. However on historical fact there is little room for error. On a personal level I know that the Vietnam War ended on my 1st birthday - April 30th 1975. Wikipedia confirms this. I also know that the F16 was the fantasy aircraft of my youth (along with the Harrier).

Wikipedia confirms these facts.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War

The Vietnam War (Vietnamese: Chiến tranh Việt Nam, in Vietnam also known as the American War, Vietnamese: Chiến tranh Mỹ), also known as the Second Indochina War,^[32] was a Cold War-era proxy war that occurred in Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia from December 1956^{[A 1]} to the fall of Saigon on 30 April 1975.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Dynamics_F-16_Fighting_Falcon

The FSD F-16s were manufactured at General Dynamics' Fort Worth, Texas plant in late 1975; the first F-16A rolled out on 20 October 1976 and first flew on 8 December. The initial two-seat model achieved its first flight on 8 August 1977. The initial production-standard F-16A flew for the first time on 7 August 1978 and its delivery was accepted by the USAF on 6 January 1979. The F-16 was given its formal nickname of "Fighting Falcon" on 21 July 1980, entering USAF operational service with the 34th Tactical Fighter Squadron, 388th Tactical Fighter Wing at Hill AFB on 1 October 1980.

For me there appears little doubt.

Back to MH370 which we can all be sure did not have ANYTHING to do with the F16 or the Vietnamese War. At least we have that scant fact.

[sunshine51]

New info out as of 0956 this morning in KL...or 1020 when I read it....your choice.

Anwar Ibrahim has just slammed the Mal Government concerning the secrecy

& doublespeak of the MH370 investigation. Could this be CNN's upcoming new

development? Who knows. However...one fact is open for all to see & hear...

the credibility of the Mal Government has been blown out of the water, not

by Mr. Ibrahims statements but by common knowledge of previous "news"

items said government has retracted or mis-stated. Mr. Ibrahim is just

reinforcing what is already known....plus a bit on the radar capabilities

he approved when he was Finance Minister back in 1994....

Links to Mr. Ibrahims words...

http://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-updates/anwar-ibrahim-slams-malaysia-over-search-for-missing-malaysia-airlines-flight-mh370/story-fnizu68q-1226874431486

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/malaysia/10743378/MH370-Malaysia-Airlines-Anwar-Ibrahim-says-government-purposefully-concealing-information.html

[Chicog]

If you're interested, media briefing just starting.

Sent from my Lenovo S960 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[boomerangutang]

Is there a more plausible theory than the Co-pilot turned left and dumped it?

Investigators say they're not sure whether it was co-pilot or pilot who said those final words. Initially they thought co-pilot, now they're leaning to pilot. Either way, it's looking like suicide-mass murder. If stewardesses or passengers were alive for the latter part of the flight, it must have been harrowing, to say the least.

[boomerangutang]

Mr Anwar said it was “baffling” that the country’s air force had “remained silent”, and claimed that it “should take three minutes under SOP (standard operating procedure) for the air force planes to go. And there was no response.” It was “clearly baffling”, he said, to suggest that radar operators had been unable to observe the plane’s progress. source

Boomerangutang's response: That's what I had mentioned in prior posts on this thread. 'why hadn't Malaysia's defensive radar seen anything?' Up until Mr. Anwar's mention, minutes ago, there was no public mention or discussion of Malaysia's radar - whether it was functional? whether it existed? whether there were cover-ups? whether operators were asleep at their terminals? nada. The ball's in your court now, Mr. Malaysian PM.

Meanwhile, the pilots on this thread will keep going on, ad nauseum, about unrelated issues dealing with vortexes from wingtips.

[Thai at Heart]

The odds of finding this plane are virtually zero.

If it was up in the Himalayas but it was 100 years ago and we had no satellites it could take years but at least we could see it with the naked eye.

At depths like there are in the Indian ocean, we have no chance.

[hawker9000]

If nothing on the ocean is ever found, and no black boxes, and nothing conclusive arises from any other source, I'm not so sure that the suicide-mass-murder theory is necessarily any more persuasive than the flew-north-and-landed-somewhere theory. I think it would be hard to hide an aircraft like this, but if the effort was state-sponsored and there was enough of the right kind of collaboration, then I think all bets are off. I don't accept that the aircraft couldn't possibly be sneaked in somewhere provided the right people were cooperating. With the avionics off, it's just a big airplane. 'Lots of big airplanes flying around. And if I were going to steal one, KL & MAL & Malaysian ATC, during the graveyard shift, might quite possibly be the low-hanging fruit I'd go for.

But it's a huge body of ocean to have to search. So not finding anything doesn't prove anything either. Therefore, unless they DO find something, OR the plane (or some of the passengers or crew) turns up intact somewhere, I don't see how there can be any final determination that's going to receive very wide acceptance.

[coma]

Mr Anwar said it was “baffling” that the country’s air force had “remained silent”, and claimed that it “should take three minutes under SOP (standard operating procedure) for the air force planes to go. And there was no response.” It was “clearly baffling”, he said, to suggest that radar operators had been unable to observe the plane’s progress. source

Boomerangutang's response: That's what I had mentioned in prior posts on this thread. 'why hadn't Malaysia's defensive radar seen anything?' Up until Mr. Anwar's mention, minutes ago, there was no public mention or discussion of Malaysia's radar - whether it was functional? whether it existed? whether there were cover-ups? whether operators were asleep at their terminals? nada. The ball's in your court now, Mr. Malaysian PM.

Meanwhile, the pilots on this thread will keep going on, ad nauseum, about unrelated issues dealing with vortexes from wingtips.

Have you seen how people in this part of the world operate during a boring graveyard shift ? Malaysian military ?? Zzzzzz !

[NeverSure]

Very conventional communication protocol by professional pilots so no 'hidden' meaning in it at all. Sometimes I may even say 'have a g'day' and my aircraft call sign.

Tywais:

What is your thought about radar blending capability of say two 777s at normal cruising speeds over long distance where one is unaware and assuming current military radar capability? How close, orientation, any wake or turbulence issue, easy to maintain and etc.? I am curious about topic.

I would have to say very difficult unless they use in flight radar and air-air communication which would probably give away their location. If visibility is good, and both aircraft are in communication with each other, that is collaborating, formation flying may be possible. But the other aircraft not aware would be highly unlikely due to collision avoidance radar systems on board (pretty sure 777s have it).

Wing tip vortices, that is wake turbulence can be very severe with a heavily loaded, large aircraft and would have to really be thought out. These vortices do not necessarily just flow straight out the back but depending on winds at altitude can 'drift' sideways or downwards so you can't rely upon avoiding them.

When I was in flight training we were trained how to deal with 'heavies' when flying behind them or landing after one. Landing protocol is to land after the touch down point and keep high of the heavy's path as it is the lift that creates the vortices. The moment lift is gone, they are gone. Also part of the training is to understand the drift aspects of them. If you are at an airfield with parallel runways and landing at or near the same time as a heavy on a parallel runway and there is a crosswind, that mini tornado can drift over onto your runway. I've seen small aircraft nearly flip over entering one.

Basically, I can't see it unless military training and both aircraft are part of the configuration, that is collaborating.

Ah, ya beat me to it. Wingtip vortices with two planes with the same wingspan and one right under the other. Also, the slower the planes fly, the stronger the "mini tornadoes" spilling off the wingtips are. I don't think the pilot in the rear could control his plane. And, if he tried to shadow from above, his vision would be blocked by the nose if his plane.

A fighter and other smaller aircraft can slip in between those vortices.

[sunshine51]

Well...if y'all think things are moving right along akin to a herd of turtles stampeding

through molasses....it's gonna get worse from the 8th onwards. All the Mals have to

now is keep stalling..like they have been since day one....read it below....

http://www.bernama.com.my/bernama/v7/ge/newsgeneral.php?id=1027607

FYI... "Bernama" is the official mouthpiece of the Malaysian Government.

[Chicog]

Malaysia isn't leading the search, Australia is.

Sent from my Lenovo S960 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[sunshine51]

^^^Chicog...Oh so true. But let's not tell the Mal's OK!

[Chicog]

You missed the briefing. Malaysia asked Australia to lead the search and handle the briefings.

Sent from my Lenovo S960 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[P45Mustang]

MH370 - Facts at a glance

• 8 March: Malaysia Airlines Kuala Lumpur-Beijing flight carrying 239 people disappears

Plane's transponder, which communicates with ground radar, was switched off as it left Malaysian airspace

Satellite 'pings' indicate plane was still flying seven hours after satellite contact was lost

24 March: Based on new calculations, Malaysian PM says "beyond reasonable doubt" that plane crashed in southern Indian Ocean with no survivors

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-26849818

[RubbaJohnny]

Anwar asserts cover up

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/malaysia/10743378/MH370-Malaysia-Airlines-Anwar-Ibrahim-says-government-purposefully-concealing-information.html

[webfact]

MH370 cover-up alleged as 'black box' locator nears

KUALA LUMPUR - Malaysian opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim accused the government of hiding information on Flight MH370.

Anwar said he was "baffled" over the Malaysian military’s failure to respond despite detecting the Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777 crossing back over the country’s airspace following its mysterious detour.

"Unfortunately the manner in which this was handled after the first few days was clearly suspect," Anwar said in an interview with Britain’s Daily Telegraph.

"One fact remains. Clearly information critical to our understanding is deemed missing. I believe the government knows more than us."

AFP


-- The Nation 2014-04-04

[NanLaew]

Very conventional communication protocol by professional pilots so no 'hidden' meaning in it at all. Sometimes I may even say 'have a g'day' and my aircraft call sign.

Tywais:

What is your thought about radar blending capability of say two 777s at normal cruising speeds over long distance where one is unaware and assuming current military radar capability? How close, orientation, any wake or turbulence issue, easy to maintain and etc.? I am curious about topic.

I would have to say very difficult unless they use in flight radar and air-air communication which would probably give away their location. If visibility is good, and both aircraft are in communication with each other, that is collaborating, formation flying may be possible. But the other aircraft not aware would be highly unlikely due to collision avoidance radar systems on board (pretty sure 777s have it).

Wing tip vortices, that is wake turbulence can be very severe with a heavily loaded, large aircraft and would have to really be thought out. These vortices do not necessarily just flow straight out the back but depending on winds at altitude can 'drift' sideways or downwards so you can't rely upon avoiding them.

When I was in flight training we were trained how to deal with 'heavies' when flying behind them or landing after one. Landing protocol is to land after the touch down point and keep high of the heavy's path as it is the lift that creates the vortices. The moment lift is gone, they are gone. Also part of the training is to understand the drift aspects of them. If you are at an airfield with parallel runways and landing at or near the same time as a heavy on a parallel runway and there is a crosswind, that mini tornado can drift over onto your runway. I've seen small aircraft nearly flip over entering one.

Basically, I can't see it unless military training and both aircraft are part of the configuration, that is collaborating.

Ah, ya beat me to it. Wingtip vortices with two planes with the same wingspan and one right under the other. Also, the slower the planes fly, the stronger the "mini tornadoes" spilling off the wingtips are. I don't think the pilot in the rear could control his plane. And, if he tried to shadow from above, his vision would be blocked by the nose if his plane.

A fighter and other smaller aircraft can slip in between those vortices.

Hold on Tonto. Let me just test that 'right up the other birds arse' scenario on the flight simulator app on my cleverclogs phone (android).

[JesseFrank]

Anwar asserts cover up

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/malaysia/10743378/MH370-Malaysia-Airlines-Anwar-Ibrahim-says-government-purposefully-concealing-information.html

Anwar, the Malaysian version of Chuwit .

[GentlemanJim]

Tywais:

What is your thought about radar blending capability of say two 777s at normal cruising speeds over long distance where one is unaware and assuming current military radar capability? How close, orientation, any wake or turbulence issue, easy to maintain and etc.? I am curious about topic.

I would have to say very difficult unless they use in flight radar and air-air communication which would probably give away their location. If visibility is good, and both aircraft are in communication with each other, that is collaborating, formation flying may be possible. But the other aircraft not aware would be highly unlikely due to collision avoidance radar systems on board (pretty sure 777s have it).

Wing tip vortices, that is wake turbulence can be very severe with a heavily loaded, large aircraft and would have to really be thought out. These vortices do not necessarily just flow straight out the back but depending on winds at altitude can 'drift' sideways or downwards so you can't rely upon avoiding them.

When I was in flight training we were trained how to deal with 'heavies' when flying behind them or landing after one. Landing protocol is to land after the touch down point and keep high of the heavy's path as it is the lift that creates the vortices. The moment lift is gone, they are gone. Also part of the training is to understand the drift aspects of them. If you are at an airfield with parallel runways and landing at or near the same time as a heavy on a parallel runway and there is a crosswind, that mini tornado can drift over onto your runway. I've seen small aircraft nearly flip over entering one.

Basically, I can't see it unless military training and both aircraft are part of the configuration, that is collaborating.

Ah, ya beat me to it. Wingtip vortices with two planes with the same wingspan and one right under the other. Also, the slower the planes fly, the stronger the "mini tornadoes" spilling off the wingtips are. I don't think the pilot in the rear could control his plane. And, if he tried to shadow from above, his vision would be blocked by the nose if his plane.

A fighter and other smaller aircraft can slip in between those vortices.

Sunshine51 just made a very appropriate comment about a herd of turtles stampeding through molasses.

Let's try and put this to bed. Look below, this is where you fly, or even a little further back and further below (just keep both aircraft in a 600 ft bubble). Note the aircraft below is flying! No mini 'tornadoes' to dodge, the pilot in the rear IS clearly controlling his aircraft (it is not a plane). You do not fly in line astern from 'above' it is done from below. The aircraft have the same wingspan yet they are not falling out the sky as some would predict.

Each aircraft just fly's a little below the one in front. Piece of cake.

I hope this makes it crystal clear that the procedure is straight forward and carried out every day of the year by military pilots. All that said, I reiterate that I do not believe this scenario occurred.

Edited April 4, 2014 by GentlemanJim

[Tywais]

Tywais:

What is your thought about radar blending capability of say two 777s at normal cruising speeds over long distance where one is unaware and assuming current military radar capability? How close, orientation, any wake or turbulence issue, easy to maintain and etc.? I am curious about topic.

I would have to say very difficult unless they use in flight radar and air-air communication which would probably give away their location. If visibility is good, and both aircraft are in communication with each other, that is collaborating, formation flying may be possible. But the other aircraft not aware would be highly unlikely due to collision avoidance radar systems on board (pretty sure 777s have it).

Wing tip vortices, that is wake turbulence can be very severe with a heavily loaded, large aircraft and would have to really be thought out. These vortices do not necessarily just flow straight out the back but depending on winds at altitude can 'drift' sideways or downwards so you can't rely upon avoiding them.

When I was in flight training we were trained how to deal with 'heavies' when flying behind them or landing after one. Landing protocol is to land after the touch down point and keep high of the heavy's path as it is the lift that creates the vortices. The moment lift is gone, they are gone. Also part of the training is to understand the drift aspects of them. If you are at an airfield with parallel runways and landing at or near the same time as a heavy on a parallel runway and there is a crosswind, that mini tornado can drift over onto your runway. I've seen small aircraft nearly flip over entering one.

Basically, I can't see it unless military training and both aircraft are part of the configuration, that is collaborating.

Ah, ya beat me to it. Wingtip vortices with two planes with the same wingspan and one right under the other. Also, the slower the planes fly, the stronger the "mini tornadoes" spilling off the wingtips are. I don't think the pilot in the rear could control his plane. And, if he tried to shadow from above, his vision would be blocked by the nose if his plane.

A fighter and other smaller aircraft can slip in between those vortices.

Sunshine51 just made a very appropriate comment about a herd of turtles stampeding through molasses.

Let's try and put this to bed. Look below, this is where you fly, or even a little further back and further below (just keep both aircraft in a 600 ft bubble). Note the aircraft below is flying! No mini 'tornadoes' to dodge, the pilot in the rear IS clearly controlling his aircraft (it is not a plane). You do not fly in line astern from 'above' it is done from below. The aircraft have the same wingspan yet they are not falling out the sky as some would predict.

Each aircraft just fly's a little below the one in front. Piece of cake.

I hope this makes it crystal clear that the procedure is straight forward and carried out every day of the year by military pilots. All that said, I reiterate that I do not believe this scenario occurred.

Piece of cake? Straight forward? Tell it to these military pilots.

[GentlemanJim]

Sunshine51 just made a very appropriate comment about a herd of turtles stampeding through molasses.

Let's try and put this to bed. Look below, this is where you fly, or even a little further back and further below (just keep both aircraft in a 600 ft bubble). Note the aircraft below is flying! No mini 'tornadoes' to dodge, the pilot in the rear IS clearly controlling his aircraft (it is not a plane). You do not fly in line astern from 'above' it is done from below. The aircraft have the same wingspan yet they are not falling out the sky as some would predict.

Each aircraft just fly's a little below the one in front. Piece of cake.

I hope this makes it crystal clear that the procedure is straight forward and carried out every day of the year by military pilots. All that said, I reiterate that I do not believe this scenario occurred.

Piece of cake? Straight forward? Tell it to these military pilots.

LoL, yes seen that. Been there, done that. Everyone has their bad days and when you do best get out the way, or the instructor gets you all out the way. This is not an exercise to be done when you are ..let's say in a high state of anxiety (which by virtue of what you are doing ..you are ) To be fair, sitting in formation is a piece of cake, when you know what you are doing. Air to Air refuelling was only ever a piece of cake to a hand full of people I knew (and never was to me).

[retell]

Tywais:

What is your thought about radar blending capability of say two 777s at normal cruising speeds over long distance where one is unaware and assuming current military radar capability? How close, orientation, any wake or turbulence issue, easy to maintain and etc.? I am curious about topic.

I would have to say very difficult unless they use in flight radar and air-air communication which would probably give away their location. If visibility is good, and both aircraft are in communication with each other, that is collaborating, formation flying may be possible. But the other aircraft not aware would be highly unlikely due to collision avoidance radar systems on board (pretty sure 777s have it).

Wing tip vortices, that is wake turbulence can be very severe with a heavily loaded, large aircraft and would have to really be thought out. These vortices do not necessarily just flow straight out the back but depending on winds at altitude can 'drift' sideways or downwards so you can't rely upon avoiding them.

When I was in flight training we were trained how to deal with 'heavies' when flying behind them or landing after one. Landing protocol is to land after the touch down point and keep high of the heavy's path as it is the lift that creates the vortices. The moment lift is gone, they are gone. Also part of the training is to understand the drift aspects of them. If you are at an airfield with parallel runways and landing at or near the same time as a heavy on a parallel runway and there is a crosswind, that mini tornado can drift over onto your runway. I've seen small aircraft nearly flip over entering one.

Basically, I can't see it unless military training and both aircraft are part of the configuration, that is collaborating.

Ah, ya beat me to it. Wingtip vortices with two planes with the same wingspan and one right under the other. Also, the slower the planes fly, the stronger the "mini tornadoes" spilling off the wingtips are. I don't think the pilot in the rear could control his plane. And, if he tried to shadow from above, his vision would be blocked by the nose if his plane.

A fighter and other smaller aircraft can slip in between those vortices.

Sunshine51 just made a very appropriate comment about a herd of turtles stampeding through molasses.

Let's try and put this to bed. Look below, this is where you fly, or even a little further back and further below (just keep both aircraft in a 600 ft bubble). Note the aircraft below is flying! No mini 'tornadoes' to dodge, the pilot in the rear IS clearly controlling his aircraft (it is not a plane). You do not fly in line astern from 'above' it is done from below. The aircraft have the same wingspan yet they are not falling out the sky as some would predict.

Each aircraft just fly's a little below the one in front. Piece of cake.

I hope this makes it crystal clear that the procedure is straight forward and carried out every day of the year by military pilots. All that said, I reiterate that I do not believe this scenario occurred.

Piece of cake? Straight forward? Tell it to these military pilots.

Indeed not an easy thing to do , perhaps thats also why birds dont mate while flying

Send with Commodore 64

[P45Mustang]

MH370. The world's biggest missing plane mystery to date was flying from Malaysia to the PRC.

Diversion from correct flight path took place as it entered Vietnam air space over the South China Sea.

The plane did not say Good Morning Vietnam but turned left and quite possibly ended up in the Indian Ocean.

Why?

[F430murci]

Wake turbulance

You guys are talking about wing vortices which I believe would tend to go down and outward, but I was thinking also about turbulance coming off those big engines on a 777. Seems like those could create some problems or at least hit tail of plane flying very close.

Would planes refueling not be a head of wake turbulance and don't they have to ploy through wake turbulence to get to cleaner air? At 600 feet back as suggested, I think it would be one rincredibly ough ride.

Don't lead please in formation fly at lower altitude to avoid wake turbulance?

Doesn't formation flying take skill that commercial pilot may not have, particularly at night?

Edited April 4, 2014 by F430murci