Missing Malaysia Airlines jet carrying 239 triggers Southeast Asia search

[y2k]

Would it be possible for passengers to make calls using the in flight handsets?

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

[Scott]

An conspiracy post has been deleted.

[canman]

Random Notes:

Re Post # 2894 (member Sarathjay): Among the best conspiracy theories I have ever read or heard. Congratulations for at least a wildly entertaining story. Best one since the various 911 theories. Who knows, you could be right. If so, WOW!

Much has been made of the course reversal back toward Malaysia/Andaman Sea. But there must have been another correction to point the airplane due South, toward the most hostile and lonely ocean on Earth, called the Southern Ocean. For reference, see the many films that have been made of these latitudes in the various 'round the world solo' yacht races. Clear skies and calm seas seem to be the exception in this area.

Could the plane have been controlled remotely? If so, by whom, and for what purpose? Is this even possible?

Some mention has been made that the pilot was having big problems at home. (Wife, girlfriend, etc.) Could this have led to a decision to commit suicide, taking 238 other souls along for the ride? Seems unlikely, but?

A look at imprecise maps of the suspected crash area reveals a "Southeast Indian Ridge" at a depth of about (+/-) 1900 m, a barely searchable depth. The ridge is flanked by impossibly deep valleys. Is this a job for Capt. Ballard and the submersible that found Titanic? Is any submersible equipped with an "arm" capable of extracting the black boxes? Is any submersible capable of cabling up the fuselage for a salvage operation? What a feat that would be.

People are blaming the news media for constantly churning this story. I disagree. It is a fantastic mystery and tragedy, fully worthy of intense worldwide interest.

The black box from the air France flight off of Brazil was recovered from about 3000m, in 1988 a black box was recovered from a South African airlines flight from a depth of 4900m. The technology is certainly there to recover the black box and indeed to recover sections of the fuselage. It is all a matter of how much you are willing to spend.

[Asiantravel]

A tape deck that can withstand certain Gs and extreme temperatures. This is not an 8 track.

Do you know bandwidth required by ACARS? Do you know bandwidth required by black box type of information? I get this stuff. I will sound a bit pompous now because I just downed some nice vodka, but my family owned and run several airlines. What I said was true about technology and why not implemented. What you say is just more bs that nit wits educated by the Internet believes and spreads. Gotta love the net! Decreasing IQs by the day.

" but my family owned and run several airlines."

So this is why you are against spending money on implementing safety measures on aircraft?

To protect the family money. Not very nice

Your comments are out of order. You seem to have no idea how any business works. The aviation industry is very safe, very responsible and in some ways over regulated. Making modifications to any high tech piece of equipment like an aircraft is a VERY expensive business. This is not a case of going down to Radio Shack, getting a few components and making a new CVR or data recorder with a flash drive as the memory. All companies have to make risk management decisions and when there is no need for expenditure then they do not do it.

After the Piper Alpha oil platform disaster in which 165+ men died, people started doing risk analysis on the requirement for blast proof fire proof walls near the accommodation areas. I know one company that did this on some of their platforms and calculated that it would cost $12 Million to build these 'walls', but over a 20 year period the likely hood was that they would suffer accidents or injury resulting in personal claims against them for $7M as a result of fire or blast injury, so did they build the fire proof blast proof walls...NO. The bean counters save $5M by not building them. That is the way industry works.

Aviation is well regulated and after this incident then maybe EASA/FAA etc will recommend the development of solid state memory devices, but for you to slag off F430murci because his family did not spend money on something that is not a requirement is out of order. Why don't you mortgage yourself to the hilt and risk house, home, car, kids education etc and when all your money is on the line start spending money on your business that you do not need to, that the regulatory authority says you don't have to. But from your comments you are not the type of person that will take the burden of risk or know how to make risk orientated decisions so you will never be in that position so will never reap the rewards it brings to those bold enough to risk all to provide a service (in accordance with regulations) that you and everyone else wants to use.

Aviation is always improving and designing aircraft is no easy task. The technical design of the A380 or B787 will have commenced 20 years ago. It is not something done a few years back. Technical specs will have been drawn up using the best available technology....20 years ago and changing that stuff for the super dupa computers we have today will be a slow old process, and the owners of aircraft will do it when the regulatory authorities say that they have to.

So Gentleman Jim, we are only about 10 days away from when the pingers in the black box will start to fade and about 16 days from when they go silent

After the Air France accident , the investigation bureau recommended the airline industry

“make mandatory as quickly as possible, for aeroplanes making public transport flights with passengers over maritime or remote areas, triggering of data transmission to facilitate localisation as soon as an emergency situation is detected on board.”

But the airlines balked at the expense of installation (which one manufacturer put at less than $100,000 per aircraft) and the cost of transmitting and storing huge amounts of data.

This is $100,000 modification on a piece of equipment that cost over $200 million and the aircraft industry balked at it

So by now I've got just a one word comment in response to your little rant and rave on Wednesday 26th about not appreciating how to run a business- and that is bo**ocks ‘ !

And that includes the likes of your friend " F430murci " the airline tycoon who proclaims continued reliance on black box technology by the airline industry is perfectly fine.

You Gentleman Jim assert “ all companies have to make risk management decisions and when there is no need for expenditure then they do not do it” Please tell me, how do you determine when there is “ no need for expenditure “, when there are human emotions involved as with the relatives of those who suffer in these kinds of circumstances?

And in circumstances like MH370 how do you even begin to measure the monetary value of the damage to the reputation of the airline industry now that it shows they are so stingy and more concerned with protecting their cash flow than adhering even to the specific recommendations of safety bureaus following earlier crashes?

This is even more ironic considering CNN recently reported USA alone has budgeted $4 million for this search.

http://www.bristolpress.com/articles/2014/03/13/opinion/doc5320fac471a4f393920890.txt

Edited March 29, 2014 by Asiantravel

[balo]

Is this anoher day without fnding anything ? Except poor satellite images telling them to search in another place.

Sent from my SM-P601 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[JetsetBkk]

<snip>

This is even more ironic considering CNN recently reported USA alone has budgeted $4 million for this search.

http://www.bristolpress.com/articles/2014/03/13/opinion/doc5320fac471a4f393920890.txt

Cost of one Boeing 777: $250 - $300 million

http://www.boeing.com/boeing/commercial/prices/

[Farma]

Is this anoher day without fnding anything ? Except poor satellite images telling them to search in another place.

Sent from my SM-P601 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

xinhua news agency is reporting a chinese search aircraft has spotted three red, white and orange objects in the new search area.

[ExpatOilWorker]

Random Notes:

Re Post # 2894 (member Sarathjay): Among the best conspiracy theories I have ever read or heard. Congratulations for at least a wildly entertaining story. Best one since the various 911 theories. Who knows, you could be right. If so, WOW!

Much has been made of the course reversal back toward Malaysia/Andaman Sea. But there must have been another correction to point the airplane due South, toward the most hostile and lonely ocean on Earth, called the Southern Ocean. For reference, see the many films that have been made of these latitudes in the various 'round the world solo' yacht races. Clear skies and calm seas seem to be the exception in this area.

Could the plane have been controlled remotely? If so, by whom, and for what purpose? Is this even possible?

Some mention has been made that the pilot was having big problems at home. (Wife, girlfriend, etc.) Could this have led to a decision to commit suicide, taking 238 other souls along for the ride? Seems unlikely, but?

A look at imprecise maps of the suspected crash area reveals a "Southeast Indian Ridge" at a depth of about (+/-) 1900 m, a barely searchable depth. The ridge is flanked by impossibly deep valleys. Is this a job for Capt. Ballard and the submersible that found Titanic? Is any submersible equipped with an "arm" capable of extracting the black boxes? Is any submersible capable of cabling up the fuselage for a salvage operation? What a feat that would be.

People are blaming the news media for constantly churning this story. I disagree. It is a fantastic mystery and tragedy, fully worthy of intense worldwide interest.

The black box from the air France flight off of Brazil was recovered from about 3000m, in 1988 a black box was recovered from a South African airlines flight from a depth of 4900m. The technology is certainly there to recover the black box and indeed to recover sections of the fuselage. It is all a matter of how much you are willing to spend.

The ABYSS can go down to 6,000 m and may soon join the search.

http://gulfnews.com/pictures/general/the-abyss-may-join-the-hunt-for-the-missing-ma-flight-mh370-1.1308364

[Thai at Heart]

Give it a rest, VK - you clearly need an aluminum helmet and a good lie down

Here is a thought for you. Why on God's green earth would Malaysian Air NOT release

the cargo manifest ? Unless.........wait for it..........they have something to hide. Am not

a big tin hat guy myself, but this refusal to release what should be an entirely benign

document is fascinating.

<deleted>, is making public the cargo manifest going to find this aircraft, I am sure it has already scrutinized by the Malaysians, Chinese, Americans and others.

It is commercially sensitive information that no airline would normally make public.

If there is anything incriminating in the list, it will make its way to the public domain somehow.

[GentlemanJim]

Easy to blame the captain, except there is no motive. No manifesto.

You obviously did not read his Facebook page

He has very obvious issues

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

So from reading his Facebook page what would you describe were his 'obvious issues'?

[nullx8]

Cost of one Boeing 777: $250 - $300 million

guess the cargo was worth more than that.

[phantomfiddler]

So, without any veiled speech. Why is the Captain considered by you to have a shadowed recent history?

Much is veiled right now, particularly by Malaysian authorities.

Tell me, assuming there was mechanical failure or a hijacking, has there been any indication that the captain took any evasive actions during the flight? Any distress signals? Not that we've heard of. Not a peep, nada.

I carefully used the adjective 'shadowed' and it's immediately twisted to 'guilty as sin' by someone else. Does someone protesteth too much? Fersure, those who are interested have to wait until added (or as yet, unreleased) evidence comes forth. In the meantime, there's speculation by all concerned. Even mentioning the pilot was 'heroic' is speculation at this time.

If a disaster has taken place, concerned people are going to speculate about what happened. That's human nature, and some of that speculation may even contribute to finding a viable explanation. The pilot is in the news. The investigative process should leave no stone un-turned. Malaysia Airlines, are understandably very sensitive about any evidence which may implicate the pilot (as not doing his job well, or worse; enacting a suicide/mass murder) - both for business reasons, and for national pride. If he's innocent and/or heroic, fine. Let the evidence point the way.

You display bar level intelligence with lines such as "does someone protesteth too much". Furthermore if you had had capacity to read and follow this thread in it's entirety, you would see that there is a poster who refers to the Captain as 'guilty as sin' that is to whom I was referring to. When I was referring to you I used YOUR term 'shadowed' many times did I not. I have not 'twisted' anything I was entirely specific but it seems just like your opinion of the Captain you have jumped to a conclusion based on an inability to process correctly the information in front of you. Where in my post to YOU, which incidentally you did not quote properly (against forum rules) do I mention 'guilty as sin'? So enough, we are clearly completely different. I have tried to communicate to you but I think there is a bit of an incompatibility and I don't have the time or the inclination to wade through the mud any longer, I have made my thoughts crystal clear and you read two completely different posts by me and get it wrong. Typical hang em high mentality.

All i said to you in my post was 'explain clearly why you say the Captain has a 'shadowed history', and you have not done that. You besmirch him with no excuse.

The most intelligent people I have ever met were encountered in bars and the more I drank the more intelligent they appeared to be

[Showbags]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Would it be possible for passengers to make calls using the in flight handsets?


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

Not now...

[GentlemanJim]

Your comments are out of order. You seem to have no idea how any business works. The aviation industry is very safe, very responsible and in some ways over regulated. Making modifications to any high tech piece of equipment like an aircraft is a VERY expensive business. This is not a case of going down to Radio Shack, getting a few components and making a new CVR or data recorder with a flash drive as the memory. All companies have to make risk management decisions and when there is no need for expenditure then they do not do it.

After the Piper Alpha oil platform disaster in which 165+ men died, people started doing risk analysis on the requirement for blast proof fire proof walls near the accommodation areas. I know one company that did this on some of their platforms and calculated that it would cost $12 Million to build these 'walls', but over a 20 year period the likely hood was that they would suffer accidents or injury resulting in personal claims against them for $7M as a result of fire or blast injury, so did they build the fire proof blast proof walls...NO. The bean counters save $5M by not building them. That is the way industry works.

Aviation is well regulated and after this incident then maybe EASA/FAA etc will recommend the development of solid state memory devices, but for you to slag off F430murci because his family did not spend money on something that is not a requirement is out of order. Why don't you mortgage yourself to the hilt and risk house, home, car, kids education etc and when all your money is on the line start spending money on your business that you do not need to, that the regulatory authority says you don't have to. But from your comments you are not the type of person that will take the burden of risk or know how to make risk orientated decisions so you will never be in that position so will never reap the rewards it brings to those bold enough to risk all to provide a service (in accordance with regulations) that you and everyone else wants to use.

Aviation is always improving and designing aircraft is no easy task. The technical design of the A380 or B787 will have commenced 20 years ago. It is not something done a few years back. Technical specs will have been drawn up using the best available technology....20 years ago and changing that stuff for the super dupa computers we have today will be a slow old process, and the owners of aircraft will do it when the regulatory authorities say that they have to.

So Gentleman Jim, we are only about 10 days away from when the pingers in the black box will start to fade and about 16 days from when they go silent

After the Air France accident , the investigation bureau recommended the airline industry

“make mandatory as quickly as possible, for aeroplanes making public transport flights with passengers over maritime or remote areas, triggering of data transmission to facilitate localisation as soon as an emergency situation is detected on board.”

But the airlines balked at the expense of installation (which one manufacturer put at less than $100,000 per aircraft) and the cost of transmitting and storing huge amounts of data.

This is $100,000 modification on a piece of equipment that cost over $200 million and the aircraft industry balked at it

So by now I've got just a one word comment in response to your little rant and rave on Wednesday 26th about not appreciating how to run a business- and that is bo**ocks ‘ !

And that includes the likes of your friend " F430murci " the airline tycoon who proclaims continued reliance on black box technology by the airline industry is perfectly fine.

You Gentleman Jim assert “ all companies have to make risk management decisions and when there is no need for expenditure then they do not do it” Please tell me, how do you determine when there is “ no need for expenditure “, when there are human emotions involved as with the relatives of those who suffer in these kinds of circumstances?

And in circumstances like MH370 how do you even begin to measure the monetary value of the damage to the reputation of the airline industry now that it shows they are so stingy and more concerned with protecting their cash flow than adhering even to the specific recommendations of safety bureaus following earlier crashes?

This is even more ironic considering CNN recently reported USA alone has budgeted $4 million for this search.

http://www.bristolpress.com/articles/2014/03/13/opinion/doc5320fac471a4f393920890.txt

How unnecessarily rude!

Ok, where do we start, how about some age old advice for you, sometimes it's better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

"After the Air France accident , the investigation bureau recommended the airline industry"

That little word that you really forgot to look at "recommended". Note that the accident investigation team 'recommended', they did not 'mandate'. Only the CAA's can mandate. If they would have 'mandated', it would have been done, no questions. Recommended means you don't have to, just as I would recommend you take your old car and pay to fit side impact and front air bags, 5 point harnesses and a carbon fibre roll cage. You don't have to, but I absolutely guarantee you that in the event of a crash with that most precious of cargo, your wife and children, it is extremely likely that you will all be safe and walk away from it. $20K will do it. Will you go out and do it? You don't have to, but come on there is not a more precious cargo in the world, why not?

Risk management, you will probably wait until the new car you save up for comes with that equipment fitted as standard.

In 1985 , a BA aircraft burned to the ground at Manchester Airport killing 54 passengers and crew. After the lengthy and rigorous investigation the CAA "recommended' that all aircraft are fitted with tail mounted camera's (as this would have shown the pilots instantly what their problem was, and would have saved many lives). So it was a recommendation! BA and many many other airlines did a cost analysis concerning the recommendation, as they always do. Now this, as some of you may think is not as simple as taping a webcam to the tail unit of an aircraft, it required extreme modification and had to be done in accordance with the multitude of safety regulations that are already in place to keep you the passenger safe. The consequence of an ill-conceived modification perhaps causing cracks in the tail plane would be catastrophic. BA discovered that it would cost around 100 million GBP to fit tail cameras to all their aircraft in the fleet, but they would probably only lose one every 20-30 years due to fire at a cost of maybe 30 million (a lot of money 30 years ago). SO the well predicted business decision was made, why bother fitting them? It doesnt make sense! I hear you all screaming as much as I screamed at the time, but THAT is business. Airlines are not there to do you favours, you do none for them after all. Airlines just like any other business in the world all share the same single mission statement. Nothing to do with 'provide the best air travel blah blah', simple - Our mission is to make money for share holders. They (almost every airline) do EVERYTHING in accordance with regulations. Why should they do something if it is not mandated, why do it if only recommended? I designed a training product for airlines and it was really difficult selling it to them even though it was proven to make airlines safer and more profitable. The regulatory bodies then made it mandatory, bam, thank you it made me a millionaire! If anything is mandatory it is done and paid for regardless of cost. With BA, they, like all airlines, simply waited until new aircraft they purchased came with tail mounted camera's as standard fit, a totaly business orientated decision.

Why did the Air France investigation team only 'recommend'? Well that is all they can do, and only ICAO, IATA and all the CAA's can mandate. Just like any CAA or regulatory body in the world of aviation, they are normally funded and paid for by the airlines themselves. The UK CAA is paid for by British Airways and the like NOT the Government, and they cannot simply INSIST that BA must pay 100 Million for a tail plane upgrade when it is only recommended, simple. A bit of a catch 22 really, the people you think are looking after your interests also have to look after the commercial interests of their sponsors - the airlines.

So back to YOUR rant. There is as you put it 'no need for expenditure', despite any amount of 'human emotions' attached UNLESS the expenditure is mandated. That is why I still maintain you have no idea how businesses function as you are completely naive in what you say. Now on a personal note, I agree with you totally from a personal moral and ethical viewpoint, that is why I could never run an airline, as it would go bankrupt very quickly.

Unless someone mandates the fitting of new equipment and memory drives etc etc after MH370 why should an airline pay 75 Million across it's fleet to install it? In the event of a disaster the insurance company will pay. The airline industry will take note and implement and in 5 years all new aircraft will have the equipment as standard fit. And remember, the airline industry is THE safest transport industry in the world, because of its meticulous standard of engineering, predictive component life-ing and it's incredibly professional employees in flight operations and engineering.

So to sum up, this is not ME asiantravel, it is the industry. I am not stingy, far from it, I am very generous and I am sure F430murci is also. When it comes to money NO airline in the world spends it on recommendations, they spend it on things that are under mandatory instruction, on legal compliance. And before you put fingers to keys and spout off another rude and ill-considered rant, read my post again carefully and really digest what I am saying.

MAS will survive whatever is coming it's way. The insurers will pay and the loyal customer base will remain. People who have never flown with them or maybe only once or twice economy will say "i'm never going to fly with them again', ah well. People like me who have flown first class with them and with almost every other airline know that their service at the front and in business is amongst the very best in the world and I will continue to fly with them. Whoever/whatever is responsible for this could have happened to any airline, the management and handling has been very poor, but that is not the people that matter in aviation, the ones that matter when you fly are the engineers, the cabin crew, the ops staff and the pilots.

So if in your rather rude words you still maintain I am speaking bo****ks that is fine, but I still maintain you do not appreciate how to run a business.

[davidstipek]

Would it be possible for passengers to make calls using the in flight handsets?

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

We TRUELY understand this ...... Answer:

"Not Now!"

Quote:

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

y2k, on 29 Mar 2014 - 13:14, said:

Would it be possible for passengers to make calls using the in flight handsets?

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

Not now...

End Quote

I think what Y2K is trying to ask was Would it have been possible "TO HAVE MADE" calls using the inflight handsets anytime from the Aircraft after it Disapeared until what ever the end result may be.

[Chicog]

Airlines will do anything to avoid spending money, look at the DC10 cargo door fiasco. People died because the FAA would not issue a directive.

Sent from my Lenovo S960 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[RubbaJohnny]

GJ, we understand and appreciate your defense of the Captain's innocence until proven otherwise. But at the same our brains are capable of some predictive thought. If he is innocent perhaps he will be vindicated. But it is also possible, and this is becoming the primary theory, that in an act of monumental selfishness; This man who was responsible for the safety of all passengers; took judgement on planeload of paying customers, whose only choice in this was selecting the flight, and he stole everything they had and everything they would ever be. A pain multiplied upon the thousands who now mourn. and inflicted massive costs to so many affected agencies and countries.

Yes we should have restraint with accusation, but you can not stop speculation. Not when we are looking one of the worst crimes of the century. Forums are for discussion and it is through discussion and speculation that mysteries get solved. If this was an accident, very few will hold it against him.

We may never know

However the pilot may have been sick ,incapicitated by crime,illness or assailants,on-board or remote (poisoned ala Georgey Markov or radioactive drink inLondon)

While out of the cockpit the second pilot may have suffered same fate or been a aprticipant accomplice,I have no insight but feel it is premature to blame anyone yet.

As for the crime of the centrury it is egregious but 9/11 and the daily suffering inMyamanmar,and if you have been to Thailand you may recall the Tsunami with 5,000 Times more destrucution.

I understand the mystery invites speculation and theory but seems unjust to blacken anybody yet.

[pmugghc]

Here is food for thought.....

MH 370 - a conspiracy theory.

Have you heard of this conspiracy theory regarding the disappearance of MH 370? The story goes like this:

The Americans are withdrawing from the Afghanistan, one of their command and control system (used for controlling the pilot less drones) was hijacked by the Taliban when the American transport convoy was moving down from one of the hill top bases. The Taliban ambushed the convoy and killed 2 American Seal personnel, seized the equipment/weapons, including the command and control system which weighed about 20 tons and packed into 6 crates. This happened about a month ago in Feb 2014.

What the Taliban want is money. They want to sell the system to the Russian or the Chinese. The Russians are too busy in Ukraine. The Chinese are hungry for the system's technology. Just imagine if the Chinese master the technology behind the command and control system, all the American drones will become useless. So the Chinese sent 8 top defense scientists to check the system and agreed to pay millions for it.

Sometime in early Mar 2014, the 8 scientists and the 6 crates made their way to Malaysia, thinking that it was the best covert way to avoid detection. The cargo was then kept in the Embassy under diplomatic protection. Meanwhile the Americans engaged the assistance of Israeli intelligence, and together they are determined to intercept and recapture the cargo.

The Chinese calculated that it will be safe to transport it via civilian aircraft so as to avoid suspicion. After all the direct flight from KL to Beijing takes only 4 and half hours, and the Americans will not hijack or harm the civilians. So MH370 is the perfect carrier.

There are 5 American and Israeli agents on board who are familiar with Boeing operation. The 2 "Iranians" with stolen passports could be among them

When MH370 is about to leave the Malaysian air space and reporting to Vietnamese air control, one American AWAC jammed their signal, disabled the pilot control system and switched over to remote control mode. That was when the plane suddenly lost altitude momentarily.

How the AWACS can do it ? Remember 911 incident ? After the 9/11 incident, all Boeing aircraft (and possibly all Airbus) were installed with remote control system to counter terrorist hijacking. Since then all the Boeings could be remote controlled by ground control tower. The same remote control system that is used to control the pilot less spy aircraft and drones.

The 5 American/Israeli agents soon took over the plane, switched off the transponder and other communication systems, changed course and flew westwards. They dare not fly east to Philippines or Guam because the whole South China Sea air space is covered by Chinese surveillance radar and satellite.

The Malaysian, Thai and Indian military radars actually detected the unidentified aircraft but did not react professionally

The plane flew over North Sumatra, Anambas, South India and then landed at Maldives (some villagers saw the aircraft landing), refueled and continued its flight to Garcia Diego, the American Air Base in the middle of Indian Ocean. The cargo and the black box were removed. The passengers were silenced via natural means, lack of oxygen. They believe only dead person will not talk. The MH370 with dead passengers were air borne again via remote control and crashed into South Indian Ocean, make it to believe that the plane eventually ran out of fuel and crashed, and blame the defiant captain and copilot.

The Americans have put up a good show. First diverting all the attention and search effort in the South China Sea while the plane made their way to Indian Ocean. Then they came out with some conflicting statement and evidence to confuse the world. The Australians are the co-actor.

The amount of effort put up by China, in terms of the number of search aircraft, ships and satellites, searching first the South China Sea, then the Malacca Straits and the Indian Ocean is unprecedented. This showed that China is very concerned, not so much because of the many Chinese civilian passengers, but mainly the high value cargo and its 8 top defense scientists.

Don't believe the story? Lets wait and see how the episode unveils itself. Or perhaps it will never be known until the next Snow den emerges.

Enjoy your weekend folks....S.

Would have been much easier and cheaper for the 5 agents to take or destroy the cargo just before it was loaded.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[F430murci]

A tape deck that can withstand certain Gs and extreme temperatures. This is not an 8 track.

Do you know bandwidth required by ACARS? Do you know bandwidth required by black box type of information? I get this stuff. I will sound a bit pompous now because I just downed some nice vodka, but my family owned and run several airlines. What I said was true about technology and why not implemented. What you say is just more bs that nit wits educated by the Internet believes and spreads. Gotta love the net! Decreasing IQs by the day.

" but my family owned and run several airlines."

So this is why you are against spending money on implementing safety measures on aircraft?

To protect the family money. Not very nice

Your comments are out of order. You seem to have no idea how any business works. The aviation industry is very safe, very responsible and in some ways over regulated. Making modifications to any high tech piece of equipment like an aircraft is a VERY expensive business. This is not a case of going down to Radio Shack, getting a few components and making a new CVR or data recorder with a flash drive as the memory. All companies have to make risk management decisions and when there is no need for expenditure then they do not do it.

After the Piper Alpha oil platform disaster in which 165+ men died, people started doing risk analysis on the requirement for blast proof fire proof walls near the accommodation areas. I know one company that did this on some of their platforms and calculated that it would cost $12 Million to build these 'walls', but over a 20 year period the likely hood was that they would suffer accidents or injury resulting in personal claims against them for $7M as a result of fire or blast injury, so did they build the fire proof blast proof walls...NO. The bean counters save $5M by not building them. That is the way industry works.

Aviation is well regulated and after this incident then maybe EASA/FAA etc will recommend the development of solid state memory devices, but for you to slag off F430murci because his family did not spend money on something that is not a requirement is out of order. Why don't you mortgage yourself to the hilt and risk house, home, car, kids education etc and when all your money is on the line start spending money on your business that you do not need to, that the regulatory authority says you don't have to. But from your comments you are not the type of person that will take the burden of risk or know how to make risk orientated decisions so you will never be in that position so will never reap the rewards it brings to those bold enough to risk all to provide a service (in accordance with regulations) that you and everyone else wants to use.

Aviation is always improving and designing aircraft is no easy task. The technical design of the A380 or B787 will have commenced 20 years ago. It is not something done a few years back. Technical specs will have been drawn up using the best available technology....20 years ago and changing that stuff for the super dupa computers we have today will be a slow old process, and the owners of aircraft will do it when the regulatory authorities say that they have to.

So Gentleman Jim, we are only about 10 days away from when the pingers in the black box will start to fade and about 16 days from when they go silent

After the Air France accident , the investigation bureau recommended the airline industry

make mandatory as quickly as possible, for aeroplanes making public transport flights with passengers over maritime or remote areas, triggering of data transmission to facilitate localisation as soon as an emergency situation is detected on board.

But the airlines balked at the expense of installation (which one manufacturer put at less than $100,000 per aircraft) and the cost of transmitting and storing huge amounts of data.

This is $100,000 modification on a piece of equipment that cost over $200 million and the aircraft industry balked at it

So by now I've got just a one word comment in response to your little rant and rave on Wednesday 26th about not appreciating how to run a business- and that is bo**ocks !

And that includes the likes of your friend " F430murci " the airline tycoon who proclaims continued reliance on black box technology by the airline industry is perfectly fine.

You Gentleman Jim assert all companies have to make risk management decisions and when there is no need for expenditure then they do not do it Please tell me, how do you determine when there is no need for expenditure , when there are human emotions involved as with the relatives of those who suffer in these kinds of circumstances?

And in circumstances like MH370 how do you even begin to measure the monetary value of the damage to the reputation of the airline industry now that it shows they are so stingy and more concerned with protecting their cash flow than adhering even to the specific recommendations of safety bureaus following earlier crashes?

This is even more ironic considering CNN recently reported USA alone has budgeted $4 million for this search.

http://www.bristolpress.com/articles/2014/03/13/opinion/doc5320fac471a4f393920890.txt

Typical, make it personal and completey ignore the current technological limitations and pratical application issues which was the gravaman of what I was discussing. Some are so close minded and entrenched in "theories" or a desire to be angry and cast asperssions that they are imcapable of viewing anything objectively.

That a technology is in the works does not mean it is ready for implementation. By all means, don't fly if you believe flying is not safe because of current black box technology.

Airline travel is safe, but there are always people that find reasons to complain no matter what . . .

[tobf16]

Am I starting to forget English ????

Quote from the OP

The new search area was determined by a team from aircraft maker Boeing and the US National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), said Azharuddin Abdul Rahman, chief of Malaysia's Department of Civil Aviation.

"From that particular record, they have come up with a higher speed for the aircraft than we did before," he said. "Therefore, the aircraft would not be as far as what we envisaged [it] to be and is on the northern side of the satellites sightings of the objects."

Now .... if the speed was greater, would you not think that they may be farther, as opposed to not as far as originally envisaged?????

Just like in a car, you have a best economic speed regarding use of fuel.

If you take your car and run it at 180 km/hour or you take it at let's say 100 km/hour, which speed do you think will bring you further?

The same goes for airplanes, there is a best economic speed for different conditions.

Flying fast if you are late will bring you to your destination faster, but you will have spent more fuel.

[chooka]

Here is food for thought.....

MH 370 - a conspiracy theory.

Have you heard of this conspiracy theory regarding the disappearance of MH 370? The story goes like this:

The Americans are withdrawing from the Afghanistan, one of their command and control system (used for controlling the pilot less drones) was hijacked by the Taliban when the American transport convoy was moving down from one of the hill top bases. The Taliban ambushed the convoy and killed 2 American Seal personnel, seized the equipment/weapons, including the command and control system which weighed about 20 tons and packed into 6 crates. This happened about a month ago in Feb 2014.

What the Taliban want is money. They want to sell the system to the Russian or the Chinese. The Russians are too busy in Ukraine. The Chinese are hungry for the system's technology. Just imagine if the Chinese master the technology behind the command and control system, all the American drones will become useless. So the Chinese sent 8 top defense scientists to check the system and agreed to pay millions for it.

Sometime in early Mar 2014, the 8 scientists and the 6 crates made their way to Malaysia, thinking that it was the best covert way to avoid detection. The cargo was then kept in the Embassy under diplomatic protection. Meanwhile the Americans engaged the assistance of Israeli intelligence, and together they are determined to intercept and recapture the cargo.

The Chinese calculated that it will be safe to transport it via civilian aircraft so as to avoid suspicion. After all the direct flight from KL to Beijing takes only 4 and half hours, and the Americans will not hijack or harm the civilians. So MH370 is the perfect carrier.

There are 5 American and Israeli agents on board who are familiar with Boeing operation. The 2 "Iranians" with stolen passports could be among them

When MH370 is about to leave the Malaysian air space and reporting to Vietnamese air control, one American AWAC jammed their signal, disabled the pilot control system and switched over to remote control mode. That was when the plane suddenly lost altitude momentarily.

How the AWACS can do it ? Remember 911 incident ? After the 9/11 incident, all Boeing aircraft (and possibly all Airbus) were installed with remote control system to counter terrorist hijacking. Since then all the Boeings could be remote controlled by ground control tower. The same remote control system that is used to control the pilot less spy aircraft and drones.

The 5 American/Israeli agents soon took over the plane, switched off the transponder and other communication systems, changed course and flew westwards. They dare not fly east to Philippines or Guam because the whole South China Sea air space is covered by Chinese surveillance radar and satellite.

The Malaysian, Thai and Indian military radars actually detected the unidentified aircraft but did not react professionally

The plane flew over North Sumatra, Anambas, South India and then landed at Maldives (some villagers saw the aircraft landing), refueled and continued its flight to Garcia Diego, the American Air Base in the middle of Indian Ocean. The cargo and the black box were removed. The passengers were silenced via natural means, lack of oxygen. They believe only dead person will not talk. The MH370 with dead passengers were air borne again via remote control and crashed into South Indian Ocean, make it to believe that the plane eventually ran out of fuel and crashed, and blame the defiant captain and copilot.

The Americans have put up a good show. First diverting all the attention and search effort in the South China Sea while the plane made their way to Indian Ocean. Then they came out with some conflicting statement and evidence to confuse the world. The Australians are the co-actor.

The amount of effort put up by China, in terms of the number of search aircraft, ships and satellites, searching first the South China Sea, then the Malacca Straits and the Indian Ocean is unprecedented. This showed that China is very concerned, not so much because of the many Chinese civilian passengers, but mainly the high value cargo and its 8 top defense scientists.

Don't believe the story? Lets wait and see how the episode unveils itself. Or perhaps it will never be known until the next Snow den emerges.

Enjoy your weekend folks....S.

Would have been much easier and cheaper for the 5 agents to take or destroy the cargo just before it was loaded.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

What was the cargo? Was it nuclear weapons and was that why he committed suicide. Was it a batch of bad baby formular? Was it drugs that a passenger was trying to import. Was Thaksin on board. So many people on here are talking about the cargo and that is why it went missing. Maybe just maybe the cargo was people. Just my theory as it was labled as a passenger plane.

[Scott]

A post which violates Fair Use policy has been deleted along with replies. You must limit how much you quote and you must post a link.

[boomerangutang]

Indonesia, Malaysia and even Singapore should have radar, as basic parts of their respective national defenses. Correct me if I'm wrong, but we've heard nothing at all from those countries re; radar showing an errant flight in their vicinity. We did hear, belatedly, from Thai defense radar tracking - why not from Malaysia, Indonesia (?) where the plane is suspected of flying over, or near.

[pmugghc]

Here is food for thought.....

MH 370 - a conspiracy theory.

Have you heard of this conspiracy theory regarding the disappearance of MH 370? The story goes like this:

The Americans are withdrawing from the Afghanistan, one of their command and control system (used for controlling the pilot less drones) was hijacked by the Taliban when the American transport convoy was moving down from one of the hill top bases. The Taliban ambushed the convoy and killed 2 American Seal personnel, seized the equipment/weapons, including the command and control system which weighed about 20 tons and packed into 6 crates. This happened about a month ago in Feb 2014.

What the Taliban want is money. They want to sell the system to the Russian or the Chinese. The Russians are too busy in Ukraine. The Chinese are hungry for the system's technology. Just imagine if the Chinese master the technology behind the command and control system, all the American drones will become useless. So the Chinese sent 8 top defense scientists to check the system and agreed to pay millions for it.

Sometime in early Mar 2014, the 8 scientists and the 6 crates made their way to Malaysia, thinking that it was the best covert way to avoid detection. The cargo was then kept in the Embassy under diplomatic protection. Meanwhile the Americans engaged the assistance of Israeli intelligence, and together they are determined to intercept and recapture the cargo.

The Chinese calculated that it will be safe to transport it via civilian aircraft so as to avoid suspicion. After all the direct flight from KL to Beijing takes only 4 and half hours, and the Americans will not hijack or harm the civilians. So MH370 is the perfect carrier.

There are 5 American and Israeli agents on board who are familiar with Boeing operation. The 2 "Iranians" with stolen passports could be among them

When MH370 is about to leave the Malaysian air space and reporting to Vietnamese air control, one American AWAC jammed their signal, disabled the pilot control system and switched over to remote control mode. That was when the plane suddenly lost altitude momentarily.

How the AWACS can do it ? Remember 911 incident ? After the 9/11 incident, all Boeing aircraft (and possibly all Airbus) were installed with remote control system to counter terrorist hijacking. Since then all the Boeings could be remote controlled by ground control tower. The same remote control system that is used to control the pilot less spy aircraft and drones.

The 5 American/Israeli agents soon took over the plane, switched off the transponder and other communication systems, changed course and flew westwards. They dare not fly east to Philippines or Guam because the whole South China Sea air space is covered by Chinese surveillance radar and satellite.

The Malaysian, Thai and Indian military radars actually detected the unidentified aircraft but did not react professionally

The plane flew over North Sumatra, Anambas, South India and then landed at Maldives (some villagers saw the aircraft landing), refueled and continued its flight to Garcia Diego, the American Air Base in the middle of Indian Ocean. The cargo and the black box were removed. The passengers were silenced via natural means, lack of oxygen. They believe only dead person will not talk. The MH370 with dead passengers were air borne again via remote control and crashed into South Indian Ocean, make it to believe that the plane eventually ran out of fuel and crashed, and blame the defiant captain and copilot.

The Americans have put up a good show. First diverting all the attention and search effort in the South China Sea while the plane made their way to Indian Ocean. Then they came out with some conflicting statement and evidence to confuse the world. The Australians are the co-actor.

The amount of effort put up by China, in terms of the number of search aircraft, ships and satellites, searching first the South China Sea, then the Malacca Straits and the Indian Ocean is unprecedented. This showed that China is very concerned, not so much because of the many Chinese civilian passengers, but mainly the high value cargo and its 8 top defense scientists.

Don't believe the story? Lets wait and see how the episode unveils itself. Or perhaps it will never be known until the next Snow den emerges.

Enjoy your weekend folks....S.

Would have been much easier and cheaper for the 5 agents to take or destroy the cargo just before it was loaded.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

What was the cargo? Was it nuclear weapons and was that why he committed suicide. Was it a batch of bad baby formular? Was it drugs that a passenger was trying to import. Was Thaksin on board. So many people on here are talking about the cargo and that is why it went missing. Maybe just maybe the cargo was people. Just my theory as it was labled as a passenger plane.

We don't know what the cargo was. But in the entertaining conspiracy theory I responded to it was a system to remote control drone planes.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Chicog]

"Typical, make it personal and completey ignore the current technological limitations and pratical application issues which was the gravaman of what I was discussing. Some are so close minded and entrenched in "theories" or a desire to be angry and cast asperssions that they are imcapable of viewing anything objectively.

That a technology is in the works does not mean it is ready for implementation. By all means, don't fly if you believe flying is not safe because of current black box technology.

Airline travel is safe, but there are always people that find reasons to complain no matter what . . ."

Inmarsat said pinging a GPS location would cost $10 a flight. That is peanuts frankly, and if you think that would put any airline out of business, then they probably shouldn't be in it.

The airline industry always has to be forced to spend money on safety, they do not care about humans, just $$$$$$$$

Sent from my Lenovo S960 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Overandout]

Is this anoher day without fnding anything ? Except poor satellite images telling them to search in another place.

Sent from my SM-P601 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

No, no,

You have to look beyond that.... its not just a day of not findng anything, its another day of total silence on issues such as the fire supression canister on the Maldives beach and the "missing" cargo manifest...

In fact you could say that they're doing a great job with releasing new satelite images and Dopple / Radar calculations to keep up the public image of performing a dilligent search.

[EyesWideOpen]

I have said it before, and will say it again. No floating wreckage will be found in the massive Indian Ocean search....

[Farma]

I found it strange nothing more has been said about that item found on the maldives beach.

The photo I saw of the washed up one along with the photo of ones installed in an aircraft look similar. I'm used to seeing aircraft fire bottles painted either brown or purple though.

It wasn't just a piece of junk and in my trained eyes looked like an aircraft component.

It should be easy to identify as the item would have part number, serial number and other information either stamped or on an identity plate.

[GentlemanJim]

"Typical, make it personal and completey ignore the current technological limitations and pratical application issues which was the gravaman of what I was discussing. Some are so close minded and entrenched in "theories" or a desire to be angry and cast asperssions that they are imcapable of viewing anything objectively.

That a technology is in the works does not mean it is ready for implementation. By all means, don't fly if you believe flying is not safe because of current black box technology.

Airline travel is safe, but there are always people that find reasons to complain no matter what . . ."

Inmarsat said pinging a GPS location would cost $10 a flight. That is peanuts frankly, and if you think that would put any airline out of business, then they probably shouldn't be in it.

The airline industry always has to be forced to spend money on safety, they do not care about humans, just $$$$$$$$

Sent from my Lenovo S960 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

The Airline industry has internally created the safest mode of transport for Humans. Please name me any industry or corporation that is in business that runs on a profit model that is interested in Humans. Name any that put humans before the bottom line when it comes to decision making and profits. Providing a business is adhering to the law and any legal requirements of a supervisory organization, which business or industry will spend their money on the Human if law and requirement says they do not have to. Every single business shares the same mission statement - Our mission is to make money for shareholders. name me one business in particular transport that does not adhere to that principle.

[Chicog]

Don't be facetious Jim, safety is a far bigger issue in passenger transport, especially aircraft, than it is in other industries. like I said, look at the DC10. People should have been jailed for that.

Sent from my Lenovo S960 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app