General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums"Source: Flight 370's altitude dropped after sharp turn" CNN
Source: Flight 370's altitude dropped after sharp turnBy Sara Sidner, Catherine E. Shoichet and Evan Perez, CNN
http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/23/world/asia/malaysia-airlines-plane/index.html?hpt=hp_t1
"SNIP........................
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia (CNN) -- As a growing number of airplanes scoured the southern Indian Ocean in the search for Malaysia Airlines Flight 370, authorities released new details that paint a different picture of what may have happened in the plane's cockpit.
Military radar tracking shows that the aircraft changed altitude after making a sharp turn over the South China Sea as it headed toward the Strait of Malacca, a source close to the investigation into the missing flight told CNN. The plane flew as low as 12,000 feet at some point before it disappeared from radar, according to the source.
The sharp turn seemed to be intentional, the source said, because executing it would have taken the Boeing 777 two minutes -- a time period during which the pilot or co-pilot could have sent an emergency signal if there had been a fire or other emergency onboard.
Authorities say the plane didn't send any emergency signals, though some analysts say it's still unclear whether the pilots tried but weren't able to communicate because of a catastrophic failure.
........................SNIP"
longship
(40,416 posts)Myself, I prefer Planet X. Or the pyramids on Mars. Or Wookies helping to kill the empire!
ARRRRRGH! It is obviously aliens!
Just ask CNN.
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)1) Aviate
2) Navigate
3) Communicate
I do not know what happened to the plane, and see no reason for wild speculation. However, the plane's left turn and decreased altitude are consistant with an in-air event that resulted in depressurization. Possible electrical problems would force shutting down most circuts, including communication. By appearances, the pilot was trying to get to the nearest available landing strip with a crippled aircraft, and crashed into the sea or remote jungle.
clffrdjk
(905 posts)Well the one that I heard has them running out of fuel prior to landing. We all know they had way more than enough to make it to the airport of intended landing so why not go there?
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)ala Payne Stewart.
clffrdjk
(905 posts)Sorry I was thinking of the wrong accident, but my title still stands this was not a ghost flight.
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)clffrdjk
(905 posts)But didn't bother to declare the emergency and instead said goodnight.
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)But see above priorities post. First priority is to keep the plane flying, or at least in an attitude for a controlled crash landing. If combatting an electrical fire, this likely includes shutting down all electrical circuits not needed to fly. Second priority is to navigate...know where they are and course and distance to destination. Third, and only third, is to communicate...including distress signals. Indications are the plane had an in-flight emergency, fire or depressurization. Pilots evidently kept plane aloft, on a new course to emergengy airfield, but were then incapacitated and the plane continued on autopilot until running out of fuel or not able to fly due to damage. So far, there is zero conclusive evidence otherwise.
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)Making a rapid turn is consistent with the idea of heading back to a runway in Mayalsia or Indonesia with which the pilots would be intimately familiar. Dropping altitude might have been a necessity to gain control, or it might have been an effort to prepare for a soft water landing in case they couldn't make it back to an airport.
By now it is abundantly clear that there was no abduction plan and no theft of the aircraft. If either of those was successful, we would have heard of ransom demands or else the spies would have heard serious chatter on that by now. And if either of those scenarios were unsuccessful, that would have resulted in a crash either in the sea near India/Pakistan or on land. A crash at sea in those busy waters would have turned up some debris by now.
So those scenarios just didn't happen and anybody still advancing theories like that really needs to check himself or herself.
It seems highly likely that the plane overshot its intended emergency runway and kept flying south until it ran out of fuel. That can only be equipment failure or suicide, and we have absolutely no reason to suspect suicide. Continuing to advance a theory of a suicidal pilot without any justification is an insult to the honor of the pilots and cruel to the families of all those lost on this flight..
It seems clear enough by now that the only really likely scenario is equipment failure. It came suddenly. The pilots tried to turn around with the idea of landing, but they were overcome and the plane did a "Payne Stewart."
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)It is obvious this was not a plane theft, a hijacking, or an abduction. We may never have enough evidence to say absolutely that it was equipment failure or intentional pilot action. I believe the cockpit recorder, if retrieved, only holds the last 30 minutes or so, which seems really foolish in an era of virtually unlimited storage. There might be a longer record on the flight data recorder -- and even if the FDR holds only the last period, it might show systems were damaged.
As far as I am concerned, all the evidence is consistent with a pilot trying to save the aircraft and until we learn otherwise WITH CERTAINTY, we should not dishonor those who lost their lives in this sad event.
zappaman
(20,606 posts)"I believe the cockpit recorder, if retrieved, only holds the last 30 minutes or so, which seems really foolish in an era of virtually unlimited storage."
It should be capable of much much more.
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)The whole idea of a "black box" is ridiculous. Yes, maybe we should have that as a back-up measure, but in today's world, we should be able to transmit the essential information in real time or near real time. There are obvious techniques for keeping the total bandwidth requirements low. We don't have to broadcast a complete readout every single second. Critical parameters could be summarized and sent every 15 seconds. A more complete set could be sent every 5 minutes. Most of the time, the cockpit is quiet, so standard noise cancellation and compression techniques would make this easily manageable.
And it we have to put up another 30 satellites to make air travel safe in the 21st century, then so be it.
If get so damned tired of hearing people hyper-ventilate about ridiculous theories about what might have happened when there are such important questions that should be discussed instead:
a) using 21st century technology to make us safer
b) With all the drones we have, why aren't they able to help with the search for debris?
On point b), I realize that there are some planes with specialized technology that need to be in the search, but they have to fly so far from Perth, they only get to search a couple of hours a day. We have drones that have outstanding camera technology and they can stay in the air for the entire 10 hours of sunlight available each day. Why aren't we using them? I'd much rather see my tax money go to that purpose then turning some innocent wedding party into a cloud of red.
lovemydog
(11,833 posts)1) Speculate
2) Bloviate
3) Regurgitate
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)clffrdjk
(905 posts)Standard rate is one 360 in two min. Those big aircraft do half standard so in two min they did a 180. All of my money is on intentional (at least at first) either suicide or hijack I do not know.
Iggo
(47,553 posts)AAAAAGH!!!!