Search for MH370 suspended following completion of this task in the current area

 
  woodford Chief Commissioner

They have now found enough wreckage of MH370 to show that it broke up into quite small pieces on impact, which indicates the aircraft almost certainly hit the ocean at high speed. ie it was NOT a controlled ditching. An example of that was flight 1549 into the hudson river, it ended almost completely intact.

See http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-37820122


One good thing has come of this it has FINALLY forced the airline industry into doing something towards mandatory tracking of aircaft and to make sure both the cockpit voice recorder data and the flight data recorder data can be EASILY got at when an aircraft crashs. They have not forced a particular method as yet, the data recorders could be made to be ejected when the aircraft crashs or the data can be streamed live to the airlines base. Note: this last method has been availble for quite a number of years. Also as from 2018 cockpit voice recorders must be able to store the last 25 hours of cockpit recordings.

woodford

Sponsored advertisement

  gordon_s1942 Chief Commissioner

Location: Central Tablelands of NSW
With the ability to now transmit data world wide, I could see the day when the contents of the Flight Recorders could be transmitted IN FLIGHT as a 'Back Up' to those on board the Aircraft.

if you can have 'In Flight' Internet connections for the passengers, these is no reason why the data relating to a flight cant be transmitted too even if it was only done in 15 or 30 minute intervals during the flight.
  woodford Chief Commissioner

With the ability to now transmit data world wide, I could see the day when the contents of the Flight Recorders could be transmitted IN FLIGHT as a 'Back Up' to those on board the Aircraft.

if you can have 'In Flight' Internet connections for the passengers, these is no reason why the data relating to a flight cant be transmitted too even if it was only done in 15 or 30 minute intervals during the flight.
gordon_s1942
The ability to do this already exists in the airline industry (note 1), the problem has been most/all? airlines have not been willing to pay for the service. An attempt was made after the Air France 447 disappearnce to enforce such data streaming but airline resistance won the day then. THe complete disapearance of MH370 has forced everyone to reconsider.

Note 1: I believe all that is required is a small mod to each aircraft to implement this, all comerclal aircraft already have the data bandwidth to allow this.

When it comes to tracking aircraft in remote areas it looks like ADS-B will be being used, with this the aircraft transmits its exact position (obtained by GPS) once a second to widely scattered ground or satellite based recievers. Some countries (Australia is one) have  ALREADY implemented this.

woodford
  gordon_s1942 Chief Commissioner

Location: Central Tablelands of NSW
Woodford, would you agree to implement and run such a system would be miniscule compared to the costs that have been incurred searching for MH370 and others?

I was watching a show on Foxtel of a flight in South America that somehow was hundreds of Kilometres off course and what effort it took to finally locate the wreckage.

I did  word my comment a bit circumspectly I know.
  woodford Chief Commissioner

Woodford, would you agree to implement and run such a system would be miniscule compared to the costs that have been incurred searching for MH370 and others?

I was watching a show on Foxtel of a flight in South America that somehow was hundreds of Kilometres off course and what effort it took to finally locate the wreckage.

I did  word my comment a bit circumspectly I know.
gordon_s1942
Sadly this is standard human behaviour, there are not that many people who will spend a signifiant amount of money to overcome a POSSIBLE future failure. In the enquiry held into the 1976 western district fires, the head of the enquiry said he could not understand why any government would allow a fire to do 1 billion dollars (1976 figures) of damage in 6 hours and then spend so little on fire brigades.

woodford
  gordon_s1942 Chief Commissioner

Location: Central Tablelands of NSW
Woodford, would you agree to implement and run such a system would be miniscule compared to the costs that have been incurred searching for MH370 and others?

I was watching a show on Foxtel of a flight in South America that somehow was hundreds of Kilometres off course and what effort it took to finally locate the wreckage.

I did  word my comment a bit circumspectly I know.
Sadly this is standard human behaviour, there are not that many people who will spend a signifiant amount of money to overcome a POSSIBLE future failure. In the enquiry held into the 1976 western district fires, the head of the enquiry said he could not understand why any government would allow a fire to do 1 billion dollars (1976 figures) of damage in 6 hours and then spend so little on fire brigades.

woodford
woodford
Woodford, many years ago I was talking to a Railway junior Signal Engineer about having a signal permit a specific move and his reply was and I hope I get the quote right, 'As you havent got it now, you dont need it and as such your not going to get it'..........
In no uncertain terms I read his reply to me that despite any changes since this particular signal and movements it controlled were brought into use, no changes would be considered.
The Signal had been there some 30 years and things had changed since its inception.
A few years later the whole place was remodeled and this 'movement' was made available but in a more suitable location.
  YM-Mundrabilla Minister for Railways

Location: Mundrabilla but I'd rather be in Narvik
I see that the new Malaysian Government has pulled the plug on the search.

Will the Australians involved follow or will we continue to search for 777?


There comes a time ...............
  woodford Chief Commissioner

I see that the new Malaysian Government has pulled the plug on the search.

Will the Australians involved follow or will we continue to search for 777?


There comes a time ...............
YM-Mundrabilla
As the aircaft belongs to an Malaysian airline, the Malaysian aviation authorities are responsible for the search, other countries can ONLY partisipate if they are invited. If malaysia has given up the search, one would assume no one else would have any authority to continue.

woodford
  gordon_s1942 Chief Commissioner

Location: Central Tablelands of NSW
I suppose there is no reason if others want to keep on searching they cant do so  if they are willing to met all the costs involved and get no support or help from the Malaysian Government.
Its Open Ocean out there and no one can stop another from looking that I am aware of.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
There is nothing stopping anyone from searching the Indian Ocean in international waters. They do NOT need permission from Malaysia or anyone for that matter.

It's a big wake up call to the airline industry that in 2010's we can literally loose 400 people and a $400m plane. This shouldn't be possible and no commercial airliner should have on board capability to disable tracking in flight or turn off voice and data recorders.

I know this plane wasn't headed to or from Oz but after all the money we have spent the Ox govt should make it compulsory for all flights to/from Australia to have compulsory tracking system as min standard. Is it really that costly to receive Lat/Long data every 1min?

As the search area keeps failing to yield results its likely the pilot was more in control than expected and the plane likely flown away from search area intentially to achieve the outcome we have seen before running out of fuel.

Hopefully one day a rich benefactor funds a private search and closes this sorry saga.
  Big J Deputy Commissioner

Location: In Paradise
Sad reality that this is still a big globe. If we do find anything it will be down to chance. If information was out there to assist the search it would have been provided (even if it was off the record). If the flying pilot decide to tactically to trigger ATC suspicion then we will never know.

The only question I have is that did this show that Military ATC in that part of the world, have a very big hole? Does it show that those countries don't have an effective system to detect aviation in their airspace?

Or do the military know but won't say anything to give away their ability? Remember initially the Chinese provided aircraft to assist in the search. So there would have been a very big reluctance to provide any intel from a non-civilian source.

I am truly surprised if this aircraft did fly past our NW economic zone, that we were not aware of its presence or have no ability to review this. I wonder what JORN is all about, with the money that we have spent on a system that is meant to detect airborne over the horizon movements? Apparently it was not operational at the time of disappearance. Very concerning as it's intended purpose is to provide an early warning for military intelligence of any incoming movements. Makes me wonder, how often JORN is not operational.

I am not a conspiracy theorist, but I am surprised with the supposed airspace systems that we meant to have (not just Australia), that no one picked this up. It is concerning that a very large civilian aircraft avoided detection. What would a gen 5 fighter/bomber do? (like a J20) I think that this has been played down as it shows up vulnerabilities of many countries defences, particularly Malaysia, Singapore and Indonesia.

Very sad outcome for the families of loved ones lost in this tragedy. I hope that one day that chance is in our favour and we do find some fuselage, to help with further investigations.
  Big J Deputy Commissioner

Location: In Paradise
I see that the new Malaysian Government has pulled the plug on the search.

Will the Australians involved follow or will we continue to search for 777?


There comes a time ...............
YM-Mundrabilla
As far as I am aware, The Australian government contribution ceased on January 2017.

The latest attempt was a Malaysian initiative.
  bevans Site Admin

Location: Melbourne, Australia


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GVOeteqUiOw

The mind boggles on how the plane was not tracked me Melbourne Centre who control airspace for a large portion of the Indian Ocean.
  woodford Chief Commissioner

A couple of comments inspired by some previous posts...............

Its not possible to track vehicles be they ships or aircraft over the oceans WITHOUT electronic assistance ro the said vehicle. Which means such  assitance can always disabled by people in the said vehicle.

ATC always use secondary radar which relies on a transponder in the vehicle. Secondary or the older reflective radar has a number of serious limitations. First its line of site only, hills, curvature of the earth even rough seas can hide a target no problems. Second it ONLY shows the presence of at target it DOES NOT provide any identification. Two methods are used to enable a target to be identified, the first is if one is being controled by primary radar (say light aircaft flying into Essendon) and the controler is unsure of your ID he/she will ask you to turn the aircraft. The second method is scramble a couple of fighters (Note 1). In fact its amazing no one scramble any fighters on MH370, inspite of it traversing at least 2 different military zones. A point I will make here in the tracking of MH370 by military radars, for the last part of the track its only ASSUMED that its MH370 as no fighters were scrambled to get a positive ID.
A third point on primary radar is that its not particularly accurate of longer distances, Note longer distances require VERY high powers, this is not to serious issue is extremely high power magnatrons are readily availible.

Note 1: This is regular done, in fact in countries like Britain, its usual to have at least two fighters on short time standby is its air spaces are regulary probed either deliberately or accidently.

From the analysis of the wreckage wash up from MH370, is certain that the aircaft has come done in the southern Indian ocean. Further analysis shows its almost certain that the aircraft hit the ocean at high speed.

Calls are being made that the electronic equipment to enable the aircraft to be indentified should not be able to be turned off. This has a number of issues. The first is that electrical problems are a common fault in todays aircraft. The reason it does not show is that the aircrew are trained to quickly isolate such problems before that become serious. One could over come this partly by taking much more care on the design and installation of wiring to such electronic devices. This would of course markedly increase the price of the aircraft.
Second issue is that even if one did something like that there would by nothing to stop the crew going down into the electronics bay and simple unpluging the device concerned.

woodford
  woodford Chief Commissioner

Note to the above post: While Primary radar is not particulary accurate in distance and direction such military radars CAN quite accurately show how big the object being tracked is.

woodford
  Valvegear Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Richmond Vic
As the aircaft belongs to an Malaysian airline, the Malaysian aviation authorities are responsible for the search, other countries can ONLY partisipate if they are invited. If malaysia has given up the search, one would assume no one else would have any authority to continue.
"woodford"
Nonsense. Anybody can search for whatever he likes in international waters. . . . ever heard of salvage?
  bevans Site Admin

Location: Melbourne, Australia
The Jindalee Over the Horizon Radar System can track a C172 on the tarmac at Changi.  I am most certain being familiar with the design the aircraft would have been tracked out to the west of Australia.  probably the north west.
  YM-Mundrabilla Minister for Railways

Location: Mundrabilla but I'd rather be in Narvik
The Jindalee Over the Horizon Radar System can track a C172 on the tarmac at Changi.  I am most certain being familiar with the design the aircraft would have been tracked out to the west of Australia.  probably the north west.
bevans
The Cessna 172 Skyhawk is an American four-seat, single-engine, high wing, fixed-wing aircraft made by the Cessna Aircraft Company. First flown in 1955, more 172s have been built than any other aircraft. (Wikipedia)
  Big J Deputy Commissioner

Location: In Paradise
The Jindalee Over the Horizon Radar System can track a C172 on the tarmac at Changi.  I am most certain being familiar with the design the aircraft would have been tracked out to the west of Australia.  probably the north west.
bevans
I totally agree. However it has been reported that JORN wasn't operational at the time of the incident.

Either we take it to be correct at face value or it isn't correct.

If it wasn't operational then that is a concern as that is a significant piece of our airborne intelligence. Why the hell was it not operational and if so how often is that the case?

The alternative, despite the statement, it was operational, but the Government does not want to release the capability of the system to other sovereign nations.

I am sure that Sir Angus Houston would have been provided some information if they had it, just even to guide where they should look, but not publicly release that infotrmation.

Unfortunately, JORN has had a troubled development and it appears that the face value explanation might be correct.

Us civvies will never know, as quite understandably this would be very sensitive for our government.
  woodford Chief Commissioner

As the aircaft belongs to an Malaysian airline, the Malaysian aviation authorities are responsible for the search, other countries can ONLY partisipate if they are invited. If malaysia has given up the search, one would assume no one else would have any authority to continue.
Nonsense. Anybody can search for whatever he likes in international waters. . . . ever heard of salvage?
Valvegear
That is correct BUT they do so at there own expense, the convention in aviation is if one wishs to be paid for searching for an aircraft one MUST be given permission to do so by the aviation body of the country concerned, and any searchers in oceans will be VERY expensive.

woodford
  woodford Chief Commissioner

The Jindalee Over the Horizon Radar System can track a C172 on the tarmac at Changi.  I am most certain being familiar with the design the aircraft would have been tracked out to the west of Australia.  probably the north west.
bevans
JORN (the Jinderlee over horizon radar network was not operational during the flight of MH370. A note published by JORN in May 2016 stated it would be unlikely JORN would have detected the flight at the time due to its range and poor ionspheric conditions, a problem with any communications in the HF band.

woodford
  woodford Chief Commissioner

The Jindalee Over the Horizon Radar System can track a C172 on the tarmac at Changi.  I am most certain being familiar with the design the aircraft would have been tracked out to the west of Australia.  probably the north west.
I totally agree. However it has been reported that JORN wasn't operational at the time of the incident.

Either we take it to be correct at face value or it isn't correct.

If it wasn't operational then that is a concern as that is a significant piece of our airborne intelligence. Why the hell was it not operational and if so how often is that the case?

The alternative, despite the statement, it was operational, but the Government does not want to release the capability of the system to other sovereign nations.

I am sure that Sir Angus Houston would have been provided some information if they had it, just even to guide where they should look, but not publicly release that infotrmation.

Unfortunately, JORN has had a troubled development and it appears that the face value explanation might be correct.

Us civvies will never know, as quite understandably this would be very sensitive for our government.
Big J
JORN uses the HF band frequencies (the band is 3 to 30mhz) for its work, any communications at these frequencies COMPLETLY live and die but the condition of the ionosphere. The conditions of this during the flight of MH370 was reported as being VERY poor, hence why the radar was not in operation.

Anybody involved in HF listening (even using such recievers as the RACAL RA17L or C) will report how variable in performance  these frequencies are.

woodford
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
The mind boggles on how the plane was not tracked me Melbourne Centre who control airspace for a large portion of the Indian Ocean.
Bevens
Australia controls a massive amount of airspace, but should should have asked this question, "how much airspace actually has radar?

Typically Radar is good for 160NM radius. In WA Perth has one radar and I think there maybe another up around Port Headland, but thats it. Basically Aircraft in Australia only fly in Radar from Brisbane to Melbourne continuously, plus a number of other localised locations. such as Townsville, Adelaide, Perth and Darwin. When I did ATC, Tas had zero radar coverage as does 98% of WA and 99% of the Indian Ocean. ATC over these areas requires planes to declare their location.

Calls are being made that the electronic equipment to enable the aircraft to be indentified should not be able to be turned off. This has a number of issues. The first is that electrical problems are a common fault in todays aircraft. The reason it does not show is that the aircrew are trained to quickly isolate such problems before that become serious. One could over come this partly by taking much more care on the design and installation of wiring to such electronic devices. This would of course markedly increase the price of the aircraft. Second issue is that even if one did something like that there would by nothing to stop the crew going down into the electronics bay and simple unpluging the device concerned.
Woodford
Sorry Woodford, I totally disagree and I think considering the events that have occurred and the cost its about time we woke and and smelled the 21st century technology options.

It is extremely practical and possible to have satellite communications reporting the planes basic position, direction, altitude and speed without having the requirement to be electrically isolated by the pilots in flight. Lets look at Voyager, mid 1970's technology, left earth over 40 years ago and still going (both), no one to reset circuit breakers. A satellite phone doesn't come with a circuit breaker.

How much does this all cost? If its made compulsory does it matter? In reality the cost and weight penalty is minimal. Planes come with life jackets despite that fact that only a hand full of planes every generation will need them and even those that crash into the sea only a handful of commercial flights have ever had a water landing in such a way to have any survivors.
  bevans Site Admin

Location: Melbourne, Australia
I thank you for outlining how radar is operated in Australia as I was not aware the indian ocean was not under some radar coverage.  I know there are 3 main radar sites for jindalee but am not sure if any  of the radar coverage extends west of Pprt Headland.

The Australian way would be to take one incident and introduce a range of requirements placed upon operators.  I think this is not necessary in the case of MH370.  Until we know exactly what happened we should not jump the gun?

The question I come back to is does anyone (agency, person or otherwise) know what happened to the flight?  Does Military radar cover the areas of the indian ocean?  There is a big base toward the middle of the indian ocean with a lot of radio on it.  Perhaps the Amercians know?
  michaelgm Chief Commissioner

IF the yanks or other nations do in fact have knowledge and have chosen not reveal information just demonstrates the lengths those nations will go to, to protect military secrets. Reasonable or otherwise.

Sponsored advertisement

Subscribers: Big J, RTT_Rules, x31

Display from:   

Quick Reply

We've disabled Quick Reply for this thread as it was last updated more than six months ago.