Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Malaysia Airlines Loses Contact With 777 en Route to Beijing

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by EconomyClass View Post
    At this point, I'm just interested in what global aviation is willing to do not to have to sit through something like this again. Seems like not that much happened after AF447. Do the executives just shrug and say "after all,the drive to the airport blah blah blah". I'm going to be cynical and say next to nothing will come out of this disappearance eithre. They just don't really care about customers all that much.
    well, to be honest, nothing about changing the technologies helps the customers, as in events such as this, they are dead no matter what.

    the BEA did recommend exponential changes to the pinger systems years ago and no one has done a thing. why? $$$. that and the fact that no governing body has ordered it.

    several pages ago, i cited a US govt agency's similar recommendation. nothing happened after that.

    i agree that there is not a single aviation executive that cares about human life beyond the cost of the inevitable lawsuit. after all, as some others have pointed out here, their sole responsibility is to the shareholders, not the public. not even their own customers.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by TeeVee View Post
      ...i agree that there is not a single aviation executive that cares about human life beyond the cost of the inevitable lawsuit...
      ...well, there is that PR/advertising factor that concerns them too, heck, they probably have an Evan SOP to assure a quick, efficient paint-over when the tail survives a crash in a legible state.
      Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by EconomyClass View Post
        ........... Seems like not that much happened after AF447. ...........
        Airbus is actually working on a couple of location systems - if I can find the info I will post it. I believe I posted what the USA is proposing some time ago.
        If I can find the info I will post it (I think the info might have been in AW&ST).

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Timmerich View Post
          If the images are reflective of a sunken 777 it would appear that it did not break up on hitting the water (which I doubt). The AF447 debris field was much larger as I recall.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by TheKiecker View Post
            The media report quoted makes it sound like it was just a green blip, no FL # or airline . Wouldnt that in of itself raise red flags ? I find it hard to believe their military doesnt have at least the technology of a FlightAware software. and just watches unknown green dots fly in and out of its country. Come on .

            Or the more reasonable explanation is that they knew what that blip was , and did nothing. Nothing while it was going by . And then nothing for weeks later , denying any information .

            What a bag of ..... See my sig .
            There are many countries out there where the radar technology is not even up to the level that it was in USA in 2001, when they "lost" 4 planes for hours, could not direct the fighters to the targets, and had to land all planes to ensure that there were no more rogue airplanes.

            Check this:
            Use this forum to discuss aviation safety related incidents, accidents, and other aspects of aviation safety.

            --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
            --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Tony Abbot
              It is now 52 days since Malaysian Airlines Flight MH370 disappeared and I'm here to inform you that the search will be entering a new phase. I regret to say that, thus far, none of our efforts in the air, on the surface or under sea have found any wreckage. [...].

              What we have been doing, as you know, for the last few weeks is focusing on the best lead we had, which was based on detections by the towed black box locator deployed from the Australian Defence vessel Ocean Shield. We have now searched close to 400 square kilometres under sea.

              I am now required to say to you that it is highly unlikely, at this stage, that we will find any aircraft debris on the ocean surface. By this stage, 52 days into the search, most material would have become water logged and sunk. And with the distances involved, all of the aircraft are operating at close to the limit of sensible and safe operation. Therefore, we are moving from the current phase to a phase which is focused on searching the ocean floor over a much larger area.

              [...]

              What we are going to do, though, is enter a new phase of search focusing under the sea. The Bluefin-21 submersible will continue in operation. What we are doing, though, is looking to an intensified underwater search involving different technology, in particular using specialised side scan sonar equipment towed behind ships to scan the seabed for evidence of aircraft wreckage.

              [...]

              Essentially, though, what we are looking to do is conduct as thorough an under sea search as is humanly possible, if necessary, of the entire probable impact zone which, as you know, is roughly 700 kilometres by 80 kilometres.

              [...]

              Enormous efforts have been made. Enormous efforts will continue to be made. This is an extraordinary mystery. We will do everything we reasonably can to resolve it.
              Full press conference transcript here:

              --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
              --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Peter Kesternich View Post
                FlightAware relies on secondary surveillance radar, i.e. transponder, activity. It would be interesting to know how much traffic there is in Southeast Asia which doesn't employ that technology.
                I'm not sure, why it would be more reasonable to assume that the military knew what that unknown radar return was.
                Even if they did, was there any reason for the military to assume that something was amiss? Given the geography, for them the flight might as well have been simply returning to Kuala Lumpur (with an electric failure thus no transponder) until it turned right and not left over the Strait of Malacca. In many countries, there is no communication between civilian and military radar.
                With all due respect . You can not be serious. Anything that moves that doesnt have a working transponder I would expect my government to go up and get .

                Of course if you want to play the shrug shoulders and blame it on "Southeast Asia living in the stone age" game then we might as well close the thread .

                Comment


                • Originally posted by TheKiecker View Post
                  With all due respect . You can not be serious. Anything that moves that doesnt have a working transponder I would expect my government to go up and get .

                  Of course if you want to play the shrug shoulders and blame it on "Southeast Asia living in the stone age" game then we might as well close the thread .
                  The majority of aircraft do not have any transponder at all, even in the USA. As far as I know, secondary surveillance radar transponders are only required for transport category aircraft.
                  As far as Southeast Asia and the Stone Age are concerned, my view of that region is the exact opposite. This region is technologically quite advanced. However, they do not live under a similar threat scenario as the USA do since 11 September 2001, and therefore their military might not watch the skies with a similar vigilance as we expect in the USA.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Peter Kesternich View Post
                    The majority of aircraft do not have any transponder at all, even in the USA. As far as I know, secondary surveillance radar transponders are only required for transport category aircraft.
                    Not so. A transponder is a required equipment in any aircraft flying flying in certain airspaces, including a big area at least 30 NM around about every big and medium airport.

                    Or something like that...

                    All in all, the transponder is a fairly basic equipment and almost every plane that I flew had one, including in some cases planes that lacked any other piece of avionics and hardly had an electrical system at all. Airspeed indicator, altimeter (not even a vertical speed indicator), magnetic compass. RPM, a transparent tube to "see" the fuel level directly, and a comm radio completed the pack.

                    I'd say that, like the comm radio, the transponder is one of the equipment that many airplanes have even when it's not required for many flights in non-controlled airspaces. Now, having it is one thing and using it is another. In many of my flights, most I'd say, my transponder remained off.

                    --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
                    --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

                    Comment


                    • a while back i was looking into australia's radar coverage maps. what i found was that its military had fairly good if not outstanding coverage of the area to the north and west. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jindale..._Radar_Network

                      so since we are casting stones, wtf was australia doing allowing an unidentifed, non-squawking aircraft to approach its coast? and where is the radar info it should've had?

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
                        Not so. A transponder is a required equipment in any aircraft flying flying in certain airspaces, including a big area at least 30 NM around about every big and medium airport.(...)
                        I stand corrected

                        Comment


                        • In many of my flights, most I'd say, my transponder remained off.
                          I dont understand how you would know that and on a different level why a transponder would ever have an OFF switch.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by TeeVee View Post
                            a while back i was looking into australia's radar coverage maps. what i found was that its military had fairly good if not outstanding coverage of the area to the north and west. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jindale..._Radar_Network

                            so since we are casting stones, wtf was australia doing allowing an unidentifed, non-squawking aircraft to approach its coast? and where is the radar info it should've had?
                            TeeVee hits the nail squarer and harder than I could .

                            I find it beyond belief that an airplane can just fly over ANY country IF it has turned its transponder off. "Hey no big deal , whatevs . I'm overworked . " As a matter of fact I believe there should be a system where if a transponder is turned off there should be a global alarm , because obviously these 3rd world asshats just DONT NOTICE . ( #King for a Day # )

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by TheKiecker View Post
                              I dont understand how you would know that and on a different level why a transponder would ever have an OFF switch.
                              He'd know it was off by looking at the switch:

                              (Note the word "off" next to the knob on the right)

                              And in general, it's good for anything electrical to have an "off" switch so you have an option when smoke starts coming out of it...
                              Be alert! America needs more lerts.

                              Eric Law

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by TheKiecker View Post
                                TeeVee hits the nail squarer and harder than I could .

                                I find it beyond belief that an airplane can just fly over ANY country IF it has turned its transponder off. "Hey no big deal , whatevs . I'm overworked . " As a matter of fact I believe there should be a system where if a transponder is turned off there should be a global alarm , because obviously these 3rd world asshats just DONT NOTICE . ( #King for a Day # )
                                And what do you propose that system should do with aircraft that don't have transponders?
                                Be alert! America needs more lerts.

                                Eric Law

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X