What's your theory?
#76
BE Enthusiast
Thread Starter
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 312
Re: What's your theory?
Question for ye wise people.
At the start, it was theorised that the reason the black box hadn't been found was because it was at the bottom of the sea so no sonar had picked it up yet etc.
Assuming it's sitting safely on the ground/in a hangar somewhere - why is it not able to be traced now?
Black box is different from transponder etc, is it not?
At the start, it was theorised that the reason the black box hadn't been found was because it was at the bottom of the sea so no sonar had picked it up yet etc.
Assuming it's sitting safely on the ground/in a hangar somewhere - why is it not able to be traced now?
Black box is different from transponder etc, is it not?
#77
Account Closed
Joined: Mar 2012
Location: Dubai, working at Dust World Central
Posts: 3,706
Re: What's your theory?
Not all fleets have that but Boeing offer it if you want to pay, so on this flight the ACARS was sending out a 'hello I'm here, talk to me" to Boeing HQ which refused to handshake (hello, nice to hear from you, how are things?) so no data ever got sent. The ACARS system usually uses VHF radio but in some places coverage is no good so it switches to satellite.
What they're chattering about on the satellite is where was the aircraft on the last ping the ACARS sent. You end up with two arcs because the satellite is moving pretty rapidly and relies on the doppler effect to figure out where the signal was, but it could be either side of the satellites track. ELT (Emergency Locator Beacons) use exactly the same principle for the satellite to figure out where the beacon is.
The issue arising from this whole situation is one where we (ATC) are going down the route of cooperative target surveillance. More reliance on the aircraft telling us where it is with it's systems on board and ATC confirming that using Multi Lateration (auto triangulation). Yea olde primary radar with all it's problems is gradually being eroded in the civil world with only the military demanding it. So when you have a non cooperative target it's much more difficult to 'see'.
#78
Re: What's your theory?
One other weird thing is the really badly photoshopped or photocopied legs on the two Iranians on stolen passports. It's the same legs and obviously so.
Not saying it's a conspiracy (more likely some poor sod was told to give them both legs) but how ****ing stupid have you got to be to try pass that one off? Bit like all the info or lack coming out of Malaysia
http://resources1.news.com.au/images...e6a43f024e.jpg
Not saying it's a conspiracy (more likely some poor sod was told to give them both legs) but how ****ing stupid have you got to be to try pass that one off? Bit like all the info or lack coming out of Malaysia
http://resources1.news.com.au/images...e6a43f024e.jpg
#79
BE Enthusiast
Thread Starter
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 312
Re: What's your theory?
I think I understand your explanations MW, but where I'm losing it there is when they are talking about ACARS being sent by satellite rather than ACARS and which side initiates it etc it's getting very confusing!
#81
Account Closed
Joined: Mar 2012
Location: Dubai, working at Dust World Central
Posts: 3,706
Re: What's your theory?
Question for ye wise people.
At the start, it was theorised that the reason the black box hadn't been found was because it was at the bottom of the sea so no sonar had picked it up yet etc.
Assuming it's sitting safely on the ground/in a hangar somewhere - why is it not able to be traced now?
Black box is different from transponder etc, is it not?
At the start, it was theorised that the reason the black box hadn't been found was because it was at the bottom of the sea so no sonar had picked it up yet etc.
Assuming it's sitting safely on the ground/in a hangar somewhere - why is it not able to be traced now?
Black box is different from transponder etc, is it not?
They emit an underwater locater 'noise' for up to 30 days down to 6,000 metres. Hangers tend to be quite dry.
#82
BE Enthusiast
Thread Starter
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 312
Re: What's your theory?
So it only emits a tracer thing if it's under water???
Wow.
Wow.
#83
Re: What's your theory?
Photocopying CCTV pics to give out to the media (sends people scurrying off in the wrong direction?) maybe they did it in a hurry and ran 2 through one after the other too quickly?
I really don't know but can't imagine anyone would not spot the mistake or be so easily fooled. A simple error me believes!
I really don't know but can't imagine anyone would not spot the mistake or be so easily fooled. A simple error me believes!
#84
Account Closed
Joined: Mar 2012
Location: Dubai, working at Dust World Central
Posts: 3,706
Re: What's your theory?
Of course, because on land you tend to pick out a couple of fluorescent oranges boxes in amongst the charred wreckage quite quickly. And they're at the back because it's more resistant to damage when your aircraft ploughs in nose first. Hint for choosing seating there.
#85
womble
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,675
Re: What's your theory?
On the basis that the plane couldn't be used as a weapon - it would be spotted and shot down long before it reached any major target, there's certainly no way it could be used to attack the West - we were speculating at lunch today that maybe, making it disappear permanently and mysteriously was the entire purpose of the exercise.
anyway - here's another site to plough through: http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/other...-wiki-171.html
#86
Re: What's your theory?
would you cause a plane to explode mid air if they said they were carrying radioactive material? you'd want that to disperse would you? or if you managed to shoot it down so it crashed, what would you do then?
anyway - here's another site to plough through: http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/other...-wiki-171.html
anyway - here's another site to plough through: http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/other...-wiki-171.html
#87
Soupy twist
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,271
Re: What's your theory?
Hell, as Millhouse says, the Channel would do as just as well, even if - by some utter miracle - it wasn't detected and intercepted thousands of miles before it got to the UK, which it absolutely would be.
Seriously, it's almost vanishingly unlikely that it's been hijacked with the intention of flying it to London, or any European city. Unless they are terminally stupid the hijackers would be only too well aware they would be picked up on radar before they got anywhere near European airspace, and they can't avoid flying over areas that would allow them to be shot down with minimal to zero risk to anyone on the ground.
Last edited by Eeyore; Mar 17th 2014 at 8:19 pm.
#88
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 13,553
Re: What's your theory?
Apologies if someone has already posted this, but it seems the most rational explanation I have seen so far.................
https://plus.google.com/app/basic/st...rfyiz3vdhbop04
https://plus.google.com/app/basic/st...rfyiz3vdhbop04
#89
Re: What's your theory?
Apologies if someone has already posted this, but it seems the most rational explanation I have seen so far.................
https://plus.google.com/app/basic/st...rfyiz3vdhbop04
https://plus.google.com/app/basic/st...rfyiz3vdhbop04
#90
Re: What's your theory?
Apologies if someone has already posted this, but it seems the most rational explanation I have seen so far.................
https://plus.google.com/app/basic/st...rfyiz3vdhbop04
https://plus.google.com/app/basic/st...rfyiz3vdhbop04