Then what's your point here?:
I wouldn't think a pilot would dump or 'climb and remain to burn off fuel' more than what they need to reach their destination.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 missing
- Thread starter quagmire
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Then what's your point here?:
I wouldn't think a pilot would dump or 'climb and remain to burn off fuel' more than what they need to reach their destination.
I'll repeat what I just edited from my previous post (tried to get the edit in, but kids were screaming).
Let me quantify this a little. Take for example that LAX-LHR flight. yesterday, UAL934 took the route of:
LOOP7.DAG LAS BCE EKR BFF FSD RST GRB J522 TVC YXI MIILS N67B VIXUN LOGSU 4900N 5000W 5100N 4000W 5300N 3000W 5400N 2000W DOGAL BEXET BAKUR UN546 STU UP2 OKESI Y3 BEDEK OCK2F
This is before picking up a NAT (North Atlantic Track) track to the UK. In plain English, that route translates to Leaving LAX, to Barstow, to Las Vegas, to over Bryce Canyon Nat'l Park area, to Meeker, Colorado, to Scottsbluff, NE, to Sioux Falls, SD, to Rochester, MN, to Green Bay, WI, across Lake Michigan, to Traverse City, MI, to Killaloe, Ontario. From there, they won't hit Ireland/UK airspace until BAKUR.
If they were to dump fuel to reach that higher altitude, even though there would be less oxygen available to burn the fuel, they still wouldn't have enough to make it across the US/Canada and the Atlantic without stopping to refuel at either Gander, Keflavik, or Shanwick.
BL.
I flew large airplanes for over 30 years and never heard of a strategy to cllimb to starve a fire, never was taught either. What kind of fire would this address?
I also don't put a lot of weight on climbing to kill passengers. I'm leaning towards a faulty estimation on whoever made the 45K call.
To starve a fire, you have to kill its source. The source would be the fuel, as temperature at altitude and speed would definitely snuff it out.
Climb to starve it? They were at either FL370 or FL390 for their flight (again, going off of NEODD/SWEVEN in RVSM airspace). I'm also going to call the area around there tropical or subtropical, and slightly warmer than say, Miami or Key West. That would seem fair.
From http://www.aviationweather.gov/adds/winds/
Couple of things here. Select the Temperature button, and go to SFC (should be the default, which is surface temperature). At Miami, you're looking at roughly 25 - 30C at surface. Taking it up to FL360, you're at -55C.
why should an aircraft have to starve a fire of oxygen by climbing, when air is already limited at that altitude, plus that cold, plus the speed that it is coming at you at Mach .89? The source of the fire is the fuel. Cut the source, feed it to the other engine, let lack of oxygen and temperature kill the fire, and concentrate on the bigger issue: landing the aircraft without any loss of life.
BL.
Sorry- there was a "Startlingly Simple Theory" making the rounds of the Internets the past couple of days that suggested:
I thought it sounded implausible. But it was the "other theory" as to what happened to explain the changes in altitude.
Last note: The Australians are wasting their time looking for that plane. There is no possible reason - suicide, terrorism, or accident that would explain that plane taking a trip to the the Roaring Forties.
I would, with respect, disagree. All the probable locations have already been searched (at least on a preliminary basis)... so all that is left are the improbable areas. And there is one scenario being bandied about that does put the plane in the south. Assume that the plane is suffering a fire that disables the cockpit communication equipment. The pilots turn the plane around to head for a nearby airport, which puts the plane on a generally SW course. The pilots are subsequently incapacitated and the plane continues on its generally SW course until the fuel runs out or it flies into the water. Since there is not much good evidence to support other scenarios - the sequence of events keeps getting amended on a daily basis it seems - then this fire scenario is as plausible as all the others. One of the strongest points in this scenario's favour is that it is simple and does not involve a conspiracy or a pilot suddenly changing their character.
Reading the news articles and hearing the experts say the course change in the FMS could only have been made by the pilots is laughable. In that, it's possible for a non-pilot to learn the planes FMS. It's called X-Plane. You can throw me in a 757 and 777 and I will know how to use their FMS systems due to using a 757 and 777 in X-Plane that was well modeled. I may not an expert on them, but I bet I have a decent enough grasp on them to initiate a course change and input a new route.
Of course that doesn't change the fact ACAR's was turned off which is not modeled in X-Plane, so it does lead one to believe the pilots were the ones behind it( whether they planned it or were forced to by hijackers who knows right now). But, it would be wrong to assume only the pilots can use the FMS with flight sims like X-Plane being readily available.
Of course that doesn't change the fact ACAR's was turned off which is not modeled in X-Plane, so it does lead one to believe the pilots were the ones behind it( whether they planned it or were forced to by hijackers who knows right now). But, it would be wrong to assume only the pilots can use the FMS with flight sims like X-Plane being readily available.
Last edited:
I still feel like Occam's Razor applies here and the answer is the simplest - onboard fire that forced the pilots to turn off circuit breakers (taking down the transponders with it) and they eventually succumbed to smoke inhalation and the plane flew until fuel ran out.
All theories are far-fetched at this point, but it seems less so than all of the hijacking or suicide theories.
All theories are far-fetched at this point, but it seems less so than all of the hijacking or suicide theories.
X-Plane, FS2004, FSX, Prepar3D.. all of these have addons for the B777, and bloody well realistic at that. So it isn't hard at all to figure out things from this..
But again, this gives flightsimmers a bad rep yet again, as there were reports that the 9/11 hijackers used FS2000 to plan their attacks. So now that this has shown up again, especially in light that now reports are coming in of people seeing MAS370 over by the Maldives, anyone owning or playing with a flight simulator must have an ulterior motive.
As someone over at FlightAware had mentioned, why are they complaining about this pilot having a sim? If it is helping him to keep proficient, as well as getting to learn the procedures used at his destination before actually needing it, there isn't a problem with having a sim at all! In fact, I would WANT him to have a sim! that keeps his skills sharp, especially when they are needed: such as in stalling, avionics going out, engine going out, etc. Those are where you want to practice those in a sim, instead of having it happening to you mid-flight and keeping calm and piloting the aircraft.
BL.
Nothing against the flight sim at all, but shouldn't the airline have more realistic flight simulators that actually look like the cockpit that pilots can use to stay sharp?
I can't imagine a joystick and a couple LCD screens being all that realistic.
Yeah I know about FS2004, FSX, and P3D, but those are flight games, not flight sims…..
Plus, P3D is just lipstick on a pig since it basically is still FSX…. P3D is also not available for consumers technically. May not make the pilot be able to feel how the plane is flying, but for procedures and familiarization, it is a great tool.
This was his personally built sim. And I doubt Malaysian Airlines would be fine with him using their sims for personal reasons.
http://www.x-plane.com/pro/certified/
So with the right tools, an $80 copy of X-Plane could be used to log flight hours.
BL.
I seem to remember the Israelies employing a similar strategy on the run into Entebbe Uganda in 1976 to disguise their presence. They were flying in three Hercules not a 777 but were certainly shadowing civilian aircraft to avoid detection.
Last edited:
The New York Times just ran a story about the Malaysian authorities asking the FBI to help recover deleted files from the pilot's home flight simulator.
Apparently last year the pilot Capt. Zaharie Ahmad Shah, posted a video on YouTube, seated in front of his flight simulator. The video has him discussing ways one could tune one's air-conditioning system to achieve maximum efficiency.
I don't know about you, but I just cannot see the sort of person who would go to the trouble of posting that type of "help the community" video being involved in commandeering an aircraft, murdering its passengers, committing suicide, etc.
Maybe the FBI will discover something truly disturbing on the flight simulator. But my guess is, if that plane got hijacked by the flight crew - it was the first-officer that did it. Not the Captain.
So many different theories that it is hard for someone not terribly familiar with flying to make heads or tails of it all.
Thank the media for that one. That's why one thing they report immediately gets debunked. It must say something when a CFI or ATP rated pilot can immediately and factually contradict anything the media tries to put out in the name of 'fresh, fast, and first'.
Because of them, the truth will take a lot longer for it to be uncovered.
BL.
The satellite reception
Hi all
There was aparently a signal picked up 7?? hours later by satellite. I understand this may have been simply a 'ping' type signal thing from the engines. Is that so?
If so, under normal conditions is the engine data sent at regular intervals reporting back engine info - or is it dependent on what is happening to the engines?
Just wanted to clarify what if anything could be inferred from the signal, when sent normally or as a ping.
Hi all
There was aparently a signal picked up 7?? hours later by satellite. I understand this may have been simply a 'ping' type signal thing from the engines. Is that so?
If so, under normal conditions is the engine data sent at regular intervals reporting back engine info - or is it dependent on what is happening to the engines?
Just wanted to clarify what if anything could be inferred from the signal, when sent normally or as a ping.
So many different theories that it is hard for someone not terribly familiar with flying to make heads or tails of it all.
interesting one i read is the iranians hijacked it and will use it to nuke israel since they are supposed to be close to an atomic bomb
I have a bad feeling that they are not finding this plane until a piece of it washes up on the shores of the indian ocean one day in the distant future. I sure hope I'm wrong because it must be a horrible feeling for the families to not get any closure and know what happened.
Wait until Pat Buchanan and those on the 700 Club chime in.
for that regard, I can see Phelps' last words being something about this.
BL.
It's being reported that British and US aviation analysts have managed to narrow down the search area to something the size of Arizona (down from an area the size of Texas - which doesn't really help me or anyone else not from the western bit of the US, but I digress .). They did this by looking at the satellite data from the engine pings, and refining it. The current priority search area is off the coast of Western Australia. If the new analysis is accurate then something should turn up shortly as the Australians have some good resources to throw at this, and they are being helped by a US Navy sub-hunter plane.
Too late for survivors, I believe, but at least the families will have closure.