Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I've heard that some airlines/aircraft carry a satellite phone in the passenger area available to the crew in case of emergencies. Did that aircraft carry one?

Depending on where you are and what company you are with there are still gaps in satellite phone service, so even if there was one on board I wouldn't be overly surprised if the southern Indian Ocean was a place that doesn't even have satellite phone coverage.
 
Ok, so it would have to be at the same time electrical and (ideally) chemical for both scenarios to be likely ?…
Lots of things made of plastic and other chemicals packed in and around the electronics. I think the nature of any fire burning on the flight deck or another systems compartment is going to be chemical.
A….
Post #1 and #7 in that thread are perfect examples of how far Guard can get you. A few pages in, they were talking about how his transmission from northern Nevada was heard as far north as Calgary.
....
nevada to Calgary is not really that far… about 1000 miles. I just pegged out the distance from Australia to the search area and it's something like 2000 to 2500 miles… and once they left the Indonesian coast early in the flight, Australia is the closest land. The Indian/Pacific oceans are really really big.
 
Lots of things made of plastic and other chemicals packed in and around the electronics. I think the nature of any fire burning on the flight deck or another systems compartment is going to be chemical.

nevada to Calgary is not really that far… about 1000 miles. I just pegged out the distance from Australia to the search area and it's something like 2000 to 2500 miles… and once they left the Indonesian coast early in the flight, Australia is the closest land. The Indian/Pacific oceans are really really big.

True, but Kuala Lampur to, say, Colombo, Sri Lanka, Singapore, or Jakarta would definitely be in range to hear something.

BL.
 
True, but Kuala Lampur to, say, Colombo, Sri Lanka, Singapore, or Jakarta would definitely be in range to hear something.

BL.

I'm not so sure about Columbo... Kuala Lumpur to Colombo is a just over 2300 miles. And Colombo is a WNW of KL. The plane likely was heading more or less southerly so I don't think it was ever within 1000 miles of Columbo. Jakarta (or another Indonesian city) is of course another matter since the plane flew over Indonesia if it ended up in the southern Indian Ocean. But if the plane isn't using it's radios, then it doesn't whether it uses the Guard frequency or not. For that to be used - it needs to be working, and there needs to be someone who can access it and knows how to use it.
 
Also the drone deployment capabilities we have today are insane. They can deploy a network of drones to literally any location within an hour. So if the plane was aloft for as long as they say, there's no way it goes missing.

I just noticed this post, if what you are saying is true then why does it take them almost 4 hours to fly out to search the suspected crash site? Why not just use these hypersonic drones to get there in 1/4 the time?

The main thing that I'm getting from this story is that modern technology and the fact that most people rarely leave developed areas has led to a false sense of how big the world is, and people not realizing that there actually are huge areas outside of radar or cell service, or any other easy way of making contact or searching an area.
 
...
The main thing that I'm getting from this story is that modern technology and the fact that most people rarely leave developed areas has led to a false sense of how big the world is, and people not realizing that there actually are huge areas outside of radar or cell service, or any other easy way of making contact or searching an area.

I agree totally. I'm lucky enough to have lived in Metro Vancouver, BC. You can take an 15 minute ordinary city bus to the northern border of the city, get off the bus in one of several provincial parks which border on the city and go hiking in totally mountainous wilderness. And every year people die in these parks because they go in unprepared for the wilderness and the weather, and they get lost. Usually they're found… sometimes it takes a few years. If they are lucky enough to get lost and can find their way to ridge they can use their cell phone to call for help. Even then it can take a few days during the winter to actually get to them. If they're in a canyon they likely have to wait for someone at home or work to miss them, to notify the authorities, and for the search teams to get near them. I should note here that the North Shore Search and Rescue Volunteers have been acknowledged as some of best in the world. They train a lot… and they get a lot of practice. People who grow up in cities often have no idea how Big the world is… even just steps from their own front doors.
 
That's more probable than a lot of the other junk floating around. IF what they have reported on TV was the case (re: location) then something along those lines is probably what happened.

No matter what though, with the amount of satellites that are constantly surveying the Earth, it doesn't make sense that they lost the aircraft. The technology Google used to take a picture of the car on my driveway (that is available to the entire world) is over 10 years old. The lenses they use now with tracking sensors are super advanced. Also the drone deployment capabilities we have today are insane. They can deploy a network of drones to literally any location within an hour. So if the plane was aloft for as long as they say, there's no way it goes missing.

Are you really being literal? :) Maybe the process could start within an hour of when a decision was made to deploy drones. A lot would depend on the location of said drones. Bottom line no way in an hour for any situation unless drones are sitting there ready to go in the immediate vicinity.
 
Are you really being literal? :) Maybe the process could start within an hour of when a decision was made to deploy drones. A lot would depend on the location of said drones. Bottom line no way in an hour for any situation unless drones are sitting there ready to go in the immediate vicinity.

I agree. They would have to be in the vicinity. However we are talking about the US. The US and China both have ships in the region with drone deployments available. They've had them for some time now. Whether or not they choose to use them or not, we'll never know. Or we already know that they did not use them.
 
I agree. They would have to be in the vicinity. However we are talking about the US. The US and China both have ships in the region with drone deployments available. They've had them for some time now. Whether or not they choose to use them or not, we'll never know. Or we already know that they did not use them.

What US or for that matter Chinese fleet is based out in the Indian Ocean?
 
I agree. They would have to be in the vicinity. However we are talking about the US. The US and China both have ships in the region with drone deployments available. They've had them for some time now. Whether or not they choose to use them or not, we'll never know. Or we already know that they did not use them.

I don't think they do, with all due respect. It was only May of last year that the first carrier launched prototype drone was launched from the US Carrier George HW Bush. It then flew off to land at an airstrip. To use drones for this search means they would need to a) have developed drones considerably and then deployed them, and then b) would just happen to have a Carrier with drones in the immediate vicinity.

Perth, the closest airstrip, is something like 2000 to 3000 miles away from the primary search area (about LA to NY, or London to Damascus for comparison) - or 4000 to 6000 mile roundtrip - before adding in any time to actually search. And the weather there is awful - constantly grounding much bigger airplanes for a day or more.

I would not be surprised to learn that drones has been used on the northern search areas - especially over land and maybe not always observing international boundaries. There are strips and bases close enough. If a drone had found wreckage I'm also pretty sure word would have quietly gone to a traditional search asset to look in a particular spot to let them 'find' it to keep the drone's mission secret.

So - with respect - I don't think drones are at all useful in the southern Indian Ocean.
 
Off topic, but I think a network of automated recoverable shipboard intelligence drones would be a great feature for any battle group. You don't think they have been considering that? ;)
 
Off topic, but I think a network of automated recoverable shipboard intelligence drones would be a great feature for any battle group. You don't think they have been considering that? ;)

I think they have been considering it.... the challenge is in the "recoverable" aspect. Landing on a bouncing, moving, gusty, carrier deck is supposedly one of the toughest skills to learn for a pilot. And that's when you are actually 'present'. I don't think they are anywhere near being able to reliably land a drone on a carrier deck either by auto pilot or remote controlled. The alternative is to launch from a carrier deck and land the drone at a land-based strip. But then - why not launch from the land based strip in the first place? Space is valuable on a carrier - to tie up space for a drone that could be launched from the shore may not make sense.

What I could see, however, is a drone setup that packs into a shipping container (already exists, according to Wikipedia) that is stored with a battle group. When appropriate - a helicopter ferries it to a nearby airstrip and the drone is flown from there.

In the case of this missing plane, though... it is so far from any where of course that drones are no help at all... assuming that it in fact in the southern Indian ocean.
 
Last edited:
I think they have been considering it.... the challenge is in the "recoverable" aspect. Landing on a bouncing, moving, gusty, carrier deck is supposedly one of the toughest skills to learn for a pilot. And that's when you are actually 'present'. I don't think they are anywhere near being able to reliably land a drone on a carrier deck either by auto pilot or remote controlled. The alternative is to launch from a carrier deck and land the drone at a land-based strip. But then - why not launch from the land based strip in the first place? Space is valuable on a carrier - to tie up space for a drone that could be launched from the shore may not make sense.

What I could see, however, is a drone setup that packs into a shipping container (already exists, according to Wikipedia) that is stored with a battle group. When appropriate - a helicopter ferries it to a nearby airstrip and the drone is flown from there.

In the case of this missing plane, though... it is so far from any where of course that drones are no help at all... assuming that it in fact in the southern Indian ocean.

I'll offer that aircraft now are being designed so unstable that a pilot could not fly them without computer assist. It would be very easy for a drone to fly in on an ILS system. What I'm not sure about is how they would stop it- modified arresting cable? big net? possibly.
 
I'll offer that aircraft now are being designed so unstable that a pilot could not fly them without computer assist.
I agree. But a pilot in the seat of an aircraft has no time lag to deal with, watching the signals and the ship's motion, and even anticipating the ship's motion from visual cues (a large wave about to slide under the keel, the change in look of the surface of the water as a large gust approaches.) I've sailed with professional sailors (as unskilled ballast mostly) but they anticipate the wind before it arrives. A carrier pilot - I am sure - is doing the same thing. A drone's pilot sitting in a room may have a time lag to contend with as computers digitize the scene and then redisplay it. Plus they won't have the same amount of information to work with. I think it *will* be done. I just don't think it's there yet.
It would be very easy for a drone to fly in on an ILS system. What I'm not sure about is how they would stop it- modified arresting cable? big net? possibly.
Since a drone doesn't have the same need to protect the pilot from high Gs as a piloted craft, they may have more options. All you have to do is make sure that the deceleration doesn't rip the drone apart. Not nets though… too many antennas out front that would get snapped off.
 
Fairly similar physically, both long haul wide bodies. 777 is a bit bigger and has longer range.

Once you get in the cockpit, I have no idea how the two compare.

You'll notice this, especially if you look at pictures on Airliners.net or Jetphotos.net.

The trunk landing gear on a B767 is double tandem (4 x 4). The B777 is triple tandem (3 x 2).

The B777 obviously has larger engines.

The tail of the B777 (underneath the tail elevator) is tapered together (similar to the MD80, DC9, and B717). The B767 is cylindrical, like the B757.

Both do come with an option for winglets, but they are more prominent on the B767, as more airlines have opted to retrofit them on the B767 (especially the -300 series).

But definitely have a look at the landing gear and fuselage behind the tail elevator. Those would be your biggest physical differences.

BL.
 
There is yet another possibility -
Given the tension between China, Vietnam, Indonesia etc. over the territorial waters & airspace, I d think any unidentified aircraft d ve jets scrambled after it. Could it be - after (for whatever reason) the transponder went off, somebody didnt (accidentally or intentionally) shoot down the plane?
The question is- which country's military would then keep it under wraps for fear of repurcusions & ramifications?
 
There is yet another possibility -
Given the tension between China, Vietnam, Indonesia etc. over the territorial waters & airspace, I d think any unidentified aircraft d ve jets scrambled after it. Could it be - after (for whatever reason) the transponder went off, somebody didnt (accidentally or intentionally) shoot down the plane?
The question is- which country's military would then keep it under wraps for fear of repurcusions & ramifications?

The evidence appears to indicate that the closest country to MH370's location is Australia, and I don't see the Aussies thinking that a jet 1000km away and not flying towards them is going to be much of threat.
 
Quick question : if they do find the recorders (and against all initial odds, they might, apparently), is it possible they were disabled like the tracking devices? I don't know, maybe by doing something as simple as driving a screwdriver through the microphone(s?) in the cockpit someone could render the voice recorder useless, even though it kept recording.
 
Quick question : if they do find the recorders (and against all initial odds, they might, apparently), is it possible they were disabled like the tracking devices? I don't know, maybe by doing something as simple as driving a screwdriver through the microphone(s?) in the cockpit someone could render the voice recorder useless, even though it kept recording.

They aren't in the cockpit though, they're in the rear of the aircraft. I suspect they'll be in a maintenance area not accessible from the aircraft in flight.
 
They aren't in the cockpit though, they're in the rear of the aircraft. I suspect they'll be in a maintenance area not accessible from the aircraft in flight.

Yes, I know that, but whoever disabled the ACARS had a thorough knowledge of the aircraft, and could have cut a few cables, even without having access to the actual black box recorders. The microphones for the voice recorder have to be in the cockpit, after all...
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.