Yep it would be. Especially considering that Malaysia has a lot of muslims it's probably quite a common name.
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
Yep it would be. Especially considering that Malaysia has a lot of muslims it's probably quite a common name.
Now this is getting interesting. The Chinese satellite images show that it is east of the Peninsula while the Malaysians say that the plane flown to the west of the Peninsula. It means that one of them could be wrong, or maybe that part of the plane disintegrated over the sea which caused the plane to be uncontrollable and eventually crash? Sounds a bit like JAL123 to me.
Yeah most definitely premature to say it is from the plane until they get actual eyes on the debris.
It's profiling, but I admit it crossed my mind.
I will say this.
The name should rather be expected, especially when living next door to the most populist Muslim majority nation in the world.
So in the pilot's defense, his name would appear normal, whereas him looking at our western names may think that we are the ones that are different.
BL.
Are these 3 new images still east of malaysia? If that oilrig worker southeast of Vietnam stated that he saw a burning aircraft, wouldn't that dispute Malaysia's military which stated that the plane turned west and headed toward the straits?
If the Malaysians seriously sent the planes to the exact spot reported by the Chinese, they have to be incompetent. Surely they took into account the currents and assumed that debris would have drifted after 3 days.....
Debris are likely moved due to ocean currents since they were taken on Sunday. Hopefully the real deal is close to being uncovered. Also hoping that they are looking underwater as well.
My understanding is that the Malaysians had an unidentified plane on radar heading west and what little info is provided I assume they made an assumption this was the plane in question. The oil rig worker who saw the burning plane was to the East of the plane's flight path.
link
----------
I wonder if large pieces of debris as those reported would stay afloat indefinitely?
----------
My impression is that underwater searches are not something started on the spur of the moment, that they take a while to organize and get equipment into the right place. And they are not that effective with such a large expanse of ocean in question. I've always wondered about the black boxes as to how well they transmit under water?
Well I've answered my own question:
link
The problem here is that 2 miles is not very much when you are looking at the size of the search area. I still don't know if aircraft could detect this underwater signal or if it would require a boat with equipment in the water?
Last edited:
Wow so that WSJ report saying that engine data suggested the plane was in flight for 4 extra hours after it lost contact is now being disputed by Malaysia and (possibly?) Rolls-Royce. Officially, they have "no comment"
Here's the link: U.S. Investigators Suspect Missing Malaysia Airlines Plane Flew On for Hours.
Here is the Malaysian Denial: Malaysia Airlines Officials Dispute Existence of Engine Data, but Say Plane May Have Flown On
What would be very valuable in any automated engine monitoring program, which I believe both Boeing and Air Bus have, would be to include position info with those reports. The position would come from the Nav System which may or may not be screwed up. Is it normally included? I don't know.
There are lots of data that would be "valuable" after a plane goes down. Of course, there is a cost/benefit decision to be made in all cases. I wouldn't expect engine data relayed to company maintenance to include position information. It would not be pertinent to engine monitoring. What happened to this flight was a rarity.
Last edited:
So much contradicting information in this story, I wouldn't be surprised if one side actually knows what happened and is trying to cover it up. Why they are covering it up is an entirely different question, however.
Didn't want to go this route, but for your sake, let's play the conspiracy game.
After 9/11, the thought of this happening would be rather slim. You'd have an unknown target on your scope entering controlled airspace; no discrete code, type and altitude unknown. Repeated attempts to get hold of it are unsuccessful. ATC would probably get hold of their admins, who would then confer with the government/military brass, who would then send up a jet to find it and either escort it down, or shoot it down.
They would have an area to look for the aircraft, but not able to verify the type of aircraft, or altitude of the aircraft until visually spotted. Then comes the assessments and what the options are to deal with the situation.
Now, if it landed somewhere, depending on if the engines were still transmitting, that would be the easiest way. If they aren't, then we are back to the same situation we are in, but just with a different area to search. We'd have:
- last place the original report had the aircraft,
- Strait of Malacca, which is where military radar last had it,
- new location, based on last transmission of RR engine data.
We would actually have those, hijacking or not. So we should probably leave any conspiracy out of the picture until we have verifiable evidence of the aircraft (read: wreckage, CVR/FDR, survivors, etc.).
BL.
Unfortunately, I am slowly coming around to the idea that you might not be entirely wrong, with this uncomfortable thought.
Yesterday's press conference was a little unsettling.
The one thing holding me back from this hijack thing is all of the people on the plane. They all have phones, unless everyone was murdered before landing I would think somebody would have send some sort of signal. Either this is the biggest conspiracy ever or this is the biggest plane crash mystery ever. Is the Malaysian government withholding valuable information about what happened.
Those programs do exist, modern aircraft are continuously sending out status data. There is no technical reason why they could not include that info, because when and where is always important, but I am not prepared to debate the cost/benefit with you for a engine maintenance program or other means of automated reporting that *currently* exists.
Keep in mind that with mobile phones, even in range, the closest connection to a tower would be spotty at best, non-existent at the most, due to how the towers cover the area. The towers would cover the area around them like a tent pole: it would spread down and out. The flight would be above the tower, so it wouldn't get the coverage needed. This is excluding satellite coverage.
But you do bring up another good question; how good is coverage over there. In other words, we aren't putting our technology to good use.
According to http://www.apple.com/iphone/LTE/, Celcom, DiGi, and Maxis cover 3G/4G/LTE for Malaysia. Using the area around the Strait of Malacca as an example, couldn't the phone carrier scour the area, creating a sort of crowdsourced hotspot or coverage area for phones to pick up a signal? If so, and if it works, Location Services could do our work for us, especially given the fact that that area does have some major shipping routes.
At this point, both iOS and Android could help the SAR mission.
BL.
My experience is that at altitude cell phone coverage is nil. People could be using the internet on the plane though.
AF447 telemetry was limited.
The BB's was eventually found, data mostly (or all) intact, and they did confirm what they suspected.
Cell signals are very, very limited.
They are mainly horizontal, and max to about 10 miles if lucky.
The airliner would have been both too far away horizontally and far too high for any ground cell tower to work.
(the few cases of mountain hikers calling from 20 miles was due to mountains acting like a dish).
If the plane was equipped with satellite up-link.
Problem is, SUL does not provide location information, just data transfer.
Yes, I know, the cell phones have built in GPS, but issues:
1. GPS is turned off by regulation.
2. GPS signal has difficult time penetrating metal body of B-777 (from experience, yes, I know.)
3. Someone needs to be monitoring and record path.
Yes, yes, despite the incredible advancements in personal radio cell phones and GPS, the aviation industry (thanks to our very litigiousness society and politicians) is very slow to adopt new technology. Air navigation is still yeas behind other industries.
The world is still a big place, and even a B777 can go missing.