Malaysian airlines has lost a 777

[el-Capitan]

I see 53' containers all the time. They make them up to 56' but 53’ is the DOT maximum length for a trailer on the road and my experience is almost always with them and truck trailers.

Perhaps here in the US and on the road.

However, in shipping there are only 20' and 40', named TEU and FEU (twenty foot equivalent unit). They will not fit into the ships' "slotted" (celled) holds if they are a different size.

I am in shipping.

 

[coxmaster]

It's a tough situation, the "pings" are audible for 2-3 miles but the Indian ocean is from 3K to 23Kft deep in the search area, all the more reason for a recorder device be made electable if a plane hits the water, sure it might float for days before you find it but it WILL have the GPS info on it as to when/where the plane hit the ocean and will also hopefully contain enough information that investigators would be able to tell what happened to the plane. I'm thinking this was a fire event, the crew were overcome with smoke before they could land it and it flew on autopilot until fuel exhaustion.

Your ejection system for the recorder seems plausible, other than the fact that it would be incredibly costly and complicated to implement. It couldn't eject simply because it detected water, otherwise clouds and rain would be a problem.

 

[norseamd]

You ejection system for the recorder seems plausible, other than the fact that it would be incredibly costly and complicated to implement. It couldn't eject simply because it detected water, otherwise clouds and rain would be a problem.

what about using some sort of impact sensors?

 

[BUTCH1]

Your ejection system for the recorder seems plausible, other than the fact that it would be incredibly costly and complicated to implement. It couldn't eject simply because it detected water, otherwise clouds and rain would be a problem.

Not really, 2 sensors on top and bottom of fuselage would need to be immersed (fully covered) for a period of time say 20 seconds or the detection of water pressure as the airframe begins to sink would cause deployment. It could contain its own small battery in the bottom of the cavity that powers the sensors and the ejection mechanism as system power would probably be unavailable. I know retrofitting existing airframes with this would be costly and probably not doable but going forward with newer designs is more or less what I was referencing to. Since much of the planet is covered in water the majority of hull-loss accidents seem to happen over water..

 

[LegendKiller]

Perhaps here in the US and on the road.

However, in shipping there are only 20' and 40', named TEU and FEU (twenty foot equivalent unit). They will not fit into the ships' "slotted" (celled) holds if they are a different size.

I am in shipping.

Agreed.

I finance the containers themselves. Tal, cai, cronos, textainer, seaco, seacube....etc.

 

[Thebobo]

Airlines don't use regular shipping containers.

 

[02ranger]

It's a tough situation, the "pings" are audible for 2-3 miles but the Indian ocean is from 3K to 23Kft deep in the search area, all the more reason for a recorder device be made electable if a plane hits the water, sure it might float for days before you find it but it WILL have the GPS info on it as to when/where the plane hit the ocean and will also hopefully contain enough information that investigators would be able to tell what happened to the plane. I'm thinking this was a fire event, the crew were overcome with smoke before they could land it and it flew on autopilot until fuel exhaustion.

The only problem with that idea is that the course change was entered into the flight computer before the "all right, good night" communication from the co-pilot, last I heard. How do you account for that if there was a fire?

I'm not trying to argue with you, because I honestly don't have a "favorite" scenario yet, I'm just curious how you reconcile the two.........

 

[alkemyst]

Yeah, I had 10th grade pupils who actually believed it had been found in the Bermuda Triangle, beacuse they saw this picture:

umm, you realize that makes you their teacher right?

 

[Kaido]

They're saying it may have flown as low as 12,000 feet now:

http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/23/world/asia/malaysia-airlines-plane/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

Military radar tracking shows that the aircraft changed altitude after making a sharp turn over the South China Sea as it headed toward the Strait of Malacca, a source close to the investigation into the missing flight told CNN. The plane flew as low as 12,000 feet at some point before it disappeared from radar, according to the source.

The sharp turn seemed to be intentional, the source said.

The official, who is not authorized to speak to the media, told CNN that the area the plane flew in after the turn is a heavily trafficked air corridor and that flying at 12,000 feet would have kept the jet well out of the way of that traffic.

 

[LegendKiller]

Airlines don't use regular shipping containers.

The airlines use ones bigger than 40'?

The whole point of this was that the idea that the pieces were 70'+ long were shipping containers, dropped from container ship, was bogus. There are no 70'+ long containers used in international shipping. There aren't any over 40'.

 

[CZroe]

Airlines don't use regular shipping containers.

Uhh, duh. That's the whole point: If it's a shipping container then it isn't plane wreckage. No one thought it could be a shipping container that came from the airliner.

 

[gscone]

Shame on the Malaysian government on doing such a shitty job in this investigation.

 

[LTC8K6]

The airlines use ones bigger than 40'?

The whole point of this was that the idea that the pieces were 70'+ long were shipping containers, dropped from container ship, was bogus. There are no 70'+ long containers used in international shipping. There aren't any over 40'.

45' is the longest standard shipping container.

But these are all used on ships, not airliners.

 

[LTC8K6]

They're saying it may have flown as low as 12,000 feet now:

http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/23/world/asia/malaysia-airlines-plane/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

Flying at 12K feet will also consume a lot of fuel. Flying at 5K feet, as was also reported, will positively guzzle fuel. Doing either for any length of time will shorten your range considerably.

 

[LTC8K6]

The only problem with that idea is that the course change was entered into the flight computer before the "all right, good night" communication from the co-pilot, last I heard. How do you account for that if there was a fire?

I'm not trying to argue with you, because I honestly don't have a "favorite" scenario yet, I'm just curious how you reconcile the two.........

That report was bogus. There is no evidence of any programmed course changes, other than the flight path itself.

Since ACARS was not transmitting, there is no way to know if anyone programmed anything different into the FMS.

The last ACARS transmission reported the normal programmed flight plan from KUL to PEK.

 

[leeland]

Has there been any word on the pilots deleted files? I can't imagine it is that hard in this day and age to process the hard drive and see what they can find out...either they can recover the files or they can't...can't believe that hasn't been revisited yet

 

[DrPizza]

Shame on the Malaysian government on doing such a shitty job in this investigation.

Agreed. They should waterboard or otherwise torture the pilots into admitting where they hid the plane. Wait. What??

 

[02ranger]

That report was bogus. There is no evidence of any programmed course changes, other than the flight path itself.

Since ACARS was not transmitting, there is no way to know if anyone programmed anything different into the FMS.

The last ACARS transmission reported the normal programmed flight plan from KUL to PEK.

I haven't seen that yet. Last thing I read was that it was for certain the course was changed before that last communication, and that somehow they could tell by the last ACARS report or something like that. With the huge amount of different reports coming out from different sources, it's kinda hard to keep up with it all.

 

[CZroe]

The airlines use ones bigger than 40'?

The whole point of this was that the idea that the pieces were 70'+ long were shipping containers, dropped from container ship, was bogus. There are no 70'+ long containers used in international shipping. There aren't any over 40'.

But the containers aren't simply stacked: they are interlocked. It could easily be more than one shipping cargo container linked together and, thus, the greater-than-40-foot length does not tell us anything.

 

[LTC8K6]

Was turn reprogrammed?

Malaysian officials, in a written update Sunday on the search, cast doubt on the theory that someone, perhaps a pilot, had reprogrammed the aircraft to make an unexpected left turn during the flight.

"The last ACARS transmission, sent at 1:07 a.m., showed nothing unusual. The 1:07 a.m. transmission showed a normal routing all the way to Beijing," it read.

From CNN.

Of course, there's no reason a new route couldn't have been programmed after 1:07, but there would be no way to know that.

This is apparently the latest rendition of the path the plane flew:

http://skyvector.com/?ll=5.21458795...I:F.WM.MEKAR:F.WM.NILAM:F.VO.IGOGU:F.VC.TOPIN

 

[skyking]

But the containers aren't simply stacked: they are interlocked. It could easily be more than one shipping cargo container linked together and, thus, the greater-than-40-foot length does not tell us anything.

No, they are simply stacked. They only have the stacking lugs on the corners.

 

[Kaido]

Flying at 12K feet will also consume a lot of fuel. Flying at 5K feet, as was also reported, will positively guzzle fuel. Doing either for any length of time will shorten your range considerably.

But we know 2 things:

1. Rolls Royce said they got engine data for 5 hours of the flight

2. They got a faint ACARS satellite ping at 7.5 hours into the flight, over the Indian Ocean (which indicates the plane had power, and normally indicates the plane is intact)

Given fuel estimates, the plane would have been able to fly 8 hours total, so that would have given them 30 minutes before the fuel ran out from the last ACARS ping. What's weird is that Malaysia still hasn't shared the list of the contents of the cargo:

http://www.news.com.au/travel/trave...he-search-effort/story-fnizu68q-1226863022091

As the article points out, Australia is spending tens of millions of dollars searching for the airplane, and Malaysia refuses to tell them what kind of debris they should be looking for. That's pretty fishy right there & says that they're hiding something - whether it's illegal (a nuke?) or of national importance or whatever.

 

[benzylic]

Given fuel estimates, the plane would have been able to fly 8 hours total, so that would have given them 30 minutes before the fuel ran out from the last ACARS ping. What's weird is that Malaysia still hasn't shared the list of the contents of the cargo:

The CEO of the airline did say that the plane was carrying lithium ion batteries, but those are found in nearly all electronic devices nowadays so while they could cause a fire its not really an obvious red flag.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/21/world/asia/missing-plane-q-and-a/

 

[LTC8K6]

But we know 2 things:

1. Rolls Royce said they got engine data for 5 hours of the flight

2. They got a faint ACARS satellite ping at 7.5 hours into the flight, over the Indian Ocean (which indicates the plane had power, and normally indicates the plane is intact)

Given fuel estimates, the plane would have been able to fly 8 hours total, so that would have given them 30 minutes before the fuel ran out from the last ACARS ping. What's weird is that Malaysia still hasn't shared the list of the contents of the cargo:

http://www.news.com.au/travel/trave...he-search-effort/story-fnizu68q-1226863022091

As the article points out, Australia is spending tens of millions of dollars searching for the airplane, and Malaysia refuses to tell them what kind of debris they should be looking for. That's pretty fishy right there & says that they're hiding something - whether it's illegal (a nuke?) or of national importance or whatever.

1. I know of no way for any engine data to be transmitted once ACARS is disabled. The RR system does not send data continuously, but in snapshots. One snapshot per flight phase, 4 total. Takeoff-climb-cruise-end of flight. it will also send a separate report if an anomaly is detected. AFAIK, the takeoff and climb snapshots were sent, and that was it.

2. ACARS was disabled at 1:07. The pings are unrelated to ACARS. The pings are simply from the SATCOM antenna system.

 

[LTC8K6]

There is no separate system to send engine data. Engine data is sent via ACARS. The WSJ report about hours of engine data is false.