Bullzeyebill
Flashaholic
Let's not carry this on any further. Member nbp said it well, so we don't need any more quotes.
Bill
Malaysian Ghost Plane
- Thread starter nbp
- Start date
Help Support Candle Power Flashlight Forum
Let's not carry this on any further. Member nbp said it well, so we don't need any more quotes.
Bill
mcnair55
Flashlight Enthusiast
I certainally do use the term often you are correct and i enjoy the thread in most parts.:thumbsup:
StarHalo
Flashaholic
Attempting to return thread to topic:
Okay, good sleep, good coffee, here we go:
Those who want longform evidence of how Inmarsat came to their conclusion about the southern arc can view a very mathematically-detailed post here, however Moldyoldy's link above is the summary; basic trigonometry combined with the Doppler Effect of the plane moving away at a specific attitude makes it clear that the southern arc is correct. All that's left to calculate from there is time, determined by the satellite pings, and distance, determined by fuel load. You end up arriving at a patch roughly 2,200 km WSW of Australia.
On to fire and why there wasn't one - some interesting facts about Lithium-ion batteries and Halon fire suppressant:
The most common fire suppressants used in commercial aircraft fire suppression systems are called Halon 1211 and Halon 1301 (respectively, CF2ClBr and CF3Br). The FAA did some tests on Halon 1301 and Li-Ion batteries a decade ago (http://www.fire.tc.faa.gov/pdf/04-26.pdf). From the executive summary:
Halon 1301, the fire suppression agent installed in transport category aircraft, is ineffective in suppressing or extinguishing a primary lithium battery fire. Halon 1301 appears to chemically interact with the burning lithium and electrolyte, causing a color change in the molten lithium sparks, turning them a deep red instead of the normal white. This chemical interaction has no effect on battery fire duration or intensity. The air temperature in a cargo compartment that has had a fire suppressed by Halon 1301 can still be above the autoignition temperature of lithium. Because of this, batteries that were not involved in the initial fire can still ignite and propagate. The ignition of a primary lithium battery releases burning electrolyte and a molten lithium spray. The cargo liner material may be vulnerable to perforation by molten lithium, depending on its thickness. This can allow the Halon 1301 fire suppressant agent to leak out of the compartment, reducing the concentration within the cargo compartment and the effectiveness of the agent. Holes in the cargo liner may also allow flames to spread outside the compartment.
The color change of the lithium sparks indicated that a reaction was occurring between the lithium and the Halon 1301. This reaction had no effect on the fire progression, neither hindering nor promoting the spread of the battery fire. The vented electrolyte fires, normally pale red in color, turned bright red when exposed to Halon 1301. The battery fire continued to propagate until all batteries were consumed, continuing long after the 1-propanol fire was extinguished. The halon also had no effect on the peak temperatures in the test chamber, peaking at about 1400°F. This is similar to the peak temperatures exhibited in previous unsuppressed fires. However, the overall temperature profiles were lower, due to the extinguishment of the 1-propanol and battery plastic coating fires.
So there's some insight about why Li-ions on planes are controversial - the suppression system has enough Halon to saturate the hold for at least one hour (some systems can go a full three hours), but this would only prevent everything else in the hold from catching fire, the batteries would continue burning unimpeded.
A post from a pilot on a piloting form fills us in on what to do/what he's done regarding cargo fires:
And therein lies the gaping hole in the cargo fire theory: If a fire disabled the plane's electronics to the point that they couldn't even communicate, then how did they make use of the autopilot and/or guidance system to continue navigating the plane? The 777's autopilot is not available if portions of the plane's electronics are offline/disabled, it logically only works if it knows everything is in order. Yet the lengthy Southern flight path is roughly straight (or magnetically straight, more on that later) which would indicate a computer-directed course.
Another issue would be smoke, a point nicely illustrated by skywriting: a small airplane uses a bottle of oil that jets into the exhaust manifold creating white smoke and thus writing in the sky which is visible on the ground. So now scale this up to a Boeing 777 with a chemically-accelerated raging cargo hold inferno - there should be a massive trail of smoke that's completely disproportionate to the size of the plane, which would not only be evident on the ground at any altitude, but would stick out plainly on weather satellite. But there's no evidence of any such contrail on the weather maps of the 370's flight path area, it makes no contrail for most of the flight (if only it did, and would then reveal the flight path concretely..)
So if the mayday call is procedure, what of the polar opposite of that reaction, the radio silence? If the electronics were still in good enough condition to navigate/autopilot by, then the lack of a transponder signal is key. The transponder control is a four-detent knob located on the center console; the far-right position is the normal position that sends out the plane's identification. The only way to cut the transponder signal completely is to turn this knob all the way to the left, something that would never be done for any reason on a commercial flight. So the transponder was deliberately turned off, at the same time radio silence was enforced, at the same time the left turn was deliberately selected.
The supposed service ceiling maneuver, which was gleaned from questionable data, would not have been done in the event of a fire; as noted above, procedure is to drop altitude immediately, not rise. Inmarsat's data shows a consistent cruise at ~30,000 feet, no anomalous altitude changes. Either way, it is consistent with the data: An incongruous and unexplained jump in altitude would fit with an incongruous and unexplained flight path, and if the engines sent ersatz data because electrical buses were turned off and on it would fit with deliberate tampering with the plane's electrical system in an attempt to cut all communication. Premeditation is indicated in both cases.
The straight-and-steady southern flight path may have been steered-in to follow a heading as opposed to a course laid in, since it appears to have followed a magnetic south course and not a straight line; where the wreckage is found will ultimately help determine this, since if it's more to the east it was probably following a magnetic heading, but if its more to the west it was following a true heading/a way point. This is why the search has been progressing along a general east/west course.
So everything points to deliberation, some irrational but intentional action that may not have had any fixed motive or plan beyond the immediate escape from oversight. No guarantee that it was the pilot or crew, but it was someone with comparable knowledge of the plane.
There's been some comparison to Sully's "Miracle on the Hudson", and to that end there is good news and bad news: The good news is that if the 777 runs out of fuel while on autopilot, it will assume you want to hold your heading and level-as-possible flight, so it will at that point become a giant glider, carefully maintaining the nose attitude while gracefully descending. The bad news is that the plane will also assume you want to hold your speed, so it will make no attempt to slow from the ~500 mph cruising velocity.
Okay, good sleep, good coffee, here we go:
Those who want longform evidence of how Inmarsat came to their conclusion about the southern arc can view a very mathematically-detailed post here, however Moldyoldy's link above is the summary; basic trigonometry combined with the Doppler Effect of the plane moving away at a specific attitude makes it clear that the southern arc is correct. All that's left to calculate from there is time, determined by the satellite pings, and distance, determined by fuel load. You end up arriving at a patch roughly 2,200 km WSW of Australia.
On to fire and why there wasn't one - some interesting facts about Lithium-ion batteries and Halon fire suppressant:
The most common fire suppressants used in commercial aircraft fire suppression systems are called Halon 1211 and Halon 1301 (respectively, CF2ClBr and CF3Br). The FAA did some tests on Halon 1301 and Li-Ion batteries a decade ago (http://www.fire.tc.faa.gov/pdf/04-26.pdf). From the executive summary:
Halon 1301, the fire suppression agent installed in transport category aircraft, is ineffective in suppressing or extinguishing a primary lithium battery fire. Halon 1301 appears to chemically interact with the burning lithium and electrolyte, causing a color change in the molten lithium sparks, turning them a deep red instead of the normal white. This chemical interaction has no effect on battery fire duration or intensity. The air temperature in a cargo compartment that has had a fire suppressed by Halon 1301 can still be above the autoignition temperature of lithium. Because of this, batteries that were not involved in the initial fire can still ignite and propagate. The ignition of a primary lithium battery releases burning electrolyte and a molten lithium spray. The cargo liner material may be vulnerable to perforation by molten lithium, depending on its thickness. This can allow the Halon 1301 fire suppressant agent to leak out of the compartment, reducing the concentration within the cargo compartment and the effectiveness of the agent. Holes in the cargo liner may also allow flames to spread outside the compartment.
The color change of the lithium sparks indicated that a reaction was occurring between the lithium and the Halon 1301. This reaction had no effect on the fire progression, neither hindering nor promoting the spread of the battery fire. The vented electrolyte fires, normally pale red in color, turned bright red when exposed to Halon 1301. The battery fire continued to propagate until all batteries were consumed, continuing long after the 1-propanol fire was extinguished. The halon also had no effect on the peak temperatures in the test chamber, peaking at about 1400°F. This is similar to the peak temperatures exhibited in previous unsuppressed fires. However, the overall temperature profiles were lower, due to the extinguishment of the 1-propanol and battery plastic coating fires.
So there's some insight about why Li-ions on planes are controversial - the suppression system has enough Halon to saturate the hold for at least one hour (some systems can go a full three hours), but this would only prevent everything else in the hold from catching fire, the batteries would continue burning unimpeded.
A post from a pilot on a piloting form fills us in on what to do/what he's done regarding cargo fires:
And therein lies the gaping hole in the cargo fire theory: If a fire disabled the plane's electronics to the point that they couldn't even communicate, then how did they make use of the autopilot and/or guidance system to continue navigating the plane? The 777's autopilot is not available if portions of the plane's electronics are offline/disabled, it logically only works if it knows everything is in order. Yet the lengthy Southern flight path is roughly straight (or magnetically straight, more on that later) which would indicate a computer-directed course.
Another issue would be smoke, a point nicely illustrated by skywriting: a small airplane uses a bottle of oil that jets into the exhaust manifold creating white smoke and thus writing in the sky which is visible on the ground. So now scale this up to a Boeing 777 with a chemically-accelerated raging cargo hold inferno - there should be a massive trail of smoke that's completely disproportionate to the size of the plane, which would not only be evident on the ground at any altitude, but would stick out plainly on weather satellite. But there's no evidence of any such contrail on the weather maps of the 370's flight path area, it makes no contrail for most of the flight (if only it did, and would then reveal the flight path concretely..)
So if the mayday call is procedure, what of the polar opposite of that reaction, the radio silence? If the electronics were still in good enough condition to navigate/autopilot by, then the lack of a transponder signal is key. The transponder control is a four-detent knob located on the center console; the far-right position is the normal position that sends out the plane's identification. The only way to cut the transponder signal completely is to turn this knob all the way to the left, something that would never be done for any reason on a commercial flight. So the transponder was deliberately turned off, at the same time radio silence was enforced, at the same time the left turn was deliberately selected.
The supposed service ceiling maneuver, which was gleaned from questionable data, would not have been done in the event of a fire; as noted above, procedure is to drop altitude immediately, not rise. Inmarsat's data shows a consistent cruise at ~30,000 feet, no anomalous altitude changes. Either way, it is consistent with the data: An incongruous and unexplained jump in altitude would fit with an incongruous and unexplained flight path, and if the engines sent ersatz data because electrical buses were turned off and on it would fit with deliberate tampering with the plane's electrical system in an attempt to cut all communication. Premeditation is indicated in both cases.
The straight-and-steady southern flight path may have been steered-in to follow a heading as opposed to a course laid in, since it appears to have followed a magnetic south course and not a straight line; where the wreckage is found will ultimately help determine this, since if it's more to the east it was probably following a magnetic heading, but if its more to the west it was following a true heading/a way point. This is why the search has been progressing along a general east/west course.
So everything points to deliberation, some irrational but intentional action that may not have had any fixed motive or plan beyond the immediate escape from oversight. No guarantee that it was the pilot or crew, but it was someone with comparable knowledge of the plane.
There's been some comparison to Sully's "Miracle on the Hudson", and to that end there is good news and bad news: The good news is that if the 777 runs out of fuel while on autopilot, it will assume you want to hold your heading and level-as-possible flight, so it will at that point become a giant glider, carefully maintaining the nose attitude while gracefully descending. The bad news is that the plane will also assume you want to hold your speed, so it will make no attempt to slow from the ~500 mph cruising velocity.
Last edited:
StarHalo
Flashaholic
That French satellite is really something, especially given the amount of cloud cover:
markr6
Flashaholic
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2012
- Messages
- 9,258
Yeah thankfully there were some gaps in the clouds...I wonder what's under all that thick cloud cover?
BenChiew
Flashlight Enthusiast
That is a lot of debris down there.
StarHalo
Flashaholic
If the passengers got to keep their cell phones, there could be hundreds of hours of audio, video, pictures, notes, etc. Flash memory holds up pretty well in water.
StarHalo
Flashaholic
We've heard from pilots, now let's hear from engineers:
moldyoldy
Flashlight Enthusiast
regarding the 'fuzzy' images of debris and repeatedly delayed information in the search process:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/27/world/asia/geopolitical-rivalries-jet.html?hp&_r=0
Notice the wind and wave speed animation images part way down the page. Talk about 'Roaring 40's'!
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/27/world/asia/geopolitical-rivalries-jet.html?hp&_r=0
Notice the wind and wave speed animation images part way down the page. Talk about 'Roaring 40's'!
Last edited:
StarHalo
Flashaholic
Holy cats! That's some rough sea! :wow:
And a very interesting discussion of the mechanics of the plane in the earlier post as well. That would certainly lend strength to the thought that maybe it was not catastrophic failure but something intentional...
And a very interesting discussion of the mechanics of the plane in the earlier post as well. That would certainly lend strength to the thought that maybe it was not catastrophic failure but something intentional...
markr6
Flashaholic
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2012
- Messages
- 9,258
What's the big deal about guarding "satellite technology"? Hasn't everyone seen Google Earth or online map sites? If we (I'm assuming some US company) can take a satellite image of my home to the point where I can see a 6" flower pot on my patio, it would seem like the cat's totally out of the bag. What's to hide? Being able to view an ant walking on the sidewalk?
And I'm not even talking about the 45° or birds eye view which give insanely detailed photos...those may be taken by some other type of satellite not available in this area of the Indian Ocean??...just guessing. Regardless, these satellite photos over the ocean look more like the B&W stuff taken in the mid-90s and nothing like the stuff on Google, Bing, etc.
And I'm not even talking about the 45° or birds eye view which give insanely detailed photos...those may be taken by some other type of satellite not available in this area of the Indian Ocean??...just guessing. Regardless, these satellite photos over the ocean look more like the B&W stuff taken in the mid-90s and nothing like the stuff on Google, Bing, etc.
Last edited:
StarHalo
Flashaholic
If you'd like to see a 777 electronically immolate itself, there's documentation of an incident here; not much to see though, it was already smoking externally before it got off the ground, and at no time did it disable communications or locators.
It's not the satellites that are being guarded, it's the radar - As satellites go, you're not going to park your multi-billion dollar black project camera over completely empty South Indian Ocean, eyes only go where there's something to see. So there's not a lot going on satellite-wise, or at least there wasn't until the relevant nations had a couple of weeks to move a spare satellite or two into position.
Radar is the bigger secret, because if you reveal what you saw or didn't see, that tells everyone else what you can or can't see. India has already admitted that they didn't release any radar data because they missed the plane entirely - it was flying through a hole in their radar coverage, which they now have to fix because the whole world knows.
It's not the satellites that are being guarded, it's the radar - As satellites go, you're not going to park your multi-billion dollar black project camera over completely empty South Indian Ocean, eyes only go where there's something to see. So there's not a lot going on satellite-wise, or at least there wasn't until the relevant nations had a couple of weeks to move a spare satellite or two into position.
Radar is the bigger secret, because if you reveal what you saw or didn't see, that tells everyone else what you can or can't see. India has already admitted that they didn't release any radar data because they missed the plane entirely - it was flying through a hole in their radar coverage, which they now have to fix because the whole world knows.
moldyoldy
Flashlight Enthusiast
Ref the 777 incident in the link above: A nice factual report. What I appreciated more were the identified production changes made either pre- or post-incident to the insulation and contactors. In particular I note the significant improvement in the depth of the arc chute around each contact set. In my experience, transfer switches and contactors were the primary failure point for high-current switching. We lost about 1/year in the plant, usually when transferring part of the plant load to the big backup generators for testing. The result was sudden darkness (flashaholic time!) and work lost. The contact material transfer from one contact to the other during the instant of initial electrical 'contact' is a frequent source of later failures. The depth of some of the pits on one contact and the corresponding growth on the other contact was truly impressive. Yet the nominal steady-state current ratings were not exceeded.
Ref the satellite vs radar images: Star Halo is absolutely correct. Satellite resources for photography are rather scarce, especially the high-resolution types that are probably mostly focused on Eastern Ukraine, the bordering Russian territory, and the Crimea. Also, it takes quite a bit of fuel to move satellites to view an area such as the Southern Indian Ocean that is rarely of significance. However, the radar coverage, or not, was really embarassing for several of the nations in the initial flight area. The radar operators in the different nations either did not have their radars turned on, had a hole in their coverage, or simply missed the signficance of a stray passenger A/C. All of this was duly noted by the militaries of the neighboring nations.
Ref the satellite vs radar images: Star Halo is absolutely correct. Satellite resources for photography are rather scarce, especially the high-resolution types that are probably mostly focused on Eastern Ukraine, the bordering Russian territory, and the Crimea. Also, it takes quite a bit of fuel to move satellites to view an area such as the Southern Indian Ocean that is rarely of significance. However, the radar coverage, or not, was really embarassing for several of the nations in the initial flight area. The radar operators in the different nations either did not have their radars turned on, had a hole in their coverage, or simply missed the signficance of a stray passenger A/C. All of this was duly noted by the militaries of the neighboring nations.
Last edited:
StarHalo
Flashaholic
The search is being moved 700 miles NE based on new information that states the plane was moving faster than originally thought. No indication on where this data is coming from, and that puts the search zone almost directly over the Diamantina Abyssal, ~5 miles deep..
Hundreds more pieces of ocean junk seen from space this week by several satellites all of which *could* be part of the plane's debris field; yet to my knowledge we have yet to physically capture a single piece of this debris from any of the satellite images.
I honestly do not understand this. I know there are rough seas and currents, but if you know the initial location of the item(s) from the satellite, the elapsed time, and general current speed and direction, you should be able to get within at least a couple hundred mile radius of the chunks of floating stuff and find it fairly easily. They are covering thousands of square miles per day, how can they be missing all of these hundreds of pieces of garbage floating around?! Not one piece can be recovered?!
I honestly do not understand this. I know there are rough seas and currents, but if you know the initial location of the item(s) from the satellite, the elapsed time, and general current speed and direction, you should be able to get within at least a couple hundred mile radius of the chunks of floating stuff and find it fairly easily. They are covering thousands of square miles per day, how can they be missing all of these hundreds of pieces of garbage floating around?! Not one piece can be recovered?!
