If it was just oxygen deprivation, the transponder wouldn't have stopped transponding, and the aircraft would have continued on whatever was programmed into the FMS, or whatever they have, and it would be seen wherever it was in secondary coverage.
But you are right, in isolation that makes sense.
Malaysia Airlines 777 - Missing
Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore
Re: Malaysia Airlines 777 - Missing
Good judgment comes from experience. Experience often comes from bad judgment.
Re: Malaysia Airlines 777 - Missing
And the mystery deepens........
From avherald:
"Hong Kong's Air Traffic Control Center reported on Mar 10th 2014 around 17:30L (09:30Z) that an airliner enroute on airway L642 reported via HF radio that they saw a large field of debris at position N9.72 E107.42 about 80nm southeast of Ho Chi Minh City, about 50nm off the south-eastern coast of Vietnam in the South China Sea and about 281nm northeast of the last known radar position. Ships have been dispatched to the reported debris field."
"Hong Kong's Civil Aviation Department confirmed a Cathay Pacific flight from Hong Kong to Kuala Lumpur spotted large amount of debris while enroute off the coast of South East Vietnam."
Almost 300nm away from the last known position - thats a pretty long way.
From avherald:
"Hong Kong's Air Traffic Control Center reported on Mar 10th 2014 around 17:30L (09:30Z) that an airliner enroute on airway L642 reported via HF radio that they saw a large field of debris at position N9.72 E107.42 about 80nm southeast of Ho Chi Minh City, about 50nm off the south-eastern coast of Vietnam in the South China Sea and about 281nm northeast of the last known radar position. Ships have been dispatched to the reported debris field."
"Hong Kong's Civil Aviation Department confirmed a Cathay Pacific flight from Hong Kong to Kuala Lumpur spotted large amount of debris while enroute off the coast of South East Vietnam."
Almost 300nm away from the last known position - thats a pretty long way.
- Attachments
-
- malaysia_b772_9m-mro_gulf_of_thailand_140308_map.jpg (60.01 KiB) Viewed 3460 times
-
Diadem
- Rank 8
- Posts: 899
- Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:16 pm
- Location: A sigma left of the top of the bell curve
Re: Malaysia Airlines 777 - Missing
Also that the DC-10 accident was an uncontained engine failure, not a structural failure, and the placement of the third engine in the tail along with the hydraulic lines made the situation worse than it would have been on a twin; it's not likely that an uncontained engine failure on a 777 would result in a loss of control, and even less likely that it would occur so abruptly as to prevent the crew from declaring a mayday. In the theme of being pedantic I'd also like to point out that it wasn't a failure of the Douglas design, but rather that of GE.AirFrame wrote:I could be pedantic and point out that the Aloha Airlines flight landed after the sunroof opened. And that the DC-10 was a Douglas Aircraft design (hence the DC) and not a Boeing...Gino Under wrote:Don't assume because it's a Boeing that no one's ever lost a Boeing due to structural fatigue.
How about that Aloha Airlines flight back in April 1988? Or post-Aloha, that other fatigue-related jet accident--the Sioux City DC-10?
-
Gino Under
- Rank 8
- Posts: 833
- Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 12:06 pm
Re: Malaysia Airlines 777 - Missing
Good rebuttals from all with thanks, but I'm sticking to my theory.
Structural fatigue might be the issue in MY opinion. Doesn't matter what part it might be, doesn't matter whether its a Boeing, Airbus or Douglas aircraft. Structural failure and/or part fatigue comes in all kinds of forms and can lead to related failures. I thought that might have been easily understood and taken from my earlier remarks. Apparently not.
Yes, for a certain group of pilots, an uncontained engine failure is/might be a non-issue. Unfortunately, not all pilots are created equally.
No debris found so far which I should think is extremely odd.
You're right. PW, GE or RR have suffered from failures in-flight which have in most cases been contained and handled by the crew. But they usually lead to a chain of failures such as the United DC-10. However, when you taxi a large aircraft like a B777 my thoughts are this.
When the outer portion of a wing strikes a stationary object like a building or a parked aeroplane, the force tends to also run from the pivot point (wing tip) to the wing root (which is stationary) and which could result in sufficient shear force that the attachment point under stress can fracture or crack. Over time, if undetected during regular inspection, you have a problem. How much of the wing tip section was damaged and how far in toward the root did it travel along the spar?
Review the American DC10 at Chicago and the relationship it had with a fork lift and attachment bolts. That didn't turn out so well and airframe structural fatigue had nothing to do with that accident.
As for the Aloha and United accidents I offered, I can only say read the findings. In both cases, structural fatigue lead to one becoming an in-flight convertible and the other without hydraulics and uncontrollable.
Most of you offer some excellent ideas and speculation. Any one of which is plausible. Some I'd agree with. Others, I don't know. Maybe.
What we do know is that no one knows right now. Including me.
Gino Under
Structural fatigue might be the issue in MY opinion. Doesn't matter what part it might be, doesn't matter whether its a Boeing, Airbus or Douglas aircraft. Structural failure and/or part fatigue comes in all kinds of forms and can lead to related failures. I thought that might have been easily understood and taken from my earlier remarks. Apparently not.
Yes, for a certain group of pilots, an uncontained engine failure is/might be a non-issue. Unfortunately, not all pilots are created equally.
No debris found so far which I should think is extremely odd.
You're right. PW, GE or RR have suffered from failures in-flight which have in most cases been contained and handled by the crew. But they usually lead to a chain of failures such as the United DC-10. However, when you taxi a large aircraft like a B777 my thoughts are this.
When the outer portion of a wing strikes a stationary object like a building or a parked aeroplane, the force tends to also run from the pivot point (wing tip) to the wing root (which is stationary) and which could result in sufficient shear force that the attachment point under stress can fracture or crack. Over time, if undetected during regular inspection, you have a problem. How much of the wing tip section was damaged and how far in toward the root did it travel along the spar?
Review the American DC10 at Chicago and the relationship it had with a fork lift and attachment bolts. That didn't turn out so well and airframe structural fatigue had nothing to do with that accident.
As for the Aloha and United accidents I offered, I can only say read the findings. In both cases, structural fatigue lead to one becoming an in-flight convertible and the other without hydraulics and uncontrollable.
Most of you offer some excellent ideas and speculation. Any one of which is plausible. Some I'd agree with. Others, I don't know. Maybe.
What we do know is that no one knows right now. Including me.
Gino Under
-
bizjets101
- Rank 10
- Posts: 2105
- Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2010 7:44 pm
Re: Malaysia Airlines 777 - Missing
Okay, update again - two fake passengers are now identified and info released - both are Iranian Nationals who traveled from Iran to Malaysia using their own identification.
In more strange news from Reuters;
"It changed course after Kota Bharu and took a lower altitude. It made it into the Malacca Strait," the military official, who has been briefed on investigations, told Reuters.
The Strait of Malacca, one of the world's busiest shipping channels, runs along Malaysia's west coast. The airline said on Saturday that radio and radar contact with Flight MH370 was lost off the east coast Malaysian town of Kota Bharu.
Maybe Iran Air will be introducing Domestic B777 service shortly.
In more strange news from Reuters;
"It changed course after Kota Bharu and took a lower altitude. It made it into the Malacca Strait," the military official, who has been briefed on investigations, told Reuters.
The Strait of Malacca, one of the world's busiest shipping channels, runs along Malaysia's west coast. The airline said on Saturday that radio and radar contact with Flight MH370 was lost off the east coast Malaysian town of Kota Bharu.
Maybe Iran Air will be introducing Domestic B777 service shortly.
-
bizjets101
- Rank 10
- Posts: 2105
- Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2010 7:44 pm
Re: Malaysia Airlines 777 - Missing
Latest update from AvHerald;
On Mar 11th 2014 Malaysia's Air Force reported their primary radar data suggest, the aircraft may have turned west over the Gulf of Thailand at about 1000 meters/3000 feet below the original flight level (editorial note: another possible interpretation could be: at 1000 meters of height compared to 10000 meters original level) and flown past the east coast near Khota Baru and the west coast of Malaysia near Kedah, the radar return was last seen at 02:40L near Pulau Perak in the Straits of Malacca, about 285nm westsouthwest of the last known (secondary) radar position. Local Police at Khota Bharu confirmed a number of locals reported lights and a low flying aircraft at Khota Bharu at an estimated height of 1000 meters/3000 feet.
On Mar 11th 2014 Malaysia's Air Force reported their primary radar data suggest, the aircraft may have turned west over the Gulf of Thailand at about 1000 meters/3000 feet below the original flight level (editorial note: another possible interpretation could be: at 1000 meters of height compared to 10000 meters original level) and flown past the east coast near Khota Baru and the west coast of Malaysia near Kedah, the radar return was last seen at 02:40L near Pulau Perak in the Straits of Malacca, about 285nm westsouthwest of the last known (secondary) radar position. Local Police at Khota Bharu confirmed a number of locals reported lights and a low flying aircraft at Khota Bharu at an estimated height of 1000 meters/3000 feet.
-
Eric Janson
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1250
- Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 10:44 am
Re: Malaysia Airlines 777 - Missing
I am somewhat familiar with the way things work in S-Asia.
The levels of corruption/nepotism/incompetence/cronyism/graft would shock most of you.
The higher up you go the worse it gets. This includes the Military who have a lot of influence.
With the national carrier involved - this is a huge embarrassment for the Malaysian authorities.
I would expect that there is a lot of frantic manoevering taking place privately to avoid the blame and "save face". One side effect of this is that critical information is slow to get out (as we are starting to see).
I would expect a lot more details to slowly emerge in the coming weeks - looks like they've already uncovered a people smuggling ring and some serious issues with their airport security.
Just another day in Asia!
The levels of corruption/nepotism/incompetence/cronyism/graft would shock most of you.
The higher up you go the worse it gets. This includes the Military who have a lot of influence.
With the national carrier involved - this is a huge embarrassment for the Malaysian authorities.
I would expect that there is a lot of frantic manoevering taking place privately to avoid the blame and "save face". One side effect of this is that critical information is slow to get out (as we are starting to see).
I would expect a lot more details to slowly emerge in the coming weeks - looks like they've already uncovered a people smuggling ring and some serious issues with their airport security.
Just another day in Asia!
Always fly a stable approach - it's the only stability you'll find in this business
Re: Malaysia Airlines 777 - Missing
I waited until the passport information was clarified before posting
and no doubt the thought police of Av Canada will want to get rid of this post too.
IMHO, the odds of this being a terrorist attack is remote because
a) no organization claimed responsibility
b) no intelligence appears to have been obtained from the passenger list.
The stories of it changing course etc, only are alleged after it disappeared from secondary radar.
That evidence does not appear to be reliable or credible.
That leaves the most probable cause as catastrophic destruction, that require something like
a fuel tank explosion or engine explosion that would cause total disintegration so rapidly
as to prevent any radio calls or the flight data from showing a descent etc.
What is a problem is that the area is full of fishing boats and it appears that one or more of
these boats lack the communications equipment to report what they saw or don't wish to
report it.
I spent several hours trying to access the public pictures of the area and the site was swamped.
Left it running on 3 different browsers overnight and none were able to register.
the odds of none of the wreckage being found, is entirely remote
That is, the odds are, at least some bits of the wreckage will be found
and that the search will take more time and it is going to be more intensive.
Once those bits are found, it will might lead to the rest of the story.
It makes you wonder if a flight data recorder would survive a mid air explosion and
an ocean impact after falling 30,000 feet.
Perhaps someone can comment on that?
and no doubt the thought police of Av Canada will want to get rid of this post too.
IMHO, the odds of this being a terrorist attack is remote because
a) no organization claimed responsibility
b) no intelligence appears to have been obtained from the passenger list.
The stories of it changing course etc, only are alleged after it disappeared from secondary radar.
That evidence does not appear to be reliable or credible.
That leaves the most probable cause as catastrophic destruction, that require something like
a fuel tank explosion or engine explosion that would cause total disintegration so rapidly
as to prevent any radio calls or the flight data from showing a descent etc.
What is a problem is that the area is full of fishing boats and it appears that one or more of
these boats lack the communications equipment to report what they saw or don't wish to
report it.
I spent several hours trying to access the public pictures of the area and the site was swamped.
Left it running on 3 different browsers overnight and none were able to register.
the odds of none of the wreckage being found, is entirely remote
That is, the odds are, at least some bits of the wreckage will be found
and that the search will take more time and it is going to be more intensive.
Once those bits are found, it will might lead to the rest of the story.
It makes you wonder if a flight data recorder would survive a mid air explosion and
an ocean impact after falling 30,000 feet.
Perhaps someone can comment on that?
-
Old fella
- Rank 10
- Posts: 2402
- Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 7:04 am
- Location: I'm retired. I don't want to'I don't have to and you can't make me.
Re: Malaysia Airlines 777 - Missing
For your info there are some pictures of the wing tip collision as you mentioned in that PPRuNe site, lot of damage and your viewpoint as a possible factor for this accident is certainly being shared by people on that siteGino Under wrote:Good rebuttals from all with thanks, but I'm sticking to my theory.
Structural fatigue might be the issue in MY opinion. Doesn't matter what part it might be, doesn't matter whether its a Boeing, Airbus or Douglas aircraft. Structural failure and/or part fatigue comes in all kinds of forms and can lead to related failures. I thought that might have been easily understood and taken from my earlier remarks. Apparently not.
Yes, for a certain group of pilots, an uncontained engine failure is/might be a non-issue. Unfortunately, not all pilots are created equally.
No debris found so far which I should think is extremely odd.
You're right. PW, GE or RR have suffered from failures in-flight which have in most cases been contained and handled by the crew. But they usually lead to a chain of failures such as the United DC-10. However, when you taxi a large aircraft like a B777 my thoughts are this.
When the outer portion of a wing strikes a stationary object like a building or a parked aeroplane, the force tends to also run from the pivot point (wing tip) to the wing root (which is stationary) and which could result in sufficient shear force that the attachment point under stress can fracture or crack. Over time, if undetected during regular inspection, you have a problem. How much of the wing tip section was damaged and how far in toward the root did it travel along the spar?
Review the American DC10 at Chicago and the relationship it had with a fork lift and attachment bolts. That didn't turn out so well and airframe structural fatigue had nothing to do with that accident.
As for the Aloha and United accidents I offered, I can only say read the findings. In both cases, structural fatigue lead to one becoming an in-flight convertible and the other without hydraulics and uncontrollable.
Most of you offer some excellent ideas and speculation. Any one of which is plausible. Some I'd agree with. Others, I don't know. Maybe.
What we do know is that no one knows right now. Including me.
Gino Under
Re: Malaysia Airlines 777 - Missing
So I have been thinking and the most logical thing I can put together at this point is a total electrical failure. Now, I don't know anything about these systems on a 777, but if they lost everything, then you would lose your transponder. I feel like they would try and turn back using the compass, however it being dark and hard to tell what lights are on land and at sea then they could end up on the west side of the island and either get disoriented and spiral dive, or slow descent and hope for the best.
Like I said, I am no expert and it's just my two cents.
Like I said, I am no expert and it's just my two cents.
-
ourkid2000
- Rank 5
- Posts: 395
- Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 11:11 pm
Re: Malaysia Airlines 777 - Missing
Even with total electrical failure they should have an ADG deploy which would provide a standby COM radio of some sort (but probably powered off of a hot battery bus however)....also should power a XPDR as well.
Re: Malaysia Airlines 777 - Missing
All of which changes the whole picture.bizjets101 wrote:Latest update from AvHerald;
On Mar 11th 2014 Malaysia's Air Force reported their primary radar data suggest, the aircraft may have turned west over the Gulf of Thailand at about 1000 meters/3000 feet below the original flight level (editorial note: another possible interpretation could be: at 1000 meters of height compared to 10000 meters original level) and flown past the east coast near Khota Baru and the west coast of Malaysia near Kedah, the radar return was last seen at 02:40L near Pulau Perak in the Straits of Malacca, about 285nm westsouthwest of the last known (secondary) radar position. Local Police at Khota Bharu confirmed a number of locals reported lights and a low flying aircraft at Khota Bharu at an estimated height of 1000 meters/3000 feet.
The transponder did not go off because of a catastrophic event. It was turned off.
There is no evidence the aircraft has crashed.
And there is this...
https://www.federalregister.gov/article ... nic-system
Good judgment comes from experience. Experience often comes from bad judgment.
-
Gino Under
- Rank 8
- Posts: 833
- Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 12:06 pm
Re: Malaysia Airlines 777 - Missing
I'll check out the PPRuNe site for those wing tip photos.
Until we have physical evidence.... Who really knows WTF happened?
As Mr. Jensen says, this happened in a very sensitive area of the world where "saving face" and running for cover is the norm. Then there's the issue of incompetence.
Gino Under
Until we have physical evidence.... Who really knows WTF happened?
As Mr. Jensen says, this happened in a very sensitive area of the world where "saving face" and running for cover is the norm. Then there's the issue of incompetence.
Gino Under
-
Old fella
- Rank 10
- Posts: 2402
- Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 7:04 am
- Location: I'm retired. I don't want to'I don't have to and you can't make me.
Re: Malaysia Airlines 777 - Missing
Gino Under wrote:I'll check out the PPRuNe site for those wing tip photos.
Until we have physical evidence.... Who really knows WTF happened?
As Mr. Jensen says, this happened in a very sensitive area of the world where "saving face" and running for cover is the norm. Then there's the issue of incompetence.
Gino Under
For sure and indeed – you are quite correct. As for the PPRuNe site, there is well over 90+ pages on this accident and comments range from “Ghosts of Cape Horn, part of the Cosmic awareness, Bermuda Triangle and Aquarius let the sun shine in………” Quite entertaining actually.
Having said that, this incident is bizarre and sinister……….
Re: Malaysia Airlines 777 - Missing
But if the plane crashed hard in a mountain side, it could be hard to find. It leaves only a small hole.
Success in life is when the cognac that you drink is older than the women you drink it with.
-
Gino Under
- Rank 8
- Posts: 833
- Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 12:06 pm
Re: Malaysia Airlines 777 - Missing
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/2008397.stm
I agree.
The damaged tip doesn't look that bad and we all know looks can be deceiving. What we don't know isn't likely to hurt us and the same can be said for the things we can't see. Including fractures and cracks whatever their genesis. I still wonder about translating stress from the wing tip collision through to the wing attachment. Then there's the issue of who did the wing tip repair. A bit of research on the subject reveals some interesting similarities to the loss of this aircraft (see the link above) but I'll leave it to fellow speculators.
http://www.themercury.com.au/news/world ... 6850952131
It was interesting as well to read this about the F/Os "open door" policy with the female Australian passengers. Especially his smoking on the flight deck.
Naughty boy.
Bizarre indeed!
Gino 
I agree.
The damaged tip doesn't look that bad and we all know looks can be deceiving. What we don't know isn't likely to hurt us and the same can be said for the things we can't see. Including fractures and cracks whatever their genesis. I still wonder about translating stress from the wing tip collision through to the wing attachment. Then there's the issue of who did the wing tip repair. A bit of research on the subject reveals some interesting similarities to the loss of this aircraft (see the link above) but I'll leave it to fellow speculators.
http://www.themercury.com.au/news/world ... 6850952131
It was interesting as well to read this about the F/Os "open door" policy with the female Australian passengers. Especially his smoking on the flight deck.
Naughty boy.
Bizarre indeed!
Gino
-
Gilles Hudicourt
- Rank 10
- Posts: 2227
- Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2012 5:51 am
- Location: YUL
Re: Malaysia Airlines 777 - Missing
The worst single aircraft crash in aviation history was that of a Boeing 747 in Japan. The cause of the crash, was the faulty repair of the rear bulkhead after a tail strike, seven years before the crash.Gino Under wrote:Then there's the issue of who did the wing tip repair.
That faulty repair had been done by.....Boeing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan_Airlines_Flight_123
Last edited by Gilles Hudicourt on Wed Mar 12, 2014 9:11 am, edited 3 times in total.
-
thirdtimecharm
- Rank 3
- Posts: 169
- Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2006 2:32 pm
- Location: Rankin
Re: Malaysia Airlines 777 - Missing
Out of curiosity- what is the normal interval for ACARS messages? If it had deviated and flown for another hour or so would there not be some sort of ACARS message?
After being in northern Twin Otter world for a bit- where everyone had Skytrac (which cost $6K IIRC to install in 2002) I was surprised making the jump to the 705 world in 2010 that the company didn't have a similar system on their Boeings until last year.
After being in northern Twin Otter world for a bit- where everyone had Skytrac (which cost $6K IIRC to install in 2002) I was surprised making the jump to the 705 world in 2010 that the company didn't have a similar system on their Boeings until last year.
Re: Malaysia Airlines 777 - Missing
Malaysia's air force chief denied a media report that the military last tracked a missing Malaysia Airlines jetliner over the Strait of Malacca, far from where it last made contact with civilian air traffic control when it disappeared four days ago.
"I wish to state that I did not make any such statements," air force chief Rodzali Daud said in a statement on Wednesday.
"I wish to state that I did not make any such statements," air force chief Rodzali Daud said in a statement on Wednesday.
Re: Malaysia Airlines 777 - Missing
Smoking is the norm in some Asian countries and in one the "Flag Carrier " still permits smoking on the flight deck subject to the Captains approval. As odd as it may seem to us in North America the no smoking lifestyle hasn't caught on in S.E. Asia yet. I was absolutely ,"gob smacked" when a First officer asked me if I minded if he smoked. I looked at him with the stunned look of a non smoker who hasn't been anywhere that you could smoke on airplanes for 15-20 years.
His response oh Captain it's in the BOM page so and so, domestic flights only. This was not Malaysian Airlines, but a neighbour. I don't know what Malaysian airlines policy is , I do know that many crew smoke and don't worry about who sees or know that they do so. Very different from here where it is not likely even permitted anywhere in most airports anymore.
The open door policy is also much more relaxed than in the US and Canada. I have been offered visits on both company flights and those of other carriers that I did not work for. something pretty much forbidden here in the west anymore.
Not a defence of the supposed actions of the FO that are being reported in Australian news but maybe an explanation. I think it would be fairly obvious to anyone who has spent significant time in Asia that certain characteristics of westerners will get you noticed and likely special treatment as well.
Once again the news media trying to make something of nothing, IMHO.
His response oh Captain it's in the BOM page so and so, domestic flights only. This was not Malaysian Airlines, but a neighbour. I don't know what Malaysian airlines policy is , I do know that many crew smoke and don't worry about who sees or know that they do so. Very different from here where it is not likely even permitted anywhere in most airports anymore.
The open door policy is also much more relaxed than in the US and Canada. I have been offered visits on both company flights and those of other carriers that I did not work for. something pretty much forbidden here in the west anymore.
Not a defence of the supposed actions of the FO that are being reported in Australian news but maybe an explanation. I think it would be fairly obvious to anyone who has spent significant time in Asia that certain characteristics of westerners will get you noticed and likely special treatment as well.
Once again the news media trying to make something of nothing, IMHO.
