Originally Posted by jungle
(Post 1605277)
Seems to be based on aircraft path via radar track, there are ways to tell, but prefer not to detail those.
Bottom line, it appears to be speculation that the FMS inputs were altered. They say it passed close to certain waypoints, but they would have been nailed with FMS input. This suggests heading inputs may have been made instead, or not. Raw radar data may not accurately reflect path or altitude depending on type of radar and operator. |
Originally Posted by Thedude
(Post 1605335)
Not to mention the new members here that are trolling for info.
Reporter style. Help them if you can but keep OPSEC in mind and BEADWINDOW. |
even the old guys are trolling for info.
|
Originally Posted by jungle
(Post 1605353)
We may safely assume reporters are trying to get some factual information here. We may also assume they have noted our disdain for the reporting so far.
Help them if you can but keep OPSEC in mind and BEADWINDOW. |
GF:
Thanks for the clarification on when they began looking. I had gotten the impression it was much, much later - not when the first handoff was missed or soon thereafter. I also didn't understand that the ACARS system transmitted info about waypoints or waypoint changes. That makes sense and explains why some things are reported as being assured, I guess. Regarding the transponder being off... if it isn't normally turned off, then I guess that, coupled with a reported change in waypoints sways my personal opinion away from it being a mechanical emergency. I hope enough facts are eventually discovered and disclosed to provide an answer as to what probably happened, and I still hope it ends up being that it was something "innocent," though that seems improbable. TheDude: I know you didn't mention me specifically, but just in case you do wonder about me - I'm not a reporter. My profession of 27 years is LEO, which definitely influences how I ask questions and how I process what's reported. Sorry if it "smells" fishy, but mine definitely isn't a reporter smell. |
Sorry to break the news to ya, JJ21, but the oil rig story is also bogus, he was 370 nautical miles and we'll beyond the horizon at the point the plane was supposed to be a fireball.
GF |
Originally Posted by mournlight
(Post 1605382)
GF:
I also didn't understand that the ACARS system transmitted info about waypoints or waypoint changes. That makes sense and explains why some things are reported as being assured, I guess. |
Originally Posted by GogglesPisano
(Post 1605145)
I wonder if the pundits, anchors, "experts," and APC accident investigators will ever publicly apologize to the pilots' families if/when they are eventually found to be victims in this tragedy.
|
Originally Posted by Taped2Seat
(Post 1605404)
I'll never forget the Rodney King incidents in LA, the riots, loss of life and property, the way CNN handled the whole thing and was never held responsible for any of it - and that is but one incident among many. So no, of course not. But at least a precedent may have been established during the Travon Jackson/George Zimmerman case when NBC got sued for their blatant alteration of digital media. Hope they are proven innocent.
|
Does anyone screen new APC account applicants for credentials? For crying out loud! Some of these people are asking questions a private pilot should know. Clearly the AIM is a document that can be researched online. It's fine to lurk as a non-pilot, but the 3 page posts of nothing but elementary questions about SAR and other established procedures contribute nothing to the discussion.
Mods can anything be done here? |
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:55 AM. |
User Alert System provided by
Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Website Copyright ©2000 - 2017 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands