jungle

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.

Sink r8

The more I think about it, the less I buy it. The odds of getting to take-off behind a "target" departure from your home airport, after you've been timing their push, and your push, for days... not that great. The odds of going out a certain distance the wrong way, and joining up with a specific but uncooperative someone in the dark, without some tell-tale holding, especially without TCAS ON over a given point of space at a specific time... not that great, IMO. Even with holding, and somehow I heard my intended "target" coming, and saw them coming, I think I would muck it up pretty good.

I think the chances are just as good that would accidentally join up on Maverick and Goose a freighter flying rubber dog-sH$+ out of Hong-Kong, straight to Diego Garcia.

Or over Macho Grande. They might even end up doing something no aviator has done before, and be the first to get over Macho Grande.

I tend to consider this myth busted.

mournlight

Questions and observations:

It seems the better we endow our aircraft with ability to nearly "fly themselves" (which is, of course, a misnomer) the more potential for unplanned events we introduce into the system. I could very nearly stand inside the engine compartment of my first vehicle and I could fix almost anything on it. There just wasn't that much to go wrong. Now, it can be difficult to find even small issues because the whole machine has become "easier" to drive, but more complicated behind the scenes. Reading through this forum makes it so obvious to me that there are so many things that could have gone wrong with the 777. It has really made me look at pilots through new lenses. There are many systems that they must understand in order to survive any unplanned event. Thank you all for your diligence.

Question 1: Is there no kind of "check-in" that is required along a commercial flight's path that, if missed, would cause a search or at least an attempt to contact? It seemed like it took a long time to realize this flight was "missing."

Question 2: Are there legitimate or ordinary reasons a pilot might turn off the transponders? Does it interfere with other flights while at the terminals or near the airports?

Question 3: Is there any reasonable (or perhaps unreasonable but possible) explanation for an aircraft to appear to follow waypoints other than pilot input?

Question 4: Is there any reasonable explantion for engines to send or appear to send acars data after a craft is no longer airborne?

As I understand the information floating around, we are all collectively apparently relying on data from various governments, as well as data from satellites made and launched by different companies for different purposes, and a multitude of experts with varying expert opinions. I know nothing about satellites, but if they ever require calibration, for instance, and that one set of data is off, there could be a huge impact on our understanding of the entire event. There are just so many variables.

Thanks in advance for your indulgence.

galaxy flyer

JJ21,

Just guessing here, but I'd bet you haven't done too many rejoins with a tanker on a dark night over an ocean? 'Fess up.

mournlight,


HCM was looking for the plane within minutes and presumably calling KL on phone lines asking about the missing plane on the handoff. It was called "missing" pretty quickly. Somewhere, a pilot posted that he heard HCM "going crazy" on 121.5 trying to reach MH 370.

No, the FMS is pretty simple, it will follow the flight plan entered. GIGO is the word here--garbage in, garbage out. And, it's already been posted, their was an ACARS transmission with the change in "next waypoint".

ACARS data will cease when on the ground with engine shutdown, although there are variations specific to engine/airframe and operator desires.

Transponder isn't normally turned OFF unless it fails or electrical fault. Erroneous outputs are another reason. I don't know of a TCAS system that will present anything if the transponder is OFF.

GF

FDXLAG

Yes I have been to the Reno Air Races. I have done many rejoins without benefit of advanced avionics. All the rejoins you have witnessed have been with a cooperative aircraft in a steady turn allowing the other aircraft to use geometry to affect closure. You cut across the inside of a circle using more bank than the aircraft you are rejoining on. With the straight ahead rejoin the overtake is achieved by significantly reducing power and giving the other aircraft an advantage.

Is it possible for a 777 to rejoin on an unaware 777 at night, at altitude, sure. Did it happen in this case no. It is much more likely the USS Enterprise traveled back in time and accidentally destroyed the triple with its tractor beam. Don't worry they were all beamed safely onboard and will be returned when Spock discovers that one of the passengers descendants is instrumental in developing warp drive or saves the whales I forget which.

JJ21

no tanker formation...just reno air racing formation.

Do I think that article is what happened? no but thought I would posted...I think the oil rig operator who witnessed an "aircraft on fire for 10-15 sec" is more correct...then a Payne Stewart type situation. Stewarts plane climbed up to Fl510 well above certified a/c alt and as low as Fl190 (some reports on line say as low as 10,000) this oscillation of climbing/descending occurred throughout that flight (for 5 hours) until the a/c ran out of fuel.

Who knows? sad for all of the families.

Thedude

Not to mention the new members here that are trolling for info.
Reporter style.

JimFromAustin

Thanks Jungle. That's what it had seemed to me, only circumstantial evidence with no definite proof of keying in new flight path. From what I can tell, they are assuming because certain waypoints were threaded, the assume it was programmed, but seems possible to fly those points via a hand held GPS or something. I don't understand why these guys on the news are so matter of fact about FMS reprogramming?

jungle

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.

JJ21

even the old guys are trolling for info.