03-20-2015, 02:14 AM
Well the search in the SIO continues. ATSB chief is still upbeat it will be found in the current search area. Many other people are somewhat less confident.
I still wonder if Inmarsat is the source of the satellite data. If this official explanation is correct, there are some questions that need to be answered:
1. Why did MH, the Malaysian government initially decline to release the complete data set? What possible reason could there be for not revealing this for independent analysis?
2. Why did Inmarsat initially not release the complete data set? Inmarsat have hinted that the information is owned by MH and must be released by them. Inmarsat is not at liberty to release this.
3. Around 12 March, the WSJ was claiming MH370 flew on for 4 hours after the last confirmed location. That same date, Malaysian authorities were denying this was accurate. So on 12 March, Malaysian government was denying this data.
http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/20...ckage.html
4. Malaysia later states it was advised of this data and how it could be used on 13 March. This suggests the WSJ had this data one day before Inmarsat advised Malaysia. Even longer than this allowing for different time zones. That seems odd doesn't it. If Inmarsat had the data first and released to MH (the customer), how did a WSJ apparently have this information 24 hours earlier. Very odd. Presumably Inmarsat would not have told anyone else prior to MH on the 13th (Malaysian time). So how did someone in the USA know of this on the 12th?
http://www.inmarsat.com/news/malaysian-g...s-uk-aaib/
5. Why would the satcom be powered up again well after the plane went dark? What for? Odd to disappear, then turn the satcom back on.
So you have to wonder
1. Maybe MH, Malaysia, and Inmarsat didn't release the full data at the time as it was not their data and they were not in possession of it.
2. The source behind the WSJ article. What information did this source have?
3. Some data was necessary in the public domain in order to shift the search area into the SIO. Was the Inmarsat data a cover to protect more sensitive sources. .
4. Was the satcom really turned on at all? Or was this necessary in order to be able to purportedly have Inmarsat data.
Also curious that Malaysian authorities (RMAF) were stating on 9th and 12th March that plane had appeared to reverse course back over the Malaysian peninsula. Yet China (the nation most with the highest number of citizens onboard) was left to announce on 13th March that Chinese satellites had found possible debris in the South China Sea.
I think we will get further by considering all these oddities than from trying to continue to analyse the Inmarsat data.
I still wonder if Inmarsat is the source of the satellite data. If this official explanation is correct, there are some questions that need to be answered:
1. Why did MH, the Malaysian government initially decline to release the complete data set? What possible reason could there be for not revealing this for independent analysis?
2. Why did Inmarsat initially not release the complete data set? Inmarsat have hinted that the information is owned by MH and must be released by them. Inmarsat is not at liberty to release this.
3. Around 12 March, the WSJ was claiming MH370 flew on for 4 hours after the last confirmed location. That same date, Malaysian authorities were denying this was accurate. So on 12 March, Malaysian government was denying this data.
http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/20...ckage.html
4. Malaysia later states it was advised of this data and how it could be used on 13 March. This suggests the WSJ had this data one day before Inmarsat advised Malaysia. Even longer than this allowing for different time zones. That seems odd doesn't it. If Inmarsat had the data first and released to MH (the customer), how did a WSJ apparently have this information 24 hours earlier. Very odd. Presumably Inmarsat would not have told anyone else prior to MH on the 13th (Malaysian time). So how did someone in the USA know of this on the 12th?
http://www.inmarsat.com/news/malaysian-g...s-uk-aaib/
5. Why would the satcom be powered up again well after the plane went dark? What for? Odd to disappear, then turn the satcom back on.
So you have to wonder
1. Maybe MH, Malaysia, and Inmarsat didn't release the full data at the time as it was not their data and they were not in possession of it.
2. The source behind the WSJ article. What information did this source have?
3. Some data was necessary in the public domain in order to shift the search area into the SIO. Was the Inmarsat data a cover to protect more sensitive sources. .
4. Was the satcom really turned on at all? Or was this necessary in order to be able to purportedly have Inmarsat data.
Also curious that Malaysian authorities (RMAF) were stating on 9th and 12th March that plane had appeared to reverse course back over the Malaysian peninsula. Yet China (the nation most with the highest number of citizens onboard) was left to announce on 13th March that Chinese satellites had found possible debris in the South China Sea.
I think we will get further by considering all these oddities than from trying to continue to analyse the Inmarsat data.