Well Gobbles old mate, you are not alone.
Provenance M'lud, provenance, where for-art thie provenance, M'lud ?
It is interesting, very interesting, that VictorI, was at first excited about the "metta data" in the Excel file, seeming to indicate that it was made by Inmarsat only a few hours after the news of MH370's demise hit London. BrockM questioned his confidence, and VictorI demoured a little. Not long after, MikeE stated that he had it from an "official channel" that it was the same file that the Malysians had given the ATSB in late March 2014 (and that raises it's own set of questions for Dolan, Foley, Hood, and a heap of others !).
But now, an air of caution ?
VictorI has "redacted" his earlier "confidence" in that metta data, and is conducting "further enquiries".
Leave those thoughts "hanging" for a moment.
Moving on to the covering "Release Note", ie, the e-mail that provided the file:-
"The authorities (begs the question, WHICH so called "authorities", within DAS, within MAS, within the JIT ?) agree to release the data (WHY, why now ? On the run up to, the near "eve" of the "promised" FINAL Report (the Malaysians did affirm that it WAS being "worked on" and would be published in the second half of this year)), on condition (who are "THEY" trying to kid ?)that:
1. We will not translate the data into any meaningful information as:
(a) the data is "proprietary" (bollocks) to Inmarsat.
(b) The Malaysian Investigation team does not have any experts (If "THEY" had any "genuine" intention to understsnd the data, "THEY have had "more than enough time", three and a half years, to either learn (you can get a Satelite Enginnering degree in that time, easy, shorter if you are a real smart k...) or "hire in" suitable people) to translate these data into any meaningful information. (Which amounts to a blatant "we don't want to either.)
2. We "will not" translate the data into any other language, including Mandarin. (Hardly surprising, "THEY" haven't been seriously, let alone genuinely interested from "day one" !)
3. (a) These data are complete and obtained from Inmarsat.
(b) Please do not manipulate the data.
Gobbles mate, you really have to laugh at point 3. Beaker must have taught them well.
It is worth remembering, that INMARSAT, Mark Dickinson in particular, was quite specific early on, that the data belonged to SITA, and NOT MAS. He also said that the data had "initially" only been given by Inmarsat to the AAIB and SITA, and another "industry player" to check and verify their analysis. He never said who that was, but it is not hard to figure that out. See below.
He also said that the AAIB had quickly passed it on to the Malaysians, with an explanation of it's meaning and the implications for the search.
Later, when Malaysia rejected the data, and persisted in fumbling around in the South China Sea, and then the Straits of Malacca, and beyond north west, and then, with the Farcical Lido "event", by day 9, and with the Chinese at that stage ready to "spit the dummy", the "yanks" entered the frey, with White House Press Secretary Jay Carny's now imfamous anouncement "a new search area might be opening up in the SIO", complete with the NYT suddenly publishing the - now long forgotten by most - two tracks - into the SIO.
Why did he, and why did he then, specifically, on day 9 ?
No matter. All of a sudden it was "scramble" for RAAF Pearce, and the show switched hemispheres.
Now a suspicious mind, might just wonder a little, about the yanks and their motives. Bear in mind that if you delve into the history of the design of 3F-1, by whom, when, where and (initially) why, it is clear that it was a "follow on" part of the "initial system" (MARISAT) which was sold off (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inmarsat) to Inmarsat prior to 3F-1 (which was commisioned by Inmarsat).
The hardware specs for the 3F-1 satellite are:
Satellite Name: Inmarsat-3F1 (Inmarsat 3 F1, I3F1, IOR)
Status: active
Position: 64° E (64.5° E)
NORAD: 23839
Cospar number: 1996-020A
Operator: Inmarsat plc
Launch date: 2-Apr-1996
Launch site: Cape Canaveral
Launch vehicle: Atlas 2A (Atlas IIA)
Launch mass (kg): 2068
Dry mass (kg): 827
Manufacturer: Lockheed Martin
Model (bus): AS-4000
It doesn't take a genious to figure out who knows all about the hardware, and the firmware, and software, that runs it, now does it.
It also doesn't take a genious to figure out who (besides the operator - Inmarsat) would have the knowledge to decode the data, and that was not the NTSB. The NTSB needed "expert help" to produce their "two tracks", and it took some doing, it took some time, probably too much time. Finally, after an agonising 9 days, "Jay" finally gets the nod that "the data is good",and he hops up on the podium, and gleefully "drives" the search into the SIO.
At the same time approximately, Inmarsat’s Mark Dickinson went to Malaysia to brief the Annex 13 "team".
So, did he brief them on the basis of the "initial raw day one data", or was he briefing them on a possibly "processed", (supposedly by the NTSB), data set ?
It is also interesting that Jay did not last too long in the job. Publickly farwelled by Obama himself - for "personal reasons", or so we are told. Obama went to see Najib too, not a long time after. First time a President had ever been to Malaysia. Just thinking aloud.
Gobbles old fella, it comes back to provenance.
Provenance M'lud, provenance, where for-art thie provenance, M'lud ?
It will be interesting to see what VictorI says tomorrow.
It IS tomorrow - 5:45am - bugger - time for bed !!
"During the Night" ..... Mike Exner (Ne ALSM on VictotI's blog), posted the following:
![[Image: attachment.php?aid=345]](http://www.auntypru.com/forum/attachment.php?aid=345)
(REF:= Victor's Blog: http://mh370.radiantphysics.com/2017/06/...mment-4300 )
Micke Exner posted this BFO comparison on twitter a couple of hours ago.
![[Image: attachment.php?aid=346]](http://www.auntypru.com/forum/attachment.php?aid=346)
And now, from Dr. Bobby Ulich @DrBobbyUlich on Twitter
![[Image: attachment.php?aid=347]](http://www.auntypru.com/forum/attachment.php?aid=347)
Red circles are 12:50 POR Log-on which occurred about 30 seconds later in thermal transient than 18:25 log-on. Warmer at 12:50 than 18:25.
Provenance M'lud, provenance, where for-art thie provenance, M'lud ?
It is interesting, very interesting, that VictorI, was at first excited about the "metta data" in the Excel file, seeming to indicate that it was made by Inmarsat only a few hours after the news of MH370's demise hit London. BrockM questioned his confidence, and VictorI demoured a little. Not long after, MikeE stated that he had it from an "official channel" that it was the same file that the Malysians had given the ATSB in late March 2014 (and that raises it's own set of questions for Dolan, Foley, Hood, and a heap of others !).
But now, an air of caution ?
VictorI has "redacted" his earlier "confidence" in that metta data, and is conducting "further enquiries".
Leave those thoughts "hanging" for a moment.
Moving on to the covering "Release Note", ie, the e-mail that provided the file:-
"The authorities (begs the question, WHICH so called "authorities", within DAS, within MAS, within the JIT ?) agree to release the data (WHY, why now ? On the run up to, the near "eve" of the "promised" FINAL Report (the Malaysians did affirm that it WAS being "worked on" and would be published in the second half of this year)), on condition (who are "THEY" trying to kid ?)that:
1. We will not translate the data into any meaningful information as:
(a) the data is "proprietary" (bollocks) to Inmarsat.
(b) The Malaysian Investigation team does not have any experts (If "THEY" had any "genuine" intention to understsnd the data, "THEY have had "more than enough time", three and a half years, to either learn (you can get a Satelite Enginnering degree in that time, easy, shorter if you are a real smart k...) or "hire in" suitable people) to translate these data into any meaningful information. (Which amounts to a blatant "we don't want to either.)
2. We "will not" translate the data into any other language, including Mandarin. (Hardly surprising, "THEY" haven't been seriously, let alone genuinely interested from "day one" !)
3. (a) These data are complete and obtained from Inmarsat.
(b) Please do not manipulate the data.
Gobbles mate, you really have to laugh at point 3. Beaker must have taught them well.
It is worth remembering, that INMARSAT, Mark Dickinson in particular, was quite specific early on, that the data belonged to SITA, and NOT MAS. He also said that the data had "initially" only been given by Inmarsat to the AAIB and SITA, and another "industry player" to check and verify their analysis. He never said who that was, but it is not hard to figure that out. See below.
He also said that the AAIB had quickly passed it on to the Malaysians, with an explanation of it's meaning and the implications for the search.
Later, when Malaysia rejected the data, and persisted in fumbling around in the South China Sea, and then the Straits of Malacca, and beyond north west, and then, with the Farcical Lido "event", by day 9, and with the Chinese at that stage ready to "spit the dummy", the "yanks" entered the frey, with White House Press Secretary Jay Carny's now imfamous anouncement "a new search area might be opening up in the SIO", complete with the NYT suddenly publishing the - now long forgotten by most - two tracks - into the SIO.
Why did he, and why did he then, specifically, on day 9 ?
No matter. All of a sudden it was "scramble" for RAAF Pearce, and the show switched hemispheres.
Now a suspicious mind, might just wonder a little, about the yanks and their motives. Bear in mind that if you delve into the history of the design of 3F-1, by whom, when, where and (initially) why, it is clear that it was a "follow on" part of the "initial system" (MARISAT) which was sold off (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inmarsat) to Inmarsat prior to 3F-1 (which was commisioned by Inmarsat).
The hardware specs for the 3F-1 satellite are:
Satellite Name: Inmarsat-3F1 (Inmarsat 3 F1, I3F1, IOR)
Status: active
Position: 64° E (64.5° E)
NORAD: 23839
Cospar number: 1996-020A
Operator: Inmarsat plc
Launch date: 2-Apr-1996
Launch site: Cape Canaveral
Launch vehicle: Atlas 2A (Atlas IIA)
Launch mass (kg): 2068
Dry mass (kg): 827
Manufacturer: Lockheed Martin
Model (bus): AS-4000
It doesn't take a genious to figure out who knows all about the hardware, and the firmware, and software, that runs it, now does it.
It also doesn't take a genious to figure out who (besides the operator - Inmarsat) would have the knowledge to decode the data, and that was not the NTSB. The NTSB needed "expert help" to produce their "two tracks", and it took some doing, it took some time, probably too much time. Finally, after an agonising 9 days, "Jay" finally gets the nod that "the data is good",and he hops up on the podium, and gleefully "drives" the search into the SIO.
At the same time approximately, Inmarsat’s Mark Dickinson went to Malaysia to brief the Annex 13 "team".
So, did he brief them on the basis of the "initial raw day one data", or was he briefing them on a possibly "processed", (supposedly by the NTSB), data set ?
It is also interesting that Jay did not last too long in the job. Publickly farwelled by Obama himself - for "personal reasons", or so we are told. Obama went to see Najib too, not a long time after. First time a President had ever been to Malaysia. Just thinking aloud.
Gobbles old fella, it comes back to provenance.
Provenance M'lud, provenance, where for-art thie provenance, M'lud ?
It will be interesting to see what VictorI says tomorrow.
It IS tomorrow - 5:45am - bugger - time for bed !!
Edited to add this - 7 1/2 hours later - after a good sleep.
"During the Night" ..... Mike Exner (Ne ALSM on VictotI's blog), posted the following:
(REF:= Victor's Blog: http://mh370.radiantphysics.com/2017/06/...mment-4300 )
Micke Exner posted this BFO comparison on twitter a couple of hours ago.
And now, from Dr. Bobby Ulich @DrBobbyUlich on Twitter
Red circles are 12:50 POR Log-on which occurred about 30 seconds later in thermal transient than 18:25 log-on. Warmer at 12:50 than 18:25.
