[Gobbledock]

The race is on for the creators and sellers of tracking software;

http://skift.com/2015/06/26/airlines-sel...-of-mh370/

[Kharon]

Things that make you go Hmmm.

The theory of fire/fumes has, at first glance, some merit – until you start to think as a pilot.  I can accept that the lithium ion batteries caught fire; I can even accept that the batteries were loaded at the furthest point from a smoke/fire detection unit; I could, at a stretch accept that the ‘system’ in that hold area was unserviceable.  But that is about as far as credibility will take me.

Fire, particularly fire/smoke/ fumes detection is an area that no manufacturer can skimp or avoid; the operators, engineers and flight crew would simply not accept a shabby half assed system.  Why, because an uncontained fire in a cargo hold is certain death; it is that simple. Fire has, from since almost the first flight, been an acknowledged killer.

Take a look at this publication from Boeing – HERE – from page 13 onward.  I can accept, without a seconds hesitation that Mr. Boeing builds a mighty fine aircraft and has not achieved that reputation by designing, building, installing and having certified fire protection systems which fail, when most needed.  I may mention the crew oxygen mask systems as well as many hours spent training in the use of all -Boeing -systems.  

Meanwhile, without any better evidence I will stick to my favourite answer – ET pinched it. Now, where's my old tin hat?

[ventus45]

I may mention the crew oxygen mask systems as well as many hours spent training in the use of all - B777  -systems.  

Can you fix the link please ?
http://www.smartcockpit.com/aircraft-res...ction.html

And this is interesting.
https://www.faa.gov/other_visit/aviation...O08014.pdf

[P7_TOM]

This one works  

FIRE systems was the one that was hosting the gremlins - 

Boeing - PDF - download

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/aeromag...011_Q2.pdf

file:///C:/Users/Admin/Downloads/B777-Fire_Protection.pdf

- All fixed Ventus - I hope.

[P7_TOM]

SAFO
Safety Alert for Operators

U.S. Department                                                                                    
             SAFO 08014 of Transportation                                                          
                                        DATE: 6/6/08
Federal Aviation
Administration                                                                                      
             Flight Standards Service
Washington, DC

http://www.faa.gov/other_visit/aviation_...afety/safo            
            A SAFO contains important safety information and may include recommended action. SAFO
content should be especially valuable to air carriers in meeting their statutory duty to provide
service with the highest possible degree of safety in the public interest. Besides the specific
action recommended in a SAFO, an alternative action may be as effective in addressing the safety
issue named in the SAFO.

Subject:  Boeing 777 Extended Operations (ETOPS) Restrictions due to Cargo Fire Suppression
System Shortfall

Purpose:   To inform operators conducting ETOPS with the Boeing Model 777 series airplane, of a
necessity to restrict some aircraft with Walter Kidde filter/regulators installed in the cargo
compartment fire suppression system. The affected systems are those with Walter Kidde
filter/regulators identified as part numbers 473494-1, -2, or -3, 473995-1, -2, or -3 or 473857-1,-2, or -3.

Background:   The Boeing Company has informed the FAA that they discovered an error in the
capability of certain cargo compartment fire suppression systems certified on Model 777 airplanes.

The affected fire suppression systems as delivered by Boeing are now known to have
filter/regulators that do not conform to the approved type design, which results in a metered flow  rate higher than the certified level. This shortfall results in a system time capability less than  that identified in the Model 777 ETOPS Configuration, Maintenance, and Procedures (CMP) Document  Number D044W054. This CMP document approves the Model 777 for ETOPS under Title 14 Code of Federal  Regulations (14 CFR) part 121, § 121.162(a) for ETOPS up to and including 180 minutes, and identifies cargo fire suppression system configurations intended to comply with the time-limited  system requirements of § 121.633(a) and appendix P, section I, paragraph (h)(4) for 207-minute  ETOPS. Boeing has determined that the correct cargo fire suppression capability of most airplanes  with affected filter/regulators is less than that required for the intended maximum ETOPS diversion  time under these part 121 operating rules.

There are a total of 694 Boeing Model 777 airplanes in the world fleet affected by this problem. Of  those, there are 137 airplanes registered in the United States and 128 operated by U.S. carriers.  The table below identifies the affected airplanes and the actual cargo fire suppression capability  for each.

The FAA plans to issue an Immediate Adopted Rule (IAR) airworthiness directive to require operators  to comply with a new revision to the Model 777 CMP that will identify the actual cargo fire  suppression capability. Boeing plans to issue service information for restoring the cargo fire  suppression system filter/regulators to the certified time capability.

Approved by:  AFS-200                                                                              
           OPR:  AFS-220
Recommended Action:  Directors of Operations and Directors of Maintenance should
determine if their 777 airplanes are equipped with the identified Walter Kidde filter/regulators as
part of the airplane’s cargo fire suppression systems. Operators should limit their ETOPS Maximum
Diversion Time to the actual capability of their airplanes cargo fire suppression system (minus 15
minutes) or maximum ETOPS authority granted by the FAA, whichever is less. Such a limit may be
removed with the incorporation of an FAA approved design change
that restores the cargo fire suppression system to the minimum required for the operator’s original
approved maximum diversion time.

Aircraft Model                  Filter Regulator          Original Certification           Actual
Capability
Part Installed


777-200 & 777-200 Increased
Gross Weight (777-200ER)
473494-1,-2,or-3   Certified Capability195 Minutes        174 Minutes


777-200 Increased Gross Weight
(777-200ER)
473995-1,-2,or-3   Certified Capability 222 Minutes        213 Minutes

777-200LR Gas Ox System       473995-1,-2,or-3   Certified Capability 222 Minutes        203
Minutes

777-200LR Low Flow System     473995-1,-2,or-3   Certified Capability 271 Minutes        213
Minutes

777-300                       473857-1,-2,or-3   Certified Capability 195 Minutes        185
Minutes

777-300ER Standard 3 Bottle System
473857-1,-2,or-3   Certified Capability 195 Minutes        185 Minutes

777-300ER Optional 4 Bottle System
473857-1,-2,or-3   Certified Capability 267 Minutes        239 Minutes

Point of Contact:  Any questions regarding this SAFO should be directed to Jim Ryan, Air
Carrier Operations Branch, AFS-220, at (202) 267-7493.

Approved by:  AFS-200                                                                              
           OPR:  AFS-220

Good catch Ventus – but this is to do with flow rates, suppression and a reduction of ETOPS time.  I agree it would be of great interest had the aircraft disappeared after two or perhaps three hours into the flight.  Even if had all turned to worms there is still the intriguing lack of comms; fire warning – hit the cut off button, get on the radio and head home. The fire/ fumes so nearly fits, just not quite there, but then, neither was I.  

ET rules OK.

[Gobbledock]

Valujet FL 592 into the Everglades is an interesting (yet heartbreaking) example of a catastrophic onboard fire. If the same type of fire with the same feed source was to break out in the cargo hold of a more modern aircraft today the outcome would be the same - no amount of fire suppression system would be able to contain it.

One could certainly hypothesise that a fire broke out on MH370, that the fuel source was of a degree that the fire was never going to be contained, and sadly the rest is history. Will we ever find out the root cause?  I certainly hope so because for as long as we do not know the exact cause the risk of reoccurrence remains. And in our industry that is not a good thing. But for now the cards still just don't stack up. Too many questions, too many inconsistencies, too many 'grey' areas. And I still ask the question as to why Boeing was and has been somewhat aloof from day 1?? Then again maybe E.T is the root cause?

The Valujet report is linked below for those interested (maybe Beaker can also read it and learn how a thorough investigation is undertaken and a succinct report is written?).

http://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/Accid...AR9706.pdf

P666

[Kharon]

I keep waiting for China to weigh in; they have, as usual been quiet and patient, but I’d bet a Choc frog, they have been watching the antics of both Malaysians and the Australians. For indeed, if they weren’t antics to begin with, they have become so.

I just wonder what the reaction will be if China decides it has been short changed, conned of even fobbed off with cynical faery stories, to cover over unpleasant truth. It’s London to brick their intelligence services know as much, if not more than those who search. P{2’s information vacuum is starting to look more and more like a deliberate attempt to obfuscate a complete cock-up of a conspiracy to cover up what? – IMO – it’s a simple truth; NFI of what occurred, when it occurred, why and what happened afterwards.

Someone, somewhere knows; find that person and you will find your aircraft.

[Gobbledock]

The talented Ferryman said;

"Someone, somewhere knows; find that person and you will find your aircraft".

Perhaps Dear Kharon Beaker with his new age 'beyond reason' methodology has already worked it out, but he has waited until the new financial year before he reveals all? That way he has his pots of money and abacus in order first? It's the new paradigm of accident investigation where 'budgets and bullshit' are the new black when it comes to accident investigations? Oh yeah sorry boys, I forgot, the bearded buffoon has been operating that way for over 5 years, so nothing new really!

Seriously, how I lament what Australia's ATSB used to be, before the once highly respected and capable organisation was hijacked, molested and destroyed by a narcissistic imbecile, with the blessing of an even bigger narcissist with a giant head and tiny torso. But then again, exactly why is the ATsB being entrusted with the responsibility of determining one of the worlds most baffling crashes since the AF loss? I mean go back in time to the days of Stray and Bills and a host of talented investigators that graced the office and I would've said 'yep maybe we stand a chance of cracking this one', but in today's ATsB world I find it laughable and disturbing.

Beaker, you are the weakest link, goodbye.

P_666

[Gobbledock]

Things have been a bit quiet in the past week on the MH370 front, so I did a little research and I found an interesting article on conspiracy website Neonnettle, that I thought some of our Conspiratists might enjoy! It's an older article, contains some interesting tidbits, some over the top conclusions and so forth, so you be the judge;

http://www.neonnettle.com/features/173-m...-shot-down

One thing has always remained a mystery, and that is why just after the search started in the original search area, from memory within 18 hours, a British submarine, many days from home, just happenned to pop up and that was only for a very short amount of time, then it left. And this fact was left out of numerous initial reports........

Doc

[ventus45]

Gobbledock,
Your 18 hour submarine is interesting.
It would have had to have already been on station in the the South China Sea, to "pop up" in 18 hours.
Are you referring to the Royal Navy nuclear submarine HMS Tireless, that later "surfaced" in the Indian Ocean late March - early April 2014 (operating with HMS Echo - Hydrographic Ship), or are you referring to an earlier (perhaps another - ie different ?) Royal Navy nuclear submarine in the first few days in the South China Sea ?
If so, it could have been "the same HMS Tireless" in both cases.
There was plenty of time (2+ weeks)for her to "transit" from the South China Sea to the Indian Ocean.
Given that the Royal Navy only has eight (I think) SSN's, it is pretty unlikely that there would be two of them in the Asian Area of Operations at the same time.

Gobbles, a "better" story - from the "nib" of Bradley West:
One Conspiracy to Rule Them All
http://bradleywest.net/vanishing-mh370-p...racy-rule/

But the best story is mine.
There is another possibility.
The possibility that "someone" did not want those Freescale people and perhaps their "luggage", (both "checked" and "carry on") to get to China, under any circumstances, is the elephant in the room.
If true, MH370 could have gone totally dark - and flown east - direct to Yap (say) or (perhaps) Ulithi. Both are within range, in the middle of nowhere, small islands, minimal locals, old runways "doable in a T7, etc, etc, ie, a suitable FOL (Foreward Operating Location).
As far as the Inmarsat 3-F1 BTO/BFO LOG is concerned, they could easily be "spoofed" either by the "spirit", or from a location almost directly under 3-F1. A smart techo can do all sorts of things with a electronic calibration lab at his disposal. Inmarsat were "worried", and said so, on TV, numerous times, that they "may" have been spoofed. As for the "occasional radar blips over the peninsula and the straits" they could actually be legit, even though there are great doubts of their "efficacy" from all quarters.
In fact, if you think about it, it is quite "easy peesie".
Just task one "spirit in the night" with the "ghost ship role", ie, the "laying of the electronic breadcrumbs role", ie, the decoy role.
Method: - Fly "dark" (of course), but generate a few radar "blips" - "here and there" (by cycling the bay doors - open and close) "every now and again" .............
Such a mission would be simple.
Planning, not too difficult - think "Black Buck".
Now, you will all of course remember, that it was the White House no less, that "drove" the search to the SIO, whilst KL was "dithering".
Connect the dots ? (between breadcrumbs ?) ........ perhaps ?

[Gobbledock]

Ventus, my source told me the Sub popped up initially within 18 hours. I find that very suspicious considering the location, however I will never be able to confirm that info (neither can my source) as Sub operations sit within a very high level of intelligence well above our prying eyes! I do recall an incident around 15 years ago when (as a younger man) I was sunning myself on Bribie Island when a US Sub popped up off the beach by about 200 metres. A sailor had a burst appendix and received an emergency medivac. It was reported to the media and was met by a 'no comment'. Later on a friend of mine in Defence explained what happenned, but even at his classification he didn't know why the Sub was at that location as there were no exercises being conducted. Even more interesting was that at the time the Sub was of the nuclear variety, which was a no no for Australian waters close to cities, so I was told...hmmmm

Anyway, I digressed, but as you said;

"There is another possibility.
The possibility that "someone" did not want those Freescale people and perhaps their "luggage", (both "checked" and "carry on") to get to China, under any circumstances, is the elephant in the room".

If ever there was to be a more sinister motive or conspiracy, Freescale semi-conductor is it. There is too much to write here, but of interest was the technology that the project team was working on (in  fact they had concluded the project), was worth quite a large sum of money. More disturbing is that documents revealed that if certain members of the company (Freescale) were to 'pass away' then all ownership rights to the technology/or the insurance payout would go to none other than the Rothschilds! If, and I say if this is remotely true then I would surmise that we will never find out what really occurred, as we are dealing with those who pull the puppets strings, and they hold more power than any single Government or country holds, include the US of A!

P_666

[slats11]

Although it has not been officially confirmed, it seems very likely we have the first piece of debris from MH370. Unofficial sources have stated it is from MH370. Remember that unofficial sources correctly informed WSJ of the existence of Inmarsat data.

I doubt it is going to take 3 days to get to France - more likely buying everyone a few days before the media starts pushing for a statement. I would expect official confirmation next week.

Some conspiracy people are suggesting that it couldn't float for 16 months and must have been "planted" to be found and support the SIO location. I think we can rule that out - all it would take would be for one piece of forensic analysis to be inconsistent, and there would be a major problem. Better no evidence than incorrect evidence.

So I think this safely puts away the northern arc scenario, the somewhere in China scenario, the Maldives, and Diego Garcia.

It came down in the IO. The fact nothing has been found further north (with more shores to wash up on and more maritime traffic) supports a location well south in the IO.

Unless we find the hull, we won't know a lot more. But the south IO does fit with this finding, and does fit with the Inmarsat data (not withstanding the limitations of this data).

There are a number of plausible explanations. All of these have some inconsistencies and oddities. Of the explanations however, I still favour a deliberate act by someone - most likely involving the death of the person responsible.

The unavoidable fact remains that the human mind is now far more fallible (probably by a couple of orders of magnitude) than the technology.

[P7_TOM]

That a pilot commits suicide; yes I can readily agree to that.  That a pilot would murder an innocent fellow crew member I find very hard to comprehend (despite scurrilous rumour).  But that a pilot would; for no valid proven, or even investigated reason choose to slaughter 230 + people, as part of a suicide; seems even more far fetched.  And yet, there is Germanwings.  One mad, homicidal, suicidal maniac? Slipped through the nets: I could, perhaps, live with that notion: but two?  Somehow that does not seem ‘mathematically’ or even logically feasible to me?  What do you think?

From the UP:- http://www.pprune.org/members/294111-toshirozero

By joves Coastalpilot, that kind of accurate summation of the tsunami of censorious drivel postulated as considered opinion posted on this idiots charter generally has a half life of about 3 minutes before the moderators reach for the delete button. Ironic then that the proposition that a pilot committed mass murder rather than suicide, as the suicide is a consequence of the mass murder, rarely gets a mention.

I have yet to read in all of the press and communications the assertion: Pilot deliberately murders 350 people.

2:59, 2:58, 2:57, 2:56, 2:55.......

[comcomtech]

What we Know

Captain Zaharie Shah, a cousin by marriage of Malaysian opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim, had claimed on Facebook that Malaysia's founding prime minister, Dr. Mahatir, was "inordinately wealthy." Captain Shah, long-term employee of a state-owned airline in a country not famous for participatory democracy, posed for a Facebook photo in a t-shirt reading "Democracy is Dead."

The afternoon just before the flight. Captain Shah attended a fast-tracked Court of Appeals hearing on Anwar's sodomy trial. Opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim had been arrested following a public disagreement with Mahatir in the early 1990s over financial policy (Anwar was then Minister of Finance). Anwar was charged with corruption and sodomy. The sodomy conviction was later quashed.

After leaving prison, Anwar taught at Johns Hopkins, Georgetown and other campuses, until he was once again eligible to run for office (there is a 5 or 10 year waiting period after a serious criminal conviction before someone can run for political office in Malaysia).

Anwar ran and won. He was soon arrested for allegedly raping an assistant (at the time, Anwar was about 60 and the assistant about 20) in a hotel room. The trial court found him not guilty, but the Court of Appeals, as I just mentioned, moved up his trial ahead of mid-term elections and in a one-hour hearing reversed the decision of the lower court, found him guilty of sodomy and sentenced him to five years in prison. Captain Shah was present as Anwar, again, his cousin by marriage and also his political hero, was led away in handcuffs.

By virtue of the conviction, Anwar once again could not run for office or hold office.

Later that evening, Anwar was released (he is in prison now), but Captain Shah left the courtroom after seeing Anwar taken away.

Captain Shah went home to his suburban house where he lived with his ex-wife, some of his adult children and some of his grandchildren.

Captain Shah then either told them to get out or they told him they were leaving. Alternately, he learned that they had already left. As he headed to the airport, he called his girlfriend and they argued. While the details are sketchy, we know he was having family and romantic problems.

An hour after departure, Shah acknowledged a hand-off to Vietnamese controllers. The transponder then shut down and the plane, according to some reports, hugged the terrain in some places flying west along the Malaysian-Thai border, a region of jungles and low mountains.

The evidence suggests Shah flew past Penang and out into the Andaman Sea before possibly turning south between Sumatra and India. The rest of his route to the southern Indian Ocean would have been over water and not detectable by most land-based radar.

Regime Change?

I believe two scenarios are possible. Shah was furious about Anwar and devastated by his family situation. He took the plane for a long trip to nowhere.

Another possibility is that he called KL departure, asked to be patched into the PM's office and demanded, for example, that the PM step down and that Anwar be freed.

About a day or two (maybe three) after MH370's disappearance, some news sources reported that the Malaysian PM would be stepping down. This of course has no occurred.

Missing Evidence

Many passengers keep their cell phones on in flight and these phones are constantly attempting to log into cell towers. There has been no discussion in the media about attempting to track the plane more precisely based on cell tower registrations.

Australia and China have long-distance radar that could have detected MH370 however it was "off" that night in both countries.

Other surrounding nations have mostly remained silent about tracking the plane on military radar.

Globe orbitting satellites could have picked up an image of the plane or its contrail, particularly at dawn if it were still flying.

So What Happened?

I believe that Captain Zaharie Shah was angry about his hero's fate and distressed about his personal life. He may have demanded a change in regime and dumped the plane in the Indian Ocean as far away from shipping channels as he could get and easing the plane into the water hoping it would go down in one piece.

I believe that Captain Shah wanted to destroy Malaysian Airlines, bring discredit on Malaysia, create an international crisis with China (most passengers were Chinese) and otherwise give a kick in the butt to a regime he despised.

Or, he may simply have been at the end of his rope, crazy and ditched the plane.

No government in the world will tolerate regime change. Nor could the Malaysian government afford to admit that it had refused to negotiate with a pilot who then went and crashed his plane.

Josh Wallace (comcomtech)

[Kharon]

Josh, welcome and thank you for an informative, balanced first post; most illuminating.  

I believe two scenarios are possible. Shah was furious about Anwar and devastated by his family situation. He took the plane for a long trip to nowhere.

Another possibility is that he called KL departure, asked to be patched into the PM's office and demanded, for example, that the PM step down and that Anwar be freed.

I believe we have not seen, up until now a clear suggestion of motive for a ‘crew hi-jack’.  The construct is certainly food for thought, however, the inferences which may be drawn from either proposed scenario leave some big questions unanswered. That the Captain was furious, upset and off balance is acceptable – that he may have planned some form of revenge or ‘threat plan’ is also believable; BUT we must consider, on balance of probability, did he execute the plan?  

Fury, angry mutterings, crazy plots, I can understand; but to parlay that into the cold blooded murder of passengers and crew is a large leap for purely ‘personal’ or unstated political reasons. Had the reasons for alleged hi-jack been made public – early – would that not be a better way to bring pressure to bear? Or; would keeping everyone alive not be an even better bargaining chip.  Killing the aircraft mysteriously served no purpose and achieve nothing.

If the man had a consistent history of rebellion against the government, even covert, the Malaysian government under hi-jack pressure would have screamed loud and long for help, promises would have been made, anything to get the aircraft back to earth where the situation could be resolved.  One call to any news agency would have provided instant, world wide coverage and attention to any demands made.  To execute the threat and kill all on board, for no conceivable benefit to either himself, his family or his ‘ cause’; for me, falls short of a satisfactory explanation.  

Toot toot. 

[comcomtech]

Josh, welcome and thank you for an informative, balanced first post; most illuminating.  

I believe two scenarios are possible. Shah was furious about Anwar and devastated by his family situation. He took the plane for a long trip to nowhere.

Another possibility is that he called KL departure, asked to be patched into the PM's office and demanded, for example, that the PM step down and that Anwar be freed.

I believe we have not seen, up until now a clear suggestion of motive for a ‘crew hi-jack’.  The construct is certainly food for thought, however, the inferences which may be drawn from either proposed scenario leave some big questions unanswered. That the Captain was furious, upset and off balance is acceptable – that he may have planned some form of revenge or ‘threat plan’ is also believable; BUT we must consider, on balance of probability, did he execute the plan?  

Fury, angry mutterings, crazy plots, I can understand; but to parlay that into the cold blooded murder of passengers and crew is a large leap for purely ‘personal’ or unstated political reasons. Had the reasons for alleged hi-jack been made public – early – would that not be a better way to bring pressure to bear? Or; would keeping everyone alive not be an even better bargaining chip.  Killing the aircraft mysteriously served no purpose and achieve nothing.

If the man had a consistent history of rebellion against the government, even covert, the Malaysian government under hi-jack pressure would have screamed loud and long for help, promises would have been made, anything to get the aircraft back to earth where the situation could be resolved.  One call to any news agency would have provided instant, world wide coverage and attention to any demands made.  To execute the threat and kill all on board, for no conceivable benefit to either himself, his family or his ‘ cause’; for me, falls short of a satisfactory explanation.  

Toot toot. 

Thank you very much Kharon. I posted a few similar messages to Pprune after the disappearance and about a week ago. All were deleted, presumably by the moderators.

Captain Shah's Facebook page (probably gone by now), said a great deal about the man, his angers and frustrations. It is interesting that the mainstream media have never discussed this. We have read and seen endless speculation about Lee Harvey Oswald's frame of mind and Osama bin Laden's fondness for porn. But other than his obsession with a state-of-the-art flight simulator, there has been almost no word on Zaharie Shah's political perspective, domestic situation and other aggravating factors.

[Kharon]

Josh. Nothing wrong with a constructive discussion, not in Aunty Pru’s garden.  The topic provided for discussion raises an unpleasant spectre.  BUT if discussing it can help the waiting, grieving families find some avenue towards coming to terms with what happened, then it is worthy of consideration – as a notion.  Germanwings, was and remains an ‘unthinkable’, but it happened.  Logic and evidence may yet rule out (or in) the possibilities you raised, but, until proven, beyond reasonable doubt, for weel or woe; it remains no less and no more than honest speculation.  

There are so many theories, none of which have been tested, eliminated or proven; many beggar imagination.  Let us all hope that recent events lead us back to the ‘right’ answers.  Even then, like all other major aviation accident events, the speculation and discussion will, particularly among flight crew, creep into ‘cruise conversation’.  

Toot toot.

[Gobbledock]

Return of the lithium battery discussion

Interesting article posted below. Best to follow the link because it is a moderately long article in length. I wasn't sure what to make of the article overall. There was certainly some common sense reasoning and plausible hypothesis, mixed with a little 'bedtime story telling'. If I had more time I would better research the players involved in the article to try and better determine if they are indeed experts in some form of safety field or whether they are just more wankers trying to cash in on MH370. You be the judge

P.S No mention of E.T in this article being the root cause of the disappearance.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/20...stery.html

P_666

[ventus45]

Extract:

"Sbirs data has also been used by U.S. intelligence officials as they continue to unravel the mystery of Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 (MH370), another 777-200ER, that disappeared in March 2014 while en route from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing. According to information from Malay military radar, the aircraft is thought to have crossed the Malayan peninsula and possibly crashed into the Indian Ocean. A flaperon belonging to the aircraft later washed up on the French overseas territory of Reunion Island in the Indian Ocean. The aircraft is thought to have flown in an area not highly trafficked, making it easier for Sbirs to find and track the heat signature of a 777-200ER.

Officials at the 460th declined to articulate their role in the search, and U.S. intelligence is unlikely to advertise if and how its data was used, for fear of revealing its capabilities. But Jackson says the team did participate by providing technical data to the intelligence community."

Full article:
http://aviationweek.com/space/unpreceden...sbirs-veil

Related / Relevant:
http://aviationweek.com/Sbirs#slide-0-fi...es-1364911

[Peetwo]

Extract:

"Sbirs data has also been used by U.S. intelligence officials as they continue to unravel the mystery of Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 (MH370), another 777-200ER, that disappeared in March 2014 while en route from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing. According to information from Malay military radar, the aircraft is thought to have crossed the Malayan peninsula and possibly crashed into the Indian Ocean. A flaperon belonging to the aircraft later washed up on the French overseas territory of Reunion Island in the Indian Ocean. The aircraft is thought to have flown in an area not highly trafficked, making it easier for Sbirs to find and track the heat signature of a 777-200ER.

Officials at the 460th declined to articulate their role in the search, and U.S. intelligence is unlikely to advertise if and how its data was used, for fear of revealing its capabilities. But Jackson says the team did participate by providing technical data to the intelligence community."

Full article:
http://aviationweek.com/space/unpreceden...sbirs-veil

Related / Relevant:
http://aviationweek.com/Sbirs#slide-0-fi...es-1364911

Excellent catch ventus...

An Unprecedented Peek Behind The Sbirs Veil

Oct 20, 2015 Amy Butler | Aviation Week & Space Technology


Related Media
[/url]
An Exclusive Look At Sbirs And Its Capabilities

• Providing Continuous Missile Warning From Space
  

Node region

In less than 10 sec., every point on the face of the Earth is imaged by the U.S. Air Force’s newest infrared (IR) missile warning satellite system.
The message from the operators of the new Space-Based Infrared System (Sbirs) at the 460th Space Wing at Buckley AFB, Colorado, is that missile or space launches cannot happen anywhere on Earth—or over it—without their knowing. With Sbirs, they can detect a launch faster than ever, more accurately identify the missile type, more precisely calculate its burnout velocity and trajectory (state vector) and more exactly determine an impact point.
The Air Force has not disclosed the system’s precise capabilities. In part, this is due to security concerns. Sbirs, along with its less capable Defense Support Program (DSP) predecessor, is the first cue system for the Pentagon’s entire ballistic missile defense architecture that protects the nation and U.S. forces abroad. It employs the sensors that would first detect a ballistic missile launch from North Korea, Iran, Russia, China or other potential aggressors. Sbirs is also responsible for “tipping” off other assets—such as ground- and ship-based radars—to detect a missile before engaging with an interceptor or warning soldiers to take cover.



Confident that the system’s woes were worth the trouble—it is nearly $14 billion over budget and nine years late—the service is preparing for a new iteration of Sbirs, combining remote ground-based locations into one, multifunctional command, control and analysis center. Officials gave Aviation Week unprecedented access to see the Sbirs center at Buckley Aug. 18 and watch operators train on the system before it goes operational next year.
With two of four of the Sbirs geosynchronous (GEO) satellites in orbit and three complementary IR payloads on classified highly elliptical orbit (HEO) satellites operating, the Air Force is finally starting to see a return on nearly two decades of technical challenges, cost overruns and delays. “This is the pivotal time in overhead persistent infrared history,” says Col. Mike Jackson, operations group commander for the 460th. Finally getting these sensors into orbit and an “explosion” in computing power advances has allowed the service to begin using this data in ways never thought possible when  the missile-warning workhorse DSP was first launched in 1970. At that time, DSP’s sole purpose was to warn of a missile launch—primarily from what was then the Soviet Union.
Now, however, at least 24 countries operate and sell a variety of ballistic missile designs, making the job of missile warning more complex and, to many, more urgent. Ballistic missiles are more capable, accurate and mobile, Jackson says. “They are sold like chickens at the market in some places,” he says. Missile Defense Agency (MDA) chief Vice Adm. James Syring says nations such as China and Russia are also developing more advanced countermeasures designed to fool U.S. sensors into mischaracterizing the missiles or shooting at the wrong target.

Expanding the Mission
The Sbirs development began in 1996 with four key missions to address: providing missile warning (its primary focus), cueing missile defenses, offering technical intelligence about missiles and delivering battlespace awareness of IR events globally. Operators at the 460th are greatly expanding the system’s utility thanks to new computing power never imagined 20 years ago, Jackson says.
Also contributing to the diversity of possible missions is the sheer number of sensors in orbit. Along with Sbirs GEO-1 and -2  and three scanning sensors in HEO orbit , the Pentagon continues to rely on an undisclosed number of legacy DSP satellites. Designed to last five years, DSP-16, the oldest remaining bird, is still operating after 24 years, says Col. John Wagner, commander of the 460th.


Credit: U.S. Air Force Concept


Designed with short- and mid-wave IR detectors, Sbirs can theoretically “see” any IR event—such as a forest fire, bomb explosion or plane crash. The sensors are “tuned” to look for specific events, such as the hot plumes of ICBMs, but are also constantly collecting background data from other heat events, data kept by the Pentagon. In the event of a natural disaster or bombing, for example, operators can find the information collected during that specific time and provide it to authorities.

An example is the case of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 (MH17), a Boeing 777-200ER that was shot down by a Russian-made BUK missile on July 17, 2014, killing 283 passengers and 15 crew. Mystery still surrounds the incident. The aircraft was downed en route from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur, and U.S. and allied officials suspect pro-Russian separatists near the Ukraine-Russia border launched the missile as tensions mounted in the region. Though the BUK, or SA-11, was initially indicated, it is likely that Sbirs data helped the intelligence community confirm the assessment.

Officials at the 460th did not disclose their specific role in this work. “This is the art of what we do,” Jackson says, noting that Sbirs and satellite IR data is used to shed light on thousands of nonmissile events annually. If operators know the time of an event and Sbirs sensors were imaging the area—and they likely were, as the U.S. closely monitors Russian forces operating near the Ukrainian border—they can filter out information about a specific event. The shootdown of an airliner would produce a hot explosion, and operators could likely go through the Sbirs data to forensically image the plume of the offending missile and, perhaps, an approximate location of its launch point. The data could then be correlated against other sources of intelligence to suggest who commanded that particular missile.

Sbirs data has also been used by U.S. intelligence officials as they continue to unravel the mystery of Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 (MH370), another 777-200ER, that disappeared in March 2014 while en route from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing. According to information from Malay military radar, the aircraft is thought to have crossed the Malayan peninsula and possibly crashed into the Indian Ocean. A flaperon belonging to the aircraft later washed up on the French overseas territory of Reunion Island in the Indian Ocean. The aircraft is thought to have flown in an area not highly trafficked, making it easier for Sbirs to find and track the heat signature of a 777-200ER.

Officials at the 460th declined to articulate their role in the search, and U.S. intelligence is unlikely to advertise if and how its data was used, for fear of revealing its capabilities. But Jackson says the team did participate by providing technical data to the intelligence community.

Col. Mike Guetlein, director of the Air Force Space and Missile Center Remote-Sensing Directorate, which oversees the program’s development and production, says satellite IR data is being more routinely used for combat and civil search-and-rescue operations, locating crash survivors or those who perished in crashes. This is made possible because satellite IR data, and Sbirs information in particular, can be collected and processed much faster now. The system can also be used to help direct firefighters to concentrate their resources because it can show areas of the worst hot spots in burn zones.
Guetlein says that if the art for Sbirs operators is in honing their tactics to use the same data in new ways, the science is in the growing set of algorithms used to manipulate data collected by the system. Work in the “battlespace awareness” mission for satellite IR data can take hours today, but that is shrinking quickly thanks to computing advances. “This is where the explosion is happening,” Guetlein says. As Air Force officials work on algorithms and tactics development, the U.S. Army is also working to improve its ability to relay Sbirs data to commanders in the field, pushing it to ever lower levels of command.
The Army is upgrading its mobile Joint Tactical Ground Stations —four locations outside the U.S. used to disseminate Sbirs warning messages—from mobile configurations to a fixed design. It is also conducting a block upgrade to exploit more data from Sbirs GEO satellites as well as DSP, said Army Lt. Gen. David Mann on Aug. 12. The mobile JTAGs are operating, but “not to the degree that we are really maximizing the Sbirs GEO constellation,” he says. “[It is] very, very minimal.” The upgrade, for which Army officials declined to identify a cost, will “allow us to fully capitalize on what Sbirs brings to us, as well as DSP and other data.”
The system can also be helpful beyond its missile warning and defense roles. The Pentagon’s National Air and Space Intelligence Center keeps a catalog of signatures—electromagnetic and IR—of aircraft, missiles and other military hardware operating globally. In a theater such as Syria, a multitude of systems are active, including those from Syria, Russia and forces friendly to the U.S., along with stolen allied systems used by the militant Islamic State. Sbirs can help sort out the chaos on the battlefield by providing one set of data for analysts to correlate with other sources. The system can also provide precise data on the whereabouts of aircraft, possibly validating or dispelling accusations from Turkey about Russian aircraft flying in its airspace, including an allegation that a MiG-29 intercepted Turkish F-16s, for example.


Credit: Lockheed Martin Concept


The number of heat events detected by the system is an indicator of how the Air Force has expanded the use of satellite IR data with Sbirs. The 460th detected 403 missile events in 2014, versus 193  through July 2015. However, while Sbirs operators worked about 8,000 IR events from the Sbirs mission control station at Buckley in all of 2014, they had already worked 7,000 such events through August 2015. The growth is due to a change in the tactics and methods used to detect and characterize events, a significant expansion of the types of events being monitored, says Maj. Greg Vice, director of operations at the 2nd Space Warning Sqdn. at Buckley. This work will be officially supported through a new Joint Overhead Persistent Infrared Battlespace Awareness Cell being established at Buckley and set to go operational in April 2016. It will be staffed by intelligence and Air Force officials and provide its data not only to the intelligence community but also to commanders around the globe via tactical data links.

Inside the Ops Center
This data is separate from the rigid nuclear command-and-control communications used by Sbirs operators to provide certified Integrated Tactical Warning and Attack Assessment (Itwaa) messages for commanders at U.S. Strategic Command. These are the official messages, dispatched in a very specific format, warning of a missile attack; they include information about the threat missile and its anticipated launch point.
For Itwaa messages, each sensor must be precisely certified in a process that is intentionally grueling because of the potentially grave consequences of these messages.
Both Sbirs GEO scanning sensors are Itwaa-certified; the first was certified a full two years after launch. Scanners on the first two HEO sensors are also Itwaa-certified. The starer is slated for this certification as soon as next year.
The gravity of the mission is contrasted by the youth of its operators at Buckley, most of whom were born after the ending of the Cold War that drove development of the missile warning and defense architecture. The average Sbirs operator is about 20 years old and has about six months’ experience working the console. The ops floor is populated by a multinational presence, including British, Australian and Canadian military officials. These operators work 12-hr.shifts, constantly monitoring computer screens. The Sbirs operators are divided into four areas aligned with its four missions: missile defense, missile warning, technical intelligence and battlespace awareness. Though the job can at times be monotonous, Airman 1st Class Cynthia Solorzano says the time often passes quickly, especially when events are reported. Operators must react within seconds of a launch to inform U.S. Strategic Command and alert missile defenses. And the job is made more complex by adversaries’ changing tactics.
More and more, nations are testing their ability to conduct “raid attacks,” firing multiple missiles at once in hopes of overwhelming U.S. sensors and defenses. “We have seen and will continue to see other countries use a ripple launch—a raid launch. . . . We have seen up to 32 launches” in one particular event within the last two years, says Jackson, the ops group commander. “We have to train our operators to handle more than just single, strategic launches. How do we handle multiple launches from multiple locations in a very small, regional conflict? You have to learn how to hand things off as a crew. You have got to learn how to set up your screens differently.”
Aviation Week was invited to tour the new Block 10 operations floor before it is shrouded in classification when operations begin in earnest. It is a modern, wide space littered with computer consoles. Personnel in an intelligence cell are off to the side. A space in the center will be occupied each shift’s director. Large screens loom over the ops center, and shift overseers can display data of their choice, including sources outside Sbirs, such as television news channels.


Credit: Lockheed Martin
[url=http://aviationweek.com/site-files/aviationweek.com/files/uploads/2015/10/IR-SIBIRS-2_LockheedMartin.jpg]

This expansion of the Sbirs mission is occurring just as the Air Force is finally realizing a long-held plan to consolidate Sbirs ground operations in a single ground control center at Buckley. Currently, operations are distributed among locations in Colorado at Boulder, Schriever AFB and Buckley under the original Sbirs ground architecture plan. Operators

Providing Continuous Missile Warning From Space

Oct 16, 2015  | Aviation Week & Space Technology

This Lockheed Martin video depicts how the U.S. Air Force Space-Based Infrared System and the decades-old Defense Support Program predecessor scan every point on Earth at least once every 10 sec. 

MTF..P2