[Kharon]

A dab of Denmark please.

When you consider the excellent post from Brock – HERE – its easy to understand why those with a ‘scientific’ bent are frustrated.  In science a theory must withstand testing, the evidence impeccable and proof irrefutable; fairy stories are rapidly debunked by peer groups.  What I believe I keep seeing from the ‘analytics’ are the results of peer groups testing of the ‘official’ theory, which indicate flaws in that analysis.  I admit, the science is beyond my limited capability; however, even wooden headed pilots have the ability to eliminate ‘theories’ that don’t reflect the situation i.e. problem solving.  And this is what troubles me the most about the 370 search, the almost total lack of ‘elimination’ by fact and logic of different theory.

When a crime is committed, the police have, in theory, the whole worlds population to consider as suspects. This notion is quickly and easily eliminated and the process of collecting evidence and gathering provable fact to support, or eliminate a theory of ‘who-dunnit’ is activated.  Same-same air crash investigation, fact and evidence collected first to be considered, before eliminating theory after theory until the true cause is established.  This has not happened to 370.

There must be dozens of ‘theories’ floating about; some half baked, like my own ET theory; through to the excellent work being done by serious, qualified folk.  Some of the ‘top end’ theories have legs and are worthy of serious consideration.  There has been ample time and enough money made available to examine and test some of the credible ‘theory’.  Gods know the search is dynamic and each time a new ‘clue’ is found, the evidence and circumstances should have ‘influenced’ the official ‘theory’, as it would in the real world.  This has not occurred; the dogged, hidebound official search has continued as scripted.

IMO It is time to ask who the real criminals are.  

I say it is criminally negligent to ignore revised scientifically testable data.  Data which must be tested to either eliminate a possibility; or, adopted to better define the search area.  It is irresponsible to simply discard credible, supportable theory.  Obviously, the search area cannot be changed, willy-nilly, but, as the search progresses the percentage chances of finding the aircraft within the area diminish so the re thinking must increase.  Revised theories must be examined and eliminated, or used to re evaluate the parameters.

IMO It is time to ask who the real criminals are.  

I am not naturally given to ‘conspiracy’ but rather belong firmly in the ‘cock-up’ school of thought; however, two important facts combined with the refusal to consider any revised data or theory rings the little alarum bells in my ‘something ain’t right’ bump.

i) The unceremonious dumping of the AMSA, an acknowledged, highly competent, qualified ocean search expert body.

ii) The introduction of ATSB and Dolan as the search masters.  An organisation with neither the qualification or expertise to manage an ocean search on any scale; led by a discredited, obliging public servant with less qualification and even less idea of how to proceed.

It makes sense, good sense to pull the ships out of the search area until the weather improves, they’re just getting hammered for no result.  I would like to believe that the hiatus will be used to re-evaluate the whole thing; re-equip, refresh and return to complete the search with fresh information.  Alas, I find I cannot manage anything more than a simple ‘believe it when I see it’.

Enough waffle from me on the subject.  If not ET, then this is a criminal matter, bring in the professionals, to find those who know what really happened and find the aircraft. Someone, somewhere knows.  

Toot (cynical) toot.

[ventus45]

Q.  Time to think of it as a criminal act ?
A.  Yes Indeed.
Q.  Who is the criminal - the pilot ?
A.  Perhaps.
Q.  Perhaps - if not - who ?
A.  That - is a very interesting question.
Q.  Really - and the answer is ..... ?
A.  ....................................




Ron's post on Jeff Wise.net post at July 23, 2016 at 1:48 PM is significant, and worth a look.




His takeaway: This is the professional fingerprint of intelligence agencies ....
It could turn out to be seminal.

I think that we need to stop, and go back to square one.
We need to have a serious re-think - from day 1.

We need to look back over the last 2 plus years at the history of the "official" information.

If you do, the only conclusion that you can come to, is that "we have been played" by the "intelligence agencies", into "beleiving" the SIO narative.

The early roumors, way back, of a flight "to a short runway, on a remote island, in the Southern Indian Ocean", is, and always was, quite clearly, pure garbage.
There is no such island, as we all know.

But, for the gullible, there are four ("stretching credulity to the limit") possibilities.

One, the fictional "Commonwealth of New Island", which is supposedly at 35S 100E, which does not fit "any" of the "other" so called "official information", but wonder of wonders, our new "red track" from these new "five data points" neatly overflys. Yeah rite !

Two, the Christmas Island theory, which is also garbage, in my frank opinion (no offence to those who developed it).

Three, Cocos Island (which was never in the game / frame).

Four, the Amsterdam / Saint Paul Islands (which don't have any airstrip of any kind) except a helo pad.

I have, like others, have worked long and hard on my own theory of a deliberate ditch in the SIO.
I still beleive it is correct, IFF (If and ONLY If) the Inmarsat pings, are legitimate.
If they are not legitimate, all bets are off.

The "debris", and the "drift studies" are slowly convincing me, that "something is rotten in the state of Denmark".

It is time to seriously question, the efficasy of the entire, "radar at 18:22" matching the "ping at 18:25" story. It is just "way too convenient", and always has been, (as others have of course pointed out in the past).

They could both be legitimate signals of course, in that those "radar returns" and the "pings" could have been generated from a real aircraft.
But those "sporadic" radar returns in the Interim Factual "were not generated by a B777 - which has a HUGE RCS", they WERE NOT MH370.
The "pings" on the other hand, could have been generated on board ANY aircraft with the necessary equipment and codes, drone or not.
Indeed, the "signal source" does not even have to be an aircraft. Those signals "could" have been generated quite easily by "someone" with the necessary codes and equipment, from any point within the 19:40 ping ring 3F-1 footprint.
That opens a can of worms, that only a very few, very shadowy creatures can play in.
.
Put bluntly, I now think Ron is probably correct.
"This is the professional fingerprint of intelligence agencies ...."

I am, more and more, leaning to the thought, that we have been "conned" by the intelligence agencies, all along, ie, that "both" the 18:22 radar hit, and the entire Isat log, are "electronically real", but are in fact A DELIBERATE DECEPTION.

I have long harboured an alternative view, that the aircraft never went west from Igari at all.
It never went over Malaysia, nor over or around the northern tip of Sumatrata, let alone south, deep into the SIO.

It went EAST, into the Pacific, towards an intended landing at a "remote island" with a "short runway".
To the Yap Islands, specifically, to Fais at 09 46.26N 140 31.15E.



Alternatively, it might have been planned to go to SE from BAHAR to Manus Island rather than NE to Yap Island .  After all, "Detention Facilities" are already "in-being", managed by a third, suitably "compliant state", on Manus Island.  "Pacific Solutions" are "Pacific Solutions" after all !! Just saying !!



But, MH370 never made it to Fais (or Manus Island).

MH370 was not an aircraft systems accident, nor was it a pilot suicide.

MH370 was a "double hijack disaster", the result of a high stakes game of international espionage and counter espionage.

The first hijack was between Igari and Bitod, where one side took the plane to "snatch back" some people who knew "too much", and who could not be "allowed" to "reach destination".
All went according to plan - flying east - for some time.

But eventually, "the escorting minders" of "the unsuspecting snatched", realized that they had been thwarted.
They launched a "counter hijack".

In the ensuing battle, it all went terribly wrong, for both sides, and the innocent passengers and crew, and the aircraft crashed.

The crash was not in the SIO, nor was it in the SCS, it was way east of there, at 4 degrees north, between waypoint MOLLY and waypoint BAHAR.





The "French held flaperon" has been locked up, under the cloak of a "Terrorist Investigation".
Why ?
Because it has "Pacific Ocean Barnacles", not "Indian Ocean Barnacles".

Crash_zone_between_Molly_and_Bahar_.JPG Size: 235.87 KB  Downloads: 153

MH370-Hijack-Flight-Plan.JPG Size: 469.2 KB  Downloads: 126

[Peetwo]

In the lead up to tomorrow night's 60 Minutes MH370 exposé, courtesy Plane Talking...

MH370: It wasn't an FBI report so why was it given a false label?
If you are going to lie about something you need to have a very good recollection as to what you previously said, and Kuala Lumpur said back in early 2014 a great deal of what is causing so much amazed outrage in certain media.

Ben Sandilands

Remember these early ATSB search maps, this one from October 2014?

There is no FBI report into the data retrieved from the home flight simulator of dead MH370 captain Zaharie Ahmad Shah.

But there is a lengthy Malaysian Police report misrepresented as being from the FBI concerning the findings made by a forensic computing contractor for them, covering investigations which began in March 2014, days after MH370, a Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777-200ER disappeared on its way from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing with 239 people on board earlier that month.

That report is dated in May 2014. The search for data in the home simulator, and its potential value to the criminal inquiry into the mystery, was referred to by Malaysian officials at the regular MH370 briefings held in Kuala Lumpur at that time,  and reported at various times in the general media and Plane Talking.

Nothing material arising from that investigation was announced or leaked, except in the vaguest of terms. The reports about this investigation began appearing in news archives late in March 2014.

The classified as secret police report does contain some positions in one game flight simulator path that indicate a track down over the southern Indian Ocean which wasn’t mentioned at the time, and many others that included routes that were either on the Malaysia Airlines network, or consisted of alternative or diversionary airports for such flights.

The ATSB guidance on that data, that it doesn’t indicate the location of MH370, or provide other assistance in refining the search, may be correct.

However, the important question arises, why was this presented to the gullible as an FBI report (the FBI has no interest in locating the sunk wreckage) when it was a Malaysia Police report?

One possible explanation is that this has allowed the Malaysian Government to correctly deny that there is any FBI report about the flight sim in the captain’s home, thus covering up the fact that there IS such a report, produced internally.

(There were also acknowledged, at that time, checks on the backgrounds of people on the passenger manifest in which the help of the FBI and other national criminal investigation agencies were enlisted, as they often are, and for many often routine reasons.)

The trouble with the possibility of Malaysia seeking to leave a false trail on this is also known as the liar’s challenge. If you are going to lie about something over a period of time you need to have a very good recollection as what you have previously said, and Kuala Lumpur basically said back in early 2014 a great deal of what is now causing so much amazed outrage in some media.

Let’s revisit that early but forgotten period in the MH370 mystery. Kuala Lumpur was very careful not to speak about either pilot as being suspected of a crime.  But it was very quick to argue, and most observers would concede, correctly, that MH370 was intentionally diverted from its route shortly after it was established on its filed flight path to Beijing and over the Gulf of Thailand.

Based on revelations made on May 1, 2014, by acting transport Minister  Hishammuddin Hussein senior government figures knew on the morning of March 8, 2014, that MH370 had been seen by military radar flying west across the Malaysia Peninsula.

This means that the Malaysia government and Hishammuddin Hussein lied to the media when they denied early reports that such tracking had taken place. It also means, as Plane Talking often reported that Malaysia, from its PM down, lied to Australia and the other early search partners, when it urged them to press deeper into the South China Sea, and across to India, and even deep into central Asia, in searching for wreckage when it would have known none would be found in any of those regions.

Malaysia knew what many of the less technically versed conspiracy theorists still deny, that the jet did indeed fly into the southern Indian Ocean, exactly where being the crucial question.

Why did Malaysia lie to us and others? One possibility is that it was engaged in a cover up concerning adverse intelligence about a Malaysia Airlines pilot that had been ignored, until the terrible night when the 777 vanished. Was if fearful of an early discovery of floating bodies and other clues as to events on MH370?

This suggestion, which this observer and others, including in other airlines, have discussed for more than two years, remains unproven, but definitely possible.

On Sunday night the Nine network will air a significant report on MH370. The promotional material has included the claim that the wife of Prime Minister Najib Razak said ‘the captain took the jet’.

This claim takes those who have followed MH370 from the outset back to the earliest months of the mystery in 2014, when the fingers of suspicion pointed at Zaharie Ahmad Shah were many. It doesn’t take us any closer to finding out where the jet is or if he really committed such a heinous crime.

MTF...P2

[Peetwo]

MH370: 60 minutes & the Oz today??

Q/ Who really are the criminal/terrorists here?

He said she said

The 60 Minutes piece was interesting to watch, but mostly covered old ground. But I had two observations from the story;

1. Foley never looked at ease, not for one second. His body language mirrored that of a man who had just had a broomstick shoved up his ass sideways. And;

2. The lines were very very blurred as to who is running this effing investigation. The Aussies, Malays, or the god damn French?? One piece of wreckage goes to Australia directly, another piece goes to Malaysia and then to Australia. Another piece goes directly to the Frogs and after a year the Malayaians still don't have that piece in their possession and the Aussies can't answer why that is the case!

Seriously, who is sitting in the left hand seat?? What an embarrassment. The whole  investigation is in a state of flux, and the way it is being managed is a pathetic joke. And by default ICAO are a pissweak joke. Sitting idly by while nobody is sitting in the left hand seat.

The 60 Minutes reporter, although on the money for most of the grilling, is in my opinion not a formidable foe, in other words 'not a Richard Carlton' and Foley should have handled him without raising so much as a sweat. But Foley looked rattled, or was it pissed off, or was it both? Either way he didn't look or sound comfortable at all, in fact I thought he almost looked relieved when subtly casting doubt over the entire sordid mess. Or am I over-reading things? My impression was that there most definitely is a bigger game being played here by those in high places and the responses from Foley may indicate that those at the ATsB at his level and below might be getting somewhat sick and tired of the entire shambolic game and having to be the proverbial 'meat in the sandwich'?


TICK '60 Minutes' TOCK

Well, I put the much abused TV at risk again and sat through the 60 minutes ‘show’.  There was nowhere near 60 minutes of ‘useful’ commentary, but I managed, just, to resist the ‘Off’ button during the dramatized bits. That said, the interview with a ‘real’ accident investigator was worth the effort.

The notion that there was ‘someone’ at the controls is irresistible.  Whether it was the pilot or not is not proven and care was taken to avoid claiming that it was. IMO there is more ‘evidence’ against this being the case than there is for it; and, despite blaming the pilot being an easy ‘cop out’ that notion was not made into a major point, just part of the jigsaw.  Which is good, responsible reporting.  Sure it’s a possibility, but so is the possibility that another hand was on the controls that night.  

The notion of a controlled ditching was nicely managed; again, IMO this is a more likely scenario than the falling leaf, ‘ghost ship’ charade.  The ‘investigator’ believed and even Foley acknowledged the increased probability. It just makes better sense of what evidence we have.

Felt a bit sorry for Foley, whatever he was sitting on was not comfortable; looked like he was perched on a stool. When under pressure at Estimates he manages very well, stays cool and comes out as mostly credible, but GD has spotted the differences.  He was probably a little of both GD, rattled and pissed off, but it could be that he has to juggle so many balls and keep so many secrets that to drop even one ball would be a disaster.  It could also be that he was worried about what he does not know; or, has not been told and that concerns him.  Then again, it may be that it was not the public he concerned about, but the men behind the scenes.  Doubt he’d give a rats for the opinions of the great unwashed horde; but of  the faceless ones, those behind the screen, that is a whole other road to a  career of pain.

Aye well, duty done.  I doubt any of it will change the world, cure poverty, famine, disease or prevent war. I expect 99% of those who watched would have forgotten all about it by bed time, even so, it was good of 60 minutes to put the program on air and try to solve the riddle. I know ratings and advertising dollars had nothing to do with their motivation, nothing at all.

Alt_file_save_forget.

Ross Coulthart via the Oz today:

MH370 under control of pilot when it crashed: search co-ordinator
Ross Coulthart
The Australian
12:00AM August 1, 2016

The Australian official co-ordinating the search for missing ­Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370 has admitted for the first time that damage found to recovered wreckage suggests the plane was under the control of a pilot when it crashed into the ocean.

Peter Foley, the Australian Transport Safety Bureau’s program director of the operational search for MH370, has conceded severe erosion along the trailing edge of two recovered wing parts points to a controlled landing into the ocean. This is a sig­nificant ­admission because such a scenario is at odds with the preferred theory held by crash investigators that the jet was not under pilot control at the end of its journey.

His admission gives weight to the theory that a rogue pilot deliberately crashed the plane and ­raises further doubts over ­whether MH370 is within the search area.

Mr Foley was asked on 60 Minutes last night: “If there was a rogue pilot, isn’t it possible that the plane was taken outside the parameters of the search area?”

Mr Foley answered: “Yeah — if you guided the plane or indeed control-ditched the plane, it has an extended range, potentially.”

Larry Vance, one of the world’s most ­experienced air crash investigators and former chief ­investigator for the Canadian Transportation Safety Board, told the program he was confident the Malaysian jet was being piloted at the end of its flight.

Mr Vance, who wrote the ­investigation report into the 1998 SwissAir 111 crash into the ocean near Nova Scotia, based his analysis in part on damage that is clearly visible along the trailing edge of MH370’s flaperon that was recovered from the French territory of Reunion Island off Madagascar a year ago.

“Somebody was flying the aeroplane at the end of its flight,’’ he said. “Somebody was flying the aeroplane into the water ... There is no other alternate theory that you can follow of all the potentials that might have happened. There’s no other theory that fits.”

Mr Vance said photographs and video of the flaperon, and more recent pictures of the wing flap found on the coast of Tanz­ania just over a month ago, show conclusive evidence of high-­pressure water erosion that cut a jagged edge along the trailing edge of both wing parts as they hit the water during a controlled landing by a pilot.

“The momentum of dragging that little flaperon through the water would be absolutely enormous,” he said.

“The force of the water is really the only thing that could make that jagged edge that we see. It wasn’t broken off. If it was broken off, it would be a clean break. You couldn’t even break that thing. I know from experience that it’s wide. If you wanted to break that off, you couldn’t do it and make it look like that.”

A critically important aspect, according to Mr Vance’s analysis, is that the evidence shows the wing flap and flaperon were extended for landing when the jet hit the ocean, and the only way they could have been extended is if a pilot manually selected them to be extended just before the aircraft went into the water.

“You cannot get the flaperon to extend any other way than if somebody extended it,” he said.
“Somebody would have to ­select it.”

Moreover, he said several course changes made earlier in the journey, including the U-turn back to Malaysia from the South China Sea, another course change along the Malay Peninsula and then another around the northern tip of Sumatra into the Indian Ocean, could have been made only if a pilot had entered co-­ordinates into the jet’s flight management computer.

Mr Foley, the ATSB’s surface safety investigation general manager, conceded this was correct: “There is a possibility … somebody (was) in control at the end and we are actively looking for evidence to support that,’’ he said.

But as recently as Friday ATSB commissioner Greg Hood reiterated the view of the search team that satellite data from the Boeing 777 jet suggested it was plunging at almost 400km/h just before it crashed into the sea with 239 passengers and crew.

He also said this meant no one was in control of the jet. Based on that satellite data, the Defence Science and Technology Group’s modelling has placed the jet as being “most likely” inside an area of 120,000sq km.

As Mr Foley now admits, however, such an analysis depends on the assumption the flight was uncontrolled after the jet ran out of fuel. A pilot could easily have ­glided or flown the plane well ­outside the current search area. Two senior 777 pilots also told 60 Minutes that the flap and flap­eron could have been extended only if the aircraft had at least one engine running, raising further doubts about the MH370 search team’s analysis, concluding that the jet must have run out of fuel before it descended at high speed into the ocean.

Malaysian police last week strongly denied the existence of any report showing the jet’s captain, Zahari Ahmed Shah, had plotted a route deep into the southern Indian Ocean on his home flight simulator, and that he later deleted this evidence off his computer, but 60 Minutes obtained a copy of that confidential Malaysian report. Mr Foley conceded the report was genuine.

Mr Hood had reportedly said it was an “FBI report” but more ­recent reports attribute its authorship to the Malaysian police. The report is not firm evidence of Captain Zahari’s culpability for the loss of MH370 but it does raise a disturbing suspicion, especially since the route he planned in his flight simulator clearly contemplated the jet would have run out of fuel over the Indian Ocean.

Malaysia’s decision to deny existence of this report has only fuelled concerns it is attempting to cover up pilot complicity in the loss of MH370.

In an astonishing admission, Transport Minister Liow Tiong Lai also said Malaysia had still not taken possession of or examined the key flaperon evidence, even though it was recovered by French authorities more than a year ago on Reunion Island.
“We are unable to get the ­details from the French government,” he admitted.

Sources have said this was likely because French judicial investigators did not trust Malaysia to fairly investigate the growing evidence that the jet was downed by a rogue pilot, even though Malaysia has the power under international conventions to demand access.

Mr Vance also said the lack of any debris from inside the missing jet strongly suggested the aircraft hit the sea at a much slower speed than the search team’s satellite analysis suggested. He said when SwissAir 111 crashed into the sea off Nova Scotia, the plane exploded into two million small pieces, many floating for weeks, but there was no evidence of such a high-speed crash with MH370.

“I think the reason we don’t see debris from inside the aeroplane washing up in different places around the ocean is because that debris remained in the fuselage and the fuselage went to the bottom,” he said.

Danica Weeks, the wife of Paul Weeks, one of the missing passengers on board MH370, told 60 Minutes about a conversation she had with the Malaysian Prime Minister’s wife, Rosmah Mansor, that left her convinced the Malaysians know more than they have publicly acknowledged.

A month after the tragedy, she met Mrs Mansor at an air base in Perth. “She told me it was very horrible that somebody would do this to 238 innocent people. She was insinuating the pilot took the plane,” she said.

Ross Coulthart is a reporter with 60 Minutes.

 Hmm...IMO Mr Coulthart is a better writer than he is presenter...


MTF?- Definitely but not before (while imagining some Malaysian or Aussie pollie or bureaucrats face on the backend of the ball) I've smacked the beejeezus out of a little white ball first - ..P2

[ventus45]

A couple of notes on the program.

Gobbledock Wrote:

My impression was that there most definitely is a bigger game being played here, by those in high places, and the responses from Foley may indicate that those at the ATsB at his level and below, might be getting somewhat sick and tired of the entire shambolic game, and having to be the proverbial 'meat in the sandwich' ?

Comment: Absolutely correct - it is now clearly apparent, that they (the ATSB) are being "used", by those in high places, as the "USEFUL IDIOTS".


kharon Wrote:
It could also be that he (Foley) was worried about what he does not know; or, has not been told and that concerns him.
Comment: Possibly.

Doubt he’d give a rats for the opinions of the great unwashed horde.
Comment: But the Senators - next time ?

Then again, it may be that it was not the public he (Foley) is concerned about, but the men behind the scenes.
Comment: Absolutely correct.

But of the faceless ones, those behind the screen, that is a whole other road to a career of pain.
Comment: Absolutely correct.



It was interesting the way the two officials (the man and woman at the back of the room) "shut down" the news conference. Shades of the woman from JACC "shutting down" Foley outside "the officials working meeting" in KL a few weeks before.

This "investigation" is not an investigation at all, it is a "political pantomime", and a pretty "piss-poor" one at that, choreographed by the "spooks" in the shadows. The ATSB is merely the lead actor in a B-grade farce. Planet Earth's "village idiot", is Australia, for being "so willing" to jump in, feet first (without so much as buying a pair of gum boots first) to go along with, and to continue to go along with it for so long.

Abbott must have been promised an Oscar, by someone ......

[Gobbledock]

'V' said;

"This "investigation" is not an investigation at all, it is a "political pantomime", and a pretty "piss-poor" one at that, choreographed by the "spooks" in the shadows. The ATSB is merely the lead actor in a B-grade farce. Planet Earth's "village idiot", is Australia, for being "so willing" to jump in, feet first (without so much as buying a pair of gum boots first) to go along with, and to continue to go along with it for so long".

Perfectly said good sir. Australia was always going to be the perfect patsy - embarrassingly I must say that although I am a proud Australian we are lead by a nation of leaders whose testicles have yet to descend and who have always been America's "bitch". They say jump and we say 'how high'. The additional bonus for the international puppet masters in all of this charade is that they also had the perfect 'lead patsy' in Beaker. Yes the ATSB was being lead by a bearded, brainless, egotistical non-aviation technical person who wouldn't know an abacus from a calculator. Perfect. Game, set and match!

Unfortunately I believe that this 'sitcom' has a few years left to run. MH370 is out there in the SIO, and she will give up more of her secrets yet. It's just that it will take some time. Not a nice prospect for the families, friends and loved ones of the deceased or the besmirched.
Then again, perhaps Edward Snowden, Julian Ass'ange or Vlad's I.T people will stumble across some 'documents'.

[ventus45]

Just a few "drift" grabs for the "EAST" theory.

March-122E-8N.jpg Size: 67.3 KB  Downloads: 297

March-121E-2N.jpg Size: 64.54 KB  Downloads: 298

March-126E-4N.jpg Size: 66.34 KB  Downloads: 298

March-130E-6N.jpg Size: 63.99 KB  Downloads: 298

[ventus45]

Over on Jeff Wise net, Mike Gibson has a few interesting comments on ditching in the SIO in March.



I think Mike has stated some valid points, which I mentioned in this post, and those that followed it.

Mike-Gibson-0.jpg Size: 203.87 KB  Downloads: 277

[ventus45]

I think there is a fault in the logic of assuming that high altitude cruise and speed was maintained between the 5th and 6th arcs (22:41 and 00:11).
That is 90 minutes.
Having the aircraft still at cruise settings at 00:11 (given the fuel model estimates) effectively requires either a deliberate suicide dive from altitude with dry tanks, or a ghost flight that effectively ends the same way at 00:19.
I don't buy either, yet this has been the consistent narative from the ATSB, until recently.

Now the ATSB seems willing (well, unwilling really) to begrudgingly entertain the idea of a ditch, (for political reasons) by assuming an un-powered glide beyond the 7th arc, implicitly from high altitude.

Such an idea is pure disingenuous stupidity.
It is a sad state of affairs that an ignorant media and public seem willing to embrace it.

To be blunt, if one was a "deliberate vanishing ditcher", you would need, and would have prepared, an excruciatingly detailed, meticulous plan, (he is acknowledged to have been "meticulous") that melded location and the sun into a workable "get there dark", and "pop out into sunlight at the last moment" to ditch.

To successfully ditch, you need:
(1) FUEL for a controlled flare and ditch, and
(2) TIME to:
(a) descend from cruise altitude to near surface,
(b) reduce speed and "configure" for the ditch, and
(3) Light, to see the surface for the ditch.

The aircraft MUST therefore descend, in the dark, EARLY, well before 00:11.
If the fuel models are any good at all, and if it was a deliberate ditch, it quite simply could not still be at cruise height speed and heading 190 at 00:11.
If it was, then:-
(a) the fuel model is wrong, or
(b) there was more fuel on board than we have been told, or
© the FMT was further south than we are told, or
(d) a combination of the three.

My DITCH PLAN, as a "mission planner", is as follows.

My "cruise south" on 190 true ends, repeat ends, at 23:40.
I have planned on being at low level flying 097 true into the advancing sunrise, but turning (just before actual sunrise) to ditch on a crest.
So, my plan is:
(1) TOD (top of descent) is at 23:40, still in "the dark", I reduce to idle, and turn left from 190 to SE (135 true) and commence descent.
(2) Descend from FL440 to A040 = 40,000 feet in 20 minutes = average ROD -2,000 feet per minute, reaching BOD (bottom of descent) at 4,000 feet at 00:00 zulu (precisely) (he is acknowledged to have been "meticulous").
My / his Speed at TOD was/is 480 knots-gs, reducing during descent iaw normal descent schedule M/IAS slowing to 250 KIAS by 4,000 feet, effectively eqals ground speed then, assuming no wind.
(3) At 00:00z I am at 4,000 feet, speed 250kn, AND (most importantly) I am still "in the dark", at the beginning of twilight.
This allows for "reconnaissance" of the intended ditch zone out my left window, looking for lights of any shipping. There is none, all good, proceed.
(4) Turn further left to 097 true to run directly at the advancing terminator, whilst slowing to 180 KIAS and configuring flap 20 for ditch.
(5) As twilight rapidly gives way to light, surface becomes visible, so now assess sea state and determine:
(6) swell alignment. Wave crest axis is 330-150.
(7) so at 00:10, commence turn left to 330 to "line up".
(8) The 00:11 ping occurs during this left, descending, slowing turn.
(9) Straighten up on 330 and establish low powered gentle descent, (no landing gear drag) at normal 600 fpm at 120 knots to 600 feet RA, then reduce to 100 feet per minute to 100 feet RA, then reduce ROD further by visually using the aircraft shadow out the left window at relative RED 053 (277 true) to minimum ROD whilst simultaneously bleeding speed to absolute min 90 knots, to ALIGHT on a crest AT NEAR ZERO ROD at min speed, and CUT at 00:17.
(10) In other words, the actual ditch position is BETWEEN the 00:12 and 00:18 terminators, probably closer to the 00:18 terminator.
(11) Engines drown, APU starts.
(12) SDU reboots, partial logon at 00:19, then APU drowns from waves flooding inlet at tail.
(13) She sinks in minutes - say before 00:30.

[ventus45]

With regard to all the "simulator babble" over on Jeff Wise and Duncan Steel, I find it interesting,  (perhaps by design ?)  that the suggested simulator great circle track from the FMT at Ache to McMurdo Sound-Mt Erebus (which is 5,500 nautical miles or 10,200 kilometres) just happens, (purely by chance mind) to intersect the 7th Arc at the same point ( 25deg 30min South 101deg 40min East ) as the direct path between the Inmarsat 3F-1 sub Satellite Point, and the Perth GES.
Too much of a coincidence ?
Curious, indeed.

The Light Blue arc is the 7th Arc
The Yellow line out of perth goes to the sub-satellite point
The Red line is the great circle track from the FMT to McMurdo

Sim Intersection 2.jpg Size: 309.86 KB  Downloads: 232

Sim Intersection.jpg Size: 188.89 KB  Downloads: 231

[FelineNut]

What's so interesting about it?
It's simply a point along the Satellites Signal Array of the Bell Curve. 
Many points intersect symmetrically in Rose Curve layout too. 

[ventus45]

FelineNut, I don't understand what that means. Could you explain please ?

[Gobbledock]

I'm not a satellite technological expert but I think Felinenut is saying that the pinpoint location that the ATsB is running off is a location that could have emanated from anywhere along that bell curve, disproving the ATsB 'theory'. Their accuracy is in doubt.
The rose curve layout would be similar in that the actual signal point could have emanated from anywhere in that rose curve, the curve however this time covers a smaller area than the blue curve which is the famous/infamous (depending on your personal preference) 7th arc.

Frau feline, I'm happy to stand corrected. But I've also been racking my brain over your post for the past 24 hours. Always enjoy your technical posts but your understanding of this particular field is probably above most of us. Can you please break it down into bite size chunks for us? Cheers.

P.S Good work to all those IOS putting so much passion and energy into this topic. The Gobbledock approves

P_666

[ventus45]

Date:    2016-08-18
Subject: The Captain's "Home Simulator Files"

Source:  ABC - Radio - Program - "PM" - Reporter - Peter Lloyd - Wednesday 2016-08-17
Web-URL: http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2016/s4521406.htm
Audio file:  http://mpegmedia.abc.net.au/news/audio/p...ulator.mp3

Analysis: - Was performed by "CyberSecurity Malaysia" an Agency under MOSTI
http://cybersecurity.my/en/about_us/cont...index.html
http://www.cybersecurity.my/data/content...1392970989





         - Dr Dr. Amirudin Abdul Wahab is the CEO of CyberSecurity Malaysia
         - by email - he confirmed (PRESUMABLY to ABC - PM) that:
         - it was his organisation that examined the captain's computer
         - at the request of Malaysia Police  
         - denied US-FBI did analysis
         - His VERDICT =
         - thousands of co-ordinates are "default positions" in the sim program
         - hundreds of routes are also defaults in the sim program
         - analysis of data provided "no conclusive evidence" that captain flew a "suicide mission".


http://www.cybersecurity.my/data/content...1392970989

http://cybersecurity.my/en/about_us/cont...index.html

http://cybersecurityclinic.my/

http://cybersecurityclinic.my/index.php/...vices.html

http://cybersecurityclinic.my/index.php/...vices.html

http://www.mosti.gov.my/faqs-2/cybersecurity-malaysia/

http://cybersecurity.my/data/content_files/46/1522.pdf



Perhaps Simon is correct after all ?

Wahab.JPG Size: 44.56 KB  Downloads: 178

Committee.JPG Size: 83.64 KB  Downloads: 3

Contact.JPG Size: 62.3 KB  Downloads: 2

Simon.jpg Size: 194.01 KB  Downloads: 174

[P1_aka_P1]

If I owned a fairly sophisticated simulator – I would, on consideration, run some simulations of the ‘major’ accidents. Erebus, as a learning experience, would be one as a CFIT classic. There are others but the Erebus event would be worth an evening ‘outing’ – in ‘the sim’.

[ventus45]

Dear Mr Hood,
cc:  Mr Foley,

Please drop your five pairs of a Drifteron and a spousal GDB, at local dawn (00:18 utc) on 08March2017, on the 083 East Meridian, at South latitudes 35, 36, 37, 38 and 39 respectively.

Thanks muchly.



Reference: Ref: http://auntypru.com/forum/-MH370-time-to...69#pid3569

Drifteron_and_GDB_deployment_for_08Mar2017.jpg Size: 183.57 KB  Downloads: 138

[ventus45]

The IG seems to be "loosening the reigns" on the ISAT data.

http://www.duncansteel.com/archives/2810

Previously, the IG held that the BTO's were "Golden" (within the 20 microsecond bins), and that the BFO's were "Silver" (within the plus / minus 20 Hz drift window).

Now it seems that the IG may have had a unstated, and unexplained (yet) change of mind, on the "solidity" of the BTO's, in that they are now introducing the possibility of the BTO's being up to 50 microseconds different from the values recorded.



You could say that the BTO's have been downgraded from GOLD to BRONZE.

I await their explanation for this apparent "change of heart".

Ventus45 Tweet 2016-08-29 at time 00-36-00zulu.JPG Size: 100.39 KB  Downloads: 116

[ventus45]

What flaperon barnacles revealed about MH370 mystery

Robyn Ironside, National Aviation Writer, News Corp Australia Network
August 31, 2016 12:30am
Subscriber only


http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/na...bc109c0dc7



ANALYSIS of barnacles found on a flaperon from MH370 has added to the mystery surrounding the plane’s final resting place — with scientists in France and Australia reaching different conclusions.

Extensive testing by Australian National University (ANU) scientist Patrick De Deckker has revealed the onstart of growth of the barnacles occurred in warmer waters probably to the north of Perth.

The most extensive period of growth then took place in cooler water temperatures such as those in the latitude of Perth, and the more recent growth happened in the tropical waters around La Reunion island.

The French are yet to make public their findings on the barnacles but Professor Emeritus De Deckker confirmed they “differed somewhat” to his own.

https://researchers.anu.edu.au/researchers/de-deckker-p




Painstaking analysis ... Professor Patrick De Deckker examining barnacles from MH370 debris at ANU in Canberra. Picture: Kym Smith
He stressed the process of testing barnacles could only reveal so much about where they grew, because very little was known about when barnacles started to form, and how fast the growth occurred.

“We just don’t know if the barnacles have been growing since the flaperon’s been floating, or if they started growing in the last few months,” Professor De Deckker said.

“But my findings are consistent with the current search area and the drift modelling done by the CSIRO.”



Precision science ... An image of the work carried out by Professor Patrick De Deckker in the hope of determining where MH370 crashed.
Picture: ANU

The same 2.5 centimetre barnacle was used by both French and Australian examiners — but different techniques applied.

“For my analysis, I used a laser to create little holes of 20 microns, over the length of the barnacles. In all we did 1500 analyses,” said Professor De Deckker.

“The French have done about 100 analyses on the same shell, but they used larger holes.”

In addition, the French looked at the oxygen isotope content of the shell — which is made from calcium carbonate, whereas Professor De Deckker examined the calcium and magnesium to determine in what water temperature it grew.

“In order to solve the difference between the French results and mine, we’d need to do more work,” he said.

“That would be quite an extensive project and (mean) possibly growing barnacles in tanks and so on — and we just don’t have the money or time.”


Looking for clues ... The ANU’s Professor Patrick De Deckker examines a barnacle from MH370 debris.




Picture: Kym Smith
Professor De Deckker provided his time and expertise to the Australian Transport Safety Bureau free of charge.

“It would cost up to $1500 a day (for additional analyses of the type carried out by the French team) and we’d have to book a machine well in advance,” he said.

The search for MH370 is poised to move into the area of the Southern Indian Ocean that Professor De Deckker identified as the place where the barnacles grew for an extensive period of time.

Weather permitting, the 120,000 square kilometre search zone will be fully scoured by the end of the year — and investigators remain hopeful the plane will be found in that time.

MH370 disappeared on March 8, 2014 after taking off from Kuala Lumpur to fly to Beijing with 239 people on board.

000.jpg Size: 28.25 KB  Downloads: 99

111.jpg Size: 27.41 KB  Downloads: 96

222.jpg Size: 30.45 KB  Downloads: 94

333.jpg Size: 22.78 KB  Downloads: 92

[Gobbledock]

Why doesn't someone purchase a large orange buoy with a GPS tracker, attached to a strong rope. Jam the rope up Dolans ass and then drop the entire lot into the ocean and see where it ends up.

[Kharon]

Steam on GD - All of it – Now.

I tried another adventure into ‘Twitter-land’ this evening.  P2 reckons I have to keep up with the times; I’ll own, it sometimes puzzles me; and MIF sets in very quickly – Heigh Ho.

But tonight I read a ‘tweet’ from this Mike Eczema plonker, who seems to fancy that every one of his mouthing’s comes directly from the gods and;  no matter what anyone else may believe, it is rubbish.  Who are this ducking ‘Independent Group”, the almighty IG? Who gives a toss what they say – or do not say.  They hold ‘an opinion’; that’s all. They are not admitted to the rarefied atmosphere of those who actually do have the information and know.  Yet they stand as ‘the opinion’ and anyone who dares disagree is branded FOOL.

Well, duck that for a game of cowboys and Indians.  Our very own Paul H has put in an enormous effort to try and decipher the data from the Captains’ simulator.  It is logical, it is reasoned and it has credibility.  No one; least of all Paul claims it as true, or even proven. It is simply one mans effort to separate the sheep from the Wise goats.

I can applaud the effort, read the data and retain an open mind.  Not Mr. Excema; Paul is called a fool, on Twitter,  for even daring to consider something external to the IG (I'm God?) unaligned, un credited, un funded IG crowd disagree with. They offer no logical contradiction or even explain where the alleged ‘errors’ are in the PH work.  Worse, there is no attempt to ‘edumacate’ the great unwashed herd; or. tell us why PH is 'a fool'.  

I call that Ego Troll action.  IG and his big mouth must now put up their analysis of where the ‘errors’ lay, refute it; or, apologise then STFU.  The Excema actions today are pure troll and not the response of ‘gentlemen’.  

Bollocks - Colour me disgusted and cranky.  Ayup, steam off now, thanks mate, just leave us enough for a

Toot toot.