Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 - Missing Plane

As for the ringing phones, has anyone suggested that it could be just the function of diverting a call to another number?

One of my friends is an engineer at a large telecom company, and he is puzzled at the fact that the location of these phones is still unclear. He says that nowdays it is quite easy to position a cell phone, especially the ringing one. The only explanation he suggests is that maybe these phone calls were automatically redirected to other numbers elsewhere because the actual ones were unavailable at that moment. He says that this service is rather popular, people might use it while on-board so that they didn't miss important calls. The calls might be redirected to their secretaries, colleagues or elsewhere.
 
Siberia said:
people might use it while on-board so that they didn't miss important calls. The calls might be redirected to their secretaries, colleagues or elsewhere.

If I understand correctly, then they have a similar service at my place of work. A phone rings, if it doesn't get picked up, the ringing noise jumps to another phone, then another etc. I haven't seen this service with a mobile phone, just landlines.

A question, why didn't the secretaries & colleagues pick up?
 
Siberia said:
As for the ringing phones, has anyone suggested that it could be just the function of diverting a call to another number?

One of my friends is an engineer at a large telecom company, and he is puzzled at the fact that the location of these phones is still unclear. He says that nowdays it is quite easy to position a cell phone, especially the ringing one. The only explanation he suggests is that maybe these phone calls were automatically redirected to other numbers elsewhere because the actual ones were unavailable at that moment. He says that this service is rather popular, people might use it while on-board so that they didn't miss important calls. The calls might be redirected to their secretaries, colleagues or elsewhere.

Then those other people, i.e. secretaries, colleagues, should answer.

I would not be surprised if the phone companies, and therefore the authorities, DO know which base station tower(s) these phones connected to. They may have even been able to triangulate a location. However maybe what they found was so bizarre, that they refuse to release this information to the public. You see, if some sort of high strangeness occurred, (a dimensional shift?) and a rough location was found, say in a populated area, where there was obviously no plane and it was impossible for over 200 people to suddenly be in, it would be information that they could not really explain, and definitely not release to the public.

Edit: But this sure is a mystery!
 
luke wilson said:
Siberia said:
people might use it while on-board so that they didn't miss important calls. The calls might be redirected to their secretaries, colleagues or elsewhere.

If I understand correctly, then they have a similar service at my place of work. A phone rings, if it doesn't get picked up, the ringing noise jumps to another phone, then another etc. I haven't seen this service with a mobile phone, just landlines.

A question, why didn't the secretaries & colleagues pick up?

That's a good question. Also, why wouldn't the authorities explain this to public if that was the case.

Still possible though?
 
luke wilson said:
Siberia said:
people might use it while on-board so that they didn't miss important calls. The calls might be redirected to their secretaries, colleagues or elsewhere.

If I understand correctly, then they have a similar service at my place of work. A phone rings, if it doesn't get picked up, the ringing noise jumps to another phone, then another etc. I haven't seen this service with a mobile phone, just landlines.

A question, why didn't the secretaries & colleagues pick up?

And remember that at least 19 families reported that their loved ones mobile phones were still ringing. So how likely is it that all of them would have this service activated?

And I guess this service can only work if the mobile phones of those people were still active at that point. Otherwise how should the network get the information that the call should be redirected to somewhere else? I guess the mobile phones need to be working in order for that to even work?

And if that is the case, we are back to "the fact" that those phones were still working at that point...
 
And I guess this service can only work if the mobile phones of those people were still active at that point. Otherwise how should the network get the information that the call should be redirected to somewhere else? I guess the mobile phones need to be working in order for that to even work?

I asked him that question too, he said that the service works exactly when the phone is unavailable (switched off).

But you are right, 19 families is a large number, could they all have this service activated and nobody answered? Not likely, I guess.
 
Yet another interesting explanation of this phenomenon at http://wonderfulengineering.com/the-mystery-behind-ringing-cell-phones-on-missing-malaysia-airlines-flight-mh370-uncovered/:

'But unfortunately, a ringing tone does not mean that the device is active. Wireless analysts say that the ringing tone is a psychological trick used intentionally to keep callers on the line while the network tries to connect their call. A ringing tone does not necessarily mean that the phone on the other end is still operational. A spokesperson from the CTIA-The Wireless Association further confirmed this.
Basically, when you call someone on a mobile, the mobile network starts to search the phone at its last known location. If the network isn’t able to find it there, it expands its search to a larger area. This process of searching takes a 2-3 seconds and during this time, the network will play the ringing tone for the caller so that he doesn’t hang up. However, once the network confirms that the phone is off, it will hang up the call. This explains the mystery of ringing tones.'
 
Siberia said:
Yet another interesting explanation of this phenomenon at http://wonderfulengineering.com/the-mystery-behind-ringing-cell-phones-on-missing-malaysia-airlines-flight-mh370-uncovered/:

'But unfortunately, a ringing tone does not mean that the device is active. Wireless analysts say that the ringing tone is a psychological trick used intentionally to keep callers on the line while the network tries to connect their call. A ringing tone does not necessarily mean that the phone on the other end is still operational. A spokesperson from the CTIA-The Wireless Association further confirmed this.
Basically, when you call someone on a mobile, the mobile network starts to search the phone at its last known location. If the network isn’t able to find it there, it expands its search to a larger area. This process of searching takes a 2-3 seconds and during this time, the network will play the ringing tone for the caller so that he doesn’t hang up. However, once the network confirms that the phone is off, it will hang up the call. This explains the mystery of ringing tones.'

I think we covered this earlier and it is all pretty much horsehockey. It is not how the cellular providers normally configure their networks, even if technically possible.
I am not surprised that such misinformation gets propagated.
 
Breton said:
Siberia said:
Yet another interesting explanation of this phenomenon at http://wonderfulengineering.com/the-mystery-behind-ringing-cell-phones-on-missing-malaysia-airlines-flight-mh370-uncovered/:

'But unfortunately, a ringing tone does not mean that the device is active. Wireless analysts say that the ringing tone is a psychological trick used intentionally to keep callers on the line while the network tries to connect their call. A ringing tone does not necessarily mean that the phone on the other end is still operational. A spokesperson from the CTIA-The Wireless Association further confirmed this.
Basically, when you call someone on a mobile, the mobile network starts to search the phone at its last known location. If the network isn’t able to find it there, it expands its search to a larger area. This process of searching takes a 2-3 seconds and during this time, the network will play the ringing tone for the caller so that he doesn’t hang up. However, once the network confirms that the phone is off, it will hang up the call. This explains the mystery of ringing tones.'

I think we covered this earlier and it is all pretty much horsehockey. It is not how the cellular providers normally configure their networks, even if technically possible.
I am not surprised that such misinformation gets propagated.

Yes we did. Look at the posts starting here: https://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,34196.msg479246.html#msg479246
 
"Malaysian officials have confirmed they received 'some radar data' from other countries about the missing Flight MH370 today - but claimed they were 'not at liberty' to release the information."

Sounds like this can't go on much longer before they reveal something that will move us on from "where did the plane go?"
 
luke wilson said:
Siberia said:
people might use it while on-board so that they didn't miss important calls. The calls might be redirected to their secretaries, colleagues or elsewhere.

If I understand correctly, then they have a similar service at my place of work. A phone rings, if it doesn't get picked up, the ringing noise jumps to another phone, then another etc. I haven't seen this service with a mobile phone, just landlines.

A question, why didn't the secretaries & colleagues pick up?

If the phones where ringing normally, that means that they where near a satellite? is that correct?
 
Perceval said:
"Malaysian officials have confirmed they received 'some radar data' from other countries about the missing Flight MH370 today - but claimed they were 'not at liberty' to release the information."

Sounds like this can't go on much longer before they reveal something that will move us on from "where did the plane go?"

The longer this whole official charade of " don't worry, we know what we're doing" goes on, the more I'm convinced that high strangeness has indeed occurred.
As mentioned before, they will probably spot wreckage in an inaccessible location or see an oil slick or pieces of wreckage floating on the ocean and declare it "case closed."
 
He had some interesting points

A Startlingly Simple Theory About the Missing Malaysia Airlines Jet

http://www.wired.com/autopia/2014/03/mh370-electrical-fire/
There has been a lot of speculation about Malaysia Airlines Flight 370. Terrorism, hijacking, meteors. I cannot believe the analysis on CNN; it’s almost disturbing. I tend to look for a simpler explanation, and I find it with the 13,000-foot runway at Pulau Langkawi.

We know the story of MH370: A loaded Boeing 777 departs at midnight from Kuala Lampur, headed to Beijing. A hot night. A heavy aircraft. About an hour out, across the gulf toward Vietnam, the plane goes dark, meaning the transponder and secondary radar tracking go off. Two days later we hear reports that Malaysian military radar (which is a primary radar, meaning the plane is tracked by reflection rather than by transponder interrogation response) has tracked the plane on a southwesterly course back across the Malay Peninsula into the Strait of Malacca.

The left turn is the key here. Zaharie Ahmad Shah1 was a very experienced senior captain with 18,000 hours of flight time. We old pilots were drilled to know what is the closest airport of safe harbor while in cruise. Airports behind us, airports abeam us, and airports ahead of us. They’re always in our head. Always. If something happens, you don’t want to be thinking about what are you going to do–you already know what you are going to do. When I saw that left turn with a direct heading, I instinctively knew he was heading for an airport. He was taking a direct route to Palau Langkawi, a 13,000-foot airstrip with an approach over water and no obstacles. The captain did not turn back to Kuala Lampur because he knew he had 8,000-foot ridges to cross. He knew the terrain was friendlier toward Langkawi, which also was closer.

Take a look at this airport on Google Earth. The pilot did all the right things. He was confronted by some major event onboard that made him make an immediate turn to the closest, safest airport.

When I heard this I immediately brought up Google Earth and searched for airports in proximity to the track toward the southwest.

For me, the loss of transponders and communications makes perfect sense in a fire. And there most likely was an electrical fire. In the case of a fire, the first response is to pull the main busses and restore circuits one by one until you have isolated the bad one. If they pulled the busses, the plane would go silent. It probably was a serious event and the flight crew was occupied with controlling the plane and trying to fight the fire. Aviate, navigate, and lastly, communicate is the mantra in such situations.

There are two types of fires. An electrical fire might not be as fast and furious, and there may or may not be incapacitating smoke. However there is the possibility, given the timeline, that there was an overheat on one of the front landing gear tires, it blew on takeoff and started slowly burning. Yes, this happens with underinflated tires. Remember: Heavy plane, hot night, sea level, long-run takeoff. There was a well known accident in Nigeria of a DC8 that had a landing gear fire on takeoff. Once going, a tire fire would produce horrific, incapacitating smoke. Yes, pilots have access to oxygen masks, but this is a no-no with fire. Most have access to a smoke hood with a filter, but this will last only a few minutes depending on the smoke level. (I used to carry one in my flight bag, and I still carry one in my briefcase when I fly.)

What I think happened is the flight crew was overcome by smoke and the plane continued on the heading, probably on George (autopilot), until it ran out of fuel or the fire destroyed the control surfaces and it crashed. You will find it along that route–looking elsewhere is pointless.

Ongoing speculation of a hijacking and/or murder-suicide and that there was a flight engineer on board does not sway me in favor of foul play until I am presented with evidence of foul play.

We know there was a last voice transmission that, from a pilot’s point of view, was entirely normal. “Good night” is customary on a hand-off to a new air traffic control. The “good night” also strongly indicates to me that all was OK on the flight deck. Remember, there are many ways a pilot can communicate distress. A hijack code or even transponder code off by one digit would alert ATC that something was wrong. Every good pilot knows keying an SOS over the mike always is an option. Even three short clicks would raise an alert. So I conclude that at the point of voice transmission all was perceived as well on the flight deck by the pilots.

But things could have been in the process of going wrong, unknown to the pilots.

Evidently the ACARS went inoperative some time before. Disabling the ACARS is not easy, as pointed out. This leads me to believe more in an electrical problem or an electrical fire than a manual shutdown. I suggest the pilots probably were not aware ACARS was not transmitting.

As for the reports of altitude fluctuations, given that this was not transponder-generated data but primary radar at maybe 200 miles, the azimuth readings can be affected by a lot of atmospherics and I would not have high confidence in this being totally reliable. But let’s accept for a minute that the pilot may have ascended to 45,000 feet in a last-ditch effort to quell a fire by seeking the lowest level of oxygen. That is an acceptable scenario. At 45,000 feet, it would be tough to keep this aircraft stable, as the flight envelope is very narrow and loss of control in a stall is entirely possible. The aircraft is at the top of its operational ceiling. The reported rapid rates of descent could have been generated by a stall, followed by a recovery at 25,000 feet. The pilot may even have been diving to extinguish flames.

But going to 45,000 feet in a hijack scenario doesn’t make any good sense to me.

Regarding the additional flying time: On departing Kuala Lampur, Flight 370 would have had fuel for Beijing and an alternate destination, probably Shanghai, plus 45 minutes–say, 8 hours. Maybe more. He burned 20-25 percent in the first hour with takeoff and the climb to cruise. So when the turn was made toward Langkawi, he would have had six hours or more hours worth of fuel. This correlates nicely with the Inmarsat data pings being received until fuel exhaustion.

The now known continued flight until time to fuel exhaustion only confirms to me that the crew was incapacitated and the flight continued on deep into the south Indian ocean.

There is no point speculating further until more evidence surfaces, but in the meantime it serves no purpose to malign pilots who well may have been in a struggle to save this aircraft from a fire or other serious mechanical issue. Capt. Zaharie Ahmad Shah was a hero struggling with an impossible situation trying to get that plane to Langkawi. There is no doubt in my mind. That’s the reason for the turn and direct route. A hijacking would not have made that deliberate left turn with a direct heading for Langkawi. It probably would have weaved around a bit until the hijackers decided where they were taking it.

Surprisingly, none of the reporters, officials, or other pilots interviewed have looked at this from the pilot’s viewpoint: If something went wrong, where would he go? Thanks to Google Earth I spotted Langkawi in about 30 seconds, zoomed in and saw how long the runway was and I just instinctively knew this pilot knew this airport. He had probably flown there many times.

Fire in an aircraft demands one thing: Get the machine on the ground as soon as possible. There are two well-remembered experiences in my memory. The AirCanada DC9 which landed, I believe, in Columbus, Ohio in the 1980s. That pilot delayed descent and bypassed several airports. He didn’t instinctively know the closest airports. He got it on the ground eventually, but lost 30-odd souls. The 1998 crash of Swissair DC-10 off Nova Scotia was another example of heroic pilots. They were 15 minutes out of Halifax but the fire overcame them and they had to ditch in the ocean. They simply ran out of time. That fire incidentally started when the aircraft was about an hour out of Kennedy. Guess what? The transponders and communications were shut off as they pulled the busses.

Get on Google Earth and type in Pulau Langkawi and then look at it in relation to the radar track heading. Two plus two equals four. For me, that is the simple explanation why it turned and headed in that direction. Smart pilot. He just didn’t have the time.

Chris Goodfellow has 20 years experience as a Canadian Class-1 instrumented-rated pilot for multi-engine planes. His theory on what happened to MH370 first appeared on Google+. We’ve copyedited it with his permission.
 
Perceval said:
"Malaysian officials have confirmed they received 'some radar data' from other countries about the missing Flight MH370 today - but claimed they were 'not at liberty' to release the information."

Sounds like this can't go on much longer before they reveal something that will move us on from "where did the plane go?"

This morning Vesti news (Russia) said that the radar data point toward Diego Garcia.
 
Going back in the transcripts and not in exact context (originally about 1920's, later the Philadelphia Experiment), however it fits with some of the prior C's descriptions of what to us are High Strangeness possibilities:

Session 31 July 1999 said:
Q: That's what I thought. Now, you told us that the Montauk experiment was something that began in the 1920s. All of the stories say that the Navy was trying to make ships invisible to radar for defensive purposes. That's the story. My question is: is that just a cover story?

A: No.

Q: Is that, in fact, what they were attempting to do?

A: Close.

Q: Can you get me any closer to it? What were their intentions?

A: Convergence of interests: US Navy, Secret Government, Esteemed physicists.

Q: Did they actually, even accidentally, discover through this work something about time travel?

A: Yes, but it was more an accident for the Navy than for others involved.


Edit: clarity change - "originally about 1920's and, {later the} Philadelphia Experiment
 

Trending content

Back
Top Bottom