MH 777 missing - MH370 media statement

Status
Not open for further replies.
Agree. If you can't get something as simple as an ATC transcript correct, and then take weeks to change it. It really makes you question the Malaysian investigation
 
However the Malaysian government told the Chinese relatives that there was evidence that could not be released including the transcript of ATC conversations with MH370.
The previous transcript in the press was from China.Apparently the recording was translated into Mandarin then retranslated to English.The Malaysian Government has decided to release the transcript to the Chinese relatives hence it now comes out with the true words.I think the most you can say is the Malaysians were backed into a corner by the press.From the other sites I read I believe it is normal to keep such transcripts sealed for the investigating team but I am only taking the word of others for that.
Malaysia says there's sealed evidence on MH370 that cannot be made public
Last words from coughpit of MH370 were 'Goodnight Malaysian three seven zero'

 
However the Malaysian government told the Chinese relatives that there was evidence that could not be released including the transcript of ATC conversations with MH370.
The previous transcript in the press was from China.Apparently the recording was translated into Mandarin then retranslated to English.The Malaysian Government has decided to release the transcript to the Chinese relatives hence it now comes out with the true words.I think the most you can say is the Malaysians were backed into a corner by the press.From the other sites I read I believe it is normal to keep such transcripts sealed for the investigating team but I am only taking the word of others for that.

I'm surprised it took this long for the world to find out that the words had been subtly mistranscribed as such (i.e. no one really suspected that the Chinese stuffed with the original English phrase and then everyone took their word for it as the Chinese press release was re-translated back to English?)

Either way, it doesn't seem like there's a significant change which arises from this error. So no point making a storm in a teacup, especially when a plane still needs to be found.
 
Either way, it doesn't seem like there's a significant change which arises from this error. So no point making a storm in a teacup, especially when a plane still needs to be found.

Its actually a significant change that would be recognized by anybody familiar with Aviation comms, its gone from very unusual phraseology to routine and almost correct.
 
Turn business expenses into Business Class! Process $10,000 through pay.com.au to score 20,000 bonus PayRewards Points and join 30k+ savvy business owners enjoying these benefits:

- Pay suppliers who don’t take Amex
- Max out credit card rewards—even on government payments
- Earn & Transfer PayRewards Points to 8+ top airline & hotel partners

AFF Supporters can remove this and all advertisements

I posted elsewhere a while back that it appeared to be the perfect crime.. almost.
If not for the pings there would appear to be little else in the way of clues.
I hope that it remains …almost , as the reality of never finding out what happened isn't wonderful to contemplate.

I do wonder what next.. there has to be a point where all the activity is scaled down.. then what ?
Will the inventive speculation , the lack of closure , and mistrustful finger pointing continue ad nauseum , as we stand on the beach waiting for gaia to disgorge a clue ?
 
Its actually a significant change that would be recognized by anybody familiar with Aviation comms, its gone from very unusual phraseology to routine and almost correct.

I'm not familiar with aviation comms, although having listened to a little bit of radio I can agree with that.

No one really raised questions as to why it sounded so unusually phrased the first time? Or did we all just believe prima facie that the transcription was correct? Of course, we - the public - had no idea of the source, so we just took for granted whoever told us, usually our local news team. Had we been told that the source of the transcription was a Chinese news team, possibly additionally that it was a translation of a news release, then we might have raised more questions.

Of course, is it really out there now that the source of the original transcription was a Chinese press release? Or is it that the Chinese news team who mistranscribed the communications is completely and wrongly off the hook?
 
I'm not familiar with aviation comms, although having listened to a little bit of radio I can agree with that.

No one really raised questions as to why it sounded so unusually phrased the first time? Or did we all just believe prima facie that the transcription was correct? Of course, we - the public - had no idea of the source, so we just took for granted whoever told us, usually our local news team.

I raised the issue up thread, as such use of non standard phraseology is normally an alarm bell to ATC, and should have been followed by a check with the next sector to confirm comms were normal after the change. Even with the new transcript, that should have been done since it lacked a frequency read back.

If one of the pilots was not part of the act, the normal coding would have been useless, so an alternative to try and alert authorities such as that in the first translation would have been possible.
 
In other news, somewhat sad news, AMSA have declared the search in Antarctica to be a waste of time, with it impossible for any survivors to be found had they managed to board a raft. Illegal fishing is suspected, which appears to have not been worth the gamble.
 
A Wedgetail has arrived at Pearce, not sure if its related to the MH370 search.
 
So it seems the final words from MH370 have been changed by the Malaysians overnight from "all right, good night" to "good night Malaysian three seven zero".

A lot more formal than the previously declared sign off which had such a focus on it, believing it to be a sign of someone under duress.

How can the Malaysians keep getting this so wrong? What information has actually been a fact to date I wonder?

I just do not see the torture for these families ending any time soon.

I think the only thing that can be 100% factual at this point is "we lost a plane". Taking everything else with a grain of salt.
 
The words that everyone has assumed were correct were provided by The Telegraph in the UK as an exclusive, translated from Chinese.

The gullible world swallowed the words. Now they blame the Malaysians for backtracking when they finally release the correct words.

Malaysia News | AsiaOne

That was printed straight after The Telegraph pushed out their "exclusive".
 
It would seem that some jump to conclusions....and then want to blame the Malaysians for their own leap of faith.

I would be most confident that there is a lot of information which has not been made public yet, and nor should it be.

In this age of instant information, the trait is to rush in prematurely....and that means that much of what is reported, particularly by those wishing to make scoops, is misleading or wrong.

Caveat emptor...
 
Earlier in this thread, I think I wrote perhaps they (whomever was flying) were seeking to come to Australia. It would be awfully tragic if that were the case. Perhaps they thought they had enough fuel to make it to Perth?

Without finding the plane, we'll never know the answers to a lot of questions.
 
Earlier in this thread, I think I wrote perhaps they (whomever was flying) were seeking to come to Australia. It would be awfully tragic if that were the case. Perhaps they thought they had enough fuel to make it to Perth?

If they thought hijacking a plane would get them into Australia, they would be utter morons. That is the most unlikely scenario of any I've heard so far.
 
If they thought hijacking a plane would get them into Australia, they would be utter morons. That is the most unlikely scenario of any I've heard so far.

Considering people can and do act in an irrational way, I would not discount the theory.
 
Earlier in this thread, I think I wrote perhaps they (whomever was flying) were seeking to come to Australia. It would be awfully tragic if that were the case. Perhaps they thought they had enough fuel to make it to Perth?

Without finding the plane, we'll never know the answers to a lot of questions.

Why wouldn't you just do as what the Ethiopian plane did going to Geneva a month ago? There shouldnt have been any issues making PER with the fuel that they had on board. From memory the flight is 5 hours 40 minutes scheduled, so I don't think fuel would have been an issue.
 
Why wouldn't you just do as what the Ethiopian plane did going to Geneva a month ago? There shouldnt have been any issues making PER with the fuel that they had on board. From memory the flight is 5 hours 40 minutes scheduled, so I don't think fuel would have been an issue.

But with all that changing of direction, increased altitude etc...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Become an AFF member!

Join Australian Frequent Flyer (AFF) for free and unlock insider tips, exclusive deals, and global meetups with 65,000+ frequent flyers.

AFF members can also access our Frequent Flyer Training courses, and upgrade to Fast-track your way to expert traveller status and unlock even more exclusive discounts!

AFF forum abbreviations

Wondering about Y, J or any of the other abbreviations used on our forum?

Check out our guide to common AFF acronyms & abbreviations.
Back
Top