MH 777 missing - MH370 media statement

[Tropic]

Sadly, noone knows what caused the aircraft and its crew/pax to disappear but unless/until definitive evidence is found, all possible causes remain on table. So maybe it was a "rogue pilot" after all, an uninterruptible auto pilot...

 

[eastwest101]

Wasn't aware of this at all, but if he really did get the push that long ago, I wonder why he would put his head up over the parapet now?

He was pushed out because of the mishandling of the ATSB investigation into the Pel-Air ditching on Norfolk Is, in retrospect the Pel Air problems that the ATSB had were just the beginnings of their problems, and the ATSB has made a much larger screw up with their efforts to stuff up the investigation into MH370, I would argue they've almost done as much as the Malaysian Government to frustrate and derail the investigation into MH370, thats why it wouldn't surprise me that this guy might feel more comfortable coming forward, and especially after an ex-PM has recently brought the issue back into focus in the media.

 

[p--and--t]

I noted in the article by The Oz that he is now 'the former' head of the ATSB - perhaps he was given the messsage?

Not sure, as other media today merely refer to him as 'retired' or similar. He'd been there for a number of years IIRC.

He was replaced and his successor took over in March 2015. It was indeed the "rumoured" ex-Qantas chief pilot Chris Manning (and he is still a commissioner of ATSB today).

 

[Ric]

Came across this interesting read:

Jumbo Jets Don’t Just Vanish – At Last Some Answers To The World’s Biggest Aviation Mystery

The strange evasiveness of Malaysia's PM, Najib Razak, and his cousin the Defence/Transport Minister, Hishamuddin Hussein, became one of the global talking points following the MH370 'disappearance'. An explosive new book by one of the international journalists who has followed the story from...

www.sarawakreport.org

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Thanks!

Some interesting comments in the reviews of the book can be found here: The Disappearing Act

Some agreeing with the author, some finding the author's propositions just as incredible as the 'accepted' narrative we've had to date.

 

[Scarlett]

Reading the newspaper report of the book is five minutes of my life I'm not getting back. What a stupid and hyperventilating 'review'.

AWACS with cloaking tech they can somehow project onto another aircraft...
Clearly the EM spectrum works differently at the Sarawak Report and in the authors fevered imagination.

Just another conspiracy theory.

 

[Ric]

Reading the newspaper report of the book is five minutes of my life I'm not getting back. What a stupid and hyperventilating 'review'.

AWACS with cloaking tech they can somehow project onto another aircraft...
Clearly the EM spectrum works differently at the Sarawak Report and in the authors fevered imagination.

Just another conspiracy theory.

I am so sorry that I posted it!!

 

[MEL_Traveller]

AWACS with cloaking tech they can somehow project onto another aircraft...

This bit I didn't actually think was beyond the realms of possibility? It seemed plausible that military capability has been built to disrupt communications of an enemy.

 

[jb747]

Fully fledged conspiracy nutcase.

 

[Scarlett]

This bit I didn't actually think was beyond the realms of possibility? It seemed plausible that military capability has been built to disrupt communications of an enemy.

Disruption of a comms network is possible by a number of measures. Stopping all radar returns from and comms from an aircraft, using another aircraft - no.

 

[jb747]

This bit I didn't actually think was beyond the realms of possibility? It seemed plausible that military capability has been built to disrupt communications of an enemy.

You can disrupt comms quite easily. You can also play silly buggers with some radar paints. You cannot throw a cloak of invisibility over another aircraft. But, the jamming itself is very evident, showing up quite clearly on radar screens, and in many cases allowing the jammer to be triangulated. It was quite often seen over India.

The ”tango” stuff is pure make believe…

 

[MEL_Traveller]

You can disrupt comms quite easily. You can also play silly buggers with some radar paints. You cannot throw a cloak of invisibility over another aircraft. But, the jamming itself is very evident, showing up quite clearing on radar screens, and in many cases allowing the jammer to be triangulated. It was quite often seen over India.

The ”tango” stuff is pure make believe…

You'd also think with all the military software/hardware and monitoring out there that you'd be able to track an aircraft flying around for 5 or 6 hours. Yet somehow no one can. By implication it means any invading air force just needs to turn off their transponders and can fly undetected into their enemy's airspace?

There's a lot that doesn't really make sense in this whole thing. The author's claims barely make less sense than the official version

 

[jb747]

You'd also think with all the military software/hardware and monitoring out there that you'd be able to track an aircraft flying around for 5 or 6 hours. Yet somehow no one can. By implication it means any invading air force just needs to turn off their transponders and can fly undetected into their enemy's airspace?

There's a lot that doesn't really make sense in this whole thing. The author's claims barely make less sense than the official version

There’s a lot less radar around in many parts of the world than you might imagine. Same with comms, where you’d be into using HF radio when barely beyond Malaysia. You could fly undetected into Australian airspace over a vast length of the coastline. Radar is placed where needed, and often pointed to scan only particular arcs. The vast majority of civilian radar is only showing secondary (transponder) paints. Primary paints just clutter up the displays. Military radar might exist, but it does not mean that it’s turned on, scanning, manned, or doing anything at all.

 

[Brissy1]

You'd also think with all the military software/hardware and monitoring out there that you'd be able to track an aircraft flying around for 5 or 6 hours. Yet somehow no one can. By implication it means any invading air force just needs to turn off their transponders and can fly undetected into their enemy's airspace?

There's a lot that doesn't really make sense in this whole thing. The author's claims barely make less sense than the official version

"Tracking aircraft"... like drug runners, we only seem to catch the ones we have prior intel on.
Edit: not a career suggestion for retired pilots.

 

[Franky]

I am so sorry that I posted it!!

No-one is shooting the messenger...

 

[ethernet]

The point of the investigation was that military radar, and downward looking satellite did NOT report what they saw, or even contribute to the elimination process. No one wanted to embarass anyone- when aviation growth looked positive. Did Jindalee OHR see any noise? Did anyone look? I know the US has done fantastic radar noise bounces to pick up light aircraft. One theory says if there are enough 5G phones on the ground, overhead stealth plane flights may be detected. The adage is , a well tuned radar will see anything. I speculate enough drones were shot down, that China would know how to process ELINT returns on FFT harmonics.

 

[OATEK]

Another "expert" has a go!

NoCookies | The Australian

www.theaustralian.com.au

No real detail about how the "new" technology has allowed the crash site to be determined. But location not inconsistent with other estimates.

 

[jb747]

Another "expert" has a go!

No real detail about how the "new" technology has allowed the crash site to be determined. But location not inconsistent with other estimates.

A friend of mine has had some involvement in this, mainly by providing some known aircraft tracks that could then be blind assessed against this technique. Apparently the results have matched up quite well, even though the users have no knowledge of the flights.

There is a little information here: WSPR (amateur radio software) - Wikipedia.

I have read a very technical briefing on this, and it certainly sounds interesting.

This time around, assumptions about just what the aircraft did are not incorporated. The analysis apparently shows speed and heading changes, and these fit into the satellite ping rings, to give a different final resting place. I'll be quite disappointed if they don't have another look.

 

[codash1099]

Another "expert" has a go!

NoCookies | The Australian

www.theaustralian.com.au

No real detail about how the "new" technology has allowed the crash site to be determined. But location not inconsistent with other estimates.

I think the question is whether anyone will throw some more $$$ into a new search.