MH 777 missing - MH370 media statement

[medhead]

Mostly I agree ( and I speak here as a specialist anaesthetist and former RAAF aviation medical instructor) but the 25000 ft mark for initiation of pressure breathing sounds a little low. Certainly back in the day when we used to inflict hypoxic indignities on fighter pilots in decompression chambers, 100% oxygen was said to be good to 39000 ft, then pressure breathing from 39 - 42000 ft, and we never went higher than that because anything short of a space suit is useless above that altitude.

Of course there is the odd soul who has survived higher altitudes; the world altitude record for gliders stood for many years (set in the 60s) at about 46000 ft by some bloke using a pressure breathing sysyem. Lucky to survive IMO. Record eventually broken by guys in spacesuits.

I saw some glider/para glider accident show on discovery the other day. Some German woman at the world para glider championship (or something like that) got sucked up into a one of the massive black thunderstorm clouds, coughulonimbus. Went to some massive altitude without O2 passed out and all. But lived. 32000 ft. Ewa Wisnerska.

 

[medhead]

Everyone asking about Australian responsibility. I though Australia is only responsibility for Search and Rescue. Not salvage.

 

[cirqueboy]

Yeah. No.

Analyzing satellite imagery is part of my day job as a geologist. Maybe the media comments could have been worded better, but here's the reality...

Satellite takes images, someone downloads images, someone does post-processing of images to make atmospheric corrections etc., then someone analyses the images and reports the findings. You do not get to analyse the images straight after they're snapped by the satellite. 4 days is an incredibly rapid turnaround time to be honest, especially given the size of the search area.

Not questioning this for a second.

What I have a problem with is that the families, and the world were misled. We were given the impression that the Presse was based on new information. What was omitted was that the new information was based on data 4 days old.

The "4 days old" bit is what is missing.

Be honest, don't be evasive. Tell it how it is, why it takes 4 days to evaluate huge areas of ocean and why, once we know what is there, we go and look.

Evasive is what Malaysia is accused of being.

 

[amaroo]

The Indonesians really don't like Abbott Debris found off WA coast could be from missing MH370 plane | The Border Mail

3:37pm: Michael Bachelard: An update to an earlier post about Indonesia's response to Prime Minister Tony Abbott's announcement.

It was claimed Indonesia's Coordinating Security Minister wasn't happy the PM made the announcement before confirmation the items were wreckage.
However, Djoko Suyanto's spokesman has denied Djoko criticised Abbott for speaking too soon.

What he said - according to the spokesman - is that Abbott was speaking about satellite data and "we have to ensure through physical observations that it relates to MH370".

and,

Tweets

• George Roberts ‏@George_Roberts 2h
  The minister made the comments on live Indonesian TV.
  

  • 
    

  
  ​
• George Roberts ‏@George_Roberts 2h
  Indonesia's Coordinating Security Minister says Australia too quick to announce possible #MH370 objects and should have checked first.
  
  ​

 

[MEL_Traveller]

How long is an exit slide/liferaft? Must be around 24m x 5m.

EDIT: Is a 777 slide also a liferaft?

I don't know how long the slide-raft is but yes, they double as liferafts as well as the slide for land.

 

[amaroo]

Seems the radar hit was a miss....

3:55pm: It seems earlier radar activity on a plane involved in the search effort had no connection with MH370:

• luis martinez ‏@LMartinezABC 48m
  US Navy/7th Fleet clarifies the Radar hits David Wright reported from the P-8 NOT linked to Australian announcement but typical Radar return
  

  • 
    

  
  ​
• luis martinez ‏@LMartinezABC 51m
  US Navy Clarifies Radar Hits David Wright Mentioned in report from P-8 NOT linked to Australian Announcement but is typical Radar return
  Expand
  

  • Reply
  • Retweet
  • Favorite
  • More
    

  
  ​
• 
  ​

 

[jb747]

Mostly I agree ( and I speak here as a specialist anaesthetist and former RAAF aviation medical instructor) but the 25000 ft mark for initiation of pressure breathing sounds a little low. Certainly back in the day when we used to inflict hypoxic indignities on fighter pilots in decompression chambers, 100% oxygen was said to be good to 39000 ft, then pressure breathing from 39 - 42000 ft, and we never went higher than that because anything short of a space suit is useless above that altitude.

It's a long time since I did that course, but I recall it as a linear increase in mask pressure from somewhere in the 20s. Of course I was a typical student, and most likely staring out the window for much of the time....

In any event, passenger masks, and crew masks, are very different in their capabilities.

 

[RooFlyer]

Not questioning this for a second.

What I have a problem with is that the families, and the world were misled. We were given the impression that the Presse was based on new information. What was omitted was that the new information was based on data 4 days old.

The "4 days old" bit is what is missing.

Be honest, don't be evasive.

Evasive is what Malaysia is accused of being.

Taber-nac! Makes as much sense as Pauline Marois on the question of a referendum

Have a think about how many satellite images are generated in a day, every day. Have a think that each and every image within a very large search zone is equally likely to have something of something of interest. How many images DID have something of interest, got followed up, and they moved on?

On something like this, I would expect the Australian Authorities to take time to make VERY SURE about what they were about to announce.

When I saw the presser, I never imagined for a moment that it was an image from this morning, or even yesterday. Why would anyone? What on earth is to be gained by the Australian authorities being 'evasive' or 'misleading'?

 

[jb747]

jb747 (or anybody else with the knowledge), why are there no waypoints between PER and half way across the Indian Ocean to South Africa? The lowest one I can find is Polum (see this SkyVector map)

I can only find Gugon (which is due west of PER, on a direct track to Africa), but that is ~2,000nm from PER. I would have thought there would be ones tracking PER/JNB all the way

There's plenty of them on the Jeppesen. Lat/longs are used too.

 

[jb747]

Thanks for the clear explanation JB747. This is possibly irrelevant given latest developments, but I couldn't quite follow when it was previously suggested that the high altitude could have been deliberately used to incapacitate pax without affecting the pilots. Now I understand how that could (hypothetically) have happened.

It still makes no sense, and I wonder just how accurate that data is. I very much doubt that a 777 could get there and still be under control, at least initially, on the way down. IF they were at FL350, and depressurised, that's more than lethal enough.

 

[cirqueboy]

Taberwhit, exactement!!!!!!!

That is the whole point! They did not think, did not explain the details and announced it prématuré.

 

[burmans]

Again, without the full specifics it is easy to criticise isn't it?

Well for some thats all they are good at!

 

[markis10]

It still makes no sense, and I wonder just how accurate that data is. I very much doubt that a 777 could get there and still be under control, at least initially, on the way down. IF they were at FL350, and depressurised, that's more than lethal enough.

Perhaps there was an issue on the flight deck, the sign off attributed to the copilot is indicative to me of duress in hindsight, he could hardly use the standard codes if the cause had a similar background.

 

[Jack_OC]

It still makes no sense, and I wonder just how accurate that data is. I very much doubt that a 777 could get there and still be under control, at least initially, on the way down. IF they were at FL350, and depressurised, that's more than lethal enough.

I don't doubt you on this - I saw your earlier comments questioning whether the plane could really have gone as high as was reported and I read comments to the same effect somewhere else.

I just meant I now understand how depressurisation could theoretically kill everyone on board except the pilots.

 

[Archphoto]

All involved seem to be "between a rock and a hard place".

• too little information released - they're hiding something;
• release with strenuous clarification that it "may not be connected" - it's too soon to release the information;
• confirm data prior to release (taking a few days) - taking too long

Personally, I'd prefer succinct reports (that are seen to have been investigated as fully as possible, prior to release), than the continuous flow of rumours and unsubstantiated reports that have been going on over the past 12 days.

All in all, it has been a total farce with regard to (lack of clear) communication from the Malaysian Government, the "leaked" reports from China and general "Media Hype" that has been running rampant and unchecked.

Co-operation in the Asian region seems totally non-existent, and it's clear that any glimmer of possibly showing how fantastic (or not!) radar tracking etc is for the countries in said region, far outweighs the 239 lives most certainly lost and the impact such pettiness has had, on the families left behind.

I get that military establishments want to keep quiet on the full capabilities they have, but surely, they are able to give information without the need for full disclosure on how they got the info they did (or didn't) - a plane being tracked reversing it's direction doesn't seem too "sensitive" IMHO.

Keeping it all so "hush-hush" simply meant that SAR efforts were in the wrong area for way too long, and whilst the outcome may not have been any different (if indeed the plane is found off the coast of WA), it may have reduced the anguish of an almost 2 week wait for the families, to know its true fate.

If it is confirmed that the plane is off the WA coast, I can only hope that the Group 5 mentioned in a few posts earlier, take the helm, and ensure that the plane is found, recovered and investigated in a manner that ensures no cover-ups, secrets or general "quick fix solutions" are applied - the 239 passengers, their families and friends deserve the truth to be told regardless of what is uncovered.

 

[SFSC]

I'm sort of wondering if it's possible to depressurise by equipment shut down and then restore pressurisation later before crew oxygen is exhausted.

 

[markis10]

I'm sort of wondering if it's possible to depressurise by equipment shut down and then restore pressurisation later before crew oxygen is exhausted.

Very possible, just like the Helios flight a switch to manual.

 

[DrA]

I think you are a geoscientist, from other thread discussions? Like me - of 30+ years standing, including deep water marine geophysical surveys (looking for minerals, not planes) I would never have considered gravity as a tool here, either satellite or surface.

With the trail likely cold (no matter where the plane ended up at deep sea), I've been trying to think what geophysics would be useful. You would have to do towed array magnetics in the first instance no matter how remote the likelihood of success as its relatively cheap and rapid to do. I've forgotten if marine EM is a practical tool in deep water. Again, assuming the plane is in pieces its hard to see that any piece of the plane would produce a meaningful response at depth.

I think AF 447 was ultimately found by probability analysis and eyeballs in a deep submersible. Reckon it'll be the same with this one unless they get really lucky with the (presumed) wreckage leaking debris for a little while yet.

Yes, I'm a geoscientist. I lecture part time at one of the local universities in exploratory data analysis and geostatistics and do consulting work in mineral exploration.

I figure gravity might work, as all it's really doing is looking for density contrasts. It'd show up if you could get a high enough resolution out there, but I really don't think it's practical. I know they use sea floor gravity for finding hydrothermal vents for potential massive sulphide mineralization. I know they also use mag, but I suspect that it would be just as impractical to get high res images that far offshore. You can also do deep EM, but due to the size of the search area and how far offshore it is, again, I think it's impractical. If they could narrow down the search area to maybe 10km x 10km? Possibly.

Otherwise just a really high resolution bathymetry map over the area should pick it up without the need for geophysics. Should check if there's any IODP cruises heading out there.

 

[shearsense]

Would agree with that - unusually fast turnaround. The change-recognition software used routinely these days in satellite image analysis possibly would have helped that (at least you would hope they would be using it, given the very large area). They may also have had to acquire data at different times to make the change-comparison. But you still have to do the hard yards and make sure it is not a glitch in the image. However, not everybody would have assumed that the imagery was days old, so perhaps should have mentioned at the press conference. 4 days is the blink of an eye to a geoscientist, but an eternity in SAR.

Yeah. No.

Analyzing satellite imagery is part of my day job as a geologist. Maybe the media comments could have been worded better, but here's the reality...

Satellite takes images, someone downloads images, someone does post-processing of images to make atmospheric corrections etc., then someone analyses the images and reports the findings. You do not get to analyse the images straight after they're snapped by the satellite. 4 days is an incredibly rapid turnaround time to be honest, especially given the size of the search area.

 

[SFSC]

Very possible, just like the Helios flight a switch to manual.

Thanks markis10. (I won't do a "like" because some might mistake it for a "like" of the action rather than your post.)