Malaysian 777 missing in action

[Phil Bunch]

The NY Times published a perspective regarding the pilot's home flight simulator today.  I guess it's somehow suspicious to have a home flight simulator, which is unfortunate.  It's not surprising to me that the Malaysian government won't release their info or the system to US authorities.  I personally wish an international team of experts would manage the investigation, but as others have described, these countries' military have much or most of the usable information and can't release it due to national security concerns...  

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/18/world/asia/malaysia-airlines-flight.html?ref=todayspaper&_r=0

Excerpt follows:

One American safety expert, John Cox, a former airline union safety official, said that someone taking such pains to divert the plane does not fit the pattern of past cases when pilots intentionally crashed and killed everyone on board.

"There's an inconsistency in what we've seen historically," he said, comparing the disappearance of Flight 370 with two murder-suicides, on an Egyptair flight off Nantucket Island in 1999 and a SilkAir jet in Indonesia in 1997. In those crashes, he said, the pilot involved simply pushed the nose of the plane down and flew into the water. The authorities searched the homes of the pilots in Kuala Lumpur on Saturday, seizing a flight simulator that one of them had in his home.

In an effort to determine whether the pilot had practiced taking down the plane, the authorities have reassembled the simulator for experts to examine. American investigators would like access to the flight simulator and any other electronic information seized from the pilots, but as of Monday night they had not been given access to those materials.

[stekeller]

What is hilarious/sad in making the Captain's home sim an item of suspicion is 3-fold for me:

1. If he wanted to do "bad things" in the sim to practice for a real commandeering of his own plane, why would he happily post photos of his home cockpit in various forums?

2. You don't need a home cockpit to go through commandeering scenarios - any laptop running FSX or X-Plane and a 777 add-on could let you practice that just as well. Having 3 big screens, a yoke, and throttles adds nothing in that regard.

3. In any case, any 777 add-on for FSX or X-Plane would not include the level of detail needed to pull CBs to off-line ACARS from the EE bay, etc.

I get that all avenues should be explored, but this one is just silly and appeals to the ignorance of the public. Why would a 777 captain have a home sim? Because he loves the hobby and flying. He also had model planes and helicopters and posted videos showing how to repair things around the house and of him cooking. Seems like a cool person to me. Another point that U.S. pilots have brought up is that if a 777 captain wanted to get some "real flying" in he could get a Piper Cub and get his fix that way. Unfortunately, while many U.S., Canadian, Australian, and European pilots can do this to some degree, in certain countries General Aviation is very limited or non-existent. Flight simming and models is the only option.

- Stekeller
KORD

[martin]

Here's a reasonable interim summary of what is known and has been guessed so far.

Martin

[ScudRunner]

I agree stkeller..

my first thought on seeing the tribute the Captains friends posted regarding his home sim and model helos was - `that's the kind of guy you want up front when things go wrong - someone who is really passionate about his flying to the extent that he even finds ways to fly when he's not at work'

Maybe the true story will turn out to be very different. Sadly, at the moment it seems equally plausible that little green men took it.

I also hope it does not get people (i.e Authorities) thinking that high end sims in the hands of `civilians' is a bad thing. Bad enough that kids can no longer jump seat in airliners - how are we supposed to get the next generation of pilots interested???

Scud.

[Phil Bunch]

The NY Times published an editorial today that advocates for transponders that cannot be turned off.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/18/opinion/out-of-control.html?ref=todayspaper

Here's an excerpt from that editorial (which is probably behind a paywall):


In case cycling does not correct the fault, all jetliners have backup transponders. Flight 370 had a backup transponder — but as with most such units, someone in the cockpit must switch the backup on. No one did that on Flight 370.

The solution is a location-broadcasting system that the flight crew cannot switch off. Over the next few years, much of the world plans to adopt an aviation tracking standard called ADS-B, which should make it harder for a plane to stop reporting its position. Automated transponders should be part of that transition.

Of course, automation of complex systems can have unintended consequences. But most of the flight time of modern jetliners occurs on autopilot — every day, millions of lives worldwide are in the hands of autopilots for extended periods. If automation can be trusted to fly the entire plane, why can't it be trusted to keep the transponders in the correct setting?

Autopilots can be turned off, because a malfunctioning autopilot may cause a crash. A malfunctioning transponder might broadcast flawed data, which is a concern. But a switched-off transponder can spell doom.

Five of the last 10 major air disasters — the four 9/11 flights, and Flight 370 — began with the transponder's being switched off. A few design changes can make that impossible.

[farrokh747]

If there was anyone who didn't know how to switch off a transponder from the cockpit before this, they certainly do by now... each news channel has had their correspondents in various simulators showing us all how to change course, switch off the xpdr, etc.... The world knows a lot more about avionics and radar then they did 2 weeks ago.

Flight 370 was not unique: Most of the world's jetliners have transponders that can be turned off. On the 777-200, the type of plane used on the flight, there's a simple rotary switch near the first officer's left hand. All someone has to do to turn the transponder off is rotate the dial.

2. You don't need a home cockpit to go through commandeering scenarios - any laptop running FSX or X-Plane and a 777 add-on could let you practice that just as well. Having 3 big screens, a yoke, and throttles adds nothing in that regard.

Agree!

[farrokh747]

http://video.foxnews.com/v/3359318380001/malaysia-airlines-jet-held-by-terrorists-in-pakistan/#sp=show-clips


and some common sense on flight sims

http://edition.cnn.com/2014/03/18/world/asia/mh370-pilot-flight-simulator/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

[Phil Bunch]

The daughter of one of the crew has published in a local newspaper an open letter asking for respectfully treating the families of the flight crew, including the pilots:

http://www.nst.com.my/latest/font-color-red-missing-mh370-font-touching-letter-from-a-mas-pilot-s-daughter-1.518063?cache=03D163D03edding-pred-1.1176%2F%3FpFpentwage63Dp%3A%2Fhe3D03Dn63Frea-rti3D19.3D163D03edding-pred-1.1176%2F%3FpFpentwage63Dp%3A%2Fhe3D03Dn63Frea-rti3D19.111w5ii%2Fed-1.1#.Uysb-OUnCGY.email

I don't get why there has been so much suspicion regarding the crew.  Perhaps it's just that the authorities didn't make it clear that the crew were not actually suspects...or maybe they are until they are somehow proven innocent?

[Will]

I feel bad for the pilots. Two explanations come to mind. First, it's human nature to look for someone to blame. And second, the news media keep reporting that someone with "technical knowledge" of the 777 had to have been involved. That leads to speculation about the pilots, because they are close to the epicenter, and no more likely individuals have yet been located. But as I said, I feel bad for them and their families. Suspicion without evidence doesn't feel fair.

[DougSnow]

Suspicion without evidence doesn't feel fair.

Why should that be in the way of a good story (at least in the minds of the worthless newsies)?

[Pierre Theillere]

Hi all,

Sadly, Malaysian Prime Minister just announced that flight MH370 crashed into south indian ocean, leaving no survivors...

[Will]

I heard that he also announced this news to the relatives of the passengers, which means he's got to be pretty certain. It would be good to see him building a case for coming to this conclusion... I'm sure many people would like to know where he gets his certainty. I hope that part of the story comes out quickly. If he keeps his evidence to himself, that will just make people more anxious.

[Jeroen Hoppenbrouwers]

Press conference Tuesday, Malaysian time. Apparently they have puzzled so much satellite data together, using analysis of Doppler shift and such, that the last received transmissions cannot come from any other area than the Southern Indian ocean. Given the fuel aboard and the absolute lack of landing sites there, this means it must have ended there.

R.I.P.

[Will]

Yes, just saw that. Sad indeed.

[Michael]

It is the confirmation of what we already suspected for some days. Nevertheless I hope that the Prime Minister has actual evidence and not only tells again what he has picked up from hearsay.

Hopefully they will find the black boxes and data explaining what happened to MH370.

[Will]

From a messaging standpoint, I wouldn't have said at this point that there are "no survivors." I would have just said that they've localized the last known ping to a spot far remote from any runway.

Someone somewhere will be asking: how do you know they didn't pull off a successful ditching after they ran out of fuel?

[stekeller]

I think that is based on water temperature, sea conditions, and the number of days that have passed with no sign of rafts or anything like that. Coast Guards are very good at determining this and I am sure Australia's is no exception.

This is the sad reality.

[Michael]

The day on which they had to reveal that there is no hope to find survivors, had to come. Incredibly heardbreaking, but "the sooner the better", because every day passing without confirmation of the obvious, only made it worse.

[Jeroen Hoppenbrouwers]

More data here:   http://avherald.com/h?article=4710c69b

[torrence]

Thanks, Jeroen

I hadn't actually seen the analysis charts - the talking heads on TV being math-phobic for the most part.  The Doppler analysis looks very straightforward to me if you have access to the raw data.  It's just not something you would ever do routinely.  Again, some of the reporting unfortunately makes it sound like some mysterious, unverified theory.  If it were a spacecraft failure investigation, everyone in the room would nod their heads, make sure the sums had been checked independently and then start looking  from the end of the predict lines - which sounds like what actually happened.

Cheers,
Torrence