Malaysia Airlines Plane "Loses Contact"
Discussion
It took almost 2 years to locate the main debris field (fuselage, engines, data recorders etc) of Air France Flight 447, the A330 that crashed in the altantic and they knew pretty much where it hit the water.
The sea is vast and deep and the parts they are looking for are very small. It’s not really surprising that they haven’t located the crash site of MAS 370
The sea is vast and deep and the parts they are looking for are very small. It’s not really surprising that they haven’t located the crash site of MAS 370
El stovey said:
The sea is vast and deep and the parts they are looking for are very small. It’s not really surprising that they haven’t located the crash site of MAS 370
People who've never done this simply cannot imagine how hard it is to find anything on the seabed - even if you have a great clue where it is!jshell said:
People who've never done this simply cannot imagine how hard it is to find anything on the seabed - even if you have a great clue where it is!
I always thought it was a shame that Google, etc with all of their engineering prowess and funds, don’t build a fleet of autonomous vehicles and map the sea bed.Gareth79 said:
Vaud said:
I always thought it was a shame that Google, etc with all of their engineering prowess and funds, don’t build a fleet of autonomous vehicles and map the sea bed.
Mining magnesium nodules? 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glomar_Explorer
(Not successful - only found some rusty Russian metal).
El stovey said:
Don't trust everything/anything you read in the Daily Star.Hacked using a mobile phone, not likely. If you've ever even remotely studied the segregation used between different functional networks (and fundamentally different networking technology used) within a modern aircraft, you'd quickly realise how proposterous that theory is.
Didn't stop a 'potential hacker' being thrown off a plane and arrested when proposing to hack a plane from his seat using the inflight entertainment system network. However, that's probably because he was genuinely insane, rather than a threat in the way that he described.
yajeed said:
Don't trust everything/anything you read in the Daily Star.
Hacked using a mobile phone, not likely. If you've ever even remotely studied the segregation used between different functional networks (and fundamentally different networking technology used) within a modern aircraft, you'd quickly realise how proposterous that theory is.
Didn't stop a 'potential hacker' being thrown off a plane and arrested when proposing to hack a plane from his seat using the inflight entertainment system network. However, that's probably because he was genuinely insane, rather than a threat in the way that he described.
Im pretty sure someone hacked the network via wifi on a plane.Hacked using a mobile phone, not likely. If you've ever even remotely studied the segregation used between different functional networks (and fundamentally different networking technology used) within a modern aircraft, you'd quickly realise how proposterous that theory is.
Didn't stop a 'potential hacker' being thrown off a plane and arrested when proposing to hack a plane from his seat using the inflight entertainment system network. However, that's probably because he was genuinely insane, rather than a threat in the way that he described.
http://edition.cnn.com/2015/05/17/us/fbi-hacker-fl...
It could be possible I guess but I'm sure we would never hear about it. I don't believe the story.
Edited by The Spruce goose on Monday 8th January 16:20
The Spruce goose said:
Im pretty sure someone hacked the network via wifi on a plane.
http://edition.cnn.com/2015/05/17/us/fbi-hacker-fl...
It could be possible I guess but I'm sure we would never hear about it. I don't believe the story.
Yes, that's the loony toon that I was referring to. http://edition.cnn.com/2015/05/17/us/fbi-hacker-fl...
It could be possible I guess but I'm sure we would never hear about it. I don't believe the story.
Edited by The Spruce goose on Monday 8th January 16:20
You can watch the defcon presentation online (which is very good and pretty easy to follow). The summary is here:https://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/08/10/why_hackers_wont_be_able_to_hijack_your_next_flight_the_facts/
CAPP0 said:
It was scheduled to fly for four hours. It was believed to have flown for at least 6 if not more. Airlines don't usually significantly overfuel planes. QED!
''00:41, 8 March 2014 (16:41 GMT, 7 March): Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 departed from Kuala Lumpur International Airport and was due to arrive in Beijing at 06:30 (22:30 GMT).''i make that 6 hours flight time, the plane actually flew for another 1.5 hours so that would actually be a quite a bit of overfueling, something the captain has control over.
The Spruce goose said:
''00:41, 8 March 2014 (16:41 GMT, 7 March): Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 departed from Kuala Lumpur International Airport and was due to arrive in Beijing at 06:30 (22:30 GMT).''
i make that 6 hours flight time, the plane actually flew for another 1.5 hours so that would actually be a quite a bit of overfueling, something the captain has control over.
It looks like about 6 hours on Google maps, I've personally flown Hong Kong to Beijing and that's 3 hours; Kuala Lumpur looks like close to twice as far, even on a quick scan of the area.i make that 6 hours flight time, the plane actually flew for another 1.5 hours so that would actually be a quite a bit of overfueling, something the captain has control over.
Do we really know for sure how long it flew for? And 1.5 hours extra fuel doesn't sound an unreasonable contingency amount to me, but it may not be that much in time, because turning onto a different heading may affect how much fuel it uses. The actual load may depend on what the captain was expecting on the way weather wise, or what Beijing was reporting at the time.
The Spruce goose said:
CAPP0 said:
It was scheduled to fly for four hours. It was believed to have flown for at least 6 if not more. Airlines don't usually significantly overfuel planes. QED!
''00:41, 8 March 2014 (16:41 GMT, 7 March): Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 departed from Kuala Lumpur International Airport and was due to arrive in Beijing at 06:30 (22:30 GMT).''i make that 6 hours flight time, the plane actually flew for another 1.5 hours so that would actually be a quite a bit of overfueling, something the captain has control over.
CAPP0 said:
Fair enough. I read somewhere (can't remember where, sorry) that it took off at 02:xx and was due to land at 06:xx.
It would be interesting to compare how fuel was loaded against similar flight routes, as I've read the captain can decide how much extra s added over set standard. For some reason i thought the the plane never ran out of fuel, but i think that was the plan. Can't imagine the nightmare the passengers went through..Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff