Missing Malaysian jet news (1 Viewer)

[KCitons]

Note to search crews and reporters........Keep your ####### mouth shut until you actually find the plane.......You are just embarrassing yourselves.

I think this has turned into a competition between the searching countries. With China wanting to be the hero.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

I think the skirting around the North end of Indonesia eliminates the possibility of mechanical failure. Agree or disagree?

We are now left with hijacking, or pilot suicide. If you go with hijacking, you would have to believe that someone incapacitated the pilots and took control of the plane. If it was a a hijacker pointing a gun at the pilots and telling them to fly, one of the pilots would have been able to communicate that they were hijacked. The only thing that may make sense, is that the hijacker seemed to be on a course for Australia. Maybe they were hoping to hit a hard target with the plane, but ran out of fuel. If this was the case, we would have heard about someone on the plane being tied to terrorism. There are too many video cameras for people to hide. (even if they are traveling with stolen passports)

One thing a talking head mentioned about pilot suicide, is that the pilot could have requested to captain a flight to Australia (Malaysian Air has multiple flights each day) At that time, he could have ditched the plane in the Indian Ocean, while not having to turn off transponders or fly out of radar range of Indonesia.

But the Captain may have snapped due to something that happened in the days leading up to MH370 disappearance. (The jailing of Anwar Ibrahim the same day the plane disappeared.)

I've been saying this.

And really I think the original turn when the plane was leaving Malaysian air space was what told us it wasn't mechanical failure, because that would be a hell of a coincidence. On the other hand it was the perfect timing for human intervention.

If we are going to have a pissing match, I've been saying it's pilot suicide since the beginning.

The original turn, taken by itself, could have been a sign of mechanical failure. Even the drop in altitude would be a normal response to a mechanical failure, fire, or something else. Had this plane crashed right after it turned around, (in an attempt to land) this would have been reported as a textbook procedure by the pilots.

It's only after you take into account maneuvers after the original turn, and the current search zone, that mechanical failure become much less likely.

Sorry, I didn't really mean it like that. What I'm really pointing to is a couple things:

- One is this "new" flight path around Indonesia the news keeps trumpeting recently: did they really not reach this conclusion within the last 30+ days? I don't think it's new but it is newly announced, and yes it does compound the conclusion that there was human interference, ie suicide/hijack.

- Two: about your point about mechanical failure could have hit then at the very point they were leaving air space. Sure it could have happened then, but the chances of it happening there and not anywhere else but there along the continuum from KL to Peking is crazy small, very, very small. Whereas again that was the perfect time for a human takeover of the plane to redirect it. Also, if it was mechanical failure the turn would have been straight back to KL or the nearest airport, not a due line north between borders.

 

[T Bell]

Just heard on the nightly news that the Chinese listening device that heard the pings was low budget and hand-towed - WTF?

But... an Australian ship, 350 miles away (as I recall), with much more sophisticated equipment has just detected a ping.

The new ping is much too far away to be related to the Chinese detected ping, and given the advanced equipment, of more interest.

Unbelievable... this would be a bad movie if it was fictional.

It's more fictional than true.

CNN had the manufacturer of those hand held, low budget listening devices on earlier. Unless the plane (or black box) is sitting on a ledge, there is no way they heard the ping with that device. The Chinese think that rest of the word is stupid enough to believe that video of Gilligan and Skipper in a life raft with metal detector.

As I've said earlier in this thread, the Chinese are trying to 1) appear active and relevant in the search to appease their citizens who were overwhelmingly the victims of the plane's demise; 2) appear organized and technologically capable in a way that's on par with the US as a way of buttressing their international stature; and 3) appear more on top of things than the Malaysians with whom they've got certain territorial disputes.

I don't know how their efforts are playing in China on the first point, but on the second point their flimsy "discoveries" are if anything backfiring on them.

 

[T Bell]

So I guess since the Chinese and Australians have found pings 200 miles apart, there are actually two planes down there.

Honestly, do you know how many ####### Pings there are in China?

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Just heard on the nightly news that the Chinese listening device that heard the pings was low budget and hand-towed - WTF?

But... an Australian ship, 350 miles away (as I recall), with much more sophisticated equipment has just detected a ping.

The new ping is much too far away to be related to the Chinese detected ping, and given the advanced equipment, of more interest.

Unbelievable... this would be a bad movie if it was fictional.

It's more fictional than true.

CNN had the manufacturer of those hand held, low budget listening devices on earlier. Unless the plane (or black box) is sitting on a ledge, there is no way they heard the ping with that device. The Chinese think that rest of the word is stupid enough to believe that video of Gilligan and Skipper in a life raft with metal detector.

As I've said earlier in this thread, the Chinese are trying to 1) appear active and relevant in the search to appease their citizens who were overwhelmingly the victims of the plane's demise; 2) appear organized and technologically capable in a way that's on par with the US as a way of buttressing their international stature; and 3) appear more on top of things than the Malaysians with whom they've got certain territorial disputes.

I don't know how their efforts are playing in China on the first point, but on the second point their flimsy "discoveries" are if anything backfiring on them.

Well unless they claim that hey they gave the directions, the US/UK/Malaysians/Aussies just didn't act in time before the pinger stopped a'pingin'.

I do agree this whole fiasco has domestic political implications for the Chinese authorities.

 

[KCitons]

Just heard on the nightly news that the Chinese listening device that heard the pings was low budget and hand-towed - WTF?

But... an Australian ship, 350 miles away (as I recall), with much more sophisticated equipment has just detected a ping.

The new ping is much too far away to be related to the Chinese detected ping, and given the advanced equipment, of more interest.

Unbelievable... this would be a bad movie if it was fictional.

It's more fictional than true.

CNN had the manufacturer of those hand held, low budget listening devices on earlier. Unless the plane (or black box) is sitting on a ledge, there is no way they heard the ping with that device. The Chinese think that rest of the word is stupid enough to believe that video of Gilligan and Skipper in a life raft with metal detector.

As I've said earlier in this thread, the Chinese are trying to 1) appear active and relevant in the search to appease their citizens who were overwhelmingly the victims of the plane's demise; 2) appear organized and technologically capable in a way that's on par with the US as a way of buttressing their international stature; and 3) appear more on top of things than the Malaysians with whom they've got certain territorial disputes.

I don't know how their efforts are playing in China on the first point, but on the second point their flimsy "discoveries" are if anything backfiring on them.

Yeah, one of the talking heads mentioned that China probably doesn't have a deep water search tools. So, in order to be relevant, they resorted to what we are seeing now.

I find it hard to believe that China wouldn't have substantial deep water (sub hunting) equipment. After all, they have all of our money. What are they spending it on?

 

[Keerock]

So I guess since the Chinese and Australians have found pings 200 miles apart, there are actually two planes down there.

Honestly, do you know how many ####### Pings there are in China?

 

[T Bell]

Just heard on the nightly news that the Chinese listening device that heard the pings was low budget and hand-towed - WTF?

But... an Australian ship, 350 miles away (as I recall), with much more sophisticated equipment has just detected a ping.

The new ping is much too far away to be related to the Chinese detected ping, and given the advanced equipment, of more interest.

Unbelievable... this would be a bad movie if it was fictional.

It's more fictional than true.

CNN had the manufacturer of those hand held, low budget listening devices on earlier. Unless the plane (or black box) is sitting on a ledge, there is no way they heard the ping with that device. The Chinese think that rest of the word is stupid enough to believe that video of Gilligan and Skipper in a life raft with metal detector.

As I've said earlier in this thread, the Chinese are trying to 1) appear active and relevant in the search to appease their citizens who were overwhelmingly the victims of the plane's demise; 2) appear organized and technologically capable in a way that's on par with the US as a way of buttressing their international stature; and 3) appear more on top of things than the Malaysians with whom they've got certain territorial disputes.

I don't know how their efforts are playing in China on the first point, but on the second point their flimsy "discoveries" are if anything backfiring on them.

Yeah, one of the talking heads mentioned that China probably doesn't have a deep water search tools. So, in order to be relevant, they resorted to what we are seeing now.

I find it hard to believe that China wouldn't have substantial deep water (sub hunting) equipment. After all, they have all of our money. What are they spending it on?

Until recently their military has been focused upon internal order and defense against any invading force crossing their borders. The army has been the priority, and their navy has only until recently been basically a glorified coast guard. It doesn't shock me that they've neglected something like deep water equipment.

Of course, it's also possible that they have that capability but don't want to reveal that they have it by using it in this particular situation.

 

[TheIronSheik]

So I guess since the Chinese and Australians have found pings 200 miles apart, there are actually two planes down there.

Honestly, do you know how many ####### Pings there are in China?

A ton. Have you ever seen a movie with a submarine in it? Those guys have a tool that pings all of the time.

 

[Pots]

Can someone explain why this plane, which has had relatively little-to-no updates for over a week now, still dominates coverage on most news channels but Russia invading and basically taking over Ukraine has all but been forgotten?

 

[KCitons]

Can someone explain why this plane, which has had relatively little-to-no updates for over a week now, still dominates coverage on most news channels but Russia invading and basically taking over Ukraine has all but been forgotten?

Planes don't just disappear every day. Countries have been invading each other since the beginning of time.

Actually, I'm following the Ukraine situation as well. Along with the landslide in Washington (which, at last check, doesn't even have its own thread)

 

[CurlyNight]

None of this tragedy is in any way amusing but something that IS amusing is watching CNN desperately struggling to reclassify worthless speculation as breaking news. They've been 24/7 for a month now and keep on dredging up new talking heads masquerading as experts to spout off about the latest rumor / speculation masquerading as fact. CNNs dedication to this story is so total that none of their viewers will know anything else that has happened in the world.

I agree but there are tons of folks who are really glued to this and like hearing the same "we don't know" over and over. Hopefully the pings heard on Sunday do turn out to be the boxes so at least the families can have closure on what happened for sure.

 

[Fat Nick]

Can someone explain why this plane, which has had relatively little-to-no updates for over a week now, still dominates coverage on most news channels but Russia invading and basically taking over Ukraine has all but been forgotten?

Because it's much easier to make up news when you don't know what happened or what's going to happen...

 

[TheIronSheik]

Can someone explain why this plane, which has had relatively little-to-no updates for over a week now, still dominates coverage on most news channels but Russia invading and basically taking over Ukraine has all but been forgotten?

Because it's much easier to make up news when you don't know what happened or what's going to happen...

This is true. This is why we live in the day and age of news outlets running stories that end with a question mark.

 

[Fat Nick]

As I've said earlier in this thread, the Chinese are trying to 1) appear active and relevant in the search to appease their citizens who were overwhelmingly the victims of the plane's demise; 2) appear organized and technologically capable in a way that's on par with the US as a way of buttressing their international stature; and 3) appear more on top of things than the Malaysians with whom they've got certain territorial disputes.

I don't know how their efforts are playing in China on the first point, but on the second point their flimsy "discoveries" are if anything backfiring on them.

Yeah, one of the talking heads mentioned that China probably doesn't have a deep water search tools. So, in order to be relevant, they resorted to what we are seeing now.

I find it hard to believe that China wouldn't have substantial deep water (sub hunting) equipment. After all, they have all of our money. What are they spending it on?

Until recently their military has been focused upon internal order and defense against any invading force crossing their borders. The army has been the priority, and their navy has only until recently been basically a glorified coast guard. It doesn't shock me that they've neglected something like deep water equipment.

Of course, it's also possible that they have that capability but don't want to reveal that they have it by using it in this particular situation.

I think you're spot on with China. Their satellites were the first to spot something in the ocean too, remember? Or at least that is what was reported. I think they later denied that claim. Now this ping detection...They're probably hurting more than helping because the real beneficial resources are constantly chasing BS claims.

Oh, and re. the internal order and defense thing - as you stated, that's always been China's MO, I think militarily and just culturally in general. This is the country that built the great wall to keep out invaders...this is really one of the first times they've put themselves in a position to be clearly upstaged by other world powers technologically. China lives in China's little box, and China is the best there is...in that little box. That's always been their philosophy.

 

[Fat Nick]

Yeah, one of the talking heads mentioned that China probably doesn't have a deep water search tools. So, in order to be relevant, they resorted to what we are seeing now.

I find it hard to believe that China wouldn't have substantial deep water (sub hunting) equipment. After all, they have all of our money. What are they spending it on?

China deep water equipment = getting more bamboo so they can make a longer pole for their little soda can detection unit.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Can someone explain why this plane, which has had relatively little-to-no updates for over a week now, still dominates coverage on most news channels but Russia invading and basically taking over Ukraine has all but been forgotten?

This is the equivalent of "girl trapped in well" stories from back in the day.

At some point, and that point is well passed, when it is no longer news but rather a very low cost reality show for CNN.

 

[JuniorNB]

Can someone explain why this plane, which has had relatively little-to-no updates for over a week now, still dominates coverage on most news channels but Russia invading and basically taking over Ukraine has all but been forgotten?

Turn on Fox News. They're loving the Russia story. They're portraying Putin like the world's Chuck Norris. And Obama like Jack from Will & Grace.

 

[CBusAlex]

Can someone explain why this plane, which has had relatively little-to-no updates for over a week now, still dominates coverage on most news channels but Russia invading and basically taking over Ukraine has all but been forgotten?

Because it's much easier to make up news when you don't know what happened or what's going to happen...

This is true. This is why we live in the day and age of news outlets running stories that end with a question mark.

I'm Ron Burgundy?

 

[fatness]

In your opinion who is covering up what, JetMaxx?

To be honest, it's just a feeling I'm left with after so many coincidences and strange turns to this. My guess is that the plane was either landed somewhere with everyone dead as a result of the decompression with the exception of the pilot(s) or it was shot down ala Flight 93. Either way the cover up would prevent a global crisis that China and the US just don't want to get into right now. Hey you asked

Yep, I did asked and you answered so thank you for that.

You're thinking it's either the McInerney Scenario or an act of war.

 

[HellToupee]

Can someone explain why this plane, which has had relatively little-to-no updates for over a week now, still dominates coverage on most news channels but Russia invading and basically taking over Ukraine has all but been forgotten?

Turn on Fox News. They're loving the Russia story. They're portraying Putin like the world's Chuck Norris. And Obama like Jack from Will & Grace.

If only Mitt won

 

[17seconds]

Can someone explain why this plane, which has had relatively little-to-no updates for over a week now, still dominates coverage on most news channels but Russia invading and basically taking over Ukraine has all but been forgotten?

Turn on Fox News. They're loving the Russia story. They're portraying Putin like the world's Chuck Norris. And Obama like Jack from Will & Grace.

10 years ago could anyone fathom the right wing taking sides with the leader of Russia vs *any* US President? That's some amazing hatred of Obama right there.

 

[T Bell]

Can someone explain why this plane, which has had relatively little-to-no updates for over a week now, still dominates coverage on most news channels but Russia invading and basically taking over Ukraine has all but been forgotten?

Turn on Fox News. They're loving the Russia story. They're portraying Putin like the world's Chuck Norris. And Obama like Jack from Will & Grace.

10 years ago could anyone fathom the right wing taking sides with the leader of Russia vs *any* US President? That's some amazing hatred of Obama right there.

Um, not quite "taking sides" going on. Where do you see anyone saying what Putin did was right?

 

[JuniorNB]

Can someone explain why this plane, which has had relatively little-to-no updates for over a week now, still dominates coverage on most news channels but Russia invading and basically taking over Ukraine has all but been forgotten?

Turn on Fox News. They're loving the Russia story. They're portraying Putin like the world's Chuck Norris. And Obama like Jack from Will & Grace.

10 years ago could anyone fathom the right wing taking sides with the leader of Russia vs *any* US President? That's some amazing hatred of Obama right there.

Um, not quite "taking sides" going on. Where do you see anyone saying what Putin did was right?

Fox has never said Putin is a hero. They're portraying him as a tough and bold leader. And loving him for it. The more they build him up, the more it looks like Obama has cowered. Typical Fox partisan brainwashing. Painting a picture for the lemmings to buy. And they buy it.

 

[Osaurus]

Chuck Norris pwns Putin

 

[T Bell]

Can someone explain why this plane, which has had relatively little-to-no updates for over a week now, still dominates coverage on most news channels but Russia invading and basically taking over Ukraine has all but been forgotten?

Turn on Fox News. They're loving the Russia story. They're portraying Putin like the world's Chuck Norris. And Obama like Jack from Will & Grace.

10 years ago could anyone fathom the right wing taking sides with the leader of Russia vs *any* US President? That's some amazing hatred of Obama right there.

Um, not quite "taking sides" going on. Where do you see anyone saying what Putin did was right?

Fox has never said Putin is a hero. They're portraying him as a tough and bold leader. And loving him for it. The more they build him up, the more it looks like Obama has cowered. Typical Fox partisan brainwashing. Painting a picture for the lemmings to buy. And they buy it.

But you're not buying it. You're smarter than everyone else?

 

[JuniorNB]

Can someone explain why this plane, which has had relatively little-to-no updates for over a week now, still dominates coverage on most news channels but Russia invading and basically taking over Ukraine has all but been forgotten?

Turn on Fox News. They're loving the Russia story. They're portraying Putin like the world's Chuck Norris. And Obama like Jack from Will & Grace.

10 years ago could anyone fathom the right wing taking sides with the leader of Russia vs *any* US President? That's some amazing hatred of Obama right there.

Um, not quite "taking sides" going on. Where do you see anyone saying what Putin did was right?

Fox has never said Putin is a hero. They're portraying him as a tough and bold leader. And loving him for it. The more they build him up, the more it looks like Obama has cowered. Typical Fox partisan brainwashing. Painting a picture for the lemmings to buy. And they buy it.

But you're not buying it. You're smarter than everyone else?

I don't get brainwashed by the Fox News and MSNBC's of the world. Just not into the partisan BS and propaganda.

 

[Rohn Jambo]

Chuck Norris pwns Putin

You're right. Putin pretty much told the whole world that Russian cannot do without Ukraine.

 

[ceo3west]

I came in here for news on the missing jet and I get Fox's take on Obama/Putin. Shocking.

 

[Pots]

I came in here for news on the missing jet and I get Fox's take on Obama/Putin. Shocking.

It's more info than the last 80 or so pages.

 

[dickey moe]

So I guess since the Chinese and Australians have found pings 200 miles apart, there are actually two planes down there.

Honestly, do you know how many ####### Pings there are in China?

I was always a big fan of Deng Xiaoping.

 

[JetMaxx]

In your opinion who is covering up what, JetMaxx?

To be honest, it's just a feeling I'm left with after so many coincidences and strange turns to this. My guess is that the plane was either landed somewhere with everyone dead as a result of the decompression with the exception of the pilot(s) or it was shot down ala Flight 93. Either way the cover up would prevent a global crisis that China and the US just don't want to get into right now. Hey you asked

Yep, I did asked and you answered so thank you for that.

You're thinking it's either the McInerney Scenario or an act of war.

The string of supposed coincidences paints a composite picture that is more than a everyone is dead and the plane flies until it runs out of fuel to the end of the world while missing all air spaces scenario.

 

[Das Boot]

This has gotta be it...

article

The first detection lasted for more than two hours; a second lasted for about 13 minutes.
The signals, detected about 1,750 kilometers (1,100 miles) northwest of Perth, Australia, were consistent with those sent by a flight data recorder and a cockpit voice recorder, Houston said.
Houston said the signals, heard in seawater about 4,500 meters (14,800 feet) deep, are "probably the best information that we have had" so far in the search.

 

[fatness]

Search crews hunting for the missing Malaysia Airlines jet have failed to relocate faint sounds heard deep below the southern Indian Ocean that officials said were consistent with a plane's black boxes, the head of the search operation said Tuesday.

Angus Houston, the retired Australian air chief marshal who is heading the search far off Australia's west coast, said sound locating equipment on board the Ocean Shield has picked up no trace of the signals since they were first heard late Saturday and early Sunday.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/malaysia-airlines-flight-370-no-new-black-box-like-sounds-heard/

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

This has gotta be it...

article

The first detection lasted for more than two hours; a second lasted for about 13 minutes.
The signals, detected about 1,750 kilometers (1,100 miles) northwest of Perth, Australia, were consistent with those sent by a flight data recorder and a cockpit voice recorder, Houston said.
Houston said the signals, heard in seawater about 4,500 meters (14,800 feet) deep, are "probably the best information that we have had" so far in the search.

So within easy reach of snorkelers from China?

 

[Keerock]

Search crews hunting for the missing Malaysia Airlines jet have failed to relocate faint sounds heard deep below the southern Indian Ocean that officials said were consistent with a plane's black boxes, the head of the search operation said Tuesday.

Angus Houston, the retired Australian air chief marshal who is heading the search far off Australia's west coast, said sound locating equipment on board the Ocean Shield has picked up no trace of the signals since they were first heard late Saturday and early Sunday.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/malaysia-airlines-flight-370-no-new-black-box-like-sounds-heard/

So when they first (or subsequently) heard these pings, why does a ship not just park itself above where they are coming from?

 

[KCitons]

Search crews hunting for the missing Malaysia Airlines jet have failed to relocate faint sounds heard deep below the southern Indian Ocean that officials said were consistent with a plane's black boxes, the head of the search operation said Tuesday.

Angus Houston, the retired Australian air chief marshal who is heading the search far off Australia's west coast, said sound locating equipment on board the Ocean Shield has picked up no trace of the signals since they were first heard late Saturday and early Sunday.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/malaysia-airlines-flight-370-no-new-black-box-like-sounds-heard/

So when they first (or subsequently) heard these pings, why does a ship not just park itself above where they are coming from?

The way I understand it, is that the ship is towing a pinger locator. They have to let out a mile worth of cable to get the locator down to the depths that they want. When they hear the signal, they attempt to mark it, real in all of the cable, turn around, and redeploy the locator in hopes of triangulating the location of the ping.

 

[Fat Nick]

Search crews hunting for the missing Malaysia Airlines jet have failed to relocate faint sounds heard deep below the southern Indian Ocean that officials said were consistent with a plane's black boxes, the head of the search operation said Tuesday.

Angus Houston, the retired Australian air chief marshal who is heading the search far off Australia's west coast, said sound locating equipment on board the Ocean Shield has picked up no trace of the signals since they were first heard late Saturday and early Sunday.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/malaysia-airlines-flight-370-no-new-black-box-like-sounds-heard/

So when they first (or subsequently) heard these pings, why does a ship not just park itself above where they are coming from?

The way I understand it, is that the ship is towing a pinger locator. They have to let out a mile worth of cable to get the locator down to the depths that they want. When they hear the signal, they attempt to mark it, real in all of the cable, turn around, and redeploy the locator in hopes of triangulating the location of the ping.

I read something about triangulation too, but honestly, that didn't make sense. Why would you need to redeploy or need another ship to triangulate?

Triangulation basically depends on them being able to determine the distance of the ping ( ) from to the locator. They'd then draw a circle around that location with a radius equal to the distance...the ping should be located somewhere along the circumference. The thing is, you should theoretically need 3 points to accurately determine where the ping comes from. 2 points would have 2 possible intersections, but 3 would only have 1.

Here's where I don't understand why you'd need more points for triangulation, and why I don't get why they can't pinpoint from what they've got...99% of the time you hear them talk about triangulation in a situation where there are stationary receivers, and a mobile transmitter (aka 3 cell towers, and a cell phone). In this case, you need 3 towers to pinpoint the cell. In this case, we have the opposite. We have a mobile receiver and a stationary transmitter. Why can't they just use the point where they first detected the signal, the point where they last detected the signal, and a mid-point? Theoretically, that's 3 points of detection. If they knew the distance at each of those 3 points, there'd be no need to redeploy, or need to detect in another area.

So...either this is all just media mumbo-jumbo, or somehow they can't accurately measure the distance, which makes me ask why triangulation is even of concern here...Oy.

 

[KCitons]

I read something about triangulation too, but honestly, that didn't make sense. Why would you need to redeploy or need another ship to triangulate?

Triangulation basically depends on them being able to determine the distance of the ping ( ) from to the locator. They'd then draw a circle around that location with a radius equal to the distance...the ping should be located somewhere along the circumference. The thing is, you should theoretically need 3 points to accurately determine where the ping comes from. 2 points would have 2 possible intersections, but 3 would only have 1.

Here's where I don't understand why you'd need more points for triangulation, and why I don't get why they can't pinpoint from what they've got...99% of the time you hear them talk about triangulation in a situation where there are stationary receivers, and a mobile transmitter (aka 3 cell towers, and a cell phone). In this case, you need 3 towers to pinpoint the cell. In this case, we have the opposite. We have a mobile receiver and a stationary transmitter. Why can't they just use the point where they first detected the signal, the point where they last detected the signal, and a mid-point? Theoretically, that's 3 points of detection. If they knew the distance at each of those 3 points, there'd be no need to redeploy, or need to detect in another area.

So...either this is all just media mumbo-jumbo, or somehow they can't accurately measure the distance, which makes me ask why triangulation is even of concern here...Oy.

Is it stationary? I've wonder this from the beginning. With all the currents and winds in that area, plus the thermal layers, I wonder if a chunk of the plane could be moving around 500 feet below the surface.

The other problem they are dealing with, is the mountainous terrain of the ocean. If the plane is resting on one side of an underwater mountain or canyon, they may not get a signal as they approach from the other side.

I don't know if the information is correct, but someone on CNN reported that sound travels 3x faster underwater? Is that a static number, or does water temp, current, etc change that drastically?

 

[T Bell]

This has gotta be it...

article

The first detection lasted for more than two hours; a second lasted for about 13 minutes.
The signals, detected about 1,750 kilometers (1,100 miles) northwest of Perth, Australia, were consistent with those sent by a flight data recorder and a cockpit voice recorder, Houston said.
Houston said the signals, heard in seawater about 4,500 meters (14,800 feet) deep, are "probably the best information that we have had" so far in the search.

So within easy reach of snorkelers from China?

Well... Chinese dissident snorkelers.

 

[T Bell]

Search crews hunting for the missing Malaysia Airlines jet have failed to relocate faint sounds heard deep below the southern Indian Ocean that officials said were consistent with a plane's black boxes, the head of the search operation said Tuesday.

Angus Houston, the retired Australian air chief marshal who is heading the search far off Australia's west coast, said sound locating equipment on board the Ocean Shield has picked up no trace of the signals since they were first heard late Saturday and early Sunday.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/malaysia-airlines-flight-370-no-new-black-box-like-sounds-heard/

So when they first (or subsequently) heard these pings, why does a ship not just park itself above where they are coming from?

They most certainly mark the spot with satellite navigation equipment, but the ping can come from any direction around the locator, not just from straight beneath it so it's not that exact.

 

[Two Deep]

Search crews hunting for the missing Malaysia Airlines jet have failed to relocate faint sounds heard deep below the southern Indian Ocean that officials said were consistent with a plane's black boxes, the head of the search operation said Tuesday.

Angus Houston, the retired Australian air chief marshal who is heading the search far off Australia's west coast, said sound locating equipment on board the Ocean Shield has picked up no trace of the signals since they were first heard late Saturday and early Sunday.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/malaysia-airlines-flight-370-no-new-black-box-like-sounds-heard/

So when they first (or subsequently) heard these pings, why does a ship not just park itself above where they are coming from?

The way I understand it, is that the ship is towing a pinger locator. They have to let out a mile worth of cable to get the locator down to the depths that they want. When they hear the signal, they attempt to mark it, real in all of the cable, turn around, and redeploy the locator in hopes of triangulating the location of the ping.

What don't they just mark their location by GPS? Hear a ping, look at your GPS, note the coordinates, turn around, go back to that coordinates, apply some simple math, length of cable, speed of tow, etc........I'm thinking if you can apply math to determine the approximate location where the plane went down and begin your search..it should only get easier from there.

 

[Two Deep]

Search crews hunting for the missing Malaysia Airlines jet have failed to relocate faint sounds heard deep below the southern Indian Ocean that officials said were consistent with a plane's black boxes, the head of the search operation said Tuesday.

Angus Houston, the retired Australian air chief marshal who is heading the search far off Australia's west coast, said sound locating equipment on board the Ocean Shield has picked up no trace of the signals since they were first heard late Saturday and early Sunday.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/malaysia-airlines-flight-370-no-new-black-box-like-sounds-heard/

So when they first (or subsequently) heard these pings, why does a ship not just park itself above where they are coming from?

They most certainly mark the spot with satellite navigation equipment, but the ping can come from any direction around the locator, not just from straight beneath it so it's not that exact.

Correct but if you pick up a ping, what would it hurt to search a 3 mile diameter from that location with a camara sub. You,ve already been wandering around in circles for a month. Start out a 3 miles and spiral on in.

 

[Fat Nick]

I read something about triangulation too, but honestly, that didn't make sense. Why would you need to redeploy or need another ship to triangulate?

Triangulation basically depends on them being able to determine the distance of the ping ( ) from to the locator. They'd then draw a circle around that location with a radius equal to the distance...the ping should be located somewhere along the circumference. The thing is, you should theoretically need 3 points to accurately determine where the ping comes from. 2 points would have 2 possible intersections, but 3 would only have 1.

Here's where I don't understand why you'd need more points for triangulation, and why I don't get why they can't pinpoint from what they've got...99% of the time you hear them talk about triangulation in a situation where there are stationary receivers, and a mobile transmitter (aka 3 cell towers, and a cell phone). In this case, you need 3 towers to pinpoint the cell. In this case, we have the opposite. We have a mobile receiver and a stationary transmitter. Why can't they just use the point where they first detected the signal, the point where they last detected the signal, and a mid-point? Theoretically, that's 3 points of detection. If they knew the distance at each of those 3 points, there'd be no need to redeploy, or need to detect in another area.

So...either this is all just media mumbo-jumbo, or somehow they can't accurately measure the distance, which makes me ask why triangulation is even of concern here...Oy.

Is it stationary? I've wonder this from the beginning. With all the currents and winds in that area, plus the thermal layers, I wonder if a chunk of the plane could be moving around 500 feet below the surface.

The other problem they are dealing with, is the mountainous terrain of the ocean. If the plane is resting on one side of an underwater mountain or canyon, they may not get a signal as they approach from the other side.

I don't know if the information is correct, but someone on CNN reported that sound travels 3x faster underwater? Is that a static number, or does water temp, current, etc change that drastically?

500 feet is minimal. I agree it's 100% possible it's moving some, but likely not much. It likely can move, but you would have to move a lot to impact triangulation that much anyway.

The terrain shouldn't impact triangulation. Picking up the signal, yes, absolutely, but not triangulation. If you can pickup a signal, you can then note the distance from that point to the signal. If you have 3 of those points, you should be able to get a pretty good idea of location. It helps if the 3 points are spread out and on all sides of the object, but even 2 pings a distance apart should help A LOT.

My point is just that if you can pick up a signal for a few hours while moving, I'd think you'd have plenty of time to calculate triangulation via 3 (probably more) points, ASSUMING you can accurately measure the distance from the ping to the receiver, and the location of the receiver at that point in time.

For anybody not familiar with triangulation, this picture should help. Imagine the cell towers as different points in the ocean where the signal was detected, and the radius of the circle as the calculated distance from the receiver to the black box. If you have 2 points (say blue and green) you know the signal is coming from one of two possible intersections. Add a 3rd, and you theoretically can narrow it to only 1 point. Theoretically.

It ALL hinges on how accurately they can measure distance to the source, and how many points they have. I think that if competent people are in command here, 1+ hours of real signal reception would be enough for them to narrow the area to a very very reasonable area.

 

[PatsWillWin]

Bump!

 

[Ursa M]

Bump!

Even the FFA has run out of things to say.

 

[St. Louis Bob]

So I guess since the Chinese and Australians have found pings 200 miles apart, there are actually two planes down there.

Honestly, do you know how many ####### Pings there are in China?

 

[Binky The Doormat]

So I guess since the Chinese and Australians have found pings 200 miles apart, there are actually two planes down there.

Honestly, do you know how many ####### Pings there are in China?

Well I really did laugh out loud.

 

[PatsWillWin]

Bump!

Even the FFA has run out of things to say.

That's been the case since about page 2.

 

[belljr]

So I guess since the Chinese and Australians have found pings 200 miles apart, there are actually two planes down there.

Honestly, do you know how many ####### Pings there are in China?

x23636