If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Slate)   Yo, dawg, I heard you like jets, so I took your Malaysian jet and put it inside another jet   (slate.com) divider line 133
    More: Strange, Malaysia Flight, Malaysia, Singapore Airlines, flights, test pilots  
•       •       •

18014 clicks; posted to Main » on 17 Mar 2014 at 7:01 PM (28 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



133 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-03-17 11:48:59 PM
The most interesting hypothesis yet, courtesy of the adroit Tyler Durden.
 
2014-03-18 12:10:15 AM

DarthBart: JPINFV: So it's like that one scene in Down Periscope?

[galeri5.uludagsozluk.com image 240x316]

This one?


More like Up Periscope amirite?
 
2014-03-18 12:21:07 AM

costermonger: All my experience in formation flying has been in the same type of aircraft as my lead or wing, but I think an airliner in cruise doing pretty much the worst thing (straight, level and fast) a lead could do for the wing to join up short of actually maneuvering to avoid him. Without a bunch of excess speed available, that's going to be a long, slow process.


www.mcchordairmuseum.org
 
2014-03-18 12:21:57 AM

C18H27NO3: DarthBart: JPINFV: So it's like that one scene in Down Periscope?

[galeri5.uludagsozluk.com image 240x316]

This one?

More like Up Periscope amirite?


So you're saying you wouldn't mind if she went down on your periscope?
 
2014-03-18 12:23:47 AM
Look, I know I'm not supposed to tell anyone this, but I know what really happened:

It was Superman.

He'd heard that they were showing Man of Steel as an in-flight movie and just couldn't take it any more. He fried their transponder with his eye beams, then flew the plane under the radar to his fortress of solitude where he could give each passenger of that flight an amnesia kiss. They'll be showing up any day now with only vague recollections of the time since the incident.
 
2014-03-18 12:24:04 AM

clear_prop: The problem is that you can't slow down much altitude to wait for a plane to come by because of the coffin corner. Slow down and stall, or keep your speed and you are going about the same speed as the plane you are waiting for.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coffin_corner_(aviation)

You could do S-turns across the airway waiting for the other plane to catch up, but even then, if you are aiming the wrong way as the plane comes by, good luck catching them. Fighter jets can intercept because they have thrust/speed to spare. Commercial jets not so much.


So, is this like balancing at MCA?  Skirting the Coffin Corner?
 
2014-03-18 12:24:10 AM
Helm match velocity, steady, 150m high and 150m directly behind, steady.
The SIA68/SQ68 cloak is engaged captain.
Helm, well done.
OPS, ETA to way point IGREX?


And now for something nearly different, the recent Airworthiness Directive (3/5/2014) didn't apply to FLT MH370.


 ...
 
2014-03-18 12:27:19 AM

AltheaToldMe: costermonger: All my experience in formation flying has been in the same type of aircraft as my lead or wing, but I think an airliner in cruise doing pretty much the worst thing (straight, level and fast) a lead could do for the wing to join up short of actually maneuvering to avoid him. Without a bunch of excess speed available, that's going to be a long, slow process.

[www.mcchordairmuseum.org image 550x358]


Heh. Yeah, I know ... "excess speed" yadda yadda

photorecon.net
thelexicans.files.wordpress.com
i164.photobucket.com
i164.photobucket.com
 
2014-03-18 12:28:20 AM
Oh, and this is nice

tomdemerly.files.wordpress.com
 
2014-03-18 12:28:58 AM

NkThrasher: And here I was hoping for a knight-rider-in-the-sky theory.


img.fark.net

Still not crazier than the "did flight 370 get hit by a meteor?" story I saw on CNN's page yesterday.
 
2014-03-18 12:31:11 AM

big pig peaches: Why are the pilots even able to turn off the transponders?


Pilots have a lot of control over the plane. You never know what could go wrong, and aviators are more of the "try all sorts of stuff and always have manual controls" type.
 
2014-03-18 12:36:18 AM

Rivetman1.0: big pig peaches: Why are the pilots even able to turn off the transponders?

Because that is how the system is designed.
You doexboyracer: Or hey I am betting you can reconfigure the transponder with a tail number say from a G5 in south america or one that is being painted or in for maint.  You file a flight plan inflight as BillyBob's G5 leaving the Andaman islands across India to one of the 'stans. If the tail number can't be changed from the transponder interface, you buy one like Boeing is using.  Config the transponder with the new tail number and swap the bogus transponder at the proper time.  I believe that most avionics are serviceable from the front side so a swap should not take long.  There you go now you are BillyBobs G5 - it is night - you are only a blip and a voice.  Certainly there is an abandoned strip - it would only have to be 5000' or so long. There are all kinds of sources for used avionics, Trade-A-Plan even Ebay and Amazon (free shippin)

Wow, don't have a clue how the system works eh Bucky?


Totally feasible.
/sarcasm

I think boyracer might not be playing with a full deck.
 
2014-03-18 12:37:21 AM

big pig peaches: Why are the pilots even able to turn off the transponders?


Cause pilots are the people what control the plane....

Seriously,  this comment has been floating around a few days now, and it's just born of shallow thought.  The pilots can turn off the nav lights, the air conditioning, and even the engines themselves, even though none of those would normally be advisable,  because  - they ARE OPERATINIG THE PLANE.  That includes all the systems.

The most practical real reason for control over the transponder is so it doesn't show up on radar while the plane is on the ground.  It normally only gets turned on just before takeoff.
 
2014-03-18 12:49:54 AM
 
2014-03-18 12:53:50 AM
In this day and age you would think there would be something mandatory in all planes that sent out a fairly regular beacon about its location that perhaps engages/disengages when you are above or below ~100' in altitude.

* Not engaged when you're on the ground so you're not adding noise; just starting at 100'.Disengages @ 100' on your way back down because you landed/crashed and ATC, FAA, or whoever knows where.
* Cannot be turned off by anyone except ground personnel in a special manner while the plane is grounded.
* Alerts ATC and pilots if the device does not go off as it should when climbing.

This way you know where the plane is when it went up and when it went down regardless if it landed as expected, crashed, or deviated.
Of course this probably has flaws and in no way helps the current situation.
 
2014-03-18 01:10:41 AM

C18H27NO3: In this day and age you would think there would be something mandatory in all planes that sent out a fairly regular beacon about its location that perhaps engages/disengages when you are above or below ~100' in altitude.


DEN is 5430' above sea level
ORD is 668'  ASL
MIA is 7' 10" ASL
 
2014-03-18 01:45:28 AM

AltheaToldMe: costermonger: All my experience in formation flying has been in the same type of aircraft as my lead or wing, but I think an airliner in cruise doing pretty much the worst thing (straight, level and fast) a lead could do for the wing to join up short of actually maneuvering to avoid him. Without a bunch of excess speed available, that's going to be a long, slow process.

[www.mcchordairmuseum.org image 550x358]


Once you're joined up, you can do whatever both aircraft are capable of. The KC-135 in that picture unquestionably did something to allow the C-17 to join up on it; probably a long turn (it's a lot easier to be precise that way, even if you have the speed to chase down the lead aircraft) and it *is* flying relatively slow compared to what it's capable of, as evidenced by the fact that a C-17 is keeping up.

A 777 is an efficient airplane to fly fast (as all long range heavies tend to be) and they don't exactly make many turns in cruise; if the guy in front is doing mach .84 and you're managing .86 or .87, it's going to take a long time to close any distance in a tail chase.
 
2014-03-18 01:45:38 AM

C18H27NO3: In this day and age you would think there would be something mandatory in all planes that sent out a fairly regular beacon about its location that perhaps engages/disengages when you are above or below ~100' in altitude.

* Not engaged when you're on the ground so you're not adding noise; just starting at 100'.Disengages @ 100' on your way back down because you landed/crashed and ATC, FAA, or whoever knows where.
* Cannot be turned off by anyone except ground personnel in a special manner while the plane is grounded.
* Alerts ATC and pilots if the device does not go off as it should when climbing.

This way you know where the plane is when it went up and when it went down regardless if it landed as expected, crashed, or deviated.
Of course this probably has flaws and in no way helps the current situation.


Airlines *hate* adding hardware that doesn't involve turning a profit.  Every pound of "1 in 100,000,000 odds avoidance" hardware is 1 pound of pax they can't carry or that much more fuel that needs to be burned to go X distance.

And the point about the crew not having access to it doesn't really work out.  The system has to have a circuit breaker for protection and the crew needs to be able to cycle that breaker in the event it trips or the system faults out and needs to be rebooted.

There's already a similar system in place called ADS-B, but not every aircraft is equipped with it and being able to receive the signal is a line-of-sight thing.
 
2014-03-18 01:51:54 AM

C18H27NO3: In this day and age you would think there would be something mandatory in all planes that sent out a fairly regular beacon about its location that perhaps engages/disengages when you are above or below ~100' in altitude.

* Not engaged when you're on the ground so you're not adding noise; just starting at 100'.Disengages @ 100' on your way back down because you landed/crashed and ATC, FAA, or whoever knows where.
* Cannot be turned off by anyone except ground personnel in a special manner while the plane is grounded.
* Alerts ATC and pilots if the device does not go off as it should when climbing.

This way you know where the plane is when it went up and when it went down regardless if it landed as expected, crashed, or deviated.
Of course this probably has flaws and in no way helps the current situation.


There are all kinds of satellite tracking devices you can get, but they're all going to have a circuit breaker. That's kind of a non-negotiable part of system architecture.
 
2014-03-18 02:37:17 AM

rbuzby: I think part if this story is the incompetence of the Malaysian government and it's institutions.  A country with it's shiat together would have probably found the plane by now.


Could this be the simple motive behind the whole thing?  Pilot, outraged because his political idol has been jailed, sets out to make Malaysian government look incompetent?
 
2014-03-18 03:12:26 AM

weemonkey: What? Nooooo, Courtney Love found the plane.

http://blog.sfgate.com/loaded/2014/03/17/courtney-love-claims-to-hav e- found-missing-plane/


Courtney Love didn't find that. Ironically enough she might be following the people that have the best chance of finding the plane if it went down over the water.

That imagery is from Tomnod, DigitalGlobe's crowdsource project. They've released a lot of recent imagery in from their satellites and set the Tomnod community to work on looking for wreckage.

If you like fooling around with GoogleEarth, Tomnod is an awesome way to put that interest to good use. DigitalGlobe releases imagery to the community on a project basis; volunteers have helped count Somali refugee camps and assess damage after natural disaster. It's been a really interesting attempt to solve a classic problem in remote sensing: putting enough analyst's eyes on the imagery that you don't miss anything.

Too much like work work for me to fool around with, but I do appreciate what DigitalGlobe is trying to do with it.
 
2014-03-18 03:22:30 AM
Maybe the plane disappeared from radar because it was surrounded by a swarm of stealth fighters who forced it to land somewhere and jammed the transponder signal
 
2014-03-18 06:51:39 AM

Ring of Fire: I'm thinking one of the pilots incapacitated the other one something in his drink maybe i don't know.  He then turned the plane flew across Malaysia avoiding radar turned north to avoid Indonesian radar.  he then turned it south flew out to the middle of the Indian Ocean and crashed the plane, pilot suicide.  He can explain the the changes of direction by saying we got turbulence up ahead have to make some flight plan adjustments or whatever, I mean is anyone really going to question the captain.  Also it was the middle of the night so not like people could see much outside the window if they were even awake.  By the time anyone noticed anything was up when the sun can up and they were in the middle of the ocean they cant call anyone because I doubt that there is much cell service in the middle of the Indian Ocean.  As for why he wouldn't just crash on the normal flight path, if they cant find the plane they can't prove that he crashed the thing.


Now this theory, I could actually buy.
 
2014-03-18 07:09:45 AM

mikemoto: Ring of Fire: I'm thinking one of the pilots incapacitated the other one something in his drink maybe i don't know.  He then turned the plane flew across Malaysia avoiding radar turned north to avoid Indonesian radar.  he then turned it south flew out to the middle of the Indian Ocean and crashed the plane, pilot suicide.  He can explain the the changes of direction by saying we got turbulence up ahead have to make some flight plan adjustments or whatever, I mean is anyone really going to question the captain.  Also it was the middle of the night so not like people could see much outside the window if they were even awake.  By the time anyone noticed anything was up when the sun can up and they were in the middle of the ocean they cant call anyone because I doubt that there is much cell service in the middle of the Indian Ocean.  As for why he wouldn't just crash on the normal flight path, if they cant find the plane they can't prove that he crashed the thing.

Now this theory, I could actually buy.



Jesus Christ, this is another horrible theory to buy into.  Why pull a bunch of maneuvers if you don't want to live anyway?  Pilots who suicide just do it, they point the nose at the ground.  They don't fly around all day first.
 
2014-03-18 07:47:05 AM

Daedalus27: Remember, it is a big ass sky out there and finding another jet to tail and getting close enough to mask radar signature isn't something anyone could count on.


clear_prop: The hardest part is finding the other plane and joining up.


It could be done.

If there was a confederate aboard the plane you wanted to track, he could have something as simple as a ham radio squawking out the planes position every so often. It could be on any frequency.

It's actually fairly easy technology to master, called APRS.

Alternatively, I presume normal commercial planes are squawking out their position anyway, you could have a passive system capturing that information (I don't know enough about that system to comment further).
 
2014-03-18 10:56:09 AM

stonelotus: [i1207.photobucket.com image 670x279]


Bane: They will see the wreckage and think everyone died in a plane crash
Other guy: And they will just assume the plane flew 10 miles without any wings?
 
2014-03-18 11:00:22 AM
media.desura.com
Om nom nom.

www.aviationspectator.com
We are one Supper Guppy away from avionic turducken.
 
2014-03-18 04:48:28 PM

jmayson: big pig peaches: Why are the pilots even able to turn off the transponders?

So they can fly undetected, duh!

Supposedly it's in case of fire or some other emergency they can shut down the electrical equipment.


From what I've read, the transponder is used mainly over land or near airports. Found this earlier:

"When the Malaysia plane disappeared, it was over the ocean, so the transponder wasn't useful anyway - it was well out of range of the ground radar systems it uses to communicate. But if someone brought the plane back to land and wanted to keep it hidden, he would have to disable the transponder."
 
2014-03-18 05:47:51 PM

imtheonlylp: jmayson: big pig peaches: Why are the pilots even able to turn off the transponders?

So they can fly undetected, duh!

Supposedly it's in case of fire or some other emergency they can shut down the electrical equipment.

From what I've read, the transponder is used mainly over land or near airports. Found this earlier:

"When the Malaysia plane disappeared, it was over the ocean, so the transponder wasn't useful anyway - it was well out of range of the ground radar systems it uses to communicate. But if someone brought the plane back to land and wanted to keep it hidden, he would have to disable the transponder."


This article suggests that an aircraft's TCAS system can be used over long ocean stretches and works by actively querying other transponders.

http://mh370shadow.com/post/79838944823/did-malaysian-airlines-370-d is appear-using-sia68-sq68

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_collision_avoidance_system

TCAS involves communication between all aircraft equipped with an appropriate transponder (provided the transponder is enabled and set up properly). Each TCAS-equipped aircraft interrogates all other aircraft in a determined range about their position (via the 1,030 MHz radio frequency), and all other aircraft reply to other interrogations (via 1,090 MHz). This interrogation-and-response cycle may occur several times per second.
 
2014-03-18 07:43:58 PM

Cerebral Ballsy: mikemoto: Ring of Fire: I'm thinking one of the pilots incapacitated the other one something in his drink maybe i don't know.  He then turned the plane flew across Malaysia avoiding radar turned north to avoid Indonesian radar.  he then turned it south flew out to the middle of the Indian Ocean and crashed the plane, pilot suicide.  He can explain the the changes of direction by saying we got turbulence up ahead have to make some flight plan adjustments or whatever, I mean is anyone really going to question the captain.  Also it was the middle of the night so not like people could see much outside the window if they were even awake.  By the time anyone noticed anything was up when the sun can up and they were in the middle of the ocean they cant call anyone because I doubt that there is much cell service in the middle of the Indian Ocean.  As for why he wouldn't just crash on the normal flight path, if they cant find the plane they can't prove that he crashed the thing.

Now this theory, I could actually buy.


Jesus Christ, this is another horrible theory to buy into.  Why pull a bunch of maneuvers if you don't want to live anyway?  Pilots who suicide just do it, they point the nose at the ground.  They don't fly around all day first.


Hmm, since you seem to know the psychology of suicidal pilots so well, remind not to fly with you.
 
2014-03-18 09:41:18 PM

MythDragon: [media.desura.com image 850x637]
Om nom nom.

[www.aviationspectator.com image 500x333]
We are one Supper Guppy away from avionic turducken.


I don't know why,
but I had to do this!

lh4.googleusercontent.com
 
2014-03-18 10:37:52 PM

ADHD Librarian: MythDragon: [media.desura.com image 850x637]
Om nom nom.

[www.aviationspectator.com image 500x333]
We are one Supper Guppy away from avionic turducken.

I don't know why,
but I had to do this!


Okay, that's worth the ticket to hell. Hopefully not on Malaysian Airlines.
 
2014-03-18 10:49:51 PM

ADHD Librarian: I don't know why,


Because you are a God among men.
 
Displayed 33 of 133 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report