Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Dillon

Malaysian Flight 370

Recommended Posts

I'm still left with the question of why the pilots would choose to fly west, if their home base was to the south..

 

Even with marginal controls, you would think that they would head home..

maybe to a closer airfield, if there was one. you wouldnt worry about a "manned station" (one that has contracted engineering) you would just get the thing down. 


 
 
 
 
14ppkc-6.png
  913456

Share this post


Link to post

Is the FO typically the person who programs the FMC?  Or is this a traded duty?

 

Exodus,

 

They seemed to have confirmed that the F/O made the last transmission. This normally means he is acting in the role of PM (Pilot Monitoring)

 

Roles are generally switched depending on who is flying the aircraft, walk around, programing the FMC, adjust the MCP etc..

 

 Culture & airline SOP also dictate how things work so nothing is set in stone.

 

Either way, one guy programs, the other must verify. It is all about working as a team.

 

Regards


Rob Prest

 

Share this post


Link to post

ATC of Makaysia directing pilots to contact Vietnam ATC. Thus Goodnight. Normal as far as I am concerned.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/03/17/lawmaker-missing-airliner-may-have-landed-in-southeast-asia-for-use-as-weapon/

 

 

Then this: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/20/passengers-terrified-fires-lit-etihad-airways-flight-australia

 

A fire could have been used to negotiate the pilots opening the cockpit door.

 

 

the atc handover one Ill go for, 

 

the second one depends on the situation. Im an ops guy, not flight deck, but at the end of the day you would probably wouldnt not open the door, you would try your best to  get it down. 


 
 
 
 
14ppkc-6.png
  913456

Share this post


Link to post

Is the FO typically the person who programs the FMC? Or is this a traded duty?

From what I have learned is that FMC route programming is done by the PNF/PM (pilot not flying=Airbus term / pilot monitoring=Boeing term) . The PF (pilot flying) would meanwhile make e.g. the walk around and later on the more performance related FMC inputs. So PNF/PM is more the navigator and communicator, while PF is responsible for flying the A/C and controlling the A/P.

In the case of MH370 the F/O, who is reported to have made the ATC communication, was the PM and so was (more) responsible for the FMC routing. 

 

 

It's been consistently reported that the last words transmitted from the cockpit were "Alright. Good night."

It is just saying "good bye" to the controller from station A before switching the frequency to say "hello" to the controller from station B. Nothing suspicious about that. But this "hello" obviously never happend (Its like saying "good bye" after a phone call. In busy ATC areas and/or during rush hours it may be left away though.)

EDIT: while "alright" would only be the confirmation of the station and frequency change transmitted by station A: "MH370, (please) contact (now) "Thailand Center" on (frequency) 123.45. (Good bye and good night!)"

 

I'm still left with the question of why the pilots would choose to fly west, if their home base was to the south..

Even with marginal controls, you would think that they would head home..

Probably they headed more westerly to George Town Air Base which is also located at the shore and so would be "easy" to find during the night.

 

Greetings,

Claus

Share this post


Link to post

I am watching the news now and they just said that the turn west the plane made was pre programed into the flight computer. Is this possible? Can they know this? Can someone at Malaysian Airlines know the flight computer was pre programed?

 

 

at my airline, the minute the guys enter into the fmgs/fmc an alternate airport in flight when they are diverting the a/c sends us an acars to our ops centre with 10 secs, so long as theres HF coverage.  

 

The flight crew will then send a preset "msg to ops" and advise us the nature of the divert, 9 times out of 10 a medical or weather, and where they plan to divert to.

 

This enables us to contact that airport for handing, fuel and medical or police etc etc etc. Its very rare theres no HF  so we normally always know if it diverted  or off course etc etc (over morroco and egypt we have issues) and I imagine the HF and VHF is crap in that neck of the woods.  

Exodus,

 

They seemed to have confirmed that the F/O made the last transmission. This normally means he is acting in the role of PM (Pilot Monitoring)

 

Roles are generally switched depending on who is flying the aircraft, walk around, programing the FMC, adjust the MCP etc..

 

 Culture & airline SOP also dictate how things work so nothing is set in stone.

 

Either way, one guy programs, the other must very. It is all about working as a team.

 

Regards

 

correct rob beat me to it

 

 

My money and, nearly everyone in my airline ops, and theres 160 of us. (so thats qualified engineers, flight planners, dispatchers, and drivers who come and see us to get the flightplans etc) all go for the decompression/explosion and divert that went wrong idea.  It seems to be unqualified looneys that are going for the "its been stolen idea" 

I'm still left with the question of why the pilots would choose to fly west, if their home base was to the south..

 

Even with marginal controls, you would think that they would head home..

 

also Bert, airports have fire category's.  For example, some airlines have to be cat 7 fire approved, some cat 6.  Depending on the size of your aircraft.

 

if your a/c is on fire its great to be able to divert quickly but you need the fire service to be up and about with more than a fire bucket to put you out if your on fire.  this is one of the reasons BGBW in Greenland cant be used as an enroute alternate for most commercial jets, you'd get it in there ok, but they wouldnt be able to put you out.

 

This is also an issue with alot of African airports to be used as en route alternates.  

 

Not sure what category the military base was which a post said earlier one, id have to look it up


 
 
 
 
14ppkc-6.png
  913456

Share this post


Link to post

at my airline, the minute the guys enter into the fmgs/fmc an alternate airport in flight when they are diverting the a/c sends us an acars to our ops centre with 10 secs, so long as theres HF coverage.

Just to make sure I understand (forgive my stupidity), if the FMC is re-programmed, the moment the new route is activated, the aircraft automatically transmits this info? I was wondering how they could tell a turn was the result of a programmed FMC as opposed to just changing heading - I guess this explains it.


Brian Johnson


i9-9900K (OC 5.0), ASUS ROG Maximus XI Hero Z390, Nvidia 2080Ti, 32 GB Corsair Vengeance 3000MHz, OS on Samsung 860 EVO 1TB M.2, P3D on SanDisk Ultra 3D NAND 2TB SSD
 

Share this post


Link to post

Further info suggesting political/media obfuscation for the sake of headlines and face-saving:

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/18/world/asia/malaysia-airlines-flight.html?hp

 

Remember how long it took the Japanese government to acknowledge anything was happening at Tepco?

 

Seems the worse the crisis, the more a smoke-cloud is spread about what's going on.

 

I won't theorize, but I highly suspect sudden decompression. Why, is the concerning thing; the 777 does not have a history of any such unreliability.

 

But, I leave it up to Boeing, and the relevant experts in a highly complex analysis field to speculate any further, and investigate.

 

Eventually we'll know, or not. Time to move on to other subjects.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

This guy Chris Goodfellow has written a good piece saying it was likely a fire on board and the pilots pulled the busses which disabled the transponders and were trying to make it to Pulau Langkawi. This theory paints the flight crew as heroes, which is something many seem to be overlooking. Have a quick read:

 

https://plus.google.com/106271056358366282907/posts/GoeVjHJaGBz

  • Upvote 1

Matthew Kane

 

Share this post


Link to post

That theory was maybe valid for the first 24 hours after the plane went missing. Now it doesn't match up with any of the facts.

Share this post


Link to post

My money and, nearly everyone in my airline ops, and theres 160 of us. (so thats qualified engineers, flight planners, dispatchers, and drivers who come and see us to get the flightplans etc) all go for the decompression/explosion and divert that went wrong idea.

 

+1; would make (until now) the most sense overall

 

 

Not sure what category the military base was which a post said earlier one, id have to look it up

 

The military WMKB "RMAF Butterworth" (2438m RWY) is close to Penang Intl (WMKP, 3338m RWY). I would prefer the more rural military base for an intended force or even crash landing. Penang as an Intl Airport has probably the better fire fighters, but it is almost surrounded by housings...

I don't know if you have read my post on "page 10", but I would be interested to hear from your side the possibility of this theory:

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/436839-malaysian-flight-370/page-10#entry2945078

 

Greetings,

Claus

Share this post


Link to post

That theory was maybe valid for the first 24 hours after the plane went missing. Now it doesn't match up with any of the facts.

 

There's been so much speculation and innuendo that it's becoming harder and harder to separate fact from fiction.


COSIMbanner_AVSIM3.jpg

Share this post


Link to post

That theory was maybe valid for the first 24 hours after the plane went missing. Now it doesn't match up with any of the facts.

 

I disagree, I still see it as plausible if it was a tyre fire and they were aiming for this airport and were incapacitated and the aircraft continued after they were knocked out. A tyre fire just might smoulder enough to produce a lot of smoke threatening life on board, but not hot enough to bring down a 777.

 

It is just another possibility is all and refreshing to look at a positive theory rather then looking at all of the negative ones.


Matthew Kane

 

Share this post


Link to post

it was likely a fire on board and the pilots pulled the busses which disabled the transponders and were trying to make it to Pulau Langkawi.

I just read the article you mentioned. Nose wheel well fire, fire caused by electronics, circuit breaker pulling and location of alternate are good points. High terrain avoidance would also be a concern for the crew, but actually the Malaysian main insula and the smaller ones can almost all be called mountainous, especially "Pulau Langkawi".

The author didn't know about the now reported frequent climbs (FL450) and descends (FL230). So he did not integrate it in his theory.

But I totally agree, too. Diversion after fire/decompression...

Greetings,

Claus

Share this post


Link to post

I think Bill's point about what was the actual conversation that ended with "Alright" Goodnight" is pertinant.

What was alright? What tone of voice was used? Of course he should have signed off with the callsign, but if there was some kind of emergency unfolding the PO would clearly be distracted by that especially as he was new. So the lack of callsign acknowledgement could be explained.

 

So many aviation accidents have started with something small developing into a disaster.

This accident in spite of the media and officials seemingly pushing the hjijacking theory could still be explained by on board failures. If there was a fire in the avionics bay then that could 'turn off' the transponder and also the radio. Having said that a fire on board would spread very quickly. It could be nothing but overheating due to fan failure. Or again as has been said a smouldering fire producing mostly smoke but hot enough to trip the CBs. Again one is conjecturing. They could have eventually put it out by which time most of the a/c systems were shot.

 

The other 'report' of the a/c see-sawing up to FL450 is also a bit strange. As far as I'm aware the operational ceiling for the 777 is FL430. So if there was still a lot of fuel on board and being full of pax and cargo it would have taken quite an effort to get to that height. So it's more likely (if true) that that was unplanned.  I think they may have had some kind of systems failure and eventually got disorientated which is very easy at night. The fuel ran out and down they went.

 

Some years ago an Alitalia Airbus flight returning across the Atlantic on a night flight lost all power in the cockpit. A Complete blackout. They had to do everything  by torch light. It took more than 15 minutes to restore power and then they had to re-programme everything. They were lucky. Had that continued they probably would not have made it.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
×
×
  • Create New...