- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Official Thread: Missing Malaysia Airlines Flight 370
Posted on 3/9/14 at 1:51 pm to siliconvalleytiger
Posted on 3/9/14 at 1:51 pm to siliconvalleytiger
It could have been on someone's radar, but you also have to think, at that time no one was looking for it. Also, I'm willing to bet airports don't have the manpower to track each and every planes flight path. As soon as the plane didn't report at a certain point, that's when they started looking. Anything could've happened, and it could've happened anywhere from the last place they communicated. It's honestly a crazy situation no one will have the answer to, unless they find most if the wreckage
1
Posted on 3/9/14 at 1:51 pm to siliconvalleytiger
quote:
This is a big part of the question. I'm told the 777 has multiple location tracking mechanisms. And not just the transponder. Is this correct?
Not sure. This plane was more than 10 years old, have no idea what kind of tracking they would have outside of primary and secondary, or radio contact
Here's a link that may help.
LINK
Posted on 3/9/14 at 1:52 pm to RogerTheShrubber
I think North Korea did it, and China is covering for them.
Posted on 3/9/14 at 1:53 pm to siliconvalleytiger
They also have GPS, but no matter what it has, once those systems are turned off, you won't see it again.
Posted on 3/9/14 at 1:54 pm to JAXTiger16
quote:
Anything in the world can be detected by radar, bc the radar transmitter is sending the signal and it reflects off the object and comes back to the receiver
LINK
All radar has a finite range, to extend the range of air traffic control radar a system was developed called "secondary radar surveillance", it works the same as IFF. Beyond a certain distance, the primary radar reflections will be too weak to be usable, but the primary signal reaching the plane will still be enough to cause the onboard transponder to identify. The transponder then transmits a signal of much higher strength than that of a primary radar reflection greatly extending the range a plane can be tracked. However, if the plane is out of range of primary radar, and has some type of system failure that takes out the transponder, it can "disappear" from radar.
P
This post was edited on 3/9/14 at 2:25 pm
Posted on 3/9/14 at 1:57 pm to EA6B
quote:
All radar has a finite range, to extend the range of air traffic control radar a system was developed called "secondary radar surveillance", it works the same as IFF. Beyond a certain distance the primary radar reflections will be too weak be usable, but the primary signal reaching the plane will still be enough to cause the onboard transponder to identify. The transponder then transmits a signal of much higher strength than that of a primary radar reflection greatly extending the range a plane can be tracked. However, if the plane is out of range of primary radar, and has some type of system failure takes out the transponder, it can "disappear" from radar.
Thanks. I couldn't explain it nearly as well.
Posted on 3/9/14 at 1:59 pm to EA6B
We understand that radar has a limited range. That wasn't the point I was trying to make. I was saying that would be the only method if it lost comms and other systems.
Posted on 3/9/14 at 1:59 pm to EA6B
Thanks for the explanation. I learned something new on TD today. 
Posted on 3/9/14 at 2:00 pm to RogerTheShrubber
Two different points of view in this quote but tied to the questions we're all asking
LINK
quote:
"If it was a catastrophic event at cruise altitude, the debris field would be hard to detect. In theory, there would be no large sections of the airplane left intact," said Jonathan Galaviz, a partner with Global Market Advisors, an aviation and leisure consulting firm.
"Never have I seen an aircraft losing control and losing all communication," said Mark Martin of aviation consultancy Martin Consulting. Even in the crash of an Air France flight in the Atlantic Ocean off Argentina in 2009, the emergency beacon directed rescuers to the site of impact, though strong currents dispersed the debris across a wide area.
LINK
Posted on 3/9/14 at 2:17 pm to siliconvalleytiger
LINK
quote:
Vietnamese air rescue crews spotted floating fragments in the South China Sea on Sunday that they suspect may be debris from the missing Malaysia Airlines Flight 370.
Vietnam’s ministry of information and communication said it had located fragments of an inner door and part of the plane’s tail, about 50 miles south-southwest of Tho Chu Island, the Wall Street Journal reports. It released a photograph purportedly showing a piece of debris.
quote:
The Malaysian air force did not say which direction the plane turned when it supposedly went off course or how long it flew in a new direction, but air force chief Rodzali Daud did say that evidence from military radar “in some parts” was “corroborated by civilian radar,” the Associated Press reports.
quote:
The unusual circumstances of the disappearance—the weather was mild, the plane was cruising, and the pilots had no time to send a distress signal—have led some experts to suspect foul play, even as authorities continue to search for the remains of the plane.
This post was edited on 3/9/14 at 2:18 pm
Posted on 3/9/14 at 2:25 pm to RogerTheShrubber
Yep, I posted that picture earlier today. I'm thinking this is it.
Posted on 3/9/14 at 2:27 pm to siliconvalleytiger
They seem to be pretty sure it's aircraft parts.
Posted on 3/9/14 at 2:28 pm to RogerTheShrubber
What about that pilot in the area that claimed to have made garbled, unintelligible radio contact with the plane?
Posted on 3/9/14 at 2:30 pm to Dead Mike
quote:
What about that pilot in the area that claimed to have made garbled, unintelligible radio contact with the plane?
Believe that was discredited at some point.
Posted on 3/9/14 at 2:36 pm to JAXTiger16
quote:
Yes, as far as I know. We do things a little different in the military. I'm not sure if they have long range radios or not.
All U.S. based planes that fly transcontinental routes have HF (long range) radios in addition to the the usual VHF comm radios. Almost all of the U.S. manufactured planes that are sold to foreign operators have HF comm radios since they usually operate routes that are beyond the range of VHF. I have no clue if anybody today is using some type of SATCOM for any of this.
Posted on 3/9/14 at 3:00 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
But these weren't fake passports. They were stolen.
And would have had to have been altered if they weren't used by the people who they were issued for. Call it "real" passports all you want, but it's still fraud.
Posted on 3/9/14 at 3:36 pm to TheIndulger
quote:
If you think the plane crashing doesn't add up, what do you think happened then?
This post was edited on 3/9/14 at 3:42 pm
Posted on 3/9/14 at 4:05 pm to JAXTiger16
quote:
It could have been on someone's radar, but you also have to think, at that time no one was looking for it.
Just absolutely no way any atc doesn't notice every plane on his radar. They all have an airline code and flight number. It could be disastrous to not notice. Guaranteed 100 percent if it showed up on radar someone would see it AND try to contact it. And yes, every single flight has a flight plan and is tracked. You can't just land wherever you want whenever you want outside of a declared emergency and I think that would be made public immediately.
Posted on 3/9/14 at 5:13 pm to TigerStripes06
now suggesting the plane broke up in midair.
That cannot be true for it should lead to a massive debris field in the ocean or across land.
The only plausible thought to me is that it entered the ocean intact and going in at a near 90 degree angle.
That cannot be true for it should lead to a massive debris field in the ocean or across land.
The only plausible thought to me is that it entered the ocean intact and going in at a near 90 degree angle.
Posted on 3/9/14 at 5:44 pm to East Coast Band
quote:From what I've read, it sounds like it would be much easier to find a plane that crashed into the ocean intact, rather than one that broke up mid-air. That goes against what I would expect, but that's what I've read (I think).
now suggesting the plane broke up in midair.
That cannot be true for it should lead to a massive debris field in the ocean or across land.
Page 16 of 375
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News