Will they find the plane this weekend?

[LuvThemDogs]

You know what, I apologized for that already but only as it applies to your friend. You stated that it happened, the news did not, moron.

Listen jackass. Why don't you show me exactly where I said that the Acars were turned off manually and that I was implying that it was MY FUCKING OPINION and not a news report that I was citing......

 

[fatdaddycool]

Doesn't really help. And I disagree. First. My good friend flies Boeings for UPS. He said the fire is not probable. Way too many flaws for it to have been a fire. There are several modes/ways to alert air traffic control that there is a may day event.

The plane was "programmed" to make the hard turn. That would have taken time and ability to pull off and a pilot, more than likely had to reprogram the computer to make the change in flight. If they had that kind of capability, they had the capability to relay a distress signal, esp with the amount of time involved.

CNN just said there are several bells and alarms that go off in case of a fire. ACARS would have sent back many alerts to air traffic control. None was sent. A distress signal from the pilot could easily had been sent out. None was sent. CNN also just completely refuted the fire theory. Not one blip of a distress was sent out. Not a button pushed. Not a word.

The plane has more than one transponders and it has been proven that they were all pulled offline at different times and intervals. 3 separate times to be exact. A person had to go into the belly of the plane to turn one of them off. That was done.

It's also been released that the plane went to a very high altitude and then back down to a much lower altitude. Given credence that it was NOT on autopilot. It also did not go in a straight line after making the hard turn.

If the pilots were looking for the nearest air strip, they passed up several and made turns after passing them up. Meaning that someone had control of the plane well after the point at which you think there was a fire.

Not seeing the fire theory. It's a small possibility, but not probable....

No mention of news reports, just you saying that it happened.

 

[LuvThemDogs]

Doesn't really help. And I disagree. First. My good friend flies Boeings for UPS. He said the fire is not probable. Way too many flaws for it to have been a fire. There are several modes/ways to alert air traffic control that there is a may day event.

The plane was "programmed" to make the hard turn. That would have taken time and ability to pull off and a pilot, more than likely had to reprogram the computer to make the change in flight. If they had that kind of capability, they had the capability to relay a distress signal, esp with the amount of time involved.

CNN just said there are several bells and alarms that go off in case of a fire. ACARS would have sent back many alerts to air traffic control. None was sent. A distress signal from the pilot could easily had been sent out. None was sent. CNN also just completely refuted the fire theory. Not one blip of a distress was sent out. Not a button pushed. Not a word.

The plane has more than one transponders and it has been proven that they were all pulled offline at different times and intervals. 3 separate times to be exact. A person had to go into the belly of the plane to turn one of them off. That was done.

It's also been released that the plane went to a very high altitude and then back down to a much lower altitude. Given credence that it was NOT on autopilot. It also did not go in a straight line after making the hard turn.

If the pilots were looking for the nearest air strip, they passed up several and made turns after passing them up. Meaning that someone had control of the plane well after the point at which you think there was a fire.

Not seeing the fire theory. It's a small possibility, but not probable....

I'm sorry if you don't comprehend attribution....I had no idea whether that was something that could or couldn't be done! I don't fly them, nor do I work on them.

 

[LuvThemDogs]

No mention of news reports, just you saying that it happened.

CNN did a 10 minute segment, with a pilot and a plane rep, on how a person has to go below the flight deck and turn Acars off manually. They showed the entire system and diagrammed it step by step showing all of control panel and what each switch, including the pull on and off switch of Acars. They also said that no pilot would go in there unless he was wanting to turn Acars off specifically. Purposely.....

 

[fatdaddycool]

Yeah. Still doesn't help. Gonna still disagree with you on several points. Let's just take the most simplest one for you at this point. The plane was programmed to make the hard left turn and that had to be done by a human being. It is NOT a simple one click. It is several and they went over every step in that process. THEY KNOW IT WAS PROGRAMMED ON THE COMPUTER. Geezus. The plane wouldn't make the hard left turn on its own. The guy who trains for Boeing stated it's more than just one click. It is now reported that the plane was programmed to make that turn, 12 MINUTES before the pilot came on and said, "alright, good night." 12 full minutes went by. Sit in your house for 12 minutes. It's a long friggin' time. There are only 2 reasons the pilot programmed that computer to make the hard left turn. 1. Because the plane is in distress. 2. Because of sabotage. If it was in a distress mode, he had 12 minutes to tell the air traffic control the plane was in some kind of trouble. And instead he says, "alright, good night." Case closed for the fire theory!

And I would sure as fuck trust my friend, who flew F/18's for the navy and now flies Boeings for UPS, over anyone. ANYONE! He did not say someone went into the bay to turn off acars. The news has been saying the acars were turned off manually. Meaning more than likely someone went down into the bay and turned them off. And that if it hadn't been turned off, it would have sent out several alerts about a fire or excess heat that a fire would cause to RR. Even if they weren't subscribed.

Now. Would the plane have been taken to 45k feet had the pilots been knocked unconscious by smoke inhalation on its own? And then back down to 23k feet? Highly unlikely. They have reported the plane making moves and not flying on a straight line. Could that have been done on autopilot? Highly unlikely. The fact that it pinged in different positions from the straight line and the satellite data showed it in different positions, says it didn't fly in a straight line.

And here it is right before you tell me what services the ACARS system would have done, which was also incorrect as the plane was too far off land for the ACARS to send a damn thing. Acars sends messages to ground using VHF ground transceivers and when out to sea or more than 200 miles or so from one of these transceivers they become ineffective and have to use satellite communication. The plane would have had to ping through Imersat or whatever satellite antenna and system they were using and it would have to be within range at that time for ACARS to send a damn thing. There is a lot more to the system and it's capabilities and restrictions than the media is reporting.

 

[LuvThemDogs]

Yeah. Still doesn't help. Gonna still disagree with you on several points. Let's just take the most simplest one for you at this point. The plane was programmed to make the hard left turn and that had to be done by a human being. It is NOT a simple one click. It is several and they went over every step in that process. THEY KNOW IT WAS PROGRAMMED ON THE COMPUTER. Geezus. The plane wouldn't make the hard left turn on its own. The guy who trains for Boeing stated it's more than just one click. It is now reported that the plane was programmed to make that turn, 12 MINUTES before the pilot came on and said, "alright, good night." 12 full minutes went by. Sit in your house for 12 minutes. It's a long friggin' time. There are only 2 reasons the pilot programmed that computer to make the hard left turn. 1. Because the plane is in distress. 2. Because of sabotage. If it was in a distress mode, he had 12 minutes to tell the air traffic control the plane was in some kind of trouble. And instead he says, "alright, good night." Case closed for the fire theory!

And I would sure as fuck trust my friend, who flew F/18's for the navy and now flies Boeings for UPS, over anyone. ANYONE! He did not say someone went into the bay to turn off acars. The news has been saying the acars were turned off manually. Meaning more than likely someone went down into the bay and turned them off. And that if it hadn't been turned off, it would have sent out several alerts about a fire or excess heat that a fire would cause to RR. Even if they weren't subscribed.

Now. Would the plane have been taken to 45k feet had the pilots been knocked unconscious by smoke inhalation on its own? And then back down to 23k feet? Highly unlikely. They have reported the plane making moves and not flying on a straight line. Could that have been done on autopilot? Highly unlikely. The fact that it pinged in different positions from the straight line and the satellite data showed it in different positions, says it didn't fly in a straight line.

At the risk of sounding repetitive.....Sorry you don't comprehend attribution!

 

[airportis]

You stated, "by people that actually know their shit". I know exactly what you meant and exactly who you meant it for. You won't admit that and I don't expect you too but we both know what you meant and it sure as hell wasn't about those good people in the field working for a solution.

seriously, what is wrong with you? if i wanted to direct something at you id quote one of your posts, like this. if i wanted to direct it towards someone else, id quote their post. my post was very simple and had no hidden meanings to decipher.

you turn something like this into a name calling battle of who knows more about airplanes. its like seriously, get a fucking grip man. youre even arguing with me over a post that wasnt even directed directly towards you, just the arguing in general over a tragedy that NOBODY knows what happened.

 

[gardenweasel]

for any other novices(like myself) out there that find this fascinating and want to follow what some of the pros are thinking and asking this site`s pretty good(some of it`s a little deep in the weeds but it`s still pretty interesting).....theres a decent timeline at the 18:30 mark/post....

http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/535538-malaysian-airlines-mh370-contact-lost-290.html#post8386068

 

[fatdaddycool]

CNN did a 10 minute segment, with a pilot and a plane rep, on how a person has to go below the flight deck and turn Acars off manually. They showed the entire system and diagrammed it step by step showing all of control panel and what each switch, including the pull on and off switch of Acars. They also said that no pilot would go in there unless he was wanting to turn Acars off specifically. Purposely.....

And I'm telling you with 100% certainty that acars can be disabled by pulling the circuit breaker on the pilots overhead panel. I have personally done this over a thousand times in my career.

 

[fatdaddycool]

At the risk of sounding repetitive.....Sorry you don't comprehend attribution!

Dude, your the one that decided to explain the meaning of turning off manually. That's not attribution at all now is it?

 

[gardenweasel]

Payne Stewart ... he flew thru my brothers airspace in Memphis (air traffic controller) when everyone was long dead ... he had to track it to make sure it wasnt going to crash in residential area or they were gonna have to shoot it out of the air :scared

and no one answered my cell phones question :facepalm:

my brother...check this out....that site i posted had someone ask the same thing....apparently it was an excellent question....

http://www.geofffox.com/MT/archives/2014/03/15/why-cell-phones-dont-work-well-from-the-air.php

 

[LuvThemDogs]

Dude, your the one that decided to explain the meaning of turning off manually. That's not attribution at all now is it?

First of all. It's "you're." Not "your." See, I can go on and on about useless shit I know too. Secondly, everything I stated was with a news attribution. If you want to attribute it to me, go right ahead. I pointed out all the attribution in every paragraph I wrote. Next time I'll make that clearer for you since this seems to be eating at your very sole.....



And...From the NY Times on Monday. It's ALL from the NY Times. None of my opinion. Does that help ya?



But Ahmad Jauhari Yahya, the chief executive of Malaysia Airlines, clarified at a news conference early Monday evening that the communications system, known as an Aircraft Communications Addressing and Reporting System, had worked normally at 1:07 but then failed to send its next regularly scheduled update at 1:37 a.m.

?We don?t know when the Acars system was switched off,? he said.



Flight 370?s Flight Management System reported its status to the Acars, which in turn transmitted information back to a maintenance base, according to an American official. This shows that the reprogramming happened before the Acars stopped working. The Acars ceased to function about the same time that oral radio contact was lost and the airplane?s transponder also stopped, fueling suspicions that foul play was involved in the plane?s disappearance.

 

[fatdaddycool]

First of all. It's "you're." Not "your." See, I can go on and on about useless shit I know too. Secondly, everything I stated was with a news attribution. If you want to attribute it to me, go right ahead. I pointed out all the attribution in every paragraph I wrote. Next time I'll make that clearer for you since this seems to be eating at your very sole.....



And...From the NY Times on Monday. It's ALL from the NY Times. None of my opinion. Does that help ya?



But Ahmad Jauhari Yahya, the chief executive of Malaysia Airlines, clarified at a news conference early Monday evening that the communications system, known as an Aircraft Communications Addressing and Reporting System, had worked normally at 1:07 but then failed to send its next regularly scheduled update at 1:37 a.m.

?We don?t know when the Acars system was switched off,? he said.



Flight 370?s Flight Management System reported its status to the Acars, which in turn transmitted information back to a maintenance base, according to an American official. This shows that the reprogramming happened before the Acars stopped working. The Acars ceased to function about the same time that oral radio contact was lost and the airplane?s transponder also stopped, fueling suspicions that foul play was involved in the plane?s disappearance.

It's soul not sole.

 

[dunclock]

my brother...check this out....that site i posted had someone ask the same thing....apparently it was an excellent question....

http://www.geofffox.com/MT/archives/2014/03/15/why-cell-phones-dont-work-well-from-the-air.php

thanks bud .... ... I understand about being at high altitude no signal as I have been up in the mountains where it was above cell coverage ... but what about after the "7 hours" the plane was in the air?

IF and thats one of the big questions IF the plan landed ... why wouldnt phones be able to be pinged for location?

I am guessing if they were under the sea then they wouldnt be able to get signals?

just havent heard much of this angle

 

[LuvThemDogs]

It's soul not sole.

You mean....."It's soul, not sole."

 

[fatdaddycool]

You mean....."It's soul, not sole."

Nope.

 

[yyz]

Now THAT is a desk worth posting on Madjack's, Jon!

 

[hedman]

 

[The Joker]

 

[layinwood]

I know this is on most peoples favorite news station but it is information so thought I would share. I thought a few things were interesting. One is that Boeing said they thought the plane was in Pakistan and the other is that the US called off it's search in the Indian Ocean. I had read that but didn't put two and two together.

http://foxnewsinsider.com/2014/03/18/lt-gen-mcinerney-flight-370-could-have-landed-pakistan