• After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.

Malaysia Airlines tragedies

You'd think the planes themselves would have some sort of always-on GPS transmitters so the airlines that owns the planes would always know where they all are at any given moment. I want to say I'm being too simplistic, but if they had them, there'd be no mystery here... they obviously don't.

Think that's what ADS-B (think that's what it's called) is supposed to be
 
Upvote 0
Think that's what ADS-B (think that's what it's called) is supposed to be

Yeh that's it I think. Only thing is radio doesn't transmit very well underwater. The flight recorders do have radio locators on them as well as acoustic sonar location for when they're submerged, but only has a very limited range and works for about 30 days I believe.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EarlyMon
Upvote 0
With all the spy satellites in space you'd think that these type of events were a thing of the past. Sorry, no disrespect to anyone but I smell cover up. To much much time has past to still not have any answers.

It took them five days to find the remains of Air France 447, by which time most of it had sunk, and two years to fully establish what went wrong, which was pilot error.
 
Upvote 0
With all the spy satellites in space you'd think that these type of events were a thing of the past. Sorry, no disrespect to anyone but I smell cover up. To much much time has past to still not have any answers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon's_razor

Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.

Then again, anything is possible - but who gains?

Spy satellites simply aren't aimed at commercial airliners.

Those are opposing views you have to decide for yourself.

The truth will come out with the data recorders.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Codegerm and mikedt
Upvote 0
How It’s Possible to Lose an Airplane in 2014

Although modern flight management systems use GPS for navigation, that only tells the airplane where it is–it does not tell air traffic control where the plane is.

The mystery of flight MH370: How on earth, with all our technology, do we lose a giant plane?

Why, then, does a plane like the MH370 keep all of its secrets locked up in a black box? Why don’t planes constantly transmit all of their black box data, so that we know their exact location, bearing, altitude, and other important factors, at all times?

The short answer is, there’s no good reason.
 
Upvote 0
By the way - it's true that the black box and flight control came from an era before the internet.

So, they simply invented a special-purpose, radio-linked network of their own.

It has flight data transmission, data recording on the ground and in the air, interlinking from network to network - you know - like internet routers do - and all sorts of cool things.

If you want to take that whole system BACKWARDS and base it off the internet, OK, but I hardly see the point.
 
Upvote 0
Think that's what ADS-B (think that's what it's called) is supposed to be

That's not deployed yet and isn't based on GPS.

Automatic dependent surveillance-broadcast - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

However - ACARS is.

Aircraft Communications Addressing and Reporting System - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Works great.

Like the ADS-B that will replace it, it only has one problem.

No automated messages from missing Boeing jet: sources | Reuters

Automated ACARS error messages from an Airbus A330 that vanished in the Atlantic in 2009 focused attention initially on inconsistent speed readings as a possible cause of that crash.


Although black-box evidence later showed that pilot error was mainly to blame for the loss of the Air France jet, the burst of error messages was a sign that basic electrical systems continued to work during the aircraft's four-minute descent.


In the case of the Malaysia Airlines jet, however, investigators have no such evidence to help them discover what happened to the passenger plane, the people said.


"There were no signals from ACARS from the time the aircraft disappeared," a source involved in the investigations said.
It can fail.
 
Upvote 0
I meant the way the tracking system can fail, but that's doesn't mean I approve of the reporters. Meanwhile...

Malaysian military says missing jet changed course


Starting to smell like 9/11?

Nope.

Starting to smell like a media feeding frenzy and the output is idiotic.

Let's take the news wire source your article used.

Malaysia military tracked missing plane to west coast: source | Reuters

"It changed course after Kota Bharu and took a lower altitude. It made it into the Malacca Strait," the senior military officer, who has been briefed on investigations, told Reuters.

OMGZ!! There's proof right there!

Until you get to the later paragraph in the same news wire:

A non-military source familiar with the investigations said the report was one of several theories and was being checked.

There's a good reason that they asked China to widen the search to the seas as far northeast as Honk Kong.

And they would not do that if they actually knew that it went southwest - the opposite direction.

By the way, your article and the news wire said basically the same thing, let's look at your article:

[FONT=Verdana,Sans-serif]Local newspaper Berita Harian quoted Malaysian air force chief Gen. Rodzali Daud as saying radar at a military base...[/FONT]

Ok, wow, there's a local newspaper quoting a named source and a general ought to know what he's talking about.

So - one last question:

Given that I've proven that 1) neither the Chicago Tribune nor the Washington Post can be trusted to report this accurately, and 2) given that everything else happening in the search investigations clearly show that that is simply one scenario and they're actively pursuing others, then 3) why do you believe a Malaysian newspaper you've never heard of?

~~~~~~~~~~

If you want to believe that the entire operational theory of air traffic is wrong and you know better based on what a reporter said, and if you want to believe that you've found evidence of a cover-up and/or terrorist activities based on a second-hand report of a Malaysian newpaper, knock yourself out.

That's your right.

As your pal, I'll only offer one piece of really good advice, also around since before the internet:

Don't drink the Kool Aide. ;) :)
 
Upvote 0
Here's yet another idiotic, inflammatory report:

Malaysia Air Crash: Why Do Airlines Keep 'Black Box' Flight Data Trapped on Planes? - Businessweek

To solve the mystery of what happened to Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370, investigators need the airplane’s data and voice recorders. In an airplane tragedy, however, the information stored in the so-called black box inevitably ends up inside a wreck. This seems like a terrible place to keep the clue you need to find most.

Why not transmit this flight data off the plane so it’s accessible almost instantly? Airlines, after all, track each of their flights everywhere in the world and can advise crews on course adjustments, security alerts, quick weather changes, and a host of other situations. Passengers are routinely offered in-air Wi-Fi and live television these days. So why keep vital data trapped on the plane?


The answer is mostly about one issue: cost. Sending all the data from each flight in real time via satellite would be enormously expensive. A 2002 study by L-3 Aviation Recorders and a satellite provider found that a U.S. airline flying a global network would need to spend $300 million per year to transmit all its flight data, even assuming a 50 percent reduction in future satellite transmission costs.

Businessweek last explored this question in July 2009 as French and Brazilian authorities searched a wide section of the Atlantic Ocean for a missing Air France (AF:FP) flight. The data recorders aboard the Airbus A330 remained missing for almost two years, some 2 miles beneath the surface, before searchers finally recovered them.

We have these pesky things called facts that really mess with idiotic, sensationalist reports.

1. The data recorders took a few years to find and bring up because they were deep in the Atlantic.

2. They found that missing plane in the middle of the Atlantic in 5 days. Not 2 years, 5 days.

3. They were able to do that because of ACARS on that plane transmitting location and flight attitude right up until the crash.

4. ACARS already talks to the ground and to satellites.

Here's why we don't need a system talking to ground with flight data and backing that up with satellite uplinks:

We already got one. :p
 
  • Like
Reactions: Unforgiven
Upvote 0
BiK4Ne4CEAA-dQp.png
When I done a track for this yesterday with the same website it shows the track about central to the land mass and then it vanishes at this point.
I checked several aircraft tracks several days before and they all came close to this flight path, one was almost exact. This to me at least shows the website tracking seemed to be working very close to the flight path!
I saw a so called expert on the news say the answer to a plane vanishing from radar could mean sudden loss of altitude, so my thinking from basic guesswork did this plane either fly under radar somewhere well away from this area or did it break up over land. Has there been 100% radar track of it over water or not?
Even though it's very unlikely I hope they turn up safe and well.
 
Upvote 0
When I done a track for this yesterday with the same website it shows the track about central to the land mass and then it vanishes at this point.
I checked several aircraft tracks several days before and they all came close to this flight path, one was almost exact. This to me at least shows the website tracking seemed to be working very close to the flight path!

Yep!

I saw a so called expert on the news say the answer to a plane vanishing from radar could mean sudden loss of altitude, so my thinking from basic guesswork did this plane either fly under radar somewhere well away from this area or did it break up over land. Has there been 100% radar track of it over water or not?

That's the million dollar question, right there.

Reports we've been given say that all systems and backup systems to cooperate with secondary, commercial, flight tracking systems (including a type of radar that doesn't work the way people think when they hear the word radar) - all failed at once, both on the airplane and on the ground (I say "both" because they're cooperative and collaborative systems involving machinery, electronics and people).

And reports of military tracking radar (that do work the way people think when they hear the word radar) have been confused, confusing and contradictory (two military radar sources, China and Malaysia, claiming different radar tracking for the same plane at the same time according to the press).

In the immediate aftermath of any flight loss, there's always confusion and speculation.

We all want to know and we all want to know right now.

Unfortunately, wanting a thing does not make it happen. :(
Even though it's very unlikely I hope they turn up safe and well.

As I hope we all do my friend.
 
Upvote 0
i thought today.. people can pay for internet connections on a plane??? same as cruise ships in the ocean. they use satellite to get connected to the internet. NOT cheap but can be done.

what is so hard to have a plane that is going over big bodies of water.. require it have internet connectivity. GPS locations sent back to it parent company (AA, Delta, etc..).

so when the plane is lost.. at least they have very good idea were to start looking..
fastest time to get to the wreckage.. to possibly save lives!!!!!



i don't see this cost much to get implemented. but of course only gov certified companies can do it.. the ones that pay Politicians for help to get these contracts.
which makes a $50 item...
to $5000 unit and $2000 installation.. with $2000/yr maintenance .. $300/month service.
 
Upvote 0
I feel that either the plane crashed by accident or purpose ...

Is there a third way for a plane to crash?

I think accidents and on-purpose cover all the bases, yeah?

I can dig what you're saying in the sense that almost anything is possible and everything is believable because we just have theories right now.
 
Upvote 0
i thought today.. people can pay for internet connections on a plane??? same as cruise ships in the ocean. they use satellite to get connected to the internet. NOT cheap but can be done.

what is so hard to have a plane that is going over big bodies of water.. require it have internet connectivity. GPS locations sent back to it parent company (AA, Delta, etc..).

so when the plane is lost.. at least they have very good idea were to start looking..
fastest time to get to the wreckage.. to possibly save lives!!!!!



i don't see this cost much to get implemented. but of course only gov certified companies can do it.. the ones that pay Politicians for help to get these contracts.
which makes a $50 item...
to $5000 unit and $2000 installation.. with $2000/yr maintenance .. $300/month service.

You simply didn't read my previous posts.

We already have a networked system sending location data back to the ground, all of the time, that uses a combination of ground and satellite uplinks of the data.

It failed in this case.

You don't need to call for that being deployed, we already have it, you don't need to figure out the costs, they're already spending it.

I don't get it. :(

Just because something failed does not mean it does not exist.

It means it failed.
 
Upvote 0
Is there a third way for a plane to crash?

I think accidents and on-purpose cover all the bases, yeah?

I can dig what you're saying in the sense that almost anything is possible and everything is believable because we just have theories right now.

A third way would be by alien interference. Jk, All I'm saying is that, one of those scenarios are what likely happened to the plane. In flight 800, to this day there is still unanswered questions and speculation. I just feel like plane crashes should be a thing of the past. Flying in aluminum deathtraps is so 20th century. We got the technology to prevent these types of tragedies.
 
Upvote 0

BEST TECH IN 2023

We've been tracking upcoming products and ranking the best tech since 2007. Thanks for trusting our opinion: we get rewarded through affiliate links that earn us a commission and we invite you to learn more about us.

Smartphones