5 ms·

Not really a huge surprise given that the debris was confirmed as a 777 flaperon a few days ago. However, It does mean that the Inmarsat positional analysis abo

by JanSolo 11y ago

Not really a huge surprise given that the debris was confirmed as a 777 flaperon a few days ago. However, It does mean that the Inmarsat positional analysis about the final location of the plane is likely correct. This should give a bit of confidence to the sailors who are running the naval search operation in the indian ocean. They were never quite sure that they were looking in the right place. I suspect their lack-of-results must be quite demoralising for them. It also discounts some of the nuttier theories such as the plane landing in Russia or Afghanistan.

muglug 11y ago
Unless (puts on tinfoil hat) that piece of wreckage was placed there with the intent that it would be discovered. Nutty people will believe whatever they want.
- fla 11y ago
  And kept into an aquarium of oceanic water for a year... A bit far fetched if you ask me.
  - pyre 11y ago
    It could have been placed there close to a year ago, but it just took this long to find it. :P
  - ripter 11y ago
    You just have to pay off the few people who report the results.
hencq 11y ago
> It does mean that the Inmarsat positional analysis about the final location of the plane is likely correct. Does it though? I'm not saying the analysis is incorrect, just wondering how predictable these ocean currents are. I understand that the debris surfacing at Reunion doesn't rule out the current search location, but that's different than confirming or proving it. I mean, can they just 'play back' the ocean currents and arrive at a specific spot? I wouldn't be surprised if there's so much uncertainty that all they can say with certainty is that it must have crashed somewhere in the Indian Ocean. Which isn't exactly new information.
- mikeash 11y ago
  The Inmarsat data seems pretty solid, but it's not very precise. There was always the possibility that the plane actually went down somewhere on the northern arc, rather than the southern arc as was assumed. The northern arc was never very likely because the plane would almost certainly have been noticed on that path, but this debris finding rules it out entirely. (In case anyone is unfamiliar with just what the data showed, here's a quick summary image: http://ogleearth.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/MH370_Mar17.jpg http://ogleearth.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/MH370_Mar17....)
  - acqq 11y ago
    No, it was actually possible to exclude the northern arc based on the satellite data only: http://www.airtrafficmanagement.net/2014/06/mh370-what-does-inmarsat-ping-data-reveal/ http://www.airtrafficmanagement.net/2014/06/mh370-what-does-... "the Doppler shift due to the satellite’s motion is not removed by the plane’s terminal when it pre-corrects the frequency of transmission, and thus there is an asymmetry between the BFO which would be produced by a plane flying north of the equator (and thus situated to the north of the satellite) compared to one flying south on a similar track."
    - mikeash 11y ago
      Nice! Never heard that stuff. I stand corrected.
      - acqq 11y ago
        It's a perfect example for "science, it works." They managed to conclude quite a lot from a miniscule amount of data with the information that was never planned to be used for such purposes.
        PhantomGremlin 11y ago
        Sadly, people will attempt to overthink that. E.g. jeffwise.net was cited earlier as a forum discussing AF447. But read this from Jeff concerning the Inmarsat data: case 3. The plane did not go south at all. If this is the case, then the satellite communications system must have been compromised by hijackers who either flew the plane north to Kazakhstan or China (if only the BFO values were spoofed) or somewhere else within a huge circle encompassed by the 7th ping ring (if both BTO and BFO values were spoofed). Yes, it's possible that occurred. But even Inmarsat itself didn't have a good understanding of this data. It's very very farfetched to think that some sinister elements, as part of a nefarious scheme, spoofed the data being sent to the satellite. IMO the probability is less than 1 in a million. So many other scenarios make more sense.
rogerbinns 11y ago
The satellite position analysis only says where the plane likely was near the end of its flight. How it ended up in the water matters greatly. For example if there was someone conscious in the cockpit then it could have glided way outside of the search area. Even an uncontrolled spiralling into the ocean describes a potentially large area. One thing that keeps resurfacing is that the whole affair is unlike anything before. Suicidal pilots have crashed quickly in all other cases, various things have involved extraordinary good luck or extraordinary knowledge (eg avoiding various radar coverage), explanations for satellite systems going offline/online require precise fiddling with various electrical busses, there aren't any credible explanations for deliberate act or accident, the Malaysian government has either covered things up or is very incompetent (or both), and it goes on. Air France 440 was also shrouded in mystery (but nowhere near this degree), and turned out to be very poor airmanship by one pilot. For anyone curious about more of the technical aspects behind the scenes then Jeff Wise writes about it frequently. http://jeffwise.net/ http://jeffwise.net/
- gnaffle 11y ago
  > Air France 440 was also shrouded in mystery (but nowhere near this degree), and turned out to be very poor airmanship by one pilot. It was poor airmanship by two pilots (and other factors, including the feedback mechanisms and the lack of training for this particular high altitude scenario).
  - encoderer 11y ago
    My understanding is that the pilot in the left chair didn't realize that the pilot in the right chair kept pulling his stick back. In boeing planes, the sticks move together, so that wouldn't be possible. And the pilot in the right chair clearly didn't understand that in the alternate law the fly by wire system was running in, his stick movements put the plane at risk.
    - mikeash 11y ago
      Yes, it was a completely incorrect reaction by a single pilot, combined with a catastrophically bad design for the controls, which caused that crash. It is completely insane to me that anyone would think that averaging inputs from two pilots and providing no feedback would be even remotely a good idea.
elorant 11y ago
But did the plane crash on the ocean or it was shattered mid-air? Wouldn’t the debris be deformed if it had hit the water?

by JanSolo 11y ago

muglug 11y ago

Unless (puts on tinfoil hat) that piece of wreckage was placed there with the intent that it would be discovered. Nutty people will believe whatever they want.

fla 11y ago
And kept into an aquarium of oceanic water for a year... A bit far fetched if you ask me.
- pyre 11y ago
  It could have been placed there close to a year ago, but it just took this long to find it. :P
- ripter 11y ago
  You just have to pay off the few people who report the results.

hencq 11y ago

> It does mean that the Inmarsat positional analysis about the final location of the plane is likely correct. Does it though? I'm not saying the analysis is incorrect, just wondering how predictable these ocean currents are. I understand that the debris surfacing at Reunion doesn't rule out the current search location, but that's different than confirming or proving it. I mean, can they just 'play back' the ocean currents and arrive at a specific spot? I wouldn't be surprised if there's so much uncertainty that all they can say with certainty is that it must have crashed somewhere in the Indian Ocean. Which isn't exactly new information.

mikeash 11y ago
The Inmarsat data seems pretty solid, but it's not very precise. There was always the possibility that the plane actually went down somewhere on the northern arc, rather than the southern arc as was assumed. The northern arc was never very likely because the plane would almost certainly have been noticed on that path, but this debris finding rules it out entirely. (In case anyone is unfamiliar with just what the data showed, here's a quick summary image: http://ogleearth.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/MH370_Mar17.jpg http://ogleearth.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/MH370_Mar17....)
- acqq 11y ago
  No, it was actually possible to exclude the northern arc based on the satellite data only: http://www.airtrafficmanagement.net/2014/06/mh370-what-does-inmarsat-ping-data-reveal/ http://www.airtrafficmanagement.net/2014/06/mh370-what-does-... "the Doppler shift due to the satellite’s motion is not removed by the plane’s terminal when it pre-corrects the frequency of transmission, and thus there is an asymmetry between the BFO which would be produced by a plane flying north of the equator (and thus situated to the north of the satellite) compared to one flying south on a similar track."
  - mikeash 11y ago
    Nice! Never heard that stuff. I stand corrected.
    - acqq 11y ago
      It's a perfect example for "science, it works." They managed to conclude quite a lot from a miniscule amount of data with the information that was never planned to be used for such purposes.
      - PhantomGremlin 11y ago
        Sadly, people will attempt to overthink that. E.g. jeffwise.net was cited earlier as a forum discussing AF447. But read this from Jeff concerning the Inmarsat data: case 3. The plane did not go south at all. If this is the case, then the satellite communications system must have been compromised by hijackers who either flew the plane north to Kazakhstan or China (if only the BFO values were spoofed) or somewhere else within a huge circle encompassed by the 7th ping ring (if both BTO and BFO values were spoofed). Yes, it's possible that occurred. But even Inmarsat itself didn't have a good understanding of this data. It's very very farfetched to think that some sinister elements, as part of a nefarious scheme, spoofed the data being sent to the satellite. IMO the probability is less than 1 in a million. So many other scenarios make more sense.

rogerbinns 11y ago

The satellite position analysis only says where the plane likely was near the end of its flight. How it ended up in the water matters greatly. For example if there was someone conscious in the cockpit then it could have glided way outside of the search area. Even an uncontrolled spiralling into the ocean describes a potentially large area. One thing that keeps resurfacing is that the whole affair is unlike anything before. Suicidal pilots have crashed quickly in all other cases, various things have involved extraordinary good luck or extraordinary knowledge (eg avoiding various radar coverage), explanations for satellite systems going offline/online require precise fiddling with various electrical busses, there aren't any credible explanations for deliberate act or accident, the Malaysian government has either covered things up or is very incompetent (or both), and it goes on. Air France 440 was also shrouded in mystery (but nowhere near this degree), and turned out to be very poor airmanship by one pilot. For anyone curious about more of the technical aspects behind the scenes then Jeff Wise writes about it frequently. http://jeffwise.net/ http://jeffwise.net/

gnaffle 11y ago
> Air France 440 was also shrouded in mystery (but nowhere near this degree), and turned out to be very poor airmanship by one pilot. It was poor airmanship by two pilots (and other factors, including the feedback mechanisms and the lack of training for this particular high altitude scenario).
- encoderer 11y ago
  My understanding is that the pilot in the left chair didn't realize that the pilot in the right chair kept pulling his stick back. In boeing planes, the sticks move together, so that wouldn't be possible. And the pilot in the right chair clearly didn't understand that in the alternate law the fly by wire system was running in, his stick movements put the plane at risk.
  - mikeash 11y ago
    Yes, it was a completely incorrect reaction by a single pilot, combined with a catastrophically bad design for the controls, which caused that crash. It is completely insane to me that anyone would think that averaging inputs from two pilots and providing no feedback would be even remotely a good idea.

elorant 11y ago

But did the plane crash on the ocean or it was shattered mid-air? Wouldn’t the debris be deformed if it had hit the water?