4 ms·
I may be missing something, but this seems like a very misleading headline. The actual article states that the plane "dropped 5,000 feet (1,500m)" and later th
by lfuller 13y ago
I may be missing something, but this seems like a very misleading headline.
The actual article states that the plane "dropped 5,000 feet (1,500m)" and later that the "twinjet descended 1,500m or even lower". This simply means that the plane descended by a relatively small amount compared to 35,000 - 40,000 foot cruising altitudes, not that it was skimming the ground at 5,000 feet.
- 001sky 13y agoConfirmed here, you may just be picking up a typo: "There are reports around in the last hour or so, claiming new information that the plane dropped <to> an altitude 5000 feet" http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/17/mh370-contact-missing-plane-communications-disabled http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/17/mh370-contact-m...
- lutusp 13y agoYes, noticed this also, but I think the headline was written by someone other than the source of the article. I think the article is meant to say descended 1500m, not descended to 1500m. Nothing in the article body suggests a descent to 1500m, and that would be a very inefficient altitude to fly a big jet.
- 001sky 13y agoThis is the article referenced by the guardian, its language is (properly) articulared in much better english. Kuala Lumpur: Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 dropped to altitudes as low as 1524 metres (5000 feet) using a dangerous flying technique called “terrain masking” to avoid radar in at least three countries, investigators believe. http://www.smh.com.au/world/missing-malaysia-airlines-jet-may-have-flown-under-radar-investigators-20140317-hvjlf.html http://www.smh.com.au/world/missing-malaysia-airlines-jet-ma...
- lutusp 13y agoThanks for this update and clarification.