Flight documents show MH370 was ‘buried in an ocean trench by pilot’, says Boeing expert

Exhaustgases said:
No need to look for a crash, when the planes whole trip can be seen. That is what RADAR does.
So there is no need to look into the ocean, for a pin in a hay stack, if its there follow the track from the system.
No total coverage you say? What part of the earth will GPS not work?
Click to expand...
Where would those radars be located to cover entire Indian Ocean?
And why? @Astro14 already explained that there is not tactical or strategic need for such expensive devices at that part of the world.
North Atlantic is far more strategically important, but there is no complete radar coverage. Astro can talk more about it from pilots perspective as he did European routes.
 
Last edited:
The radar's would be located in orbit, just like GPS is. Of course they want to see what is happening where someone thinks they don't.
It cost them nothing we all pay for it.
 
Astro14 said:
There are listening devices on the ocean floor, but not “most of the floors”. It’s very difficult to string listening devices on the ocean floor. Parts of the Atlantic are over 10,000 feet deep, for example, and it’s not smooth terrain.

So, nations with those devices (which is basically the US) tend to place them where they do the most good - like the GIUK gap - where we can listen for Russian submarines coming and going. It’s a very small part of particular oceans and seas (like the Baltic) where we, or anyone else, have sensors.

Most of the oceans floors are not monitored.

It serves no tactical purpose to have them on the floor of the Indian Ocean.
Click to expand...
I assure you many of the worlds navys are capable of and are listening to the ocean at all times. Much like seismic monitoring, these listening devices can calculate where noises of interest are located by using triangulation.
Many of the submarine accidents in the last few decades have been heard around the world. Frequently, larger navys have known of submarine accidents before the smaller nations that lost the boat. The Titan submersible accident is a prime example of this. It's demise was heard before any even knew what had happened.
But after all of this, I have no idea what an plane landing/crashing into the ocean would sound like. It may have been indistinguishable from other sounds.
 
Does anybody else but me think that continuing to look for MH370 is a colossal waste of time, resources, and someone's money?
Let's say that they find it. They are not going to be able to recover it off of the ocean floor if it is in as deep of water as they think it is in. What relevant questions will finding it answer?
 
midobo said:
I assure you many of the worlds navys are capable of and are listening to the ocean at all times. Much like seismic monitoring, these listening devices can calculate where noises of interest are located by using triangulation.
Many of the submarine accidents in the last few decades have been heard around the world. Frequently, larger navys have known of submarine accidents before the smaller nations that lost the boat. The Titan submersible accident is a prime example of this. It's demise was heard before any even knew what had happened.
But after all of this, I have no idea what an plane landing/crashing into the ocean would sound like. It may have been indistinguishable from other sounds.
Click to expand...
Since you are assuring a retired navy pilot, maybe you should provide us with something called FACTS and give us some examples. When you say "assure you," that means you consider yourself something of an expert in the field.
 
wag123 said:
Does anybody else but me think that continuing to look for MH370 is a colossal waste of time, resources, and someone's money?
Let's say that they find it. They are not going to be able to recover it off of the ocean floor if it is in as deep of water as they think it is in. What relevant questions will finding it answer?
Click to expand...
French didn't want to give up on AF447 investigation as they thought it was imperative to find CVR and FDR to understand accident and prevent future ones. They saw it as important for their own airline industry.
MH370 is bit different story, but human curiosity usually prevails.
 
edyvw said:
Since you are assuring a retired navy pilot, maybe you should provide us with something called FACTS and give us some examples. When you say "assure you," that means you consider yourself something of an expert in the field.
Click to expand...
I had no idea you are a retired Naval Aviator, that awesome, what did you fly and thank you for your service. I would have guessed you are an IT guy, man how wrong I was.
61EwIMQD2hL._AC_UF894,1000_QL80_.jpg
 
midobo said:
I assure you many of the worlds navys are capable of and are listening to the ocean at all times. Much like seismic monitoring, these listening devices can calculate where noises of interest are located by using triangulation.
Many of the submarine accidents in the last few decades have been heard around the world. Frequently, larger navys have known of submarine accidents before the smaller nations that lost the boat. The Titan submersible accident is a prime example of this. It's demise was heard before any even knew what had happened.
But after all of this, I have no idea what a plane landing/crashing into the ocean would sound like. It may have been indistinguishable from other sounds.
Click to expand...
I’m pretty familiar with the capabilities of the Navies of the world - but I did retire from the USN a few years ago. One of the programs with which my work intersected was the BAMS - Broad Area Maritime Surveillance - aircraft. So, ocean surveillance, in radar, sound, and other spectra, are not unfamiliar to me.

If you read what I first posted, it was in response to the claim that “most of the ocean’s floors are planted with listening devices” and that simply isn’t true. There are devices, in the Baltic, in the GIUK gap, in other high-traffic, high-interest areas, but the middle of the IO is not one of those.

As far as capabilities - Navies can listen in specific areas (sonar and listening devices are on many ships and Naval aircraft) and yes, sound travels pretty far, which is why the implosion of the OceanGate Titanic submarine was heard.

But nobody has sensors in the middle of the IO - it’s not an area that is heavily monitored because there isn’t much activity there. And an airplane crash isn’t as distinct as a deep water implosion. So, I don’t buy the claim that governments are withholding information on MH370 because that information simply doesn’t exist.
 
Modern reality TV shows can make millions. Couple this with a pre-negotiated potential “ award “ from the Malaysian and Chinese governments, an investment syndicate could make a private attempt to find the plans. Looks like that may happen.

6470EE54-9008-4B77-9AC0-A29C9B4DF862.jpeg


F49A1D0E-BE96-4399-BBAC-F1BAFFD2B1B2.jpg
 
Last edited:
Astro14 said:
So, I don’t buy the claim that governments are withholding information on MH370 because that information simply doesn’t exist.
Click to expand...
Assuming the plane crashing into the ocean created a fireball visible enough to be seen by an SBIRS, is it likely this information would be shared? It looks like it has been in the past but I guess every situation is different.
 
Owen Lucas said:
Assuming the plane crashing into the ocean created a fireball visible enough to be seen by an SBIRS, is it likely this information would be shared? It looks like it has been in the past but I guess every situation is different.
Click to expand...
SBIRS has shady coverage in that area as the focus is on the equator and north. it does not have equal reliability. Also, if a plane ran out of fuel, there would be no fireball. Also, even if it had, it is water etc.
 
Owen Lucas said:
Assuming the plane crashing into the ocean created a fireball visible enough to be seen by an SBIRS, is it likely this information would be shared? It looks like it has been in the past but I guess every situation is different.
Click to expand...
First, I think the fireball is a poor assumption.

Next, consider why we have SBIRS. it’s for ballistic missile launches.

So, why would it be looking at a place where the odds of a ballistic missile launching are zero?

Don’t you think SBIRS would be looking at, say Iran? North Korea, Russia?

Why would we take our eyes off those threats and that activity to look in the middle of nowhere?

The coverage of satellite systems is not infinite. The constellation of any satellite system, has a particular set of orbits and areas where coverage is needed.

SBIRS is no different.

We point it at the important areas. We don’t take billion dollar satellites and point them at nothing. That would be a horrible waste of critical capability, not to mention taxpayer dollars.
 
edyvw said:
SBIRS has shady coverage in that area as the focus is on the equator and north. it does not have equal reliability. Also, if a plane ran out of fuel, there would be no fireball. Also, even if it had, it is water etc.
Click to expand...

Obviously water might have an effect at smothering any potential fire. However, fumes can still ignite and my understanding is that they're more likely to ignite. The explosion of TWA 800 was attributed to a fuel-air mixture igniting in the center tank.
 
y_p_w said:
Obviously water might have an effect at smothering any potential fire. However, fumes can still ignite and my understanding is that they're more likely to ignite. The explosion of TWA 800 was attributed to a fuel-air mixture igniting in the center tank.
Click to expand...
A fuel air mixture heated by the AC compressors.

Very different than a cold-soaked fuel air mixture at -45C.
 
Astro14 said:
A fuel air mixture heated by the AC compressors.

Very different than a cold-soaked fuel air mixture at -45C.
Click to expand...

Sure. However, there is a misunderstanding that liquid fuel ignites and that somehow an "empty" fuel tank isn't likely to catch on fire for one reason or another.
 
edyvw said:
What else is going on in a flat earth society?
Click to expand...
This is how you know when someone is on the mark, when they are shut down by this sort of stuff. Radar systems have been in orbit for many years now. Sorry we are not in the 1920's, now technology is much more advanced.
Flat earth ha ha ha, I mention orbit explain how to orbit a flat earth. Brilliant.
 
y_p_w said:
Sure. However, there is a misunderstanding that liquid fuel ignites and that somehow an "empty" fuel tank isn't likely to catch on fire for one reason or another.
Click to expand...
I understand that, but it is highly unlikely in this situation. Also, let's say it happened, it is different from heat source on ballistic missile or BUK SAM.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top