Response to #395
Originally Posted by MAP Waves
How would it effect your calculations if the change in flight path did not occur but was the change in course of the boat at 19:15 that gave the appearance of a changed flight path?
I'll have to get back to you on that, run it through STK first, which I don't have here right now and am not sure I will be able to run anytime soon.
And I really need those maps and calculations to compensate for my lack of accurate imagination.
But from what I can tell just from the back of my head
there would appear to occur several problems with that:
- MH370 would probably have been far, far away at 1915 already (I'll have to estimate how far with STK, too - especially for the ATSB scenario)
- that plane HAD to make a turn somewhere sometime (but at the theoretical latest not until 1940) to "hit" the other Ping Rings, but if it does that turn too late you get in trouble because it would not "hit" the Ping Rings on the "one turn route" I described or could probably not reach the 1940 Ping Ring in a timely fashion to fit the ATSB scenario at certain coordinates. And also the question would appear: what was the plane doing from 1822 UTC until 1915 UTC?
- all that set aside: IF MH370 passed the boat exactly DURING the boats' turn, so it might appear to be crossing even though it was actually the boat that was turning: I'd like to check the rotation direction in comparison to the plane making its way, say, south, as well. Even though I think, that plane had long passed the boat at that time. This "1915 boat turn scenario" might also conflict with Saucy's statement, that she apparently saw the plane from the side (not from the front or the tail), so it seems to me, that at least the plane was indeed crossing, in other words: flew by, not towards or away from the boat. But on this I might be too critical.
So, you made me twisting my melon again, so much I had to re-read what I posted before. I want to clear up again something I wrote (there might be a difference to what sounds clear to me in English
when I write it down to what it sounds like when I read my own words some hours later ...).
Let me just scribble down exactly what path I have in mind when I speak about the "one turn scenario", so as not to be too cryptic about it. Again, I do not say, that's what happened, I say, this was my private hypothesis that helped me think, I understand, what's going on in the world - until I couldn't help but post on this forum:
It is actually quite simple and therefore something even I can think about
The plane flies at a constant speed of about 480-490 kts (usual travelling speed, smart people told me) all the time from 1822 UTC until 0011/0019 UTC (last handshake ping / partial ping).
The plane continues on the heading it had at 1822 UTC (last military radar contact) for a couple more minutes, taking it further up WNW to a location of about 7.2 or 7.3/94.2 or 94.3, I think. Again this is just from memory, I'll check again later.
The plane is pretty much straight to the north of the boat now (might be around 1845 UTC, I guess, +-10mins)
It then changes course FOR THE LAST TIME in the flight (at least until "hitting" the 7th arc) to a heading of just some degrees less than 190°.
After a few minutes it passes the boat pretty damn close, if I may say so (in an ocean perspective, I guess).
According to the UTC log file it just "flies by" on your port side, disappearing around the direction of your stern, still on your port side. No crossing here (but IF the boat WOULD HAVE been heading east at that time, almost everything - I can't say anything about the other two planes in the air - would fit: the distance, the boats' heading, the planes' heading, Saucys' description of the plane going from 7 o'clock port to 5 o'clock starboard CROSSING the stern).
To say nothing about a possible mechanical failure onboard the plane leading to smoke (possibly flames?) - and perhaps loss of pilot control around that time and therefore no more manouevering (is that spelled correctly?) - but that is HIGHLY speculative, I think.
The plane simply flies along that "slightly under 190° heading", "hitting" all arcs (at least according to my amateurish STK calculations) at the correct times within the margin of error (at least the margin of error, smart people told me about
: +- a few nm). I think, it ends some degrees to the west of 90°, by that I mean: "hits the 7th arc" way, way (about 2000 miles perhaps, but I don't remember) to the west of Perth and even "a little" to the south, I seem to remember.
I had done this "rough" scenario when the "raw" data was published and wondered since then why the ATSB was looking so far up to the north-east at the end of a multiple heading change path.
I told myself: perhaps, because these guys know what they're doing and you are somebody who apparently should sleep more.
Then Saucy came along.
Talking about her boat going east and a plane crossing behind her from port to starboard, therefore going south. The rest I described above.
I know, this scenario is way off the latest ATSB scenarios (approximately too little fuel
to go that fast and therefore get that far south, several turns to the east during the rest of the flight...).
But since they got it so grossly wrong with that fishernet acoustic ping detection or whatever that was ... I thought: if that lady's seen something, and it fits the data, maybe they better get that sonar mapping device much further to the south-west. BUT APPARENTLY NOT: data being data, showing the GPS logged heading to be quite different around that time.
May be, it's just the simplicity of the scenario, that got me bothering you and the fact, that so far, most airplane accidents that I heard about, didn't need a movie
plot that would leave James Bond dropping his jaw to be explained sufficiently.
I also would very much like to see a solution to that mystery, first for the relatives and friends of those onboard. This simply is a never ending nightmare for them, as far as I can imagine. And I guess, I'm still not a 100 percent convinced that Saucys' report can't help with that.
Also, and this is a thought that I simply couldn't express until now: IF the plane went on that "one-turn-route" I'm thinking about, giving the boat and MH370 so very close: In my oppinion (still depending on the direction she was facing) Saucy was VERY LIKELY to observe the plane go by no matter if MH370 was "just" passing by (not crossing over the stern) on the port side.
So why the heck did it go by crossing the stern, according to Saucy?
That boat's position seems quite compelling to me ... if it wasn't for the heading ... I can't get my head around it.
So, Marc, I'll check on that 1915 suggestion and get back to you.
P.S.: Will Pete approve of a post that (again) somehow got that long? If so, I promise to better myself, Pete!