Cruisers Forum
 


Join CruisersForum Today

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 5 votes, 4.80 average. Display Modes
Old 11-06-2014, 05:16   #406
Registered User
 
bill good's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Brisbane Australia
Boat: sold
Posts: 721
Re: I Think I Saw MH370

Remember the aircraft was prob. doing 8nm every minute while this change was going on so the apparent size of the observed object would have changed over the period as it travelled over its flight path.

Bill
__________________

__________________
bill good is offline   Reply
Old 11-06-2014, 05:51   #407
Registered User

Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 42
Re: I Think I Saw MH370

Every single piece of information supplied by the Malaysian government seems to be ambiguous at the very least. I'm not one for conspiracy theories but more of a realist. I am aware however that circumstances are manipulated for a governments advantage be it strategically, politically or otherwise.
The MH370 incident is definately a tradgedy but the question here is whether Saucy saw something regardless of government statements. I've spent a couple of months now trying to think outside the box and to be honest, the only apparent credable information to work with seems to be Saucy's eye witness account of a glowing object that 'could be an aircraft in distress' (my words not hers) and a fairly comprehensive GPS log which Marc kindly supplied. Everything else that has been released by the authorities just does not add up for some reason.

I've attached a few screen shots to help illustrate my thought process and I have to be honest, after dismissing the speculation, trash and false reports it makes quite interesting viewing.

The first picture shows the Inmarsat 'ping' lines and time transgressions.

The second picture shows an overview of the general area:
Faded red lines= Inmarsat ping zones
Green line= Known MH370 flight path
Yellow/pink lines= Known Inmarsat 'ping' transgressional routes
Light blue= Saucy's boat path

The third picture shows :
Yellow/pink lines= Known Inmarsat 'ping' transgressional routes
Light blue= Saucy's boat path
NOTE THE TIME ADJACENT TO THE BOAT BASED ON AN AIRCRAFT FLYING AT 425kts........very close to her position!!!!!

Additionally, the information that Saucy supplied (approx 15,000ftasl, 20 degree elevation etc) works out at 5-7 miles away from her position at 22 degrees elevation! A commercial aircraft usually flies at 6 miles up so judge for yourself. It would be twice the size as normal as it's half the height. THAT'S DAMN CLOSE! The island of Great Nicobar is approx 33 nm away from the boat by the way.

I cannot locate any oil rigs or flare dereks in that region. I have it on good authority by a friend who works the Malaysian oil fields that there aren't any nearby.

The orange coloured, commercial sized aircraft attending the Sumatrian forest fires is speculation on my part and i'll look into it further for you....either way Saucy, I think you're onto something!!

ANY thoughts would be good.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Satellite-Data.jpg
Views:	139
Size:	119.5 KB
ID:	82868   Click image for larger version

Name:	General View.jpg
Views:	229
Size:	127.0 KB
ID:	82869  

Click image for larger version

Name:	Indepth general view.jpg
Views:	206
Size:	76.8 KB
ID:	82870  
__________________

__________________
Jess928 is offline   Reply
Old 11-06-2014, 06:05   #408
Registered User

Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 42
Re: I Think I Saw MH370

This is obviously in USA attending the Californian forest fires...
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_0826 w.jpg
Views:	116
Size:	249.9 KB
ID:	82871  
__________________
Jess928 is offline   Reply
Old 11-06-2014, 06:17   #409
Registered User

Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 9
Re: I Think I Saw MH370

Response to #395
Quote:
Originally Posted by MAP Waves View Post
Hi Behoerde,

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?

Marc
Hi Marc,

I tried to check that 1915 turn scenario you suggested and tried to think of possible constellations, that could make it fit.

If I understand the GPS log correctly the boat was not doing a simple “90”, but a “reverse 270” at 1915, meaning going from almost 12 o’clock over roughly 9o’clock over 4 o’ clock to 3 o’ clock (343° to 258° to 117° to 88° in the log). An “anti-clock-wise turn” if that is a word. Do I interpret that correctly?


If so it simply doesn’t matter, in which direction the plane is in relation to the boat – it will always appear on the starboard side first during the boats’ turn, since there is appearing "what's new" on the horizon. That doesn't fit Saucys report. Sorry, seems to be just another dead lead.

So long
__________________
Behoerde K. is offline   Reply
Old 11-06-2014, 08:43   #410
Registered User

Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 9
Re: I Think I Saw MH370

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jess928 View Post
The second picture shows an overview of the general area:
Faded red lines= Inmarsat ping zones
Green line= Known MH370 flight path
Yellow/pink lines= Known Inmarsat 'ping' transgressional routes
Light blue= Saucy's boat path

The third picture shows :
Yellow/pink lines= Known Inmarsat 'ping' transgressional routes
Light blue= Saucy's boat path
NOTE THE TIME ADJACENT TO THE BOAT BASED ON AN AIRCRAFT FLYING AT 425kts........very close to her position!!!!!

ANY thoughts would be good.
Hi Jess,

here's one:

The plane seems to do sharp turns exactly on each ping ring on your map. That would be quite a coincidence. Even if it would do its turns shortly after passing each ping ring (and therefore going somewhat faster than 425kts). The time windows get quite narrow then, too, I think.

I think that this is a scenario that would bring MH370 close to the boat for a SECOND TIME, yes. I do, however, think it is very complex, especially with those narrow parameters for turns corresponding to the coincidental hitting of Ping Rings.

I do however think MH370 was extremely close to the boat before and I'd guess that's when the sighting happened - if it did: around 18:45 UTC.

Say, the plane stays on its course after passing the last know radar position until about 18:38 UTC, doing 480kts. Now it is around 7.3/98.2, more or less exactly north of the boat. It changes heading to about 186.5 and passes the boat at 18:45 UTC within a distance of only about 8 miles. That's when the sighting might have happened. The plane does no more turn, remains heading and speed, hitting all Ping Rings about the exact times published by Inmarsat.

Problem with that: At 18:45 the boat was heading north according to the UTC log, so the plane couldn't cross the stern.

I'd really like somebody to take a look at that and tell me any thoughts.

After all I don't think that flight scenario to be more likely than 25-30 percent. So I actually expect that hypothesis to be proved wrong since it seems to me to be perhaps too simple to be valid(?).

Cheers!
__________________
Behoerde K. is offline   Reply
Old 11-06-2014, 10:24   #411
Registered User

Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 42
Re: I Think I Saw MH370

If an airliner was flying over directly over the southern tip of Great Nicobar Island at 36,000ft asl, then the elevation of the observation would be approximately 10 degrees from the boat above the horizon. This means that the observed object was either much, much higher....or much, much nearer and lower. So the parameters of observance are a maximum distance of 33nm to the island, approx 15,000ft asl and approximately a 20 degree viewing angle. Plug in the trigonometry and you get 10 degrees. However....

Plug into the trigonometric calculator:
8nm horizontal to the target base
15,000ft asl and
23 degrees viewing angle

...then you get a flight path which correlates with the 02:55hrs (1855) point!!

If Saucy's observation WAS at approximately 15,000ft asl based on two other aircraft flying above and more distant from their location this would be near accurate. If it WAS an AIRWORTHY, FLYABLE and INTACT Boeing 777-200ER with a glide range of 30:1 (realistically 15:1), then it would have glided to sea level within42 to 85 miles of her observance. This means that for every 1 foot it loses in altitude, it can travel 30 feet forward so 85 miles (realistically 42 miles).

If the aircraft is in distress, I would suggest 25% maximum of that range or 21 miles (realistically 5 miles?).
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Aaza Dana.jpg
Views:	157
Size:	60.7 KB
ID:	82877  
__________________
Jess928 is offline   Reply
Old 11-06-2014, 10:49   #412
Registered User

Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 42
Re: I Think I Saw MH370

That puts a landing area on Aceh near Pulau We if intact ....or within 5 to 21nm of last observance if not.

(Note the runway at Maimun Saleh would not be physically able to take a large bodied, fully laden 777 because of the shorter 6,000ft runway and infrastructure problems. The aircraft needs at least 10,000ft).
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Ranges.jpg
Views:	158
Size:	93.4 KB
ID:	82879  
__________________
Jess928 is offline   Reply
Old 11-06-2014, 16:41   #413
Registered User
 
mister_g's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: UK
Boat: Hunter Channel 323
Posts: 4
Re: I Think I Saw MH370

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jess928 View Post
ANY thoughts would be good.
I don't disagree with your logic, but I think it mainly serves to show that there are a near infinite number of solutions to making the plane pass through the 'ping rings' at the correct time, some of which have the plane in Saucy's general area at roughly the correct time, so it is very difficult to rule a possible sighting out.

The number of solutions can be narrowed down through detailed knowledge of the plane's performance capabilities (min/max speed), fuel consumption, etc. and the doppler data (BFO) from the satellite contacts, but any flight path is speculative and only arrived at by making *ASSUMPTIONS* about what the plane did in the mean time (constant speed? constant heading? one turn? two turns? more?, etc..). No doubt the ATSB are looking at possible scenarios, and Saucy's observation may well help re-inforce other information and narrow down the current search area.

Also, if one gives credence to the early ping rings (and I have no reason to question them), then one should also give credence to subsequent ones which, several hours later, and even with the most contrived flight path, put the plane at the very least 800nm away from Saucy & Marc.

Too long, didn't read? - Speculation is pointless without the very detailed information to narrrow down the possibilities.
__________________
mister_g is offline   Reply
Old 11-06-2014, 16:52   #414
Registered User

Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 6
Re: I Think I Saw MH370

Behoerde K.-

Have you seen that MAP Waves posted two spreadsheets with times and locations?Here is the issue about them:

Row 9106 of the table on sheet 2 shows a UTC time of 18:20:45 and a heading of 353° true as you have shown in your Post #394, above. If “local” time is UTC +7, this should be 1:20:45 AM local time. However, the table on sheet 1 does not list any data for 1:20:45 AM.

Row 9118 of the table on sheet 2 shows a UTC time of 19:20:45 and a heading of 88° true and correlates to 2:20:45 “local” time on sheet 1.

This could mean that the conversion between UTC and “local” time between sheets 1 and 2 was not calculated properly. It appears that MH370 was no where near the boat at 19:20 UTC. The question is whether boat was headed northerly or easterly sometime between 18:20 and 18:40 UTC?

Also note that a southern magnetic heading of the a/c would give a slightly curved track towards the East, rather than a great circle route.
__________________
LCH77 is offline   Reply
Old 11-06-2014, 17:19   #415
Registered User

Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 5
Re: I Think I Saw MH370

Firstly, I'd just like to say to Behoerde that "counter-clockwise" is the word you were looking for.

Jess, the assumptions about the planes course that you used to suggest that the plane may have been close to the boat at 18:55 UTC are extremely unlikely-- It's even conceivable that the track is physically impossible. I commend your ambition and thinking outside of the box, but those flight paths, as far as I'm aware, are erroneous. I think that after all the analysis done on this forum regarding the planes track and position relative to the boat at the time of the sighting (18:45 UTC), there are a few safe conclusions that can be made, and a few more that need further investigation. It's safe to say that the plane was nowhere near the boat at 19:41 UTC, hundred of miles south. The 2 most important facts to flesh out are 1) Make absolutely positive that the time correlations (UTC, local time) are 100% accurate. It seems that this has been given a lot of thought already, but it's definitely worth going back and checking on to make it absolutely certain that we are working with accurate times. 2) Make absolutely positive that the boat headings at the various times are 100% accurate. This too, is make or break. Minor variations in heading can make this sighting credible, and visa versa. I think once these 2 things are completely worked out to the best, and most accurate knowledge of those who were on the boat, it will be relatively simple to figure out whether this was feasible or not. The planes track is not something we fiddle around with, and I think it's best to go with the published most conceivable flight track released by the NTSB.
__________________
kayej1188 is offline   Reply
Old 11-06-2014, 18:45   #416
Registered User

Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 9
Re: I Think I Saw MH370

Response to #414

Quote:
Originally Posted by LCH77 View Post
Behoerde K.-

Have you seen that MAP Waves posted two spreadsheets with times and locations?Here is the issue about them:

Row 9106 of the table on sheet 2 shows a UTC time of 18:20:45 and a heading of 353° true as you have shown in your Post #394, above. If “local” time is UTC +7, this should be 1:20:45 AM local time. However, the table on sheet 1 does not list any data for 1:20:45 AM.

Row 9118 of the table on sheet 2 shows a UTC time of 19:20:45 and a heading of 88° true and correlates to 2:20:45 “local” time on sheet 1.

This could mean that the conversion between UTC and “local” time between sheets 1 and 2 was not calculated properly. It appears that MH370 was no where near the boat at 19:20 UTC. The question is whether boat was headed northerly or easterly sometime between 18:20 and 18:40 UTC?

Also note that a southern magnetic heading of the a/c would give a slightly curved track towards the East, rather than a great circle route.
Hi LCH!

Thank you for telling me that - I hadn't noticed. Unfortunately I'm not so sure what that means. Problems with the UTC conversion again, if I understand you correctly. To be honest: I've never taken a look at the Local Time spread sheet.

Here's the problem: Talking to me about time zone conversions is somehat difficult - I find myself to be extremely clumsy with that. Also, I think, I simply couldn't determine how many hours to add/substract for lack of a point, where to start ... So I would buy any DEFINITIVE solution that smarter people than me tell me is right. So long I assume the given UTC times to be converted correctly.

I agree: the heading of the boat after 18:20 (until 18:55 I'd say) is ABSOLUTELY CRUCIAL. In the case of Saucys' Report I suppose: Timing is not everything, but without timing everything else is nothing.

That magnetic heading topic I found to be quite interesting. However, I myself can't contribute anything of value on that topic, sorry. How much could "slightly curved" mean over a duration from about 18:30 UTC until 00:11/00:19?

Just a thought: I don't necessarily see a need for that plane to be on a magnetic heading. I was just saying, that approximate 186.5 heading was a course that seemed plausible to me to possibly have been flown by the aircraft. I don't think that a programmed heading, magnetic or otherwise, would be neccessary for that path. But pilots could say definitely, I couldn't. But I'd really like to know, what "slightly curved" could mean in numbers (approximations welcome).

Thank you!
__________________
Behoerde K. is offline   Reply
Old 11-06-2014, 18:50   #417
Registered User

Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 9
Re: I Think I Saw MH370

Response to #415

Quote:
Originally Posted by kayej1188 View Post
Firstly, I'd just like to say to Behoerde that "counter-clockwise" is the word you were looking for.
...
Make absolutely positive that the time correlations (UTC, local time) are 100% accurate. It seems that this has been given a lot of thought already, but it's definitely worth going back and checking on to make it absolutely certain that we are working with accurate times. 2) Make absolutely positive that the boat headings at the various times are 100% accurate.
...
The planes track is not something we fiddle around with, and I think it's best to go with the published most conceivable flight track released by the NTSB.
Hi Kayej!

1. Thanks very much, appreciate that.
2. I agree! #414 by LCH77 seems to indicate some doubt about that. Because I am only using UTC calculations: everytime somebody shows doubt about the UTC I get kind of nervous ...
3. NTSB track? I thought ATSB/Malaysian "Ministry for Transport or whatever" track released in the preliminary report? We're talking about the track ending at 1822 UTC, last radar position? Or is there one that "shows more", an assumed flight track later on? Because I think we can at least have some doubts about a projected flight leading to the Bluefin-Area west of Exmouth, Australia - the one with the slight "counter-clockwise" turning.

Thanks again!
__________________
Behoerde K. is offline   Reply
Old 11-06-2014, 19:03   #418
Registered User

Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 9
Re: I Think I Saw MH370

Response to #411, #412

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jess928 View Post
That puts a landing area on Aceh near Pulau We if intact ....or within 5 to 21nm of last observance if not.

(Note the runway at Maimun Saleh would not be physically able to take a large bodied, fully laden 777 because of the shorter 6,000ft runway and infrastructure problems. The aircraft needs at least 10,000ft).
Jess,

you're not really talking about a "landing area" as in "landing area MH370 might have landed in", are you?

You mean that as a possible "landing area" MH370 might have been trying to get to, but didn't. Right?

And, while you're at it, you're ignoring the Satellite Pings at least after 1829?

Sorry, what is it, you're saying?
__________________
Behoerde K. is offline   Reply
Old 11-06-2014, 21:33   #419
Registered User

Join Date: May 2014
Location: Perth, Western Australia, Australia.
Posts: 35
Re: I Think I Saw MH370

Possible magnetic anomaly: Racing pigeons missing in Western Australian outback - ABC Rural (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
__________________
Gclark8 is offline   Reply
Old 11-06-2014, 21:49   #420
Registered User

Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 5
Re: I Think I Saw MH370

This is the flight path that we should be going by: http://rack.2.mshcdn.com/media/ZgkyM...ght-Path-2.jpg
__________________

__________________
kayej1188 is offline   Reply
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Mh370 sighting... not! unbusted67 Off Topic Forum 0 18-03-2014 22:43
Hole Saw Tips and Tricks GordMay Construction, Maintenance & Refit 11 10-12-2011 14:12



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 14:22.


Google+
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Social Knowledge Networks
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

ShowCase vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.