I Think I Saw MH370

[europaflyer]

Originally Posted by SaucySailoress

Yesterday I read on one large UK paper's comments site

Link anyone?

Originally Posted by SaucySailoress

I take that back. I wondered where the higher planes were going to up north... Bengal? I also wondered where the lower plane was going, especially being so low, since there was nothing to the south of us it. So we were on a port tack heading east.

In which case - assuming that the times are UTC+7 - I'm afraid by my reckoning the plane would have to be well south of your position by the time you tacked at 1910 UTC, in order to reach the first satellite position by 1941 UTC. It's 373nm from your position to the 1941 position, and it did not make that distance in 30 minutes. If you really care about it, it's up to you to prove the GPS time zone is something other than what you said. Or that Inmarsat got their position calculation grossly wrong! Or, indeed, that I did...

Anyway, you have certainly got a hell of a story which you can dine out on for a very long time. Next time, though, do make a quick note in the log...

[Mi Kha El]

Hi everyone!

Me just jumping in here from other forums due to the MH 370 topic.
First, big thanks to SaucySailoress for presenting the information.

I just wanted to say, that there is a number of aviation forums, where this topic is being extensively discussed.
On of the best (IMO) is to be found at Duncan Steel | Space Scientist, Author & Broadcaster
There are almost no hard data what has happened to this plane after 18:22 UTC (even before, at least not officially presented).
All of the flight tracks after that time point, which are circulating around, are assumptions. Some highly qualified, based on the scarce data available, some less.
There were sightings of a plane reported from the Andaman islands, all of them not confirmed or dismissed. But as an example, there is a possible track (which would fit at least some part of the data) here. The time noticed there is UTC.
http://media.wix.com/ugd/c3aa61_e3e0...956f4585cb.pdf
My conlusion: the time window, when you might have spotted the plane, can be longer than previously stated here, because the flight track is not known. The more important is what You remember personally.
So don´t throw away or adapt what You have seen to fit the data. As suggested, in a calm state of mind, try to remember the details and note them done (if you feel like to do such thing). An example, what would be valuable, is here
An immediate response to the Inmarsat information now released | Duncan Steel

Once more hearty thanks,
M.

[annalenacrying]

Originally Posted by europaflyer

Link anyone?

voila it's currently the only article open for discussions

Mother of MH370 passenger expects to die before plane's mystery solved | World news | theguardian.com

[SaucySailoress]

Good question on my blog from Paul Gleave:

Hi Kate
You mention that you saw two other aircraft at the time. Could you elaborate on that please? Were they following the same path? Would you assume that they were also airliners? And was the glow definitely orange? If this was at night, are you sure that it was smoke that was issuing, and not a contrail?
Thanks
Paul
(just an interested party, not a journo)

My response:

Good question. I have elaborated on the two aircraft on Cruisers Forum thread. The glow was definitely orange. At first I thought they were sodium lights which struck me as strange. The black trail is what made me think the plane was on fire. It could have been a contrail, in fact my thoughts were, “oh, but the trail is black”.

[SaltyMonkey]

Be advised, there may be other reports submitted that might also concur the same sighting, reports outside of what we read publicly or is in the press.

[annalenacrying]

Originally Posted by annalenacrying

Hi Kate,
Yesterday I discovered your story at that UK newspaper site.
It is good that you decided to report it.. it might be nothing, but it could also be a valid lead.. experts have been looking into it via ATSB & many here have been helping as well.. it is cool to see how this forum works.
Now the other reason why I'm here. I wanted to let you know that I asked moderators at that UK newspaper to delete that entry. It was based on what you described in your initial posts (..By this time my rucksack was packed, and the divorce planned..) but apparently badly misinterpreted. Sorry about that.. yes it was me I hope it won't take too long for that comment to be deleted... I feel like an idiot!
Good luck with everything you've been up to
Helena

Kate, just to confirm that yesterday's unfortunate quote at that UK newspaper discussion has now been deleted.. I feel relieved cause I felt pretty bad when I saw what you wrote.. From what I saw at your blog (volunteering spirit ~ K’S PATH shelter) I feel we might have similar passion for good causes (maybe) so here my

floydish excuse

to round it up (inspired by Haiti quake & MSF) bye :-)

p.s. now that I'm here at this forum I have to get a boat or some nice crew job ;-) have been to the Azores, sailed on Whitsundays, a bit off Tassie's coast.. one day maybe someone here might need a helping hand ;-)

[who_cares]

How did you see the smoke at night?

[IdoraKeeper]

The monkey is likely correct. The contractor(s) who undertake to find the plane will want to evaluate all the data/sightings. It will be up to them to find the plane. Hopefully they will find it. What they find will be important for safety of flight going forward. It will be worth the effort and the wait.

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by who_cares

How did you see the smoke at night?

Moonlight.. Starlight... its bright out there if not overcast...

[SaucySailoress]

Originally Posted by who_cares

How did you see the smoke at night?

That surprised me too, since I'd never seen it before.

BTW, It is with relief that I hear most news sites aren’t picking it up. That, apparently has to do with the fact that I have been posting as honestly about it as I can. The more I say, the less credible I am. Well, TBF, I have said in pretty much every post that I have doubted my sanity. That I don’t even know what day of the week it was. That’s fine.

Oddly enough, the freelance journalist who approached me said if I want it to be picked up I should say as little as possible if I want the papers to pick it up. Well, I admit that since I am so cynical, I thought that maybe she’d be getting paid for submitting the story! But that is why I decided to post everything I know as openly as possible. I’m not after fame or money! But I do know that at least one family member has thanked me, and the ATSB has assured me the track data is being considered. That is all I wanted or needed.
Can I ask that any more comments are posted on Cruisers Forum, tho please? That helps me to keep it all tidy. Thanks.

[annalenacrying]

Originally Posted by SaucySailoress

...at least one family member has thanked me, and the ATSB has assured me the track data is being considered. That is all I wanted or needed.

well said, Kate
there might be people who respond to this story with doubts (..) but most of the reactions I've seen are encouraging There's nothing to loose, possibly a lot to gain. As you wrote earlier, ATSB sent it to the Search Strategy Group & assured you the investigators were reviewing it. Now it's in their hands

[europaflyer]

Originally Posted by annalenacrying

there might be people who respond to this story with doubts but most of the reactions I've seen are encouraging

Which is a shame really, as it now appears the boat wasn't even on the right tack when the aircraft was in the area.

It's funny that when I finally concluded that in #91 (after some considerable time spent working it out), that was pretty much the first post of mine that no-one responded to. I suppose people hear what they want to hear...

There are three main points of which only two can be correct if the object was MH370:

1. The aircraft flew from the port side to the starboard side while the boat was heading east on port tack (Saucy)
2. The boat tacked at 1910 UTC (GPS)
3. The aircraft passed a point 375nm south of the boat at 1941 UTC (Inmarsat)

In other words, either Inmarsat are wrong and the aircraft did not reach the southern point at that time, or the GPS time is wrong and the boat tacked earlier, or Saucy is wrong and the aircraft passed from starboard to port when they were still on starboard tack heading north. I trust Inmarsat, I have been assured that the GPS time zone is indeed UTC+7, and Saucy is now adamant about the port tack and it passing from port to starboard side.

Therefore, with the facts presented to us it is not possible to construct a scenario whereby the object sighted could be MH370.

[SaltyMonkey]

Actually europaflyer, as much as I appreciate your effort and am extremely impressed by it, I leave it to the official authorities to conclude anything based on what SS has provided. There is no one here to validate the record, what other information is only known to the authorities, or peer review your own calculations.

[SaltyMonkey]

Saucy:

Did it look something like this?

[Mi Kha El]

It is difficult to conclude something from the officially released information.
The process of creating a possible track has not been disclosed by Inmarsat, and could not yet been reproduced, see
MH370: This is simply a new (empty) post to allow for a new thread of comments | Duncan Steel
The searched zones (as pointed out by Inmarsat) revealed nothing yet.

I would not state Inmarsat to be an umistakeable source...

Greeitings,

M.