I Think I Saw MH370

[europaflyer]

Originally Posted by 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.

Absolutely Salty, but I would be surprised if they bother look in to it in the same detail I did - or indeed even understand about port/starboard tack etc.

Unfortunately I have found very little about the detail of it that checks out and I felt it was worth pointing that out, not least because I think that having people check through the story is probably one of the reasons SS posted here in the first place.

I hope she understands that I mean no disrespect to her in arguing that the 'object' was not MH370, and I have no doubt that her memory of it is very real indeed.

I'm a little concerned your 'meteor' video is in fact a 4-engined jet aircraft in the sunset...

[SaltyMonkey]

Originally Posted by europaflyer

Absolutely Salty, but I would be surprised if they bother look in to it in the same detail I did - or indeed even understand about port/starboard tack etc.

Yes you are quite right, yet I still have hope

Originally Posted by europaflyer

Unfortunately I have found very little about the detail of it that checks out and I felt it was worth pointing that out, not least because I think that having people check through the story is probably one of the reasons SS posted here in the first place.

Your intentions are warm and full of goodness.

Originally Posted by europaflyer

I'm a little concerned your 'meteor' video is in fact a 4-engined jet aircraft in the sunset...

I agree, but if you can find some videos or images that she might look at that we could match up, please provide. There must be something close to compare to.

[annalenacrying]

Originally Posted by europaflyer

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 (..), that was pretty much the first post of mine that no-one responded to

I agree with SaltyMonkey that it might be best to ''leave it to the official authorities...''

I don't dig too deep in the tech data here or at The Guardian articles (full of comments).. it's not my area of expertise. I try to follow the MH370 (non-)logic & same as everyone (excl. those who might be hiding facts?) I just keep on wondering

[SaucySailoress]

I am more than happy to accept that I am wrong. My husband less so, especially now that he has acknowledged he does seem to recall me saying something about this before.
But he would be interested to see the source of the data, since he can't find anything to indicate that they have published definite times and positions.

On a lighter note, now that the pressure is off, I'd like to clarify an oft occurring point... What was going on in Saucy's head. I have indicated that I was under stress but not discussed the reasons why. It is irrelevant to the sighting, but relevant to my state of mind.

It started around the point of Sri Lanka, when we moved from lovely calm waters with crystal clear skies into those mountainous seas I was talking about. For days they were over 10ft, with choppy confused seas at the top. We were being pushed way south, as far as 04'. The other take would have taken us back to Colombo, since they were too steep to get a decent angle into. We argued about that. I won, but only after a massive argument which created a massive resentment in me that the captain wouldn't do as he was told straight away. Water was flooding into the cabin through the anchor locker which wasn't watertight, we were being swamped through the companionway which has a stupid design that traps water which then pours down my neck when I'm trying to cook. The mast seat was almost totally ineffective. All our warm clothes were wet. We had only one dry berth.

The baby stay broke. The side decks were flexing on account of being rotten. Doors on lockers inside were breaking when crew tried using them as handholds. All the flour landed on the floor, amongst other foodstuff, and not in their containers. The water maker stopped working. Only I was cooking, since conditions meant it was unsafe for the crew to do so. The ancient genoa sheets snapped, and were tied together in random places. The pressure of the bow digging into the waves damage the bow roller, which had the anchor still on it at that stage. The captain refused to wear a life jacket or harness at any time, even when he was fixing stuff on the foredeck. I was petrified for him. There's more, but you get the idea.

I was pissed off, and I blamed the captain, even though he did an awesome job of fixing everything he could as we went along. We argued badly. I raked up past resentments once he had rectified everything he possible could. I dug myself into a deep hole of self pity, and stopped talking except to eject venom. I can be a bitch when I'm feeling low, so morale was low all round.

Luckily, the captain is a much stronger man than I am, so we did get over it, and have learnt a lot of lessons. Our relationship has been strengthened by this, we have both learnt some of our weaknesses. The boat is on the hard, having a very major overhaul. We're hopefully gonna be ok. So will the boat.

But that is why I didn't trust my eyes. And will be very open to accept the situation if I was mistaken. But seeing something like that sticks in your mind. I'm glad I shared what I saw, even tho I risk looking like a fool. It is now up to the professionals to sort out if there is anything of value which can be verified and add to the investigation.

[DeepFrz]

Big HUGS SS. You are very brave, in my opinion, for starting this thread and I for one don't believe that your mind made this up. I am glad that things are going better for you in your relationship.

[Tx J]

Originally Posted by boatman61

Presume from an 80's TV program.. dodgy car salesman petty crim referred to his Missus as She Who Must Be Obeyed..
Arthur Daley.. I think it was.. can't remember the name of the show tho'..

From one of those non-literate colonists, I think the phrase is remembered from the series "Rumpole of the Bailey" Rumpole of the Bailey - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia . I first aired in 1975/8, and was carried on PBS over here a little later.

"Rumpole of the Bailey is a British television series created and written by the British writer and barrister John Mortimer. It stars Leo McKern as Horace Rumpole, an aging London barrister who defends any and all clients, and has been spun off into a series of short stories, novels, and radio programmes."


' He secretly calls his wife Hilda "She Who Must Be Obeyed", a reference to the fearsome queen in the adventure novel She by H. Rider Haggard.[1]"



The "character sketch" section of the Wiki Rumpole of the Bailey - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia seems like it could describe certain characters around here (a 'Boatie' one being a close fit, n'est pas?).

[annalenacrying]

what a story with the boat my friends from Hobart sailed from Canada (east coast) to Hobart years ago, I remember following them via email updates... thanks to MH370 chats I discovered Marine Traffic site.. I'll have to look you up I'm happy I found you stay sane

Originally Posted by SaucySailoress

I can be a bitch when I'm feeling low

I know that feeling

[annalenacrying]

p.s. one guy at The Guardian forum started a MH370 blog in case someone's interested.. he's been dedicating loads of effort to fill it with relevant info.. none of us exactly knows what is right & what's false.. his blog is an attempt

ok, bye for now

[europaflyer]

Originally Posted by SaltyMonkey

I agree, but if you can find some videos or images that she might look at that we could match up, please provide. There must be something close to compare to.

Great Video of Meteor Over Iowa 12/27/13 - YouTube

Colorado Meteor 2008 - YouTube

Originally Posted by SaucySailoress

I am more than happy to accept that I am wrong. My husband less so, especially now that he has acknowledged he does seem to recall me saying something about this before.
But he would be interested to see the source of the data, since he can't find anything to indicate that they have published definite times and positions.

In the end the calculations were nothing too fancy - according to the very detailed calculations done by Inmarsat the aircraft had to be at a point 375nm south of you within around 30 minutes of your first tacking on to port at 0210. In fact, you don't seem to be fully established on port tack until at least 0220-0230 local by your log, leaving no time at all really. The aircraft making so much distance in so little time is barely plausible even with a substantial error (in the order of at least 100 miles) my Inmarsat. Plus, I feel you would have remembered if this happened so soon after tacking?

In addition, there are no airways running north-south in your area, as there is nowhere for the aircraft to really come from to the south (as you said yourself I think), which makes me wonder about the other two aircraft you saw at the same time. I can't find any two aircraft close together entering your area in radar records, at least not for the time in question.

As the aircraft flew for a further five hours from when it was near your position, the authorities will probably dismiss your claims of a fire large enough to be seen from some miles away out of hand. While the 777 does have the ability to suppress an internal fire for extended periods, I can think of no precedent for an aircraft with a fire as severe as you describe flying on for as long as MH370 did. The only possible scenario would be an engine fire which was later extinguished, but the fuel efficiency of an aircraft on one engine drops significantly and I doubt the endurance in this situation would meet the five hours required, or indeed that it would cover enough ground to reach the ocean off Australia.

As to what you saw, who the heck knows! Only you know if your were tired enough to hallucinate at the time. Of course, there are other possibilities. A meteor like Salty suggests, some weird phenomenon like a small noctilucent cloud triggering a hallucination, an aircraft with landing lights on performing a fuel dump (long fuel plumes are supposed to look very impressive, and with moonlight on them...), an aircraft with landing lights passing through a thin cloud layer giving it an odd glow, some sort of military test... You have to bear in mind as well that as you're not sure what night it was on you may well have witnessed part of the search effort for MH370. A low, slow military aircraft with search lights could fit the bill... Or maybe, silly though it sounds, you didn't even have the memory until people started talking about it ashore. If you see a skilled hypnotist at work you will know that the power of suggestion is very strong indeed, especially if your mind is already tired and vulnerable. Yes, you've supplied reasons why you didn't note it in the log and why you're only going public now... but how do you know these aren't just your subconscious trying to come up with an explanation for the actions, or rather lack of actions? Spooky! You'd probably know if you were going that bonkers though, and I'm no psychologist... But this sort of speculation is a bit pointless, isn't it.

Of course, I might have got all this completely wrong. Perhaps the authorities have new information about the flightpath which allow MH370 to be in your area at the correct time, and maybe they will get back to you, in which case I will look thoroughly silly, and be glad of it!

Either way, you have a story that will get you a drink at any port you enter... and it's not as if the multimillion dollar search effort has come up with anything better is it? Who knows, you could be the last person to witness the greatest aviation mystery of all time! Who else has a story like that, flaunt it!

Something to think about:
Hessdalen light - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[IdoraKeeper]

The calculated position by Inmarsat is a derivative of time and orbital mechanics. The system his not intended to be used to geolocate aircraft in this manner. No body except the engineers who made the calculations know what assumptions were employed. There could be a range of solutions and the published position at a given UTC could be in error. Note that absolutely nothing has been found to date. There is also the matter of the transponder being turned off. In the event of a fire in flight that is not an item on any checklist I have ever encountered. This could indicate a more complex situation involving some form of human intervention. The authorities will be considering all these things but not necessarily telling us about it. Without an accurate track it will be difficult to locate the aircraft. It may come down to sightings like SS made.

[Cavalier]

Originally Posted by DeepFrz

Big HUGS SS. You are very brave, in my opinion, for starting this thread and I for one don't believe that your mind made this up. I am glad that things are going better for you in your relationship.

+1

I think reporting it was completely the right thing to do. You saw something that appeared to match, what you later discover to be, a major news item.

There's nothing to be worried about in IMHO. It's not like you said you were alone, on watch early in the morning after little sleep and you saw the Virgin Mary walking across the waves towards you, a sighting corroborated by a sample of "virgin DNA" from the rub-rail - no, not at all!

What you saw was well described and you shouldn't feel any need to worry about being cast as a loon regardless of how big the MH370 mystery is (or not).

[MAP Waves]

Firstly, a great deal of thought, effort and time from europaflyer went into evaluating our position, which brought great hope to many of the possibility that this may help bring a conclusion to the unknown fate of MH370. But it's unfortunate that the vast majority of hope was based on the assumption of the GPS time being +8 hours as opposed to local gps time at its position. We all know the difficulties of time offsets.

What I find puzzling is why Inmarsat's position might cause distress to those who have lost loved ones, when the radar positions and times are public information, bringing into serious doubt any credibility to their claim, as there would be no reason not to make public the last positions. If they really believed their positions, they would publish them; as the radar positions have been, so that too is just a claim, which until established as fact does not invalidate what Kate believes she saw.

In regards to Kate's claims, I do vaguely recall Her mentioning something about it during the passage. However, as she has explained, the beginning of the passage was rather fraught with differing opinions, which we are all entitled to. That resulted in the discord she has already elaborated on.

On Saturday we heard on the radio that the search in the Indian Ocean had been called off and after almost three months of fruitless searching with no results, Kate brought up the incident and asked me to look at our gps track from the 7th to the 9th of March, without the knowledge of any of the known positions or times. At that time, we had no idea the plane might have been in the vicinity. She started this thread requesting people's advice on how to proceed, if at all.

As we all know, and it needs no further elaboration, the truth is perception and is often very different from fact. Hence there is a possibility that some of the stated facts may not be totally correct. However, to me it would appear relatively simple for the investigators to filter out the facts from the perceptions, much like europaflyer kindly did.

To me it would appear a relatively simple task, given the information, to establish whether two other aircraft were more or less in that position because that would more accurately establish the time of the possible sighting (on the assumption that we actually know where these multi millions dollar machines are at any point in time, bearing in mind that it is common practise for even small businesses to have their vehicles satellite tracked in much of the world. This begs me to ask how on earth we don't know where an airplane is, and really we should be going to our regulators and kicking up a bloody stink).

With my doubts of the credibility of the Inmarsat information, as previously explained, if the authorities could correlate a time and a position, and as this is the approach to the malacca straights which is the worlds busiest shipping lane, one would make the assumption, with the shipping traffic, that they would know where they were and when, and enquire with any vessels in the area whether they saw anything. To my mind this may well build up a better cluster of opinion which would make it more likely to have some credibility, as clearly the information they have been basing their search on has been unsuccessful to date.

Does Kate do this sort of **** for publicity? I think she made a fantastic decision to bring this up in the open to the full scrutiny of a large number of people in order to avoid the risk of misrepresentation of the press (who twist what's being said in order to sensationalise it and increase ratings); as opposed to being quartered by the journalist who wanted exclusivity, (and advised her to remove both this thread and her blog from public view) where indeed she would have achieved far greater exposure and notoriety.

Finally, I would just like to say that thankfully Kate and I have worked through many of our issues, and are now back on calmer waters.


Marc.

[europaflyer]

Originally Posted by MAP Waves

Does Kate do this sort of **** for publicity? I think she made a fantastic decision to bring this up in the open to the full scrutiny of a large number of people in order to avoid the risk of misrepresentation of the press (who twist what's being said in order to sensationalise it and increase ratings); as opposed to being quartered by the journalist who wanted exclusivity, (and advised her to remove both this thread and her blog from public view) where indeed she would have achieved far greater exposure and notoriety.

Hear, hear. We'll see if the authorities make anything of it, and it would of course be great to have any further correspondence with them posted here.

Originally Posted by MAP Waves

Finally, I would just like to say that thankfully Kate and I have worked through many of our issues, and are now back on calmer waters.

If a relationship survives a long rough voyage it survives anything. Best of luck to you both.

[annalenacrying]

Hi Marc, Thank you for what you wrote.

I've included a few quotes & links to discussions about those topics at The Guardian If you feel like, check those comments. There are also links to articles & videos about Inmarsat --> you might want to check EnoughIsEnoughUS's blog on the Inmarsat data <-- everything is based on that data & not everything has been revealed to the public by Inmarsat.

Originally Posted by MAP Waves

This begs me to ask how on earth we don't know where an airplane is, and really we should be going to our regulators and kicking up a bloody stink).

With my doubts of the credibility of the Inmarsat information, as previously explained, if the authorities could correlate a time and a position.....with the shipping traffic, that they would know where they were and when, and enquire with any vessels in the area whether they saw anything.

Does Kate do this sort of **** for publicity? I think she made a fantastic decision to bring this up in the open to the full scrutiny of a large number of people in order to avoid the risk of misrepresentation of the press (who twist what's being said in order to sensationalise it and increase ratings); as opposed to being quartered by the *journalist* who wanted exclusivity, (and advised her to remove both this thread and her blog from public view) where indeed she would have achieved far greater exposure and notoriety.

*journalist* who wanted exclusivity
can I ask you what is the latest status re this freelance journalist & article by that Sydney based newspaper? I assume it's Sydney Morning Herald? if you don't want to disclose it, no problem

Take care, both of you

[chris_gee]

The immarsat figures/data were released a couple of weeks ago, and the position arcs well before that. While there has been discussion of them that might best be left to those with the requisite expertise.
While the gps updates the time zone, I wonder if the crew relied on that for their own watches and updated them periodically. It is possible in the conditions they omitted one or more changes.That is they could have differed by up to 1.5 hours. I have not checked the course an
hour before.
Possibly the other two aircraft were fighters. There are bases in the area including the Andamans.
The whole episode is odd to say the least.