I Think I Saw MH370

[Tx J]

Originally Posted by SaucySailoress

Hi there. A word of explanation, I am on a visa run and trying to relax and clear my head again. But I would like to say a few things.

1. Adam, if you are able to share a plausible explanation for why an aircraft would have been glowing orange (and it was the whole thing) in the dark, I would be grateful.

2. About memories, which have been discussed here. It seems that since I had been observing stars, clouds, sea states etc during the entire passage, it is plausible that when I was thinking it over and over, lacking sleep, only just becoming aware of some horrific theories which are out there, that other memories did start to impose themselves. But at the end of the day, at that point in time I spent a lot of time staring at that plane wondering why the hell it was glowing, so that is the only clear recollection I have of that night. I wasn't interested in the stars and clouds at that time. I am the first to accept that now I have thought about it that memory may be changing. And to be fair, in my imagination I can now also see passengers unconscious, pilots steering and all sorts of other things. If hypnosis is offered by the authorities as an option, I will certainly accept.

3. A few media sources asked me how I feel about the comments that were out there. As I'm sure you're aware, they fell into three basic categories: I'm a liar. I'm insane. I am a selfish bitch and could have saved those lives by calling it in.

A) "She's a liar". I'm not lying. I think I have stated over and over that I couldn't believe what I was seeing, and rationalised it with other reasons. At first I thought it must be a meteor as it was just an orange glow approaching. Then as it clearly became a plane, I justified it as a military craft doing some sort of exercise. Willy Loman, this is not a deplorable marketing exercise. And I am not being paid by some company to deepen a conspiracy.

B) "She's insane". Maybe. That's certainly what I thought at the time. Remember, the cruisers at the yacht club (who first told us about the plane the night we arrived) instantly dismissed what I thought I had seen. Why would anyone else believe me?

C) "She could have saved their lives"... Do you think I don't know this. If this is true, then it is a fact I will have to live with forever, and is a far more horrific crime against humanity than I could ever have considered I could ever be guilty of. And until this is cleared up, that guilt will always be in me and with me. And how does one even begin to make amends to the families on something like this? I don't know. But, and this is to the families, I am really, really sorry I didn't take action at that time or report the matter sooner.

Hi Saucy,
You need to ease up a bit. If you are thinking in your 3 C) comment (above) as I'm interpreting it, you are completely mistaken for blaming anything on yourself.
Those people aboard that plane, if that is what you may have seen, were either dead or about to die soon. Far, far beyond your reach in any form or way.
Nothing you could have done was going to change that.
Even if you had instantly contacted every Air Force, Navy and Coast Guard within 1000 miles of your position and convinced them of the situation, those unfortunate people were beyond anyone's aid.
They were simply doomed, no matter what anyone below may have seen or done. They were miles away from you, hurtling through space and time, far out of your reach or anyone's ability to alter their fate (even any believers among them who were surely praying).
It's a hard lesson for many to comprehend, that some incident that they may witness (or be a part of, like combat), is for the most part out of their control, and just "happens".
The world, nature, sea, man's efforts, are all largely indifferent towards any given individual, and random (of course on a small, personal scale things can be understood a little better).

Take care and don't brood over this random, unfathomable event.

[rydberg]

Originally Posted by SaucySailoress

Getting closer, but I couldn't see a light source and it wasn't that bright.

I'd say that Adam's is so far the closest.

The idea of Jules Verne in a hot air balloon did hit home. Although this was not a hot air balloon...

Apparently some aircraft, notably rescue and some special military kinds, get painted with "dayglo", a kind of fluorescent orange paint, which under some circumstances glow in the dark [1,2].

So maybe what you saw was precisely that - an orange aircraft, glowing in the dark?

Henrik

[1] DAY-GLOW: Pictures of Military Airplanes With Bright Orange Safety Markings - "Cloud9Photography.US -- Peter J. Mancus" Original High Res Historical and Modern Military and Civilian Airplane Pictures For Sale; A Wide Variety of Original High Res Flyi
[2] DayGlo Fluorescent Pigments National Historic Chemical Landmark

[rydberg]

Originally Posted by Alan Mighty

The PDRM has tried hard to sort through rumour etc on MH370. I've cruised and lived in Malaysia on and off for the past 14 and do not think the use of a yahoo address is that unusual in this case.
l

It appears you were right. My apologies for the hasty judgement.

Henrik

[SaucySailoress]

Originally Posted by rydberg

Apparently some aircraft, notably rescue and some special military kinds, get painted with "dayglo", a kind of fluorescent orange paint, which under some circumstances glow in the dark [1,2].

So maybe what you saw was precisely that - an orange aircraft, glowing in the dark?

Henrik

[1] DAY-GLOW: Pictures of Military Airplanes With Bright Orange Safety Markings - "Cloud9Photography.US -- Peter J. Mancus" Original High Res Historical and Modern Military and Civilian Airplane Pictures For Sale; A Wide Variety of Original High Res Flyi
[2] DayGlo Fluorescent Pigments National Historic Chemical Landmark

If this is what it was, then I will be hugely relieved. Now, these pictures are apparently all 40 years old. Is this practise still used? I'd be interested to see a photo of what these look like in the dark.

[cwyckham]

Originally Posted by SaucySailoress

If this is what it was, then I will be hugely relieved. Now, these pictures are apparently all 40 years old. Is this practise still used? I'd be interested to see a photo of what these look like in the dark.

Certainly some rescue aircraft still have dayglo orange markings. They don't glow in the dark, though.

[cwyckham]

Originally Posted by Tx J

IIRC, a fuel dump is done at a high volume using fairly robust pumps and large dump vents (away from the engines). Look up the TWA800 flight
on Wiki and it has something about this mechanism on the center wing tank that was the probable cause of the downing (there were some refs to this on this thread earlier).

The fuels' rapid expulsion and altitude will mist/atomize it quick enough on the long way down.

Fortunately nowadays there are some fairly strict rules and regulations about doing this. In the past it was a dirty environmentally degrading semi-common practice, when fuel was cheaper and route/load/WX planning not as good.

I've been on an aircraft that had to dump over the north sea to return to Schipol soon after take off for a medical emergency. I watched the dump from my window seat. It was a surprisingly small, fine mist. It took about 15 minutes to dump enough to reduce our weight to max landing weight.

The fine, atomized mist would have been quite flammable.

[rydberg]

Originally Posted by cwyckham

Certainly some rescue aircraft still have dayglo orange markings. They don't glow in the dark, though.

Complete darkness would not work, of course, but the fine thing with fluoresence is that it requires less light, from a broader spectrum, to be visible. So, if it was *almost* dark at the time, it could explain why a) the plane appeared orange, and b) why nothing else appeared bright. Consider it a refinement of the early-dawn theory, if you will.

Henrik

[Koolinglass]

Ms Lee

I have read through your posts from the very beginning. I have just entered this forum to help with some explanations to assist you.

Firstly, I note that your first recollections will be the most useful ones in any investigation. As you are aware any subsequent "recollections" could be discounted.

So based only what you have said in your initial post, I note that you said that it "appeared to be a plane, it was glowing, could not see the source of the light (no fire?), trailing black smoke".

Based on these simple sightings, one possible explanation is that what you saw was a plane with an on board fire (with no significant breach of the external skin/airframe). From your location and anyone below the plane, the fire won't be obvious, but the light from the fire would exit through the windows ABOVE the wing level. It would be a string of light around the plane and would look like a glow of light in the background. From below the plane you would not be able see the windows individually, especially if the light or internal fire is very bright and the plane is flying at say 5Km. The trail of black smoke could be the clue that it is a fire on board.

Significantly, such on board fires can be extinguished depending on what type of fire it is. The cockpit may not be affected and depending on the location of the fire, some of the systems and navigation tools could become inoperable but the plane could still continue flying.

Congratulations for what you have done to date. Relax and be assured that you have done your civic duty.

Hope this helps as I don't intent to add to what I have already stated here.

[Behoerde K.]

Hello Saucy, hello everybody,

I’m sorry to bring this up again, but since the timing of the events described in Saucy’s report are so important:


Some days ago I found a GPS log of Saucy’s track on pprune (Post obviously deleted by now), which among others the following data:

9102 07/03/2014 18:00:45 (UTC) 355° true N6 31.977 E94 27.391

9111 07/03/2014 18:45:45 (UTC) 343° true N6 36.057 E94 26.860

9123 07/03/2014 19:45:45 (UTC) 70° true N6 37.920 E94 27.391
and eastwards from that on until 23:00 UTC.

I am sorry for neither being a native English speaker nor a mathematician. But that log I thought I understood - since it gave exact UTC times, course and positions.

Then again I simply could not follow the discussion about UTC+7, UTC+8 or UTC+9 here (perhaps due to a language barrier). What was the consensus?

If there is still uncertainty: Couldn’t a known time in the voyage (e.g. the time of arrival if known to Saucy or crew) be compared to the log and therefore simply be decided which one it was, +7, +8 or +9? That would be a solution without much doubt.

Is the original UTC log above still reliable? If not, could someone please tell me where to find an updated version or simply tell me, what to do with the 19:45 UTC 70° heading for example?

Sorry for bothering, but I do think, for several reasons, Saucy’s observation is the only possible eye witness report that sounds reliable to me. And it could be of viable importance in determing the track MH370 went on, but “timing” is very much of the essence here.

Thanks to everyone + thanks, Saucy for coming forward with what you saw!

[Koolinglass]

Response to Post 384:

Which time zone did the GPS pick up?

http://www.convertit.com/go/converti..._map_large.asp

[Jess928]

Originally Posted by cwyckham

The photo isn't of afterburners or "reheat," though. That's a dump and burn. The aircraft is dumping fuel and has lit it using the afterburners. It's a cool airshow trick. They may or may not do it in real life. The only reason they would do it, though, would be on approach to landing if they are overweight for landing. No-where for it to land out there.

Also not sure about an aircraft being on afterburners out there. Afterburners suck a lot of fuel and are only used for short sprints. Might be doing that for a training exercise for sure, but what military was doing exercises that far from home? Why bother going all the way out there to do it?

As an ex military/action man/armchair Columbo/all round good guy, you might want to take a look at this before you suggest that training exercises are usually done at home. This is NOT a unique thing.
Colombian Kfirs intercept Russian bombers enrout to Venezuela | Defense Update:

[Jess928]

Hi,
The term 'Day-Glo' is a trade mark name I believe and not necessarily a function of the paint.

[Jess928]

Hi Saucy,
I too have been following this discussion from the very beginning and decided at the time NOT to contribute because of my lack of maritime knowledge. I now however (and on reflection) think that this may have been a mistake on my part.
My background is action man/military/pilot/sports endurance etc to name a few, so my skill sets are probably well suited to helping you and the forum members put a possible closure together.

Again, I must emphasis that I have no current qualifications in all things maritime as the sea is not my chosen playground. Three weeks sailing around the Baltic and a couple of week in Turkey proved that!

I am very familiar with constellations, adiabatic lapse rates, the effects of long term sleep deprivation on the body and other issues associated with an unbelievable trip that you and Marc? made. What ignorant people will not be aware of is the dynamics of the boat's group, relationships of individual members, cultural clashes, lack of proper food to feed a thinking brain, fatigue etc. It all amounts to a potential recipe for disaster and to have survived three weeks as a group and arrive safely is absolutely commendable.

With regards to your conduct so far, again it's commendable. You've chosen quite rightly to use one mouthpiece as a conduit to avoid misrepresentation and misquote. The majority of the media will false quote to sell papers. I know, I've been on the end of them.

With regards to the possible 'sighting', you clearly saw something. Military aircraft will no be identified on Flight24Radar for obvious reasons. The other suggestions I have are if you were looking west from your boat at an angled elevation of between 20 to 40 degrees, with the boat bobbing up and down and (tacking?) could this observation have been a static object such as an oil rig with a 'flare off' from a stack/derek but seemed to have moved with the boat in 'pivot'?
http://en.tengrinews.kz/disasters/Fl...as-leak--8716/

Alternatively, in the same position, could it have been the sun rising over Malaysia and reflecting on a silver commercial aircraft? The contrails could still be visible in a moist atmosphere. Granted at 15,000+ft asl it would not be as dramatic as 33,000ft asl.
http://seediving.wordpress.com/2014/...sun-gone-down/

My narrative is purely based on speculation and designed to stimulate everyone's thought process. Obviously my thoughts and sympathies are with the families involved.

[Behoerde K.]

Response to #385

Originally Posted by Koolinglass

Response to Post 384:

Which time zone did the GPS pick up?

Time Zones of the World Map (Large Version)

I'm sorry, perhaps I should try to make myself more understandable:

To avoid any time zone mix up my questions simply put are:

Where were was the boat at 18:45 UTC?

Where was it at 19:45 UTC?

And so on ...

Can that be said without any doubt (e.g. by comparing a point in the voyage with known time and location with the GPS log - perhaps the time of arrival in port)?

It would be great if the original log could be converted into UTC without any doubt. I just don't have the information to available to do that - or I'm just not capable to see it ... Anyway, I read, that Saucy might take some time off - so I'm pretty much asking around for help.

Background: I've done a STK scenario of MH370 and inserted Saucy's track according to that UTC log I found on pprune. Saucy does get remarkably close to the MH370 flight route I found to be the simplest and most fitting one (hitting all the "Ping Rings" at the right times, but it's different from the current ATSB/Malaysian Government one, for instance: MH370 only would have changed its heading once after 1822, not several times).

So if it could be made absolutely sure which heading Saucy took at what UTC it might even be possible that her report in fact does fit a possible and pretty simple track of MH370, what with the plane she saw going from port to starboard and so on.

Furthermore it could possibly also confirm (in a distant future) that Saucy is not nuts afterall and - contrary to her own statement - she in fact IS "a credible eye witness".

Just to make it clear: I'm not a conspiracy theorist - that possible track would still put MH370 into the absolute nowhere of the Indian Ocean. And - of course - it would still be a hypothesis.

Thanks, everyone!

[Jess928]

It would be interesting to know when these forest fires started and whether orange 'outside' contract fire fighting aircraft were flown in from other countries to attend the Sumatrian fires:

MH370 Plane Search Region Infernos Close Int?l Airports | Spies and Intelligence

This may give an explanation to the 'orange' aircraft' doing a practise test 'water bombing' run before fighting the fires around Saucy's position. It may explain the altitude also?