Thread: Contact lost with Malaysia Plane.

The access hatch would be inside the cockpit. The pilot would need access to the avionics without unlocking the cockpit door.
Hatches outside would be to cargo spaces.

Bollix.

Check out Boeing's diagrams, (one posted above).

Originally Posted by ENT

Agreed, just bringing up all reported possibilities as the search shifts towards the northern arc traveled as postulated by Inmarsat.

The search isn't shifting towards the Northern arc, it's expanding around the search area they've just finished.
.

Originally Posted by OhOh

Originally Posted by ENT

on floor in the aircraft cabin area

The access hatch in the passenger cabin. Unlikely I would of thought. Any terrorist would be able to open the door more easily.

I've seen access doors from a ladder outside to lead underneath and into the pilots cabin.

Maybe Hb, with all his visits to the pilots cabin knows more?

I never once sat and had a coffee in the pointy end when the flight deck had to be dicking about under the cockpit floor, so I wouldn't really know. I think most of the pilots I knew would have probably asked me to return to my seat if that was required.

An honest comment.

Originally Posted by ENT

The avionics bay may be another place for it, but highly doubtful, as the pilot would have to open an access hatch on floor in the aircraft cabin area to enter the bay.

How many times do you need to be told the pilot is not involved in the data loading.

Updates to databases are carried out on a 28-day cycle by ground-crew not by the pilots.

What would our MH-370 pilot want to update as part of his mission to make the plane disappear, except possibly co-ordinates to Cloud Base or the beam-me-up-Scotty frequency.

I am pretty sure the data loading is part of the AIMS kit, which is in the avionics bay, although I don't know if it is AIMS-1 or AIMS-2 or the MAS policy for doing up the uploading.

Originally Posted by Troy

Originally Posted by ENT

The avionics bay may be another place for it, but highly doubtful, as the pilot would have to open an access hatch on floor in the aircraft cabin area to enter the bay.

How many times do you need to be told the pilot is not involved in the data loading.

Updates to databases are carried out on a 28-day cycle by ground-crew not by the pilots.

What would our MH-370 pilot want to update as part of his mission to make the plane disappear, except possibly co-ordinates to Cloud Base or the beam-me-up-Scotty frequency.

I am pretty sure the data loading is part of the AIMS kit, which is in the avionics bay, although I don't know if it is AIMS-1 or AIMS-2 or the MAS policy for doing up the uploading.

As far as I understand it, the ground crew are responsible for loading geographical waypoints into the FMS.

The pilots actually choose which waypoints to follow using a predetermined flight plan. These are keyed in as part of the pre-flights. The route can be changed mid-flight, e.g. to avoid bad weather or at the request of ATC, by keying into the FMS.

The last time I was up the front having a coffee with a mate (happened to be Captain) was heading to BKK from the Gulf (I think it was an A330), and he changed the route simply by twisting a dial to change the heading a few degrees over the Bay of Bengal. But on that occasion they weren't using the FMS, but flying manually albeit using the autopilot to do the menial stuff (if that makes sense).

On that aircraft the route and available waypoints were available on a screen even though they weren't letting the aircraft do all the flying.

You could at that time still follow a predetermined route of waypoints without ever using the FMS, but I don't know if that's still the case.

But I would guess it is, otherwise that's just plain f-ing dumb.

Correcting it for you.....

How many times do you need to be told the pilot is not involved in the primary data loading[/QUOTE]

Above post to Troy.

Ent:
You are confusing data loading, as in databases, and data entry as in waypoints to follow on the designated route. In fact the routes are also included in the Airline data that is uploaded so the pilot only needs to enter which route with assigned SID and Landing runway profile as far as Navigation is concerned. The engine data will depend on the load and weather conditions but this really only governs the de-rating to apply during take-off and climb-out to reduce engine wear and comply with noise regulations.

Things may change en-route that require a change in route, landing runway or alternate airfield. This can be entered at will during the flight but pretty much everything is already entered and ready before taxi from the gate.

I'm not type qualified on a 777 but I have written the code for several Nav computers, FMS and Engine Management systems. Prior to that, I was a licenced avionics engineer, primarily autopilot and flight director systems but also a dab hand at A-A and A-S Radar.

Thanks for the explanation, appreciated.

Am I then correct in saying that fresh data can be entered into the FMS by the pilot en route, if necessary, by manually keying in required info or entering it by USB through the data loader, to the FMS?

If so, the pilot (captain) needn't even leave his seat in the cockpit to "feed" the data loader, according to Honeywell's description of the DL 950 and its mounting point and Boeing's diagram of the position of an older (possibly DL 900) diskette reliant data loader in the cockpit, beside the captain's seat.

In the case of MH 370, the captain (or someone on board, presumably) entered new flight data/info into the FMS en route, either via a key-pad, or by using diskettes as in the older DL 800 or 900, or the USB port in the DL 950 data loader which was the type fitted into Boeing 777 200 ER up until 2002, when MH 370 was produced (April 2002).

So the captain had no need to enter the avionics bay to change MH 370's flight plan, all could be done from the cockpit.

Originally Posted by ENT

Am I then correct in saying that fresh data can be entered into the FMS by the pilot en route, if necessary, by manually keying in required info or entering it by USB through the data loader, to the FMS?

The data is manually keyed in. The data loader via USB is a red herring since it is for updating the databases only. These databases are airfields, nav aids etc as defined in Jeppesen; engine data; Airline Routes and so on.

Incorrect data entry has been a cause of several accidents and one that comes readily to mind is AA FLight 965, where the wrong Nav Aid was keyed in resulting in a mountain getting in the way.
American Airlines Flight 965 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Although the pilot would not need to leave his seat, he would need the co-operation of the co-pilot or to have incapacitated him first. Or vice-versa if the co-pilot was doing the deed. It is also possible they entered the wrong waypoint as in the incident above and ended up going somewhere other than intended.

Originally Posted by ENT

the pilot (captain) needn't even leave his seat in the cockpit to "feed" the data loader

He wouldn't even need to use the data loader. Data can be manually entered directly into the FMS.

So we've gone through all these posts to essentially say that if the person who took charge of the plane wanted to, he could easily change the route the plane took without actually bothering to fly it, just by selecting a new set of waypoints.

Although without ACARS turned on, there is no incontrovertible evidence of that yet. I assume it would be on the FDR.

Might be of interest:

Waypoint data entry error led to 777's rapid descent
By: DAVID KAMINSKI-MORROW Source: 16:25 20 Sep 2013
Incorrect data entry during a Boeing 777-300ER’s preparations for landing resulted in the crew’s having to deal with an unexpectedly rapid descent and a low-level approach into Melbourne.

The aircraft, operated by Virgin Australia from Los Angeles, had been performing the LIZZI 7V standard arrival pattern to runway 34.

This arrival pattern, which had been programmed into the flight management computer during cruise, ended at a waypoint designated SHEED, so the crew supplemented the pattern by selecting a visual approach from the database.

Selecting this option added another pair of waypoints to extend the pattern beyond SHEED: one at the runway threshold and one, fixed by the crew, positioned 2.8nm before the runway.

The threshold waypoint’s altitude defaulted to 330ft but the carrier’s procedures advised pilots to adjust this to 380ft, to provide a 50ft threshold crossing height.

But investigators state that the pilots instead mistakenly assigned this 380ft altitude to the second waypoint, the height for which was normally automatically calculated by the flight computer.

As a result, after passing the SHEED waypoint, the aircraft’s autopilot increased the rate of descent from 700ft/min to 1,500ft/min in order to lose height and cross the 2.8nm waypoint at 380ft.

This sudden rapid descent surprised the crew, who noted that the aircraft was too low for the approach. The captain disengaged the autopilot and levelled the 777 at 700ft – some 500ft above ground – and flew at this height until precision-approach path indicator lamps showed the jet had intercepted the glidepath. It landed safely.

Four flight crew were in the cockpit during the approach. Australian Transport Safety Bureau investigators are still assessing the 15 August 2013 event, adding that the inquiry will focus on how the data was incorrectly entered and “remained undetected”.

Courtesy of Troy, on the Fish Thread, we have a picture of the search.

U.S. begins to back away from soaring MH370 search costs
Apr. 30 2014, 9:58 AM EDT


With the search for missing Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 entering a new, much longer phase, the countries involved must decide how much they are prepared to spend on the operation and what they stand to lose if they hold back.

The search is already set to be the most costly in aviation history and spending will rise significantly as underwater drones focus on a larger area of the seabed that Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott said on Monday could take six to eight months to search.

But despite U.S. President Barack Obama publicly promising to commit more assets, the United States appears keen to begin passing on the costs of providing sophisticated sonar equipment that will form the backbone of the expanded hunt.

That means Australia, China and Malaysia – the countries most closely involved in the operation – look set to bear the financial and logistical burden of a potentially lengthy and expensive search.

“We’re already at tens of millions. Is it worth hundreds of millions?” a senior U.S. defense official told Reuters last week. “I don’t know. That’s for them to decide.”

He made it clear that Washington was intent on spending less from now on, making it the first major donor country to scale back its financial commitment to the search.

“We’re not going to pay to perpetually use the equipment on an indefinite basis. Basically from here on out – starting next week or so – they need to pick up the contract,” he said.
U.S. begins to back away from soaring MH370 search costs - The Globe and Mail

Well Malaysia has released the preliminary report.

Malaysia Airlines release report into MH370 - Telegraph

Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: Maps released as part of a preliminary report on the mysterious disappearance of the Malaysian jet indicate that the plane deliberately flew along a route to evade military radars, according to a media report.

Malaysia released the report on the missing Flight MH370 yesterday which confirmed that the plane avoided flying over land after an unexplained westward turn and flew along a route apparently designed to prevent it being detected by military radars, The Telegraph reported.

Releasing its first findings on the aviation mystery, the Malaysian government provided a detailed map showing the flight's unusual path after it disappeared from the screens of air traffic controllers on March 8.

The map indicated that the plane did not - as previously believed - follow a series of predetermined navigational waypoints but instead flew directly above the Strait of Malacca and then turned again and travelled south above seas for about seven hours before crashing in the Indian Ocean, the daily said.

This route would have ensured the Malaysia Airlines plane avoided flying over Indonesian territory - thereby reducing the risk of detection - though it may have passed over the northern tip of Sumatra, it said.

The British daily quoted David Learmount, an aviation expert, as saying the route suggested the aircraft was trying to evade detection and to ensure it was not tracked or targeted by the Indonesian air force.

"It does look like the plane was trying to avoid Indonesian air space. It was an aircraft that has gone rogue. It did not need to follow waypoints. There are no roads in the sky - pilots can go wherever they want," he said.

Air traffic controllers failed to notice for 17 minutes that the ill-fated jet had gone off the radar and did not activate a rescue operation for nearly four hours, according to the report.

The investigation report offered no explanation of why the Boeing 777 carrying 239 passengers and crew, including five Indians, flew off course during a routine flight from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing.

A police investigation in Malaysia is continuing, but nothing has been found to suggest the pilot or co-pilot - or anyone else on board - was suspicious or had links to terrorism or were psychologically disturbed.

'Maps in Malaysia Report Indicate MH370 Flew to Avoid Radars' | NDTV.com

A full list of the cargo has been released, which includes the four tonnes of mangosteens that had previously sparked an investigation. Also featured is lithium batteries, which Malaysia Airlines only admitted to carrying two weeks after the plane disappeared and after having denied it.

Lithium-ion batteries - which are used in mobile phones and laptops - have been responsible for a number of fires on planes and have even brought aircraft down in recent years.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...nto-MH370.html

Would a pilot have any reason to take that path around Indonesian airspace if his plane was on fire, and communications knocked out ? Do the Indonesians send up fighters if unidentified planes go over their airspace ?

Funerals planned for Australian passengers of jet
May 03, 2014

SYDNEY: The first funeral service for passengers from a missing Malaysian jetliner will be held in Australia this weekend, nearly eight weeks after the plane disappeared and apparently crashed in the remote southern Indian Ocean.

Despite the most intensive air, sea and underwater search in commercial aviation history, no trace of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370 has been found since it vanished on a flight from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing on March 8.

Family and friends of Rod and Mary Burrows, two of six Australians on board the flight, will be holding a formal memorial in Brisbane on Sunday, according to a statement on behalf of the family released by police on Friday.

“Family and friends send their appreciation for the well wishes from the media and public but ask for privacy and request their solitude be respected during this difficult time.”

gulftoday.ae | Funerals planned for Australian passengers of jet

Originally Posted by Latindancer

Would a pilot have any reason to take that path around Indonesian airspace if his plane was on fire, and communications knocked out ?

Do the Indonesians send up fighters if unidentified planes go over their airspace ?

No.

Yes if they think it's a threat, they have two jet-fighters ready to scramble.

Post deleted

This is evolution in progress with technology, the latest technology has failed to locate a lost passenger plane.
After every accident humans (those in the Airline industry) sit down and discuse how the technology failed to locate a downed aircraft.
Next step, black box is redundant.
Wait for it, what is the next step in evolution technology.

First rites set for MH370; Malaysia says 'face reality'
May 3, 2014

The first funerals for passengers on board a missing Malaysia Airlines jet will be held this weekend, relatives said on Friday, as a Malaysian official urged relatives of those presumed dead to "face reality" and leave support centers.

Despite the most intensive air, sea and underwater search in commercial aviation history, no trace of Flight MH370 has been found since it vanished on a scheduled service from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing on March 8.

Almost eight weeks later, Malaysia Airlines (MAS) has said it will close assistance centers it has set up in Beijing and Kuala Lumpur for the families of the 239 passengers and crew on board the Boeing 777-200ER jet.
Many of the bereaved are Chinese.

On Friday, Malaysia's deputy foreign minister said it was time for relatives to be "realistic".

"We have been waiting to come up with a statement and all of us, be it the family members or the whole world, is actually looking for the answer," Hamzah Zainudin told a news conference.

The airline, he said, had been looking after and supporting family members in Beijing for 55 days.

"And that's the reason it's about time for us to actually accept the reality that the family members should go back and wait for the answer in their hometowns."

Families, Malaysian officials said, would be told of developments in the search and those who qualified would receive prompt compensation.
Some families in Beijing have left for home, but others were resisting.

"Do you think I will leave? How many things do we need to do if we go back home? What will life be like after returning home?" said Wang Bao'an, the father of a passenger.

"Our life has been ruined by this. We are not able to face our relatives if we go back."

Another relative, Zhang Yongli, said: "Malaysia Airlines has promised that they would not ask families to leave the Lido Hotel until they figured out what had happened and had found the plane. But now they go back on their words."

Families of other passengers were moving on.

First Memorial Service in Brisbane

Family and friends of Rod and Mary Burrows, two of six Australians on board the flight, will hold a memorial service in Brisbane on Sunday, according to a statement on behalf of the family released by police.

The family, it said, sought "privacy and request their solitude be respected during this difficult time".

The announcement was issued a day after Malaysia released its most comprehensive account yet of what happened to Flight MH370, detailing the route the plane probably took as it veered off course and the confusion that followed.

The report showed four hours elapsed between the first sign that the plane had failed to report in and the decision to mount a search.

Maps showing the aircraft's probable flight path suggest the plane turned back from the South China Sea and flew across the Malaysian Peninsula.

Investigators believe it then turned south and headed for the southern reaches of the Indian Ocean.

The preliminary report, however, left many questions unanswered, including whether the aircraft was deliberately diverted after communications were disabled.

Malaysia's defense minister said an independent panel would look into the delay in ordering a search and rescue operation.

"We created the independent body with experts from around the world," Hishammuddin Hussein, who doubles as acting transport minister, told the Kuala Lumpur news conference.

"There were things that Malaysia has done well and there were things we could have done better. If that's something the panel says, we won't be reluctant to take the relevant action."

Using groundbreaking analysis of satellite data, experts have narrowed down the search area where the plane is presumed to have crashed to a large arc of the Indian Ocean some 1,600 km (1,000 miles) northwest of the west Australian city of Perth.

But after weeks of scouring millions of square kilometers without finding any sign of debris, Australian authorities have called off the air and surface search.

Australia and Malaysia now plan to contract commercial companies to undertake a sonar search of 60,000 sq km (24,000 sq mile) of seabed that could take eight months or more at a cost of about A$60 million ($55.6 million).

china.org.cn