Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Final two communications from MH370 support controlled descent scenario (2021)

researchgate.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 126 posts

Re: Final two communications from MH370 support controlled descent scenario (2021)

#91

Post by [deleted] »

thyristan wrote: post #3
sinuhe69 wrote: post #2

If the descent was controlled gliding, the passengers (at least some of them) should be alive upon landing, shouldn’t they? Where are they now? Which theory could explain the absolute silence?

Even if all passengers were alive at the time of a water landing, getting out of a plane is tricky in the best of conditions. Getting out of a damaged, rapidly sinking plane is very hard or maybe impossible. Also, if you would get out of the plane, you are then in the middle of the indian ocean with just your life vest and the sharks. You get maybe 3 days, because the water is warm. And nobody will find you if they d…

[deleted]

Re: Final two communications from MH370 support controlled descent scenario (2021)

#92

Post by krisoft »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #85
krisoft wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Searching for keys under the light is reasonable. Concluding the keys must be under the light is not. Yes. And there is nothing to indicate that they concluded that the keys must be under the lights. In fact there is every reason to assume that they choose this assumption to fit their resource constraints. Because the other option would have been to not even start searching. But turns out if you assume people are s…

> there is nothing to indicate that they concluded that the keys must be under the lights "ATSB chose to assume that the plane spiraled in close" based on their resource constraints. The resources are the light. They ruled out--according to this source--a hypothesis based on where the light was. > the other option would have been to not even start searching Why?! Even when ATSB chose their hypothesis the entire area…

> They ruled out--according to this source--a hypothesis based on where the light was.

That is your reading of the sentence. "choose to assume" does not mean that they ruled out other options. It especially does not mean that they ruled out other options when it is combined with the second part of the sentence which describe that the reason they took this assumption is due to resource constraints.

> Have you flown a plane?

Yes.

> This isn't a "who knows" situation.

You are misunderstanding the whole paragraph. The "who knows" situation is what you, JumpCrisscross was thinking when you wrote "What in the actual fuck.". If instead of emotional venting you would have wrote a complete and full sentence we would not have had to speculate what you are incredulous about. Clear?

Re: Final two communications from MH370 support controlled descent scenario (2021)

#93

Post by gymbeaux »

Tomte wrote: post #11

There is a fascinating paper about making conclusions about MH370‘s location by investigating the drift of wreckage by analysing balanidae on those parts: https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2023AV00...

Honestly that’s probably more accurate than anything else they’ve tried so far. I’m tired of hearing about “arcs”.

Re: Final two communications from MH370 support controlled descent scenario (2021)

#94

Post by gymbeaux »

imglorp wrote: post #89

In context of the paper, "high-speed gravitationally accelerated dive following fuel starvation", it bears mentioning the L/D ratio of a 777 is around 20. Which means if you lose power at 35,000 feet, you can have at most 132 miles of glide to the surface if well piloted. https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/56420/lift-to-d...

What are the assumptions for the “132 miles” figure? At the very least wind is going to affect that- if you’re in a headwind you could probably make it closer to 150 miles (albeit not a huge gain).

Re: Final two communications from MH370 support controlled descent scenario (2021)

#95

Post by jtc331 »

mytailorisrich wrote: post #30
sinuhe69 wrote: post #2

If the descent was controlled gliding, the passengers (at least some of them) should be alive upon landing, shouldn’t they? Where are they now? Which theory could explain the absolute silence?

Debris of the plane were recovered. The plane crashed.

What is in dispute isn’t that it crashed but how it crashed.

Re: Final two communications from MH370 support controlled descent scenario (2021)

#96

Post by mannykannot »

netsharc wrote: post #19
l33tman wrote: post #13

What happened to that other research team who used amateur radio network packet metadata that had been saved, to track airplanes including MH370 and showed tracks that also matched the satellite pings? Can't remember the name of that group though...

Wasn't the conlusion they were finding data that match their conclusion, i.e. they said "it could be here in the ocean" and then they found signals to confirm their guess, but it could be any point in the ocean and they'd be able to find such signals. In any case I googled the keywords, it's called WSPR, and also found a critique: https://www.rtl-sdr.com/nils-critiques-the-mh370-wspr-aircra... And the full critique h…

IIRC, there was one test case where the airplane being followed diverted, yet it was 'tracked' to its intended destination.

Re: Final two communications from MH370 support controlled descent scenario (2021)

#97

Post by gymbeaux »

throw310822 wrote: post #52
lupusreal wrote: post #23

The more certain it seems that MH370 was a murder-suicide scenario, the less comfortable I am with the media's preoccupation with it. News reports about such events may contribute to copycats: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17750236/ > Airplane accident fatalities increase just after newspaper stories about murder and suicide D P Phillips. Science. 1978. > Abstract: Fatal crashes of private, business, and corporate-…

The most effective publicity ever for a form of murder-suicide must be the "active shooter" training in US schools.

This. Everyone knows active shooter situation = teachers close blinds and turn off the lights. You aren’t fooling anyone.

Re: Final two communications from MH370 support controlled descent scenario (2021)

#98

Post by carlmr »

krisoft wrote: post #58
carlmr wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could of course blame the individuals for not knowing where which information comes from, but that wouldn't help in avoiding such problems in the future. I think it's a UX failure in some sense. It's important information to know which number comes from what source. So it should be clearly visible if a trajectory is prediction without up to date positional data. It should be clearly visible which values are from…

> Sometimes I think UX design should be mandatory for software developers and engineers. Human Factors is very much part of every airplane's design. From the ground up, and it involves all roles and every subsystems. > Even only reading The Design of Everyday Things would probably prevent a lot of catastrophes. I think you have a twisted assumption about how much care goes into aviation UX. The people who do these de…

>I think you have a twisted assumption about how much care goes into aviation UX. The people who do these designs did much more than read a single book.

I don't work in that sector which is why I went by the posted examples. Showing a predicted trajectory exactly the same as a measured trajectory seems like no care at all was taken.

>Good plan! Now tell us how you will do it.

I'd have to see an actual implementation. But e.g. the air traffic controller gets their trajectory shown the same? Make it a dashed differently colored line from the point you haven't gotten a sensor reading.

But by the way you're attacking people over small oversights in a comment I can't assume good faith from you.

Re: Final two communications from MH370 support controlled descent scenario (2021)

#99

Post by coredog64 »

beerandt wrote: post #87
aaronmdjones wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aeroperu 603.

Not knowing your altimeter is connected to your transponder, and that you provide the altitude along with your squawk to the atc screens is a pretty glaring wtf.

ATC does have access to radar that locates aircraft via skin paint. TBH, I’d push that back on ATC. If I’m confused about my altitude, it’s not because I suddenly can’t read the numbers on the dial. ATC should understand that the confusion can be resolved by checking with an outside source.
Post reply on HN