Any pilots that actually KNOW?

[bruceb58]

Re: Any pilots that actually KNOW?

Good description Four Winns.

 

[GA_Boater]

Re: Any pilots that actually KNOW?

This incident certainly is a mystery.

The most accurate assessment!

 

[dwco5051]

Re: Any pilots that actually KNOW?

Anyone from Western Pennsylvania who is as long of tooth as I am remembers the B-25 that crashed into the Mon river, floated for a while, and then sank and was never found.

Mystery in the Mon - Search for the Pittsburgh B-25 Ghost Bomber

 

[Bullrider]

Re: Any pilots that actually KNOW?

I am qualified on a large aircraft (not the 777) and fly overwater routes in both the Atlantic and Pacific regions (mostly the Atlantic by choice). The 777 is a big airplane, but it's a mere speck compared to an ocean.

I'll try to answer a few of the questions posed in this thread.

1) Radar. It's good out to about 160 miles or so for an aircraft at 35,000'. Its distance capability decreases with altitude. At 500', it's good for about 20 miles, depending on antenna site and other factors. Those figures are for an aircraft equipped with an operating transponder. For "skin painting", those figures would probably be somewhat less. I just really don't know because I have no experience with such and hope to never gain it!

2) Transponder. It really doesn't have an "off" position. It is placed in "standby" which has much the same effect. There is a circuit breaker for it on my aircraft. Wire cutters would be useless to disable it. There are no wires accessible.

3) ACARS. Aircraft Communication Addressing and Reporting System. The best analogy I can draw for a layman about what ACARS does and how it operates is "text messaging". It communicates with the ground via VHF or HF radios or via Sat Comm. In my operation, we communicate with flight ops, get weather reports, receive ATC route clearances on the ground and oceanic clearances airborne prior to making an Atlantic crossing. ACARS on my aircraft also makes use of a utility called a Digital Flight Data Aquisition Unit (DFDAU). It's a system intalled on the aircraft that collects myriad performance parameters and sends them to our company automatically on a periodic, but not continuous, basis via ACARS. I'm certain the 777 had ACARS and DFDAU. I don't know the specifics of its operation.

This incident certainly is a mystery.

Very interesting. What aircraft do you fly? Yes the 777 is very large. I have walked around inside the 777 wings/fuel tank as a mechanic for years. It is close in size to a 747

 

[bruceb58]

Re: Any pilots that actually KNOW?

This is an interesting theory.

A Startlingly Simple Theory About the Missing Malaysia Airlines Jet | Autopia | Wired.com

 

[four winns 214]

Re: Any pilots that actually KNOW?

A few things don't add up from the story linked above. First, if it was an electrical fire, it's pretty tough to "pull the busses" on a highly automated airplane like the 777. Many busses have multiple power sources for redundancy and they switch between sources automatically. It can be done, but it would be hard to do under duress. Second, he mentions that Inmarsat pings were received for hours after going AWOL. That tells me that there was AC power on the airplane somewhere, so if busses were "pulled" they didn't get them all. BTW, I have never heard or read the term "pulling busses" in almost 25 years of flying big airplanes. Third, a fully depowered 777 would be left with very rudimentary navigation capabilities making almost impossible the bird dog direct course to the divert field that the writer suggests. Last, the writer cites a couple of inflight fire accidents. He made fundamental errors in his discussions about both.

 

[Bullrider]

Re: Any pilots that actually KNOW?

A few things don't add up from the story linked above. First, if it was an electrical fire, it's pretty tough to "pull the busses" on a highly automated airplane like the 777. Many busses have multiple power sources for redundancy and they switch between sources automatically. It can be done, but it would be hard to do under duress. Second, he mentions that Inmarsat pings were received for hours after going AWOL. That tells me that there was AC power on the airplane somewhere, so if busses were "pulled" they didn't get them all. BTW, I have never heard or read the term "pulling busses" in almost 25 years of flying big airplanes. Third, a fully depowered 777 would be left with very rudimentary navigation capabilities making almost impossible the bird dog direct course to the divert field that the writer suggests. Last, the writer cites a couple of inflight fire accidents. He made fundamental errors in his discussions about both.

At this moment I am 75 feet fron the 777 assembly line. If you wish I could walk over and confirm this about "busses" ...as long as it is not proprietary information...

 

[rbh]

Re: Any pilots that actually KNOW?

At this moment I am 75 feet fron the 777 assembly line. If you wish I could walk over and confirm this about "busses" ...as long as it is not proprietary information...

Yeah, WTH, go for it.

Don't get caught. LOL

 

[HT32BSX115]

Re: Any pilots that actually KNOW?

A few things don't add up from the story linked above. First, if it was an electrical fire, it's pretty tough to "pull the busses" on a highly automated airplane like the 777.......................Third, a fully depowered 777 would be left with very rudimentary navigation capabilities making almost impossible the bird dog direct course to the divert field that the writer suggests.

Yeah, but you *could* trip both engine driven generators and get right down to the emergency busses pronto! and like most Boeing airplanes, the transponder is still "transponding" unless you either pull the CB or turn it to STBY.

Years ago, (in the Lockheed C-141) we used to practice the electrical fire checklist when the instructor started the "smoke" generator in the center console.

The checklist systematically de-powered every (normal) bus until you got down to the emergency busses.

Each time something was de-powered, you would wait a bit for the smoke to dissipate. When it didn't, you would continue de-powering everthing until the only busses left were the emergency AC and DC busses.

Of course, that STILL didn't "fix' it!!


So the checklist re-power all the normal busses and then have you de-power the emergency busses. (step-by-step!!)

The IFF (ATC Transponder) was powered by the emergency DC bus and it was the last one on the list (of course!!!!!!)

This scenario actually happened in the past so they put a (1st) statement in the emergency checklist that said "If you can identify the item burning, TURN IT OFF!!" (pull the CB etc).

Now having said all that, I can completely de-power an airplane and use my IPAD or my smart phone and navigate any where on the planet!!


In general, the news media is "reaching for straws".

In the absence of ANY evidence at all everybody is speculating. I am thinking the airplane is at the bottom of the ocean. but that's just a guess on no evidence at all!



Cheers,


Rick

 

[Bullrider]

Re: Any pilots that actually KNOW?

From what I heard yesterday there is a 4 digit code+- they can punch in for just that issue.

Yeah, WTH, go for it.

Don't get caught. LOL

Yes, that is a term used in modern electrical systems with our manufacturing here.

 

[four winns 214]

Re: Any pilots that actually KNOW?

On my first generation highly-automated Boeing, if all AC power is disabled, there is no power to the transponder. I don't know about the 777. If all AC busses are unpowered, you're down to battery power and that's good for a half-hour or so of flight with standby instruments.. Again, that's my airplane. I don't know about the 777. It's probably similar, but since the 777 is fly-by-wire, there are probably some more robust back-ups.

On your "old school" C-141, you had a flight engineer and more control to depower various individual busses. Not so on highly automated airplanes.

I agree with your assessment, the airplane is probably in the ocean. The mystery is how and why.

 

[HT32BSX115]

Re: Any pilots that actually KNOW?

On my first generation highly-automated Boeing, if all AC power is disabled, there is no power to the transponder. I don't know about the 777. If all AC busses are unpowered, you're down to battery power and that's good for a half-hour or so of flight with standby instruments.. Again, that's my airplane. I don't know about the 777. It's probably similar, but since the 777 is fly-by-wire, there are probably some more robust back-ups.

On your "old school" C-141, you had a flight engineer and more control to depower various individual busses. Not so on highly automated airplanes.

I agree with your assessment, the airplane is probably in the ocean. The mystery is how and why.

Yeah. that thing was "old school" alright!!

Yes, most modern airliners have about 30min on the batt(I hear somewhere the 777 has 45 min or so on emergency pwr)

But they wouldn't have had to depower any busses of course if they didn't want to........... if they were bent on going "black" it's a simple task to pull CB's for VHF #3(ACARS) , the HF's and/or the Inmarsat/satcom etc, and flip the xponder to STBY.

We can speculate all we want. There's a "zillion" different scenarios we can theorize. It's also possible that no one will ever find the plane at all.

 

[GA_Boater]

Re: Any pilots that actually KNOW?

The Australians are reporting debris found in the Indian Ocean. Finding debris and the plane still two different things. The black boxes should have some of the answers if they are recoverable. This is still a long time to closure.

 

[southkogs]

Re: Any pilots that actually KNOW?

The Australians are reporting debris found in the Indian Ocean. Finding debris and the plane still two different things. The black boxes should have some of the answers if they are recoverable. This is still a long time to closure.

^^^^ Big piece too - 79 feet long! Hopefully this is it.

 

[bekosh]

Re: Any pilots that actually KNOW?

The crash of TWA800 (747) in 1996 was shot down. I personally know people who saw it happen before the media sterilized the reports.

Shot down by what? Aliens?
There were no other planes in the area and no ships large enough to carry a missile that could have hit it.

 

[Bullrider]

Re: Any pilots that actually KNOW?

Shot down by what? Aliens?
There were no other planes in the area and no ships large enough to carry a missile that could have hit it.

perhaps.
my friends who watched the video of a missile streaking towards that plane in 1996 saw no evidence of aliens,or at least they didn't talk to me about it...

 

[bruceb58]

Re: Any pilots that actually KNOW?

my friends who watched the video of a missile streaking towards that plane in 1996 saw no evidence of aliens,or at least they didn't talk to me about it...

Are they the same friends as these?

The crash of TWA800 (747) in 1996 was shot down. I personally know people who saw it happen before the media sterilized the reports.

Do you think that the Apollo moon landing was faked?

 

[HT32BSX115]

Re: Any pilots that actually KNOW?

That TWA crash, a 737 "burn-up" on the ramp and other center fuel tank explosions resulted in Boeing generating a bulletin (and the FAA generating an Airworthiness Directive [AD]) concerning center-(fuel)tank pump operation.

The message concerns allowing center-tank fuel pumps to continue to operate after the fuel tank is empty.

Seems the fuel pumps,if allowed to operate "dry", causes them to get REALLY HOT and then ignite fuel vapors in the tank. (causing a "Kaboom")

It's happened to more than one aircraft on the ground.

Boeing subsequently has redesigned the center fuel pump control system so that they automatically shut-OFF after the fuel low pressure lights illuminate for a specified length of time.......

Maybe aliens control those vapors.....(or the sparks).......... Or it could still be a conspiracy.:facepalm: I'm a bit skeptical of missiles from a single video. Videos can easily be faked...........



Cheers,


Rick

 

[gm280]

Re: Any pilots that actually KNOW?

After reading a lot of these comments and having work for the DOD for 38 years, I find it nearly impossible that our eye-in-the-sky capabilities have zero clues to where this Boeing 777 aircraft is presently. However, and I'm only thinking out loud, IF we were to tell the world where it is, it would be giving a lot of other countries some of our unbelievable spying capabilities. So I think we (our Military) is playing along to protest our capabilities... I honestly could be wrong, but I do know a heck of a lot of what we presently can do... I also think that knowing where this aircraft is, it will be watched to see what it is going to do and who is doing it... My 1 1/2 cents worth!

 

[bruceb58]

Re: Any pilots that actually KNOW?

After reading a lot of these comments and having work for the DOD for 38 years, I find it nearly impossible that our eye-in-the-sky capabilities have zero clues to where this Boeing 777 aircraft is presently. However, and I'm only thinking out loud, IF we were to tell the world where it is, it would be giving a lot of other countries some of our unbelievable spying capabilities. So I think we (our Military) is playing along to protest our capabilities... I honestly could be wrong, but I do know a heck of a lot of what we presently can do... I also think that knowing where this aircraft is, it will be watched to see what it is going to do and who is doing it... My 1 1/2 cents worth!

There is no way that is even possible. If our satellites could find the wreckage, there would be no need to say how easily we saw it...just that we saw it.

I designed portions of a SAR(Synthetic Aperture Radar) system for submarine detection. I have no idea how well it worked because we weren't allowed to see how well it worked.