Malaysia Airlines loses contact with B777-200 / MH370 enroute from KUL to PEK

SBIRS huh ?!?!

I would love it if SBIRS is involved in helping solve this incident

 

One more wacko conspiracy set....Is it possible that the signals attributed to the 777 were in fact emitted from a second plane in very close proximity to the MAS plane used as a diversion to allow the 777 time to fly off undectected to a planned destination? This would also be known as the Vegas magician " l shall now make an airliner vanish" theory..would require some ground crew participation.
Also, at what point was the 777 declared missing and by what official entity? A point not to be missed is the lack of effective air defense systems by multiple governments, eh?

 

That's a very creative idea, but not possible. At least with regard to the ACARS data and the engine data transmitted, it is unique to each individual aircraft and engine via embedded serial / ID information, so another aircraft could not transmit a duplicated signal. Not only would the ghosting aircraft have to be another 777......it would also have to be one manipulated to emit counterfeit signal IDs both from Boeing (the serial ID of the aircraft) and Rolls Royce (the serial IDs of both engines) ---- and only Boeing and Rolls Royce would be capable of doing that. So now you would have to have both those manufacturers involved in the "conspiracy" .

 

I like to dream

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2

 

I don't understand why a commercial airliner would have or need the capability of shutting off it's transponders...Why would this ever be needed??

 

Every transponder that I have ever seen has a "Standby" position on the switch which allows them to be powered up, but not transmitting. When you are taxiing on the ground or powering up the airplane for maintenance, you don't want the transponder on. If the transponder were on all the time you would need to set it to something before you turned on the master switches or it will start broadcasting a code. If you haven't contacted ground control yet what code do you put in?

Typical procedure is to set the transponder to standby, power up the airplane, go through the checklists, get your clearance and transponder code, and then put in the code and after startup turn the transponder to the on position with the proper code already set in. That way you always have the right transponder code whenever you are broadcasting, and that avoids confusion with ATC and ground control.

In addition, you need to have a breaker for every electrical circuit so that if a piece of wiring to that box gets shorted you can shut it down.

So there are at least two ways to shut down the transponder and yes they are both necessary.

 

Thanks for the reply, makes perfect sense! That's the reason why I always come here for updates, information! Thanks

 

Does a 777 have a large enough heat signature for SBIRS to follow it?

 

I've also had transponders fail in such a way that they were sending out inaccurate data.

Most jet airplanes have two transponders, but you don't use both at the same time. Instead, one is in standby while you use the other one. If you have a problem with the one you're using, you can switch to the number 2.

 

How do you know its data is inaccurate? Are you contacted by a traffic controller inquiring about the related info?

 

Yes. ATC will ask you to recycle the transponder because they lost your id. If it is still sending out none or erroneous information like bad altitude data, you switch to your secondary.

 

multispectral imagery/IR etc has been around for a long time, there are many factors that effect whether or not target recognition, video/still imagery, etc can be acquired...
Suffice to say what isnt said is more important...

 

Depending on the Manufacture of the transponder, many will have a digital display showing altitude and squawk code.
Gary Bobileff

 

I worked on SBIRS.

It was (and is ongoing) a huge project. Many detailed aspects of its capabilities are still classified, and some of the system capability I do not know simply because it was not related to the parts that I was involved with ---- either way, I cannot give out any information along those lines.

 

Were you at LHM in Sunnyvale?

 

Sounds like the Malaysian military may have had more radar data than was initially mentioned as well.

CNN Exclusive: Analysis shows Flight 370 crashed in Indian Ocean - CNN.com

 

No --- BATC in Colorado. We were one of the sub-contractors under NGST's phase of the program.

Yourself --- are you an LHM guy ?

 

Yeah, I worked for IS&GS in San Jose. We were pretty closely tied to the goings-on at Sunnyvale...ground stations.

 

There is the possibility they are being given info to present as their own, to quell the situation some. The intelligence community has really come together this, but none of them want to be anywhere in the spotlight, as that is not how they work and live.

The new info on the news and the thread in silver spoke of a high altitude maneuver above the normal max ceiling for a 777. Sad to say but it sure reads like a purposeful depressurization maneuver to kill the crew and passengers, as someone in silver alluded to as well.

So big questions: Is the aircraft intact, somewhere?

Is the aircraft now a threat to the global community?

Tensions and security will remain high because of this.

 

Is there an avionics bay under the cockpit of the 777?

 

Yes.

 

Is it possible for a stowaway to fit in there? Two people?

 

Is it pressureized?

 

I'm I interpreting this as a pilot suicide that succumbs the entire population on board?
What was this high altitude maneuver? Decompression some how?
If the plane was controlled afterwards there must be a way to survive the maneuver right? If I understand correctly the black boxes would have transmitted a signal if they were jarred around, so the black box signal is either out of range (under water , to far away) or never crashed.