It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
" Lithium-ion batteries are heat intolerant, according to a potential whistleblower familiar with... Lithium-ion batteries are heat intolerant, according to a potential whistleblower familiar with their technology. "Too much heat on those things, they will go into a thermal runaway, they will explode." The informant, a former senior engineering technician of Securaplane Technologies, was fired in 2007 for repeated misconduct, but he says it was in retaliation for voicing concerns about the batteries. The NTSB acknowledges that the lithium-ion batteries in Boeing's (BA) Dreamliner experienced a thermal runaway, but insists there's no connection between the incident and the whistleblower's claims. " "The Japan Transport Safety Board makes a number of interim points. This battery, unlike one that burst into flames in a Japan Airlines 787 earlier in January, did not actually ignite. It experienced a thermal runaway, as a result of a build up of heat, yet the materials affected did not start burning. While the semantics might escape the casual observer the safety investigator said:- “The battery was destroyed in a process called thermal runaway, in which the heat builds up to the point where it becomes uncontrollable. “But it is still not known what caused the uncontrollable high temperature”. In simple language, uncontrollable rises in temperature will if uncontrolled most likely result in a fire, including one that can burn through structural composites and alloys, and prove almost uncontrollable by fire fighters, even on the ground. It took a Boston airport fire brigade detachment 99 minutes to put out the Japan Airlines fire using equipment unavailable if the airliner was hours away from an emergency landing strip in the high arctic or north Pacific, which that particular flight had only recently traversed before the fire broke out after landing.
originally posted by: roadgravel
The cargo manifest is 'secret' but it has been revealed there were lithium batteries on board. May be more than stated. May be the amounted stated was enough for a disaster. Also radios. Did they have lithium batteries installed?
This is an FAA video, seems to be for air crews, about dealing with lithium battery fires in passenger lap tops, etc. Halon 1211 will put out the flames but it does not cool other cells which might be near ignition temperature.
My understanding is the 777 cargo bay is protected will halon.
The point is that if cargo batteries somehow started burning, Halon will stop the flames but without cooling the other cells quickly, thermal run away can occur and allow additional batteries to ignite. Lithium induced fire seems quite serious.
Just thought some here would be interested in this material and the background on lithium battery fires.
originally posted by: sy.gunson
What a load of nonsense... It is not secret!
3-4 tons of Mangosteens and 200kg of lithium batteries
Where do you get these nonsense ideas?
PKR de facto leader Anwar Ibrahim had urged the government to make public the cargo that was on board flight MH370, which has been missing since March 8.
Keadilan Daily reported Anwar as saying that every flight would have its own cargo manifest which detailed the items carried on a particular plane.
“Every flight has it cargo manifest. So far, the government said that MH370 was carrying four tonnes of mangosteen and lithium ion batteries.
“But the government has not revealed everything and is being secretive. Why are you afraid? What is it that was being taken to China? Tell us Najib ( Tun Razak),” asked Anwar at a ceramah session in Perak on Friday.
He added that to date the Australian government, which is leading the search and rescue mission at the Indian Ocean, has yet to receive MH370′s cargo manifest from Malaysia.
Link
originally posted by: earthling42
Well your plotted route would be consistent with the frquency offset.
Flying the same course after BITOD or even more to the east would indicate an even greater velocity away from the satellite.
The fact that the angle is less steep then right after taking off from KL can indicate that it had diverted its course heading south west before the handshake at 18:29.
It would sure be a logical explanation to everything happening that night, including the testimony form the man on the oilrig, this aircraft would have been a lot closer to the oil-rig.
....He estimates the distance at 50-70 km.
The last information from CNN is contradictory, this man said it was flying at a lower altitude, so it did not climb to 39.000ft.
At night it is hard to judge height or distance. I doubt there is any evidence anywhere that it climbed.
The aircraft could have been turned by selecting a new course in L-Nav function and possibly also selecting a new speed hold in the auto-throttle. Whatever disaster overcame the flight deck crew could have followed. The time elapsed 6.5 hours does not fit with an aircraft flying at 473 knots, but rather 278kt.
That is a speed more in keeping with lower altitudes. Of course if the fuselage had a hole blown through it then drag would have slowed it.
edit on 21-4-2014 by sy.gunson because: (no reason given)
originally posted by: earthling42
After it diverted from it's normal flightplan, it must have been descending to a much lower altitude, because according to this plot the speed with which it travelled during normal flight was 473kn, and 330kn after 18:29 until it crashed at the spot where the signals were picked up.
Of course the red line is the plotted path, black lines are flight corridors.
It has been even further away from the satellite, but the handshake was at 18:29 when it was closer to the satellite again. The path until it crashed.
originally posted by: roadgravel
originally posted by: sy.gunson
What a load of nonsense... It is not secret!
3-4 tons of Mangosteens and 200kg of lithium batteries
Where do you get these nonsense ideas?
Really?
PKR de facto leader Anwar Ibrahim had urged the government to make public the cargo that was on board flight MH370, which has been missing since March 8.
Keadilan Daily reported Anwar as saying that every flight would have its own cargo manifest which detailed the items carried on a particular plane.
“Every flight has it cargo manifest. So far, the government said that MH370 was carrying four tonnes of mangosteen and lithium ion batteries.
“But the government has not revealed everything and is being secretive. Why are you afraid? What is it that was being taken to China? Tell us Najib ( Tun Razak),” asked Anwar at a ceramah session in Perak on Friday.
He added that to date the Australian government, which is leading the search and rescue mission at the Indian Ocean, has yet to receive MH370′s cargo manifest from Malaysia.
Link
originally posted by: roadgravel
a reply to: auroraaus
Are all plane accidents criminal cases? If not why this one. That would mean there is fact that isn't known to the public, something like a bomb or high jack.
They can mention some cargo but not other but it's sealed. Don't sound straight up to me. If concealing cargo is standard, why did they mention it in the first place?
It is so obvious that you've never been a pilot.
MH370 took off with 31,000 US gallons (69.5% full tanks) and was limited to 266,000kg take off weight by the length of runway.
You can't just take off with full fuel tanks and full payload. Most aircraft are incapable of that and even were that not the case you would need a runway halfway to the moon with full tanks.
In actual fact aircraft are not only limited by runway length, but also by the load bearing capacity of the runway/tarmac and even by the load bearing capacity of their structure and undercarriage.
If all you care about is creating a fantasy fiction novel then anything goes I suppose, but pilots live in the real world.
KUALA LUMPUR: Members of the International Investigation Team (IIT) who have been putting their heads together since day one to find Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 are now looking at the likelihood of starting from scratch in hopes of finally solving this unprecedented aviation mystery. Sources within the team that is based in Kuala Lumpur told the New Straits Times that among areas they were revisiting was the possibility that the Boeing jetliner had landed somewhere else, instead of ending up in the southern Indian Ocean.
The sources admitted that it was difficult to determine if the plane had really ended in the Indian Ocean, though calculations carried out pointed to the direction. They pointed out that the Malaysian-led investigation team, together with experts from Inmarsat and the United Kingdom's Air Accidents Investigation Branch, had to rely on a communications satellite (Inmarsat), which did not provide any definite details, including the plane's direction, altitude and speed.
"A communications satellite is meant for communication... the name is self-explanatory. The reason investigators were forced to adopt a new algorithm to calculate the last known location of MH370 was because there was no global positioning system following the aircraft as the transponder went off 45 minutes into the flight," one of the sources said.
The Mail reported early in the search that fishermen and villagers living in north east Malaysia had filed official statements with police claiming to have seen - or heard - a low-flying aircraft at the time when MH370 lost all contact with ground control.
Their descriptions of a 'very loud engine' and headlights like those switched on by an aircraft about to land at night suggested that the aircraft was flying to the west, across jungle, very fast, at a low altitude.
“We may have to regroup soon to look into this possibility if no positive results come back in the next few days … but at the same time, the search mission in the Indian Ocean must go on,” a source on the investigation team told the newspaper. “The thought of it landing somewhere else is not impossible, as we have not found a single debris that could be linked to MH370.”