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.
originally posted by: roadgravel
A series of pings detected in the southern Indian Ocean and originally believed to have come from missing Malaysia Airlines jet MH370 are now thought to have been emitted from either the searching ship itself or equipment used to detect the pings, a US Navy official says.
Michael Dean, the US Navy's director of ocean engineering, told CNN that authorities now believed the four acoustic pings at the centre of the search off the West Australian coast did not come from the missing passenger jet's black boxes, but from a "man-made source".
"Our best theory at this point is that (the pings were) likely some sound produced by the ship ... or within the electronics of the Towed Pinger Locator," Mr Dean told CNN on Wednesday.
"Always your fear any time you put electronic equipment in the water is that if any water gets in and grounds or shorts something out, that you could start producing sound."
Link
Scratch the pings. This might also mean the best guess from sat data is wrong. Back to the drawing board.
originally posted by: roadgravel
A series of pings detected in the southern Indian Ocean and originally believed to have come from missing Malaysia Airlines jet MH370 are now thought to have been emitted from either the searching ship itself or equipment used to detect the pings, a US Navy official says.
Michael Dean, the US Navy's director of ocean engineering, told CNN that authorities now believed the four acoustic pings at the centre of the search off the West Australian coast did not come from the missing passenger jet's black boxes, but from a "man-made source".
"Our best theory at this point is that (the pings were) likely some sound produced by the ship ... or within the electronics of the Towed Pinger Locator," Mr Dean told CNN on Wednesday.
"Always your fear any time you put electronic equipment in the water is that if any water gets in and grounds or shorts something out, that you could start producing sound."
Link
Scratch the pings. This might also mean the best guess from sat data is wrong. Back to the drawing board.
Now you say we should 'throw out' the satellite data too? I don't think so.
The "Doppler Effect analysis" of the satellite data that placed the plane on the Southern Arc is another LIE.
originally posted by: roadgravel
a reply to: Psynic
Now you say we should 'throw out' the satellite data too? I don't think so.
The "Doppler Effect analysis" of the satellite data that placed the plane on the Southern Arc is another LIE.
If the Doppler analysis is a lie then that whole data set might be in question. Someone else could do a similar analysis to check it.
originally posted by: roadgravel
Reports of fishermen netting what might be an aircraft wheel rim near Sri Lanka. Investigation of parts underway.
originally posted by: earthling42
I have been searching but can't find the answer if there is a radar at Pulau Perak.
Why, because of this plot.
The circle seems to indicate a blind spot from a radar, but if there is no radar at this rock called Pulau Perak, than the radar which possible had tracked MH370 is the one at Kuah, which obviously means that there cannot be a blind spot above Pulau Perak.
Please anyone, verify this and correct me if i am wrong
...it claims that the radar track is from Pulau Perak.
originally posted by: qmantoo
originally posted by: earthling42
I have been searching but can't find the answer if there is a radar at Pulau Perak.
Why, because of this plot.
The circle seems to indicate a blind spot from a radar, but if there is no radar at this rock called Pulau Perak, than the radar which possible had tracked MH370 is the one at Kuah, which obviously means that there cannot be a blind spot above Pulau Perak.
Please anyone, verify this and correct me if i am wrong
I have been reading that forum thread and somewhere after the link above there was a discussion about if the aircraft was low, then the radar would not be able to get a good fix on it. Hence the "intermittent" word used in the official reporting.
Did you read the pprune forum? That's not what they say, in fact it says the exact opposite, that the complete absence of a radar image in the circle probably occurred because it was flying above radar, not below it. Apparently if you fly directly over some radars, the radar won't detect your aircraft if you're overhead because the radar beam angle doesn't extend that far up.
originally posted by: Psynic
Your interpretation is correct. The aircraft was flying 'on the deck' to evade radar detection.
The complete absence of a radar image in the circle indicates just how extremely low it was flying.
Katherine Tee, who was sailing across the Indian Ocean from Cochin, India, to Phuket with her husband Marc Horn, said she saw what looked like an aircraft on fire crossing the night sky, with a plume of black smoke trailing behind it.
Tee, 41, was alone on the deck of the couple's yacht in the early hours of 8 March.
"I was on a night watch. My husband was asleep below deck and our one other crew member was asleep on deck," she told Thailand's Phuket Gazette.
"I saw something that looked like a plane on fire. That's what I thought it was. Then, I thought I must be mad. It caught my attention because I had never seen a plane with orange lights before, so I wondered what they were."
"I could see the outline of the plane, it looked longer than planes usually do. There was what appeared to be black smoke streaming from behind it."
Link
Map with her location
Source - I Think I Saw MH370