|
|
Post by ComfortZone on Mar 13, 2024 15:17:24 GMT 12
The wags say ETOPS stands for Engines Turn Or Passengers SwimAviation has some cool sayings. One of my favs is 'Takeoffs are optional but landings are compulsory'
Ha fancy that, I've never seen or even heard of EROPs before
I have a great slideshow from the USA military of various quips, need to get Fogg's help to post it. This is one of the pieces of advice BASIC FLYING RULES.
'Try to stay in the middle of the air. Do not go near the edges of it.
The edges of the air can be recognized by the appearance of ground, buildings, sea, and trees.
It is much more difficult to fly there."and on the ground
‘If you see a bomb technician running, try to keep up with him.' |
|
|
|
Post by GO30 on Mar 14, 2024 21:23:18 GMT 12
BASIC FLYING RULES.
'Try to stay in the middle of the air. Do not go near the edges of it.
The edges of the air can be recognized by the appearance of ground, buildings, sea, and trees.
It is much more difficult to fly there." That's brilliant and 100% accurate.
I strayed a little close to the edge once. I was throwing Easter eggs out the window at people camping at Tawharanui. Never got even close to a human but apparently got a cow in the paddock next door. I was too busy filling my undies wondering if my wheels would catch the fence as I may have dropped a wee bit below minimums.
It was one of those moment that you remember when thinking of pulling another dumbarse.
But I did learn Cadbury marshmallow filled Easter eggs can hit the ground at terminal volocity and still be perfectly eatable. I'm told it kept the kids busy for hours hunting for them all  |
|
|
|
Post by muzled on Mar 15, 2024 7:55:28 GMT 12
I remember watching a doco on tv as a kid.
Some 'merican was talking about flying in the Himalayas, the two things I remember
- Don't fly in the clouds, some of them clouds have big mountains in them
- Landing in the Himalayas is like parking your car in the garage. At 80mph...
|
|
|
|
Post by eri on Mar 15, 2024 8:06:31 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by El Toro on Mar 15, 2024 8:30:43 GMT 12
My brother was a first officer on the same type of 777 when 370 went missing, he is now a captain. He said at the time, the only way to turn off some of the transponders etc is from the outside of the plane (done for the reason that no one on board can turn the things off).
He was shocked to learn later that you could in fact turn them off from inside the plane, by opening up an electronics compartment under the floor in the business class section.
He was of the firm opinion that the pilot decompressed the plane then did just that and said that the pilot would have had to had learned the plane backwards to discover how to turn them off inside that compartment, the pilots are not taught about it and it is in no manuals. After the event, all pilots were then shown how it could have happened as it wasnt in anyones training and everybody wanted to know how he did it
The pings came from the engines, not the plane and the pilot would have had no idea that they were pinging and no way to turn those off.
|
|
|
|
Post by eri on Mar 15, 2024 10:15:28 GMT 12
avionics techs know how to turn off everything from inside the plane via fuse or a plug
even the black boxes
which is why this engine management system reporting direct to satellites is fascinating
you'd probably have to turn the engine off to turn that off
i'd know enough to bring down a 747 from the passenger toilets
fortunately they've addressed that access issue in later planes and the 747s don't fly passengers anymore
|
|
|
|
Post by GO30 on Mar 15, 2024 12:14:44 GMT 12
My brother was a first officer on the same type of 777 when 370 went missing, he is now a captain. He said at the time, the only way to turn off some of the transponders etc is from the outside of the plane (done for the reason that no one on board can turn the things off). He was shocked to learn later that you could in fact turn them off from inside the plane, by opening up an electronics compartment under the floor in the business class section. He was of the firm opinion that the pilot decompressed the plane then did just that and said that the pilot would have had to had learned the plane backwards to discover how to turn them off inside that compartment, the pilots are not taught about it and it is in no manuals. After the event, all pilots were then shown how it could have happened as it wasnt in anyones training and everybody wanted to know how he did it The pings came from the engines, not the plane and the pilot would have had no idea that they were pinging and no way to turn those off. I have a mate who also flys 777's and he's sure someone inside the aircraft had to have fiddled. But was it the pilot or .......
I read a opinion piece by a aviation crash investigator a while back that put up a good case that it can't have been a black ops due to a few small but important things, one being they would have known of transponders and why let the aircraft fly on risking someone bouncing back. He also didn't seem convinced it was the pilot either. He did seem to know things that may not have been public or publicly well known.
I love a good mystery and so want to know what happened. it's fascinating stuff.
|
|
|
|
Post by El Toro on Mar 15, 2024 13:17:09 GMT 12
The pings from the engines were not back to Malaysian Airlines, but back to the engine makers. Airlines can choose the level of support they want, MA had the minimal support option, or one of them, but the engine maker was still collecting some real time data, but not much. Cause its a generic system the engines always ping back to base, but depending on the option, alot, some or no data would get sent back.
Thats why it took a week before they could even figure out the arc the plane may have taken and even then it took several more days before they decided it went south, which included the military radar data.
It took some time before someone with at MA or the engine maker popped up and said hey we ping the engines....
The pilots and 99.99% of MA staff, I doubt would have had any idea that the engines pinged back to anywhere. Id suggest it was the engine guys who came forward with that info, and then they had to work out how to map the pings, as they werent designed for that.
Thats my limited knowledge on it anyway, happy to be proved wrong!
|
|
|
|
Post by El Toro on Mar 15, 2024 13:20:24 GMT 12
avionics techs know how to turn off everything from inside the plane via fuse or a plug even the black boxeswhich is why this engine management system reporting direct to satellites is fascinatingyou'd probably have to turn the engine off to turn that off i'd know enough to bring down a 747 from the passenger toilets
fortunately they've addressed that access issue in later planes and the 747s don't fly passengers anymoreYep, and someone probably did, my point is, they dont/didnt teach the pilots how to turn them off from inside the plane, so then the couldnt. As I said, my brother was pretty shocked to learn how to do it, after been trained that it can only be done from the outside. So whoever did it, must have gone through the phone books of tec manuals to work it out |
|
|
|
Post by GO30 on Mar 15, 2024 16:22:33 GMT 12
Yeah, I seriously doubt any standard aircrew would have that deep a knowledge or even existence of the more technical systems like remote engine monitoring, they would have no need. Hell most people don't even know their cars have pretty much the same thing these days. I know some of the more advanced aircraft I fly have all manner of techo shit going on but I've no real idea of the extend nor technicals of them. I'm taught assorted degrees of the mission critical systems to help with problem solving should something happen but there are many more I have no need to know about and don't.
So either there was a real WTF? shit happens no one could imagine happening or someone aboard went fiddling for whatever reason or it was taken out intentionally for whatever reason.
If it was the pilot as some suggest why and why do it in that manner? That is a bit of a head scratcher in itself.
|
|
|
|
Post by eri on Mar 15, 2024 18:43:13 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by DuckMaster on Mar 15, 2024 19:01:50 GMT 12
The pings from the engines were not back to Malaysian Airlines, but back to the engine makers. Airlines can choose the level of support they want, MA had the minimal support option, or one of them, but the engine maker was still collecting some real time data, but not much. Cause its a generic system the engines always ping back to base, but depending on the option, alot, some or no data would get sent back. Thats why it took a week before they could even figure out the arc the plane may have taken and even then it took several more days before they decided it went south, which included the military radar data. It took some time before someone with at MA or the engine maker popped up and said hey we ping the engines.... The pilots and 99.99% of MA staff, I doubt would have had any idea that the engines pinged back to anywhere. Id suggest it was the engine guys who came forward with that info, and then they had to work out how to map the pings, as they werent designed for that. Thats my limited knowledge on it anyway, happy to be proved wrong! Nope they had no data. MA had not subscribed at all. The "pings" were to the satellite service provider, inmarsat, effectively the equipment on the plane was trying to connect to the satellite network and it was responding with "no access - you don't have an account" identical to you having a sim card in your phone but you've cancelled the subscription with spark. Your ph trys to connect to the network as long as it's turned on. It was the satellite engineers that came back with the idea. Based on which antenna array of which satellite at which time and signal strength they were able to determine a very wide radius that the plane was in at that moment the "network connect" message was sent. Those collective radius's gave a corridor of the planes path. |
|
|
|
Post by DuckMaster on Mar 15, 2024 19:30:15 GMT 12
My brother was a first officer on the same type of 777 when 370 went missing, he is now a captain. He said at the time, the only way to turn off some of the transponders etc is from the outside of the plane (done for the reason that no one on board can turn the things off). This is completely contrary to what's been in the public domain for over 10yrs. Every single article released in the past, even releases from Boeing has been very clear that the pilots have full control and can turn off both transponders from the cockpit. There's even pictures all over the Internet of where the switches are... Eg: Airplanes have two transponders. There are two knobs in the cockpit -- one on the right, the other on the left -- that control one or the other. When one transponder is on, the other is normally in standby mode. To turn off a transponder, a pilot turns a knob with multiple positions and selects the "off" setting. The second transponder doesn't automatically activate if the first one is shut down -- a knob would also have to be turned. In this case, it appears one transponder was turned off, and the second not activated. Ross Aimer, a retired United Airlines pilot and former 777 instructor, said it is possible that one pilot could reach up and turn off the transponder without the other pilot seeing it, say if one was looking away or distracted. |
|
|
|
Post by harrytom on Mar 15, 2024 19:43:54 GMT 12
Didnt the pilot have all sorts of manuals etc at his house? One of lifes mysteries as where it is,lots of deep trenches in the ocean. Took 73 yrs to find Titanic. Look at Piha and how many unsolved missing persons there.
|
|
|
|
Post by eri on Mar 15, 2024 19:51:04 GMT 12
the manuals a very thick and heavy
but if you knew what you wanted to do
well before you wanted to do it
it would be easy enough to read and memorise the steps beforehand
|
|
