- Joined
- Mar 30, 2013
- Messages
- 31,009
- Reaction score
- 9,029
- Location
- The Lone Star State.
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
If it did that then the search range would be even smaller.
Having been there a few times, I can say that Malaysia has a pretty shoddy military, Thailand's isnt that great either. Since they arent on a war footing Im pretty sure whatever they see on their radar (if in fact they did see it) they would probably just pretend it was some glitch or something and not even care. The only high tech military in that region is Singapore's (and they are pretty small) and China (too far).I'm still wondering why if the military saw this plane, they didn't send up jets to follow it?
They have their own WTC in the Petronas Towers, so it should have rung alarms if only because there was an unidentified plane on the radar.
Totally agree, the Malaysians have been pretty undependable when it comes to information since they keep changing their story. I dont believe a word they say anymore.I'm not buying any of this - none of it adds up, IMHO. And they keep changing the 'evidence they have' and so forth. Maybe it's all the fault of jump-to-conclusion journalists but I don't think anything is 'fact' or 'official'
It's all political tango bruhaha BS and false conclusions.
MH370 flew as low as 1,500m to avoid detection, says paper
As the search for the missing flight MH370 enters its 10th day with few clues as to its whereabouts, the New Straits Times said today the Boeing 777-200ER dropped 5,000 feet (1,500m) to evade commercial radar detection.
In an exclusive story, the government-backed paper said investigators analysing MH370’s flight data revealed that the 200-tonne, fully laden twinjet descended 1,500m or even lower to evade commercial (secondary) radar coverage after it turned back from its flight path en route to Beijing.
The Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777-200ER (9M-MRO) disappeared on March 8 with 239 people on board. Malaysian authorities said on Saturday the plane was deliberately diverted and its on-board transmission devices switched off to avoid detection.
Its last contact was at 8.11am north of the Strait of Malacca.
Further indication it was taken.
"Flew as low as" means they were a little less than 5000 ft off the terrain.Did it descend to 5000ft or did it descend by 5000ft? Those are totally different things.
Also, saying that it descended "to evade commercial radar" is complete conjecture at this point.
"Flew as low as" means they were a little less than 5000 ft off the terrain.
That's the headline, but there's nothing in the article to support that. Reporters don't write their own headlines so it's usually a bad idea to stop reading there. But even then, the article is pretty muddy. In this day and age, you should treat every article with more than a few grains of salt.
just a few points
1). Accurate reports have been few and far between on this story.
2). Early reports had the plane flying at 35,000 ft when it lost contact, turning almost 360 and dropping to 29,500. That's a drop of about 5000ft.
3). It seems strange to claim to have radar tracks of a plane that allegedly avoided radar contact. If you had a track that was good enough to pick up a heavy at 5000ft, then why don't you know where the plane is? Also, how do you know that the plane was attempting to avoid radar contact? And better yet, why didn't you do anything about it?
4). Contour following doesn't stress an aircraft when it's over water unless it's sucking in salt water.
5). Someone would have seen or heard a 250 ton aircraft flying over land at 5000ft.
This story might pan out. But my guess is that it's a mistaken headline.
Here a bit more ingredients for the steaming pot.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/18/world/asia/malaysia-airlines-flight.html?smid=tw-share&_r=0
Do we have any Pilots here at DP? We should have a few Military Pilots.....Right.
Has any asked about all the tracking in the area with those who have flown in and around there?
There isn't much in the way of tracking over the ocean in terms of RADAR, turn off the transponder and even less.
What about Sats.....I keep hearing a lot of military pilots saying there are many tuned into that area.
Sats don't act like RADAR and in general they are no "looking" in the middle of the ocean, unless those in charge have decided there is something there to look at.
Then what about ship mounted devices? If the plane flew as low as 1500 meters some one might have seen it?
I suppose they could have but the plane would have to fly near enough to a ship with equipment to do so and the understanding of what it might be. World is a huge place and the chances of that are pretty small, and apparently didn't happen
If it flew that low it could have been seen by a ship.
Yes it could and that would have made quite the impression on anyone who saw it but again the ocean is huge so what are the chances?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?