A Comprehensive Overview on the Ongoing Search for MH370 by Gerard Mendoza Ferrandis.
On 8 March 2014, the greatest mystery in the history of aviation took off from Kuala Lumpur International Airport (KUL) en route to Beijing Capital International Airport (PEK). How and why this plane ended up in the Indian Ocean is still unknown to this date; more than eight years after its disappearance. The scarcity of information regarding the route and wreckage location of the plane has only allowed for speculation, and the lack of a clear motive has left the families of the 239 people on board without closure.
However, a major breakthrough earlier this year has made it possible not only to completely fill in the gaps in the timeline of events, but also to determine the final resting place of the plane. This new evidence, coupled with what we already know from years prior, may allow to not only determine a motive and probable cause, but to also finally find the plane and its black boxes.
Although we have made some progress in uncovering the secrets of MH370 over the years, there is still much more to discover at the depths of the southern Indian Ocean. Despite the uncertainty, there remains a glimmer of hope that finding the wreckage will ultimately provide closure and a definitive explanation for the fate of Malaysian Airlines 370. With the facts in hand, we will be able to finally put an end to speculation and better understand what occurred on that fateful day.
The paper by Gerard Mendoza Ferrandis can be downloaded here
@Gerard,
Welcome to the blog!
Many thanks for your guest post “A Comprehensive Overview on the Ongoing Search for MH370”.
I look forward to putting an end to all the speculation we are continuously barraged with and gaining a better understanding as to what exactly occurred on that fateful day.
Thank you very much for the opportunity, it’s been a pleasure.
Also, many thanks for all of your contributions to date and the ones to come!
Hi Richard,
Fascinated by your work. With the new flight path in red is there any explanation regarding all the turns in the SIO (after the holding pattern)? If a pilot was at the controls surely the most logical thing for them to do would be to fly in a straight line as far south as possible if their motivation was to sink the plane in a remote location? Also, what are the chances that the data units from both black boxes would be unreadable after being on the ocean floor for over 9 years under immense pressure? The only precedent we have was AF447 where both black box modules functioned correctly after retrieval but that was 2 years, not 9.
@Leon,
Welcome to the blog!
There are several possible explanations why the flight path did not follow a straight line:
(a) The aircraft had a malfunction with the rudder or steering system.
(b) The pilot was suffering from confusion or orientation problems brought on by hypoxia.
(c) The pilot wanted to check if he was being followed.
(d) The pilot was changing his mind as to his next goal or wanted time to think before committing to a particular course.
I agree with you however that it is more likely that there was a straight line flight to an ultimate target point.
Andy Sherrell of Ocean Infinity and Peter Foley formerly with the ATSB have both suggested in their review of our work, that instead of following every WSPR detection, we should only follow the key WSPR detections with multiple intersecting anomalies and show a probability heat map based on a set of flight paths that match the key WSPR detections coupled together with the Inmarsat satellite data and the Boeing aircraft performance and fuel data.
With regard to your question about the black boxes, the memory is non volatile, does not require any power and can last in excess of 10 years as long as it has not been physically damaged.
On the Netflix show about mh370 There are a couple of stories of what happened The show is called “mh370 the plane that disappeared” One of them is that two russian guys hijacked it
What is interesting is that the airplane flew over two countries and avoided Sumatra’s radar entering international area away from any radar reach. This does not seem desrientation to me bur pre-meditation.
Dear Richard, firstly thanks for all your inputs throughout these years regarding MH370. I have been constantly following your leads. Recently, I watched the netflix documentary and came across an important point regarding a phone call which was made after the flight’s disappearance, from a passenger to his daughter. Unfortunately, nothing much was shown regarding this in the documentary. Hence it would be really helpful if you could provide some more insight into it in your next article.
many thanks
@Manoj,
Welcome to the blog!
I have seen the Netflix documentary series, but I did not see the call from a passenger to his daughter. Can you point me to which of the three series and at what time in the documentary please?
Hello Richard, first time here and not an expert, I had the same question. I hope it’s ok if I jump in.
It’s in the first Netflix episode (the only one I’ve watched, the other two seem to be completely conspiracy theory crap).
It’s at around 20 minutes and 32 seconds in. Here’s a little transcript:
[Reporter’s voice]: “Some relatives of the missing passengers say they’ve called their loved ones’ cell phones, and instead of going straight to voicemail the phones continue to ring.”
[Jiang Hui, son of MH370 passenger, in Mandarin]: “Suddenly, there was a daughter of a passenger running toward us. We could see her phone was showing an incoming call. Uh, it was displaying “Papa.” She said, “What should I do?” I shouted back to her, “Pick up the call!” But sadly, when she tried to pick up the phone, it stopped ringing.”
“Many of us tried to call our families on the plane. In many of those calls, there was a connection and a ringtone. We requested that Malaysia Airlines follow the lead on the connected calls. But their replies were always the same. They didn’t have the technology to trace it further. Um, it was incomprehensible to us, the families, here was the easiest way to locate the passengers and the plane.”
Obviously at this time, the plane was still in the air. I don’t fully understand how a cell phone from a plane connects when it’s in the air, if it’s reliant on the plane itself to provide a connection or if it can reach cell towers on the ground. I guess at this point the plane’s electricity etc was turned back on, so maybe the connection was via the plane somehow?
My question is, would those phone records contain possible useful data? And my second question, which no one can answer, whether anyone other than the perpetrator could have been alive at that point to call out.
Thank you.
I too, am really interested in your take on this. How would this be possible?
@Becca Risman,
Please see my answer to Hazel:
https://www.mh370search.com/2022/09/08/mh370-detection-and-tracking/comment-page-1/#comment-1992
This scene from the documentary struck me as bizarre. Why would the family member not immediately answer the phone? What possible reason could there be NOT to answer it?
My understanding is that while MH370 was still within range of cell phone towers, passengers could theoretically have turned their phones on and made calls. Indeed, if any were aware that something was clearly wrong with the flight (e.g. oxygen masks deploy, copilot appears locked out of the cockpit and is banging frantically on the door), they might well attempt to call their family or emergency authorities to report something wrong.
Richard stated that the passenger oxygen masks last 20 minutes so it seems plausible some would have tried to make a call under such extreme and unusual circumstances.
There is a possibility of premeditation on the part of the captain and moments before making the turn to cross the two neighboring countries, he immobilized permanently the co-pilot, then turned off the plane’s mapping and the wi-fi systems, so that no one would notice the changes in course. The telephony would be working, but nothing, during the night, seemed abnormal. Nobody would suspect anything because everything else would be in full working order, in-flight service, entertainment, etc. The captain would ask the flight attendants to bring dinner in advance and asked not to be disturbed anymore.
He only started to depressurize the plane when everything was calm and quiet, on his way to the lower south.
The question is: what is the motivation?
Richard if another search happens will you be with search team to help
@Harry,
Welcome to the blog!
The ship might be unmanned and remotely operated.
Richard Btw will there be a search this year or next?
@Harry,
The next search will be in the next Southern Hemisphere summer, so it could be late 2023 or early 2024.
Hi There,
I am trying to check if somebody is expert with climate scientist, wanted to know if somebody have a record of the sea vibration signal or do calculation on air vibration during this happen?
@Harry,
At the earliest late in 2023, failing that early in 2024.
Richard since the start of this year has there been any developments excluding the Netflix documentary
Hello Richard,
Fascinated by your blog and appreciate your transparency and dedication to the science.
I have several questions that I hope you might have more information on.
1) I saw a post above from someone asking about sea floor vibration. Would the impact of the airplane have made a detectable vibration and do any instruments monitor those depths? Or does it take something more significant like an earthquake?
2) similarly are there any early warning tsunami buoys for the Australian coast out that far, that might have picked up a wave from impact?
3) I saw somewhere in your blog but can’t find it now— one post suggested the pilot targeted the deepest known part of the Indian Ocean at the time in 2014. What was that location called again and how close is your calculated crash site to this area?
4) did the FBI look on the pilot’s computer for internet history of searches for the deepest part of the ocean?
5) Is it possible that he flew to fuel exhaustion to prevent the chance of an oil slick and/or debris fire?
6) If cabin depressurization was the way the pilot disarmed the crew and passengers, would he have had knowledge there there was enough oxygen specifically for him to complete the remaining 7 hr flight? Is this type of information modeled and available to pilots?
Dear Richard: Does the Independent Group still exist? I would like to contact Peter Foley or someone associated with that group. I spent 60 days on the ADV Ocean Shield with the TPL-25 and Bluefin 21 searching for MH-370 and would like to offer my thoughts on any new underwater search. I am retired. I am not looking to get paid or for any publicity.
@Curt Newport,
I was a founder member of the Independent Group and it still exists.
Pete Foley was not a member, but I can pass your email address to him if you wish.
@All,
The information on the primary and secondary civilian and military radar given in the Malaysian Safety Investigation Report is incomplete and contradictory.
1. Malaysian Civilian Primary Terminal Area Radar and co-mounted Civilian Secondary Surveillance Radar.
There are three Malaysian Civilian Primary Radar Terminal Area Radar sites and three co-mounted Civilian Secondary Surveillance Terminal Area Radar sites:
(a) Kuala Lumpur International Airport (KLIA) Terminal Area Radar (TAR).
(b) Kota Baru Airport TAR.
(c) Butterworth RMAF Airport TAR (acting also for Penang Airport TAR).
These radars are ATC Approach Radars with co-mounted SSR and Primary Antennas. The nominal range of the primary radars are 60nmi. The nominal range of the SSR is 200 nmi but with the Transponder switched off this data was unavailable. There are Malaysian Civilian TAR provided data points on average every 10 seconds up to 18:00:51 UTC.
2. Malaysian Civilian Primary Regional Surveillance Radar.
There is one Malaysian Civilian Primary Regional Surveillance Radar site and one co-mounted Civilian Secondary Surveillance Regional Radar:
(a) Genting RSR.
The nominal range of the primary radars is 165nmi.
3. Malaysian Military Primary Regional Surveillance Radar.
There is one Malaysian Military Primary Regional Surveillance Radar:
(a) Western Hill, Penang Island.
The nominal range of the primary radars is 250nmi.
We have all the raw data for all the Civilian Primary and Secondary Terminal Area and Regional Radar sites, but the raw data for the Military Primary Radar has never been released. We also have the complete official raw ADS-B data file, raw ACARS data log and raw Inmarsat data log. There is a mismatch between the civilian radar data, ADS-B data, ACARS data from MH370 and the Inmarsat BTO and BFO data.
There was no data available from the Military Primary Radars in Thailand, Indonesia or Car Nicobar Island (India). The Military in both India and Indonesia admitted that their radar systems were switched off at night in times of peace or for maintenance work.
4. DSTG Bayesian Methods MH370 Search.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/xq6psc0h9lnt23a/DSTG%20Bayesian_Methods_MH370_Search_3Dec2015.pdf?dl=0
In Chapter 4 the primary radar data supplied by Malaysia is discussed. In particular on page 17 it is noted “The radar data contains regular estimates of latitude, longitude and altitude at 10 second intervals from 16:42:27 to 18:01:49. A single additional latitude and longitude position was reported at 18:22:12.”
In addition on page 18 it is noted “The final reported position from radar was at very long range from the sensor and there was a long time delay between it and the penultimate radar report. This report is at long range and it is likely to have rather poor accuracy because the angular errors translate to large location errors at long range. The radar report at 18:22 is closer to the penultimate report at 18:02 than the filter speed predicts. Also, it was observed that the range ring derived from the timing measurements at 18:25 and 18:28 are closer to the 18:02 report than predictions based on either the 18:02 filtered speed or the 18:22 filtered speed.”
Finally on page 19 it is noted “The 18:22 radar observation was not used quantitatively because the latitude and longitude derived from it are likely to be less accurate at long range and the aircraft may have manoeuvred prior to 18:22. The radar observation was deemed to indicate that the aircraft did not turn between 18:02 and 18:22, but the numerical values were not used. Instead, a prior was defined at 18:01 at the penultimate radar point using the output of the Kalman filter described above.”
According to the DSTG, there is no 10 second radar data after 18:01:49 UTC.
There is a mismatch between the DSTG and the Malaysian Safety Investigation Report page 9 “At 1801:59 UTC [0201:59 MYT] the data showed the “blip” on a heading of 022°, speed of 492 kt and altitude at 4,800 ft. This is supported by the “blip” detected by Military radar in the area of Pulau Perak at altitude 4,800 ft at 1801:59 UTC [0201:59 MYT]. At 1803:09 UTC [0203:09 MYT] the “blip” disappeared, only to reappear at 1815:25 UTC [0215:25 MYT] until 1822:12 UTC [0222:12 MYT], about 195 nm from Butterworth, on a heading of 285°, speed of 516 kt and at an altitude of 29,500 ft.”
There is a mismatch between the single Military Primary Radar data at 18:22:12 UTC and the Inmarsat satellite BTO and BFO data as noted by the DSTG.
The DSTG decided to use a prior at 18:01 UTC.
We use a prior defined by the Malaysian Civilian Primary Radar data at 18:00 UTC to synchronise with the WSPR transmissions every 2 minutes at 1 second past every even minute.
On page 4 of the report it says:
“The holding pattern also shows that the previous turns made by the plane would most likely have been performed manually by the captain, rather than automatically by the autopilot”.
This is incorrect, as it has not yet been ascertained who was the pilot-flying at the time of the holding pattern.
It is known that the pilot-flying during the ascent to 35,000 feet was the First Officer.
It is not known who made the decision to turn the plane back, and it is not known who was the pilot-flying at the time of the air turnback.
It is known that the pilot navigating at the time of the last contact with KL ATC was the Captain.
There is currently no means of knowing who was flying the plane at the time of the holding pattern, so a more reasonable statement, based on the evidence currently available would be:
“The holding pattern also shows that the previous turns made by the plane would most likely have been performed manually by the pilot flying, rather than automatically by the autopilot”.
According to the MH370 Safety Investigation Report, the pilot flying at the time of the air turn-back was the Captain, or the First Officer or a Third Party, so it seems reasonable to assume that the pilot-flying at the time of the holding pattern was, in order of decreasing probability, the First Officer, The Captain, a third party who was aboard the plane, or that the plane at that stage was under remote management by an external third party.
Thank you for clarifying what is reliably known about the Malaysian radar data. I do not believe the Malaysian authorities have data for the Malacca Strait. I have been working with the communication from a unit on Perak island to the cockpit printer of MH370, which went unanswered, as being reliable. Then the Inmarsat data. I believe after his series of turns around Perang Island – sentimentality or to see if they were scrambling the jets at Butterworth Airforce Base – he flew visually using the lighthouse on Perak Island and then the Indonesian coastline confirmed by King William III lighthouse on Breueh Island.
@TommyL,
As editor of this web site, I disagree. I defer to the author for his opinion.
You admit there are 4 theoretical possibilities of who was flying MH370 after the diversion.
You agree that one of those 4 possibilities is Captain Zaharie Shah.
On the same page, to which you refer, you will read that at the start of the section titled “Putting The Pieces Together” the prevailing hypothesis is that it was a murder suicide by the Captain.
The data found on Captain Zaharie Shah’s home flight simulator is at the very least a smoking gun.
The fact that Captain Zaharie Shah was against the corruption of the then Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak, who is meanwhile serving a prison sentence for corruption estimated at $700 M into his own bank account in the 1MDB scandal, has been established by a court of law.
The fact that Captain Zaharie Shah had opportunity, motive and means to hijack his own aircraft has been established.
The fact that the timing between the last ACARS message and the disabling the ACARS system, disabling the transponders, crossing into Vietnam airspace and the diversion back over Malaysia allowed very little time for anyone else to hijack the aircraft has been established.
The fact that no hijacker or terrorist group has ever made any public demand has been established.
The WSPR research has shown that there was an active pilot and the aircraft made various turns and climbs following diversion.
It is a bona fide hypothesis and not an “incorrect” statement to have a working hypothesis that the perpetrator was Captain Zaharie Shah.
The article states: “This theory attempts to reconcile the facts with the evidence recovered but cannot be validated until the black boxes are found.”
The article states: “Speculation is Worthless Without Proof”.
With regard to “Speculation is Worthless Without Proof”,
I did speculate as to who had control of 9M MRO after the holding pattern, based on the very limited evidence that is available.
There is no evidence that anybody other than the First Officer had control of the plane at any time after it left Kuala Lumpur.
There is evidence that the Captain failed to make contact with Ho Chi Minh ATC and failed to repeat to KL ATC the frequency on which he was supposed to contact HCM.
There is also evidence that the First Officer’s mobile phone was switched on at the time the plane passed Penang.
While recovery of the wreckage is very important, and will help to bring closure for the relatives and friends of those on board, it makes complete sense for Interpol and any other criminal investigators to focus, in the interim, on the period between when the Captain repeated the flight level without being asked to, and the moment the plane stopped communicating.
The key unresolved question from that brief period is whether or not the Captain failed to contact HCM by his own choice, as part of a fiendish suicide/murder plot, or whether he failed to do so because he was unable to.
While a lot of speculation has focussed on the former, it is, in my opinion, slightly more likely, based on the available evidence from the flight, that he was unable to communicate with HCM, and that is why the First Officer, most probably, turned the plane around, either by his own choice or under instruction from the Captain or a third party.
This could, potentially, explain why the First Officer, also unable to communicate using the plane’s communications systems, switched on his mobile phone and may have attempted to use it to request assistance and permission for an emergency landing at Penang / Butterworth.
I fully acccept and understand that you and the author of the latest report, Gerard Mendoza Ferrandis, are of the opinion that it is more likely that the Captain took control of the plane.
Richard have you had any independent validation of WSPR yet. Can you refer us to that. Also did you ever publish your technical paper so others can reproduce your data?
@Cameron Townshend,
Welcome to the blog!
We are in the middle of a large scale study and independent validation of WSPR. Once the study is complete from our side, the plan is to send all our data to a team at Liverpool University to allow them to reproduce our results. The process will take another 3 months.
Hi Richard,
This is my first time on the site and I give massive congratulations for what you have right now. I am a second year aerospace engineer studying at Liverpool University and would love to get involved wherever possible, please get in touch if you need.
@Meiven Moreno,
Many thanks for your offer of support.
I advise you to contact Prof. Simon Maskell at Liverpool University who is fully informed of our research.
I hope the candidate site you propose will contain the wreckage, I don’t necessarily believe it will be found further north but I do support your analysis, I hope you can prove me and anyone else wrong, I’m careful to understand the predicted location is just a hypothesis based on circumstantial evidence and it’s not proven, I fully support all the effort you’ve put in and looking forward to a new search soon.
@Mike R,
You are correct that the MH370 flight path analysis based on WSPR technology is a hypothesis, but it is not based on “circumstantial evidence” as you claim.
The hypothesis is based on a statistical analysis of the historic WSPRnet database. The WSPRnet database provides a large number of global radio transmissions. The fact that a radio transmission has been received is proven by the exchange of the WSPR protocol.
The null hypothesis is: WSPRnet links show statistically significant anomalies when an aircraft is not on the great circle path between the transmitter and receiver.
The alternative hypothesis is: WSPRnet links show statistically significant anomalies when an aircraft is on the great circle path between the transmitter and receiver.
The goal is to demonstrate a statistically significant number of examples of the alternative hypothesis and show that the alternative hypothesis is generally true, whilst at the same time demonstrate a statistically significant number of examples of the null hypothesis and show that the null hypothesis is generally false.
@All,
A new article by Geoffrey Thomas of airlineratings.com titled “MH370: End Destructive Bickering and Nonsense”
https://www.airlineratings.com/news/mh370-end-destructive-bickering-and-nonsense/
On the ninth anniversary of the loss of MH370, I appeal for all official and independent investigators to work together to support a new underwater search and help solve the mystery of MH370.
I am already working together with Blaine Gibson, Charitha Pattiaratchi, Prof. Simon Maskell, Andy Sherrell, Pete Foley and many others to achieve the goal of finding MH370 and determining the cause of the disappearance.
I invite others to join us.
@All,
Geoffrey Thomas of airlineratings.com has published a link to the article by Gerard Mendoza Ferrandis titled “A Comprehensive Overview on the Ongoing Search for MH370” and featured in this post.
https://www.airlineratings.com/news/mh370-a-comprehensive-overview/
It is an honour to have my work read and published by Geoffrey Thomas. Thank you for the support.
@Gerard,
You deserve the recognition!
You kept an open mind and you did your homework.
Shouldn’t Ocean Infinity request for more information from the Malaysian government before initiating a search, it sounds like the most logical thing do, the Malaysian Royal Air Force never published the military radar data that shows the turnback, they also never released the full data of the Captain’s simulator, however I feel the latter is insufficient to help us start a new search while I believe the former to be more significant to the event.
@Mike R,
I agree that it would be helpful that all investigators share all the information they have publicly. You mention the Malaysian military radar and the full FBI report on the simulator data as two examples of information not made public.
I do not agree that disclosure of this information is a prerequisite for a new search.
@All,
Are there any radio communications with MH370 that have not been publicly disclosed?
SATCOM communications would be logged and there were none in the log from MH370 in the timeframe of the aircraft’s disappearance.
VHF radio communications would have been picked up by others and VHF radio frequencies are often monitored, but VHF only works over shorter distances. VHF radio uses the frequencies 118.000 MHz to 136.975 MHz in 25 KHz steps, which allows 759 different frequencies.
HF radio communications is a different matter.
HF radio allow long distance transmissions and uses the frequencies 2.000 MHz to 29.999 MHz in 1 KHz steps. You would have to continuously monitor 28,000 different frequencies in order to be sure to pick up every HF radio communication. A perpetrator would have to have a designated frequency by prior agreement or a perpetrator could demand a frequency allocation to negotiate. A pilot would know the designated frequencies to communicate with base operations or trans oceanic air traffic controllers.
The chances of a HF radio communication being picked up by others at a particular time on a particular frequency is small. It is possible though, that someone somewhere monitored a HF radio communication by MH370 following its diversion.
Two cases to consider. Case-1: If the perpetrator was acting alone to hide the flight path and achieve deniability, then radio-silence may have the goal. Case-2 (somewhat popular but totally without evidence) is some negotiations with a “ground team” typically for diversion to Xmas Island. Case-2 is looking much less realistic these days, but we have to concede not impossible. In other words, I’d say ~99% we witnessed an act of air piracy, but the exact nature of the “plan” we are less clear, though I’d say 80+% Case-1.
re:”Are there any radio communications with MH370 that have not been publicly disclosed?”
On the 9th March 2014 the New Straits Times reported that the captain of a commercial flight to Tokyo (Narita), at the request of HCM air traffic control, made brief contact with MH370 on an emergency freqeuency.
The pilot noted that he heard no Mayday call from MH370, that there was a lot of static and that he heard mumbling. He also noted that his radio transmission would have been picked up by any other aircraft or naval vessels in the vicinity.
While not certain, he was fairly confident that the mumbling voice was that of the First Officer, rather than the Captain.
At the time, *just after 1.30″, he was thirty minutes ahead of MH370’s scheduled position.
By then the planes would have been over 200 miles apart and MH370 was already heading in the opposite direction, which might explain the static and why contact was lost after a short period.
There can be any number of speculations as to why the First Officer was heard ‘mumbling’, but the most likely explanation (ie greater than 50% probabilty) would be that he was wearing an oxygen mask.
@All,
Geoffrey Thomas at airlineratings.com has published an article titled “MH370 Expert slams new Netflix series”:
https://www.airlineratings.com/news/mh370-expert-slams-new-netflix-series/
Is there any chance the autopilot was simply set to an unreachable destination like AQ YCSK? Unlike most of the planet, there are very few waypoints that this flight could have been heading for. Why not simulate them all?
@Kevin English,
Welcome to the blog!
I undertook an analysis of all waypoints in 2016. You can view a copy in the archive section of this website and sub-section Flight Path Analysis:
1st February 2016 – Comparison of MH370 Flight Paths Based on Waypoints – Duncan Steel’s Blog
@All,
Geoffrey Thomas at airlineratings.com has published my list of the 10 major errors in the Netflix documentary series:
https://www.airlineratings.com/news/ten-major-errors-in-netflix-mh370-documentary/
How easy is it for the pilot to turn off the black boxes? If it’s possible for the pilot to turn off the black boxes, wouldn’t Zaharie likely have done that, considering all the effort he apparently put into avoiding detection?
@Katrine,
Welcome to the blog!
It is not possible for the pilot to switch off the black boxes.
Dear Richard, Thank you for all the work you are doing and trying to solve the big miracle around MH370. I listened to the podcast “Flugforensik” by Benjamin Denes and Andreas Spaeth about the case. In the podcast, it is said that it would not be possible to completely switch off the ACARS system from the cockpit for this type of Boeing777, but it would be necessary to enter the avionics room. Do you share this opinion? I think that it is very important for the line of events. And please allow me a second question: In the (more serious) media coverage, I find contradictory information of the private flight simulator activity of the Captain. Sometimes it is written that he practiced a similar route, ending in the SIP going out of fuel. Other reports say that this is not correct, as he would have practiced landing on a short runway on an island in the SIO. These are different versions. Do you know which one is correct and where this can be verified?
Please keep going with your work! I hope you will be successful!
@Jana,
Welcome to the blog!
It is very simple to close down the Inmarsat satellite connection and hence the ACARS reporting that runs via the satellite connection from the cockpit.
We have the data from the home flight simulator of Captain Zaharie Shah, which shows a simulation until zero fuel and nowhere near any island in the SIO.
ACARS can be stopped from the cockpit computer menu, so your source is wrong. Many of us believe that was actually done. As Richard mentions, the other option is to cut off SATCOM from the cockpit, by cutting off LEFT BUS electric circuit.
@TBill,
You do not have to power down the SATCOM to stop ACARS transmissions via the SATCOM. You can logoff the SATCOM from the current satellite connection and simply not logon to the next satellite available.
Richard – it is hard to get confirmation from Boeing, but my understanding from past discussions, is the Rt XFER BUS, if depowered, cuts power to the DFDR. LT XFER Bus, if depowered, cuts CVR. Not to mention EE Bay breakers, if the perp wanted to go down there.
@TBill,
The Boeing Manual confirms that the Cockpit Voice Recorder is powered from the 115V AC Left Transfer Bus and the the Flight Data Recorder is powered from the 115V AC Right Transfer Bus.
@All,
There is universal condemnation of the Netflix MH370 documentary series.
Naren of the MH370 next of kin has published this damning review:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/0sapb1ctgpmzd0e/Naren%20Review%20of%20Netflix%20MH370%20Documentary%20Series.pdf?dl=0
Mike Exner of the Independent Group (IG) has published this damning review:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ukq7zwpgiug2oh1/Exner%20Review%20of%20Netflix%20MH370%20Documentary%20Series.pdf?dl=0
Geoffrey Thomas of airlineratings.com has published these two damning reviews:
https://www.airlineratings.com/news/mh370-expert-slams-new-netflix-series/
https://www.airlineratings.com/news/ten-major-errors-in-netflix-mh370-documentary/
Alec Bojalad a TV critic has published this damning review:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/s1ibl4tbufyipg0/What%20Netflix%27s%20Malaysia%20Airlines%20Flight%20MH370%20Documentary%20Gets%20Wrong%20%7C%20Den%20of%20Geek.pdf?dl=0
Hi Richard, I’m a big fan of your work.
Do you believe the aircraft entered the water at a nearly vertical angle?
I saw a short video on YouTube which said a mathematician had modeled the crash and at a vertical angle, there is much less debris breakup – meaning there would be less debris found – explaining how we have only found some debris.
@Rory Ingram,
Welcome to the blog!
I do not believe the angle was nearly vertical, but very steep none the less.
I have worked on many military crash investigations. If in fact the aircraft hit the water at high speed and a high angle of attack, I can state from previous experience that the debris field might be very small; far less than Air India Flight 182, which I worked on. That one was about 10 nm x 5 nm.
@All,
A new article by Geoffrey Thomas of airlineratings.com titled: “MH370 Debris: Now for the Facts”.
https://www.airlineratings.com/news/mh370-debris-now-for-the-facts/
“The recent MH370 “show” broadcast by Netflix seriously questioned the integrity of the debris from the downed Boeing 777 and that of the many people who found the pieces.”
“Blaine has been vilified by a number of people who have suggested either directly or indirectly, that he is just seeking publicity and incredibly “planting” debris.”
“Nothing could be further from the truth.”
“The reality is so very different that when the truth emerges it’s almost not recognisable.”
@All,
A new article by Alex Berezow, PhD, Executive Editor | Big Think titled: “What happened to Flight MH370? Don’t believe what Netflix’s documentary tells you”
https://bigthink.com/the-present/what-happened-flight-mh370-netflix-documentary/
“Unless it’s on National Geographic, I am deeply skeptical of documentaries. It seems that many films that label themselves as such are primarily about presenting a polished, highly persuasive narrative — but whether that narrative is true is of secondary importance.”
“Richard Godfrey, an avionics expert who has studied MH370 for nearly a decade and has extensive experience designing and operating electronic systems for commercial and military aircraft, told Big Think in an interview, ‘Most evidence points to a murder-suicide by the Captain Zaharie Shah, although most evidence is insufficient to stand up in a court of law.'”
“But instead of giving the 239 suffering families and the public at large a true story, Netflix exploited the pain caused by a horrifying tragedy to push lies and conspiracies to boost its viewership. Shame on them.”
Dear Richard,
The mystery surrounding this tragedy has fascinated me from day one and I admire your work enormously.
There is one aspect that I cannot get my head around, and that relates to Captain Zaharie Shah from a psychological perspective, and his possible motivation. It is known that during the year prior to MH370 going missing he had become more politically involved, and was opposed to the Malaysian government’s arrest of a member of the opposition party on sodomy charges, who I believe was a distant relative. The popular hypothesis is that his actions were politically motivated.
As I understand it, the “practice” flight on his home simulator was taken a month before this arrest occurred. The arrest happened on the morning of the flight. This may explain a sudden emotionally charged, impulsive decision to hijack is own plane that same day, but how does it explain his motivation a month prior to practice a similar murderous route on his simulator? What was his motivation at that point?
What puzzles me most is that in hijacking his own plane, it seems to me he could only have had one of three main motives:
1) to force some kind of outcome or solution to his grievance, whatever that was and whoever it was with. Surely this would have required him to communicate from the cockpit with somebody on the ground. Would it have been possible for him to have communicated privately from the cockpit, without that conversation being heard by anybody else over the radio and revealed to the public by now?
2) An act of revenge or to make some sort of statement. But this only makes sense if he had claimed responsibility for doing so, and as far as we know, he didn’t leave a note or communicate anything at all to make any motivation known.
3) He was a lunatic and had no logical reason at all for what he did. Except he was not known to suffer from any mental illness, had a spotless professional record, was well respected amongst his colleagues and was an active member of the community. This seems so at odds with the description of everyone who knew him.
I apologise if this is a stupid question, I’m not a scientist or aviation expert… is it possible that all of the navigation, tracking and communication equipment on the plane malfunctioned, but the engines kept running? So he turned back and flew manually but essentially blind towards Malaysia, where he knew the lay of the land better, but was unable to put in a mayday call, and due to cloud cover couldn’t see to land? Could he have simply got lost in the dead of night over the ocean with no visual reference points, and didn’t give up until the plane ran out of fuel? With my very unexpert perspective, that makes more sense to me than a very elaborate plan to disappear a plane and murder all those people for no apparent reason. Perhaps you have a moment to read this and give your thoughts.
In any case, I sincerely hope that all your hard work results in a renewed search very soon.
@Laura,
Welcome to the blog!
Anwar Ibraham was first detained without trial in 1998. There is a long history behind government corruption in Malaysia and attempts by the government to prevent political opposition. Captain Zaharie Shah was a active supporter of the opposition party led by Anwar Ibraham.
It is not possible to ensure privacy when using the aircraft communications systems. With 3 VHF radio systems, 2 HF radio system and a satellite telephone it is highly unlikely that all 6 communication systems stopped working at the same time, whilst at the same time the aircraft managed to fly for 7 hours 37 minutes.
I have asked a professional psychiatrist to profile Captain Zaharie Shah and the conclusion was that there is no certain psychological evidence for a murder/suicide hijack.
There are numerous navigation systems on a Boeing 777 with redundancy and backup, so it is not possible for an aircraft like MH370 to simply get lost. It is possible that a pilot suffering from the effects of hypoxia can become disoriented.
That’s so interesting. Makes me think the Malaysian government know more than they are letting on. He must have somehow stated his intent else the entire thing served no purpose other than mass murder. Tragic. Those poor families need answers after so long and I hope with your help they will be given them.
Hello, I am very thankful for all you guys have done. You are helping these families and the world find closure. I have seen the 60 minutes clip of the guy who used radio signals to find the crash location, and he is very smart. Does anyone know exactly when ocean infinity will start their search? And when/if they find the crash and black boxes, will they share them immediately? Thank you all for all you have done, you are doing gods work.
Hello all, how do we know when we search the new pinpointed area the parts will not be already scattered all across the ocean? Thanks.
@Charles McLaughlin,
The parts either float in which case they will be potentially scattered all across the Indian Ocean, or the parts sink in which case they eventually land on the sea floor.
The parts that sink may be spread by underwater currents over a wide area. For example, the debris field of AF447 covered a main area of 600 m x 200 m.
Once parts that sink get stuck in sand or mud on the sea floor they seldom move. The average part recovered weighed around 5 kg (11 lbs) and this is sufficient weight to keep a part in place on the sea floor.
Hi Richard, I just watched the Netflix show, don’t really have too much of an opinion in a couple of hours of editing but the three things that did get me wondering was the lack of personal belongings used in forensics, were all the bits of wreckage analyzed as coming from the same craft and the woman from Florida seemed to make a pretty compelling case of found wreckage that was never shown as being investigated?
Poor people 🙁
@Robert Manuell,
1. 56 items of personal belongings have been recovered, listed, photographed and shown privately to the next of kin. Only a few items have been identified.
2. 39 items of aircraft debris have been recovered and handed in to the authorities. Not all have been analysed. 21 items have been confirmed from MH370 or from a Boeing 777. As there has been only one Boeing 777 to have crashed in the Southern Indian Ocean, items found from a Boeing 777 are highly likely to be from MH370. 11 items have been confirmed from part numbers or stencil marks as confirmed or almost certain from MH370. A further 10 items are possibly from MH370 and the provenance of 8 items has either not been analysed or could not be determined.
3. The satellite imagery from Tomnod in the South China Sea is too poor a resolution to be definitive and that it depicts MH370. The location contradicts the floating debris finds, radar data, satellite data and mobile phone detection evidence.
Hi Richard,
Thank you for your work on this, I am a strong supporter. I didn’t bother finishing the netflix series due to its saturation of nonsense.
A few quick points, and questions
Your analysis suggests a flight route with several clear manual inputs for changes of direction as the flight progressed south, as opposed to the more straight track hypothesis suggested by early analysis and Zaharie’s flight sim. As you say this suggests an active pilot throughout.
1. However these manipulations to me don’t suggest a pilot who has set himself the objective of hiding the plane in the southern indian ocean (which I have always believed), as surely the pilot could have just set himself on a straight track down in the direction he desired, without zigzagging the plane all over the place. It also doesn’t make sense to me that the pilot would be suffering the effects of hypoxia for such a long period of time. What is your best guess as to why there are so many manipulations?
2. In other cases of pilot suicide as well there were key indications that the pilot both had the intention and searched the means for carrying out what they were planning. I.e. Andreas Lubitz in the Germanwings case, had found to have searched how to secure a cockpit door (as well as how to commit suicide). In the case of silk air 185 captain tsu had lost lost 1.2 million in the markets which he could not repay – a fairly clear motive. You are of the view that this could have been politically motivated, however Zaharie never made these intentions clear, as to why he might undertake the actions that he did, which leaves me highly sceptical to this. He also doesn’t seem to have displayed suicidal tendencies, or searched for additional means to support his plan e.g. turning off acars. Why do you think there might be such a dearth of evidence throughout on means and motivation?
3. I have always thought the flight path of MH370 looks eerily similar to Varig flight 254, which ended up going west and then south instead of north, just like MH370. Is there a set of circumstances at all where a combined electrical fault would knock out the transponder and flight navigation systems leaving the pilots disorientated as to their position, and they end up getting lost?
4. If the pilot suicide theory is true, is there any usefulness the wreckage will present? I.e the CVR would only go back a certain amount of time as far as I’m aware, leaving the critical parts of the flight without voice recording evidence.
Many thanks
Typically CVRs only record the last 30 m of cockpit conversations.
@Curt Newport,
The Boeing 777 CVR records the last 2 hours of cockpit voice.
If the cockpit is silent for 2 hours, then you will hear nothing.
The recording overrides previous recordings.
@Joe Stanley,
@Welcome to the blog!
1. You ask why so many manipulations in the flight path?
There are many possible reasons including uncertainty and disorientation. The effects of hypoxia do not fade that fast.
Andy Sherrell of Ocean Infinity and Pete Foley ex ATSB have suggested that the manipulations could be an artefact of the WSPR technology. Their suggestion is to take only the rock solid WSPR anomaly detections with multiple intersecting links and show a range of possible constant speed straight and level flight paths.
Whilst I agree that it is more likely that a straight flight path was flown, it is not impossible that there were turns or even climbs/descents and changes in speed.
2. Captain Zaharie Shah’s favourite poem was about a lone soldier. He may have seen himself as such:
“The soldier fought his battle silently.
Not his the strife that stays for set of sun;
It seemed this warfare never might be done;
Through glaring day and blinding night fought he.
There came no hand to help, no eye to see;
No herald’s voice proclaimed the fight begun;
No trumpet, when the bitter field was won,
Sounded abroad the soldier’s victory.
As if the struggle had been light, he went,
Gladly, life’s common road a little space;
Nor any knew how his heart’s blood was spent;
Yet there were some who after testified
They saw a glory grow upon his face;
And all men praised the soldier when he died.”
3. The Boeing 777 has many redundant navigation systems. In the case of Varig 254 the pilot’s gave the wrong bearing into the flight management system. As mentioned previously, hypoxia can cause disorientation.
4. The CVR will most likely not reveal much, but the FDR will have recorded the whole flight.
This poem is mind blowing. It sheds a whole new light on his psychology. Thank you for posting this, I don’t believe it is widely known in the public domain. Of all the far fetched conspiracy nonsense the Netflix “documentary” raises, I can’t believe this smoking gun wasn’t included at all (along with your factual, scientific and expert analysis). This is the only psychological explanation I have ever come across that might explain his actions. May I ask how you know this was his favourite poem? It’s so very sad, but also so telling.
@Laura,
You ask how do I know it was Captain Zaharie Shah’s favourite poem?
It is the only poem Captain Zaharie Shah posted in social media. In his various Facebook accounts you will find a number of worrying quotes.
A commenter named Matt first alerted me in 2014 and stated: “I feel it necessary, in light of those claiming that Zaharie seemingly exhibited NOTHING that would give one reason for concern, to share just a few of his MANY worrisome (in hindsight) posts/commentaries. Here are four examples that trouble me, greatly.
“there is a rebel in each and everyone of us. let it out! don’t waste your life on mundane life style. When is it enough?”
“General Elections 2013 are over, so its time they try to dismantle us. We are not going to be quiet.”
“If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor. – Desmond Tutu”
”The SOLDIER FOUGHT HIS BATTLE SILENTLY
Not his the strife that stays for set of sun;
It seemed this warfare never might be done;
Through glaring day and blinding night fought he.
There came no hand to help, no eye to see;
No herald’s voice proclaimed the fight begun;
No trumpet, when the bitter field was won,
Sounded abroad the soldier’s victory.
As if the struggle had been light, he went,
Gladly, life’s common road a little space;
Nor any knew how his heart’s blood was spent;
Yet there were some who after testified
They saw a glory grow upon his face;
And all men praised the soldier when he died.”
The Pilgrim and Other Poems – Sophie Jewett (Ellen Burroughs) – 1896
Dante The Divine Comedy Paradise XXIX 91 “Non vi si pensa quanto sangue costa.” (You don’t think about how much blood it costs)
(capitals are from Matt’s comment)
Here is the Facebook post quoting the soldier poem:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/2w4kv2sa8wunbjn/ZS%20Psychology%20Poem%20Quote.png?dl=0
I have archived 195 pages of Captain Zaharie Shah’s Facebook accounts and analysed them with a Criminal Psychologist. Although there are with hindsight some worrying quotes, there is nothing which allows you to draw a conclusion that he was in any way psychologically disturbed.
Just a thought. If Captain Shah had wanted to take the aircraft into the Southern Ocean, for whatever purpose, why do it on a flight to Beijing? Surely he would have had European destinations on his roster. He could have waited until he had a flight directly out over the Bay of Bengal, turned south and that would have been that. No pesky ATC or radars to worry about.
So why did it have to be THAT particular night?
@Jonathan Stoner,
Welcome to the blog!
Longer flights to Europeans destinations had more flight crew.
Much simpler a flight with a novice First Officer and no other more senior flight crew on board.
Agreed, but there would only have been two on the flight deck at any one time, as the other one or two would have repaired to the crew rest.
Substitute Indian or Gulf destination in my above and it’s still a better opportunity than a Beijing flight if just making an aircraft disappear was his motive.
The fact that is was that particular flight on that particular day, executed despite the complex FIR boundary following route, detection avoidance and other complexities seems to indicate that the *timing* of this event is important, and is a clue to it’s disappearance.
@Jonathan Stoner,
The Beijing flight was the longest flight without additional senior flight crew on board and the only flight leaving after midnight local time.
All other flights to Istanbul, Jeddah, Europe, Australia or New Zealand had a second crew on board. Flights to Denpasar, Dacca, Hong Kong and Tokyo did not have the required amount of fuel on board.
The only flight without a second crew and with sufficient fuel was to Dubai, but the last time Captain Zaharie Shah flew that route was on 10th October 2013 and it was not on his roster of upcoming flights in March 2014.
In my view, the choice of flight was made because of the unique combination of:
1. A large enough amount of fuel on board for a diversion into the southern Indian Ocean.
2. The knowledge that some radar installations shut down at midnight.
3. No additional senior crew on board.
4. A novice co-pilot.
Hello Richard, thank you for your answer to my question about phones, I very much appreciate you sharing your expertise!
One more question for you, not about phones this time:
Do you know if anything has been done to prevent pilots from having the ability to depressurize the cabin?
Thank you,
Hazel
@Hazel,
A pilot may need to depressurise an aircraft in the event of a fire where the cabin is filled with smoke in order to clear the smoke out of the cabin.
However I would say, if life conditions are not maintained, an alarm should be sent. The problem is pilot can do it instantly, secretly, with no alarm, with the security of the reinforced cockpit doors.
In my chem engr job, if we enter a big confined space, such as an empty reactor the size of a B777 fuselage, we have confined space monitoring for O2, gases, etc and a person on manhole watch. This is what is missing, conceptually. I guess flying on a airplane is the one time chem engrs forget their normal safety rule for confined space monitoring.
@All,
A new article by Patrick Fogerty of Collider is an excellent read and beautifully written:
https://collider.com/mh370-the-plane-that-disappeared-conspiracy-theories/
The article has been reviewed by Geoffrey Thomas at airlineratings.com:
https://www.airlineratings.com/news/another-trashing-of-netflixs-mh370-series/
@All,
Alex Braum sent me an email today with pictures of a debris item that she found on a beach in South Africa at 34.449807°S 20.652071°E on 13th November 2016. The find was made in a nature reserve which is closed to the public and you need a special permit to enter. There was a super moon on 14th November 2016, which was especially “super” because it’s the closest full moon to Earth since 1948. We won’t see another super moon like this until 2034. The tides and rip currents were manic and there was a lot of debris washed up on this particular beach.
She notified the ATSB who forwarded her photos and information to Malaysia, who subsequently collected the item in December 2016. We never heard anything more from Malaysia regarding their analysis of the debris item.
I was struck by the similarities to a debris item found in Tanzania by Paul Smithson in 2016 and a debris item found by a fisherman and handed to Blaine Gibson in Madagascar in 2018.
Here is a photo collage with high resolution pictures of all three debris items. You can zoom in on the individual photos to see the structure of the items in more detail:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/5knmsxozjq2hlom/Tanzania%20Madagascar%20South%20Africa.pdf?dl=0
Those parts are definitely aircraft wreckage.
@All,
A new article by Geoffrey Thomas titled: “Netflix MH370 Series: Criticism Intensifies”
https://www.airlineratings.com/news/netflix-mh370-series-criticism-intensifies/?fbclid=IwAR1fSOKsagut6vz2hx18ML04JBivthgN1IJ6eWztQkj-xWTFM0mKcYIgls8
In a damming article on the Netflix MH370 series in The Times famous wreck hunter David Mearns, a British-resident US marine scientist is quoted via Twitter expressing his disappointment.
The series is “dominated by Jeff Wise and Florence de Changy, ridiculous and unsupported conspiracy theories” he wrote.
He added “Inmarsat is real, Blaine Gibson is real, the plane is in the southern Indian Ocean. Resume the underwater search.”
I had the privilege of meeting with David Mearns for 3 days at his home in England to give him a full briefing on MH370. So far he has not been asked by the authorities to help in the search for MH370.
The Netflix documentary series as a lot of people say is a waste of time, irrespective of your opinions you cannot accuse someone of misleading of derailing the search, the worst thing they could ever say is Blaine Gibson being a Russian spy and he contributed the majority of debris found, by no means I’m defending them but I understand everything behind the scepticism to a lot of people trying to find an alternate explanation it’s there way of saying they are desperate for more details to come into light, from there perspective the current evidence is not simply enough so they think they can just post and say whatever it is they want to say without consequences, if you’re sceptical okay I understand that but do not come up with accusations that have no basis in facts because it hurts others that contributed so much to the search, on top of that it focuses too much on a fantasy or spy drama.
@All,
Please do not send me any more pictures or videos of MH370 spotted in Google Earth!
Sometimes a cursory look at the date of the imagery or the history of imagery at that particular location in Google Earth is all you need to debunk the false claim that MH370 has been spotted.
The aircraft is already to be seen at that location in historic images taken before 8th March 2014.
The aircraft is not to be seen in historic images taken after 8th March 2014 and first appears in images taken at a much later date.
So why is there a plane in the middle of a forest? The answer is simple: it was flying over the forest at the moment this satellite image was taken.
So why is there a plane in the middle of the Indian Ocean en route to Diego Garcia? The answer is simple: it was flying over the Indian Ocean at the moment this satellite image was taken.
Google answers key questions on satellite imagery
Today, satellite imagery is one of the most popular features on Google Maps. Capturing the world from above is a huge undertaking, matching millions of images to precise locations. But how does satellite imagery actually work? How often are images updated? What are some of the biggest challenges to bringing satellite imagery to more than 1 billion users?
To answer these questions, Google asked their satellite imagery expert, Matt Manolides to explain. Matt is Google’s Geo Data Strategist. He’s worked at Google for over 14 years and he gave an aerial view (pun intended) of how satellite imagery works.
How do we accumulate the images used in Google Maps? Do we actually use satellites?
The mosaic of satellite and aerial photographs you can see in Google Maps and Google Earth is sourced from many different providers, including state agencies, geological survey organisations and commercial imagery providers. These images are taken on different dates and under different lighting and weather conditions.
In fact, there’s an entire industry around doing aerial surveys. Companies cut holes in the bottom of planes, and cameras take pictures as they fly overhead. In many areas around the world, this is happening constantly. In parts of the world where there isn’t an established aerial survey market, we rely on satellites. With aerial surveys, we get very high-quality images that are sharp enough to create detailed maps. Satellites produce lower-quality imagery, but are still helpful because they provide global coverage.
When do the images meet the map?
“Google obtains commercially available satellite imagery from a range of third parties, and our team stitches the images together to create a seamless map,” Matt says. This is a process called photogrammetry and, according to Matt, we’re increasingly able to automate the photogrammetry process using machine learning to help accurately place images and improve resolution.
For aerial data, the images are delivered on hard disks and we upload them into Google Cloud. For satellite imagery, the data is uploaded directly from our providers to Google Cloud. The imagery is delivered in a raw format, meaning it’s not yet positioned on the ground and is separated into red, blue and green photos, as well as panchromatic images, which includes finer details. We then combine the jumble of images so they all line up and have an accurate placement in the real world, and generally look beautiful.
How often do you update satellite images?
“We aim to update satellite imagery of the places that are changing the most,” Matt says. For instance, because big cities are always evolving, we try to update our satellite images every year. For medium-sized cities, we try to update images every two years, and it goes up to every three years for smaller cities. Overall our goal is to keep densely populated places refreshed on a regular basis and to keep up with a changing world, so we will refresh areas more frequently when we think there’s lots of building or road construction going on.
Why do we sometimes see mysterious objects on Maps? What are they?
Matt explains that sometimes the way the images are collected can create optical illusions. One of the most common instances of this are “sunken ships,” which are actually regular, operating ships that might appear underwater due to the way the satellite imagery gets layered together. Other times, sunlight can reflect off something shiny, and it will look like a strange white object that some believe are haunted houses or other such spookiness.
Because the satellite cameras take multiple pictures at the same time, but in different color spectrums, a fast-moving object, like a plane, can look strange, like several identical but differently coloured planes flying over each other.
As for Matt, his favourite part is finding public events that are happening when the images are captured. From hydroplane races to car shows, it’s fascinating to see events in the overhead imagery.
“When I was a kid growing up in Seattle, I always loved the hydroplane races that would happen each summer. It was a thrill to realise that we captured one from the air back in 2010,” Matt says. “The imagery isn’t visible in Google Maps anymore, but you can still see it using Google Earth Pro’s Historic Imagery feature, which lets you browse our full catalogue of imagery.”
Is there going to be another search any time soon? And if there is how do we participate? Thanks.
@Sarah Doherty,
Welcome to the blog!
I expect a new search at the end of 2023 or the beginning of 2024.
You can follow any new search on this website, as I will be bringing regular updates.
@José Pillon,
Welcome to the blog!
You are correct to point out that there are lots of questions about MH370.
We still do not know exactly what, where, who or why.
re:”We still do not know exactly what, where, who or why.”
With regard to the ‘where and when’, it is known that there was an error in the filed flight plan, as detailed in figure 2.2A un section 2.2.3 on page 289 of the safety report.
In section 2.2.6, point 3, on page 296 of the report it states:
“It is observed that the fifth group of alphabet/number, written as ZPE0450, in line 13th of the FPL message of MH370 should read ZBPE0450. However, the missing alphabet B from the original text message does not invalidate the FPL.”
ZBPE is the ICAO code for Beijing FIR
While the missing capital B from ‘ZBPE0450’ might not have invalidated the flight plan, it may, among many possibilities, be indicative of ill health of the Captain or whoever filed the flight plan on his behalf
@TommyL,
Most airlines have a flight planning department that files the flight plans.
However, I admire your attention to detail.
I agree a typo is indicative of “many possibilities” including a lack of attention to detail.
@Andrea,
Welcome to the blog and many thanks for your kind words!
You ask 6 questions as follows, together with my answers.
(Q1) I saw a post above from someone asking about sea floor vibration. Would the impact of the airplane have made a detectable vibration and do any instruments monitor those depths? Or does it take something more significant like an earthquake?
A number of instruments monitor the Southern Indian Ocean. They are able to detect an atomic weapon test, seismic events such as an underwater earthquake or volcano, or even an antarctic glacial ice collapse into the ocean. It is perfectly possible that the crash of MH370 was monitored. An aircraft with a zero fuel weight of 174,369 kg and impact at a speed of 490 knots on the surface of the ocean has a kinetic energy about 5.6 GJ, equivalent to about 1.3 tonnes of TNT. The impact of wreckage on the sea floor is at a much slower speed due to water resistance and the kinetic energy is therefore much reduced. Water pressure at depths of several thousand metres is very large and will cause implosions of sealed items of wreckage such as oxygen bottles or fire extinguishers.
The Australian Government operates a Hydrophone Station HA01 at Cape Leeuwin as part of the Comprehensive (nuclear) Test Ban Treaty Organisation (CTBTO) verification program, which continuously monitors sound propagated through the Indian Ocean. There are three sensors colocated at Hydrophone Station HA01 that allow a degree of triangulation of the location of the source of the hydro-acoustic disturbance. Recordings of low-frequency underwater acoustic signals from data loggers and hydrophones off the Western Australian coast (these hydrophones are located in the Perth Canyon to the west of Rottnest Island) were retrieved and analysed by Curtin University’s Centre for Marine Science and Technology during the search for MH370. The ATSB requested the Curtin University Centre for Marine Science and Technology (CMST) and the Defence Science and Technology Organisation to analyse these signals in an attempt to detect and localise underwater sounds that could be associated with the impact of the aircraft on the water or with the implosion of wreckage as the aircraft sank.
Unfortunately data from the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty Organisation (CTBTO) hydroacoustic data from station HA08 Diego Garcia, British Indian Ocean Territories / Chagos Archipelago is missing for 25 minutes around the time of MH370’s impact, which would have allowed a better triangulation with the data from station HA01 Cape Leeuwin, Australia and the data from station HA04 Crozet Islands, French Southern and Antarctic Lands. The HA08 data has not been released by the US Government under their treaty obligations and the British and French Government have acquiesced.
(Q2) similarly are there any early warning tsunami buoys for the Australian coast out that far, that might have picked up a wave from impact?
Australia operates a tsunami warning system 24/7 with 10 stations along the coast of Western Australia. The system is capable of detection small abnormal waves, tides and currents caused by even relatively small tsunamis which can be dangerous to swimmers and mariners, but do not present a threat of land inundation. Sea level observations are monitored and any potential first point of impact on Australia is broadcast when less than 90 minutes away.
Tsunamis are usually the result of a sudden rise or fall of a section of the earth’s crust under the ocean. A seismic disturbance can displace the water column, creating a rise or fall in the level of the ocean above. This rise or fall in sea level is the initial impulse generating a tsunami wave. A typical tsunami buoy system comprises two components; the pressure sensor anchored to the sea floor and the surface buoy. The sensor on the sea floor measures the change in height of the water column above by measuring associated changes in the water pressure. This water column height is communicated to the surface buoy by acoustic telemetry and then relayed via satellite to the tsunami warning centre. However, Australia is potentially vulnerable to tsunami generated by undersea earthquakes along subduction zones (where the earth’s tectonic plates are moving under each other) to the northwest, northeast, east and southeast of Australia. Deep-ocean tsunami detection buoys are not used to monitor the Southern Indian Ocean due West of Perth, Australia.
The wave caused by the impact of an aircraft is relatively small compared to an underwater tsunamigenic earthquake and although the sea level satellite monitoring can detect sea level change of 1” from 800 miles up, it takes NASA 10 days to cover all the oceans. There is no continuous monitoring of the sea level at each position in the Southern Indian Ocean.
(Q3) I saw somewhere in your blog but can’t find it now— one post suggested the pilot targeted the deepest known part of the Indian Ocean at the time in 2014. What was that location called again and how close is your calculated crash site to this area?
@Hazel reported: “At the time MH370 went missing, the Dordrecht Deep was reported to have been the deepest point in the Indian Ocean, with conflicting reports citing Dordrecht and others citing the Java Trench.”
“This was only proven wrong in 2019 by explorer Victor Vescovo.”
“One issue that quickly arose during the early stages of the expedition was how to locate the deepest places in each ocean, and how to determine their exact depth. One might expect this to be easy using global datasets such as GEBCO and the ever-omnipotent Wikipedia. However, it soon became apparent while planning the expedition that the information available is fraught with inconsistencies, including erroneous statements perpetuated online and numerous datasets of varying resolution. […] the search for the deepest point in the Indian Ocean and Southern Ocean proved much more problematic [compared to other oceans].”
@Hazel reported that “The deepest point in the Indian Ocean is also contentious as it is often reported as being either the Java Trench or the Diamantina Fracture Zone. To resolve this debate, the Five Deeps Expedition surveyed the Diamantina Fracture Zone in March 2019 recording a maximum water depth of 7,019 ±17m at 33°37’52″S, 101°21’14″E for the Dordrecht Deep. Survey work consequently undertaken in April/May 2019 revealed the Java Trench to be a maximum of 7,187 ±13m at a location further west than previously anticipated (at 11°7’44″S, 114°56’30″E), with Vescovo completing his solo dive at this location on 16 April 2019.”
@Hazel makes the point that in 2014 at the time MH370 went missing the common consensus of the deepest point was that it was the Dordrecht Deep. It is pure speculation that any active pilot of MH370 was heading specifically for the deepest part of the Indian Ocean. The Dordrecht Deep is in any case 419 km from the crash location I have indicated.
(Q4) did the FBI look on the pilot’s computer for internet history of searches for the deepest part of the ocean?
The Royal Malaysian Police made an extensive search of the internet history of both pilots, but there is no record of any interest in the depth of the Indian Ocean. The only interest in the Southern Indian Ocean was shown by Captain Zaharie Shah’s home flight simulator, but that related to fuel usage and not the ocean depth.
(Q5) Is it possible that he flew to fuel exhaustion to prevent the chance of an oil slick and/or debris fire?
Even with no fuel left, there is 44.5 l of oil in each engine and 96.9 l of hydraulic fluid in each of the three hydraulic systems. That is a total of 379.7 l and both engine oil and hydraulic fluid are less dense than water and will float on the surface. There are combustible materials on an aircraft even without fuel, such as oxygen supply or lithium batteries.
Therefore flying to fuel exhaustion will not prevent the chance of an oil slick or a fire.
(Q6) If cabin depressurization was the way the pilot disarmed the crew and passengers, would he have had knowledge there there was enough oxygen specifically for him to complete the remaining 7 hr flight? Is this type of information modelled and available to pilots?
A description of the pilot’s oxygen system is included in the Boeing 777 training manual. There are two oxygen bottles for the pilots on the MAS Boeing 777s, each with 3,150 l capacity and pressurised to 1,850 psi. The maintenance records show that the crew oxygen was topped up to 1,800 psi as part of routine maintenance before the departure of flight MH370. A pilot would know that he has sufficient oxygen for the entire flight, although this is uncomfortable and not without risk to maintain for a longer period of time, especially for a smoker. The pilot would also know that passenger oxygen masks are designed to last at least 22 minutes. The cabin crew also have portable oxygen bottles, which can last several hours.
Hello Richard!
I’m a great fan of your work. I am a Machine Learning engineer, although I’ve always been interested in aviation and hobby piloting. I have a few questions:
1. In the technical report, you mention that “The target RCS may vary greatly
with the frequency and the angle of incidence of the illuminating radio waves”. Is there a plot of [SNR deviation] vs [angle of incidence] for all anomalous datapoints? And if so, is there a trend?
2. Are there any other data sources not considered so far, that could potentially be used for anomaly detection, but that are too obfuscated/convoluted for manual analysis?
@Natanijel Vasic,
Welcome to the blog and many thanks for the kind words!
1. I am currently running a large scale project detecting and tracking a Boeing 777 across the Indian Ocean. I have the SNR deviation, frequency and frequency drift, position and track data for all anomalous data points and can easily derive the 3D aircraft angle of incidence data. So I will take up your suggestion to make a plot and see if there is a trend in the target RCS shown by SNR deviation vs angle of incidence.
2. There are no data sources that have not been considered so far, that I am aware of. Prof. Simon Maskell at Liverpool University is using Machine Learning to investigate the WSPRnet data. There is a very large amount of WSPRnet data. The row count for 1st April 2023 was 4,516,644 (no April Fool’s joke). Looking for anomalies and patterns in both the signal amplitude and signal frequency is limited in the WSPRnet historic data as this data has been processed. We only have the SNR and the frequency drift data, which is limited by the DSP capability of the receiver.
Dr. Robert Westphal uses the raw WSPR data, which allows him direct access to pre-processed real time data. Both Rob and Dominik Bugmann operate their WSPR stations in remote mountain locations using satellite or relay links. A growing number of operators allow remote access to their WSPR stations via the internet. A quick look at kiwisdr.com this morning showed 1,057 people listening to 665 WSPR stations.
A major step forward was building a database with the precise locations of each antenna used by each WSPR station. The row count for yesterday of 4,516,644 WSPRnet links was produced by 3,225 transmitters and 1,608 receivers. There were 4,112 unique WSPRnet stations involved and only 721 WSPRnet stations both transmit and receive. A small number of WSPRnet stations are mobile in vehicles, boats and pico balloons. These are easily detectable as their Maidenhead Grid locator changes over time. The vast majority are stationary installations, although a few call signs operate multiple locations and a number are connected via repeaters. WSPRnet stations may have multiple antennas and the active antenna at any time will depend on the mode of operation.
Extracting more information from the WSPR raw signals (curvature, interference, dropouts, non-detects, Doppler etc.) will require a larger database and more Machine Learning developments. Access to multiple WSPR stations in real time will allow triangulation in detecting anomaly locations. Dr. Hannes Coetzee and I are considering how to use the Kiwi SDR Time Difference of Arrival (TDoA) direction finding techniques in relation to aircraft detection and positioning.
There is much more to be discovered about using WSPR as a passive radar system.
@All,
Geoffrey Thomas at airlineratings.com has published a new article titled: “MH370: What Has Happened To Missing Debris?”
https://www.airlineratings.com/news/mh370-what-has-happened-to-missing-debris/
Alex Braum found a piece of floating debris in South Africa at 34.449807°S 20.652071°E on 13th November 2016. She notified the ATSB and sent pictures, which they forwarded to the Malaysian authorities, who collected the piece shortly afterwards in December 2016.
I reported the find in a previous comment:
https://www.mh370search.com/2023/02/26/the-ongoing-search-for-mh370/comment-page-1/#comment-2057
Since then there has been silence from the authorities. No press release, no report of any analysis. It would appear that the authorities have closed the book on MH370 despite all the claims to the contrary.
Re: “…It would appear that the authorities have closed the book on MH370”
Perhaps some parts of the MH370 investigations have become ensnared in one or other jurisdiction’s Official Secrets Acts.
The Malaysian Daily Express is reporting a recent court decision to declassify a report into a fatal plane crash in 1976
Let’s hope that the relatives and friends of the passengers and crew of MH370 don’t have to wait 47 years for closure.
https://www.dailyexpress.com.my/news/210670/govt-to-declassify-report-on-double-six-plane-crash/
@All,
Report Number: #202250275869516
I have reported the Facebook Group “MH370 What’s happening? Facts, Information, Discussions”.
https://www.facebook.com/groups/495684600535872
This group is found in a search on Facebook Groups for “MH370 Families”, although the administrators are not MH370 Family members.
The official MH370 Families Facebook Group has been forced to change their cover photo.
https://www.facebook.com/watch/MH370Families/
Until this week the cover photo used to look like this as can be seen in the following Facebook live broadcast of the 9th Annual MH370 Remembrance Event 2023:
https://www.facebook.com/watch/live?ref=watch_permalink&v=210506848306497
On 22nd February 2023 11:25 am the MH370 Families updated their cover photo in preparation for the 9th Annual MH370 Remembrance Event 2023.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/pu28smjfrhljw7x/MH370%20Familiess%20Group%20Cover%20Photo.jpg?dl=0
On 22nd February 2023 at 12:20 pm the fake MH370 Families Facebook Group “MH370 What’s happening? Facts, Information, Discussions” changed their Facebook Group page to match in just 55 minutes.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/z9lykyoe1xcyf2c/MH370%20What%27s%20Happening%20Group%20Cover%20Photo.jpg?dl=0
Using the same picture, title, font, design, slogan and logo “REMEMBERING MH370”, “9 YEARS GONE”, “Voice 370”, “Cry for Truth” or “Search 9.0” is deceptive and fraudulent.
Only the hash tag “#searchon” has been changed to “#it’snotoveryet”.
The administrators of the fake MH370 Families Facebook Group “MH370 What’s happening? Facts, Information, Discussions” are Kaye Russell, Lena Lynette Tupua and the Moderator is Mick Gilbert.
This fake MH370 Families Facebook Group “MH370 What’s happening? Facts, Information, Discussions” purports to represent the MH370 Families and Kaye Russell very promptly posts whatever the NOK post on their official families page on her fake families page!
This fake MH370 Families Facebook Group “MH370 What’s happening? Facts, Information, Discussions” is passing off as the official MH370 Families Facebook Group.
The fact is that Kaye Russell, Lena Lynette Tupua and Mick Gilbert are not NOK and have no right to pretend they speak on behalf of the NOK.
I can only imagine how the NOK feel about this.
Kaye Russell also uses the same cover photo on her Facebook account.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/wiuh4e0wtnmgbmr/Kaye%20Russell%20Cover%20Photo.jpg?dl=0
Mick Gilbert used to have two Facebook accounts, one current and one older from 2010.
In the older Facebook account Mick Gilbert, you will find many comments that are a glorification of violence, sexism, pornography, abuse to women and children, mocking religion, race and creed.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/kaxg0kk0cfctm54/Mick%20Gilbert%20Facebook%202010.pdf?dl=0
I have reported Kaye Russell’s and Lena Lynette Tupua’s Facebook Group as “False Information” and “Disparagement of the memory of the deceased”.
I have also reported Mick Gilbert as a person with inappropriate views and unfit to act as a moderator of a Facebook Group.
I am particularly disturbed that Mick Gilbert with his background and views on violence, religion, sex, abuse, women, parenting and children should be appointed as moderator of this fake group.
I look forward to Facebook taking action under the Network Enforcement Act., which is supposed to be a law intended to make it easy to report certain types of unlawful content.
Hi Richard,
Thanks again for all of your ground breaking work and analysis. I write to update you and your readers of the latest turn of events over on Facebook. Early this week Mick Gilbert, Kaye Russell and Lena Lynnette Tupua suspended me from commenting in the group “MH370 What’s Happening? Facts, Information, Discussion…” for what was supposed to be a period of ten days without warning or explanation. Then, two days after being suspended, in the middle of the night, Gilbert, Russell and Tupua summarily removed and blocked me from What’s Happening without warning, explanation or cause. Gilbert, Russell and Tupua did not even attempt to give me a pretext for my expulsion.
It is clear to me, however, that I was thrown out of What’s Happening because I openly support a renewed ocean floor search of WSPR and UWA areas in and around the Broken Ridge between latitudes 30°S to 33. Anyone who advocates for a search in and around the Broken Ridge is targeted for expulsion from What’s Happening?
Kaye Russell is one of the administrators of What’s Happening. Russell tells everyone that she administers the group for the sake of the families of those lost on mh370, but she is really pushing wild conspiracy theories that could derail any renewed search effort. She claims that she wants the plane to be found, but then she allows spurious group members to post and spread sick lies about passengers being alive and held captive on Diego Garcia, claiming MH370 was shot down in the South China sea or crashed in the Malaysian jungle, and the like. Lately she has been pushing the ludicrous Netflix series and claims the 370 families support it. They don’t.
Kaye’s favorite saying is that “the plane could be anywhere and anything is possible.” Saying that the plane could be anywhere and there’s not enough evidence to determine what happened is the best way to convince the public to get the politicians to kill the next search.
@Ricky R,
Welcome to the blog and many thanks for the kind words!
You quote Kaye Russell: “the plane could be anywhere and anything is possible.”
That statement is nonsense.
(1) MH370 must match the Boeing 777 performance data.
(2) MH370 must match the MAS Engineering data for 9M-MRO.
(3) MH370 must match the aviation weather data for the Indian Ocean region at the time of the flight.
(4) MH370 must match how aircraft radio and satellite communications work.
(5) MH370 must match the Inmarsat satellite BTO and BFO data.
(6) MH370 must match how aircraft navigation works.
(7) MH370 must match the ACARS and ADS-B position reporting.
(8) MH370 must match how radar data works.
(9) MH370 must match how WSPR data works.
(10) MH370 must match how Oceanography drift analysis works.
(11) MH370 must match how underwater search sonar data works.
(12) MH370 must match how debris analysis and materials science works.
(13) MH370 must match how mobile phone data works and the detection of the co-pilot’s mobile phone over Penang.
(14) MH370 fuel range and endurance must match the amount of fuel on board.
All this data gives us a clear idea where MH370 crashed and MH370 will be found, despite some people’s attempts such as Kaye Russell’s at misinformation, disinformation, obfuscation and suppression of the truth.
Hi Richard!
I have been fascinated by the IG’s work for years now. I remember coming across Victor’s site right before the first OI search and have been revisiting this case on and off ever since.
That awful Netflix doc sent me back down this deep rabbit hole and I was pleased to discover this site with so many fresh updates.
I am glad that Gerard’s article posted above establishes a prevailing hypothesis of pilot murder-suicide that can only be confirmed through retrieval of the black boxes. This was the same conclusion I drew many years ago from sifting through the IG’s mountain of reports, even though many of those reports did not mention this hypothesis at all (IIRC).
It also appears that the evidence that’s trickled in over the years only further supports the theory of a deliberate diversion by an actively controlling pilot (whoever that might have been) with the intent of causing the most destruction to the plane upon impact.
Question: I remember reading way back when that it was discovered that the Captain had nothing recorded in his planner/calendar after the date of the crash. This, combined with the Flight Simulator data created a month prior, seems like it would indicate a pre-meditated plan.
Was this actually true, or just another rumor/lie regarding this case that the media simply picked up and reported as true? It seems like another piece of compelling evidence if it were true.
@Matthew Neuteboom,
Welcome to the blog!
You ask whether “the Captain had nothing recorded in his planner/calendar after the date of the crash.”
This is an unfounded media speculation started by the Mirror Group Newspapers.
There is nothing recorded in the Royal Malaysian Police files that have been leaked about the Captain’s diary being cleared of all appointments.
The police report looked at all the Captain’s phone records, internet activity, emails and social media communications. The police report does include his duty roster with future flights to DPS 11 March 2014, HKG 13 March 2014, AMS 20 March 2014 and MEL 29 March 2014 and various licence checks for himself and operational checks which he would run on pilot colleagues, an instructor meeting and a simulator training appointment.
The police report does note that the Captain had made 11 recent visits to a forum for home flight simulators and 28 visits to a forum for do-it-yourself. The Captain had also recently bought 4 ebooks. It sounds to me like the Captain had at least plans for flight simulations, DIY and reading several books.
Sincere thanks for clarifying that the Captain’s diary being cleared of all appointments “is an unfounded media speculation started by the Mirror Group Newspapers.”
I had suspected as much when this detail never seemed to resurface in later coverage of the issue.
I also appreciate the further details on the police investigation into the Captain.
I was also expelled and blocked from that Russell Gilbert group too, after saying in many different forums that the MH 370 crash site is in the UWA recommended area between 28°S and 33°S.
My younger brother (technically cousin) and I keep our family names private for security reasons. However Admins Russell Gilbert and Tupua demanded they be on our public facebooks and that we provide them with our personal IDs.
My younger brother was also targeted and expelled from their group after saying 370 crashed near Broken Ridge. For almost two years Mick Gilbert followed and hounded us both from forum to group to group, attacking us and bullying him. Then after a year of contributing about debris and oceanography in What’s Happening group, Gilbert Russell and Tupua singled him out and demanded my younger brother’s personal ID to confirm his family name. But that was clearly bogus because they admitted 6000 new members with names ranging from Atilla Hun to BC Bionic Chronic. They were freely commenting crazy conspiracy stuff while he was suspended, then expelled. Looking at Mick Gilbert’s porno violent older facebook account and posts, you can understand why my younger brother at his age would not want someone like Mick Gilbert to have access to his personal information.
@Apollo,
Welcome to the blog!
I am sorry to hear of your bad experience with Kaye Russell, Lena Lynette Tupua and Mick Gilbert. It appears they have one rule for the likes of Atilla Hun and another for genuine MH370 analysts.
I draw the line at the attempt by Kaye Russell, Lena Lynette Tupua and Mick Gilbert to pass off as the MH370 Families FB page and hence I have reported them to Facebook.
Feel free to comment on this website as you wish.
So Mick Gilbert joins Kaye Russell as admin /moderator and immediately throws out the four folks who support searchin at Broken Ridge.
I made the mistake there of usin my real name, supportin the three other folks who wanted to search there, and sayin I thought WSPR could be used to help find MH 370. So I got kicked outa that troll group too !
It’s fine in that group to say the passengers n plane are captive in Diego Garcia, Kazakhstan, crashed in Cambodia, shot down in the South China Sea. ABBR … Anywhere But Broken Ridge.
Well at least we know more about where the plane is now.The pirates start shootin’ at you when ya get near the buried treasure they dont want ya to find.
@Johnny Rivers,
Welcome to the blog!
MH370 is not to be found in Diego Garcia, Kazakhstan, Cambodia or the South China Sea.
The physical evidence found in the Indian Ocean does not fit Kazakhstan, Cambodia or the South China Sea.
The drift analysis does not fit Diego Garcia, Kazakhstan, Cambodia or the South China Sea.
The satellite data from Inmarsat does not fit Diego Garcia, Kazakhstan, Cambodia or the South China Sea.
The mobile phone detection of the Co-Pilot’s mobile phone over Penang does not fit Cambodia or the South China Sea.
It appears that serious MH370 analysts, with real names, who do not follow wild conspiracy theories are not welcome on the fake MH370 Families Facebook Group at MH370 What’s happening? Facts, Information, Discussions.
They seem to prefer Bionic Chronic types with no facts, no information and certainly no discussion.
Hello Richard,
I watched the Netflix Doc and quickly after I started to search around and realized how many theories in that doc were completely invented for pure clickbait purposes.
I liked a lot your reports and fact checking of any theory. Still, I have many questions to ask out of pure curiosity.
I heard that the black boxes cannot survive for many years in salt water and my question is:
Would the black box flight recorder of MH370’s black boxes still be preserved after 9 years in the depths of the ocean? Could the black box be buryied under terrain of the ocean floor after so much time?
Why didn’t Ocean Infinity search up North or South of the assumed impact location?I ask this since AF447 debris area was much more North of the original impact location. And the Ocean Infinity search area seemed pretty much a Horizontal Line why didn’t they go north or south?
Is there any way to investigate without flight recorder data?
Thanks for the response in any case and keep up the good work 🙂
@Youssef,
Welcome to the blog!
Black boxes are designed to survive longer than 9 years.
Even if the black box is buried in the sea floor, then a detector can find it.
The data flight recorder contains the full history of the MH370 flight path.
Ocean Infinity did search a long way North of the assumed impact location.
Ocean Infinity did not search a long way South of the assumed impact location, because the ATSB were convinced they had searched that area already.
I have been following this subject since december 2022. I don’t understand why the hypothesis of a failure of the communication system is not taken into account ? It is much more likely that the plane had issuses that prevented it from reaching its destination than the hypotheses proposed over the years. Thank you !
@DianaS,
Welcome to the blog!
There is no evidence that the aircraft followed any lost communications protocol. The transponder was not switched to 7600, it was switched to standby. The aircraft did not follow the filed flight plan, it diverted. No attempt was made to communicate via the satphone, if all three VHF and both HF radios had failed. The Controller–Pilot Data Link Communications (CPDLC) were not used.
With 3 VHF radio systems, 2 HF radio system and a satellite telephone it is highly unlikely that all 6 communication systems stopped working at the same time, whilst at the same time the aircraft managed to fly for 7 hours 37 minutes.
Hi Richard,
1) Page 361 of the 2018 report by the The Malaysian ICAO Annex 13 Safety Investigation Team for MH370 is scant on the timeline of movements of the Captain on his two days off prior to and morning of, the flight. The only evidence of him in a place between his last shift on the 3rd March and the actual flight is his sign in time on the day of the flight.
Was a detailed timeline of his movements on his days off on the 5/6 March and the morning of the 7th March released elsewhere?
2) Page 20 of the same report is the only evidence relating to mobile phone activity detected from MH370, that being the FO’s mobile phone was grabbed by a tower in Penang. Is there any other evidence of mobile phone activity from the plane?
Also regarding your detection methodology. I feel putting a GPS tracker on a real flight with a passenger and comparing that GPS data, to your tracking method, AFTER your tracking method is completed, will convince people on this.
@Brad,
Unfortunately GPS does not work very well on an aircraft, because the aircraft hull shields reception of the satellite signals. It can work, if you can pick up satellite signals in a window seat, but it can be patchy. The aircraft GPS has an external antenna for this reason.
We are currently tracking a Boeing 777 across the Indian Ocean, where we have limited ADS-B data. ADS-B goes out of range when the aircraft is more than around 225 nmi from nearest receiver on land.
@Brad,
Welcome to the blog!
The leaked report prepared by the Royal Malaysian Police has some background information on the timeline of movements of the Captain on his two days off on 5th/6th March 2014, mostly from his calls, messages and online activity.
The Captain phoned his wife on her mobile phone from his mobile phone on 6th March 2014 at 21:46:58 local time. They were obviously in two separate locations at that time. The Captain again phoned his wife on her mobile phone on 7th March 2014 22:31:36 local time two hours prior to the departure of flight MH370.
There were numerous logins to Facebook on 5th March 2014 at 07:21:26, 08:23:19 and 09:23:39 and on 6th March 2014 at 05:19:49, 06:21:34 and 22:04:14. The Captain had two Facebook accounts. He also checked his emails and WeChat messages several times on the 5th/6th March 2014. The Captain again checked his WeChat messages on 8th March 2014 00:40 local time whilst sitting on the departure runway awaiting take off clearance.
There is no evidence that the Captain used his home flight simulator during these two days off on 5th/6th March 2014.
The police records give a detailed table of each connection from the Captain’s mobile phone to the Celcom 4G network including the Cell Global Identity Service Area Identifier (CGISAI) on 7th/8th March 2014, but not for 5th/6th March 2014. On the 7th/8th March 2014 the Captain’s mobile phone was connected to cells within the the Kuala Lumpur area and you can trace his route to the airport.
It would have been possible to determine which cell his mobile phone was connected to during his two days off. The records show the Captain was frequently active on email, Facebook, WeChat and web browsing, so it would have been easy to track the Captain’s whereabouts on the 5th/6th March 2014.
The Malaysian police checked all the mobile phone records of the crew of MH370 but not of the passengers. The majority of the passenger’s mobile phone providers were based in China and other countries outside the jurisdiction of the Malaysian police. However the Malaysian police did not check the mobile phone records of the Malaysian passengers within their jurisdiction.
@All,
The leaked Royal Malaysian Police report gives the details of calls, messages and online activity for the Captain’s Nokia mobile and the First Officer’s Blackberry. Both the Captain and the First Officer used Malaysia Celcom as their mobile phone service provider.
The online activity is even more detailed from 7th March 2014 00:00 local time until the MH370 take off on 8th March 2014 00:41 local time with the Location Area Code (LAC) and the Cell Identifier (CI). The Captain made 50 online connections in this around 25 hour timeframe, whereas the First Officer made 149 online connections. Both the Captain and the First Officer used their mobile phones during this timeframe for web browsing, emails, messaging, Facebook and WeChat. In addition the First Officer used WhatsApp and used his mobile phone for online shopping with Amazon, Apple iTunes and the App Store.
The First Officer’s 149 connections were with 43 different mobile phone cells in 19 different locations near his home, travelling around the Kuala Lumpur area and at the airport. The Captains’s 50 connections were with 10 different mobile phone cells in 7 locations all close to the airport. The only mobile phone cells they both had in common were in 3 locations around the airport.
Both the Captain and the First Officer lived in different sectors of the Shah Alam area, a suburb of Kuala Lumpur, which is around one hour by car from the airport. Whereas the First Officer’s mobile phone was detected near his home on 7th March 2014, the Captain’s mobile phone was not.
The Captain kept his mobile phone switched on after the aircraft left the gate and it made 10 connections to 3 cells in 3 locations around the airport during taxiing. The First Officer did not use his mobile phone after leaving the gate, where it made only 5 connections to 1 cell and 1 location at the gate.
What is of interest to note is that calls to the First Officer’s mobile phone made by MAS Operations at 04:48:40 and 06:08:59 local time diverted directly to voicemail. Calls to the Captain’s mobile phone at 04:47:37, 04:47:46, 06:07:44 and 07:30:19 local time did not divert to voicemail. The First Officer had closed his connection whilst online and set the divert to voicemail option.
The First Officer’s mobile phone was detected by a cell tower at the BBFARLIM2 base station at Bandar Baru Air Itam on Penang Island at 01:52:27 local time, but the divert to voicemail option was left unchanged. The Captain’s mobile phone was not detected by a cell tower on Penang Island.
Good info. Any implications? One possible implication is lack of sterile cockpit policy at MAS in March_2014, if one pilot is using phone during taxi. Re: FO- what type of phone connected at Penang? I did not recall it was a Blackberry — but I could well be wrong (iPhone5s I recalled).
I agree that there was apparently a plan to check for other crew cell phone connects, but I do not recall that we ever heard results reported.
@TBill,
The RMP report states that the Co-Pilot’s mobile number 019-2292042 was detected at the BBFARLIM2 base station on Penang Island. All calls to and from this number were to his Blackberry Bold 9790 prior to the departure of MH370.
The Co-Pilot did also have his Apple iPhone5s with him and it is possible that he swapped sim cards between the Blackberry and the iPhone.
The RMP reconstruction of the mobile phone detection over Penang tested all three devices, the Captain’s Nokia mobile phone and the Co-Pilot’s Blackberry and iPhone.