Ocean Infinity presented a new MH370 underwater search proposal to Anthony Loke, the Malaysian Minister of Transport in Kuala Lumpur on 2nd May 2024. Anthony Loke said that based on discussions held on Thursday, the company had submitted a proposal paper along with evidence and information for examination by the relevant parties under his ministry.
Josh Broussard, the Chief Technology Officer, of Ocean Infinity led the team making the presentation, together with their Commercial Manager.
Pete Foley, the former ATSB search director, also attended the meeting in Malaysia. Pete has been campaigning for a new search for several years and is advising Ocean Infinity on the new search.
Prof. Simon Maskell, from Liverpool University, is a scientific advisor to Ocean Infinity and was also in attendance at the meeting. Simon leads a team investigating the possibility of using WSPR to detect and track aircraft. Simon plans to add the WSPR data to the particle filter developed by the Australian Defence Science and Technology Group (DSTG) described in their book titled “Bayesian Methods in the Search for MH370” in order to refine the new MH370 search area.
The new search for MH370 is expected to start in November 2024. Anthony Loke said the whole process of examining the new proposal, including cabinet approval would take about three months. Two representatives of the Association for Families of the Passengers and Crew on board MH370 also attended the meeting. The Association welcomed the new proposal and thanked everyone involved.
@All,
An update today on the MH370 search from Airline News with Geoffrey Thomas:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4pJDs3XjhwQ
As with MH370, when there is no final crash investigation report, or when investigators disagree, or the report is not conclusive, then the ICAO should take the lead role in the investigation or conduct its own investigation. Airline safety can only improve with open and transparent aircraft crash investigations.
China Eastern Airlines flight MU5735 crashed on 21st March 2022 on a domestic flight from Kunming to Guangzhou. There were 132 passengers and 9 crew, who were all killed. China Eastern Airlines is the 3rd largest airline in China based in Shanghai and is state owned. There are 66 airlines in China, of which 39 are state owned, with 620 Million passengers per year.
The aircraft was a Boeing 737-89P and only 6 years old. Boeing have delivered a total of 4,989 aircraft of the 737-800 series since 1998 and only 11 have been involved in a fatal accident over the last 27 years.
The CAAC in China has not published a flight plan and has only given very few details of the crash. The preliminary report published on 20th April 2022 was one page long.
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/rk064726m3m8w3dcqcxbk/Google-Earth-Map-of-KMG-to-CAN.png?rlkey=ow0241biesl53onrgf5hydsiu&dl=0
There is no official ADS-B data, but FlightRadar24 has published the ADS-B data with 397 data points and a partial coverage of the flight route. We are showing a link to the ADS-B data marked in black, which follows the flight route A599 marked in red.
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/ynm6hjrjwxd759ukjz4vm/FRF24-MU5735-Flight-Path-ADS-B-Data.png?rlkey=1lxso8uqf2wde3uhvd10y35sw&dl=0
The crash location was in a remote wooded location and it was difficult for rescue workers to reach the site. The remaining fuel, which I have estimated at 2,448 kg, caused a fire on impact and created a forest fire, which had to be extinguished before rescuers could reach the scene.
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/rhuphixjzkrk9ewsxtyaq/Google-Earth-MU5735-Crash-Site-JAN2022-141-m-125.4.png?rlkey=v1bhmxqb2ogswfh8hn53p39e2&dl=0
The impact left a crater 141 m long and 2.7 m deep, which filled with water during the wreckage recovery and pumps had to be brought in.
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/oze5hsicyavbm82g0xc1m/Google-Earth-MU5735-Crash-Site-APR2022-141-m-125.4.png?rlkey=howfd8iq07r5zkhq9rourtysq&dl=0
The descent was caught on a security camera, in a near vertical dive, by CCTV from a nearby mining company.
https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=257768099901811
The aircraft descended so fast that the structure experienced flutter and a part of the wing tip winglet separated and was found 12 km from the main crash site.
The ADS-B data makes it clear that the descent was without auto-pilot control and flown manually.
The final sequence of events was:
1. 06:17:02 UTC – Adjacent to waypoint ATLAT (5 nmi lateral offset South) – Top of the descent point reached.
2. Throttle switched to idle.
3. Autopilot disengaged.
4. 06:21:00 UTC – Nose down maximum.
5. Guangzhou Air Traffic Control Centre – Altitude Alarm.
6. 06:22:58 UTC – Crash – 118 seconds dive from 29,100 feet Pressure Altitude – 30,675 feet GPS Altitude.
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/chk16ay2tdinktcwq9g1v/FRF24-MU5735-Crash-Location-ADS-B-Data.png?rlkey=ufmqphfxwnvg50yawp0ogdnlc&dl=0
If you compare the technical data with other similar aircraft accidents, three things stand out.
The speed of the descent (-30,975 fpm).
(2) The short time of the descent (118 seconds).
(3) The nose down attitude of the descent (Nose Down Attitude).
Germanwings 4U9535 was shown to be caused by a suicide pilot, but under auto-pilot setting to an altitude of 100 feet and a steady descent of -3,400 fpm. In this case, the descent was -30,975 fpm.
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/wt5hg01pylyc1o08cm73n/Technical-Data-Comparison.png?rlkey=mkyx4y1vzvha5zo3zm7c9r6eq&dl=0
When you take the key NTSB statement: “The plane did, what it is supposed to do, by someone in the cockpit.”
Plus the key NTSB statement: “There was silence during the descent.”
Add the ADS-B end of flight data on the curving non auto-pilot flight path, we showed earlier.
Add the ADS-B descent rate and levelling off during the descent for a short time and even climbing 575 feet.
My conclusion is that this was a silent struggle in the cockpit.
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/mn3cgoifynqga7greks4j/FRF24-MU5735-Crash-Descent-ADS-B-Data.png?rlkey=zdh7kl23g4kic8y11tl9lk5wp&dl=0
The NTSB completed their analysis almost 3 years ago. They confirmed that they had received the CVR on 1st April 2022 and the FDR on 5th April 2022. In the worst case where both black boxes are severely damaged, such as the TWA 800 accident, it takes 8 weeks to fully recover and validate the data. We can reasonably assume the analysis was completed by July 2022.
The NTSB has not published their findings, having analysed the FDR and CVR, preferring to defer to the Chinese, as lead investigators.
The NTSB statements widely quoted in reputable media, conflict with the one pager repetitious annual statements from the CAAC in China.
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/y6vpjmvq51tnomwl9vj89/Preliminary-Findings-on-China-Eastern-Plane-Crash-Released.png?rlkey=fp9aso5k550s284o347w5fn0r&dl=0
There is no official final report, just the one pager preliminary report, which is repeated annually.
When you compare with other similar investigations, the one page official responses from China are quite frankly, a sick joke.
The MH370 final report was 447 pages long and with appendices 1,483 pages, but unfortunately inconclusive.
The BEA reports from France on AF447 (373 pages) and Germanwings (110 pages) were conclusive.
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/fkx8qqg62fquubu6svabq/Official-Reports-Comparison.png?rlkey=in9nb9mzp6yr4r8bgyw0nz3vt&dl=0
My personal conclusion is murder/suicide by the First Officer, following a cockpit struggle with the Captain and possibly third officer.
There is an unconfirmed report that twenty minutes after the incident, the public security department personnel of Yunnan Airlines (affiliated with China Eastern Airlines) went to the hotel where Zhang Zhengping was temporarily staying to search his room and saw the suicide note left by Zhang Zhengping.
Yunnan Airlines used the Mercure Hotel for flight crew on rotation. They required flight crew to overnight close to the airport and be available without restricting the allowed limits for flight hours.
The content of the note was very long, but it apparently exposed the persecution and unfair treatment of him and the original team of Yunnan Airlines after China Eastern Airlines merged with Yunnan Airlines.
The second content of the suicide note is that he complained about the central government’s economic policies. He had entrusted someone to invest his decades of savings in Evergrande Real Estate, but ended up losing all his money and became disgusted with the world.
The public security personnel of Yunnan Airlines purportedly, not only submitted this suicide note to the public security agency, but also copied a copy to the top management of China Eastern Airlines, and the top management of China Eastern Airlines copied another copy and handed it to the Civil Aviation Administration of China. Now dozens of people have seen this suicide note.
The focus on the lack of information regarding the China Eastern Airlines crash may prove helpful in prompting a response from Malaysia re MH370. It’s also worth noting, if it hasn’t been highlighted recently, that MH370 was a codeshare with China Southern Airlines flight CZ 748.
The Guardian had a recent article about long-standing stresses in the US ATC sector, but the problem probably goes far beyond the US.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/may/10/air-traffic-control-america
The Malaysian Airlines ATC operators were working under very stressful conditions at the time of the disappearance of MH370, and this might partly have contributed to the multiple mis-communications that bedevilled the flight monitoring, search, rescue and recovery operations.
On page 95-96 of Appendix 1.18F of the Factual Information Report the following entries indicate the stress:
“21:20:16 MAS Ops_____Morning
21:20:17 KL ATC_____Morning MAS Ops centre here any news on Eight Seven Zero?
21:20:20 MAS Ops_____Negative Sir….still…..we are…..haa
21:20:23 KL ATC_____I see
21:20:23 MAS Ops_____This is aaa…actually I don’t know how to explain but we are under aa…mode very stressful mode down here.”
While there currently seems to be no indication of ATC fault in the crash of China Eastern Airlines flight MU5735, there is a strong suggestion that the personnel management processes experienced by the First Officer may have contributed significantly to the incident.
Operator overload may also have played a significant part in the January 29th 2025 crash between a helicopter and a passenger jet near Ronald Reagan National Airport in Washington.
In addition to the ICAO, there may be another UN role, in this case for the ILO, in ensuring that airline industry workers are not abused in the reckless pursuit of maximum profit and market share, regardless of the human cost.
Perhaps instead of airlines being government owned or privately owned they could be re-designated as Public Benefit Corporations, at least in the US to start with. If the idea proves to be popular with air travellers it might be taken up by other nations and corporations.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benefit_corporation
@All,
An update today on the MH370 search from Airline News with Geoffrey Thomas:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4G_VtjAMV4c
Several viewers have put forward the proposal, that any country that does not fully publish the investigation findings after a serious incident such as an aircraft crash, however caused, should have all its carriers restricted to that country and be banned from international operations.
It is all about aviation safety, If we can’t learn lessons out of each accident, then how do we ensure it does not happen again?
Another viewer asked: “Are the yokes in the 737-89P linked together? Or, are they independent like on the Airbus?” The yokes are mechanically connected on the Boeing 737-800 series aircraft. A rigid bar runs beneath the cockpit floor, linking the left and right control-column assemblies. The columns themselves are connected internally by steel cables or rods that mesh into pinion gears at the base of each column.
The stronger pilot (or the one exerting greater force) will tend to “win” unless a deliberate disconnect mechanism is used.
Boeing 787 is a fly-by-wire aircraft, like Airbus. Airbus aircraft also have a Priority Takeover button, which lets one pilot take control and have the airplane ignore inputs from the other side-stick.
@All,
An update today on the MH370 search from Airline News with Geoffrey Thomas and Blaine Gibson:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZkHGNfO8sl8
From the ADS-B data of the China Eastern Airlines crash, it appears that there were manual inputs via the yoke (both elevators and ailerons), the foot pedals (rudder) and the throttle levers. Inputs for pitch, roll, yaw and speed.
There were turns in the horizontal plane, flying an s-curve, initially without excessive side slip.
At the same time, there was as a steep dive in the vertical plane.
When the aircraft levelled out, it was also in a straight flight for 21 seconds.
At the end of the descent, there was a sharp turn with massive horizontal side slip.
The final direction of 114°T aligns with the crater at the crash location at 125°T.
In my view, this all points to a struggle in the cockpit.
Horizontal and Vertical ADS-B Data.
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/8igoyvakrhfjljfy7t7tc/Horizontal-and-Vertical-ADS-B-Data.png?rlkey=bp2winamg7us4req3qiwfo21o&dl=0
Google Earth MU5735 Crash Site APR2022 141 m 125.4°.
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/oze5hsicyavbm82g0xc1m/Google-Earth-MU5735-Crash-Site-APR2022-141-m-125.4.png?rlkey=howfd8iq07r5zkhq9rourtysq&dl=0
@All,
An update today on the MH370 search from Airline News with Geoffrey Thomas:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z5VmMLpj19g
Four weeks ago we did an episode on MH370 SEARCH – HUGE DATA IS MISSING!
A viewer called Ventus45 commented ALL data must be collected from ALL sources immediately and before it becomes “perishable”.
The viewer suggested: “Richard, perhaps the best thing you can do is draft a ‘gigantic check list’.
The first draft of the check list is ready. We want to invite the viewers to submit their suggestions for the next version.
There are viewers who are pilots, air traffic controllers, engineers, scientists, first responders, rescue coordinators, airline personnel, victims of air crashes and airline users or aviation geeks. We have viewers who work for Boeing, Airbus and other companies in the aviation industry. We even have an aviation journalist, an aerospace engineer and a wreck hunter on the show.
We look forward to your feedback.
The draft contains 33 different types of data and 240 possible sources of data have been identified so far.
The draft document can be downloaded as an Excel spreadsheet at the following link:
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/dr6eo2qeyjhco9ske85wi/Checklist.xlsx?rlkey=6zl50jg1fbdjji0d5jq1dek3g&dl=0
Infrasound sources might be worth adding to the checklist, eg the raw data from IS23 etc. The data is used normally for volcanic activity monitoring and is part of the IMS
A 2004 article describes the way volcanic and other infrasound signals can be enhanced by “speeding up” the signals so that they fall within the human acoustic range. and can then, ideally, be detected in real time by operators.
The article suggests that these boosted ‘audio’ signals can then be further enhanced to remove noise by using film studio sound processing software.
https://geoscienceletters.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s40562-020-00158-4
https://www.ctbto.org/our-work/monitoring-technologies/infrasound-monitoring
@All,
An update today on the MH370 search from Airline News with Geoffrey Thomas and Blaine Gibson:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1gCgQDo_cc
Today Blaine is answering viewer’s questions about the MH370 debris.
@All,
An update today on the MH370 search from Airline News with Geoffrey Thomas:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U5Xr1kDj0AU
What happens when an aircraft is in distress?
The pilot in command (PIC) takes the lead role in a distress situation. One reason why you have two pilots on board all commercial airliners is in the event of one pilot being incapacitated, the other pilot takes over.
ATC has a critical support role to ensure communication, to provide a clear path, expedite routing, and coordinate with rescue services, but never to usurp the PIC’s authority.
Once a distress phase is declared, national Search and Rescue (SAR) coordinating agencies take charge of rescue operations, leveraging the Global Aeronautical Distress and Safety System (GADSS) for locating the aircraft.
Every country either has a Rescue Coordination Centre (RCC) or an agreement with a neighbouring country to provide coverage. Every coastal country has a Maritime RCC (MRCC), there are over 60. There are also 44 countries with a Joint RCCs (JRCC). A few countries have a separate Aeronautical RCC (ARCC). Large countries often have several regional RCCs.
Databases such as SARContacts.info list over 200 RCCs worldwide, covering every country either directly or via agreements with neighbouring RCCs.
Hi Richard,
Following the recent video with Geoffrey; there are many practical implications for having the cockpit door closed during passenger boarding.
The pre-departure period is a very busy time for everyone involved. The cockpit door is left open to allow easy communications with cabin crew and access for engineers and dispatchers who need to sign off paperwork. Having the door closed would have a significant detrimental effect and would delay the departure process.
The security screening process at the airport is considered to be sufficient to prevent anyone boarding the aircraft who could be carrying a weapon of some kind. It is also thought that take-over of an aircraft is much less likely to happen on the ground where the security services have immediate and ready access.
Cabin crew are always in the vicinity of the cockpit door during boarding and would be considered the last line of defence should some unauthorised person have a desire to access the flight deck.
@All,
An update today on the MH370 search from Airline News with Geoffrey Thomas:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BroWkiTDeFk
Two months ago, we did several episodes on the observation of Captain Martyn Smith, who was an Emirates pilot on 8th March 2014, crossing the Indian Ocean from Melbourne to Dubai. This was the day after the disappearance of MH370.
“We were in a block from FL370 to FL390 over the Indian Ocean, when I observed an aircraft within this block and crossing our track. I queried this with Australian ATC, who denied any knowledge of traffic near to us.”
“I had a visual sighting, there was certainly no Traffic Alert (TA) or Resolution Advisory (RA) given.
EK407 and the unidentified aircraft were detected and tracked on 8th March 2014 every two minutes using the WSPR technology, that we have developed for tracking aircraft.
The scenario at 18:46 UTC, is shown in the screenshot with flight EK407 reaching waypoint MUTMI along its planned flight route. It turns out that there were 3 unidentified aircraft in the vicinity of EK407 at 18:46 UTC.
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/adslb4vuw3s5r8soxpbn4/EK407-from-Melbourne-to-Dubai-08MAR2014-1846-UTC-Waypoint-MUTMI.png?rlkey=65ubabebesuu2cna5audw5kxm&dl=0
I tracked the aircraft using WSPR, back in time towards their departure point, and forward in time towards their arrival point. Three aircraft were detected and tracked consistently at over 50 different data points along the track. The flight path is 3,857 nmi long and the flying time was 8h 55m. The maximum range of a P-8A Poseidon aircraft is 4,500 nmi, so there was sufficient fuel without an in-flight refuelling.
When you overlay the WSPR flight path for MH370, then there is a further interesting observation, that the tracks broadly align. It is possible that the US Navy picked up MH370 on an OTHR radar from Diego Garcia. It is possible that the Poseidons went back again in the following days.
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/r10aguds90tkzhl3ggefq/US-Navy-P-8A-Poseidon-Flight-Path-XX-08MAR2014-with-MH370-Flight-Path-07MAR2014.png?rlkey=rl2lhuuu5n520qn92p1byz0vw&dl=0
Five Poseidons flew to and from Perth Airport as well as Pearce AFB in Perth from 18th March 2014 onwards. On 25th March 2014 the commander of the US Navy Pacific fleet, Admiral Harry Harris arrived in Perth to congratulate the crews personally. Neither the US nor Australia have said exactly how many P-8A Poseidons were involved in the MH370 search and rescue operation. The official US Navy picture shows 3 Poseidon aircraft, the official AMSA picture shows 2 Poseidon aircraft and the report by the Australian RCC states 1 Poseidon aircraft. Plane spotters in Perth show 5 aircraft and faithfully record date, time and registration.
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/fbkfcat73hhei96e1dcpq/MH370-Search-and-Rescue-Operations-429-430-433-438-439.png?rlkey=ldykythgv93ag0s7yblvnkbkj&dl=0
Is there any evidence for the presence of an OTHR at Diego Garcia in 2014? OTHRs typically have their transmitters and receivers located hundreds of miles apart, to minimise signal interference. That would not be possible at Diego Garcia, where the island is only about 40 miles long. Also, reports on various other websites indicate the US military only started getting serious about OTHR relatively recently. The USAF, for example, is expected to commence construction on two OTHR sites in Oregon in 2028.
@All,
An update today on the MH370 search from Airline News with Geoffrey Thomas:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xT64p4uJL2c
The Poseidons only followed the MH370 flight route from the equator down to around 20°S on this sortie around 15 hours later. The assumed MH370 crash area is between 30°S and 36°S. We are hoping, that the Poseidons flew another sortie, covering the search area further south.
The distance from Diego Garcia to the 7th Arc is 2,038 nmi. There and back is 4,076 nmi. With a maximum range of 4,500 nmi, that only leaves 424 nmi, which is cutting into reserves. Without an in-flight refuelling, there would only be an absolute maximum of 50 minutes on station.
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/g9llr1v0ql2odo44y6rq7/US-Navy-P-8A-Poseidon-Flight-Path-XX-09MAR2014-with-MH370-Flight-Path-07MAR2014.png?rlkey=twau6mdjd9yah38vhgzcqx83k&dl=0
On 2nd April 2014, the Pentagon announced it had spent over $3.3 million on the MH370 search between March 8 and March 24, funding ships, helicopters, and surveillance flights from its humanitarian aid budget.
JORN Was Not Operating on the Night of 8th March 2014. When questioned about why the over-the-horizon radar network had not picked up Malaysia Airlines Flight 370, Defence spokespeople confirmed that the relevant Jindalee Operational Radar Network (JORN) segment was switched off at the time the aircraft was transiting the Indian Ocean MH370 Search.
JORN Is a directed, not continuous, surveillance system. Official commentary has emphasised that JORN is not a passive “always-on” global radar; rather, it operates by steering long-range beams into specific sectors and only on a scheduled basis. It does not continuously monitor every part of the sky, so even when active it may not detect every aircraft in its nominal range
The U.S. position is that its OTHR assets at Pine Gap and elsewhere, and its SOSUS assets in the Indian Ocean, neither detected MH370 nor can it confirm any such detection, and it will not provide further details due to the classified nature of its surveillance systems.
@Francis Botham,
Welcome to the blog!
The US has a global network of OTHR. The data is shared between over 20 listening stations on a satellite network. The prime OTHR covering the Indian Ocean is based at Pine Gap in Australia. Diego Garcia is another of the listening stations with a satellite connection to the Echelon system. Every telephone, email, SMS, message, mobile cell, radio, TV, microwave link, satellite link and including every aircraft are captured 24 x 7 globally in the Echelon system, which is funded by the CIA and the NSA, as well as the security services in Canada, UK, Australia and New Zealand, the so called five eyes.
There is also a Sound Surveillance System (SOSUS), the US has fixed sea floor assets and mobile ships and buoys assets in the Atlantic Ocean, Pacific Ocean and Indian Ocean. They have officially stated that they did not detect MH370. They have also stated that they would neither confirm nor deny any such detection, should it have taken place. They will not provide any details due to the classified nature of its surveillance systems.
There are a few other systems on Diego Garcia.
CDAA Surveillance – Circular Disposed Antenna Arrays on Diego Garcia and elsewhere, which can be used for direction finding and triangulation.
Satellite Surveillance – Diego Garcia has an AN/GSC-39C SHF satellite system able to intercept all satellite communications in its area of operation.
GEODSS – Ground Based Electro Optical Deep Space Surveillance system.
In summary there is SOSUS Sound Surveillance, OTHR Over-The-Horizon-Radar, Hydro-Acoustic and other surveillance systems, which have not all been revealed publicly and certainly have data on MH370, which is not in the public domain.
The reason for the secrecy is, that they watch Iraq, Afghanistan, Russia, China, North Korea and the Middle East from Pine Gap, Diego Garcia and 20 other locations and they do not want to give away the extent of their capability.
@Richard
Thank you for your reply. I am aware of the Five Eyes’ ECHELON program, used to gather SIGINT from around the world. I also know that Diego Garcia plays a role; however, I have not heard of a global network of OTHR associated with that program. Are you able to share any references or let readers know how you came by that information?
@All,
An update today on the MH370 search from Airline News with Geoffrey Thomas:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iy9ZoKtvd74
We go through the sources of information available to the US Navy on 8th March 2014, on which their search and rescue operation was based. They had the Inmarsat satellite data, OTHR, SOSUS, CTBTO, radio, SATCOM, CDAA as well as other passive radar systems, which operate like WSPR does.
The Pentagon spent $3.3 M in 16 days, between 8th March and 24th March 2014, funding ships, helicopters, and surveillance flights from its humanitarian aid budget.
The Malaysian official search started on 8th March 2014 in the South China Sea and Gulf of Thailand.
The Australian official search started on 18th March 2014 (10 days later). Australia’s Search and Rescue Area is 54 M km2, 1/10th of the Earth’s surface and 85% Ocean.
The US Navy were on the job on 8th March 2014. If there is any possibility of survivors following a crash in the Indian Ocean, in an area with a water temperature of 22°C, you have a maximum of 40 hours to find them and much less time if people are injured.
@Francis Botham,
As far as I am aware, there are nine Over The Horizon Radar (OTHR) Sky Wave systems and four Over The Horizon Radar Ground Wave systems currently operated by the US and their allies, partly with the help of US personnel. Some of these are fixed OTHR and others are relocatable ROTHR systems.
The US, UK, Australia, Canada, France are quite restrained about publishing information on the exact capability of each system. There is a good overview on OTHR in Wikipedia. There are also a large number of academic papers (109) on OTHR in general and aircraft (64) or ship (129) detection in particular.
A wider literature research reveals a total of 8,535 papers on passive radar.
In particular, Doppler aircraft detection (560), reference waveforms (688), surveillance beams (917), matched filtering (1097), adaptive beam forming (365), constant false alarm rate (35), space time adaptive processing (53), coherent integration time (7), coherent processing interval (13).
A good introduction is the paper by Giuseppe (Joe) Fabrizio the key guy behind JORN, titled “Passive Radar in the High Frequency Band” dated 2008, which can be downloaded from IEEE Xplore with a subscription.
More general literature on the subject is immense, forward scatter (9,433), back scatter (7,659), side scatter (7,664), radar cross section (14,767), near field (68,489), mid field (5,656) and far field (126,754).
Over The Horizon Radar Sky Wave systems include:
North Atlantic – Chesapeake, Virginia, USA – ROTHR – 1993.
Central America, Gulf of America – Corpus Christi, Texas, USA – ROTHR – 1995
South America, South Atlantic – Rafael Hernández, Puerto Rico, USA – 1999.
Pacific Ocean – Longreach, Queensland, Australia – JORN – 1984.
Indian Ocean – Laverton, Western Australia – JORN – 1984.
Asia, Indonesia – Alice Springs Northern Territory, Australia – JORN – 1984.
Asia, Pacific and Indian Ocean – Pine Gap, Northern Territory, Australia – OTHR -1988.
Europe – France – NOSTRADAMUS – 2009.
Middle East, Mediterranean – Cyprus (UK) – PLUTO – 2012.
Over The Horizon Radar Ground Wave systems include:
North Atlantic – Cape Race, Newfoundland, Canada – OTHR – 1999.
North Atlantic – Cape Race, Newfoundland, Canada – OTHR – 1999.
Mediterranean – France – STRADIVARIUS – OTHR – 2015.
Black Sea – Romania – OTHR – 2009.
Planned OTHR systems include:
Arctic – Canada – JORN.
Pacific Ocean – Palau (US) – TACMOR.
Asia, Pacific and Indian Ocean – JORN Upgrade.
Decommissioned OTHR systems are not included in the above lists:
USAF AN/FPS-118 network (East Coast, West Coast, Alaska).
Anglo-American Cobra Mist.
You may find the short paper on the history of the US OTHR systems interesting (4 pages):
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/2mgvi6t43jpnj04yj1hrt/Development-of-OTHR-in-the-USA.pdf?rlkey=9f698il0eufjn0vv5hy3sc4oo&dl=0
Two of the key papers on the subject are:
In 2016 Ari J. Joki et al. presented a paper titled “Forward-scatter Doppler-only Distributed Passive Covert Radar” in which they describe a system for air traffic safety augmentation. One possibility is to take advantage of existing radio amateur and dx listener resources. During the periods where the proprietor is not using the receiving equipment for their hobby, perhaps the receiver could be utilised as part of an air traffic monitoring network (NATO).
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/5joafgw56t3zwxcwf9boy/NATO-Finnish-Defence-Forces-Air-Force-Sytems-Division-Forward-Scatter-Doppler-only-Distributed-Ari-Joki.pdf?rlkey=1rv6zwoxa2e73c2ezlzed87qe&dl=0
In 2017 M. A. Cervera et al. published a paper titled “Climatological Model of Over-the-Horizon Radar” in which they describe using HF ionospheric radio waves to detect and track Boeing 777 aircraft in Australia from three stations in New Caledonia, Norfolk Island and New Zealand, over distances of up to 3,000 km away from the target aircraft (Radio
Science).
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/g41ujki6rucew6yp8dl3o/Climatological-Model-of-Over-the-Horizon-Radar-Cervera.pdf?rlkey=rbnhok0npmko1xkx8cjibwdt1&dl=0
Then there are airborne line of sight systems like the Hensoldt PEGASUS airborne SIGINT system. The Persistent German Airborne Surveillance System (PEGASUS) is a SIGINT/reconnaissance suite mounted in a crewed Bombardier Global 6000 aircraft. It records and geolocates military radio traffic and radar emissions. My co-author Dr. Hannes Coetzee has a leading role in this project.
My other co-author Prof. Simon Maskell is working on a number of projects including sonar, active radar and passive radar. He is leading a team of researchers investigating WSPRnet data by comparing with the ADS-B data from thousands of aircraft using “big data” and distributed computing. He is also a scientific advisor to Ocean Infinity on the search for MH370.
@Richard
Thank you for the detailed reply. There are indeed a number of OTHR sites operated by several different countries. However, I haven’t found any information that suggests those OTHRs operate as a network that feeds data to the ECHELON program. Furthermore, I have not found any mention of an OTHR at Diego Garcia, or indeed Pine Gap.
If an OTHR was installed at Diego Garcia, the most likely candidate seems to be the AN/TPS-71 ROTHR operated at other US Navy sites. The following reference states that the AN/TPS-71 transmitter and receiver sites are located 50 to 100 nm apart. Such a configuration does not seem possible at Diego Garcia, given the small size of the island.
https://www.radartutorial.eu/19.kartei/01.oth/karte006.en.html
Armada 78 06 departs for Cape Town. It looks like they have plans for this summer in Europe.
@Edward,
Thanks for the update!
@Francis Botham,
You ask:
1. Whether global OTHR sites are connected in a network.
2. Whether global OTHR data is shared on ECHELON.
3. Whether Pine Gap is an OTHR facility.
4. Whether Diego Garcia is an OTHR facility and whether the island is too small.
The UKUSA agreement was established in 1946 and provides for a comprehensive intelligence sharing between the UK and the USA, and subsequently Canada, Australia and New Zealand.
The particular networked entities in each country are the GCHQ (UK), NSA (USA), CSE (Canada), ASD (Australia) and GCSB (New Zealand).
Countries operate shared listening stations and conduct joint operations. Pine Gap in Australia, is jointly run with the US. Facilities like Menwith Hill in the UK, Waihopai Station in New Zealand and Misawa Air Base (Japan, with US support) are part of this network.
There are several other networked entities including the BND (Germany) and DGSE (France). The BND has reduced sharing since they discovered 40,000 NSA selectors targeting European companies. The DGSE cooperation with the Five Eyes was formalised in the Lustre agreement.
The members of the Five Eyes Plus group are France, Germany, Japan, South Korea and India.
ICReach is a NSA search engine with data from all Five Eyes members.
FIVE-EYES Intelligence Sharing System is a secure network connecting the SIGINT agencies.
Each key entity has a geographic focus:
US (NSA): Americas, Russia, Middle East, China.
UK (GCHQ): Europe, former Soviet Union, Middle East.
Canada (CSE): Northern Russia, parts of Latin America.
Australia (ASD): Southeast Asia and Pacific.
New Zealand (GCSB): South Pacific and Southeast Asia.
Data comes from PRISM, XKeyscore, TEMPORA, MUSCULAR and ECHELON.
OTHR and other military surveillance data is shared via the STONEGHOST secure network, which is a Multinational Information Sharing (MNIS) network.
Pine Gap was established in the late 1960s to monitor and track Soviet missile capabilities, and its functions have evolved over time. Pine Gap is a key contributor to the NSA’s global surveillance and interception efforts, including the ECHELON program. It’s jointly operated by the Australian Defence Force (Australian Signals Directorate), the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), US National Security Agency (NSA), and US National Reconnaissance Office (NRO).
There are three types of OTHR, mono-static, bi-static and multi-static.
The first type has a dedicated transmitter co-located with the receiver.
The second type has a dedicated transmitter located between 100 km and 3,000 km from the receiver.
The siting and radiative properties of the emitters, the propagation channel characteristics, and most importantly, the transmitted waveforms are under the control of the radar.
The third type only has a receiver. Illuminators of opportunity are used, such as signals from FM radio transmitters, digital television broadcast towers, cellular base stations (e.g., 4G, 5G), Wi-Fi routers, satellite transmissions, commercial air traffic control radars (secondary radar), navigation aids (like VOR or DME) and HF radio amateur transmissions.
These multi-static systems have a number of advantages. They are cost effective, multi-frequency, harder to detect, less susceptible to electronic counter measures and can enhance the radar cross section of a target.
The size of Diego Garcia does not prohibit a mono-static active OTHR or a multi-static passive OTHR.
JORN on the other hand is a network of three transmitter and receiver pairs, each around 80 km to 120 km apart and spanning Australia over 2,272 km and all controlled from RAAF Edinburgh up to 1,728 km distant.
@All,
An update today on the MH370 search from Airline News with Geoffrey Thomas:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-S4BxUgIbuo
Armada 7806 has left Port Louis, Mauritius and is heading for Cape Town, It is expected to arrive in 9 days time on 31st May 2025.
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/qsnoogqb97ipog657pde3/Armada-7806-Vessel-Finder-22MAY2025-0530-UTC.png?rlkey=mqs0mg40v95s7g03x7eb63rwy&dl=0
We look at all the radar systems that could have seen MH370. Here is an overview of the Five Eyes listening stations and satellite networks, connected to the NSA computer at Fort Meade, Maryland, USA:
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/rgsgoy225l8sfv7jupxf1/Echelon-Global-Listening-Stations-and-Satellite-Network.png?rlkey=ez6z1uflsjcck1klpuy50s2xl&dl=0