Flight mh370 independent group's new search location

[Josh Heuer]

Just saw this on CNN. A group of folks seem to think this is a good place to look.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/06/18/world/asia/malaysia-missing-plane/

A group of independent experts -- who prodded authorities to release satellite data on Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 -- says it thinks it knows the approximate location of the missing aircraft.

Five separate computer models all place the plane in a tight cluster of spots in the south Indian Ocean — hundreds of miles southwest of the previous search site.

"We recommend that the search for MH370 be focused in this area," the group said in a statement late Tuesday.

"While there remain a number of uncertainties and some disagreements as to the interpretation of aspects of the data, our best estimates of a location of the aircraft (is) near 36.02 South 88.57 East," according to the statement, which was approved by 10 named experts.

The group opted to release its statement late Tuesday in advance of a BBC documentary on the missing plane, and ahead of the Australian government's announcement on the focus of the search, so that there would be no question about the independence of the group's findings, said one member of the group, American Mobile Satellite Corp. co-founder Mike Exner.

"We wanted to get our best estimate out," Exner said.

The group believes that after the Boeing 777 circumnavigated Indonesia, for reasons that are still unknown, the plane traveled south at an average speed of 470 knots, probably at a consistent altitude and constant heading, Exner said. All five computer models developed by the experts place the aircraft in a "pretty tight cluster...plus or minus 50 miles of each other," he said.

The plane and its 239 occupants vanished March 8 while flying from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing.

In a blog post, group member Tim Farrar called the recommended search site "our best estimate -- but not the only possible -- location for a potential search."

Content from external source

Here's the location they came up with:



Picture is from the site I linked to above.

 

[vooke]

They should share their methodology or shut up

 

[zebra100]

They should share their methodology or shut up

Better be not be so rude-- this is a group of highly respected scientists, including Duncan Steel who recently stopped his blog on MH370 due to some rude even personal attacks.

The problem for them to be not so sure is that Inmarsat only released partial "raw data" which was not really original and Inmarsat said they compared its data with past MH370 flight data records and other similar planes flying data records and it didn't release any of them even the satellite drifting data, so it was very hard for other people, even genius to do the guesswork if not having the whole raw data for evaluation. Seems to me Inmarsat and Malaysia government still try to hide something.

As for this group's analysis for their conclusion on the limited data Inmarsat released, you can see very detailed discussion on Duncan Steel's former blog and I see they are still there--but they are very technical and mathematically complicated.

 

[vooke]

Better be not be so rude--

Not rude really but transparency is what sucks on this #MH370 saga. They can share both the technical bit and the down-to-earth version for earthlings.

Still it begs the question, why is Inmarsat being economical with the truth? They can't be the only brains under the sun that can crunch numbers

 

[Mick West]

What's the original source here? Where is the blog that was mentioned?

 

[zebra100]

What's the original source here? Where is the blog that was mentioned?

here: http://www.duncansteel.com/archives/date/2014/06/17

and here and here, but i saw today that some of the comments and graphs were taken off- maybe prepare for their formal release

 

[Jason]

here: http://www.duncansteel.com/archives/date/2014/06/17

and here and here, but i saw today that some of the comments and graphs were taken off- maybe prepare for their formal release

Why would the graphs and comments be deleted? IMO, probably because they were "wrong" assumptions on his behalf. What he should've done to gain more respect from a scientific approach was discuss why his theories didn't hold up, and by not holding up what did the alternatives prove..

 

[Simon Gunson]

People like Duncan Steel and Mike Exner have predicted MH370's route based on a number of assumptions, but their complex assumptions unravelled because one or more of their underlying assumptions were wrong. Rather than childishly crow at the fact one side was right or one side was wrong, what would be helpful would be an honest reappraisal of those assumptions rather than continuing to try and make the same old assumptions fit a different impact point.

For example the BTO error in signal data from 18:25 UTC to 18:28 UTC suggest MH370 flew west through the Straits of Malacca at 4,000mph (Mach 5). Instead of addressing that flaw the Independent group have brushed it aside or ignored it. Evidence from the Bayesian analysis report dated 03 December 2015 however set out compelling evidence for a massive electrical failure.

Put quite simply electrical failure-hypoxic flight is mutually incompatible with the alleged radar sightings in the Straits of Malacca. Nobody much has thought to question the veracity of the radar evidence.

Neither Thailand's radar at Hat Yai, nor Indonesia's radar at Lhokseumwae saw this miraculous transit of the Straits, yet it was this that formed the underlying assumption for MH370's location at 18:22. Without a confirmed start point the BFO data are meaningless Doppler vectors. It cannot be assumed MH370 circumnavigated Sumatra.

Nor for that matter if MH370 suffered massive electrical failure can it be assumed the satellite handshake data values were not corrupted. Excess heat or cold could have altered the BTO transmission bias, thus relocating the ping rings. Any changes in AFC oscillator frequency could have distorted the Doppler BFO values for part or all of the flight.

If electrical failure rendered the SAT data unreliable then of course all the calculations by Duncan Steel and Mike Exner could be hundreds of miles off course.

The basis for assuming MH370 impacted further north appears to be the growth of barnacle varieties on the Flaperon that needed immersion in warmer waters than the supposed impact location, however they neglected to consider that with it's internal volume, the Flaperon acted more like a sail and likely drifted further north than other MH370 debris lacking marine growth.

 

[Simon Gunson]

Not rude really but transparency is what sucks on this #MH370 saga. They can share both the technical bit and the down-to-earth version for earthlings.

Still it begs the question, why is Inmarsat being economical with the truth? They can't be the only brains under the sun that can crunch numbers

INMARSAT seem to have concealed the contradictions in their methodology.

I also gather from the New York Times March 14,2014 that there was a RR EHM message sent at IGARI indicating MH370 dived 40,000ft in one minute. In the weeks following MH370's loss I remember reading allusions to this alleged 40,000ft dive but never understood the source. Since reading the NYT article in 2016 it has suddenly dawned upon me that INMARSAT of course knew of this extra signal but chose not to tell anyone.

Had that signal been laid bare at the time, people of course would have been entitled to draw different conclusions about the cause of MH370's loss or at least question the veracity of false assumptions.