• MH370 speculation has become excessive recently. Metabunk is not a forum for creating theories by speculation. It's a forum for examining claims, and seeing if they hold up. Please respect this and keep threads on-topic. There are many other forums where speculation is welcome.

Flight MH370 Speculation

Status
Not open for further replies.
They did not say the frequency increased though, unless there somewhere is an official report publicized stating that. The graph displays "frequency offset". That ofset could be negative for what we know.
I found an article from a site called Physics Buzz that might help you see things in a different light. http://physicsbuzz.physicscentral.com/2014/03/how-did-inmarsat-really-find-flight.html
Tuesday, March 25, 2014
How Inmarsat Hacked Their Data to Find Flight MH370[/paste:font]

The mystery behind the missing Malaysian Airlines flight MH370 is no more. Engineers working out of the British company, Inmarsat, have used a “groundbreaking but traditional mathematics-based process” to conclude that the plane landed in a remote region of the southern Indian Ocean. Plane wreckage has yet to be found to support this notion.

Yesterday afternoon, the Malaysian Prime Minister, Najib Razak, announced in a press statement that the investigation was completed with a never-before-used analysis. However, few news articles are getting their hands dirty with the details of this mystery-solving method.

From most of the articles you’ll get a sense that it has something to do with the Doppler effect, trigonometry, a satellite and a magical mathematical equation that ties everything together. But how do these elements coalesce into a single, coherent story?

If you look at a general equation of the Doppler effect, you’ll notice that nowhere does it offer information about an object’s position in space. But you can still get an idea of an object’s location and direction of travel from the Doppler effect.

If you have an object that emits a signal, like a train blowing its horn, the frequency of that signal depends on the speed and direction the object is traveling and also on the speed and direction of the instrument measuring the signal.

Malaysian Airlines lost touch with Flight 370 on March 8. After that, the plane’s only form of communication was brief “pings” indicating that the plane was still operational. An Inmarsat satellite detected a handful of these electromagnetic signals, which turned out to be key to solving the mystery.
The frequency of the ripples that the car emits change as the car moves. If you were on the left, you would measure a higher frequency than the original frequency, and if you were on the right you would measure a lower frequency. Credit Charley Whisky.
Velocity, alone, cannot tell you anything about position. But if you have a reference point in space with a known position, you can determine your target object’s position with respect to your reference point.

Say the satellite and the plane were both at the same height above the Earth’s surface and the plane was flying in a straight line away from the satellite. This simplified version breaks the problem down into one dimension. If you knew the position and velocity of your satellite and you knew the velocity of the plane, you could easily map the plane’s position over time.

Now consider the more realistic scenario that the satellite is many thousands of kilometers higher than the plane. You can still solve the position problem, but you are now dealing with a solution that requires some trigonometry in a three-dimensional space. And since the satellite is orbiting Earth and the plane is also moving, albeit at a different velocity, this becomes a very complex problem very quickly.


Imagine the satellite sitting at the top of the sphere. Now, picture the plane flying across the surface. Notice the multiple angles and positions you would need to account for while attempting to model the plane's flight path. Credit: Peter Mercator.


I imagine that most of data-crunching marathon the Inmarsat engineers took to determine the plane’s crash site to within 100 miles, was spent identifying how best to determine MH370’s final destination given the few data points available and testing that series of equations using known flight paths of other Malaysian flights.

The single Inmarsat satellite that detected the plane’s pings measured the frequency of only eight pings in total. From that, engineers plotted the plane’s likely course across the Indian Ocean using a combination of the Doppler effect to calculate the plane’s velocity with respect to the satellite and trigonometry to then map the plane’s flight path and ultimately determine where it likely crashed after emptying its fuel tanks.

The ten Inmarsat satellites orbiting Earth were built as part of the Global Maritime Distress and Safety System and have never before been used for this type of mission, said Inmarsat Senior Vice President, Chris McLaughlin.
Content from External Source
I would also recommend checking out the comments below, because its seems many people have asked questions about how the measured the frequency using the doppler shift. But the one thing I'm not able to accept at this time, is that there would be a multinational cover up to protect Malaysian Airlines' negligence. No one wants to go through this again and considering all of the speculation out there it would be the most easily available and "provable" direction for investigators...
 
Last edited:
Ah damn, my post made it, there was a long delay in it appearing & the reality is I was kinda happy about that.

Here's what I should add about Inmarsat's graph:
Honestly you don't need to look too hard at it to see, at best it is a hurried "Visual Press Release" thingy.
There is no real discernible data that could or should be taken from it.

I think everyone will agree it is not 'this graph' that Inmarsat used to reach their findings, lol.

Yet I see people making charts & complex & detailed diagnoses direct from 'this' graph !
I find this a bit amusing, sorry if that offends.

Can anyone see the 'Hourly Pings" 11 past each hour on it ?
I cant ! and I think we can all accept that it's a fact those hourly pings really existed.

So a vote everyone !
This graph is:
1. "Visual Press Release" thingy
2.
An extremely detailed & accurate computer plotted graph.
 
Last edited:
Ah damn, my post made it, there was a long delay in it appearing & the reality is I was kinda happy about that.

Here's what I should add about Inmarsat's graph:
Honestly you don't need to look too hard at it to see, at best it is a hurried "Visual Press Release" thingy.
There is no real discernible data that could or should be taken from it.

I think everyone will agree it is not 'this graph' that Inmarsat used to reach their findings, lol.

Yet I see people making charts & complex & detailed diagnoses direct from 'this' graph !
I find this a bit amusing, sorry if that offends.

Can anyone see the 'Hourly Pings" 11 past each hour on it ?
I cant ! and I think we can all accept that it's a fact those hourly pings really existed.

So a vote everyone !
This graph is:
1. "Visual Press Release" thingy
2.
An extremely detailed & accurate computer plotted graph.
Vote: #1
 
Well everyone, it's confirmed, one of China's ships detected the signal in the Indian Ocean
MH370 RIP
My heart goes out to the families, now they can have some closure.
 
So can we put all this speculation to rest, or not quite yet... Does anyone know har far off the coast of western Australia this is? I thought the Australian air defense detection systems are top notch and have the capability of seeing 3000 miles beyond its coast line in all directions..
 
So can we put all this speculation to rest, or not quite yet... Does anyone know har far off the coast of western Australia this is? I thought the Australian air defense detection systems are top notch and have the capability of seeing 3000 miles beyond its coast line in all directions..

1650Km From Perth. Nearest land approx 1250 Km (Straight line to WA coastline)
Right on 08.11 (4800Km Radius from Inmarsat)
Latest update about 1.5hrs ago - direct from (Chinese source here in China) is that 'as yet' they have NOT been able to confirm it..
(not sure how to exactly read that ? still looking now ?) 12.01AM China Southern Time

From original source: Over 15 minute period 3 different points in time a 37.5kHz signal was detected.

EDIT: In another report signal detected every second for 90 Seconds.
 
Last edited:
So can we put all this speculation to rest, or not quite yet...

EDIT: In another report signal detected every second for 90 Seconds.

after all the false flag reports, I'll wait a mo till they check is was not the kitchen mirco wave cooking sui min noodles
 
EDIT: In another report signal detected every second

after all the false flag reports, I'll wait a mo till they check is was not the kitchen mirco wave cooking sui min noodles


Notwithstanding that the Chinese report of pings being detected (at Lat 25 South / Long 101 East) has yet to confirmed, has anyone else spotted that if you put a pin on the map of the last known location (the sign-off to KL Air Traffic Control), a 2nd pin at Kuala Lumpur, and a 3rd at the Chinese ping location, they form a straight line. This would be consistent with a reciprocal course to KL programmed into the autopilot shortly after last known message.
 
Last edited:
So can we put all this speculation to rest, or not quite yet... Does anyone know har far off the coast of western Australia this is? I thought the Australian air defense detection systems are top notch and have the capability of seeing 3000 miles beyond its coast line in all directions..

JORN is not an Air Defence Radar in the classical sense. It does not provide a continuous scan and interception ability over the area it covers. ( which is not in all directions). It has to be steered and more importantly, it has to be actually turned on.
 
Notwithstanding that the Chinese report of pings being detected (at Lat 25 South / Long 101 East) has yet to confirmed, has anyone else spotted that if you put a pin on the map of the last known location (the sign-off to KL Air Traffic Control), a 2nd pin at Kuala Lumpur, and a 3rd at the Chinese ping location, they form a straight line. This would be consistent with a reciprocal course to KL programmed into the autopilot shortly after last known message.
I think you may have misplaced the Chinese pin.
 
JORN does not run 24/7. It is likely that JORN wasn't active when MH370 was flying. Take into consideration that MH370 went missing on a weekend and during peacetime operations?

upload_2014-4-5_19-41-29.png

https://www.airforce.gov.au/docs/JORN_FAQS.pdf

https://www.airforce.gov.au/Technol...etwork/?RAAF-dq9yQKwX6WliV2hNVcj38sG4oMWiAMtQ
To this end, JORN’s peacetime use is focused on searching
for those objects that the system has been designed to detect, thus ensuring efficient peacetime use of
JORN’s fiscal and staff resources.
Content from External Source
So what does this mean? What has the system been designed to detect during "peacetime". Could it be low flying aircraft? Or ships and planes that have announced their presence with ATC or who ever ships contact before entering ports? If I'm being honest this plane would've "probably" fit the profile of what this system was designed to detect, aircraft with no means of being in the area with no transponder on. From how I interpreted this statement is that its always on, but its limited during peacetime to tract specific profiles. Their use of OTHR allows them to see a great distance away right down to sea level and based on what they are saying; its is cost effective.
Over-the-Horizon Radar (OTHR) utilises the refractive properties of the ionosphere to refract or bend
transmitted high frequency (HF) electromagnetic waves back to Earth well beyond a conventional
radar’s radar horizon. This concept negates curvature of the Earth effects and the resulting blind zones,
making it difficult for low flying aircraft or ships to approach undetected
Content from External Source
 
To this end, JORN’s peacetime use is focused on searching
for those objects that the system has been designed to detect, thus ensuring efficient peacetime use of
JORN’s fiscal and staff resources.
Content from External Source
So what does this mean? What has the system been designed to detect during "peacetime". Could it be low flying aircraft? Or ships and planes that have announced their presence with ATC or who ever ships contact before entering ports? If I'm being honest this plane would've "probably" fit the profile of what this system was designed to detect, aircraft with no means of being in the area with no transponder on. From how I interpreted this statement is that its always on, but its limited during peacetime to tract specific profiles. Their use of OTHR allows them to see a great distance away right down to sea level and based on what they are saying; its is cost effective.
Over-the-Horizon Radar (OTHR) utilises the refractive properties of the ionosphere to refract or bend
transmitted high frequency (HF) electromagnetic waves back to Earth well beyond a conventional
radar’s radar horizon. This concept negates curvature of the Earth effects and the resulting blind zones,
making it difficult for low flying aircraft or ships to approach undetected
Content from External Source

It means that Australia is a long way from anywhere and due to its military/intelligence sharing relationship with the "anglosphere", doesn't need to maintain or fund a constant 24hr quick reaction air defence network capable of tracking/intercepting rogue airliners from any part of its coastline.

Consequently, we don't.

(Ex RAAF pilot here..)
 
Clearly the Australian that is heading the investigation is just a puppet inserted by the U.S.
I mean his name is, Angus Houston. :D
 
Quote from "JACC CHIEF", as reported by XINHUANEWS
AUSTRALIA'S OCEAN SHIELD ALSO PICKS UP SUSPICIOUS PULSE SIGNAL:
"Houston said Ocean Shield, equipped with a U.S.-supplied pinger-locater, also picked up suspicious pulse signals in a separate location."

Not much of a story yet, more like a couple of Tweets, yet from official sources.
I think we can consider Oz's "Ocean Shield" a confirmation that at least a signal is present within that region.
Now all they need to do is work out the source of such 37.5kHz 'signal'
Getting closer.
:p
Unless of course, someone on-board Ocean Shield was attempting to heat-up a couple of "4'N'20 Meat Pies"
in the UltraLow-wave
 
Last edited:
Now CNN is report that flight 370 turned back in a southwest direction and once it crossed over Malaysia again, it turned to the northwest to go around Indonesia, and the turned south and flew along the coast of Indonesia, until it turned southeast heading towards Australia.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hi Jason,
That story by CNN (not that I have watched it YouTube blocked here) mentions their source as "Bla, Bla - Un-named Official"
Malaysian Officials deny they have reached such a 'conclusion'.
A CNN - 'let's get hits' headline.

It's seems many people want to discount the Chinese hearing the signal (Poor form by them! - a whole bunch of other detail skipped here)
At least JACC chief has never assumed any less viability of the Chinese heard signal.
There is absolutely no need to consider any claim as any less significant.
The Chinese using a hydrophone, a less sensitive yet very useful (USA Made) bit of equipment. (Some call a tin can on a string, funny yet insulting)

It seems that in the initial stage the signals were heard nearly 500Km apart. (Fri, Sat)
First by Chinese, second by Ocean Shield.
People use this to quickly de-validate one or the other.
I don't ! I keep an open mind !
Especially considering Ocean Shield is towing a locator which is very deep into the ocean, THEY could not even maintain a constant signal.
I am confident nothing is wrong with the 'Black Boxes', not yet anyway.

What's wrong with them ? They had 2 Hours to play. They should have wound the line back in until loss of signal, then stopped.
Then using that new not as deep length gone back & forth a bit, see if signal could be reacquired, maybe suggesting a direction closer to source, ahhhh.
Something...But it seems they just listened for 2 hours ? I am a bit ignorant of the facts here, but it does seem like a wasted opportunity, :(

It's easy to say BA! not possible for 2 receivers so far apart could in fact be hearing the same source signal, and not think about it any-more.
When it makes more sense to ask the question:
How could the signal travel so far from the same source in 2 different directions ?

A possible simple answer based on Science:
The depth, wow astonishing 4.5Km at this depth - the radial circles from centre of signal source could help the Ultra Sonic sound travel in like a pipe of stratification layers.

Stratification layers in water.
Can be created and affected by things like salinity, temperature & current.
This would explain the on, off reception of the Ultrasonic Sound as received by both Ocean Shield & Haixun 01, let's face it neither could maintain a constant reception.
Again I stress, I feel the 'Black Boxes" are pinging away just fine, as they should !

Why pick up signal one minute then gone again ?
1. Signal is actually transmitting on & off (Due to damage or battery depletion)
A. Not possible ! it has already been confirmed both recorders are pinging, it seems one at slightly lower than default freq.

2. Not close enough to get a DIRECT reception to source signal.
As I just explained above a 'natural phenomenon' of some sorts is somehow directing the UltraSonic sound waves along a much longer path than would be expected.
Yet it seems both ships seem to be playing around in similar areas as signals have been detected previously, arghhh
Source http://www.marinetraffic.com

In other news TODAY, after several days of nothing, Ocean Shield has again picked up the signals.
So off I go now to http://www.marinetraffic.com to get a plot where this baby is on the map right now.
I've been tracking.
 
Last edited:
The head of Australia’s Joint Agency Co-ordination Centre, Angus Houston, said on Wednesday the Australian defence vessel Ocean Shield had detected two further pings on Tuesday – one in the afternoon and one in the late evening – that had allowed the search area to be further refined to 75,000 sq km. He said he was “optimistic” the plane would be found soon.
Content from External Source
http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...rastically-reduced-after-two-more-pings-heard
 
And so it's confirmed both ships are meandering around in similar areas to when they both first picked up the signals. (cough, cough).
So what ? It took a couple of days for "Ocean Shield" (in roughly same location as original) to get the same environmental conditions which allowed them to hear it previously.

Basically logic would say for the last few days that they didn't pick up any signals, that the pingers (2 of them operating on separate power sources @slightly different freq.)
have been doing their thing CONSTANTLY 24hrs a day.
Just cause no-one heard them doesn't mean they weren't working, however battery decay is imminent !

Errr, wouldn't it make more sense if Ocean Shield moved several hundred kilometres South, along the arc & Haixun 01 moved 100Km North ?

Seems the HMS Echo & Haixun 01 are reasonably close. At least send Echo to a more central location then o_O
 
Last edited:
"Ocean Shield" still continues up the northern end of now much smaller 'southern arc' is still roughly the same area as previously.
Sonar Buoys have been deployed to assist. Still I reckon they should drop some in the middle.
"MHS Echo" seems to be alone at the southern end of the arc where "Haixun 01" was previously.
"Haixun 01" seems to have travelled far away to help with the debris field so it seems (not a bad thing)

MHS Echo's capabilities are most interesting, as a survey vessel she had her sonar adapted to help with the 'black box' hunt, a first for her.
In July 2013 she was responsible for finding 18 wrecks in the waters off Libya.
I had a bit of trouble working out the actual depth the Echo can effectively map with it's tech.
Image adapted for posting here, source: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/hms-echo-finds-18-wrecks-off-libya


"Ocean Shield" is now responsible for receiving 4 pinger events, but that may have changed overnight & this morning..?
Anyway clearly from the Australian 'official' graphic these events are all within a relatively small 25Km area.
And from all reports those events have been nothing but short term.

Here's hoping there is still some viable life in those batteries & that Echo can make some Northward progress across the day.
 
Last edited:
HMS Echo for the last 4 hours has been moving very slowly northward (along the arc)
After rocketing there from their previous location approx 355Km South.
About 150Km shy of Ocean Shield (which is still hovering around same old area as usual)

I am no expert, but the 'Ocean Shield' has never seemed to be able to get a 'clear line of sight' reception to a pinger once.
I just don't get why they persist it that area..

Yeah, yeah I know..
the pingers range CANT be greater than around 7Km from source (4.5 Miles) so the source MUST be round there somewhere.
But my reading has shown me sound under water can do all sort of crazy things !
Confused
 
Last edited:
Hi Jason,
That story by CNN (not that I have watched it YouTube blocked here) mentions their source as "Bla, Bla - Un-named Official"
Malaysian Officials deny they have reached such a 'conclusion'.
A CNN - 'let's get hits' headline.

It's seems many people want to discount the Chinese hearing the signal (Poor form by them! - a whole bunch of other detail skipped here)
At least JACC chief has never assumed any less viability of the Chinese heard signal.
There is absolutely no need to consider any claim as any less significant.
The Chinese using a hydrophone, a less sensitive yet very useful (USA Made) bit of equipment. (Some call a tin can on a string, funny yet insulting)

It seems that in the initial stage the signals were heard nearly 500Km apart. (Fri, Sat)
First by Chinese, second by Ocean Shield.
People use this to quickly de-validate one or the other.
I don't ! I keep an open mind !
Especially considering Ocean Shield is towing a locator which is very deep into the ocean, THEY could not even maintain a constant signal.
I am confident nothing is wrong with the 'Black Boxes', not yet anyway.

What's wrong with them ? They had 2 Hours to play. They should have wound the line back in until loss of signal, then stopped.
Then using that new not as deep length gone back & forth a bit, see if signal could be reacquired, maybe suggesting a direction closer to source, ahhhh.
Something...But it seems they just listened for 2 hours ? I am a bit ignorant of the facts here, but it does seem like a wasted opportunity, :(

It's easy to say BA! not possible for 2 receivers so far apart could in fact be hearing the same source signal, and not think about it any-more.
When it makes more sense to ask the question:
How could the signal travel so far from the same source in 2 different directions ?

A possible simple answer based on Science:
The depth, wow astonishing 4.5Km at this depth - the radial circles from centre of signal source could help the Ultra Sonic sound travel in like a pipe of stratification layers.

Stratification layers in water.
Can be created and affected by things like salinity, temperature & current.
This would explain the on, off reception of the Ultrasonic Sound as received by both Ocean Shield & Haixun 01, let's face it neither could maintain a constant reception.
Again I stress, I feel the 'Black Boxes" are pinging away just fine, as they should !

Why pick up signal one minute then gone again ?
1. Signal is actually transmitting on & off (Due to damage or battery depletion)
A. Not possible ! it has already been confirmed both recorders are pinging, it seems one at slightly lower than default freq.

2. Not close enough to get a DIRECT reception to source signal.
As I just explained above a 'natural phenomenon' of some sorts is somehow directing the UltraSonic sound waves along a much longer path than would be expected.
Yet it seems both ships seem to be playing around in similar areas as signals have been detected previously, arghhh
Source http://www.marinetraffic.com

In other news TODAY, after several days of nothing, Ocean Shield has again picked up the signals.
So off I go now to http://www.marinetraffic.com to get a plot where this baby is on the map right now.
I've been tracking.
Don't we have satellites that can map the topography of the ocean floor with precision. Why don't we have all available sonar capable devices of seeing the ocean floor, doing just that.
"Ocean Shield" still continues up the northern end of now much smaller 'southern arc' is still roughly the same area as previously.
Sonar Buoys have been deployed to assist. Still I reckon they should drop some in the middle.
"MHS Echo" seems to be alone at the southern end of the arc where "Haixun 01" was previously.
"Haixun 01" seems to have travelled far away to help with the debris field so it seems (not a bad thing)

MHS Echo's capabilities are most interesting, as a survey vessel she had her sonar adapted to help with the 'black box' hunt, a first for her.
In July 2013 she was responsible for finding 18 wrecks in the waters off Libya.
I had a bit of trouble working out the actual depth the Echo can effectively map with it's tech.
Image adapted for posting here, source: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/hms-echo-finds-18-wrecks-off-libya


"Ocean Shield" is now responsible for receiving 4 pinger events, but that may have changed overnight & this morning..?
Anyway clearly from the Australian 'official' graphic these events are all within a relatively small 25Km area.
And from all reports those events have been nothing but short term.

Here's hoping there is still some viable life in those batteries & that Echo can make some Northward progress across the day.
Don't we have satellites in space that can image the ocean floor with extreme precision, and cover 10 times more ground than boats or buoys can?
 
Don't we have satellites that can map the topography of the ocean floor with precision. Why don't we have all available sonar capable devices of seeing the ocean floor, doing just that.

Don't we have satellites in space that can image the ocean floor with extreme precision, and cover 10 times more ground than boats or buoys can?

I'm not sure that we do.

The search for MH370 has illustrated once again just how poor are our maps of the ocean floor.
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-26956798
Content from External Source
 
the radial circles from centre of signal source could help the Ultra Sonic sound travel in like a pipe of stratification layers.
Unfortunately, that is just what's happening. The thermocline will focus the sound generated into a narrow vertical beam directed upward. Only when one is directly over the signal will it be heard.

By dropping a sensor well beneath the thermocline and much more than 1500 feet down a more normal signal will be detected.
 
I'm not sure that we do.

The search for MH370 has illustrated once again just how poor are our maps of the ocean floor.
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-26956798
Content from External Source
Well I know we use satellites to detect gravitational influences in the topography of the oceans, and we can then asses what lies beneath it. Many people think the ocean is flat because water should find its level, but in fact the ocean has mountains and valleys just like we have on land, but not as pronounced. When the ocean is viewed from space we see it bulges over an underwater mountain range, and will also dip down when it is over a valley or a rip in the ocean floor. I was under the assumption that the NOAA satellite could map the ocean floor to within 1/2 inch, so thats why I brought it up.
 
I was under the assumption that the NOAA satellite could map the ocean floor to within 1/2 inch, so thats why I brought it up.
You'd better bring it down again. The resolution is at least 50 times worse than that required to spot a black box.
 
Well I know we use satellites to detect gravitational influences in the topography of the oceans, and we can then asses what lies beneath it. Many people think the ocean is flat because water should find its level, but in fact the ocean has mountains and valleys just like we have on land, but not as pronounced. When the ocean is viewed from space we see it bulges over an underwater mountain range, and will also dip down when it is over a valley or a rip in the ocean floor. I was under the assumption that the NOAA satellite could map the ocean floor to within 1/2 inch, so thats why I brought it up.

They map the average height of the "geoid" (essentially a measure of the gravitational field of the earth - or more particularly the height of an isosurface at which terrestrial gravity is a particular value), and use that to infer the topography of the sea floor. The actual resolution you get from that is very low - the horizontal resolution of the geoid measurements is measured in hundreds of meters. So it's good for finding mountains, that's about it. A plane is too small to affect the Earth's gravitational field in a measurable way, and even if it did, you could not distinguish it from normal variations in the sea floor.
 
They map the average height of the "geoid" (essentially a measure of the gravitational field of the earth - or more particularly the height of an isosurface at which terrestrial gravity is a particular value), and use that to infer the topography of the sea floor. The actual resolution you get from that is very low - the horizontal resolution of the geoid measurements is measured in hundreds of meters. So it's good for finding mountains, that's about it. A plane is too small to affect the Earth's gravitational field in a measurable way, and even if it did, you could not distinguish it from normal variations in the sea floor.
So basically the "radio waves" will deflect off the surface of the ocean giving them an idea of what the ocean floor looks like. So its impossible to use a satellite to infer what the ocean floor looks like directly, unless we can discover a way for the radar to not bounce off the surface of the ocean and penetrate it?
 
So basically the "radio waves" will deflect off the surface of the ocean giving them an idea of what the ocean floor looks like. So its impossible to use a satellite to infer what the ocean floor looks like directly, unless we can discover a way for the radar to not bounce off the surface of the ocean and penetrate it?

Yes, and you can imagine how impossible it would be to try to detect if there was a plane two miles down, simply by looking at the surface of the sea. And unfortunately physics prevents the possibility of making radar travel through deep water. High resolution seafloor mapping uses sonar or LIDAR/LADAR (lasers) both of which only work to limited depths, and not from satellites.
 
Slight aside, I'm familiar with the seafloor mapping because of the "Atlantis" road and clites that show up in Google earth's seabed mapping:


Which are just tracks and areas of higher resolution mapping, done by ships.
 
Which are just tracks and areas of higher resolution mapping, done by ships.

The same can be seen in the BBC article. Only in this case the high resolution tracks were blacked out.

oceanfloor.jpg


If MH370's last resting place really is to be found here somewhere, the recovery of the wreckage could be a very extreme endeavour, indeed.

But look again at the map, at the black lines that criss-cross back and forth.

The thick bands indicate tracks surveyed by modern acoustic echosounders, which map a swath of area along the path of the ship, and these are very accurate (to about 2%).
Content from External Source
 
Slight aside, I'm familiar with the seafloor mapping because of the "Atlantis" road and clites that show up in Google earth's seabed mapping:


Which are just tracks and areas of higher resolution mapping, done by ships.
So the black lines are created because when a ship pulls the sonar or lidar device it can't see directly below it. Right? If thats the case how could these lines be so precisely straight and not veer off. Boats are traveling through ocean tides and waves, not too mention the submerseable is also being jolted around below the oceans surface as its being towed
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top