# Need 3/8/14 Andaman Sea Sat Photos to Verify Malaysia Woman Saw Downed MH370

Status
Not open for further replies.

#### zebra100

##### Member
Read this woman Raja Dalelah who claimed on 3/8/14 2:30 PM witnessed a plane half submerged in Andaman Sea:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ter-near-Andaman-Islands-day-disappeared.html

first appeared here:
http://www.thestar.com.my/News/Nati...onvinced-I-saw-aircraft-near-Andaman-islands/

I believed in her story.
Scientific proof:

Imagine two lines extending from your eye's lens to two objects. The angle at which those two lines meet at your eye is

the angle we're talking about. Someone with "standard vision" ("20/20" vision in English measurements) has a resolution

limit of 1 arc minute, 1/60 of a degree. Details in a scene that are closer together than this will not be "resolved" by

the human eye.

MH370 is Boeing 777-200ER with 209 feet long and the wingspan is about 200 ft. To find the resolution limit you divide

this by the distance and take the arctangent of the result:

atan(200/35000) =0.3274 degrees That's almost 20 arc-minutes, which is much larger than required for us to see it. In

other words, not only should we be able to see the MH370 at sea level from 35,000 feet high, we also should be able to

see a much smaller aircraft! Assuming normal vision, or vision corrected to be normal. Problem solved. And I really

don't know what the pilot laughed about.

To test the theory:

I cut a paper 10 mm plane paint black, paste on window, at 5 m distance, I can perfectly distinguish the shape the the

plane: antan(10/5000)=0.114591406238, much smaller than the woman could see. And I's short sight with glasses. Even the

woman looked at, say an angle, even use 3-4-5, she's looking at airplane at less than 45 degree (which is rare) we

assume she looked at 50000 real distance antan(200/50000)=0.229181895754 much larger than we see on the window. By the

way, 2 pm a silver plane on dark blue sea has much better contrast than the black paper plane on window.

In real world, I fly for more than 30 years always acquire a window seat, and at 35000 level i can see clearly all the

big small vessels on the sea levels. I suggest Tomnod check this out. It's not difficult to find out on 3/8/14 at 2:30

PM Malaysia time where this Sudi flight SV2058 was (using flight track 24 or others) then if Tomnod has the sat photos

of that time or before ( I believe at Andaman Sea or a little of Bay of Bengal with islands in between )--- since

Malayisa and Thai military radars tracked MH370 at almost same area when it disappeared, why not it not because of radar

limit but of the plane lost altitude and down to the water? Maybe the previous flight at 45000 ft for more than 20

minutes ( accord to radar data) already knocked out all the passengers on board and I don't believe all the analysis

from the pinging-- if it's wrong or the Satcom already ripped off the plane but still pinging ( there is a FAA warning see here: http://www.lowyat.net/2014/03/was-there-a-problem-with-the-mh370-boeing-777-200-aircraft/

just coming out before the flight that the Satcom bay has cracks and caused depressure of 777. Add all these together,

it definitely worth check out---all the more since Indian Ocean search provided nothing up to now!
Content from External Source
Do we have a 3/8/14 Andaman Sea Sat image? which is before Malaysia local time 2:30 PM? The woman took SV2058 it's not difficult to decide where she was above at 2:30 PM via flighttrack 24 etc. and she claimed saw some islands- must be those Indian Island between Bay of Bengal and Andaman Sea

Last edited by a moderator:

#### zebra100

##### Member
Also Satcom acknowledged the "pinging" analysis was first time, the reliability is questionable at least

#### zebra100

##### Member
The ping theory used the time from ground sat station sent ping to satellite then to the satcom device on MH370 then MH370 auto hand shake response to the ground to determine the distance from geo sat to the plane. Remember, the electric wave transfer at speed of 300,000 KM/sec, that means a 0.001 second difference will cause 300 KM mistake (certainly this we talked about is the distance between the sat and the plane not the earth surface distance which is smaller but offset by sphere earth surface) then we know the accuracy is limited.

#### zebra100

##### Member
Unfortunately, the woman saw a distinguished image of airplane with float down, not these ambiguous image which told us nothing. And from the proof, it's possible for her to see it clearly. As long as she was not lying. Remember, when she told the spotting to her friends and air waitress on the plane, none of them heard the story of MH370 missing

#### WeedWhacker

##### Senior Member
...and air waitress...

OMG! Sorry, just had to chime in here. Hilarious.

(Look up "ball-bearing stewardesses" online. Not to be sexist or offensive....just humour).

#### zebra100

##### Member
What's the point???

#### zebra100

##### Member
Add on more conspiracy theory: According to this: http://www.lowyat.net/2014/03/was-there-a-problem-with-the-mh370-boeing-777-200-aircraft/
Satcom device is a rather small device which might has its own extra battery. If some one very sophisticated in tech ( I believe there was on MH370)
After knocked out the whole crew and passengers, and landed on water, ripped off the Satcom device and powered it up, had a boat waiting in plan, stroll on the water for the hours needed then took off. As I said, it's a sophisticated plan, but there was some one able to do it after months maybe years of preparation and knew the in and out of the 777 after decades of flying and researching

#### MikeC

##### Closed Account
Are you suggesting a 777 landed on water and then took off again from water???????????

#### MikeC

##### Closed Account
Modis daily satellite photos are available on this page - just select the red rectangle that corresponds to the area you want to look at - there are a couple that cover part or all of the Andaman sea.

Having selected the area you can then go back and look at daily images - there are normally 2 each day (1 from each of the 2 satellites that provide the data), and there are various filters and scales available.

#### Bill

##### Senior Member.
Are you suggesting a 777 landed on water and then took off again from water???????????
The famous 777 with pontoon options offered for sale by S.P.E.C.T.R.E.

#### WeedWhacker

##### Senior Member
Are you suggesting a 777 landed on water and then took off again from water???????????

I think I saw this once, here:

(Sorry....I liked this show when I was a child). (And, as an adult, this is so HILARIOUSLY absurd, I am embarrassed!!)

I just realized that "Amber Alert" came from this video...{about 2 minutes in}. I'm sure they did not realize, then....or maybe someone else had a minor memory, and added it to the social consciousness?

This series was made by adults...even if the intended audience were children, as myself at the time....still, there is ARTISTRY in the puppeteering, seen here. I might laugh at my innocence, as a child....but now I can appreciate their skills.

(But I veer off-topic...sorry. I just think and wish to share, because I presume "many" also might share similar experiences?)

Last edited:

#### MikeC

##### Closed Account
I liked that show when you were a child too

#### zebra100

##### Member
Are you suggesting a 777 landed on water and then took off again from water???????????
a boat. Did you see ?

#### zebra100

##### Member
Modis daily satellite photos are available on this page - just select the red rectangle that corresponds to the area you want to look at - there are a couple that cover part or all of the Andaman sea.

Having selected the area you can then go back and look at daily images - there are normally 2 each day (1 from each of the 2 satellites that provide the data), and there are various filters and scales available.
Nice! thank you!

#### zebra100

##### Member
Unfortunately, those were low definition images with Pixel at 250M best--- you only can see a carrier maybe by that

#### MikeC

##### Closed Account
a boat. Did you see ?
sorry - I know English is not your 1st language, but I do not understand.

she is certainly adamant she saw an aircraft, however she is not a trained observer, was 35,000 feet in the air, looking without magnification, and lots of rubbish that we have had much better information on has already turned out to be not an aircraft.

there is a common effect of seeing what you want to see, and also of seeing shapes in things that are not real - eg faces in clouds - both of these are normal in humans.
Eg this picture is of a tugboat carrying a crane that caused calls to emergency services in Spain last week -

#### Bill

##### Senior Member.
a boat. Did you see ?
So a 777 landed turned around and took of from a, lets say 6000 plus ft ship that also has room for turn around, that is bobbing in the ocean providing an unsteady landing platform and no-one has noticed the construction or deployment of this massive object.

#### zebra100

##### Member
She was not, looking at what she wanted to see like us or the rescuers. She even didn't know the MH370 was missing. For how could she see from 35000Ft, I even don't want to say because you obviously read nothing from my post

#### zebra100

##### Member
She was not, looking at what she wanted to see like us or the rescuers. She even didn't know the MH370 was missing. For how could she see from 35000Ft, I even don't want to say because you obviously read nothing from my post
And the whole airplane is like day and night difference from debris even it's 25 meter long!

#### WeedWhacker

##### Senior Member
Just for reference (perhaps not relevant to a person's view, as a passenger, from over 30,000 feet out an airplane window?)

An actual video of a Boeing 767 that ditched in the ocean...this case, near the beach. Still, it "says" a lot (about the B767, anyways):

I have always been intrigued by this footage. I offer it to add to the discussion.

AND to add: Every pilot will confirm that when we might be forced to "ditch" into the sea...(assuming normal standards)...there are certain criteria that we are trained for. ONE of which is...."KEEP THE WINGS LEVEL!!!"

AND, try to "LAND" on a swell, in the sea, if there are swells. (On the "Upside" of a swell...based on the winds, at the surface, if known....)

I'm certain that some "MB" members who are boaters will know the reference, and help with comments (??)

We as airline pilots received a LOT of "ditching" training, to include many, many lessons about the LifeRafts, and all of the "stuff" contained within....but, we usually never gave it much concern, since the entire "notion" of a ditching by a modern airliner seemed....well, out of the "MainStream" of possibility.

Nevertheless, we "trained" for it. Pilots AND cabin crew....(KNOW that your Cabin Crew are VERY well trained!!!!)

(I add that last bit, about "Cabin Crew", because we pilots know that they are part of the entire crew)

Last edited:

#### zebra100

##### Member
So a 777 landed turned around and took of from a, lets say 6000 plus ft ship that also has room for turn around, that is bobbing in the ocean providing an unsteady landing platform and no-one has noticed the construction or deployment of this massive object.
Good imagination--same as mine. But mine says the airplane sank into Andaman Sea within hours and this guy just got away with a small boat with the satcom
Just for reference (perhaps not relevant to a person's view, as a passenger, from over 30,000 feet out an airplane window?)

An actual video of a Boeing 767 that ditched in the ocean...this case, near the beach. Still, it "says" a lot (about the B767, anyways):

I have always been intrigued by this footage. I offer it to add to the discussion.

AND to add: Every pilot will confirm that when we might be forced to "ditch" into the sea...(assuming normal standards)...there are certain criteria that we are trained for. ONE of which is...."KEEP THE WINGS LEVEL!!!"

AND, try to "LAND" on a swell, in the sea, if there are swells. (On the "Upside" of a swell...based on the winds, at the surface, if known....)

I'm certain that some "MB" members who are boaters will know the reference, and help with comments (??)

We as airline pilots received a LOT of "ditching" training, to include many, many lessons about the LifeRafts, and all of the "stuff" contained within....but, we usually never gave it much concern, since the entire "notion" of a ditching by a modern airliner seemed....well, out of the "MainStream" of possibility.

Nevertheless, we "trained" for it. Pilots AND cabin crew....(KNOW that your Cabin Crew are VERY well trained!!!!)

(I add that last bit, about "Cabin Crew", because we pilots know that they are part of the entire crew)

well said, this one I also in doubt---I was just watching the youtube on two ditchings--Ethiopian Airlines Flight 409 and Tuninter Flight 1153-- not that great---the only thing I can recommend was the Hudson ditching--but that's a river. I only hope the Andaman Sea was calm that day. But remember, some one flying decades of 777 still practicing at home evryday---nice skill!

#### MikeC

##### Closed Account
She was not, looking at what she wanted to see like us or the rescuers. She even didn't know the MH370 was missing.

but perhaps she wanted to se an aeroplane - or got the idea that it was an aeroplane and now wants it to be an aeroplane in het light of what has happened since then.

For how could she see from 35000Ft, I even don't want to say because you obviously read nothing from my post

#### MikeC

##### Closed Account
And the whole airplane is like day and night difference from debris even it's 25 meter long!

Indeed - however aircraft can look very different from various angles, and though atmospherics, cloud, sea spray, possibly with water covering parts of them.

#### zebra100

##### Member
Indeed - however aircraft can look very different from various angles, and though atmospherics, cloud, sea spray, possibly with water covering parts of them.
Oh, now I know----you have seen it---not only you have seen it, and you have seen how the woman had seen it--- don't be offended, just....

#### WeedWhacker

##### Senior Member
Good imagination--same as mine. But mine says the airplane sank into Andaman Sea within hours and this guy just got away with a small boat with the satcom

Except, of course, those of us with actual experience IN COMMERCIAL PASSENGER airplanes will see this as (sorry) just not a valid "speculation".

As I tried to "already" post, there is TOO MUCH about the reality of an airliner, and especially a "ditching" scenario....that those of us within the industry know, already.

Hard, perhaps, to properly describe in this setting.

EDIT: Some Hollywood movies tend to give people mistaken impressions, about "reality". I will only attach this video, that explains "HOW MANY TIMES "JOHN McCLANE" SHOULD HAVE "DIED" in the "Die Hard" series of movies....in order to explain (and entertain>>??)

I just want to add that those of us IN THE AIRLINE business, even if we may be retired, do have to be exposed to something called "Recurrent Training". This is similar to "Inital Training" except...it "recurs".

Hope this makes sense?

ALSO....for pilots (Captains) in the USA, they must have a doctor "Physical" (WITH associated paperwork...and for an ATP? ('Airline Transport Pilot') certificate, there is an EKG required....LIVE, linked to the FAA medical site. Every six months. ONCE per year, for the ATP and First Class "Medical"...but, the "Medical" requires a visit EVERY SIX MONTHS. After age 60? These are "new rules"...
Please keep this in mind. OK, when I was getting my medical, I only had to do the EKG once per year. Now, over age 60??? I think it is far more....

Last edited:

#### zebra100

##### Member
What if this is a perfect murder case and we know there was some one very smart and knowing all the electronics on board

#### Pete Tar

##### Senior Member.
Um, I don't know - what if?

#### zebra100

##### Member
you guys are really amazing. Ok, I have a last cat in the bag. http://theaviationist.com/2014/03/19/mh370-shot-down/
And I will add something else: Have you heard a New Zealand Oil guy in South China Ocean platform witnessed a fire with something whole (not disintegrated) in high altitude and filed police report exposed his passport number by a reporter (so dumb)?

No debris, right? Ok, ever heard of US new laser weapon can blind pilots, destroy electronics but still make the airplane intact?....

#### zebra100

##### Member
and the Russian and Chinese stole the blueprints from internet---it's complicated

#### MikeC

##### Closed Account
you guys are really amazing. Ok, I have a last cat in the bag. http://theaviationist.com/2014/03/19/mh370-shot-down/
And I will add something else: Have you heard a New Zealand Oil guy in South China Ocean platform witnessed a fire with something whole (not disintegrated) in high altitude and filed police report exposed his passport number by a reporter (so dumb)?
Yes I've heard of it - it was all over the New Zealand media.

No debris, right? Ok, ever heard of US new laser weapon can blind pilots, destroy electronics but still make the airplane intact?....

How would that leave no debris?

The "weapon" is called a laser pointer.

#### zebra100

##### Member
Yes I've heard of it - it was all over the New Zealand media.

No debris, right? Ok, ever heard of US new laser weapon can blind pilots, destroy electronics but still make the airplane intact?....
How would that leave no debris?

The "weapon" is called a laser pointer.

that's a BB gun compare to real gun

Last edited by a moderator:

#### Pete Tar

##### Senior Member.
...
atan(200/35000) =0.3274 degrees That's almost 20 arc-minutes, which is much larger than required for us to see it. In
other words, not only should we be able to see the MH370 at sea level from 35,000 feet high, we also should be able to
see a much smaller aircraft!
I'd be interested in seeing a discussion of the reasoning used in the first post to prove it was a possible sighting.
I suspect there's a flaw in it, but cannot comment myself.

You're (zebra) starting to speculate wildly and just throw out possibilities which will obscure the original intent of the post.
We could come up with hundreds of possibilities but there's not much sense in doing so without a solid reason.
Let's get back to demonstrating what is possible to resolve at sea level from 35000 feet with the human eye.

#### zebra100

##### Member
Certainly, the main focus here is the woman's story and check it out

#### Bill

##### Senior Member.
The biggest problem is the whole argument in favor of the woman's story is based supposition and "what if" arguments with no physical evidence to provide support. She has made the claim and seems to believe it. Other people have come up with a narrative to support it. As the story is passed on and it's shown to be unlikely, new layers of "what if" are added to the story to keep it alive making the story more elaborate and even more unlikely.

#### MikeC

##### Closed Account
Yes it is interesting to speculate a bit.

But once a theory has been shown untrue by multiple sources then there's no point discussing it any more.

#### Mick West

Staff member
Modis daily satellite photos are available on this page - just select the red rectangle that corresponds to the area you want to look at - there are a couple that cover part or all of the Andaman sea.

Having selected the area you can then go back and look at daily images - there are normally 2 each day (1 from each of the 2 satellites that provide the data), and there are various filters and scales available.

MODIS images are too low resolution to see anything like a plane (250m per pixel). But here's the shot for March 8th for the region mentioned in the story. (using the Worldview interface, which is much easier to use than the raw images you linked to).
https://earthdata.nasa.gov/labs/wor...8&map=78.114502,11.793457,82.056396,14.142334

#### Mick West

Staff member
I'd be interested in seeing a discussion of the reasoning used in the first post to prove it was a possible sighting.
I suspect there's a flaw in it, but cannot comment myself.

You're (zebra) starting to speculate wildly and just throw out possibilities which will obscure the original intent of the post.
We could come up with hundreds of possibilities but there's not much sense in doing so without a solid reason.
Let's get back to demonstrating what is possible to resolve at sea level from 35000 feet with the human eye.

a 200 foot object at 35,000 feet is the same as a 1 inch object at 175 inches (one inch at 15 feet). Quite recognizable.

However you'll notice that most planes you see at the head of contrails (meaning they are at a similar altitudeto 35,000 feet) look a lot smaller than that - and are often invisible, which is because most planes are not flying directly over your head. But if a 777 does fly over your head at 35,000 feet, then you can see that it is a plane quite well, weather depending.

So yes, it's possible to see a plane that is 35,000 feet, or even 50,000 feet away. However you need to factor in:
1. Haze, which makes it harder to see
2. Clouds
3. Reflections off the sea, waves, etc.
4. Other things like oil tankers, cargo boats, garbage
5. She might have made it up
6. She might have dreamed it
7. It's highly unlikely that the plane would have gone over the exact location.
8. Those are busy waters, so it's highly unlikely that nobody else saw anything.
While it it possible to see a plane, it seem vastly more likely that she did not.

Status
Not open for further replies.