• 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.

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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Here's a practical illustration. I stuck a 1" white cross on a fence that I stood 15 feet from, and 10 feet to the side. If you size this image so it's about a extended handspan (8" at arms length) wide on screen, then that's what I saw:

It stands out starkly on the dark fence, but we have no haze or the scintillating ocean, or clouds, and this is the best case distance. Here's a more realistic offset:

And here it is with simulated haze: The "plane" is still there in the center of the image.


And here is a photo of a nearby plane, taken at the exact same focal length. This is a 737 at around 35,000 feet, maybe 20 miles away.


Here's the same plane with a much bigger magnification:
 
Last edited:
Mick West said:
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.
Click to expand...
One thing you left off your list that makes a big difference is individual visual acuity. We always assume that the people making these claims have 20/20 vision or are wearing their glasses at the time.
 
Mick West said:
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.
Click to expand...

That's the exact things I want to hear. It depends on credibility of the woman. According to the Low Definition Image above that day, visibility was quite well ( the Sat images were taken during the day, I suppose). The woman claimed saw some ships and boats before she saw the plane. She claimed she never sleep during flights ( maybe scared) always gazing out of windows. And she didn't know (and no one on the plane knew) the MH370 was missing). She had witnesses proved that she woke them up to see the airplane and they all laughed her off. And she called Flight Attendant she told her to shut the window and get some sleep. She told his son(policeman) the story after landing at Kuala Lumpur at 7 pm that's when he urged her to file police report, and then her friends on the plane starting to believe her, most importantly, that time no one revealed the military radar data, all the rescue teams were in South China Sea searching and no one ever mentioned Adanman Sea and how about that. And this woman has ten children. She said she just came back from pilgrim and would never lie. That's why I think her story is quite convincing and need to check out.

Anyone has sources on the map?
 
Last edited:
Bill said:
One thing you left off your list that makes a big difference is individual visual acuity. We always assume that the people making these claims have 20/20 vision or are wearing their glasses at the time.
Click to expand...
I believe most old people are far sighted (means they can see quite clear in far distance.) I myself is short-sighted, but I always see all kinds of ships, boats very clearly at 35000 ft level with glasses--- and I assume this woman has a very good sight----otherwise she would even not interested to watch out of the window because she would see nothing interesting
 
I hate Tomnod is that they assign you to do whatever. You even don't know where are you look at and what date the image was from. They think that will bring the candid view which is not. And by that they kill a lot of curiosity, incentive and enthusiasm ( which are the foundation of any endeavor ).
 
Mick West said:
Here's a practical illustration. I stuck a 1" white cross on a fence that I stood 15 feet from, and 10 feet to the side. If you size this image so it's about a extended handspan (8" at arms length) wide on screen, then that's what I saw:

It stands out starkly on the dark fence, but we have no haze or the scintillating ocean, or clouds, and this is the best case distance. Here's a more realistic offset:

And here it is with simulated haze: The "plane" is still there in the center of the image.


And here is a photo of a nearby plane, taken at the exact same focal length. This is a 737 at around 35,000 feet, maybe 20 miles away.


Here's the same plane with a much bigger magnification:
Click to expand...



According to these tests, I pretty sure this woman could have seen a plane big as 777 size like MH370 and the contrast of dark blue sea would be better than the light blue sky with sun light direct on to the plane and reflect to the eye above.
 
zebra100 said:
She said she just came back from pilgrim and would never lie.
Click to expand...

zebra100 said:
It depends on credibility of the woman.
Click to expand...
It's not so much about her and her credibility or that she may be lying, it's more about human perception and how good it is at filling in gaps in information, or being fooled by simple arrangements and shades of light and dark objects, especially at a large distance.
It seems really unlikely given Mick's demonstration that she was able to distinguish the shape of a tail and wing and floats on the side and also determine it to be submerged in the water at six miles. Much more likely she was tricked by arrangements of reflected light, perhaps around a legitimate object. She also doesn't metnion how long she was looking at it, was it a second out of the corner of her eye, three seconds, thirty?
It would be negligent not to have some form of follow up searching in that area, but I think it has been and nothing was found, so it must be reasonable to assume it was a false impression.
 
zebra100 said:
She had witnesses proved that she woke them up to see the airplane and they all laughed her off. And she called Flight Attendant she told her to shut the window and get some sleep
Click to expand...
Sorry if it was previously mentioned, but have these other witnesses since verified these events? It would give her story more credence if they now portray some doubt in what they originally dismissed as delusion If, however, they still maintain she was "seeing things", then I think we can be pretty sure she was mistaken.
 
zebra100 said:
I believe most old people are far sighted (means they can see quite clear in far distance.) I myself is short-sighted, but I always see all kinds of ships, boats very clearly at 35000 ft level with glasses--- and I assume this woman has a very good sight----otherwise she would even not interested to watch out of the window because she would see nothing interesting
Click to expand...
You can't generalize like that. As I've aged my major problem has been astigmatism. You also can't make that assumption about her motives for looking out the window, she just may believe that looking at blurry objects is better than looking at nothing at all.
 
As usual, Mick's "practical illustration" is spot on, providing some useful perspective (literally)
in a format that is accessible and easy to understand. Kudos, Mr. West.

On the other hand, his overt use of the cross is just example #561 of his relentless campaign to convert everyone here to Christianity! ;)
 
I know, I know. Everyone here is sure this woman is short sighted, blurring sights, illusions maybe drunk-- oh I forgot, she couldn't drink, well hallucinations---(though I'm not sure why she hallucinating an airplane instead of an angel, a bird, an elephant or even a wise guy). So everyone is heading to Indian Ocean--good luck!

Well, you know what, I'm heading Andaman Sea until I'm sure this is bogus.
 
Last edited:
And I will interview this woman and check out her sights and ask her what she really saw. Fact is more powerful than 1,000 wise guys sitting there hallucinating:)
 
Mick West said:
She said she saw a wing and tail, not a plane.

And her honesty is not the only question here, it's her skill as a plane-in-the-sea spotter.
Click to expand...

Let's record what exactly the news said: "But mother of 10 Mrs Latife Dalelah, 53, insisted she saw a silver object in the shape of an aircraft on the water as she was flying from Jeddah to Kuala Lumpur." Raja Dalelah said she took another look and was sure it was an aircraft in the ocean.

And then, "I know what I saw. I am convinced that I saw the aircraft."

So it was a shape of plane, not only wing and tail.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...an-Islands-day-disappeared.html#ixzz2xnafEO9S
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
 
Last edited:
“I took a closer look and was shocked to see what looked like the tail and wing of an aircraft on the water,” she said.
...
She said the aircraft had what looked like floats on its side but a large part of it was under water.
Content from External Source
 

“It looked like an aeroplane,” said the mother of 10.....“Throughout the journey, I was staring out of the window of the aircraft as I couldn’t sleep during the flight"....
“I had seen several shipping liners and islands from my window earlier. Then, I saw the silvery object"....“I took a closer look and was shocked to see what looked like the tail and wing of an aircraft on the water,” she said.....“I know what I saw. I am convinced that I saw the aircraft. And I will not lie. I had just returned from my pilgrimage,” she said...She said the aircraft had what looked like floats on its side but a large part of it was under water
Content from External Source
 
The FBI has completed of review of the in-home flight simulator that belonged to the captain of the missing Malaysia Airlines passenger jet and found “nothing suspicious whatsoever.”
And the fleet of ships and planes plowed Indian Ocean from the scientific analysis for a week and yet to find one single piece of debris. "It could take months, it could take years." "At the end of the investigations, we may not even know the real cause".....

That's great. I'm going to Kuala Lumpur this weekend.
 
Last edited:
More detailed analysis here: http://skyjuiceiswater.blogspot.com/2014/03/i-saw-missing-malaysia-airlines-flight.html

And apparently the blogger didn't notice that boarding pass picture actually showed the boarding pass of the woman seat was 40A, which is on left hind side,so the only direction she could see was left (north) side of the route--and we can eliminate the blogger's south side Tomnod spotting assumption. Also, the woman said she saw islands before seeing the plane. There were only those Andaman Islands there so it narrows down quite bit of the searching area. Any maps that day there? 2:30PM time seemed a bit early but who knows which local time she was looking at?

Also, the Lanzhou air photo took there is one of the most polluted city in China --I stayed there for times and air above Andaman Sea should have been much cleaner
 
Last edited:
Do you know what areas were actually searched there? They were looking as far as I know, so they would likely have spotted something if there was something there, unless they were in a different area.
 
I believed they searched the area like 3 maybe 4 days later, and by that time if there had been MH370, it had long sunk into the deep water. No report that they used the FDR ping finder to tow through the region, though. If it was a perfect ditch like "Hudson Miracle" US Airway flight 1549, then there would be hardly any debris left then.
 
Last edited:
The funny thing in this incident is that the only eye witnesses (even extremely few) ali didn't account. One had a New Zealander showed his passport number to report of sighting of mid air fire. We had Malaysians saw a low flying jet in the middle of that night. We have several witnesses seeing Jet flying over Maldives Island Kudahuvadhoo, then we have this woman saw a downed plane lying in Andaman Sea. All we depend on is the damned "scientific analysis" of pinging response. Nobody would think this ping thing could have gone total wrong or manipulated?

Now if we assume all these witnesses accounts are solid, what the picture we have? First, there was a fire or explosion occurred, but didn't destroy the plane (the guy said something fell as a whole but didn't say it reached the ground or water): then we have military radar spotted erratic flying patterns turning, low altitude, then high over limit altitude, then lower again---if this was caused by uncontrollable or half controllable plane? And we have Malaysia locals heard low flying airplane mid night over Malaysian Peninsula. Then 9:15 am Malaysian time showed up at Maldives Island Kudahuvadhoo-- we assume that military radars didn't pick up an extremely low flying jumbo, then 2:30 pm some woman spotted it at Andaman Sea.

What this whole picture tell us? Is this telling us this plane was circling in an irregular untrollable pattern and not as these experts assumed it was flying out of a straight line?
 
Last edited:
Unless they locate the wreckage or find the black box, the remote possibility of this clue still can't be deserted.
 
Just came back from Europe, taking almost a dozen flights. Tried to see if possible to detect an airplane on sea at 33,000 feet high. Luckily, I didn't see any airplane on the water, but I saw a lot of wind mills at sea level---you know what: with the white color, I could easily see the blades clearly turning lazily. And normal commercial windmill blades are from 65-150 feet--- there were a few as long as 300 feet, but I don't believe I saw those and my flight height mostly at 36,000 feet. Angles normally within 45 degrees----Conclusion: Sighting an airplane at sea level from 33,000 feet is not that difficult with normal sight ( I mentioned before: I'm very short-sighted with correct glasses) and normal weather conditions ( I actually saw those often in light haze weather) especially if it painted white.

On the other hand, now we have company claimed they could see the plane underwater; another Aussie businessman claimed he saw airplane underwater when he flew over eastern sea over Malaysia.... Oh, well, I definitely need to see this Malaysia woman---no one interviews her again? Or is she mysteriously vanished from public sights? I searched, not a word, not a single report ever since that report--wierd.

From the most recent Malaysia report:


and compare to this:



See how close the woman spot the downed airplane and the last radar detected MH370 locations were? As for the pings.... uhm, tell me about the pings, don't let me go into conspiracy theories...
 
zebra100 said:

What this whole picture tell us? Is this telling us this plane was circling in an irregular untrollable pattern and not as these experts assumed it was flying out of a straight line?
Click to expand...

possibly.

also possibly the witnesses saw other aircraft, or no aircraft at all and only illusions. Or a mix of the 2.

The only thing it tells us FOR CERTAIN is that the witnesses do not give us enough information to know what actually happened.
 
MikeC said:
possibly.

also possibly the witnesses saw other aircraft, or no aircraft at all and only illusions. Or a mix of the 2.

The only thing it tells us FOR CERTAIN is that the witnesses do not give us enough information to know what actually happened.
Click to expand...

That's true. There is no more follow up by either media, police and government. No more interviews, no lie detection test, no detailed questioning about the sight, where the location exactly, what kind of shape of the plane, what detailed color, what direction it faced, eye-sight of the woman-these are basics to determine the reliability of her story. And that's wierd.
 
Because the witness statements do not actually tell us what happened.

"I saw an aircraft in the Andaman sea" does not tell us what happened.
 
question was for @zebra100 for this statement...

zebra100 said:
There is no more follow up by either media, police and government. No more interviews, no lie detection test, no detailed questioning about the sight, where the location exactly, what kind of shape of the plane, what detailed color, what direction it faced, eye-sight of the woman-
Click to expand...
How do you know there's been no follow-up? Has she said so?
 
is it possible that MH370 was travelling at a very low altitude and much lower speed than their plane when she saw it? That would explain how she could see it clearly (and still have impression it's standing in the water) and still fit Inmarsat pings.
 
Stevan Gvozdenovic said:
is it possible that MH370 was travelling at a very low altitude and much lower speed than their plane when she saw it? That would explain how she could see it clearly (and still have impression it's standing in the water) and still fit Inmarsat pings.
Click to expand...
Not possible. She saw it 3/8/14 abt 14:30 local time. By then, MH370 already total dead.
 
Newest analysis: here

"The next, and apparently normal standby signal exchange between MH370 and the satellite 73 minutes later occurs at a point calculated by the official investigation to be only 195 miles further northwest and immediately prior to the jet turning south.
However at the speed assumed by the official inquiry, MH370 would have covered that distance in a straight line in 21 minutes leaving 52 minutes of flight time unaccounted for."

52 minutes uncounted for such a jumbo plane within that 192 miles range is almost unbelievable: let me wonder the total authenity of the pings generated from then on was really from MH370 or else. And remember, a very short line to link the arc is also possible if you make the route much north than the Inmarsat drawn line

The sister of the captain concerned stated:“He was just a man who took so much to aviation. He loved aviation, he spent a lot of his funds buying model airplanes...." makes really wonder
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

AluminumTheory
CNN: Search for missing Malaysia Airlines plane expands to Indian Ocean
Replies
1
Views
4K
WeedWhacker
WeedWhacker

Latest posts

Back
Top