Earthlinggb's Blog

Malaysian Flight MH370

Posted in "Terrorism", Disappearance of MH370, Geo-Political Warfare by earthling on August 14, 2019

Just an update approx 5 years later.

I’ve just watched this video providing what is “known” (or surmised, esp re flightpath) about the flight.

What I pick up on is the pieces of “wreckage” scattered around near the South East coast of Africa. The film speaks of ocean currents making it drift from the suspected area of the crash being in the arc just west of Australia in the South Indian Ocean BUT, as you will hear, that suspected arc has brought up nothing, wreckage-wise in the intervening 5 years and was assumed based on the Pilot, Zahari’s, flight simulator paths at his home. However, as you will hear, these paths have not even been confirmed as being part of the same simulation!

In case you are not aware, I wrote quite a few posts re MH370 at the time, most of which are long, detailed critiques of what we were being told and how, from my own perspective, we were being fed a “story” while I also took a look at some background political issues together with assessments I made re the satellite and tech issues.

I still stand by my thesis that the plane – for whatever reason – was brought down by American/Western interests, however, being “brought down” does not necessarily mean shot down or crashing but guided to land at, or around, Diego Garcia. Granted, it is a “hunch” but I believe it is an educated one.

If you decide to read my posts on MH370 and you wish to comment and/or critique them in any way, I am happy to enter a dialogue with anyone on a constructive basis.

My interest in it was piqued due to my having lived in Malaysia some years ago, have fond memories of it and the people. I simply do not subscribe to the “conspiracy theory” of the official story which really doesn’t add up.

 

There are (at the bottom of these posts) “older posts” which go into even more detail so don’t think you have reached the end once you come to the bottom of the page:

https://earthlinggb.wordpress.com/?s=MH370

 

INMARSAT MH370 CALCULATIONS ERRONEOUS

Posted in "Terrorism", Disappearance of MH370, Geo-Political Warfare, Politics by earthling on May 10, 2014

I’ve stated it again and again – granted without going into this much detail – but Inmarsat have been talking dross all along AND they will not share the data.

It reminds me of the IPCC Climate Change “Peer reviews”.

Malaysia/China: You are being lied to! The Atlantic and these scientists are no “Conspiracy theorists”. But then neither are those scientists whose voices are suppressed telling you global warming caused by man is crap too!

 

Inmarsat wrong 1

 

The following are just some “highlights” of this article. For full understanding of why I choose these highlights, you need to read the whole thing:

 

Inmarsat concluded that the flight ended in the southern Indian Ocean, and its analysis has become the canonical text of the Flight 370 search. It’s the bit of data from which all other judgments flow—from the conclusive announcement by Malaysia’s prime minister that the plane has been lost with no survivors, to the black-box search area, to the high confidence in the acoustic signals, to the dismissal by Australian authorities of a survey company’s new claim to have detected plane wreckage.

This information is far from perfect. You know how far the plane was for each ping, but the ping could be coming from any direction. And you how fast the plane is moving toward or away from you. It could also be moving right or left, up or down, and the speeds would sound the same. The task of the Inmarsat engineers has been to take these pieces and put them together, working backwards to reconstruct possible flight paths that would fit the data.

So it should be straightforward to make sure that the math is right. That’s just what a group of analysts outside the investigation has been attempting to verify. The major players have been Michael Exner, founder of the American Mobile Satellite Corporation; Duncan Steel, a physicist and visiting scientist at NASA’s Ames Research Center; and satellite technology consultant Tim Farrar. They’ve used flight and navigation software like STK, which allows you to chart and make precise calculations about flight scenarios like this one.

When the plane is moving away from the satellite, the radio signal gets stretched out, so the frequency decreases. This means that the frequency shifts should be negative over most of the flight. Although there was an approximately one-hour period starting 40 minutes after takeoff when radar showed the plane moving westward, toward the satellite, the graph shows that no pings were sent during that time—so actually, all of the shifts on the graph should be negative.

But the graph defies these expectations. Taken at face value, the graph shows the plane moving at a significant speed before it even took off, then moving toward the satellite every time it was pinged. This interpretation is completely at odds with the official conclusion, and flatly contradicted by other evidence.

The first problem seems rather straightforward to resolve: the reason the frequency shifts aren’t negative is probably that Inmarsat just graphed them as positive. Plotting absolute values is a common practice among engineers, like stating the distance to the ocean floor as a positive depth value rather than a negative elevation value. (straightforward to resolve IF you make the assumption they are making as stated, However, if you assume they are graphed positively because they WERE positive then that leads you to this conclusion: THE PLANE WAS, IN FACT, TRAVELLING WEST – toward the Satellite – AND WEST LEADS TO (among others) DIEGO GARCIA!)

Inmarsat’s analysis is highly ambiguous about whether the satellite-to-ground transmission contributed to the measured frequency shift. But if it did, a ground station located significantly south of the satellite would have resulted in frequency shifts that could account for the measured shifts being too large at the beginning of the graph and too small at the end. And sure enough, Inmarsat’s analysis states that the ground station receiving the transmission was located in Australia.

It’s possible to check the theory more precisely. Public records of Inmarsat ground stations show just one in Australia: in Perth.

Why Inmarsat’s Analysis Is Probably Wrong
If this interpretation—based on the work of Exner, Steel, Farrar, and myself—is correct, it would allow independent experts to fully review Inmarsat’s analysis, verify its work and check to see if Inmarsat might have missed any important clues that could further narrow down the plane’s whereabouts.

The problem is, although this interpretation matches two basic expectations for the frequency graph, it still doesn’t match Inmarsat’s example flight paths. The new frequency values, calculated by Exner, show the flight’s speed relative to the satellite as only about 144 miles per hour by the last ping, but Inmarsat’s example flight paths show a relative speed of about 272 miles per hour.

Either Inmarsat’s analysis doesn’t totally make sense, or it’s flat-out wrong.

For the last two months, I’ve been trying to get authorities to answer these questions. Malaysia Airlines has not returned multiple requests for comment, nor have officials at the Malaysian Ministry of Transportation. Australia’s Joint Agency Coordination Centre and the UK’s Air Accidents Investigation Branch, which have been heavily involved in the investigation, both declined to comment.

Until officials provide more information, the claim that Flight 370 went south rests not on the weight of mathematics but on faith in authority. Inmarsat officials and search authorities seem to want it both ways: They release charts, graphics, and statements that give the appearance of being backed by math and science, while refusing to fully explain their methodologies. And over the course of this investigation, those authorities have repeatedly issued confident pronouncements that they’ve later quietly walked back.

The biggest risk to the investigation now is that authorities continue to assume they’ve finally found the area where the plane went down, while failing to explore other possibilities simply because they don’t fit with a mathematical analysis that may not even hold up.

After all, searchers have yet to find any hard evidence—not so much as a shred of debris—to confirm that they’re looking in the right ocean.

http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2014/05/why-the-official-explanation-of-mh370s-demise-doesnt-hold-up/361826/

 

So, to those of you who enjoy throwing the nasty comments (which yes I do read but trash soon after because they are not adding anything just simply attempting to have a go at me personally), please determine the location of your anus entrance/exit and, very gently, attempt to remove your cranium from the orifice. You will feel much better I assure you.