Posted on 03/17/2014 8:17:58 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
“Are we sure his wife and 3 kids MOVED OUT, or were they KIDNAPPED BY TERRORISTS who ordered Zaharie to fly somewhere or else they’d all be killed????”
That is what I do not understand. The story broke about them leaving the day before, and no follow up as to where they are or went.
But then the pilot attended a political forum the next day before his flight, so obviously he was not worried at that time.
Question pfflier about the transponders. They can be turned off in the cockpit by the pilot, (or someone else), is what I do not understand. Why? Why have this transponder be even capable of being turned off? Why not have it located deep in the plane’s innards somewhere where it would continue it’s ‘work’ and not be available to in flight shenanigans ? Thanks in advance.
So far, just about everything the Malaysian government has said has turned out to be lies, including the words “and” and “the.”
The theory of shadowing another flight to bask in the other plane’s radar’s signature makes a of of sense.
Both planes are 777s. The Singapore Airlines plane could not see the Malaysian Airlines jet because the transponder was off. The Malaysian Airlines pilot could see the Singapore jet and flew behind and below, and it would all show up as one dot to the military radars.
This theory would also explain why the MH370 plane turned to the west, to get in the trough where the pilot knew the Singapore jet was going to travel.
This theory makes a lot of sense. The plane landed somewhere. And it landed over a week ago. The painstakingly slow release of information is deliberate as multiple governments are trying to spin this out , while figuring out what the heck happened.
Early TV coverage reported the airliner had a plane closely following it. So something was scrambled or diverted to check it out. Perhaps just a phantom if that is possible because it hasn’t been mentioned since but I don’t watch much TV. Sorry no link or other details.
Turning off the transponder in the cockpit (yes it can be done)is a moot point. If an improper code is set or the transponder is turned off, the effect is the same. The airplane is not as visible to ATC radar. The plane can be seen but is more difficult to see.
The second type of transponder in question is the Emergency Location Transponder (ELT) sometimes called an ELT beacon. It is powered by it's internal battery and must be disabled by manual disconnection. No cockpit switch for this one. Only someone who knows the airplanes unique systems and configuration can do this. This transponder is typically not easily accessible in flight. In most plane it is located in the tail section because it is most survivable structurally in a crash.
Bobby, the pilot needs to control the transponder at all times. The transponder has four digits. Those digits run from zero to seven. Air traffic control has a finite number of codes that can be assigned. It is a little unusual to change codes during a flight, but not too unusual. I have had as many as seven code changes during one flight. ATC’s computer gets ‘full’ and as I transition from one airspace to another, that local controller asks me to change codes.
Transponders have a four position switch: Off, Standby, On and Altitude (for reporting your altitude to ATC). The pilot needs control because the altitude encoding function might have a problem. He still wants to be identified by ATC, but he has to sacrifice the altitude encoding capability.
And finally, you need to control the power to ANY piece of electronics from the cockpit, either with a switch or a circuit breaker, in case of a malfunction leads to arcing, or overheating and thus an inflight fire.
Great info! Thanks guys!
They still use Crays?
I thought the latest supercomputers were IBM?
Ed
Probably. It’s just Crays are more easily identified with that line of work. So I was using the term generically ... ;-)
after 9/11, we have to be concerned about missing jet liners as we have seen that they make effective weapons. That’s what all the concern is about IMO and it is increasingly looking like that is a possibility, again, IMO.
Great. You've "Xeroxed" a supercomputer, turned them into Kleenex!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.