Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Uncle Chip

The max speed of a 777, from what I’ve been able to gleen, is 590mph, hammer down. Since the new suspected splash spot is shorter in distance from the turn, than any of the three predicted flight paths, this evidence of lack of fuel conservation is counter to any argument that the objective was to find a safe landing spot.

On a side note, I’m very interested in the tacking pattern prior to the southern turn. Was it deception of the passengers? (would the tacking have been the same on the trip to Bejing?) did a passenger takeback attempt begin at the southern 270degree turn? I just can’t envision an Aussie, much less an American, sitting quietly in their seats while all this was going on.


13 posted on 04/07/2014 1:42:52 PM PDT by blueplum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]


To: blueplum

Here are the two flight paths — at 400 knots and 450 knots:

https://www.facebook.com/178566888854999/photos/pcb.740971779281171/740971732614509/?type=1&theater

If you calculate a 350 knot flight path it would be right where they are searching now — where the 811 Arc crosses the S20 Parallel — a shorter distance from waypoint IGREX where it turned south.

If the red line is where it would have run out of fuel at after 5 hours @ 400 knots, then it would have still had fuel after 5 hours @ 350 knots.

The slower speed and shorter distance from IGREX to the new search area means increased likelihood that there was still fuel in the tank when it went down.


14 posted on 04/07/2014 2:37:25 PM PDT by Uncle Chip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson