Text 12861, 166 rader
Skriven 2014-03-17 01:35:10 av Ward Dossche (2:292/854)
  Kommentar till text 12853 av Ross Cassell (1:123/456)
Ärende: Re: Kyoto anyone?
=========================
Ross,
 
RC> Point is, dont consider the nobel "powers that be" to be infallible or
RC> the penultimant source of knowledge, authority much less legitimacy.
 
At the same time they should not be considered to be imbecils either.
 
RC> I objected to Obamas because HE HAD NOT DONE ANYTHING YET!
 
I think he himself was not all that happy about it too because locally it
didn't make things easier for him during his first months.
 
RC> Just like you have always know to bow to royalty, we have never been
RC> known to worship Govt.
 
There we go again ... I'm an anti-monarchist, unfortnately it takes a
constitutional ammendment which requires a 2/3 majority. Reaching those numbers
is virtually impossible ... rather than bowing to them, we're stuck with them.
Consider yourself lucky.
 
RC> No, but perhaps they heard of the fallibility of the Canadian and British
RC> systems. Montana is a red state, Montana citizens are more likely to have
RC> a gun than any other.. Montana citizens trust the govt less than anyone
RC> else, except perhaps the Michigan militia nutz.
 
That is spot on.
 
RC> Many of us over here dont like some of these decisions in the hands of
RC> those subject to the political winds to keep their jobs, which is
RC> contrary to doing the right thing, more often than not.
 
Although I'm there a lot, I fail to grasp why a basic simple health-care system
like here isn't possible there. I don't register complaints here.
 
RC> Does Belgium have a constitution?
 
Yes, it was fashioned after the US-constituion and its ammendments. After it
became the constitution in 1830 it got ammended a number of times and the
resemblance has vanished in large parts, way more complicated.
 
RC> Regardless of make of jetliner Airbus, Boeing, Lockheed et al, why on
RC> earth would the cockpit controls of any jetliner have a button, switch et
RC> al to turn off transponders or other beacons that emit a signal for
RC> ground and satellite use? It is my opinion that those devices should only
RC> be able to be turned off by the ground crew when the jetliner is not
RC> going to be flying anytime soon. I see no need for the flight crew to
RC> have any ability to influence the operating condition of those safety
RC> devices.
 
I have no immediate answer, though i wonder if there's any relevancy.
 
A transponder does not send an automatic blip, it only responds when querried
by radar by sending the type of aircraft, the flightnumber (if any), direction,
altitude and speed.
 
When the transponder is turned "off", the radar still sees it, but now merely
as a blip on the screen without added information. It often happens that a
transponder is disfunctional in which case the air traffic controller can enter
that data manually by a keyboard.
 
So when Malaysian authorities or any news service report that track of the
aircraft was lost when the transponder was turned-off, then they are
bullshitting the public as the radar-return on the screen is not caused by a
transponder but by the reflection on the fuselage itself. Up to a point the
authorities were able to actually track that aircraft, without its transponder
"on" as the radar return was quite obvious.
 
However, once an aircraft is sufficiently beyond the curvature of the horizon,
then the radar will not get any returns irrespective of the transponder being
turned "on" or "off". Radar signals travel in a straight line and when the
plane is out of electronic view, the blip on the screen is gone.
 
It is known that at some point the aircraft veered to port (left) and went on a
westerly heading towards the Malaysian peninsula again at a spot where there is
no known radar tracking. So it is totally feasable that the plane crossed into
the Indian ocean unseen.
 
Again ... however ... this is a very modern Boeing-777 with very modern
RollsRoyce engines that auto-collect data and send that in bursts every 30
minutes via ACARS to who-ever subscribed to that service ... Boeing ... and
RollsRoyce. Not Malaysian Airlines mind you. By continously monitoring these
data streams manufacturers can detect early warnings of mechanical/technical
failure.
 
ACARS (Aircraft Communications Addressing and Reporting System) is a
communication system on board modern jetliners and it is used to communicate
with landbased sites via satellite. In this particular case, an INMARSAT
satellite. During 9-11 United and American used ACARS to send warning messages
to teletypes inside cockpits. It is very weel depicted in that movie about
flight 93 that crashed north of Shanksville PA.
 
ACARS is not a primary system directly connected to the plane's batteries. The
hardware sits in the tail, just like the orange "black" boxes, and the control
panel incl a kind of teletype printer in the cockpit. The system is powered by
a generator in either engine to provide redundancy.
 
An INMARSAT geostationary satellite at an altitude of 35,800 kilometer has
continued receiving connect-requests from that Malaysian Airlines airplane for
4 hours, some sources say 8, after its initial disappearing. What does it mean?
Easy ... ACARS can only function when the airplane is in one piece ... flying
... or on the ground.
 
So it is known for a fact that 4 hours after the airplane officially went
missing, it was still airborne with ACARS functioning ... and the transponder
obviously shut off.
 
It all points to hi-jack.
 
INMARSAT has also been able to determine the lattitude at which the plane
probably is to be found. Look at this map, it was downloaded from Reuter's:
 
http://users.skynet.be/sky35373/MH370-track.jpg
 
Somewhere on the red line ACARS stopped its attempts to upload engine-data.
 
So where is the plane? Probably not the southern arc, west of Australia. The
northern track is way more plausible. The last read-out was either over Laos,
China, Myanmar, Kyrgyzstan or Kazakhstan.
 
70% of the population of Kazakhstan is muslim, 80% of Kyrgyzstan is muslim.
 
Both the pilot of MH370 as well as the co-pilot were radical muslims. And
Russia has definite problems with its republic Chechnya which is overwhelmingly
muslim.
 
So far the facts, now come the assumptions.
 
Someone I know who is very much aware of how big planes operate, and with a
keen eye for detail, told me "Do not go on a trip to Moscow, and if you do
don't show up on Red Square nor visit the Kremlin until that plane is found".
 
In certain circles it is expected that the plane has landed intact on an
abandoned former  USSR-military base somewhere in a desert and is in hiding
until the right moment for a terrorist attack is there and then someone will
want to crash it either fully fueled or full with explosives, or both, on the
Kremlin. Russian air defenses are looking to the west, to the north and to the
east. Historically they have disregarded the south-east.
 
OK, so the cellphones of passengers were operational hours later and went
unanswered. Probably the whole cabin was dead already either through gas,
poisoning or decompression at high altitude without breathing devices
deploying.
 
Intersting however, because it means those phones were near a cellular antenne,
but maybe the aircraft was equipped with it in-flight.
 
Landing on an abandoned Soviet base? Yes, there are dozens of 'm. Just have a
look via Google Earth to these coordinates:
 
     44.054288, 57.547525
 
Thank you, BTW, for your sneer about my "expertise" on jetliners.
 
I'd be surprised if you didn't learn now way more about this particular case
that you'd read in any newspaper, pulled up from any newsservice or saw on any
TV-station.
 
As an encore, I am aware of several 777-operators now reviewing all aircraft of
that type to look for hidden and known flaws.
 
Take care,
 
 \%/@rd

--- D'Bridge 3.99
 * Origin: Many Glacier / Protect - Preserve - Conserve (2:292/854)