One minute after MH370’s flight crew said “Good Night” to Malaysia air traffic controls, and five seconds after the plane passed waypoint IGARI at 1720:31 UTC, the plane’s Mode S signal disappeared from air traffic control screens. As it reached the border of the Ho Chi Minh Flight Information Region (FIR) approximately 50 seconds after that, the plane made an abrupt 180 degree turn. The radius of this turn was so small, and the ground speed so low, that it appears to have been effected via a semi-aerobatic maneuver called a “chandelle.” Similar to a “box canyon turn,” this involves climbing under power while also banking steeply. The maneuver offered WWI pilots a way to reverse their direction of flight quickly in a dogfight.
Chandelles are not a normal part of commercial 777 operation. They would not be used by pilots responding to in-flight fire.
The fact that such an aggressive maneuver was flown suggests that whoever was at the controls was highly motivated to change their direction of flight. Specifically, instead of going east, they wanted to go west.
At the completion of the left-hand U-turn the plane found itself back in Malaysia-controlled airspace close to the Thai border. It flew at high speed (likely having increased engine thrust and dived from the top of its chandelle climb) toward Kota Bharu and then along the zig-zaggy border between peninsular Malaysia and Thailand (briefly passing through the outer fringe of Thai airspace) before making a right-hand turn south of Penang. We know this “based mostly on the analysis of primary radar recordings from the civilian ATC radars at the Kuala Lumpur (KUL) Area Control Centre (ACC) and at Kota Bahru on the east coast of Malaysia; plus (apparently) the air defense radars operated by the RMAF south of Kota Bahru at Jerteh, and on Penang Island off the west coast,” according to AIN Online.
At 18:02, while over the small island of Pulau Perak, the plane disappeared from primary radar, presumable because it had exceeded the range of the radar at Penang, which at that point lay 83 nautical miles directly behind the plane. Then, at 18:22:12, another blip was recorded, 160 miles to the northwest.
The most-asked question about the 18:22 blip is: why did the plane disappear then? But a more pressing question is: why did it reappear? If the plane was already too faint to be discerned by Penang when it was at Pulau Perak, then how on earth could it have been detected when it was three times further away?
One possibility is that it was picked up not by Malaysian radar, but by the Thai radar installation at Phuket. An AFP report from March 2014 quoted Thailand’s Air Marshal Monthon Suchookorn as saying that Thai radar detected the plane “swinging north and disappearing over the Andaman Sea,” although “the signal was sporadic.”
At 18:22, the plane was approximately 150 miles from Phuket. This is well beyond the range at which Penang had ceased being able to detect the plane. What’s more, when the plane had passed VAMPI it had been only about 120 miles from Phuket. If it hadn’t seen the plane when it was at VAMPI, how was it able to detect it when it was 30 miles further? And why just for a momentary blip?
I don’t believe that, as some have suggested, the plane climbed, was detected, and then dived again. As Victor Iannello has earlier pointed out, the plane was flying at around 500 knots, which is very fast, and suggests a high level of motivation to be somewhere else, not bleeding off speed through needless altitude changes.
I propose that what happened at 18:22 was that the plane was turning. Entering into a right bank, the plane would turn its wings temporarily toward the Phuket radar station, temporarily presenting a larger cross section. Then, when the plane leveled its wings to straighten out, the cross section would shrink, potentially causing the plane to disappear.
Why a right bank? The diagram at top is an annotated version of one presented in the DSTG’s “Bayesian Methods” book. The vertical white line is the 18:25:27 ping arc. The orange line represents the path from the 18:22:12 radar detection to the first ping arc. It is 13 miles long. To travel 13 miles in 3.25 minutes requires a ground speed of 240 knots. Prior to final radar return, MH370 was traveling at approximately 490 knots. A plane can’t slow down that quickly without a radical climbing maneuver, which can be dangerous at cruise altitude (cf Air France 447.)
If it had continued at its previous pace, the plane would have traveled 26.5 miles in that time — enough to carry it to the unlabeled yellow thumbtack. Or, to turn to the right and take the path shown in green.
I don’t mean this path to seem so precise and deterministic; there are errors associated with both the position of the ping arc and the radar return. The ping arc, for instance, is generally understood to have an error bar of about 10 km. If the ping arc radius is 10 km larger, and the radar hit location stays the same, then the heading will be be 336 degrees instead of 326 degrees; if the ping radius is 10 km smaller, the angle will be 310 degrees, representing just a 20 degree right turn from a straight-ahead path.
It does not, however, seem possible that the combined radar and ping-arc errors will allow a scenario in which the plane continued on its VAMPI-to-MEKAR heading and speed. As the “Bayesian Methods” book puts it, “the filtered speed at the output of the Kalman filter is not consistent with the 18.25 measurement, and predictions based purely on primary radar data on this will have a likelihood very close to zero.” Neil Gordon confirmed to me in our conversation that something must have changed.
Dr Bobby Ulich, in his recent work examing different flight-path scenarios, has also concluded that the plane turned north at this time. He looked at a southern turn, too, but observed that “the left-hand turn… needs a turning rate higher than the auto-pilot bank limit allows.”
Looking at the over picture of MH370’s first hour post-abduction, we note that:
- The timing of the silencing of the electronics was coordinated to within several seconds to the optimum time to evade detection.
- The 180-degree turnaround maneuver was highly aggressive.
- The plane’s course allowed it to remain in Malaysian airspace. After Penang it stayed closer to the Indonesian FIR (lower black line) than the Thai FIR (upper black line).
- Post diversion, the plane was traveling at high speed, faster than normal cruise flight. This suggests that whoever was flying it was motivated to escape primary radar surveillance–they wanted to get away.
- When last observed, MH370 was likely making a turn to the northwest, in the general direction of Port Blair in the Andaman islands. This is consistent with Air Marshal Monthon Suchookorn’s assertion that Thai radar detected the plane “swinging north and disappearing over the Andaman Sea.”
The overall shape of the flight path from IGARI to 18:25 is U-shaped, curving around Thai airspace. In the Malacca Strait it remained closer to the Indonesian side than the the Thai side. It is possible that the turn at 18:22 resulted from a compromise between two goals: to stay beyond the detection range of the radar station at Phuket, and to travel in a northwesterly direction.
It is widely believed that, since the plane presumable ended up in the southern Indian Ocean, the flight up the Malacca Strait was undertaken in order to avoid penetrating Indonesian airspace en route to the southern ocean. If this were goal, and the person flying the plane should have turned to the left at 18:22, onto a westerly or west-southwesterly heading.
The fact that they did not suggests that, whatever ultimately transpired aboard the plane, the goal prior to the “final major turn” was a destination to the northwest, and that the reason the plane flew southwest from IGARI before turning northwest was to avoid Thai airspace and radar surveillance.
@Jeff
“What does the Lido image represent? How could it be so different from ATSB and Malaysian descriptions of what primary radars saw?”
I’d go with Neil Gordon’s idea that Malaysia have full video recordings of the route at least off Penang (descriptions of military radar track up to Penang in the FI are sketchy, perhaps indicating the recording started only once Penang was alerted, on this see below). Deviation from a straight line route increases with long range view, perhaps indicating that their radar wasn’t very accurate and that was corrected later (particularly the penultimate short range 02:07:06 blip followed by the 02:07:16 blip). The FI agrees with the Lido picture in that MH370 was spotted directly at VAMPI (note the use of weasel-words in the FI for all other waypoints but this one).
The section “Malaysia Military Radar” (FI, p. 2-3) indicates, to me, that the air turn back was spotted by the military radar south of Kota Bharu (up to 1:52). From the Lido picture I’d say Penang started to track MH370 from around 1:58 onwards (which matches the Reuters article on Penang being notified by ATC around that time.)
A possible conclusion is that Malaysia was not happy to indicate that it took somewhat long for their ATC to notify the military and the section “Malaysia military radar” therefore looks like hotchpotch, but it still is reasonably clear that there was continuous tracking up to MEKAR and beyond until 2:22 (and starting with VAMPI) both in the Lido picture and the FI.
@Rob
“If the Malaysian military radar operated from Butterworth Air Base, is situated at the southern end of Penang Island, he would have been flying directly away from it as he proceeded up the Malacca Strait – a stealth tactic, possibly?”
Flying and turning directly overhead a radar station brings you into the cone of silence. The antenna cannot look 90° upward. For the assumed cruising altitude the cone of silence would have a diameter of about 15 NM, about 2 minutes stealth flying time.
@Sajid UK
umm, too much from still image; you need at least the famous(!) 3secs, or better 3mins or best the 3hrs to see thorugh their heads, IMHO
@Jeff
I agree with putting spoof scenarios down on our list until such time as we determine that there was some reason (something on the plane) that would warrant such an elaborate undertaking.
I will say that given the recently expanded view of the possible ISAT data routes, it is not axiomatic that the decoy aircraft could not have landed at say Exmouth. Again, not worth the trouble to dig into without any motive for a spoof.
No I didn’t but it struck me as worth noting that there might be other planes in the air and that some 7 min ahead on the same flightpath is pretty close. With contrails and all. Had he been approached himself from behind then his day might have been ruined a little earlier than planned. So our happy hijacker had either planned ahead or had a load of luck, i would say.
And as you brought it up, it is hard not to think of the qualitative difference bwtween flying an airliner the supposed way, like a subway-train chauffeur, and the way our pilot chose to fly it.
Last post for @Retired4.
Sorry.
I read somewhere ZS has NOK in Australia.. does any one know which city?
@MH
Z’s daughter, Aishah, studied architecture and lived in Melbourne. Z sent her money under the auspices of buying retirement property in Australia. My own view is that he just wanted to get money out of Malaysia before the “deed”. Would anyone send a daughter enough money to buy property? Just another of the one thousand little coincidences, like an empty social calendar after March 8, that contribute to the WEB of little coincidences.
Daughter returned to Malaysia after MH370 went missing.
@RetiredF4
@All
I wasn’t referring to the cone of silence, actually, but that the particular flight path, up the Malacca Strait would mean that a minimum surface area would be presented to the radar (the plane was showing it’s backside only, to put it in basic terms), with a minimum crossrange component. Intended to give it the minimum radar cross section?
@Sajid, @Shadynuk
One cannot pretend to infer anything particularly significant from a photo such as this, I agree but having said that, he does look as though he has a lot on his mind. His body is in the group, but his mind is somewhere else. For that to be captured in an apparently informal photo…
“DennisW
Posted September 19, 2016 at 6:08 PM
@MH
Z’s daughter, Aishah, studied architecture and lived in Melbourne. Z sent her money under the auspices of buying retirement property in Australia. My own view is that he just wanted to get money out of Malaysia before the “deed”. Would anyone send a daughter enough money to buy property? Just another of the one thousand little coincidences, like an empty social calendar after March 8, that contribute to the WEB of little coincidences.
Daughter returned to Malaysia after MH370 went missing.”
–> its happening everywhere where I live – that foreign kids are sent to local schools here and they buy mega properties on their families’ behalf.
–> maybe he wanted to disappear and operate a remote ranch some where in the Australian hills.
@Johan
I’m not sure exactly when it was taken, maybe a few weeks before the disappearance? Hopefully Jeff can shed some light on that when he next posts.
@Shadynuk
Yep, I suppose you’re right, I’m probably getting a little carried away.
But at the very least, Z is clearly ‘distracted’ by something. He certainly doesn’t seem relaxed. His manner of standing, the eyes wandering into the distance.
Then again, it might just be a misleading snap, capturing fleeting emotions and facial expressions only present within that millisecond.
@Shadynuk
Lol I was thinking the same thing about Sajid’s speculation regarding that image JW posted. The selection of this particular image, is telling in itself.
The image often shown of him is a freeze frame from his Youtube video that makes him look a bit dodgy. Yet if you watch entirely he looks very nice and ordinary. In most other images he is presenting the personality attributed to him in reports by friends, colleagues and family, a nice, likable and popular guy.
Standing about KLIA numerous times, waiting for a flight, I’ve observed those young pilots always look like cats that have swallowed the creme. They have achieved their goal, to fly large commercial planes. Boys with the best kind of toys. It is all new and fresh for them, they are upwardly mobile, enjoying the perks of their job.
Zaharie is one of the select group of experienced pilots in a job and country where age, education and experience are treated with respect. The co-pilots sometimes land the plane in god awful clunky landings. You might note however the changing face of Malaysian pilots, more and more Chinese Malaysians and less Malay.
Re: photo. ZS looks distracted from the unexpected photo being taken. Probably annoyed if done without permission /etc
@MH,
It is common for foreign students in Australia, children of wealthy merchants as well as middle and upper middle class Asian parents to purchase property in Australia for their children to live in while they study.
Looking for a place in Melbourne several years back and the agent said many of her clients were children of wealthy Asians, students, planning to stay when they finish their degree.
The route to permanent residence in Australia looks something like this, study, obtain a degree in a field that allows a track to PR, citizenship and use the family reunion track to have parents join you in Australia.
@ROB
“One cannot pretend to infer anything particularly significant… but… he does look as though he has a lot on his mind. His body is in the group, but his mind is somewhere else. For that to be captured in an apparently informal photo…”
Yep, well said. A curiously well-framed photo given what was to come!
@Gloria – all same here.
@Gloria
Ah, I see, was this a freeze frame of one of his YouTube videos? Then yes, probably a case of someone choosing the least flattering pose!
But to play devil’s advocate, maybe its the only time we can get a glimpse into the other emotions Z is feeling and that’s what makes this pic so unique.
I do agree with you though; this picture may be entirely unrelated to what was about to come afterwards.
@Oleksandr
“Jeff,
“Frankly speaking again very disappointing article. You again repeat the same mistakes as before: (1) interpret observations in the way that fit your own current narrative; (2) forgetting to mention other possible interpretations of the same observations; (3) presenting assumptions instead of conclusions; (4) discussing only fragments of the whole picture.”
Also my observation.
Reading this latest article by JW, my first thought regarding these details professional, rehearsed and military.
As experienced as Z, to execute all this maneuvering with tech heads and other expat/experts on board as well as experienced cabin crew who the hell is going to be taking this game plan sleeping.
Passenger phone would be on unless under duress or the passengers were dead by this time.
The puzzle parts do not fit together, never did.
If you only look at data that is one thing but when all aspects of the flight are considered there are too many holes in the wall.
I think however it was done, in 3 possible ways, this was a hostile takeover and reading the description of the flight before it allegedly turned into the SIO, it smells, tells of professional, rehearsed and military.
That flight was not a one off, MAS were running two flights a day to Beijing, morning and night at the time. The night flight, a routine one, selected as the one to hijack.
It was mentioned in a post above the earlier speculation about a substitute being used to mask the true direction of MH370 which would fit, professional, rehearsed and military takeover.
@Jeffwise
@DennisW
Jeff, your annotated diagram is taken from the DSTGs Bayesian Methods, but they didn’t show the 18:25 arc in its actual position, I’m thinking. The arc is actually a good 10Nm west of the position shown in the diagram. I remember you and Dennis had a discussion about it, a while back. To put it bluntly, I think the DSTG were being a bit sloppy. They failed to make sure their diagram was an accurate representation.
Accordingly, the distance between the 18:22 position and the 18:25.5 arc might be closer to 25Nm, which fits in better with a ground speed of around 510Kts. How about this scenario: Aircraft flies to VAMPI, then toward ANOKO, bypassing MEKAR, then at 18:22 suddenly banks to the right toward NILAM and continues toward IGOGU, where it turns south.
@Gloria
Oops, you didn’t say this pic was from a YouTube vid but you were talking about a different one and how its usually ‘manipulated!’
Sorry for the misunderstanding, I’m hoping Jeff can shed some light on where this pic’s from; its certainly an excellent pic (for all the wrong reasons)!
@Sajid
Yes I pointed out that the one usually shown by mainstream media is from Z’s Youtube video. The source of the image posted by JW above is attributed at the bottom of that image.
What I’m pointing out is that if you analyst the images in relation to the stories and then search more images of Z you will find that the only ones that are being used are frozen at a point where he looks dodgy. That is very telling propaganda when the majority of images available, if searched show a happy go lucky nice guy.
We are being programed to view him in the way the media and the architects of the authorized version want people to think.
@all
I would appreciate it if someone knowledgeable could comment on ZS’s apparent face assymetry. His mouth, left hand end doesn’t seem to be able to smile in several photos (eg in white pilot shirt, and selfie in brown shirt). Although I can’t discern dates, the problem is not apparent in earlier photos (eg meat cleaver, sitting on couch in yellow outfit). Perhaps facial nerve damage?
@ROB
I don’t have a clue where the plane was at 18:22, and anyone who does make such a claim is blowing smoke.
As you know we do not have any radar data in that time period. What we have is a mislabeled graphic and hearsay.
@Gloria
I can only shake my head at your rants. The latest being:
“We are being programed to view him in the way the media and the architects of the authorized version want people to think.”
If anything the media has been exceptionally kind to Zaharie, IMO. What you and MH are doing is playing the asymmetric win-win game. If Zaharie is proven innocent you can say “we told you so”. If he is proven guilty you can take the high road and use the PC – “a person is innocent until proven guilty slogan”. You cannot lose. Congrats on ‘hanging it out there’. Not.
Rather than telling us what did not happen why don’t you try barking with the big dogs and tell us what did happen?
@ROB
I don’t have a clue where the plane was at 18:22, and neither does anyone else.
@Cofee- maybe Bell’s Palsy. My mother who has it smiles the similarly.
@Dennis
There is no definitive evidence against him just some hearsay and then based on following this due to frequent flyer status on MAS. There are also many self proclaimed experts on here well my expertise is not numbers but it is visual analysis.
How obvious of you to use bullying tactics of sock puppets.
If people are interested to search they will find mostly images of Z that support him in the character assessment of his colleagues, friends and family. However they might also note how the majority of images shown by mainstream media are edited to be one or two that are frozen to make him look dark and dodgy.
People can search and see for themselves because when one is conscious of this you will not be so easily misled.
DennisW wrote:
“I don’t have a clue where the plane was at 18:22, and neither does anyone else.”
In reality, no one (publicly) “knows” where it was post IGARI. “Everything post IGARI (including the “supposed turnback”) is speculation, not “investigation”.
@DennisW
@All
Sorry, wrong answer Dennis.
Alternatively, he flies to Vampi, and Mekar on N571, then doesn’t proceed straight to Nilam from Mekar, but comes out of LNAV for a couple of minutes, then at 18:22 designates N571 again and flies to Nilam. Igogu and Isbix, and Bob’s your uncle.
Crash: Malaysia B772 over Gulf of Thailand on Mar 8th 2014, aircraft missing, data indicate flight MH-370 ended west of Australia
By Simon Hradecky, created Sunday, Mar 8th 2015 10:36Z, last updated Sunday, Mar 8th 2015 14:27Z
On Mar 8th 2015, one year after MH-370 disappeared, the Malaysian Government released an interim statement and factual information.
The preliminary factual information re-iterates that the secondary transponder signal was lost at 17:21:13Z (Mar 7th) and went on to report the primary radar data off Kuala Lumpur’s primary and military primary radar as follows:
At 1721:13 UTC [0121:13 MYT] the Military radar showed the radar return of MH370 turning right but almost immediately making a constant left turn to a South Westerly direction.
At 1730:35 UTC [0130:35 MYT] to 1735UTC [0135 MYT] the radar return was on heading 231 magnetic (M), ground speed of 496 knots (kt.) and registered height of 35,700 ft.
At 1736 UTC [0136 MYT to 1736:40 UTC [0136:40 MYT] heading was 237M, ground speed fluctuation between 494 and 525 kt. and height fluctuation between 31,100 and 33,000 ft.
At 1739:59 UTC [0139:59 MYT] heading was 244M, ground speed 529 kt. and height at 32,800 ft.
At 1752:35 UTC [0152:35 MYT] radar return was observed to be slightly south of Penang Island.
It was noted by the Investigation Team that the position and heading of the radar return from both Civilian and Military Radar, suggested that it was from the same target.
After the last radar return disappeared from KL ATCC Primary Radar at 1752:35 UTC [0152:35 MYT], the Military Radar continued to track this radar return as it headed towards Pulau Perak, a small island over the Straits of Malacca. The time registered over Pulau Perak was 1802:59 UTC [0202:59].
The tracking by the Military continued as the radar return was observed to be heading towards waypoint MEKAR, a waypoint on Airways N571 when it disappeared abruptly at 1822:12 UTC [0222:12 MYT],10 nautical miles (Nm) after waypoint MEKAR.
The factual information further states that Kota Bharu’s primary terminal approach radar captured a primary target:
The appearance of an aircraft target on the KL ATCC radar display, coded as P3362, was recorded at 1730:37 UTC [0130:37 MYT] but disappeared from the radar display at 1737:22 UTC [0137:22 MYT].
At 1738:56 UTC [0138:56 MYT] an aircraft target, coded as P3401, appeared on the KL ATCC radar display and disappeared at 1744:52 UTC [0144:52 MYT].
At 1747:02 UTC [0147:02 MYT] an aircraft target, coded as P3415, appeared on the KL ATCC radar display but disappeared at 1748:39 UTC [0148:39 MYT].
At 1751:45 UTC [0151:45 MYT] an aircraft target, coded as P3426,appeared on the KL ATCC radar display but disappeared at 1752:35 UTC [0152:35 MYT].
The factual information states, that there were no significant medical issues with both flight crew even though the captain, following a paragliding accident in 2007 causing the fracture of the 2nd lumbar vertebra, took “analgesics on an irregular basis” for his pain.
The report went on to say: “There were no behavioural signs of social isolation, change in habits or interest, self-neglect, drug or alcohol abuse of the Captain, First Officer and the Cabin Crew. The Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) recordings at KLIA on the 07 March 2014 were evaluated to assess the behavioural pattern of the Captain and the First Officer from the time of arrival at KLIA until boarding time. … On studying the Captain’s behavioural pattern on CCTV recordings on the day of the flight and prior 3 flights there was no significant behavioural changes observed. On all the CCTV recordings the appearance was similar, i.e. well groomed and attired. The gait, posture, facial expressions and mannerism were his normal characteristics. The First Officer’s movement captured on CCTV at KLIA on 07 March 2014 was observed. The Flight Officer’s behavioural pattern on CCTV recordings on the day of the flight showed no significant behavioural changes.”
The report states, that following a ground collision in Shanghai in 2012 a Boeing ground team had done the repairs needed to the right hand wing of the Boeing 777 9M-MRO.
The flight crew oxygen supply had been checked prior to departure, showed a pressure of 1750psi with no leaks and was topped up to 1800psi.
At the time of disappearance there was no sigificant weather and no lightning activity at the area of where MH-370 disappeared.
The report states that during the last 30 years in 257 accidents monitored by ICAO only 39 resulted in ELT transmitter detection, although 173 aircraft carried ELT transmitters.
Primary Radar returns linked to MH-370 plotted (Graphics: Ministry of Transport Malaysia):
The above extract from http://avherald.com/h?article=4710c69b/048 is indicative of deliberate evasion especially in this portion “Kota Bharu’s primary terminal approach radar captured a primary target……….”
There was no activation of code denoting emergency (7700), hijack (7500) or comloss(7600) etc. There was no attempt made to contact other aircraft (of which there were many) as per suggested procedure:
Make use of other aircraft to relay messages when operating at extreme range or when poor propagation is suspected.
If there is no suitable frequency on which to initially re-establish communications, then 121.5 MHz can be used. This frequency should also be selected if it is impossible to re-establish communications on any frequency so that any transmission from intercepting military aircraft might be heard.
http://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/Loss_of_Communication
One can conjecture from the evidence that this was someone intent on getting away by the fastest possible means any which way he could through minimal detection/subterfuge. And given prior knowledge of Malays air defense behavior, he gambled the faster he did it the better would be his chances of thwarting any interception, if it WERE to happen.
@DennisW – as per @ventus45
“Everything post IGARI (including the “supposed turnback”) is speculation, not “investigation”.”
The only game I have is to figure out all scenarios just post IGARI. What’s yours ?
@ DennisW
The media is definitely shaping the narrative using the pilot as scapegoat.
– pilot’s faceshot referred to above
– face of victims changed from Chinese to one Indian girl
– multiple pieces of debris implying violent impact with no chance of finding fuselage
– huge amount of money spent on Sea search leading to fatigue with story
@MH
Same approach here. I’ve looked at all the data, evaluated it (both physics and nuances), and have stated my scenario clearly. You just happen to disagree with it. That’s OK. I am not the least bit annoyed with people defending Shah. I am amused by it.
I would wonder how many students buying land in Australia just happen to have a Malay father who was captain on a Malay aircraft that vanished, and who also has a flight simulator with SIO coordinates on it, and who also was politically active in the PKR, and who also had a girl friend who was active in the PKR, and who also made politically charged statements on his Facebook account? There are probably thousands of people who fit that description. All perfectly innocent and normal stuff from which no definite conclusion can be drawn.
@DennisW, You wrote, “I don’t have a clue where the plane was at 18:22, and anyone who does make such a claim is blowing smoke.” What on earth are you talking about?
@Jeff
We (people outside the investigation) have no radar data at that time. What we have is a mislabeled graphic and hearsay.
@DennisW, No, we have credible professionals — the ATSB and the DSTG — telling us precisely where the radar returns showed MH370.
@Sajid UK, Sorry, I don’t know where it’s from–I was struck by it and put it on my desktop but didn’t make a note of where I found it.
@Jeff Wise
It was not their radar. Even the DSTG said they were given a single point. Why do you think that point is accurate based on the source of the info? A source who has consistently obfuscated this investigation every step of the way.
From the DSTG Book page 19.
“A single additional latitude and longitude position was reported at 18:22:12.”
@DennisW, Why would it not be accurate? It is you, I fear, who are “blowing smoke.”
@Rob, There is indeed a significant gap between the DSTG’s 1st arc and that calculated by just about everyone else. But they are playing a higher level of game, and I assume that their version is correct.
@Jeff
Why is the Lido Hotel graphic not accurate – and never corrected? There are a lot of inaccurate points in that image. In fact, all of them.
@all
Take a look at a wider range of images of Z, the media cherry picked the the ones that fit the authorized version of the story. Predominantly the larger image bank shows a range of a fun, nerdish guy who looks like he enjoys life.
https://www.google.com.au/search?q=zaharie+shah&biw=1280&bih=656&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&sqi=2&ved=0ahUKEwiP46WJ5ZzPAhWImpQKHcYyBncQ_AUICCgD
@Gloria
No baby pictures?
You remind me of the OJ Simpson attorney, Dershowitz, who moved to have testimony that OJ beat his wife to be ruled inadmissible, based on the fact that fewer than one in a thousand men who beat their wives go on to murder them. Of course, the Bayesian prior was a body of the wife, and another truth is that the batterer is the murderer when a wife turns up dead about 80% of the time.
The judge correctly ruled the wife beating testimony to be admissible, prejudicial as it was.
Just found Z’s Youtube channel and list of his subscribed channels.
Please see
https://www.youtube.com/user/catalinapby1
He liked TED, in particular Sir Ken Robinson’s amusing talks, his interest in balloon animal making and other how to videos is telling, a bit goofy, with liked channels including 5 crazy pranks to play on your friends and family. There is how to tune air conditioner to save electricity, barely anything political compared to all the other benign content.
@Dennis
There is clearly nothing there but it does show how media cherry picked the couple of images that might be interpreted as dark.
People may look at the links and get a broader picture, draw their own conclusions. Rather than sock puppets like you directing them to forgone conclusions based on hearsay
@Gloria
There is not a scrap of hearsay in anything I have posted. I have never made mention of pictures either. It is all out there to be found unchallenged in the public domain. You, on the other hand, would have us believe you can judge a man by his pictures. Do you have any idea how silly that is?
@Gloria
Gloria, please lose the “sock puppets”, not only does it stem from juvenile distinction but you have abused the heck out of it.
@DennisW – the top motive I can see was ZS reinvesting his retirement funds in Australia for his eventual immigration there. His disappearance maybe related if his funds were moved illegally by laws of My.
@ROB
FWIW, my 18:25 arc is about 30km West of the DSTG arc. I would take the “Pepsi Challenge” relative to my arcs with anyone.
@MH
Could very well be. All I am saying is that it reinforces a broader pattern of behavior. Perhaps it is, as you say, perfectly innocent.
It does, however, remind me of stock tips I get from time to time from people in a position to have insider information. I never act on these tips because SEC computer programs would flag me like roman candle, and I would be hauled to basement somewhere in San Francisco and water boarded until I told them why I woke up one day and bought a significant position in a company I displayed no previous interest in. These people take insider trading much more seriously than hijacking or Arab terrorists. As well they should.
So it is with the Malays. They need to take the gloves off and quit screwing around with Shah’s wife and girlfriend. Somebody knows something, and that somebody is not talking yet.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7t6voT6Rog