Twitter user @AirInvestigate just tweeted this picture. Thanks to reader Ventus45 for posting the link in comments. This presumable is part of the 1,000-page Royal Malaysian Police report that the Independent Group and others have been sitting on for months.
When Victor Iannello described the contents of this report to me, he implied that the only parts that were interesting were 1) the pages describing the flight simulator hard drive data points in the southern Indian Ocean, and 2) confirmation of the Penang cell-phone tower connection with Fariq’s phone. Apparently there was nothing in the rest of it that suggested any hint of what might have happened during the fateful final flight.
Here I’ve used Google Earth to drop a 32 km radius circle centered on Bandar Baru Air Itam on top of a map of MH370’s flight path taken from the “Bayesian Methods” e-book:
UPDATE 11/12/16: @Airinvestigate has posted a second part of the document on Twitter. He describes it as “parts clipped & redacted.”
Interesting to note that the Malaysian police are on the same page with many of those here in this forum in concluding that the plane was flying in excess of 500 knots and at an altitude of 35,000 to 45,000 feet–very clearly not the behavior of someone looking for an emergency landing spot.
Tower mapper cited above has no info (that I can see) about specific tower locations in Penang Is./Banda Baru Air Atim in particular.
Could the banking of the plane around penang have been to dip the cockpit Windows to get a line of sight for the phone to the ground?
@Ge Rijn your measurement of Penang Is seems to be a bit out. I have replotted 32km radius circle and it seems to correspond pretty well with Dennis W’s. kmz is here:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/0q23okft4y7sixw/32km%20radius%20circle%20centre%205.4N%20100.28E.kmz?dl=0
@Paul Smithson, Thanks. I’ve added an image to the post to show the location of the cell-phone tower range.
@Aaron, It’s a fool’s mission to establish a motive before establishing the facts of the case. DennisW has come up with a plausible motive, it’s true, but for his scenario to be true requires a set of actions to have occurred for which there is no evidence, namely a negotiation between Zaharie and the Malaysian government which was subsequently 100 percent covered up. I find it very hard to imagine the Malaysian government covering up a plot that they cooked up; I find it impossible to imagine them covering up an event which they didn’t plan and were completely surprised by.
BTW, when a person describes a motive as plausible, what they mean is, “I can imagine a person being motivated to do such a thing.” But how can you imagine what Putin would be motivated to do? You don’t know his deep goals, his perception of the world, his capabilities. It is becoming increasingly clear that the Russian leadership blasted another Malaysia Airlines 777 out of the sky four and a half months later. What was their motive for that? The fact that there was no easy-to-imagine motive led virtually every expert and government official to assume in the aftermath that the shoot-down must have been an accidental act carried out by rogue militiamen who didn’t know what they were doing. Only after the facts were meticulously pieced together did it start to become clear that the experts had been hornswaggled.
So back to MH370: we know that the experts have committed a $180 million failure in their search for the plane. Were they unlucky, or were they hornswaggled? I strongly suspect the latter.
@Paul Smithson
Your file doesn’t open in my dropbox but my (rough) measurement was only based on Penang’s surface area of ~1050km2 and its ~square shape which makes roughly 35kmx30km.
So it could well be off a bit.
DennisW’s radius is stretching almost two times the lenght of Penang.
Important in any case IMO is that MH370 approuched Penang from the east-east/north.
It would have entered the range of this base-station probably still flying well above mainland Malaysia. Certainly if DennisW’s radius is rightly projected.
With a groundspeed of ~15km/min it could have been connected to this base-station for more than a minute I assume maybe even two.
Enough to make a small phone call.
It’s a pity the report gives no more details.
@All. I know this is only anecdotal, but my own experience of sailing around European coasts with a cellphone is max distance that I ever saw signal indication was 15NM at which signal indicated was 28km and more typically I began to see signal at 10NM or less (<19km). This, obviously, at sea level. Since antenna pattern is designed for signal at ground level and not at elevation, I would expect chances of a connection at altitude to be very remote at 20+kms. Back in the day there was extensive discussion including expert comment about the technical feasibility of a cellphone connect at altitude/range over at Reddit. https://www.reddit.com/r/MH370/comments/22u62t/mh370_copilot_attempted_phone_call_over_penang/
Clearly there are rare occasions when a cellphone registration/connection occurs even at cruising altitude but it seems to me the odds of this are very low indeed.
I therefore speculate that if a connection was made the aircraft was:
a) likely much closer to the tower than the 32km max range.
b) likely at much lower than cruising altitude
c) to the south of the tower.
It won't have escaped your notice that Penang Int'l Airport is situated nearly due south of the tower, at a distance of 11kms. Which makes me wonder whether a descent for approach / attempted landing was made at Penang.
This might be difficult to reconcile, though, with the short strip of radar trace heading just S of W, lying approx 19kms from the tower that is shown in Fig 1.1F of F.I.; time at Pulau Perak (avg. ground speed required to get there on time).
edit:
max distance that I ever saw signal indication was 15NM (28km) and more typically I began to see signal at 10NM or less (<19km).
@All, I will probably get admonished again but the cell tower at banda baru air itam is literally 5km from where ZS grew up and went to school (Penang Free School). But then, I am just ignorant. Dennis, we need a probability recal:).
@Paul Smithson
I only see now Penang consists of two parts..
A ~700km2 part on the Malaysian mainland and Penang Island which is only 293km2.
So your radius and DennisW’s are obvious the right ones.
Like to mention that Banda Buru Air Atim is a bit more south than Air Atim (your center of radius-circle) and more under the hills on its south side.
I assume range is limited in this south direction due to those hills.
I see a GSM/UTMS antenna-section horizontal angle width of sending and recieving is 120degrees and the vertical angle width about ~45 degrees.
A rough calculation when the antenna is fixed straight verticaly on its mast brings me to a maximum altitude of ~10km on the edge of the range of 32km to be possibly detected for a brief moment.
The lower the plane was under ~10km the longer the connection could have lasted.
It was only detected by section 2 of the antenna. Probably this would be the 120 degrees east-south-east part of the antenna (as mentioned before).
I think it would be usefull to know how long the connection lasted.
IMO this could give an estimate on which altide MH370 was flying when it was detected by this base-station.
@Jeff
you said:
“So back to MH370: we know that the experts have committed a $180 million failure in their search for the plane. Were they unlucky, or were they hornswaggled? I strongly suspect the latter.”
I think neither “hornswaggled” nor unlucky. Ineptitude is my explanation. I strongly disagree with your priority relative to when motive should be considered. Means, motive, and opportunity are the cornerstones of the criminal investigative process. It was the refusal to consider motive which lead the so-called experts astray. In the ‘Duncan Days” motive was a taboo subject, and you were invited to leave at the mention of it. Of course, those were the giddy times when the IG was clustering their pins in a map.
Motive is a very good beacon relative to a being a sanity check regarding a theory of an action undertaken by a human being. Of course means, motive, and opportunity are insufficient to convict. That is where the preponderance of hard evidence comes in.
The debris finds are evidentiary, and rule out a Northern path as does the Inmarsat data. You have to toss a lot of lot of what we know in the toilet to cling to a Northern path scenario, and then you are still left to ponder what Putin’s motive could possibly have been.
http://edition.cnn.com/2014/04/14/world/asia/malaysia-airlines-plane/?hpt=bosread
If the above report is to be believed -odds are good – it was only Fariq’s phone that made contact with the tower and no call attempt was made.
Why on earth would it only be Fariq’s phone? Surely the protocol compatibility of his phone wasn’t the only one on the entire flight to be able to connect with the tower?
Am I missing something, because this seems huge if the above is correct. What are the scenario’s for this to occur?
@tr1ptych
As I linked in a previous post Celcom offers compatibility to 4 different protocals.
The article states his (co-pilot) was the only phone that connected and it’s part of the checklist all mobile phones in the cockpit are switched off.
If true this means all +200 mobile phones in the plane were switched-off too and only his was switched on at that time.
Very strange indeed.
It seems to me someone must have demanded everyone to switch-off their phones somewhere before reaching Penang Island.
There are always people who don’t switch-off their phones or forget it.
Celcom would have registered those connections too.
It probably also means the co-pilot was outside the cockpit when he switched his phone on again (and near a window to connect IMO).
Maybe he was the only one alive in the cabin by that time to be able to do that?
Smells like a hijack more and more to me.
By a hijacker or the captain.
FYI
http://www.sensorly.com/map/2G-3G/MY/Malaysia/Celcom/gsm_50213/Ipoh#q=kampung+kebun+nyiur|coverage
http://www.sensorly.com/map/4G/MY/Malaysia/Celcom/lte_50213/Ipoh#|coverage
___________________
Just so we are all clear on the flight path, perhaps it is best to
re-observe figure 2.1 of the pdf;
“Bayesian Methods in the Search for MH370”
http://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/978-981-10-0379-0.pdf
___________________
@Ge Rijn (said) “detected by section 2 of the antenna”
Actual report states;
“detection was made by sector 2 of BBFARLIM2 Base Station”
You have probably misunderstood a translation.
The report does not state it is a section of an antenna.
It could refer to a section of an actual physical antenna
(unlikely) of the base station,
or
‘sector 2’ could refer to a specific part-area (think like a pie
slice) of the total coverage area for that base station (more
likely)
or (..other readers may have more concise suggestions).
@Ge Rijn, “Celcom would have registered those …too”. Asking everyone to switch their cell phones off at take-off is SOP. The majority complies or put their phone in stand by. Just because Fariq’s phoe tried to make a connection, does not automatically mean other phones (that were left on) would also do so. People place them in their bags, in overhead compartments etc. As such, it does not have to be odd that it was just Fariq’s phone that tried to connect to the tower.
@buerninety
I assume the last; a pie-slice.
Those antennas are consisting of three seperate sector antennas covering 360degrees (120 each ofcourse).
In the meantime I made a simple scetch to show what I mean.
Have a good laugh but have a closer look too please 😉
https://www.dropbox.com/s/nui8tex0tsg6ygj/BBAAcellphone.JPG?dl=0
@Ge Rijn, I should be more precise, Fariq’s phone established a brief connection, but was not successfull. There is no evidence, that a live person was trying to establish that connection. All we know at this point, is that his phone briefly connected. This simply means, that other phones were not successfull in establishing a brief connection.
Ge Rijn said;
“It probably also means the co-pilot was outside the cockpit when he switched his phone on again”
I would suggest the co-pilot’s phone was more likely to be in the cockpit, (and possibly even placed on a ledge, in anticipation
of seeing the phone company designation and signal strength bars
appearing, when the aircraft had descended to a lower level).
Note the position of the clipboards on the right side;
http://www.airliners.net/photo/Emirates/Boeing-777-21H-LR/2037721
@DennisW, Frankly, I have no idea what “ineptitude” you are referring to. The seabed search was a stunning technological feat. Likewise, the analysis that led to it being targeted is impressively clever.
You have said many, many times that you think the analysis was flawed, that it insufficiently credited a slower, curving path to the northeast, but you have never made a detailed case to that effect, and indeed you could not, because you would fail.
The reason the plane was not found where the analysis suggested it would be is because (I believe) the inputs to the analysis were wrong. In previous posts I’ve pointed out the inconsistencies in the data, and the fact that all the data emerged from a box that had evidently been tampered with. Obviously I’ve been saying this for a long time, and have long hoped that once the search’s failure had become more manifestly obvious people would start to come around. We’ll see.
Having examined the inconsistencies in the data, it’s time to turn to inconsistencies in the debris. If the data was forged, as I suggest it might have been, then clearly the highjacking of MH370 accompanied by a mind-bogglingly sophisticated deception, and we should not be surprised to find debris in the aftermath. The question is, does close examination of the debris reveal inconsistencies? Watch this space…
P.S. no-one ever came back to me with an identification of
the mobile phone model that is being held here;
http://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/444413091866898432/DxKPh1Yn.jpeg
@Keffertje
What you say could sure be the case. The phones that were left ‘on’ could well have been not in a location that made it possible for them to connect (like you mention; bags, overhead compartments etc.).
IMO this is even more a compelling indication Faric switched-on his phone while consious in a place where connection was possible; near a window.
And no one else did in such a case.
All aboard could (would) have taken there phones out, switch them on and try to reach the outer world in an emergency.
No one did (if true what the article states). Only Faric.
This is quite telling IMO.
@David:
I am not sure I follow you but the blend of science, secular rule and religious traditions are bound to produce some funny-sounding situations. If there is a taboo in a confession against intrusion in the body in different ways (exists also among christians) then there might be situations where the elder of a congregation will need to persuade the members. The taboo is inverted to fit a need. The logic is that religion is used to shepherd a population, and the dogma of tradition is used to excert power and define people (for better and worse). The origin might be that something was held as dangerous at the point in time (eating shrimps offseason) when the religion was codified, but it lives on as one of “colours” that is recognizable, allows for identification and organises daily life. We do like this, this is what we are. In a society where religion still organises people like this, claiming to be an atheist can make you get some enemies in the countryside, probably, although Kuala Lumpur is surely modernised in many ways. But dogmatism will not be happy to let go of their rules, because that is how they keep their membership up — a membership you are born into and that won’t see many addiitions from adults (esp. if people don’t move between the federal states much, mostly from them to the big cities). Whether the elder “believes” in the recommendation or believes anyone believes is another matter. It is like a decree telling citizens that this is alright although scripture could be interpretated in the other way (and some orthodox groups might see a chance to get some followers from preaching for literal dogmatism).
@Ge Rijn, I fully agree with your statement that people would have tried to use their phones as well in an emergency situation. We don’t know if anyone did, all we know is no other phone was successfull in making a brief connection. Just Fariq’s phone. Does not mean others may not have tried. It is telling.
@Keffertje @buyerninety
We don’t know how ‘brief’ the connection was.
Details are not provided.
Depending on the altitude where MH370 entered the range of this base-station the connection could have lasted a few seconds up to ~2 minutes IMO.
@buyerninety
I think we must assume the co-pilot’s phone was switched-off in the cockpit according to checklist protocol before take-off.
It was switched-on again later.
I agree possibly in the cockpit when all other communication-possibilities where still down.
But this seems very unlikely to me regarding no other cellphones connected and there must have been at least one radio available in the cockpit even when the the left AC bus was isolated.
IMO there is only one solution in this case (if the article is correct).
Faric was in the cabin and was locked out.
@Jeff Wise
Coming back on your ‘political’ comment to me a few days ago.
I agree and thank you for it.
We can not afford to bring us down and show defeated for we are not.
Needed some time to pull myself together.
But you see I’m back 😉
@Jeff, I wonder who leaked this information? Perhaps lawyers of the NOK? I know they were going to receive documents.
@Ge Rijn, Thank you, it’s always great to see you here.
@Keffertje, I don’t know how it was leaked; the source on Twitter (Mick) was evasive. I wouldn’t be surprised if these things are released with some purpose in mind, but what that might be I can’t guess.
@matt:
In the aircomditioner videos (1-2) Z demonstrates his murder-weapon together with his wife / housekeeper (?) who carries a suspect t-shirt with print on its back.
He no doubt demonstrates the technical skills necessary but nothing to indicate a political message or concealed threat.
Since there is no dictatorship in Malaysia and free speech exists the need/motive for secret messages is missing too.
Nothing here to suggest premeditation or political extremism or insanity. Can only “support” suicide for personal reasons. Or did I miss something? Any suggestion for the next to analyse?
I do admit that the headlines in the window seal video borders to the probable. Esp the shadow-banking one (together with Bond and twilight). One will need to check if they belong to one and the same paper, one and the same day etc to decide if they ended up there by random or not. But go figure how he would have to behave and think and plan to run into those headlines, save them and realise how he would use them. That is even less probable than them ending up there by dumb chance. If they are from the same issue of one and the same paper it is weird, but not at all impossible. Less probable that he looked for them and found them in one and the same paper. Good thing he didn’t tape up the cinema pages, then we’d be discussing his involvement in MH17 and the annexation of Crimea.
@Jeff
“@DennisW, Frankly, I have no idea what “ineptitude” you are referring to. The seabed search was a stunning technological feat. Likewise, the analysis that led to it being targeted is impressively clever.
You have said many, many times that you think the analysis was flawed, that it insufficiently credited a slower, curving path to the northeast, but you have never made a detailed case to that effect, and indeed you could not, because you would fail.”
Then you have not been reading my posts. I have pointed out over and over again the mistakes that were made in defining the priority search area, and the foolishness of conducting an expensive underwater search based on the available information and the interpretation of the information.
As far as generating a slow curving path to the NorthEast is concerned, it would be a piece of cake. Not sure where the assertion to the contrary comes from.
You are fixated on your spoofed route to the North and the planting of debris to support that route. The fact that the underwater search has not found anything is not at all surprising, and it certainly does not imply the ISAT data has been spoofed or that debris has been planted.
@Keffertje, @Jeff:
Z’s medical records and some other documents have been said to be about to be released to the NoK.
There are to me so many “indications” (the Phone, the reboot and more) around in this case (select, in an otherwise inexplainable total communications’ silence) that I get the feeling it is staged. We need to be allowed to know more. How easy it would be for Z to make sure the FO’s phone connected if he planned for it. And if the FO tried to connect himself, why didn’t he text something, or is sms harder to get through?
@Johan, If you read Article 10 of MY constitution you will understand that there is no such thing as free dom of speech in Malaysia. Also, in 2008 the then PM made it very clear that the media should impose unabashedly to self censorship. MY is not a democracy and the government, also in Article 10, has imposed laws to protect themselves. Do not think for a moment that MY is a free country. It is not.
@Johan, The only information we have is that Fariq’s phone made a connection to a cell tower. It is logical to assume that Fariq would have turned his phone back on. Mine goes into locked mode after just 1 minute, so I am assuming it is Fariq that turned it on. How, why, where, we do not know.
[content deleted by JW] @Aaron, please do not troll me.
@DennisW, You wrote, “As far as generating a slow curving path to the NorthEast is concerned, it would be a piece of cake. Not sure where the assertion to the contrary comes from.”
You imagine it would be a piece of cake, because you have not tried it. What you will end up doing is generating a flight plan with arbitrary heading and/or throttle changes. Not only are these incompatible with even irrational human behavior, they are vanishingly unlikely from a probabilistic perspective, in that the hijacker would have to have arrived at, by sheer chance, the ones that just happen to match the straight-and-fast ping rings, out of the untold possible routes one could arrive at via arbitrary heading and throttle changes.
This is the essence of the “Bayesian Theory” paper, and I’m surprised that you’ve been unable to grasp it.
@Keffertje
How, why and where, we don’t know I agree.
But at least he switched his one on and no one else did.
If there was an emergency in the cockpit disabling all other communication-possibilities he could have been the one switching his phone on and trying to connect with his mobile phone if not being the flying pilot.
Very unlikely IMO but not impossible.
It just won’t explain no other phone connected and no one seems to have tried.
His phone must have been switched off before take-off. It was his first flight as a certified B777 pilot. He would not left his phone on under the authority of Zaharie anyway.
He switched it back on later for a very urgent reason only, I’m sure.
If he did it allready right after IGARI no base-station was able to pick-up his (or any other) phone signal due to altitude, or all phones where switched off or not able to connect during that time till reaching Penang Island (all unconsious perhaps).
His phone connected probably while MH370 descended towards Penang Island.
IMO there’s no other solution. He, or at least only his phone, was still consious in the cabin when this signal was detected.
It’s impossible from the cockpit regarding the SDU came back on line at ~18:25.
Impossible, it just won’t make no sence at all Fariq switching on his phone before this time in the cockpit.
To me it’s clear as a wistle Fariq was locked out of the cockpit.
Seeing through a window the plane was descending to a city.
He took the opportunity to switch on his phone and try to make a call.
The only one who tried and saw the city and island pass underneath him.
@Ge Rijn said;
..”this seems very unlikely to me regarding no other cellphones connected
and there must have been at least one radio available in the cockpit even
when the the left AC bus was isolated.”
Rather than asking why all the other postulated phones didn’t seem
to connect, maybe we should look at it, as to why only one phone
made a connection – the co-pilots phone possibly being at the
clipboard on the right window or more likely on the shelf atop
the MCP where it is probably against the front window. Any other
phones are not against a window by the time the aircraft passed
by Penang, because everyone was non-concious and passengers phones
were either in their owners laps, or more likely where any phone
ends up if you pass out – out of your hand and (down) onto the
floor, where the metal aircraft skin apparently shielded and
reduced somewhat any signal the phone might have tried to TX.
As to the handheld radio, if Shah was absent from the cockpit,
the FO would have had his oxygen mask on, and I doubt he would
have tried to transmit using the handheld whilst wearing that.
In addition, Kota Bharu tower was outside its’ hours of operation,
and Kota Bharu communications were also outside the hours they
are in operation.
That’s all for now, Cheers
@Johan
A text-message/SMS would take a lot more time than a direct call.
@Keffertje:
In that case I will retract that. I apologize. They are still having a parliament and elections and parties and political public culture (with a lot of people involved) although it might only work for some (the Malay, the Federal states etc). Otherwise Anwar and the opposition makes no sense (but as a simulation of opposition).
And there is still not much of a political message in the videos. Nothing. So there remains postnings on his FB page.
If you are right, he would sooner or later have met some real opposition from his colleagues and superiors. Isn’t he inviting trouble with his use of social media?
Has anyone ever considered the possibility that Fariq did it?
@buyerninety
As proclaimed the co-pilots mobile phone would have been switched off before take off and during flight if it was on this clipboard or not. It’s checklist-protocal.
He (co-pilot) would not left it switched on there.
I agree, IF it was switched on beside this window later, it had the possibility to connect. Especialy for it was the right faced window.
But as I stated, this seems all very unlikely to me. Not impossible but very unlikely regarding all the other circumstances.
The co-pilot would not left his mobile phone switched on before or after take-off on that clipboard location doing the checklist with Zaharie.
@Gysbreght
You missed some posts from me some time ago I guess…
No one responded so no problem.
It seems more unlikely regarding this new information but as then, no one seems to consider Fariq as a possible culprit.
He was a certified B777 pilot too afterall.
His mobile phone connecting as the only one aboard could mean he was the only one alive aboard also at the time.
At least he was the last sign of ‘life’ on MH370.
@Jeff
We (you and I) are not getting anywhere. Suffice to say that lots of people (including me, Victor, SK999,…) have published flight paths that are:
1> compatible with ISAT data
2> have minimal or no arbitrary speed/track changes
3> lie outside the area being searched
In fact it is this multiplicity of possible paths that makes the expense of the underwater search so questionable.
Additional constraints – drift analytics, bioforensics, possible motives,… are needed to disambiguate the possible terminal locations. I don’t believe that is going to happen.
@Gijsbrecht, I have given Fariq a lot of thought as well and have not ruled him out entirely.There is so little information on him thats its very hard to form any theories to his persona.
@Gysbreght
I am in the same boat as Keffertje (above). While Fariq cannot be ruled out, I can’t dig up anything at all that would point in his direction.
@DennisW
Actualy if you take the latest drifter based drift analizes for what they are, they are in a 5 degree latitude range along the 7th arc between 35S and 30S.
Maybe some degrees north but not much else is possible IMO regarding the debris/drift data till now.
The width depends on a glide, phugoid or dive reaching a max of 100 miles from the 7th arc max in case of a glide.
Any descend between 0:11 and (after) 0:19 would be to the east, north-east or south-east.
This would limit the possible crash-area in radius from zero 00:19 on between 35S and ~30S from the 7th arc.
Still a tremandous area but when concentrating on rough statistical probabilities one could choose for the middle of the road.
~32.5 South and a phugoid over 50 miles.
To be certain I would take the glide on 100 miles.
But for 50 miles I could settle at this time.
@ Jeff Wise
If the source of this image is Mick Gilbert, then it’s interesting that he wrote a paper recently on windshield breach of MH370.
Perhaps the cellphone connected with the tower because it was thrown out of the aircraft.
@ Jeff Wise
… Or perhaps the cellphone was turned on and flushed out of the airplane.
@CliffG
Yes, through the toilet. Trolling nonsence.
I’m off to bed reading a good book 😉
@Johan
We simply see things differently. Very differently. Fair enough. Until you come to terms with the beyond obvious STAGING of the window seal video, we have little to discuss. Respectfully.
The idea that you believe he didn’t carefully select and frame these headlines is bewildering?
But this is how you see it…
@Ge Rijn
Glad to see you back. I appreciate your objectivity.