Mick Rooney, aka @Airinvestigate, has released further documents from the secret Royal Malaysian Police investigation into the disappearance of MH370. I asked him if he could tell me anything about how the documents were sourced or why they are being released now, but he says that he is bound by an oath of confidentiality not to discuss further.
Those familiar with recent events surrounding the case might be able to hazard a guess.
Here are the files:
data-from-flight-simulator-computer
This 14-page document includes technical information about the data found on Zaharie’s flight simulator hard drives. It appears that the machine crashed multiple times in the months before MH370’s disappearance. The document also includes a log of when the flight sim was played, the last time being on March 15, 2014, a week after the plane disappeared (presumably this reflects activity by investigators.) Prior to that, the sim had last been played on February 20, two weeks before the disappearance. This suggests that Zaharie was not using his flight simulator to practice vanishing in the weeks before his disappearance.
data-from-prelim-exam-report-translated-from-malay
This 7-page document seems to have been machine-translated from Malay, and appears to describe a preliminary investigation of the computer hard drives by a Malaysian police technician. It lists the various hard drives found with the flight-sim computer. Among the information recovered were passwords and account information for Zaharie’s hobbies and interests, as well as information about an online bookstore, Zaharie’s various social media accounts, and online shopping. Of particular note, investigators found a deleted folder labeled “777TwinTower” which contains pictures of a Malaysia Airlines plane flying toward the Kuala Lumpur city center. Given widely held suspicion that Zaharie took MH370 on a suicide flight, and that fact that terrorists flew two planes into New York’s twin towers in 2001, this will no doubt raise eyebrows. However, this document notes that: “These images have been taken from the computer screen to play a simulated airplane. The assessment believed that the owners of these computers have taken one of those images for the purpose of being used as an icon on the account.” That is to say, an innocent interpretation of this folder and its contents would be that Zaharie, a proud Malaysian 777 pilot, wanted to create an image of his plane flying past an iconic Malaysian landmark.
After a section discussing the seven deleted points from the flight simulator, which have been much discussed in this forum, the report concludes with a brief Summary: “The results of the examination of the goods were found that no any activity outside the common. The overall computer use to host gaming Flight Simulator only. Nor has any information source which directly indicates there any plans to eliminate MH370 found.”
This 31-page document appears to contain all of the saved data in the seven above-mentioned flight simulator points. Hopefully independent flight simulator experts will look it over and render an opinion for the rest of us who lack the expertise to properly grapple with it.
Overview
How does this new information alter our understanding of the MH370 mystery?
For me, it is noteworthy that so little incriminating information was found on any of Zaharie’s computers, even (especially) among the deleted files. The way we use computers these days, they are essentially extensions of our brains. Any passing fancy that drifts through our head is likely to be reflected in our internet search history, in notes we write to ourselves, and so on. When Andreas Lübitz was in the throes of his final mental dissolution, he spent a great deal of time online reading about mental disorders and researching ways to commit suicide. It’s all right there to be seen. Yet on Zaharie’s computer there is nothing. Indeed, he seems to have been spending his time prior to the disappearance doing things like making instructional DIY home-repair videos and pretending to fly an antique DC-3 airplane. Not, it would seem, the behavior of someone contemplating his imminent extinction.
In the light of this newly released information, it is easier to understand why the Malaysian police came to the conclusion that nothing about Zaharie’s behavior points to him being the culprit.
@MH:
My thought was sending a message not to marry Malaysia with Kazakhstan… Another former Soviet Republic.
@MH:
And there is obviously a lot of money in Malaysia. Maybe someone is piling up duty.
@Johan – maybe Russia was expecting MH370 to land in Kazakhstan but however that was diverted as well. Russia could have gotten the short end of this deal so took revenge on MH17. I think I heard that MY supplied alot of money to gain access to the remains of the MH17 accident… maybe this was to calm down Russia from further troubles.
@MH:
Hopefully govts. don’t use airliners in that way. And not much in terms of single money transactions can’t be solved with the state budgets and/or a couple of investment funds and banks.
I have a hard time getting a grip on Z’s FB page. My last post on that may be wrong as to when he actually stopped posting. Political content and social comment seems to continue to 28 May 2013. I will look at it again when all systems work.
@Keffertje@TBill
Thank you for your comments. This is purely speculative “bouncing ideas in the dark” as you eloquently say. I agree with what you point out about the frenetic nature of the first part of the flight and accessing the E/E bay. Really it almost needs someone there prior to PAX loading. This would require high level involvement.
Also there is this weird disconnect between the polish of the disappearance of 9M-MRO (if indeed it is a hijack) and inconsistencies in the debris field and ISAT data which is difficult to explain.
FB: it figures, through my Iphone I haven’t had access to Z’s political postings. Only cooking and tech c:a 10
postings (one is the political (go and vote!) 4th of May post I mentioned above) until 31 May. On my stationary computer I can see also the 370 some posts on politics until end of May. That’s another picture.
It should be said that there are some postings here of a more private character as far as I can judge, and that seemingly most of the political posts are commented upon by airline people and other friends. As if these were not published to the full public originally (on the other hand, how many will comment on or even find someone’s FB page?). So the picture is perhaps not exactly as clearcut as I first thought.
@SteveBarrat
“… I agree with what you point out about the frenetic nature of the first part of the flight and accessing the E/E bay. Really it almost needs someone there prior to PAX loading. This would require high level involvement.”
Why would accessing the E/E bay prior to pax loading require high level involvement? A 777 parked on an apron is not Fort Knox, at the time of the accident the external access hatch was a pull and turn mechanism, no lock or safe guard was there. I dont know if it is still the same, hopefully not. The only obstacles for accessing the E/E bay via the external access hatch were the airport perimeter safety measures/ access to the parking place of the aircraft and about 3.5 meters height distance between apron and the aircraft fuselage.
@Steve/RetF4
What tends to get lost when generating possibilities such as accessing the EE bay is why someone would do it in the first place. Planes are not hijacked for cargo or PAX. Without an overarching motive no scenario is worth considering IMO. It is the “why” that is the litmus test for speculation.
@DennisW, the “primacy of motive” is a lamentably widespread fallacy; it’s what allowed the Russians to escape blame for MH17 for over a year as experts, analysts and pundits all swore up and down that the shoot-down must have been carried out by rogue militants, because Russia had nothing to gain from such an act.
Moral of the story: you can’t imagine what other people will or will not do, what their motives may or may not be, what they will feel to be in their interest or not in their interest. Especially if you don’t even know who they are.
@Keffertje
I am interested in what we know about the early flight meal service schedule. Many people say everyone was sleeping on the MH370 red eye, but the diversion happened so early in the flight, one would think the drink service was just getting started. But I do not know the typical habits on this flight.
@Jeff
Well, you certainly cannot accuse anyone officially involved in the MH370 mystery to be distracted by considerations of motive. Quite the opposite. Motive has been avoided like a virus.
Your post coupled with the search results to date proves my point beautifully. I am sure that isn’t what you intended.
@DennisW, You lost me.
@all
At daughters house in SLO. She is off to teach a class, but left me with a “pointer problem” she intends to use on a quiz today.
Little does she know I was in college when pointers were invented by Bud Lawson circa 1964. So happy to just be a all part of it all.
@TBill, Typically, flight crew get up about 20 minutes into a flight to start drinks and dinner service at which point the ovens are turned on. Sometimes they do this before take off to speed things along. You can typically choose a quick dinner or the longer version. Many people, because it is a red eye and they go to work when they arrive, will put their blinders on and ear plugs in and go to sleep. Others will stay awake the whole night, read, watch movies, drink, eat and grab a shut eye the last couple of hours or not at all. The 1st 2 hours of the flight is usually busy and noisy after that the cabin settles down and lights go off. At the time of IGARI, the service would have been in full swing, people being served their dinners both in business and economy.
@DenniwW, Yeah being part of it all is what matters most 🙂 Don’t mess up her house like you do your truck! And I hope your parked in the back 🙂
Hi Everyone!
Thanks for the continued hard work. I have seen some chatter about other 3 other cell call attempts by other crew on the flight. Has anyone seen or heard of this?
@all
I am noticing MH370 seemed to take off a bit early as 0035 is the schedule departure and 0025 is apparently when push back was requested in the FI. FI makes no comment on the actual time vs. scheduled time.
@ChristineL
Over on Reddit there is some brief discussion on the point of other cell phone calls, but as far as I know it is not getting much traction. At the time of the accident (2014) there were some (unclear) press reports that are still hanging out there I think is where the speculation started.
DennisW
Posted November 16, 2016 at 11:23 AM
@Steve/RetF4
What tends to get lost when generating possibilities such as accessing the EE bay is why someone would do it in the first place. Planes are not hijacked for cargo or PAX. Without an overarching motive no scenario is worth considering IMO. It is the “why” that is the litmus test for speculation.
Dennis by all respect, the motive is still a canondrum until more facts are known. You think otherwise, as we all know and also most respect.
But let me ask you an honest question. What would this blog and this discussion gain, if we all unisono would agree on your motive and your scenario? End of discussion? Or would such an agreement help in finding the wreckage?
The diversity of the discussion is the life of this blog, and every scenario and every motive presented until this day has its own inconsistencies with some of many issues. While technical issues, suicidal crewmembers and political statement has been discussed to the greatest detail, discussion about intentional act by third parties has been neglected and has been branded as conspiracy theories.
Sometimes I wonder why.
@RetF4
Things happen for a reason whether attributable to the laws of physics or human action. To say that pondering what that reason might be somehow dilutes the focus of this investigation is preposterous. It is a parallel and worthwhile pursuit.
I do agree that if even the reason for MH370’s vanishing was known, it may not aid in finding the wreckage.
For some time now, iI have come to believe that the initial flight path was the result of a human choice, and was subsequently modified as a result of unplanned events.
I think we do have a high degree of confidence in the aircraft location at 17:52 when the cell registration occurred, and at 18:25 shortly after the last radar contact at 18:22. Beyond that we have reasonable confidence the plane was headed generally South at 19:40. There really is not much more anyone can say.
Personally, I put mechanical failure and hijacking very low on the list of possible scenarios. The image of someone accessing the aircraft on the tarmac, using a ladder to climb into the EE bay, and subsequently pulling the ladder in behind them or the ladder being carried off by an accomplice is not easily formed in my mind.
Is it OK to speculate on that possibility? Sure. I think it is also OK to wonder why someone would do that.
@Jeff
…”Especially if you don’t even know who they are.”
may be good opportunity to search for it?
A bto value they haven’t shared shows the plane wasn’t even on this planet.
Don’t take my word for it.
@trond – maybe it landed
@MH
Well Boeing registered it landed, but that wasn’t until MH370 reached the 7th arch.
@trond. Just to clarify – maybe it landed twice at least.
@keffertje
“Typically, flight crew get up about 20 minutes into a flight to start drinks and dinner service at which point the ovens are turned on”
I don’t where you got 20mins into a flight from..
I fly long haul at least 2 times a year over the past 8 years..
Unless the plane is experiencing turbulence
Cabin crew is up and about around 10mins into the flight than seat belt signs off for passengers shortly after..
Important thing to note about a possible passenger wanting to access the avionics bay via the hatch..
Cause the hatch location is just before flight deck door..a passenger who was not seated in business class trying to gain access would surely draw attention..
So maybe it’s important to look at who was seated in business class on MH370..
@Aaron, For me its 20 minutes average. I fly long haul weekly. Maybe it differs depending on the airline., idk.It’s not important, IMO.
@Aaron, Nikolai Brodsky, a 43-year-old Russian from Irkutsk, was sitting in seat 3K, about 15 feet from the E/E bay hatch. An interesting character, I spent a fair bit of time tracking down friends and relatives and wrote about him in my book. He was a timber-products exporter whose hobby was technical deep gas-mixture diving under the ice of Lake Baikal — his friends describe him as a real MacGyver type.
With regards to getting through the hatch while no one was looking, it’s worth considering how a good pickpocket is able to make off with watches and wallets without their owners noticing. A subtle bump, a light touch while brushing past — ‘sorry, excuse me!’ — a fleeting distraction enough to take the subject’s attention away for a few seconds, an action that otherwise would be obvious goes undetected.
@Jeff Wise
Thanks for that info..Did I read somewhere here that the passenger from the Ukraine was seated near SDU? Which you wrote?
If so is there any connection with these two guys?
I,e Could they have been working together?
@Jeff Wise
Found this bit of info…
“Have been looking hard and can’t find out who the 2 Ukranians on board MH 370 were.. Can anyone shed any light? Two 45 year old guys… Military experience? What were they doing in KL and where were they heading?
This was only in Feb…
ISTANBUL — A passenger aboard a commercial airline flight from Ukraine to Turkey tried to hijack it to Sochi, Russia, on Friday after the Winter Olympics started. He threatened to set off a bomb with a cellphone if his demands were not met, but the crew fooled him — and the other passengers — into thinking the plane had landed in Sochi when it was actually in Istanbul, passengers and the authorities said.
The man, a 45-year-old Ukrainian, was seized by special security forces as the Turkish aircraft, a Pegasus Airlines Boeing 737-800 with 110 passengers, was being evacuated at Sabiha Gokcen Airport, according to Huseyin Avni Mutlu, the governor of Istanbul.
What age was the guy who tried to hijack the plane and take it to Sochi….?
Yep 45 as well….”
https://visuomenedotcom.wordpress.com/2014/07/24/missed-plane-mh-370-who-are-oleg-chustrak-and-sergii-deineka-from-ukraine/
@Aaron
Makes me glad to have passed through my mid-life crisis without incident. Did not even fall prey to the Porsche syndrome like many of my colleagues.
Jeff (and all),
Do we have any idea if the cell records of the passengers were analyzed as well? This seems to me to be a pretty important piece of information. Here’s why:
If I’m understanding the leaked report correctly, the co-pilot’s cell didn’t actually make a call, it merely pinged off a cell tower, correct? Are we to believe that of all the cell phones on that flight, the co-pilot’s phone was the only one that pinged off a tower during the entire flight? That seems very unlikely, unless the passengers had turned off their phones and were oblivious to the fact that the plane had been diverted. But once the plane started travelling over land again, one would suspect that confusion would be spreading throughout the cabin, and at that point I suspect passenger phones would be getting turned on.
So if passenger phone records were searched, and none connected with cell towers, this might point to a scenario where the passengers were no longer conscious when the plane tracked back over land.
If passenger phone records weren’t checked, I would love to hear that explanation.
@Dennis
ROFL!!!
@BigMac, That’s an excellent question. How confident are we that the police gathered all the cell-phone information for all the passengers and ran it against all the different carriers’ records? I mean, it’s quite plausible that they were looking extensively at the pilot and first officer, since they were prime suspects, but were they looking as carefully at all the others? Not long after the disappearance, search officials said that they coordinated with all the passengers’ home countries, and all had been cleared, but none of the survivors’ next-of-kin that I talked to said that they were contacted by investigators.
@Aaron, Good find, about the Ukrainian would-be hijacker! As far as the guys in the back go, yes, there’s no reason they couldn’t have been working with Brodsky. And yes, they were sitting under the SDU. I spent even more time looking into their background than Brodsky’s, and to make a long story short, it’s just a fog.
@BigMac
I’d say we do not know. Believe MY says the flight crew phones were checked. There were press reports of another possible crew connection, but this is unsubstantiated.
Quite a few folks on both sides of the debate (mechanical vs. human diversion) theorize cabin depressure scenario at IGARI. So that is one common ground.
Then there is an alternate negotiation theory that keeps the PAX alive for safe return pending outcome of negotiations.
Some also feel the INMARSAT pings “accuracy” suggest the plane was not depressured, otherwise the ping rings might not line up so perfectly if the SDU pinger crystal had been upset. Notice how the first ping ring at 18:25 is in quite good agreement with the 18:22 last radar fix.
Bottom line we do not have all the info yet. Hopefully they dribble more out.
@Aaron:, @DennisW:
The key fact around that guy might the characterization by a witness: “in an advanced state of drunkenness”.
According to Artem Kozlov’s own claims was he a protester against Yanukhovic’s sudden political turn towards Moscow and the detainment of regime protesters in Kiev. He aimed to catch Putin and Yanukhovic at the Olympics and perhaps see a game or two while he was there (no, the latter was my joke). Officials didn’t regard the incident as too serious and definitetly as an individual stunt. He faced (as of 9 Feb 2014) twenty years in prison according to Turkish law.
Z was 48 by the way, and had his (or one of them) quest for renewed weightlessness (or what we should call it) already well behind him — the paragliding accident.
Just spit balling here, but assuming passengers cell records were checked, and none hit any towers, that may play into the investigators understanding of what happened. If all of the passengers were thought to be unconscious as early as the initial return over Malaysia, it’s quite possible that this factored heavily into their decision to lean towards a ghost flight scenario w/ uncontrolled descent.
@BigMac, Well, if they’d left their phones on (as surely some passengers must accidentally do on every flight) then you’d expect the towers to detect them regardless of whether they were unconscious/dead or not. Unless the phone had to be held next to a window, as some have suggested? It’s confusing.
@Johan
Z was 53 when he disappeared. A dangerous age
@Jeff:
Many non-Malay pax will have had phones that would not work in Malaysia, right? Did that regard simplest form of connect too? (The FO kind?)
Others would have had their phones tucked away, so there might have been a considerable drop in rate. But a complete silence from boarding to Penang as has been suggested sounds like an episode in a very poor tv-series.
@ROB:
Ha ha ha. My mistake. Someone else must have been 48. Thanks.
@BigMac @ChristineL
Further up on this page ChristineL asks: “Thanks for the continued hard work. I have seen some chatter about other 3 other cell call attempts by other crew on the flight. Has anyone seen or heard of this?”
The “chatter” apparently originates from Simon Gunson who claims 3 crew cell phone calls came in during the fly back over MY, with one call being a distress call, that allegedly a U.S.A. station picked up. The alleged distress call is not a new report, it was rehashed a while back on Reddit.
Apparently thus far the U.S.A. has not commented on this report (true or false?). But its old news. What might be new news is SimonG says the distress call came in over Gerik, Malaysia.
@TBill, That explains a lot. Simon Gunson, whoever he is, has dedicated himself to energetically spreading misinformation about MH370. I don’t know what his motive is but his actions go beyond well-intentioned incompetence; he is actively and deliberately making stuff up and trying to get people to believe it.
@Jeff:
While at it: I haven’t heard from the theory of major pilot/airline error before Igari in a while, i.e. something like pilots discovering that everyone in the cabin is dead or that something with substantial deadly consequences happened that obviously was the responsibility of the Captain or MAS (and why not, something that one pilot did and the other waged to report). With pilot suicide as a decision taken in the air. Would it be technically possible to do away with a considerable share of the pax by mistake before Igari? Anyone?
@Johan
That’s absolutely no problem. Simon Gunson can make things up, but the rest of us have to keep to the script 😉
@Jeff Wise
“@BigMac, Well, if they’d left their phones on (as surely some passengers must accidentally do on every flight) then you’d expect the towers to detect them regardless of whether they were unconscious/dead or not. Unless the phone had to be held next to a window, as some have suggested? It’s confusing.”
No expert there, but signals from the cabin could have been jammed by some device, while the cell of the Co was unaffected in the Cockpit.
@Johan
The Helios 522 case where the inexperienced pilots failed to realize the cabin pressurization was set wrong. But this caused a lot of alarms, calls to the tower, and ACARS equipment overheat messages, O2 masks to pop down, and does not seem to explain MH370 very well.
Perhaps it is now time to go back to “square one”.
I think we all agree, that for all practical purposes, the entire “search” is based “entirely” on the ISAT data, and the assumption(s) that it is both genuine, and accurate (at least BTO wise).
The entire world’s main stream media, and those in this forum (and others), have “accepted” the “veracity” of the ISAT data, “unquestioningly”, virtually as “an article of faith”.
The so-called “corroborating” data, (the radar data and Hamid’s phone data) are essentially only “bit players”, intrinsically of no use in and of themselves, other than to “lend credence” to the ISAT data.
In essence, it all hinges on the ISAT data.
Without the Isat Data, we have no “real” clue, and thus no “real” search, and even that, is “rubbery” at best.
Now, in the “early weeks”, Inmarsat publicly stated (a number of times) that they had been “concerned” that they “may” have been “spoofed”.
So far as I am aware, there has never been any “emphatic” statement “from Inmarsat themselves”, that has nullifiied that “concern”.
Further, so far as I am awarer, the only “official” government “asseertions” that MH370 went to the SIO have been:-
(in order):
(1) Jay Carney (then Obama).
(2) Najib then
(3) Abbott.
The US NSA then “classified” everything they have on MH370, rejecting all FOI requests.
In Australia, when Annette (Aussie500) on twitter (https://twitter.com/aussie500?lang=en) placed FOI requests on the RAAF, for the photos and data taken / gathered during the P3 search missions, only a limited set was released, and “acces was denied” to what appears to be a lot more.
If you look at her Dropbox Link:-
(https://www.dropbox.com/sh/kolkrm0a913kotc/AADPMJelkCOHzg7tVBm2FP9Wa?dl=0))
you will see the following FOI related files.
(A) (https://www.dropbox.com/sh/kolkrm0a913kotc/AAByUceJkRd5sJNVRQic9pvNa/RAAF%20images%20info.txt?dl=0)
(B) (https://www.dropbox.com/sh/kolkrm0a913kotc/AADpKIPqj3YQPbJ2tZBESRaoa/FOI%20280%201516%20-%20Schedule.pdf?dl=0)
(C) (https://www.dropbox.com/sh/kolkrm0a913kotc/AAD9_Ka0cBiwMkBO2usb2izua/Final%20Statement%20of%20Reasons.pdf?dl=0)
(D) (https://www.dropbox.com/sh/kolkrm0a913kotc/AACkHkRS9tlPtd0SJSHUgi2Ga/ADF-FoI-Aussie500.xlsx?dl=0)
QUESTIONS:
(1) Has the Chineese Government ever “publicly” stated that they “accept” the ISAT Data ?
(2) Has the Chineese Government ever “officially” said that they “accept” that MH370 “did actually go to the SIO” ?
(3) If not either (1) or (2) – Why Not ?
Should we therefore turn our attention to finding out “why not” ?
Since, Reference C above, quite clearly indicates, that the RAAF are withholding considerable additional photos and data from the P3 search missions, it begs the question as to the “real reasons why” they should do so, or even want to do so.
Should we thherefore not “seriously persue” the RAAF for those additional photos and data ?
In addition, it is quite obvious that the ATSB has them, but they have said nothing.
Perhaps we should “turn the screws” on “BOTH” the RAAF and the ATSB to release “ALL” P3 mission “collections”
“That explains a lot. Simon Gunson, whoever he is, has dedicated himself to energetically spreading misinformation about MH370. I don’t know what his motive is but his actions go beyond well-intentioned incompetence; he is actively and deliberately making stuff up and trying to get people to believe it.”
Like to add if you disagree with his wild theory..Simon will get very argumentative..
He still thinks MH370 flew over the mainland of Indonesia..Which is totally absurd!..
Indonesian military radar near Banda Aceh may not of had no one operating it at the time..But there is no way military radars on the mainland were not operating..
Also Jeff says misinformation..
Simon claims MH370 impact was further south and Chinese satellites spotted objects of various sizes.. Simon claims Aust did not send planes to that area to investigate..When in fact they did!
Further more I thinks it’s shameful that a person would try and get ppl to contribute money to a fund to search that area..Given facts presented are misleading..
Last I heard is that group withdraw the project..No surprise there..
@Big Mac, Here is a link. Surveys reveal 30pct leave their phones on. However, this was a red eye and it is so irritating when your battery goes dead because you left it on and its roaming to no end. So, I would think a lot of people had their phones off. None the less its a given that many would not have turned it off and stored them in bags, overheads or in the back seat pocket (including ipads). Fariqs phone was detected which means it was on. Though he was a young puppy still and perhaps not always following the rules, I doubt that he would have left his phone on during take-off. But he turned it on at some point that we know . http://edition.cnn.com/2014/04/14/tech/mobile/phones-in-flight/