Malaysia 777 Missing

[Guest]

According to the cargo manifest, ( page 5 ) the flight had a container carrying over 2500 kgs of lithium ion batteries. It doesn't state whether or not the batteries were in something or by themselves.

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MSNBC/Components/Photo/_new/MH370CargoManifestandAirwayBill.pdf

Not quite, the consol was 2500kgs and the contents were shown as being packed in accordance with Pi II, so it is quite likely that the entire consol was not lithium batteries if they were indeed packed in accordance with the packing restrictions .

You can review the PI at : http://international.dhl.ca/content/dam/downloads/g0/express/shipping/lithium_batteries/lithium_ion_batteries_regulations.pdf

However since we are on the topic of Lithium Batteries you may find the following of interest.

Lithium battery shipments 'an unacceptable risk' on passenger jets, plane makers say

Move would only seek to ban shipments of bulk batteries, not travelers personal electronics

ThThe Associated Press Posted: Mar 10, 2015 9:24 AM ET

Aircraft makers are urging a ban on bulk lithium battery shipments on passenger planes, calling the threat of fires "an unacceptable risk," according to an industry position paper obtained by The Associated Press.

The International Coordination Council of Aerospace Industry Associations, which represents aircraft companies such as Boeing and Airbus, also is calling for stronger packaging and handling regulations for batteries shipped on cargo planes.

The International Federation of Air Line Pilots Associations, an umbrella group for pilot unions, joined the aircraft makers in issuing the paper.

Batteries can emit explosive gases

The paper cites recent testing by the Federal Aviation Administration that shows the batteries emit explosive gases when overheated. It's common for tens of thousands of batteries to be packed into a single shipping container. In the tests, a buildup of gases inside the containers led to explosions and violent fires.

The tests show aircraft fire protection systems "are unable to suppress or extinguish a fire involving significant quantities of lithium batteries, resulting in reduced time available for safe flight and landing of an aircraft to a diversion airport," aircraft makers said. "Therefore, continuing to allow the carriage of lithium batteries within today's transport category aircraft cargo compartments is an unacceptable risk to the air transport industry."

• Transport Canada probes shipment of dangerous lithium batteries via air cargo

The call for a ban applies to both lithium-ion and lithium metal batteries. Lithium-ion batteries are rechargeable and are used in products ranging from cellphones and laptops to power tools. Lithium metal batteries are not rechargeable, and are often used in toys, watches and some medical devices, among other products.

The International Civil Aviation Organization, a U.N. agency, decided last year to change its shipping standards to prohibit the shipment of lithium metal batteries aboard passenger planes, but not rechargeable batteries, which are shipped by air far more frequently. The aircraft industry paper obtained by the AP was drafted for presentation at an upcoming meeting of the agency's dangerous goods panel in April.

Just bulk batteries — not personal gizmos

The call for a ban is aimed only at cargo shipments, not batteries that passengers take on board planes in their personal electronic devices or carry-on bags.

George Kerchner, executive director of PRBA — the Rechargeable Battery Association, said in a statement that lithium-ion battery makers are "fully committed to the safe transport of lithium batteries." He said the battery industry trade association will continue to work with the aviation industry and government officials.

In recent weeks, two major U.S airlines — Delta and United — have announced they will no longer accept rechargeable battery shipments. The aircraft makers' call for a ban puts further pressure on international carriers around the globe to refuse battery shipments or appear indifferent to safety.

• Boeing 787 Dreamliners grounded over battery concerns

The shipments are less of an issue for domestic or regional carriers who generally fly smaller planes with less room for cargo. Also, the demand for air shipments of batteries tends to be for flights across oceans.

Passenger and cargo airlines generally fly the same types of planes, although they are configured differently inside. The fire protection capabilities of the planes were "developed considering the carriage of general cargo and not the unique hazards associated with the carriage of dangerous goods, including lithium batteries," the paper said.

Temperatures in some of the government testing reached nearly 1,100 degrees. That's close to the melting point of aluminum, about 1,200 degrees. The FAA tests show "the uncontrollability of lithium battery fires can ultimately negate the capability of current aircraft cargo fire suppression systems, and can lead to a catastrophic failure of the airframe," the position paper said.

U.S. and international officials have been slow to adopt safety restrictions that might affect the powerful industries that depend on the batteries. About 4.8 billion lithium-ion cells were manufactured in 2013, and production is forecast to reach 8 billion a year by 2025. A battery contains two or more cells.

Lithium batteries dominate the global battery industry because they're cheap to make, lightweight and can hold a lot more energy than other types of batteries.

Cargo airlines are continuing to transport the batteries even though they are believed to have either caused or contributed to fires that destroyed two Boeing 747 freighters in recent years, killing their pilots. The pilots of a third freighter managed to escape after landing in Philadelphia, but that plane was also destroyed.

UPS recently completed a round of tests on a shipping container that was adjusted to allow gases to escape while continuing to contain a battery fire. UPS officials said the company was encouraged by the results of the tests.

Pilot unions in the U.S. have been pressing for a single safety standard for both passenger and cargo airlines.

U.S. regulators' hands are tied by a 2012 law that Congress enacted in response to industry lobbying. It prohibits the government from issuing regulations regarding battery shipments that are any more stringent than standards approved by the International Civil Aviation Organization, a U.N. agency, unless an international investigative agency can show the batteries ignited a fire that destroyed an aircraft. That's difficult, since in the three cases thus far in which batteries are suspected of causing fires, the planes too damaged to determine the source of the blaze

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/lithium-battery-shipments-an-unacceptable-risk-on-passenger-jets-plane-makers-say-1.2988654?cmp=rsswere

[Guest]

Another tracking system, it will be interesting to learn (if the information is made public) which carriers will use the new system(s).

Rockwell unveils global aircraft tracking system

By: JON HEMMERDINGER

WASHINGTON DC

Source:

15 hours ago

One year after the disappearance of Malaysia Airlines flight MH370, avionics company Rockwell Collins announces it has developed an system that can help airlines cost-effectively track aircraft nearly anywhere on the globe.

Key to the new system, called ARINC MultiLink, is its ability to collect position data from a patchwork of six different sources.

Those include position information from air navigation service providers and data from aircraft communications addressing and reporting systems (ACARS), automatic dependent surveillance-broadcast (ADS- systems and automatic dependent surveillance-contract (ADS-C) systems, Rockwell says.

In addition, the company says MultiLink can process data from Rockwell’s air-to-ground high-frequency data link (HFDL) system. The company says it has modified HFDL, which formerly primarily transmitted non-real-time aircraft data for maintenance purposes, so that it can transmit real-time position data.

MultiLink merges the data, which can then be sent directly to airlines or incorporated into Rockwell products, says the company.

During a conference call with reporters on 9 March, Rockwell director Tim Ryan explains that different systems provide coverage over different regions of the globe.

For instance, ADS-C data can track aircraft positions across the Atlantic and Pacific oceans, while ADS-B data is available primarily for aircraft travelling over North America and Europe, plus over heavily-populated regions elsewhere in the world, Ryan says.

The company’s HFDL system can provide position reports in remote regions of Asia, Ryan says.

“Our ability to merge HFDL network performance data with multiple data sources results in a more robust and truly global aircraft tracking capability,” says Ryan in a media release.

Ryan and other Rockwell executives decline to say exactly how much the system will cost carriers, but note it can be tailored based on airlines’ needs.

For instance, some carriers may want to track only aircraft flying specific routes, while others might want to track only certain aircraft types, they say. The Rockwell executives decline to say if any airline customers have signed up for the system.

The launch of Multilink follows the November 2014 statement by an IATA task force that, in order to be effective, aircraft tracking systems needed to transmit position reports at least every 15 minutes.

The need for better aircraft tracking most recently gained traction following the 8 March 2014 disappearance of MH370.

The search for that Boeing 777 continues amid speculation that it may never be found.

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/rockwell-unveils-global-aircraft-tracking-system-409930/

[Don Hudson]

At least the industry is moving towards tracking systems instead of deployable recorders or real-time, full-time data transmission.

Skytrac, in Kelowna, produced a tracking system years ago and I can say from experience that it works extremely well. The user can chose polling times from 5" to 300". They can also do real-time data transmission which is useful for monitoring continuing airworthiness items such as engine parameters, g-loadings, flap overspeeds, etc. Data is transmitted only when parameter thresholds are exceeded.

[blues deville]

That is an interesting lead.

Or did someone drop this on a commonly walked beach hoping it would be found and cause a stir?

The investigators didn't seem to be too interested.

[DEFCON]

I acknowledge, there's no shortage of possibilities when it comes to fraudsters, but if the package did arrive on the beach honestly, it would be the only known physical evidence supporting the contention the aircraft actually did end up somewhere in the Indian Ocean.

[boestar]

And how is it possible that this is the ONLY debris found at all from the aircraft? If it escaped from the fuselage then surely other buoyant debris would have also made the journey.

[DEFCON]

I think that would be the obvious question Boestar and probably is the reason the investigators weren’t moved by its find. Other than perhaps making some believe the underwater search is worth continuing, the towelette doesn’t do much in the way of assisting in locating the aircraft.

A number of possibilities exist which could explain the towelette’s appearance on the beach. They might include the obvious, movement by tide, wind and current. A bird may even have picked up the package somewhere ‘out there’ and gave it up along his way in favour of something more tasty? I don’t have a clue what phase the birds are in down there, but other little pieces from the aircraft and its contents may later be found in nest structures. Simple random chance works too.

Edited to add:

If the pictures in the article are of the actual package, it’s hard to imagine it looking that pristine after a year of weathering at sea.

[blues deville]

Recent article. Have to agree that after a full year, something should be showing up on a beach.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3002130/Ocean-cleaning-operation-casts-doubt-search-MH370-right-place-Volunteers-Tasmania-say-wreckage-washed-area-now.html

[Woody Pusher]

Contrails have apparently been identified that supposedly show a more complex turn that commenced before NILHAM. In fact it is claimed that 3 separate turns took place and the aircraft finally passed through IGEBO heading 191T, then passed 30NM abeam and to the west of Banda Acheh.

Furthermore, the author - Dr. Bobby Ulich, claims to have identified contrails between 32.44S 87.00E and 34.11S 86.37E captured by the Electro-L-Satellite at 0000, 0030 and 0100 UTC on 8 March, 2014.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzOIIFNlx2aUWEtvSjBVS2JWX0E/view?pli=1

The visible image shown on the left, is in my opinion not oriented correctly, but its best left to everyone to form their own opinion on what they may or not see in all of these images.

I have repositioned the visible channel image and marked with a green ellispe what may be a contrail shadow as shown in the following link.

http://i62.tinypic.com/rlkn6a.jpg

Overall, I believe that the resolution of the satellite images is insufficient for the detection of contrails, unless there was sun shadow cast on a stratus layer immediately below. Nowhere in the paper has there been mention made of the OAT at the assumed levels and more importantly was the Relative Humidity high enough to support long lasting contrails.

The images shown of the Andaman Sea area contain many faint lines that could be other aircraft; so why haven't any of those traces been matched to known aircraft tracks? A lot more validation of the methods used needs to be made.

[Woody Pusher]

Satellite Detection of Contrails

This University of Copenhagen webpage provides some interesting detail on the subject.

[DEFCON]

Woody

Have you attempted to correlate the handshake data with the pictorial information put forward in the contrail theory?

[Woody Pusher]

Have you attempted to correlate the handshake data with the pictorial information put forward in the contrail theory?

No.

Ulich is associated with the Independent Group, and as they have collectively worked to validate the Inmarsat data, I am guided by his statement that the turns and climb that he has alluded to, "Fit the data". The originals of the images he has presented, must have a much higher resolution as he talks about a 4 pixel filter to reject noise in the Andaman Sea shots.

[DEFCON]

Fascinating.

I don't recall, but is there a time frame to complete the current search and has anyone suggested they'll proceed to the area defined by Dr. Ulrich next?

[Woody Pusher]

DEFCON;

This link to the ATSB MH370 Search Update will provide the current thinking on extending the search area.

Ulich's contrail derived position is a little further WSW, and unless the ATSB working group can validate his contrail theory, I doubt that there will any consideration given to going elsewhere.

[DEFCON]

Thanks Woody.

[moeman]

Related story, I suppose:

Malaysia Airlines has put its entire fleet of six Airbus A380s up for sale, along with four Boeing 777-200ER jets, as the airline ramps up its efforts to wipe out millions of dollars in ongoing losses.

http://www.ausbt.com.au/malaysia-airlines-puts-its-entire-airbus-a380-fleet-up-for-sale

[blues deville]

More details not discussed by the media.

http://www.conspiracyclub.co/2015/03/03/jacob-rothschild-sole-owner-of-semi-conductor-patent/

[inchman]

Very interesting.

Also on that site:

huge-black-cube-spotted-over-texas

and

Mummy Of An Ancient Astronaut Found By The KGB (VIDEO)

Neither of these have been on the FBI-controlled news either.

[mo32a]

More details not discussed by the media

Yeah, I wonder why.

[blues deville]

Very interesting.

Also on that site:

huge-black-cube-spotted-over-texas

and

Mummy Of An Ancient Astronaut Found By The KGB (VIDEO)

Neither of these have been on the FBI-controlled news either.

Pretty funny

How about this?

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/malaysia-airlines-plane-mh370-latest-conspiracy-theory-were-freescale-semiconductor-top-employees-1440097

[inchman]

According to Snopes:

• The 4 theoretical patent holders aren't even on the flight manifest.
• The patent would be held by the company which is publicly held, not its employees.
• Patents are property. Even if the patent was held by the employee/inventors, on the death of any holders, the value would fall to their heirs, not the other patent holders, unless specified in one's will.

All that BI is reporting is that a conspiracy site has put forward a conspiracy theory. It refers to "the site" and the "anonymous author on the site". The Fox News article referenced "by the report" about stealth technology was published 6 months before the disappearance that seems to add some substance, but has nothing to do with it and just describes how China had developed some prisms that bend light and radar (a few years after the US and Europe).

Other parts of the BI are more factual.... the employees were on their way to Taiwan to help improve efficiency at a plant there.

Finally... if you were developing classified military technology, why would you apply for a patent? .... that essentially gives your technology to the enemy. The reference to patents plays on the average person's ignorance of the patent process.

[blues deville]

Well maybe that floating black cube over Texas knows what happened.

[Don Hudson]

"Fox News"

Says it all.

Canada's version of Fox News failed. That also says a lot.

[vanishing point]

Black cube?

Come on....we all know what that thing is...

"Resistance is futile"

[J.O.]

Black cube?

Come on....we all know what that thing is...

"Resistance is futile"

Harper's campaign bus?