<p>Okay - who is going to fly with me when we go on vacation next month? Busdriver - any chance you fly to the Caribbean? I really feel for those families - this must be unbelievably agonizing. </p>
<p>I keep wondering why the airplane is built so that the transponder (if I have the technical term correct), which constantly identifies the plane’s location, CAN BE TURNED OFF? Why would the airplane be designed and built that way? Why would a pilot ever want or need to turn it off? Why wouldn’t it be in a location or a black box that cannot be tampered with in any way?</p>
<p>From Aviation Stack Exchange website:
"… when the aircraft is at the gate, the transponder is switched off to reduce the amount of radio transmissions. 100 aircraft on the surface of a large airport can produce a massive Radio Frequency noise, which negatively affect radar systems. When taxiing, radar replies are useful for aircraft identification, hence the transponder is switched on at pushback or engine start. "</p>
<p>Sure, I’ll fly with you to the Caribbean, eyemamom. Though I’d have to be a passenger, I don’t fly that route. I’m convinced someone would have a hard time hijacking an airplane I was on (unless I was asleep or they killed me quickly). I always sit in an aisle seat, as close to the front as possible, ready to trip, attack or stop anyone I think is a threat to the cockpit. I honestly don’t know how someone could actually hijack an airplane nowadays with all those passengers. People realize hijackings are usually suicide missions now, and would not be passive like before. I don’t know that someone could get away with it unless they were already in the cockpit, or found a way to get in there quickly before people noticed.</p>
<p>I am sure there are ways to disable passenger oxygen, while still having oxygen masks (maybe even walkaround bottles) in the cockpit. People could be incapacitated within seconds at a high altitude, and not even realize what was happening.</p>
<p>I think they are guessing about everything now. Releasing every single possibility without good data and hard facts. I doubt this is some sort of James Bond scenario where they poisoned everyone and jumped out of the airplane. I also doubt they are going to find anyone from that airplane alive.</p>
<p>Perhaps the transponder can be set up to:
- Automatically turn on when the aircraft is moving with the engines on.
- Not turn off until both the engines are off and the aircraft is stopped.</p>
<p>That would generate too many signals when the airplane is in the airport range like snlmom mentioned above. And it does not help when the airplane engines stop after an accident.</p>
<p>The reality is, transponders are turned on during the aircraft preflight (within an hour before push), and turned off during postflight (after engine shutdown). If they were turned on and off based upon when the engines are started and shutdown (like our flight data recorders), they would probably be on for a shorter time, and be less of an annoyance to ATC. So as much as I hate to admit it, ucbalumnus might have a good idea there. Of course, any modifications to aircraft have cost involved, and airlines never want to add additional costs unless they are necessary.</p>
<p>The thought that the Malaysian authorities know that a transponder was purposefully turned off is laughable. All they can know is that the signal was lost, whether purposefully or accidentally turned off, mechanical malfunction, or loss of radar signal. Even the military radar they have is pathetic, the entire altitude loss/gain could be attributed to nothing but poor radar, even +/- 15,000 feet. They know almost no true facts except for that the airplane didn’t make it to its destination. These are the Keystone cops making proclamations about what happened.</p>
<p>I feel so awful for the families. Now they must be hanging onto hope. How very tragic.</p>
<p>The issue is that this whole thing has now become an “international incident.” I am sure that with all the nations involved, there is much, much more information authorities have that simply cannot be released to the public. They have already said that multiple terrorist organizations have claimed responsibility, and it seems likely that authorities are trying to determine fact from fiction. But the thought that they are going to share this info publicly is not very likely. In the event that demands have been made by any organization, no country is likely to set a precedent of negotiating with terrorists. So, they would need that freedom without outside political pressures or pleas from the passengers’ families. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I agree, and cannot imagine any kind of torture being worse than this…on the one hand, knowing that logically the plane crashed into the ocean…but hoping that maybe there was some kind of hijacking and my loved one was alive somewhere on some island, but with that would be a whole set of other horrors…</p>
<p>This is one of the most horrible, puzzling, awful situations and I cannot imagine how agonizing this would be for anyone who is close to any of the passengers. These people occupy a lot of my thoughts and I’m hoping that the answers come soon so that no matter the outcome, their loved ones at least have an answer, as not knowing would be the worst situation of all…</p>
<p>HarvestMoon, where did you hear multiple terrorist orgs have claimed responsibility? I haven’t heard or read that anywhere. Can you link to this info? </p>
<p>This article has a map showing the huge area surrounding the possible flight path:</p>
<p><a href=“Timing of Report by Flight’s Pilot Focuses Inquiry - The New York Times”>Timing of Report by Flight’s Pilot Focuses Inquiry - The New York Times;
<p>There is also an interesting piece of information that I hadn’t previously heard. The plane’s transponder was turned off after the plane left Malaysian airspace but before it entered Vietnamese airspace, putting it into a “no man’s land.” I don’t know anything about how this works, but wouldn’t the Vietnamese air traffic controllers be aware that this plane was expected? </p>
<p>Here’s an article about the limitations of military and defense radar in that part of the world. You can call it pathetic but it’s not just Malaysia. It’s how these nations choose to allocate economic resources.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/15/us-malaysia-airlines-defence-idUSBREA2E0JT20140315”>http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/15/us-malaysia-airlines-defence-idUSBREA2E0JT20140315</a></p>
<p>Interesting article. Thanks, annoyingdad!</p>
<p>Sure, they don’t want to spend the money. The radar is very poor in that entire area. And they should be requesting as much assistance in the disappearance from the entities that can help.</p>
<p>emilybee, it was on a newscast that the Chinese Martyrs Brigade and other radical groups in China have claimed responsibility. Don’t think they are being taken seriously though. CIA director John Brennan is also on record as saying that claims of responsibility have been made but none of them can be “confirmed or collaborated.”</p>
<p>People from the NTSB and FAA and Great Britain’s equivalents are there but how they are being used isn’t really known. But without radar data, how do you suggest assistance be provided? Countries with satellite data have been pouring over it and Thailand, India and others have been asked to look at radar data, but if there isn’t any or much, it’s hard to do anything after the fact.</p>
<p>But there is intelligence we could be providing about the 239 people on board. And we could be sending submarines, airplanes and other ships to the south Indian Ocean.</p>
<p>We have sent ships but we don’t have anywhere near the number of ships hanging out in these remote locations that we once did. Looking for wreckage somewhere in the Indian Ocean is about all there is to do and that’s what we are doing. </p>
<p><a href=“http://www.aol.com/article/2014/03/16/3-pieces-of-evidence-point-to-jets-takeover/20850854/?icid=maing-grid7|main5|dl1|sec1_lnk3%26pLid%3D454350”>http://www.aol.com/article/2014/03/16/3-pieces-of-evidence-point-to-jets-takeover/20850854/?icid=maing-grid7|main5|dl1|sec1_lnk3%26pLid%3D454350</a></p>
<p>Interesting article.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You can call that pathetic or enviable. They are not threatened to extend enormous effort to monitor ther air space. When I heard terrorism, my first thought was what they could possibly target over there.</p>