V25 MH370: PETUNJUK BARU BERCANGGAH DENGAN MAKLUMAT TERDAHULU

d'zeck

kelana36 posted on 3-4-2014 12:48 PM
engkau dengan RBA engkau...

macam la jugak tanjung kupang punya crash... JRA konon...

Japanese Red Army memang wujud
satu masa dulu bro

ko lemah sejarah,

aku tau
prasyarat pilot tak pentingkan subjek tu,

apa boleh buat.

rayonronie

mamanoni posted on 3-4-2014 12:38 PM
@tapibukankau sahutlah cabaran rayonronie nie...

tgk....ade yg menyokong
thanx mamanoni

come on...lg 1 page tuh
@tapibukanaku

kelana36

d'zeck posted on 3-4-2014 08:49 AM
ko kata dah ada maklumat jenis mod IFF
yang USAF dengan RAF punya,

hallo gang... aku pernah beberapa kali having joint exercises dengan puak puak ni la.. tau sangat system dia orang..
aku bukan macam tin kosong, golek sana sini bunyi kuat..

Nape?Tak caye?

eh minyak naik semalam you orang perasan x?

rayonronie

scorpionkiki posted on 3-4-2014 12:41 PM
Siapa yg ada power tu sayang..?

sesiapa yg rs ade power sgt kt sini

ade aku kesah?


Bebaskan...bebaskan....@AdamBillionaire
(sambil nyanyi lagu dr filem Frozen versi marsha)

kelana36

d'zeck posted on 3-4-2014 08:51 AM
Japanese Red Army memang wujud
satu masa dulu bro

so mengikut sejarah yang kau terror tu, JRA lah yang hijak kapalterbang mas , tanjung kupang tu?

scorpionkiki

Nape?Tak caye? posted on 3-4-2014 12:52 PM
eh minyak naik semalam you orang perasan x?

Ron97? Tak isi lagi hari ni

scorpionkiki

rayonronie posted on 3-4-2014 12:52 PM
sesiapa yg rs ade power sgt kt sini

ade aku kesah?

Ni Adam yer

lorelai

kelana36 posted on 3-4-2014 04:32 AM
At the first place, did I ever involve politic kat MH370 ni? tak ada langsung kan.

Aku sentuh k ...

biasa tu bang
ada oranh x tau beza debate n personal attack..

once da nak kalah..resort tu smearing campaign,adopt holier than thou attitude..

and x pasal2 masukkan political affiliation.

lorelai

rayonronie posted on 3-4-2014 04:52 AM
sesiapa yg rs ade power sgt kt sini

ade aku kesah?

ntah..
ksian adam
ada org yg lg patot di banhammer plus plus.. berbanding dirimu

saba ye

cloudy_83

This Data Model Shows MH370 Could Not Have Flown "Accidentally" To Its Destination            
None of the plane's paths can be reconciled with a geodesic, meaning the plane took multiple, intentional turns before going dark.
By Conor Myhrvold                                                            

    Over the past two weeks, FastCoLabs has been building a Monte Carlo model to predict potential paths of MH370. I wrote about Version 1 last week and after the piece hit Reddit I added a more technical description. Now I've updated and extended the model, using information that wasn't yet available earlier. This project is also available as code: Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3, and as a full file via GithHub.

Picking Up Where We Left Off
   We last left off with a relatively simple Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) model, trying to predict possible flight paths for the missing airliner. I used the plane's previous heading--assuming MH370 tended to along a similar direction as before, with some ability to turn--and the tendency to head to the last ping arc (8:11 am) at each time to probabilistically determine its subsequent locations.
The last ping arc took into account enough distance on either side--through the standard deviation--to effectively cover an area which blanketed the other pings as well [1]. Each new location only depended on the heading of the previous step, while the ping arc probability grid which made the plane tend toward the last ping arc, remained constant.
Results consistently showed, across a range of reasonable variations, that MH370 “chose” the southern arc most frequently and ended off the Australian West Coast, confirming independent Inmarsat Doppler analysis identifying a similar area of ocean nearby:


5% error, normal distribution

Heading Off Criticism
    Yet the normal distributions I used for the plane heading, and the probability grid, were still criticized for being, well, too normal. So I implemented two heading choice distributions as well, both quite popular in some circles (unit circles, actually): the Wrapped Cauchy and the Von Mises. Both generated heading selections that were similar and then dramatically different, from how I chose the heading in Version 1.

I also found the Inmarsat ping error range: a specialty satellite industry blog pointed out a careful calculation on PPRuNe [2], which determined 1o to 2o error. For the last ping, where the satellite was 40o from the plane’s perspective, this would mean error of 2.5% or 5% of the total distance between the satellite and the plane, measured by the lag time [3].

Here is one set of the results:


Von Mises, uniform distribution, 5% error


Wrapped Cauchy, quasi-uniform distribution, 5% error

    All showed that if MH370 did a true random walk--picking plane headings which wandered any which way, and using just the ping arc to constrain MH370’s ultimate location--MH370 ends up all over the arc within its flight range. This was the uniform distribution so vaunted on Reddit, confirming my original intuition on how to not pick the heading.

Desserting The Data Through Cherry-Picking
    Next, I wanted all the pings to make my model the Queen of them all. Enough infographics had shown multiple pings, and my error assumptions were accommodating enough, that with some effort in Mathematica, I could now plot all of the plane pings. So each time step would have its own unique ping, instead of ping-ybacking on the generous error assumptions of another ping. I also plotted the Great Circle path from MH370’s last known location to where it ended up in all of my models, a standard feature in the Python library I used [4]. Importantly, a Boeing 777 such as MH370 will either fly by magnetic bearing (unlikely just by eyeballing) or alternatively via the Great Circle to maximize fuel efficiency (via distance efficiency) between two waypoints.



Version 1 of the model simultaneously and independently came to the southern route conclusion; now, I wanted to see the complete picture of the flight. All of the plane’s possible locations, over the whole duration. I had not yet seen modeled, let alone guesstimated with specific scenarios in mind.
The National Transportation and Safety Board provided Australia with few possible paths to aid in the search, in a reserved or miserly manner, depending on your perspective. Malaysia, in turn, has released its own few paths; but none of them appeared to plot the pings arcs to see whether these paths were actually possible, let alone showing them in the plot.
Now, it was time to generate thousands of paths. Our simulation would be the ultimate pathfinder (sorry, Nissan!) No more cherry-picking several fortunate few. This would be equal opportunity, Monte Carlo style, which would lead to unequal outcomes [5] in a fraction of the time and expense of the traditional way you can narrow down potential paths of MH370.

Reconstructing The Pings, And Why This Is Right (On Average)

Several quick points about accuracy:

• The error I assume in each ping is still generous; the standard deviation is 2.5% and 5% of the last ping’s radius arc--which is more than the distance differences between the pings. So I am allowing for as much wiggle room as possible in terms of how I pick where the pings are; and then some.
• Even if the ping timings between the first ping and the last ping are not exact in an absolute sense, they certainly are in an average sense. Which means that using the plane’s ultimate location on the arc, as the end point for the Great Circle, is a sound strategy.
• Looking at where the plane is plotted over time, the conclusions are plain to see--there is just not enough wiggle room to adjust the ping spacings in a way that allow for a flight path which does not make turns contrary to what an autopilot would automatically pick.
  

MH370 Flight Trajectory Through All Pings
So, here are the results, with the realistic normal heading assumption of Version 1 along with the realistic options in Version 2 for Wrapped Cauchy [6] and Von Mises:

normal distribution, 5% error


normal distribution 2.5% error


Von Mises distribution, 5% error


Von Mises distribution, 2.5% error


Wrapped Cauchy distribution, 5% error


Wrapped Cauchy distribution, 2.5% error

Autopilot Analysis
    Through many thousands of simulations of various parameters specific to MH370’s predicament, we now have a much better idea of what MH370’s flight paths could be. My model shows likelihoods for MH370, not a definitive location. Is it possible that what is most likely is not in fact the case? Yes, of course, but the very notion of a Monte Carlo is predicated on the odds, meaning this analysis comes with an unfortunate realization--even if you don’t want a scenario to be true, if all of the available information points to that, then it is the likely leading outcome.
What does this all mean? Autopilot is out of options. You see, here is the simple problem--none of the possible paths can be reconciled with a geodesic (Great Circle) which means that the plane turned at multiple points. How could it turn? Well, the plane was “flown” to its final location--either manually by a human, or by a program entered into the flight management system. These results strongly suggest that wherever MH370 is, the odds are that someone wanted it there.

Inmarsat Ping Timeline Table
2:11 am -- First ping.
2:15 am -- Last sighting of MH370 by Malaysia military radar.
3:11 am -- Second ping. First ping after plane disappeared [7].
4:11 am -- Third ping.
5:11 am -- Fourth ping.
6:11 am -- Fifth ping.
7:11 am -- Sixth ping.
8:11 am -- Seventh ping. Last full ping from MH370. (What earlier was thought of as the 5 th ping after disappearance, but is actually the 6th ping.)
8:19 am -- Partial ping?! (Still not understood.)

Source: MH370 Article, Wikipedia.

*contoh pendapatan teknikal penyelidik luar berkenaan maklumat ping flight mh370.
**notakaki: pendapatan ini BUKAN PENDAPATAN RASMI dari pihak kerajaan Malaysia

sumber: http://www.fastcolabs.com/3028569/this-data-model-shows-mh370-could-not-have-flown-accidentally-to-its-destination?partner=rss&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:%20fastcompany/headlines%20%28Fast%20Company%29&partner=skygrid

Nazrulism

Adam lat thread mh370 ni ok-ok jer.. taktahu ler kalau tempat lain dia meracau-racau.

syadail

scorpionkiki posted on 3-4-2014 12:41 PM
Orang lain tak adanya nak sebut psal kos... US saja yg buat

US tu nak cakap takde maknanya dia nk sorok kepatebang tu kat Diego Garcia sedangkan dia berhabis berjota tolong SAR.

atira

djek kene seligi
tu la kene blajar lagi cara2 nampak intelijen...
kurangkan sikit kemacaian tu bang djek

atira

d'zeck posted on 3-4-2014 12:44 PM
those so-called RBA
adalah benda hidup sebenar
yang sengaja di down toned kan

banyak sangat baca mestika la bang

scorpionkiki

lorelai posted on 3-4-2014 12:57 PM
ntah..
ksian adam
ada org yg lg patot di banhammer plus plus.. berbanding dirimu

Kita nak baca mendapat ilmu... bila dah melalut tak masuk topik ni rasa mcm nak ketuk saja... selalunya orang gila dia tak tau dia gila... kalau orang tak cerdik, dia tau tak dia tak cerdik, Lorelai?

d'zeck

kelana36 posted on 3-4-2014 12:51 PM
hallo gang... aku pernah beberapa kali having joint exercises dengan puak puak ni la.. tau sangat  ...

thats why la
sekilas ikan di air dah tau
jantan ke pondan

sudah gaharu korek pula,
sudah tahu lagi mau tanya ka

hyie

korang ni tak keje ke?

#page100

d'zeck

kelana36 posted on 3-4-2014 12:53 PM
so mengikut sejarah yang kau terror tu, JRA lah yang hijak kapalterbang mas , tanjung kupang tu?

ya bro
yang eksen

kelana36

d'zeck posted on 3-4-2014 09:01 AM
thats why la
sekilas ikan di air dah tau
jantan ke pondan

sebab aku tau tu aku stressed yang kau ni gebang jer kat.. tak tau benda yang sebenar.. main bantai jer bagi staement.