|
|
[Dunia]
V16: MH370- SKALA OPERASI SAR SEMAKIN BESAR MELIBATKAN BYK NEGARA
[Copy link]
|
|
|
poison_paradise posted on 20-3-2014 03:01 AM
Mesti de terhempas kat mana2 ni dlm hutan tebal atau gunung ganang..
Uols ingt lg tak ada pesawat ...
Kisah ni difilemkan....terhempas kat area tggi banjaran andes yg sejuk bersalji...mayat2 x mereput bila ditanam dalam salji..ada yg mati sbbkan avelanche...blh simpan stok daging utk dikekah ramai2...diandaikan mh370 crash kat kaw berhutan dan ada survivor(s) at least kn ada survival skill sikit2 kot...itu pentingnya jgk tgk dokumentari mcm man vs wild, man women and wild..dual survivor bagai.. Last edited by Centurion on 20-3-2014 08:05 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
poyohabis posted on 19-3-2014 11:28 PM
Ha ah aku pun fkr teori mcm ni... Tp malaysia ni cari dah sampai ke mn2 dah mcm dah jauh tersasar. ...
melaenkan ada konspirasi x terjangkau org2 biasa...mebbe terjangkau kot tp kita kan suka bebaik sngka
hehe |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
berancuk posted on 20-3-2014 01:41 AM
yang rare item kena download kak, bukanlah semua porn itu bagus, kalau akak bukak laman porno, ber ...
buat koleksi ke kak, yg available tu kurang memuaskan ke? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SIGH I don't know who Chris Goodfellow is, but just having a "Class 1 License in Multi-engine planes" and 20 years experience does NOT qualify him to speak with authority on 777 systems and trans-oceanic airline operations. Heck, when I learned to fly in Canada, I had the same certifications. Mr. Goodfellow misses the mark on real-world operations, as evidenced by statements he makes in this article.
As an MD88 Captain for a major US airline, I have some pretty good experience to draw from but I certainly wouldn't want to stray into the realm of 777 systems and become another self-professed "expert" in the speculation frenzy we are seeing with regards to this incident. But some things are just really basic, and Mr. Goodfellow makes quite a few assumptions.
Where do I start?
"When I saw that left turn with a direct heading, I instinctively knew he was heading for an airport". Um, why? Why can you make that statement? There are a whole host of reasons why the aircraft FMS was programmed to make a turn. You say yourself just a paragraph or two later that "There is no point speculating further until more evidence surfaces...". Aren't you in fact "speculating"? We have far too many "speculators" as it is. The fact is, we can speculate all day as to the "who" and "why", but it's all pointless. The fact is, the aircraft turned west, away from it's planned northerly track. Why? It could be many things, but you can't say with any certainty that "he was heading for an airport".
Mr. Goodfellow states that an electrical fire first response is to "pull the main busses and restore circuits one by one until you have isolated the bad one". Actually, the first response is to don the oxygen mask and put on the smoke goggles (or some aircraft have masks/goggles in one unit). Mr. Goodfellow says "Yes, pilots have access to oxygen masks but this is a no-no with fire." GOOD LORD. He has NO IDEA what he's talking about. What are the pilots supposed to do? Hold their breath and work the checklist?? He is probably confusing the use of PASSENGER oxygen masks which, in the event of a fire in the cabin, we are trained to NOT manually deploy. Why? Because PASSENGER oxygen masks MIX cabin air with oxygen...thus, passengers would breath smoke regardless, and you're just providing oxygen to an environment where fire exists...that is bad. But with COCKPIT oxygen systems, the masks are FORCED PRESSURE and 100% oxygen is available. Yes, you ABSOLUTELY don the oxygen masks THEN work on isolating the source of the fire/smoke. Otherwise, the pilots are breathing smoke and, in no-time, the entire flight is doomed (he should know that.)
As far as isolating the source of the fire, referring to the Boeing checklist, the pilot will begin to isolate SYSTEMS, as directed, and try to isolate the source of the flames. This process does not involve "pulling busses" but rather in isolating systems through directing power sources and pulling circuit breakers. ("Pulling busses" is not even lexicon we use in our industry).
Mr. Goodfellow states that a hijack code (which exists) or "even a transponder code off by one digit would alert ATC that something was wrong". Um, good try. ATC would simply ask the flight to correct the code. But being unable to communicate with the flight would preclude this, and having one digit off would be the least of their concerns. If the pilot can move the transponder to "one digit off", he could certainly enter the code for the hijack (these aren't Cessna 172 transponders, Mr. Goodfellow.) He adds "Every good pilot knows keying an SOS over the mike always is an option." The vast majority of pilots would never consider this, as morse code is never used in communication, other than listening to a code (with the key displayed on an approach chart) is used to identify navigation frequencies for approaches, but not in the 777....that is not required. It automatically identifies the frequency for the pilots, and displays the identification on their EFIS screens (basically TV screens that display their instrumentation). Thus, 777 pilots rarely, if ever, deal with morse code, yet alone think about "transmitting" it via microphone clicks. He further adds "Even three short clicks would raise an alert". Um, yeah. No way.
Mr. Goodfellow states "Disabling the ACARS is not easy, as pointed out". WRONG. Pulling two or three circuit breakers disables the entire system. In fact, we routinely do it to reset the ACARS unit if it is not receiving or transmitting properly on the ground before pushback. Again, a bogus statement.
Mr. Goodfellow will "accept for a minute" that the pilot may have ascended to 45,000' in a last-ditch effort to quell a fire by seeking the lowest level of oxygen". That is completely laughable. The service ceiling of the 777 is 43,000'. The cabin pressurization system is designed to maintain a "maximum differential" of so-many psi (the difference between the outside air pressure and the inside-cabin air pressure) up to the service ceiling. A standard airliner will hold somewhere in the area of 8000' cabin pressure up to it's service ceiling. Going above that (in this case, 45,000') will NOT "quell a fire" with lower oxygen amounts. What WOULD happen is the pressurization system would raise the cabin altitude just a hair, in order to maintain the maximum cabin differential psi. No pilot would even CONSIDER taking an airplane to a HIGHER altitude in such a situation. It's preposterous! We know (a) it would have no effect on "quelling" a fire and (b) we want to get on the GROUND when a fire exists (it's our worst enemy in the air). You state this yourself later: "Fire in an aircraft demands one thing: Get the machine on the ground as soon as possible." So why veer off into off-the-wall speculation and even consider it?
While we are talking about altitudes, as I mentioned, the service ceiling of the 777 is 43,000'. Going above the service ceiling is just downright dangerous. Why? Because the aircraft is not designed to be able to perform at those altitudes. Mr. Goodfellow got this one thing right in that doing so would put the pilots in a situation where going too FAST would result in a "mach buffet" situation where the airflow over the wing would be going so fast that it would separate, and thus the overspeed would create a loss of lift. Going too SLOW would of course mean the wing would stall. Thus the pilots would have to maintain aircraft speed in such a small range that it is entirely too dangerous. Many pilots refer to this as "the coffin corner"....the airspeed range is so precise that safety is sacrificed...thus the reference to the "coffin". Thus any pilot with any experience in jet aircraft would NEVER consider taking the aircraft above the certified flight "envelope". And if you've got a fire or other emergency on board, why on earth would you do that? As to WHY it was up there (supposedly), I will not "speculate".
I could go on and on further. What's my point? The point is this: There are WAY TOO MANY "talking head" experts who desperately want to be part of solving this mystery and, in the process, get their two minutes of fame. The problem is they just create more confusion, misinformation and wild-haired theories. We all need to stick to what we know and let the experts, who have all the information, work to solve the mystery. The hysteria that has ensued since the disappearance of the jet has gotten to fever pitch. It does nobody any good and, I would say, does a great deal of harm.
And lastly, if you say "we need to not speculate" and then you SPECULATE, you really aren't deserving of any credibility.
http://disqus.com/disqus_gGLyZWZ8Sp/
Comment submitted to Wired article: http://www.wired.com/autopia/2014/03/mh370-electrical-fire/
chris goodfellows theories debunked!! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AniSani posted on 20-3-2014 01:29 AM 
teori dibawah yg nampk logik stakat ni
http://one4u-one4me.blogspot.com/2014/03/mh370-teori-terba ...
Logik apa kebendanya....tulis kat situ menteri pertahanan n kpn x tahu menahu; pastu tulis yg najib x nampak runsing sb dia lah tok dalangnya.... Errrmmmmmm....nampak sgt membohongnya...najib kan menteri pertahanan?! Kalo nak menipu n keluarkan teori, pastikan fakta betul dulu
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
pinksarah posted on 20-3-2014 03:15 AM
yg 16 org ni hidup makan bangkai passenger yg mati..
jd cannibal selama 72 hari until ditemui.. ...
akak risau cina tongkang itu pelahap daging manusia, cina ni tolak batu tolak kayu jah  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
berancuk posted on 19-3-2014 07:31 PM
lebih mengarut ialah Al-Qaeda yang bisu
ada udang disebalik kebisuan |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bila baca paper hari ni yg FBI nak ambil simulator capt zaharie, aku dah mula syak wasangka yang bukan2. dorang ni bukan boleh percaya sangat. Selalu dalam crash investigation, walaupun kapal terbang ada masalah teknikal, sedikit sebanyak penyiasat tetap salahkan pilot.
Dalam hal ini, aku lihat mereka mungkin hendak menutup kelemahan boeing. Nanti kalau org tahu kelemahan boeing, pelanggan beralih ke airbus.
atau kalau aku nk buat spekulashit, usa mungkin menggunakan alasan untuk mencampuri hal ehwal bahagian sini. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
berancuk posted on 20-3-2014 08:00 AM
akak risau cina tongkang itu pelahap daging manusia, cina ni tolak batu tolak kayu jah
Hbs la baby kn makan.. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
orglama posted on 20-3-2014 08:00 AM
Logik apa kebendanya....tulis kat situ menteri pertahanan n kpn x tahu menahu; pastu tulis yg naji ...
kemungkinan besar bang. Altantuya pun boleh meletup dgn C4 tentera Malaysia. Mmg boleh dipercayai kalau MH370 hilang akibat tentera Malaysia. Contohnya TUDM yg bisu 1000, MH370 masuki ruang udara Malaysia tapi dorang tak buat apa2. Kenapa macam tuh? Adakah tidur penjaga radar ataupun mmg dorang bagi MH370 masuk balik ke ruang udara Msia dgn sengaja?
Teori dlm blog tersebut mungkin 100% benar.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ade x forumer di sini bermimpi2psl mh370 ni?mna la taw kot2ade mimpi yg lebih kurang sma... i klu mimpi pun.. jln cite mcm merapu je... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
carold posted on 20-3-2014 12:33 AM
Patut kalau dah jemput kpt.Nik..tak yah jemput ahli panel yg lain sbb penonton lebih teruja dgn pe ...
Aritu Awani jemput satu professor dari satu IPTA. Pengacara tanya - kenapa kalau terbang rendah pengunaan minyak akan tinggi. Dia cakap engine tu lebih efficient pada suhu sejuk and then explain pasal thermodynamic engine. Itu betul jugak tp sebab no 2 or no 3. Sebab no 1 - kat low altitude udara tebal. Jadi air resistance begitu tinggi. Kat 35,000kaki udara sgt nipis. Rintangan udara sgt-sgt kecil. Dlm vacum ianya zero. Sebab tu satelite keliling bumi boleh gerak 8km sesaat sebab zero resistance. Kalau bergerak 8km sesaat dlm udara habis terbakar la jawabnya. Itu pasal space shuttle pakai special heat sheild bila masuk ruang udara. Professor kangkung betul laaa!!!....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
orglama posted on 20-3-2014 08:00 AM
Logik apa kebendanya....tulis kat situ menteri pertahanan n kpn x tahu menahu; pastu tulis yg naji ...
mender lah najib menteri pertahanan
macam betul je kak mah pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
berancuk posted on 19-3-2014 04:48 PM
so, betul lah zarema tu anak kepada YB yang buat Istana Zakaria Happycock tuh?
knapa dgn zarema? dia patot bertugas kt mh370 ke ? istana ke ni? mcm istana takeshi jah
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
mummyladybird posted on 20-3-2014 08:15 AM
ade x forumer di sini bermimpi2psl mh370 ni?mna la taw kot2ade mimpi yg lebih kurang sma... i klu mi ...
kena tanya incik mimpi.. sebab dia nyanyi lagi rindukanlah..
adeh.. semalam main gitar jap lagu encik mimpi neh.. kepala kat mh370..
rasa senduuuu sangat.. syahduuu aje..
walaupun tak ada siapa yang dikenal dalam plane tuh..
tapi syahdunya lain macam je.. 
macam tak caya ai diri ini pun ala2 kesenduan juga..
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
gogo2 posted on 20-3-2014 08:14 AM
kemungkinan besar bang. Altantuya pun boleh meletup dgn C4 tentera Malaysia. Mmg boleh dipercayai ...
Kira 14 negara tu semua kena tipu dgn najib ler... oohhhh hebatnya isteri kak mah ni...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Post time 20-3-2014 07:41 AM
mmg 3rd party byk yg best2.. dan dah upgrade dr segi grafik... tapi semua mcm mahal2 jer... 
@gogo2 take note
