Posted on 03/23/2014 1:06:32 PM PDT by txgirl4Bush
In reality, you don’t even know velocity or time accurately enough to calc anything.
Estimates is all there are.
So are you saying that the Boeing engineers/Inmarsat are all lying???
The only reliable data you can get from the pings is that the engine is still running.
Distance is derived by ASSUMING a velocity, and an approximate course too.
Its all assumptions for the pings.
“Do you really think the Paki government would not know about, or would remain quiet about a 777 full of Chinese nationals landing on one of its airfields? “
The Pakistani government is on paper only. Sure people hold offices and they have all the titles represented, but it is a blind for various competing Islamic agendas. Their version of the CIA has been actively aiding terrorist attacks on India for a long, long time. If they turn somebody over to our side it’s to eliminate a rival, not take out terrorism. So, does SOMEBODY in the Pakistani government know if (assuming it is) there? Certainly. Will they share that information? That depends on what their agenda is.
You do not even know what Boeing has released, and you are trying to say I even disagree with them?
What is your game?
Nobody is saying they are.
The sat cannot generate a range vector from a simple vhf signal.
Who said anything about vectors? All Inmarsat has is one number per hour: the distance from its satellite to the airplane at that point in the hour. It has no direction, hence no vector.
Example: The satellite sends a ping message to the airplane. The airplane's reply arrives in 240 milliseconds (after subtracting out delays imposed by the electronics at either end). This means the airplane is 120 light-milliseconds distant, or 22,354 miles. Such a measurement would put the airplane right under the satellite, flying over the Indian Ocean.
Longer times would put locate the airplane on ever larger circles around the satellite's ground-track position. Then you apply other constraints to try to chop arcs out the circles. E.g., how far could have maximally flown in the time available? How come nobody up north or in Malaysia or Indonesia admits to seeing it on radar? Etc.
Also, remember that almost every country on earth has the misfortune of having television (I think it’s Bhutan that doesn’t, but I could be wrong), and television is always hungry for talking head experts. It is its nature, bub! Since we are all global, this incident is known across the globe and experts are needed by every television channel, d’uh! Let’s establish conservatively that on all of world’s television channels there are 1,000 experts, each with a theory as to what happened, some or many of them parroting others’ theories, but many having their own, so let’s say 527 theories out there in television land in as many human languages.
You and 527 other theories. Don’t be so humble, said Golda Meir, you’re not that great!
>> “Do you really think the Paki government would not know about, or would remain quiet about a 777 full of Chinese nationals landing on one of its airfields? “ <<
.
Do you mean one of its remote mountain roads?
.
We can tell that you don't work for Boeing, or the airlines, or NASA, or anywhere where accuracy is important.
No, the sat doesn’t have an accurate distance to the aircraft.
“Is it possible that the Regime has schemed to feed him false info in order to turn him into a comic book character? “
Anyone that unknowing, that gullible, or that stupid is a comic book character.
I use code phase positioning daily Einstein.
What do you do?
If it were possible to gather distance without code phase, we wouldn’t need it, would we!
You need at least three points of reception even with code phase, to “solve the integers.”
“Do you mean one of its remote mountain roads?”
If they plan on taking off again the runway must be around 8,000 feet. But if they were just going to land I’d imagine they could make it a good deal shorter.
I heard a few interviews with McInerney and in a couple he honestly states that his theory is less than certain. In the last interview I heard he placed it at 65%. IOW, he has a clear understanding that he could be wrong.
Why does he stay with it?
For the same reason our government darn well better be focusing on this possibility.
It is far and away the most dangerous to the US, and it could be catastrophic for some civilian or military target in the future.
What’s the danger if that plane is ditched in the Indian Ocean? Nada.
“Why does he stay with it?”
Exactly. You don’t go on national TV and make claims like that.
It's highly likely the satellite can measure the ping delay to the nearest microsecond. That would translate to about two city blocks. Not GPS quality, but more than good enough to aid this investigation. Remember, it's through a vacuum (mostly). And there are no routers in between.
If they have a light fuel load, it can get off in less than 4000 feet.
Just now noticed your tag line....boy, do you have THAT right....*s*
Most of this area is cut off from the rest of Pakistan by high snow-filled passes for up to six months of the year (even as speak, I would imagine).
Those airports are:
............Longest
...........runway (ft)...Elev (ft)
Gilgit......5400........4900
Chitral.....5741........3600
Chilas......4500........4150
Skardu.....11944........8200
Of the four, Skardu is the easternmost and the most remote.
You have no idea of how far off the synchronization is.
It could be off by minutes. The crew pulled the breaker on the processor, and all that was running was a periodic handshake.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.