MH370 what other aircraft were operating Straits of Malacca


#1

I do not accept MH370 flew through the Straits of Malacca.

When you do the maths it could not have flown back at 5,000ft within the time constraints.

What Butterworth appears to have tracked is either an aircraft taking off from Penang International or a normal commercial flight like SIA68 or UAE343.

I have analysis of the Butterworth radar track showing the aircraft which Malaysia believes was MH370 directly over Pelau Perak at 18:03 UTC. Does anybody out there have the exact co-ordinates of UAE343 or SIA68 or any private flights departing Penang about these times please?


#2

The Malaysian authorities originally claimed MH370 flew IGARI-VAMPI-GIVAL-IGREX, but refused to publish radar tracking data to prove their assertion.

Then at the Lido Hotel in Beijing on 21 March they revealed this image to relatives which they claimed was the Butterworth radar track of MH370 flying through the Straits:

Someone named Bill in another online discussion with me then posted these pictures which he had used focus sharpening tools on. With that he was able to identify fuzzy time stamps in the above image.

Most importantly we can identify from this image exactly what time this aircraft overflew a small island called Pelau Perak (“Silver Island”) in the norther Straits of Malacca. It’s route traces back to southern Penang and it appears to me that it was actually a military transport flight taking off from Penang.

The other main reason why I can’t believe MH370 flew west from IGARI (apart from HCM control contacting Lumpur control to say they lost MH370 off radar at BITOD) is that it spoke with MH88 and JAL750 by line of sight VHF radio after 17:30 UTC.

At that time JAL750 was at 32,000ft 398nm north of IGARI far beyond the curvature of the earth and beyond VHF range. To speak with JAL750 I estimate MH370 had to be within the 306nm range circle in this image:

One further point is this. Flightaware notes that three minutes of transponder contact from MH370 was picked up about three hours after take off. The fuzzy logic employed by SITA means that the transponder return was identified being picked up at Hong Kong. This gave rise to a claim on 8th March that MH370 may have made an emergency landing at Namming, China.

Of course it did not land there however the transponder returns cannot be dismissed so lightlly

In actual fact the ADS-C, FANS 1/A signal protocols determine that when a waypoint event is detected the system recognises it as a return from the location expected on the Flight Plan for the predicted route, whilst the return may have been from an entirely different location.

*The B2 ATN ground system can receive only the predicted route group from FANS 1/A aircraft *

This refers to the fuzzy logic used by the system. It only recognises a transponder return as emanating where the aircraft is predicted to be.

In other words if MH370 was flying over an ADS-B ground repeater station about 3 hours after take-off, the contact would be relayed back to SITA, but SITA would only recognise it as a return from Hong Kong where it expected to see MH370 at that time.

Thus Flightaware may have recorded the smoking gun where MH370 actually flew.