Just read this. I'm certainly not a stats guy, so I have no way putting what is written in any kind of context. If there is anyone here who understands math of this kind and can explain to those who don't ... I'm curious to know ... Is buddy wearing a tin foil hat, or is he onto something?
http://www.seventharc.net/2016/11/22/pi ... earch-arc/
MH 370?
Moderator: Soñadora
3 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Re: MH 370?
by LarryHoward » Tue Nov 29, 2016 4:47 pm
Well,
I'm pretty rusty but he is attempting to recreate the Inmarsat analysis to move the arc of position to align with his theory of where the aircraft is and torturing the data so that it supports his assumptions. Apparently, Inmarsat uses all of the pings from a known location (mostly prior to takeoff) to calibrate their analysis and all of the periodic handshake attempts to establish the radius from the satellite. Where GPS accurately measures the time that a signal is received and knows from its ephemeris download the position of the satellites and calculates a fix by the distance arcs from each received satellite, in the MH370 case, they looked at the round trip time for each ping and calculates the arc from that. With only one satellite, all they get is a single arc of position for each ping and can derive a bit of a running fix as to position of the aircraft since a number of the possible solutions were physically impossible for the aircraft to fly to those positions with the fuel available.
Where is analysis falls short for me is that he discards the data that might make his analysis wrong and gets down to a very small data set to analyze. Then he discards any data that keeps the aircraft in the air long enough to get it past his effectively predetermined point.
Is he wrong? Who knows. He's a smart guy but seems to be focused on proving his preconceived assumptions. Pretty uncharted area and he gives a lot of credence to some limited drift analysis and then backs up the position where the debris ended up to correlate with his calculations from his adjusted data. All of his assumptions may be valid and he chose exactly the right data to remove from his analysis. He threw away calibration data from one channel but then used that channel's later data in his position analysis. Things like that give me pause.
In any case, he isn't going to find survivors. As I said in the days after the crash, I have a lot of time on the ocean and a lot of time flying aircraft over the ocean. It's a big, empty area and the search has been challenging at best. It was clear within a day that all were dead (the plot from "Lost" just doesn't happen) and I truly hope that the passengers were not aware that they were on a one way trip and that the end was mercifully quick. No debris, analysis or hope will bring them back. The tin foil brigade has merely given hope to the hopeless families and delayed their grieving and acceptance. It would be positive to find the black boxes and get some insight into what happened but they are now well beyond their design life and may not be readable even if found.
The hard question for our Australian and Malay friends is when to declare the search unsuccessful and over.
I'm pretty rusty but he is attempting to recreate the Inmarsat analysis to move the arc of position to align with his theory of where the aircraft is and torturing the data so that it supports his assumptions. Apparently, Inmarsat uses all of the pings from a known location (mostly prior to takeoff) to calibrate their analysis and all of the periodic handshake attempts to establish the radius from the satellite. Where GPS accurately measures the time that a signal is received and knows from its ephemeris download the position of the satellites and calculates a fix by the distance arcs from each received satellite, in the MH370 case, they looked at the round trip time for each ping and calculates the arc from that. With only one satellite, all they get is a single arc of position for each ping and can derive a bit of a running fix as to position of the aircraft since a number of the possible solutions were physically impossible for the aircraft to fly to those positions with the fuel available.
Where is analysis falls short for me is that he discards the data that might make his analysis wrong and gets down to a very small data set to analyze. Then he discards any data that keeps the aircraft in the air long enough to get it past his effectively predetermined point.
Is he wrong? Who knows. He's a smart guy but seems to be focused on proving his preconceived assumptions. Pretty uncharted area and he gives a lot of credence to some limited drift analysis and then backs up the position where the debris ended up to correlate with his calculations from his adjusted data. All of his assumptions may be valid and he chose exactly the right data to remove from his analysis. He threw away calibration data from one channel but then used that channel's later data in his position analysis. Things like that give me pause.
In any case, he isn't going to find survivors. As I said in the days after the crash, I have a lot of time on the ocean and a lot of time flying aircraft over the ocean. It's a big, empty area and the search has been challenging at best. It was clear within a day that all were dead (the plot from "Lost" just doesn't happen) and I truly hope that the passengers were not aware that they were on a one way trip and that the end was mercifully quick. No debris, analysis or hope will bring them back. The tin foil brigade has merely given hope to the hopeless families and delayed their grieving and acceptance. It would be positive to find the black boxes and get some insight into what happened but they are now well beyond their design life and may not be readable even if found.
The hard question for our Australian and Malay friends is when to declare the search unsuccessful and over.
- LarryHoward
- Posts: 5095
- Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2012 10:18 am
Re: MH 370?
by Tigger » Tue Nov 29, 2016 5:38 pm
Fascinating. Thanks for the insight.
Ross Bligh, Beneteau 36.7 'Elision' (rhymes with 'collision', lol)
-
Tigger - Posts: 1357
- Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 12:50 am
- Location: Vancouver, BC
3 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Design by pit
Design by pit