Meanwhile, Irving ignores the satellite evidence that the turn to the south was performed at a higher rate of turn than the automated systems can achieve. And to claim that Langewiesche is wrong because this flap was not literally "shredded into confetti" is just silly. There is another non-sequitur in Irving's argument about the flap deployment: while deployment would indicate that there was someone flying the airplane at the time of the crash, its non-deployment tells us nothing. Irving's claim in this regard is a non-sequitur: the fact that the flight's early stages, after the departure from the planned route, did not follow the simulated track, is beside the point. > I would say it raises serious questions about the accuracy of the simulator Langewiesche relies on. If you can't even construct an internally consistent argument, your attempt to debunk others will come across as lacking. Langewiesche explicity gets this right Irving gets backwards. Since it had not been deployed, we don't know if the pilot was alive at the end. If the flap had been deployed, we would know that the pilot was alive at the end. After several weeks of detailed scrutiny, investigators concluded that the flap had not been deployed, and therefore the jet had plunged into the ocean once its fuel was exhausted without any human intervention. It could not be independently moved by the autopilot. > this flap could only be activated for takeoff or landing by command of the pilot. And the author does themselves no favours with trivial logic errors like this: This countergument, such as it is, seems to be that we don't have a lot of data to support point 3 above, which is quite true, and indeed, one of the main points of the article: That the official report did not dig into point 3 in detail, and in fact seems to have omitted some key details.īut what of it? At most this is an argument that we shouldn't rule out the junior pilot, but no evidence is advanced, however weak to suggest he was to blame. The situation is:Ģ) The senior pilot had the ability to do soģ) His marriage had failed and he was possibly depressed, which is a possible reason.Ĥ) Nobody else had the ability to do so with the possible exception of the junior pilot, who seemingly had much less reason. This seems as close to a smoking gun as we're ever likely to get. Instead he advanced the flight manually in multiple stages, repeatedly jumping the flight forward and subtracting the fuel as necessary until it was gone. Of all the profiles extracted from the simulator, the one that matched MH370’s path was the only one that Zaharie did not run as a continuous flight-in other words, taking off on the simulator and letting the flight play out, hour after hour, until it reached the destination airport. Victor Iannello, an engineer and entrepreneur in Roanoke, Virginia, who has become another prominent member of the Independent Group and has done extensive analysis of the simulated flight, underscores what the Malaysian investigators ignored. That is true, as far as it goes, which is not far enough. Malaysian investigators dismissed this flight profile as merely one of several hundred that the simulator had recorded. Forensic examinations of Zaharie’s simulator by the FBI revealed that he experimented with a flight profile roughly matching that of MH370-a flight north around Indonesia followed by a long run to the south, ending in fuel exhaustion over the Indian Ocean.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |