r/UFOs • u/Atiyo_ • Aug 16 '23
Massive new lead: Inmarsat data has been wrong all along - Incompetence or cover up? - peer reviewed report goes over the actual location of MH370 Rule 6: Bad title
Edit: Something that was pointed out to me, the author claims to have his paper sent in for peer review on page 6, but we don't know for sure who reviewed this.
Another Edit: Back in 2014 this was published. A low frequency signal was recorded and although back then they said it most likely was a natural event, there was a slight chance it might've been MH370. The image shows their estimate of where that signal came from and shows roughly the same area as mentioned in the report.
So after reading this post by u/TheSilverHound I wanted to double check the inmarsat data to see if it would make sense that the plane could end up at the maldives, since eye-witnesses claimed to have seen a plane on fire around that location, which had the same stripes as MH370. To my surprise I stumbled over this:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/xmacjohwqhs3shk/The-Path-To-Flight-MH370-v2.0e-Sergio-Cavaiuolo-8Mar2022ws.pdf?dl=0EDIT: The author's website: http://www.foundmh370.com/
Here we have a "peer-reviewed" report which showcases how the previous Inmarsat rings are not accurate
Incompetence or cover-up?
"The problem is in the Inmarsat analysis in ‘TheSearch For MH370’ [REF2] that produced the BTO RINGS – that analysis does not use the actual Round Trip transmission Time of the Handshake (HRTT in Figure4) as is required by physics, to calculate the distance of MH370 from the satellite and plot the aircraft’s location rings. –Instead, the BTO analysis mis-uses the BTO TIME from the satellite data [REF1] as if it were the Round Trip transmission Time of the Handshake" - Page 11
This raises some serious questions. How has no one noticed this back in 2014? This seems like basic physics for anyone working in that field. This report was released in 2022. 250 million $ have been wasted on search efforts, because they were unable to calculate this properly? And no one double checked that? On top of that they ignored eye-witnesses who have seen the plane at low altitude?
This either sounds like everyone involved in calculating the Inmarsat data is incompetent or it was a cover up.
From what I could find everyone involved in this was: "...the Joint Investigation Team... These included representatives from the UK's Inmarsat, Air Accidents Investigation Branch, and Rolls-Royce; China's Civil Aviation Administration and Aircraft Accident Investigation Department; the US National Transportation Safety Board and Federal Aviation Administration; and Malaysian authorities."
I was able to find only 2 articles on this report with the search words being "MH370 maldives".
Even a 2023 article talked about MH370 going down in the southern indian ocean, suspecting pilot suicide.
This immediately also raises the question about the simulator route that was found in the pilots home. In the official report from 2014 regarding MH370:"It was also discovered that there were seven ‘manually programmed’ waypoint4 coordinates (Figure 1.5A [below), that when connected together, will create a flight path from KLIA to an area south of the Indian Ocean through the Andaman Sea. These coordinates were stored in the Volume Shadow Information (VSI) file dated 03 February 2014. The function of this file was to save information when a computer is left idle for more than 15 minutes. Hence, the RMP Forensic Report could not determine if the waypoints came from one or more files."
It was only after they handed the data over to the FBI, that they "figured out" it was in fact one route and those waypoints were not from different sessions. This is a crucial part in lending more evidence to the pilot suicide theory. In 2014 DailyMail released an article questioning the mental health of the pilot and claiming the family said things like "He wasn't the father I knew. He was lost and disturbed". However the daughter stated afterwards in a facebook post, that the dailymail made it all up. From what I could find the DailyMail article is what really sparked the theory for pilot suicide. So the simulator investigation by the FBI just added on top of that.
Also worth noting, during the time of 2014 there were a lot of mistakes in the media coverage surrounding MH370. This is taken from the ATSB australian government website, here you can see just how many letters they sent out to correct false media reporting:https://www.atsb.gov.au/search?keywords=MH370&page=2
Now back to the report:
Based on the new calculations a relatively small area was located where the plane most likely crashed. "The likely area to search is a much smaller area inside the circle that would focus searching along the Atoll coastlines (down the outer coral reef walls) of the Southern Thaa Atoll (search first) and then along the Northern Laamu Atoll (second)"
MH370 was last seen circling over Gaadhiffushi island, roughly 10 minutes away from this crash site.
These are the new accurate HRTT rings.
And this is an example of the new flight route for MH370
"on reach HRTT RING(P2)...MH370 was suddenly turned around again to head back East where it seemingly entered into a 3 Hour holding pattern"For later reference: P5 = 22:41 UTC = 6:41 MYT
This is where M370 was seen circling over an island, trying to find a spot to land, probably running extremely low on fuel
"Recall: Oil-rig worker McKay (in Figure13) likely witnessed the sudden turn back of MH370 over the Gulf of Thailand, seeing MH370 at high altitude with flames beneath it that lasted for about 15 seconds before extinguishing. Miss Kate Tee described a similar sighting of an elongated plane (MH370) glowing orange with thick black smoke trailing behind"
This report also links 2 youtube videos as visual aids to this report Part 1 and Part 2. (Part 1 = 5,1k views, Part 2 = 660 views).
Conspiracy time
Another interesting quote from this report:"How did the Pilot(s) of MH370 manage to keep the aircraft airborne for at least 8Hours & 34 Mins since take-off from KLIA in order to have reached the Maldives? One possibility is, they must have glided MH370 somewhere along the way (unpowered-withboth-enginesoff) for about 50 minutes or so. Where this glide happened, was immediately following the mid-air emergency/sudden turn back"
**DISCLAIMER** The following section is assuming the video is real and speculation on my part
Is this where our video comes in to play? As noted earlier the time at which MH370 was at P5 was 6:41 MYT. March 8, 2014 the sunrise in malaysia happened at 7:22 MYT.This means MH370 had around 40 minutes time to fly from P5 to the coordinates in the video (8.834301, 93.19492).
It also seems like there would be no reason for the pilot to fly over the ocean after turning around from P5, considering he would be able to see land below him. No reference points and we can assume some of his systems are malfunctioning/not working at all, so it seems like a safer option to remain in that area, where he's able to see land.
With this new evidence we have to conclude that the plane was teleported from the coordinates in the video to a different location on that flight route. This happened after he turned around from P5.
According to eye-witnesses MH370 was burning for a period of time (exact duration unknown, but it stopped at some point). Did this happen because of the teleportation?**end of disclaimer**
Conclusion
On a finishing note, I was actually so confused when I discovered this report. How has no one seen this? 2 News articles, barely any youtube views. In the report he talks about presenting his findings to the malaysian government in 2018, before his report was finished, when he initially discovered the miscalculations. Why was there no follow up investigation? The report has been public since March 8, 2022.Important I'm not claiming that this was a cover up. Some things about this are definitely suspicious, but it could be sheer incompetence by everyone involved in figuring this out back in 2014.
I hope this can clear some things up around the topic and possibly provide new angles for us to investigate the video. I encourage everyone to read the report and possibly spread it on social media, maybe that will pressure someone into investigating this location and hopefully finding MH370. I haven't fully finished reading it (it's 125 pages and writing this post took quite some time), so if I missed anything important that could help us investigate, let me know and I'll add it to this post.
TL;DR:
Inmarsat data in 2014 was calculated wrong, giving a position in the southern indian ocean. This 2022 report shows what they did wrong and reveals the location of MH370 crashing to be at the maldives. Everyone involved back in 2014 is either incompetent or covering something up, they wasted 250 million$ on searching the wrong area, because of wrong calculations. Pilot suicide theory is also most likely wrong.
Edit: Formatting
367
u/authority23 Aug 16 '23 edited Aug 16 '23
Just gonna leave this here
"As Inmarsat put all its resources at the disposal of the international investigation team to try and narrow the search area, personal tragedy struck Dickinson and his team.
Dickinson and a colleague flew to Kuala Lumpur to brief the investigation team at the end of the first week. On the way back, Dickinson was meant to fly from Kuala Lumpur to Los Angeles via Heathrow early in the second week.
As he landed at Heathrow, he found out that a key member of his operations team, one of the satellite controllers, had suddenly died overnight. The team was already working overtime and being such a closely-knit group, the tragedy hit them hard."
221
u/republicofzetariculi Aug 16 '23
”had suddenly died overnight” - that’s not suspicious at all. Might have been the guy who filmed leaked the footage??
115
u/Ok_Feedback_8124 Aug 16 '23
He viewed a video of Illegal Miners with ... Ok ok too much, too soon.
→ More replies9
23
u/VoidOmatic Aug 17 '23
Sadly I have had 7 co-workers pass away on my teams over the various years from 2007-2019. Losing coworkers is pretty common 30+. All of them from normal everyday health issues.
61
9
→ More replies34
u/authority23 Aug 17 '23 edited Aug 17 '23
Hmm. In this context though - a SATELLITE CONTROLLER - pretty damn interesting coincidence yes?
7
u/Ghauldidnothingwrong Aug 17 '23
It's interesting given the context of the whole situation, but if you take the missing plane and videos the sub has been deep diving out of the equation and it's just a sad, real world thing that happens at nearly every job after 30-40.
→ More replies0
u/Eldrake Aug 17 '23
Probably was under extreme stress and workload, might have had a heart attack.
→ More replies5
→ More replies24
u/Atiyo_ Aug 16 '23
Wait. Anyone working as personal security?
31
u/authority23 Aug 16 '23
Are you asking about the employee's job role?
Their role is explicitly mentioned as "satellite controller" in the article.
21
u/Atiyo_ Aug 16 '23
No i was making a bad joke, that I would be the next one to be killed for exposing this. Someone should figure out if the author of that report is still alive.
31
u/authority23 Aug 16 '23
Oh I see. My bad haha.
I had a memory of this article, but pretty damn hard to actually find again.
But anyway - I find the "sudden death" of an Inmarsat satellite controller at the peak of Inmarsat's involvement in supporting formulation of the official mh370 investigation narrative highly suspicious.
What better way to send a message to the surviving team? Fall in line. Or else.
→ More replies3
u/Grimaceisbaby Aug 16 '23
How legit is this website?
→ More replies13
u/authority23 Aug 16 '23
You mean Aviationtoday?
Highly legit - it's an (online) industry magazine for the aviation electronics sector.
The info itself comes from an interview with the Inmarsat exec himself- so there's no doubt at all the death occurred.
204
u/UNSC_ONI Aug 16 '23 edited Aug 16 '23
Wow. If what you say is true, this is truly a very big development.
Will also take a look too to see if I can get some more info from it.
Edit:
Damn, do you know what is close to Thaa listed in the picture above...
Diego Garcia
The military base.
62
u/TheRaymac Aug 16 '23
It's not true though.
The BTO rings are accurate. They were tested on 17 different data points where they KNEW where the plane was because it was still at the airport or early in its flight when the transponder was still on. The calculated the error rate of <1 km-8.85 km.
This Sergio guy completely ignores that and then goes on to imply that his paper is peer-reviewed when it isn't. And the actual paper he is trying to debunk is in a peer-reviewed academic journal. The premise for this post and that guy's paper is totally bogus.
17
u/UNSC_ONI Aug 16 '23
Fairs dude, truth be told I actually got caught up reading the latest debunk post 😂. I was going to edit my post to include some of the same things.
9
u/TheRaymac Aug 17 '23
Well, you did say "if", so you're good. lol
It just happened to really jump out at me because I've been getting into the weeds on all that satcom data stuff today.
3
u/Necrid41 Aug 17 '23
You know that poster is as clear as day disinformation? look at his history and Ten comments over two years calling hoax or fake.
Then creates this ridiculous it’s a hoax post Is called out And poof. Comments deleting left and right. He messed up. Redditors caught it. Elgins working hard on this one Man I was all in on hoax at first too. They really help reinforce what’s real when they go after it’s
Check that debunk post again. Read through
That debunk post is the hoax
→ More replies7
u/covid_is_from_a_lab Aug 17 '23
Good stuff, thanks for the info. This post is definitely not a 'massive new lead', more like some bad analysis followed by insane conclusions
22
→ More replies39
274
u/crjlsm Aug 16 '23
Wow.
I'm not gonna lie, I didn't think today would bring anything but more boundless speculation.
Feels like this whole thing has been blown wide open. The footage has a good shot at being authentic, and the details of the flight itself and all the assumptions we've been running on for 9 years might be false now?
Feels like MSM is days behind this one. Gonna be hard to ignore soon.
We've literally learned classified military details regarding sensor and imaging capability as we dig.
This is totally nuts 🤯
72
u/bejammin075 Aug 16 '23
I found this 2015 Media Watch article "MH370 Maldives theory debunked". It would be interesting to compare the details in this "debunking" of the Maldives theory and see if any of that matches with the current speculations.
I've been completely ignoring this story in r/UFOs until yesterday, so sorry if I'm posting something already digested by the community.
107
u/Ex_Astris Aug 16 '23
This is potentially the third fairly mind-blowing, seemingly legit (at least at first glance), revelation on this topic TODAY ALONE.
There's the post about how the plane seemingly moved 'backwards' into the portal, and the post where the military official is quoted as saying they had satellite data on MH370 (the same satellite system in the video's text).
Though I'm honestly still piecing this post together, since like everyone else, I had zero knowledge of satellites and their terminology two weeks ago.
But this is just wild. It's such a strange mix of compelling analyses by laymen/hobbyists/professional, of mystery, and of entertainment. And with a long shadow of potential disinformation or fraud hanging over it. And it's unraveling before all of our eyes.
Just when I think it's slowing down, that it can't possibly keep going at this pace, multiple new paths unravel.
I can't tell if we're "lucky" (to be watching a grassroots investigation actually solve a world-shattering puzzle), or are victims here (of disinformation), but either way, at least we're being entertained.
12
u/kensingtonGore Aug 17 '23 edited Aug 17 '23
Did you see the post about the portal effect matching older videos of UAP flying into solid rock near a volcano?
Edit: this thread
2
2
→ More replies2
20
u/cozy_lolo Aug 16 '23
Why is the plane moving backwards into the portal such a big deal? Because other UFO-reports include similar details or something, perhaps?
→ More replies24
u/Ex_Astris Aug 16 '23
Yeah, maybe it’s not a breakthrough post or anything, because it doesn’t get us any closer to knowing if it’s real or fake. So I could have worded that better.
I guess I meant it more as another tiny detail that the faker would have had to think to fake, which just it makes it more impressive if it’s a fake.
But mostly, I was just surprised we were still uncovering these tiny details even after so many people have already gone over it, including professional VFX artists.
3
u/dathislayer Aug 17 '23
Then there's the 1940s UFO film originally posted on the same guy's YouTube. I can see it being disinfo, but not a plain hoax. To put all this planning into something that wouldn't be relevant until 9 years later? And do it in a way that can remain plausible after days of scrutiny? Whole situation is wild.
3
u/covid_is_from_a_lab Aug 17 '23
This evidence/analysis (main post here, not you) is actually not very compelling. It seems to be in direct conflict with the rest of the data (which is miraculously internally consistent). Seems like it's muddying the waters more than anything.
31
u/Vladmerius Aug 16 '23
This is honestly insane if we are really witnessing a real mass abduction and the general public is going to be shown the same clips on national news sometime in the next few months as the first public disclosure.
If this is what they show us first though, officially, it paints an unfortunate picture for the direction they are going to go on with disclosure in general. I feel like they're going to say nhi are a huge threat and we need to funnel all of our money to the military budget immediately.
2
u/optifog Aug 17 '23
This isn't official disclosure, it's clearly being heavily suppressed from up top. Massive efforts against it. They don't want you to know that NHI are a huge threat, that's the LAST thing they were ever going to admit. It will have to be dragged out, they want blissful ignorance, not informed precaution-taking.
12
u/shitpipebatteringram Aug 16 '23
I would lean towards 100% legitimacy of a cover up as well as the video being real. The last piece of this puzzle for me are the people on board and the families. It’s the one remaining “unaccounted for.”
7
u/lobabobloblaw Aug 16 '23
The MSM being days behind is actually less good for us than it is for them…
26
Aug 16 '23
This isn’t an MSM thing. They didn’t have this info before most likely either. To me, this is Malaysian authorities probably getting it wrong, realizing they got it wrong, and then trying to cover up that incompetence.
34
u/Atiyo_ Aug 16 '23
Well considering the team that investigated this was partly from the US, UK, China, Australia and Malaysia, you can definitely not blame this on just one of them. Each one of them could've spotted the mistake. The initial mistake came from Inmarsat's internal calculations.
9
Aug 16 '23
I know, but Malaysia was getting soooo much flak during the initial investigation and then continued to for years, and they were working so closely with Inmarsat that I would say it would not surprise me if they were the ones pushing to cover it up.
Agreed that Inmarsat(who were very smug in the Netflix doc, might I add) definitely shares blame here.
11
u/crjlsm Aug 16 '23
Completely! I meant that mainstream media is probably only a week or so off from picking this story up
6
u/LedZeppole10 Aug 17 '23
Do you really believe that? I don’t think the MSM or even News Nation would ever touch this with a 100 ft pole.
Wishful thinking sadly.
→ More replies4
u/oswaldcopperpot Aug 17 '23
The fuck are you talking about? They aren't going to touch this with a 20 foot pole.
APNews picked up up the UAP July 26th hearing for an HOUR on their front page.. and then removed it and from all news categories so the only way you could find it was through search.Most of the rest of them had cringe titles, cringe thumbnails and opinion pieces from people that saw it as extreme woo.
You can forget about mainstream media.
2
→ More replies1
u/TheJungleBoy1 Aug 16 '23
Brother, if it's true, U.S, U.K, China, Australia, and Malaysia all were neglectful and covered it up? For what reason, though?
21
u/mystichobo23 Aug 16 '23
Well if what we see in the videos is true then that would be the exact reason.
9
u/TheJungleBoy1 Aug 16 '23
Yeah, stupid question. My mind was blown a little. It's just so messed up.
→ More replies4
u/Atiyo_ Aug 16 '23
This doesn't necessarily need to be a cover up. In the report on page 76 he goes into why this error can easily be missed. It might just be that no one noticed this.
21
u/TheRaymac Aug 16 '23
This whole post is bogus. The BTO rings are accurate. It's from an actual academic journal and they tested for the accuracy of their method before applying it to the rest of the flight.
"The combined SDU and ground station bias was calculated from 17 signals exchanged between the ground station and the aircraft during a 30-minute period before take-off, when the aircraft's location was known (at Kuala Lumpur International Airport). To establish the accuracy of their calculations, the bias value was used to calculate the distance from the aircraft to the satellite during the time it was on the ground at KLIA, with errors of <1 km-8.85 km (<0.6 mi-5.5 mi). The distance from the satellite to the aircraft was also calculated while the aircraft was in-flight and at a known location shortly after take-off, showing similar accuracy.
Here's a link to the paper. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-navigation/article/search-for-mh370/D2D1C4C99E7BFDE35841CFD70081114A
2
13
u/bullettrain1 Aug 16 '23
pleasseee somebody explain to me why we’re just casually ignoring that this video is teleporting a plane the same way shown in the opening scene of Steven Spielberg's Taken (2000)
https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/15pproa/first_scene_in_episode_01_of_taken_television/
i genuinely do not understand why people are glossing over this like it’s not a big deal. there’s a a movie made 23 years ago showing the same thing as this video, even if you believe this video is real, isn’t that insanely relevant to talk about??
16
u/JLanticena Aug 16 '23
If the video was fake (I don't think the video is fake) then whoever created the video can use references or inspiration from something like Taken. So I don't think there's a strong case there, but I agree that there could be more to it.
-7
u/bullettrain1 Aug 16 '23
I just don’t see how that is not a strong case. Otherwise that’s an incredible coincidence that a movie showing aliens teleport a plane is actually accurate. This MH370 video is very similar to the teleportation concept from the movie Contact too. Circling objects around one (3 vs 4), accelerating speed curve, bright flash on moment of teleport. If this video is a hoax video, doesn’t it make sense that the filmmaker who made it took inspiration from common sci fi films?
19
u/FoggyDonkey Aug 16 '23
The clip you linked doesn't even vaguely resemble the video, and I don't know why you're pushing the idea so hard that if anything on this topic is even slightly similar to any idea or concept anyone has ever had for how that might look then it must be false.
→ More replies14
u/FernFromDetroit Aug 16 '23
That video hardly resembles the other one. They don’t even spin around the plane.
-2
u/bullettrain1 Aug 16 '23
How about the movie Contact as well then?
In the movie Contact, SETI detects blueprints from outer space. The blueprints are for a large machine with four large rings, with an air opening in the middle for a small ship to drop into the center. When the machine is turned on, it “warms up” and the circles start to rotate at an accelerated speed. The rings then reach max speed, at which point the ship is dropped into the center, and a large bright flash occurs the moment the ship disappears and is sent through a wormhole (“teleported”).
Breakdown on why it’s the same teleportation concept between the movie and this video:
• movie uses 4 outer objects, this video has 3
• both place the item that is going to be teleported in the center (as opposed to above, below, forward, under, parallel)
• once ready to begin the teleportation, both have a “warming up phase”, and have their outer objects start to circle around the item, speeds synchronized
• the speed of the circulating objects follow an accelerating curve
• both reach a peak speed, and a sudden bright light flashes covering view of the object, which at that point has been teleported
So Orbs from Taken since it’s in the air, and tech from Contact.
→ More replies16
u/whatisitthatis Aug 16 '23
If you think what you see in “Taken” is “Exactly” the same thing then id get my eyes checked lmao. Whatever happens in that movie is as fake looking as it can get.0
6
u/bullettrain1 Aug 16 '23
How about the movie Contact as well then?
In the movie Contact, SETI detects blueprints from outer space. The blueprints are for a large machine with four large rings, with an air opening in the middle for a small ship to drop into the center. When the machine is turned on, it “warms up” and the circles start to rotate at an accelerated speed. The rings then reach max speed, at which point the ship is dropped into the center, and a large bright flash occurs the moment the ship disappears and is sent through a wormhole (“teleported”).
Breakdown on why it’s the same teleportation concept between the movie and this video:
• movie uses 4 outer objects, this video has 3
• both place the item that is going to be teleported in the center (as opposed to above, below, forward, under, parallel)
• once ready to begin the teleportation, both have a “warming up phase”, and have their outer objects start to circle around the item, speeds synchronized
• the speed of the circulating objects follow an accelerating curve
• both reach a peak speed, and a sudden bright light flashes covering view of the object, which at that point has been teleported
So Orbs from Taken since it’s in the air, and tech from Contact.
13
u/whatisitthatis Aug 16 '23
Iv seen that movie and it’s incredible.
So hold on let me get this straight, I thought you are trying to talk about “Taken” as if it can debunk the portal video.
Like “if the movie can do it” why can’t the hoaxer. That’s why I said the movie looks fake AF while our video doesn’t
4
u/bullettrain1 Aug 16 '23
I’m trying to draw attention to the concepts being the same, they’re filmmaker concepts. We have no real world examples of teleportation technology beyond movies, what are the actual chances these movies are showing how it works? Like, why would there a bright flash at the end that just so happens to cover the object being teleported? To me, our video makes a lot more sense when you look at it from the perspective of filmmaking, which gives merit to the idea this video is from a filmmaker.
6
u/whatisitthatis Aug 16 '23
I understand what you mean now, earlier I thought it was a cheap attempt to debunk the video.
Back to your point.
How do we know what teleportation means?
How do we know what it looks like?
I can guarantee you that the filmmaker that created that sequence, didn’t invent teleportation or how it should look.
We can do historical research and try to figure out the first instance of a teleportation being illustrated by picture or video, but I am willing to bet the filmmaker is conditioned by pop culture and “how a teleportation should look” just like all of us. All I’m saying is I think the design of a teleportation portal probably predates the filmmaker.
→ More replies→ More replies4
u/lemtrees Aug 16 '23
Things spinning around things is hardly a filmmaker concept. It just sort of... is.
2
u/bullettrain1 Aug 16 '23
It’s the cheapest / time efficient way to animate something. No complex moving parts, same with the flash at the end, because it replaces the need to make a realistic complex animation, the bright light hides everything
→ More replies2
u/lemtrees Aug 16 '23
I don't disagree that it is the cheapest way to animate something. I'm just not convinced that that argument carries any weight here, especially when you look at the relative complexity of the (presumed) renderings in the FLIR video, such as the hot exhaust mirage effect on the orb that flies behind it, etc. Assuming it is animated, there was still quite some effort put into it. Even if it is real, there's no reason to suspect that wormhole or portal or explosion or whatever that is is visually anything other than an elegant simple display.
→ More replies2
u/Grimaceisbaby Aug 16 '23
What am I supposed to take from this? Is ET real? It’s that why he would know secret alien tech?
→ More replies→ More replies2
u/LedZeppole10 Aug 17 '23
It’s just sci fi stuff being all sci fi-ey. Couldn’t be less to discuss IMO.
→ More replies2
Aug 16 '23
Who knew a bunch of dudes, dudettes and dudems on a silly subreddit dedicated to posts about flying plates and little green men would crack open one of the biggest mysteries of the 21st century just because they were bored due to Congress being on recess? Lol.
63
u/GearBrain Aug 16 '23
This is... not right. The original analysis of the handshakes took into account the signal delay. But even if they didn't, these are radio signals that propagate at the speed of light. The satellites are geostationary, iirc, and none of them are farther out than the moon. Any miscalculation around timing would result in a rather small offset.
I doubt this has passed peer review, either.
And the sightings made that day over the Maldives were apparently of a twin-engine craft, not an airliner. And I'm reading it landed safely?
This is nonsense.
→ More replies16
u/Key-Procedure88 Aug 16 '23 edited Aug 17 '23
The "peer review" selected comments include:
"Your report is very clear cut! They’ve been searching in the wrong location...; / At last someone with a little less hubris brings together the eyewitness accounts and the science to produce a plausible theory that now needs to be tested through proper investigations." lol, very scientific.
I mean... just look at the document, the dude is claiming to know the crash location in the Maldives and it includes some... random photo of a plane cockpit underwater.
I have a strong feeling most people here don't even bother to click through sources.
edit: bonus "peer review" comment: "f we accept Section 2 as defining BTO (we have little choice - all my google searches of BTO point to the Inmarsat report, which means we have no independent definition)." Honestly hilarious
Just for bonus memes I scrolled down to one of the witness accounts which includes a woman in the Maldives claiming she could see the blue stripe on the bottom of MH370 as it circled her island... at 1:30 in the morning lmao
67
u/dobias01 Aug 16 '23
Wouldn't that mean that the satellite video (along with its location) is false? Since it seems that the satellite was confirmed to be in the area of what we thought was the point of disappearance? Unless it's not far from line of sight to either locations.
36
u/covid_is_from_a_lab Aug 17 '23
Yeah this post is a bit wonky. Feels a bit like a Trojan horse, trying to get us to swallow conflicting information by coating it in the same appearance as some recent posts here. Plus our belief in coverups.
The idea that "and the plane must have teleported" is not at all reasonable given the evidence I've seen. Much more reasonable to assume that this 3rd party analysis is in fact flawed. The number of facts that already triangulate with the satellite video is jaw dropping.
Always worth taking a critical look at the data though.
4
u/oversizedvenator Aug 17 '23
If I’m tracking though (and I might not be) - if the data used to calculate location was false, then the coordinates in the video would have been 100% faked since they were based on erroneous data.
→ More replies1
u/Atiyo_ Aug 17 '23
To be clear I've said this in a different comment already, if we assume the plane was teleported to a different location on earth, the video can be real, however this post is not proof of the video being real or fake.
If we assume that "portal" thing destroyed the plane or teleported it to a different planet/dimension, then the video can't be real.
So I would say this post can't get us clarity on whether it is real, because we would need to figure out what that "portal" did, but that seems impossible.
32
Aug 16 '23
This is from 2022? Why does no one know about it? It’s such a big development
46
u/TheRaymac Aug 16 '23
Because it's bogus. The BTO rings are accurate. Here's the paper that calculated it. You'll notice it's from a peer-reviewed academic journal and not some random guy's personal website. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-navigation/article/search-for-mh370/D2D1C4C99E7BFDE35841CFD70081114A
10
12
u/TheRaymac Aug 16 '23
No.
The whole premise for this is wrong. The BTO rings are not wrong.
If you look at the actual report, WHICH IS POSTED IN AN ACTUAL ACADEMIC JOURNAL WHICH IS PEER-REVIEWED not just some pdf posted on a personal website, you will see that the authors rigorously tested the accuracy of their model multiple times using secondary sources.
"The combined SDU and ground station bias was calculated from 17 signals exchanged between the ground station and the aircraft during a 30-minute period before take-off, when the aircraft's location was known (at Kuala Lumpur International Airport). To establish the accuracy of their calculations, the bias value was used to calculate the distance from the aircraft to the satellite during the time it was on the ground at KLIA, with errors of <1 km-8.85 km (<0.6 mi-5.5 mi). The distance from the satellite to the aircraft was also calculated while the aircraft was in-flight and at a known location shortly after take-off, showing similar accuracy."
The premise is wrong. Eye witnesses are not reliable, but actual scientific evidence is.
Here's a link to the actual PEER-REVIEWED paper. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-navigation/article/search-for-mh370/D2D1C4C99E7BFDE35841CFD70081114A
1
u/Atiyo_ Aug 16 '23
He points out the mistake in that paper you linked on page 70 in his report. Feel free to verify this.
5
u/TheRaymac Aug 16 '23
I did. Did you?
He simply is harping on the term "BTO" without actually looking at the method they used. He makes no reference to the fact that they tested the method on 17 different data points where they KNEW where the plane was because it was still at the airport or early in the flight which was verified by the transponder radar data.
They tested it and determined the possible error rate. This Sergio guy makes no mention of that whatsoever.
It also totally ignores the fully confirmed WSPR data of the flight path as well.
2
u/Atiyo_ Aug 17 '23
I tried to point out the mistake they apparently made here, I would need to calculate this to see if that's actually what happened here, but I'm getting flooded right now with messages and about to go to bed.
https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/15t1jlo/comment/jwi7juk/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3→ More replies
28
Aug 16 '23
So, your conclusion doesn’t really sum up what any of this potentially means, and a lot of this is way over my head/confusing to me(I’m also trying to be productive, so reading this in bits and pieces isn’t helping). What would you say is your personal takeaway of what this means in reference to the videos possibly?
33
u/crjlsm Aug 16 '23
Basically the flight path we've been assuming the plane took along might have been incorrect. I'm not sure if OP is implying this was done deliberately or if these are just big mistakes, or what.
17
Aug 16 '23
Yeah, this doesn’t really affect the video one way or the other, but it does basically move the original investigation back to square one.
It does make debris being found off the coast of Madagascar make more sense, though.
To me this scream incompetence and the potential attempt to cover up said incompetence.
→ More replies32
u/Atiyo_ Aug 16 '23
I will add a tl;dr in the post:
Inmarsat data in 2014 was calculated wrong, giving a position in the southern indian ocean. This 2022 report shows what they did wrong and reveals the location of MH370 crashing to be at the maldives. Everyone involved back in 2014 is either incompetent or covering something up, they wasted 250 million$ on searching the wrong area, because of wrong calculations. Pilot suicide theory is also wrong.
14
Aug 16 '23
It also makes the debris being found off the coast of Madagascar make sense, and it definitely feels like this was likely not widely circulated intentionally to hide the incompetence of getting it wrong the first time.
2
3
u/cat_with_problems Aug 16 '23
i've never understood why the abduction video makes any sense if there was debris found in the ocean?
→ More replies7
Aug 16 '23
Well, the conspiratorial assumption is that the debris was planted. The other assumption is that it’s not abduction/teleportation, that it’s just destroying it in some way.
I am on the fence about both videos(the satellite one seems more legit to me), and I keep being pulled back and forth on which way I lean on them. Right now, I’m leaning towards thinking at least the satellite video is legit, but there’s a lot that’s hard to explain away from both sides of the argument, which makes it tough to definitively say.
4
u/btcprint Aug 16 '23
Plus, they say the plane could not have traveled that far with the amount of fuel. Said it would have had to glide for 55 minutes to get that far.
That is, glide... or....jump through a wormhole. Bada bing bada boom.
-12
u/HelgaGeePataki Aug 16 '23
Pilot suicide theory isn't wrong just because the daughter felt the news made it up.
People act normal all the time before suicide or murder.
25
u/Atiyo_ Aug 16 '23
Read the report, the pilot suicide theory just doesn't make sense after reading it. He was circling an island trying to find a landing spot, that's not something you do if you want to commit suicide.
→ More replies
26
u/TheJungleBoy1 Aug 16 '23
UAP's or not, real video or not. This information is crazy. How can they be so neglectful? This is multiple governments overlooking this fact, if true.
23
Aug 16 '23
[removed] — view removed comment
→ More replies10
u/bejammin075 Aug 16 '23
Searching for "maldives" in that sub turns up only 2 posts within the last 5 years.
There is a stickied post at the top warning the sub that there will be an influx of UFO conspiracy theorists.
25
u/MPBengs Aug 16 '23
I hope someone is documenting this for Netflix in two years. It’s the next ‘don’t fuck with cats’
→ More replies7
13
u/notepad20 Aug 16 '23 edited Aug 16 '23
So if the teleport actually occurred at sunrise, then that other YouTube video makes perfect sense, and we have additional contrails in that video, so what other planes were in the area at that time?
Edit: and the little plane in the back ground is the drone. No contrail cause it prop driven.
→ More replies
5
u/Dillatrack Aug 16 '23
Where was this peer reviewed? You linked a dropbox and then someones website, did people even bother looking at this before upvoting? It looks more like a powerpoint presentation...
5
u/FarMuffin9550 Aug 16 '23
It's illegible source with the narrative I like. People died for my right to throw upvotes at shit like this.
→ More replies1
u/Atiyo_ Aug 16 '23
added this at the top of the post. Should've put "peer reviewed" in quotation marks, but the math should still be correct.
→ More replies
6
u/bobbejaans Aug 16 '23
Can a triple 7 glide for 50 minutes? What do the times look like on a single engine powered? I would prefer this over dimensional vortices tbh.
13
u/darkquarks Aug 16 '23
Boeing 777 glide ratio is 17:1. So for every 17 units it goes forward it goes 1 unit down. If it’s at a standard flight level of 40K feet then it can glide roughly 128 miles assuming perfect conditions (weight distribution, wind, etc). How long that would take depends on a variety of factors. Air Transat 236 glided about 75 miles in the span of 20 minutes after the second engine flames out.
8
u/KOOKOOOOM Aug 16 '23
I have difficulty with a few points.
So this person's report has the order of the arcs completely reversed? I understand that Inmarsat may be shady, but it seems weird to throw away every other scientist's analysis of the arcs, in order to just believe this one person. I'd understand if he had noticed a small inaccuracy or error, but to assume the original team had everything backwards?
Doesn't this conclusion also contradict the more accurate flight path arrived at with the WSPR method? That flight path more or less aligns with Inmarsat, but more accurate. WSPR wrong too?
Maldives isn't exactly deserted. And shallow waters. I don't understand, like are we saying the plane's literally right next to an atoll/populated islands in the Maldives and everyone's just like 🤷♂️?
I don't understand how it's possible for the plane to make it from P5 to the Maldives in 40 minutes. Are we assuming the portal appears while the plane is still near Malaysia? Why would the satellite footage show the coordinates of the destination of the portal?
3
u/SlayerofDeezNutz Aug 17 '23
The sat footage doesn’t show the destination but departure point in the Andaman Islands along the p5 Inmarsat point at 7:22 am Malaysia time.
2
u/KOOKOOOOM Aug 17 '23
Ok thank you I think I finally understand op's theory.
If I understood correctly:
40 minutes for plane to go from p5 to 8.834301, 93.19492.
Portal at 8.834301, 93.19492.
Portal destination Maldives.
Not sure if I agree with it, but interesting nonetheless.
→ More replies2
u/Atiyo_ Aug 17 '23
- It was a very small error, it's detailed on page 70. I also talked about it here, maybe it's easier to understand.
- The WSPR Data was controversial, see this comment
- Well that's his theory based on eye-witness testimony, the key point being that the plane could've ended up anywhere on that last ping P7.
- The time difference between P5 and P6 is 1hr and 30 minutes, for whatever reason the difference here wasn't hourly, perhaps because he turned off the plane to glide for some distance
10
u/Squishy_Cat_Pooch Aug 16 '23
We also aren’t talking enough about how the NHI could’ve disabled communications on the plane, not allowing for a distress call. Or, even taking control of the plane - there are many anecdotal stories of this happening with military equipment (i.e. nukes).
17
6
Aug 16 '23
Great stuff. I also just want to add this X thread since I found it a compelling case against pilot suicide: https://twitter.com/JustTrayLoL/status/1690469517342769152
39
u/VRForum Aug 16 '23 edited Aug 16 '23
I knew it. I kept thinking, Diego Garcia must play into this. Explains why the drones were there. They wanted to be sure the data showed the plane heading AWAY from the base. I'm starting to think this is not UFO's at all, I think this military is covering up the fact they used advanced weaponry to down a passenger plane. It would also explain why wreckage was found on the other side of Diego Garcia. This isn't a teleportation, it's an obliteration.
Edit: Could be some kind of heatseeking tech? It could explain the IR view from the drone. As well as the one cold side of the spinning orb.
10
Aug 16 '23
[deleted]
→ More replies3
u/VRForum Aug 16 '23
For every answer, there's a new question. I like speculating but I hope to god we get some answers that don't lead to more rabbit holes.
5
u/MVPoker Aug 16 '23
But why… if you think about it from Deigo Garcia’s perspective you see on your radar an approaching plane, potentially hijacked and you determine that its a threat to your base. You give the orders to take out the threat and for some reason decide to risk the safety of everyone on the base by using a new technology that essentially doesnt really do much more than what a few missles would do… why would they make this choice? There would have to be a good reason to not shoot it down with a reliable weapon that you know works, since this to them is a real life attack.
10
u/Jane_Doe_32 Aug 16 '23
Just like in Peru, when it became known that US troops were maneuvering through the area, this case increasingly reeks of the military playing with its super-advanced technology at the expense of the citizen.
7
u/ZolaThaGod Aug 16 '23
Why can’t the military just test out their super-weapons on some old junk plane they have laying around? Why risk all this media attention by fucking with a real airliner?
2
u/VRForum Aug 16 '23
I mean I doubt it was a test. I think it was flying toward the base with unknown intentions. They don't mess around with that shit since 9/11.
3
u/ZolaThaGod Aug 16 '23 edited Aug 16 '23
That’s plausible, but do you think the US government would really go through all this trouble to cover something like that up? Especially after 9/11, like you say.
And didn’t the US also shoot down another airliner near Iran some years ago? The plane’s transponder was off or something and so the pilots weren’t responding, so a US Naval Ship shot it down. Why cover up MH370 but not cover up that one?
→ More replies2
u/Jane_Doe_32 Aug 16 '23
A direct message to China? Something like, look at what we have and see how far we are able to project our operations.
→ More replies2
u/Grimaceisbaby Aug 16 '23
I thought a lot of people were originally leaning into this because this seems like an obvious possibility.
We don’t have any proof of teleportation that I know of but hasn’t there been reports of military tech that just disintegrates everything?
I’m really curious about the cargo and people on board. This case has always made people uncomfortable because of the amount of bizarre information surrounding it. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a conspiracy with this many confusing possibilities.
It’s hard to believe this was aliens because this just doesn’t seem to happen to passenger planes. We have so many examples of governments killing innocent people and covering it up.
What confuses me is why they would hide this from the general public. It would have been much cheaper to pay off families and call it a terrorist attack. Every country worked together on this. If the US isn’t hiding it’s tech from the international military, why are they hiding it from us?
→ More replies1
u/SlayerofDeezNutz Aug 16 '23
The phenomenon happened over the Andaman Islands though; that’s where India has a military base not the US. I just don’t see how a drone could be deployed all the way from Diego Garcia unless it was already deployed to watch the military games going on in the region.
→ More replies
4
u/queensekhmet Aug 16 '23
Still need to further review this material you posted, but I just want to make the point that nothing you included seems to be "peer reviewed". Peer review is a process where a journal you submit a paper to will assign experts in the subject to assess the validity of your work. If all reviewers accept the validity and any suggested revisions, the work is then published to the journal. News articles and Dropbox pdfs are not peer reviewed.
8
u/braidedbutthair Aug 16 '23
I can’t get behind this. Members from the Independent Group would have caught this long ago and I seriously doubt no one would have caught this previously.
→ More replies4
u/Atiyo_ Aug 16 '23
Well consider this: After an extensive search in the southern indian ocean no traces of MH370 have been found. Yet we have multiple eye-witnesses claiming to have seen a plane that looked like MH370 at the maldives. I mean let's say he's wrong about the exact location, maybe it was way further south or way further north, I'd say it still makes sense. Check his report on page 76 he talks about why this error can be easily missed.
And yes it is surprising how apparently no one has noticed this report. Even when this subreddit started investigating this issue I don't think anyone ever brought up this report. Despite so many people going through articles and stuff. It was by sheer luck that I found this.
→ More replies2
u/ZolaThaGod Aug 16 '23
After an extensive search in the southern indian ocean no traces of MH370 have been found.
That’s just not true though. Haven’t some like 30 pieces of plane wreckage been found along coastlines that would be consistent with the currents in the Indian Ocean and where the plane is suspected to have gone down? And out of those 30 some pieces, a few have been confirmed to be part of the plane.
If you want to say they’re lying about that, well then 🤷🏻♂️
2
u/chAzR89 Aug 17 '23
This hole story about MH370 is weird but I'll never understand why so many ppl say the found parts are placed.
→ More replies1
u/Atiyo_ Aug 17 '23
Check out page 41 and 42 of the report. According to this online simulator plasticadrift.org it would be possible for debris to end up in the locations where debris was found.
20
u/im_da_nice_guy Aug 16 '23
I am so tired of this topic clogging up the sub but dadgummit you SoBs do really impressive research. I am excited to see these skills brought to bear when we have some other things to dig into in the future.
→ More replies
6
u/thatnameagain Aug 16 '23
Sorry, what's the takeaway here? The satellite data was wrong so therefore the plane got teleported by UAPs in the video?
I really can't follow this narrative anymore. The plane was seen diverting from course and didn't radio in contact, but it's not a pilot suicide? Ok then why did they do that?
The plane was on fire? Maybe? Hours after it was intentionally diverted from it's course? And this means maybe it was UAP teleported?
Honestly this whole recent obsession with the video seems to have fueled a massive speculation rush in which any crack in the previously reported info means that UAPs teleported it. I don't get this at all.
3
3
7
u/victordudu Aug 16 '23
No one seems to notice that the EFFING F B I was entitled to investigate out of US , in a foreign sovereign nation. How on earth ?
Not a peep about thi big fat RED FLAG ?
8
2
u/chAzR89 Aug 17 '23
This isn't unusual. Fbi cooperates with European agency's aswell about potential sleeper cells and such. Pretty much the whole world tried to help but you say the fbis involvement is a red flag?
6
u/HelgaGeePataki Aug 16 '23
Wait, so eye witnesses saw it on fire before it crashes into the ocean but people think it was teleported by the orbs?
How does that reconcile?
9
u/Krustykrab8 Aug 16 '23
Their whole disclaimer explains what they think about it
2
u/HelgaGeePataki Aug 16 '23
My comment was a general question to all of r/UFO who believe that it was teleported and not the more logical conspiracy of it being blown up by the US.
5
u/HOMELAND3R Aug 16 '23
It’s actually pretty logical that it wasn’t aliens, but that doesn’t make it inconsistent with the video.
→ More replies→ More replies4
u/d3fin3d Aug 16 '23
The implication is (from what I understand, correct me if I'm wrong):
If the video is real, the orbs teleported the plane near to the Maldives for <reasons> and the result of the teleportation was some sort of critical failure.
Motive? Perhaps for fun, perhaps tactically, perhaps as an experiment. Also could indicate a human tech job rather than NHI activity?
Strange if true.
6
u/GrinNGrit Aug 16 '23
Plane going down with classified materials and high value targets, US says “hey, now’s a great time to test out our new warp tech!” Queue UFOs teleporting plane to Diego Garcia!
3
u/HelgaGeePataki Aug 16 '23
If this plane was really teleported by aliens don't you think the US government would be clamoring to get the wreckage instead of leaving it in the ocean for other countries to find?
Would they really leave it for China to find?
14
2
u/SlayerofDeezNutz Aug 16 '23
So p5 could have been over the andamen islands at 7:22 which is right where the coordinates are. Could it have been in a holding pattern for those 40 minutes from p5 record to where and when the footage takes place?
2
u/Atiyo_ Aug 16 '23
I think the coordinates in the video are further west than P5. But it had atleast 40 minutes until sunset to reach that area, which would explain why we see the satellite footage in daytime. It also circled that same area for 3 hours prior, so to me it's a mystery why the pilot decided to head towards the maldives, instead of back towards the mainland.
→ More replies
2
2
u/Nevergonnawork1 Aug 16 '23
.....so we are now saying that the plane was teleported to another spot on it's route, and then it was on fire? I'm not sure if the plane lining up in the spot where people have claimed to have seen it on fire is somehow evidence that it was sucked into a black hole by aliens lol.
1
u/Atiyo_ Aug 16 '23
No it's just a theory if the video is real. It's not proof that the video is real.
2
u/Gammazeta430z Aug 16 '23
This sub has gone from mediocre to the best community in a month. So glad to be part of this sub ❤️. Excellent work on all sides
1
2
u/Flangers Aug 17 '23
This was also posted about Inmarsat a few days after the crash.
2
u/Atiyo_ Aug 17 '23
Can you summarize it or copy paste the text? Cant access the article without an account
3
u/Flangers Aug 17 '23
London: A new satellite tracking technique is what gave Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak enough confidence to announce that Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 went down in the remote south of the Indian Ocean.
British firm Inmarsat was behind an earlier analysis that indicated the plane had been flying in one of two big ‘corridors’, one in the northern hemisphere and one in the southern.
However last week it went back to its data and tried a new mathematical analysis, which concluded on Sunday.
The new analysis allowed them to discard the northern corridor, and focus more precisely on the southern route.
Based on this new information, Mr Najib announced on Monday that MH370’s last known position was in the middle of the Indian Ocean, west of Perth.
The nature of the pings indicated that the plane was still moving during that time.“
This is a remote location far from any possible landing sites,” he said. “It is therefore with deep sadness and regret that I must inform you that … flight MH370 ended in the southern Indian Ocean.”
The aeroplane had Inmarsat’s ‘Classic Aero’ satellite system, which collects information such as location, altitude, heading and speed, and sends it through Inmarsat’s satellites into their network.
This ‘ACARS’ (aircraft communications addressing and reporting system) was switched off or interrupted early in the flight, meaning no such information was available to track the plane.
However the Classic Aero system still sent hourly ‘pings’ back to Inmarsat’s satellite for at least five hours after the aircraft left Malaysian airspace, the company discovered.
These pings contained no data – they were just a simple ‘hello’ to keep the link open – however their timing and frequency contained hidden mathematical clues.The company looked at the ‘Doppler effect’ – tiny changes in the frequency of the ping signal, caused by the relative movement of the satellite and the plane (the Doppler effect is the reason why, for example, police sirens are a different pitch or frequency depending on whether they are travelling toward you or away from you).This analysis allowed Inmarsat to map two huge ‘corridors’ for the plane’s possible location, in big arcs stretching thousands of kilometres north and south of the point where the last radar contact with MH370 was made.
Australian and US experts took this information, added some assumptions about the plane’s speed, and narrowed the southern option into an area of ocean that could be realistically searched.Meanwhile, Inmarsat went back to its satellite data.
Its new analysis found that the northern route did not quite correlate with the frequency of the pings from the plane – meaning the plane must have been heading south.
It also suggested that the plane had been travelling at a steady cruising altitude above 30,000 feet.They compared satellite data from MH370 with that from previous Malaysian Airlines Boeing 777 flights, going back a few weeks, in order to better model the movement of the plane.“
This really was a shot in the dark,” Chris McLaughlin, senior vice president of external affairs at Inmarsat told the BBC. “It’s a credit to the scientific team that they managed to model this.
“Just a single ‘ping’ can be used to say the plane was both powered up and travelling. And then by a process of elimination comparing it to other known flights and established that it went south.”
The UK’s Air Accidents Investigation Branch also contributed to the analysis.
2
2
u/GeneralTullius01 Aug 17 '23
This is a coordinated disinformation campaign. Unbelievable that so many people are buying into this with no proof.
2
u/wellmanneredsquirrel Aug 17 '23
Hi guys.
I think the premise this post is based on is not necessarily wrong (a miscalculation may have occurred), however the explanations put forth by the cited report and why that is are wrong.
I have read sections of the below 3 reports.
- The Cavaiuolo Report (dropbox link) (2020, edits in 2022) (single author) cited here and using the handshake round trip time (HRTT) method
- The Inmarsat Report (cambridge org link) (2014) (several authors, all affiliated to Inmarsat) this is the report claimed to use the wrong calculation
- The Australia DoD Report (oapen org link) (2026) (several authors, all from Australia Dept of Defense)
My takeaways are :
- A) The Australia DoD report explains best what (Burst Timing Offset) BTO is. See section 5.1 of the report (page 24 of the report, page 37 of the pdf).
As the name implies, BTO is an offset. It's a measurement of lag. Basically how lagging was a signal to go from a ground station to the satellite link to the aircraft and back through the satellite and to the ground station vs the expected "quickest" time possible.
The system's expectation is the time the signal should take to be back at the ground station assuming a theoretical perfect position of the aircraft right underneath the satellite (90 degrees elevation angle). (To further complexify the matter, the calculation is based on the also theoretical perfect position of the satellite, called nominal satellite position. For now, just know that the satellite has a fixed position in theory but, in practice, moves around a bit in a predictable fashion).
BTO, (once corrected for noise and other stuff) is thus a measurement of lag due to distance away from the satellite.
If you understand that BTO should be 0 when the aircraft is perfectly underneath the satellite (simplifying here), and otherwise represents the difference or delta or lag for when the craft is away from that perfect position, you will also understand this line from the report :
Hence, the BTO is a measure of how far the aircraft is from the sub-satellite position
- B) The Inmarsat report uses the same calculation as the the Australia DoD report, although in a slightly less sophisticated format as far as noise and certain bias are accounted for.
You can go and compare the two if you want. I encourage you to do so and also to work the equations to fully understand the concepts at play. That would be section 3.2 of the Inmarsat report together with section 5.2 of the Australia DoD report
- C) The calculations that are being contested by the Cavaiuolo report are based on the equations and understanding of BTO articulated in the other two reports.
Self-explanatory
- D) The Cavaiuolo report fails to understand the concept of BTO. (I refer you to the quote above, stating that BTO is a measure of how far the aircraft is from the satellite.)
BTO (the lag) can be said to represent how far the craft is from the satellite because it has a frame of reference embedded within, that is, the perfect position right under the satellite. The lag is measured against ideal/quickest timing at this perfect position (aircraft at 90 degrees elevation angle from the satellite).
The Cavaiuolo report, on the other hand, fails to understand that.$
It then uses the HRTT method, which is simply a measurement of time (how long it takes the signal to come back). You will note this HRTT data has no frame of refence per se, and thus cannot on its own be inferred to mean a specific distance. In order to make any distance calculations, the Cavaiuolo report uses a "known reference point" or external frame of reference : the HRTT (time measurement) when the plane was in a known position (the KLIA airport).
$ For instance, the Cavaiulo report on page 70 of the pdf
it is the Round Trip transmission Time of the Handshake (HRTT) that relates directly to the distance between the Groundstation(GES) and the aircraft via the satellite and is made of the two components (a fixed time component and a variable component that varies with the distance of the plane from the satellite), not the BTO
While its true that HRTT relates to a distance, only the BTO can solve for an actual distance
$ Also, page 77 and 78 of the pdf
Another indicator that something was amiss with the BTO based equation in (2) that was not immediately obvious (but arose from the misuse of BTO and the ill-formed ‘(BTO -bias)’ TIME VARIABLE) is the fact that the calculated bias constant [in REF2] turned out to be a negative time duration (which is problematic in itself because a ‘processing delay’ in the real world can never be a negative time. Processing delays are always a positive/finite
amount of time / a positive time measurement.
BTO is not a measurement of processing time, but a measurement of lag. In order to isolate the part of the lag that is due to distance away from the satellite, rectifications have to be made for noise, channel bias and other factors. Otherwise, the lag due to distance would appear worse than it is because of those factors. Hence why certain amounts (in units of time) have to be substracted.
Hope that helps,
Cheers
S
1
u/Atiyo_ Aug 17 '23 edited Aug 17 '23
While its true that HRTT relates to a distance, only the BTO can solve for an actual distance
I'm not sure why this is the case.Page 74:
He calculates the HRTT as the sum of all time delays (bias+full signal time from sending signal to receiving it and back).
He rearranges the equation to show twice the time t1 and t2 (t1=signal time from aircraft to satellite and t2=signal time from ground station to satellite) + the bias (BiasRT=t aes+t ges)
He then rearranges the equation to solve for t1 (aircraft to satellite).
He multiplies the entire equation with c (speed of light, unit m/s). Therefore gaining the distance d1 instead of time t1 because m/s * s.
This is the final equation d1 = c * (HRTT - BiasRT) / 2 - d2
d2 is the known distance between the ground station and the satellite
HRTT = the sum of all the time delays
BiasRT = the processing time by the satellite and ground station
c = speed of light
BTO is not a measurement of processing time, but a measurement of lag. In order to isolate the part of the lag that is due to distance away from the satellite, rectifications have to be made for noise, channel bias and other factors. Otherwise, the lag due to distance would appear worse than it is because of those factors.
"The Burst Timing Offset is the additional delay after the start of the allocated time slot at which the message is received" - from the australian paper 5.2
So the BTO is the time delay after the message was received according to the australian paper, right?
The BTO is the difference between the round trip message delay and the nominal delay.Which means the original paper calculated their rings based on the difference, instead of the actual value, but then their calculation is wrong.
The australian paper also clearly points out that:
Tnom = nominal round trip delay (Round trip delay = The time it takes for a signal from a sender to a receiver and back, this is basically the same as HRTT in the other report, except this is for the nominal position of the satellite and aircraft)
They correctly included the aspects of the satellites position and everything you mentioned above, however I didn't see them confirm the rings calculated by the original paper.
They clearly have different definitions for BTO in both papers and the australian paper did not include the original calculations for the BTO rings (unless I somehow missed that). So they used the BTO values that were provided by Inmarsat data incorrectly, right?
If I messed up at any point feel free to correct me, I've only had 1 coffee so far.
Edit: formatting
→ More replies
2
u/InfluxOG Aug 17 '23 edited Aug 17 '23
I've watched his entire hour and half breakdown of this and did some research, I cannot find a single shred of evidence that the search team have once searched the depths of waters near the Maldives. The only thing they did was fly to the island to collect debris found by locals and collect items from land, which they determined had no significance to MH370.
Why is this significant? Because this guy provides a compelling insight into why he believes the plane is in the waters surrounding the Maldives, shows satellite imagery of what is most definitely a plane submerged under the water, FLIES OUT to that exact spot in the Maldives with a sonar fish finder and actually CONFIRMS there is what looks like a plane directly underneath him on the sonar. He also confirms that in 2015, this information was passed on to the Malaysian authorities investigating the crash and was told they'd be taking this into account as part of the investigation. Despite this, there has still been no recorded search effort in the waters surrounding the Maldives.
Interestingly, if you go to page 442 of the investigative crash report for MH370 found here under the analysis of the Barnacles found on the Flaperon discovered on Reunion island (One of the most significant parts confirmed to be from MH370) it states the following: "At the beginning of their growth, the barnacles were immersed in waters with a temperature close to 28.5 +/- 1°C. Temperature distribution maps in the months preceding the discovery of the flaperon suggest that it has drifted in waters located East-North East of Reunion Island."
This seems to imply that this flaperon had drifted more or less from the North East of Reunion Island, months before it was found, in waters of temperatures around 27.5-30c. However, the search area in the South Indian Ocean that they had been searching in this whole time was almost directly east-south east of Reunion Island, where temperatures wildly fluctuate between 12c and 32c. The waters surrounding the Maldives are directly North East of Reunion Island and they have a temperature all year round of around 28-30c. And yet still, even after this discovery, they have not searched the Maldives. What's going on here? Something doesn't add up.
5
4
Aug 16 '23
Generally if they are incompetent in the military sector, they don't last long enough to make fuck ups this big, a cover up in 2014, definitely more plausible then anything. I hope this gets the traction it deserves.
2
u/Aerodye Aug 16 '23
I have no idea how true any of this is, but I’m inclined to think Inmarsat, one of the UK’s leading aerospace companies, in a huge landmark case wouldn’t just use the wrong number because they aren’t morons, and in fact you and the poster of this paper are wrong
→ More replies
2
u/Deadandlivin Aug 16 '23
If this is true, doesn't it disprove the Airliner videos?
Since the satelites are alleged to have filmed where the plane was thought to initially have crashed and not the Maldives.
3
u/Atiyo_ Aug 16 '23
2
u/Deadandlivin Aug 16 '23
Assuming your analysis is correct.
For the video to be authentic, the UFOs most likely performed the teleportation in sight of the satalite vision and instantanously moved the craft to the Maldives?Now, if we assume the videos are fake and there wasn't any UFO involvement.
If the plane flew in a straight line from Penang, did it have enough fuel to fly all the way to the Maldives?2
u/Atiyo_ Aug 16 '23
They wouldn't have teleported it directly to the maldives, they needed to teleport it to a location where it would still be at P6 and then fly later to P7. So if we assume this video took place 10 seconds before the ping P6 was made, it would've teleported the plane pretty much on any location on P6. After that the pilot probably did fly towards the maldives himself, however it could still be possible that the UFOs were impacting him at that point.
It didn't have enough fuel, but if the pilot turned off the engines and started a glide, he might've been able to pull it off. I think the author mentioned he would've needed to glide for ~50 minutes. But maybe there's a calculation in the report that I've missed.
1
u/covid_is_from_a_lab Aug 16 '23
If this is conflicting evidence then we need to weigh it against the other evidence. "And teleportation" is not a valid move at this point. It's too early to dismiss anything or jump to unsupported claims, as that just muddies the water.
If I were running a perception management campaign against this leak then I would create a post just like this. Introduce conflicting evidence, jump to outlandish claims, appeal to paranoia.
Currently I give more weight to the timestamped, geo-located stereoscopic military satellite video than to a 3rd party analysis. But I have an open mind, so let's see what the hard evidence says.
1
u/Fantastic-Role-364 Apr 23 '24
How does Inmarsat know the pings are from MH370 in the first place? Like what identifies them?
2
u/adponce Aug 16 '23
The satellite video coordinates line up with the route but the report of fire is interesting. I'm going to go out on a limb here. I remember talk back after the NYT videos of a video that showed something terrifying and cruel. What if this wasn't really an abduction and instead a sick game for the NHI? I am imagining they are just harassing this airliner, maybe attacking it to start a fire, and generally just driving it all over the place as it is trying to avoid them. They might even teleport it a few times from spot to spot just to fuck with it further. They drive it to where the US is having exercises so they can get a good view of them fucking with it too. Then they destroy it when they are done and we find some wreckage.
9
u/lightbriter Aug 16 '23
Flipside, NHI might have known that the plane/passengers were in distress, or even already incapacitated. At one point, the plane was at an altitude where everyone was likely unconscious?
6
u/adponce Aug 16 '23
Yeah, if memory serves, that altitude was straight up impossible to achieve in a 777, and by a wide margin too. I think they tried in a simulator and failed too. My guess is the NHI were responsible for it being that high.
2
u/lightbriter Aug 16 '23
Yes, that could also be the reason :/ my mental health likes to entertain the possibility that they were attempting to help the plane somehow..
if they did teleport the plane, yes who is to say that the nhi did not sabotage the plane as early as from take-off
11
Aug 16 '23
From what we got from Grusch about NHI, is that they seem to just be devoid of emotion, so the idea of them playing a game seems far-fetched.
2
→ More replies2
u/Jane_Doe_32 Aug 16 '23
With Diego Garcia Island in the way, I bet my 5 pence on the military trying out their toys.
2
Aug 16 '23
But why text it with a random airliner? They could have easily just gotten a decommissioned Boeing 777 to test this with.
The U.S. has done some shady shit plenty(a lot of countries have), but murdering a flight full of people from several different countries is a monumentally stupid and risky thing to do.
1
u/Jane_Doe_32 Aug 16 '23
There can be so many things, we can speculate to infinity, from wanting to kill one of the passengers, to eliminating something that would be in the cargo hold, to sending a message to other organizations or countries.
1
u/Synn_Trey Aug 16 '23
So what exactly was found then? There was an airplane wreck collected right?
2
u/Atiyo_ Aug 16 '23
No further investigation has been done so far, despite the author of the report initially reporting his findings back in 2018 and finishing his report in 2022 and sending it to the malaysian government. It definitely is weird that no one went there looking yet.
1
u/dogmob34- Aug 17 '23
Please check out my post where I explain in detail exactly how the thermal video of mh370 is fake. And honestly it's not even a good fake.
1
u/Blackheart806 Aug 17 '23
Can we shut tf up about MH370 now? The "footage" has been repeatedly debunked as cgi. Stop taking the disinformation bait people.
1
u/bullettrain1 Aug 16 '23 edited Aug 16 '23
can somebody please, please tell me why aliens are using the same teleportation technology from the opening scene of Steven Spielberg's Taken (2000)
https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/15pproa/first_scene_in_episode_01_of_taken_television/
like, it’s the same thing from a movie released long before MH370. anybody can watch that movie. why are people on this sub just casually ignoring that, or calling it disinformation to mention something so blatantly obvious?
3
u/FiftyCalReaper Aug 16 '23
It's not the same. All we see is a flash and the screen goes to white. It's not identical to the ink blot from the video. The orbs also aren't rapidly rotating around the sides of the plane, there's like 5 of them in front of the nose. You're displaying confirmation bias here. Just making connections where you want them to be.
→ More replies5
Aug 16 '23
I am a big skeptic by nature, but the video you posted is not simiar to the alleged MH370 videos. The comparison is very thin.
→ More replies2
u/lookthisisme Aug 16 '23
Orbs that fly around a plane and then zap it out of existence with a big flash. I wouldn't call that a very thin comparison. I would call it relatively similar, at the least.
0
u/Worldly_Ad_2267 Aug 17 '23
Why are people talking about MH370? Seems like a diversion from recent events.
•
u/BerlinghoffRasmussen Aug 17 '23
To better reflect the original poster's edit, we've flaired this post for having a misleading title.