More questions are being raised about flight MH370's mysterious disappearance exactly eight weeks ago, particularly the response from relevant authorities – the Department of Civil Aviation (DCA) and the military – after the Malaysia Airlines (MAS) Boeing 777-200ER vanished with 239 people on board.
Defence Minister Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein, who is the acting Transport Minister, released a preliminary report last night, the same as the one sent to the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) last week.
The report included details of the cargo manifest and audio recordings of what had transpired between the pilots of the plane and the air traffic controllers when it disappeared on March 8 while on the way to Beijing.
But it also showed gaps that have turned flight MH370 into an "unprecedented aviation mystery". The plane has yet to be found despite a multi-million dollar search that began in the South China Sea and has expanded to the southern Indian Ocean.
Also, it showed that there was a complete breakdown in communications between the DCA and the military, an irony considering both share air traffic control facilities at the airport in Subang.
Among the key questions are:
1. Why didn't the DCA or the Kuala Lumpur Air Traffic Control Centre inform the Malaysian military that the MAS passenger jet was missing after it received a query from the Ho Chi Minh air traffic control?
It informed Singapore and other air traffic control and even activated a rescue coordination centre but there is no mention of the military being informed?
2. Why the four-hour gap before initiating the search and rescue? Was it due to waiting for Malaysia Airlines to confirm that the plane was indeed missing?
Isn't time critical to find the plane? Did the authorities knew at that time that the Boeing 777-200ER had enough fuel for another seven hours of flight? Did that help define the search area?
3. Why the confusion that it was in Cambodian air space? Was that mystery ever solved?
Was it a glitch in the MAS monitoring systems or just a projected flight path although Ho Chi Minh air traffic controllers said it was not the flight path.
4. Why did the military radar operator categorise an aircraft, now believed to be flight MH370, as a friendly aircraft as it travelled in a westerly direction that Saturday morning?
Aviation industry sources said that very few planes fly that route, especially to the west, at any time of the day.
5. Did the military radar operator check with DCA or civilian air traffic controllers before designating that mystery aircraft as friendly?
Did it hail the pilots of the aircraft?
6. Why did the Royal Malaysian Air Force (RMAF) deny and then confirm a report that it believed the aircraft did an "air turn back" when Hishammuddin's statement last night clearly showed the authorities were aware of an aircraft making a turn-back?
"As stated previously, Malaysian military radar did track an aircraft making a turn-back, in a westerly direction, across Peninsular Malaysia on the morning of 8 March. The aircraft was categorised as friendly by the radar operator and therefore no further action was taken at the time.
"The radar data was reviewed in a playback at approximately 08:30 on 8 March. This information was sent to the Air Force operations room at approximately 09:00.
"Following further discussion up the chain of command, the military informed the acting Transport and Defence Minister Hishammuddin Hussein at approximately 10:30 of the possible turn-back of the aircraft.
The Minister then informed the Prime Minister, who immediately ordered that search and rescue operations be initiated in the Straits of Malacca, along with the South China Sea operations which started earlier in the day," the statement said.
So, why did the government deny there was a possibility of a turn-back?
Was it waiting for confirmation that the mystery aircraft was flight MH370?
But the five-page preliminary report issued last night is scant on such details.
Global television news channel CNN reported last night that the equivalent preliminary report on Air France 447 was 128 pages long.
"That report, produced by France's aviation safety agency just one month after the plane went missing in 2009, offered specific details on communication between various air traffic control centres.
"Flight 447 was found more than a year later in the Atlantic Ocean; all 228 people on board had died," CNN reported.
It also said that a preliminary report by the Australian Transport Safety Bureau into the Qantas engine explosion in 2010 ran more than 40 pages, including diagrams and charts.
"I can certainly understand that the authorities had more pressing matters in finding the plane than writing a long report, when there will be plenty of other chances to do so," CNN aviation expert Richard Quest said last night, "but this report is the barest possible they could get away with."
Putrajaya relented to release the report after criticisms that it only gave a copy to the ICAO, a United Nations agency, and not to relatives of the 227 passengers and 12 crew members on board the plane. – May 2, 2014.
Source : http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/mh370-preliminary-report-raises-more-questions-than-answers-about-malaysias
Defence Minister Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein, who is the acting Transport Minister, released a preliminary report last night, the same as the one sent to the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) last week.
The report included details of the cargo manifest and audio recordings of what had transpired between the pilots of the plane and the air traffic controllers when it disappeared on March 8 while on the way to Beijing.
Also, it showed that there was a complete breakdown in communications between the DCA and the military, an irony considering both share air traffic control facilities at the airport in Subang.
Among the key questions are:
1. Why didn't the DCA or the Kuala Lumpur Air Traffic Control Centre inform the Malaysian military that the MAS passenger jet was missing after it received a query from the Ho Chi Minh air traffic control?
It informed Singapore and other air traffic control and even activated a rescue coordination centre but there is no mention of the military being informed?
2. Why the four-hour gap before initiating the search and rescue? Was it due to waiting for Malaysia Airlines to confirm that the plane was indeed missing?
Isn't time critical to find the plane? Did the authorities knew at that time that the Boeing 777-200ER had enough fuel for another seven hours of flight? Did that help define the search area?
3. Why the confusion that it was in Cambodian air space? Was that mystery ever solved?
Was it a glitch in the MAS monitoring systems or just a projected flight path although Ho Chi Minh air traffic controllers said it was not the flight path.
4. Why did the military radar operator categorise an aircraft, now believed to be flight MH370, as a friendly aircraft as it travelled in a westerly direction that Saturday morning?
Aviation industry sources said that very few planes fly that route, especially to the west, at any time of the day.
5. Did the military radar operator check with DCA or civilian air traffic controllers before designating that mystery aircraft as friendly?
Did it hail the pilots of the aircraft?
6. Why did the Royal Malaysian Air Force (RMAF) deny and then confirm a report that it believed the aircraft did an "air turn back" when Hishammuddin's statement last night clearly showed the authorities were aware of an aircraft making a turn-back?
"As stated previously, Malaysian military radar did track an aircraft making a turn-back, in a westerly direction, across Peninsular Malaysia on the morning of 8 March. The aircraft was categorised as friendly by the radar operator and therefore no further action was taken at the time.
"The radar data was reviewed in a playback at approximately 08:30 on 8 March. This information was sent to the Air Force operations room at approximately 09:00.
"Following further discussion up the chain of command, the military informed the acting Transport and Defence Minister Hishammuddin Hussein at approximately 10:30 of the possible turn-back of the aircraft.
The Minister then informed the Prime Minister, who immediately ordered that search and rescue operations be initiated in the Straits of Malacca, along with the South China Sea operations which started earlier in the day," the statement said.
So, why did the government deny there was a possibility of a turn-back?
Was it waiting for confirmation that the mystery aircraft was flight MH370?
But the five-page preliminary report issued last night is scant on such details.
Global television news channel CNN reported last night that the equivalent preliminary report on Air France 447 was 128 pages long.
"That report, produced by France's aviation safety agency just one month after the plane went missing in 2009, offered specific details on communication between various air traffic control centres.
"Flight 447 was found more than a year later in the Atlantic Ocean; all 228 people on board had died," CNN reported.
It also said that a preliminary report by the Australian Transport Safety Bureau into the Qantas engine explosion in 2010 ran more than 40 pages, including diagrams and charts.
"I can certainly understand that the authorities had more pressing matters in finding the plane than writing a long report, when there will be plenty of other chances to do so," CNN aviation expert Richard Quest said last night, "but this report is the barest possible they could get away with."
Putrajaya relented to release the report after criticisms that it only gave a copy to the ICAO, a United Nations agency, and not to relatives of the 227 passengers and 12 crew members on board the plane. – May 2, 2014.
Source : http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/mh370-preliminary-report-raises-more-questions-than-answers-about-malaysias
No comments:
Post a Comment