Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 crash

[jim hardy]

There's a description here of what the 'detectives' did with the pings...

http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/535538-malaysian-airlines-mh370-contact-lost-403.html#post8399949

Refined analysis from inmarsat
in recent days inmarsat developed a second innovative technique which considers the velocity of the aircraft relative to the satellite. Depending on this relative movement, the frequency received and transmitted will differ from its normal value, in much the same way that the sound of a passing car changes as it approaches and passes by. This is called the doppler effect. The inmarsat technique analyses the difference between the frequency that the ground station expects to receive and that actually measured. This difference is the result of the doppler effect and is known as the burst frequency offset.

The burst frequency offset changes depending on the location of the aircraft on an arc of possible positions, its direction of travel, and its speed. In order to establish confidence in its theory, inmarsat checked its predictions using information obtained from six other b777 aircraft flying on the same day in various directions. There was good agreement.

While on the ground at kuala lumpur airport, and during the early stage of the flight, mh370 transmitted several messages. At this stage the location of the aircraft and the satellite were known, so it was possible to calculate system characteristics for the aircraft, satellite, and ground station.

During the flight the ground station logged the transmitted and received pulse frequencies at each handshake. Knowing the system characteristics and position of the satellite it was possible, considering aircraft performance, to determine where on each arc the calculated burst frequency offset fit best.

The analysis showed poor correlation with the northern corridor, but good correlation with the southern corridor, and depending on the ground speed of the aircraft it was then possible to estimate positions at 0011 utc, at which the last complete handshake took place. I must emphasise that this is not the final position of the aircraft.

more at that link.

The famous "Arcs" i believe came from angle measurements off the vertical, probably they are circles centered about the satellite's location over earth.

 

[AlephZero]

more at that link.

... including a graph of the correlation.

 

[Czcibor]

Okay... but maybe a little bit 'complicated'... why not just buy a tiny sailboat and pull the plug... somewhere near the 'South Pool'? ;)

No flashy enough?

You know, if you ask me about a story that makes sense I still think that the northern route would be more reasonable ;)

 

[jim hardy]

call me Pollyana...
but
i'm sticking to the scenario "something bad happened to those pilots", who i presume acted heroically.

pure speculation here
my guess - because of the 'tiptoeing' around those 440 pounds of batteries in the cargo hold...
and the UPS 747 that was brought down in 2010 by a battery cargo fire which disabled crew and smoked up the cockpit.

to me it's more likely than a meteor strike...

and equally simple

and does not presume malice, except perhaps by whoever signed for those batteries being properly packaged.

Maybe someone will interview the cargo loaders and find out just where in the hold those things were. If forward under cockpit environmental equipment and adjacent electronics bay, the plot will thicken. And the crew will be exonerated.

old jim

 

[Czcibor]

call me Pollyana...
but
i'm sticking to the scenario "something bad happened to those pilots", who i presume acted heroically.

pure speculation here
my guess - because of the 'tiptoeing' around those 440 pounds of batteries in the cargo hold...
and the UPS 747 that was brought down in 2010 by a battery cargo fire which disabled crew and smoked up the cockpit.

to me it's more likely than a meteor strike...

and equally simple

and does not presume malice, except perhaps by whoever signed for those batteries being properly packaged.

Maybe someone will interview the cargo loaders and find out just where in the hold those things were. If forward under cockpit environmental equipment and adjacent electronics bay, the plot will thicken. And the crew will be exonerated.

old jim

Concerning the fire theory - is it possible that there would be exactly the right amount of fire - that pilots are immediately incapacitated, transponder is damaged, but after many hours of burning plane can still fly for hundreds of kilometres without any problem?

Hijack by someone not being pilot that went awry does not sound impossible. In that case such weird direction could be perceived as evidence of pilots that made a heroic sacrifice. (yes, a pure guess)

 

[jim hardy]

Concerning the fire theory - is it possible that there would be exactly the right amount of fire - that pilots are immediately incapacitated, transponder is damaged, but after many hours of burning plane can still fly for hundreds of kilometres without any problem?

Well I'm not an airline pilot, so what's plausible to me is not "gospel".

That said, here's some things i picked up from that report on the UPS 747 crash, and from comments by pilots at the pprune site...

The 777 has halon fire extinguishers for the cargo hold, so an ordinary fire that needs oxygen will be put out soon enough.
But Lithiium batteries burn their own internals and do not need external oxygen. Halon won't put them out. That report shows pictures of rocket-like flames emanating from a box of burning Lithium batteries. They could breach a nearby wall. They'd go out when the battery fire was over, and presumably the halon would prevent further smioldering.

Given that the battery cargo fire in the 2010 UPS 747 disabled the pilot's oxygen supply within minutes, yes i believe such a fire could quickly disable the flight crew. It's happened before. Oxygen lines in that 747 were routed underneath the cockpit floor, above cargo hold.

So i'll not dismiss the battery fire possibility until something more comes out.
this image is too wide for page, so take a look...
http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/media/civilaviation1949-2006cutaways/images/31510/boeing-777-200-cutaway.jpg

Given that there is a forward electronics bay on lower level, i am waiting for someone to find out how close that 440 pounds of batteries was loaded to the forward bulkhead.(as i said earlier)

The battery fire hypothesis is attractive to me because it doesn't assign malice to a presumably upright air crew . And it has plenty of precedent.

 

[jim hardy]

Aircraft Fires Tied to Lithium-Battery Cargo Prompt New UN Rule
By Alan Levin Feb 13, 2012 10:00 PM MT


A United Nations panel is calling for tougher inspections and detailed labeling of air shipments of lithium batteries following two incidents in which aircraft were destroyed when freight shipments burst into flames.
...............

Packages containing as much as 66 pounds (30 kilos) of rechargeable lithium-ion batteries can be carried as cargo on passenger flights under U.S. regulations. (200 kilos were on MAS370- jh)

Under the proposed ICAO standards, all lithium battery shipments will have to be labeled as hazardous material, Rogers said. Companies that want to ship batteries must train employees on how to handle the battery shipments.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-14/aircraft-fires-tied-to-lithium-battery-cargo-prompt-new-un-rule.html

if I'm shown wrong i will promptly admit it.

old jim

 

[jim hardy]

After reading this

http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org...carrier_info/media/battery_incident_chart.pdf

BATTERIES & BATTERY - POWERED DEVICES
Aviation Cargo and Passenger Baggage Incidents Involving Smoke , Fire , Extreme Heat or Explosion
As of February 17, 2014, 141 air incidents involving batteries carried as cargo or baggage that have been recorded since March 20, 1991

i'm amused at the irony... I've lost pocket knives at airport security, but can carry a lithium battery with impunity?

 

[Czcibor]

I think that you actually haven't used the best argument here, from wiki:

Around the time of the crash, the National Transportation Safety Board had asked the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to install automatic fire extinguisher systems in the holds of cargo aircraft. UPS Airlines followed FAA regulations, which stated that pilots should depressurize the main cabin and climb to an altitude of at least 20,000 feet (6,100 m) upon detection of a fire so as to deprive the flames of oxygen

So except of transponders failing in the right moment and flight continued for hours after fire started, that would sound very convincing :D (I have no idea what's true, as a layman I can only say what sounds convincing)

 

[jim hardy]

Thanks for the kind words...

One would have to know the aircraft's electrical distribution system in detail before stating as fact that a single point of failure exists whereby an intense fire could knock out the transponders and radios but not the autopilot.

And i don't know that either.

The instructions to depressurize and climb seem consistent with some early reports of what the aircraft did, but those claims are disputed.
IF they did that and their oxygen quit shortly after,, well - good night.

Excessive speculation usually leads to embarrassment. So all I'm saying is "at this time it looks plausible to me".
The premise will have to withstand scientific method inquiry.

 

[256bits]

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-14/aircraft-fires-tied-to-lithium-battery-cargo-prompt-new-un-rule.html

if I'm shown wrong i will promptly admit it.

old jim

FedEx is as good as any for an outline of present ( 2013 ) IATA DG regulations regarding Lithium batteries, either new and in plastic covering, or in equipment.
You can readily see how confusing it still is on the classification and packaging and labeling, even with the newer adopted regulation.

PAX ( passenger aircraft ) is limited to 5 kg per package.
CAO ( cargo aircraft ) can accept packages up to 35 kg.

Per package means that there can be multiple cells packaged as one, but each cell should be individually wrapped from the others. As a trust issue, the pilots and airline have to rely upon the packager as being responsible, knowledgeable, and truthful. ( which would be the case for all DG shipments, which is why the fines are up to I recall $100,000 and possible prosecution if convicted of willful non-compliance )

Whether there is a regulation for the maximum amount that can be carried per aircraft I do not know.

 

[DevilsAvocado]

So except of transponders failing in the right moment and flight continued for hours after fire started, that would sound very convincing :D (I have no idea what's true, as a layman I can only say what sounds convincing)

One would have to know the aircraft's electrical distribution system in detail before stating as fact that a single point of failure exists whereby an intense fire could knock out the transponders and radios but not the autopilot.

I think one problem is that we are trying to build a 'coherent picture' from media "facts" that can't possibly all be true. This is the 'picture' I've got (red dotted line & white text being mine, probably includes some errors):

Credit Flightradar24.com

Now, MH370 can't possible have dropped to 12,000 ft and then continue for an 8hr flight. This is impossible due to fuel limitations. But if it didn't drop (in case of fire/smoke), that would mean a major accident that killed the pilots instantly, which also seems incompatible with the 8hr flight.

Also, if the pilots were 'disabled' – what "half-damaged-not-preprogrammed" autopilot can perform the current zigzag route?

Not much makes sense at this stage...

 

[Dotini]

CNN just released a GIANT clue in an interview between Wolf Blitzer and Kit Darby, a retired UA pilot and aviation consultant.

Wolf revealed that Malaysian Airlines had changed the last cockpit radio transmission from "All right, good night" to "Good night, Malaysia three-seven-zero", and refused to provide transcripts.

As a consequence, it is now accepted that MH's general credibility has taken yet another blow.

 

[Ptero]

Ha, ha! Now the Malaysians will INVENT terrorists since they never had any. The cost to Malaysia of the plane going down due to terrorism is ZERO, while the cost due to incompetence in shipping dangerous cargo on their passenger airliner could reach a BILLION DOLLARS.

 

[masara]

If the plane did in fact end up in the Indian Ocean then my personal theory is this a)Killed all passengers/pilots/crew by going to 45000 ft, depressurizing the cabin.b) Descended very low over land possibly Malaysian land or adaman islands or Maldives.( Needed land to drop down something + the hijacker/s). c) Had programmed the autopilot to take the plane to it's grave.

 

[masara]

Excellent explanation posted before for the lithium bats. But... I once shorted a small Li-po on purpose to see what happens,it was amazing it melted the tiles.
400 kg Li-po would melt and cut the whole plane in 2 imo. Then does China import such batteries?? They produce their own at 1/10th of price.
I don't know of any airline that would ever accept a li-ion/li-po cargo.

 

[Ptero]

The Kleptocracy of Malaysia is the world hub of counterfeit Li-ion battery manufacturing and shipping. If you understand how microscopic defects lead to dendrite growth and short circuiting (see the Dreamliner thread), you will understand my cynicism about the veracity of any documentation concerning Li-ions originating in that area.

FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
(U//FOUO) FBI Counterfeit and Substandard Lithium Batteries Pose Serious Health Risks to Law Enforcement
July 19, 2012
Counterfeit and Substandard Lithium (CR123A) Power Cell Batteries Pose Serious Health and Safety Risks to Law Enforcement Officers, Other Consumers
https://publicintelligence.net/fbi-counterfeit-lithium-batteries/

Counterfeit and no-brand lithium batteries are also of concern, because they may not have been safety tested. These lithium batteries may be poorly designed, have little protection, or contain manufacturing flaws. It is mandatory that all cells and batteries, and each subsequent re-configuration, be tested and pass the UN Manual of Tests and Criteria Part III Subsection 38.3 before they can be shipped. The regulations also forbid transport of batteries that have been identified by the manufacturer as being defective, damaged, or have the potential of producing a dangerous evolution of heat, fire or short circuit (e.g. those being returned to the manufacturer for safety reasons).

...Regardless of their format, with a few exceptions, all lithium cells and batteries are regulated for transport as Class 9, Miscellaneous Dangerous Goods. Each consignment containing lithium batteries must be accompanied with a document that indicates that the package contains lithium cells or batteries (primary or rechargeable) and must be handled with care. It also must indicate that a flammability hazard exists if the package is damaged; special procedures including inspection and repacking must be followed in the event the package is damaged; and a telephone number for additional information.

Complicating things further is the particular form in which the batteries are shipped. Both formats can be shipped alone, packed with equipment, contained in equipment, or possibly a mixed combination of these different forms. So we actually have six basic proper shipping names:
UN3090, Lithium metal batteries
UN3480, Lithium ion batteries
UN3091, Lithium metal batteries contained in equipment
UN3481, Lithium ion batteries contained in equipment
UN3091, Lithium metal batteries packed with equipment
UN3481, Lithium batteries packed with equipment
Fully regulated lithium batteries contain more than two grams of lithium, and fully regulated lithium-ion batteries have a watt-hour rating higher than 100 watt-hours.

In order to ship these correctly by air, the batteries must have been tested and pass the UN Manual of Test and Criteria. A shipper must have received dangerous goods training to ensure that they know the proper classification and limits on the net quantity of lithium batteries per package. These details are indicated in the International Air Transport Association’s (IATA) Dangerous Goods Regulations (DGR) Part 4.2 as well as the applicable packing instructions. Appropriate UN tested specification packaging must be used, and the package must be marked and labeled according to the applicable specific requirements. A safety document must accompany the consignment, and a Shipper's Declaration for Dangerous Goods must accompany the air waybill.

All of these requirements also apply to fully regulated batteries packed with equipment. When fully regulated batteries are shipped contained in equipment, the UN performance testing for the package is not required, but the equipment must be packed in strong outer packagings made of suitable material of adequate strength and design in relation to the packaging's capacity and its intended use unless the battery is afforded equivalent protection by the equipment in which it is contained. At this point U.S. shippers of primary lithium metals batteries must be very careful to adhere to the more stringent Department of Transportation (DOT) restrictions for passenger carrying aircraft.

There are some exceptions, but unless a shipment is labeled for cargo aircraft only, every shipment must have "LITHIUM METAL BATTERIES—FORBIDDEN FOR TRANSPORT ABOARD PASSENGER AIRCRAFT" clearly marked on the outside of every package regardless of the shipping mode.

Depending on the amount of lithium or the strength of the cell or battery, there are exceptions for small lithium batteries. Primary metal batteries that include two grams or less of lithium or lithium-ion with a rating less than 100 watt-hours have less stringent requirements. The typical laptop battery, for example, has a rating around 60 watt-hours and qualifies for applying the exception for lithium-ion battery contained in equipment. These include a maximum limit of two batteries per non-specification packaging; no hazard label, only a lithium-ion battery handling label; and no dangerous goods declaration. There is also no maximum quantity per package when cells have a rating of 2.7 watt-hours or less and the total weight of the package does not exceed 2.5 kilograms.

Along with all the exceptions that can be applied, there are numerous special provisions that may apply to a shipment such as the limitations on shipping untested prototypes or the detailed requirements for large batteries that weigh greater than the 35-kilogram cargo aircraft limit. A very important one is Special Provision A164, which specifies packing requirements designed to prevent accidental activation and short circuiting.
http://www.ibt-articles.com/absnet/templates/trade_article.aspx?articleid=562&zoneid=2

 

[Ptero]

I should add that the search has turned into an embarrassing circus full of clowns in the media and printing press largess from the bankrupt United States. It is estimated that there is over 100 millions tons of garbage in the Pacific Gyre between Hawaii and the west coast of the US. The other ocean Gyres are similar. It simply does not make financial sense for anyone to search for MH370. The entire concept of "The Black Box" is obsolete in the days of personal ELTs.
https://www.google.com/search?q=per...v=2&es_sm=94&ie=UTF-8#q=personal+ELT&tbm=shop

It's enough to make one think the airlines and the national oversight are run by idiots.

Look at this:

Lithium cargo clue to MH370 fate? March 21, 2014 by Aimee Turner - Air Traffic Management
Billie Vincent who served as the FAA’s civil aviation security chief insisted from the outset that rather than portraying the crew of the missing Malaysian Airlines Flight 370 as saboteurs, the pilots struggled heroically to save the aircraft until overcome by smoke from a catastrophic cargo fire caused – or exacerbated – by its highly flammable lithium battery cargo.

Vincent played a key policy and crisis management role in the handling of all hijackings of US aircraft in the 1980s. He was also in charge of the agency’s armed Federal Air Marshals and served as an expert witness in the trial of the Pan Am 103 terrorist bombing.

After leaving the FAA he led an international consulting firm which was contracted in the 1990s to design and implement the security system of Malaysia’s Kuala Lumpur International Airport where Flight 370, carrying 227 passengers and 12 crew, started its journey at 12.41 am on March 8 before disappearing from civilian radar en route to Beijing at 1.21 am after a final radio transmission made at 1.19 am.

Pings

Officials in Malaysia said they suspected that someone on board the aircraft first disabled the Aircraft and Communications Addressing and Reporting System (ACARS) shortly after takeoff before switching off the aircraft’s transponder in a systematic effort to render the aircraft invisible to air traffic surveillance. ‘Pings’ sent from the aircraft to an Inmarsat satellite, indicated that Flight 370 may have then been deliberately diverted and flown as far north as Central Asia or south over the Indian Ocean.

Speaking exclusively to Air Traffic Management, Vincent dismisses the likelihood of a bomb being detonated on board which would have ruptured the pressure hull of the aircraft citing the fact that the series of ‘pings’ would indicate that Flight 370 flew for up to seven more hours. That would not have been possible if its aerostructure had been compromised. If, building from the aircraft’s final ‘ping’ satellite signals, debris is indeed found in the predicted area 1,550 miles south west of Perth, many now believe that the aircraft may not have been under active pilot control.

“The data released thus far most likely points to a problem with hazardous materials. This scenario begins with the eruption of hazardous materials within the cargo hold – either improperly packaged or illegally shipped – or both,” says Vincent.

Malaysian authorities on Friday confirmed that the missing flight was carrying lithium batteries in its cargo hold but said they did not regard them as endangering safety as standard rules had been observed in packing. “These are not regarded as dangerous goods and were packed as recommended by the International Civil Aviation Organisation,” Malaysia Airlines CEO Ahmad Jauhari Yahya told a media briefing. Until now details of the cargo manifest have been limited to four tonnes of mangosteens.

Vincent remains convinced however that a fire which started in the cargo hold progressively and serially destroyed the aircraft’s communications systems; toxic fumes quickly overwhelmed the passenger cabin and the cockpit where at least one of the flight crew managed to don an oxygen mask allowing them to turn the aircraft back to either Kuala Lumpur or Pulau Langkawi.

Flight 370 is reported to have climbed to 45,000ft which Vincent believes could have been due simply to the inability of the flight crew to clearly see and set the controls for a return.

Diversion

Vincent guesses that control could have been regained and the aircraft sent back to a lower altitude of around 25,000 ft – which is a diversion altitude set by aircraft manufacturers to prevent a fire taking further hold and which both allows better survivability while venting the avionics bays.

The final report of a UPS B747 crash in Dubai in 2010, details how that crew similarly attempted to depressurise the freighter aircraft by descendign to 10,000 ft to slow down the fire 30 seconds after the loss of aircraft systems and flight controls. In that accident in which there were no survivors, the time interval between fire detection and the onset of aircraft system failures was around two and a half minutes.

The aircraft was found to be carrying at least three shipments of lithium batteries which should have been declared as hazardous materials – but were not. Testing conducted by the FAA Tech Center in the United States after the crash indicated that even overheating caused by an unrelated fire in the cargo hold could have caused a chain reaction: “For this reason, batteries that are not involved in an initial fire may ignite and propagate, creating a risk of a catastrophic event,” stated the investigators in their final report.

With this in mind those investigating Flight 370 will no doubt want to know the location of the battery cargo on the aircraft. It will also be vital to know how they were packaged and manufactured as well as the shipping history of this type of cargo by both Malaysia Airlines and the manufacturer.

Investigators of the Dubai accident also found that cockpit voice recordings indicated that the captain’s oxygen mask had stopped delivering oxygen around six minutes after the fire alarm was sounded. This resulted in the captain leaving his position due to incapacitation from toxic gases. The first officer who had to take control of the aircraft could not see outside the cockpit, the primary flight displays or the audio control panel to retune to the required frequencies.

Authorities have said that the last verbal communication from Malaysia Flight 370 was issued two minutes before the aircraft disappeared from air traffic controllers’ screens while flying over the South China Sea. Vincent guesses that the crew did manage to stabilise the aircraft and set it on a new course before once again succumbing to either a loss of oxygen or the remaining toxic fumes.

“The airplane then continues flying until no fuel remains and crashes – most likely into the ocean as there has been no report of any Emergency Locater Transmitter (ELT) signal which can be received by satellite if the crash were on land,” says Vincent.

Improbable

Vincent insists other scenarios involving hijacking and sabotage are improbable. “For instance, there is no indication that either of the pilots was criminally involved in the disappearance of this airplane. Neither has Malaysia released any data indicating anything amiss in the security clearance of the passengers for this flight. The one question raised about the two passengers traveling on stolen passports has been cleared indicating that they were planning on illegally claiming refugee status in another country, probably Germany.”

Several air accident investigators tell Air Traffic Management that there are still some anomalies in such a scenario such as the complete radio silence of MH370.

“In every inflight fire where the aircraft crashed, the situation deteriorated rapidly, ultimately overcoming the aircraft’s ability to fly such as the UPS 747-400 lithium-ion battery fire in Dubai; the Valujet 594 chemical oxygen generators in the forward cargo hold; SwissAir 111 electrical system fire in overhead void space and the South African Airways Boeing 747 cargo fire in 1987,” says one expert.

In each case, he points out that the crew had sufficient time to communicate with air traffic control before the aircraft crashed even though the fire intensified rapidly, igniting nearby materials. In each case the fire also rendered the aircraft unflyable, with the exception of SwissAir which stayed airborne longer as the crew attempted to burn off fuel.

A second reason that throws doubt on a cargo fire scenario is that the pilots of Flight 370, if they followed proper emergency procedure, would have both been using emergency oxygen masks, protecting them from toxic gas. “There are microphones in the masks, so they would have advised air traffic control of their intentions as they attempted an emergency return,” he says.

Finally, there remain doubts as to whether – even if the autopilot remained engaged – an aircraft would be capable of flying for seven hours. “A catastrophic end should have happened much sooner, even if they tried to depressurise the cabin to reduce the fire.”
http://www.airtrafficmanagement.net/2014/03/lithium-cargo-clue-to-fate-of-mh370/

 

[jim hardy]

Thanks, ptero for spotlighting those darn batteries.

I hadn't thought about a load of counterfeits.

So many of these battery incidents happen in airplanes, i have to think that a marginal battery is subject to failure when atmospheric pressure decreases and it tries to expand.
Aircraft cabins i think are kept around 7,000 feet. Ever bought yogurt in Denver? The top is bulged outward.

I don't know but wish i did, arrangement of cargo hold, electronics bays, and routing of wires for avionics.
Is there any single point that's vulnerable?
400 pounds of batteries could make a bodacious fire, and if we are suspect of the manifest anyhow - how many were there really aboard? Where were they placed? What was adjacent?

Your hypothesis is very plausible to me.

 

[Ptero]

Lithium cargo facing outright industry ban
Posted on April 1, 2014 by Aimee Turner
A worldwide cargo ban on transporting highly combustible lithium metal batteries on passenger aircraft could be imposed on airlines as early as next week, writes Aimée Turner.

There was comprehensive testing of all the various chemistries and sizes in a series of simulated cargo fire scenarios using shipping cartons placed in a test Boeing 727 airframe – either through overheating or through directly heating the battery up to 190 degrees Celsius.

Test showed that smoke caused by the fire quickly engulfed the flight deck within eight or nine minutes of detection. In one test, after that test had finished with halon levels nearing zero and oxygen levels increasing, a single battery in thermal runway led to a flash fire, causing an explosion that ripped through the test airframe and blew the flight deck door off its hinges. Tests in the hold of a freighter aircraft showed that smoke started to pour into the flight deck within five minutes and became so severe that it soon became fully obscured by smoke. more:
http://www.airtrafficmanagement.net/2014/04/lithium-cargo-facing-outright-ban/

----------
Jim, I think the hypothesis has evolved into theory. There remain no show-stoppers. Only Wolf Blitzer ceaselessly pounding floating garbage for the needle in the haystack.

And my gut feeling is that MH370 Pilot Shah, a consummate professional, KNEW the dangers of mislabeled genuine or counterfeit lithium batteries on his run and took the 777 to 45,000 feet on purpose in an attempt to starve the fire. Just like his pre-programmed "bug-out" coordinates to the nearest emergency runway, he reacted immediately by taking the 777 to max altitude and depressurized. But it didn't work. As we all know, Li-ion fires produce their own oxygen. They all died and MH370 became a "zombie" flight.

PS -- You said "a marginal battery is subject to failure when atmospheric pressure decreases and it tries to expand."

Actually, the physics are pretty concrete. Dendrites form on impurities and can trigger a fire at random.
http://newscenter.lbl.gov/science-shorts/2013/12/17/roots-of-the-lithium-battery/

There does appear to be hope:
Researchers build nonflammable lithium ion battery
https://uncnews.unc.edu/2014/02/10/researchers-build-nonflammable-lithium-ion-battery/

 

[jim hardy]

http://www.ndtv.com/article/world/with-plane-still-missing-legal-moves-for-payouts-start-503268

Beijing: For 10 days, Monica R. Kelly and her American law firm's aviation lawyers have stalked the dim hallways of the Lido Hotel here to make their pitches to relatives of passengers aboard missing Malaysia Airlines Flight 370.

They tell the families that a court in the United States could potentially award millions of dollars per passenger in a lawsuit against the Boeing Co., which built the missing jet, a Boeing 777-200. In a hotel suite, Kelly uses a model of a Boeing 777 to show families how the plane might have malfunctioned. (Malaysia releases transcript from missing jet's cockpit)

"It's not an issue of whether families will be compensated," Kelly said recently. "It's a question of how much and when."

House of Atreus Law Firm ?

 

[masara]

Most types of batteries develop dendrites over time, this doesn't mean they will explode.Too many dendrites will simply not allow the battery to get charged, and even if it gets some charge it will lose it quickly. Without charge the chemicals inside the battery are just dirty chemicals.They may leak alright, cause some surface damage but that's all.
Lithium batteries are dangerous when they are actually good and well charged. When they get short circuited at this stage, i mean the +ve in some manner finds it way to the -ve (even of that happened for a fraction of a second) they deliver so high a current that they get fried hot immediately.
Li-ion batteries are not as dangerous as the Lithium polymer (li-po) ones. Simply because most li-ions deliver max 3-5 amps. A small li-po however of the size of 2 cigarette packs may deliver 100Amps+ instantly,could even be used to start up a car.

Btw all laptops, and mobile phones run on li-ion batteries. Yet hundreds of laptops and mobile phones get shipped via Airfreight.

 

[Enigman]

http://xkcd.com/651/​

 

[mheslep]

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/bag_check.png
http://xkcd.com/651/[/center]

Mouse over text:

"A laptop battery contains roughly the stored energy of a hand grenade, and if shorted it ... hey! You can't arrest me if I prove your rules inconsistent!"

At the risk of becoming the point of the gag or attracting more 'Oh God's:

Li-Ion Battery 1kg: .7 MJ
Hand grenade, US M5: 1 MJ
Big Mac: 2.2 MJ

The Big Mac can't give up all its energy in an instant as can the grenade, but then neither can the shorted battery, not all of it.

Hey, its a physics forum.

 

[jtbell]

Ping!

Report: Chinese ship hears pulse signal in south Indian Ocean (CNN)

 

[Ptero]

Most types of batteries develop dendrites over time, this doesn't mean they will explode.Too many dendrites will simply not allow the battery to get charged, and even if it gets some charge it will lose it quickly.

However, there have always been concerns over their fire safety – as after several charge and discharge cycles, potentially dangerous tiny lithium fibres, known as dendrites, can form on the carbon anodes. These fibres can short circuit the battery, causing it to overheat and catch fire.
-- Elsevier Materials Today
http://www.materialstoday.com/energy/news/improved-lithium-batteries/

We disagree. When one is dealing with the possibility of a fire occurring in one battery, the chances are admittedly slim. But the odds increase as the number of batteries goes up. Just like a bad apple in a barrel of good apples, one dendrite short can set off all the batteries in a shipment. Thus you have a maximum number of batteries allowed in a shipment. But even with this limit, the NTSB has predicted a number of future catastrophic events (airline crashes) based on this.

The MH370 had a lot of lithium batteries in its cargo. Over 400 pounds on a passenger airliner - or perhaps a lot more... There is also the possibility that many of these may have been counterfeit; manufactured with defects. With overwhelming empirical evidence such as UPS Flight 6, making light of the problem seems at odds with finding a solution. To me, the only real solution to stop passenger airlines from going down because of lithium battery fires is an outright ban on shipments in the cargo hold.

 

[AlephZero]

Ping!

Sometimes you have to wonder if anybody here actually knows what they are doing...

China's Liberation Daily reported that three people on board had heard the signals, which were not recorded as they came suddenly.

from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-26902127

 

[masara]

@Ptero
Please concentrate on the meaning of the sentence "after several charge and discharge cycles". a) The presumable Lithium cargo batteries on MH370 were supposedly new hence never passed through those several cycles. b) Faulty ones among them would not even have a charge, hence they were simply inert cells.

That's why I previously said that those batteries are dangerous only when they are good (meaning they are either new or old that hold a good charge)

The forming of Dendrites is a gradual process.It is impossible to get so many Dendrites from one charge to another that would form an internal short circuit. Dendrites are in fact measurable as Internal Resistence.(Rint).
A new Li-ion with 2000mah capacity should have Rint<0.1 ohms. At Rint of about 0.8 Ohms you just throw it away ( in a recycle bin) because it wouldn't hold charge any more. And at short circuit state Rint= infinite your charger would refuse to charge it, because it's voltage would be below 3V/cell. Chargers for Li-ions are clever you know, and they know the risks :-)

NB. Dendrites are more of an issue on Ni-Cad and Ni-Mh batteries rather than on Li-ions.
Imo the risk from the li-ions arises from their high current discharge in short circuit instances, and the chemicals they employ. Not from their forming Dendrites after several cycles..

 

[AlephZero]

To me, the only real solution to stop passenger airlines from going down because of lithium battery fires is an outright ban on shipments in the cargo hold.

You are entitled to your opinion, but
1. There are already regulations in place over this.
2. "Creating more regulations about something" is not the same as "ensuring that something is not done."
3. The number of serious passenger aircraft incidents known to be caused by this is zero.
4. Risk assessment in aviation is (or at least tries to be) an objective science. Decisions are not made on the basis of which lobby group shouts loudest.

Of course there are fire risks from batteries, but how to you propose to regulate against such things as

Last month [Novenber 2011] a mobile phone caught fire on a Boeing 747 inbound to London Heathrow after being crushed by a seat as a passenger reclined. Cabin crew were able to extinguish the fire before any serious damage occurred.

(from http://www.caa.co.uk/application.aspx?catid=14&pagetype=65&appid=7&mode=detail&nid=2069)

 

[Ptero]

@masara
So all the research done with optical and electron microscopes, nuclear magnetic resonance, and magnetic resonance imaging was wasted because they could just have used an ohm meter? I don't think so. Dendrite growth in electrolyte has recently been discovered to be a later stage of the root problem which occurs inside the anode. Only when the dendrite growth has matured can it sometimes be measured by an ohm meter.

It is incorrect to assume that because failure rates due to dendrite growth increase with cycle life, that new batteries do not have this problem. They do.

@AlephZero
There is a difference between battery fires in the passenger compartment vs. the cargo hold.

The FAA in AC120-80 made the following statement:
“For aircraft with hidden fires, an approximate assessment is that only one
third will reach an airfield before the fire becomes uncontrollable.”
SMOKE, FIRE AND FUMES IN TRANSPORT AIRCRAFT
PAST HISTORY, CURRENT RISK AND RECOMMENDED MITIGATIONS
Royal Aeronautical Society --Second Edition 2013

The difference is, in the passenger compartment, people can put it out or put it in the oven. In the cargo compartment, people can't put it out.

How many passenger airliners need to go down from lithium battery fires in the cargo hold before you would think something needs to be done?

The lobbying group for the pilot and first officer of UPS Flight 6 is calling for a ban of lithium batteries on cargo aircraft. Does this bother you?

 

[Borg]

Yesterday's news seemed so promising. Two distinct sets of pings that appeared to be coming from both recorders. But, nothing more heard yet today.

Ship hunting for more 'pings' in plane search

 

[AlephZero]

The lobbying group for the pilot and first officer of UPS Flight 6 is calling for a ban of lithium batteries on cargo aircraft. Does this bother you?

Considering that I'm more likely to get killed in a road accident driving to the airport than while I'm on the plane, it doesn't bother me at all.

On the other hand, if the aviation industry starts making decisions on the basis of which lobby group shouts loudest or can raise the most money, I'm never going to fly again.

 

[Borg]

More pings today!

Underwater pings relocated in hunt for missing jet

 

[masara]

Diving equipment

http://uncw.edu/nurc/systems/toolmanual/beacon.pdf

NURC-UNCW has a variety of acoustic pinger beacons available for use. Helle
27XX pingers are available in 27 or 37 kHz frequencies for deployment of equipment to 6,000 feet seawater and have a battery life of one month.

 

[nsaspook]

The planes current location box is about 2.8 miles down. We're trying to find a suitcase while looking from the top of a mountain while listening to an ultrasonic bell. It might take a while even if we have a good ping location.
http://www.bluefinrobotics.com/products/bluefin-21/

We are at the Depth Rating limit of the Bluefin 21.
http://www.bluefinrobotics.com/news-and-downloads/press/cbs-news-one-of-the-navy-s-best-tools-deployed-in-flight-370-search/