Satilites
Satellite communications.
This first explanation gives a fairly good overall explanation of how the satellite communication system, specifically Inmarsat’s system works. He gets a few details wrong, but we will cover those.
http://tmfassociates.com/blog/2014/03/15/understanding-satellite-pings/
ACARS is a system on board the airplane that collects engine and airframe system information, and transmits it to the ground so RR (in this case), or Malaysian Air, could be pre-prepared with spares etc when the plane lands at its destination, if necessary.
I discovered Caterpillar using this system to collect data on the use and abuse of their earth moving machines around the world, and took a small part in implementing it on boeings commercial fleet.
Even when ACARS is switched off, and pilots routinely switch this off on the ground to avoid data overloading the airport VHF etc, the handshake is still active. When the ACARS system is switched off, the transmitter still checks in with the satellite occasionally to ensure the satellite is available if needed. This ‘handshake’ called a ‘ping’ by the press for some reason (everything is a ‘ping’, expect a ‘ping’ ice-cream any day, unless its blocked by a golfball lawsuit) but its just the airplane and satellite exchanging identification signals.
These signals take an exact transit time, and so therefor an exact distance from the satellite to the transceiver can be established. This is effectively a cone of equal surface length, centered on the satellite, touching the earths surface. This is the curve shown on many cartoons and is just an old fashioned ‘position’ line.
Ancient Kayaker, this is substantially identical to the sight cone established from a star sight on the earths surface in astronomical navigation.
The method of counting relative time between receiving these identification signals (handshakes), (i cannot bring myself to call them ‘pings’) is substantially identical to the method used in LORAN. LORAN used distance only, (easy to measure with radio) and received signals from several transmitter beacons, triangulated for position.
Now everyone in Inmarsat knew their signals showed a Doppler shift, basically generated by the angular velocity of the transceiver compared to the satellite, because this was a pain, requiring far greater receive bandwidth as a result. As usual with these things, these differences were ignored when re-transmitted down to earth, but the ‘audio’ or information imbedded in the original signal was not, so the audio part still contained the original Doppler shift.
Now the Inmarsat people are supplied with the absolute distance from the satellite, and angular velocity (no angle, no height, no direction, only relative velocity) from 5-8 separate ‘handshakes’. Public data differs on how many there were.
Given only the above released information, this is the result. By using “best fit’ mathematics, and checking the results against known aircraft flying known tracks, a very good ‘estimate’ of the actual track can be made. The software used here is “Monti-Carlo” from gambling, and now financial advice soft ware, but engineering/physics has used it for a long time for this kind of multi input complex problems.
The ‘last’ handshake gave two possible positions, one way north in Burma, the other south by Australia. As Burma has rather good radar coverage, it swiftly became fairly obvious it wasn't there, though the possibility of its ‘hiding’ still existed. Toward the end of this analysis, he drifts off accuracy, but that is because he didn't know how autopilots work. So ignore the latter half, and his speculation about possible tracks.
http://www.fastcolabs.com/3028265/h...of-malaysia-air-using-monte-carlo-data-models
Now comes the tricky part. according to various sources (and they are very annoyed at this), the data released by Inmarsat cannot be ‘reverse engineered’ into the signals as received by Inmarsat. The above is fairly good example. I understand this, Inmarsat has very large military contracts, with the MoD, DoD, Australians, and probably nearly every other western nations military, not to mention the CIA’s of this world.
Now Inmarsat becomes the perfect vehicle for other information to be discussed/released. For instance, we know the low flight altitude, and high speed, from Indonesian military radar, this took a long time to emerge, and they needed assurance their data would not become public. We probably also know the high speed from Jindilee system, which measures this very well.
Some comment has been made to the effect that inferences could be made by adding factors from the ‘wobble’ of the satellite. This may be true, but is more probably an excuse for introducing less public information.
Those of you who did astro navigation will remember getting two position lines, mine crossed just SW of Fiji, and somewhere in india. Now i knew at the time i was not in India, so i had to be SW of Fiji. This is the first time i have heard of where the vehicle could quite possibly be at either crossing point, hence the issue of whether it went north or south.
The Boeing people i had lunch with talked extensively about inferring data from various individual sources, so they could calculate fuel burn, flight time, factoring in the low level, and high thrust, and hence producing the ‘short’ flight path that suddenly and dramatically moved the search north a few hundred miles.
Its no coincidence that Air Chief Marshal Angus Houston chose the short, southern route, and he was right, those acoustic signals from the ‘black boxes’ were unique, and found just in time. There is hope yet. Few of you will believe me, but an Australian ex RAAF engineering officer, and a classmate of Angus Houston, is a crew-mate on the sailboat i crew on every second weekend.