Welcome to episode 5 of our podcast, Waypoints to Nowhere, Navigational Quirks.
Before we take off into today's episode, we have some exciting updates to share about our MH370
investigation. We apologize for the delay in releasing this episode, but the past few weeks
have been dedicated to preparing for and conducting several crucial meetings with high-profile
companies. These meetings required 100% of our time to ensure we presented our 10 years of research
based on facts accurately. Welcome back to another episode of Vanished Skies, the MH370 mystery unsolved.
I'm Ed Skerritt, your operational and flight crew MH370 analysis human errors effect reporting,
and as always, I'm joined by my co-host, Marilyn Skerritt, a seasoned expert in the travel and
airline industry. Marilyn has a wealth of experience from running her own travel agency
back in the 90s until the internet revolutionized the way business was done to working with major
airlines like Continental and Avalo. She's handled everything from customer service to gate operations,
ticketing, and ensuring safety and compliance with airline rules. Back in the early days at
Continental Airlines at Tweed, things were a bit different. I remember one day when a
boss just walked up to me, pointed at the door, and that was all the direction I got. But the day
that really stands out was during a heavy snowstorm. I was out there and my boss shouted,
climb point, shoot. It was on the spot training at its finest. Or maybe it's roughest. There I was,
in the middle of the storm, being told to spray the plane without much guidance. It was a different
world back then where you learned by doing, often in the thick of it. These experiences were part of
the knowledge I gained before aviation safety saw the major changes that we rely on today.
It's always a pleasure to have you on board while diving deep into the role of waypoints in the MH370
mystery. So Marilyn, let's start with the basics. What exactly are waypoints and why are they so
crucial in this investigation? Great question, Ed. Waypoints are essentially coordinates, specific
points in the sky that a plane's navigation system uses to guide it along its route. Think of them
like the milestones you see on a road trip. Each waypoint is a stepping stone that keeps the plane
on its intended path. Right, so they're like the GPS points you follow when you're driving somewhere,
but in the case of MH370, it seems these waypoints became more than just coordinates on a map. They
might actually hold the key to understanding what happened that night. Exactly. The waypoints that
MH370 was supposed to follow were pre-programmed into the flight computer. But here's where it gets
interesting. The plane didn't stick to its original course. It deviated, and those deviations are what
we need to focus on. So are you saying that by studying which waypoints were hit and which
were missed, we can trace the plane's movements and possibly figure out why it went off course?
Yes, that's right. Each waypoint tells a part of the story. For example, after the plane made that
sharp left turn over the South China Sea, it started following a completely different set of
waypoints. These weren't part of the original flight plan to Beijing. The question is why?
Was it a deliberate change, a system error, or something else?
And that's where things get complicated. Because if we can figure out why the plane shifted from
one waypoint to another, we might be able to answer the bigger question of what really happened
to MH370. But before we continue, I have to say the last two months pretty crazy, or what?
It's been a challenging yet rewarding process to condense a decade of investigation into just
an hour. The first 10 minutes alone were spent debunking social media myths. We had to summarize
the first five episodes of this podcast quickly. Despite the tight deadline, we had a lot of work
to do. We needed to convert the information stored in our Google Earth program and present our
findings in the simplest and most efficient way possible. After exploring various meeting applications,
we narrowed it down to Microsoft Teams and Zoom. We tested various meeting platforms and all agreed
that Zoom meetings with its whiteboard features allows us to present our findings in the simplest
format. For an investigation like MH370, we need to show all the details clearly. We found Zoom to
be the best tool for this stage and we are getting better each time. Our investigation is well-rounded
with hundreds of interconnected findings that strengthen our conclusions. We're excited to
continue sharing our progress with you, our listeners. Ed, I remember those predictions you
made two months after the event. You were convinced that the cause was as simple as human error,
compounded by several other contributing factors that no one but you considered.
The conspiracy theories reported by the major media sounded like a major motion picture.
With all your experience working for the railroad, you realized that the details of the events were
being overembellished. You knew it just doesn't happen that way in the real world. The media would
often begin an article with valuable news like a crew member entering information into the plane's
flight computer. That story alone had a probability of 51%. It could have been a great discovery,
but the author decided to dilute good information with speculation. Yes, a person did input
information into the plane's computer. This is where the article should have ended. The
investigators knew something was typed into the plane's computer, but what was missing was who
did it, what was typed in, and why it was being typed in. Exactly. That was a classic case of
inline training. Definitely a red flag in today's standards. But I promise you, by the time we wrap
this up, our listeners will find it hard to dispute our findings. Let's go over our checklist.
One, flight path. We've mapped it out precisely. Two, supported by analysis. Think of it like a
combination lock with billions of possibilities. But that lock becomes much easier to crack when
you consider our analysis, which suggests that the autopilot was engaged at 1752 UTC. And for those
who want to fact check us, we're drawing straight from the MH370 factual reports. The biggest
obstacle for MH370 investigators with the lack of debris to examine, the teams were forced
looked to other avenues like the satellite data. Inmarsat satellite engineers played a crucial
role by using satellite pings to help communicate with the airplane. Simply put, a ping is like a
quick check to see if something is there and can respond. Imagine it as sending a small signal or
message to the airplane to see if it replies. This process helps confirm the airplane's location
and status. It's a basic tool used in computer networks to verify if a particular address exists
and can accept requests, similar to checking if a friend is home by sending a text and getting a
reply. When investigating an accident, we need to focus on identifying the initial trigger,
the first act in a series of unfortunate events. Imagine a snowball starting small at the top
of a mountain. As it rolls down, it gathers more snow, becoming larger and more destructive.
By the time it reaches the town at the bottom, it causes significant damage. The investigators knew
something was typed into the plane's computer, but what was missing was who did it, what was typed
in and why it was being typed in. What sets our investigation apart is our unwavering commitment
to basing our analysis on facts and logic. Most investigators would start looking for answers in
the damaged town, but the real starting point is the top of the mountain. Our investigation only
needs to look for that initial problem, the initial trigger. The more contributing factors involved,
the harder the problem becomes to solve. What was your biggest challenge in finding out what
happened? We have to different approaches to the disappearance of MH370, different from teams of
professionals aviation experts. How did your approach differ from the team of investigators?
To be honest, this whole inline training thing, whether it's two words or three,
reminds me a lot of what I've seen in railroad training. That's where I started looking, right?
You know, when similar training errors happen, you're lucky if they end up naming a rule after it.
For the record, I don't have any rule named after me, but I know people who do.
We delve into the aviation industry's data to provide a grounded perspective on what might
have happened to MH370. Here's an essential fact. In the realm of commercial aviation accidents,
85% of investigations conclude that human error is the primary cause. Of these incidents, 60%
are attributed to pilot error. This translates to a 51% likelihood that a pilot made an error,
those statistics form the foundation of our assessment. If we consider the world news reports,
there's a tendency to highlight that the first officer was the most prone to errors.
Here's the basis for our assessment. Fact one, it was reported that the first officer was on his
last day of training with a qualified flight instructor. However, some critical facts are
often overlooked. During his last five days of training, the previous four days involved a
qualified flight instructor observing his every move. So the four previous training flights had
a third person in the cockpit. This third person's job is to observe every action the training pilot
makes. You could ask yourself if that third person was there to observe. Maybe this would have never
have happened. A review and discussion of flight management safety reporting systems provided a
lot of useful information. What we couldn't find was information about training programs. Is there
a failure rate or does everyone pass? Types of testing, grades, are their guidelines? This training
program is designed to provide pilots opportunities to advance. In this case, we have a student
transitioning to a different type of plane from an Airbus to a Boeing, akin to switching from
Microsoft software to Apple. When dealing with unknowns, it's crucial to consider where the
most obvious results lie. Our investigation meticulously reconstructs the flight path using
waypoint data, accounting for potential confusion over similar sounding waypoints and the ICAO's
efforts to rename them for clarity. So the foundation of our investigation starts with
collecting all available data and seeing what pieces fit together. We need to take all the
information we have and store it somewhere. For us, Google Earth serves as our framework. We know
the plane was instructed to make corrections, cancel the SID, and fly direct. Using this framework,
we begin to structure our theory. We structured our outline based on the different phases of flight,
takeoff, climb, cruise, approach, and landing. Using these phases provides us with a clear
time frame for various workload periods. For example, during takeoff and climb, the workload
is heavy until the autopilot is engaged, after which it becomes lighter. We also divided our
analysis into three different areas based on available information. The first area covers
the flight from the gate to Aigari, which includes most of our information from A-cars and Rolls-Royce
Engine Monitoring Reports, ATC Communications, and radar. The next section has less information
and covers the flight from Aigari to the Straits of Malacca. What's interesting here is how different
approaches were taken with the information available. Let's start with the basics. We had the lost
A-cars signal. Fact check that with the MH370 factual reporting for the exact time. Then the
lost transponder, again, fact check that, and the turn that happened within the first 12 minutes.
This is where the media started to miss key clues. So what did they miss? Inline training and the
errors that come with it. If you look back at all the media coverage, when did they actually mention
the cancellation of the SID? Let me pause you right there, Ed. I don't want our listeners to get
confused. The cancellation of the SID. While it's not crucial right now, it's going to be very
important when we dive deeper into the waypoints. And consider the first officer. He had only four
days of training with third-person observation before that. Five days in total. Before exams
and testing were supposed to be done. At that time, we had what? Three or four key clues? But no
mention from the media. You have to wonder, if they had started with an inline training approach,
they would have thrown out three basic assumptions to see what happened. And really,
the first officer's ability has to come into question. Just a little bit, yes or no. But
without the test results that were never completed before his first solo trip, that question lingers.
Just to be clear, this isn't about blaming anyone. It's about recognizing how a combination of the
most subtle changes in the environment can create what we call a toxic environment. And on that note,
I'm going to read from the report we prepared for the OIF third-party file. This is where the case
of Malaysia Airlines Flight 370, MH370, comes into play. The disappearance of MH370 is one of the most
perplexing and tragic events in modern aviation history. As we analyze the conditions that led
to this event, we see how the environment in the cockpit could have transitioned from sterile to toxic.
The very principles underlying the sterile cockpit rule, such as minimizing distractions,
ensuring clear communication, and maintaining focus, were compromised, leading to a situation where
small errors, missed communications, and potential lapses in protocol could have escalated into a
larger catastrophe. The essay then ties this historical and procedural understanding to the
specific circumstances surrounding MH370. We discuss how the environment on that flight may have
deteriorated, influenced by factors like unsupervised training, communication breakdowns, and nighttime
conditions. These elements, which should have been managed within a sterile framework,
instead contributed to creating a toxic environment, one where small issues were allowed to snowball
into an uncontrollable situation. Connecting points, sterile cockpit rule, established to
prevent distractions and maintain focus during critical flight phases, historical context,
key incidents where the rule was violated, leading to tragic outcomes, modern application,
how the rule is integrated into contemporary aviation practices and challenges. MH370, analysis,
the transition from a sterile to a toxic environment on MH370, where lapses in adherence
to sterile cockpit principles may have contributed to the flight's disappearance. As we transition
from our discussion on sterile environments and the toxic elements that can creep into the cockpit,
it's important to circle back to a key concept we've touched on today, waypoints. Waypoints are
essentially the coordinates or markers that aircraft use to navigate along their flight path.
Think of them as invisible signposts in the sky, guiding the plane from one point to another,
ensuring it stays on course. In this episode, we've only scratched the surface of how crucial
these waypoints are, not just in navigation, but in understanding how MH370's flight path might
have been influenced or altered. We've discussed how misinterpretations or errors related to
waypoints could contribute to confusion and even tragedy within the complex systems of modern aviation.
You've been listening to Vanished Skies, the MH370 mystery unsolved. I'm Ed Skerritt, here with
my co-host, Marilyn Skerritt. If you have any questions or thoughts you'd like to share,
please don't hesitate to reach out. We're committed to finding the answers you're looking for.
Email us at vanishedskiesmh370@gmail.com. That's all one word. We're always eager to hear from
our listeners. We're excited for our next episode, where we'll be taking a deep dive into the complex
effects of a toxic environment and how it influences the processing of navigation waypoints between
Boeing and Airbus. There's a lot to uncover, and we're sure you'll find it fascinating.
Thank you for listening, and we look forward to having you with us again for episode 6.