The alignment of Captain Zaharie Shah’s home simulator flight path with the WSPR flight path analysis is no coincidence.
The flight path from Captain Zaharie Shah’s home flight simulator passes right through the WSPR defined crash location. The coordinates from Captain Zaharie Shah’s home simulator flight path were recovered by the Royal Malaysian Police during their investigation into the disappearance of MH370.
There are two key coordinates on the home simulator flight path, one at the turn south in the vicinity of the Andaman Islands at around 10.2°N 90.2°E and the other at fuel exhaustion at around 45.1°S 104.1°E.
The major difference between Captain Zaharie Shah’s home simulator flight path and the WSPR flight path analysis is that the flight path is much longer in the home simulator. The reason for the longer path is the amount of fuel assumed during the simulation.
The flight path from Captain Zaharie Shah’s home flight simulation was run on 2nd February 2014, with a starting fuel amount of 68,523.8 kg fuel on board. Capt. Zaharie Shah flew the Malaysian Airlines System (MAS) flight MH150 from Kuala Lumpur to Jeddah on 4th February 2014 and had an estimated 68,450 kg of fuel on board following the MAS standard fuel planning practice. It is no coincidence that the two fuel amounts in the simulator and in the real world are almost identical.
This raises the question: Was the original target actually MH150 and not MH370? If the initial plan was to hijack flight MH150, then it obviously did not happen. A possible reason is that there were two sets of crew on flight MH150 making it more risky to divert and hijack. Was MH370 was chosen instead, although there was less fuel, but because there was no extra flight crew on board?
A short paper discussing these questions can be downloaded here
@All,
Geoffrey Thomas has published a new article on airlineratings.com titled “Was MH150 The Intended Target Not MH370?”
https://www.airlineratings.com/news/was-mh150-the-intended-target-not-mh370/
The flight path from Captain Zaharie Shah’s home flight simulation was run on 2nd February 2014, with a starting fuel amount of 68,523.8 kg fuel on board. Capt. Zaharie Shah flew the Malaysian Airlines System (MAS) flight MH150 from Kuala Lumpur to Jeddah on 4th February 2014 and had an estimated 68,450 kg of fuel onboard following the MAS standard fuel planning practice. It is no coincidence that the two fuel amounts in the simulator and in the real world are almost identical.
Mr Godfrey added that “MH370 with 239 people on board remains the worst loss of life in aviation history as a result of a diversion and hijacking since the 911 multiple hijackings on 11th September 2001″
“MH370 is the worst aviation incident in the history of commercial aviation of all 447 aircraft listed as missing or as cause undetermined in the Aviation Safety Network accident database, which goes back to 1919.”
“A diversion and hijacking of MH150 to Jeddah would have been even worse news for a mainly Muslim country like Malaysia.”
If it was a hijacking why were no demands made?
You assume there were demands to be met.
it’s basically 99% accepted the pilot took control, hijacking doesn’t mean ransom and demands. the flight path threaded the needle between various airspaces to avoid raising red flags, power was manually cut and not by an accident, and the figure 8 motion right before crashing shows he was in command til the end.
this is all based on the available data from the handshakes, wispr info and the planes various systems. power was cut, oxygen was turned off, and the dude took it out to the middle of the ocean knowing it wouldn’t be found.
every other theory is wild baseless speculation with zero data backing it. mentour Pilot has the best video I’ve seen on the subject with no speculation, just the facts we know, and Green Dot aviation has a full recreation of the sequence of events based on what we know.
This path, if true, makes a lot of sense. Whomever piloted this plane would, in my mind, fly it totally uncharacteristically than normal. The bob and weave pattern looks hand flown, and at the hands of someone who knows the end is near. I equate it to someone who stole a car and is joyriding the crap out of it.
Amazing work. Love for the families.
@C Kwn,
Welcome to the blog!
Many thanks for the kind words.
I equate it to someone wanting to do the maximum damage to the Malaysian government within their capacity, with the minimum of evidence of who the perpetrator was.
@ka004343482,
In other pilot suicide hijackings, no demands were made.
There was no demand made by the co-pilot of German Wings flight 4U9525 on 24th March 2015 with 150 fatalities in a suicide hijacking.
There was no demand made by the co-pilot of Egypt Air flight MS990 on 31st October 1999 with 217 fatalities in a suicide hijacking.
Terrorist hijackings are very rare these days, since the security measures brought in after 911 on 11th September 2001.
There were 303 hijackings between 1968 and 1972, mostly in the US and mostly coupled with demands for money or to be flown to a particular destination, mostly to Cuba. This was brought to an end in 1973 when the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in the US introduced rules which required the screening of all passengers and carry-on luggage before boarding passenger aircraft. This became a global security measure, that we all take for granted today.
Very interesting article! Out of curiosity, were the flight crew of MH150 ever interviewed by investigators? Was Captain Zaharie friends with some member of the crew? Was he acting strangely on the flight? Did he try and get the copilot to leave the cockpit but he wasn’t able to do so? Seems like there would be a lot of interesting questions if MH150 were indeed the target and haven’t heard much about the theory before. Thanks!
@Sammy,
Welcome to the blog!
There is no record of the flight crew of MH150 ever being interviewed by the investigators in any of the official reports.
You ask a number of very good questions.
The investigators spent a lot of time analysing Captain Zaharie Shah’s home flight simulator, including involving the FBI.
The Malaysian Safety Investigation Report refers to the RMP Forensic Report on page 27: “The RMP Forensic Report on the simulator also did not find any data that showed the aircraft was performing climb, attitude or heading manoeuvres, nor did they find any data that showed a similar route flown by MH370. The RMP Forensic Report concluded that there were no unusual activities other than game-related flight simulations.”
The ATSB Report “The Operational Search for MH370” includes a section on Captain Zaharie Shah’s home flight simulator on page 98 to 99, where they state: “The simulator data was a partial reconstruction of a flight simulator session from 2 February 2014.”
The ATSB report explains: “On the day the simulation was conducted the PIC was on a rostered day of leave. The following day the PIC was rostered to fly from Kuala Lumpur to Denpasar, Bali and return the same day. On 4 February 2014 the PIC was rostered to fly from Kuala Lumpur to Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. The first three data points recovered from the simulator were consistent with the route from Kuala Lumpur to Jeddah. In the weeks between the Jeddah flight and the accident flight the PIC was rostered to fly return flights from Kuala Lumpur to; Denpasar, Beijing, Melbourne and then Denpasar again.”
The ATSB report concludes: “There were enough similarities to the flight path of MH370 for the ATSB to carefully consider the possible implications for the underwater search area. These considerations included the impact on the search area if the aircraft had been either glided after fuel exhaustion or ditched under power prior to fuel exhaustion with active control of the aircraft from the cockpit.”
The Malaysian authorities concluded that there was nothing suspicious despite spending a lot of time analysing Captain Zaharie Shah’s home flight simulator. Why the Malaysian authorities involved the FBI in the investigation, when they thought this was not “unusual” and just “game-related flight simulations” is impossible to believe.
The ATSB took the home flight simulator seriously and recognised the consistency with flight MH150 from Kuala Lumpur to Jeddah, which took place on 4th February 2014.
In an article in “The Australian” newspaper dated 17th April 2017 they report: “When last year it was revealed the FBI had discovered Zaharie had plotted a course quite close to that track on his home computer flight simulator, the ATSB joined the Malaysian government and Malaysia Airlines to hose down suggestions this pointed to the “rogue pilot” hijack theory.”
Hello
Never mind the good questions what fantastic answers you have provided.
In a recent Lore Lodge video it was stated that the simulation session on 2 February was dated 21 February and that on this date Shah was due to fly MH370 to Beijing. Do you know if this is correct?
Thank you
John.
@John Finlay,
The Lore Lodge video is incorrect regarding the date of the simulation session, where the deleted data points were recovered, which was definitely 2nd February 2014 and not 21st February 2014.
When the captain’s computer was recovered, there were several drives with different versions of Microsoft Windows and Microsoft Flight Simulator installed. It was previously reported that the deleted flight files were created using FSX, as FSX is referenced extensively throughout the Malaysian police report. This is incorrect.
In fact, the aircraft model used in the simulation was a “PSS Boeing 777-200LR No VC”, which refers to an aircraft model developed by Phoenix Simulation Software. This aircraft model is only available for Flight Simulator 2004, also known as FS2004 and FS9.
There was an FSX simulation session on 21st February 2014, but this is irrelevant for the FS9 simulation session to fuel exhaustion in the Southern Indian Ocean, I am referring to.
Captain Zaharie Shah did fly on 21st February 2014 to Beijing, but there was no diversion or hijacking.
@All,
In an email to the Independent Group dated 5th October 2017, the ATSB admits that they have several pages more data from the FBI, which was recovered from the home flight simulator of Captain Zaharie Shah, than is contained in the leaked Royal Malaysian Police (RMP) report. This was originally thought to just be header and footer data, that was not relevant to the investigation of the disappearance of MH370. It turns out that this original assessment was wrong.
The key data missing from the RMP report was the [DateTimeSeason] of the simulation time for each of the “Program Generated” files found on the external hard drive. The additional ATSB data from the FBI shows that Captain Zaharie Shah started the simulator run on 2nd February 2014 at 15:26 local time and finished the simulator run at 16:38 local time. Captain Zaharie Shah was assigned the flight MH150 from Kuala Lumpur to Jeddah, which took place on 4th February 2014 with an actual time of departure at 15:14 local time. The simulator run appears to have been made at the same time of day as the real world flight, which was planned to take place according to the duty roster, previously published in the short paper which can be downloaded from the post above.
The home simulator run lasted 72 minutes, which is much shorter than the real world flight time of 9 hours 19 minutes for MH150 on 4th February 2014 from Kuala Lumpur to Jeddah. Captain Zaharie Shah paused the simulator at several points and manually moved the aircraft forward to a new location to shorten the simulator time. The total simulation run time in the Malacca Strait was 29 minutes, the total fuel jettison time was 38 minutes and the flying time in the Southern Indian Ocean to use up the remaining fuel after jettisoning was 5 minutes, which totals 72 minutes.
This simulation was made in order to check, how far the fuel load of 68,523.8 kg required for the Kuala Lumpur to Jeddah flight would take a diverted flight into the Southern Indian Ocean. A recreation of the simulation by Victor Iannello and Yves Guillaume dated 29th November 2016 shows the aircraft flew an additional 449 nmi past the end point at 45°S 104°E, before the tanks were empty, but whether this difference is due to the manual repositioning and refuelling of the aircraft or manual jettisoning of fuel is not clear.
The FBI data, missing from the RMP report, shows the alignment of the timing of the simulation by Captain Zaharie Shah to the flight MH150 from Kuala Lumpur to Jeddah. Up until now, we have only observed the alignment of the fuel amounts in both cases.
The major question arising from the FBI data, in the possession of the ATSB, but missing from the RMP report is why the RMP did not include all the data from the FBI? Did the RMP have the data and decide not to include in their internal report? I doubt it.
The question is then, why was the data given to the ATSB, but not to the RMP?
The ATSB has not disclosed the complete FBI data in their possession and this should now be done to provide transparency in the investigation. This would also enable independent investigators to analyse the data from the home flight simulator of Captain Zaharie Shah.
Good question. We can only speculate why the Malaysian Police (RMP) only had a partial version of the sim data, which they then proceeded to incorrectly interpret. My opinion is that the sim data was/is highly sensitive. I believe FBI probably advised Malaysia the sim data represents hijack planning, very sensitive info that would have to be withheld from the public for at least several months until national security concerns of Malaysia and other countries such as Saudi Arabia were adequately addressed. Was there another “shoe to drop” (eg; more hijacks planned)? who knew? Looks like Malaysia decided to give the RMPolice a sanitized version of the data, deleting the incriminating nature of full data set. Can you imagine if the full data was released in the 2016 leak? The world would have seen the true incriminating nature of the sim data. The full data set is still not public, for the obvious reason. But denial forces have won the day, so nobody cares now.
The sim data is hard for everyone to accept, because it conflicts with preconceived notions. If you think the pilot is innocent, it conflicts. If you think the pilot did it, but you feel there were no-pilot-maneuvers (official narrative), it conflicts. If you think the pilot flew southwest to 38s to 40s, it conflicts with that. Thus the sim data, which is probably evidence of the broad nature of the pilot’s plan, is universally dismissed,
Hi Richard,
It seems very odd to me that neither the Malaysian Police nor the ATSB were / are in possession of a copy of the full set of data from the flight simulator, but just relied on facts the FBI presented in some paper to them. Isn’t this unserious? A flight file may contain more than thousand parameters to analyze and if the data set is not full, then this means that an analysis cannot be done thoroughly. The date of the simulated flight should usually be contained by default in the files.
Creating such six flight files in a session that allegedly lasted for ca. 70 minutes requires some effort, but what would be the benefit to do that? In particular with the data points being created manually?
Also, even though I am not sure about that, it would be new to me that such flight files would be saved automatically. So Zaharie saved such flight files manually and separately? This is very confusing to me. Saving a flight file only makes sense if you intend to fly the same route again. But we already know that he did not fly the route anyway, but just positioned several data points manually. Then he saved them and subsequently deleted them?
This is so strange that I wonder: How can we be sure that this data is real and not altered?
I would say-
ATSB has the complete data. But Malaysia’s RMP police (for unexplained reasons*) leaked a redacted or incomplete version of the sim data. The “complete” sim data is held by ATSB, but it is secret still, however ATSB has provided verbal guidance as to the total contents.
Yes it is apparently new idea for you that MicroSoft Flight sim saves some data in temporary-type files. This is one of the facts we learned verbally from ATSB in recent years
Unfortunately the more detailed PSS777 addon data is not saved in this manner. Therefore we are missing many flight parameters. Therefore it is necessary to interpret the nature of the work, which to me is fairly obvious hijack planning.
*I would suggest Malaysia in 2016 made a semi-good-faith effort to make public only that portion of the sim data that could help with finding crash site, and they redacted the somewhat incriminating flight time and other details. Once we knew those hidden details (from ATSB 2017 and later) the flight in the sim cases appears to be MH150 to Jeddah, which implies MH150 was a possible target under consideration.
Wouldn’t it be helpful for the RMP report to be published rather than relying on an admission from ATSB “that they have several pages more data from the FBI, which was recovered from the home flight simulator of Captain Zaharie Shah”? What is there for them to hide?
@Colin MacGillivray,
Welcome to the blog!
The RMP report has been published, since it was leaked. The ATSB claim they have several more pages from the FBI, which is not in the RMP report and that they have not published.
Who is hiding what and why?
There was high tension in KSA on Feb 1, 2014 due to changes to anti-terrorism laws, and on Mar 7, 2014, specific groups were named to a list of ‘terrorist organizations’ in the kingdom.
Q: could these changes in the politics of KSA have lead to a heightened risk of an ‘incident’ happening which in turn could have prompted additional security arrangements including measures intended to thwart hijacking of aircraft flying into the KSA?
Q: is ditching a hijacked aircraft among the standard ‘worst case’ measures implemented by airlines?
Q: are certain senior pilots designated to run secret simulations of hypothetical ‘worse case’ scenarios which are not supposed to be discussed among staff?
Well I do think there might have been focus on security if and when FBI advised Malaysia of MH150 after seeing the sim data after MH370 (and other MAS destination countries). I have wondered if 1MDB could have factored into a MH150 choice as protest, but I am unable to see much evidence for that idea at this late date.
@Richard
You ask: “Was the original target MH370 or MH150 ?”
I contend neither of them.
I contend the original target was MH16, later changed to MH163, and ultimately, to MH370.
My reasoning is as follows.
I think it is ‘taken as ‘a given’ by now’, that the vanishing of MH370 was a deliberate act, which had been meticulously planned, by the captain, in furtherance of his political aims.
I think that this planning process had ‘a much longer gestation period’ than most people realize.
I think it went back a long time, many months, back into 2013, possibly even further.
I think, that ‘in the fullness of time’, when it all ‘comes out in the wash’, probably many decades from now (noting that we are already one decade in) it will be revealed that Zahari’s ‘original Mk1 flight plan’ for his pijack was based off MH16, an Amsterdam Flight (WMKK to EHAM), because that flight has more than enough fuel to reach Antarctica (his originally intended destination). His originally intended ‘diversion point’ off an Amsterdam flight was simulator point #3 (otherwise known as point 10N (north)). Further, I think that his ‘Mk1 simulation’ did have the ‘final waypoint’ on Ross Island in Antarctica.
Further, I think that Zahari’s ‘intermediate Mk2 flight plan’ was to pijack a Jeddah flight (WMKK to OEJN) because he recognized that there would be too many issues with successfully conducting a pijack off an Amsterdam flight, given the extra crew on board, and (possibly) time of day as well.
Thus, he selected the Jeddah flight because it followed the same route up the straits to north of Ache that the Amsterdam flight use, so his ‘diversion point’ remained ‘in play’.
There were two Jeddah flights, MH150 (daytime) and MH163 (nighttime).
I believe he deliberately selected MH163 due to the late hour making for a much safer prospect of conducting his pijack with the lowest probability of being ‘foiled’.
He knew of course that he didn’t have the fuel to get to Antartica now, but he was curious to see how far he would get.
He knew what the ‘typical fuel loads’ were for a flight WMKK to OEJN, so he ran the simulation again, juggled the fuel figures, and simply ‘dragged the mouse’ down the existing track-line in the simulator map display, from 10N towards Ross Island, to the point of MH163’s fuel exhaustion, and stopped, and clicked the mouse to produce a track point, thus producing what we now know as simulator point 45S1.
But, he had originally intended to crash on Ross Island at 4,000 feet, so he clicked on the mouse again, and produced another point close by, (now known as 45S2), but with a manually entered altitude of 4,000 (3999 ?) feet.
He was happy with that, he mused:
“45S/104E is a ‘good place to vanish’, it is smack in the middle of ‘the roaring forties’, the weather is filthy, and the currents will most likely take any floating wreckage east, and most likely circumnavigate Antarctica forever. Thus satisfied, he then deleted the remainder of the track to Ross Island, and shut the simulator down, job done, thus saving 45S1 and 45S2 as we know them today.
There was however, still the problem of the additional flight crew.
The ‘plan’ was therefore ‘on hold’.
Then, late in February 2014, two events occur.
His forward roster arrives, and Anwar Ibrahim’ trial date is confirmed as 7th March 2014.
His roster says he is going to be operating MH370 only hours later, in the early hours of the morning of the 8th March 2014, and it is a short flight, there will be no additional flight crew.
He knows that the outcome of the trial is ‘a foregone conclusion’.
So he resolves, it is ‘the perfect time to strike’, the crewing issue is solved, so MH370 it is.
But, he also knows that he has even less fuel for a flight from WMKK to ZBAA than he would have had for a flight from WMKK to OEJN.
He goes back into the simulator and works out that the only way he can get to 45S1/45S2, is to pijack at Igari, backtrack to Penang, then escape up the straits as originally planned towards 10N.
But he knows that he cannot go as far as 10N, he will not have enough fuel, he knows he has to shorten his track miles.
He plays with the simulator, and eventually decides that he has to divert across Sumatra near Pulau Perak Island.
He clicks the mouse and produces a ‘track point’ there, a new ‘turn point’, and then he drags the mouse to the closest point on the western side of Sumatra on the existing track line from 10N to Ross Island but does not click.
He now knows how many ‘track miles’ he can save by overflying Sumatra from Pulau Perak instead of going all the way to 10N.
He realizes that MH370 will do fuel wise, but only if he can get a bit of extra fuel for weather diversion alternates that are as far from ZBAA as he can get. That should not be a problem.
Thus, the die is cast, he is satisfied.
He shuts down the simulator, and it saves the Pulau Perak point.
I believe that this is how the simulator points were created, and why the Pulau Perak point in particular was created. There is no other conceivable reason for it to have been created. It is not near any airway, let alone any waypoint.
@ventus45,
You contend: “The original target was neither MH370 or MH150.”
You state: “I contend the original target was MH16, later changed to MH163, and ultimately, to MH370.”
“Mk1 flight plan for his pijack was based off MH16, an Amsterdam Flight (WMKK to EHAM)”.
“Mk2 flight plan was to pijack a Jeddah flight (WMKK to OEJN)”. There were two Jeddah flights, MH150 (daytime) and MH163 (nighttime).
“Then, late in February 2014, two events occur. His forward roster arrives, and Anwar Ibrahim’ trial date is confirmed as 7th March 2014. His roster says he is going to be operating MH370 only hours later, in the early hours of the morning of the 8th March 2014, and it is a short flight, there will be no additional flight crew. He knows that the outcome of the trial is ‘a foregone conclusion’. So he resolves, it is ‘the perfect time to strike’, the crewing issue is solved, so MH370 it is.”
“But, he also knows that he has even less fuel for a flight from WMKK to ZBAA than he would have had for a flight from WMKK to OEJN. He goes back into the simulator and works out that the only way he can get to 45S1/45S2, is to pijack at IGARI, backtrack to Penang, then escape up the straits as originally planned towards 10N. But he knows that he cannot go as far as 10N, he will not have enough fuel, he knows he has to shorten his track miles. He plays with the simulator, and eventually decides that he has to divert across Sumatra near Pulau Perak Island.”
“He realises that MH370 will do fuel wise, but only if he can get a bit of extra fuel for weather diversion alternates that are as far from ZBAA as he can get. That should not be a problem. Thus, the die is cast, he is satisfied. He shuts down the simulator, and it saves the Pulau Perak point. I believe that this is how the simulator points were created, and why the Pulau Perak point in particular was created. There is no other conceivable reason for it to have been created. It is not near any airway, let alone any waypoint.”
I see 4 problems with this ingenious, but fantastic story:
1. MH163 is not a flight from Kuala Lumpur to Jeddah, but a flight from Dubai to Kuala Lumpur.
Please see the Malaysian Airlines timetable valid for the timeframe:
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/6fkiog3pnlic9m5vxoand/Malaysia-Airlines-Timetable-01DEC2013-to-29MAR2014-MH163.png?rlkey=pxlgejbfllp6ayjjm17d52bob&dl=0
MH150 is the only flight from Kuala Lumpur to Jeddah;
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/qf30s56e0gmzuo7zbaxrq/Malaysia-Airlines-Timetable-01DEC2013-to-29MAR2014-MH150.png?rlkey=wu8h5wbdohykdwlbivev0ezu2&dl=0
2. MH163 was not a flight that Capt. Zaharie Shah had flown since 12OCT2013 or was scheduled to fly, but MH150 was both flown on 28NOV2013 and planned for 04FEB2014:
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/w6g45fh2r3s4euhude9lc/Zaharie-Shah-Flights-27AUG2013-to-08MAR2014.png?rlkey=1unln5hm2a92ymd3tpzgbzwwa&dl=0
3. MH163 was not on the duty roster for Capt. Zaharie Shah in either February 2014 or March 2014, but MH150 was planned on the duty roster for 04FEB2014:
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/z68qmk06j664o34s0h2vm/Zaharie-Shah-Duty-Roster-FEB2014.png?rlkey=t7453psh119xcjz5yvbmneszc&dl=0
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/92gh77esysim042o6h6ek/Zaharie-Shah-Duty-Roster-MAR2014.png?rlkey=1v6y7h70wkcuvwu7jqjrr5vbj&dl=0
4. Pulau Perak is 40 nmi from waypoint 5N at 5.111630°N 98.587946°E, which is on flight route B466 between waypoint GUNIP and waypoint TASEK:
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/gainc7luz9s47lpwmb4dr/Sky-Vector-of-ZS-simulator-point-5N.png?rlkey=vilocxwgc14hfrq9hu72tsqcl&dl=0
@Richard.
1. Re MH163.
My apologies. I must have had eye strain when I read MH163 instead of MH168 as per Bill Tracy’s paper: (https://www.mh370search.com/2021/02/04/guest-paper-by-bill-tracy/).
MH168 was apparently an infrequent additional ‘red-eye’ flight to take pilgrims to Mecca (on an as needed basis).
2. Re 5N.
In the initial MH16 or later MH150/MH168 simulations, the 5N point would have been on route (as you say), but the crucial point is, there was absolutely no reason for him to select that point in the sim, for any reason, in either of those two plans.
However, once MH370 was selected, it became a different matter.
I still believe that Z then knew that he absolutely had to “shorten his track miles” to get to 45S.
Obviously, he could not go around Ache, so he had to cut across Sumatra.
In my “ingenious, but fantastic story:” (thank you !) he had to create 5N as a turn point for the ‘Sumatran Overflight’ (as previously stated in the post above).
Furthermore, he could have planned on going all the way to KETIV (unlikely) to pick up the existing 10N to 45S1 track, or he could have shortened it by turning south at ISBIX, or UPROB (now PAKRA).
These tracks avoid all TNI-AU primary air defense radars (operable at the time or not), except for Sibolga (and he would be outbound when he came up on their scope), and Medan (which is probably only used as a local approach control facility like Butterworth.
The net result being that he could now certainly get to 45S with even standard fuel for MH370.
@Richard
1. To clear up the flight number issues KUL – JED and return, I went back to Bill Tracy and asked him to repeat the details that he had provided me long ago (but which I had misplaced).
This morning, he came back with this:
QUOTE:
There was a plan per press release.
“Malaysia Airlines from 28JAN14 to 29MAR14 is adding 2nd daily Kuala Lumpur – Jeddah service, on board Boeing 777-200ER aircraft.
Reservation for the new MH168/169 service is now open.
MH150 KUL1145 – 1600JED 772 D
MH168 KUL2230 – 0245+1JED 772 D
MH169 JED0500 – 1835KUL 772 D
MH151 JED1730 – 0705+1KUL 772 D
MH169 begins from 29JAN14 until 30MAR14.
From 30MAR14, MH will operate 1 daily flight as MH168/169.
(which means the oneWorld member shifting operational schedule to night-time departure from KUL).
If you look at the final schedule, there is some reference to 11:45 take off time.
Image = (https://twitter.com/messages/1192236752-3137975353/media/1788627866999009571)
But apparently MH168 never happened.
MH150 stayed at 1515.
That’s why I speculate ZS might have been done the sim work to check out a different take off time than he had expected.
Of course, we know nothing about ZS planned flight schedules.
(We know what flights he actually flew, but we don’t know any behind the scenes schedule changes.)
There was the unsubstantiated MAS pilot’s wife rumor on FB that ZS bumped another pilot (her husband) to take his spot MH370.
END QUOTE.
So, although I caused some confusion with the flight numbers, the issue from a planning point of view was simply ‘time of day’, i.e., a night flight being much preferred to a day flight.
Further, as Bill says above:
(We know what flights he actually flew, but we don’t know any behind the scenes schedule changes.)
I think Z would have simulated any flight that he felt would suit his purpose, full well knowing that he was senior enough to be able to get any change to his roster that may be necessary (if he really wanted to). We will never know if that occurred or not, but it is plausible.
2. I also forgot to mention above, that I had somehow ‘mis-plotted’ 5N in GE closer to Pulau Perak. Now that you have corrected me, it actually supports my long-held view that Z diverted MH370 approaching Pulau Perak, turned left (probably for TASEK) thence direct NAGAN (now IVRAR) and went ‘feet wet’ passing WITC, and out towards MABIX, before turning south. Alternatively, he could have tracked a little further south of that track (as above).
@ventus45,
I refer you to 2 comments I have previously made on this website.
6th February 2021
https://www.mh370search.com/2021/02/04/guest-paper-by-bill-tracy/comment-page-1/#comment-216
Malaysian Airlines planned the service extension of an additional flight from Kuala Lumpur to Jeddah with MH168 in September 2013. The additional flight was to start from 28th January 2014 until 29th March 2014. The new flight was open for reservations on 6th September 2013.
The duty roster for Zaharie Shah contained in the RMP report has him clearly assigned to MH150 and not MH168.
Zaharie Shah was definitely only rostered to fly MH150 on 4th February 2014 and there is no mention of him in the duty roster being planned to fly MH168 at any time.
7th February 2021
https://www.mh370search.com/2021/02/04/guest-paper-by-bill-tracy/comment-page-1/#comment-223
The duty roster in the RMP report is the planned roster. As you can see it contains flights for Zaharie Shah after MH370 disappeared. He was planned to fly to DPS on 11th March 2014, HKG on 13th March 2014 and AMS on 20th March. All these future entries are with the default departure and arrival times.
For all the flights that had already taken place the duty roster is updated with the actual time of departure and the actual time of arrival.
If Zaharie Shah was unable to fly then the standby pilot would have been called in and the standby pilot would be allocated the actual flying hours. If Zaharie Shah had arranged a mutual swap with another pilot then it would be marked M. If Zaharie Shah was the standby pilot and had been called in then it would be marked SX-777 where X = 1 to 4 to denote the type of standby and the actual hours would be entered. There are no such entries in the duty roster of Zaharie Shah flying MH168 or doing a mutual swap with another pilot or being called in on standby to replace the pilot of MH168.
In any event, the fuel load for MH168 would have differed from the fuel load for MH150 only because of the expected weather en-route and availability of alternative airports. The difference would not be significant.
My personal interpretation, from my work with the data, is the sim data is probably representative of a body of work, unfortunately for hijacking a flight to SIO. Various flights of the pilot were probably studied, but at least MH150 and MH370. The basic plan in my view was probably to depressurize then divert via 180 Magnetic Heading towards the Magnetic South Pole (most of us originally thought NZPG was the target but I now think it was probably Magnetic South Pole, which is similar idea). According to my work, the fuel loaded in the sim case N10 was exact amount needed to get to Magnetic South Pole (which is a spot in the ocean below Australia offshore Antarctica). In the sim case, it looks like the pilot jettisons the fuel and then drags the plane to 45s, as if he knows from memory the basic shape of the flight path for this generic plan. Based on real life MH370, it looks like for MH370 on a weekend night, the plan allowed turning south a bit earlier than for MH150 at ~1090E during the day.
@TBill,
I agree with your reply to me above: “Looks like Malaysia decided to give the RMPolice a sanitized version of the data, deleting the incriminating nature of full data set.”
I would call that a cover up.
You say: “But denial forces have won the day, so nobody cares now.” and “Thus the sim data, which is probably evidence of the broad nature of the pilot’s plan, is universally dismissed.”
I would call that being compliant with a cover up.
I agree with your assessment: “My personal interpretation, from my work with the data, is the sim data is probably representative of a body of work, unfortunately for hijacking a flight to SIO. Various flights of the pilot were probably studied, but at least MH150 and MH370.”
The truth will eventually prevail.
Yes, indeed, the only other option is the RMPolice themselves redacted the data. But the RMPolice’s wrong interpretation of disconnected waypoints seems to suggest that they probably did not have the full data set. Re: the sim data, it looks like the RMPolice report might date back to Spring 2014, so that is possibly an early period when secrecy might have been somewhat understandable for national security reasons.
In his recent interview with Megyn Kelly, I believe William Langewiesche was quite critical about the RMPolice effort/report. I do not know exactly why he feels that way, but the sim data is certainly one area where the Police report is apparently not valid.
You know, public was advised (basically by ATSB) that MH370 was “no pilot intent” ghost flight. Then we find out from Tony Abbott in 2020 that Australia knew from Day-1 from Malaysia that MH370 was likely pilot hijacking. The following is speculation on my part, but I suspect ATSB probably knew that FBI thought the sim data was nefarious. Yet apparently ATSB let itself be swayed by those voices disputing the data to defend industry or whatever. Hence failure to advise public of the apparent truth, resulting in the current anarchy.
I just noticed the final SIR (July_2018) report p.27 does credit the RMP Police Report for their work on the sim data, which we now know from ATSB in Oct_2017 the sim data reported by RMP seems to be redacted or incomplete. So that aspect of the SIR report is questionable, and bona fide apparent coverup.
@JK Loewe,
Welcome to the blog!
Captain Zaharie Shah’s home flight simulator comprised several hard disk drives with different versions of the Microsoft Windows operating system as well as different versions of the Microsoft Flight Simulator software. The flight simulator version used for the flight to the Indian Ocean was the Microsoft Flight Simulator 2004 (also known as FS2004 or FS9) with an add on from Phoenix Simulation Software (PSS) for the Boeing 777-200LR called PSS Boeing 777-200LR No VC (Virtual Cockpit). This is contrary to the Royal Malaysian Police (RMP) report, which mistakenly states the FSX version was used. The PSS add on was only available for FS2004 or FS9.
The flight simulation software allows the user to stop the simulation at any point, save all the data at that point and resume the simulation at a later time, but also automatically generates files when a flight plan is created or modified, particular functions are used or the program is closed. All the flight files of interest were auto generated by the software. The software also has a map function which allows the user to manually move the aircraft during the simulation and save all the new simulator data at that point, but that was not used in this case.
A total of 668 flight files were found on the computer on the 6 hard disk drives (1 internal drive and 5 external drives). The 6 flight files of particular interest for the Indian Ocean flight simulation were deleted on an external hard drive, which was found disconnected from the computer. The 6 flight files were later recovered from a shadow volume. The other flight files were not deleted, which is why the deleted files are of special interest to the investigation.
The home flight simulator was recovered by the Malaysian police and was investigated by both the Malaysian police forensics at their Computer Crime Investigation Section and by the FBI (with respect to the Sandisk Extreme 240 GB external hard drive of interest annotated MK25 by the RMP). The RMP report relies on the findings from their own computer forensics department. Why they never received or ignored the more complete data from the FBI is not known.
The ATSB were provided a more complete analysis of the deleted data by the FBI who were able to recover a little more data at the beginning and end of the deleted files. The ATSB have confirmed that the 6 flight files (which they annotate A to F) are as follows:
A is a complete flight file from a previous flight simulation and is the starting point for a number of simulations at Kuala Lumpur International Airport at 2.7480°N 101.7223°E 70 feet.
B is a partial file with the end missing after [Panel. 12] at 3.4151°N 100.8856°E 23,247 feet, but the [Date TimeSeason] places B between A and C.
C at 5.1116°N 98.5879°E 32,246 feet, D at 10.1831°N 90.2245°E 40,003 feet and E at 45.0852°S 104.1455°E 37,651 feet are complete program generated temporary flight files.
F is a partial file with beginning missing, but the [SimVars.0] latitude and longitude data place the file at 45.1277°S 104.1408°E 4,000 feet.
When you manually save a flight file it contains 946 data elements that includes all the PSS parameters. Microsoft Flight Simulator will routinely automatically generate smaller flight files that contain up to 389 data elements and exclude the PSS parameters. Captain Zaharie Shah did not save those files, the software automatically saved those files. The ATSB have confirmed the structure of the flight files recovered by the FBI.
The map function was not used as certain data groups such as [ATC Active Flight Plan] and [GPS Eng] data groups are missing from the structure of the recovered flight files.
During the course of a simulated flight, the software keeps track of the minimum and maximum values of g-force (MinimumGForce, MaximumGForce) and also the maximum values of revolutions per minute (rpm) for each engine (MaxReachedEngineRPM). Because these values are not reset during the flight they can serve as a marker that can link various flight files to the same simulated flight. Flight files B to F have common markers and are from the same simulation. Flight file A is a generic starting point, which was reused several times.
All the flight files A to E contained a [Date TimeSeason] field which comprises values for Day, Year, Hours, Minutes, Seconds and Season. The files A to E had common values of Day=33, Year=2014 and Season=Winter. The Hour and Minute fields indicated times between 15:26 and 16:38. The flight simulation into the Indian Ocean took place on 2nd February 2014 starting at 15:26 and lasted 72 minutes. Captain Zaharie Shah had a day off according to the duty roster included in the RMP report. Captain Zaharie Shah was scheduled to fly MH150 on 4th February 2014 at 15:15 local time (actual departure time 15:14 according to the duty roster included in the RMP report.
Obviously the entire simulation would take over 7 hours, so the simulation was stopped and moved forward in time at some point. One theory is the simulation was stopped to remove fuel from the tanks, but if that was done we would have another program generated file, which we do not have. Another theory is that the fuel jettison function was used, but this would have taken 38 minutes to complete. The assumption is that there was around 62,700 kg of fuel at point D and the fuel jettison function allows the user to empty fuel down to a minimum of 454 kg.
Estimating the simulation time on the basis of using the fuel jettisoning function, the overall time from point A to F is around 72 minutes. The largest part of this time was between point D and E at between 42 and 43 minutes, where the fuel was being jettisoned and the aircraft moved forward in position and time. The ATSB have confirmed that the simulation time between D and E was around 42.5 minutes.
Many thanks to Victor Iannello, Yves Guillaume, Bill Tracy and Mick Gilbert for their various analyses of Captain Zaharie Shah’s home flight simulator.
Hi Richard,
many thanks for your detailed answer. I appreciate that and am definitely impressed by all the work and effort you & the IG took and still take to find out what happened to MH370. I am definitely not able to keep up with your technical knowledge on the case. Overall your arguments are certainly convincing & WSPR appears to be a great chance to find the wreckage.
Regarding the simulator data, the following question comes to my mind:
You write “The 6 flight files of particular interest for the Indian Ocean flight simulation were deleted on an external hard drive, which was found disconnected from the computer. The 6 flight files were later recovered from a shadow volume. The other flight files were not deleted, which is why the deleted files are of special interest to the investigation.”
And: “Captain Zaharie Shah did not save those files, the software automatically saved those files.”
This would mean that Captain Zaharie Shah intentionally deleted six separate flight files that he had not manually saved, but that were created automatically by the system. Does this make sense from your perspective? If the system creates such files automatically, then the user usually does not even know about them.
Regarding the fuel jettison function: Zaharie had so much experience as a pilot that he must have known how many fuel the aircraft burns and where he may approximately end up on a murder suicide mission. The data points were manually positioned along the simulator route. This means that the indications in the simulator fuel gauges were not accurate as it would only show the amount of fuel consumed during the part of the sim session when the aircraft was actually in flight. Therefore at the end of the flight the simulator fuel gauge would still indicate enough time of fuel remaining.
The full data sets of the flight files have not been released. In particular that the file time stamp data is not fully available makes any interpretation difficult; it is based on thin ice. Who is trying to cover-up what? There are two possibilities: Either Malaysia tries to protect Zaharie because they fear the reputation loss and further liability if they admit that he did it, or they know that he is not responsible and use him as a scapegoat to cover-up something else. One of the two scenarios must be right, and no matter which one it is: How can we trust the data if we know that they cover up something?
Richard can augment this.
Keep in mind we only have “leaked” partial data, but ATSB has the “complete” sim files. ATSB has in later years verbally provided guidance. It turns out Line#1 of the data, which has not been publicly disclosed, tells us file name and it is a type of Microsoft Flight Sim temporary file that is automatically created and deleted when a user makes certain flight changes. You are correct that Time, Date, sim time, are data lines available to ATSB, but as yet undisclosed. However we understand from ATSB that the runs are contiguous points, seemingly consistent with MH150 to KLIA/Jeddah take off time and initial route. The simulation features some unusual fuel management, including an approx. 45 minute period after which the fuel tanks are empty. Several of us postulate that that timing is consistent with using the fuel jettison to empty the tanks, after which the aircraft icon is dragged to 45S in the SIO. The entire sim run is only a bit over an hour flight time, so the data features a lot of moving the aircraft ahead by hand…
Richard, I would like to explore a couple of issues, if I may.
Issue One: you state that:
“File A is a complete flight file from a previous flight simulation and is the starting point for a number of simulations at Kuala Lumpur International Airport at 2.7480°N 101.7223°E 70 feet.”
My questions are:
(1) what number of simulations, i.e. how many of Z’s complete simulations start at WMKK ? A few, dozens, hundreds ?
(2) of those simulations beginning at WMKK, are they all (or mostly) the 777 ?
(3) for all of the WMKK / 777 simulations, what are the brakes release fuel loads ?
Are they all the same, or do they vary ?
If so, can you tabulate the values ?
Issue 2: you state that:
“The assumption is that there was around 62,700 kg of fuel at point D” (10.1831°N 90.2245°E 40,003 feet).
My questions are:
(1) how (specifically) was that assumption of 62,700 kg derived ? (calculations please).
(2) that amount of fuel (if correct) is way too much fuel for MH150, a flight to Jeddah (OEJN). It is far more consistent with my long held view (ferociously derided by some) that Z’s initial planning (months before) had been originally planned off an Amsterdam (EHAM) flight, and not MH150 as is often portraid.
Which brings me to the crux of the matter.
Going back to issue One, and adding questions four and five, which are:
(4) What was the date and season and destination of all the WMKK/777 simulations in (3) above ? (tabulate ?)
(5) And in particular, what was the EARLIEST date of these simulations ?
@ventus45,
Good questions, but we are not given comprehensive information on the other 668 flight files on Captain Zaharie Shah’s home flight simulator.
There are snippets of information in log files, which shows Boeing 738 simulations from Penang Airport with 4 landings on 20th and 21st December 2013, Boeing 777-200 LR simulations from Kuala Lumpur International Airport on 24th January 2014 with 3 landings and Douglas DC3 simulations from Yellowknife Airport, Canada to the Cantung Mine Tungsten Airstrip on 1st February 2014 with 7 landings.
FSX was installed on 20th December 2013 and FS9 was installed on 23rd December 2013. We do not know if there were earlier installations of FS9 and the PSS Boeing 777-200 LR, which was available since 10th March 2013.
We only have part of the information recovered by the FBI for the 6 deleted flight files. These files were recovered in to some extent by the Malaysian police computer crime unit and more fully by the FBI.
We only have part of the information provided by the FBI to the ATSB. Duncan Bosworth of the ATSB was very helpful in answering specific questions, but the ATSB were not allowed to publish the full FBI report.
This simulation was made in order to check, how far the fuel load of 68,523.8 kg required for the Kuala Lumpur to Jeddah flight would take a diverted flight into the Southern Indian Ocean. The flight path from Captain Zaharie Shah’s home flight simulation was run on 2nd February 2014, with a starting fuel amount of 68,523.8 kg fuel on board. Capt. Zaharie Shah flew the Malaysian Airlines System (MAS) flight MH150 from Kuala Lumpur to Jeddah on 4th February 2014 and had an estimated 68,450 kg of fuel onboard following the MAS standard fuel planning practice. It is no coincidence that the two fuel amounts in the simulator and in the real world are almost identical.
The recovered data shows that the aircraft was fuelled so that the left and right tanks were at 100% and the centre tank was at 15%, where the levels are expressed as a fraction of the tank capacity. In the configuration file for this aircraft model, each side tank on the left and right side tank is assigned a capacity of 9,300 gallons (35,204 litres) and the centre tank is assigned a capacity of 26,100 gallons (98,799 litres). Using a fuel density of 0.803 kg/l, the capacity of each side tank is 28,269 kg and 79,336 kg for the centre tank. The total fuel when the aircraft was positioned on the runway before takeoff was 68,438 kg.
The remaining fuel at point D of 62,700 kg is an estimate. At point D there was 7.7843% of the centre tank remaining, which would leave 62,714 kg.
Richard- Did you personally contact ATSB Duncan Bosworth? When was that about? and did you learn anything new?
Thankyou for that, very interesting.
@TBill,
I personally contacted Duncan Bosworth of the ATSB, as well as Angus Mitchell, Pete Foley and Joe Hattley. There are a total of 86 direct personal email exchanges over the years 2016 to 2024 between the ATSB and myself, mostly with Duncan Bosworth (84%). I found the ATSB were always helpful, within the bounds of their confidentiality agreements.
I have remained in contact with Pete Foley and Joe Hattley, after they left the ATSB. I have exchanged 116 emails with Pete Foley since he left the ATSB, primarily because he is acting as an advisor to Ocean Infinity along side my co-author Prof. Simon Maskell. In addition I have had 9 emails exchanges with Joe Hattley since he left the ATSB.
In addition there were a number of emails between the ATSB and the IG. In total there are 9,639 emails discussing the ATSB statements amongst various MH370 independent analysts. The ATSB were gracious enough to acknowledge by name the contribution from a number of external analysts including myself in their final report.
For example, Duncan Bosworth arranged for me to receive all the data from the AMSA search flights under a confidentiality agreement for my WSPR research.
Interesting Richard thank you for that summary of ATSB contacts