Cyprus-Forum.com

[Paphitis]

They know the pings came from MH370 because each ping has an identifying code unique to that aircraft only.

Furthermore, it was I that mentioned the + or - 300kms and only because I do not know whether Inmarsat use Atomic Clocks on their Satellites and I reckon it is a pretty safe bet that they do, that all satellites do, in which case that error margin goes out the window.

Then that leaves the errors attributed to the calculations in reconstructing the flight which the Aircraft Performance Analysts will be aware of since their models are based on a range of assumptions which are unverifiable but nonetheless there is a method in the science which means none of it can be discounted. They are indeed very lucky that they have the Inmarsat data which gives them 7 start points. If they only had the last primary return then they practically can only draw a circle around that, the radius of which can
only be the best possible range of the aircraft for the given amount of fuel on board.

These methods are not tried or tested but the good people and experts at Boeing, Inmarsat and Rolls Royce are no fools either. Very difficult explaining their methodology to the layman but one day they will reveal the entire intriguing process.

[Pyrpolizer]

Actually the +- 300km comes from the mathematical formula
S=C*t
S=distance
C=speed of light=300 000 km/sec
t=1milisecond accuracy of logged data = +-0.001sec
==> S=+- 300Km

[Pyrpolizer]

And this is how thick an arc like that would look like on a map

[Paphitis]

Actually the +- 300km comes from the mathematical formula
S=C*t
S=distance
C=speed of light=300 000 km/sec
t=1milisecond accuracy of logged data = +-0.001sec
==> S=+- 300Km

Yes that is how I came up with the 300 kms but it is all irrelevant if the Satellite has an Atomic Clock because I guarantee you that if that is the case, the time will be to the nth decimal point.

I know that GPS, and GLONASS have Atomic Clocks and I am pretty sure all Satellites have Atomic Clocks just to even maintain their orbit or geostationary position and what not.

So no, the calculations are not rounded to 3 decimal points. It would be insane if they were.

GPS and GLONASS are accurate to + or - 10m. Not to mention the fact that some errors are deliberate.

[Pyrpolizer]

Similarly the data of inmarsat were recorded at millisecond intervals .

[Pyrpolizer]

http://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2014/05/world/mh370-inmarsat-data/

[Paphitis]

If the Satellites have Atomic Clocks then the times are recorded to the nth decimal point.

The data set released is just that or what was released. It does not mean they captured the data to the nearest millisecond because that defeats the purpose of the Atomic Clock in the first place. The Satellite or Inmarsat are able to capture the data as per their satellite's Atomic Clock which id dead accurate.

[Pyrpolizer]

LOL how many times should I repeat the same thing? Just copy the damn link on your browser and see for yourself that the recorded data was NOT recorded at nanosecond accuracy, NOT even recorded at microsecond accuracy. If the sat had or did not have atomic clock on board (actually none has) if or not the sat was synchronized with an atomic clock on ground will not change the fact that the LOG FILE itself is accurate to the millisecond ONLY.
Boring.

[Paphitis]

LOL how many times should I repeat the same thing? Just copy the damn link on your browser and see for yourself that the recorded data was NOT recorded at nanosecond accuracy, NOT even recorded at microsecond accuracy. If the sat had or did not have atomic clock on board (actually none has) if or not the sat was synchronized with an atomic clock on ground will not change the fact that the LOG FILE itself is accurate to the millisecond ONLY.
Boring.

They actually state that the BTO was captured to microsecond accuracy!

That means that they do have an Atomic Clock and the times are captured to one millionth of a second - 1/1,000,000 second.

[Pyrpolizer]

...