PDA

View Full Version : Vanished: The disapearance of the Star Dust



trucker17
July 16th, 2013, 19:01
Found this on Youtube.....Good Documentry about the loss of the B,S.A.A. Star Dust.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=Zy8Ga6OmNx8

Geomitrak
July 16th, 2013, 20:15
In the opening few minutes, quote ' pieces of the plane mysteriously reappeared on a high glacier' - and thats where I turned it off. The wreck was covered by snow and ice, and as the glacier moved down, so parts of the aircraft were revealed, simple as that. Nothing mysterious about it whatsoever. More dumbed down sensationalist crap-speak from the BBC. Sorry, but this sort of thing irritates me.

Naismith
July 16th, 2013, 23:06
Wow if BBC Horizon is dumbed down crap you must have insurmountable standards when it comes to Documentary TV. I yearn for shows of such quality this side of the Atlantic but fat chance of that ever happening.

mal998
July 17th, 2013, 05:58
Very interesting and entertaining...I thought it was really good, I liked it.

2 Thumbs up.

trucker17
July 17th, 2013, 07:35
Well...To me I thought it was good.....
The first time I heard of the disappearance of the Star Dust, was when I was a kid......I heard the same story years later, when 2 pilots were talking about what they would do if they ever came across the Star Dust....
The last coded message from stardust......S.T.E.N.D.E.C . Is still a mystery today, as to what it meant.

Firekitten
July 17th, 2013, 07:46
Actually the science is fairly good behind that documentary... glacial ice does move in.,. cycles, and material that starts lower down, can end up higher after years within the ice, imagine it flowing down hill not like a train on tracks, but like a caterpillar track... one piece stays stationary while the rest moves over it and is pulled up behind. Seemed only logical when you look at it in hindsight.

MarkH
July 17th, 2013, 08:29
Wow if BBC Horizon is dumbed down crap you must have insurmountable standards when it comes to Documentary TV

No, I agree about Horizon. I rarely watch it now, it's all hype and graphics with little substance or real information. I enjoyed it as a teenager, which may have been because I was a teenager rather than that it was better back then. We used to have so much more intelligent science and technology programming with Equinoxe, QED, James Burke and the like. It's surely a lowest common denominator thing.

Firekitten
July 17th, 2013, 08:44
Frankly, pieces of a long lost aircraft reappearing on a glacier is a little mysterious... but then they go on to explain how it happened, and the mystery is solved. if you want Pure science, read a report, tv documentaries are supposed to polish things a little to make it palatable to all viewers, I didn't see much wrong with the glaciology in the docu...

hairyspin
July 17th, 2013, 10:50
No, I agree about Horizon. I rarely watch it now, it's all hype and graphics with little substance or real information. I enjoyed it as a teenager...

As did I. The programmes treated the viewer as an intelligent adult, able to recall some facts presented ten minutes earlier while following the development of an argument. Now we must cater for the channel surfers and the gnat's heartbeat attention span, so the subject of the broadcast is restated every three minutes, sometimes less. It's not as if the programme is interrupted by adverts, duh: we're talking BBC 2 after all.

Haven't deliberately watched it in years, but I watched the Star Dust video which dates back to 1999: Horizon more like I remember it. Thanks!

nio
July 17th, 2013, 11:07
O/T

If you can ever get hold of the Horizon documentary on the subject of infinity, I commend it to you.

Mind expanding stuff.

best

nio

Matt Wynn
July 17th, 2013, 12:17
O/T this one Nio?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ACUU7CIMPCY

mjahn
July 17th, 2013, 22:15
Watched the Horizon episode spellbound, not least because I modelled a FS9 Lancastrian once and couldn't help thinking they could have used that model rather than the paper flier they did use. Never mind. Did you see the comment by one YouTube viewer, who suggested that


STENDEC is a world war two acronym used in morse code. The translation is as follows:
Severe Turbulance Encountered Now Descending Emergency Crash-landing.


Sounded very plausible to me ... even though one of the experts suggested they just flew into the glacier and were all killed instantly.

Geomitrak
July 17th, 2013, 23:42
Watched the Horizon episode spellbound, not least because I modelled a FS9 Lancastrian once and couldn't help thinking they could have used that model rather than the paper flier they did use. Never mind. Did you see the comment by one YouTube viewer, who suggested that

STENDEC is a world war two acronym used in morse code. The translation is as follows:
Severe Turbulance Encountered Now Descending Emergency Crash-landing.


Sounded very plausible to me ... even though one of the experts suggested they just flew into the glacier and were all killed instantly.

I very much doubt there was a set of approved single acronyms covering every eventuality, and combination of eventualities, that could occur in flight. Can you imagine the radio operator looking through a list to see which acronym applied to whatever set of circumstances that were applicable at that given moment? Hang on, can't use that one - there is no icing...I'd use this one, but the visibility is okay...we've got an engine out, turbulence, descending - would that be EOTURD ?

The actual message received at Santiago was 'ETA Santiago 17.45 Hrs. STENDEC' the first portion of which indicates there were no problems on board the aircraft and that they fully intended to land normally at their intended destination. STENDEC wasn't recognised by the Chilean radio operator on the ground and he asked for clarification. The message STENDEC was repeated twice, after which all fell silent and the aircraft was lost.

The most plausible explanation I've read for the loss of the Star Dust was that it had encountered high altitude winds ( the jet stream ) that were little understood at that time, and the navigator hadn't factored them into his calculations. The aircraft had been slowed down and wasn't as far along its intended track as the navigator assumed. Therefore when it started its descent into Santiago, it was still above the Andes, rather than west of them.

This would also add weight to the another speculation;- that STENDEC was an abbreviation of Standard Enroute Descent. So..ETA Santiago 17:45. Standard Enroute Descent.

That said, its odd that the definition of STENDEC wasn't clarified at the time. Surely if it was in common use with BSAA, someone from the airline would have said so at the time of the accident investigation.

mjahn
July 18th, 2013, 00:14
Gotta admit these are all good points. Were these voice messages or was it Morse code?

Firekitten
July 18th, 2013, 00:45
At times like this its best to look at the history of the radio op... was he ex raf? it might have a source there... Some things are hard to shake remember.

SADT
July 18th, 2013, 00:52
Gotta admit these are all good points. Were these voice messages or was it Morse code?

I believe they were using morse as, several theories around the meaning of STENDEC have revolved around that it could have been miss heard by the receiver. Apparently STENDEC is similar in morse to VALP, the code of a near by (Near to Santiago, about 110KM - Valparaiso airport) airport. So one theory is that the crew of Star Dust thought they were over Valparaiso, due to not knowing about the jet stream were actually not where they thought they were, began their descent, and crashed into the Andes. STENDEC is also an anagram of DESCENT.. It was also noted Star Dust was transmitting very quickly, (Many words per minute) so it is entirely possible the operator mis heard.

Craig.

roger-wilco-66
July 18th, 2013, 01:29
At times like this its best to look at the history of the radio op... was he ex raf? it might have a source there... Some things are hard to shake remember.


Very good point, IMO ! What I thought immediatly.


Cheers,
Mark

Dev One
July 18th, 2013, 03:41
If reception was dubious & the morse operator not so good as the sender & copying it down with bad separation of the dots & dashes it could have read STARDUST!
Keith

Geomitrak
July 18th, 2013, 05:37
Wow if BBC Horizon is dumbed down crap you must have insurmountable standards when it comes to Documentary TV. I yearn for shows of such quality this side of the Atlantic but fat chance of that ever happening.

No they are not insurmountable at all. Watch such productions as the BBC's 'The Great War', Thames Television's 'The World at War' ( they actually interviewed Hasso Von Manteuffel ! ) or any of David Attenborough's natural history documentaries, and you'll appreciate how precipitous Horizon's fall has been. Its not just Horizon however.

I once watched a 50 minute documentary on Channel 5 about a ship wreck found lying on the bottom of the Mediterranean. As usual, it was all spurious mystery and enigma... 'What was this ship...what was it carrying...AND WHAT WAS IT DOING HERE ?? !!! After all that was established we progressed to ' What caused her loss...was it bad weather, a mine perhaps... or ( cue dark lowering of the voice ) WAS IT SOMETHING ELSE ????

All it turned out to be was a an unremarkable cargo ship carrying bog-standard war materials, flying the British flag and so was torpedoed by a German U-boat, just like all the others that litter the sea bed from two world wars. They could have said all that in the five minutes, but no, it had to be stretched out into an underwater detective story, a riddle of the deep !!

Sorry, but its all such crap. The fool's lantern has put us to sleep.

trucker17
July 18th, 2013, 08:21
This you say are very true, it could have all been said in 5 minutes or less....their are some out here who have never heard of this plane, because it was lost in history and forgotten about......Some out here are younger generations, from when the plane went down, some are still in school....The point is their are some here who may not have known about the way ice moves and carry something with it......You look at the younger crowed today, and they know very little about the systems that were on aircraft of that time. Most think aircraft back then had GPS systems in them....Unless you are raised in areas around aircraft, your knowledge is more then limited....The same goes for ships.....OK it was in a particular part of the ocean....Question you will always hear about these things is "WHY WAS IT THEIR" "WHEN DID IT GO DOWN" "WHAT CAUSED IT TO SINK".....Each and every one of these ship and planes that litter the planet all have a story behind them to tell......
Myself I knew about the Plane in question years before this was aired on TV, or was posted here.....It a very simple thing called HISTORY....And their are some who are interested in it....No matter where in the world it is, or what country it came from....
How many out here knew about this plane before this show first aired, or even posted on this site....? How many still don't know about this plane...?
When I posted this video to the site, I was thinking of the people here that may not have heard of this wreck.....For many years no body even knew what happened to the plane....Yeah it went down, but no one knew for sure where it went down, or even why.....
A news report lasts about 30 seconds to 3,4 or more minutes......A documentary delves into the history and life of the subject matter....whether it be a person, ship, plane, or country, etc....

Geomitrak
July 18th, 2013, 09:59
Trucker, I would clarify my point; yes the discovery of an aircraft's wreckage 50 years after it went missing does make for an interesting story. Its the nature of the documentary's making, the garnish of contrived mystery and intrigue, that is my bug bear.

As for each of these sunken ships having a story to tell, well, in the majority of cases the story can be told in two or three sentences. If you had a huge book that detailed every merchant ship lost in both world wars, by page 40 or 50, you'd be leafing through it. By page 100 you'd be putting it back on the shelf. Two or three sentences would have summed up the whole 50 minutes of that documentary, without all the tedious hushed and foreboding tones of the commentary. Its not the subject so much as how its reported that irritates me.

By the way, one question raised in Star Dust documentary was left unanswered - the ex-BSAA captain they interviewed, the one who'd flown out to assist in the search...did he know what STENDEC meant ? If it had been a standard acronym, either generally or within BSAA, surely he would have known. Unfortunately he was never asked, at least not on camera.

Desert Rat
July 18th, 2013, 10:31
If reception was dubious & the morse operator not so good as the sender & copying it down with bad separation of the dots & dashes it could have read STARDUST!
Keith

Firstly,
thoroughly enjoyed this, Got me wanting to know if more has come to earth since the documentary.

Now, I can see how the Morse may have been confused, especially the Star/Sten section. The latter part is a bit further afield, but at speed, plausible.



... - .- .-. -.. ..- ... -
S T A R D U S T
... - .- .-. -.. ..- ... -
... - . -. -.. . -.-.
S T EN D E C
... - . -. -.. . -.-.

ARD= .- .-. -..

END= . -. -..

trucker17
July 18th, 2013, 10:57
Geomatric. I wasn't aiming my response at you bud.....
I used the bit about time and news and documentaries as a way of showing the difference between the 2......
True the documentaries of today cant compete with the documentaries of the past, Back then they went deeper into the scene then they do today....Like doing more then just saying that the Star Dust was a civilian version of the Lancaster Bomber.....That's fine for people like us who know about the Lancaster....But many out their don't even know what a Lancaster looks like.....Its one of them planes that is less known, as with many others out their....
The show did answer a few questions about what happened to the Star Dust, and still left many, many more unanswered.....All in all some of the questions that were answered was good. But it left to many unanswered.....But that's the way they shoot documentaries today. To fast with not enough info to answer all the questions.....which is why we watch them to begin with, to get answers to what we have heard.....:salute:

Geomitrak
July 18th, 2013, 11:23
No problems Trucker. Thank you for indulging me, and allowing me to vent my spleen on your thread that merely started out as a link to a Youtube. All the very best...and if I find the link to that sunken ship vid, I'll let you know so you can waste 50 minutes of your time on Earth the way I did ! :icon_lol:

:icon29:

trucker17
July 18th, 2013, 14:27
No problems Trucker. Thank you for indulging me, and allowing me to vent my spleen on your thread that merely started out as a link to a Youtube. All the very best...and if I find the link to that sunken ship vid, I'll let you know so you can waste 50 minutes of your time on Earth the way I did ! :icon_lol:

:icon29:

Only if you pass the Beer and Pretzels:icon_lol:

Firekitten
July 18th, 2013, 15:11
Here's a thought I had earlier after I was chatting on teamspeak, and with vox on, the start of my message was missed...

What if, the start and or end of the message were garbled or missing due to range and interference? what if S T EN D E C was something more?

two words, two halves of words? misheard and combined into one?

trucker17
July 18th, 2013, 16:20
Here's a thought I had earlier after I was chatting on teamspeak, and with vox on, the start of my message was missed...

What if, the start and or end of the message were garbled or missing due to range and interference? what if S T EN D E C was something more?

two words, two halves of words? misheard and combined into one?

Very possible, that is something we will never know for sure......

Jafo
July 18th, 2013, 16:48
Here's a thought I had earlier after I was chatting on teamspeak, and with vox on, the start of my message was missed...

What if, the start and or end of the message were garbled or missing due to range and interference? what if S T EN D E C was something more?

two words, two halves of words? misheard and combined into one?

That won't be the case...it was sent via Morse.
The Doc mentions TWO subsequent repeats of the trans.
No Op is going to be so incompetent as to mis-read a transmission three times.
There was no reference to clarity or lack of with transmissions...only a non-understood acronym.

Sadly, my old man turned up his toes 5 years ago....but I can bet he could shed some light on it. School of Marconi in the 30's ...Signals Corp in WW2 and DCA [Flight Service] post war till retirement.... then Ham to the end [VK3-DEK]
He always thought it humorous the 'Jerries' would end trans with 'H H' .... took out the doubt as to who he was listening to...;)

robert41
July 18th, 2013, 18:42
Trucker, I would clarify my point; yes the discovery of an aircraft's wreckage 50 years after it went missing does make for an interesting story. Its the nature of the documentary's making, the garnish of contrived mystery and intrigue, that is my bug bear.

As for each of these sunken ships having a story to tell, well, in the majority of cases the story can be told in two or three sentences. If you had a huge book that detailed every merchant ship lost in both world wars, by page 40 or 50, you'd be leafing through it. By page 100 you'd be putting it back on the shelf. Two or three sentences would have summed up the whole 50 minutes of that documentary, without all the tedious hushed and foreboding tones of the commentary. Its not the subject so much as how its reported that irritates me.

By the way, one question raised in Star Dust documentary was left unanswered - the ex-BSAA captain they interviewed, the one who'd flown out to assist in the search...did he know what STENDEC meant ? If it had been a standard acronym, either generally or within BSAA, surely he would have known. Unfortunately he was never asked, at least not on camera.


I think I know what you mean Geomitrak.
Yes, the facts can be told in a few minutes, but these shows need something for an hour.
Sometimes there is an interesting story to be told, and it is interesting to watch.
But the thing I really dislike is when they dramatise the show. Keep the drama in the movies.

warchild
July 19th, 2013, 02:12
this seems the most plausible explanation to me..
http://www.flywiththestars.co.uk/Documents/STENDEC.htm