frequency is significant in this particular situation. we have all kinds of resources with us here this morning to walk us through what s happening. we have jim clancy in kuala lumpur and former inspector general with the u.s. transportation department mary schiavo and simon boxall the oceanographer. we have all of the resources used by scientists and military that would emit signals. that it is 37.5 is significant in this conversation. we need to confirm they have measured it correctly and there are other standard pingers. pingers are tuned to this frequency. this is a compromise between maximum distance and frequency. it is not an uncommon frequency to use from beacons. you need to know what else is
it detected in the southern indian ocean, that perhaps its device was able to pick up a ping, a pulse that may be that of the voice or flight data recorders there in the indian ocean as it pertains to flight 370. my next guest believespingers that went into flight 370 and he s kept siskeptic about this d ping. so, why is it that you are skeptic skeptical? well, it s not that we re skeptical. it s the right number, 37.5 kilohertz. but let s get multiple sources to validate. let s get additional assets on-site, some sonabouyies to validate before we conclude or jump to the conclusion we identified where the devices, debris field may or may not be.
the report wanted to clear fi. someone said that was a single pulse. that s not what was reported. what was reported was a 37.5 kilohertz signal at one second intervals. there are other machines that operate in the area other machines that use that specific frequen frequency. however, it s important of say this is denoted by one-second interval. there s nothing else that i m aware of or maybe david gallo can address this, nothing else that comes with this signature fall. 1 1/2 minutes with one-second pulse intervals from what i understand. that is very specific to me as to what this thing is. now, what i don t understand is how the people that reported this can then go off line for eight hours, the australians have been trying to reach them for eight hours saying is this verifiable, and then they just go off line and not be able to communicate with them is reprehensible. we re going to continue this conversation. when we come back we re going to talk more about this black boxes, how
not just necessarily one, since both flight recorders are equipped with pingers? they re both both recorders are equipped with a unique pinger but the pinger is on the same frequency, so the 37.5 kilohertz is identical to both pingers. if you hear one and the other one is adjacent or nearby, you re going to hear a second ping. it won t be synchronized. the units don t talk to each other, so you will hear two independent pings at that same frequency and same pulse rate. and according to the reporting, the chinese are saying the sound they heard was not continuous but lasted maybe for about a minute and a half. is that a viable description of how a pinger just might work? does that sound, you know, like a pinger with perhaps a dying battery? well, it s hard to say. we ve not duplicated a situation like that in the lab where it would stay on and then turn off and then stay on. typically it s continuous, and
can t reach the surface. it s 4400 meters at that point. depth of water. so they can t physically hear that signal from the surface. number three, we don t know what equipment the chinese is using. they say 37.5 kilohertz. but that s it could be a wide band frequency, it could be anywhere between 40 and 70 frequency kilohertz. so there are a lot of questions that have to be answered. i would discount that. so, art, let s play some sound now of what this pulse or the pinger would sound like. you were tacki intalking about single pulse is unusual, sounds like the wrong signal. here s an example of, i guess, what the correct signal would be, what the sound would be from that pinger. it s just a click. yeah. you got it. all right. so that s what it should sound like. we don t know if that s what the