Malaysia Airlines Flight Goes Missing En Route to China

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the Wired article seems most plausible. The only thing that I wonder about is the route programming. If that was done some time before they lost communication, it means the pilot turned off the communication devices.

With all the talk about deliberate intent, I was starting to think there was something to it, but really, it just doesn't make sense. The Wired article presents the scenario that seems most reasonable. There's been no "red flag" for either pilot or copilot that suggests they'd be capable of doing something so heinous. One's a well-regarded husband, father, & community member, the other a well-regarded man who's engaged and reportedly has a bright future in front of him. So the pilot was upset about the opposition leader's conviction - he's going to throw away the happiness of his entire family and destroy hundreds of lives for that reason? I just don't see it.

[Anonymous]

There is also an explanation on the pprune pilot's website about how the great changes in altitude could happen if there was catastrophic failure of the electrical system.

All of this seems to be the most reasonable explanation. The plane kept going on autopilot after all aboard were dead or unconscious due to asphyxiation or lack of oxygen. It headed towards the emergency landing site the pilot programmed in at the beginning of the emergency, but kept on going, out to sea, where it eventually ran out of fuel and crashed into the water.

[Anonymous]

Apparently some residents of the Maldives saw a low-flying jumbo jet on the morning in question. If true, this would put the plane further west than the current search area:

http://www.ibtimes.co.in/articles/543849/20140318/missing-malaysia-airlines-flight-mh370-maldives-sighting.htm

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Boeing f**ed up.

How so?

At first it looked like catastrophic failure which puts all the blame on the manufacturer i.e. Boeing. Then it looked like they were let off the hook due to hijacking/pilot suicide etc. Now we're coming back around to the plane malfunctioning theory again which means Boeing gets raked. If true it'll cost them hundreds of millions to service 777s out there. They'll most likely have to ground a number etc.

[Anonymous]

It is important to understand that civil and military aviation use different types of radar. Civil aviation uses what is called Secondary Surveillance Radar, which depends on the aircraft transponder to display to the controller the height, speed and identity of the aircraft. The military use Primary Radar, which is what everyone understands to be “radar” i.e. creation of returns from aircraft “painted” by radar beams. The two systems are generally not operated together by authorities, not only in Malaysia, but all over the world. Indeed, the same is the case in Europe and the USA, again with 9/11 being an excellent example of when with transponders shut off, the American civilian controllers were unable to follow the hijacked aircraft.

The Malaysians have been very coy about revealing what their military radar did or did not see that night, partly due to not wanting to reveal capabilities, and partly, it is said, due to the Eastern practice of attempting to “save face”. It would appear though, that the military did not detect or respond to the absconding aircraft as it passed across their screens. The time of day (1 am on a Saturday) may well have contributed to the less than stellar performance.

Before we hasten to judge or criticize, we must recall a month ago, when an Ethiopian Airlines First Officer locked his Captain out, and hijacked his own plane to Switzerland. The Swiss were not able to respond in any way as the Swiss Air Force only operates during office hours, strictly 9 to 5, so at 6:30 am they had to ask the Italians if they had any interceptors available. By the time any European fighter was launched, the plane was parked on the ground.

Reports have emanated, of the aircraft making altitude changes, climbing to some 45,000 feet as well as reports of “low flight at 5,000 feet to avoid radar”. Let’s examine these claims.

A Boeing 777 at that weight is not capable of climbing to 45,000 feet, or even close to it. At extreme ranges, radar returns have a large margin of error, which may explain this report.

There is also no reason for a pilot, as evil as can be, to make such a maneuver. If he wished to incapacitate everyone else on the plane by oxygen starvation, all he had to do was depressurize the aircraft at its current altitude (35,000 feet) and within a few minutes all would be asleep and a few minutes later, all would be quite dead. True, oxygen masks would have automatically dropped for the passengers, but this oxygen would only last for a number of minutes.

Regarding the low flight – this theory is problematic as at 5,000 feet an aircraft is still very much visible on radar. A much lower altitude would be required to be hidden. It is not clear what is the source of this information, as the aircraft was not transmitting any data regarding its altitude. The only way to know this would be from… radar. It has been said on various news outlets that this happened “over two or three countries”, which if true, would suggest that the aircraft was tracked for far longer than has been publically admitted. Which then begs the question –  why the massive search effort, especially in the southern sector?

A modern jet aircraft burns fuel at a prohibitive rate at such an altitude, so if endurance was an issue for these pilots, it is unlikely that they would fly so low for any length of time. Cell phones of the passengers would also register with towers on the ground at such an altitude.



Read more: Some points on Malaysian Airlines MH370 | Gideon Afek | Ops & Blogs | The Times of Israel http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/some-points-on-malaysian-airlines-370/#ixzz2wL7MdmDR
Follow us: @timesofisrael on Twitter | timesofisrael on Facebook

The plane may not have gone to 44,000 ft. It is very likely the radar is giving a false return.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Mark my word. The pilots are "players" - they depressurized the cabin, killed the passengers and sold the plane for parts. They will get hundreds of millions of dollars, and the parts won't show up until they have to be replaced.

Cool screenplay you got there bro.

NOW YOU BELIEVE ME??!! If you are not educated regarding the topic STFU. We don't care about you.

Sorry bro, but I don't think your book/screenplay is going to get picked up. Might make a fun community theater play though.

[Anonymous]

What about an intentional water landing near an island? They could swim to safety, but the plane would sink and so would all the cell phones.

[Anonymous]

Why are they searching the southern sector if hey have radar returns from the northern sector? It's a conspiracy. I think it is Doctor No. He does like his islands. Maybe he relocated from the Caribbean?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous



What about an intentional water landing near an island? They could swim to safety, but the plane would sink and so would all the cell phones.

No, the iPhone has an app that turns it in to a life boat(google has the same but will automatically activate the camera and take selfie). The cheap knock off phones from china do not have this feature!.......wait .....that explains a lot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why are they searching the southern sector if hey have radar returns from the northern sector? It's a conspiracy. I think it is Doctor No. He does like his islands. Maybe he relocated from the Caribbean?

Where in the world are you getting your information from? Who like Islands? The pilot? Where are you getting this?

All along, the reports are that the plane seemed to take EITHER a northern or southern arc route. The satellite pings were not specific, but the north/south route were both about 50/50. Anything you hear that favors the northern route theory is basically media hyping that theory because it sounds more sexy, and would earn them ratings.

[Anonymous]

Why are they searching the southern sector if hey have radar returns from the northern sector? It's a conspiracy. I think it is Doctor No. He does like his islands. Maybe he relocated from the Caribbean?


Where in the world are you getting your information from? Who like Islands? The pilot? Where are you getting this?

All along, the reports are that the plane seemed to take EITHER a northern or southern arc route. The satellite pings were not specific, but the north/south route were both about 50/50. Anything you hear that favors the northern route theory is basically media hyping that theory because it sounds more sexy, and would earn them ratings.

Doctor No does not like the "media". See it has to be the northern route, the lack of radar returns means those government are working with the terrorist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Why are they searching the southern sector if hey have radar returns from the northern sector? It's a conspiracy. I think it is Doctor No. He does like his islands. Maybe he relocated from the Caribbean?


Where in the world are you getting your information from? Who like Islands? The pilot? Where are you getting this?

All along, the reports are that the plane seemed to take EITHER a northern or southern arc route. The satellite pings were not specific, but the north/south route were both about 50/50. Anything you hear that favors the northern route theory is basically media hyping that theory because it sounds more sexy, and would earn them ratings.

Doctor No does not like the "media". See it has to be the northern route, the lack of radar returns means those government are working with the terrorist.

I think you need an internet filter/blocker for those moments when you might be high, pp.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://plus.google.com/106271056358366282907/posts/GoeVjHJaGBz

fire in plane

MAYDAY MAYDAY FIRE IN PLANE

program to nearest acceptable airport

pull the busses and lose systems (communication, transponders)

Plane now heading in new direction

overcome by smoke

plane flies on until it runs out of fuel

This sounds very plausible in most ways, except for the continued pinging of the engines for another 8 hours.

Not plausible. If they had time to reprogram the plane they would have sent out a distress call or contact ATC

Also, did he fly up to 45,000 asphyxiate the passengers and crew? If so, very morbid to then be flying around on your final flight with a plane full of deceased passengers behind you. And what about the co-pilot? First kill him, then depressurize the cabin (but not the cockpit), then ride around with all those bodies? Extremely morbid and homicidal.

Did you read the article? It says you may choose to fly up to 45000 feet for two reasons: 1 - because oxygen levels are low and that de-fuels the fire and 2 - to dive back down in an attempt to manually extinguish the flames.

I know this isn't the sexiest theory because it has nothing to do with malice or terrorism, but it makes a lot of sense.

Original article with less weird looking link is via Wired: http://www.wired.com/autopia/2014/03/mh370-electrical-fire/

This makes the most sense out of anything I've read.

+1 - this guy makes a really convincing argument.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://plus.google.com/106271056358366282907/posts/GoeVjHJaGBz

fire in plane

MAYDAY MAYDAY FIRE IN PLANE

program to nearest acceptable airport

pull the busses and lose systems (communication, transponders)

Plane now heading in new direction

overcome by smoke

plane flies on until it runs out of fuel

This sounds very plausible in most ways, except for the continued pinging of the engines for another 8 hours.

Not plausible. If they had time to reprogram the plane they would have sent out a distress call or contact ATC

Also, did he fly up to 45,000 asphyxiate the passengers and crew? If so, very morbid to then be flying around on your final flight with a plane full of deceased passengers behind you. And what about the co-pilot? First kill him, then depressurize the cabin (but not the cockpit), then ride around with all those bodies? Extremely morbid and homicidal.

Did you read the article? It says you may choose to fly up to 45000 feet for two reasons: 1 - because oxygen levels are low and that de-fuels the fire and 2 - to dive back down in an attempt to manually extinguish the flames.

I know this isn't the sexiest theory because it has nothing to do with malice or terrorism, but it makes a lot of sense.

Original article with less weird looking link is via Wired: http://www.wired.com/autopia/2014/03/mh370-electrical-fire/

This makes the most sense out of anything I've read.

+1 - this guy makes a really convincing argument.

But what about the pre programming, then?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://plus.google.com/106271056358366282907/posts/GoeVjHJaGBz

fire in plane

MAYDAY MAYDAY FIRE IN PLANE

program to nearest acceptable airport

pull the busses and lose systems (communication, transponders)

Plane now heading in new direction

overcome by smoke

plane flies on until it runs out of fuel

This sounds very plausible in most ways, except for the continued pinging of the engines for another 8 hours.

Not plausible. If they had time to reprogram the plane they would have sent out a distress call or contact ATC

Also, did he fly up to 45,000 asphyxiate the passengers and crew? If so, very morbid to then be flying around on your final flight with a plane full of deceased passengers behind you. And what about the co-pilot? First kill him, then depressurize the cabin (but not the cockpit), then ride around with all those bodies? Extremely morbid and homicidal.

Did you read the article? It says you may choose to fly up to 45000 feet for two reasons: 1 - because oxygen levels are low and that de-fuels the fire and 2 - to dive back down in an attempt to manually extinguish the flames.

I know this isn't the sexiest theory because it has nothing to do with malice or terrorism, but it makes a lot of sense.

Original article with less weird looking link is via Wired: http://www.wired.com/autopia/2014/03/mh370-electrical-fire/

This makes the most sense out of anything I've read.

+1 - this guy makes a really convincing argument.

But what about the pre programming, then?

And, wouldn't the airplane sent out a distress signal, even if the pilots were too busy trying to save the plane than make a distress call themselves?

It also seems very coincidental that this fire happened within 5 minutes of the goodnight signoff.

Finally, the maldives are too far west for that last ping at 7 hours. If the plane was in the southern corridor, it would have had to make a complete u-turn.