Malaysia Airlines flight MH370-Updates and Discussion

bohsfan

As people keep mentioning Helios 522 as part of various theories you might be interested in Air Crash Investigation right now on Nat Geographic. 7pm start for 'Ghost Plane'

Ace2007

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

I dont get why all these people coming out of the woodwork saying they noticed a plane flying at very low altitude and heading off in a strange direction are only saying this NOW, 10 days after the incident. I would take such claims with a massive pinch of salt. In every investigation you have a few crazies who will make up anything just for attention. In a case this big, the number of crazies quadruples so its hard to take such accounts seriously.

Here's the thing, maybe they tried to notify people before but where ignore, after day 3/4 American's were saying if flew for 5/6 more hours where as in the press conference the officials weren't saying this at all.

I (probably stupidly) would assume that if the plane crashed anywhere that someone would notice it, - military ships in the oceans would have radar or something - I assume any ships on there are monitoring their positions and everything around them for fear of attack?

Cantremember

Best explanation yet.

theKillerBite

Timeline:

1:07 - ACARS Signal sent out (the turn off course has been preset into the flight computer)
1:17 - Co-pilot "All Right, Goodnight"
1:22 - Transponder turned off
1:07 to 1:37 - ACARS turned off

It all points to the First Officer, he inputted the change in direction into the Flight Computer before signing off with ATC. I just can't see a motive.

sopretty

theKillerBite wrote: »

Timeline:

1:07 - ACARS Signal sent out (the turn off course has been preset into the flight computer)
1:17 - Co-pilot "All Right, Goodnight"
1:22 - Transponder turned off
1:07 to 1:37 - ACARS turned off

It all points to the First Officer, he inputted the change in direction into the Flight Computer before signing off with ATC. I just can't see a motive.

I thought it was 1.19 when the co-pilot signed off and 1.21 when the transponder turned off? Have they changed the times again? It's no wonder nobody can understand anything, when they keep moving the bloomin' goalposts!!!

Sam Russell

Is it significant that www.flightradar24.com is turned off at the moment?

Techno_Toaster

Flight radar is working for me at the minute

kippy

Sam Russell wrote: »

Is it significant that www.flightradar24.com is turned off at the moment?

Fine here......

intellectual dosser

Apologies lads, but like many I'm not going back through pages of posts to see if something was posted.

Wanted to make sure everyone had seen this from Wired.com

An experienced pilot reverts back to one of simplest outcomes we've discussed and gives a convicting argument.

sopretty

intellectual dosser wrote: »

Apologies lads, but like many I'm not going back through pages of posts to see if something was posted.

Wanted to make sure everyone had seen this from Wired.com

An experienced pilot reverts back to one of simplest outcomes we've discussed and gives a convicting argument.

That's a new and interesting theory alright.

intellectual dosser

sopretty wrote: »

That's a new and interesting theory alright.

I can't tell if there is sarcasm there or if your post is genuine.

I know the theory of the pilots becoming incapacitated after reacting to a major problem has been discussed to death, but I thought the article was interesting, particularly with the 'criminal investigation' thats underway with all the chatter in the media almost leading us to believe as fact that communications were deliberately turned off.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

sopretty

intellectual dosser wrote: »

I can't tell if there is sarcasm there or if your post is genuine.

I know the theory of the pilots becoming incapacitated after reacting to a major problem has been discussed to death, but I thought the article was interesting, particularly with the 'criminal investigation' thats underway with all the chatter in the media almost leading us to believe as fact that communications were deliberately turned off.

Look I'm coming at all this from the dark also. I have however discussed this story for the past hour or so, on the thread in AH in relation to MH370. I have also asked the pilots to clarify in the 'ask the pilot thread'.

I think we can be sometimes blinded by someone's credentials and refrain from questioning them.

I shall always remain an annoying questioner! I don't care how many people I p*ss off in the process.

intellectual dosser

sopretty wrote: »

Look I'm coming at all this from the dark also. I have however discussed this story for the past hour or so, on the thread in AH in relation to MH370. I have also asked the pilots to clarify in the 'ask the pilot thread'.

I think we can sometimes be blinded by someone's credentials and refrain from questioning them.

I shall always remain an annoying questioner! I don't care how many people I p*ss off in the process.

Fair enough - my apologies.

I hope we all get the answers we're looking for soon enough.

sopretty

intellectual dosser wrote: »

Fair enough - my apologies.

I hope we all get the answers we're looking for soon enough.

Oh don't apologise! I just wish I could get my head around the whole lot! Please have a read of my doubts about this theory and let me know what you think also.
It seems implausible to me, but as they say 'a little knowledge is a dangerous thing'.

pompeyboi

North Sentinel Island has something to do with this....North sentinel indeed

cml387

intellectual dosser wrote: »

Apologies lads, but like many I'm not going back through pages of posts to see if something was posted.

Wanted to make sure everyone had seen this from Wired.com

An experienced pilot reverts back to one of simplest outcomes we've discussed and gives a convicting argument.

Hadn't see that.
It's persuasive, but given the fact that fire in an aircraft is such a serious situation, it's difficult to believe that they would not have declared mayday.
Swissair 111
Valujet 592
Saudia 163

All are fires on the aircraft, where the aircraft was lost in all cases there was a mayday.

sopretty

pompeyboi wrote: »

North Sentinel Island has something to do with this....North sentinel indeed

Do these Sentilese resemble elves? :eek:

sopretty

cml387 wrote: »

Hadn't see that.
It's persuasive, but given the fact that fire in an aircraft is such a serious situation, it's difficult to believe that they would not have declared mayday.
Swissair 111
Valujet 592
Saudia 163

All are fires on the aircraft, where the aircraft was lost in all cases there was a mayday.

Presumably they didn't ping a satellite 5 hours and hundreds of miles later?

the_monkey

Good read :

http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-26609687

Mountainsandh

Happyman42 wrote: »

No digs, just genuinely disappointed in this forum's undoubted experts. There a few still major holes in his theory, it wasn't necessarily the nearest airport, doesn't adequately explain why no distress call and also the selectivity of the fire. It may be the answer, still questions to be answered for me.

Hhhmmm I have to check your link Happyman42, I mentioned a few pages ago that there was an airport there :
https://maps.google.ie/maps?ll=6.523455,101.756573&spn=0.024943,0.042272&t=h&z=15

with a long landing strip, and without a plane on fire having to cross over land to reach the airport mentioned by the Goodfellow guy.

Why choose the further airport ?

The theory totally makes sense, except for that one crucial bit, imo.

Haven't looked too close for other potential pitfalls though, since finding this closer airport pretty much ruined it for me.

edit : Facepalm. Duh, of course one massive flaw in that theory is that the plane was pinging for hours after that. How could a plane on fire last several hours whether on the ground or up in the air ? Is that possible ?

jasonb

theKillerBite wrote: »

Timeline:

1:07 - ACARS Signal sent out (the turn off course has been preset into the flight computer)
1:17 - Co-pilot "All Right, Goodnight"
1:22 - Transponder turned off
1:07 to 1:37 - ACARS turned off

It all points to the First Officer, he inputted the change in direction into the Flight Computer before signing off with ATC. I just can't see a motive.

I'm not certain how you know that the turn off course was entered into the flight computer by 1:07, before the 'All right, goodnight'. Has this been confirmed anywhere? Are you saying that the transmission from ACARS at 1:07 includes the fact that a new course was entered into the flight computer? I haven't read that anywhere...

J.

Sam Russell

Flightradar24.com works for me in chrome but not in firefox. It used to work in firefox before today. Hmmmmm.

Doublelime

There is something sinister about this missing . We know the pilot's turned the tracking system off (extremely rare malfunction). I think the pilots may have crashed into a side of a mountain. Another theory is that the plane has been landed but I doubt it. We know it didn't crash into the sea because one of the seats (they float) would have been spotted by now.

I think the plane crashed into a mountain. RIP.

Mech1

Sam Russell wrote: »

Flightradar24.com works for me in chrome but not in firefox. It used to work in firefox before today. Hmmmmm.

Working fine in Firefox here.

Mountainsandh

Re the Goodfellow theory (fire, plane headed for nearest airport), this guy posted this interesting Google Earth analysis of flight path, with another plane's flight path thrown in the mix. It's interesting and well done. There is actually an even closer airport than the one I linked to in Kuala Terengganu.

http://findmh370.tumblr.com/

sopretty

jasonb wrote: »

I'm not certain how you know that the turn off course was entered into the flight computer by 1:07, before the 'All right, goodnight'. Has this been confirmed anywhere? Are you saying that the transmission from ACARS at 1:07 includes the fact that a new course was entered into the flight computer? I haven't read that anywhere...

J.

It was reportedly recorded by flight data transmitters (presumably ACARS before it was turned off?). I saw it on Sky, I have no link to an article (cos I can't be assed looking for one). I actually can't remember whether it was the guys speaking at the press conference or who, but they definitely confirmed that according to the latest data they could receive, the information to turn left (or whatever) was known, as it was pre-programmed. Something like that.

Growler!!!

Mountainsandh wrote: »

How could a plane on fire last several hours whether on the ground or up in the air ? Is that possible ?

Depends. If one of the fire triangle was removed ie. oxygen it may have quenched itself. But only after using up enough of the available oxygen not to support life at those altitudes!

With no input to the autopilot it may continue on until fuel runs out

Paco Rodriguez

In my opinion RIP shouldn't be used in still hypothetical outcomes. I still think there is a chance these passengers are being held hostage somewhere.

China seem to suspect that Malaysia of keeping secrets. No smoke without fire?
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/indepth/2014-03/18/c_133195943.htm

Paco Rodriguez

Growler!!! wrote: »

Depends. If one of the fire triangle was removed ie. oxygen it may have quenched itself. But only after using up enough of the available oxygen not to support life at those altitudes!

With no input to the autopilot it may continue on until fuel runs out

And once it descended again the fire could have re ignited once it got a supply of oxygen again