Malaysia Airlines flight MH370-Updates and Discussion

robbieVan

sopretty wrote: »

So we can continue to speculate then? :cool:

I'm going with
1. Mechanical (don't know enough to comment or speculate in this area!)
2. Hijacking
While pilot suicide is still possible I suppose, I find it hard to understand that he wouldn't have done it straight away. Why fly on for hours?

when did I say don't speculate?, it's crashed in the ocean, why and how it did is the question, I never said I knew exactly what happened? Where did I say that?

The security these days and the passenger checks made me put pilot suicide as 2nd most likely, and because of his political backround and what happened the day before in that regard, he could've just lost the plot and intentionally ****ed up the flight

Colser

robbieVan wrote: »

Tell me how I said it wasn't a hijack?!! Jesus Christ are you people serious?! Can you not read previous posts or can you not understand them maybe?.. I said it wasn't landed somewhere in some big operation because if you used common sense it would be clear.

Also the fact that nearly every passenger has come back clear in terms or terror links kinda clears that one up but hijacking is probably still 3rd on the list of likely things that happened.

Bottom line so is you are saying that it maybe mechanical ,suicide or hijack...how does that differ from what other posters are saying..you know the ones that are idiotic ect?

lord lucan

robbieVan wrote: »

I feel my IQ levels going down just replying to people in this thread, it's hurting my head, you are all obviously hoping that the most dramatic thing has happened and not the most obvious and logical, maybe that's the way things are these days, conspiracy theories are more fun to think about probably.

I hope that they find the plane soon as closure to the families and so all of you who just came to this forum when this happened finally leave and take your lack of aviation knowledge and common sense with you, it really is getting boring reading all these stupid comments.

Less of the elitism please,this isn't a forum for aviation professionals only,it's a forum for everyone who has an interest in the field. Just because people aren't pilots or engineers doesn't mean they may not have a valid point or theory.

robbieVan

Colser wrote: »

Bottom line so is you are saying that it maybe mechanical ,suicide or hijack...how does that differ from what other posters are saying..you know the ones that are idiotic ect?

please just read the posts, please that's all I ask, I was disputing the fact that it was taken and landed somewhere to be used in a future attack, just read back, save your fingers and my fingers the strain of having to type

MuffinsDa

Silverbling wrote: »

Is the key to unravelling all of this in the amount of fuel on board?

I thought so originally, but in order to assume that correlation, we need to assume that:
1. The jet ran out of fuel and fell to the sea due to engines flaming out: may not be the case - if there was an accident catastrophic enough, it could have disabled the system gradually and it could have crashed anywhere along the route.
2. The jet flue at cruising altitude: this may not be the case, and at lower altitudes the fuel won't go nearly as far, so again it could be anywhere.
3. It's caused by malfunction/mechanical problems/fire: we are still not sure of that. If there is an intentional element then again could be anywhere.

robbieVan

lord lucan wrote: »

Less of the elitism please,this isn't a forum for aviation professionals only,it's a forum for everyone who has an interest in the field. Just because people aren't pilots or engineers doesn't mean they may not have a valid point or theory.

I'm not an aviation professional, I'm in the same boat as these guys? I'm just using sense and discussing how their theories are crazy, this is a discussion forum, I have an interest in aviation and am a fan of reading stuff from guys who are actually in the business.

You saying if I go to a forum that I have no idea about and start speculating and talking crap about things I've never even thought about that I won't be told where to go? .. people who have no idea should be posting in the AH thread about MH370

MuffinsDa

Here's some new info from "the gorjen":

My colleague Carmen Fishwick has been talking to a longhaul pilot and an experienced cabin crew member about the various theories that are circulating about what might have happened on board flight MH370. You can read their words in full here. The (anonymous) pilot tells us:

To turn the transponder off, there is a simple switch within the flight deck. It would take two seconds to turn off … Alternatively if someone had broken into the flight deck, and they were aware of the various communication systems, then they could force the pilots to turn them off.

One question I keep being asked by friends and family is: "Can the pilots turn off the black box?" The answer is no.

And on the question of why the Malaysian pilot had a flight simulator in his home:

It’s not that uncommon; pilots generally love their job. I’ve got a flight simulator programme on my computer but rarely use it. Some pilots love their job so much that in their spare time they like to fly simulators, fly aerobatics and train other pilots. The job is more of a lifestyle than a 9-5 job, so I don’t see it as concerning that the captain had set up a very basic flight simulator at home.

Lee Cobaj, a long-haul cabin crew member, explains how much contact there is between the crew and the pilots during a flight:

The aircraft could fly to its destination and even land on autopilot but the cabin crew are trained to communicate with the flight crew at least every 20 minutes to ensure that neither of them are ill or incapacitated. Procedures are in place to gain access to the flight deck if necessary, for example in the event of no response

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/21/mh370-search-for-missing-plane-resumes-at-daybreak-live

ruskin

You are all oblivous to what really happened the plane. The plane was abducted by aliens. I for one believe that this abduction is the first act of aggression in what may very well become an intergalactic or indeed interdimensional war.

Colser

robbieVan wrote: »

please just read the posts, please that's all I ask, I was disputing the fact that it was taken and landed somewhere to be used in a future attack, just read back, save your fingers and my fingers the strain of having to type

You pointed out that this was a discussion forum...some posters would like to discuss the fact that it may have been hijacked and landed for future use..just because you dont think that could have happened doesnt mean other people arent entitled to their opinions and post in relation to them.

Happyman42

robbieVan wrote: »

Tell me how I said it wasn't a hijack?!! Jesus Christ are you people serious?! Can you not read previous posts or can you not understand them maybe?.. I said it wasn't landed somewhere in some big operation because if you used common sense it would be clear.

Also the fact that nearly every passenger has come back clear in terms or terror links kinda clears that one up but hijacking is probably still 3rd on the list of likely things that happened.

How can you be surer than the Israeli's that it wasn't hijacked then landed with the intention of it being used as a weapon? Please tell us and maybe ring the Israeli's as I'm sure the extra defences they have put in place are costing a fortune.

Bill G

MuffinsDa wrote: »

One question I keep being asked by friends and family is: "Can the pilots turn off the black box?" The answer is no.

Untrue. The pilots can turn the FDR and CVR off by pulling appropriate circuit breakers. Those devices may have battery power that allows them to run for a few minutes more once power is pulled.

sopretty

sopretty wrote: »

If there were several batteries and one went on fire, would they not all go on fire and cause a pretty big fire? I still can't get my head around the possibility that there was a fire serious enough to knock out systems, yet not serious enough to mean the plane would crash. Maybe it's possible, who knows!

Another poster on the AH thread has somewhat answered the above question.

"A recent report by the General Civil Aviation Authority in the United Arab Emirates found that “with reasonable certainty” the fire began in cargo where “thousands” of lithium batteries of different types were being held for transport. The report could not be completely sure, but they did note an event called a “thermal runaway”, which is when a battery starts to heat up because pole connections are crossed – much like hooking two 9-volt batteries together. That reaction, it is thought, caused that battery to heat to a critical point, catching fire, which then heated the nearby batteries, then resulting in their explosions. Finally a fire raged through the plane.

“The fire escalated rapidly into a catastrophic, uncontained” blaze, the report said."

http://www.webpronews.com/lithium-batteries-cause-plane-crash-2013-07

robbieVan

Happyman42 wrote: »

How can you be surer than the Israeli's that it wasn't hijacked then landed with the intention of it being used as a weapon? Please tell us and maybe ring the Israeli's as I'm sure the extra defences they have put in place are costing a fortune.

because of a million reasons, i stated a few earlier when i first posted today, go read some credible news sources and all the professionals who discredited this idea early on, please go and look up all that and then compare your professional credentials against theirs and come back, I have to go back to work now so if anyone else wants to go around in circles and keep repeating the same rubbish to me I'll prob be back on in a couple of hours.

Thanks, it's been ironically enlightening seeing how some people use their heads, or lack thereof

GEO147

Mellor wrote: »

Are you serious? You are kinda overlooking a pretty obvious point. The plane may not be destroyed.

Terrorist groups claim responsibility for actions after they've been carried out. To highlight their cause to the world. If the plane was commandeered by a terrorist group, I wouldn't expect anyone to claim responsibility yet as this was only a prelude, the catalyst for a much bigger event. Think about it, a terrorist group being in possession of a very large long range aircraft has a rage great damage potential than a few hundred passengers. While it would be totally invisible at a later date, it would be a lot more concealed in normal air traffic than a hijacked scheduled flight.

To be clear, i'm not saying I believe that the plane being hijacked is the most likely scenerio. It isn't, there are far more likely events imo, but disregarding terrorists completely because nobody has claimed it, is pretty short sighted - I guarantee intelligence agencies were/are considering it.


My guess, its at the bottom of the ocean, with no surface debris. Needle in a haystack if its found anytime soon.

Yeah agreed. But if they were going to use it to crash into something else, they would surely have coordinated it to have flown it straight there and crashed it before the whole world knew the plane was missing and had their eyes out on sticks for it?

Much more straight forward operation than hijack>land>hide>take off>fly> and crash.

Tenger

sopretty wrote: »

Well why were military/government and aviation agencies investigating passengers and crew? Just to have a nose into their lives for no reason is it?

Oh dear lord I hope you are actually sopretty. Becuase this comment displays a serious lack of cop on and ability to understand words on a screen.
Please go back to AH

Have you ever heard the term "leave no stone unturned"?

The military have the resources and expertise to conduct the search. The Malay Govt are running the investigation. And it is standard practise in any unexplained aircraft to investigate every person connected to the aircraft and/or flight. Eg.You can bet money on the fact that the engineer who signed off on that aircraft was interviewed within 24 hours of that plane being declared missing.

lb1 wrote: »

Well it seems to have been flying for several hours yet no radar picked it up. Somalia and Yemen are obvious candidates....... all I am saying is there are a range of possibilities out there until its found.

It didn't have the range to reach Somalia or Yemen. The know exactly how much fuel was onboard and can work out range from that figure.

There are many possibilities however hijacking for later use has rapidly moved down that list. Crew incapacitation whilst dealing with an inflight emergency remains the most plausible theory at present.



Just to repeat what has been noted elsewhere.....the aircraft has sent pretty much NO information. The satellite 'pings' we hear about are just that. a ping to a satellite. They know the angle it arrived at and the time it arrived at.
This angle (40 degrees in this case) allows them to plot the 2 possible corridors of travel.
The time tells them that the aircraft was intact several hours after last contact.

Happyman42

robbieVan wrote: »

because of a million reasons, i stated a few earlier when i first posted today, go read some credible news sources and all the professionals who discredited this idea early on, please go and look up all that and then compare your professional credentials against theirs and come back, I have to go back to work now so if anyone else wants to go around in circles and keep repeating the same rubbish to me I'll prob be back on in a couple of hours.

Thanks, it's been ironically enlightening seeing how some people use their heads, or lack thereof

A million reasons eh? Wow.

When you get home from work, check out the motives of people who want to cause terror, why they would bother hijacking 4 jets and attempt to fly them into buildings and why that act has changed the world.
You will need a level of sophisticated thought to understand the mentality of those who want to achieve that. Risk doesn't come into it, if the gains are big enough.
The possibility that this jet was landed somewhere is still a very real one, The Malaysians and everybody else in the region are still investigating that possibility and will do until they find this jet.

Mountainsandh

I think the argument that it has been taken to use as a weapon and landed is not outlandish. Not all countries can be relied on to disclose what radar coverage they really have, potentially exposing weaknesses in their defense system. A lot of politically sensitive area, tensions within and without countries... For example do we know exactly where the satellite images of debris came from ? (I mean who owned that particular satellite)

robbieVan

Happyman42 wrote: »

A million reasons eh? Wow.

When you get home from work, check out the motives of people who want to cause terror, why they would bother hijacking 4 jets and attempt to fly them into buildings and why that act has changed the world.
You will need a level of sophisticated thought to understand the mentality of those who want to achieve that. Risk doesn't come into it, if the gains are big enough.
The possibility that this jet was landed somewhere is still a very real one, The Malaysians and everybody else in the region are still investigating that possibility and will do until they find this jet.

of course every imaginable situation has to be looked at, but is it a real one? is it credible?.. no not really, not really at all, and common sense would rule this out if you just thought about it.

I'm on the west coast of north america, my work day has only started unfortunately

sopretty

Tenger wrote: »

Oh dear lord I hope you are actually sopretty. Becuase this comment displays a serious lack of cop on and ability to understand words on a screen.
Please go back to AH

Have you ever heard the term "leave no stone unturned"?

The military have the resources and expertise to conduct the search. The Malay Govt are running the investigation. And it is standard practise in any unexplained aircraft to investigate every person connected to the aircraft and/or flight. Eg.You can bet money on the fact that the engineer who signed off on that aircraft was interviewed within 24 hours of that plane being declared missing.
.

It's standard practise, why? To rule out/in any wrong-doing on the part of anyone involved with the flight be that with a personal or terrorist motive!
I was responding to the other guy who was saying it was ridiculous to suspect anything OTHER THAN mechanical failure (though he broadened his horizons in more recent posts).

And yes, I am pretty damn hot, with a brain to boot.

Tea 1000

Bill G wrote: »

Compasses upside down and requirements to aviate, navigate and communicate in that strict order.... I give up. You're right robbieVan, I came back to this forum way too early.

In fairness, ignorance like this is what makes the Aviation & Aircraft forum the hostile corner of boards. Get over yourself.

sopretty

Mountainsandh wrote: »

I think the argument that it has been taken to use as a weapon and landed is not outlandish. Not all countries can be relied on to disclose what radar coverage they really have, potentially exposing weaknesses in their defense system. A lot of politically sensitive area, tensions within and without countries... For example do we know exactly where the satellite images of debris came from ? (I mean who owned that particular satellite)

Australian images I think?

robbieVan

sopretty wrote: »

It's standard practise, why? To rule out/in any wrong-doing on the part of anyone involved with the flight be that with a personal or terrorist motive!
I was responding to the other guy who was saying it was ridiculous to suspect anything OTHER THAN mechanical failure (though he broadened his horizons in more recent posts).

I said it was ridiculous to suspect it was LANDED SOMEWHERE TO BE USED IN A FUTURE ATTACK.. never said it could ONLY BE mechanical, I think it is mechanical but never ruled out hijack or suicide, read my posts , comprehend words

Tenger

Mountainsandh wrote: »

........ For example do we know exactly where the satellite images of debris came from ? (I mean who owned that particular satellite)

Err the Chinese last week and the Americans this week I believe.


On another note....the Malaysian military radar has been exposed as 'not great' over the last 10 days. Info the PNLAAF may note with glee.

Mountainsandh

Not sure... I think it was a man on the Pat Kenny show who raised the question. I think digital globe distributed them, but not sure it has been officially disclosed what the source was. Australia would make the most sense allright, but according to the guy this morning it wasn't clear.

lord lucan

robbieVan wrote: »

I'm not an aviation professional, I'm in the same boat as these guys? I'm just using sense and discussing how their theories are crazy, this is a discussion forum, I have an interest in aviation and am a fan of reading stuff from guys who are actually in the business.

You saying if I go to a forum that I have no idea about and start speculating and talking crap about things I've never even thought about that I won't be told where to go? .. people who have no idea should be posting in the AH thread about MH370

In fairness,this thread has moved beyond the A&A forum in many ways but its an unprecedented event and is naturally going to attract many who wouldn't normally post here. Everyone's opinion is valid in the absence of the truth,even some of the more wacky ideas.

Bill G

Tea 1000 wrote: »

In fairness, ignorance like this is what makes the Aviation & Aircraft forum the hostile corner of boards. Get over yourself.

Sorry, I'm not sure what ignorance you are refering to.

sopretty

robbieVan wrote: »

I said it was ridiculous to suspect it was LANDED SOMEWHERE TO BE USED IN A FUTURE ATTACK.. never said it could ONLY BE mechanical, I think it is mechanical but never ruled out hijack or suicide, read my posts , comprehend words

You slammed a potential hijack motive/ theory as being ridiculous, which suggests to me that you eh..... thought that the possibility of hijack was ridiculous.

Less of the personal insults too. They don't become you or the other fella Tenger. :cool:

robbieVan

Sorry for the insults if they hurt you but come on just use your cop on for once, I reacted to the idea it was landed to be used for future attack and that was it!!!, I'm coming back here when they finally find it, can't take this running in circles, peace x

sopretty

robbieVan wrote: »

Sorry for the insults if they hurt you but come on just use your cop on for once, I reacted to the idea it was landed to be used for future attack and that was it!!!, I'm coming back here when they finally find it, can't take this running in circles, peace x

Enjoy your break.

Standard Toaster

*Unfollows thread*