Malaysia Airlines flight MH370-Updates and Discussion

Savman

If it was some attempt at a hijacking and did fly west, then we can't rule out it being shot down. Helluva lot more plausible than a ghost plane flying for hours undetected.

I think they badly need a breakthrough of some sort, something has to come out at some point.

In the meantime, maybe this thread needs some comic relief?

news.com.au wrote:

UNTIL a few weeks ago, most of us thought Diego Garcia was probably someone who played bass with Carlos Santana.

http://www.news.com.au/world/asia/comment-conspiracies-more-mysterious-than-mh370/story-fnh81fz8-1226894919767

I lol'd

Growler!!!

the_monkey wrote: »

Also Black Boxes cannot be switched off, the whole point of them is to be inaccessible and protected as much as possible.

That is incorrect. Both, CVR and FDR have circuit breakers as seen below:

the_monkey

Growler!!! wrote: »

That is incorrect. Both, CVR and FDR have circuit breakers as seen below:

Interesting, but surely inaccessible from within the aircraft in flight yeah ?

Growler!!!

the_monkey wrote: »

Interesting, but surely inaccessible from within the aircraft in flight yeah ?

Nope, above our heads. Within arms reach - as they should be. Sometimes if an incident has occurred the company will ask that the Circuit Breakers be pulled in order to preserve the Data which has been recorded. This stops the data from being over written.

fits

Fight!

http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/AW_04_21_2014_p20-678253.xml

ICAO not too happy with article in aviation week

Synode

:eek: So there's a chance that if they ever did recover the CDR and FDR they could have been tampered with and contain nothing useful?

the_monkey

I find that hard to believe ....

Growler!!!

the_monkey wrote: »

I find that hard to believe ....

Is that in response to my post?

Grandeeod

Synode wrote: »

:eek: So there's a chance that if they ever did recover the CDR and FDR they could have been tampered with and contain nothing useful?

Most definitely. That's what was attempted by the hijacker of Fedex 705.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Express_Flight_705

mbur

Grandeeod wrote: »

Most definitely. That's what was attempted by the hijacker of Fedex 705.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Express_Flight_705

Quite a harrowing account. I think this bit is perhaps relevant to MH370:

As part of his plan to disguise the intended attack as an accident, Calloway attempted to disable the cockpit voice recorder (CVR) by tripping its circuit breaker. During standard pre-flight checks, Peterson noticed the tripped breaker and reset it before take-off so the CVR was reactivated. However, if Calloway successfully killed the crew members with the CVR still on, he would simply have to fly for 30 minutes to erase any trace of a struggle from the CVR's 30 minute loop.

Crashing into the sea in a very remote location would also be a good way to thwart any investigation.

Mountainsandh

Tenger wrote: »

Actually this incident could very well be a botched hijack attempt. I would not consider a hijacking as a 'conspiracy'.....afterall aviation history is full of hijack attempts. Botching hijacking does fit with the known facts. However at the moment finding the aircraft is the priority, then figuring out the 'why' follows.

However I would see any attempt to claim hijacking for future bomb conversion, yet to be announced ransom demands, hostage taking for some as yet unknown reason, etc to be viewed as conspiracy.
.

In other words you're saying ... and then we're like ...


Sorry, just saw these and couldn't resist.

At least I didn't embed !

eatmyshorts

Growler!!! wrote: »

That is incorrect. Both, CVR and FDR have circuit breakers as seen below:

The CVR and FDR circuit breakers are not accessible from the flight deck on the 777.

Bill G

eatmyshorts wrote: »

The CVR and FDR circuit breakers are not accessible from the flight deck on the 777.

But they are accessible during flight

Growler!!!

eatmyshorts wrote: »

The CVR and FDR circuit breakers are not accessible from the flight deck on the 777.

Everyday is a schoolday:D, I'm not rated on the 777 unlike yourself I stand corrected.

Happyman42

fits wrote: »

Fight!

http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/AW_04_21_2014_p20-678253.xml

ICAO not too happy with article in aviation week

If anything positive is to come from this sad tragedy it is hopefully a resolution of the issues mentioned here, regardless of costs and issues of privacy.

This is simply not tolerable. IATA's efforts to dissect safety-related issues, although useful, sometimes seem not relevant to the real world. Not to mention the International Civil Aviation Organization's (ICAO) bureaucratic approach at times when quick-reaction measures are urgently needed. Remembering Air France's Flight 447 plunge into the Atlantic Ocean in 2009 and two costly years of search before locating the Airbus A330's wreckage, it is obvious that—technology permitting—the time has come for real-time permanent transmission of ATC data and long-duration batteries for flight data recorder distress beacons. Similarly, enhanced cockpit voice recorders should become the rule, without further delay.

the_monkey

Growler!!! wrote: »

Is that in response to my post?

Yeah, Sorry - I'm not trolling here, I just mean it's incredible, I would think it would be designed to be as difficult to get to as possible..


edit - ok now i see the rest of the thread, I just watched that channel 5 documentary from a few weeks back, very interesting ...

I find the remote hijacking theory ridicolous tho ..

pfurey101

I'm not too sure the industry will respond to cockpit crew shutting out control over the CVR and FDR, it they do it will take years to modify every aircraft and could cost a fortune (depending on the fix they come up with). I know we are talking about peoples lives here and the industry shows the way when it comes to safety. Grounding every B787 until snags are sorted comes to mind!

There were 3.1 billion passengers last year and 210 fatalities. The industry wants ZERO fatalities.

I can understand the expense of grounding all B787's (Boeings cost) but I dont see a retrofit to cover the very very rare rogue pilot amongst the 10,000's of brilliantly normal ones. Lets face it, if a pilot wants to go rogue there are probably many other things they could do!

What if a US secret service agent decides to go mad and turn on the president? Or a train driver somewhere looses the head? Or even a bus driver?

I dont know what the answer is but if an insider wants to corrupt - despite a huge amount of safety protocols, nothing much can be done. I guess profiling seems to work!

PlanIT Computing

Apparently the Malaysian government did have an unidentified plane on radar after all ..

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/missing-flight-mh370-malaysian-pm-3456443

tharmor

The pilot managed to vanish the plane....No information is like an act of terror in this age of internet !!

The plane will be found but will take years...

Jack1985

The pilot managed to vanish the plane

Speculating with not one bit of substantiated evidence.

weisses

Jack1985 wrote: »

Speculating with not one bit of substantiated evidence.

In fairness ... Speculating would be on topic ... As stated in the thread title.

Don't you think even people officially involved would speculate as to what happened ?

mr.anonymous

PlanIT Computing wrote: »

Apparently the Malaysian government did have an unidentified plane on radar after all ..

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/missing-flight-mh370-malaysian-pm-3456443

I was under the impression that this is old news and that we knew about the primary surveillance radar (PSR) picking something up for weeks.

If I remember correctly, the initial search was around position of last radio/radar contact. Then the search moved south of Malaysia following news of the PSR target. Then following the satellite data, ultimately ended up west of Australia.

I noticed in that article and on Sky News, which aired a programme about the "Investigation", that the media fail to understand that this is a search and recovery operation. They can investigate a lot of things without the actual aircraft and its FDR and CVR, such as the flight crews' personal lives and the maintenance records of the aircraft . But for now it's still a search.

I decided early on to only follow this on AvHerald. They don't make good news stories out of the families' pain or speculate.

My own opinion of this accident is that it was a deliberate act, either by the crew or those on board with false passports. If this is the case, I believe I'm correct in saying that the FDR and CVR could have been turned off? What do people think of this? They could be searching for black boxes that had their circuit breakers pulled.

This is, of course, the major accident of this year. Hopefully we'll find the black boxes and aircraft soon.

Jack1985

weisses wrote: »

In fairness ... Speculating would be on topic ... As stated in the thread title.

Don't you think even people officially involved would speculate as to what happened ?

What that flight deck crew can continue to be the poster-card for those responsible for the flights disappearance when there seems to be, really not one notion it could have been any of the passengers - and there is no difference between the two because there is not one bit of evidence to speculate and/or implicate any of the aboves actions.

And yes investigators speculate with confirmed information in-front of them, they don't carry on like the media do in these situations e.g. lampooning people with unsubstantiated accusations.

Colser

Jack1985...Everyone is allowed to speculate regardless of your opinions..Bottom line is there is no concrete evidence so of course people have their own opinions and dont have to adhere to your criteria in order to post.
Some of us are interested in other people thoughts without them being dismissed by you every time.

Why dont you tell us what happened and back it up with hard facts?

billie1b

Colser wrote: »

Jack1985...Everyone is allowed to speculate regardless of your opinions..Bottom line is there is no concrete evidence so of course people have their own opinions and dont have to adhere to your criteria in order to post.
Some of us are interested in other people thoughts without them being dismissed by you every time.

Why dont you tell us what happened and back it up with hard facts?

In the aviation industry over 12 years now, not as long as others here but I can safely say that the Pilots are the first to get the blame and continue to get the blame for any crash until its proven otherwise, so in fact the statement 'the pilot managed to vanish the plane' is in no way biased.

Colser

billie1b wrote: »

In the aviation industry over 12 years now, not as long as others here but I can safely say that the Pilots are the first to get the blame and continue to get the blame for any crash until its proven otherwise, so in fact the statement 'the pilot managed to vanish the plane' is in no way biased.

Is that just within the industry itself because its not really something I ever really thought had happened...of course he needed to be investigated but I dont think the general public ever really blamed him ?

As i say it really could be anything at this point and one that has grabbed peoples interest across the world so I feel we should be able to share our thoughts without getting ridiculed by those who feel they are more expert than the rest of us.(within the guidelines of course)

billie1b

Colser wrote: »

Is that just within the industry itself because its not really something I ever really thought had happened...of course he needed to be investigated but I dont think the general public ever really blamed him ?

As i say it really could be anything at this point and one that has grabbed peoples interest across the world so I feel we should be able to share our thoughts without getting ridiculed by those who feel they are more expert than the rest of us.(within the guidelines of course)

First people to be suspected are the pilots, on hearing of a crash or plane going missing the first thing they do is pull the loadsheet and cargo manifest to see if all the figures were correctly calculated and a/c loaded within its limitations, if all that is cosher they move on to pilot error and pretty much stay there until the wreck is investigated or the recorders are found. Even after the two lads houses were searched and investigated and nothing found, you can still be sure they are No1 suspects in the investigation for pilot error and mechanical error close behind until the a/c is found and boxes recovered.

Jack1985

Colser wrote: »

Jack1985...Everyone is allowed to speculate regardless of your opinions..Bottom line is there is no concrete evidence so of course people have their own opinions and dont have to adhere to your criteria in order to post.
Some of us are interested in other people thoughts without them being dismissed by you every time.

Why dont you tell us what happened and back it up with hard facts?

I don't have any facts of what happened bar what's been confirmed/released, but then again I don't go shooting my mouth of speculating who personally done what when there are no concrete facts relating to actions taken by individuals on that flight.

A quote from the ALPA;

Airline pilots are the ones who are most frequently singled out for prosecution. Airline pilots sign for and assume command of their aircraft, passengers, and cargo before leaving the gate. To a large degree, airline pilots are typically the last individuals in the event chain who might be able to alter the outcome. Simplistic reasoning presumes that an airline incident or accident that does occur must be the flight crew’s fault. In addition, they always end up at the scene of the mishap, alive or dead, and so are physically accessible targets for blame. But the victims here aren't just the pilots or other aviation professionals. The entire industry suffers, and that includes investigators and passengers, too.

My point is blaming those in command is the simplest theory for many; and it annoys a lot of people in the industry not least me. I am not dismissing peoples theories, I simply do not agree any individual regardless of there chain of command should be presumed guilty when there is no evidence that concurs with that belief, until there is such a time that changes I will be of the opinion they are innocent along with every individual on-board.

Law is not my forte but to me wouldn't you open yourself up for liable if you accused person x with doing an action they were present at but you had no evidence which would concur with your accusation? what's the difference here?

And I'm well aware this is a speculation thread, but I don't see how accusing individuals adds anything.

Calina

mr.anonymous wrote: »

I decided early on to only follow this on AvHerald. They don't make good news stories out of the families' pain or speculate.

Likewise. I don't think the media have been noticeably good on this story otherwise.

With respect to the question of speculation, the issue I have in this thread is there is a modicum more assertion than speculation sometimes.

One other thing worth noting while I'm in here (waiting for the pasta to boil irl) is that throwing the word blame around isn't always helpful - it leads to a cover your ass approach when what we really need is clarity and honesty about what people did or did not do. So while it is entirely possible pilot error might be involved, I would not necessarily use the word blame either.

What it boils down to is this: planes take off and land every day. For every one accident there are thousands of accident free flights daily.

There was a high profile accident in Antarctica about 35 years ago when an Air NZ plane flew straight into Mount Erebus. That was put down to pilot error initially but a key contribution to the fact was that the flight computers were updated with a different flight route without advising the pilots. The Wiki report is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_New_Zealand_Flight_901 and it's worth a look, particularly with respect to the follow up enquiry.

I would only go using the word blame in the case of a proven malicious decision on the part of the pilot. A lot other cases are a combination of factors rather than a single point of failure called the pilot. Errors happen - the difference is, for pilots, it can be a bit more fatal than most other people's work slip ups.

I think, again, one of the key issues is we like simple answers to questions. Unfortunately, they aren't always available

pfurey101

billie1b wrote: »

In the aviation industry over 12 years now, not as long as others here but I can safely say that the Pilots are the first to get the blame and continue to get the blame for any crash until its proven otherwise, so in fact the statement 'the pilot managed to vanish the plane' is in no way biased.

I started in 1972, got laid off in 2009 and still keep up to date with as much as I can. I was involved in aircraft maintenance and I'd say you are way off the mark with that comment.

It is widely accepted that there could be multiple factors involved in any incident and I cannot recall any speculation without facts during my years. It was always a waste of time speculating.

If anything it was the norm to sit and wait for the preliminary accident report and that work on getting any mandatory fixes in place . Of course there was always yapping over a mug of tea but everyone was well aware - sit and wait.

This link (FWIW) does show a high level of flight crew cause

http://www.1001crash.com/index-page-statistique-lg-2-numpage-4.html

But, again, I believe your statement to be way off the mark - in my experience.