Flight 370

[A-shot]

45,000 feet. Disable oxygen. Depressurization. Passengers dead. Then dive under radar.

Kill all comms and land quick. I honestly believe in 2 ideas. It will show back up aimed at something or it nosed dived. Either way the gov't knows.....

This. Easiest way.

And that would be instantaneous. No comms out, no words spoken. Especially if the captain offed his first mate right before. And really if terrorist in nature, it will be used again. And what about a cartel trying to buy a plane? Too much speculation...

[sigsauerfan]

someone pulled out the theory that the jetliner might have followed another plane on the desired path from behind close enough to escape the radars !!!!

it's theorically possible,however, kind of very touchy piloting .

in such case you need a quite skilled pilot to be able to follow that close such jumbo jetliner ; but air force pilots fly in close formations all the time , so that is not impossible.

it looks like the pilots are guilty of the hijacking now. nobody else could have been able to fly that plane the way they did.

[Chills1994]

I suspect that 200 plus cell phones trying to connect to a tower would get the attention of NSA's satellites.

Some of the people who were on the plane worked for a company called Huawei (just google it). They might have been on the NSA's radar already.

[KnurlingTurtle]

Here's a theory that makes the most sense to me:

https://plus.google.com/app/basic/stream/z13cv1gohsmbv5jmy221vrfyiz3vdhbop04

Here's a theory that makes the most sense to me:

https://plus.google.com/app/basic/stream/z13cv1gohsmbv5jmy221vrfyiz3vdhbop04

But it has a glaring flaw:

"There was most likely a fire or electrical fire. In the case of fire the first response if to pull all the main busses and restore circuits one by one until you have isolated the bad one. If they pulled the busses the plane indeed would go silent. It was probably a serious event and they simply were occupied with controlling the plane and trying to fight the fire. Aviate, Navigate and lastly communicate. "

That has already been ruled out: location transmitter and data transmitter were turned off separately about 6 minutes apart.

Good call. Apparently this has more than one flaw.

A very precise rebuttal:

SIGH I don't know who Chris Goodfellow is, but just having a "Class 1 License in Multi-engine planes" and 20 years experience does NOT qualify him to speak with authority on 777 systems and trans-oceanic airline operations. Heck, when I learned to fly in Canada, I had the same certifications. Mr. Goodfellow misses the mark on real-world operations, as evidenced by statements he makes in this article.

As an MD88 Captain for a major US airline, I have some pretty good experience to draw from but I certainly wouldn't want to stray into the realm of 777 systems and become another self-professed "expert" in the speculation frenzy we are seeing with regards to this incident. But some things are just really basic, and Mr. Goodfellow makes quite a few assumptions.

Where do I start?

"When I saw that left turn with a direct heading, I instinctively knew he was heading for an airport". Um, why? Why can you make that statement? There are a whole host of reasons why the aircraft FMS was programmed to make a turn. You say yourself just a paragraph or two later that "There is no point speculating further until more evidence surfaces...". Aren't you in fact "speculating"? We have far too many "speculators" as it is. The fact is, we can speculate all day as to the "who" and "why", but it's all pointless. The fact is, the aircraft turned west, away from it's planned northerly track. Why? It could be many things, but you can't say with any certainty that "he was heading for an airport".

Mr. Goodfellow states that an electrical fire first response is to "pull the main busses and restore circuits one by one until you have isolated the bad one". Actually, the first response is to don the oxygen mask and put on the smoke goggles (or some aircraft have masks/goggles in one unit). Mr. Goodfellow says "Yes, pilots have access to oxygen masks but this is a no-no with fire." GOOD LORD. He has NO IDEA what he's talking about. What are the pilots supposed to do? Hold their breath and work the checklist?? He is probably confusing the use of PASSENGER oxygen masks which, in the event of a fire in the cabin, we are trained to NOT manually deploy. Why? Because PASSENGER oxygen masks MIX cabin air with oxygen...thus, passengers would breath smoke regardless, and you're just providing oxygen to an environment where fire exists...that is bad. But with COCKPIT oxygen systems, the masks are FORCED PRESSURE and 100% oxygen is available. Yes, you ABSOLUTELY don the oxygen masks THEN work on isolating the source of the fire/smoke. Otherwise, the pilots are breathing smoke and, in no-time, the entire flight is doomed (he should know that.)

As far as isolating the source of the fire, referring to the Boeing checklist, the pilot will begin to isolate SYSTEMS, as directed, and try to isolate the source of the flames. This process does not involve "pulling busses" but rather in isolating systems through directing power sources and pulling circuit breakers. ("Pulling busses" is not even lexicon we use in our industry).

Mr. Goodfellow states that a hijack code (which exists) or "even a transponder code off by one digit would alert ATC that something was wrong". Um, good try. ATC would simply ask the flight to correct the code. But being unable to communicate with the flight would preclude this, and having one digit off would be the least of their concerns. If the pilot can move the transponder to "one digit off", he could certainly enter the code for the hijack (these aren't Cessna 172 transponders, Mr. Goodfellow.) He adds "Every good pilot knows keying an SOS over the mike always is an option." The vast majority of pilots would never consider this, as morse code is never used in communication, other than listening to a code (with the key displayed on an approach chart) is used to identify navigation frequencies for approaches, but not in the 777....that is not required. It automatically identifies the frequency for the pilots, and displays the identification on their EFIS screens (basically TV screens that display their instrumentation). Thus, 777 pilots rarely, if ever, deal with morse code, yet alone think about "transmitting" it via microphone clicks. He further adds "Even three short clicks would raise an alert". Um, yeah. No way.

Mr. Goodfellow states "Disabling the ACARS is not easy, as pointed out". WRONG. Pulling two or three circuit breakers disables the entire system. In fact, we routinely do it to reset the ACARS unit if it is not receiving or transmitting properly on the ground before pushback. Again, a bogus statement.

Mr. Goodfellow will "accept for a minute" that the pilot may have ascended to 45,000' in a last-ditch effort to quell a fire by seeking the lowest level of oxygen". That is completely laughable. The service ceiling of the 777 is 43,000'. The cabin pressurization system is designed to maintain a "maximum differential" of so-many psi (the difference between the outside air pressure and the inside-cabin air pressure) up to the service ceiling. A standard airliner will hold somewhere in the area of 8000' cabin pressure up to it's service ceiling. Going above that (in this case, 45,000') will NOT "quell a fire" with lower oxygen amounts. What WOULD happen is the pressurization system would raise the cabin altitude just a hair, in order to maintain the maximum cabin differential psi. No pilot would even CONSIDER taking an airplane to a HIGHER altitude in such a situation. It's preposterous! We know (a) it would have no effect on "quelling" a fire and ( we want to get on the GROUND when a fire exists (it's our worst enemy in the air). You state this yourself later: "Fire in an aircraft demands one thing: Get the machine on the ground as soon as possible." So why veer off into off-the-wall speculation and even consider it?

While we are talking about altitudes, as I mentioned, the service ceiling of the 777 is 43,000'. Going above the service ceiling is just downright dangerous. Why? Because the aircraft is not designed to be able to perform at those altitudes. Mr. Goodfellow got this one thing right in that doing so would put the pilots in a situation where going too FAST would result in a "mach buffet" situation where the airflow over the wing would be going so fast that it would separate, and thus the overspeed would create a loss of lift. Going too SLOW would of course mean the wing would stall. Thus the pilots would have to maintain aircraft speed in such a small range that it is entirely too dangerous. Many pilots refer to this as "the coffin corner"....the airspeed range is so precise that safety is sacrificed...thus the reference to the "coffin". Thus any pilot with any experience in jet aircraft would NEVER consider taking the aircraft above the certified flight "envelope". And if you've got a fire or other emergency on board, why on earth would you do that? As to WHY it was up there (supposedly), I will not "speculate".

I could go on and on further. What's my point? The point is this: There are WAY TOO MANY "talking head" experts who desperately want to be part of solving this mystery and, in the process, get their two minutes of fame. The problem is they just create more confusion, misinformation and wild-haired theories. We all need to stick to what we know and let the experts, who have all the information, work to solve the mystery. The hysteria that has ensued since the disappearance of the jet has gotten to fever pitch. It does nobody any good and, I would say, does a great deal of harm.

And lastly, if you say "we need to not speculate" and then you SPECULATE, you really aren't deserving of any credibility.

http://disqus.com/disqus_gGLyZWZ8Sp/

Comment submitted to Wired article: http://www.wired.com/autopia/2014/03/mh370-electrical-fire/

[Steve RA]

Well, we do know they haven't found it yet. (Or haven't released that information)

[Chills1994]

Boeing made the plane. Sticker price is only about $265 million. Corinthian leather and 6 disc in dash CD changer extra.

Boeing makes the spy satellites that pick up cell phone signals and other ELINT type related stuff for the NSA.

A subsidiary of Boeing makes the beam splitters so the NSA can tap into fiber optic lines at various spots inside the US and around the world, for the NSA.

[outerlimits]

They found it!

[GentlemanJim]

Knowing that part of the world, i would not be surprized if it landed undetected just about anywhere.

jim

[bountyhunter]

I could go on and on further. What's my point? The point is this: There are WAY TOO MANY "talking head" experts who desperately want to be part of solving this mystery and, in the process, get their two minutes of fame.

+1

Worse, there are wayyyy too many bozos who have long standing pet paranoias they want to dust off and trot out ie, an alien ship beamed them up, the government used a new directed energy weapon, yadda yadda yadda.

I just hope they find the remains soon so they will all shut up and go back to their part time job of making tinfoil hats.

Edited March 19, 2014 by bountyhunter

[bountyhunter]

Knowing that part of the world, i would not be surprized if it landed undetected just about anywhere.

jim

I agree it landed undetected.... going about 500 mph straight into the ocean.

Are you saying you believe they could have landed at night over land with no runway and survived that?

[Miranda]

Knowing that part of the world, i would not be surprized if it landed undetected just about anywhere.

jim

I agree it landed undetected.... going about 500 mph straight into the ocean.

Are you saying you believe they could have landed at night over land with no runway and survived that?

I think 'surprized' in the operative word (we'll work on spelling togeter, one day)

think of it like this;

lets say the air liner can be anywhere in a thousand sq miles of ocean

and that there is a sq mile of island area out there as well.

the odds are about 1000 to 1 for the airliner to come to rest on land.

if the pilot has any say, that is where the airliner will be....

not so surprising.

miranda

[MNshooter]

They found it!

Haha I texted this to a lot of people. I'd cite you but it loses comedic effect.

[whitedog]

I know for absolute certainty that a plane the size of that plane can land at night with no run way lights. Just beacons of some sort. Not sure what type of beacons. I also know for certain it can be done beneath radar.

I know because I was on a plane that did it in '90 in an African country...Go 4th ID. ?

Maybe technology is different now..but I believe it's on the ground somewhere

[GentlemanJim]

Knowing that part of the world, i would not be surprized if it landed undetected just about anywhere.

jim

I agree it landed undetected.... going about 500 mph straight into the ocean.

Are you saying you believe they could have landed at night over land with no runway and survived that?

Knowing that part of the world, i would not be surprized if it landed undetected just about anywhere.

jim

I agree it landed undetected.... going about 500 mph straight into the ocean.

Are you saying you believe they could have landed at night over land with no runway and survived that?

This aircraft may well be at the bottom of the ocean, who knows at this piont.

I do know in that part of the world radar coverage is a joke.

and there are many uncontroled runways in MANY of the countries within the planes range.

If this thing is in the water we may never find it.

If its on land who knows what will come of it.

I am going to keep an open mind, usually the (cant be that, or has to be this ) crowd are incorrect in the end.

Jim

[Chills1994]

It appears that the Rolls Royce engines were trying to phone home every hour at 11 minutes past. So you have these pings at

1:11 AM

2:11

3:11

4:11

5:11

6:11

7:11

8:11

So at some time after 8:11 AM the engines stopped trying to ping the satellites. The two most plausible or probable reasons for that:

A. It crashed somewhere and everybody is dead (but we don't have an ELT signal which is supposed to go off when a plane crashes especially on land)

B. It landed intact and its engines or the entire ane were shut off before it could make the 9:11 ping .

In theory, it could have landed at 6:00 AM and sat on a runway or tarmack idling for 2 hours and 15 minutes.

[sigsauerfan]

B

[bountyhunter]

The official spokesman informed the families today with a public statement that the plane went down and there are no survivors. They said it is based on "further analysis of satellite data" which I interpret to mean covert intel sources have fed them more of the info they have that they don't want to reveal outright because it will compromise monitoring systems they don't want to acknowledge exist. I would wager the plane's location will be revealed within the next week.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/25/world/asia/malaysia-airlines-flight-370.html

Edited March 24, 2014 by bountyhunter

[sigsauerfan]

in short,whatever the pilots crashed it in the sea reciting the koran or delivered it to al-crappola it's still a terrorist act...

[bountyhunter]

in short,whatever the pilots crashed it in the sea reciting the koran or delivered it to al-crappola it's still a terrorist act...

Maybe, but sometimes a suicide is just a suicide..... a way for a troubled person to check out. And the window dressing is the excuse. Edited March 26, 2014 by bountyhunter

[trgt]

think of it like this;

lets say the air liner can be anywhere in a thousand sq miles of ocean

and that there is a sq mile of island area out there as well.

the odds are about 1000 to 1 for the airliner to come to rest on land.

Deleted -- my math not so good today or I misread OP - thx on correction Sarge Edited March 26, 2014 by trgt

[Sarge]

think of it like this;

lets say the air liner can be anywhere in a thousand sq miles of ocean

and that there is a sq mile of island area out there as well.

the odds are about 1000 to 1 for the airliner to come to rest on land.

1000 square miles is 1000x1000 mile squares, so each mile square is 1:1,000,000 chance, fwiw

1000 square miles is 1000 square miles or 10x100 1000x1000 is one million square miles

Edited March 26, 2014 by Sarge

[trgt]

think of it like this;

lets say the air liner can be anywhere in a thousand sq miles of ocean

and that there is a sq mile of island area out there as well.

the odds are about 1000 to 1 for the airliner to come to rest on land.

1000 square miles is 1000x1000 mile squares, so each mile square is 1:1,000,000 chance, fwiw

1000 square miles is 1000 square miles or 10x100 1000x1000 is one million square miles

I was wrong thinking of something else - thx.

[Sarge]

think of it like this;

lets say the air liner can be anywhere in a thousand sq miles of ocean

and that there is a sq mile of island area out there as well.

the odds are about 1000 to 1 for the airliner to come to rest on land.

1000 square miles is 1000x1000 mile squares, so each mile square is 1:1,000,000 chance, fwiw

1000 square miles is 1000 square miles or 10x100 1000x1000 is one million square miles

I was wrong thinking of something else - thx.

You weren't off by that much!