|
OK, here's a completely 100% conspiracy theory. So stupid it's not to be believed, yet maybe..
Aircraft takes off normally. En route, it becomes apparent that there are terrorists on board and they manage to hijack the plane. Their goal is to do something 9/11 but to China.
China has fighters intercept the airliner and shoot it down. Since they're evil communists, they just keep the whole thing a 100% secret.
/endstupidtheory
Anyway, someone mentioned that an airliner had once been shot down by a missile, this is indeed true: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_Air_Lines_Flight_007
Though it's not like we're in the Cold War or anything at the moment.
|
|
|
On March 12 2014 01:50 DeepElemBlues wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2014 01:48 Hydrolisko wrote:
not to belittle the situation, but can someone fill me in why this is so mysterious. planes crash and the wreckage can take weeks, months and years to find. we have found examples of no distress signals given before crashes, and there are many examples of pilot error on autopilot taking the plane off course very far, especially if there's some kind of mechanical problem contributing to it too. this is only the second time i believe in the history of modern civilian flight that a large jet airliner has simply disappeared at cruising altitude with no communication from the pilots, no debris found (yet), etc. it is a very very rare and mysterious situation since there is almost always some kind of communication either from the pilots or the ship's systems sending data out that gives a clue as to what happened.
It is also mysterious because it is a Boeing 777 Airliner. The jet is 19 years old with a flawless record until last year, when a Asiana Airline hit a sea wall on landing in San Fran but that landing was more pilot error, misjudging, but 3 people died.
For the 777, this is the first real serious issue for the plane in 19 years that has so far no explanation. There has been several other instances when the plane disappeared/crashed while in cruising altitude, the foremost is the Air France 447 that crashed in the sea in 2009(?) due to a pilot and mechanical error (mostly pilot error). It took 2 years to fully figure out what happened with the plane and find all the pieces + black box.
It's curious also because it has now been 5 days and no news of the plane has been found. Air France 447 pieces was found in 2 days (though the rest of the plane + black box was found 2 years later. Not to mention the flight was in a communication dead zone.)
Edit: There are some updates on the news. Trying to debunk the dumb rumors lol.
http://time.com/19591/mh370-officials-clueless-as-stolen-passport-user-idd-as-asylum-seeker/
|
TLADT24920 Posts
Why are coming up with such bizzare conspiracy theories when they have more data:
I have to wonder why they changed flight destination.
|
On March 12 2014 03:16 BigFan wrote:Why are coming up with such bizzare conspiracy theories when they have more data: I have to wonder why they changed flight destination.
So many possibilities, could be hijack, losing control of plane or they could simply mistaken something else for the flight.
|
What I have never understood, on a civil plane why can the position signal be turned off to begin with?
I can't think of any situation, where that might be useful.
|
On March 12 2014 03:34 lord_nibbler wrote:
What I have never understood, on a civil plane why can the position signal be turned off to begin with?
I can't think of any situation, where that might be useful.
and then war breaks out and the military is in desperate need for transportation.
|
On March 12 2014 03:34 lord_nibbler wrote:
What I have never understood, on a civil plane why can the position signal be turned off to begin with?
I can't think of any situation, where that might be useful.
So that when you don't need it you can save energy by turning it off (when the aircraft is in the hangar)? So that when the plane isn't flying it doesn't transmit useless radio waves? So you can turn it off to fix it if it gets broken? etc It's just common sense to be able to turn something off when it's not needed?
|
But being able to turn it off by the maintenance staff while on the ground makes sense there, a lot more so than while it is flying.
|
On March 12 2014 04:09 Saryph wrote:
But being able to turn it off by the maintenance staff while on the ground makes sense there, a lot more so than while it is flying.
This would mean that this thing could only be turned on BY maintenance staff. That's just plain inefficient. Once the aircraft gets turned off, does it really make sense to wait for the maintenance staff to have to turn off something that's eating battery power for nothing?
This is pointless lol, it doesn't even matter.
|
I just read up on the Air France Flight 447 accident.
The co-pilots were so used to all the automatic safety measures performed by the board computer that they didn't actually know how to fly the airplane when those measures had to be shut down because of a faulty sensor. I guess one of the dangers of modern planes and their sophisticated systems is that the pilots aren't as well prepared for emergencies as in the past when they had to do all the hard work themselves.
|
So current info is plane did a 180 and flew back 100s of miles the other way. Why not fly back to the airport?
Some gross negligence or something sinister.
|
On March 12 2014 05:03 JimSocks wrote:
So current info is plane did a 180 and flew back 100s of miles the other way. Why not fly back to the airport?
Some gross negligence or something sinister.
because it's quite hard to navigate in the middle of the night on the ocean. All you see is black water.
This would ofc imply that there was a major electronic failure which shut down both navigation and communications. Also the plane just turned to 40° shortly before they lost contact with the plane. So the plan might have been to turn 180 so they surely hit land and then fly along the coastline or simply get closer to land before going down.
|
On March 12 2014 04:52 Maenander wrote:I just read up on the Air France Flight 447 accident. The co-pilots were so used to all the automatic safety measures performed by the board computer that they didn't actually know how to fly the airplane when those measures had to be shut down because of a faulty sensor. I guess one of the dangers of modern planes and their sophisticated systems is that the pilots aren't as well prepared for emergencies as in the past when they had to do all the hard work themselves.
Not quite that simple.
Put it this way. It's not that they didn't know how to fly when the safety measures are gone, rather they didn't assess the situation in time before it got out of hand.
Take out the airspeed indicator, what do you have left? Altimetre, vertical speed indicator and pitch. At this time, the aircraft was in a stall. This meant that the altitude was dropping quickly, the vertical speed indicator was showing the drop rate and the pitch showed that the aircraft was nose high. In such a situation, you also see that the airspeed is very low. However the pilots didn't have access to this information. Nonetheless, with the other instruments on hand, they could have deduced what was going on. However, things can happen very quickly in a situation such as this.
The remedy to this kind of stall is pushing forward on the yoke, dropping the nose and regaining sufficient speed to once again fly normally. Getting out of a simple stall isn't difficult.
It isn't that the flight controls, autopilot and modern avionics make the aircraft so easy to fly that you forget how to actually fly. It's simply that pilots found themselves in a critical situation and failed to properly react to this situation, because they misread the situation*. These type of accidents also happen in general aviation (more frequently unless I'm mistaken), where everything is done "by hand".
*indeed, arguably a lack of training
Not sure if they had outside visual references to work with either, but they probably didn't. If the airliner had been flying by day and the crew had seen that the nose was up and the altitude was dropping quickly, they would have immediately realized they were stalling. I'm guessing it was dark outside and they didn't figure out what the aircraft was doing (in this case stalling). They probably assumed that the aircraft was diving and as such pulled on the stick to bring the nose up. The aircraft was already nose up and stalling, so it just continued stalling until it crashed. In their "defense", there's no force feedback in the stick in an A330, since it's fly-by-wire, so they couldn't "feel" their elevator, which would probably have also given them the hint needed to figure out what was going on.
It's kind of a stupid accident when you think about.
|
I'm sure there have been many examples of not finding a single piece of wreckage until many days later. Adam Air Flight 574 just to name one... the ocean is very very vast, especially if there's a pilot error/mechanical failure taking the plane to some random place.
|
They are saying there's no foul play going on, it was a mechanical failure that resulted in both navigation and communications/radio shutdown. The plane turned around and got lost. If that is the case, why did it take 3 days before we found out what happened. What was the crew, passengers, and everyone doing in these 3 days? Was nobody able to contact the outside world? How long is it before planes run out of fuel?
|
On March 12 2014 06:48 W2 wrote:
They are saying there's no foul play going on, it was a mechanical failure that resulted in both navigation and communications/radio shutdown. The plane turned around and got lost. If that is the case, why did it take 3 days before we found out what happened. What was the crew, passengers, and everyone doing in these 3 days? Was nobody able to contact the outside world? How long is it before planes run out of fuel?
what? source?
|
On March 12 2014 06:51 ComaDose wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2014 06:48 W2 wrote:
They are saying there's no foul play going on, it was a mechanical failure that resulted in both navigation and communications/radio shutdown. The plane turned around and got lost. If that is the case, why did it take 3 days before we found out what happened. What was the crew, passengers, and everyone doing in these 3 days? Was nobody able to contact the outside world? How long is it before planes run out of fuel? what? source?
wait you don't read the exact same articles as that guy?
|
On March 12 2014 06:56 heartlxp wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2014 06:51 ComaDose wrote:On March 12 2014 06:48 W2 wrote:
They are saying there's no foul play going on, it was a mechanical failure that resulted in both navigation and communications/radio shutdown. The plane turned around and got lost. If that is the case, why did it take 3 days before we found out what happened. What was the crew, passengers, and everyone doing in these 3 days? Was nobody able to contact the outside world? How long is it before planes run out of fuel? what? source? wait you don't read the exact same articles as that guy?
i've never even heard the story he is telling before.
|
TLADT24920 Posts
On March 12 2014 06:57 ComaDose wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2014 06:56 heartlxp wrote:On March 12 2014 06:51 ComaDose wrote:On March 12 2014 06:48 W2 wrote:
They are saying there's no foul play going on, it was a mechanical failure that resulted in both navigation and communications/radio shutdown. The plane turned around and got lost. If that is the case, why did it take 3 days before we found out what happened. What was the crew, passengers, and everyone doing in these 3 days? Was nobody able to contact the outside world? How long is it before planes run out of fuel? what? source? wait you don't read the exact same articles as that guy? i've never even heard the story he is telling before.
look at my post 4th from the top. It has some info.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
