|
On March 18 2014 23:57 Hydrolisko wrote:Show nested quote +On March 18 2014 23:54 ComaDose wrote:If i understand correctly the TL:DR is there was a problem on the plane. the pilot pointed the plane towards the nearest airport, the pilots became incapacitated with the plane in auto pilot. the plane continued to fly for hours with no control. this doesn't seem more credible than any of the other theories to me. Please read the entire article word for word. He explains most (if not all) occurrences, including the sharp turn, then shutdown of comm systems, the altitude change 45k and 25k... etc. It isn't necessarily an ironclad explanation, but it is by far the most credible I've read. And I've been following this pretty closely.
New facts revealed last night have poked a major hole in this theory. Apparently the course correction that caused the plane to turn towards that closer airport was programmed into the flight computer, not by the pilots at the helm.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/18/world/asia/malaysia-airlines-flight.html?hp&_r=0
It seems unlikely the pilots would have done anything other than manually steer the craft if such a sudden electrical emergency occurred.
|
On March 19 2014 00:31 Mafe wrote:
Maybe stupid question as I might be missing something obvious (I don't have much experience with flying), but: I thought mobile phones are free to use on planes, apart from starting and landing situations? Assuming the plane continued flying in a false direction for several hours, wouldn't at least some of the passengers realize it and try to call relatives etc. (or even just make make regular phone calls)? As was the case on 9/11 iirc. Is there any technical reason that prevents any mobile phones from getting a connection as long as the plane itself has communication systems shut down?
it is impossible to make phone calls above 8000-10000ft with a cellphone.
its 9/11 bs 
|
On March 19 2014 01:22 whiteLotus wrote:"They flew one of two "arcs" for 7 hours" Right there I knew the guy had no clue.
Are you sure you're quoting the right article?
Chris Goodfellow has 20 years experience as a Canadian Class-1 instrumented-rated pilot for multi-engine planes.
Doesn't seem like someone with "no clue". Also, there are 0 occurances of the word "arc" in this article.
Not that it makes it any more true or not. Just wanted to make sure people know what they quote before berating it.
|
On March 19 2014 01:23 Hydrolisko wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2014 01:07 r.Evo wrote:On March 19 2014 00:45 arbiter_md wrote:
Good theory. I agree that it is the most credible. The fire was somewhat isolated since the aircraft was able to fly for another 6 hours. Which makes me think, it was the smoke that disabled the people, and after that the fire probably stopped because of lack of oxygen. This also needs a lot to come together. There was the case of Helios Airways Flight 522 that had a similarly eerie story. You'd basically need a fire that, for whatever reason, either quickly disables all forms of communication (unlikely) or something that causes incapacitation of the crew due to hypoxia before being able to communicate it (also unlikely but this is a case where it happened). An example of a flight where a fire was underestimated (but in this case communicated to ATC) would be Swissair Flight 111. Nigeria Airways Flight 2120 is an example of the bursting tire -> fire theory. Those things don't just happen without anyone noticing. tl;dr: The issue with all the fire-theories is that you need a fire so subtle that the crew doesn't notice it (which would be immediately communicated and is also highly unlikely) but also strong enough that it disables communication so suddenly that you can't communicate it before it ate up your ways of communicating. That's really, really hard to pull off. =P The pilot would be the one disabling the comms, not the fire, as stated in that article.
That's not how it works. It's not "something is burning better disable all electronics". If your warning lights pop up or someone reports a smell of smoke or, even worse, sees smoke it's a matter of a few seconds to communicate it.
Yes procedures put saving your plane above communicating what's going on but that brings us back to very specific circumstances that need to occur to make a fire at FL300+ both so subtle that you didn't feel the need to communicate it at first but also so suddenly horrible that you now are unable of communicating it. That's also why I specifically mentioned the Helios flight above. In that case something happened that was very subtle at first (basically the pilots slowly lost access to oxygen), they were both occupied with trying to solve a different but related problem together with ground control (aka distracted from the real issue) and then all of a sudden fell unconscious.
|
On March 19 2014 01:36 ElMeanYo wrote:Show nested quote +On March 18 2014 23:57 Hydrolisko wrote:On March 18 2014 23:54 ComaDose wrote:If i understand correctly the TL:DR is there was a problem on the plane. the pilot pointed the plane towards the nearest airport, the pilots became incapacitated with the plane in auto pilot. the plane continued to fly for hours with no control. this doesn't seem more credible than any of the other theories to me. Please read the entire article word for word. He explains most (if not all) occurrences, including the sharp turn, then shutdown of comm systems, the altitude change 45k and 25k... etc. It isn't necessarily an ironclad explanation, but it is by far the most credible I've read. And I've been following this pretty closely. New facts revealed last night have poked a major hole in this theory. Apparently the course correction that caused the plane to turn towards that closer airport was programmed into the flight computer, not by the pilots at the helm. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/18/world/asia/malaysia-airlines-flight.html?hp&_r=0It seems unlikely the pilots would have done anything other than manually steer the craft if such a sudden electrical emergency occurred.
Interesting, watching the video I think it's important to notice that last Acars transmission occurred at 1:07. And it was supposed to transmit 30 minutes after that. Which didn't happen. So, it was switched off during this interval. I guess it stopped working before the plane changed the direction, according to all the theories. Just didn't see this in timelines of events so far.
|
On March 19 2014 02:03 r.Evo wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2014 01:23 Hydrolisko wrote:On March 19 2014 01:07 r.Evo wrote:On March 19 2014 00:45 arbiter_md wrote:
Good theory. I agree that it is the most credible. The fire was somewhat isolated since the aircraft was able to fly for another 6 hours. Which makes me think, it was the smoke that disabled the people, and after that the fire probably stopped because of lack of oxygen. This also needs a lot to come together. There was the case of Helios Airways Flight 522 that had a similarly eerie story. You'd basically need a fire that, for whatever reason, either quickly disables all forms of communication (unlikely) or something that causes incapacitation of the crew due to hypoxia before being able to communicate it (also unlikely but this is a case where it happened). An example of a flight where a fire was underestimated (but in this case communicated to ATC) would be Swissair Flight 111. Nigeria Airways Flight 2120 is an example of the bursting tire -> fire theory. Those things don't just happen without anyone noticing. tl;dr: The issue with all the fire-theories is that you need a fire so subtle that the crew doesn't notice it (which would be immediately communicated and is also highly unlikely) but also strong enough that it disables communication so suddenly that you can't communicate it before it ate up your ways of communicating. That's really, really hard to pull off. =P The pilot would be the one disabling the comms, not the fire, as stated in that article. That's not how it works. It's not "something is burning better disable all electronics". If your warning lights pop up or someone reports a smell of smoke or, even worse, sees smoke it's a matter of a few seconds to communicate it. Yes procedures put saving your plane above communicating what's going on but that brings us back to very specific circumstances that need to occur to make a fire at FL300+ both so subtle that you didn't feel the need to communicate it at first but also so suddenly horrible that you now are unable of communicating it. That's also why I specifically mentioned the Helios flight above. In that case something happened that was very subtle at first (basically the pilots slowly lost access to oxygen), they were both occupied with trying to solve a different but related problem together with ground control (aka distracted from the real issue) and then all of a sudden fell unconscious.
There are actually a lot of differences between the Helios flight and this.
1) Alarms were going off.
2) Pilots were communicating with the tower (and disregarding their advice) until they passed out.
3) Auto pilot flew to the destination by itself and circled until crashing.
4) Even though Helios was stuck at cruising altitude, atleast one person was conscious. One of the crew was seen going into the cockpit and trying to regain control of the aircraft from the unconscious pilots. Unfortunately the plane ran out of fuel before he could have done anything.
5) MH370 descended to 23,000ft. This is lower than Everest which you can climb without supplemental O2.
So there are a lot of issues in that comparison.
|
On March 19 2014 02:59 Antisocialmunky wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2014 02:03 r.Evo wrote:On March 19 2014 01:23 Hydrolisko wrote:On March 19 2014 01:07 r.Evo wrote:On March 19 2014 00:45 arbiter_md wrote:
Good theory. I agree that it is the most credible. The fire was somewhat isolated since the aircraft was able to fly for another 6 hours. Which makes me think, it was the smoke that disabled the people, and after that the fire probably stopped because of lack of oxygen. This also needs a lot to come together. There was the case of Helios Airways Flight 522 that had a similarly eerie story. You'd basically need a fire that, for whatever reason, either quickly disables all forms of communication (unlikely) or something that causes incapacitation of the crew due to hypoxia before being able to communicate it (also unlikely but this is a case where it happened). An example of a flight where a fire was underestimated (but in this case communicated to ATC) would be Swissair Flight 111. Nigeria Airways Flight 2120 is an example of the bursting tire -> fire theory. Those things don't just happen without anyone noticing. tl;dr: The issue with all the fire-theories is that you need a fire so subtle that the crew doesn't notice it (which would be immediately communicated and is also highly unlikely) but also strong enough that it disables communication so suddenly that you can't communicate it before it ate up your ways of communicating. That's really, really hard to pull off. =P The pilot would be the one disabling the comms, not the fire, as stated in that article. That's not how it works. It's not "something is burning better disable all electronics". If your warning lights pop up or someone reports a smell of smoke or, even worse, sees smoke it's a matter of a few seconds to communicate it. Yes procedures put saving your plane above communicating what's going on but that brings us back to very specific circumstances that need to occur to make a fire at FL300+ both so subtle that you didn't feel the need to communicate it at first but also so suddenly horrible that you now are unable of communicating it. That's also why I specifically mentioned the Helios flight above. In that case something happened that was very subtle at first (basically the pilots slowly lost access to oxygen), they were both occupied with trying to solve a different but related problem together with ground control (aka distracted from the real issue) and then all of a sudden fell unconscious. There are actually a lot of differences between the Helios flight and this. 1) Alarms were going off. 2) Pilots were communicating with the tower (and disregarding their advice) until they passed out. 3) Auto pilot flew to the destination by itself and circled until crashing. 4) Even though Helios was stuck at cruising altitude, atleast one person was conscious. One of the crew was seen going into the cockpit and trying to regain control of the aircraft from the unconscious pilots. Unfortunately the plane ran out of fuel before he could have done anything. 5) MH370 descended to 23,000ft. This is lower than Everest which you can climb without supplemental O2. So there are a lot of issues in that comparison.
I'm aware of those differences. I mostly mentioned it to show a case of pilots "slowly falling unconscious" which some people mentioned could happen because of a fire on board. The tl;dr is among the lines of "a lot of stupid stuff needs to happen for a pilot to just fall unconscious because he has no oxygen".
|
Okay, I misread your post and intent.
|
So where the hell is the plane?
Crashed into a mountain in Central Asia?
At the bottom of the Indian Ocean?
Sitting in a hangar on the Legion of Doom's secret island base?
|
On March 18 2014 23:57 Hydrolisko wrote:Show nested quote +On March 18 2014 23:54 ComaDose wrote:If i understand correctly the TL:DR is there was a problem on the plane. the pilot pointed the plane towards the nearest airport, the pilots became incapacitated with the plane in auto pilot. the plane continued to fly for hours with no control. this doesn't seem more credible than any of the other theories to me. Please read the entire article word for word. He explains most (if not all) occurrences, including the sharp turn, then shutdown of comm systems, the altitude change 45k and 25k... etc. It isn't necessarily an ironclad explanation, but it is by far the most credible I've read. And I've been following this pretty closely.
So does anyone know if the autopilot is on a different electrical system than the rest of the electronics? Wouldn't pulling busses, which result in the plane going black, also disable autopilot?
|
On March 19 2014 04:05 DeepElemBlues wrote:
So where the hell is the plane?
Crashed into a mountain in Central Asia?
At the bottom of the Indian Ocean?
Sitting in a hangar on the Legion of Doom's secret island base?
A part of me really wants this to be true.
|
Well these planes are all fly by wire so that means that if the electrical controls go out, it's game over. That's why pilots are afraid of lightning, if your electronics go out you have no way of controlling the plane. So I don't know about auto pilot staying engaged after a catastrophic failure but perhaps it could be within the realm of possibilities. There was the Helios incident and more recently a case in the US where both pilots fell asleep and overshot their destination by 2 hours which could support a "ghost plane" theory where it flys itself until running out of fuel.
|
i just feel bad for the all the families yo
|
Havent been following this incident too closely but is it safe to assume all passengers of the flight are dead?
|
On March 19 2014 07:46 MooMooMugi wrote:
Havent been following this incident too closely but is it safe to assume all passengers of the flight are dead?
At this point it is near impossible that they are alive. If they are, someone would have said something but nope. The plane is crashed "somewhere" and no one knows where.
I read the NY Times report, the theory by the pilot is very sound and is oddly the only one I have read that makes major sense. If he IS correct, I'm going to laugh only because no one thought of it in Malaysia. When it comes to Air Plane Disasters, I trust the NTSB over any other organization in the world.
|
On March 19 2014 04:05 DeepElemBlues wrote:
So where the hell is the plane?
Crashed into a mountain in Central Asia?
At the bottom of the Indian Ocean?
Sitting in a hangar on the Legion of Doom's secret island base?
Mistery solved
+ Show Spoiler +![[image loading]](http://cdn29.elitedaily.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/missing-plane-tweet-elite-daily.jpg) Its obviously aliens, its on the moon!
|
http://www.timesofisrael.com/israel-tightens-airspace-security-after-jets-disappearance/
Israel Prepares for Possible Attack by Hijacked Malaysian Plane
As terrorism fears grow in Malaysian plane case, Israeli officials increase already-tight precautions
By Times of Israel staff and AP March 16, 2014, 9:41 pm EDT
Israel has tightened security in its airspace following the disappearance and possible hijacking of Malaysian Airlines flight MH370 on March 8, Channel 2 reported Sunday.
According to the report, security officials and aviation authorities recently held a security assessment and decided upon a series of security measures intended to enhance safety in Israeli airspace.
Among the measures, airliners are now required to identify themselves much earlier when approaching Israel’s airspace. [anybody see this yet in a NOTAM? - Airbubba] Other actions were not disclosed at this time.
The increased security came as El Al’s former global security chief told The Times of Israel he believes that the disappearance of the Malaysia Airlines flight points directly to Iran.
|
Guess they went with the Legion of Doom's secret island base.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
|
So after ten days, Thailand decides to tell us that they saw a blip on their radar that might have been the plane.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
