|
On March 26 2014 01:19 FFW_Rude wrote:
I don'tflûtes ngwhy the hijacking gone wrong has been dismissed. Sure the plane crashed in the middle of the ocean. But why was it htere ? I mean there's nothing here. No place to land, no base, no petrol platform. No target.
I remember a video from a crash plane in the sea (impressive video) and it was an hijacking gone wrong were the hijacker wanted to go some place, pilots told they didn't have the fuel to get there but hijacker insist. I even think the video was posted here in this very thread.
So i don't get why the pilots would have flown that deep into the ocean. It's like they were going to south pole or something. There's no sense in that.
There's too many misteries in this case to affirm or dismiss anything.
Why a complete silence ? (During 9/11 attacks, the passengers used their phone to call their familly)
Why the opposite direction? (Hijacking ? Terrorist attack with pilots changing direction during the night to avoid a crash on Beijing? A technical issue avoiding the pilot to communicate and/or killing the passengers while auto pilot send the plane in the middle of nowhere?)
I saw a ton of aircraft crashes investigations on TV and anything is possible.
One of them for exemple crashed in the ocean after hours of flying because a little piece of the plane didn't worked properly when too cold and the pilots couldn't change the plane direction. Just a 10 cm long piece of metal. It took years and few other accident to understand what was going wrong.
Another crashed because pilots used to turn off a noisy and useless alarm. The day this larm would have been usefull, it was off and the plane crashed, the pilots being unable to react to something they were not aware of.
We might never know.
|
Yeah i think you're right Agathon.
|
Cell phones wont work unless you're by a cellphone tower. Middle of no where isn't likly to be able to reach a cell phone tower to relay the call to a satellite.
|
On March 27 2014 00:37 semantics wrote:
Cell phones wont work unless you're by a cellphone tower. Middle of no where isn't likly to be able to reach a cell phone tower to relay the call to a satellite.
Yeah. 9/11 planes where flying low and were inland. Also a lot of calls were made with the inplane phone (don't know english name)
|
The plane cut low across Malaysia itself, seemingly working to dodge radar in the process. So it was close enough it might have passed by several cellphone towers. And you never know if someone has an Iridium Satellite Phone on board (they're not that expensive if you travel the world, and aren't a bad investment if you're galavanting around the further corners of the World, but they'd work from inside the plane). So complete silence is both suspicious, but it closes off no open possibilities.
Though I am getting annoyed of 1 news story already: News Flash, the Southern Indian Ocean has a LOT of junk floating around it. Please stop randomly reporting finding objects from planes that no one has been able to get to collect up yet. We get it, they're looking!
|
On March 27 2014 07:01 Taf the Ghost wrote:
The plane cut low across Malaysia itself, seemingly working to dodge radar in the process. So it was close enough it might have passed by several cellphone towers. And you never know if someone has an Iridium Satellite Phone on board (they're not that expensive if you travel the world, and aren't a bad investment if you're galavanting around the further corners of the World, but they'd work from inside the plane). So complete silence is both suspicious, but it closes off no open possibilities.
However, how many window seat passengers would know the surroundings of a completely different area from the air to know they started going the wrong direction? I really don't think it's all that unlikely that no one tried to make a call.
|
On March 26 2014 07:06 Seraphic wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2014 05:28 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 26 2014 01:19 FFW_Rude wrote:
I don't get why the hijacking gone wrong has been dismissed. Sure the plane crashed in the middle of the ocean. But why was it htere ? I mean there's nothing here. No place to land, no base, no petrol platform. No target.
I remember a video from a crash plane in the sea (impressive video) and it was an hijacking gone wrong were the hijacker wanted to go some place, pilots told they didn't have the fuel to get there but hijacker insist. I even think the video was posted here in this very thread.
So i don't get why the pilots would have flown that deep into the ocean. It's like they were going to south pole or something. There's no sense in that. Some people think you shouldn't spread baseless rumors that someones dead family members may have been a terrorist. Some people think you should have some solid evidence before you start maligning someones character, integrity, and faith on a global scale, just so they can say that they suggested the 'right' scenario first or "knew it all along". There aren't any solid facts about most things regarding MH370. And saying the pilots who, all we know, could have done all they can to save the plane and calling them terrorist are the worst thing you can ever say to the decease without any facts. As with most more reasonable theories floating around right now, the best possible answer to the plane's behavior is something catastrophic happened on the plane, forcing the pilots to turn towards the nearest airport.
I would say the theory that the captain may have done something deliberately as a result of being upset about recent events in his life is reasonable as well-
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/air-accidents/news/article.cfm?c_id=665&objectid=11226334
Of course it could be an accident but the timing of the turning off of the transponder just seems incredibly suspicious to me. I agree that terrorism seems far-fetched however.
|
From now on i think i'll wait the analysis. I browsed the internet last night on the subject and i've seen so many different theory (a lot with NO evidence whatsoever etc...).
|
People might as well stop speculating uselessly.
We probably won't know the real story for a few years (if we ever know it), so don't be impatient.
|
Malaysia Airlines was facing bankrupcy before the plane-crash and the economic burden will hang on Khazanah National and therefore indirectly the malaysian government either way.
There are some pretty, well, unprecedented circumstances in this case. Now that a lawsuit has been filed, the situation will be even more clamped up and information about what happened during the flight even more confirmed before they are released. If one of the pilots actually caused the death of the passengers by suicide or mass murder, how liable would Malaysia Airlines be? And what would the default position be in a case where insufficient information can be gathered about what happened to determine liability (US law)?
Speculation about what has happened is only as good as the evidence that supports it. In this case, even if the black boxes are found, it is still very likely that we will never know exactly what happened. With the lawsuit, things have turned from an investigation into a blame-game. The likelyhood of finding the exact truth has therefore diminished further.
|
Some pretty interesting stuff:
http://www.smh.com.au/world/mh370-pilot-responsible-us-newspaper-quotes-malaysian-official-20140327-zqnrx.html
According to an Australian Aviation expert:
- This is the wreckage, garbage patches are not that dense and it is where the plane expected to crash.
- Plane could not have done what it did without human agency.
- One theory is about a possible stowaway hijacker hiding in one of the service bays of the aircraft who physically disconnected the ACARS and Transponder.
I'm not sure if hiding in the service areas, disconnecting the right electronics and then hijacking the aircraft is even possible but it seems interesting if it is.
|
On March 28 2014 01:32 Antisocialmunky wrote:Some pretty interesting stuff: http://www.smh.com.au/world/mh370-pilot-responsible-us-newspaper-quotes-malaysian-official-20140327-zqnrx.htmlAccording to an Australian Aviation expert: - This is the wreckage, garbage patches are not that dense and it is where the plane expected to crash. - Plane could not have done what it did without human agency. - One theory is about a possible stowaway hijacker hiding in one of the service bays of the aircraft who physically disconnected the ACARS and Transponder. I'm not sure if hiding in the service areas, disconnecting the right electronics and then hijacking the aircraft is even possible but it seems interesting if it is.
As far as I know the FMS is a computer and it can therefore be hacked. ACARS and transponders are sending signals and they can be disconnected or jammed. When that is said, I think the possibility of that happening is much more of a theoretic argument for protecting the systems better against sabotage/hacking from people with interests in computer-security, than a feasible explaination of what happened.
|
Northern Ireland22208 Posts
Malaysian authorities have issued a new version of the last communication between air traffic control and the cockpit of the missing flight MH370.
The last words spoken were "Good night Malaysian three seven zero" - and not "all right, good night" as reported.
How the fuck does it take them this long to realise that? I had sympathy for the Malaysian authorities until this. This is unbelievably sketchy.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-26825184
|
why would you alter the script 3 weeks after you listened to the audio...what the hell...
|
On April 01 2014 08:29 Doraemon wrote:
why would you alter the script 3 weeks after you listened to the audio...what the hell...
From the bbc article above,
The BBC's transport correspondent Richard Westcott says the new version of the last words is more formal and more in keeping with the way a pilot might usually speak to air traffic control than the wording previously reported.
It is not clear why it has changed or why it has taken the authorities this long to determine this, he says.
While it is actually the protocol, the layman might mistake it for an indication of foul play by the pilot. Malaysia probably did not want it misconstrued so they gave an altered version. Anyhow, it is not very relevant to anything else.
|
It's relevant to the fact that Malaysia has made an unbelievable cock-up of the entire operation.
I gave them the benefit of the doubt up until this little gem, but it's now clear that we can't trust them to report things which a literal five-year-old would have been able to verify. As a result, a lot of other information becomes suspect as well.
In addition, plenty of fuss was made about the nonstandard signoff at the time with no comment from them, so it absolutely cannot be a case of well-meaning-but-generous reporting. Such reporting would have no place in an investigation on this scale in any case.
At this point, whether we're talking malicious intent or just gross incompetence is not yet clear, but it's pretty sketchy either way.
|
So all the pieces are salvaged and they are not from the airplane.
They are now sending a submarine to that location NW of Perth.
A few more days and the black box signal will be gone.
I'm starting to wonder if they are searching in the completely wrong place.
Who would fly a plane to the middle of nowhere in the first place?
What would be the incentive for a kidnapper to fly a plane to certain death?
What would be the incentive for a pilot in an emergency to change course to certain death?
What would be the incentive of terrorists to change course to certain death where no one can find the plane?
|
On April 05 2014 00:20 urboss wrote:
So all the pieces are salvaged and they are not from the airplane.
They are now sending a submarine to that location NW of Perth.
A few more days and the black box signal will be gone.
I'm starting to wonder if they are searching in the completely wrong place.
Who would fly a plane to the middle of nowhere in the first place?
What would be the incentive for a kidnapper to fly a plane to certain death?
What would be the incentive for a pilot in an emergency to change course to certain death?
What would be the incentive of terrorists to change course to certain death where no one can find the plane?
Well assuming nothing supernatural is possible, anything involving changing the planes course requires someone who is skilled and knowledgeable as well as well practiced in flying. Essentially a real professional pilot, or some crazy James Bond guy who can fly a plane after sneakily hijacking it. But what doesn't make sense is, as you said, why the heck would they crash it, so I think it had to be either:
1. Pilot flew it there without the passengers realizing
2. James Bond hijacked it and then messed up
3. Super jamming technology that blocks out all communications and then hijacked it and then messed up
4. Supernatural cause?? bermuda triangle, worm hole, aliens?
|
Slow down there CNN, you still have hours of TV to fill now.
|
On April 05 2014 00:20 urboss wrote:
So all the pieces are salvaged and they are not from the airplane.
They are now sending a submarine to that location NW of Perth.
A few more days and the black box signal will be gone.
I'm starting to wonder if they are searching in the completely wrong place.
Who would fly a plane to the middle of nowhere in the first place?
What would be the incentive for a kidnapper to fly a plane to certain death?
What would be the incentive for a pilot in an emergency to change course to certain death?
What would be the incentive of terrorists to change course to certain death where no one can find the plane?
Do you have a source of the pieces not part from the plane ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
