|
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51479 Posts
Wow so 2 people on the plane where not on it and had passports stolen. So Terrorism could likely be at the heart of this? I don't know, it's very interesting.
You would of thought though that it would be hard to lose a plane signal? I mean surely you can't just "Switch off" the tracking beacon sort of thing? Mainly because why would there ever be a need to turn it off?
If you can't and it goes missing then you know where it was last and surely there is a crash zone which isn't "that big" to search around?
Hope everyone is safe though.
+ Show Spoiler [List of Nationalities on board] +
Malaysia Airlines' updated list of the nationalities on board the missing airliner:
China/Taiwan 153 including 1 infant
Malaysia 38
India 5
Indonesia 7
Australia 6
France 4
USA 3 including 1 infant
New Zealand 2
Ukraine 2
Canada 2
Russian 1
Netherlands 1
|
Northern Ireland22208 Posts
|
im flustered how a plane can go missing just like that
|
How does a plane just drop out of the air without some sort of distress signal being sent out?
|
Northern Ireland22208 Posts
On March 09 2014 05:26 Spicy_Curry wrote:
How does a plane just drop out of the air without some sort of distress signal being sent out?
Basically, catastrophic structural failure.
|
Human error is the cause of accidents in most cases really. Aircraft these days are really well made and 2002 is quite young for an aircraft.
That said, even experienced pilots are liable to make mistakes. 18000 is a record though, never heard of anyone with that amount. Record for me is 16000.Or, it could be co-pilot error. Maintenance error (from mechanics on ground). I would call for a mistake on their part before anything else. It's also quite common for airline pilots to also fly in tourism aircraft as well.
It could however, possibly indeed be the aircraft. Or, rather than the aircraft, the instruments it was using. The possible (probable?) cause of the Air France flight that also crashed between Paris and Rio was faulty pitot tube. It could be that as well. [startrant]Shitty computer stuff, ya know? Aircraft back in the day had dials and stuff. Everything today is digitalized. Glass cockpits. Fly by wire. I don't like it all that much. I like needles more, old aircraft instruments were mechanical and as such less liable (in my opinion) to faulty electronics on board. Fly-by-wire (where a computer listens to pilot input and then controls the instruments itself; it can make an aircraft really easy to fly / stable), similarly, means that the outside elements won't directly be felt by the pilot via controls. Easy aircraft to fly, why not? I'm not sure that it's good that the pilot loses information like that though. It's not like I know any better, since I've never flown fly-by-wire, but seriously, there's information in the yoke itself.[/endrant]
Yeah, went on a tangent there. We had Rio-Paris, now this, I can't help feeling that it's the fault of the shitty glass cockpits. Also let's not start an argument, these are just my feels, as an aircraft enthusiast
Edit: mid-air disintegration is really scary but i doubt it. i don't think it's supposed to be common with modern airliners. i know the de haviland comet had this problem though. I personally suspect a huge electronics failure or something. pilots lose their avionics/controls, don't react in time to stabilize the aircraft with back-up instruments/controls, they crash. the transponder, which is basically something that makes an aircraft more visible on radar (well, an airliner is already pretty damn visible), and more importantly, attaches information to a radar contact (squawk code, altitude, etc) would have failed with the rest of the electronics on board.
2 bucks says that's what happened to rio-paris as well.
|
On March 09 2014 05:35 Incognoto wrote:Human error is the cause of accidents in most cases really. Aircraft these days are really well made and 2002 is quite young for an aircraft. That said, even experienced pilots are liable to make mistakes. 18000 is a record though, never heard of anyone with that amount. Record for me is 16000.Or, it could be co-pilot error. Maintenance error (from mechanics on ground). I would call for a mistake on their part before anything else. It's also quite common for airline pilots to also fly in tourism aircraft as well. It could however, possibly indeed be the aircraft. Or, rather than the aircraft, the instruments it was using. The possible (probable?) cause of the Air France flight that also crashed between Paris and Rio was faulty pitot tube. It could be that as well. [startrant]Shitty computer stuff, ya know? Aircraft back in the day had dials and stuff. Everything today is digitalized. Glass cockpits. Fly by wire. I don't like it all that much. I like needles more, old aircraft instruments were mechanical and as such less liable (in my opinion) to faulty electronics on board. Fly-by-wire (where a computer listens to pilot input and then controls the instruments itself; it can make an aircraft really easy to fly / stable), similarly, means that the outside elements won't directly be felt by the pilot via controls. Easy aircraft to fly, why not? I'm not sure that it's good that the pilot loses information like that though. It's not like I know any better, since I've never flown fly-by-wire, but seriously, there's information in the yoke itself.[/endrant] Yeah, went on a tangent there. We had Rio-Paris, now this, I can't help feeling that it's the fault of the shitty glass cockpits. Also let's not start an argument, these are just my feels, as an aircraft enthusiast
One thing that struck me is the discrepancy in age and experience between the Captain and the F/O. I mean, there could be potential CRM issues where the First Officer is somewhat intimidated by his captain. That's purely speculation tho.
Another very odd thing that struck me is how this happened so suddenly and without any warning. This indicates that the incident unfolded so quickly that the crew had no time to inform ATC. Keep in mind that this happened during cruise when things are supposed to be safest. This can pretty much narrow it down to a few things, and they're all really, really bad...
|
i think if it was structural issue, like it blew up in the air, they would have found signs of the wreckage by now since it would cover a very large area.
no matter the issue, at least this did not happen over land or something even worse than it already is.
|
On March 09 2014 05:43 zev318 wrote:
i think if it was structural issue, like it blew up in the air, they would have found signs of the wreckage by now since it would cover a very large area.
no matter the issue, at least this did not happen over land or something even worse than it already is.
A plane generally don't "blow up" in the air. A bomb can cause a plane to crash, and potentially break up in the air by the forces surrounding the descent. A bomb could just as easily damage the planes ability to steer and make it crash still reasonably intact.
|
On March 09 2014 05:40 dyDrawer wrote:Show nested quote +On March 09 2014 05:35 Incognoto wrote:Human error is the cause of accidents in most cases really. Aircraft these days are really well made and 2002 is quite young for an aircraft. That said, even experienced pilots are liable to make mistakes. 18000 is a record though, never heard of anyone with that amount. Record for me is 16000.Or, it could be co-pilot error. Maintenance error (from mechanics on ground). I would call for a mistake on their part before anything else. It's also quite common for airline pilots to also fly in tourism aircraft as well. It could however, possibly indeed be the aircraft. Or, rather than the aircraft, the instruments it was using. The possible (probable?) cause of the Air France flight that also crashed between Paris and Rio was faulty pitot tube. It could be that as well. [startrant]Shitty computer stuff, ya know? Aircraft back in the day had dials and stuff. Everything today is digitalized. Glass cockpits. Fly by wire. I don't like it all that much. I like needles more, old aircraft instruments were mechanical and as such less liable (in my opinion) to faulty electronics on board. Fly-by-wire (where a computer listens to pilot input and then controls the instruments itself; it can make an aircraft really easy to fly / stable), similarly, means that the outside elements won't directly be felt by the pilot via controls. Easy aircraft to fly, why not? I'm not sure that it's good that the pilot loses information like that though. It's not like I know any better, since I've never flown fly-by-wire, but seriously, there's information in the yoke itself.[/endrant] Yeah, went on a tangent there. We had Rio-Paris, now this, I can't help feeling that it's the fault of the shitty glass cockpits. Also let's not start an argument, these are just my feels, as an aircraft enthusiast One thing that struck me is the discrepancy in age and experience between the Captain and the F/O. I mean, there could be potential CRM issues where the First Officer is somewhat intimidated by his captain. That's purely speculation tho. Another very odd thing that struck me is how this happened so suddenly and without any warning. This indicates that the incident unfolded so quickly that the crew had no time to inform ATC. Keep in mind that this happened during cruise when things are supposed to be safest. This can pretty much narrow it down to a few things, and they're all really, really bad...
When in dire situations, the pilot must first:
1. control aircraft
2. figure out where he's going / reassure passengers / go in right direction
3. contact ATC
If he failed to obtain step 1, then it makes sense that he didn't contact ATC, I guess.
I've heard that asian cabins can have that kind of scary relation between first officer and captain, where the captain is god and acts like it. Not sure if it applies here though. It wouldn't be because of age/experience differential though. It would be a cultural problem. The man who taught me to fly was over 57 years old and had 16000. I was 17 and from my first 2 hours of flying to where I am know, I still feel incredibly relaxed flying with an experienced guy, knowing that his experience is there as a shield almost. Knowing him, he flies the same way in an airliner as he does a small tourist aircraft, because he respects both aircraft equally.
|
On March 09 2014 04:53 Pandemona wrote:Wow so 2 people on the plane where not on it and had passports stolen. So Terrorism could likely be at the heart of this? I don't know, it's very interesting. You would of thought though that it would be hard to lose a plane signal? I mean surely you can't just "Switch off" the tracking beacon sort of thing? Mainly because why would there ever be a need to turn it off? If you can't and it goes missing then you know where it was last and surely there is a crash zone which isn't "that big" to search around? Hope everyone is safe though. + Show Spoiler [List of Nationalities on board] +
Malaysia Airlines' updated list of the nationalities on board the missing airliner:
China/Taiwan 153 including 1 infant
Malaysia 38
India 5
Indonesia 7
Australia 6
France 4
USA 3 including 1 infant
New Zealand 2
Ukraine 2
Canada 2
Russian 1
Netherlands 1
Yes, it's terrorism. A terrorist would spend all his resource and crash it in the middle of nowhere instead of flying it into a major city doing more potential damage. Seriously?
|
On March 09 2014 05:48 Incognoto wrote:Show nested quote +On March 09 2014 05:40 dyDrawer wrote:On March 09 2014 05:35 Incognoto wrote:Human error is the cause of accidents in most cases really. Aircraft these days are really well made and 2002 is quite young for an aircraft. That said, even experienced pilots are liable to make mistakes. 18000 is a record though, never heard of anyone with that amount. Record for me is 16000.Or, it could be co-pilot error. Maintenance error (from mechanics on ground). I would call for a mistake on their part before anything else. It's also quite common for airline pilots to also fly in tourism aircraft as well. It could however, possibly indeed be the aircraft. Or, rather than the aircraft, the instruments it was using. The possible (probable?) cause of the Air France flight that also crashed between Paris and Rio was faulty pitot tube. It could be that as well. [startrant]Shitty computer stuff, ya know? Aircraft back in the day had dials and stuff. Everything today is digitalized. Glass cockpits. Fly by wire. I don't like it all that much. I like needles more, old aircraft instruments were mechanical and as such less liable (in my opinion) to faulty electronics on board. Fly-by-wire (where a computer listens to pilot input and then controls the instruments itself; it can make an aircraft really easy to fly / stable), similarly, means that the outside elements won't directly be felt by the pilot via controls. Easy aircraft to fly, why not? I'm not sure that it's good that the pilot loses information like that though. It's not like I know any better, since I've never flown fly-by-wire, but seriously, there's information in the yoke itself.[/endrant] Yeah, went on a tangent there. We had Rio-Paris, now this, I can't help feeling that it's the fault of the shitty glass cockpits. Also let's not start an argument, these are just my feels, as an aircraft enthusiast One thing that struck me is the discrepancy in age and experience between the Captain and the F/O. I mean, there could be potential CRM issues where the First Officer is somewhat intimidated by his captain. That's purely speculation tho. Another very odd thing that struck me is how this happened so suddenly and without any warning. This indicates that the incident unfolded so quickly that the crew had no time to inform ATC. Keep in mind that this happened during cruise when things are supposed to be safest. This can pretty much narrow it down to a few things, and they're all really, really bad... When in dire situations, the pilot must first: 1. control aircraft 2. figure out where he's going / reassure passengers / go in right direction 3. contact ATC If he failed to obtain step 1, then it makes sense that he didn't contact ATC, I guess. I've heard that asian cabins can have that kind of scary relation between first officer and captain, where the captain is god and acts like it. Not sure if it applies here though. It wouldn't be because of age/experience differential though. It would be a cultural problem. The man who taught me to fly was over 57 years old and had 16000. I was 17 and from my first 2 hours of flying to where I am know, I still feel incredibly relaxed flying with an experienced guy, knowing that his experience is there as a shield almost. Knowing him, he flies the same way in an airliner as he does a small tourist aircraft, because he respects both aircraft equally.
Seeing as you seem to know what you're talking about, aren't there automatic systems that would send information to the ground if something goes wrong? Is it possible for all of them to fail at the same time (assuming there are multiple different ones)? Can't say I know much about planes.
[Edit]
Well, I guess they did all fail at the same time or we'd know more about what happened. Good thinking.
|
On March 09 2014 06:03 TriO wrote:Show nested quote +On March 09 2014 04:53 Pandemona wrote:Wow so 2 people on the plane where not on it and had passports stolen. So Terrorism could likely be at the heart of this? I don't know, it's very interesting. You would of thought though that it would be hard to lose a plane signal? I mean surely you can't just "Switch off" the tracking beacon sort of thing? Mainly because why would there ever be a need to turn it off? If you can't and it goes missing then you know where it was last and surely there is a crash zone which isn't "that big" to search around? Hope everyone is safe though. + Show Spoiler [List of Nationalities on board] +
Malaysia Airlines' updated list of the nationalities on board the missing airliner:
China/Taiwan 153 including 1 infant
Malaysia 38
India 5
Indonesia 7
Australia 6
France 4
USA 3 including 1 infant
New Zealand 2
Ukraine 2
Canada 2
Russian 1
Netherlands 1
Yes, it's terrorism. A terrorist would spend all his resource and crash it in the middle of nowhere instead of flying it into a major city doing more potential damage. Seriously?
Seriously? You feel you're so sure it's not terrorism because the plane didn't crash into a major city? I don't know, but maybe, just maybe, something happened that made the terrorists unable to do more damage with the plane like they wanted to.
"Oh yeah, a plane crashed, but not in a city, so we can rule out terrorism."
...Seriously?
|
On March 09 2014 06:20 Epishade wrote:Show nested quote +On March 09 2014 06:03 TriO wrote:On March 09 2014 04:53 Pandemona wrote:Wow so 2 people on the plane where not on it and had passports stolen. So Terrorism could likely be at the heart of this? I don't know, it's very interesting. You would of thought though that it would be hard to lose a plane signal? I mean surely you can't just "Switch off" the tracking beacon sort of thing? Mainly because why would there ever be a need to turn it off? If you can't and it goes missing then you know where it was last and surely there is a crash zone which isn't "that big" to search around? Hope everyone is safe though. + Show Spoiler [List of Nationalities on board] +
Malaysia Airlines' updated list of the nationalities on board the missing airliner:
China/Taiwan 153 including 1 infant
Malaysia 38
India 5
Indonesia 7
Australia 6
France 4
USA 3 including 1 infant
New Zealand 2
Ukraine 2
Canada 2
Russian 1
Netherlands 1
Yes, it's terrorism. A terrorist would spend all his resource and crash it in the middle of nowhere instead of flying it into a major city doing more potential damage. Seriously? Seriously? You feel you're so sure it's not terrorism because the plane didn't crash into a major city? I don't know, but maybe, just maybe, something happened that made the terrorists unable to do more damage with the plane like they wanted to. "Oh yeah, a plane crashed, but not in a city, so we can rule out terrorism." ...Seriously?
Relevant:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Airlines_Flight_93
|
^Yes, that immediately popped into my head as well when he said that.
|
On March 09 2014 06:03 TriO wrote:Show nested quote +On March 09 2014 04:53 Pandemona wrote:Wow so 2 people on the plane where not on it and had passports stolen. So Terrorism could likely be at the heart of this? I don't know, it's very interesting. You would of thought though that it would be hard to lose a plane signal? I mean surely you can't just "Switch off" the tracking beacon sort of thing? Mainly because why would there ever be a need to turn it off? If you can't and it goes missing then you know where it was last and surely there is a crash zone which isn't "that big" to search around? Hope everyone is safe though. + Show Spoiler [List of Nationalities on board] +
Malaysia Airlines' updated list of the nationalities on board the missing airliner:
China/Taiwan 153 including 1 infant
Malaysia 38
India 5
Indonesia 7
Australia 6
France 4
USA 3 including 1 infant
New Zealand 2
Ukraine 2
Canada 2
Russian 1
Netherlands 1
Yes, it's terrorism. A terrorist would spend all his resource and crash it in the middle of nowhere instead of flying it into a major city doing more potential damage. Seriously?
Terrorist evens on planes are generally about bringing down/destroying the plane and not about using it to destroy targets on the ground. At least if you look at it historically.
|
Hong Kong9153 Posts
this is all rampant speculation
|
|
|
|
|
Our government has sent our best unit on rescue. Such a bad week, earlier a boy has been crashed by bus's wheel and then this 
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
