Malaysia airlines plane may have crashed 239 people on board #9

Status
Not open for further replies.

gregjrichards

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2010
Messages
12,478
Reaction score
70,422
Breaking news

Malaysia Airlines says it has lost contact with a plane travelling from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing, with 239 people on board.

The airline said in a statement that flight MH370 disappeared at 02:40 local time on Saturday (18:40 GMT on Friday).

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-26492748

I'm praying the plane is found and people on the plane survive.

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=238253"]Frequently Asked Questions[/ame]

Thread #1
[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=237547"]Thread #2[/ame]

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=237716"]Thread #3[/ame]

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=237792"]Thread #4[/ame]

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=237900"]Thread #5[/ame]

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=238022"]Thread #6[/ame]

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=238110"]Thread #7[/ame]

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=238225"]Thread #8[/ame]

[ame=http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=238282]Thread #9[/ame]
 
guidelines for posting:
*post in a civil manner
*stay on topic
*be respectful of the passengers' families- no sleuthing of crew or passengers is allowed
*post only msm tweets and articles with links
*other forum links are not allowed
* for copyright compliance only 10% of an article is allowed to be posted
 
Members can create topic specific threads for in depth discussion, new developments in the case or as the need arises. New threads will go under mod review and a decision will be made whether to approve and open the thread for posting. Most threads are approved immediately.

Continue discussion here...
 
Cutting to the chase is it not possible that in fact the pilot was attempting to attract the attention of the radar station by his sharp left turn after the communications ceased with the tower because at that point the plane had been commandeered?

It would have been great if the Malaysian air force had scrambled a couple of planes for a look see.

Here are two links that appeared today criticizing the lack of action

http://time.com/26883/malaysian-air-force-slammed-for-failing-to-intercepted-mh370/

the second link shows the radar station to the south and west of the last ''known arc'' as well

http://news.malaysia.msn.com/tmi/mh...n-malaysia’s-air-force-and-radar-capabilities
 
Pilot on CNN Disputes Hijacking Theory, Suggests Catastrophic Event

Incapacitation or something else that could prevent the crew from controlling the plane -- fire, collision, explosive depressurization -- could also be indicated, which wouldn't necessarily mean the cockpit was breached by anyone...

I would urge that we not jump to conclusions based on inconclusive evidence. The evidence we have may be "consistent with deliberate acts," but it is also consistent with other explanations as well.

He argues that the known flight profile could be consistent with a lengthy "auto-pilot off" uncontrolled phase after an initial catastrophic event.
At the very least, this could fit the timeline:
1:19 -- (No problems): "Alright, good night"
1:21 -- Catastrophic event disables crew and many systems.
Transponder/ACARS knocked out. Turns and altitude changes uncontrolled.

I hate to say it, but if ACARS/transponder went out after the co-pilot's final words (and very probably at the same instant), the CNN pilot is right and it's still quite possible this was an accident and not a hijacking.
 
Pilot on CNN Disputes Hijacking Theory, Suggests Catastrophic Event



He argues that the known flight profile could be consistent with a lengthy "auto-pilot off" uncontrolled phase after an initial catastrophic event.
At the very least, this could fit the timeline:
1:19 -- (No problems): "Alright, good night"
1:21 -- Catastrophic event disables crew and many systems.
Transponder/ACARS knocked out. Turns and altitude changes uncontrolled.

I hate to say it, but if ACARS/transponder went out after the co-pilot's final words (and very probably at the same instant), the CNN pilot is right and it's still quite possible this was an accident and not a hijacking.

It may well be...but as I am reading more about the lack of action on part of the radar personnel I can't help but get really angry that no action was taken to follow the plane and check them out. If an accident did occur perhaps an interceptor might have witnessed the accident and could have saved some lives and provided some answers for the anguished family members.
 
it's still quite possible this was an accident and not a hijacking.

They are saying that the sharp turn back was preprogrammed into the flight plan! That means it was planned ahead of time which doesn't make sense if this was an accident.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/03/17/pilots-become-focus-malaysia-airlines-investigation/

Plus this:
Authorities had said Sunday that the words were heard around 1:30 a.m. local time, nearly a half hour after the plane’s data recorder was turned off and 10 minutes after its transponder was deactivated.
 
I don't know what to think anymore :scared:
 
Cutting to the chase is it not possible that in fact the pilot was attempting to attract the attention of the radar station by his sharp left turn after the communications ceased with the tower because at that point the plane had been commandeered?

It would have been great if the Malaysian air force had scrambled a couple of planes for a look see.

Here are two links that appeared today criticizing the lack of action

http://time.com/26883/malaysian-air-force-slammed-for-failing-to-intercepted-mh370/

the second link shows the radar station to the south and west of the last ''known arc'' as well

http://news.malaysia.msn.com/tmi/mh...n-malaysia’s-air-force-and-radar-capabilities

What I can't figure out is how the hijackers were so confident that the Malaysian military would NOT check out this "blip" in their radar? Because the whole thing seems to have been planned out so well, so I would think they would have planned that part out very well, instead of just taking a "chance." A chance that Malaysia would just ignore the blip. A chance that they and Vietnam ATC wouldn't notice the flight was "missing" on radar early on and start the search for the flight much earlier.
 
Just a little relief!

The Federal Aviation Administration said it is aware of Teso's claims, but said the hacking technique does not pose a threat on real flights because it does not work on certified flight hardware.
"The described technique cannot engage or control the aircraft's autopilot system using the (Flight Management System) or prevent a pilot from overriding the autopilot," the FAA said. "Therefore, a hacker cannot obtain 'full control of an aircraft' as the technology consultant has claimed."
Teso says he developed SIMON in a way that makes it work only in virtual environments, not on actual aircraft.
 
Interesting poll results so far:

It was hijacked and crashed into water 52 34.67%
It was hijacked and crashed into land 10 6.67%
It blew up due to mechanical failure 1 0.67%
It has landed safely on land 62 41.33%
It flew into a time warp 2 1.33%
Alien Abduction 4 2.67%
I don't know 18 12.00%
It was hijacked by a pack of evil emus 7 4.67%
It is a narcicist and decided to employ an antiquated investigative strategy of silence 0 0%
Hijacked and hopefully if the passengers are already dead, it crashed into water. 3 2.00%
 
Re: looking at the camera, I don't know about the rest of you but I look at cameras all the time when going about my normal life in a big city (where there are lots of them in public transportation facilities especially). They're usually noticeable on the ceilings/ walls/ corners and when looking up I find my eye catching on those things (similar with signs, funny looking pipes, all sorts of things). I can completely imagine looking up during a pat down and having my eye catch on a camera...

I realize with so little to go on it's tempting to overanalyze every detail (and that's sort of the point of this whole thread), I just wanted to propose that the camera thing is probably not that significant...
 
What I can't figure out is how the hijackers were so confident that the Malaysian military would NOT check out this "blip" in their radar?

My guess is that if the plane was hijacked the hijackers were either pilots OR knew how lax the Malaysian military and traffic control folks were. In the US or Germany or Israel one would expect prompt action but a whole lot of other countries are pretty darn disorganized (and I could see it happening in the U.S. too)
 
What I can't figure out is how the hijackers were so confident that the Malaysian military would NOT check out this "blip" in their radar? Because the whole thing seems to have been planned out so well, so I would think they would have planned that part out very well, instead of just taking a "chance." A chance that Malaysia would just ignore the blip. A chance that they and Vietnam ATC wouldn't notice the flight was "missing" on radar early on and start the search for the flight much earlier.

bbm

maybe...((just a guess)) they had that covered too ((help)) lots of corruption
 
Pilot on CNN Disputes Hijacking Theory, Suggests Catastrophic Event



He argues that the known flight profile could be consistent with a lengthy "auto-pilot off" uncontrolled phase after an initial catastrophic event.
At the very least, this could fit the timeline:
1:19 -- (No problems): "Alright, good night"
1:21 -- Catastrophic event disables crew and many systems.
Transponder/ACARS knocked out. Turns and altitude changes uncontrolled.

I hate to say it, but if ACARS/transponder went out after the co-pilot's final words (and very probably at the same instant), the CNN pilot is right and it's still quite possible this was an accident and not a hijacking.

I agree that we probably can't jump to conclusions based on one aspect. But they've found no wreckage and there's also undetailed but higher intelligence that has now concluded this was a purposeful flying in another direction--a hijacking. I'd say we can't conclude, either, based on an outside pilot's assessment from what he's read or been told. He's disputing something based on limited information.
 
They are saying that the sharp turn back was preprogrammed into the flight plan! That means it was planned ahead of time which doesn't make sense if this was an accident.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/03/17/pilots-become-focus-malaysia-airlines-investigation/

Plus this:

They've said a lot of things... none of which I feel we can consider 'fact' at this time :/ We just have too little information to rule out any particular scenario. Every time we think we can, past statements are reiterated and we're back to square one.


I get the feeling that authorities don't know what happened at all and are just feeding little bits of information to the press to keep them busy and going round in cicles.
 
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/18/world/asia/malaysia-airlines-flight.html?hp&_r=0

So, if the report is correct:

-not sure precisely when ACARS was turned off, but it was sometime between 1:07 and 1:37 AM.
-last communication with a person at 1:19 AM (they think it was co-captain).
-transponder turned off at 1:21 AM.

****So IF it was not some accident and IF the pilots were not involved, then it sure does seem like whoever the hijackers were knew exactly when the verbal signoff occured with Malaysian ATC. Because just within the span of TWO MINUTES, they had taken over the cockpit.

****Maybe someone had , prior to the flight, attached some device in the cockpit to where the hijackers could somehow listen to everything going on in the cockpit??

JMO.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
138
Guests online
2,004
Total visitors
2,142

Forum statistics

Threads
590,019
Messages
17,929,078
Members
228,038
Latest member
shmoozie
Back
Top