Malaysia airlines plane may have crashed 239 people on board #16

[ilovepierre]

I agree, perhaps started by a smoldering fire. It's shutting off ACARS that has me perplexed. It doesn't appear to be something that could be done in the cockpit and the Captain would have to go to a lot of work to shut it off.

MOO

There's two parts to ACARS. One in the cockpit, and one under a hatch somewhere else on the plane. The ACARS in the cockpit was disabled, but the other hard to get to one, wasn't. That's why the plane was still able to transmit partial pings to the satellites. That's what I read in earlier posts in this thread (or possibly the last one...). The entire ACARS system wasn't shut down like we all originally thought.

 

[ElleElle]

We do know the engines were running and the plane did turn so not sure to what extent there would be mechanical problems.

As far as the pilot. It is reported that he was distantly related to Anwar and had been to the trial that morning. Malaysians seem as if they are very proud people so I do not see that the pilot would have benefited by taking over the plane because it could bring disgrace for Anwar. And I don't think he would want to do that, ever. He could have taken a private plane up and crashed into the ocean if that were his intentions. I don't see him putting all those lives in any danger.

The co-pilot is new. This was his first flight without a monitor hanging over his shoulder. Maybe he was nervous. Maybe the pilot said we are cruising along, take over and I'll be right back. Did he turn off the systems he should not have, he could have? Could he have noticed that the APC was off, thought there was a problem and immediately turned the plane left to go back while the Capt. was out of the cockpit. He could have. For all we know when the plane was turned those batteries might have broken loose. There may have been more batteries than has been reported and it started a fire.

To me batteries in such a high quantity do not belong on a plane, ever. It bothers me that it was initially reported that cargo was not scanned because the scanner was broken. The climb to 43,000/45,000 could have been an attempt to put the fire out. There is still the person on the oil rig who claims he saw the plane on fire one minute and the fire out the next, I believe.

There is a lot of information we do know. It's just a process of elimination. What sounds logically. I don't think the two Iranian's were involved because something would have turned up by now and we have heard nothing. They just wanted their freedom, so sad that they were that close.

jmo

Did the engines stop running? Wouldn't a fire in cargo fry the electronics? How can an aircraft fly for that long on fire missing every radar?

ITA with the Iranians. They were seeking freedom and that's all. JMO.

 

[ElleElle]

RMAF assumed MH370 turn back was normal
Leven Woon | March 26, 2014
We thought the aircraft was non-hostile, we assumed it was a directive of the control tower that had directed the plane to turn back, says deputy defence minister.

In revealing this today, Deputy Defence Minister Abdul Rahim Bakri said the air force decided to ignore the radar signal because the aircraft was categorised as non-hostile in nature.
“We thought the aircraft was non-hostile, we assumed it was a directive of the control tower that had directed the plane to turn back,” he told the Dewan Rakyat today.


http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/ca...air-force-assumed-mh370-turn-back-was-normal/

Finally, after 3 weeks important players are speaking up. Thanks for posting! :seeya:

 

[Isabelle]

See, and I disagree with this. I think a “mechanical failure” explanation leaves the Malaysian gov’t open to liability through either faulty upkeep or oversight as owner of the airline, kwim?

I would think (no legal experience whatsoever) that a explanation of pilot action would limit their liability and also paint them as “soft” victims, because after 30 years, how could they ever have predicted that?

And if lawsuits target mechanical failure with Boeing and Rolls Royce included in the suits, those companies are going to get to all of Malaysia's maintenance records. I would bet that is exposure Malaysia does not want.

 

[ilovepierre]

I'd never actually seen that before - thanks for the link. I'd take it with a grain of salt though, unfortunately. ATC directing a/c to "get on the runway" stopped me in my tracks. LOL. "Taxi (or proceed)" would sound right. ATC is very precise with terminology.

So I'm assuming we are either losing a lot in translation somehow or we should focus on the prefix in "unofficial" transcript.

I'm having a hard time knowing who to trust getting our information from with this case. It's really frustrating.

I think it's a translation issue.
It would be nice to have a copy of the transcript in its original language!

 

[Momoffourboys]

"When the cockpit signed off with Kuala Lumpur traffic controllers, before it disappeared from their radar at 1:22 a.m. Malaysian time, the Aircraft Communications Addressing and Reporting System (ACARS) had already been manually turned off, said authorities. Experts familiar with the system say that shutting down ACARS can be done only manually and requires a series of keyboard commands."

Would they be able to communicate if ACARS had previously been turned off?

http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/3/16/search-for-missingjetnowincludes25countries.html

 

[panthera]

There's two parts to ACARS. One in the cockpit, and one under a hatch somewhere else on the plane. The ACARS in the cockpit was disabled, but the other hard to get to one, wasn't. That's why the plane was still able to transmit partial pings to the satellites. That's what I read in earlier posts in this thread (or possibly the last one...). The entire ACARS system wasn't shut down like we all originally thought.

Thanks for the clarification. I was confused by what the "experts" have been discussing. I initially had thought there were two parts, however, what I just heard tonight made it appear he would have had to exit the cockpit to another part of the aircraft.

MOO

 

[PoirotryInMotion]

I have added a map which shows the air space borders. The area of interest is the one which goes over the Malaysian peninsula, and ends with the waypoint west of Phuket, Thailand.

Thanks, aa9511--neat map. I used your borders map to make a new map that superimposes the waypoints navigational route over the airspace borders map:



Been busy thinking about theories in more detail today after reading ToutCa's post (about pilot as hero, villain, or victim). Need to catch up reading, and hopefully will post more tomorrow.

 

[Momoffourboys]

Did the engines stop running? Wouldn't a fire in cargo fry the electronics? How can an aircraft fly for that long on fire missing every radar?

ITA with the Iranians. They were seeking freedom and that's all. JMO.

Forget radar. I want to know how an aircraft can fly for that long on fire?
Anyone know? TIA

 

[ElleElle]

Agree with this, thought about it earlier. I would also wonder if Malaysia doesn't want their aircraft maintenance records exposed.

IMHO, if their aircraft maintenance records were audited, they would fail.

We've already witnessed holes in their security.

 

[MsFacetious]

Forget radar. I want to know how an aircraft can fly for that long on fire?
Anyone know? TIA

I don't think it can.
I think if it took out communication it would also take out auto pilot.
I'm looking... but I haven't found one that stayed in the air longer than an hour. :twocents:

 

[ElleElle]

Good point.
Hence why they want to put the blame on one or both of the pilots.
If it turns out that this plane had mechanical failure, it makes Malaysia Airlines look bad. If something came back in those maintenance records that showed safety checks weren't done correctly, it makes Malaysia Airlines look bad.

Saying this was a "deliberate action" and "sabotage" takes the heat off of them.

And, they he quickly changed it to the plane crashed in the S. Indian ocean.

That flight was what 6 times/week back and forth from KL-Beijing?

 

[Boodles]

Interesting wind map...my mind is blown re where wreckage debris might be located at this point.

http://earth.nullschool.net/#current/wind/surface/level/orthographic=118.76,-13.19,550

 

[ElleElle]

Thanks for the clarification. I was confused by what the "experts" have been discussing. I initially had thought there were two parts, however, what I just heard tonight made it appear he would have had to exit the cockpit to another part of the aircraft.

MOO

Or he could of had a "co-pilot" in the cargo area? A secret latch?

:scared:

 

[CARIIS]

If they can count and hit 122 pieces it makes no sense that cant say its a passenger door or a bunch of water bottles from 2012 - just nonsense - counting to 122 certainly, to me, sounds llike they have a pretty specific notion of whats in the pile -no?

 

[CARIIS]

It cant!! There is a center fuel tank !

 

[ilovepierre]

And, they he quickly changed it to the plane crashed in the S. Indian ocean.

That flight was what 6 times/week back and forth from KL-Beijing?

Is it that many? I thought it was less than that. Most 777's fly their intended route 2-3 times a week. I don't know how to check how many times that particular route was flown.

 

[MLO]

Has the pilot officially been named a suspect? If not, jmo he's a victim just like anyone else until (if and when) he is named the prime suspect.

Agreed. I'm surprised that accusations like that are allowed to stay up more than a minute. I'm a member of a huge parenting forum, it has something like 100,000 members and a sub-forum for just about anything you can imagine. There has been cases of people googling themselves or family members and taking the website to court to get the names, ip address and any identifying information about a member who has accused or slandered them/their family. I tell ya, if I were one of the pilots kids I would be all over it, gathering any information ready to fight.

 

[revampz]

I think it is now important to start talking about the legal issues and the monetary responsibility that may be dished out from legal procedures.

I would be interested to know in the cases of pilot suicide, who was sued...and who won??

To me: if it is mechanical error then there will be a .... fight between Malaysian Airlines, Boeing and Rolls Royce.

If it was the pilot, I still don't think it looks good for Malaysian airlines, as I can see 238 families being able to sue them due to "duty of care" or similar, especially if their psychological checking of the pilots is lacking compared to other countries.

If it was the pilot, I also think it looks bad for the Malaysian government as it spotlights on why he may have done this, and one reason being a corrupt government......to me it opens (and has opened) a big can of worms which the whole world is/and will question...

If they are going to have scapegoats that may get them out of any legal troubles, you'd think they would be pushing for a hijacking by terrorists not to do with their internal politics, ie the Uighurs or al-queida and the likes........that would almost have them come out scot free, except for the fact that their security was very lacking at the airport!!! now that one I can't see them getting around, unless the security was through a private company and being Malaysia, I doubt that is the case...

 

[21merc7]

O/T sort of,

For law student, or anyone thinking about international corporate law.

This image is of paid lawyers, paid by the team they will oppose. No poker face. Sold out.

While these families will need attorneys, who do you think sent these there? Not their own money was it? Could it be Boeing and Rolls? Article linked below, but I think this round of attorneys knew that the internet age would expose and they couldn't hide. JMO. If I didn't work for attorneys for so long, I might have just wondered what the heck. (There are other areas of law that are great, just not when employed like this.)

http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/...-law-firm-to-sue-boeing-mas-over-mh370-traged