Malaysian Airways Flight 370

[Yellow_Festiva]

Just heard on the news that the plane flew on for 7 hrs and actually did a U turn and flew back over Malaysia.

This is getting more insane by the hour.

The stuff that is going through the minds of the families involved would be beyond comprehension....

After all this time I'm starting to think the plane will be found, intact.

[Romulus]

Next news conference due at 8pm KL time.

[Brendo_GSUte]

I read in WA today it was a hostage situation.

Some (yet again un-named govt official) said it was to do with insurance on a family member. Alluding to if they faked his death they get paid out move the cash to a swiss bank account let all the hostages go.

As for the secrecy around it they couldnt let the news go public as saying it wasnt a hostage situation might put the uninvolved at risk. The black box emits a frequency for 30 days and has a range of 4000m under water. the fact they cant find it means someones knows enough about them to put it in a lead container or underground somewhere...

The plot definately thickens, my moneys on the Yanks finding it as they have the technology.

[XBROO]

I reckon it's had a quick paint job and it's flying under virgin colours to the USA. Well it's as good as most of the bullshit getting spun around.

[CoupeKing]

Originally Posted by Brendo_GSUte

The black box emits a frequency for 30 days and has a range of 4000m under water.

Well considering 4000m is the average depth of the Indian Ocean, and 8000m being the deepest, they better be getting on the phone to Dr Robert Ballard if thats where the plane ditched.

[Yellow_Festiva]

The Malaysian military minster reminds me more and more each day of that 'Comical Ali' guy that was the spokesperson for Saddam while Iraq was being invaded...

Remember him?

[sixman]

Originally Posted by Yellow_Festiva

The Malaysian military minster reminds me more and more each day of that 'Comical Ali' guy that was the spokesperson for Saddam while Iraq was being invaded...

Remember him?

Yeah, but didnt he turnout to be some kinda double agent?

[Yellow_Festiva]

Originally Posted by sixman

Yeah, but didnt he turnout to be some kinda double agent?

Don't know, but I do recall that only obvious untruths and garbage were what came from his mouth at every press conference.

[csv8]

It has been said the plane could make Kazakstan...or was it Klingons with a tractor beam !!! Whatever, has happened, it is a mystery....solution will be interesting..

[Mighty Reds]

This is going to make some film studio a nice chunk of change someday.

[csv8]

Originally Posted by Mighty Reds

This is going to make some film studio a nice chunk of change someday.

Sure will !!! Latest Liam Neesam film...Non-Stop comes to mind....

[vbvbvb088]

Originally Posted by Yellow_Festiva

The Malaysian military minster reminds me more and more each day of that 'Comical Ali' guy that was the spokesperson for Saddam while Iraq was being invaded...

Remember him?

...and Tariq Aziz - hated everything USA. Except for MTV, Coke, Playboys etc etc in his office.

[FPVS3]

Originally Posted by cheap

Malaysian PM news conference says they are certain the plane was hijacked by persons as yet unknown. Based on its last know path and assuming it had sufficient fuel it could have been going to Sri Lanka, East coat of India or Bangladesh. My guess it is now at the bottom of the Bay of Bengal. Mystery gets more mysterious, the conspiracy people must be orgasming.

I would say they're making some sort of a decision now as they've looked quite foolish up 'till now and face saving is the overriding motive plus not wanting their positions threatened.

[MDS69]

Imagine how ****ed some agencies and governments will be for committing assets like vessels and satellites to search in areas where the plane was nowhere near.

[cheap]

Is it normal for an airforce to track an unidentified aircraft flying through their airspace without it being challenged? Shouldn't they have scrambled a jet to check?

[zilo]

Originally Posted by GasOLane

The only problem with the shot down/hijack theories is that no one has claimed they did it.

Usually when something big like this happens all the radicals in the world surface to claim responsibility.

Here is a link to the last time a plane went mysteriously missing in that part of the world.

Denials were made for quite a while.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_...nes_Flight_007

[zilo]

Or maybe this one?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655

[Yellow_Festiva]

Originally Posted by MDS69

Imagine how ****ed some agencies and governments will be for committing assets like vessels and satellites to search in areas where the plane was nowhere near.

Who foots the bill for this? Do airlines have insurance for this sort of thing?

Would be a real expensive love job....

[Shonky.]

Does anyone believe the passengers could be alive?

I don't, but was just thinking what it must be like for their loved ones.....

If I had someone on that plane I may well be clinging to hope still.

Horrible situation - I reckon the long term impact for the families would be far greater as a result of the wait to find out than if they had of instead just had an instant moment of horror when they learned of their loved ones death.

I think the only thing worse than loosing a loved one in a disaster would be what they are going through now

[chamb0]

I can't imagine the wild speculation and media frenzy has been helpful for them either. It must be a terrible wait - I feel so sorry for them.

[nstg8a]

Now they're saying the captain is a political activist lol

[Yellow_Festiva]

Originally Posted by nstg8a

Now they're saying the captain is a political activist lol

[FoxtrotGolfXray 5.0]

Ok, now that we know some of the 'what' the officials need to start asking the 'why' (to substantiate a theory) and 'how' (so that it can be prevented next time).

Let's examine the 'why'. Two basic theories exist: either one of the pilots or aircrew decided to take over the aircraft or it was hijacked by unknown assailants.

Let's look at the first scenario. If it was an experienced flight crew member, why was there a 14 minute period between the comms being disabled? Surely an experienced operator (unfettered, of course) would be able to disarm these systems in a matter of seconds, not minutes. And why was the aircraft taken to 45,000 feet? The flight crew would have known that this was well above the service ceiling for the aircraft. Expecting something untoward to happen? But then why descend again?

Scenario 2: If the aircraft was hijacked, who hijacked it and what was the purpose of the hijack? And, with all of the additional physical security measures implemented post 9/11, how did they accomplish access to the cockpit? And once they gained access how did they overpower the flight crew and why did they follow the path that they did end up following?

Seems to me that even though we now know some more information, there's just as many questions now, if not more, as there was before yesterday's announcement.

Finally, I think that any chance of finding anyone alive from MH370 are nigh on impossible, unfortunately.

Craig H

[gtfpv]

i have a gut feeling that there was a pressure problem in the plane , and perhaps it was one of those everyone unconscious on the plane while the plane keeps flying scenarios . as far as feedback from the plane . i'd say they know what happened and we arent being told ( especially if protocol wasnt adhered too ) or gross negligence is involved .

[Yellow_Festiva]

Originally Posted by psychobimbo

Ok, now that we know some of the 'what' the officials need to start asking the 'why' (to substantiate a theory) and 'how' (so that it can be prevented next time).

Let's examine the 'why'. Two basic theories exist: either one of the pilots or aircrew decided to take over the aircraft or it was hijacked by unknown assailants.

If it was a staff issue, they could reduce it next time by introducing a random revolving roster (I think they do this with customs here in OZ after finding a few 'teams' working together in airport customs). The workers only know what hrs they are to work, not where they are going, or with whom. This will greatly reduce the teamwork and relationship building prep needed for such a task.

Originally Posted by psychobimbo

Let's look at the first scenario. If it was an experienced flight crew member, why was there a 14 minute period between the comms being disabled? Surely an experienced operator (unfettered, of course) would be able to disarm these systems in a matter of seconds, not minutes. And why was the aircraft taken to 45,000 feet? The flight crew would have known that this was well above the service ceiling for the aircraft. Expecting something untoward to happen? But then why descend again?

Flight crew may not have been in on it. There would be a tolerance to whatever ceiling Boeing specifies. Crew nor passengers would know if they were at 25,35 or 45k feet up. Perhaps they were avoiding radar?? (Also my theory as to the reports they were as low as 500m).

Originally Posted by psychobimbo

Scenario 2: If the aircraft was hijacked, who hijacked it and what was the purpose of the hijack? And, with all of the additional physical security measures implemented post 9/11, how did they accomplish access to the cockpit? And once they gained access how did they overpower the flight crew and why did they follow the path that they did end up following?

We may never know the reasons why. Additional security is only as good as the people behind the badge. Malaysia is not a wealthy country, I'm sure an envelope with a few thousand $US will go a long way. We also know that reported stolen passports were not even found out, and people that may have not 'appeared' as per their documents got on the plane. You would assume that check in staff, flight crew, passport control are all trained to look out for these anomalies. Would love to see the scans of the passports that the Malaysian check in staff would have taken. Were the documents professionally altered? Were the pictures the same as the faces of the Iranians or the Europeans??

We also know that gaining access to the cockpit may not be as hard as it should be after those 2 girls went on TV showing those shocking pictures and having obvious, unrestricted access to the controls if they so chose. You would assume that when this was going on the cockpit doors were closed and probably locked. After all, I'm sure anyone seeing this happening (crew / passengers) would know it is very wrong and lets not forget the fact they were smoking during the flight.

Did any flight crew report these rendezvous?? To whom? What was their reply? Why are they still flying? How many reports for misconduct do these pilots have? Whose job is it to follow through with disciplinary actions? What were those actions?

Originally Posted by psychobimbo

Seems to me that even though we now know some more information, there's just as many questions now, if not more, as there was before yesterday's announcement.

Finally, I think that any chance of finding anyone alive from MH370 are nigh on impossible, unfortunately.

Craig H

What we do know is that Malaysian Airlines have a ton of explaining to do. If this doesn't make them lose their licence for their actions so far the truth, when it does actually come out, should.

[Yellow_Festiva]

Originally Posted by gtfpv

i have a gut feeling that there was a pressure problem in the plane , and perhaps it was one of those everyone unconscious on the plane while the plane keeps flying scenarios . as far as feedback from the plane . i'd say they know what happened and we arent being told ( especially if protocol wasnt adhered too ) or gross negligence is involved .

If that was the case, I'm sure the auto pilot wasn't programed to zig zag all over the place, reduce and increase altitude or turn off the devices that allow for tracking of the aircraft.

[FPVS3]

Originally Posted by Yellow_Festiva

We also know that gaining access to the cockpit may not be as hard as it should be after those 2 girls went on TV showing those shocking pictures and having obvious, unrestricted access to the controls if they so chose. You would assume that when this was going on the cockpit doors were closed and probably locked. After all, I'm sure anyone seeing this happening (crew / passengers) would know it is very wrong and lets not forget the fact they were smoking during the flight.

Actually the pilots are quite within their right to have passengers in the flight deck as long as it is for the entire flight. They can't have passengers coming and going back to the cabin out of the flight deck during the flight. Usually these pax who go into the flight deck are boarded first. During the flight they can go out of the flight deck to use the toilet immediately behind the flight deck and to use the pilot crew rest area immediately aft of the forward galley which is right behind the flight deck.
During these movements the curtains should be drawn so that pax in the fwd cabin can't see these movements.
These pax who are in the flight deck must be in the flight deck for T/O and LDG.
They definitely cannot be in a pilot seat at any time during the flight. Smoking in the flight deck, disgusting as it is, may not be prohibited by the company.

[russellw]

What a farce. If it weren't for the fact that there are a whole raft of human tragedies surrounding this event it reads like a Mack Sennet script from the early days of slapstick comedy.

We've gone through a range of theories, factoids, lies (or at least subversion's of the truth), innuendo and more conspiracy theories than you can poke the proverbial at while still being no closer to a real answer than we were over a week ago.

The facts that we do know for certain are alarming enough:

1. Passengers traveling on dodgy stolen passports - and worse still not recently stolen but stolen well in advance of their use, listed on a global database but undetected by Malaysian authorities.

2. Passengers having been allowed onto the flight deck by air-crew in breach of current protocols (at least for most countries) and a practice that seems to have been common-place with some of this crew.

3. Flight crew with (alleged) extreme political views - you'd reasonably expect in the post 9/11 world (and Egypt Air) that evaluation of the mental state of pilots would have become as important as their physical state and certainly the requirement for security evaluation. Obviously not.

4. The relatively high count of no-shows for the flight. Again, I wouldn't expect it to be more than a couple on a full flight but maybe those levels are normal.

5. The relative lack of clarity around flight paths despite the availability of various civilian and military radars and satellites with an eye on the region. Or maybe it is clear and 'they' don't want us to know.

6. Most of all, it is concerning that with all the available technology today, something as large and complex as a 777 can simply go missing to the point where there remains no certainty as to the fate of the flight some 9 days later.

What next?

[Yellow_Festiva]

Originally Posted by FPVS3

Actually the pilots are quite within their right to have passengers in the flight deck as long as it is for the entire flight. They can't have passengers coming and going back to the cabin out of the flight deck during the flight. Usually these pax who go into the flight deck are boarded first. During the flight they can go out of the flight deck to use the toilet immediately behind the flight deck and to use the pilot crew rest area immediately aft of the forward galley which is right behind the flight deck.
During these movements the curtains should be drawn so that pax in the fwd cabin can't see these movements.
These pax who are in the flight deck must be in the flight deck for T/O and LDG.
They definitely cannot be in a pilot seat at any time during the flight. Smoking in the flight deck, disgusting as it is, may not be prohibited by the company.

If that is indeed the case it is obvious there are flaws in the rules.

Curious, is there any reasoning behind the fact that if a passenger is in the flight deck, that they must be there for the whole flight?

Can you offer any scenarios as to why a passenger is in the flight deck as we saw on ACA? By passengers, I mean lay people, not flying professionals or people associated with the airline in any way.

[FPVS3]

Originally Posted by Yellow_Festiva

If that is indeed the case it is obvious there are flaws in the rules.

Curious, is there any reasoning behind the fact that if a passenger is in the flight deck, that they must be there for the whole flight?

Can you offer any scenarios as to why a passenger is in the flight deck as we saw on ACA? By passengers, I mean lay people, not flying professionals or people associated with the airline in any way.

I guess it does seem a bit weird. I suppose that pax can do this because it would be harder for smuggling weapons into the flight deck, ie they have to be in the FD the whole time and not coming and going. Probably depends on the country and airline rules.
Pilots often carry their spouses and or children in the FD, perfectly legally for example if they don't have a firm pax seat, that is, on standby and no pax seat available.

If pilots do anything illegal they will most likely be reported on by the rest of the crew. Some countries don't allow anyone other than operating crew in the FD in their airspace.