Malaysia MH370

[Ron]

But the question remains...why?

No one has claimed responsibility.
No major human targets have been identified.

If they simply wantd a 777 there are easier ways to obtain one Id think....and then wht are you going to do with it.

Its a slow, not very nimble air craft. Its only attack use would have been while it was still up...to try and launch it and carryout an attack would seem unlikely at best.

 

[buddyantunez1]

That's a well put together theory, but I still see flaws.

I believe and am pretty condident that any modern aircraft based radar services will detect a shadow aircraft if it's farther away than a couple hundred feet of the aircraft it's following. Remember me mentioning that the radar services will give a percieved altitude? And remember how radar can detect objects at fiarly low altitudes depending on how far they are from the station? So this guy is trying to say that TWO BOEING 777's(over 200 feet long, and almost 200 feet wide) flew thousands of miles within a couple hundred feet of each other, despite turbulance, updrafts, downdrafts, thermals, and the jet stream that ALL can have altitude changes that could cause the aircraft to strike each other. Not to mention the potential for instrument interference, or a passenger seeing a huge piece of metal in the sky above or below them.

 

[RHSCTJ]

So is this like the world's biggest game of Where's Waldo?

Nah. At least with waldo you knew which page to look on.

 

[RHSCTJ]

That's a well put together theory, but I still see flaws.

I believe and am pretty condident that any modern aircraft based radar services will detect a shadow aircraft if it's farther away than a couple hundred feet of the aircraft it's following. Remember me mentioning that the radar services will give a percieved altitude? And remember how radar can detect objects at fiarly low altitudes depending on how far they are from the station? So this guy is trying to say that TWO BOEING 777's(over 200 feet long, and almost 200 feet wide) flew thousands of miles within a couple hundred feet of each other, despite turbulance, updrafts, downdrafts, thermals, and the jet stream that ALL can have altitude changes that could cause the aircraft to strike each other. Not to mention the potential for instrument interference, or a passenger seeing a huge piece of metal in the sky above or below them.

For the sake of debate, what if that's why 370 climbed to 45000 ft and flew above sia68? Would that be detectable? It's dark out, is it possible to turn the exterior lights off on mh370?

 

[buddyantunez1]

Yes I do agree that there is not radar coverage across the globe. Over vast bodies of water, such as the atlantic, pacific, and parts of the Antartic are not covered. But we're not taslking about those ares. But just for some more info, in areas without radar or even radio coverage, the the onboard FDC or Flight Data Computer will send out mandatory position reports at specified waypoints until they resume radio and radar coverage.

 

[buddyantunez1]

For the sake of debate, what if that's why 370 climbed to 45000 ft and flew above sia68? Would that be detectable? It's dark out, is it possible to turn the exterior lights off on mh370?

Yes that could have been them climbing. I still think it would be detectable, because their altitudes were so far off. I would say that they would have to be within 1,000ft MAX, to even think they might be undetectable. You can shut off all the interior and exterior lights making it very hard to see, but there are a good bit opf polish type surfaces on the leading edges of the wings, tail, and engine inlets that could reflect even moon light.

But yes, it is possible to shut off every light on the aircraft abnd fly in the dark and be vetry hard to see.

 

[RatLabGuy]

But the question remains...why?

No one has claimed responsibility.
No major human targets have been identified.

If they simply wantd a 777 there are easier ways to obtain one Id think....and then wht are you going to do with it.

Its a slow, not very nimble air craft. Its only attack use would have been while it was still up...to try and launch it and carryout an attack would seem unlikely at best.

Only thing I can think of with the plane-jacking theories is, there was some kind of error/failure and it crashed. Essentially a failed mission. Then maybe the group responsible dosn't want to show their hand.

 

[buddyantunez1]

There is a reasoning I say 1000 feet, becuase preset cruising altitudes for general aviation and commercial aircraft under 18,000 feet only differ 500 feet. For example, if you are flying in an easterly direction, you're cruising altitude will be odd thousand feet(3000,5000,7000,ect), and westerly heading will cruise at even thousand altitudes(4000,6000,8000,ect). Now thoise are aircraft operating under IFR flight rules, VFR aircraft cruise at the same altitudes + 500 feet. So a VFR general aviation aircraft in eastery direction would cruise at 3500,5500,7500, ect, and westerly headings cruise at 4500,6500,8500,ect. Our current radar systems here in the US can still determine there are 2 aircraft crossing opposite direction, even though there is only 500 feet separating them.

Make any sense or did I completely lose everyone?

 

[Loganwayne]

im probably way off but on the news they showed the arcs of where the last signal came from and where they estimate they would have ran out of gas. they said it would have been in the ocean off Australia if it continued of its previous course, but the range also made it to land in Australia. the NW corner of Australia doesnt have much going on mostly desert could it not be possible that the plain landed there?

 

[buddyantunez1]

ANYTHING is possible at this point because there is very little evidense to prove much. So yes, that is also possible, although I believe someones radar services would have picked them up.

 

[RHSCTJ]

There is a reasoning I say 1000 feet, becuase preset cruising altitudes for general aviation and commercial aircraft under 18,000 feet only differ 500 feet. For example, if you are flying in an easterly direction, you're cruising altitude will be odd thousand feet(3000,5000,7000,ect), and westerly heading will cruise at even thousand altitudes(4000,6000,8000,ect). Now thoise are aircraft operating under IFR flight rules, VFR aircraft cruise at the same altitudes + 500 feet. So a VFR general aviation aircraft in eastery direction would cruise at 3500,5500,7500, ect, and westerly headings cruise at 4500,6500,8500,ect. Our current radar systems here in the US can still determine there are 2 aircraft crossing opposite direction, even though there is only 500 feet separating them.

Make any sense or did I completely lose everyone?

That makes sense. "Our current radar systems here in the US can still determine there are 2 aircraft crossing opposite direction, even though there is only 500 feet separating them." I understand that. Again for the sake of debate, would it be something obvious or could it be over-looked after a long shift. I wouldn't think it's something you would see a lot(if ever) and if you had contact with sia68 and they said it was all good is it the kind of thing you quickly respond to?

 

[buddyantunez1]

If you've ever watched Breaking Bad, the radar system was just like the episode of the mid-air collision. There is a audible and visual warning when two aircraft are in close vicinity. This is followed by the controller giving verbal warnings to pilots in both aircrafts of the traffic direction and altitude and reference direction when sitting in the cockpit.

For example, the controller sees the warning for two aircraft that are within 3 miles of each other(laterally or vertically), he would tell each pilot of the traffic heading, altitude, and vicinity from the pilot's view. "King Air in opposide direction at your 3 o'clock at 6000 feet."

 

[Xj972door]

What if all of this is just an elaborate plan to tie up the thoughts and efforts of American people on internet forums so they don't realize that governments both foreign and domestic are slowly stealing their economic and personal freedom? Thought I would start one more theory.

 

[mysterync]

I was reading a article written by fairly experienced pilot on redit earlier. Made some very logical point about all of this.

 

[85 toy]

What if all of this is just an elaborate plan to tie up the thoughts and efforts of American people on internet forums so they don't realize that governments both foreign and domestic are slowly stealing their economic and personal freedom? Thought I would start one more theory.

That has been happening here since 2008.

 

[buddyantunez1]

I was reading a article written by fairly experienced pilot on redit earlier. Made some very logical point about all of this.

post the link.

 

[BrianGreen]

I dont know about yall, but there has been too much bad stuff going on in the aviation world in the last week and a half.

Plane disappears off the face of the earth.
Plane's front landing gear collapses.
Plane's wing loses a piece while in the air.

My @$$ aint gettin on a plane in a while!

 

[buddyantunez1]

I dont know about yall, but there has been too much bad stuff going on in the aviation world in the last week and a half.

Plane disappears off the face of the earth.
Plane's front landing gear collapses.
Plane's wing loses a piece while in the air.

My @$$ aint gettin on a plane in a while!

I like when people say that things are "bad." But there were well over 50,000 DAILY commercial service flights in the world, and only 3 hishaps. Flying is safer than ANY other form of transportation in the world, even walking lol. Then add at least another 20,000-30,000 general aviation or private aircraft to that daily tally. Just saying

 

[mysterync]

I would've but couldn't find it again. Basically speculated that something like an electrical fire or something that caused heavy smoke. Stated that as a pilot he always watched for exit strategies and had a plan. He figured the pilot made a hard turn headed for the closest no obstruction airport and they began shutting of electrical circuits in case it was electrical fire or lost all electronics, and lost consciousness. He explained all the reasonable discrediting thoughts I had with logical reasosning. I'll keep looking for it.

 

[Ron]

I like when people say that things are "bad." But there were well over 50,000 DAILY commercial service flights in the world, and only 3 hishaps. Flying is safer than ANY other form of transportation in the world, even walking lol. Then add at least another 20,000-30,000 general aviation or private aircraft to that daily tally. Just saying

Sure and chihuahuas bite more folks than alligators.
Would you rather get bit by a chihuahua or a gator?

Car breaks down you walk home plane breaks down you die.

 

[CThurmond]

When my door falls off I don't fall out of the sky.

 

[buddyantunez1]

Sure and chihuahuas bite more folks than alligators.
Would you rather get bit by a chihuahua or a gator?

Car breaks down you walk home plane breaks down you die.

Yes there are probably more injuries/fatalities per accident, but you're comparing apples to oranges. Cars on overage can only seat 5. Give everyone city busses, and watch the numbers increase exponentially. I bet there were more automotive fatalities in the US alone last week than injuries/fatalities in the aviation industry worldwide in that same week.

And no, you don't automatically die if an engine quits. There are MANY procedures to safely maneuver and land the aircraft. Did you know each twin engine commercial aircraft has to be able to shut down 1 of it's engines and not only maintain it's altitude, but also increase it's altitude and sustain that climb before it's certified? Did you also know that scheduled commercial carriage aircraft are required to have 2 engines in the US?

 

[Dylan W.]

I've been reading this thread and all the theories. Fully expecting that the plane would be found way before now. I read the theory about the ''other'' 777 and all the ''shadowing''.

So, I finally broke down and called my father in law. He was an air traffic controller for 30 years. He has been retired from the ''center'' for a few years. (hilliard fla) He was a Lead controller and although there were no ranks,lets just say he was one of the highest ranking dudes at the center before he retired. So high, that on 911, other controllers were asked to leave the rooms while he stayed and ''controlled'' 4 more flights after the skies were shut down. (let ya guess who and what planes they might have been.) 2 went to cuba and one headed in a zig zag North and the other ,even till this day, he cant say or wont say, what or who was in the air.

So I tell ya all that, not to brag about the dad in law, but just to say, that I trust his knowledge. He's a fairly quiet man and doesn't say much , but when I asked him about the ''shadow theory'' he said that it was possible. But he said that it would have to be the biggest planned air event in the history of aviation. He said that it would be impossible for this to go ''unknown'' to anyone. That it would take other countries to be involved in the ''shadow plan''.

In other words, if this happened, MANY folks and countries would absolutely HAVE to be involved. He mentioned a few types of radar and other confusing words to me, but all in all, he thinks it's the best '' Random''theory that he's heard, but it just couldn't be true.

His theory is that the co-pilot did it and dumped it into the Indian ocean. And good luck finding anything or anyone near the impact zone.

So that's what I'm going with too.

 

[ManglerYJ]

Yes there are probably more injuries/fatalities per accident, but you're comparing apples to oranges. Cars on overage can only seat 5. Give everyone city busses, and watch the numbers increase exponentially. I bet there were more automotive fatalities in the US alone last week than injuries/fatalities in the aviation industry worldwide in that same week.

And no, you don't automatically die if an engine quits. There are MANY procedures to safely maneuver and land the aircraft. Did you know each twin engine commercial aircraft has to be able to shut down 1 of it's engines and not only maintain it's altitude, but also increase it's altitude and sustain that climb before it's certified? Did you also know that scheduled commercial carriage aircraft are required to have 2 engines in the US?

You don't automatically die if your plane lands in water, either.... There has been at least one successful landing on the Hudson River. Just saying.

 

[buddyantunez1]

I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks logically. And I have NO WHERE NEAR his experience, but I also have ATC experience and am also a pilot. Pretty cool he put in that much time.

My father and I talked about it yesterday. He's a retired Marine Corps pilot and flies for a medical life flight helicopter company(Air Evac), and we think the same thing. Aircraft for whatever reason, broke up, went down, and the search area is so vast, chances of finding anything at this point is small to none.