This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Finally, A Plausible Scenario Of What Happened To Flight 370
Submitted by Charles Hugh-Smith of OfTwoMinds blog,
The scenario that best fits the facts is a spontaneously initiated "drastic political protest" by the captain that went awry.
At long last, a plausible scenario of what happened to Flight 370 has emerged. By plausible I mean that the scenario fits all the known facts.
The key piece of evidence has finally been released by Malaysian authorities: Pilot Spoke to Air Controllers After Shutoff of Data System (NYT.com).
This proves that one of the pilots turned off the ACARS communications link and then reported to air traffic control (ATC) as if all was normal. Twelve minutes later, one of the pilots switched off the aircraft's transponder, which transmits the aircraft's altitude and location.
This sequence of events more or less proves that one of the pilots was in charge of the aircraft. Given the lack of evidence of duress, this sequence strongly suggests one of the pilots was executing a plan of his own rather than following orders of hijackers.
Given the strong political views of the captain and his mastery of the Boeing 777, all evidence points to the captain as the pilot who turned off the communication links and was in command of the aircraft thereafter.
Post-disappearance moves suggest sophisticated handling, experts say (CBSnews.com)
Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 search grows as pilots face increased scrutiny (CNN.com)
Though early reports on the captain were limited to neutral comments by peers that he was a nice guy and a devout family man, the strength of his opposition to the current regime in Malaysia is now coming to light:
'Democracy is dead': 'Fanatical' missing airliner pilot pictured wearing political slogan T-shirt (Daily Mail)
Captain Zaharie Ahmad Shah, a father-of-three, was said to be a 'fanatical' supporter of the country's opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim - jailed for homosexuality just hours before the jet disappeared.
It has also been revealed that the pilot's wife and three children moved out of the family home the day before the plane went missing.
Anwar Ibrahim is a broadly popular democracy icon and former deputy prime minister whose prosecution on a charge of sodomy is seen by many Malaysians as political persecution.
‘Colleagues made it clear to us that he was someone who held strong political beliefs and was strident in his support for Anwar Ibrahim,’ another investigation source said. ‘We were told by one colleague he was obsessed with politics.’
What makes this significant is the Malaysian authorities' attempts to suppress this possible motive.
Malaysian officials initially appeared keen not to direct any suspicion towards Zaharie or his co-pilot, 27-year-old Fariq Abdul Hamid, who was last week revealed to have invited two women passengers into the cockpit and smoked on an earlier flight to Phuket.
But evidence of the way the plane’s transponder and communication systems were disabled and the way the plane was expertly flown over the Indian Ocean apparently using navigational waypoints meant only a skilled aviator could have been at the controls. Investigators were also baffled by why, if hijackers took over the plane, there was no Mayday call or signal from the two pilots to say the cockpit had been breached.
Thus we have motive and clear evidence that it was the captain, not the co-pilot, who was in command of Flight 370. Enraged by the Soviet-style show-trial and imprisonment of his political hero, the captain may have "sabotaged the flight as a form of drastic political protest." Flight 370: Was Hijacking The Pilot’s Political Revenge?
Now add in that neither the co-pilot nor the captain requested each other, and it seems increasing likely that the captain was making it up as he went along, applying his deep knowledge of the aircraft and navigation to sketch out a makeshift initial plan that was dynamically modified along the way.
I think we can easily trace a plausible series of steps the captain initially took, and then speculate knowledgeably about the challenges and decision trees that arose later in the flight.
The first challenge would be to render the co-pilot unable to contest his control of the aircraft. The easiest way would have been to dissolve a sedative in a beverage and coax the co-pilot into drinking the Mickey Finn.
The "mumbling co-pilot" heard by the airline pilot flying to Japan who radioed Flight 370 offers tantalizing (if scant) evidence of this. (Interestingly, that pilot was confident he spoke with the co-pilot, not the captain.)
Alternatively, the co-pilot fought for control of the aircraft, one explanation of the abrupt climb to 45,000, well above the aircraft's designed ceiling.
If there was a struggle, clearly the co-pilot lost that battle or had already been incapacitated by other means.
Another explanation for the climb to 45,000 feet and the subsequent drop to 23,000 feet is that the captain sought to deprive the passengers of oxygen for long enough to render them unconscious but not long enough to kill them.
Given the profile of the captain that is emerging, I see little evidence of a personality who would set out to kill everyone on board, including himself. I believe the evidence strongly suggests a political motive, to embarrass the Malaysian government and perhaps to do so by seeking asylum in another country.
Once again, the key here is to understand the incomplete nature of the captain's plan: after the initial phase was successful--turning off the ACARS and transponder, incapacitating the co-pilot, and moving beyond the range of Malaysia's military radar-- a number of destinations might have occurred to the captain. It's important to note that flying was not just the captain's vocation, it was also his hobby. I think it is safe to say his life revolved around aviation and flying.
Data showing the number of plausible runways where the plane could have touched down - which need to be at least 5,000ft - offer a baffling number of potential locations.
According to a map drawn up by U.S. radio station WNYC, there are 634 locations which could fit, from Australia to the Maldives to Pakistan.
However, the true number is likely to be even higher, as estimates of how far the plane could have travelled have been increased since the calculations were carried out.
Here is the best current map of the possible routes of Flight 370. I have added the decision tree the captain faced: either fly north and seek political asylum or a remote landing site or fly south and search for a remote landing site.
If the co-pilot had regained control of the aircraft, either alone or with the aid of crew and passengers, he would have first turned on the ACARS and transponder and sent a Mayday signal. Since this didn't happen, we can be confident that the captain was in command of Flight 370 for the duration of the flight--roughly 7.5 hours.
While we don't know if the aircraft landed at some point, we do know the last ping to the satellite was at 8:11 a.m., roughly 6 hours after the last military radar contact.
Here are some other points to consider:
The fact that the Malaysian authorities withheld the sequence of events in the cockpit strongly suggest that they quickly identified the potential for a political motivation for the flight deviation and sought to suppress speculation along this line of inquiry.
This also explains why they withheld the military radar data for three days, and their continuing reluctance to share information or come clean about what they know. They fear the truth, and with good reason.
The captain's home flight simulator suggests that he may well have practiced all sorts of landing scenarios, just out of curiosity or to sharpen his skills in outlier situations. Think about it: if you already have over 18,000 hours in the cockpits of advanced aircraft, you're not going to practice conventional landings you could do in your sleep. That would be beyond boring to someone of his experience.
Given the few hours the captain had to assemble his plan, it is likely that once the initial phase was successful, he might have changed his mind, perhaps more than once.
Given his long experience in aviation, I think it very likely that he knew that the primary and military radars in the region were usually turned off at night. Off-the-record confirmations of this have come from Thailand and Indian officials with knowledge of radar covering the Andaman and Nicobar islands.
Thus it is not surprising there were no primary radar sightings in the region: most or perhaps all of the radars were turned off.
It's also worth noting that most of the primary radars in the region have limited ranges--100 miles or less appears to be average. It is more than possible to thread a flight through the gaps in coverage, even if the radars were active.
Let's assume my speculation is accurate and the captain had no intention of crashing the 777 and killing all on board. As I noted in my first entry on Flight 370, if that was his intention (or simply suicide), why fly for hours? Despite his best intentions, he may have encountered some problem that he responded to incorrectly; it's even possible that he missed his intended destination or became confused about his location.
What Happened to Flight 370? An Analysis of What Is Known (March 13, 2014)
The scenario that best fits the facts is a spontaneously initiated "drastic political protest" by the captain that went awry, despite his intentions and experience.
One last thought: since the U.S. must monitor potential airborne threats and nuclear explosions virtually everywhere on the planet (with the exception of Antarctica), why wouldn't the U.S. have wide-aperture thermal imaging assets in space? And if the U.S. has space-based thermal imaging assets, would they be so low quality that the heat signature from two large jet engines would not show up? That seems unlikely.
Since it has long been known that the U.S. has "wired the oceans for sound," (SUBMARINES, SECRETS, AND SPIES - NOVA/PBS) it's also likely that the sound of a large aircraft hitting the water would also have been detected, regardless of the remoteness of the location.
All of which is to say that it seems probable that the global and space-based intelligence gathering assets of the U.S. recorded some sort of signals that could provide clues to the final resting spot of Flight 370.
»
- 142868 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
I have a feeling all the passengers are now hostages in small groups all over Afghanistan
They should be so lucky.
Finally something plausible! Quick- shove it in my earhole. My head meat is starting to is
starting to ask uncomfortable questions.
OK...so then where's the plane? No one has any idea in this age of surveilance of every square inch of the earth? I call B.S. on the whole thing until the plane or wreckage of it is produced.
ADS-B. Should it ever happen again.
Fixed it!
Next gen will take a long time to implement.... but, it will be there on most major commercial aircraft soon enough. of course, that's when the terrorists will blow up the subways or the buses or the trains. they'll just find another, softer target, so that each person can get their own big brother/TSA guardian.
Or the terrorists can take the chance that our entire defensive system will collapse like a deck of cards: see 9/11/2001.
Put your plans out there, roll the dice and see what happens. I like your odds.
Next gen will take a long time to implement....
Having worked on that one it certainly solves alot of those and similar problems of tracking $150 million flying machinery around the globe anytime anywhere... What is holding it back to a large extent are the FAA employees who's jobs will be threatened when that technology becomes fully implemented. That and making it difficult for forensic discovery to the criminals that want to keep a plane missing for whatever reasons they choose to come up with when they need to tell the public what happened?..
And you wonder why the United States Government had a mandate to implement ICANN policy DNSSEC and IPv6 in 2007, then were told (after the fact) by the likes of AT&T, Verizon and Qwest who they already control that it's too expensive a challenge for them to fix with all the commercial equipment vendors and that 128 bit address space loaded with all the security NSA and those other IC professionals need in protecting their networks from a "terrorist cyberattack" -will just have to wait!...
7 years later... As they have trillion dollar blackhole budget(s) that can't be audited and spend $5 billion to overthrow and subvert legitimate governments...
Gotta love what the American people are doing to themselves!
Airliners use ADS-C. It makes no difference if you use ADS-B (there are two types of ADS-B) or ADS-C, you can turn any transponder off at any time, either by switching it to standby, turning it off, or disconnecting the power. And this will always be the case. And it is necessarily the case.
Sure Element you can turn off anything, if you really want to.
But that isn't the point is it!...
Plenty of safeguards to make certain that stuff stays on of course -if you make the rules to enforce it!!!
Wrong, completely fucking wrong. I'm not going to explain further why you are wrong about trying to make rules to have transponders stay permanently on, you can study that from actual course materials if you are interested, which I doubt, or you would have already done it and know what you are talking about. Transponders NEED to be turned off, regularly, and a pilot HAS to be able to do that. You can accept that or you can believe your fantasy, or else you can find out why a pilot does have to be able to turn them on and off. That's your choice.
And your link is irrelevant baloney as I pointed out yesterday, there are transponder-only regions, in the US, and all over the bloody world today in fact, where there is ZERO radar emission for an ATC radar, and IFR traffic are required to have a fully functional ADS-C or ADS-B transponder emitting a transponder code provided via ATC.
Again, you can believe silly fantasies, or you can check how the system actually works, read:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-03-16/malaysian-airlines-flight-370-c...
Here's the book I'm quoting from, learn something, read it:
http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/handbooks_manuals/aviation/instr...
And don't waste my time with ignorant bullshit.
Why thanks Element.
Thought 9/11 would have changed all that, especially the way the "Commission" crucified the FAA under the leadership of Senator Bob Kerry...
When you get the chance please be so kind to paraphrase the part in those attached pdfs from FAA field manual that talk about under which "emergency conditions" those transponders would need to be turned off.
Your response tells it like it is!
As far as I can see 9-11 was practically totally insignificant and irrelevant to ATC functions, and also pilot procedures, other than for some sky marshals pretending to be passengers, armoured doors on cockpits, and TSA gropers playing with junk, long cues and scanners.
You are confused and trying to mix and conflate 9-11 issues with basic day-to-day procedures that are completely unrelated. If you knew anything about the ICAO or National regs and flying, you would know this stuff already - so clearly you don't.
And I did not say anything about emergency procedures, you did in you last comment. I am talking about ordinary prosaic practical flying requirements. So if you have some little web of intrigue going on that's all yours to sort out.
Frankly, you don't seem anywhere near capable of working through the simple issues discussed without hopeless confusion, stemming from a lack of the basic knowledge or experience required.
If you want to posit baloney or to pretend the FAA 'rule maker' is out to get you in some way, those organizations don't give a rats ass about your delusions, and they do freely and openly provide all the documentation you need to dispel those delusions. And no those documents are not a conspiracy, these are the basic document and procedures jet pilots use to become accredited to fly a jet like a 777. That link I gave you, IFR pilots have to know all that - ALL of it. And that's just the tip of the iceberg, I assure you.
i.e. you have to apply yourself to dispel your own ignorance, have fun.
So why can't a transponder system be hard-wired into a plane where it's always functional?
What code is it going to transmit if it is going to be constantly transmitting? You get a four digit code when you obtain your clearance. It is valid to uniquely identify your aircraft during your ATC slot scheduled for your flight and is valid only for your cleared flight plan. It is not valid after that. When you land your code and flight data also clutters the display of controllers screen around the airport, so the transponder is turned off to de-clutter it on landing. Usually you don't turn your transponder on until ready to take off be cause taxiing with it clutters the display also. However they are looking into a possible ATC taxi control system that will use a transponder signal display in some way to reduce the possibility of ground collision in low visibility conditions.
But electrically would you hardwire a fridge to a 240 volt AC mains cable? If the fridge developed an electrical fault you can't turn it off, and a fire may start. Smelling smoke in a cockpit is a more common occurrence than you might think, electrical shorts are not infrequent and circuit breakers are what saves the day.
Transponders must be able to be turned off, reset, switched to standby, or else the power cut, and always will need a circuit breaker that can disconnect it from the 28v DC bus.
Element
Well done brother! Now tell us about the other instances when it is advisable to "turn them off"?
Sure as hell don't buy the notion that transponders always will be turned off when "electrical shorts" take place!
You opinions are useless ignorant bilge. What you will 'buy' is based on the reality that you are a delusional moron. Unfortunately there is no cure except the one you work on. Sorry I can't be more helpful to your special needs.
Obviously I have you upset. But one last thing before we end this lively discussion and debate.
If you would be so kind as to elaborate on this piece of info you "dumped" here for us? I can't wait!
Transponders must be able to be turned off, reset, switched to standby, or else the power cut, and always will need a circuit breaker that can disconnect it from the 28v DC bus.
I thought so.
Thanks for the technical response you provided here it was most enlightening.
I already did in several instances already, you're too thick to grasp what you've already been supplied, and sadly there is no cure for wilful terminal dumbass.
btw Dave, I just realized you probably don't use 240V AC like we do, change that to 110V AC I expect.
Element
I just asked you where in the FAA module that you sent given your years of knowledge and expertise on the subject to point out to me under what conditions a pilot would (procedurally speaking that is) turn off a transponder so that it couldn’t be tracked?!!!
I of course disagree completely with your assertion that 9/11 wasn't a “wake-up” call to change both the regulation of the technology and standard operational procedures in light of what occurred that day which has very much to do with what we are witnessing with the disappearance of the Malaysian jetliner given the lives of the passengers, the enormous costs and burden to the airlines as well as the federally regulated aviation administration’s responsible for keeping them in the air and tracking their locations “wherever they may be” in order to avoid legal actions which cost both time, money and which always has the potential to put them out of business permanently –for example PAN AM.
Overhaul of those safety regulations is done constantly when breaches occur and accidents occur or when new technologies such as global positioning systems are introduced and put in place. Are you suggesting that the “rules never change”????
By all means indulge us with your advanced knowledge on the subject and provide us with the list of where and when it is suitable to turn tracking equipment for an airliner “off”?
Don't try to put words in my mouth. I never at any point said "it is suitable to turn tracking equipment for an airliner “off”?"
I've pointed out, entirely correctly, that pilots have to be able to, for the reasons I've already given, which was MORE than sufficient to demonstrate that point.
I am not your wet-nurse, or your tutor, or your entertainer. I am providing input to a debate that - now get this - is not about you and your special-needs tuition whine-athon. It is about contributing to the thread of discussion on a complex topic.
Statements like that reveal your failure to understand what the FAA does in these situations, and all other regulators and the ICAO. This is one of thousands of incidents and accidents, INTERNATIONALLY, and the regulations change all the time due to all of these.
Now, if you got off your lazy pseudo-intellectual arse for a minute or two, and went over to the FAA and ATSB and also looked at the federal pending rule changes to those Regs, which are all there on public display for anyone to examine, and which is now standard practice in any western country today, you would realize what a dopey whinging lazy ignorant fuck you are to be asking me if I think the rules never change.
Dick!
Our chip implants will pretty much remove the need for this...
Just carry that cellphone and you can avoid the painful implant process.
Amen brother. It sure would seem someone with a lot of power and resources is hiding it.
Important cargo/persons will be offloaded at Diego Garcia, then plane will be flown via remote control to final "destination" (read: crash site in ocean) upom which time the media will declare captain to be off his rocker and the funerals can commence with the ensuing closure.
Sounds plausible to me :-)
Not finding this plane really trashes the veracity of Jason Bourne movies
Sparking wide debate, creating endless column inches for the MSM. I really don't believe that any of this has happened at all. Sorry.
Pardon me for saying this, but if this were any other time without a belligerent like the United States Government I would certainly care about this story.
But here is the real problem.
Couldn't give a fiddlers fuck what happened to that airplane as the American people better be more concerned about getting an "all over tan" they may receive if they don't pull their heads out of their ass and soon!
Don't blame me for providing the non-censored news.
This came in last night from another well-informed ZH 'non-Zionist' news reader!
Yeah, I saw that on Yahoo yesterday. Really had to dig deep...
Interesting link, the censorship tells me the Russian state is expecting the real possibility of escalation to combat.
I think any "responsible" govt would have contingency plans covering such things.
Yes, but they have activated them.
Maybe it's an automatic member of a particular threat set? Declare a particular DEFCON level (http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/c3i/defcon.htm) and it pulls along all sorts of things to look out for.
I would say that's almost certainly what it is.
Need to start paying more attention to military movements.
I'm not quite following how wearing a t-shirt constitutes evidence of anything. If I were a cynic, I would think it was a convenient cover.
several passengers texted loved ones that while boarding one pilot was wearing a t shirt that said "terrorist" and the other pilot's said "I'm with terrorist".
"I'm with terrorist." Classic.
Oh! Co-pilot's t-shrit read: "Hostage of Pilot"
I've always thought a trendy 'Che' t-shirt makes a statement.
Funny you say that. Bought one in Granada, Nicaraqua. When wearing it there, as a middle age hippie, it gets everything from laughs, at the joke of it, to frowns to those that are old enough to have lived through it. Most were too young and only know Che as a brand name.
Now, in the states, this shirt confuses people as they have no education. I wear it as an IQ test because I am a punkass.
It is likely that the US spy state knows exactly what happened to the plane -- but does not want to reveal sources and methods by making that public, especially if no rescue op is possible. Washington probably also does not want to shame regional players anymore than needed -- including Indonesia, Thailand, and Burma, all of whom in addition to the Malays, look like bumbling fools already.
Or the US spy state pulled off the job and have the plane in Diego Garcia. Que the dirty tricks squad.
If it wasn't a plane bound for Beijing full of Chinese I'd entertain that possibility. But China is about to step up the pressure and effectively mount their own search -- great way to flex their navy and coast guard in the region to boot.
The US is withholding information so that it forces the Chinese Navy to respond. The US wants to test and see how strong the Chinese military has become....gauge their enemy's prowess.
You do realize that they could just park it in a hanger and the Chinese would not find it. Furthermore, they've had a week to move the plane to another location entirely.
If the Chinese find anything it will be wreckage/bodies. That is assuming the NSA/CIA/? wasn't involved in the disappearance.
With just a little of that sticky shelf paper, you could make that ugly old plane look like it belongs in a baby's bedroom.
And with just a little diddling, those dumb old onboard electronic devices could be convinced that they're from the Flying Dutchman.
Before you know it, you've got a DisneyAir excursion jet at almost no cost to anyone.
(Except for a few unfortunate innocent passengers who just chose the wrong flight on the right day)
If there were 20 chinese nationals working on highly a sensitve project for a U.S. company, and they all decided to head to China at once, do you think the U.S. "Intelligence" community might take an interest in preventing a possible transfer of sensitve material to China???
BINGO
It's a huge area, it takes many days to get anywhere in a ship.
Or he tried to fly to Diego Garcia, but then the Brits or Americans shot him down, and that's being suppressed.
ALL EYES ON DIEGO GARCIA
There are numerous alternative theories now, all being pushed by either mainstream media or "mainstream alternative media" and all have major problems. Diego Garcia remains by far the most highly probable location for flight 370. There are three big reasons why flight 370 most likely ended up there, and a few smaller ones...
...This plane not only vanished while in clear sight of civilian radars, it vanished a second time while in full sight of military radars, the plane remained within range of military radars for at least a full 300 miles after it vanished from them, simply calculating the curvature of the earth proves it and only a phase cancelling electronic warfare platform could have done that.
http://www.degaray.com/?p=4052
They certainly are not fools, they are just not well-equipped with long-range sensor systems.
If the US government can fake the OBL killing, they can fake anything else..
After the 9-11 production, the OBL "mission" was small potatoes.
You mean the BBC didn't report 370 missing earlier than everyone else.. I bet they did..
Hell, they may have reported it missing before it took off. But as I understand it that's how these things happen sometimes.
Well, according to some religions everything has been mapped out well in advance...
For us it is not "mapped out" as we have Free Will and there is the illusion of randomness.
But if you were made of Light then, according to the Laws of Special Relativity, you can be everywhere at once. Light travels ZERO Distance and takes absolutely no Time to travel. That is the implications of the Lorentz Transform.
x = xo(1 - v2/c2)1/2 Relative Distance Lorentz Transform
Let v = c then x = 0
t = to(1 - v2/c2)1/2 Relative Time Lorentz Transform
Let v = c then t = 0
Space and Time become irrelevant and you'd know all that was, is, and will ever be.
From that frame of reference, at v = c, it has all been determined.
"God is Light and in Him there is no darkness."
I wonder how the "backwards people" of 2000 years ago, without any knowledge of Relativistic Physics, would know that it was a requirement of an omniscient and omnipresent being to have that as the defining quality.
It just must have been a lucky guess, right???
Well, you cannot reach v=c, unless your rest mass would be exactly zero, which doesn't seem to be the case ...
Wow, is this a stupid hypothesis. If the captain-- who was obviously a very bright individual-- wanted to make a political protest, you'd think that OPENLY COMMUNICATING THAT FACT would be integral to the plan. Because it isn't a protest unless you COMMUNICATE THAT IT IS A PROTEST.
Imagine, if you will, the idiocy of this thought process: "As a monumental political fantatic, I must make my protest as bewildering and confusing as possible in order to draw as little attention to my fantatical ideas as possible! Only in that way can I communicate the importance of my ideas! If only I had a sub-100 IQ, it would be so much easier to make this confusing and bewildering! Unfortunately I am very smart so I will have to figure out a way to enstupidize myself in order to have as little practical effect as possible! LAUNCH ALL ZIG!!!"
See, I think one of the air forces in the region freaked, scrambled and shot him down before he could make that protest. Now everyone is trying to figure out how you tell China that without the Red Dragon eating you whole.
That's my guess as well.
I wouldn't say the country that shot them down freaked, it is probably standard operating procedure since the pilot had switched off all methods of communication.
You mean they shot the plane down after it flew around for 7 hours?
What better way to hide Americas humbling defeat at the hands of Putin than this charade.
If I was on that plane and knew it was going down, I'd have opened the emergency escape and jumped with my life vest.
Does that work in India?
Not when you're wearing so much gold!
That's how they smuggle all that gold in.
The no parachute thing makes cleaning the gold up a disgusting chore though.
There are Ten Pounds per Square inch of pressure on that Emergency Exit Door. At altitude there are Two Pounds per Square Inch on the outside of that door. That is a Pressure Differential of Eight Pounds per Square inch.
Now how many Square Inches does a typical Emergency Exit Door have? Now I am guesstimating but since the exits are about 4 foot High and 4 Foot wide that is 482 inches2 or about 2300 Square inches.
Multiplying that figure by Eight Pounds yields about 18,000 pounds. (Eight Pounds per Square Inch...) That is the Force (Weight is a measure of Force) required to open that door at cruising altitude. Unless you are Superman...it is rather impossible.
Now you can allow the Aircraft to descend to an altitude nearer the ground and it will be possible as the differences in the Pressures outside and inside of the Aircraft have equalized. That happens at about 10,000 feet. But, once again you face the problem of the fall.
With the Ground Speed Vector and Gravity you are still not likely to survive.
Then let's suppose that the Aircraft had remained at a level flight and was 10 foot from the Water. You are still traveling at a minimum of 150 mph and the chances of survival of your impact with the water (which is like concrete at that speed) is alos very unlikely. Hell you will be knocked out, suffer internal injuries, and probably drown. Your body takes all of the energy from the impact.
Actually your chances of survival inside of the Aircraft are much better because the Plane itself will dissapate a lot of the Kinetic Energy while being ripped open like an Aluminum Can. You actually stand a much better chance of surviving the impact inside of the aircraft.
So when would you choose to open that door? Personally I would not open it until the Plane has stopped. Then I would exit rapidly and...FOLLOWING MY EXIT, then I would INFLATE MY LIFE VEST. You do not inflate it until after you are outside of the Aircraft.
Far too many drowned because they were trapped inside of the Hijacked Ethiopian Airlines flight that crashed off of the coast of Africa. They inflated their Life Vests before getting outside of the cabin and were trapped by the rising water, pinning them to the ceiling, and subsequentially drowned.
I seem to remember that the sudden pressure change tends to rip the clothing off the victims of in-flight air disasters.
Probably a good idea to wear Kevlar undies if you're going to jump out of a moving plane.
I recommend D.B. Cooper brand boxers with the fly front for the jumper with savvy.
Fighter interceptors do not go unnoticed in that region, they are watched closely and constantly, even from outside the region, as are all air bases and their traffic. If an interception occurred, it would have been seen.
That was my first/early thought as well (posted it in one of the early threads).
Bumbling, it appears, primarily shows up when "diplomatic" actions are in full force... and this has all the look of being just that.
The question really, is this: What story will they finally settle on? I'm thinking that they'll say that fire took it down and that gravity had nothing to do with it...
"...I think one of the air forces in the region freaked, scrambled and shot him down before he could make that protest."
If the Military Forces had their RADAR TURNED OFF then it would be pretty hard to detect where that bandit was to knock him out of the sky, wouldn't it? They would not even know where to vector the interceptors. They would not even know that his course had deviated.
Unlikely.
I disagree. Remember the pilot was an expert and his political statement is stronger through his excellence that through a microphone. It must have been extremely thrilling for him to put up such a stunt, piece by piece, and I am convinced he landed the plane somewhere. All his training is consistant with this. Would he have communicated at any time during his odyssey, it would have been over in a matter of minutes!
Nope, this was 10 days ago and not a word of 238 other people. Word would get out even if they landed at an old WWII airstrip in Burma.
These people are dead, the aircraft crashed or was shot down.
I agree with that. The people are probably dead. But the plane flew 7 hours. This is a very long time to just crash a plane. It also seems to me that a "crash" site would be easy to identify with satellite software and in the sea it would be heard whatever the location.
Good point, the NW Cape of Australia contains the Harold E Holt ELF submarine comms station for the US Trident D5 boomer boats. It is three large and geographically separate complexes, and you can bet SOSUS passive low-freq sonar is one of its primary functions for long range sub tracking. If that jet crashed into the Indian ocean they would have heard it. Combined with Diego Garcia and Fremantle they would be able to triangulate the impact point with a fair degree of accuracy too.
Element your are right most of the time. But Sosus will not hear a surface explosion. Different sound transmission layer. Surface sounds can be heard to 30-40 miles. Submarine at depth of 400 feet can be heard out to 1000 miles. Some noise might have been able to jump layers but it would be weak.
Yeah true, I had forgotten about the propagation path, thanks for that.
However, they would have heard it hit the bottom. I imagine the engines would make a nice low frequency thud, even on mud. I suppose SOSUS also uses a waterfal type display format.
Shallow, warm, salty ocean. Horrible acoustics which is why diesel subs in shallow water rule the day. Might be able to hear 20 miles if you are at depth. Sosus net does not cover anything but choke points.
Ah, I happen to know it also monitors open ocean, at least in the north atlantic it does (not GIUK), or at least it did. Actually it was on the west coast too.
Have you seen the so called SOSUS net recently. How many hydrophones don't work anymore ? SOSUS was great for giving us a snif back in the day, and that was all it was. A directional sniff of a frequency of probable Soviet origin. I am not down playing SOSUS, it rules, just really limited. After you got the lead you had to localize, it could be in very many places due to sound bouncing off of layers.
Sounds like you were a P3C pilot back then. I know it's dilapidated now. I realized about ten tears back the US was focusing much more heavily of on a multi-emitter based active system which they were still calling SOSUS, although it was nothing like SOSUS. More a long-range active imaging array that hung in a net-like structure in the water column. Made it hard to hide.
yes the new systems are all active and all useless in shallow water ops. The public won't know until they lose a ship to a sub. Made sense at the time though, now we have lots of cheap diesel submarines. Great for shallow water ops and stealth on a McDonalds budget. We have floating targets with our bloated defense budgets.
The problem with the diesel-electrics is that they are slow as hell within this region (SEA), the Collin Class, although about the best SSG around even without AIP, it's much too slow in modern war. It has to be pre-positioned to be useful, and that will suck for the crews the rest of the time (~5 kt from Fremantle to the ME, or China, in submerged littoral transit - can you imagine that? Which is why the RAN is finding it so hard to keep them all crewed. Australia badly needs SSGN subs.). Plus it absolutely has to stay on the littoral to survive in real ASW combat, and it's not exactly small or shallow draft. So at least you know where they are, and such open water active systems will keep the diesel-electrics there. Pity about the AIPs. I would not want to be on one of those US LCS coffins, I know they will have the countermeasures and anti-torpedo-torpedo, and guns etc, but a diesel sub is bad enough, but to be in the environment of a genuinely modern mobile mine-torpedo capability - forget that- that LCS is going to make a nice reef (even if it could fend off the ASMs as well).
But RE the passive SOSUS arrays, they were only let fall into decrepitude due to the lack of a bluewater nuclear sub force contender after 1990, and that is no longer the case, they will be dusting that system off and giving it an upgrade or three. The Harold E Holt base will be the key regional ELF coms and SOSUS bluewater SSBN monitoring station, just as it was in the old cold war. I fully expect to see US subs operating from Freemantle WA in coming years, as they did during WWII, if it can be sustained politically, given the lack of RAN SSGNs to cover that area.
Anyway, back to topic.
Just as it was in the cold war? Really? You mean, just like Operation Dominic, test Swordfish (May 11, 1962)? Wow, that was a sight ... it still frightens me, after all this years ... ;-)
It's been a target for a multi-mirv strike all this time BW. We have many of those in oz, then and still. The US setup a stack of secret listening facilities and trip wire systems at that time, and Harold E Holt was THE major component of the USNs entire global ELF system for the Polaris Boomer fleet, as the ELF could propagate around the entire planet and North West Cape was the perfect location for it. Most these systems were abandoned soon after 1990 but new facilities are getting set up again today. Harold E Holt was one that the public basically didn't know much about in the cold war, because the media never made it an issue, they were focused on places that had the big geodesic domes. That old ASROC nuke is a fearsome sight though. ;-)
This is worse, 8.3 megatons:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2c/Dominic_Chama_002.jpg
I think that were only 1.6 megatons. Look: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Dominic
It says 8.3 megatons below the photograph, but 1.6 (which, according to my knowledge is correct) in the tables. I think the 8.3 megatons mean test "Housatonic", which was the biggest yield in "Dominic", and not the "Chama", although the picture is nice. ;-)
Right you are. :)
"But the plane flew 7 hours."
Can this be accepted as FACT? Who contols/has access to that data?
Discussion along these lines:
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=21718
Again, always take the time to question key premises.
Admittedly, a pilot suicide would usually involve a crash dive (Egypt Air, etc.) so the 7 hours is perplexing. If for some reason he took that southerly route, and I can't imagine way, they just ran out of fuel over the southern Indian Ocean, one of the remotest part of the planet.
If he had an agenda, you'd think he would have communicated it. Even the suicide pilots haven't turned off transponders and taken evasive flight patterns.
I agree, but he could have been dead and the plane kept going? (Payne Stewart) He'd off'd himself after taking care of all else?
NOTE: I don't really gravitate to the "suicide" angle, primarily because I don't think that someone under a lot of stress like that is going to be able to master all that seemingly had to be mastered (stacking up all the probabilities gives it a low probability).
There is considerable doubt that the official explanation of the Egypt Air crash was due to the pilot committing suicide.
CIA/Mossad were a more likely pair of culprits.
Which is why he wasn't a "suicide" pilot.
"Enstupidize" is my new favorite word.
I think this one makes more sense.
http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index1753.htm
Sorcha Faal! Lol!
Sorcha Faal is absurd, but reading that drew my attention back to the two ex-SEALs that died mysteriously on the Maersk Alabama. MSM says they both possibly died of a heroin overdose, which is laughable.
Same bad batch as Philip Seymour Hoffman?
Red or Green?
You couldn't get a conviction for a parking ticket based upon this 'evidence'.
You've obviously never parked in central London.
Dont buy anything printed in US news
Just an addendum here: if you know someone who flies big airplanes, it's not like a video game or like driving a car. It's not really a "visual" thing. Flying one of these things into a visual target, like a manhattan skyscraper, is virtually impossible.
Just sayin'.
You are traveling at 600-700Mph course corrections are Impossible for up to a Mile, visibility is often limited, your field of view is limited, there are more than a dozen electronic systems on board that you would need to turn off to get total manual control over the plane some are impossible to turn off. You could maybe possibly pull a 9/11 with a Chesna but not even the most experienced pilots could do it with an Airliner, there would be a 1%-5% chance of success and that does not even include the physically impossible manuvers at the Pentagon.
They don't fly at Mach 1, sheesh.
Ok fine I am European :) Mph is not what I am used to
Typical cruise speed for a 777 is 475 kt [~M=0.82], or 546 mph, or 880 km/h.
Right, but quite a bit slower at the altitudes the plane was allegedly flying. Seemed it was at sub-radar elevations for hours.
yeah, max cruise speed is probably found around FL330 to FL350.
Don't know what Vne is below 5,000 but guessing 290 kt would be fairly close.
The Boeing 777 is designed to travel at cruising altitude at Mach 0.84
The wings on the 777 feature a supercritical airfoil design that is swept back at 31.6 degrees and optimized for cruising at Mach 0.83 (revised upward after flight tests to Mach 0.84). Norris and Wagner, 1999, p.130
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_777
This does not mean that the Jet cannot exceed these designs as they for nominal flight.
As the Speed of Sound is dependent upon temperature Mach 1 at Sea Level is 762 m.p.h. at STP
But a Boeing 777 operating at 40,000 feet will be traveling at 554.4 mph. That is 10% below 600 mph. Here is a neat online calculator. The Formula was derived using a Temperature of -70oF.
http://www.globalaircraft.org/converter.htm
But since you are being so pedantic would you care to discuss the Taylor Expansion of
vair = 4.63(10-4) mi/hr(1 + [5/9(oF - 32)]/273.15)1/2
And then we can discuss Wind Speeds and the Jet Stream...
Looking forward to it...
Excuse me? Pedantic? The discussion above was about how fast the jet typically flies, at normal cruise speed and altitude, and then also at around 5K ft. OK?
Typical cruise speed for a 777 is 475 kt [~M=0.82], or 546 mph, or 880 km/h and a a Vne of about 290 knots @ 5kt feet, is not pedantic, it is accurate, and not even pretending to be precise, and it was given in units that everyone can understand. And did you happen to notice the ~ sign in front of the M number that I gave? That meeans it is an approximate value, and it is approximate precisely becauses the ambient T-P away from standard ISA makes it approximate. Get it?
And do you see that the M number you gave is M=0.01 different to the number I gave above? Plus you are using false precision with one decimal place, as in "554.4 mph".
So who's being pedantic here? I'll give you a hint, have an actual look at what you wrote above ... oh deary me ... that right there is called ostentatious irrelevant crap.
I am fully aware of ambient Temp and Pres effects and their excursion from ISA, as is every pilot, and given these are completely irrevent to the basic question and the point was amply made already (by me) then you'll have to get your petty quantitative jollies with yourself ... mmkay?
Have fun with your personal pissing-contest.
...so you've never heard of a visual approach?
that almost never happens all Big planes and Big airports have guided systems that give the pilots a "bounding box" which they need to stay in to land, and certainly no visual approach happens at Top-Speed of an Airplane but at the Minumum Air speed, why where those planes at their Top-Speed(or even over it) when they hit the towers? impossible unless they where GPS guilded and not by some inexperienced "pilots" who flew 1st faking time!
nonsense. pilots hit a three foot wide centerline stripe every day on a 150' wide runway. the planes don't land themselves. the ils systems guide them in. If the fucking planes landed themselves southwest wouldn't keep landing at the wrong airport. fucking false flag quack.
Right on. This crap about 'can't fly visually' is just that - crap.
Is there any difference between landing a plane on a two mile long strip of asphalt while decelerating, and striking an airplane-wide building while doing 400 kts?
Think about it carefully and get back to me.
Dill-snip.
It's not two miles wide, it's 7,000+/- feet long, and 150' wide.
planes fall out of the sky when going too slow... errrr, and they don't have great control b/c it takes air moving over the control surfaces in order to have control. thus, it's easier to fly when moving at a faster speed, than at a slower speed.
think about it, and get back to me. WeToddIt.
Go back and re-read my post
I didn't say "wide" I said "long"
If you want to argue, at least be...aw forget it. Fuck yourself, douchebag
I am not saying you "can't fly visually" I am saying you can't fly visually at that altitude sub 1000ft. at the Airplanes Top Airspeed(500-600 Mph) executed flawlessly by two guys who never before sat in a real cockpit of such a big plane. The video of the 2nd plane shows that the plane is making last second course adjustments to perfectly smash into the South Tower, how's that possible?
That part is actually basically true, though most of what else you said was not.
Zerohedge turns more and more into Main Stream Media with every day.
This is getting stupid. Until you find the plane, shut the hell up.
it seems probable that the global and space-based intelligence gathering assets of the U.S. recorded some sort of signals that could provide clues to the final resting spot of Flight 370.
that's what i've been saying!!!
You ever watch LOST?
Rubbish.
He did all this without having predetermined where he would land the fucking thing. Yeah, right.
When I first heard he had his own flight simulator, it became obvious that he was training for something.
This has been discussed on pilot forums. Apparently it's not at all unusual for a pilot to have his own simulator. Especially if they do training on the side.
Payne and myself went over it in some detail yesterday, on zh:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-03-16/malaysian-airlines-flight-370-c...
Whoever redded that, without comment, you are a gutless coward who can not face facts.
"What's his plan?"
"His plan?"
"[Malaysians] don't take a dump, son, without a plan. And senior captains don't start something this dangerous without having thought the matter through."
You will see this plane again, most likely flying into something.
Yea I'm defnitely on watch for more unmarked grey planes with odd under belly gear flyng into something.
That big stack of contaminated water tanks at Fukushima would make a nice big target. As I see it this villian by the name of Tunatoe is going to radiate the Pacific with the world's biggest dirty bomb, after covering the market on canned tuna. Canned tuna goes up fifteen to twenty times. I saw something similiar on an old James Bond movie.
What are you talking about. Don't come and tell me you for one second believe anything at Fukushima is contained?
Do you?
If so, I have a nice little bridge I would like to sell you.
"All of which is to say that it seems probable that the global and space-based intelligence gathering assets of the U.S. recorded some sort of signals that could provide clues to the final resting spot of Flight 370."
But you won't find out, since those assets are used as seen fit by whomever is in charge. Ether way, to me it is becoming increasingly obvious that GLOBALIZATION is a must. Share information, share resources in an open source style of economics. Incidients like these or Ukraine, and so on, would be resolved much more quickly with the Oligarcs at the helm
And I mean English speaking masters, it would be too difficult for me to try to understand what the Russian Overloads want. I'd proablly make too many mistakes and get shot in the first 5 minutes. So yeah, I'd rather have my Masters speak English. "psss and at night I shall secertly drink their whiskey!" hahahaha
The best place to hide something is out in the open for everyone to see.
Odd though, not a single text msg from any of the passengers. Not a single passenger had a phone running Android or IOS where they could track the phone?
Put a cell jammer on the plane, fly around in a big circle for 8 hours and land back at the airport you left from. The last place anyone would look. Or even easier, don't even bother to take off and mock up the whole thing.
Listen, if thinking "democracy is dead" makes you a radical, well, I guess then I'm a radical.
And If the captain smoked on board, wow, then surely a super radical!! Totally unpredictable!~
The only problem with all of this is, if all this effort, then for what? Where are the statements, the demands, the hostages?
Can I sugggest it does not make much sense until that surfaces?
What about Flight 747 to Sydney?.
And if so, where is the plane now?
Evidently nobody in the MSM, nor in the "alternative press" nor at this site wants to mention the captain's personal issues. I understand a "deep state conspiracy" is the only way people here think, but...
1) the show trial of the Malay politician resulted in his 5 year imprisonment for being GAY. Some reports indicate the captain was at the trial.
2) his wife and three children were estranged, with some reports claiming they moved out of his house the day before the flight
3) the captain's youtube channel has about 10-12 "like videos". Half of them are odd gay rights and atheism based clips. Obviously that in itself means nothing but the other liked videos are do it yourself things. It's an odd assortment by anybody's standards and we all like weird videos.
Was this guy coming out of the closet? Was his life falling apart? Of course, we never want to mention that "gay" had something to do with this.
I do buy the "captain did this" scenario, however. Sorry, not every event on planet earth is a Rothschild project.
As per your first point, this is a very long running accusation since 2008. It appears to be a political accusation (discussed at very annoying length in the Australian media btw) made against him by the ruling elite in Malaysia. He was the next in line to the leadership of the UMNO party and Dr Mahathir Mohamed decided to destroy him politically via claiming this married Muslim man was engaging in acts of sodomy. In a Muslim country that was a political kiss of death. It was Dr. Mahathir who started the process:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahathir_Mohamad
This is the same Mahathir who claimed in 1998 that George Soros and other Jewish banks had conspired to trigger the 1998 Asian FX and financial crisis. Here's the real back-plot to why they want to keep him out of the Malaysian PM's seat:
He most probably isn't a closet bum-grub.
Thanks for some of that background.
I assumed the charges were utter nonsense, but that doesn't change my view or speculations regarding the airliner captain. His YouTube collection was very odd along with the conflicting reports on his family life. Something was going on with HIM in the days and hours before he took the controls of MH370. Whether that was sufficient to push him to drastic and disastrous actions likely won't ever be confirmed. The VDR just runs a 2 hour loop or something like that, so the initial events in the cockpit will remain unknown.
Yeah no problem, just didn't want it made worse by people thinking it was probably true.
It sure is becoming a very strange story....it will be exciting to when they finally find the plane intact or the wreckage...I would guess some of the familes have hope now that maybe it landed somewhere
Which is particularly cruel of whoever is in con-troll of this whole operation.
To string the families along and give them hope when, in reality, they will never see their loved ones again...
now that's a special kinda evil.