[2014] Most plausible explanation of mystery of Malasyian Flight 370

ricoba · Mar 25, 2014

SMHarman said:
Exactly, overlaid on the geographical map it looks like this was a well planned route that took the 'craft along a line between all the landmasses and out to see while avoiding radar detection.

I think the crew had planned this route and punched all of it into the FMS (will be interesting to see if the content of the FMS can be recovered in time)

Then asphyxiated themselves, then the FMS executed the plan until it ran out of plan and then ran out of fuel.

So, you are saying this whole thing was an intentional act by the flight crew?

Not saying that you may not be correct, but there are just so many theories out there, I am just not sure we may ever know what really happened.

If this was intentionally done, then, what was the purpose for the crew doing this? Just curious.

ace2000 · Mar 25, 2014

ricoba said:
So, you are saying this whole thing was an intentional act by the flight crew?

Not saying that you may not be correct, but there are just so many theories out there, I am just not sure we may ever know what really happened.

If this was intentionally done, then, what was the purpose for the crew doing this? Just curious.

See post #4. It all adds up.

ace2000 · Mar 25, 2014

ace2000 said:
At this point, anyone would be crazy not to believe it's in the Indian ocean. That's where they are seeing the floating debris and that's where they are frantically searching.

If anyone believes otherwise at this point, please step forward.

Where'd everybody go ???

Smokatoke · Mar 25, 2014

Anything beyond looking at the plane trajectory data is pure fabrication. Even saying it was intentional is questionable even though the flight path screams it.

Then we get into decompressions and knocking out the crew is wild speculation based on what, a movie you watched? Ninjas taking over the flight has just as much evidence as your theory. If you really want to believe a plane take over for a meet up, you could say when they dipped to 12k feet the skydived out, just as supportable

ace2000 · Mar 25, 2014

Smokatoke said:
Anything beyond looking at the plane trajectory data is pure fabrication. Even saying it was intentional is questionable even though the flight path screams it.

The whole thread is full of fabrication and questionable theories. Where you been?

Beefnot · Mar 25, 2014

If there was a huge malfunction and they lost all ability to communicate and navigate via flight instrumentation, can skilled pilots still navigate effectively in the dark? I thought that it didn't matter how skilled a pilot was, they cannot navigate by sight/feel in darkness. If a malfunction of this nature happened and they could not effectively navigate at all, then by the time sunrise happened and they were in the middle of nowhere, they were pretty much dead in the water. Pardon the pun.

SMHarman · Mar 25, 2014

ricoba said:
So, you are saying this whole thing was an intentional act by the flight crew?

Not saying that you may not be correct, but there are just so many theories out there, I am just not sure we may ever know what really happened.

If this was intentionally done, then, what was the purpose for the crew doing this? Just curious.

I've said it somewhere further back, I think there was a plan to steal the 'craft but it went awry.

Smokatoke said:
Anything beyond looking at the plane trajectory data is pure fabrication. Even saying it was intentional is questionable even though the flight path screams it.

Then we get into decompressions and knocking out the crew is wild speculation based on what, a movie you watched? Ninjas taking over the flight has just as much evidence as your theory. If you really want to believe a plane take over for a meet up, you could say when they dipped to 12k feet the skydived out, just as supportable

OK, what is the heading of this thread?

ace2000 said:
The whole thread is full of fabrication and questionable theories. Where you been?

Some would call these the 'Most plausible explanation of mystery of Malasyian Flight 370', others have their own opinions.

Beefnot said:
If there was a huge malfunction and they lost all ability to communicate and navigate via flight instrumentation, can skilled pilots still navigate effectively in the dark? I thought that it didn't matter how skilled a pilot was, they cannot navigate by sight/feel in darkness. If a malfunction of this nature happened and they could not effectively navigate at all, then by the time sunrise happened and they were in the middle of nowhere, they were pretty much dead in the water. Pardon the pun.

I guess the leap of faith to take there is that you loose all comms and navigation but a flyby wire plane just keeps cruising along, and does not and up in the water nearby this communication failure.
Even with all electronics down the pilots have a manual gyroscope to level the plane and set a compass heading. They also have paper maps, or an independently powered iPad or other digital flightcase. Or a cellphone with GPS.
If I take your scenareo and think it through you now have a mechanically operated 777 with no FMS or comms but a conciouse crew on the flight deck.
You climb out of confusion, you dive out of confusion and then level off. You now know which direction you are flying on and can navigate by heading, GPS on your cell phone, whatever, to a suitable runway to get back on the ground.

All the turns as the plane navigated out to the indian ocean don't comport with that theory.

Chrispee · Mar 25, 2014

SMHarman said:
You now know which direction you are flying on and can navigate by heading, GPS on your cell phone, whatever, to a suitable runway to get back on the ground.

All the turns as the plane navigated out to the indian ocean don't comport with that theory.

In addition, all pilots are trained in celestial navigation, and flying a 777 with gyros under VFR is not as daunting a task as it sounds. Basically, you have a giant Cessna 172.

I still believe that could have played a role in the events that transpired. At altitude, pilots can still function for a length of time but in a state not unlike being on prescription meds. This could account for some of the maneuvers and the altitude changes. FL12 would let you function, but in an inebriated state.

T_R_Oglodyte · Mar 25, 2014

Beefnot said:
If there was a huge malfunction and they lost all ability to communicate and navigate via flight instrumentation, can skilled pilots still navigate effectively in the dark?

Well, the plane apparently followed a path between known instrument navigation waypoints prior to making the turn over the Indian Ocean. So they couldn't have lost the ability to navigate via flight instrumentation, regardless of whether it was being flown by autopilot or manually.

Clemson Fan · Mar 25, 2014

ace2000 said:
Where'd everybody go ???

I went skiing as I'm currently on vacation at my ski-in/out timeshare with my family. Awesome day! My favorite family vacation of the year! Per the ski tracks app, me, my wife and 9 year old son skied 14 miles.

ricoba · Mar 25, 2014

ace2000 said:
See post #4. It all adds up.

SMHarman said:
I've said it somewhere further back, I think there was a plan to steal the 'craft but it went awry..

I know this whole thread is conjecture, but I just don't see how a supposed liberal human rights advocate pilot would capture a plane and end up destroying it to simply prove a political point against the Malaysian government.

Now, I may be 100% wrong, and these theories may be fully accurate, but at this time, I just don't get it. :shrug:

DeniseM · Mar 25, 2014

According to news reports - his wife left him the same day, so maybe he was despondent.

ricoba · Mar 25, 2014

DeniseM said:
According to news reports - his wife left him the same day, so maybe he was despondent.

That would give a whole new (and terrible) meaning to the term "murder-suicide".

ace2000 · Mar 25, 2014

DeniseM said:
According to news reports - his wife left him the same day, so maybe he was despondent.

See post #4. It all adds up. It's amazing that the news is picking up on that now.

easyrider · Mar 25, 2014

My nature always looks at the worse case scenarios on these types of dealios. To me the worse thing that can happen is to see the plane used as a weapon.

One thing for sure is that this flight has been a big distraction in the media. While were watching the search of flight 370 the Russians took Crimea and are looking at other parts of the region, the Polish Government has recalled its military reserves, Israel has hunkered down after going through a massive ongoing rocket attack and so much more. I have read an ancient script that seems to actually predict these worldwide events. Its not a secrete script as its in the top drawer of most motel nightstands.

So until they actually prove with certainty that the plane is found, which at some point it should be, Im sticking to it will be used in a nefarious fashion.

Bill

PigsDad · Mar 25, 2014

easyrider said:
So until they actually prove with certainty that the plane is found, which at some point it should be, Im sticking to it will be used in a nefarious fashion.

Really Bill???

1) They know where the plane was by the hourly pings to the satellite.
2) They know the minimum fuel consumption of that plane, and how much fuel it had.
3) They know at the point of the last ping, the plane did not have enough fuel to reach any land mass, let alone an airport.

I know you said your "nature" is to assume worst case, but are you saying it is not logical that the plane is in the ocean? And that it will still be used by some bad guys? I know -- maybe this was one of those super-secret amphibious 777s that can land on the ocean, get refueled, load up some explosives, and take off again?

Kurt

Chrispee · Mar 25, 2014

PigsDad said:
I know -- maybe this was one of those super-secret amphibious 777s that can land on the ocean, get refueled, load up some explosives, and take off again?

Kurt

That's only marginally more far-fetched than a 777 that lands undetected with limited navigational aids, on an 8000+ foot cement strip, with a hanger big enough to hide it from satellite view, with 50,000 gallons of jet fuel on hand, in a geographical location where it can take off again undetected.

SMHarman · Mar 25, 2014

Chrispee said:
That's only marginally more far-fetched than a 777 that lands undetected with limited navigational aids, on an 8000+ foot cement strip, with a hanger big enough to hide it from satellite view, with 50,000 gallons of jet fuel on hand, in a geographical location where it can take off again undetected.

LMFAO

:hysterical:

Tough Day at work and I just cracked up.

csxjohn · Mar 25, 2014

Do planes that fly over water carry an EPIRB or are those stricly for boats?

easyrider · Mar 25, 2014

PigsDad said:
Really Bill???

1) They know where the plane was by the hourly pings to the satellite.
2) They know the minimum fuel consumption of that plane, and how much fuel it had.
3) They know at the point of the last ping, the plane did not have enough fuel to reach any land mass, let alone an airport.

I know you said your "nature" is to assume worst case, but are you saying it is not logical that the plane is in the ocean? And that it will still be used by some bad guys? I know -- maybe this was one of those super-secret amphibious 777s that can land on the ocean, get refueled, load up some explosives, and take off again?

Kurt

A person need the ability to entertain a thought. Neither accepting or rejecting the thought, just entertaining the thought without emotion. This is just one of those thoughts.

With the technology they are using to find 370 everything suggests that all went the way you describe but even with the technology the search area is larger than the state of Alaska.

Most people didn't think an airplane could be used to bring down the Twin Towers until they did.

Theoretically, the ability to hack into an aviation system exists. This is interesting to me anyway and contrary to what most people think. I believe the talent is out there to hack this.

http://treeatwork.blogspot.com/2014/03/on-hacking-777-myanmar-airspace-and.html

Bill

T_R_Oglodyte · Mar 25, 2014

easyrider said:
My nature always looks at the worse case scenarios on these types of dealios. To me the worse thing that can happen is to see the plane used as a weapon.

One thing for sure is that this flight has been a big distraction in the media. While were watching the search of flight 370 the Russians took Crimea and are looking at other parts of the region, the Polish Government has recalled its military reserves, Israel has hunkered down after going through a massive ongoing rocket attack and so much more. I have read an ancient script that seems to actually predict these worldwide events. Its not a secrete script as its in the top drawer of most motel nightstands.

So until they actually prove with certainty that the plane is found, which at some point it should be, Im sticking to it will be used in a nefarious fashion.

Bill

You're being silly, Bill. You're saying that the only standard of evidence is proving the negative.

You are the one making the assertion that it will be used for nefarious purposes. You are the one who bears the burden of proof for that assertion. You do not prove your case by your refusal to accept the arguments for another premise because they haven't proven yours impossible.

I trust that you, like Linus, also believe in the Great Pumpkin. After all, the existence of the Great Pumpkin has never been proven false, either.

T_R_Oglodyte · Mar 26, 2014

easyrider said:
A person need the ability to entertain a thought. Neither accepting or rejecting the thought, just entertaining the thought without emotion. This is just one of those thoughts.

Entertaining a thought without emotions is one thing. Holding to a thought that flies in the face of dispassionate evidence just because you are attracted by the thought is the essence of entertaining a thought with emotion.

I'm not against the notion of entertaining a thought because of emotion. Most great discoveries in science and technology came about because someone not only entertained a thought with emotion, but passionately believed in the thought. But success comes when one entertains a thought with emotion, but also embraces the information that challenges the thought. The ensuing dialectic leads to a better theory.

So instead of saying I don't believe, infuse your disbelief with an accounting for the information that challenges your thought.

MULTIZ321 · Mar 26, 2014

Fabien Cousteau: It May Take Years to Find Flight 370 - from Marketwatch.com

Fabien Cousteau, 46, oceanographic explorer, conservationist and grandson of legendary explorer Jacques Cousteau, has been following the search for the missing jetliner. Cousteau, who will himself soon lead “ Mission 31 ,” an exploration team that will spend 31 days submerged in the Red Sea, spoke to MarketWatch about the prospects of ever finding Malaysia Flight 370. ''

Richard

easyrider · Mar 26, 2014

Steve, I like what your saying. Not metaphorically speaking, I do believe in God even though I have no corporeal evidence. I also think it is possible to prove a negative to disprove a positive and vise versa. That is the premise of most scientific research, imo.

Anyway, I have been involved with the burden of proof in empirical subjects discussion a few times and the difficulty is both sides are right and both sides are wrong. Toss a coin.

Certainly the media evidence is more than empirical but it is still somewhat subjective as to what media a person takes advantage of.

The easy explanation of this flight, to me anyway, just seems convenient and also very contradictory. The media explanation will become the "truth" even with out physical evidence as the story airs repeatedly masking all other issues. The act of diverting the plane is nefarious enough for me.

Bill

ace2000 · Mar 26, 2014

More news on the pilot's state of mind...

Sources close to the inquiry were quoted by Britain's Daily Telegraph as saying investigators believed Flight 370 was crashed deliberately.

"This has been a deliberate act by someone on-board who had to have the detailed knowledge to do what was done," an official source said.

Investigators believe no malfunction or on-board fire was capable of causing the aircraft's unusual flight or the disabling of its communications system, or of taking it on a seven-hour flight wildly off course.

New Zealand aviation expert Peter Clark said he believed Captain Zaharie may have been responsible.

"This had to be a pilot or somebody with expert knowledge, who had to know what they were doing to complete this," Mr Clark said.

"It had to be somebody with immense knowledge ... the co-pilot would not have the capability of doing this. It's a takeover of the aircraft, it can only be the pilot."

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/air-accidents/news/article.cfm?c_id=665&objectid=11226334

[2014] Most plausible explanation of mystery of Malasyian Flight 370

ricoba

ace2000

ace2000

Smokatoke

ace2000

Beefnot

SMHarman

Chrispee

TUG Review Crew: Veteran

T_R_Oglodyte

Clemson Fan

ricoba

DeniseM

ricoba

ace2000

easyrider

TUG Review Crew: Elite

PigsDad

Chrispee

TUG Review Crew: Veteran

SMHarman

csxjohn

TUG Review Crew: Expert

easyrider

TUG Review Crew: Elite

T_R_Oglodyte

T_R_Oglodyte

MULTIZ321

easyrider

TUG Review Crew: Elite

ace2000